3 "phobic" VALUES OF GOD

[Sammy-San]

No, because indignity implies that something isn't worthy of respect and honor. Two married people having sex isn't unlawful or immoral, so it should be considered honorable and having dignity.

Dignity is the state worthy of honor or respect.

 

[SilverBear]

By applying these labels to people who disagree with specific ideologies or trends in our society today, free speech itself is under attack. Instead of dealing with arguments and criticisms, people are caught up in defending against the accusation that they are morally reprehensible people simply for having a point of view that runs counter to the leftist narrative.

Like when you toss out the label 'leftist'?

 

[Sammy-San]

I would think it possible the couple could believe they were being united by God - not so likely as in a church wedding.

What do you mean by united-souls and spirits?

 

[Sammy-San]

At least, it's not something I find persuasive just based on the merits of hygene alone. Alot of other unhygenic things aren't sinful.

People end up in the emergency room from straight sex. Sometimes with serious injuries. You rarely hear about it though, perhaps for obvious reasons (we just don't talk alot about sex period). One reason I don't like the "yuck" and "hygene" arguments. The more you know about sex in general, the less appealing those arguments are.

So the only argument should be the Bible says it's sin and not right, and everything else is irrelevant.

 

[Sammy-San]

Definitions would include that element of reproduction, but it is not a necessary feature of it, not necessarily the result of it.

How is sexuality not a necessary feature of reproduction? Sex organs are reproductive organs.

 

[noam burde]

There are 3 values of God that many people like to label "phobias," i.e. mental diseases.

1. Islamophobia - being AGAINST ISLAM.
2. Homophobia - being AGAINST PERVERSION.
3. Xenophobia - being AGAINST IMMIGRATION.

Because all the false accusations, that being against these things is disease (or at least like unto mental diseases), do not seem to be capable of being overthrown, that the language incorporating them is becoming ever more entrenched, it seems necessary to endorse them, take them up as one's own, in order to overcome them.

Hence the necessity to insist these values are very godly, that the godly person will endorse these values. (And the people who enjoy beating up people with these fake names of supposedly irrational fears are quite anti-God.)

Perhaps there is some inherent truth in the "phobic" designation, in that those very concerned for God, who love God greatly, will "get all upset by" recognizing these things are against the will of God and hence we should be (in the present context of language usage) islamophobic, homophobic, and xenophobic?

it is falling into a trap to embrace labels designed by our enemies to hurt us.
we should use rational terms like:
anti islam
against homosexual relationships.
against dangerous immigration.

 

[FutureAndAHope]

I voted no, we should not have phobias or fears of certain types of people. I am sure God is afraid of no one. However this does not mean that we can not disagree if certain ideas. I certainly disagree with Islam, having studied the Quran and Hadith I know the religion is not good, so why should I be a sheep that just follows blindly those who would call me Islamophobic. Homosexuality is a sin yes, but I also see it as a perversion of God's best for people, it is not how God wants people to live. So why should I support an idea that I see as perverse, or twisted. As for immigration God is not against immigration, I don't know where people get that idea from.

 

[Douglas Hendrickson]

it is falling into a trap to embrace labels designed by our enemies to hurt us.
we should use rational terms like:
anti islam
against homosexual relationships.
against dangerous immigration.

The main point here is very good.
Do capitalize "Islam," though, it being the proper noun indicating a political ideology masquerading as a religion.

Do not use the term "homosexual," since it implies there is sex involved, and it is the perversion of sex, nothing of sex itself. CALL IT WHAT IT IS, perversion. And those choosing to practice perversion, "perversion addicts," and those sporting it at every opportunity, "perversion lovers."
Never never use the 3 letter "g" word that has been totally distorted from a formerly fine expression for"joyful"!

And in accord with God's admonition to be good stewards of the world, please be in the direction of NO IMMIGRATION so at least a few places in the world remain good for God, and not everything everywhere completely inundated by wanton flesh.

 

[Sammy-San]

Sex is only incidentally about reproduction. For older people not at all. Though no doubt reproduction is part of its design.

Isn't male and female for reproduction?

 

[Douglas Hendrickson]

Isn't male and female for reproduction?

Should I repeat myself?
SEX IS ONLY INCIDENTALLY FOR REPRODUCTION!
Perhaps once out of thousand sexual intercourses!
On the average.

 

[Sammy-San]

Should I repeat myself?
SEX IS ONLY INCIDENTALLY FOR REPRODUCTION!
Perhaps once out of thousand sexual intercourses!
On the average.

A male and female is there to reproduce the race.

Sexual means reproductive organs.

 

[DamianWarS]

There are 3 values of God that many people like to label "phobias," i.e. mental diseases.

1. Islamophobia - being AGAINST ISLAM.
2. Homophobia - being AGAINST PERVERSION.
3. Xenophobia - being AGAINST IMMIGRATION.

why is God against immigration?

 

[Douglas Hendrickson]

why is God against immigration?

Because there should remain a few good places for decent living on this good earth.
It is our responsibility to be good stewards and try to maintain some sanity and not just piling people on top of each other.

That not all be overcome with the the blatant spread of wanton flesh.

 

[Douglas Hendrickson]

A male and female is there to reproduce the race.
Sexual means reproductive organs.

ONLY INCIDENTALLY. Not much of the time, if at all.
For many in having sex there is not even the possibility of pregnancy. Consider the older for instance.
Far from all sex is reproductive - in fact, only a very small MINORITY of times is there anything of actual reproduction.

 

[Sammy-San]

Post edited.

 

[Douglas Hendrickson]

The definition of female according to the dictionary i have here is

"Of or denoting the sex that can bear offspring or produce eggs, distinguished biologically by the production of gametes (ova) that can be fertilized by male gametes."

Of course that is part of what makes a female not a male.
We're TALKING ABOUT SEX, sexual intercourse, not what makes a female a female.
But the genitals I would consider are the much more encompassing biological feature, and they can and are used (almost every time they are used) WITHOUT ANY REPRODUCTION being part of it.

 

[Sammy-San]

Post edited.

 

[Douglas Hendrickson]

According to God, the genitals are there, the difference between male and female exists, so that a man can leave his mother and father and become ONE FLESH with his wife. Not to create flesh. to be the unity of one flesh.
That is what Jesus said; he did NOT say they come together to reproduce.

 

[Sammy-San]

According to God, the genitals are there, the difference between male and female exists, so that a man can leave his mother and father and become ONE FLESH with his wife. Not to create flesh. to be the unity of one flesh.
That is what Jesus said; he did NOT say they come together to reproduce.

Isn't loins the definition of sexual?

 

[Douglas Hendrickson]

See if you can find a dictionary that says that.