Is being gay a sin according to your religion?

[Muffled]

I saw no point made. I saw no point at all. Hard to prove a point that does not exist.

And I believe in calling thing which are absurd absurd. Do I need to prove they are absurd? No. They do that for themselves.

I didn't say you call all love a perversion, but you do call love within the confines of a loving monogamous consensual adult relationship a perversion if the individuals within the relationship just happen to be of the same gender.

There is nothing logical about focusing on the sex another couple has. Especially if that couple consists of two consenting adults. What anyone does in the bedroom with another consenting adult is not anyone else's business. To believe it is, to judge others upon perceived sexual relations, is not logical at all, but sick, perverted, and disgusting. It shows the mind of someone who has extreme sexual issues and repression. Honestly, it comes across as a mental illness.

I believe you see what you wish to see.

I believe if I do not see something as absurd then it has not proven itself. I believe you have assumed that it is absurd without any evidence at all.

I do not call it love in the sense that God loves but love as physical and emotional desire. It is a perversion by definition whether the desire exists or not.

I believe you have reverted to calling good evil and evil good again. There is nothing perverted in seeing the truth but it takes a perverted mind to see what is false as true. I believe I am most healthy and if my goodness is disgusting to you that does not surprise me.

I believe I have no sexual issues. My mind is quite healthy and I accept reality which is more than I can say for those who ignore it.

 

[Draka]

I believe you see what you wish to see.

I believe if I do not see something as absurd then it has not proven itself. I believe you have assumed that it is absurd without any evidence at all.

I believe this has gone into the "whatever" and "pot meet kettle" category, so moving on...

I do not call it love in the sense that God loves but love as physical and emotional desire. It is a perversion by definition whether the desire exists or not.

So, then, the love that heterosexuals feel for each other must then be physical and emotional desire and, therefore, a perversion as well. As the love that is felt is THE SAME DAMN THING then straight love and sex is a perversion as well as it is also based upon the exact same feelings.

I believe you have reverted to calling good evil and evil good again. There is nothing perverted in seeing the truth but it takes a perverted mind to see what is false as true. I believe I am most healthy and if my goodness is disgusting to you that does not surprise me.

No, I have called a sexual perversion a sexual perversion. It is perverted to be concerned about the sex other people are having. It verges on pornographic and voyeurism. It is disgusting and sick to judge other people upon the sex they are having. Not even really the sex, as both heterosexuals and homosexuals have the same kinds of sex except homosexuals actually do one less thing, but WHO is involved in the sex. I do not see goodness in you, I see bigotry and hatred dressed up in a religious bow.

I believe I have no sexual issues. My mind is quite healthy and I accept reality which is more than I can say for those who ignore it.

Believe what you like. I can believe the sky is purple with pink polka dots, doesn't mean I'm right. Nor you believing that you don't have sexual issues mean that you are right. That you have your head and concern in the sex of others in order to judge them upon it, that shows an issue right there.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Oh look, another example of you finding any way you can to disregard what someone has to say when you know they disagree with you. You are flippant quite a bit you know that? Why don't you just swallow your pride and just ask him? Your answer isn't the only one you know.

Draka...your reading skills are very poor....He said he had a spirit in his post # 1311...

Since his post appeared somewhat flippant, and was also an extraordinary admission from an atheist....I asked for confirmation in my post #1313...

He came back to me in post #1314 with a misdirection to avoid confirming or denying he had a spirit....and thus my post implying he is not a believer after all which you quoted...

Now since you have the history....see if you can do what I was not able to accomplish and seek from Spiny Norman a simple yes or no answer to the question as to whether he was serious in his post # 1311?

Thank you for your support...

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Now you are trying to force me into your particular definition of "spirit". That isn't going to work.

A more intelligent question would be to ask how I think about spirit.

No I am not trying to force you into any definition of spirit..... Just some clarification....you said in your post #1311 that you have a spirit.......will you confirm that you were serious......a simple yes or no is all that is required?

 

[Draka]

Draka...your reading skills are very poor....He said he had a spirit in his post # 1311...

Since his post appeared somewhat flippant, and was also an extraordinary admission from an atheist....I asked for confirmation in my post #1313...

He came back to me in post #1314 with a misdirection to avoid confirming or denying he had a spirit....and thus my post implying he is not a believer after all which you quoted...

Now since you have the history....see if you can do what I was not able to accomplish and seek from Spiny Norman a simple yes or no answer to the question as to whether he was serious in his post # 1311?

Thank you for your support...

No, I followed quite well. You gave a particular way of looking at spirit and asked if he believed that as if that were the only way to look at it and no matter how he answered you could either disregard and dismiss or debate. You were trying to lock him into something rather than just asking how he viewed spirit. Hence, why he said the better question would be for you to ask him that rather than wedge your definition and views upon him. Your way of looking at something is not the be all end all of the matter. Something you have repeatedly shown you are unwilling to accept. So...just ask him what it is he does believe about spirit without it being a leading question with requirements to meet. Perhaps you'll actually learn something.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

No, I followed quite well. You gave a particular way of looking at spirit and asked if he believed that as if that were the only way to look at it and no matter how he answered you could either disregard and dismiss or debate. You were trying to lock him into something rather than just asking how he viewed spirit. Hence, why he said the better question would be for you to ask him that rather than wedge your definition and views upon him. Your way of looking at something is not the be all end all of the matter. Something you have repeatedly shown you are unwilling to accept. So...just ask him what it is he does believe about spirit without it being a leading question with requirements to meet. Perhaps you'll actually learn something.

Even when you are shown the way, you are still are too obtuse to see it....

Did you think to check why Spiny made the comment in his post # 1311?

Let's start at the beginning.....Jo said in her post # 1306.....

Now unless you are trying to say that a person cannot have a spirit, which each of us does, you cannot define what it means to each person.

I replied in my post #.1309...

Of course I understand that everyone is of a spiritual basis....but I do not accept calling those who reject their spiritual basis as being spiritual persons... As a case in point....I dare you to ask the likes of Spiny Norman if he has a spirit?

Spiny replies in his # post 1311...

Yes, I have one of those. Ha-ha.

So it was Jo who started the ball rolling by stating that everyone has a spirit...

I agreed and dared her to ask Spiny if he had a spirit?

Spiny flippantly said he had a spirit?

I ask Spiny for confirmation....

Spiny claims I am trying to force him into your particular definition of "spirit"....obviously an attempt to misdirect...

So all I am trying to do is get a simple yes or no answer....

 

[Draka]

Even when you are shown the way, you are still are too obtuse to see it....

Did you think to check why Spiny made the comment in his post # 1311?

Let's start at the beginning.....Jo said in her post # 1306.....



I replied in my post #.1309...




Spiny replies in his # post 1311...



So it was Jo who started the ball rolling by stating that everyone has a spirit...

I agreed and dared her to ask Spiny if he had a spirit?

Spiny flippantly said he had a spirit?

I ask Spiny for confirmation....

Spiny claims I am trying to force him into your particular definition of "spirit"....obviously an attempt to misdirect...

So all I am trying to do is get a simple yes or no answer....

I am not obtuse, nice job trying to discredit me though.

You did not simply ask for confirmation, you asked for confirmation of a particular viewpoint. You may have asked for confirmation the second time as to whether he believe or not, but then, he already said as much. The first response you made to him, the one he responded to, you asked a question about a specific way of looking at things as if that were the only way. I shouldn't have to explain this to you again. He was not out of line in any of this, you, however, have been nearly every step of the way.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I am not obtuse, nice job trying to discredit me though.

You did not simply ask for confirmation, you asked for confirmation of a particular viewpoint. You may have asked for confirmation the second time as to whether he believe or not, but then, he already said as much. The first response you made to him, the one he responded to, you asked a question about a specific way of looking at things as if that were the only way. I shouldn't have to explain this to you again. He was not out of line in any of this, you, however, have been nearly every step of the way.

Are you saying you believe he basically confirmed he has a spirit?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Yes, I have one of those. Ha-ha.

As you are aware, my first attempt at clarification was apparently interpreted by you and Draka as an attempt to force you into accepting my definition of spirit, so please disregard it totally and simply confirm or not that you have a spirit?

 

[JoStories]

Of course I understand that everyone is of a spiritual basis....but I do not accept calling those who reject their spiritual basis as being spiritual persons... As a case in point....I dare you to ask the likes of Spiny Norman if he has a spirit?

He already answered this so I won't comment on that however, I will say that spirit may have a different meaning for each individual and what is wrong with that? Do you get to define what spirit means for each of us?

 

[JoStories]

Being gay may well just being who you are. We all have fallen natures so I would not say that being gay in itself qualified anyone to be called sinful anymore than being a liar or an adulterer would for instance. But acting gay is sinful according to my faith.

That is your opinion but it is not one shared by very many of those on this forum.

 

[mindlight]

That is your opinion but it is not one shared by very many of those on this forum.

Since when is truth established by a democratic vote

 

[JoStories]

Oriental Buddhists are spiritual people in the main, they are not theists for sure...but neither are they atheists... The reality represented by the concept of Nirvana is akin to the Divine beyond human understanding of the Abrahamic tradition..or the Eternal Tao of Taoist tradition....it is a transcendent state beyond conceptualization... It is mainly western christian converts to Buddhism who do not understand that Buddhism generally does not teach duality...theism/atheism...but the transcendence thereof... who reject the very spiritual basis of their oriental brethren and join the mindset of western secular atheists...

.

You are wrong Ben. There are atheists who are Buddhists. IE: http://buddhism.about.com/od/basicbuddhistteachings/a/buddhaatheism.htm. And there is secular Buddhism which is more agnostic in nature.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Since his post appeared somewhat flippant, and was also an extraordinary admission from an atheist....I asked for confirmation in .

"An extraordinary admission from an atheist"? That says much more about you than it does about me.

But yes, I think of myself as having a spirit. I doubt that it conforms to your narrow viewpoint though.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

You are wrong Ben. There are atheists who are Buddhists. IE: http://buddhism.about.com/od/basicbuddhistteachings/a/buddhaatheism.htm. And there is secular Buddhism which is more agnostic in nature.

Many western Buddhists are atheists.

 

[JoStories]

I think we should let Saint Frankentein
speak for himself... I am not sure what you consider 'out of line' wrt my comment on sacred texts? ..and I doubt Saint Frankenstein considers the 'haha' as a cause of calling me 'out of line'. Let us be patient and wait for Saint Frankenstein to shine a light on his comment....

Ben, right after this comment you wrote:

Haha....obfuscation....Spiny Norman does nor believe that spirit is the source of his being....

That is considered, IMO, somewhat rude.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Do you get to define what spirit means for each of us?

I think that's the idea. A little presumptuous, to say the least.

 

[JoStories]

Since when is truth established by a democratic vote

Truth is individual for each of us. What you consider truth is not what I consider truth. I am a Buddhist. I find truth in many places. Where you find it is entirely up to you.

 

[JoStories]

Many western Buddhists are atheists.

True and many eastern Buddhists also are atheists. Following the Buddha does not require a belief in God. It is simply a path to follow for one's life. A good one, IMO.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

He already answered this so I won't comment on that however, I will say that spirit may have a different meaning for each individual and what is wrong with that? Do you get to define what spirit means for each of us?

Jo...spirit is on other side of any and all definitions...how many times have I explained this? That mere mortals claim themselves to be spiritual is the height of arrogance and ignorance... This is not meant to be a definition...just a plain statement of fact...