Homosexuality and religious.

[Sheldon]

And what does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

Without both a mother and a father, an infertile person could not exist. What does that tell you? It tells you exactly as much as your comment does.

I know, it was utterly meaningless claim, without a mother and a father heterosexual people could not exist, so what was again the only cogent response to his assertion.

 

[Sheldon]

You have said in the past that the words themselves are evidence for you that they come from a god, but that is just motivated reasoning again. If one assumes that they are from a god, then whatever they say is godly.

It's also hard to imagine anyone can fail to see the danger in such a closed minded mindset. Literally nothing attributed that deity can be wrong or immoral, that's a terrifying delusion.

 

[Sheldon]

I have been taught to be loving to all and that’s how I treat people.

Claiming gay people are evil, immoral, sexual aberrations who should deny their very nature isn't loving, maybe love means something different to Bahai's?

 

[Sheldon]

It’s a crucial point because without a man and a woman humanity cannot perpetuate.

Nope, it's an irrelevant false dichotomy, as we are not faced with a choice between gay and straight people.

Whether you believe in homosexuality or not,

You can hardly deny gay people exist, while simultaneously decrying them as immoral? Though given the contradictions you've espoused thus far maybe you can?

for the very survival of our race and procreation, the opposite sexes must bond.

In other news water is wet. Apparently you think choosing to be dry is a threat to it's wetness.

But homosexuality does not further procreation so it is not essential or a necessity.

So what, that doesn't stop straight people breeding.

There may be sterile couples but homosexuals are 100% infertile permanently

Not even remotely true, are you trying to make as many manifestly false claims as you can for some bizarre reason?

Oh good grief, gay people can and do have children, how many times?

The continuation of humanity depends upon both male and female bonding

So what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, ?????

homosexual relationship is inconsequential and of no importance to the perpetuation of our species.

So what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, so what, ?????

Are you trying to set a record for redundant red herrings? My toe nail clippings are inconsequential and of no importance to the perpetuation of our species, this doesn't make cutting my nails immoral, or evil.

 

[We Never Know]

And what does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

Without both a mother and a father, an infertile person could not exist. What does that tell you? It tells you exactly as much as your comment does.

They all tell me that people having only gay relationships(m/m and f/f) won't have offspring and per evolution it will lead to their genes being taken out of the gene pool.

 

[Trailblazer]

So you acknowledge that it's your choice to assign this religious meaning, but you don;t have the authority to dismiss anything it teaches?

That is an absurdity.

How could I have any authority? Where would I get authority?

Why not? If they claim all their laws come directly from God, and you disagree with at least one law due to its prejudice, then you should reject it. You have even admitted you can't know any of it is from God, you just believe it it is. So you treat the religion as absolute even though you could be wrong that it is.

I do not necessarily disagree with that law although maybe there is a way it could be applied differently. I don't think on terms of if I could be wrong. Anyone can be wrong about anything that cannot be proven as a fact.

I do know it is from God. Of course I cannot know that as a fact, but there are other ways of knowing.

I would think that if enough Bahai protested this law that the leadership would have to do something, or see followers leave in droves. In the end all religions are a business and need money.

I do not see Baha'is leaving in droves just because they disagree with one law. In fact, most Baha'is do not even disagree with it.

Heck even Catholics don't follow the doctrine of the Chruch and pope on much of their doctrines, abortion being one of them. They get away with it, and that's a religion that has existed for nearly 2000 years. But Bahai can't get away with a protest of discrimination?

I do not think there would be many Baha'is protesting given most Baha'is just accept the Laws of Baha'u'llah.

 

[dybmh]

With all due respect, I believe that many verses in the Old Testament anthropomorphize God and turn God into a human. I do not believe that God is ever jealous since God has no competition. I think that verse was meant to convey that we should worship the one true God rather than false gods that do not even exist.

All that said, I believe that God has a mind and emotions but God does not think or feel the way humans think and feel since God is not a human.

That's a fair assessment about anthropomophizing God. However, "we should worship the one true God rather than false gods that do not even exist" is an attitude.

 

[Sheldon]

The way society looks at sexuality has nothing to do with what is moral

Societies only pass laws according to what they think is moral

Hells bells...

 

[Trailblazer]

An absent God that no one sees, and a dead Messenger that no one can question. Sounds pretty suspicious. You've even acknowledged that you can't know if the God exists, yet you treat this dogma as if it is. You could be wrong. You are, in essence, assuming infalibility yourself. It's as if you have the authority of God.

No, I just have certitude. That is not infallibility. Only God and His Messengers are infallible.

Where is the humility? It's one thing to dance naked under a full moon with underwear on your head if you believe that gets you closer to God. Biut as soon as a dogma tragets a class of people AS an organization, and you understand this is wrong, yet are committed to it anyway, is highly problematic. I understand you don;t care about this line of thinking, but it's important that you hear how others find this inconsistent as a moral framework.

I do not understand that it is wrong because I do not see it as targeting a class of people, I see it as a religious law that states that certain sexual behaviors are immoral in the sight of God.

Moreover, nobody is targeted because they can choose to become a Baha'i or not and the Baha'i Faith does not make secular laws that affect people's lives.

 

[Trailblazer]

Many many have left. It's probably the single most common reason to be an ex-Baha'i.

Anyone who left for that reason never really believed in Baha'u'llah in the first place. Baha'is who really believe in Baha'u'llah do not question His Laws, just because they don't like them.

 

[dybmh]

Prejudice: preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience

I'm sorry, but I disagree. The opinions expressed are not preconceived, they're based on the Baha'i writings. These writings are also the reasons for the opinions. If it's reasoned and not preconceived, it can't be prejudice.

 

[dybmh]

I do not understand that it is wrong because I do not see it as targeting a class of people, I see it as a religious law that states that certain sexual behaviors are immoral in the sight of God.

All gay Baha'i are required to be celibate per the law. That targets a class of people.

Moreover, nobody is targeted because they can choose to become a Baha'i or not and the Baha'i Faith does not make secular laws that affect people's lives.

What about children born into Baha'i families? They don't choose.

 

[Trailblazer]

Biut as soon as a dogma tragets a class of people AS an organization, and you understand this is wrong,

The Baha'i Faith does not target a class of people, it has laws regarding specific sexual behaviors, laws that are not limited to homosexuals. If you want to say it targets a certain class of people then it targets anyone who has sex out of wedlock.

 

[Trailblazer]

It’s a crucial point because without a man and a woman humanity cannot perpetuate. Whether you believe in homosexuality or not, for the very survival of our race and procreation, the opposite sexes must bond. But homosexuality does not further procreation so it is not essential or a necessity.

Very well said, and this is the very crux of the issue -- it is not necessary, only desired.

 

[Sheldon]

They all tell me that people having only gay relationships(m/m and f/f) won't have offspring and per evolution it will lead to their genes being taken out of the gene pool.

I don't know who they are, but they're clearly spectacularly ignorant idiots, and you'd do well to ignore them. Since straight people have gay children.

Maybe homophobia is a threat to bigotry, as they should all eventually die of embarrassment?

 

[Sheldon]

How could I have any authority? Where would I get authority?

All human morality is subjective, we each ultimately have moral authority, if we choose to relinquish this and blindly follow dogma or doctrine then we cease to be moral.

 

[We Never Know]

I don't know who they are, but they're clearly spectacularly ignorant idiots, and you'd do well to ignore them. Since straight people have gay children.

Maybe homophobia is a threat to bigotry, as they should all eventually die of embarrassment?

"They", the comments that were being discussed.

Per eveolution when genes aren't passed on, they leave the gene pool. Do you deny that?

 

[Trailblazer]

The continuation of humanity depends upon both male and female bonding and homosexual relationship is inconsequential and of no importance to the perpetuation of our species.

Why not just call an ace and ace and a spade a spade? Homosexual sex serves no purpose except for the physical pleasure of those who engage in it. That is why God has never condoned it.

 

[Sheldon]

"They", the comments that were being discussed. Keep up.

Can I have that in a coherent English sentence? How does being gay represent a threat to gay people, when firstly gay people can and do procreate and secondly straight people have gay children? Do at least try to to understand the simple stuff.

 

[Trailblazer]

Just one question. What purpose does homosexuality serve? What does it do for humanity?

Nothing.