• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Why does homosexuality seem to get more hate?

kepha31

Active Member
I will start by saying I am not anti-gay. I donate my services as a registered reflexologist to a local AIDS center, where all my clients there are gay. My best friend is gay. My daughter is gay. I love them all. It should be pointed out that Mother Teresa founded the first AIDS hospice in New York City; we can all learn something from her attitude.

Being gay is not a sin. Doing gay things is. I don't care how you slice it, getting poop on your dick is not normal, belief in God or no god. That is not gay-bashing, that is just the repulsive truth. Homosexuals, if they are Christian, are called to chastity, which is the call to all Christians. Nobody says it is easy, gay or straight, but chastity is certainly is worth while, properly understood. Again, their is nothing wrong with BEING gay. Here is a short article on Pure Love and chastity:
Catholic Answers: Pure Love
 

kepha31

Active Member
Natural law or the law of nature (Latin: lex naturalis) has been described as a law whose content is set by nature and is thus universal.[1] As classically used, natural law refers to the use of reason to analyze human nature and deduce binding rules of moral behavior. The phrase natural law is opposed to the positive law (meaning "man-made law", not "good law"; cf. posit) of a given political community, society, or nation-state, and thus can function as a standard by which to criticize that law.[2] In natural law jurisprudence, on the other hand, the content of positive law cannot be known without some reference to the natural law (or something like it). Used in this way, natural law can be invoked to criticize decisions about the statutes, but less so to criticize the law itself. Some use natural law synonymously with natural justice or natural right (Latin ius naturale)[citation needed]
Although natural law is often conflated with common law, the two are distinct in that natural law is a view that certain rights or values are inherent in or universally cognizable by virtue of human reason or human nature, while common law is the legal tradition whereby certain rights or values are legally cognizable by virtue of judicial recognition or articulation.[3] Natural law theories have, however, exercised a profound influence on the development of English common law,[4] and have featured greatly in the philosophies of Thomas Aquinas, Francisco Suárez, Richard Hooker, Thomas Hobbes, Hugo Grotius, Samuel von Pufendorf, John Locke, Francis Hutcheson, Jean Jacques Burlamaqui, and Emmerich de Vattel. Because of the intersection between natural law and natural rights, it has been cited as a component in United States Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States. The essence of Declarationism is that the founding of the United States is based on Natural law.

Paul of Tarsus wrote in his Epistle to the Romans: "For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things contained in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law unto themselves, their conscience also bearing witness."[40] The intellectual historian A.J. Carlyle has commented on this passage as follows:
There can be little doubt that St Paul's words imply some conception analogous to the 'natural law' in Cicero, a law written in men's hearts, recognized by man's reason, a law distinct from the positive law of any State, or from what St Paul recognized as the revealed law of God. It is in this sense that St Paul's words are taken by the Fathers of the fourth and fifth centuries like St Hilary of Poitiers, St Ambrose, and St Augustine, and there seems no reason to doubt the correctness of their interpretation.[41]
Some early Church Fathers, especially those in the West, sought to incorporate natural law into Christianity. The most notable among these was Augustine of Hippo, who equated natural law with man's prelapsarian state; as such, a life according to nature was no longer possible and men needed instead to seek salvation through the divine law and grace of Jesus Christ.
In the Twelfth Century, Gratian equated the natural law with divine law. A century later, St. Thomas Aquinas in his Summa Theologiae I-II qq. 90-106, restored Natural Law to its independent state, asserting natural law as the rational creature's participation in the eternal law. Yet, since human reason could not fully comprehend the Eternal law, it needed to be supplemented by revealed Divine law. (See also Biblical law in Christianity.) Meanwhile, Aquinas taught that all human or positive laws were to be judged by their conformity to the natural law. An unjust law is not a law, in the full sense of the word. It retains merely the 'appearance' of law insofar as it is duly constituted and enforced in the same way a just law is, but is itself a 'perversion of law.'[42] At this point, the natural law was not only used to pass judgment on the moral worth of various laws, but also to determine what the law said in the first place. This principle laid the seed for possible societal tension with reference to tyrants.[43]
The natural law was inherently teleological and deontological in that although it is aimed at goodness, it is entirely focused on the ethicalness of actions, rather than the consequence. The specific content of the natural law was therefore determined by a conception of what things constituted happiness, be they temporal satisfaction or salvation. The state, in being bound by the natural law, was conceived as an institution directed at bringing its subjects to true happiness.
Natural law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Homosexual behaviour violates the Natural Law.
 
Last edited:

Acim

Revelation all the time
Being gay is not a sin. Doing gay things is. I don't care how you slice it,

Would you care if one sliced it by saying that doing hetero things is a sin, while being hetero is not? Would that work for you? If not, then you may wish to reconsider this position.

getting poop on your dick is not normal, belief in God or no god.

Hetero people can get poop on your dick. I mean their dick. It is normal if you don't wrap that rascal.

Homosexuals, if they are Christian, are called to chastity, which is the call to all Christians. Nobody says it is easy, gay or straight, but chastity is certainly is worth while, properly understood. Again, their is nothing wrong with BEING gay.

If you stay consistent with this message (i.e. chastity), applying equally to heteros as it does to homos, then I may have tough time disagreeing with you. But if saying things are different for homo relationships in terms of sexual practice, I will have disagreement with you, in a understanding of Christian principles.

And since you (nor Adonis) responded to my earlier points, I so far feel like my disagreements are of no match for your Christian understandings. Meaning, you appear to cower away from Christian morality when presented head on with it in a debate. Which is okay, but does make me wonder how much own righteousness is getting in way of spirit of Christ.
 

Father Heathen

Veteran Member
I'm curious; how many homosexuals are you aware of that went into marriage as virgins? You know, the ones that saved themselves for marriage; how many?

I imagine that most people who don't hold a religiously fundamentalist attitude toward homosexuality likely wouldn't hold a religiously fundamentalist attitude toward marriage, either.
 

kepha31

Active Member
...Natural Law

People have a basic, ethical intuition that certain behaviors are wrong because they are unnatural. We perceive intuitively that the natural sex partner of a human is another human, not an animal.

The same reasoning applies to the case of homosexual behavior. The natural sex partner for a man is a woman, and the natural sex partner for a woman is a man. Thus, people have the corresponding intuition concerning homosexuality that they do about bestiality—that it is wrong because it is unnatural.

Natural law reasoning is the basis for almost all standard moral intuitions. For example, it is the dignity and value that each human being naturally possesses that makes the needless destruction of human life or infliction of physical and emotional pain immoral. This gives rise to a host of specific moral principles, such as the unacceptability of murder, kidnapping, mutilation, physical and emotional abuse, and so forth.
Homosexuality

Homosexual behaviour is wrong using the same Natural Law reasoning that murder and torture is wrong. It's wrong because it is unnatural. That is the truth and, obviously, the truth is not always agreeable.
 

blackout

Violet.
I will start by saying I am not anti-gay. My best friend is gay. My daughter is gay. I love them all.
Being gay is not a sin. Doing gay things is. Here is a short article on Pure Love and chastity:

You cannot truly love another person
and insist that they deny themself an intimate/love life partnership.
sorry.
You can twist it all you want,
but in reality
it's hurtful
and damaging,

to who they are,
and to your own relationship with them.

I truly hope your daughter
lives true to WHO SHE IS,
instead of living without the intimacy
you would deny her.

It's not right.
live your life,
let others live theirs.

You ARE anti gay.
The expectations of unecessary and burdensome
even sorrowful
Self Sacrifice
you lay upon others
is a sin.
 
Last edited:

Yeshe Dawa

Lotus Born
What we are experiencing now, is a clash of belief systems. You want Christianity to stand down and let the opposing view work its repulsive behavior into mainstream America. Is this fair? I say it isn't. You call us haters, bigots and ignorant for not embracing homosexuality. We simply call that behavior, sin. In the end, only one side is going to win this cultural war, and I believe it's not going to be you people.

Hi Everyone!

I think Adonis65 summed up very clearly and honestly how many Christians view this issue. Mainstream Christianity will never accept homosexuality and will actively oppose it in all venues - social, political, religious. I think the only hope for equality and freedom from persecution for LGBT people is to educate the people who are not mainstream Christians (including those liberal versions of Christianity that have stopped excluding LGBT's from their religion). As Adonis65 points out, mainstream Christians will always view homosexuality as a perversion. Statistics and objective facts will never change his mind that two people of the same sex being in a relationship is an abomination to his god. I think the reason gay rights are lagging is that liberals are still in the negotiation phase and, as Adonis65 points out, Christians are in the war phase.

Peace and blessings,
Yeshe
:flower2:
 

methylatedghosts

Can't brain. Has dumb.
Hi Everyone!

I think Adonis65 summed up very clearly and honestly how many Christians view this issue. Mainstream Christianity will never accept homosexuality and will actively oppose it in all venues - social, political, religious. I think the only hope for equality and freedom from persecution for LGBT people is to educate the people who are not mainstream Christians (including those liberal versions of Christianity that have stopped excluding LGBT's from their religion). As Adonis65 points out, mainstream Christians will always view homosexuality as a perversion. Statistics and objective facts will never change his mind that two people of the same sex being in a relationship is an abomination to his god. I think the reason gay rights are lagging is that liberals are still in the negotiation phase and, as Adonis65 points out, Christians are in the war phase.

Peace and blessings,
Yeshe
:flower2:

There will be some people who read these conversations, and others, and will hear them on TV, and in public, who will see the flaws in those beliefs, and realise that there is nothing wrong with homosexuality. Yes, for some - generally those who are so opposed already anyway - it will strengthen their beliefs. Overall though, more and more people will become more accepting. At least, thats why I join in. Some day it will happen where it's acceptable everywhere, I feel it's inevitable.

Christianity has been on the warpath for hundreds of years. It's reign will end, like the reign of the dinosaurs did, and disappear into history. It's growing tired. We've had them since the whole witch-burning thing stopped.
 
Last edited:

averageJOE

zombie
...Natural Law

People have a basic, ethical intuition that certain behaviors are wrong because they are unnatural. We perceive intuitively that the natural sex partner of a human is another human, not an animal.

The same reasoning applies to the case of homosexual behavior. The natural sex partner for a man is a woman, and the natural sex partner for a woman is a man. Thus, people have the corresponding intuition concerning homosexuality that they do about bestiality—that it is wrong because it is unnatural.

Natural law reasoning is the basis for almost all standard moral intuitions. For example, it is the dignity and value that each human being naturally possesses that makes the needless destruction of human life or infliction of physical and emotional pain immoral. This gives rise to a host of specific moral principles, such as the unacceptability of murder, kidnapping, mutilation, physical and emotional abuse, and so forth.
Homosexuality

Homosexual behaviour is wrong using the same Natural Law reasoning that murder and torture is wrong. It's wrong because it is unnatural. That is the truth and, obviously, the truth is not always agreeable.
So your argument is that homosexuality is wrong because murder is wrong? Are you really putting the two under the same umbrella?

I suggest stepping outside into the real world for once.
 

otokage007

Well-Known Member
...Natural Law

People have a basic, ethical intuition that certain behaviors are wrong because they are unnatural. We perceive intuitively that the natural sex partner of a human is another human, not an animal.

Intuitiveness is not related to what is right or wrong. It is not objective and therefore invalid to establish what is good or bad.

The same reasoning applies to the case of homosexual behavior. The natural sex partner for a man is a woman, and the natural sex partner for a woman is a man. Thus, people have the corresponding intuition concerning homosexuality that they do about bestiality—that it is wrong because it is unnatural.

Homosexual behaviour is wrong using the same Natural Law reasoning that murder and torture is wrong. It's wrong because it is unnatural. That is the truth and, obviously, the truth is not always agreeable.

To have sex with the same gender is not unnatural. In fact, homosexuality is common in nature, as we can see it in all superior beings, from insects to all mammals. Also, homosexuality is not condemned in animal kingdom as there is no documented event of an heterosexual animal showing hostility against an homosexual of the same species.

As you can see, homosexuality is just condemned in human species, and that is a recent hatred because the greek and elder roman society had no problem with homosexuality.
 

Tristesse

Well-Known Member
Excellent. Now all you have to do is drum up some proof, and your theory will have support. But until then, we'll just have to take their word for it. :yes:

So you think it's a choice? Could you choose to be gay? I certainly couldn't.
 

Tristesse

Well-Known Member
I don't own any.

I know enough about the constitution to know that our federal government doesn't follow it very well.

You're right. It's not like turning on a light switch. It's more like turning up the dimmers. You start with mild perversions, and work up from there.

Good to know, about the gun thing.

I agree with you about the government not following the constitution, surprisingly.
 

Tristesse

Well-Known Member
I won't dispute the fact that there are cruel people out there who refer to themselves as Christians. But I'm telling you right now, that way is not the Christian way. I am not into persecuting others. What I am into, is defending the sanctity of marriage. Now, I know that people like you would deem this as persecution, but it really isn't. What we are experiencing now, is a clash of belief systems. You want Christianity to stand down and let the opposing view work its repulsive behavior into mainstream America. Is this fair? I say it isn't. You call us haters, bigots and ignorant for not embracing homosexuality. We simply call that behavior, sin. In the end, only one side is going to win this cultural war, and I believe it's not going to be you people.

This isn't about your beliefs, trust me it isn't. You are free to hold your beliefs, as am I. Where we draw the line is where your beliefs impose on other peoples rights.

If you're really into protecting the "sanctity" of marriage, lets go back to the way marriage originally started, as a property trade. It also used to be that people of different ethnicities could not marry. Is that the "tradition" that you're protecting?
 

Tristesse

Well-Known Member
I will start by saying I am not anti-gay. I donate my services as a registered reflexologist to a local AIDS center, where all my clients there are gay. My best friend is gay. My daughter is gay. I love them all. It should be pointed out that Mother Teresa founded the first AIDS hospice in New York City; we can all learn something from her attitude.

Being gay is not a sin. Doing gay things is. I don't care how you slice it, getting poop on your dick is not normal, belief in God or no god. That is not gay-bashing, that is just the repulsive truth. Homosexuals, if they are Christian, are called to chastity, which is the call to all Christians. Nobody says it is easy, gay or straight, but chastity is certainly is worth while, properly understood. Again, their is nothing wrong with BEING gay. Here is a short article on Pure Love and chastity:
Catholic Answers: Pure Love

Are you saying that doing lesbian things are ok? Because girls usually don't get "poop on their dick" from engaging in sex.
 

Duck

Well-Known Member
So your argument is that homosexuality is wrong because murder is wrong? Are you really putting the two under the same umbrella?

I suggest stepping outside into the real world for once.

Don't forget the also made inevitable comparison to ******* animals!
 

Yeshe Dawa

Lotus Born
Some day it will happen where it's acceptable everywhere, I feel it's inevitable.

HI Methylatedghosts!

I believe you are right. Someday people will be amazed that there was even a debate over something like LGBT rights, or that there actually were people who opposed it.

Peace and blessings,
Yeshe
:flower2:
 

Father Heathen

Veteran Member
People have a basic, ethical intuition that certain behaviors are wrong because they are unnatural.

Not really. The notion is indoctrinated. If anything, ethical intuition suggests that sexual repression based on superstitious beliefs is wrong.
Catholicism is far more sociologically and psychologically damaging than homosexuality could ever hope to be.
 
Top