Why is homosexuality a sin?

[TeddyKGB]

Actuall...how GOD tells you...not man

Funny, you've been doing considerably more talking in this thread than God has.

 

[TooCurious]

Here's a matter on which I've never been clear...

Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that the Christian God exists and he decided that homosexual sex was a sin. Why?

Is there a logical reason to explain why God chose to make gay sex a sin? We can certainly understand the logical reasons behind other sins, like murder or theft. Can we likewise understand the reasons that gay sex is a sin? Are there any reasons, or was it a completely arbitrary decision on God's part? This is what I'd like to know.

 

[quatona]

Here's a matter on which I've never been clear...

Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that the Christian God exists and he decided that homosexual sex was a sin. Why?

Is there a logical reason to explain why God chose to make gay sex a sin? We can certainly understand the logical reasons behind other sins, like murder or theft. Can we likewise understand the reasons that gay sex is a sin? Are there any reasons, or was it a completely arbitrary decision on God's part? This is what I'd like to know.

If it´s just about telling the sheep from the goats there is no problem with the rules being arbitrary. In fact, the more absurd and less intelligible or reasonable the rules, the better for this purpose.

 

[TooCurious]

If it´s just about telling the sheep from the goats there is no problem with the rules being arbitrary. In fact, the more absurd and less intelligible or reasonable the rules, the better for this purpose.

This is true. I'm interested to know if people believe that. I guess my question boils down to, "Did God make certain acts sinful because there were logical reasons to prohibit those specific acts, or simply to determine who was obedient and who was rebellious? Or are there some sins in the first category, and some in the second?"

 

[Lilly of the Valley]

Funny, you've been doing considerably more talking in this thread than God has.

Yet, you claim that God doesn't exist yet, say what man says and what God has said and decide which one is which...

 

[ReluctantProphet]

We can certainly understand the logical reasons behind other sins, like murder or theft.

Interesting.. I have yet to hear anyone say what the logic behind laws against theft and murder are. Most say they are naturally bad. They say they don't like them. Society wouldn't get along well. I'v never once heard any logic.

And I dare say that not one of you can spell out a clean logical progression for either case.

 

[TooCurious]

Interesting.. I have yet to hear anyone say what the logic behind laws against theft and murder are. Most say they are naturally bad. They say they don't like them. Society wouldn't get along well. I'v never once heard any logic.

I'll agree that things like "I don't like it" are arbitrary, but the fact that you seem to say that to make something unlawful because "society wouldn't get along well" isn't logical, confuses me. As I understand them, the purpose of laws is to keep "society" working at an acceptable level of functionality. If that isn't a logical reason for a law, what would you consider to be one?

And I dare say that not one of you can spell out a clean logical progression for either case.

Murder: Humans are social creatures. It is part of our nature to live and function in the context of a group. In order for such a group to function, the members of the group must trust one another. Killing a member of one's own group without cause is not an action which inspires trust--in fact, quite the opposite. As such, it must be discouraged and punished. Thus, killing a tribemate is "wrong." As human civilization has expanded, we have moved from a small, tribal setting into larger cities and communities wherein "our group" is much larger and does not always consist of the same people. As such, the mores that keep the system functioning have had to become universalized. Now, instead of "murdering a member of my tribe is wrong," we have "murdering any other person is wrong." Because we have a common consensus that murder is "wrong" and unlawful, each individual doesn't have to worry nearly as much that someone else will murder him. (Note: I am not saying that no one has to worry at all about being murdered, but rather that murder is dramatically less common than it would be if it were legal and morally accepted.)

Theft: At some point in their social and cognitive development, humans invented the concept of "property." In simple terms, this concept means that an object outside of my body is "mine," and I have the exclusive right to make use of that object as I choose. As John Locke conceptualized it, the means of establishing an object as one's property was to put one's labor into an unclaimed object. For instance, if I find a stick unclaimed out in the woods, and I take it home and sharpen it into a spear, it has become "my spear." Inherent in the concept of property is that if something is "mine," I have jurisdiction over its use. If someone else takes that object away from me, he is depriving me of my jurisdiction over the use of the object that I have made "mine" by applying my labor to it. Without the notion that it is "wrong" to take away someone else's property, we very literally cannot have the notion of personal property. As many cultures have found the notion of personal property to be useful, they have codified into law a prohibition against depriving another person of his property. This also helps to save each individual the trouble of having to protect every article of his property against all comers, allowing him more time to devote to more productive pursuits, secure in the knowledge that if someone does attempt to deprive him of his property, he has legal recourse against that person.

 

[Plecto]

They're different only in their attractions. Like I said...I don't see attraction as sin, it's what you do w/ it that becomes sin. Yes, some christians do ban them and such...I think eliminating them from 'society' isn't loving nor wise. However, God can deliver a person from that type of attraction. It's happened many times. Plus, God can give them strength not to live that type of life. The bottom line is...you may not control the attraction, but you control what you do w/ the attraction...so no one has any excuse.

You're saying that gay people shoud "act" like hetrosexuals? Beacuse this is just mad. Its like telling a hetrosexual man to have sex with another man (it is just mad to say that when the man is hetrosexual). To demand that a homosexual shoud act like a hetrosexual is just cruel.

Is for my point of view; this only support the fact that man made god. Since there is not reason the put homosexuality as a sin (other than saying that it is "wrong" or "we are not meant to do that"), homosexuality is looked down apon from most people because people don't like it. They think it is immoral and actually "disgusting". "so if the shoud be a god, he sure can't accept this kind of behavior"

 

[ReluctantProphet]

I'll agree that things like "I don't like it" are arbitrary, but the fact that you seem to say that to make something unlawful because "society wouldn't get along well" isn't logical,

I meant to say that people JUST say that without elaboration through a logical argument line.

Not to continue this on this thread, but just to point out what I meant by "clean logic" let me point out a few of the very many flaws in your response;

Murder: Humans are social creatures.

Unsubstantiated premise

In order for such a group to function, the members of the group must trust one another.

Inappropriately speculative in that trust is a rare commodity. Thus your statement would allude to the notion that our society as it stands today doesn't function. "Degree of trust" was your concern which brings a very serious issue into the logical train.

Killing a member of one's own group without cause ...

Ambiguous and presumptuous use of the word "cause." You meant "justifiable impetus". But it is merely the appearance or perception of having a "just cause" for doing something that triggers it. Thus a murder properly hidden, is not a bad thing because it would instill no trust concerns?

You have said that trust is the only issue involved in murder. Thus if trust is established by other means, then murder is fine and possibly good. Trust was only an issue because it was asserted that trust is a requirement for society. You assumed that society is somehow good without premise or rationale.

I could go on. You have not provided a CLEAN logical argument for murder being a bad thing (or that trust and socializing is a good thing).

[FONT=&quot]When it comes to why homosexuality is good or bad, none of you even begin to scratch the surface of actual logical derivation. Thus you prove nothing and learn only that he who bangs the bigger drum gets more attention.



.


[/FONT]

 

[TooCurious]

I meant to say that people JUST say that without elaboration through a logical argument line.

Not to continue this on this thread, but just to point out what I meant by "clean logic" let me point out a few of the very many flaws in your response;

Oh, this should be fun...

Unsubstantiated premise

Take an anthropology course. We're primates. Primates are social animals. Here: http://www.unipr.it/arpa/mirror/pubs/pdffiles/Cognitive%20Continuity.pdf First sentence in the second paragraph, under "Against the 'Ptolemaic' Paradigm."

Inappropriately speculative in that trust is a rare commodity. Thus your statement would allude to the notion that our society as it stands today doesn't function. "Degree of trust" was your concern which brings a very serious issue into the logical train.

Oh, so you knew the point I was getting at, but chose to be pedantic about how I phrased it? Lovely, Just FYI, it's noon where I am, and I haven't slept yet. That's probably why I'm not being pedantic enough for you right now.

Ambiguous and presumptuous use of the word "cause." You meant "justifiable impetus". But it is merely the appearance or perception of having a "just cause" for doing something that triggers it. Thus a murder properly hidden, is not a bad thing because it would instill no trust concerns?

Again, I could've been more specific, had I known you were going to require it.

You have said that trust is the only issue involved in murder.

Did I explicitly say that, or was trust the only issue I discussed up to this point?

Thus if trust is established by other means, then murder is fine and possibly good.

Conclusion does not follow, as premise is flawed.

Trust was only an issue because it was asserted that trust is a requirement for society. You assumed that society is somehow good without premise or rationale.

More to the point, I assumed that you were familiar with basic anthropology. Assumption corrected.

I could go on. You have not provided a CLEAN logical argument for murder being a bad thing (or that trust and socializing is a good thing).

What about theft? Did you have any issues with my treatment of theft?

[FONT=&quot]

When it comes to why homosexuality is good or bad, none of you even begin to scratch the surface of actual logical derivation. Thus you prove nothing and learn only that he who bangs the bigger drum gets more attention.
[/FONT]

What does that have to do with anything I said? I was asking the Christians for "logical derivations" of God's supposed condemnation of homosexuality. I'm not the one responsible for providing such a thing, since I don't even know if they think there is one. Are you sure you're clear as to which side of this debate I'm on?

 

[Lilly of the Valley]

You're saying that gay people shoud "act" like hetrosexuals? Beacuse this is just mad. Its like telling a hetrosexual man to have sex with another man (it is just mad to say that when the man is hetrosexual). To demand that a homosexual shoud act like a hetrosexual is just cruel.

Is for my point of view; this only support the fact that man made god. Since there is not reason the put homosexuality as a sin (other than saying that it is "wrong" or "we are not meant to do that"), homosexuality is looked down apon from most people because people don't like it. They think it is immoral and actually "disgusting". "so if the shoud be a god, he sure can't accept this kind of behavior"

If you don't have any self control, and this goes for all humans, then you have an issue. If a heterosexual has to have sex all the time....then do they not have an issue and self control problems? Same w/ the homosexual.

Man didn't make God. God made man and made rules and sets the standard. Bottom line. Just because you don't agree or get something doesn't automatically make it 'man made' and not of God.

 

[TooCurious]

Lily of the Valley, do you have any thoughts on the question I asked in post #22?

 

[levi501]

Because God said so.

no he didn't.

 

[whitestar]

Here's a matter on which I've never been clear...

Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that the Christian God exists and he decided that homosexual sex was a sin. Why?

Is there a logical reason to explain why God chose to make gay sex a sin? We can certainly understand the logical reasons behind other sins, like murder or theft. Can we likewise understand the reasons that gay sex is a sin? Are there any reasons, or was it a completely arbitrary decision on God's part? This is what I'd like to know.

That isn't hard to figure out...look at the damages its done to the world...its not natural first of all...its a great way to spend diseases.

June 5, 1981
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports five gay men in Los Angeles are suffering from a rare pneumonia found in patients with failing immune systems.

May 1983

Human T-Cell leukemia virus is identified in patients with AIDS. Identified as the virus that causes AIDS, it is later renamed human immunodeficiency virus, or HIV.
December 1984
Ryan White, a 13-year-old Indiana boy, is diagnosed with AIDS. He contracted it through a blood-clotting agent used to treat his hemophilia. The following year, he is barred from school for fear the disease will spread.

Oct. 2, 1985

Rock Hudson, a Hollywood heartthrob who epitomized the clean-cut American male, dies after a year-long battle with AIDS. It is the first celebrity AIDS death.
May 26, 1988
The government mails "Understanding AIDS," an eight-page educational pamphlet with information on how the disease is transmitted, to 110 million American homes.
Aug. 18, 1989
The number of AIDS cases reported in the United States reaches 100,000.
April 8, 1990

Ryan White dies at an Indiana children's hospital after fighting an AIDS-related lung infection. His death gains worldwide attention, putting an innocent and youthful face on the disease's destruction.
June 1991
By the 10-year anniversary of the appearance of AIDS, more than 250,000 Americans have been diagnosed with AIDS cases and up to 1.5 million more people are infected with HIV.

Nov. 7, 1991

Magic Johnson, after leading the Los Angeles Lakers to five NBA championships, announces he is infected with HIV and says he is retiring from basketball. He encourages Americans to practice safe sex.
March 26, 1992
The government unveils advertising to remind Americans that AIDS reaches beyond urban drug addicts and gays.

April 8, 1992
Arthur Ashe, a pioneering black tennis player, announces he has AIDS, saying he was infected by a blood transfusion during heart surgery.

Feb. 6, 1993

Ashe dies at 49 of AIDS-related pneumonia.

Dec. 7, 1995
The Food and Drug Administration approves the nation's first protease inhibitor, a new class of drugs that cripples an enzyme HIV needs to reproduce. The government calls the treatment some of the most hopeful news in years for AIDS patients.

Dec. 30, 1996

Time magazine names as its Man of the Year researcher Dr. David Ho, one of the doctors who pioneered combinations of protease inhibitors and other drugs to treat AIDS. Almost overnight, the drugs changed AIDS from a death sentence to a manageable chronic illness.

Feb. 27, 1997
The government reports a 13 percent drop in AIDS deaths in the first half of 1996, the first significant drop in the epidemic's history.

Jan. 31, 1999
Researchers report they have convincing proof that the AIDS virus has spread three separate times from chimpanzees to people in Africa. One of these transmissions started the worldwide epidemic.

June 2001
At the 20th anniversary of AIDS, the number of Americans diagnosed with the disease tops 700,000. More than 420,000 have died. Worldwide, more than 36 million people are now infected with the AIDS virus, with more than 16,000 new infections each day.

Of course it went out of the gay community because many gays are bi-sexual...so had sex with women and so began the spread of AIDS to the straight community.
IF everyone had simply followed God's law on no sex until marriage and remained married to that one person for life...and marriage in the bible is defined as between one man and one woman..we would not have any STD...no babies now would be dying of it...no children with be dying of it...but because few can seem to behave themselves sexually this is the disease that has killed so many...God only made this rule to protect us because He loves us...

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/07/06/health/main627613.shtml

Panel: Make A Peace Corps For AIDS

WASHINGTON, July 7, 2004

"We must act now to rein in the global AIDS catastrophe."

God bless

 

[TooCurious]

That isn't hard to figure out...look at the damages its done to the world...its not natural first of all...its a great way to spend diseases.

<snip chronology>

Of course it went out of the gay community because many gays are bi-sexual...so had sex with women and so began the spread of AIDS to the straight community.
IF everyone had simply followed God's law on no sex until marriage and remained married to that one person for life...and marriage in the bible is defined as between one man and one woman..we would not have any STD...no babies now would be dying of it...no children with be dying of it...but because few can seem to behave themselves sexually this is the disease that has killed so many...God only made this rule to protect us because He loves us...

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/07/06/health/main627613.shtml

Panel: Make A Peace Corps For AIDS

WASHINGTON, July 7, 2004

"We must act now to rein in the global AIDS catastrophe."

God bless

Here's the thing that you don't seem to realize; HIV does not equal gay. STDs are transmitted through irresponsible sex practices; HIV can also be transferred through blood contact. The take-home point here is that anyone, heterosexual or homosexual, who engages in a great deal of promiscuous unprotected sex, is at risk for STDs. Anyone, heterosexual or homosexual, who maintains committed, monogamous relationships and/or uses safer sex practices, is at much less of a risk. Neither heterosexuality nor homosexuality, in and of itself, necessitates a high risk of disease. HIV and other STDs can be used as an argument against promiscuous unprotected sex, but NOT against homosexuality.

 

[moogoob]

Here's the thing that you don't seem to realize; HIV does not equal gay. STDs are transmitted through irresponsible sex practices; HIV can also be transferred through blood contact. The take-home point here is that anyone, heterosexual or homosexual, who engages in a great deal of promiscuous unprotected sex, is at risk for STDs. Anyone, heterosexual or homosexual, who maintains committed, monogamous relationships and/or uses safer sex practices, is at much less of a risk. Neither heterosexuality nor homosexuality, in and of itself, necessitates a high risk of disease. HIV and other STDs can be used as an argument against promiscuous unprotected sex, but NOT against homosexuality.

*jumps into midst of thread*
Exactly what I was going to say. Saying STDs are caused by the gay community is poor reasoning. Homosexuals are exactly like any other cross-section of humanity.

 

[whitestar]

Here's the thing that you don't seem to realize; HIV does not equal gay. STDs are transmitted through irresponsible sex practices; HIV can also be transferred through blood contact. The take-home point here is that anyone, heterosexual or homosexual, who engages in a great deal of promiscuous unprotected sex, is at risk for STDs. Anyone, heterosexual or homosexual, who maintains committed, monogamous relationships and/or uses safer sex practices, is at much less of a risk. Neither heterosexuality nor homosexuality, in and of itself, necessitates a high risk of disease. HIV and other STDs can be used as an argument against promiscuous unprotected sex, but NOT against homosexuality.

I think I said that actually....I said IF everyone had followed God's plan and waited to have sex until marriage....etc, etc, there would be no STD...

At any rate you seem to be overlooking the very first thing I posted...AIDS was first found IN gay men.

Not in a straight person messing around...but in gay men. Of all the studies I have read on this I think the reason it got them first and not a straight person is because of the way they have sex....they have anal sex ...that skin in the anus tears very easily and causes bleeding...so this virus had an open door straight into the blood stream. The article also did not say it was first found in drug users either...though we know that came next.

If you notice because of people's overall bad behavior is the reason we got it and spread it in the first place. Also I am NOT say being gay is any worse then any other sin. That verse about homosexuals not inheriating the kingdom of God...also includes Adulter and other sins listed...

My only point being is gay men especially are more vunerable to disease simply because of the way they have sex...

The death rate among gay men ought to be enough evident that this is not a good nor healthy thing to do: http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/26/3/657.pdf#search='Life%20rate%20of%20gay%20men'

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20060317-123346-6729r.htm
Homosexual men boost increase in syphilis rate
By Joyce Howard Price
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
March 17, 2006

Now why would anyone wish this kind of life on anyone else? Saying its a good thing? When its killing them? Does that even make any sense?

 

[Plecto]

In many countries, people are told not to use condoms just BECAUSE of God's laws, spreading AIDS like fire in dry grass. Thumbs up for preventing HIV infection

If you don't have any self control, and this goes for all humans, then you have an issue. If a heterosexual has to have sex all the time....then do they not have an issue and self control problems? Same w/ the homosexual.

So you are saying that people that are gay are just born with a burden that hetrosexuals don't have? A burden they don't choose to have, a burden few can get rid of?

 

[TooCurious]

I think I said that actually....I said IF everyone had followed God's plan and waited to have sex until marriage....etc, etc, there would be no STD...

The same is true for monogamous gay couples.

At any rate you seem to be overlooking the very first thing I posted...AIDS was first found IN gay men.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HIV
"HIV is hypothesized to have originated in southern Cameroon after jumping from wild chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes troglodytes) to humans during the twentieth century"

To the furthest extent of our knowledge, HIV originated with chimpanzees, not gay men.

Not in a straight person messing around...but in gay men. Of all the studies I have read on this I think the reason it got them first and not a straight person is because of the way they have sex....they have anal sex ...that skin in the anus tears very easily and causes bleeding...so this virus had an open door straight into the blood stream. The article also did not say it was first found in drug users either...though we know that came next.

Gay men are not the only people who engage in anal intercourse. Furthermore, not all gay men necessarily engage in anal intercourse; oral sex is much less likely to transmit the virus.

If you notice because of people's overall bad behavior is the reason we got it and spread it in the first place.

No; HIV made the jump to humans as a result of some form of contact with infected chimpanzees. Note that this does not imply sexual contact.

Also I am NOT say being gay is any worse then any other sin. That verse about homosexuals not inheriating the kingdom of God...also includes Adulter and other sins listed...

For the purposes of this discussion, I am not interested in discussing whether being gay is a "sin." I am interested in discussing, if we accept for the sake of argument that it is, why it should be so.

My only point being is gay men especially are more vunerable to disease simply because of the way they have sex...

The use of condoms dramatically reduces this risk. Heterosexual couples have also been known to have anal intercourse. Homosexuality != anal sex != HIV. Further, the anal sex/HIV argument does not address lesbians.

The death rate among gay men ought to be enough evident that this is not a good nor healthy thing to do: http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/26/3/657.pdf#search='Life%20rate%20of%20gay%20men'

Rather, it should suggest that high-risk behavior, such as promiscuous, unprotected anal sex, is "not a good nor healthy thing to do." This is not an argument against monogamous homosexual couples who get HIV tests before having sex.

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20060317-123346-6729r.htm
Homosexual men boost increase in syphilis rate
By Joyce Howard Price
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
March 17, 2006

Now why would anyone wish this kind of life on anyone else? Saying its a good thing? When its killing them? Does that even make any sense?

Your argument is based on fallacious premises.

 

[whitestar]

The same is true for monogamous gay couples.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HIV
"HIV is hypothesized to have originated in southern Cameroon after jumping from wild chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes troglodytes) to humans during the twentieth century"

To the furthest extent of our knowledge, HIV originated with chimpanzees, not gay men.



Gay men are not the only people who engage in anal intercourse. Furthermore, not all gay men necessarily engage in anal intercourse; oral sex is much less likely to transmit the virus.



No; HIV made the jump to humans as a result of some form of contact with infected chimpanzees. Note that this does not imply sexual contact.



For the purposes of this discussion, I am not interested in discussing whether being gay is a "sin." I am interested in discussing, if we accept for the sake of argument that it is, why it should be so.



The use of condoms dramatically reduces this risk. Heterosexual couples have also been known to have anal intercourse. Homosexuality != anal sex != HIV. Further, the anal sex/HIV argument does not address lesbians.



Rather, it should suggest that high-risk behavior, such as promiscuous, unprotected anal sex, is "not a good nor healthy thing to do." This is not an argument against monogamous homosexual couples who get HIV tests before having sex.



Your argument is based on fallacious premises.

Yes I know about the monkeys...but they don't know if the man ate the monkey (some tribes in Africa do kill and eat monkeys) or if he had sex with it.

I have stated homosexuality is NOT worse then other sexual sins by any means. I have shown how damaging it can be (including sex before marriage, adultery, etc...all of those aer equally sins and equally bad for people) the facts state this for themselves. Condoms are known to break and yes now more and more teens are having oral sex thinking its not really sex and now getting STD in their mouths and throats!

It seems pretty clear to me ANY type of sex outside of God's plan is dangerous to our health and never affects just the two (or more) involved...sin never happens in a void in other words. For instance in the history of AIDS...simply because a boy was born with a blood clotting problem and need blood transfusion he died because others were doing things they should not have been doing....

And as I said countless babies and children are still dying of AIDS because of the actions of adults, both straight and gays. I am not singling out homosexuals as that sin being any worse then any others...as I pointed out before there were many other sins listed along with that one that can harm all of us. I think the evidence speaks for itself...sorry you cannot see that.