Gay Marriage

[Nadiine]

Of course, if the entire town was homosexual, there was little reason for God to destroy them, since they would not have survived to the next generation anyway....

Aren't homosexuals often bisexual too?
Lot offered the men his daughter. (something I'll NEVER understand) -
Those men would have seen the barrel of my shotgun instead of
a loved one.

Clearly Lot figured some or most were bisexual to offer a female
to them.
It doesn't matter anyways, we know many of them were violent
and homosexual.

 

[Polycarp1]

I disagree.
Prior to their destruction, Abraham was asking God to spare them if
he could just find 50 righteous in the city -
Gen 18
20 Then the LORD said, "The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous
21 that I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me.
If not, I will know."

It started at 50, then was whittled down to just 10...
32 Then he said, "May the Lord not be angry, but let me speak just once more.
What if only ten can be found there?"
He answered, "For the sake of ten, I will not destroy it."

Not even 10 righteous people could be found to spare the city.
Lot & his family were escorted in short order.

I think they could easily have been that depraved. I mean, stop
to think of it, in ancient days, they held violence as sport -
where Christians & prisoners were tortured for fun in packed
out arena's!
Cheering as people were skinned alive & eaten by animals.

Yes I think they could be that depraved in Sodom.

Review that post. Ezekiel 16 does not even mention homosexual activity of any sort, rape or otherwise, but makes very clear that the men of Sodom acted despicably before God. It would be very easy to find groups the size of Sodom in which there are not ten righteous men without any of them necessarily being homosexual -- or given to dominance by threatening homosexual rape, which I would point out that criminology shows is far more common in prisons than are people of gay orientation. Nobody is defending the men of Sodom; there is merely a disagreement about what Scripture says God condemned them for.

 

[Polycarp1]

Aren't homosexuals often bisexual too?
Lot offered the men his daughter. (something I'll NEVER understand) -
Those men would have seen the barrel of my shotgun instead of
a loved one.

Clearly Lot figured some or most were bisexual to offer a female
to them.
It doesn't matter anyways, we know many of them were violent
and homosexual.

By definition, no -- 'homosexual' means exclusively or predominantly oriented towards sex with others of the same sex as oneself. Bisexuals, in contrast, are commonly attracted to both men and women -- and hence if they engage in sex may engage in both heterosexual and homosexual acts. But it is a valid point -- lots of people have questioned the Bible's facile description of Lot as 'righteous' given his behavior here, as well as his deal with Abraham (the land he chose was at the time far the more fertile) and his behavior with his daughters.

And w4 do not know that "many of them were violent and homosexual" -- only that they purposed to rape the two angels disguised as young men.

Rape of another man is no more a homosexual act than forcible rape of a woman is a heterosexual one.

 

[Zebra1552]

Well, they're different to everyone I know! Worse, they've been pointed out to me as evil and bad since I was a kid, by significant authority figures no less! Come on! What else do you need?

Studies to refute the numerous studies that show that there's little to no harm in gay families who raise children. Let's start with that. Any takers?

 

[peace4ever]

By definition, no -- 'homosexual' means exclusively or predominantly oriented towards sex with others of the same sex as oneself. Bisexuals, in contrast, are commonly attracted to both men and women -- and hence if they engage in sex may engage in both heterosexual and homosexual acts. But it is a valid point -- lots of people have questioned the Bible's facile description of Lot as 'righteous' given his behavior here, as well as his deal with Abraham (the land he chose was at the time far the more fertile) and his behavior with his daughters.

And w4 do not know that "many of them were violent and homosexual" -- only that they purposed to rape the two angels disguised as young men.

Rape of another man is no more a homosexual act than forcible rape of a woman is a heterosexual one.

Now the world has to try to re-define homosexuality like Clinton tried to re-define "is" to pass along his lies also. That just proves my post true in "How can man become more wicked?" that people think that semantics can change reality. But it never can. Sorry.

 

[Zebra1552]

That's not what you said GC. You just said ONLY anal sex
is condemned in the OT... then the NT it's anything else.

Anal sex typically only happens among males, especially at that time period. Context. Add it to my words.

The same sex sexual activity is abomination - the NT is simply
elaborating on it just as Jesus did with giving further detail
to Adultery.


It was not commonly practiced whatsoever (even in the USA in
the 70's it was looked down upon and even called a mental
illness by the medical board) - and Jesus gave the
marital covenant definition in Matt 19 that is the first marriage
example of Adam & Eve -
It was never common or accepted in OT Israel.

Um... says you and what sources?

If you want to try to support homosexuality in the bible, good
luck the evidence is against you, and you can join the many
who here to try to do the same.
Jump on the bandwagon

First, I've never said homosexual practices are okay. I'm defending our right in America to have freedom to do what we feel is right without people shoving religion down our throats. I'm defending the very thing our country was founded on: freedom from the establishment and prohibition of religion.
You realize that you are on a bandwagon as well, making assumptions about OT Israel and what harm is done by allowing same sex marriage, right? Again, for the third time, and I'll make it bigger so you don't miss it this time:
Where are your sources to back your idea of same sex marriage harming families, society, or even the kids of same sex families? Where are the studies?

 

[peace4ever]

Anal sex typically only happens among males, especially at that time period. Context. Add it to my words.
Um... says you and what sources?

First, I've never said homosexual practices are okay. I'm defending our right in America to have freedom to do what we feel is right without people shoving religion down our throats. I'm defending the very thing our country was founded on: freedom from the establishment and prohibition of religion.
You realize that you are on a bandwagon as well, making assumptions about OT Israel and what harm is done by allowing same sex marriage, right? Again, for the third time, and I'll make it bigger so you don't miss it this time:
Where are your sources to back your idea of same sex marriage harming families, society, or even the kids of same sex families? Where are the studies?

You certainly have the right to break God's laws. But we're here to warn you what will happen if you do just like meteorologists are there to warn us of an impending natural disaster that they see and we don't. They're not throwing the weather down our throats any more than we're throwing God's laws down your throats. People just feel like we are because they don't want to think about eternity. They want to pretend that they can break God's laws without guilt or consequences. But since God gave each of us a conscience, then no one can keep sinning without feeling guilt and/or conviction. And trying to silence Christians won't make people any less guilty.

 

[Fade to Gray]

When the bible says that men wanted to have sex with other men, the it's completely and totally illogical to claim that the men in Sodom weren't homosexuals. ..unless of course, you don't know what homosexuality is.

Men in prisons often commit homosexual rape--that doesn't make them homosexual. Rape often has much less to do with sexual attraction than you would think. Try researching the subject.

 

[peace4ever]

Men in prisons often commit homosexual rape--that doesn't make them homosexual. Rape often has much less to do with sexual attraction than you would think. Try researching the subject.

Anyone who willing commits a homosexual act has engaged in homosexuality, and semantics can't change that. Sorry.

 

[Fade to Gray]

Anyone who willing commits a homosexual act has engaged in homosexuality, and semantics can't change that. Sorry.

Engaging in a forcible homosexual act does not make a person homosexual. This isn't about semantics.

 

[peace4ever]

Engaging in a forcible homosexual act does not make a person homosexual. This isn't about semantics.

You missed the word "willing" in my post. So if you don't want it to be about semantics then make sure you read all the words in someone's post.

 

[Nadiine]

Men in prisons often commit homosexual rape--that doesn't make them homosexual. Rape often has much less to do with sexual attraction than you would think. Try researching the subject.

So why didn't they bang on the door demanding Lot's
virgin daughters? Or any other daughters in the town
for that matter?
They had free pickins' in the city - anywhere in the city.

(that would make them bisexual btw).

 

[peace4ever]

So why didn't they bang on the door demanding Lot's
virgin daughters? Or any other daughters in the town
for that matter?
They had free pickins' in the city - anywhere in the city.

(that would make them bisexual btw).

They know that the men in Sodom all engaged in homosexuality. They're just trying to fit a square peg into a round hole and not doing a very good job of it either.

 

[Fade to Gray]

You missed the word "willing" in my post. So if you don't want it to be about semantics then make sure you read all the words in someone's post.

I was referring to the person doing the forcing--the rapist. A man who rapes another man is not necessarily a homosexual. Once again, "rape often has much less to do with sexual attraction than you would think."

So why didn't they bang on the door demanding Lot's
virgin daughters? Or any other daughters in the town
for that matter?
They had free pickins' in the city - anywhere in the city.

(that would make them bisexual btw).

Because the attempted rape wasn't about sex--it was about humiliating (and perhaps killing) the strangers in the town. Which is actually proved by your comment about "free pickins." Because that also means that if they really wished to have homosexual sex, they could have had it with anyone they wished--but instead they attempt to rape the men Lot had taken in. It's obviously not about the sex.

 

[peace4ever]

I was referring to the person doing the forcing--the rapist. A man who rapes another man is not necessarily a homosexual. Once again, "rape often has much less to do with sexual attraction than you would think."


Because the attempted rape wasn't about sex--it was about humiliating (and perhaps killing) the strangers in the town. Which is actually proved by your comment about "free pickins." Because that also means that if they really wished to have homosexual sex, they could have had it with anyone they wished--but instead they attempt to rape the men Lot had taken in. It's obviously not about the sex.

So why didn't they pick a different way of trying to humiliate the man of God instead of lusting after him? I can tell you one thing; I don't know of one-non-homosexual man who would try to bang down the door of someone and demand sex from him if he just wanted to humiliate him.

So sorry, friend, but your arguments aren't even good. So try again.

 

[peace4ever]

But your arguments are funny. I've been busting a gut laughing over the desperate attempts by people here to try to make the bible justify homosexuality. I'd like to hear some more because I could really use some more laughs.

 

[LightHorseman]

They know that the men in Sodom all engaged in homosexuality. They're just trying to fit a square peg into a round hole and not doing a very good job of it either.

Not even the Bible makes such a claim Carico. Are you saying you know more than the Bible?

Hey, on a completely unrelated matter, can you tell me the difference between a star and a planet?

 

[Fade to Gray]

So why didn't they pick a different way of trying to humiliate the man of God instead of lusting after him? I can tell you one thing; I don't know of one-non-homosexual man who would try to bang down the door of someone and demand sex from him if he just wanted to humiliate him.

So sorry, friend, but your arguments aren't even good. So try again.

All I can tell you is to research the subject. Look at the reasons behind rape in general as well as homosexual rape. It's all about dominance and control (and humilation plays in a big factor). If you don't like my arguments, that's fine. It doesn't bother me. Your approval or disapproval doesn't make them any less valid.

 

[peace4ever]

Not even the Bible makes such a claim Carico. Are you saying you know more than the Bible?

Hey, on a completely unrelated matter, can you tell me the difference between a star and a planet?

Wrong. That's why the term "sodomy" which means anal sex came from the town of Sodom.

So it's clear as a bell to the world that the sins of the people of Sodom included homosexuality. It's only unclear to those who want to pretend that God loves homosexuality so people can continue to be slaves to their own lusts. Again, another bad argument, so try again.

 

[LightHorseman]

Wrong. That's why the term "sodomy" which means anal sex came from the town of Sodom.

So it's clear as a bell to the world that the sins of the people of Sodom included homosexuality. It's only unclear to those who want to pretend that God loves homosexuality so people can continue to be slaves to their own lusts. Again, another bad argument, so try again.

Check the etymology of the word. Your wrong.

So, planets and stars, whats the difference?