The Homosexuals Of Alderaan Want Your Children

[-Peacemaker-]

Which means that homosexuality may be as immoral as tattoos. (which would be to most people: not very much, if at all )




I need to ask again, what book are you reading o.o? They are barely adressed at all.

The best argument that you have is that Jesus didn't mention homosexuality by name. You can make the same argument for bestiality and incest. Maybe Jesus has no problem with us having sex with farm animals? The Bible from cover to cover is pretty clear that homosexuality is a sin when you consider the OT and Paul. Jesus is clear about sexual immorality and shows no indication that he's ushering a new era of sexual "freedom". Yes, we can play this game of speculating on what Jesus might or might not have done, but the argument that Jesus MIGHT have actually approved of this behavior is far weaker than the argument that he stood fast to to OT laws on sexual behavior.

 

[Agnostic75]

I've compiled a decent little apologetic arguing for the historical reliability of the NT. I've shared it before. We could reopen that can of worms sometime.

Until you do, your arguments are not reasonable.

How could any historian reasonably prove that Jesus said everything that the New Testament says that he said, and that Paul said everything that the New Testament says that he said?

 

[Me Myself]

The best argument that you have is that Jesus didn't mention homosexuality by name. You can make the same argument for bestiality and incest.

That is my best argument to say that you don´t have to believe God specificaly commanded you that that is a sin.

I am not saying that anything that is not a sin by Jesus words or the bible is not a sin. I am saying that you have no argument to say that it is any more of God´s law than the one of tattoos.

If the bible is your only source of morality, then pedophilia is not a sin BTW.

So I do would urge you to look elsewhere for morality, not only Jesus´s or the Bible´s word. BUT I do most make it clear that judging by what you have shown yourself, there is no argument from the bible that homosexuality is more of a sin than eating pork or not marrying the widow of your brother to give her children (which is NOt polygamy, because your brother is dead).

The Bible from cover to cover is pretty clear that homosexuality is a sin when you consider the OT and Paul.

Paul is not Jesus. furthermore, Jesus wwarned against peolpe like him that would trick many.

didn´t Paul say that if you become circunsized you deny the whole point of Jesus´s message? Should circumsicion be a sin now?

Yes, we can play this game of speculating on what Jesus might or might not have done, but the argument that Jesus MIGHT have actually approved of this behavior is far weaker than the argument that he stood fast to to OT laws on sexual behavior.

Actually, both arguments would be absolutely fallacious. I am not saying he was okay with homosexuality. I am saying you have no reason to prove he was not, and every reason to doubt all of the passages of the OT (Mind you, doubting all of them doens´t mean discarding all of them, but it does mean to accept that ultmately it will be only your OPINION which would make them moral or not moral)

 

[Agnostic75]

.......we can play this game of speculating on what Jesus might or might not have done, but the argument that Jesus MIGHT have actually approved of this behavior is far weaker than the argument that he stood fast to OT laws on sexual behavior.

Are you defending the historical reliability of the Old Testament?

 

[-Peacemaker-]

Are you defending the historical reliability of the Old Testament?

You might be surprised by how much we can gather about the NT from what history has left behind. As far as the OT goes, I really haven't done much research on thie historical reliability of it. That's not to say that it isn't reliable, just that I don't know enough to really talk about it

 

[Agnostic75]

You might be surprised by how much we can gather about the NT from what history has left behind. As far as the OT goes, I really haven't done much research on thie historical reliability of it. That's not to say that it isn't reliable, just that I don't know enough to really talk about it.

As far as alleged supernatural events are concerned, I am not aware of any in the Bible that are backed up by history and/or science.

As you know, there is historical reliability, and textual reliability. A Bible verse can be textually accurate, but historically inaccurate. For example, if the writer of the book of Genesis said that a global flood occurred, those writings are textually accurate since he said them, but that does not necessarily mean that a global flood actually occurred.

Anyway, if we wish to limit this thread to the topic of homosexuality, what evidence do you have that God inspired any Scriptures about homosexuality?

If God opposes homosexuality, why did he cause almost all bonobo monkeys to be bi-sexual, and cause homosexuality in over 1500 species of birds and animals? Why would God need to cause homosexuality in animals and birds? If he hadn't, it would have been far easier for conservative Christians to oppose homosexuality. As it is, the prevalence of homosexuality among so many animals, including humans, does not appear to be the work of a God who strongly opposes homosexuality.

 

[nnmartin]

What do you mean by "discretion"?

Discretion - meaning that the homosexual lifestyle should not have the overexposure that it's adherents seem to believe it warrants.

If we take the issue to relate to roughly 2% of the population then that is obviously quite a low amount of people in comparison to the rest of society.

so why do we need all the clamoring, parades, equality campaigns etc.?

There are plenty of other minorities out there that go about their business in a quiet and respectful manner so what makes the homosexual brigade so special?

 

[9Westy9]

Discretion - meaning that the homosexual lifestyle should not have the overexposure that it's adherents seem to believe it warrants.

If we take the issue to relate to roughly 2% of the population then that is obviously quite a low amount of people in comparison to the rest of society.

so why do we need all the clamoring, parades, equality campaigns etc.?

There are plenty of other minorities out there that go about their business in a quiet and respectful manner so what makes the homosexual brigade so special?

Because their rights are trampled upon by the likes of fundamentalist Christians. And it's quite disgusting that we're still discussing same-sex marriage in a secular society

 

[McBell]

Discretion - meaning that the homosexual lifestyle should not have the overexposure that it's adherents seem to believe it warrants.

If we take the issue to relate to roughly 2% of the population then that is obviously quite a low amount of people in comparison to the rest of society.

so why do we need all the clamoring, parades, equality campaigns etc.?

There are plenty of other minorities out there that go about their business in a quiet and respectful manner so what makes the homosexual brigade so special?

Wait, it is fine for the heterosexuals to be displaying their laud behavoiur all over tv and in the white house but when same sex couples try to bring attention to the fact that they are being discriminated against by bigots, you want to whine and cry?

 

[9Westy9]

Wait, it is fine for the heterosexuals to be displaying their laud behavoiur all over tv and in the white house but when same sex couples try to bring attention to the fact that they are being discriminated against by bigots, you want to whine and cry?

Funny ain't it

 

[McBell]

Funny ain't it

Rather disgusting if you ask me.

Some people are just so extra proud of their hypocrisy that they feel the need to wave it about in front of them like a flag.

 

[9Westy9]

Rather disgusting if you ask me.

Some people are just so extra proud of their hypocrisy that they feel the need to wave it about in front of them like a flag.

I find all people against same sex marriage to be disgusting. Or at least against civil unions that grant the same legal rights

 

[waitasec]

There are plenty of other minorities out there that go about their business in a quiet and respectful manner so what makes the homosexual brigade so special?

the mob mentality of
put up and shut up...nice.

 

[nnmartin]

Wait, it is fine for the heterosexuals to be displaying their laud behavoiur all over tv and in the white house but when same sex couples try to bring attention to the fact that they are being discriminated against by bigots, you want to whine and cry?

Heterosexuals displaying their laud behaviour on the TV is not especially appealing I agree.

But, as I've said before - opposing same sex marriage does not equal bigot.

It is a merely a different point of view , albeit the most sensible one given the fact that the notion of a man marrying a man is clearly absurd.

 

[nnmartin]

And it's quite disgusting that we're still discussing same-sex marriage in a secular society

I agree - it's high time this illogical idea was finally thrown onto the scrapheap where it belongs.

 

[9Westy9]

Heterosexuals displaying their laud behaviour on the TV is not especially appealing I agree.

But, as I've said before - opposing same sex marriage does not equal bigot.

It is a merely a different point of view , albeit the most sensible one given the fact that the notion of a man marrying a man is clearly absurd.

You've yet to point to any evidence to back this up. So until then you're view is bigoted

 

[nnmartin]

I find all people against same sex marriage to be disgusting. Or at least against civil unions that grant the same legal rights

That sounds like you have a rather bigoted viewpoint there.

 

[9Westy9]

That sounds like you have a rather bigoted viewpoint there.

Indeed it does. Bigoted towards intolerance and discrimination

 

[waitasec]

That sounds like you have a rather bigoted viewpoint there.

why tolerate intolerance?

 

[nnmartin]

so you think it is acceptable to be a same-sex marriage advocating bigot then?