The Problem with "Fighting" Homosexuality

[Rick O'Shez]

Do you really not get this?

No I don't. Smoking and stealing are choices, homosexuality is not.

 

[1robin]

1. It is not actually condemned in the Bible.

Wow a post that did not start with "bull" in size 6 font. So I will respond. I did not say the bible condemned it. I said I used a secular argument to do so. I use "sin" as a synonym for "immoral" at times when I am in a hurry because I debate theology so often and it is how I think (terminology wise) so I understand if you misunderstood what I meant. I however believe the bible does in fact condemn it several times but I was not attempting to claim or show that.

2. Even if that were not the case, - supposedly Christians are not under Tanakh Law (except for ten.) So, any Christian condemning, or shoving anti-gay, or you are a sinner for being gay crap, etc., against homosexuals, is being a hypocrite.

That is actually an interesting point but not one about what I said. I made an argument quite a ways back that was strictly secular and that is my primary argument. However let me take a second with this.

1. First of all Christians don't excuse their own sin. In fact what you responded to claimed homosexuality is a sin JUST AS MANY OF THE THINGS I DO ARE. That is not hypocrisy. A Christian is the one so aware of his sin he believed only another man dying for it would satisfy God's judgment.
2. What laws were nailed to the cross varies by doctrine. Some say only ceremonial laws, some say the temple law, some none, some all, some all but ten.
3. The rightness or wrongness of a behavior is not determined by a law. Murder would be wrong even if no law was ever written down. The laws in the OT were primarily given as instructions about what to do in that period by a single group of people about a behavior or event. The principles have not changed but the applications have as mankind has. A child who does evil constantly is no longer to be stoned but the behavior is no less wrong. Those covenant rules were designed to maintain the moral integrity of a culture through which God would reveal his word and his messiah. His word being given and the messiah come the revelation conduit no longer has the same precedence and no longer the same rules.

If Christians do not follow ALL of the Torah Laws (that still can be followed,) then they are being hypocrites calling others sinners, for not following one of them!

*

This is not a new argument it is a repeat of the above. God never changes. His moral nature makes certain things wrong. It is how we are told to handle those situations that changes as we ourselves do and God's purposes unfold. There is much more to say on this issue but this is a whole new topic and not even remotely related to my main argument.

I act immorally at times but would admit it and require forgiveness.
I think Homosexuality immoral, they won't admit it, and I still give forgiveness to the level I am capable.

That is love and truth not hypocrisy.

 

[Nietzsche]

I act immorally at times but would admit it and require forgiveness.
I think Homosexuality immoral, they won't admit it, and I still give forgiveness to the level I am capable.

That is love and truth not hypocrisy.

Your version of 'Christian Love' is rather backhanded and fickle, don't you think?

 

[1robin]

Your version of 'Christian Love' is rather backhanded and fickle, don't you think?

Even after all these years I can't predict this kind of stuff. Forgiving people and accepting them is backhanded now. You non-theists must send me the notes from your meetings. I just can't allow for that kind of thing beforehand. I literally have no idea what to say and that is not an ailment that often troubles me.

 

[1robin]

No I don't. Smoking and stealing are choices, homosexuality is not.

Come off it man. Even if that was true you could not possibly no it and research is all over the place on it. Pile on top of that I must have said dozens of times that I am talking about the sexual acts not an orientation to begin with. In no other thread or aspect of life do I have to constantly repeat my self so much as on those that deal with homosexuality. My primary argument is two short and simplistic sentences long and it must have been distorted a hundred ways so far and most after I had corrected the earliest distortions. This truly is a wonder. That is a good one to leave on. Have a good one.

 

[sojourner]

I hate when gay threads get heterosexually graphic.

Just picture it another way. It'll make you feel better.

 

[sojourner]

I have never noticed that. In fact I do not make an argument against a single gay person who ever lived. I make claims and show how the behavior is unjustifiable. I do not condemn anyone. Homosexuality is a sin just like many things that I at times do. I do not expect a Christian to condemn me because none are without sin, but if a Christian claims that my behavior was wrong I agree with him I do not look for reasons to defend what is wrong nor suggest he is making personal attacks.

So... who a person is, is sin? But not who your are, of course. That's very convenient, and darn mean-spirited, wrapped up in a thin veneer of "I'm not condemning anyone." It's the same thing as the "separate-but-equal" vermin who spout off about not being prejudiced.

 

[sojourner]

Good Lord. I used to think Islamic threads were exasperating but homosexual threads make those look like the VERITAS forum.

Here is the difference.

I hate smoking because it kills people.

Compared to:

I hate you because you smoke.

or

Stealing a video game is wrong.

Compared to:

Your evil because you stole a video game.

or

Homosexuality is morally unjustifiable.

Compared to:

You are morally insane because your a homosexual.

Do you really not get this?

I condemn a behavior but love the one who engages in it if at all possible.

Problem is, homosexuality isn't an action, like theft or smoking. Homosexuality is the very identity of the person. So, when you condemn homosexuality as sin, you're saying that the person is sin!

 

[sojourner]

Even after all these years I can't predict this kind of stuff. Forgiving people and accepting them is backhanded now. You non-theists must send me the notes from your meetings. I just can't allow for that kind of thing beforehand. I literally have no idea what to say and that is not an ailment that often troubles me.

But you're not really accepting homosexuals, when you identify their very being as "sin."

 

[sojourner]

Come off it man. Even if that was true you could not possibly no it and research is all over the place on it. Pile on top of that I must have said dozens of times that I am talking about the sexual acts not an orientation to begin with. In no other thread or aspect of life do I have to constantly repeat my self so much as on those that deal with homosexuality. My primary argument is two short and simplistic sentences long and it must have been distorted a hundred ways so far and most after I had corrected the earliest distortions. This truly is a wonder. That is a good one to leave on. Have a good one.

So, where's the equality or the dignity in heterosexuals being able to express themselves, but homosexuals not being able to express themselves?

 

[Nietzsche]

Even after all these years I can't predict this kind of stuff. Forgiving people and accepting them is backhanded now. You non-theists must send me the notes from your meetings. I just can't allow for that kind of thing beforehand. I literally have no idea what to say and that is not an ailment that often troubles me.

Not a non-theist. Polytheist.

And even though I still go to those meetings, we've been sending you and those similar to your view of the Christian faith, the minutes. It's just now you have to listen to them and take it into account instead of back-tracking the postage and burning down the clubhouse.

 

[fantome profane]

I must have said dozens of times that I am talking about the sexual acts not an orientation

Let's be honest, you are talking about one particular specific sexual act. And you are absolutely obsessed with that one particular sexual act. Every single post you have ever made on the topic of homosexuality (and you have made lots) is about anal sex. You are obsessed with anal sex. You have anal sex blinders on, you cannot see or consider anything other than anal sex.

You can't consider lesbian relationships, because they don't involve anal sex, but still you condemn them.

 

[dgirl1986]

Well if you think of it purely in math terms, in a way you do. It was in a man at some point and had to be coaxed out, and it was then inserted into you. There's some degrees of separation but the law of something or another whos name I can't remember says that in fact, you did.

That is why I said I didnt need it directly. Directly indicates the P in the V.

You don't even need the sperm bank. Just a willing friend. A couple of years ago someone used a turkey baster to transfer the sperm - and got pregnant.
*

I don't know anyone I would want to share DNA with lol

I think any loving couple or individual can make good parent(s). I don't bring anything else into it.

Exactly

 

[dgirl1986]

I have never noticed that. In fact I do not make an argument against a single gay person who ever lived. I make claims and show how the behavior is unjustifiable. I do not condemn anyone. Homosexuality is a sin just like many things that I at times do. I do not expect a Christian to condemn me because none are without sin, but if a Christian claims that my behavior was wrong I agree with him I do not look for reasons to defend what is wrong nor suggest he is making personal attacks.

Someone who is not gay could not understand and there is so much misinformation surrounding it.

A person chooses sex, he does not choose his sexual orientation. That said, I've never said that being a homosexual itself is a sin. That would be like saying that having brown hair is a sin and only being blond is not.
Whether any sexual acts are sins or not, is something for each of us to decide.

Sin is a religious term really. I dont see anything as sin. Just good or bad, right or wrong etc.

So... who a person is, is sin? But not who your are, of course. That's very convenient, and darn mean-spirited, wrapped up in a thin veneer of "I'm not condemning anyone." It's the same thing as the "separate-but-equal" vermin who spout off about not being prejudiced.

Wouldnt that be the fault of the "creator"

Problem is, homosexuality isn't an action, like theft or smoking. Homosexuality is the very identity of the person. So, when you condemn homosexuality as sin, you're saying that the person is sin!

This depends on the person. My sexuality is a part of my identity but it stops there.

 

[dgirl1986]

I think Homosexuality immoral, they won't admit it, and I still give forgiveness to the level I am capable.

Take away religion and then explain what is immoral about it. honestly, truthfully and in real terms.

 

[dgirl1986]

Let's be honest, you are talking about one particular specific sexual act. And you are absolutely obsessed with that one particular sexual act. Every single post you have ever made on the topic of homosexuality (and you have made lots) is about anal sex. You are obsessed with anal sex. You have anal sex blinders on, you cannot see or consider anything other than anal sex.

You can't consider lesbian relationships, because they don't involve anal sex, but still you condemn them.

I guess that means im good then lol

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Let's be honest, you are talking about one particular specific sexual act. And you are absolutely obsessed with that one particular sexual act. Every single post you have ever made on the topic of homosexuality (and you have made lots) is about anal sex. You are obsessed with anal sex. You have anal sex blinders on, you cannot see or consider anything other than anal sex.

I noticed that too.

You can't consider lesbian relationships, because they don't involve anal sex, but still you condemn them.

Picking nits here, only because you're cool and all. Just a reminder that female same sex relationships can most certainly penetrate anally. We simply have different tools.

 

[fantome profane]

I noticed that too.



Picking nits here, only because you're cool and all. Just a reminder that female same sex relationships can most certainly penetrate anally. We simply have different tools.

Fair enough. But those "tools" don't present all the same potential health problems that Robin is obsessed with.


(and some lesbian friends have told me that lesbians don't tend to enjoy deep penetration, at least not to the extent that the "movies" would have us believe. I don't know if that is true or not, and of course individual preferences will vary.)

 

[Ingledsva]

...

I don't know anyone I would want to share DNA with lol

LOL! No, I meant anyone can do this without the expense of a clinic, or anonymous donor.

Gay people whom want children - take note, Good friend - and a turkey baster to transfer sperm.

You don't have to have sex with the opposite gender, or pay out all that cash.

*

 

[sojourner]

Wouldnt that be the fault of the "creator"

No, that would be the fault of the person who makes such a judgment call based on some ancient text, whose meaning isn't all that clear in the first place.