Does your religion accept homosexuality?

[Link]

If you are looking for a logical framework. Then there is a principle that every type of moral act you do to be moral allowable has to be such that everyone doing is fine in society and no harm comes as a result. I think if everyone became homosexual, there would be problems in society. Same with bisexuality, as the family structure would be threatened.

Every moral allowable act should be assessed on more global level. If one person lies, not a lot of harm. Everyone lies to everyone constantly, then trust becomes an issue.

 

[The Crimson Universe]

Thank you. That was driving me nuts

When did you first watch this?

 

[VoidCat]

When did you first watch this?

I think i was a little kid.

 

[Vee]

Does your religion accept homosexuality?

If so why, and if not why not?

No, because the Bible condemns homosexual acts and we follow the Bible.
To put things into perspective, we also don't accept smokers and people who consume drugs and too much alcohol because those substances damage the body, and we don't accept people who cheat on their spouses for obvious reasons. If people want to become Jehovah's Witnesses they have to chose to follow the Bible's principles and not to practice those things.

 

[Sand Dancer]

It accepts the reality of a homosexual orientation that is not by choice. It does not accept a marriage between homosexual persons due to its position on pro-creation being the first reason for marriage.

That stinks for infertile couples.

 

[danieldemol]

Since I dont adhere to an organised religion I will just say my personal spirituality both accepts and approves gay and lesbian etc relationships between consenting couples including marriage etc.

In my opinion.

 

[1-Brother James]

Does your religion accept homosexuality?

If so why, and if not why not?

And I mean accept, as opposed to just tolerate

And I don't mean saying "hate the sin but love the sinner"

Or "judge not lest ye be judged"

I mean actual acceptance - of homosexuality being morally equal to heterosexuality

Such as having LGBT ministers and performing same-sex weddings

My church does

The difference between Truth and what some believe is true, is a person's MIND [or I-MIND], which can cause a person to believe whatever it wants one to believe.
Peace

 

[Polymath257]

If you are looking for a logical framework. Then there is a principle that every type of moral act you do to be moral allowable has to be such that everyone doing is fine in society and no harm comes as a result. I think if everyone became homosexual, there would be problems in society. Same with bisexuality, as the family structure would be threatened.

Every moral allowable act should be assessed on more global level. If one person lies, not a lot of harm. Everyone lies to everyone constantly, then trust becomes an issue.

Sorry, but I don't think that is a valid way to determine morality.

For example, would it be good for society if everyone was a university professor? No. But it is still moral to be a university professor.

Would it be good for society if everyone was a baker? No. But it is still moral for someone to be a baker.

Would it be good for society if everyone believed (your religion of choice)? No. But it is still oral to believe in a religion.

I disagree that bisexuality would harm the family structure. If anything, I bet it would extend and strengthen it.

 

[Aštra’el]

Does your religion accept homosexuality?

If so why, and if not why not?

And I mean accept, as opposed to just tolerate

And I don't mean saying "hate the sin but love the sinner"

Or "judge not lest ye be judged"

I mean actual acceptance - of homosexuality being morally equal to heterosexuality

Such as having LGBT ministers and performing same-sex weddings

Not in the way you appear to be using the word “accept”, no.

No, my religion is not about diversity and inclusion, or the acceptance of all people as “equal”. Those things don’t matter to me. What I accept, is that all people are not equal, because we all have our own strengths and weaknesses. What I accept is that the world is cruel, and it is beautiful, and that all humans are capable of beautiful or terrible things no matter who they are or what they’ve done.

My religion is not for or against unity, and does not obsess over “right” and “wrong” or “good” and “evil”. It is about believing in one’s self fully, and following one’s own dreams and ambitions no matter how beautiful or terrible they are, so long as one’s connection to their God(s) remains strong.

 

[Eddi]

Not in the way you appear to be using the word “accept”, no.

No, my religion is not about diversity and inclusion, or the acceptance of all people as “equal”. Those things don’t matter to me. What I accept, is that all people are not equal, because we all have our own strengths and weaknesses. What I accept is that the world is cruel, and it is beautiful, and that all humans are capable of beautiful or terrible things no matter who they are or what they’ve done.

My religion is not for or against unity, and does not obsess over “right” and “wrong” or “good” and “evil”. It is about believing in one’s self fully, and following one’s own dreams and ambitions no matter how beautiful or terrible they are, so long as one’s connection to their God(s) remains strong.

what is your religion?

 

[Guitar's Cry]

If you are looking for a logical framework. Then there is a principle that every type of moral act you do to be moral allowable has to be such that everyone doing is fine in society and no harm comes as a result. I think if everyone became homosexual, there would be problems in society. Same with bisexuality, as the family structure would be threatened.

Every moral allowable act should be assessed on more global level. If one person lies, not a lot of harm. Everyone lies to everyone constantly, then trust becomes an issue.

This is using Kant's categorical imperative, but I'm not sure if it is offering the argument you are looking for.

For one, bisexuality and homosexuality still offers family structure. In fact, family structures are naturally diverse and function well this way universally.

Second, I suspect the idea is also that reproduction would halt, but this isn't logically valid given that homosexuals and bisexuals can still reproduce and humans can bring about reproduction without sex.

Third, @Polymath257 does a great job at showing how the categorical imperative, ironically enough, fails as a universally useful moral tool.

 

[Link]

Sorry, but I don't think that is a valid way to determine morality.

For example, would it be good for society if everyone was a university professor? No. But it is still moral to be a university professor.

Would it be good for society if everyone was a baker? No. But it is still moral for someone to be a baker.

Would it be good for society if everyone believed (your religion of choice)? No. But it is still oral to believe in a religion.

I disagree that bisexuality would harm the family structure. If anything, I bet it would extend and strengthen it.

If everyone had the same job, it would harm society. Therefore it's good to diversify in job's according to that principle. However, family structure as in the best form of it, is threatened with the bisexuality.

 

[Polymath257]

If everyone had the same job, it would harm society. Therefore it's good to diversify in job's according to that principle. However, family structure as in the best form of it, is threatened with the bisexuality.

By your logic, though, no single job would be moral since it would be bad if everyone had that job.

So the question is whether some homosexuality actually improves society. I would say it does.

I also don't see how bisexuality is a problem for the family. It just gives more options for families.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

However, family structure as in the best form of it, is threatened with the bisexuality.

How?

And what is the "the best form" of family structure?

 

[Link]

By your logic, though, no single job would be moral since it would be bad if everyone had that job.

So the question is whether some homosexuality actually improves society. I would say it does.

I also don't see how bisexuality is a problem for the family. It just gives more options for families.

That's how you phrase it. But to not diversify would be a problem by the principle. So diversify in Jobs would the right thing. While if everyone diversifies in sexual acts, then bisexuality might become the norm since it sex with either sex is deemed moral and acceptable. If it is morally acceptable, and both are not ugly but beautiful acts, then most of society might opt in on it. The problems that occur are obvious to me in this case. The sacred family structure is threatened by that.

Usually the case of Kant's categorical imperative, it deals with almost binary things. It is good to steal: yes or no. Is it good to to lie: yes or no. Now these can have exceptions in which they find a situation where it's appropriate.

So when it comes to sex with same sex, it's yes or no thing. This is not the same with jobs comparison. It's good to get a job yes. It is good for all society to have same job and not diversify? No.

 

[Link]

How?

And what is the "the best form" of family structure?

The best form is one father and one mother and where they are sexually sufficient for each other. No open relationships or swinging. There's exceptions in Islam where you can marry more then one woman, but I would argue, per Quran, the justice that is required to your wife, is that it's not a selfish act and not saying she is not enough, but rather, it's to take care of orphans and other things like that, this is the context of marrying more then one wife in Quran. If you think in your heart you doing it out selfishness or that she is not sufficient for you, I Would say that is an injustice to her and should not be done in that case.

Also, I would say as both are "malakat aymanahim" and she has ownership as well by the contract of marriage, you require her permission.

 

[cataway]

If you are Catholic that's incorrect.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church, a text which contains dogmas and teachings of the Church, names “homosexual acts” as “intrinsically immoral and contrary to the natural law,” and names “homosexual tendencies” as “objectively disordered.”

when found out ,you kick them out of the church ?

 

[Ashoka]

If you are Catholic that's incorrect.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church, a text which contains dogmas and teachings of the Church, names “homosexual acts” as “intrinsically immoral and contrary to the natural law,” and names “homosexual tendencies” as “objectively disordered.”

This is very sad. So many young people in the church are told that they are contrary to "natural law" and are disordered. Our words have power, and can kill or bring life. What do you think these words will do?

 

[Link]

This is very sad. So many young people in the church are told that they are contrary to "natural law" and are disordered. Our words have power, and can kill or bring life. What do you think these words will do?

What's the difference in telling people who believe it's morally evil, that they are "bad" for believing that. It's the same. One judgment towards one or the other. Morals should be taught irrelevant how people feel about themselves regarding them.

The issue is we should find out the truth about this issue, and not morally bully people to believe it's okay for the sake of people who embrace homosexuality or bisexuality. We should put emotions aside - we may want it to be okay because of friends or family we may find out are that, but this is not determining factor.

Our wish to make it not evil, doesn't make it not evil or a disorder. We all have friends we respect that are bisexual or homosexual, it's not the right thing in my view, just to say, how can I say they are bad?

We can't achieve mental clarity, if we just deem all goodness simply by niceness of friends and want to not "judge" them.

 

[Wildswanderer]

This is very sad. So many young people in the church are told that they are contrary to "natural law" and are disordered. Our words have power, and can kill or bring life. What do you think these words will do?

They tell the truth. Acting out any sexual act with another person outside of the marriage union considered sin, biblically.