Steps toward civil discourse in this sub-forum

[Hentenza]

The answer to this is not a significant matter. It is an effort to mask your impotence in this debate. It doesn't matter if there's no such references or 1000 such references because it is a complete distraction and irrelevancy.

Again, what parts of the NT support homosexual marriage and homosexual activities?

 

[Hentenza]

I am not sure how it is "honest" but it is certainly incredibly stupid. This sort of distractor only is attempted to mask the impotence of the argument for your side. The answer is entirely irrelevant and not of concern to rational individuals.

I guess anything that does not meet with your views are just stupid, dishonest, detractors, etc. but I am yet to see you post an answer to any of the questions and/or arguments directed at you. Are you capable of a civil debate or not?

 

[KCKID]

Again, what potions of the NT support homosexual marriage or any homosexual activity?

The question is nonsensical, Hentenza, and a couple of posts from others have demonstrated WHY the question is nonsensical. There are MANY things that the Bible doesn't address. This does not necessarily make it 'not so'. There are MANY things - such as the present topic concerning one's sexual attraction toward the same gender - about which the Bible-writers were in total ignorance. This does not necessarily make it 'not so'. By all means use your Bible to enrich your own life but don't use it as a medium with which to address/explain ALL things. It just cannot be done even though a few on this forum appear to have their Holy Book strapped to their foreheads.

Once more with feeling ...the Bible says NOTHING about one's sexuality, be it heterosexual or homosexual. Science, however, has VERY MUCH to say about sexuality.

 

[Hentenza]

The question is nonsensical, Hentenza, and a couple of posts from others have demonstrated WHY the question is nonsensical. There are MANY things that the Bible doesn't address. This does not necessarily make it 'not so'. There are MANY things - such as the present topic concerning one's sexual attraction toward the same gender - about which the Bible-writers were in total ignorance. This does not necessarily make it 'not so'. By all means use your Bible to enrich your own life but don't use it as a medium with which to address/explain ALL things. It just cannot be done even though a few on this forum appear to have their Holy Book strapped to their foreheads.

Once more with feeling ...the Bible says NOTHING about one's sexuality, be it heterosexual or homosexual. Science, however, has VERY MUCH to say about sexuality.

It is nonsensical to you because it does not support your position. Funny how that bible is used to prove points but not to disprove points by the camp that you support. You just can't have it both ways.
The bible says plenty about homosexuality; actually it screams about how wrong it is but just ignored by many that choose to ignore it. As to science just remember what Albert Einstein said "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

 

[Texas Lynn]

I guess anything that does not meet with your views are just stupid, dishonest, detractors, etc. but I am yet to see you post an answer to any of the questions and/or arguments directed at you. Are you capable of a civil debate or not?

You should be asking yourself the same question. I have given you the answer you are going to get and that's it. If it's not what you want that's your problem. Harping on it on won't help. There are arguments against my position which have an element of rationality and intellectual rigor; you haven't posted any of them.

 

[Texas Lynn]

The bible says plenty about homosexuality; actually it screams about how wrong ...

It gives a few obscure passages which reflect the culture but say nothing of loving physical same gender relationships of today. The gotcha passage in Romans 1 is always cited out of context; The passage mentions some 25 or so sins of which we are all guilty at some time or another and concerns forgiveness of same. What mention it makes of promiscuity of any orientation does not address loving relationships. Your assertion above is hyperbole at best.

 

[KCKID]

It is nonsensical to you because it does not support your position. Funny how that bible is used to prove points but not to disprove points by the camp that you support. You just can't have it both ways.
The bible says plenty about homosexuality; actually it screams about how wrong it is but just ignored by many that choose to ignore it. As to science just remember what Albert Einstein said "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

The BEST you can do with your 'The Bible says plenty about homosexuality' and your rhetorical 'actually it screams about how wrong it is', Hentenza, is the word 'sodomy'. Nothing more. Because homosexuality is generally seen as nothing other than anal sex, the original word 'sodomy' was replaced with the more modern but grossly inappropriate word 'homosexuality'. AGAIN ...homosexuality - as in one's innate sexual attraction toward another of the same gender - is NOT addressed in the Bible AT ALL!

If you must target or focus on anything at all to bolster your own perceived Christian superiority and authority - once you have your own house on order, that is - then focus on 'sodomy' and NOT 'homosexuality'!

 

[CaDan]

*wonders where the civility went*

 

[Crazy Liz]

What part of the Bible commands, or indeed even enables, Christians to hurl invective towards others for disagreeing with them? What part of the Bible enables any Christian to set him/herself up as the authority to whom others should turn for the authoritative meaning of the Biblical text?

Whether or not homosexual people may marry each other (and no Phinehastic quibbling, what is meant by that usage is same sex marriages) is immaterial to the duty of members to be civil to each other under the rules of the board, and the duty of Christians to show courtesy and respect towards others, even returning good for evil and a soft word for a bitter one.

What has been shown in this forum by and large is the inability of people who call themselves followers of Jesus Christ to obey even his simplest commandments as regards how they should bear witness to others. (Of course many such people believe in the Bible rather than in Jesus, and found their insults on selective quotation supposedly justifying them as "proclaiming righteousness," and I sincerely hope that He does not hold that idolatry against them.)

For the gay person, the "Good News" seemingly is that they are fated to live a life without love, and choose between being sneered at and castigated by the "good Christians" or living a lie about themselves. There is no promise of joy, acceptance, fellowiship, God's love, or anything but legalistic condemnation. If any of you wonder why your "witness" is so barren, consider what you are witnessing about. You have as much as told gay people that God's grace is not sufficient for them.

And for that you should be ashamed.

Good points, Poly.

 

[Crazy Liz]

*wonders where the civility went*

Isn't civility the topic of this thread?

 

[Crazy Liz]

Dear Mskedi,
On the contrary I have explained why we can make the comparison with all of us from the Bible, its because all are sexual immorality outside marriage. This is a Christian forum and thus we may use God's Biblical testimony as a basis for our views, whether people find it discourteous or not.
You are also asking for a special exemption for LGBT so they wont be compared, I see no similar request from those you call straight..

Are you circumspect about treating all sexual attractions to people other than one's spouse the same?

 

[Crazy Liz]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mod Hat On

Mod Hat Post:

Calm down people. It's starting to get heated in here. Ironically so in a thread discussing the promotion of civility in this subforum..

Mod Hat Off
-----------------------------------------------------------------------​

Knock what off, please?

 

[Texas Lynn]

Isn't civility the topic of this thread?

Notice how none of the antigay faction except Ishida responded to the enumerated points in the original post. It would therefore appear civility is a one-sided situation with that cohort.

 

[catlover]

Oh my goodness ...Christians might blame Gay Marriage for the next CA earthquake.

Why not? The late Jerry Falwell blamed gays for 9-11. It's easy to scape goat people in our society who are viewed with contempt...another good rule would be for people to stop scape goating gays for what is wrong in society..

 

[catlover]

Dear KCKID,
Sorry but Christians know there is no such thing as ‘gay marriage’. Marriage is man and woman, male and female, husband and wife, bride and bridegroom, the Bible is full of these countenanced, it is God's creation purpose (Genesis 2) Gay means having a same-sex attraction, the two are not connected.

According to The Bible marriage can be between one man and many women...according to The Bible marriage can also have concubines as well...

 

[Texas Lynn]

According to The Bible marriage can be between one man and many women...according to The Bible marriage can also have concubines as well...

The Old Testament was written by rich powerful men to benefit rich powerful men.

 

[Hentenza]

The Old Testament was written by rich powerful men to benefit rich powerful men.

LOL!!!! I would like to see you offer some proof that backs your flawed opinion.

 

[CaDan]

The Old Testament was written by rich powerful men to benefit rich powerful men.

Dogmatic pronouncements like this are pretty far from civil.

Let's be blunt, Lynn--you are the source of a lot of incivility. I actually agree with you on a lot of substantive matters (your flawed hermeneutic of the entire OT notwithstanding). But your dogmatic pronouncements, your snide insults, and your barely disguised contempt contribute nothing to the civility of the discourse here.

 

[CaDan]

A couple of random thoughts on civility here:

1. I think we can assume everybody is familiar with the passages from Leviticus and Romans. There is really no need to trot them out in every thread.

2. I think it is a mistake to equate "homosexuality" with "gay sex." More specifically, arguments based on "teh butt secks is teh nasty" don't really go anywhere useful.

3. I think it is also a mistake to assume people who believe gay sex to be a sin also want to do harm to homosexual people.

4. More generally, put away the broad brushes. Just because someone is gay doesn't mean they are re-enacting scenes from "Cruising" every night. Just because someone is an evangelical Christian does not mean their religious experience is, in the words of Real Live Preacher, "a domineering father and endless hours of religious abuse punctuated with occasional beatings."

5. Even more generally, assume good faith on the part of all participants until you have good reason to believe otherwise. Gay people are not necessarily trying to "justify their sin;" straight people are not necessarily trying to "oppress."

 

[catlover]

Dogmatic pronouncements like this are pretty far from civil.

Let's be blunt, Lynn--you are the source of a lot of incivility. I actually agree with you on a lot of substantive matters (your flawed hermeneutic of the entire OT notwithstanding). But your dogmatic pronouncements, your snide insults, and your barely disguised contempt contribute nothing to the civility of the discourse here.

CaDan being passionate about a subject isn't bad per say-