Why is Fundamental Christians so down on Homosexuality?

cubanito · Nov 8, 2006

Oh really, an animal can not consent? You should have met those 2 great Danes...they seemed pretty happy to me. Anyway, so what if the animal can't consent. It most certainly is not being tortured.

As to children, consent ages vary, in Wash DC, for example it is 16, and at times has been 14 in various places. Consent is a variable ruller, and what will the next judge decide?

As to heterosexual promiscuity. I was a virgin (well, thought life aside) until marriage. I totally agree that heterosexual promiscuity is also sin. And as I've stated before, I'm not comfortable with rating sin. STD's though are FAR more frequent among male homosexuals than among male heterosexuals for the very simple reason that the colonic mucosa was not designed for that purpose. Now, it is also true that lesbians tend to have FEWER STD's than active heterosexual women. Lesbians do share with homosexual men far higher statistics for domestic abuse than heterosexuals, and heterosexuals that are not married far higher than those who are married. But all that is statistics.

Sin is sin, and the machista guy out for his latest conquest before returning home to beat his wife aint my cup of tea.

Now I ask you, why should a monogamous relationship be any more your right to enshrine in law than a swinging marriage? Remember swingers? Married people who consensually share partners. My parents were once so proposed.

What is wrong with consensual polysexuality? Who are YOU to judge?

JR

manchambo · Nov 8, 2006

NewGuy101 said:
That's not the point, the point is that it's against God's obvious design...hence against nature.

If that is the point, why then do we have to have all of this spurious talk about homosexual promiscuity.

This pattern repeats so often that it is sickening. Someone makes an assertion, the errors in that assertion are pointed out, the invariable response is "that assertion has nothing to do with this discussion, why did you even bring it up?"

cubanito · Nov 8, 2006

So what is wrong with promiscuity?

Aren't condoms the total prevention to all problems?

Why not have as much sex, with as many living or nonliving things as anybody feels like it? Why should monogamy be any better than promiscuity? Who are YOU to judge?

C'mon somebody, why not?

HeavenzAngel · Nov 8, 2006

cubanito said:
So what is wrong with promiscuity?

Aren't condoms the total prevention to all problems?

Why not have as much sex, with as many living or nonliving things as anybody feels like it? Why should monogamy be any better than promiscuity? Who are YOU to judge?

C'mon somebody, why not?

takes the magic out it, I shall only have sex with the girl I fall in love with, I don't like promiscuity at all. Monogamy is very romantic to me.

misslisa · Nov 8, 2006

cubanito said:
So what is wrong with promiscuity?

Aren't condoms the total prevention to all problems?

Why not have as much sex, with as many living or nonliving things as anybody feels like it? Why should monogamy be any better than promiscuity? Who are YOU to judge?

C'mon somebody, why not?

I think that the problems with promiscuity are emotional rather than the possible physical consequences. I mean, has anyone here actually been happier sleeping around than they have been in a stable, loving, monogamous relationship?

noparty · Nov 8, 2006

NewGuy101 said:
That's not the point, the point is that it's against God's obvious design...hence against nature.

Is anal sex between two married heterosexuals against God's obvious design, and nature?

misslisa · Nov 8, 2006

noparty said:
Is anal sex between two married heterosexuals against God's obvious design, and nature?

I would say so.

noparty · Nov 8, 2006

misslisa said:
I would say so.

So would my wife.

But I don't know of any scriptual basis for making that claim.

hithesh · Nov 8, 2006

Forgive my digression, back to my question: if homosexuality is to now be enshrined as equal to heterosexual marriage, why not all the other consenting sexual preferences? Why not polygamy, why not pedastry, why not inappropriate behavior with animals?

As for me, I have a signpost, I bow to an external Authority. So I CAN answer why not: for the Bible tells me so.

I love slippery slopes!!

As you perhaps, already know, polygamy is never condemed by the bible, and plenty of biblical figures/heros were polygamist, and even today the prevailing polygamist are "supposed" Christians. So if, one were to say, he wanted to have multiple wives, so he could breed more Christians into a given area, to spread the word, perhaps you should blame the bible for leading him to this.

You would find more support for polygamy among "supposed" christians, than you would among "homosexuals" and those that support "gay rights". So be watchful where you begin your slope.

Why even say "gay marriage" will lead to these things? Why not just say "gay sex" leads to these things? Why not go a step further, and say, certain forms of hetrosexual sex leads to these things? Why not say, hetrosexuals who like to have sex, for purposes other than procreation, leads to the acceptance of homosexuality, and this lead to the acceptance of beastility??? Why not seek laws to moderate the clothing of woman, perhaps enforce a "Saudi" dress code, because if we allow women to wear cloths that are suggestive, this will arose men, and this will lead them to having sex with men, and this will eventually lead them to having sex with animals.

Let's think for a minute, perhaps we need to reinnact sodomy laws, and since pedophiles and homosexuals are one in the same, anyone found of commiting a homosexual act should be jailed, perhaps even sent to the gallows?

Let's think for a minute:

Now, since many of you here like to place homosexuals in the same category as pedophiles, and rapist. Answer me this, why don't you also seek the same finite punishment? Since two men having sex is just as bad, as a man having sex with a child, why don't we send the homosexuals to the gallows as well, as a form of justice??

Answer me this.

(Just a side note: For your slippery slope to be true, there would have to be a correlation between those that support gay rights, and those that support polygamy/beastility/pedophilia. I can guarntee you that regardless if one supports "gay rights", there opinions on these other matters, on average, will be as consistent, as those who oppose gay rights.)

savedandhappy1 said:
I still work with a few homosexuals. Which I consider my friends.

You do seem very considerate in your opinions, so if I ever point to bigotry and intolerance in those that oppose gay rights, I'm not referring to you, but others in general.

savedandhappy1 said:
Well opening the door and saying it is ok for you to do something that I believe goes totally against my Lord, would be a sin to me, so I can't do that. To me a vote for gay marriage is me saying it is ok, and I truely don't believe it is.

savedandhappy1 said:
Answered above.

So, I just need a bit of clarifacation, on the "answered above." If someone were to write up legaslation, that would deny unbelivers the right to marry, and it was gaining popular christian support, would you sign on as well? It would have came about by Christians, who felt that married unbelievers, will endanger their Children, by leading them to hell fire. Are you signing on to this legeslation, my friend?

LockeTheMagna · Nov 8, 2006

savedandhappy1 said:
Is it not a sin to have sex before marriage? Is is not a sin to have sex with someone that is already married and not your spouse?

Then homosexuality is a sin!! There is no where in the Bible that it says if the law of the land won't let you marry you can have sex anyhow. If it does I would love to see the scriptures for that, just like I have ask to see the scriptures that back your point of view, but you have none.

You lower yourself to name calling, instead. But the Word told us that would happen as we see below.

Luke 6:22 KJV
22Blessed are ye, when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you from their company, and shall reproach you, and cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man's sake.

Luke 6:22 NIV
22Blessed are you when men hate you, when they exclude you and insult you and reject your name as evil, because of the Son of Man.

John 15:18-21
18If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you.

19If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.
20Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also. 21But all these things will they do unto you for my name's sake, because they know not him that sent me.

The Bible tell us we will be hated and cast out because we speak the truth. It tell us that they will cast out our name as evil and insult us (which being called a bigot, to me, is an insult).

As I have shown before the scriptures in Romans 1 are not just about sex. You can have an affection for someone without having sex. The Bible is the Living Word, and covers everything for the past, present and future.

Is it not a sin to have sex before marriage? Is is not a sin to have sex with someone that is already married and not your spouse?

Then homosexuality is a sin!!

You are comparing apples and oranges. Premarital and extramarital sex are very different from homosexuality. You are comparing relationship problems/situations with sexual preferences.

Intelligably it is only logical to compare homosexuality with heterosexuality and bisexuality.

Also, you ask that people provide bible quotes to support there evidence. First of all you cite hardly anything, and the citations you do provide have no relevance to your point.

Luke 6:22 NIV
22Blessed are you when men hate you, when they exclude you and insult you and reject your name as evil, because of the Son of Man.

This seems to be pointing out that we are 'blessed' when men hate you or insult you. If you are highlighting insulting in reference to someone calling you names, then you are pointing out that they are blessed, and thus it holds no validity if you are trying to say that he is wrong. Plus you posting this quote is like your running to your mommy to complain. I'm not saying name calling is right, but come up with more solid evidence, or just tell him to stop.

John 15:18-21
18If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you.

19If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.
20Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also. 21But all these things will they do unto you for my name's sake, because they know not him that sent me.

It is not clear what you are referring to here. Are all of these citations a rebuttal to being called names? That is childish. You are NOT hated. Plus, this is off topic, so why not keep it to private messages. Lord knows this thread is long enough as it is. If this isn't off topic, and it is in reference to homosexuality, and you are saying that gays are hated, these quotes exemplify the fact that God is on their side (which he is) but it is pulling down your argument. Learn to formulate better ideas and postulates, and outline them in a clearer way so that we can understand them.

'Scripture' citations aren't the 'be-all' 'end-all' in terms of argueing. Why not share physical evidence, experience, personal theory and proven fact to support your ideas? The bible is NOT proven fact, it is only speculated that the stories and parables are true, and written for the sole purpose of Christianity.

Locke

'Shining light into the darkness of ignorance.'

GenemZ · Nov 8, 2006

cubanito said:
So what is wrong with promiscuity?

Aren't condoms the total prevention to all problems?

Why not have as much sex, with as many living or nonliving things as anybody feels like it? Why should monogamy be any better than promiscuity? Who are YOU to judge?

C'mon somebody, why not?

A lack of condoms did not stop Israel in Jermiah's day... Its too involved for here, but the Greek and Hebrew texts reveal that scar tissue (hardness of heart) of the soul is created by promiscuity. It destroys the ability to function sexually with one you love, if you find love. Not everyone finds love. Anyone can find sex, though.... Viagra would have been used back then if it were available.

The factor left out in sex education is the coalescence of souls that takes place when two find true love. The LORD wants man and wife to become one, as he is one with the Church. Its a mystery, Paul said.

Those who are promiscuous, or indulge in perversions of God's design, never get to realize what it is they are missing. They have not a clue as to what it is they are being denied, because of denying the LORD.

Matthew 11:15 niv
"He who has ears, let him hear."

Those who need to be told, have yet to be shown by God...

Grace and truth, GeneZ

RonnyRulz · Nov 8, 2006

noparty said:
Is anal sex between two married heterosexuals against God's obvious design, and nature?

You can do whatever you want as long as you both are married and consent.

RonnyRulz · Nov 8, 2006

The factor left out in sex education is the coalescence of souls that takes place when two find true love. The LORD wants man and wife to become one, as he is one with the Church. Its a mystery, Paul said.

Those who are promiscuous, or indulge in perversions of God's design, never get to realize what it is they are missing. They have not a clue as to what it is they are being denied, because of denying the LORD.

Very well said!

You can't put a condom on your heart.

misslisa · Nov 8, 2006

RonnyRulz said:
Very well said!

You can't put a condom on your heart.

Well, technically, if you cut yourself open...

But seriously, you are right.

icedtea · Nov 8, 2006

misslisa said:
I think that the problems with promiscuity are emotional rather than the possible physical consequences. I mean, has anyone here actually been happier sleeping around than they have been in a stable, loving, monogamous relationship?

Sure, most men, I would wager.
But not I. I always thought sex and love went together. Never met a man who loved me though.
I've been with 6 men in my life, and the only time I enjoyed sex was with my husband, and not because he was better at it, far from it. Its because we were Married.

intricatic · Nov 8, 2006

hithesh said:
Let's think for a minute, perhaps we need to reinnact sodomy laws, and since pedophiles and homosexuals are one in the same, anyone found of commiting a homosexual act should be jailed, perhaps even sent to the gallows?

Let's think for a minute:

Now, since many of you here like to place homosexuals in the same category as pedophiles, and rapist. Answer me this, why don't you also seek the same finite punishment? Since two men having sex is just as bad, as a man having sex with a child, why don't we send the homosexuals to the gallows as well, as a form of justice??

I don't remember hearing anyone say anything about sending anyone to the gallows or seeking a form of justice.

But I think the point to the "slippery slope" argument in this case isn't that homosexual advocates want these things as well, but that the normalization of homosexuality is the normalization of hedonism in itself by implication.

savedandhappy1 · Nov 8, 2006

hithesh said:
So, I just need a bit of clarifacation, on the "answered above." If someone were to write up legaslation, that would deny unbelivers the right to marry, and it was gaining popular christian support, would you sign on as well? It would have came about by Christians, who felt that married unbelievers, will endanger their Children, by leading them to hell fire. Are you signing on to this legeslation, my friend?

To my knowledge there is no where in the Bible where it says unbelievers can't marry, so I really don't think this example has anything to do with the subject of this OP. It's not like I would go to an unbeliever and try and tell them that if they get married they will not inherit the Kingdom of God. Their unbelief would be want I would be warning them is sending them to Hell, and keeping them from inheriting the Kingdom of God.

It does say that if an unbeliever and a believer are married, and the unbeliever wants out of the marriage, then the believer is free to re-marry without it being adultrey. I can't remember where that scripture is right now, and will have to look that up when time permits.

The Bible also tells believers to not marry unbelievers and the reasons why, but this is not something that would lead to the believer not inheriting the Kingdom of God.

2 Cor 6:14
14Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?

You say that Paul's writings have to do with a cultural time frame, and that he wouldn't have any idea about the way it would be today. You say the answers are in the Gospels.

Well then how about this?

Mark 10:6-12
6But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
7For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;
8And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.
9What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
10And in the house his disciples asked him again of the same matter.
11And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her. 12And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery.

Don't you think that since Jesus was answering this, His answer would have been different if He thought it was right for a man and a man or woman and woman to be together?

It is really clear to me that these verses are telling us the way God planned for marriage to be. He is an all knowing God He would have seen this day coming, and would have mentioned it if it was the way things should be. Yet even Jesus tells us that God created them male and female, and that the man would leave his parents and take a wife.

When Jesus was speaking there was enough people on the earth to keep the population growing so it would have been ok then for this to happen if it was in God's will and plan.

I don't follow what Christians say and do, I follow the manual that God gave us. To think that I am against or for something just because all the other Christians are doing it is, well, it is degrading to me if you think that I have given up thinking/reasoning, etc. I read His Word and pray before I do anything, so your the answer to your question would be no..

savedandhappy1 · Nov 9, 2006

LockeTheMagna said:
You are comparing apples and oranges. Premarital and extramarital sex are very different from homosexuality. You are comparing relationship problems/situations with sexual preferences.

Intelligably it is only logical to compare homosexuality with heterosexuality and bisexuality.

The Bible tells us that premarital and extramarital sex along with homosexuality are all sins that will keep us from the Kingdom of Heaven. That is what I am comparing. I just don't tell homosexuals that it is a sin, and they need to repent, but I also tell anyone who is committing any sexual sin what the Bible says.

LockeTheMagna said:
Also, you ask that people provide bible quotes to support there evidence. First of all you cite hardly anything, and the citations you do provide have no relevance to your point.

This seems to be pointing out that we are 'blessed' when men hate you or insult you. If you are highlighting insulting in reference to someone calling you names, then you are pointing out that they are blessed, and thus it holds no validity if you are trying to say that he is wrong. Plus you posting this quote is like your running to your mommy to complain. I'm not saying name calling is right, but come up with more solid evidence, or just tell him to stop.

It is not clear what you are referring to here. Are all of these citations a rebuttal to being called names? That is childish. You are NOT hated. Plus, this is off topic, so why not keep it to private messages. Lord knows this thread is long enough as it is. If this isn't off topic, and it is in reference to homosexuality, and you are saying that gays are hated, these quotes exemplify the fact that God is on their side (which he is) but it is pulling down your argument. Learn to formulate better ideas and postulates, and outline them in a clearer way so that we can understand them.

You seem to be the only one misunderstanding my posts, but whatever.

If we want to call someone childish or what they do childish, then I believe someone calling someone names is alot more childish then someone quoting scriptures that tell how these things will happen when we stand up for the Lord. Anyhow speaking of something that maybe should have been done in a PM, and not in a thread that is about homosexuality. :doh:

Since I don't call you names, etc. then it isn't you that is being blessed in the scripture I gave. Also the scripture tells us that if we are insulted, and our names considered evil for His sake (Jesus) we will be blessed. I don't believe anyone is doing things to homosexuals because they are spreading the Gospel and standing up for Jesus.

Running to my mommy, now that is funny. Makes no sense, but funny.

I ask people to cite scriptures that show that what is called a sin in the scriptues I provided are no longer considered sins. If you read the whole thread maybe you missed that.

LockeTheMagna said:
'Scripture' citations aren't the 'be-all' 'end-all' in terms of argueing. Why not share physical evidence, experience, personal theory and proven fact to support your ideas? The bible is NOT proven fact, it is only speculated that the stories and parables are true, and written for the sole purpose of Christianity.

Well to you that may be so, but not to me, and since we are discussing if God considers it a sin to be a homosexual then where else would you go but to His Word? Has He published other books that I should read? You know something like homosexuality in the 21st. Century and my commandments about it. This book would have been written after the books about homosexuality in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc. Century.

hithesh · Nov 9, 2006

intricatic said:
eking a form of justice.

But I think the point to the "slippery slope" argument in this case isn't that homosexual advocates want these things as well, but that the normalization of homosexuality is the normalization of hedonism in itself by implication.

If you want to moderate how homosexuality leads to the normalization of hedonism, you would be much wiser, by allowing homosexuals to marry.

The normalization of homosexuality, is not prevented by opposing gay marriage. The normalization of homosexuality occurs from shows like America's next Top Model, Will and Grace, Oprah, American Idol, Dick Cheney and his Daughter, etc... etc... etc...

The thing is when you oppose marriage for homosexuals. Homosexuals can only have "premarital" sex, if anything homosexuals not being allowed to marry, helps to send the message that sex before marriage is okay.
Thus unmarried homosexuals, normalize hedonism.

Married homosexuals, would help deter the spread of hedonism.

If they were allowed to marry, then you would have homosexuals who have sex with only their spouse. With marriage rights, you can also lead them to shift away from premarital sex, to sex in an established relationship/marriage.

noparty · Nov 9, 2006

If you're a fundamental Christian who opposes gay marriage and opposes divorce, how would you feel about gay divorce?

Why is Fundamental Christians so down on Homosexuality?

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Far Away

Junior Member

Senior Member

Junior Member

Senior Member

Well-Known Member

Junior Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Junior Member

Well-Known Member

...a dinosaur... or something...

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Senior Member

Similar threads