ISSUE OF HOMOSEXUALITY

[psychoslice]

I do not concern myself with their biology, genetics, personal choices or anything else. I could care less how their "gayness" came to be. I work with gays within my unit. They keep it to themselves and are very professional. I have no problems with that as personal crap does not belong in the workplace to begin with, regardless of sexual orientation. I don't talk about how freaky my wife got the night before, as it would be wrong to do so.

I have already stated that I support gay rights in that they should be treated equal according to the law (marriage, health care, etc.). No human should be considered a subclass and treated any differently by law. No religious institute should dictate what the law can or can't say/do. What more do you want from a Southern, Bible-belt heterosexual male with a wife and two kids, that was brought up in a conservative Baptist church?

I will say this one more time and I hope it will sink in...I personally, as is my right and choice, do not approve of homosexual activity. I see it as both immoral and unnatural. Immoral because, according to my opinion and beliefs which I am entitled to, it is wrong. It is my right to think that way. Unnatural because two men can't procreate. Two women can't procreate. It takes a man and woman to procreate naturally. Plain and simple.

I am entitled to my opinion, as is my right, just like I support human rights to equal treatment by law. I, on a personal level, do not have to like it, approve of it, or accept it. Just because it may be made legal (which I support) does not mean I am forced to look the other way and act like nothing is happening. It does not mean that I am no longer entitled to my opinion, or that I have to teach my children that being gay is ok. My rights, as a US citizen, are also protected under the Constitution, especially where the 1st Amendment is concerned.

In summary, I support gay rights and they should be treated equally, by law.
I personally do not approve of homosexuality and I am entitled to my opinion about it.

No one is taking your opinion away, I'm also giving my opinion, that's all it is, there is no such thing as morals, there nothing but concepts of man, the universe does revolve around our personal morals. Please don't be paranoid, I'm not taking anything away from you, I am just trying to show you another way of thinking about it, there is no need to be a drama queen lol.

 

[Neo Deist]

No one is taking your opinion away, I'm also giving my opinion, that's all it is, there is no such thing as morals, there nothing but concepts of man, the universe does revolve around our personal morals. Please don't be paranoid, I'm not taking anything away from you, I am just trying to show you another way of thinking about it, there is no need to be a drama queen lol.

Me, paranoid? LOL!

Not a drama queen...just standing my ground.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

I do not concern myself with their biology, genetics, personal choices or anything else. I could care less how their "gayness" came to be. I work with gays within my unit. They keep it to themselves and are very professional. I have no problems with that as personal crap does not belong in the workplace to begin with, regardless of sexual orientation. I don't talk about how freaky my wife got the night before, as it would be wrong to do so.

I have already stated that I support gay rights in that they should be treated equal according to the law (marriage, health care, etc.). No human should be considered a subclass and treated any differently by law. No religious institute should dictate what the law can or can't say/do. What more do you want from a Southern, Bible-belt heterosexual male with a wife and two kids, that was brought up in a conservative Baptist church?

I will say this one more time and I hope it will sink in...I personally, as is my right and choice, do not approve of homosexual activity. I see it as both immoral and unnatural. Immoral because, according to my opinion and beliefs which I am entitled to, it is wrong. It is my right to think that way. Unnatural because two men can't procreate. Two women can't procreate. It takes a man and woman to procreate naturally. Plain and simple.

I am entitled to my opinion, as is my right, just like I support human rights to equal treatment by law. I, on a personal level, do not have to like it, approve of it, or accept it. Just because it may be made legal (which I support) does not mean I am forced to look the other way and act like nothing is happening. It does not mean that I am no longer entitled to my opinion, or that I have to teach my children that being gay is ok. My rights, as a US citizen, are also protected under the Constitution, especially where the 1st Amendment is concerned.

In summary, I support gay rights and they should be treated equally, by law.
I personally do not approve of homosexuality and I am entitled to my opinion about it.

I respect that. For what it's worth.

I also hold the right to express how misogynist and homophobic some religious beliefs are, and how I have the right to teach my children about how bigoted some religious people are. I simply disagree with bigoted religious people and hold the right to express my disgust at the choices bigoted religious people make with their chosen lifestyles.

But I still love them as people in spite of how much I disagree with their bigoted, ignorant, dehumanizing, and oppressive choices in the public sphere.

I love conversations like these.

 

[Neo Deist]

I also hold the right to express how misogynist and homophobic some religious beliefs are, and how I have the right to teach my children about how bigoted some religious people are. I simply disagree with bigoted religious people and hold the right to express my disgust at the choices bigoted religious people make with their chosen lifestyles.

I agree, some religions are rather extreme and unyielding. They preach compassion, understanding and forgiveness...but only if people conform to their ideals. Why do you think I enjoy being a deist so much? I am subject to no religious authority other than God.

 

[Awkward Fingers]

If my God is the true God (and I believe he is), he will back up his words by actions.(Zephaniah 1:12-18)

Curious then, what you think of Texas flooding shortly after banning gay marriage,
but a giant double rainbow over Ireland as they passed gay marriage as legal?
Do you consider that a sign?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I will say this one more time and I hope it will sink in...I personally, as is my right and choice, do not approve of homosexual activity. I see it as both immoral and unnatural. Immoral because, according to my opinion and beliefs which I am entitled to, it is wrong. It is my right to think that way. Unnatural because two men can't procreate. Two women can't procreate. It takes a man and woman to procreate naturally. Plain and simple.

I'm going to try and make it clear that I'm not going to jump down your throat about this - you have made your opinion clear with regards to gay rights, and I do not think you are are in any way homophobic or bigoted - but I still wish to question these two beliefs of yours.

Firstly, do you consider it unnatural when individuals who are infertile are in a relationship? Since they also cannot procreate, is a relationship between a man and women in which the man is sterile considered unnatural by the same logic?

Secondly, does something being unnatural, in your eyes, count as a negative? In other words, just because something is unnatural by your definition, does that make it bad?

Third, what is your moral objection to homosexuality? What beliefs do you hold indicate to you that it is wrong?

 

[Selinagirl]

Curious then, what you think of Texas flooding shortly after banning gay marriage,
but a giant double rainbow over Ireland as they passed gay marriage as legal?
Do you consider that a sign?

That's a very good question. Has there ever been studies if there is a coherence between bigotry and natural catastrophes?

 

[Neo Deist]

I'm going to try and make it clear that I'm not going to jump down your throat about this - you have made your opinion clear with regards to gay rights, and I do not think you are are in any way homophobic or bigoted - but I still wish to question these two beliefs of yours.

Firstly, do you consider it unnatural when individuals who are infertile are in a relationship? Since they also cannot procreate, is a relationship between a man and women in which the man is sterile considered unnatural by the same logic?

There is a difference between a man/woman couple that is infertile and two men or two women that simply can't make it happen naturally. That should be obvious and has no bearing on my logic.

Secondly, does something being unnatural, in your eyes, count as a negative? In other words, just because something is unnatural by your definition, does that make it bad?

I do not view things as positive or negative. As a deist, I view things in life as "it is what it is." Can I be in support of something while disliking it? Absolutely! Vegetables are good for you but I can't stand many of them, and they certainly are not bad...just bad tasting!

Third, what is your moral objection to homosexuality? What beliefs do you hold indicate to you that it is wrong?

If you read my bio, you would have found that my first 30 years of life were spent in a Southern Baptist church. That should explain much of why I initially disagree with homosexuality. Even though I have broken away from that and have found firm ground in deism, there will always be some lingering thoughts about certain subjects. The difference between the new me and the old me, is that I now try to be more open minded and understanding...which is why I support gay rights instead of wanting to burn them at the stake and condemning them to hell.

All of that aside, the mere thought of two men together sickens me (just being honest). I could care less what religion says about it, I am just not physically attracted to or interested in the concept in any shape or form. However, being hypocritical, the thought of two women together does not bother me. Heterosexual males fantasize about being in the middle of two women, but would rather jump off a cliff and fall to their deaths than be with two men.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

There is a difference between a man/woman couple that is infertile and two men or two women that simply can't make it happen naturally. That should be obvious and has no bearing on my logic.

But what is the difference? If you consider it unnatural because two men and two women can't procreate, surely a man and woman couple who are infertile are equally unnatural. Is your issue that the attraction is unnatural (i.e: attraction is an evolutionary mechanism designed to draw mating partners together)? If so, then procreation is not an issue, and an attraction between sterile couples should still count as unnatural by the same distinction.

I do not view things as positive or negative. As a deist, I view things in life as "it is what it is." Can I be in support of something while disliking it? Absolutely! Vegetables are good for you but I can't stand many of them, and they certainly are not bad...just bad tasting!

So something being unnatural is not a negative to you?

If you read my bio, you would have found that my first 30 years of life were spent in a Southern Baptist church. That should explain much of why I initially disagree with homosexuality. Even though I have broken away from that and have found firm ground in deism, there will always be some lingering thoughts about certain subjects. The difference between the new me and the old me, is that I now try to be more open minded and understanding...which is why I support gay rights instead of wanting to burn them at the stake and condemning them to hell.

All of that aside, the mere thought of two men together sickens me (just being honest). I could care less what religion says about it, I am just not physically attracted to or interested in the concept in any shape or form. However, being hypocritical, the thought of two women together does not bother me. Heterosexual males fantasize about being in the middle of two women, but would rather jump off a cliff and fall to their deaths than be with two men.

I respect your honesty, but I believe your position of revulsion is most likely a socially enforced mindset - a holdover from your years as a Baptist. I am a heterosexual male, but I am not repulsed or sickened by the idea of two men being in a relationship or having sex. I am certainly not attracted to it, but I am a long way from being repulsed by it. Perhaps the issue is really one of exposure. Being from a Southern Baptist background, perhaps you are not around homosexuals as much as I have been (growing up in the liberal British melting-pot city of Manchester), but that's probably far too presumptive on my part as I simply don't know enough about your position or your surroundings/upbringing. Thank you for answering my questions and thank you for your honesty.

 

[JoStories]

I think the questions you raise are good questions. I agree that the true religion should be able to provide evidence that it is the truth. I believe true Christianity is the true religion; (those who truly follow the Christ instead of only claiming to be "Christian".) I take no political stand on issues of homosexuality or same-sex marriage. What I posted was not my opinion. It is what the Bible says. What matters is God's view, not man's.

For you, this is what matters. However, this country is not founded on your god's view or even your religions. It's based on secular law. And should be. There are simply too many faiths to imagine this government being based on a religion's dogma.

 

[Neo Deist]

For you, this is what matters. However, this country is not founded on your god's view or even your religions. It's based on secular law. And should be. There are simply too many faiths to imagine this government being based on a religion's dogma.

In reference to the USA...many Christians do not realize that the country was NOT founded as a Christian nation. Jesus is never mentioned in any of these documents:

Continental Association (1774)
Declaration of Independence (1776)
Articles of Confederation (1777)
US Constitution (1789)

Although God is mentioned, many of the Founding Fathers were not Christian. Many of the key players were actually deists, and that list includes Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine and Benjamin Franklin. Those documents were intentionally written to be very vague about religion, other than granting the freedom of (and from) religion. When people say, "but the US was founded as a Christian nation," they are incorrect, and should simply say, "the US was founded on the principle of religious freedom...which includes the right to be non-religious."

 

[Marisa]

Do I agree with homosexuality? No I do not. I see it as immoral and unnatural. I certainly don't want to have to explain to my young children why two men are kissing in public. However, what other people do is none of my business, just like when I tell my kids that those people are wrong, disgusting and confused is none of their business. It may be made legal, but that does not mean I have to like or approve of it.

It also doesn't mean you have to teach your kids to be as intolerant as you are, which you are if you're running around teaching your kids that other human beings are "disgusting" or "wrong" or "confused". Here's the thing: no one feels the need to explain to kids why a guy and a chick are kissing in public. If your kids asked, you'd probably just say they love each other. Why do feel like you have to do anything differently if it's two dudes or two chicks? Why is "they love each other" suddenly insufficient?

 

[Marisa]

I never used the word hate. I don't hate anyone. I just don't agree with the choices some people make, as is my right to do so. Love the person, disapprove of their actions.

You carry this to the nth level when you teach your children that other human beings are "digusting", "wrong" or "confused" (your words) simply because you disapprove of them. Those are extremely hateful words, so protesting you don't hate despite using them to strip other people of their humanity is rather hollow. Do you think your kids fear that you will level such charges at them if they do something you disapprove of? I'm always fascinated how people often don't seem to realize they reveal as much or more about themselves when they are condemning others.

 

[Neo Deist]

Do you feel better after that little rant?

 

[Marisa]

I do not concern myself with their biology, genetics, personal choices or anything else. I could care less how their "gayness" came to be. I work with gays within my unit. They keep it to themselves and are very professional. I have no problems with that as personal crap does not belong in the workplace to begin with, regardless of sexual orientation. I don't talk about how freaky my wife got the night before, as it would be wrong to do so.

I would bet money that you don't do this more out of respect for your wife than a feeling that wild tales of sexual exploits don't belong in the workplace. I bet gays keep their private lives to themselves for the same reason. That said, the feelings you've felt were perfectly reasoned to display here are likely not unknown to those around you.

I have already stated that I support gay rights in that they should be treated equal according to the law (marriage, health care, etc.). No human should be considered a subclass and treated any differently by law. No religious institute should dictate what the law can or can't say/do. What more do you want from a Southern, Bible-belt heterosexual male with a wife and two kids, that was brought up in a conservative Baptist church?

I've lived in the bible belt my whole life, too. 48 years old, born and raised in Texas, I've lived in Arkansas and now Tennessee. I could sit you in a room with my 45 year old husband, who was raised catholic in Kentucky and maybe he can educate you on how southern men can be tolerant.

In the meantime, I suggest you give yourself a refresher course on Civil Rights history. Take note of all those people running around in white robes with pointy hats. I wonder if any of them also asked society what more it could want from a "southern, bible-belt heterosexual male with a wife and ____ kids, that was brought up in a conservative _____________ church"?

I will say this one more time and I hope it will sink in...I personally, as is my right and choice, do not approve of homosexual activity. I see it as both immoral and unnatural. Immoral because, according to my opinion and beliefs which I am entitled to, it is wrong. It is my right to think that way. Unnatural because two men can't procreate. Two women can't procreate. It takes a man and woman to procreate naturally. Plain and simple.

Millions of straight couples can't procreate either, but it doesn't appear you've ever given that 2 seconds' consideration.

I am entitled to my opinion, as is my right, just like I support human rights to equal treatment by law. I, on a personal level, do not have to like it, approve of it, or accept it. Just because it may be made legal (which I support) does not mean I am forced to look the other way and act like nothing is happening. It does not mean that I am no longer entitled to my opinion, or that I have to teach my children that being gay is ok. My rights, as a US citizen, are also protected under the Constitution, especially where the 1st Amendment is concerned.

Yes, you are entitled to your opinion. The rest of us are entitled to our opinion on your opinion. And when you get thrown in jail for your opinion, I will be leading the charge against the violation of your Constitutional rights. But thanks for giving me the opportunity to educate you that the 1st Amendment protects you from the government, not from other people.

In summary, I support gay rights and they should be treated equally, by law.
I personally do not approve of homosexuality and I am entitled to my opinion about it.

At the end of the day, there is at least hope for you. I suggest you stop focusing on the ick factor thing you've got going on and give people half a chance to show you how awesome they are, despite not being you.

 

[JoStories]

Do you feel better after that little rant?

Well, that little 'rant' was right on point. And your response was rather rude, IMO. Marisa is far more tolerant of people's ignorance than I am. She goes to great length to try to explain how your ideals are detrimental to your children. Of course youve the right to raise them as bigots but who does that help?

 

[JoStories]

Homosexuality can be cured spiritualy. Loving the Creator with strong affection will destroy all wicked feelings.

there is nothing about homsexuality that needs to be 'cured'. Nor is it 'wicked'. your dogma may state that for you but until you can prove that God truly exists and holds these ideals you claim, I won't be holdinhg my breath to consider homosexuality as an illness. In fact, my belief in God is that God made me just as I am and that includes being gay.

 

[JoStories]

I never used the word hate. I don't hate anyone. I just don't agree with the choices some people make, as is my right to do so. Love the person, disapprove of their actions.

being gay is not a choice at all. I didn't choose to be attracted to both sexes. I just am. DId you choose to be heterosexual and if you did, when was that? You see, gay people no more choose their orientation than you did. It comes as natural as breathing. You say you don't see the issues as having any basis, in terms of the Christian right having a claim to stop SSM or homosexuality out of one side of your mouth and then state we are 'disgusting' and 'confused'. Do you consider yourself disgusting or confused to be attracted to women? I think not. Why is it so different for me, at least in your eyes?

 

[rusra02]

No it doesn't condemn homosexuals!

As has been shown OVER-and-OVER-and-OVER,

Romans 1 is about Sacred Sex - it TELLS US SO!

Rom 1:24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonor their own bodies between themselves:

~~ ~ NOTE: the people in 24 that dishonor their bodies, are the people WHO worship the Act of Creation in 25! Religious Sexuality! ~~~

Rom 1:25 Who changed the truth of Deity into a lie, and worship and render religious homage to the "Act of Creation" more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

Worshiping with sex is obviously - SACRED SEX - not homosexuality!

There is NO verse saying only male and female may marry!

1 Corinthians does NOT say what you imply!

1 CO 6:9 Know you not that the “heathen” shall not inherit the Kingdom of God? Be not deceived: Neither prostitutes (pornos,) nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor the morally weak, nor arsenokoites (rapists,)

There are no ancient Greek texts using arsenokoites or its stem as homosexuality. There are uses for both male and female as RAPE.

The Thesaurus Linguae Graecae. TLG has collected and digitized most literary texts written in Greek, from the 8th century BC to the fall of Byzantium in AD 1453. They have 73 references to the arsenokoit stem. There are NO early Greek uses of the word as “homosexual.” LATER - the church decides to translate it as such – then these later texts copy the church original.
*

Matt 19 is specifically a question about married people, and says, or implies NOTHING about homosexuals, or gay marriage.

Mat 19:3 The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?

You folks need to stop saying texts that have NOTHING to do with homosexuality - are somehow condemning them!!!!!

*

Those who advocate for homosexuality often make such claims, that somehow the Bible doesn't say what it plainly does.
1 Cor. 6:9 "ἢ Or οὐκ not οἴδατε have you known ὅτι that ἄδικοι unjust (ones) θεοῦ of God βασιλείαν kingdom οὐ not κληρονομήσουσιν; they will inherit? Μὴ Not πλανᾶσθε· be you being misled; οὔτε neither πόρνοι fornicators οὔτε nor εἰδωλολάτραι idolaters οὔτε nor μοιχοὶ adulterers οὔτε nor μαλακοὶ soft [men] οὔτε nor ἀρσενοκοῖται liers with males." I checked numerous translations and all consistently render this verse as referring to homosexual acts.
The point of Matthew 19:4,5 is that God made marriage between a male and female. "In reply he said: “Have you not read that the one who created them from the beginning made them male and female and said: ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and his mother and will stick to his wife, and the two will be one flesh’?"
Finally, quoting what the Bible says is not done to condemn anyone. Suppressing the truth benefits no one. (Romans 1:18)

 

[Marisa]

Those who advocate for homosexuality often make such claims, that somehow the Bible doesn't say what it plainly does.
1 Cor. 6:9 "ἢ Or οὐκ not οἴδατε have you known ὅτι that ἄδικοι unjust (ones) θεοῦ of God βασιλείαν kingdom οὐ not κληρονομήσουσιν; they will inherit? Μὴ Not πλανᾶσθε· be you being misled; οὔτε neither πόρνοι fornicators οὔτε nor εἰδωλολάτραι idolaters οὔτε nor μοιχοὶ adulterers οὔτε nor μαλακοὶ soft [men] οὔτε nor ἀρσενοκοῖται liers with males." I checked numerous translations and all consistently render this verse as referring to homosexual acts.
The point of Matthew 19:4,5 is that God made marriage between a male and female. "In reply he said: “Have you not read that the one who created them from the beginning made them male and female and said: ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and his mother and will stick to his wife, and the two will be one flesh’?"
Finally, quoting what the Bible says is not done to condemn anyone. Suppressing the truth benefits no one. (Romans 1:18)

Those who advocate for homosexuality don't much care what the the bible has to say on the subject, only those trying to rationalize bigotry do. After all, the bible also says slavery is okie dokie, and we determined that to be immoral, too.