Debate help...why is homosexuality wrong?

[HunterRose]

No they don't. I am not black and I oppose racial injustice.

So why did you assume I was gay?

Homosexuality is not racial injustice.

But prejudice and discrimination against gays and lesbians, like it or not, is injustice and it is indistinguishable from racial prejudice and discrimination

It is sinful behavior laid out in the Bible that has received its own social category, which now wants rights based on sexual orientation.

So a generation ago when African Americas were marching and protesting they just wanted rights based on skin color?

So you support gay lifestyles

I support equality and justice for all.
I have no idea what this “gay agenda” is…is it anything like the “black agenda” or the “Jewish agenda”?

even though your own Catholic Church is opposed to it. Why do you remain affiliated?

The Catholic Church is opposed to prejudice and discrimination. Why are you not opposed to these things?

 

[HunterRose]

James E. Miller may, but I have yet to see evidence that this is the Teaching of the Church Catholic.

Secondly, you quoted only half of the passage I used.

The strength lies in the second half.

The relationships are referred to as being unnatural. The Greek words physin and paraphysin have been translated to mean natural and unnatural respectively. Contrary to popular belief, the word paraphysin does not mean "to go against the laws of nature", but rather engage in action(s) which is uncharacteristic for that person. An example of the word paraphysin is used in Romans 11:24, where God acts in an uncharacteristic (paraphysin) way to accept the Gentiles. Thus the passages correctly reads that it would be unnatural for heterosexuals to live as homosexuals, and for homosexuals to live as heterosexuals.

 

[Kgreg]

So why did you assume I was gay?


But prejudice and discrimination against gays and lesbians, like it or not, is injustice and it is indistinguishable from racial prejudice and discrimination


So a generation ago when African Americas were marching and protesting they just wanted rights based on skin color?



I support equality and justice for all.
I have no idea what this “gay agenda” is…is it anything like the “black agenda” or the “Jewish agenda”?


The Catholic Church is opposed to prejudice and discrimination. Why are you not opposed to these things?

As I've said numerous times before:

Race is not a choice, nor is it a sin.

Having homosexual sex is a choice, and it is a sin.

There's a big difference, inspite of how the gay rights activits want to co-opt the civil rights movement. It's not the same situation.

 

[Colabomb]

The relationships are referred to as being unnatural. The Greek words physin and paraphysin have been translated to mean natural and unnatural respectively. Contrary to popular belief, the word paraphysin does not mean "to go against the laws of nature", but rather engage in action(s) which is uncharacteristic for that person. An example of the word paraphysin is used in Romans 11:24, where God acts in an uncharacteristic (paraphysin) way to accept the Gentiles. Thus the passages correctly reads that it would be unnatural for heterosexuals to live as homosexuals, and for homosexuals to live as heterosexuals.

Not according to the Church you claim to obey.

 

[HunterRose]

Please do not misunderstand this post. PLEASE do not take this wrong!

But I have to ask. Should we tell the Kleptomaniac it is acceptable to steal because they have such a strong urge to do so?

We all struggle with sin. The difference lies in how we respond to our struggles. Do we continually fight, even if we fall, or do we give in?

The comparison of a sexual orientation to a mental illness is both malicious and offensive, just as reducing a person to “an urge” is.

 

[Kgreg]

The relationships are referred to as being unnatural. The Greek words physin and paraphysin have been translated to mean natural and unnatural respectively. Contrary to popular belief, the word paraphysin does not mean "to go against the laws of nature", but rather engage in action(s) which is uncharacteristic for that person. An example of the word paraphysin is used in Romans 11:24, where God acts in an uncharacteristic (paraphysin) way to accept the Gentiles. Thus the passages correctly reads that it would be unnatural for heterosexuals to live as homosexuals, and for homosexuals to live as heterosexuals.

This is a grievous misinterpretation of the Book of Romans. Grievous.

 

[Kgreg]

The comparison of a sexual orientation to a mental illness is both malicious and offensive, just as reducing a person to “an urge” is.

Do you know "outlaw" from the Morality and Ethics section. You sound like him and use exactly the same arguments?

 

[Colabomb]

The comparison of a sexual orientation to a mental illness is both malicious and offensive, just as reducing a person to “an urge” is.

I did not call anyone an Urge, I said that they had an urge.

Scripture is clear that homosexual sex is a sin, on the same level as theft.

Therefore the Kleptomaniac analogy fits.

 

[HunterRose]

/sigh

There is a difference between "judging" someone for unavoidable sin, and allowing behavior the Bible clearly states is wrong, and is being encouraged to others on this forum. Would we turn a blind eye to someone advocating illegal drugs, theft, rape? We are not saying anyone with homosexual tendencies or urges are doomed. We are debating those who say homosexuality is a blessed life style and are telling other Christians it's ok.

But the only difference apparent difference is your desire to justify your own personal prejudice.

Can you clarify just how the judging and condemnation you are engaging in here ageist gays and lesbians is “different” from making the same statements about non-CHristiasn about non-whites, about women?

And why is it morally justifiable to ignore other sins such as the wearing of clothing made of mixed fabrics?

In fact, we are being very tolerant.

Justifying prejudice and discrimination is “tolerant”

George Orwell would be very proud

Clearly we are still talking to and trying to help homosexual Christians.

And just how do you think you are helping?

If we turned a blind eye to everything as you are suggesting, new and confused Christians may stumble when they read these behaviors are ok.

But you happily turn a blind eye towards gluttony, pride, the eating of shellfish, the wearing of clothing made of mixed fabrics, tattoos, women wearing pants, wearing gold jewelry and so on and so on and so on….

Why are these things OK?

 

[Colabomb]

But the only difference apparent difference is your desire to justify your own personal prejudice.

Can you clarify just how the judging and condemnation you are engaging in here ageist gays and lesbians is “different” from making the same statements about non-CHristiasn about non-whites, about women?

And why is it morally justifiable to ignore other sins such as the wearing of clothing made of mixed fabrics?



Justifying prejudice and discrimination is “tolerant”

George Orwell would be very proud


And just how do you think you are helping?


But you happily turn a blind eye towards gluttony, pride, the eating of shellfish, the wearing of clothing made of mixed fabrics, tattoos, women wearing pants, wearing gold jewelry and so on and so on and so on….

Why are these things OK?

Since when was women wearing pants sinful?

 

[HunterRose]

This is a strawman. We are not under the law, but under Christ.

Homosexuality was condemned however after Christ, after the institution of the Church.

Yes, I'll eat Shellfish, because I am set free from the law. However, being set free from the law does not imply that we may do whatever we please.

“Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one title will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven." Matthew 5:17-19

Well heaven and earth are still here….so the law stands

 

[ThyNeighbor]

But I have to ask. Should we tell the Kleptomaniac it is acceptable to steal because they have such a strong urge to do so?

No.

Right!

This is the kind of example I have been giving. We are not judging. There is a difference between attacking someone who has habitual sin who wants to change, and someone who has habitual sin, advocating that it is ok to continue to do so and to encourage others as well.

Now let me ask you a question. If a man is starving to death and he steals a piece of bread is it a sin?

Also, who is the worse sinner, the man who stole the piece of bread or all of the people around him with plenty to eat that would not give him the bread?


The error in your analogy is that a kleptomaniac steals, not out of need, but out a compulsion. Unlike a kleptomaniac, God has placed within each of us an emotional need for love, intimacy, compassion, etc. Whether you are straight or gay does not make a difference – it’s a universal truth. It’s not good that the man should be alone, so sayth the Lord.

 

[Kgreg]

“Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one title will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven." Matthew 5:17-19

Well heaven and earth are still here….so the law stands

The Law was for the Jews. Christians were never under the Law, as the last thing Jesus said on the cross is "It is finished". At that moment the obligation of the Jews to live according to the Law ended, and all believers fell under grace.

We live according to the New Testament, not the OT.

 

[HunterRose]

II Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is inspired by God.

To deny the divinity of the Holy Scriptures is heresy.

”What I am saying I say not with the Lord’s authority” 2 Cor 11:17

 

[Kgreg]

”What I am saying I say not with the Lord’s authority” 2 Cor 11:17

Hmmmm.....

Care to answer some questions "HunterRose"?

Do you believe in the Triune God?

Do you believe that the Bible is the Word of God?

Do you believe that Jesus is the Son of God?

Do you believe in the subsitutionary attonement of Jesus for our sins?

Do you believe that homosexual sex acts are righteous before God?

Do you believe there is a heaven and that the one and only God dwells there?

Do you believe there is a hell and that all people who don't accept salvation via Jesus go there for eternity?

Your profile doesn't really say much about you at all. Just so we better understand where you are coming from, as it doesn't really seem very Roman Catholic Church, would you please answer the questions?

Thanks.

 

[HunterRose]

As I've said numerous times before:

Race is not a choice, nor is it a sin.

Having homosexual sex is a choice, and it is a sin.

Racists do not hate people with dark skin. They hate the behavior, the pretence, that dark skinned people are equal to whites.
Racists will happily cite the bible in support of their beliefs of racial superiority and the sin of pretending otherwise.

There's a big difference, inspite of how the gay rights activits want to co-opt the civil rights movement. It's not the same situation.

Coretta Scott King

"I still hear people say that I should not be talking about the rights of lesbian and gay people and I should stick to the issue of racial justice... But I hasten to remind them that Martin Luther King, Jr., said, 'Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere' ... I appeal to everyone who believes in Martin Luther King, Jr.'s dream to make room at the table of brotherhood and sisterhood for lesbian and gay people."1

"Gay and lesbian people have families, and their families should have legal protection, whether by marriage or civil union. A constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriages is a form of gay bashing, and it would do nothing at all to protect traditional marriages."2

"We are all tied together in a single garment of destiny... I can never be what I ought to be until you are allowed to be what you ought to be," she said, quoting from her husband. "I've always felt that homophobic attitudes and policies were unjust and unworthy of a free society and must be opposed by all Americans who believe in democracy."3

"Gays and lesbians stood up for civil rights in Montgomery, Selma, in Albany, Georgia, and St. Augustine, Florida, and many other campaigns of the Civil Rights Movement. Many of these courageous men and women were fighting for my freedom at a time when they could find few voices for their own, and I salute their contributions."4

"We have a lot of work to do in our common struggle against bigotry and discrimination. I say 'common struggle,' because I believe very strongly that all forms of bigotry & discrimination are equally wrong and should be opposed by right-thinking Americans everywhere. Freedom from discrimination based on sexual orientation is surely a fundamental human right in any great democracy, as much as freedom from racial, religious, gender, or ethnic discrimination."5

"We have to launch a campaign against homophobia in the black community."6

"Homophobia is like racism and anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry in that it seeks to dehumanize a large group of people, to deny their humanity, their dignity and personhood. This sets the stage for further repression and violence that spread all too easily to victimize the next minority group."7


Sources:
1 Coretta Scott King, 25th anniversary luncheon for Lambda Defense and Education Fund, March 31, 1998
2 Coretta Scott King, speech at The Richard Stockton College of New Jersey, USA Today, March 24, 2004
3 Coretta Scott King, 25th anniversary luncheon for Lambda Defense and Education Fund, quoted in the Chicago Sun Times, April 1, 1998
4 Coretta Scott King, 25th anniversary luncheon for Lambda Defense and Education Fund, quoted in the Chicago Tribune, April 1, 1998
5 Coretta Scott King, Opening Plenary Session, 13th annual Creating Change conference of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, Atlanta, Georgia, November 9, 2000
6 Coretta Scott King, Reuters, June 8, 2001
7 Coretta Scott King, a speech at the Palmer Hilton Hotel, quoted in the Chicago Defender, April 1, 1998



John Lewis

From time to time, America comes to a crossroads. With confusion and controversy, it's hard to spot that moment. We need cool heads, warm hearts, and America's core principles to cleanse away the distractions.

We are now at such a crossroads over same-sex couples' freedom to marry. It is time to say forthrightly that the government's exclusion of our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters from civil marriage officially degrades them and their families. It denies them the basic human right to marry the person they love. It denies them numerous legal protections for their families.

This discrimination is wrong. We cannot keep turning our backs on gay and lesbian Americans. I have fought too hard and too long against discrimination based on race and color not to stand up against discrimination based on sexual orientation. I've heard the reasons for opposing civil marriage for same-sex couples. Cut through the distractions, and they stink of the same fear, hatred, and intolerance I have known in racism and in bigotry.

Some say let's choose another route and give gay folks some legal rights but call it something other than marriage. We have been down that road before in this country. Separate is not equal. The rights to liberty and happiness belong to each of us and on the same terms, without regard to either skin color or sexual orientation.
Some say they are uncomfortable with the thought of gays and lesbians marrying. But our rights as Americans do not depend on the approval of others. Our rights depend on us being Americans.

Sometimes it takes courts to remind us of these basic principles. In 1948, when I was 8 years old, 30 states had bans on interracial marriage, courts had upheld the bans many times, and 90 percent of the public disapproved of those marriages, saying they were against the definition of marriage, against God's law. But that year, the California Supreme Court became the first court in America to strike down such a ban. Thank goodness some court finally had the courage to say that equal means equal, and others rightly followed, including the US Supreme Court 19 years later.

Some stand on the ground of religion, either demonizing gay people or suggesting that civil marriage is beyond the Constitution. But religious rites and civil rights are two separate entities. What's at stake here is legal marriage, not the freedom of every religion to decide on its own religious views and ceremonies.

I remember the words of John Kennedy when his presidential candidacy was challenged because of his faith: "I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant, nor Jewish -- where no public official either requests or accepts instructions on public policy from the pope, the National Council of Churches, or any other ecclesiastical source -- where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials -- and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all."

Those words ring particularly true today. We hurt our fellow citizens and our community when we deny gay people civil marriage and its protections and responsibilities. Rather than divide and discriminate, let us come together and create one nation. We are all one people. We all live in the American house. We are all the American family. Let us recognize that the gay people living in our house share the same hopes, troubles, and dreams. It's time we treated them as equals, as family.
Boston Globe, October 25, 2003





Dr. James Lawson

"Gays and lesbians have a more difficult time than we did. We had our families and our churches on our side. All too often, they have neither."
www.soulforce.org/article/407





Andrew Young

"I'd be disappointed if we did not approve this resolution. I think it would be consistent with our historic spirit of fairness and justice. But it also would be consistent with the spirit of grace and mercy as the path to peace and that you judge not that you not be judged."

Andrew Young says Synod's affirmation of marriage equality would be prophetic.

Julian Bond – Chair of the NAACP

“Discrimination is discrimination, no matter who the victim is, and it is always wrong. There are no ‘special rights’ in America, despite the attempts by many to divide blacks and the gay community with the argument that the latter are seeking some imaginary ‘special rights’ at the expense of blacks.”
http://online.statesmanjournal.com/sp_section_article.cfm?i=76605&s=2486


Earl Ofari Hutchinson

Blacks insist that there's absolutely no way you can compare a state barring same-sex marriage to the centuries of slavery and the near century of relentless racial violence and apartheid like discrimination laws they've suffered. But this is a terribly, lop-sided, and self-serving read of history. It also ignores or denies the fact that gays have been murdered, socially stigmatized, and have suffered gender Jim Crow like discrimination in America and countless other countries. In creating a pecking order of oppression, a kind of my oppression is worse than yours, blacks can then pick and choose when and where they will fight discrimination, or worse, to denigrate another group deemed less worthy of support their battle against in discrimination. This is foolhardy, and irresponsible.
http://www.blackamericatoday.com/article.cfm?ArticleID=296


Leonard Pitts Jr.

Granted, the comparison between the black struggle and the gay one is inexact. But here's the thing: Every freedom movement from Poland's labor uprising to America's feminism to China's Tiananmen Square protests has been compared to the civil rights movement. When Czechoslovakians threw off communist rule in 1989, they sang We Shall Overcome. Yet no one bothered to point out that the Czechs were never slighted in the U.S. Constitution, much less to accuse Poles of ''pimping'' the civil rights movement. What's that tell you? It tells me this stinginess about the movement arises only when gays seek to embrace it. And that black people -- some of us, at least -- ought to be ashamed.
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/living/columnists/leonard_pitts/8164391.htm?1c

Bill Maxwell

I am personally, along with intellectually, offended by the current outbreak of homophobia surrounding the gay marriage issue. This outbreak is driven by, among other things, raw hatred, ignorance, illogicality, irrational fear and, alas, crass election-year politics.
http://www.sptimes.com/2004/02/15/Columns/Taking_gay_rights_per.shtml


Sheryl McCarthey

So many parallels exist between what's happening in the gay-rights movement and what occurred in previous civil-rights movements. The same angry and emotional arguments being made against homosexuals who want the right to marry were made against blacks who wanted to attend the same schools, eat in the same restaurants, hold the same kinds of jobs and live in the same neighborhoods as whites, and against women who wanted to vote, serve on juries, attend medical school, and be hired for the same jobs as men: "It's not natural. It will upset the social order, and destroy our way of life. It's against religious teachings."
http://www.nynewsday.com/news/opinion/ny-vpmcc163672301feb16,0,348315.column

 

[HunterRose]

This is a grievous misinterpretation of the Book of Romans. Grievous.

So…having an interpertaion different from yours is “grevious”?

 

[HunterRose]

Do you know "outlaw" from the Morality and Ethics section. You sound like him and use exactly the same arguments?

I’ve read his writings….he is good.

 

[Proselyte]

Hunter, Crumbs there have been so many posts here, I will just say this...

We are addressing Christians who are advocating a homosexual lifestyle. As Christians who hold to Biblical ideals, we are witnessing to, sharing with, or correcting wayward Christians.

A) If you don't acknowledge that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God, then our argument will hold no water with you. So be it. Just say so if that is the case.

B) If you do hold the Bible as the inerrant Word of God, then what we say must have some meaning with you.

So which is it? A or B?

It seems like we are rehashing the same thing over and over again. State your position with the Bible and let's put this to rest.

 

[HunterRose]

Since when was women wearing pants sinful?

“A woman must not wear men's clothing, nor a man wear women's clothing, for the LORD your God detests anyone who does this.” Deuteronomy 22:5