Homosexuality and religious.

[ChristineM]

The original issue was with Bahaism's homophobic teachings, calling it "evil, immoral, sexual aberration that needs purging from the world".
I don't see how you cam claim that the teachings are the perfect word of god, and that you follow them to be a better person, etc, but also claim that you don't condone or agree with what those teachings actually say.

Often, that distinction seems to depend on the nature of the scripture. When it's about nice stuff, then scripture is brilliant and true, when it's violent or intolerant, suddenly we shouldn't pay attention to it or it doesn't mean what it says.

I explained my point, im not repeating it if you dont see it and want to put your own interpretation on what i said then so be it

Yes, if the scripture is hateful you will find a larger number of people don't follow it.

 

[KWED]

I'm not intolerent and prejudiced towards practicing homosexuals, but you are intolerant and prejudiced against Baha'is, it seems.

If you accept Bahai teachings then you accept that homosexuality is evil, immoral and a shameful aberration that needs to be purged from the world (all words taken from Bahai writings).
How is that position not intolerant and prejudiced towards homosexuals?
Saying you are not racist after shouting "P*** go home!" at an Asian is an utterly meaningless claim.

The argument that anyone who is opposed to religious intolerance and bigotry is therefore intolerant and bigoted themselves is so puerile as to barely warrant a response.

But yes, I am intolerant of Bahism's homophobia, and I will call out as an enabler of intolerance anyone who attempts to defend that homophobia.

Hope this helped.

 

[Spirit of Light]

If you accept Bahai teachings then you accept that homosexuality is evil, immoral and a shameful aberration that needs to be purged from the world (all words taken from Bahai writings).
How is that position not intolerant and prejudiced towards homosexuals?
Saying you are not racist after shouting "P*** go home!" at an Asian is an utterly meaningless claim.

The argument that anyone who is opposed to religious intolerance and bigotry is therefore intolerant and bigoted themselves is so puerile as to barely warrant a response.

But yes, I am intolerant of Bahism's homophobia, and I will call out as an enabler of intolerance anyone who attempts to defend that homophobia.

Hope this helped.

I hope you do the same to homophobic atheists too??

 

[sayak83]

I would think it has an answer, but it is not mine to answer it.

Is that the case for all moral questions, or only this one?
For example is the moral question "Is rape ethical or not?" yours to answer? If it is something that is yours to answer, then why this one or not for the homosexual act question?

 

[KWED]

I explained my point, im not repeating it if you dont see it and want to put your own interpretation on what i said then so be it

You didn't explain it very well then.

Yes, if the scripture is hateful you will find a larger number of people don't follow it.

Firstly, not so. Bothe the Bible and Quran contain plenty of violent intolerance and discrimination, yet billions follow them.
Second, even if only one person puts into practice the hateful elements of a scripture, then that scripture still needs criticising.

 

[Aupmanyav]

And what if you encounter a society that has sex with dogs?
Are you saying wrong is right if it's in some relative cultural setting?
Can I eat people like the Aztecs did ????

If it is OK with them, who am I to complain? People do it.
Sure, morality is subjective.
People used to do that and perhaps still do - Human cannibalism - Wikipedia. The article mentions the risks involved. Is cannibalism permitted in your country?
If not, then I will not recommend it. It is a question of law.

 

[sayak83]

To force anyone to go against their will is in my understanding wrong yes.

Ok. Good. I understand your position.

 

[KWED]

I hope you do the same to homophobic atheists too??

Oh dear gods.
Of course I do. And homophobic Muslims, and Christians, and Buddhists and whatever you care to name.
If someone attempts to promote or defend homophobia, I'll be on it, don't you worry

But is that what your argument has been reduced to - whataboutery?

 

[Spirit of Light]

Oh dear gods.
Of course I do. And homophobic Muslims, and Christians, and Buddhists and whatever you care to name.
If someone attempts to promote or defend homophobia, I'll be on it, don't you worry

But is that what your argument has been reduced to - whataboutery?

You seem to be RF head judge so you have to make a ruling of what I mean

 

[KWED]

Again, is that what I said?

Again, it's what you implied.

(You said that the difference between rape and homosexuality in the context of calling one wrong and remaining neutral on the other was that you could prevent a rape)

 

[Spirit of Light]

Again, it's what you implied.

(You said that the difference between rape and homosexuality in the context of calling one wrong and remaining neutral on the other was that you could prevent a rape)

In a public place i could prevent it if I saw it yes. Due to rape being illegal, being homosexual is not forbidden, not in Norway anyway

 

[ChristineM]

You didn't explain it very well then.

In your opinion

Firstly, not so. Bothe the Bible and Quran contain plenty of violent intolerance and discrimination, yet billions follow them.
Second, even if only one person puts into practice the hateful elements of a scripture, then that scripture still needs criticising.

And billions more actually think about their holy book.

Oh i agree. But @Seeker of White Light is not putting hateful elements into practice and has been very clear on this point

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

So the world is divided into those who are positively in favor of homosexual acts as a morally good thing to participate in and those who are homophobic?

The world is divided into those who realize that they have no reason to disesteem homosexuality and those who have been taught otherwise. You've made the same error that the anti-choice people make when they call pro-choice people pro-abortion. No, they're pro-choice, and don't have much interest in which option a person chooses.

if I have no problem with people being homosexual and do not judge them, but my God has said that homosexual acts are something that He wants His people to avoid, am I homophobic?

No. But if you consider homosexuality a moral defect and homosexuals somehow violating some natural or God-given law, then that constitutes homophobia. Bigotry need not feel like hatred. Bigots can feel constructive in their bigotry of low expectations, as when one objects to women in the military because it violates his idea of what a woman is capable of and what is good or harmful for her. I call this cold bigotry. It occurs when one unwittingly serves as a vector for somebody else's hot bigotry - the kind where one feels antipathy for the target of the bigotry.

So homophobic is agreeing that the Bible God is the just and good judge of the world.

If the deity depicted is homophobic, then yes. This is classic cold bigotry. Whoever wrote the words attributed to that god wants homosexuals persecuted and oppressed. If a god wrote them as believers believe, then that god is homophobic. How could one be more homophobic than to declare homosexuality an abomination in the eyes of a god that is said to be a "just and good judge of the world," fit for eternal suffering for having same-sex sexual relations.

They realize they follow a religion / ideology which is at heart homophobic but they themselves are aware of that and are uncomfortable with it. But they are also uncomfortable with saying that they think their religion is wrong on that issue. So they'll declare themselves "neutral" and refuse to speak out on it. Instead, you'll just get dodge after dodge and ambiguous / vague statements that keep it all in a grey area. I suspect that that is exactly what is going on here.

Agreed. What we have here is a man in search of way to live and rules to follow who has found a holy book with a value in it he doesn't share (he is not homophobic), and who deals with the cognitive dissonance by distancing himself from the issue and not taking a stand. He frames this unwillingness to pass judgment as a virtue, not recognizing that to others, it is seen as defense mechanism.

@KWED Dont understand me at all. zero understanding

I disagree. He understands you, Tagliatelle understands you, and I understand you. Why do you see yourself as difficult to understand? You've been in search of a religion for years, and the latest one has at least one principle that you reject. You are not homophobic, but the latest religion is. You have a strong aversion to disagreement and have chosen to deal with it by saying that unlike this deity, you don't judge anybody. If you disagree, please say where and why.

And who are you to tell Baha`is how to believe? Who the HELL do you think you are?

Is that what you thought he did? I don't. He's pointing out the inconsistencies in your position. He probably doesn't care if you continue to think that way. He's telling you how he thinks and why.

Why does a person have to be 'hateful' to disbelieve in LGBTQ ?

Disbelief? LGBTQ is not an ism to be believed or not. The correct word is disapprove. If you disapprove of homosexuality, you are homophobic. It's not about whether you feel hatred. It's about holding irrational and destructive beliefs that harm an entire demographic of largely law-abiding people just trying to be good neighbors and pay their bills as they go about their lives. That's destructive. It diminishes lives. It leads to gay bashing, discrimination, self-loathing, and suicide. Humanists among others consider it immoral to hold such ideas, and worse to express them even in ways that seem loving to the bigot.

I would rather rely on an All Knowing God on these issues than the error prone human mind

Unfortunately, all you have are the words of men speaking for gods. It is by faith that you believe they are of divine providence.

“Agree with me 100% or your a bigot” has infected many here and elsewhere.

I don't think that's the attitude. Hold an irrational and destructive view about every member of a law-abiding demographic just for belonging to that demographic and you're a bigot. If one agrees that homosexuals are immoral or somehow less than heterosexuals, he's homophobic and a bigot even if he feels no hatred.

 

[Spirit of Light]

The world is divided into those who realize that they have no reason to disesteem homosexuality and those who have been taught otherwise. You've made the same error that the anti-choice people make when they call pro-choice people pro-abortion. No, they're pro-choice, and don't have much interest in which option a person chooses.



No. But if you consider homosexuality a moral defect and homosexuals somehow violating some natural or God-given law, then that constitutes homophobia. Bigotry need not feel like hatred. Bigots can feel constructive in their bigotry of low expectations, as when one objects to women in the military because it violates his idea of what a woman is capable of and what is good or harmful for her. I call this cold bigotry. It occurs when one unwittingly serves as a vector for somebody else's hot bigotry - the kind where one feels antipathy for the target of the bigotry.



If the deity depicted is homophobic, then yes. This is classic cold bigotry. Whoever wrote the words attributed to that god wants homosexuals persecuted and oppressed. If a god wrote them as believers believe, then that god is homophobic. How could one be more homophobic than to declare homosexuality an abomination in the eyes of a god that is said to be a "just and good judge of the world," fit for eternal suffering for having same-sex sexual relations.



Agreed. What we have here is a man in search of way to live and rules to follow who has found a holy book with a value in it he doesn't share (he is not homophobic), and who deals with the cognitive dissonance by distancing himself from the issue and not taking a stand. He frames this unwillingness to pass judgment as a virtue, not recognizing that to others, it is seen as defense mechanism.



I disagree. He understands you, Tagliatelle understands you, and I understand you. Why do you see yourself as difficult to understand? You've been in search of a religion for years, and the latest one has at least one principle that you reject. You are not homophobic, but the latest religion is. You have a strong aversion to disagreement and have chosen to deal with it by saying that unlike this deity, you don't judge anybody. If you disagree, please say where and why.



Is that what you thought he did? I don't. He's pointing out the inconsistencies in your position. He probably doesn't care if you continue to think that way. He's telling you how he thinks and why.



Disbelief? LGBTQ is not an ism to be believed or not. The correct word is disapprove. If you disapprove of homosexuality, you are homophobic. It's not about whether you feel hatred. It's about holding irrational and destructive beliefs that harm an entire demographic of largely law-abiding people just trying to be good neighbors and pay their bills as they go about their lives. That's destructive. It diminishes lives. It leads to gay bashing, discrimination, self-loathing, and suicide. Humanists among others consider it immoral to hold such ideas, and worse to express them even in ways that seem loving to the bigot.



Unfortunately, all you have are the words of men speaking for gods. It is by faith that you believe they are of divine providence.



I don't think that's the attitude. Hold an irrational and destructive view about every member of a law-abiding demographic just for belonging to that demographic and you're a bigot. If one agrees that homosexuals are immoral or somehow less than heterosexuals, he's homophobic and a bigot even if he feels no hatred.

He can point out anything he thinks. That is his free choice to do

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Is that the case for all moral questions, or only this one?
For example is the moral question "Is rape ethical or not?" yours to answer? If it is something that is yours to answer, then why this one or not for the homosexual act question?

Simple. There are things that are harmful to others, such as rape and murder. For those, we need Laws and punishments. Homosexuality obviously has nothing to do with causing harm to other people. It is a personal choice.

 

[sayak83]

In a public place i could prevent it if I saw it yes. Due to rape being illegal, being homosexual is not forbidden, not in Norway anyway

You are making a different point here than what you said to me. If, as you said to me, consensual acts between two people cannot be called wrong by you, unlike rape, you ought not to prevent it even if you happened to live in a country where homosexual acts are illegal by law. Nations laws can also be wrong and unethical.

Is that not the case? Or are you simply acceding to what the law is when you call something wrong and another thing neutral?

 

[Spirit of Light]

You are making a different point here than what you said to me. If, as you said to me, consensual acts between two people cannot be called wrong by you, unlike rape, you ought not to prevent it even if you happened to live in a country where homosexual acts are illegal by law. Nations laws can also be wrong and unethical.

Is that not the case? Or are you simply acceding to what the law is when you call something wrong and another thing neutral?

How many times do i have to repeat my self?

If a person is in any way homosexual and have sex with their partner of choice, it is non of my f-ing business

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Yesterday (for me) i was answering about a question relating to baha'i scripture and homosexuality. And i replied something like "I can not tell other what they can and can not do in their belief/faith."

The person who made the question then directly assumed i had to be a homophobic, hateful person against every LGBTQ person.

I just wonder, how is it possible to conclude that a person is homophobic or hateful from a reply like the one i gave?

Just to clerify my true stand on it, i am neutral to what other people do in their relationship sexually, i is not any of my business to critique them.

That person's conclusion about you was quite wrong, have no fear.

On the other hand, some people (and there is no shame if you are not among them), have found their way to stand up to religious leadership and say, "this is wrong." Within multiple religious communities around the world, this has led to the acceptance of gay members among their communities, and even allowing and celebrating their loves and their unions. They got there by recognizing that because homosexuality is a natural feature of the human range of orientation, that their religious proscriptions must have been the result of simple ignorance earlier in the development of their religion, and therefore could be changed.

These religions include (in order of acceptance): Unitarian Universalists, Buddhists, Reform Judaism, some Conservative Judaism, Quakers (Friends) United Church of Christ, United Church of Canada, Episcopal (Anglican) and others.

 

[stvdv]

I would suggest it is not that simple.

Thoughts, feelings and actions are not one and the same.

If I have a thought of murder, but don’t act on it I’m not a murderer. Being tempted by a given sin be it sex, killing or stealing a pack of gum is not the same as acting on it.

I was speaking for myself, making sure to phrase all lines with "I ....."

My Master said:
"your thoughts, words, deeds should be one"
"Check if the thought is Dharmic, if not then don't act on it"

Again, before you debate this, my Master, so this is for me

Not always easy for my though, but a good challenge

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Sexual preference is usually not a choice imo and I see no reason for you to see a moral component in being gay, and neither do I see a moral component in being heterosexual. But God has told Christians what His morals are and so even if I don't fully understand, I go along with it because I am a Christian.

So you sacrifice your moral compass in favor of blind obedience.

I also go along with other bits of morality in the Bible even if I don't fully understand the reasons.

Indeed. This is how you get otherwise reasonable people to engage in attrocities.