Heterosexual sins, adultery, fornication, etc.

[Viker]

Why is any sort of consensual sex a sin?

I don't believe it so. I can't figure out why it should ever be.

 

[Link]

Does that mean its not your natural disposition to be heterosexual but a decision you make everyday?

It's a decision first to believe it's the natural disposition. And it's a decision to not deviate from it.

 

[Link]

I don't believe it so. I can't figure out why it should ever be.

But have you really tried and given a chance to see why God and his chosen ones say it is a sin (outside of marriage and Muta).

 

[Link]

Why wouldn't anyone else other than heterosexual couples be able to do this?

I meant the concern is about children being taught it's okay to be gay early in life, when, they should be warned against it's dangers. This relates to your OP, why people are overly concerned with it.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I meant the concern is about children being taught it's okay to be gay early in life, when, they should be warned against it's dangers. This relates to your OP, why people are overly concerned with it.

What is the dangers of being gay?

 

[Viker]

But have you really tried and given a chance to see why God and his chosen ones say it is a sin (outside of marriage and Muta).

I used to think that way when I was younger. Doesn't work with me. I only have a problem with betrayal of trust.

 

[Viker]

I meant the concern is about children being taught it's okay to be gay early in life, when, they should be warned against it's dangers. This relates to your OP, why people are overly concerned with it.

I don't see dangers from as much as I see threats to anyone with lifestyle outside of the established norm.

People readily accept heterosexual couples/arrangements outside of marriage, with no complaints about this lifestyle.

 

[KW]

I see quite a few threads addressing homosexuality and transgender topics. Many pointing to the sin of it all.

But I don't see many addressing sexual immorality in general, just targeting specific groups. Why is this? Is it just that we choose people's sins as they become pop topics?

It seems that for a great deal of the world's religious that "Thou shall not commit adultery" has been lost in the shuffle, even among today's moral crusaders. Have they given up?

This thread is thusly about a specific naughty group.... heterosexual sinners and why no one cares that they get a free pass. Heterosexuals being the largest group also tend to exhibit the greatest amount of inequity.

Have you seen Christians claiming that adultery is not a sin?

 

[Wildswanderer]

I see quite a few threads addressing homosexuality and transgender topics. Many pointing to the sin of it all.

But I don't see many addressing sexual immorality in general, just targeting specific groups. Why is this? Is it just that we choose people's sins as they become pop topics?

It seems that for a great deal of the world's religious that "Thou shall not commit adultery" has been lost in the shuffle, even among today's moral crusaders. Have they given up?

This thread is thusly about a specific naughty group.... heterosexual sinners and why no one cares that they get a free pass. Heterosexuals being the largest group also tend to exhibit the greatest amount of inequity.

Why would they get a free pass? Sin is sin. God doesn't say one sexual sin is ok and another isn't.

 

[Subduction Zone]

What is the dangers of being gay?

It can be very expensive. The cost of replacing an entire wardrobe is not cheap.

 

[Viker]

Have you seen Christians claiming that adultery is not a sin?

Not very vocal about it if so. I know they believe so. I don't see many campaigns trying to stomp it out.

 

[firedragon]

It's a decision first to believe it's the natural disposition. And it's a decision to not deviate from it.

Hmm. That has a different connotation but you know better than me brother.

 

[John D. Brey]

Can you judge it without trying it? "Judge not lest ye be judged" (Jesus quotation).

Thought itself is a process of making judgments. So your interpretation would have Jesus advising people not to think. In the context of the verse that I assume you're quoting, Matthew 7:1, Jesus is saying not to judge your brother. I don't judge any particular homosexual, nor even homosexual sin itself. My judgment concerns the evaluation of homosexuality as being not sinful. And as I stated it in the message you're responding to, I realize that to most people there appears to be nothing wrong with homosexuality.

Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.

John 7:24.​

John

 

[John D. Brey]

Can you judge it without trying it?

Jack LaLanne said, if it tastes good spit it out. Liking something isn't always a good criteria for if it's good for you.

Homosexuality is superior to heterosexuality in a number of ways, the most pronounced of which is that by uniting two like entities, you forgo some of the confusion and conflict involved in attempting to unite unlike things. But in nature, to get anything new, profound, alive, living, you have to combine unlike things to produce novelty, newness, creativeness.

In evolution things were moving too slow in order to produce a meme-machine in the lifespan of a planet like ours (using clonal reproduction, or homogeneous processes). ----- So nature got creative, literally, and came up with binary-gender, and binary gender unification, in order to get things hopping.

Mother nature finalized the meme-machine, the human brain, thousands of years ago. Now she has bigger and better things in mind (literally) so that she abhors nothing so much as slowing down the meme-machine by assuming living, creative, thoughts, of the highest order, can tolerate thinkers who tolerate homogeneous processes, as though the very memes that came about through binary opposition and unification, can produce viable thoughts and thinkers by accepting homogeneity in the very process nature made binary to arrive at viable thinkers in the first place.

Someone will no doubt say: Dear John, some of the most brilliant thinkers in the world are gay! -----And they are, but their genius came from down and dirty bi-gendered sex, they were created by nasty ole, phallic, sex, and they produced no offspring, no geniuses, of their own, unless they went against their homogeneous inclinations and mixed unlike things in the manner that produced them and their genius.

Furthermore, the great homosexual geniuses, to a man, were, are, the most prolific womanizers, so far as memes are concerned, that have ever existed. Genetically they prefer the same kind, but in the mind, when chasing memes, their bi-gendered promiscuity is literally Solomonesque. You can catch them in the middle of the night, even a weeknight, in their study, with low light and books by the dozens lying their with their legs and pages spread open awaiting the bi-gendered (eisegesis and exegesis) process that produces living ideas.

Books don't produces books. And those reading for peace, pleasure, and enjoyment (foregoing binary intercourse with the words), don't produce books either. It's the person willing to engage the book in a binary (eisegesis and exegesis) manner, like gendered-sex, who, not withstanding the constant bickering about who will cook and who will eat, nevertheless, admittedly with some pain and suffering, give live birth to more books.

Mother nature is passionate about genes and memes; living bodies, and books filled with living ideas. Homogeneity, homosexuality, produces neither. That this should have to be explained implies it's too late to bother. Which is perhaps why Jesus said when homosexuality is considered holy matrimony the age of man begun after the flood of water will end in a conflagration of fire.



John

 

[Guitar's Cry]

True. I was talking strictly about religion though and was not really talking about the whole cultural experience of men afraid to be seen as effeminate in any way shape or form.

My current theory about homophobia: It seems like the cultural fear of being seen as effeminate is even more deeply seated than religion, because religion cannot seem to control it. Rather it takes over and uses religion. I think we men are influenced by the women. They (overall) keep pushing for sexual limitations. Our fear (men's phobia) is a cascading effect which stems from the women's fear of being rejected by society, which is an extremely powerful and reliable fear. Somehow this gets transferred, because of the shame of sex, to men as a fear of being seen as effeminate. The women (with their biological imperative to give birth and to have a stable relationship) don't want us getting interested in other men, so they push for shame in connection with sexual liberality. This, then, becomes a fear in boys and men and overshadows the culture regardless of any religious teaching to try to be more feminine. We strive to be extremely un-feminine and to look big and tough and hairy, and this has to do with being accepted by other men as manly men but stems from the women's fear of social rejection. Its just a theory.

I agree with you that a lot of homophobia is gender-related, but I am not sure it stems from women.

 

[blü 2]

Excellent question. . . The short form of the answer is: human history, anthropology, genesis, science, theology, and eschatology. None of these elements of human reality are as simple as your nine point are. And yet they are equally, or, as history show, more important than your admittedly important nine points.
John

People may have a clear sexual orientation. They may experiment with alternatives. For the great majority there will be one particular orientation that's natural to them. Let them find it. If it doesn't work out, let them keep looking.

Through all of that, the moral rules are all filed under Do No Harm ─ equality of the parties, openness, honesty, no betrayal of third parties, and so on.

 

[Viker]

Why would they get a free pass? Sin is sin. God doesn't say one sexual sin is ok and another isn't.

Technically, I agree with you (from a Biblical perspective not my own). The 10 Commandments are very clear.

 

[blü 2]

Technically, I agree with you (from a Biblical perspective not my own). The 10 Commandments are very clear.

If I may respectfully observe, the Ten Commandments are a wonder of sloppy draftsmanship. The first four are about maintaining the rights of the religious establishment, "Thou shalt not kill" has countless exceptions (God, war, the state, the Law, worshipers of other gods, certain aliens &c), no mention of self-defense, insanity, the status of honor killings and crimes passionels, death though negligence or recklessness, dueling, on and on. No statement of principles, just weird examples about what your neighbor might have (eg don't try to steal his slaves).

Oh, and nothing about homosexuality.

 

[Subduction Zone]

If I may respectfully observe, the Ten Commandments are a wonder of sloppy draftsmanship. The first four are about maintaining the rights of the religious establishment, "Thou shalt not kill" has countless exceptions (God, war, the state, the Law, worshipers of other gods, certain aliens &c), no mention of self-defense, insanity, the status of honor killings and crimes passionels, death though negligence or recklessness, dueling, on and on. No statement of principles, just weird examples about what your neighbor might have (eg don't try to steal his slaves).

Oh, and nothing about homosexuality.

Those are of course not the originals. Moses broke the tablets and was speaking from memory. He went back up to the mountain and God carved him a second set. Those are the ones that would have been in the Ark of the Covenant. They were not much better:

1. Thou shalt worship no other god: for the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God.

2. Thou shalt make thee no molten gods.

3. The feast of unleavened bread shalt thou keep.

4. All that openeth the matrix is mine; and every firstling among thy cattle, whether ox or sheep, that is male.

5. Six days thou shalt work, but on the seventh day thou shalt rest.

6. Thou shalt observe the feast of weeks, of the firstfruits of wheat harvest, and the feast of ingathering at the year's end.

7. Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leaven.

8. Neither shall the sacrifice of the feast of the passover be left unto the morning.

9. The first of the firstfruits of thy land thou shalt bring unto the house of the Lord thy God.

10. Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother's milk.

 

[blü 2]

Those are of course not the originals. Moses broke the tablets and was speaking from memory. He went back up to the mountain and God carved him a second set. Those are the ones that would have been in the Ark of the Covenant. They were not much better:

1. Thou shalt worship no other god: for the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God.

2. Thou shalt make thee no molten gods.

3. The feast of unleavened bread shalt thou keep.

4. All that openeth the matrix is mine; and every firstling among thy cattle, whether ox or sheep, that is male.

5. Six days thou shalt work, but on the seventh day thou shalt rest.

6. Thou shalt observe the feast of weeks, of the firstfruits of wheat harvest, and the feast of ingathering at the year's end.

7. Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leaven.

8. Neither shall the sacrifice of the feast of the passover be left unto the morning.

9. The first of the firstfruits of thy land thou shalt bring unto the house of the Lord thy God.

10. Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother's milk.

Excellent point.

Do NOT cook the goatlings in their mother's milk. Just DON'T.

NEVER.

But again, nothing about homosexuality.