Is living a gay/lesbian lifestyle a problem with God?

[Autodidact]

I see it has taken you quite a while to calm yourself.

Hopefully, everyone has gotten all the yelling out of their systems and we can go on without any negative feelings towards one another.

I don't hate anyone.

To Yogi, I really do understand why you felt the need to say something, but you need not defend anyone from me as I am no one's enemy or attacker. If I used strong language out of annoyance, I apologize, as I did not mean to belittle your religious practice--please forgive me. My goal is to have constructive dialogue with educated, intelligent people not to parade my own beliefs, but to learn from other's opinions.

Allah'u'Abha' ("God is All-Glorious")

All I know about you is your bigoted, dishonest, slanderous attacks on an innocent group of people who have done nothing to harm you in this thread. So far you have not managed to substantiate or defend a single one of your libels. It has nothing to do with strong language, intensity or even controversy. It has to do with being wrong. You're wrong. The particular way you are wrong is called bigotry. I guess when you withdraw and apologize for your slander, I'll be be ready to go on with no negative feelings. Until then, yeah, when people spread vicious lies about me or anyone, it causes negative feelings. If you don't want to cause negative feelings, then stop doing it.

Now, what on earth is the supposed connection between Chinese eunuchs, harems, and homosexuality? Or legendary masturbating monks and homosexuality?

And why again are women of no interest to you? I mean, if you're concerned about sexual slavery, I would think heterosexuality would be the first practice you would want to critique.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

To Yogi, I really do understand why you felt the need to say something, but you need not defend anyone from me as I am no one's enemy or attacker. If I used strong language out of annoyance, I apologize, as I did not mean to belittle your religious practice--please forgive me. My goal is to have constructive dialogue with educated, intelligent people not to parade my own beliefs, but to learn from other's opinions.

Allah'u'Abha' ("God is All-Glorious")

The good thing about this is we tend to tread on issues that are uncomfortable. By doing so I learn a lot. Forgive me also. I tend to have an emotional nature. So I can get to harsh.

 

[Cosmos]

Now, what on earth is the supposed connection between Chinese eunuchs, harems, and homosexuality? Or legendary masturbating monks and homosexuality?

And why again are women of no interest to you? I mean, if you're concerned about sexual slavery, I would think heterosexuality would be the first practice you would want to critique.

Well, this thread is specifically about homosexuality. Even so, I have fairly stated that my position is not merely to exclude homosexuals and have mentioned heterosexuality to be under the same precursors of abhorrent behaviors and expressions. I'd be glad to discuss the centuries of female oppression the world over if this was the thread.

I apologize if the sensitivity of topic is causing harm to other's emotions.

 

[Autodidact]

Well, this thread is specifically about homosexuality. Even so, I have fairly stated that my position is not merely to exclude homosexuals and have mentioned heterosexuality to be under the same precursors of abhorrent behaviors and expressions. I'd be glad to discuss the centuries of female oppression the world over if this was the thread.

I apologize if the sensitivity of topic is causing harm to other's emotions.

IT'S NOT THE SENSITIVITY OF THE TOPIC. It's the slander. If you're trying to say that all sexuality is related to slavery, then why even bring it up in a thread on homosexuality? Saying that homosexuality originates in slavery is just disgusting, evil slander. There is nothing fair about it; it's bigotry, pure and simple. I suggest that you withdraw your baseless propaganda, apologize to gay people for spreading lies about them, and refrain from doing so in future.

Still wondering why you thought Chinese eunuchs were relevant.

 

[Cosmos]

IT'S NOT THE SENSITIVITY OF THE TOPIC. It's the slander. If you're trying to say that all sexuality is related to slavery, then why even bring it up in a thread on homosexuality? Saying that homosexuality originates in slavery is just disgusting, evil slander. There is nothing fair about it; it's bigotry, pure and simple. I suggest that you withdraw your baseless propaganda, apologize to gay people for spreading lies about them, and refrain from doing so in future.

Still wondering why you thought Chinese eunuchs were relevant.

...Dude, what are you talking about?

I've clearly stated more than once that my stance was not to present homosexuality itself as being derived from slavery.

The focus on these social evils was to also draw attention to the other spectrum of that social ladder where the victimizer or oppressor are the ones in lofty environments engaging in hedonistic rituals deemed respectable by those in power.

Rather than assuming I mean to degrade homosexuality or sexuality itself, why not pay attention? My focus is to reveal how sex enslaves us through the flesh and not according to iron chains or branding, but the fetters of the self. Please desist from insisting that I come to spread hate.

 

[Autodidact]

...Dude, what are you talking about?

I've clearly stated more than once that my stance was not to present homosexuality itself as being derived from slavery.

Then why bring it up in a thread about homosexuality?

The focus on these social evils was to also draw attention to the other spectrum of that social ladder where the victimizer or oppressor are the ones in lofty environments engaging in hedonistic rituals deemed respectable by those in power.

Rather than assuming I mean to degrade homosexuality or sexuality itself, why not pay attention? My focus is to reveal how sex enslaves us through the flesh and not according to iron chains or branding, but the fetters of the self. Please desist from insisting that I come to spread hate.

Well, here are a few highlights of your contribution to the thread:

The love itself is not the problem. It is the sexual interaction between two people of the same gender.

Every single spiritual culture and successful civilization known in history does not indulge in homosexual behavior.

While it is absolutely true that every culture has had homosexuality, often it marks the declining period of said society,...

Take the eunuchs of ancient China, who were forced into service in the harems, as this is an example of how certain aspects of homosexuality originates from slavery.

Contemporary homosexuality may not be directly tied to slavery, but the mind-set itself is a form of slavery that evolves from the socio-economic imbalance between classes and gender...

there's two categories of homosexual behavior: That induced by trauma (i.e. slavery) and the dominance of upper classes or privileged classes. One is a victim and the other victimizer.

many aspects of homosexuality can be observed through societal enslavement, including hyper-masculine militaristic cultures.

it is this hyper-masculinity that breeds homosexuality (my argument).

No traditional culture has ever honored homosexual relationships.

every society heavily prevalent in homosexual behavior has collapsed.

you're probably aware of the many early sects, such as the Manicheans, where the monks would masturbate into their hands and eat their own semen. This is another example--outside of slavery--of homosexual spirituality or culture being institutionalized as an escape ladder away from society, which is traditionally represented by feminine symbols and agriculture.

Every one of these statements is false. Every one of them is the kind of scapegoating slander that is used to incite hatred against innocent groups of people. Several of them are also slightly whacko. If you're not a bigot, then apologize, retract, and stop practicing bigotry.

 

[Cosmos]

I am afraid none of my statements were slanderous. Or false. The statement about the Manichean may or may not be true, but it is based upon certain rituals actually committed by certain societies at one time or another, for example, in Egyptian mythology we see Atum-Re masturbating and eating His own semen, spitting it out to create the world. This is a transsexual reference to ancient veneration in certain cults and their societies of the Feminine Principle whereby the men, lacking the science of modern biology, were mystified by the powers of birthing life the female seemed to possess. This may or may not have been ritualized by Gnostic sects, though more likely was something done in the harems of the pharaohs and what not--either way I can concede it is conjectural speculation. Barbera G. Walker's, The Woman's Encyclopedia of Myths and Secrets, which I own, describes in detail many of the rituals performed in ancient societies, much relating to the tranny cultures persisting due to men's incomprehensive understanding of sexuality on a purely biological/physical level. In any case, I've apologized for anything misunderstood that I may have said, but I will not placate and act as if I need be redeemed.

 

[Aquitaine]

I've only read this last page of this thread, but from what Autodidact has quoted you saying Cosmos - it sounds like pure Homophobia to be honest.

 

[Autodidact]

I am afraid none of my statements were slanderous. Or false. The statement about the Manichean may or may not be true, but it is based upon certain rituals actually committed by certain societies at one time or another, for example, in Egyptian mythology we see Atum-Re masturbating and eating His own semen, spitting it out to create the world. This is a transsexual reference to ancient veneration in certain cults and their societies of the Feminine Principle whereby the men, lacking the science of modern biology, were mystified by the powers of birthing life the female seemed to possess. This may or may not have been ritualized by Gnostic sects, though more likely was something done in the harems of the pharaohs and what not--either way I can concede it is conjectural speculation. Barbera G. Walker's, The Woman's Encyclopedia of Myths and Secrets, which I own, describes in detail many of the rituals performed in ancient societies, much relating to the tranny cultures persisting due to men's incomprehensive understanding of sexuality on a purely biological/physical level. In any case, I've apologized for anything misunderstood that I may have said, but I will not placate and act as if I need be redeemed.

It is FALSE that there is a shred of relationship between putative masturbatory practices of certain manichean monks and homosexuality. It is FALSE that homosexuality is based in, related to, or a form of slavery. It is FALSE that accepting its gay members has any negative affect on society.

By spreading lies like this, you contribute to the hatred and scapegoating of gay people in the world. This in turn adds to the atmosphere in which gay people are discriminated against, taunted, blamed and sometimes killed. It is hateful, damaging and wrong, and no one with a shred of compassion for other people would do it.

But yeah, I understand, you don't think you said anything wrong, and are sorry if we misunderstood you.

 

[Mr Cheese]

the whole masturbatory manichaen monks thing is utterly ridiculous frankly!

now no more silly misinformation please! here we see an extract of an essay on Gnostic baby eating and ingestation of semen!

Baby eating....well I never

...........


In Roman times the Catholic clergy spread the most vile and slanderous rumors against the Gnostics. The worst attacks were made by a cleric named Epiphanius of Salamis (310–403) and are preserved in a lengthy anti-heresy diatribe known as the Panarion (“medicine chest&#8221. In this bitter, venomous diatribe the Gnostics are accused of masturbating, of mass fornication, and of eating semen and flux as symbols of the body and blood of Christ. As the final, ultimate outrage, Epiphanius informs his readers that when some Gnostic woman becomes pregnant, as a result of all this alleged promiscuity, he claims that the Gnostics have a special ritual where they extract the fetus, pound it with spices, cook it, and eat it (Panarion, 26).

Another cleric who made similar accusations against the Gnostics was Augustine of Hippo (354–430). Augustine accused the Gnostic Manichean sect of eating a Eucharist “sprayed with Human semen” (de Haeresibus ad Quodvultdeum, 46). A similar accusation comes from Cyril of Jerusalem (315–386), who accused the “Manichees” of eating pieces of pork dipped in semen (Catechetical Instruction, 6.33). [1]

Of course all of these wicked accusations begin to crumble under close scrutiny. Augustine, as an example, was a member of the Manichean sect for nine years, and was a fanatical defender of the sect, just as he would be for the Catholic Church later ( CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: St. Augustine of Hippo ).

The amazing fact is that Augustine never witnessed any such ritual first hand in the nine years he was in the sect. The basis for his story originates from a scandal supposedly involving local Manicheans in the city of Carthage. This scandal involved the abuse of two young women in an alleged Eucharist ritual that is too bizarre and too depraved to be believed (W. Barnstone, The Other Bible, pg. 676). I will not repeat the sick and disgusting details of this story here. I can only express my disbelief that religious people would engage in such perversions as an expression of their spirituality. I can see where deranged perverts would engage in such depravity, but not religious people. The supposed ritual that Augustine describes is no more sacramental than the molestation of altar boys by Catholic priests can be considered to be a sacramental ritual. Yet this is exactly how Augustine wants this story to appear. He is eager to see this account laid at the front door of all Manicheans everywhere; even as they protest their innocence of such evil deeds. Again, I find it incredible that Augustine was in the Manichean sect for nine years, but never witnessed anything like this with his own eyes. He actually admits that the Manicheans deny engaging in such practices.

The all-important concept of self-knowledge has basically been omitted from the four Gospels

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Homosexuals can live their lifestyle as freely as they wish, so long as that is not at the expense of society, particularly traditional (not fundamental) religious communities, forfeiting its own ethics. More importantly, this goes beyond the issue of homosexuals, as the moral code applies to heterosexuals, as well. Life is a responsibility and sexuality needs to be exercised responsibly, for the health of the individual and for the society.

No one is forfeiting their own personal moral values though. If a church wants to refuse to marry, or even allow gays in the door, that is fine by me. I don't even think the boy scouts should be forced to allow gays because it is a private organization. You can't have freedom without having some trade-offs.

So, yes, the Graeco-Romans are a fantastic example of how society degrades when tutors take advantage of their pupils, monks break their vows to commit unwholesome deeds, or when ruling classes abuse their subjects!

Then how would you explain the Spartans? They hardly ever slept with their wives, and the women had to look and act like men to get the attention of a man. In Athens, it was normal social customs for an unmarried man to have a boy as a lover, not over class or dominance, but it was just as normal as parents living with their children in some cultures.

 

[Cosmos]

Cheese, thank you for using references to dispel my error.

Much appreciated and shall be observed.

 

[TheBotanicalDolly]

Many claim that the Bible has nothing against 'homosexuality' or being 'gay or lesbian', that in fact the words never appear in scriptures so thus its not a problem with God. Well lets check it out...

Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.
Lev 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood [shall be] upon them.
Leviticus 18:23 Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion.
1Cr 6:18 Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.
1Cr 6:19 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost [which is] in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?
1Cr 7:2 Nevertheless,[to avoid] fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.
Man with man is fornication!! Woman with woman is fornication!!
Gal 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are [these]; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
Gal 5:20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
Gal 5:21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told [you] in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

God loves sinners, God hates sin!!
Does Christ say that He forgives but we can continue sinning.....

John 5:14
Afterward Jesus findeth him in the temple, and said unto him, Behold, thou art made whole: sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee.

John 8:11
She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

You have to ask yourself a question - what is worse? Living an openly gay lifestyle...or hiding from it, lying about it and trying to be straight to fit what is acceptable?

Either lie or be gay. Both apparently sinful, but only one was written in stone. So it must be more important to not lie, right?

 

[Cosmos]

As someone who has personally experimented with bisexualism/homosexuality, it i important for me to express to people that what is hardly talked about in popular society today concerning sexuality is not being addressed properly. It is not uncommon for young adults (teenagers) to have desires oriented towards the same-sex gender or for experimentation. However, what about all of the men and women who thought they were gay and apparently are heterosexuals? More than often is it said nowadays that there is no 'cure' or treatment for homosexuality... but I beg to differ, as I am living proof that hormonal suggestiveness is something society and culture engenders to develop one way or the other. So, living an openly gay life could be equally as great of a mistake as living in the closet, and the more relevant question posed to society today, I think, which has been satisfactorily answered by modern science, is whether or not sexuality itself needs to be regulated and monitered (on an individual basis of education) so as to avoid emotional/psychological damage.

 

[Autodidact]

As someone who has personally experimented with bisexualism/homosexuality, it i important for me to express to people that what is hardly talked about in popular society today concerning sexuality is not being addressed properly. It is not uncommon for young adults (teenagers) to have desires oriented towards the same-sex gender or for experimentation. However, what about all of the men and women who thought they were gay and apparently are heterosexuals? More than often is it said nowadays that there is no 'cure' or treatment for homosexuality... but I beg to differ, as I am living proof that hormonal suggestiveness is something society and culture engenders to develop one way or the other. So, living an openly gay life could be equally as great of a mistake as living in the closet, and the more relevant question posed to society today, I think, which has been satisfactorily answered by modern science, is whether or not sexuality itself needs to be regulated and monitered (on an individual basis of education) so as to avoid emotional/psychological damage.

It seems like you're generalizing from your own specific bisexual experience to all gay people, which is obviously dicey. In addition, you're assuming that there's something wrong with being gay, and that people who can live a heterosexual life should. I question this assumption, especially for women. There is nothing wrong with being gay or a lesbian, and no reason why a woman with a capacity for a lesbian relationship or way of life should not explore it.

Oh, and what about all the men or women who thought they were straight and apparently are homosexual?

And no, there is "cure" for homosexuality, nor does it need one, since it is not a disease, simply a normal variation of human sexuality.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

More than often is it said nowadays that there is no 'cure' or treatment for homosexuality... but I beg to differ, as I am living proof that hormonal suggestiveness is something society and culture engenders to develop one way or the other. So, living an openly gay life could be equally as great of a mistake as living in the closet, and the more relevant question posed to society today, I think, which has been satisfactorily answered by modern science, is whether or not sexuality itself needs to be regulated and monitered (on an individual basis of education) so as to avoid emotional/psychological damage.

There is no "cure" for homosexuality because there simply is nothing to be "cured." It is perfectly normal to experiment, or at least fantasize about experimenting, because as the saying goes "how can you know unless you've tried?" Science shows that people should live in a manner to accept their own orientation, be it homo, hetero, or bi, and that it shouldn't be regulated or monitored. And I am very confident that if there weren't such a social stigma attached to men experimenting and bisexuality, and sometimes women experimenting, then far more people would be bisexual, or at least have had one or more bisexual experiences.

 

[Cosmos]

Read my print. I said 'cure' to be facetious and not to attack homosexuals--nor have I ever (or would ever) equate homosexuality as a disease. Rather, Didactic, popular culture generalizes the experience of homosexualism, which is why I chose to use my personal life experience as a fine example of million's of experiences to parallel the overly emphasized aspects of people's sexual curiosity turning into a full-blown lifestyle. Now, not to argue, but everyone should know my religious stance on the issue--so, yes, anyone who can live a healthy heterosexual life should. No woman or man should develop homosexual relationships, but this is my personal opinion based upon my very own intimate experiences.

So, is there treatment for the condition? Yes. The treatment does not necessarily have to do with institutionalizing one's self to psychiatry as if one is diseased, though any sexual urge not regulated or controlled can express itself as an affliction and counseling can be beneficial and healthy. Treatment is self-discipline to realize the full capacity on a spiritual level the human being's potential and aspirations. Please know that I am not here to generalize any group of people, but I can only relate from my own understanding, so forgive me.

To Shadow Wolf... I absolutely agree that it is not a sin to fantasize and desire someone of the same sex, and the Guardian Shoghi Effendi of my faith speaks in-depth on this subject. Speaking of science, studies reveal that this is especially true for us in stages of adolescence (young adulthood), but we must discipline these emotions and behaviors to ensure a mature human race. I do not, however, agree that sexuality should not be monitered or regulated. Let me ask this forum--how many people here actually have CHILDREN? I have a step-child and am a stepfather, as well as a young man with such a perspective on the subject. Gays are not new to me, having been raised in Seattle, or alien, and I even have bisexuals in my own family. Correct... If society did not have social mores about protecting the institution of familyhood (i.e. biological procreation and culture) then everyone would just do as they please and in some societies this is acceptable to just let loose with the lower chakras, comingling sexually with anyone and everybody. Sex does not make you a grown up or a mature emotional individual. And back to family issues, I'd personally be damned if I let a young developing child do as they please and cross all bounds! Sexuality is a fundamental aspect of our human identity, but the PHYSICAL ASPECT is the lowest and most insignificent part of us, and as I've argued through and through in this forum is that sexuality is a MENTAL IDENTITY or Self that has been for centuries conceptually mixed and abased with the illusory 'self' ("I") of sensous (i.e. five sense) reality.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

To Shadow Wolf... I absolutely agree that it is not a sin to fantasize and desire someone of the same sex, and the Guardian Shoghi Effendi of my faith speaks in-depth on this subject. Speaking of science, studies reveal that this is especially true for us in stages of adolescence (young adulthood), but we must discipline these emotions and behaviors to ensure a mature human race. I do not, however, agree that sexuality should not be monitered or regulated. Let me ask this forum--how many people here actually have CHILDREN? I have a step-child and am a stepfather, as well as a young man with such a perspective on the subject. Gays are not new to me, having been raised in Seattle, or alien, and I even have bisexuals in my own family. Correct... If society did not have social mores about protecting the institution of familyhood (i.e. biological procreation and culture) then everyone would just do as they please and in some societies this is acceptable to just let loose with the lower chakras, comingling sexually with anyone and everybody. Sex does not make you a grown up or a mature emotional individual. And back to family issues, I'd personally be damned if I let a young developing child do as they please and cross all bounds! Sexuality is a fundamental aspect of our human identity, but the PHYSICAL ASPECT is the lowest and most insignificent part of us, and as I've argued through and through in this forum is that sexuality is a MENTAL IDENTITY or Self that has been for centuries conceptually mixed and abased with the illusory 'self' ("I") of sensous (i.e. five sense) reality.

Being homosexual or bisexual, or even just experimenting is "letting loose our lower chakra." It's not even necessarily being promiscuous. While we do indeed need heterosexual couples to ensure the survival of any race, even if half of the population suddenly turned gay over night and refused to reproduce the human race would be ok. While I agree that sexual orientation is a lower point of identity, there is nothing to be concerned about. Myself, I never had any serious curiosities about being sexual with a man until maybe a year ago. Of course I've always had the thoughts, I just never actually considered it until recently.

 

[sojourner]

Is living a gay/lesbian lifestyle a problem with God?

What, exactly, is a "gay lifestyle?" Possessing closets? Being fashionable? Being an interesting individual? Being creative?

Jesus said that we should "go into our closets to pray in secret." One can only assume that he knew that we would have to come out of our closets sooner or later. Crucifixes are the height of fashion these days. Who was more interesting than the King of Heaven? Since "all things were created through him," who could be more creative?

Since God created homosexuality, I should think that God would have no problem living that lifestyle.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

I have said it a million times in this thread, but it merrits repeating. Romans 1 and 1 Corinthians 6 in context do not condemn homosexuality. Romans 1 condemns being born straight, but then choosing to be gay. If you're born gay, it's not a choice. 1 Corinthians 6 is Paul addressing the Roman practice of young boy prostitutes, if you read the Greek there, it more accurately renders boy prostitutes, not homosexuals.