Prop 8 Support Defense for those of us who are LDS or like-minded in moral values

[9-10ths_Penguin]

infact, can anyone find scripture that even mentions gays?

Assuming you're talking about the Bible, there's plenty and it's generally negative when looked at in isolation. However, there's also plenty about love as virtue, setting aside the whole notion of "sin" and concerning yourself with your own shortcomings and not the shortcomings of others that makes coming to conclusions about homosexuality less clear than the so-called Religious Right would generally have you believe.

 

[Magic Man]

However, there's also plenty about love as virtue, setting aside the whole notion of "sin" and concerning yourself with your own shortcomings and not the shortcomings of others that makes coming to conclusions about homosexuality less clear than the so-called Religious Right would generally have you believe.

Maybe we should put all of these parts in bold in all of the Bibles. :yes:

 

[Luminous]

again, please quote me the scripture that mentions GAYs

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

again, please quote me the scripture that mentions GAYs

Leviticus 18:22
Leviticus 20:13
Romans 1:26-27 (arguably, and the only Biblical verse to refer to female homosexuality... though again, arguably)
1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (arguably)
Also, the story of Sodom & Gomorrah in Genesis 19 is sometimes cited, though I think that seeing how the "sin of Sodom" was attempted male-male gang-rape, there's enough sinfulness in the gang-rape part without inferring sinfulness in the male-male part.

You can look them all up here:

BibleGateway.com: A searchable online Bible in over 100 versions and 50 languages.

If you want the verses that support the other side, I can give you them too... though I think we're taking the thread a bit off-topic.

 

[Luminous]

Leviticus 18:22
Leviticus 20:13
Romans 1:26-27 (arguably, and the only Biblical verse to refer to female homosexuality... though again, arguably)
1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (arguably)
Also, the story of Sodom & Gomorrah in Genesis 19 is sometimes cited, though I think that seeing how the "sin of Sodom" was attempted male-male gang-rape, there's enough sinfulness in the gang-rape part without inferring sinfulness in the male-male part.

You can look them all up here:

BibleGateway.com: A searchable online Bible in over 100 versions and 50 languages.

If you want the verses that support the other side, I can give you them too... though I think we're taking the thread a bit off-topic.

oop, sorry; your right. Thank You:yes:. Finally(not you but finally someone even looks to see about my question.):bow:

 

[Rolling_Stone]

Then I think you may have misunderstood my intent. I am concerned about the whole. I'm just interested in your individual opinion on why sanctioning gay marriage will be a detriment to the whole of society now or in the future. That is a strong claim, so I was just hoping you could back it up with an example of just what the negative impact(s) would be on the whole. So far, as I understand it your answer is "I don't know, but I am certain there will be." That seems like a weak argument to me.

Maybe it is a weak argument, but it is stronger and more realistic than the egalitarian ideal. But even if I cited some examples, like the disconnect between sex and parenting seen in at least one study, you would still want something more. You would dismiss indications of social disintegration everywhere and the collapse of populations in many European countries so eagerly exemplified by the homosexual community as having nothing to do with society sanctioning homosexual behavior. The "liberal" mind (which isn't liberal at all in the classical sense of the word) is so self-absorbed it cannot make correlations: it cannot see the interrelatedness of all things, it cannot see that everything is connected and nothing happens in isolation. It wants only to satisfy its "infantile claims to entitlement, indulgence and compensation." It wants freedom to be synonymous with license. It mistakes tolerance for weakness and thinks it can get its way by creating and reinforcing perceptions of victimization.

This infantile and undisciplined mindset can be traced to Cartesian dualism and materialism--the false notion that things and beings exist in relative isolation and circumstances can be changed without affecting the whole. Maybe they will get their way, but it will be a pyrrhic victory, and in the end, short-lived.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Maybe it is a weak argument, but it is stronger and more realistic than the egalitarian ideal.

Your whole argument so far has been an exercise in special pleading. You completely discount the possibility of unintended negative consequences of the status quo.

 

[Rolling_Stone]

Your whole argument so far has been an exercise in special pleading. You completely discount the possibility of unintended negative consequences of the status quo.

And all your pleading is from the infantile, self-indulging, self-pitying and undisciplined mindset whose values are derived from the very values you protest.

I trust that in time you will get tired of the merry-go-round and step outside the system.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

And all your pleading is from the infantile, self-indulging and undisciplined mindset whose values are derived from the very values you protest.

Ah. Ad hominem. Let nobody say you're a one-trick pony when it comes to logical fallacies.

 

[kiwimac]

Leviticus 18:22
Leviticus 20:13
Romans 1:26-27 (arguably, and the only Biblical verse to refer to female homosexuality... though again, arguably)
1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (arguably)
Also, the story of Sodom & Gomorrah in Genesis 19 is sometimes cited, though I think that seeing how the "sin of Sodom" was attempted male-male gang-rape, there's enough sinfulness in the gang-rape part without inferring sinfulness in the male-male part.

You can look them all up here:

BibleGateway.com: A searchable online Bible in over 100 versions and 50 languages.

If you want the verses that support the other side, I can give you them too... though I think we're taking the thread a bit off-topic.

The Leviticus verses also include prohibitions on the eating of shellfish, not trimming your beard and the interesting information that Bats are birds (at least in the KJV.) The Ancient Jewish holiness code is NOT applicable to gentiles and never has been. According to Ezekiel and Jesus the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah was inhospitality and the ending verse for Romans 1 is Romans 2:1. I would further argue that the OT verses have much more to do with Temple Prostitution than with Homosexuality.

 

[deseretgov]

Fortunately I don't have to guess what those verses mean. I have a living prophet that tell us what God will concerning gay marriage is.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

The kingdom of Deseret....say, didn't I read about you guys in Krakauer's Under the Banner of Heaven?

Amazon.com: Under the Banner of Heaven: A Story of Violent Faith: Jon Krakauer: Books

 

[Draka]

And all your pleading is from the infantile, self-indulging, self-pitying and undisciplined mindset whose values are derived from the very values you protest.

I trust that in time you will get tired of the merry-go-round and step outside the system.

= nuh uh! You're just a poopy-head!


Wow! Do I call 'em, or do I call 'em?

 

[deseretgov]

The kingdom of Deseret....say, didn't I read about you guys in Krakauer's Under the Banner of Heaven?

Amazon.com: Under the Banner of Heaven: A Story of Violent Faith: Jon Krakauer: Books

I'm sorry, I'm not familiar with that book or its contents other than what is on that Amazon page. The Nation of Deseret is not controlled by any religious organization.

 

[silvermoon383]

Um...you are aware that the Nation of Deseret ceased to exist when the area it was in became US territory, right? When Brigham Young found out that they were back inside the States they immediately started the process to become a state.

Instead they got territorial status at the time (Utah Territory), and it was one heck of a battle, but in the end the Nation of Deseret became (at least in part) the states of California, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming, Idaho, Oregon, and Utah.

 

[Sententia]

Why do people opposed to same sex marriage think that they are better and entitled to more rights then same sex couples?

Gays and lesbians are not second class citizens. All men and women were created equal.

 

[texan1]

Fortunately I don't have to guess what those verses mean. I have a living prophet that tell us what God will concerning gay marriage is.

You are certainly free to believe what you want about gay marriage, but why should the country write legislation based on your religious beliefs? You can't expect the general public to trust a living prophet in a church that didn't allow African-Americans in the clergy until nearly 1980. They seem to be slower than everyone else when it comes to issues of equality. :sorry1:

 

[texan1]

Hi again Rolling Stone. I really appreciate the fact that you responded to me despite all of the abuse you have gotten on this thread. Thanks.

Maybe it is a weak argument, .

Thank you for recognizing this.

but it is stronger and more realistic than the egalitarian ideal.

I'm not sure I understand you here. Perhaps you could clarify. Your argument is that gay marriage is wrong because it is wrong or unrealistic to strive for equality? The egalitarian ideal may be unrealistic and unattainable, but does that mean it is a bad thing to pursue? Isn't it what our country is based upon? The idea that all men are created equal? It is this idea that brought us things like: an end to slavery, women's suffrage, etc. Our country has made huge progress because of the fact that the egalitarian ideal is written in our constitution. Do you think these things have brought us terrible consequences? Do you think women were "infantile" or "self-indulgent" for pursuing the right to vote since this position is not supported in the Bible?

But even if I cited some examples, like the disconnect between sex and parenting seen in at least one study, you would still want something more. You would dismiss indications of social disintegration everywhere and the collapse of populations in many European countries so eagerly exemplified by the homosexual community as having nothing to do with society sanctioning homosexual behavior. .

I would? How do you know? Why don't you give it a shot - tell me more about these specific examples.

The "liberal" mind (which isn't liberal at all in the classical sense of the word) is so self-absorbed it cannot make correlations: it cannot see the interrelatedness of all things, it cannot see that everything is connected and nothing happens in isolation. It wants only to satisfy its "infantile claims to entitlement, indulgence and compensation." It wants freedom to be synonymous with license. It mistakes tolerance for weakness and thinks it can get its way by creating and reinforcing perceptions of victimization.

This infantile and undisciplined mindset can be traced to Cartesian dualism and materialism--the false notion that things and beings exist in relative isolation and circumstances can be changed without affecting the whole. Maybe they will get their way, but it will be a pyrrhic victory, and in the end, short-lived.

Hmmmm ...why do I get the feeling you are cutting and pasting this stuff from a certain blog site or philosophy journal...just trying to find ways to justify the fact that you have a visceral reaction to the idea of two guys kissing and just want to stamp it out?

By the way, it seems to me that the "conservative capitalist mind" is self absorbed and concerned only with the well-being of the individual and not the whole.

 

[texan1]

The homosexual community should be very careful, however, because it may be that the only thing protecting them from retaliation may be the very value-system against which they commit acts of violence and hate.

This is a horrible and ignorant statement. Who is "they"? A few angry protesters? Are you aware of all of the hate crimes and murders there have been against gays? I can cite some examples if you like.

With all due respect Rolling Stone, I feel your position is that of complete ignorance. Perhaps because of where I live and the fact that I am involved in the arts, I happen to have a lot of close friends who are homosexuals. They are among the most honorable people I know. I feel that if you knew these people like I did you would understand how awful Prop. 8 is. For their sake I hope that someday people like you would stop being so self indulgent and infantile......judging them from a distance, using quotes from a few philosophers and bloggers to justify bigotry. I'm willing to risk the "unforseen consequences" in order to support them.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The Leviticus verses also include prohibitions on the eating of shellfish, not trimming your beard and the interesting information that Bats are birds (at least in the KJV.)

And rabbits chew their cud, apparently. :areyoucra

I wasn't trying to justify anything with the verses; I'm only pointing them out as the usual citations for anti-homosexual positions by Christians.

The Ancient Jewish holiness code is NOT applicable to gentiles and never has been.

Yeah... but then you get into whether Christians inherit the status of "God's Chosen People" along with (or instead of, in some versions) the Jews. There's a fair bit of talk in the Epistles about physical vs. spiritual circumcision and the like, so cases have been made either way.

In any case, though, I do agree that if that's the justification, it should be an all-or-nothing approach. It's inconsistent to condemn homosexuality with Leviticus but not eating shellfish or reaping the edges of your field. I've heard attempted justifications why homosexuality should be singled out, but none I've encountered really work when you think about them.

According to Ezekiel and Jesus the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah was inhospitality

Yeah, I suppose attempted gang-rape of guests could be considered a form of inhospitality... very, very extreme inhospitality.

and the ending verse for Romans 1 is Romans 2:1.

I don't have reason to doubt you. However, I've found that arguing that parts of the Bible are later interpolations doesn't work well with many Christians.

I would further argue that the OT verses have much more to do with Temple Prostitution than with Homosexuality.

Again, I don't have reason to doubt you. I was just trying to give the verses normally cited against homosexuality, and I did note that there was another side to the issue of interpreting the Bible's message about homosexuality.