Is being gay a sin according to your religion?

[Rick O'Shez]

No....the irony that we are talking about bible teachings on morality as they pertains to deviate sex....and the Catholic church, being the self proclaimed divinely appointed institution on the planet with the inherent responsibility to uphold and proclaim the bible teachings, has been the sexual corrupter of their flock all over the planet for centuries...and this corruption was and is systemic.....it goes right to the top.

Much of this "corruption" stems from a repressive attitude to sex and a patriarchal hierarchy. In any case Catholics are Christians and monotheists.

 

[MountainPine]

Actually that has been scientifically disproven. But you are obviously a science denier so I doubt that will do any good for you.

Science has refuted the Common Core curriculum's agenda? Hmm, interesting.

There are parts of the world where a young girl not consenting to having her genitals mutilated, or being forced into an arranged marriage, supposedly "dishonors" her family.

In the eyes of many, homosexuality is grotesque and is an unnatural affection. Not accepting a particular sexual orientation does not violate anyone's right as a human being. Removal of a girl's clitoris can cause physical and emotional harm, which is a violation of her natural rights. Besides, clitoridectomies are only practiced in African Islamic cultures, but that is a culture. Homosexuality is not a culture, it's merely an orientation. Your argument is not relevant, and one MAJOR straw-man.

And, no, my issue is not just with anal sex. Straight couples do a lot of sexually immoral practices, but that is not what this thread is about. Like I said before, the peg fits the hole; therefore, man + woman is natural. As my mother used to say, God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.

 

[MountainPine]

It clearly is subjective. In this thread for example we have some people arguing that it is right to discriminate against gays, and others arguing that it is wrong.

Ok, fine. If a sociopath doesn't think raping is wrong, then it's okay for him to do it, and no one has any right to stop him, otherwise that would be "forcing other beliefs upon him".

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Ok, fine. If a sociopath doesn't think raping is wrong, then it's okay for him to do it, and no one has any right to stop him, otherwise that would be "forcing other beliefs upon him".

I can't decide whether this is a straw-man or red herring, or both.

 

[MountainPine]

I can't decide whether this is a straw-man or red herring, or both.

How so? It is a perfect example of subjective morality. A person believes raping is okay, therefore, he should do it. It clearly addresses the subject.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

No, shellfish is very relevant because you have claimed the Bible as a source of authority on moral questions. I really think you should "clam" up on this point now.

....

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Much of this "corruption" stems from a repressive attitude to sex and a patriarchal hierarchy. In any case Catholics are Christians and monotheists.

Forced celibacy without a doubt.....

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

How so? It is a perfect example of subjective morality. A person believes raping is okay, therefore, he should do it.

The morality of gay sex & the immorality of rape stems, at least in part, from the amount of harm caused. Rape, unlike gay sex, causes immense, measurable harm both to the victim, and to their families who have to deal with the after-effects. If you think that a consensual act of love is morally equivalent to non-consensual, painful violation on both a physical and personal level then I would suggest that its your own moral compass that is in dire need of adjustment.

There is no victim in gay sex (unless it's non-consensual, which would then mean it could arguably fall under the category of rape anyway). The only negative side-effects associated with gay sex are when homophobes see two guys in the street kiss get a little grossed-out, then start fixating on what those two men get up to together in private. It's not your business.

 

[MountainPine]

The morality of gay sex & the immorality of rape stems, at least in part, from the amount of harm caused. Rape, unlike gay sex, causes immense, measurable harm both to the victim, and to their families who have to deal with the after-effects. If you think that a consensual act of love is morally equivalent to non-consensual, painful violation on both a physical and personal level then I would suggest that its your own moral compass that is in dire need of adjustment.

There is no victim in gay sex (unless it's non-consensual, which would then mean it could arguably fall under the category of rape anyway). The only negative side-effects associated with gay sex are when homophobes see two guys in the street kiss get a little grossed-out, then start fixating on what those two men get up to together in private. It's not your business.

I wasn't comparing homosexuality to rape. I was merely using rape as an example to address the fallacious concept of subjective morality. BTW, I disagree that there are no victims in gay sex considering that more than half of gay men are infected with STDs and spread it to each other and their bisexual partners, who spread it to women. Did you know that HIV was originally known as "Gay Man's Disease", and Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS) was originally known as "Gay Bowel Syndrome"?

 

[JoStories]

The Westboro Baptist Church represents less than 1% of Christians in the world, and even less of the Abrahamic faiths, thus it is an illogical conclusion.

Illogical? Not at all. Your Biblical verse that you all hold so tightly too states that the end result of being gay is to be put to death. Have you forgotten that part?

I disagree, but that's beside the point. You are nitpicking a single sentence from what I said and failed to address my point, which is to say that gays should have their own institutions that cater to their wants.

Do you read what you write before you post it? This above intimates that all gays should be in internment camps. We should have our own this or that, so therefore, we should exist in a place where you Christian bigots cannot see us nor have to interact with us on any level. Is that about it?

 

[JoStories]

Indeed. Defining spirit in terms of Christ is a very specific religious belief which many will not share. It's that familiar pattern of monotheists trying to claim a monopoly on spirituality and religion.

I know. Which is why monotheistic faiths have never worked for me. Its an inclusive religion, meaning either you believe as they do or you are apostate to their faith. Who is to say that the Hindus don't have it right with a pantheon of Gods and Goddesses?

 

[JoStories]

I wasn't comparing homosexuality to rape. I was merely using rape as an example to address the fallacious concept of subjective morality. BTW, I disagree that there are no victims in gay sex considering that more than half of gay men are infected with STDs and spread it to each other and their bisexual partners, who spread it to women. Did you know that HIV was originally known as "Gay Man's Disease", and Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS) was originally known as "Gay Bowel Syndrome"?

Ugh! How long is this absolute bull merde going to continue to be spread? It is true that HIV, for a time, meaning in the late 80's and early 90's, was known as a "gay man's disease". However, it is no longer the case. Furthermore, most gays are not infected with STD's. (I am refraining from using stronger language and being rude as I try very hard not to do that but you are really testing me here). And IBS? Are you for real? Gays do not spread disease to women. HIV is a disease that affects men and women equally now. Mostly it is seen in IV drug users these days. Maybe someday, people like you will stop spreading misinformation and understand reality instead of the tripe that religious websites try to push on others.

 

[JoStories]

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying, and no that is not the same thing as racism. Sexual orientation is a choice, and I've already presented evidence to prove that. The color you're born with isn't.

You have not provided any accurate information about sexual orientation being a choice. OTOH, I CAN and will.

Ngun, T. C., & Vilain, E. (2014). The biological basis of human sexual orientation: Is there a role for epigenetics. Adv. Genet, 86, 167-184.

Sanders, A. R., Martin, E. R., Beecham, G. W., Guo, S., Dawood, K., Rieger, G., ... & Duan, J. (2015). Genome-wide scan demonstrates significant linkage for male sexual orientation. Psychological medicine, 45(07), 1379-1388.

 

[JoStories]

Eve was made as a mate for Adam...if Adam used the Eve's back passage for sex...the human race would not exist...

That is not a source. That is your opinion. Either admit there is no Biblical passage about anal sex or post it. I know there is not one so why not admit you are speaking from opinion only?

 

[JoStories]

I don't see your judgemental attitudes and simplistic beliefs as compatible with that kind of inner harmonisation. You are still stuck in duality and discrimination, us and them, you fail to see the bigger picture and the commonality of the human spirit.

Exactly. Duality is one of the biggest drawbacks of the Christian faith. Eastern faiths are so much more astute in that they recognize that there is no duality. For example, light cannot exist without darkness. Good without bad, etc. There is no us V them, there is only WE. Which is what drew me to those faiths in the first place.

 

[JoStories]

Look...cut to the chase...homosexuality has got nothing to do with eating shellfish......have you seen the recent movie "Spotlight"... This is based on reality and shows that religious institutions are the facilitators of homosexuality....the fox is in charge of the hen house... You can down load the torrent from Pirate Bay....

It has everything to do with it. One cannot live by that one alleged law if one also dismisses the other laws as not pertinent. It has to be all or none. If you chose not to live by the laws set forth in the OT, you don't live by any of them. You (general you) tout out that one verse as being directly given to you by God but when it comes to shellfish or pork, those you can ignore. Either the book was written by God and therefore has to be adhered to or it was not.

 

[JoStories]

Are you talking about the movie about the Catholic sex abuse scandal? What does that have to do with homosexuality? Are you trying to equate gay men to sex abusers? Wtf.

As you know, that is often the case. All to often, Christians will point to gays as being sexual predators. The facts are that that is as far from the truth as it can be.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

In the eyes of many, homosexuality is grotesque and is an unnatural affection.

And in the eyes of many others, it isn't.

Not accepting a particular sexual orientation does not violate anyone's right as a human being.

Nobody is asking you to accept it. You are free to believe what you want. But when you spread misinformation and ignorance in support of your view or to encourage others to take your position, expect to be met with opposition from your more rationally-minded opponents.

Removal of a girl's clitoris can cause physical and emotional harm, which is a violation of her natural rights. Besides, clitoridectomies are only practiced in African Islamic cultures, but that is a culture. Homosexuality is not a culture, it's merely an orientation. Your argument is not relevant, and one MAJOR straw-man.

You completely missed the point of my argument. You said that a child coming out as homosexual would "shame" their family, and that this is reasonable argument for the harm homosexuality does. Young women not consenting to female circumcision are viewed by many, as you rightly say "in their culture", as bringing "shame" on their family, and so are the young girls who refuse to be forced into arranged marriages. I have a personal friend who I have not seen or heard from in over five years because her family forced her to go back to India and marry someone she did not love and cut off all contact with any friends she made in this country. What you or may not believe "shames" a family is a subjective, personal opinion based on little more than cultural bias and prior assumptions, and has no relevancy in any discussion about what is or isn't objectively harmful.

And, no, my issue is not just with anal sex. Straight couples do a lot of sexually immoral practices, but that is not what this thread is about. Like I said before, the peg fits the hole; therefore, man + woman is natural. As my mother used to say, God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.

So that's your best argument? Then you're basically already beaten.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

That is not a source. That is your opinion. Either admit there is no Biblical passage about anal sex or post it. I know there is not one so why not admit you are speaking from opinion only?

For heavens sake Jo....it is a matter of logic....if a man lying with another man as with a woman, ie..anal sex...is condemned....why would anal sex involving a man lying with a woman as with another man be any different.. It is anal sex that is condemned...not love...

 

[Ben Dhyan]

It has everything to do with it. One cannot live by that one alleged law if one also dismisses the other laws as not pertinent. It has to be all or none. If you chose not to live by the laws set forth in the OT, you don't live by any of them. You (general you) tout out that one verse as being directly given to you by God but when it comes to shellfish or pork, those you can ignore. Either the book was written by God and therefore has to be adhered to or it was not.

Jo...the thread is about what the bible has to say about homosexuality.....not about diet... Start another thread if you want to get into the kosher issue...