Is Homosexuality Wrong from a non Biblical perspective?

[Mystman]

Yep, that's the law of gravity -- no it's not wrong but the consequences can sure hurt.


No another law supersedes it -- it's called the law of aerodynamics. So the law isn't broken.


Mystman: Talking about laws, there are spiritual laws to consider as well as these physical laws. Have you thought on that?

A spiritual law of nature perhaps?

Well, could you name one? (remember the "from a non-biblical perspective" from the thread title )

(oh, and I wasn't talking about physical laws. I was talking about "natural laws of nature". I'm quite aware that a physical law can't be broken (although it can be falsified). The idea of my post was to show that a natural law of nature (like.. men liking women, or people falling to the ground when jumping) isn't quite necesarily an actual law.)

 

[Mystman]

COUGH

bump

 

[Mystman]

BUMP for great justice!

Cmon people, you can't have given up already

 

[thegurlsgurl55432]

no i do not believe its wrong for i am one hint hint my username... i find it really dispising that youd say such things as it is imorral...or its against gods law....but to be fair i never followed gods law anyways....so to put it simple... i believe there is nothing wrong with love...not matter who u loved... howd u like it if someone told u being heterosexual is wrong and u cant marry cuz of sum bible thing writen i dont know how many years ago...u wouldnt be too pleased would ya... well i have one thing to say....wats happend to seperation of church and state. because in the end its not gods riegn who will make the desicion on gay marriage...or the church...but the people

 

[JGG]

Opposites attract. Male and female are opposites. Negative magnet attracts a positive magnet. That's the natural law of nature, so too with human beings, there is a natural law.

But by this logic white people should only be marrying black people. Besides, you're citing a law of physics (magnetism), not of human sexuality. There is no reason to assume that homosexuality is "not normal", as we ourselves have dictated what "normal" is. There are animals that have homosexual populations, isn't that in nature?

 

[sister_maynard]

Yes, they do. While heterosexuality is the universal majority and norm, the percentages of homosexual and bisexual animals can be quite high.
http://www.bidstrup.com/sodomy.htm
Without resorting to the Bible, I can't see why it would be wrong. The argument about delicate colon tissue is an interesting one, but applying the logic that it harms a partner willingly can be extended to things like S&M when both partners are willing. Not every gay relationship involves S&M (lest I be flamed because of a misunderstanding,) but if both parties are willing and over the age of consent I don't see a nonBiblical reason that homosexuality would be wrong.

 

[full_of_faith]

Plain and simple, of course it is wrong, it is against nature. It doesn't make psychological sense. Even King Solomon or David (little unsure) said "there are three things that are too amazing for me, four that I do not understand... the way of an eagle in the sky, the way of a snake on the rock, the way of a ship on the high seas, and the way of a man with a woman." (Prov 30: 18, 19)

I believe the OP wanted NON biblical reasons. Your reason is biblically based.

 

[chalice_thunder]

... but I just can't believe that people were born homosexual. Think of it another way, if we were all homosexual, there wouldn't be any of us left! Remember this is just an opinion.

Because you believe it does not make you right.

Now I'm thinking of it another way, as you directed us to do. I'm not sure how you arrived at your conclusion. Just because we are gay does not mean we don't know how to procreate. You would be amazed at the number of gay men who have lived married lives, raised children, only to come out of the closet late in life.

 

[Cian]

There are a lot reasons for society to think that homosexuality is wrong without turning to the bible.

1. Once its considered o.k. it leads to what we have now: Homosexual marriage and it doesn't benefit society for these reasons:

a. No procreation
b. More disease
c. Deviate behavior becomes legitimized.

2. Health care costs for you and I will go up.

3. Our kids will be brought up to believe its normal.

There are more, but the point is society in no way benefits from it.

a. With the population of the United States approaching 300 million, global population rocketing skyward, and urban sprawl destroying natural habitats of many species I see nothing wrong with homosexual unions not producing offspring.

b. Yes, initially AIDS and other STDs were greatly affecting the homosexual community; I believe heightened awareness of the dangers of unprotected sex will lead to a decline disease among homosexuals.

c. It seems that your definition of deviate behavior comes from no other source except the Bible; I do not find homosexuality deviate in any way.

2. I do not see how homosexuals will in any way raise health care costs; their numbers will never constitute any more than a small minority.

3. I hate to break the news to you but my generation is quite accepting of homosexuality. I am bisexual and I have many friends who are bi, gay, or lesbian; I have never been harassed for my orientation nor have any of my friends. I do not see any reason why it would be a negative thing for children to believe that homosexuality is a norm for some people.

 

[thepegleggedpenguin]

The truth of the matter is that the only true opposition of homosexuality lies in the text of a book thousands of years old (and which has been the object of revision to more fit agendas). While it is the natural impulse of someone to fear that which they do not understand, they need to be understanding. How many people that oppose homosexuals have ever sat and spoken with one. I am disgusted by those that think of it as a disease. They do not care to infect you, they would rather live their lives accepted.

 

[Brennin]

This is pretty much Natural Fallacy, with a Bible quote when non-Bible evidence was required.

There are hard fallacies and fluff "fallacies," and the one you cite is an example of the latter.

 

[levi501]

There are hard fallacies and fluff "fallacies," and the one you cite is an example of the latter.

Since homosexuality is observed outside of humans in nature, citing some natural law is simply inconsistent and wrong.

 

[kopilo]

Plain and simple, of course it is wrong, it is against nature. It doesn't make psychological sense.

Drinking alcohol till it becomes a poisen doesn't make psychological sense (in ways of survival) either, and as for nature, plants have been procreating with each-other for a very long time, and animals well I'm not sure of the first recorded event of it occuring, but I'm sure it is nothing new, of course neither is homosexuality.

Hence it has become an issue because some people have decided somewhere that it is wrong, right? So really the problem with homosexuality is that people will not agree with it because for some reason they have been taught it is wrong. In addition when they view other texts that minor bias may lead them to interperate without the tollerance of other view points on the theories of those texts.

Therefore homosexuality is wrong because people believe it is wrong, and for them to consider otherwise might take effort, or a basic developement of being able to put ourselves in other people's shoes, or whatever you want to call it.

 

[kopilo]

Yes

Read Romans 1:26-32

Take note all 'homoerotic' events in the bible take place outside of marriege and hence can all be considered adultary.

 

[Blackmarch]

This isn't a formal debate invite as much as a discussion. I would like to ask if anyone has a NON-biblical reason for thinking Homosexuality is wrong. This is seperate from promiscuity, bestiality or any other "sexual sins." I only want to know what reasons, if any, you have for believing homosexuality is wrong. This is open for christians or non-christians alike.

A few things about me. I do not consider myself a Christian, at least not in the fundamentalist sense. I do admire C.S. Lewis and his views. I'm agnostic about most things but most days I believe in a personal God. Lately I've been rediscovering my spirituality. I"m not gay myself--I'm very happily married and have son and daughter. I have a gay uncle and a gay boss and a few gay friends, so this issue is somewhat personal to me.

Thanks
Fregas

From a neutral stance without using what god has commanded.. dunno, and would depend on the situation..
although were homosexuality were to be practiced by every person their whole lives, the world's human population would seriously decline.
So if someone is rooting for human depopulation, especially to those sort of levels then yes it would seem good for them,
But to someone who is on the other end of the line, it would like wise be wrong.

And there are also non biblical cultures that believe homosexuality is wrong.

 

[wblastyn]

From a neutral stance without using what god has commanded.. dunno, and would depend on the situation..
although were homosexuality were to be practiced by every person their whole lives, the world's human population would seriously decline.
So if someone is rooting for human depopulation, especially to those sort of levels then yes it would seem good for them,
But to someone who is on the other end of the line, it would like wise be wrong.

And there are also non biblical cultures that believe homosexuality is wrong.

Why on earth would everyone start practicing homosexuality? LOL. This argument makes absolutely no sense to me "if homosexuality is accpted the human race will die out". Just because people accept something doesn't mean you become it. That's like saying someone who supports equal rights for blacks and woman will magically become a black woman lol.

 

[wblastyn]

Opposites attract. Male and female are opposites. Negative magnet attracts a positive magnet. That's the natural law of nature, so too with human beings, there is a natural law.

ROFL. "Atoms do it, therefore humans must do it too" yes...I follow your logic...not. Well as far as I know atoms don't use computers, so what are youdoing here?

 

[Blackmarch]

Why on earth would everyone start practicing homosexuality? LOL. This argument makes absolutely no sense to me "if homosexuality is accpted the human race will die out". Just because people accept something doesn't mean you become it. That's like saying someone who supports equal rights for blacks and woman will magically become a black woman lol.

Reread the post, and Please note the extreme case scenario provisos.

Were everyone to practice it (not just accept, and not being bisexual).. there would be serious lack of children.

 

[Spherical Time]

Reread the post, and Please note the extreme case scenario provisos.

Were everyone to practice it (not just accept, and not being bisexual).. there would be serious lack of children.

What makes you think that senario is likely enough to even consider?

 

[Mr. QWERTY]

Several people have brought up evolution as a means of saying homosexuality is wrong because it does not result in reproduction.

There is a flaw in this argument. Evolution favors beneficial traits, works against detrimental traits, and really does not care much about neutral traits.

This means that if homosexuality does not have a negative impact on overall reproduction of the group, it will not be selected against. For homosexuality it can be argued that it does not have a negative impact on group reproduction. One man is capable of fathering children with many women. So if there is another man that does not father children, it really does not matter. The species has reproduced. Similarly with women. Any individual woman can only have a few children, so if one does not reproduce, survival of the species is not harmed.

Add to this the fact that many homosexuals do have sex, at least occasionally, with the opposite gender. This means that they will reproduce, at least occasionally.

So, since homosexual behavior is present in only a small percentage of the population, and for only a portion (albeit maybe a large portion) of their reproductive life, it is not a detriment to the species as a whole. Therefore there is no reason to weed it out. Therefore it is not unnatural from an evolutionary point of view.