Is being gay a sin according to your religion?

[Saint Frankenstein]

I don't personally care about homosexuals; the principles of homosexuality being a sin and particularly lust in dogma I understand..

I am not even Catholic, I just understand the principle of that dogma. I explained it
as homosexuality being an act of lust because it is not for reproduction; it is merely
sating desires, which is lust.

Besides, you're all just arguing about what you want more over than the principles of the dogma.

According to the dictionary, lust is just very strong sexual desire for someone. Anyone in a healthy relationship will feel that way about their partner. Love and lust aren't mutually exclusive. Everyone - gay, straight, bi - experiences lust.

 

[Triumphant_Loser]

According to the dictionary, lust is just very strong sexual desire for someone. Anyone in a healthy relationship will free that way about their partner. Love and lust aren't mutually exclusive. Everyone - gay, straight, bi - experiences lust.

I'm curious to know how religious types think people can even procreate without lust. That's literally just another word for sexual arousal, which is obviously necessary for reproduction.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I'm curious to know how religious types think people can even procreate without lust. That's literally just another word for sexual arousal, which is obviously necessary for reproduction.

Because they define it as "disordered desire". At least Catholics do.

 

[Ingledsva]

The notion of sex being a sin oriented around disdaining from acts of sexual intercourse other than
consummate reproduction, homosex being an act of lust in itself; marriage is a completely different issue.


ING - Both Heterosexual and Homosexual sex runs on hormones, and they are both the same - and are triggered by pheromones, - and studies have shown that heterosexuals only respond to the opposite sex's pheromones, while homosexuals only respond to same-sex pheromones. This puts a lie to the choice CRAP!


Personally, I could not give a damn; it's between you and the Lode or Satan.


ING - There is no Satan.


Civil rights and mental illness is just a laugh riot; I can cut my jognsten off, get breast implants; change my gender to a woman, and I am not mentally ill. But, if you are a traditionalist, you're a bigot, racist and prejudiced *******.

ING - Homosexuals are not mental ill. Get a grip.


That's the principle of the notion of the "sin", I find it unnatural to deny yours bodies chemical need; .
and it is not good for your health to any extent.

I believed in log cabin stance with all of this and the Libs in Murica' just unleashed these mentally ill sluts on the populace of the American people; and they're greatly supporting these mentally ill.


ING - Whom are you calling "mentally ill sluts?" If you are referring to homosexuals - then you will also have to call heterosexuals the same - because they are acting the same - for the same reasons, - SEX.

It's apparently o.k. to presume the Lord accepts homosux; I just quit caring and think that is best for all of us.

Tanakh says nothing about it, nor does Jesus - so there you have it!



*

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

ING - There is no Satan.

Hey, hey! As a Satanist, I find that offensive!

 

[Ingledsva]

No they are spiritually ill. But I didn't see where he said mentally ill

They are neither spiritually, or mentally, ill.

You folks need to get a grip on reality.



*

 

[Ingledsva]

Hey, hey! As a Satanist, I find that offensive!

LOL! Very funny.


*

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

LOL! Very funny.


*

All jokes aside, I am a Satanist but I certainly don't believe in the Christian idea of the Devil. That being certainly does not exist. :no:

 

[Ingledsva]

Yes, mentally ill; They are suffering from chemical imbalances.

The principle in the sin of Lust is having sex to sate your carnal desires other than consummate reproduction; I did not say I agreed with it.

My jokes about ESP went well... I will explain all in time, my trove.

No they aren't! And that has been proven!



*

 

[Ingledsva]

All jokes aside, I am a Satanist but I certainly don't believe in the Christian idea of the Devil. That being certainly does not exist. :no:

I know. I remember you talking about it.



*

 

[Whiterain]

LOL! Very funny.


*

Ingledsva:

So you're saying same sex intercourse is purely choice and not chemically induced, or
just choice?

I have a firm grip on reality and to me same sex intercourse is repugnant; I'm not
bigoted or prejudice.

Honestly, I could give a ****; I'm just trying to back the principle of the dogma regarding
sex.

Like I said; you're all just arguing with what you personally want over the principles of the dogma.

 

[dgirl1986]

I have a firm grip on reality and to me same sex intercourse is repugnant; I'm not
bigoted or prejudice.

Does that also apply, in your view, to lesbians?

 

[Ingledsva]

consummate

verb

verb: consummate · third person present: consummates · past tense: consummated

make (a marriage or relationship) complete by having sexual intercourse:

---

It used to be slightly more strict; that is why the Cathoholics have not accepted contraception, as well.

With that, I am not arguing; this is more of a matter of what people want not what
is allowed with the Catholic dogma.


Do I care, personally? No.

Do I know how the dogma should be handled? Yes.

Then would I care? Yes.

As far as biology, the ultimate excuse for same sex lust; it is nothing more than a scape goat for people that would be more than likely be executed or flogged into being straight Men.

This is more people arguing about what they want, not the principles of the dogma.

Actually it is about the same human rights for all - and kicking archaic religious crap to the curb where it belongs.


*

 

[dgirl1986]

Actually it is about the same human rights for all - and kicking archaic religious crap to the curb where it belongs.


*

I respectfully request that you join me in a high five. *raises hand*

 

[Glaurung]

I'm curious to know how religious types think people can even procreate without lust. That's literally just another word for sexual arousal, which is obviously necessary for reproduction.

Because what they mean by lust is the desire for sexual pleasure in of itself divorced from the wider context in which they believe sex should exist.

In other words, a married couple's sexual desire for each other is appropriate so long as the sex within the relationship is open to its appropriate functions of emotional bonding and procreation. Basically, lust is the desire for gratification divorced from these functions, which in turn are only appropriate in the marriage institution.

You may disagree with this kind of reasoning, but it is a coherent position.

 

[Whiterain]

Does that also apply, in your view, to lesbians?

No, I'm saying it's an act of lust regardless; seeing as it isn't an act of reproduction.. [/quote]

Actually it is about the same human rights for all - and kicking archaic religious crap to the curb where it belongs.]



*

The creation of a new dogma to suit society will make this simply abdominal in contrast..

I'm moving on..

 

[dgirl1986]

Because what they mean by lust is the desire for sexual pleasure in of itself divorced from the wider context in which they believe sex should exist.

In other words, a married couple's sexual desire for each other is appropriate so long as sex within the relationship is open to its appropriate functions of emotional bonding and procreation.

You may disagree with this kind of reasoning, but it is a coherent position.

People seem to skip the fact that for gay and lesbian people sex is a form of bonding and not just a way to "get off".

 

[Ingledsva]

Ingledsva:

So you're saying same sex intercourse is purely choice and not chemically induced, or just choice?

I have a firm grip on reality and to me same sex intercourse is repugnant; I'm not bigoted or prejudice.

Honestly, I could give a ****; I'm just trying to back the principle of the dogma regarding sex.

Like I said; you're all just arguing with what you personally want over the principles of the dogma.

Incorrect! We are arguing human rights, - over archaic, - stupid, - religious crap.


You can hold any archaic ideas that you wish to. You just have no right to prevent other people from having the same rights that you do.



*

 

[Whiterain]

Incorrect! We are arguing human rights, - over archaic, - stupid, - religious crap.


You can hold any archaic ideas that you wish to. You just have no right to prevent other people from having the same rights that you do.



*

I think it is not natural human behavior to disdain from sexual intercourse.

Although, I think the creations of dogma and sins was an attempt to reform our
society into a "civilized" ideology. Nothing about a lot of religion and piety is natural
to the human being except our cult like admiration of figures, deities...ect.

I'm done, I'm moving on.

 

[Ingledsva]

I respectfully request that you join me in a high five. *raises hand*

High-Fives all around! And A GROUP HUG!



*