LGBT

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Incest is radically different. Not only can it compromise the health of offspring but it can be part of abusive family relationships especially if it is non-consenual. I never said anything about incestual homosexuals being okay, all incest is wrong and I believe it should never happen. Homosexuality is okay but yes, if it does involve incest it is not. Not every single homosexual relationships do have factors of incest involved, in fact majority don’t. Also I am advocating for my Christian Standards, the one where the lgbtq+ community is included and viewed as completely equal and valid.

Any relationship can be abusive, incest is not exclusively an abusive category. Therefore your argument falls apart in the case of a consensual non-abusive incestual relationship. Why don't you approve of said relationship? If both the man and woman sterilize themselves (or maybe you are pro-abortion), what's the problem?

Your personal Christian standards are at odds with the historic teaching of the Church. They are unlimited in what they are willing to accept because it is based on a purely modern consensual idea of what a legitimate relationship is. Christianity has never operated on that framework and if it had many of the rules within Christianity don't make any sense. Why is chastity needed when all is needed is consensual erotic attraction?

 

[Lost Witness]

Ezekiel 33:8

 

[River__raine]

Any relationship can be abusive, incest is not exclusively an abusive category. Therefore your argument falls apart in the case of a consensual non-abusive incestual relationship. Why don't you approve of said relationship? If both the man and woman sterilize themselves (or maybe you are pro-abortion), what's the problem?

Your personal Christian standards are at odds with the historic teaching of the Church. They are unlimited in what they are willing to accept because it is based on a purely modern consensual idea of what a legitimate relationship is. Christianity has never operated on that framework and if it had many of the rules within Christianity don't make any sense. Why is chastity needed when all is needed is consensual erotic attraction?

It almost sounds as if you’re trying to prove incest is okay, we both disagree with it so why should we need to debate about incest? Homosexuality is same sex attraction and incest is sexual acts with a family member, different. Also you just said it yourself chastity isn’t needed, only consensual attraction. Homosexuality is just that, if it is a healthy relationship it is consensual and safe, there is nothing wrong with that.’

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

It almost sounds as if you’re trying to prove incest is okay, we both disagree with it so why should we need to debate about incest? Homosexuality is same sex attraction and incest is sexual acts with a family member, different. Also you just said it yourself chastity isn’t needed, only consensual attraction. Homosexuality is just that, if it is a healthy relationship it is consensual and safe, there is nothing wrong with that.’

Per your standard, I am. Of course my own standard is that incest is disgusting and that is enough to want to criminalize it and socially stigmatize it. You have chosen to rely on purely rational means for determining whether a relationship is acceptable. If love is all that is required to justify a relationship, as is your argument for Homosexuality, Polygamy, polyamory and I would also presume sex before marriage, then incest is included in that category as well. It can be consensual and non-abusive.

I also agree, on your non-Christian premises there is nothing wrong with homosexuality or any of the above relationships.

 

[Lost Witness]

It's Still Sin, and your supposed to love your neighbor just not their sins.

 

[River__raine]

Per your standard, I am. Of course my own standard is that incest is disgusting and that is enough to want to criminalize it and socially stigmatize it. You have chosen to rely on purely rational means for determining whether a relationship is acceptable. If love is all that is required to justify a relationship, as is your argument for Homosexuality, Polygamy, polyamory and I would also presume sex before marriage, then incest is included in that category as well. It can be consensual and non-abusive.

I also agree, on your non-Christian premises there is nothing wrong with homosexuality or any of the above relationships.

So we’ve come to an agreement, incest is disgusting. I have no real opinions on sex before marriage, do it or not it’s your choice really and if you don’t believe in sex before marriage that’s totally fine and I support that. We’ve also come to an agreement that the relationships we discussed and homosexuality is fine and there is nothing wrong with it. I didn’t actually expect it’d come to this but I’m glad it did. I’m glad we could agree on something.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

So we’ve come to an agreement, incest is disgusting. I have no real opinions on sex before marriage, do it or not it’s your choice really and if you don’t believe in sex before marriage that’s totally fine and I support that. We’ve also come to an agreement that the relationships we discussed and homosexuality is fine and there is nothing wrong with it. I didn’t actually expect it’d come to this but I’m glad it did. I’m glad we could agree on something.

Except we don't agree. Homosexuality is disgusting to me and you will not accept that as a reasonable justification against it. What then? Well, as we've already established there is no reasonable objections to incest on your progressive vision. So long as it is consensual your logic demands its legitimate. Love being love, how do you deny its expression?


Or do you actually agree with me that disgust can be a basis for rejecting certain kinds of behavior? In which case, do you agree with God that Homosexuality is an abomination?

 

[Lost Witness]

Why should you hate on someone for who they love? The bible says that you should love thy neighbour as you love thyself, (this is not the direct quote I cannot recall it word for word) if somebody has a intercourse or experiences attraction to someone of the same gender why should you deny their love and affection for the other person? After all they are not damaging anyone, they are being themselves and this cannot be changed. I grew up in a Christian/Catholic household and went to a Christian church and my parents were not homophobic and still continued to have strong faith, proving Christian’s and homosexuality can live together in harmony. There are many different forms of attraction, sexual and romantic and depending on who you ask there are many different potential genders and the bible says, "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." (Genesis 1:27) a true Christian would say God does not make garbage and he meant to create the LGBTQ+ community and he loves them and he wants everyone else to love them equally so regardless you should respect who they are and whoever they love.

If you truly love someone you will warn them when they commit a sin so that they might not perish. Hense Love your neighbor as yourself

 

[River__raine]

Except we don't agree. Homosexuality is disgusting to me and you will not accept that as a reasonable justification against it. What then? Well, as we've already established there is no reasonable objections to incest on your progressive vision. So long as it is consensual your logic demands its legitimacy.


Or do you actually agree with me that disgust can be a basis for rejecting certain kinds of behavior

You said earlier there is nothing wrong with homosexuality, did you not? We both agree incest is disgusting, I support your belief in no sex before marriage and there is nothing wrong with the relationships we spoke about prior to this. Disgust can be a basis for rejecting certain kinds of behaviour I agree on that but homosexuality is not a behaviour so what is your point? I’m attracted to men and women yet it does not change me or how I act, please explain further what you mean by behaviour.

 

[River__raine]

If you truly love someone you will warn them when they commit a sin so that they might not perish. Hense Love your neighbor as yourself

I am bisexual and I do not believe there is anything wrong with it, I am still Christian and believe god is the almighty father. I understand what it’s like to feel same sex attraction and know it is not possible to change, if I were to love my neighbour as myself I would love and support them regardless of what gender they love.

 

[Lost Witness]

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

You said earlier there is nothing wrong with homosexuality, did you not? We both agree incest is disgusting, I support your belief in no sex before marriage and there is nothing wrong with the relationships we spoke about prior to this. Disgust can be a basis for rejecting certain kinds of behaviour I agree on that but homosexuality is not a behaviour so what is your point? I’m attracted to men and women yet it does not change me or how I act, please explain further what you mean by behaviour.

I said there was nothing wrong with homosexuality from your purely secular non-Christian progressive viewpoint. I am also saying that your view also implies the necessity of supporting incest, so long as it is consensual and non-abusive. You have no secular progressive argument against it. Nor will I allow you to latch on to the Christian rejection of incest while you maintain another standard for yourself.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

I am bisexual and I do not believe there is anything wrong with it, I am still Christian and believe god is the almighty father. I understand what it’s like to feel same sex attraction and know it is not possible to change, if I were to love my neighbour as myself I would love and support them regardless of what gender they love.

Then why don't you love and support the incestual couple or throuple? What about your progressive secular non-Christian sexual moral framework allows you to reject incest so long as it is consensual and non-abusive> You've already stated you support polyamory and polygamy. Why not go further?

 

[River__raine]

Then why don't you love and support the incestual couple or throuple? What about your progressive secular non-Christian sexual moral framework allows you to reject incest so long as it is consensual and non-abusive> You've already stated you support polyamory and polygamy. Why not go further?

I have already clarified incest is wrong because of health issues and genuine morals, I support couples and throuples regardless of gender, not age and relation.

 

[River__raine]

I said there was nothing wrong with homosexuality from your purely secular non-Christian progressive viewpoint. I am also saying that your view also implies the necessity of supporting incest, so long as it is consensual and non-abusive. You have no secular progressive argument against it. Nor will I allow you to latch on to the Christian rejection of incest while you maintain another standard for yourself.

Not once in my argument have I suggested incest is okay, I have said you can love whoever you want meaning you can love whoever you want responsibly which means you are within a similar age range or are at least both adults, not related and consenting. I’ve made it extremely clear that I do not support incest and as a Christian I am allowed to use Christian beliefs to prove my point to another Christian. I simply believe the bible says to love and respect everyone, this includes people of the LGBTQ+ community and God does not make trash and meant to have us here.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Not once in my argument have I suggested incest is okay, I have said you can love whoever you want meaning you can love whoever you want responsibly which means you are within a similar age range or are at least both adults, not related and consenting. I’ve made it extremely clear that I do not support incest and as a Christian I am allowed to use Christian beliefs to prove my point to another Christian. I simply believe the bible says to love and respect everyone, this includes people of the LGBTQ+ community and God does not make trash and meant to have us here.

I have already clarified incest is wrong because of health issues and genuine morals, I support couples and throuples regardless of gender, not age and relation.

You seem to be misunderstanding my position. My position is that your progressive sexual ethic must necessarily lead you to accepting Incest as a legitimate relationship. All your concerns against incest have been addressed. Homosexual incest is okay because there is no risk of genetic offspring being born deficient. Heterosexual incestual couples can sterilize themselves and make themselves infertile to avoid conceiving.

This is a perfectly fine secular progressive view to hold and you cannot avoid it per your reasoning. You think that you can appeal to disgust to reject incest but you can't, because plenty of people like myself find homosexuality disgusting. I find polyamory particularly disgusting. Yet these are moral relationships to you as a believer in secular moral progressivism. So when I say I won't let you latch on to my beliefs against these things, I won't. Because we hold two very different ideas. You hold to a non-Christian view as a Christian for a progressive and open view of human sexuality. I hold to a Christian view which is thoroughly traditional and rooted two thousand years of Christian teaching. It is not an open view of sexuality nor is it egalitarian or unlimited in it's scope. It certainly doesn't only operate on the basis of consent.

If you think that rejecting homosexuality and your attraction to same sex reduces you to trash, well yes it does. We are all kind of trash in the eyes of God to some degree or another. As Augustine said, we are born between feces and urine. You having a disordered attraction doesn't justify it, especially on a Christian view. Our desires are not good simply because we have them. That has never been the teaching of any Church, unless you're an Episcopalian or some other form of progressive Christian. In which case you existed only yesterday.

 

[ozso]

The problem with LGBT is how pervasive and domineering it's become. That's why there's so much pushback.

 

[ozso]

Why should you hate on someone for who they love? The bible says that you should love thy neighbour as you love thyself, (this is not the direct quote I cannot recall it word for word) if somebody has a intercourse or experiences attraction to someone of the same gender why should you deny their love and affection for the other person? After all they are not damaging anyone, they are being themselves and this cannot be changed. I grew up in a Christian/Catholic household and went to a Christian church and my parents were not homophobic and still continued to have strong faith, proving Christian’s and homosexuality can live together in harmony. There are many different forms of attraction, sexual and romantic and depending on who you ask there are many different potential genders and the bible says, "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." (Genesis 1:27) a true Christian would say God does not make garbage and he meant to create the LGBTQ+ community and he loves them and he wants everyone else to love them equally so regardless you should respect who they are and whoever they love.

Any and all sexual relationships that exist outside of marriage between a husband and wife is sin.

There's no outcry that I know of for Christians and churches to accept fornication, or adultery, or prostitution, or pornography, or strip clubs, or internet sites that exist to meet sex partners etc. Nor should there be for LGBT.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Firstly, I’d like to say it is not a lifestyle, there is a documentary called ‘Pray Away’ which shows the point of views of current Christian’s who were involved in conversion therapy who learned to accept their sexual orientation and the point of views of other current Christian’s who still believe in conversion therapy. I’d suggest watching this as it is extremely informational and can deliver more than I can in this response. However going back to the fact it is not a lifestyle, lifestyle suggests that instead of homosexuality being attraction to someone else it is going to gay clubs, hooking up with people of the same sex etc. this is not the case. I am bisexual and I don’t see anything wrong with this and I know it isn’t something that could be changed or altered because it is a part of me, we are not trying to force anything on you we just want discrimination to end and equal rights to cisgender heterosexual people. The reason we are suing institutions is because they have anti-lgbtq+ views which in some cases can be seriously harmful. One of my extremely close friends knew he was a trans man from a young age and had major anxiety and gender dysphoria for his entire childhood due to his mother not letting him transition to male. If an organisation found out he was once a female and did something such as force him to use female bathrooms or use she/her pronouns that has the ability to affect his mental health and hurt him. This is homophobia/transphobia and can sometimes drive people to suicide because they feel hated and unwanted. Whilst some people are trying to force athiest beliefs onto Christian’s not everyone is, all we are trying do to is tell you we are equal. I have always been bisexual and I knew since I was 11 and I knew I was a Christian, homosexuality can live in harmony with Christianity and everyone can love each other and be happy about it.

Homosexuality and transgenderism are lifestyles. Just as heterosexuality is a lifestyle.

We follow the lifestyle according to our desires.

The lawsuits I'm referencing have nothing to do with the beliefs themselves, but as a way of getting
economic revenge by gay activists. This happened in my dioceses and has happened to other Christian
institutions. Heck, my parish even had protesters trying to keep parishioners from signing a petition for
the state government to recognize that marriage is between one man and one woman. Of course the
head of the State Senate, ignored the petition, until he ended up in jail for a different reason. The
Senate voted down the request by the citizens. But this is the People's Republic of Massachusetts.

Sexual orientation itself is not a sin, but the act is.


Anal copulation is a direct sin whether the act is committed by two gay men, or a man and a woman.

People tend to ignore this part of homosexual acts, which are unhealthy to both the couple involved
and others when proper hygiene is not followed.

 

[Lost Witness]

Leviticus 20:13 // ezekiel 33:8. // Make no Mistake, being Born Again doesn't remove you from being held accountable for complicity in what GOD clearly calls sin My soul is worth no more or less than a saint in the eyes of GOD, nor is a sinners soul worth less than a prophets or vice versa.