Why take such a stand against homosexuality?

[Shane Roach]

By altering the very meaning of marriage, you destroy it and the surrounding family law that has grown around it, both common law and statutory.

I and others have raised this issue any number of times. Obviously neither of you are convinced, but unless you actually intend to try to convince me or others, please let us not continue the back and forth? It is tiresome. Everyone is well aware that allowing homosexuals to wed does not mean heterosexuals cannot....

The institutions of marriage, family, and the existence of laws governing those states argues strongly against the pretense that there is nothing intrinsic to marriage that would suggest it be limited to opposite sex couples. The judgment that things have somehow changed so much that this needs to be changed is subjective at best.

 

[LightHorseman]

By altering the very meaning of marriage, you destroy it and the surrounding family law that has grown around it, both common law and statutory.

How, precisely? I'm in a relationship of some 10 years standing... if my homosexual housemates get married, how will this "destroy" my relationship? Specifics please?

The institutions of marriage, family, and the existence of laws governing those states argues strongly against the pretense the idea that there is nothing intrinsic to marriage that would suggest it be limited to opposite sex couples. The judgment that things have somehow changed so much that this needs to be changed is subjective at best.

Again, specifically, how will extending marriage rights to same sex couples alter anyone elses use or observance of marriage rights or laws?

 

[b&wpac4]

By altering the very meaning of marriage, you destroy it and the surrounding family law that has grown around it, both common law and statutory.

I and others have raised this issue any number of times. Obviously neither of you are convinced, but unless you actually intend to try to convince me other others, please let us not continue the back and forth? It is tiresome. Everyone is well aware that allowing homosexuals to wed does not mean heterosexuals cannot....

The institutions of marriage, family, and the existence of laws governing those states argues strongly against the pretense the idea that there is nothing intrinsic to marriage that would suggest it be limited to opposite sex couples. The judgment that things have somehow changed so much that this needs to be changed is subjective at best.

True, it's always the same argument.

 

[BigBadWlf]

What a ridiculous statement to make.

And is not the original claim “Why do liberals take a huge stand against Christianity” just as ridiculous?

Do you dislike God? I ask because you say He teaches ugly, hateful, man-made things. He teaches none of them.

I didn’t write the bible
Nor can I change the fact that things like racism and slavery and sexism are biblically condoned and supported


If one wants to be a biblical literalist then one must take all of the bible literally, even the ugly parts

 

[BigBadWlf]

Jesus was the God of the Old Testament. And the Old Testament declares that a man shall not lie with a man as with a woman. Period.

Do you follow all the laws of Leviticus?

I doubt it
Do you cut your hair?
Wear clothing made of different fabrics?
Allow people with glasses to attend your church?
Keep slaves?
Eat shellfish?

It is interesting how those who don’t follow the laws of Leviticus are so willing to inflict cherry picked verses out of this book to attack a minority and defend prejudice and discrimination.


Even though you personally do not follow the many laws of Leviticus yet you do not seem to have a problem using Leviticus laws to attack a minority. Why?

Using Leviticus to justify prejudice and discrimination has many issues

First – we live under a new covenant. Jesus did away with the law and put in place his commandment
A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. John 13:34

Promoting or justifying discrimination against a minority is not loving. And no matter how one tries to twist the justification it is an act of hate.

If any one says, "I love God," and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen, cannot love God whom he has not seen. 1 John 4:20


A further problem is one of translation. Leviticus has many injunctions against engaging in sex – specifically carnal knowledge. However carnal knowledge is not used in either Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 the word that is used is shakab. It is popularly translated to mean to lay (lie) with but there is a problem with that translation. Shakab is used 52 times in the old testament and is always used to a sexual encounter typified by deceit or force, in other words, some type of rape.


Shakab Means "Rape" not copulation, not carnal relations…rape.


Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 means that a man shall not force, or in any way coerce, another man to have sex, in the way that a man is allowed to force sex upon his wife. In other words, man is not allowed to rape a man, it is an abomination.
A man raping a man is no more a description of homosexuality than a man raping a woman is a description of heterosexuality.

 

[BigBadWlf]

I think a more accurate translation is that a man should not rape another man.. but I am no Hebrew scholar.

You are correct

 

[BigBadWlf]

No! God did not make you gay. Our nature of sin was important so that we could show God that we choose Him and not our nature. We are to rise above the challenges we are given, and that includes our weaknesses. Tell me, what is easier for you. To be gay? Or to follow God?

Yet every scrap of evidence shows that sexual orientation is inborn.

But you do have to constantly state your case to anyone and everyone who opposes you, don't you. Why are you really here? You don't like yourself very much do you?

The same can apply directly to you

 

[LightHorseman]

Yet every scrap of evidence shows that sexual orientation is inborn.

Um... in the interests of accuracy, that isn't strictly true. A large body of research indicates that sexuality is partly the result of genetics, partly the result of environment. Thats not to say anyone has any control over their sexuality, of course, but to say it is "inborn" as though predestined from birth, is misleading and possibly incorrect.

 

[SallyNow]

Hey, I have no problem if you don't want to believe what's written in the Bible, but I figured that being a Christian you pretty much believed everything in it, particularly what has been attributed to your god. But if you have some method of picking and choosing what deserves to be believed and what shouldn't be, more power to you, I guess. I'm sure other Christians here would like to know how you decide such things.

When Christians claim that agnostics and atheists hate God, it can be annoying, right, because they show a total misunderstanding of what agnostisism and atheism are? Well, when agnostics or atheists insist that Christians have to follow OT law, it's annoying, because it's a misunderstanding of what Christianitity is. Christians are not required to follow OT law.

There are Christians who pick and choose OT laws to follow, often because they don't like the whole idea of "charity", "love thy neighbor", and other NT laws that basically require a person to give of themselves rather than to overpower others. The Christians who cherry-pick OT laws usually only pick the laws that require other people to bow down to them, not the OT laws that require them to give to others (like leaving parts of their fields unharvested so that poor people can harvest what they need to survive)

So why do some Christians pick on homosexuals? Because they if they picked on mouthy kids they'd end up in jail for abuse and murder. Picking on homosexuals gives some people a power rush, just like bullies in the playground.

 

[Beanieboy]

I think people don't want to love homosexuals. So, they see that flaw in themselves. They knowing homosexuals are mocked, denied rights, demonized, lied about. We are labeled to make us less than human, "pervertss" gay activists", abmoninations" "threat to the family. We aren't spoken of as people, but subhuman, to justify the reason to hate. And the Spirit within them sees that darkness within themselves.

So they blame the victim, to take focus off of themselves.

"The woman made me take a bite."

They can't admit their own sin: not loving their neighbor, or acknowledge that we are, their neighbor. So, give it a name. I'm Craig. Shine bright, and illuminate, and they will be able to see the darkness within them.

I'm rather amazed at people who seem to almost worship the Bible, rather than have a talking, walking prayer, conversation with God, and listen to God. God is God. He can talk through me, a commercial, The Simpsons, or a dream. He isn't locked in a book, and to look at the English translation and ignore its history, it's context, just shows totally irresponsibility of the text, using the bible to burden rather than free, and a disrespect of one's neighbor and thus God.

But Jesus said these things to the Pharisees, not to condemn them alone, but to show them their darkness, to give them a choice.

So, illuminate. Expose the lack of love, in love, and allow the person to choose.

 

[BigBadWlf]

6 reasons homosexuality is wrong - 3 from nature and 3 from Scripture

1) it is contrary to design - the male and female are designed to fit and function like a lock and a key. the parts being made/prepared for one another.

False. Demonstrated by the fact that same gendered partners fit together perfectly fine.

for the male homosexual, the anus is the primary point of intercourse (beyond oral) and the anus is not equipped to serve this purpose and can cause damage if done so, not to mention the anus is the source of excreting waste from the body

So is the vagina, menstrual flow being waste product. And the Penis is an organism for excreting waste from the body.

2) contrary to health - the average lifespan of the male homosexual is 60 or less (the average lifespan of a heterosexual male is 80 years)

This is a well known falsehood that is continually repeated by various conservative groups. Though the age of live expectancy varries (this is quite high, i have read claims of 38 years) It was originally fabricated by Paul Cameron of the Family Research Institute after he was expelled form the APA for ethics violation (he was found to have made up data and to have purposefully lied about the legitimate research of others.)

because anal intercourse spreads disease and infection and exposes the homosexual to auto-immune disorders because the body is constantly fighting infection

More well known falsehoods. The origins of this one are harder to pin down but seems to stem from either John Digs “the Health Risks of Gay Sex” or Timothy Daily and his essay “The Negative Health Effects of Homosexuality” both contain a lot of the same misinformation. Both rely heavily on misrepresenting legitimate research and making unsupported claims.

3) it is contrary to nature - there is not a single instance of true homosexuality anywhere in nature

Except for the 1500 plus animal species that do. so that means it is natural

and in fact a contradiction of nature's survival because homosexuality cannot reproduce

You of course realize that there are entire species where only a very tiny percentage of individuals reproduce don’t you?
Such species range from termites (where one couple has hundreds of millions of offspring)
To wolves, where only the alpha male and female of a pack actually reproduce
To Gorillas where only about 5% of males ever have offspring
To Elephants where the males are even less likely to have offspring to gorillas


survival has to do with the continuation of the species, noot the continuation of a specific person

4) God's intention for man is union to 1 wife as established in Eden (Adam and Eve) and is in in this union that God has designed us

Yet the standard family unit in the bible is polygamous.
And what does God call the second or third or fourth woman to marry a man? He calls them wives

5) The call of the Gospel is to live contrary to our rebellious nature and not live according to our own desires

But if a gay man were to lie and pretend to be heterosexual isn’t that living contrary to his nature?

6) God says you shall not under any circumstances practice homosexuality

Not by any literal reading of the bible

 

[Beanieboy]

In a world where kids are going to school and shooting other kids, maybe we should be spending less time telling gay people that they shouldn't love each other, and look at why we have a world of children, raised by heterosexuals, going to school WITH GUNS, and shooting other people.

The reason is probably because straight people are spending all their time worrying about gay couples, and not their own lives, or even their own children.

Step away from the keyboard, and spend some time with your kids.

 

[BigBadWlf]

Um... in the interests of accuracy, that isn't strictly true. A large body of research indicates that sexuality is partly the result of genetics, partly the result of environment. Thats not to say anyone has any control over their sexuality, of course, but to say it is "inborn" as though predestined from birth, is misleading and possibly incorrect.

The statement made is that many believe environment plays some factor but there is no evidence to for any environmental (read post birth) factors

 

[LightHorseman]

In a world where kids are going to school and shooting other kids, maybe we should be spending less time telling gay people that they shouldn't love each other, and look at why we have a world of children, raised by heterosexuals, going to school WITH GUNS, and shooting other people.

The reason is probably because straight people are spending all their time worrying about gay couples, and not their own lives, or even their own children.

Step away from the keyboard, and spend some time with your kids.

Well known fact that school shootings are all Darwin's fault, and that since homosexuals are proved wrong by Darwin, and Darwin causes school shootings, therefore Homosexuals cause school shootings. Simple deductive reasoning.

 

[LightHorseman]

The statement made is that many believe environment plays some factor but there is no evidence to for any environmental (read post birth) factors

In fairness, assuming environmental contributions to behavioural traits is a psychologicaly standard.

Genetics determine the size of the bucket, environment dictates what goes into it.

 

[KCKID]

Because I know that once we allow one sin, then others will follow.

Sexual orientation is not a sin. Please be clear on that fact.

Soon, Christianity will be abolished.

What do you mean 'abolished'? You mean like slavery? Or the law to execute disobedient children? Or God's 4th-commandment concerning the Sabbath? What?

Like it was predicted in the bible.

It was predicted in the Bible that Christianity would be abolished? Which scripture says that?

I do not want my children (if I will have any) to live in a world where their bible will be taken by the government.

Newsflash! The Bible is not necessary for one to possess a Jesus-like heart. In many cases, as we have seen thru'out history, the Bible has been the reason behind much strife ...even though PEOPLE and NOT the Bible were the cause. Even from a Christian perspective there are hundreds of different Christian denominations that differ on BIBLE interpretations. The Bible should be used as a guide ...NOT as a religious icon!

Or a world where churches will be torn down.

If a church is not being productive in the 'love' department, then it probably needs to be torn down.

And this is already happening. The whole world views Christianity as lame or other. We are all losing faith. How could it be that we could stray so far from our God? Our Father?

I generally find it better not to respond to rhetoric, especially when it's rhetoric that is driven by pure emotion.

I just don't want to live in a world where me believing in Jesus is a bad thing. Because it's not. And I'm sure you can say the same about you living in a world where you want your gay freedom, and I can understand that you feel it's right.

I believe in Jesus. I tell you what, if you can point me to ONE text where Jesus had something to say about gay freedom I might consider joining you in your condemnation of if. Deal?

But I cannot help how I feel.

Nor can homosexuals. Isn't that the whole point of what we're discussing?

I was lost before, but now that I came back to Jesus, repented of my sins, I feel renewed. Before, I didn't have the Spirit with me. I would read the Bible and get frustrated with it because I even though I prayed for the Spirit to reveal things to me, I couldn't feel him.

I see people full of the Spirit before every football game. They are pumped! Is this of the 'Holy' Spirit or is it caused by adrenaline? Some view 'on fire' or 'over-the-top' Christians as being so unrealistically hyped up that science can explain it with a cause other than that of an infilling of the Holy Spirit. Those that I've met who I would say are 'genuine' Christians or 'convincing' Christians are those who behave quite 'normally' other than they exude much warmth and love and total lack of condemnation for others. Yes, there ARE Christians like that. From the little that I've seen of him, I would say that Bishop John Shelby Spong is representative of a convincing Christian.

But now ever since I repented,

But, again ...a homosexual orientation is not a sin to begin with so why should one feel the need to repent? This is silly.

when I read the Bible, it's clear to me

What's clear to you? That you should kill victims of rape? kill disobedient children? Stone to death adulterers ...but only females? dishonor the Sabbath by instead keeping the 'man-made holy day', Sunday? What?

What I just mentioned - and much more nasty stuff - is in the Bible to be read and obeyed. Which parts are clear to you and which parts did you toss out or ignore?

And now I feel obligated to share with others what He has revealed to me,

Nice, as long as you do so without ignoring the reality about LIFE and PEOPLE and not couching everything of a complex nature into some warm and fuzzy belief system that relies purely on faith.

because before I was in the dark, doing things I shouldn't have done. And I truly allowed Satan to make me believe that these things I was doing was Ok. That God was a myth.

If Satan - or God for that matter - causes people to do things against their will then they should seek therapy ASAP. Satan is not to blame for wrong-doing ...people are! I would say the same thing about God in regard to 'right-doing'. People are responsible for their own actions. 'The Devil made me do it' is an expression of children ...not adults.

But he was wrong and I knew it. So, my confusion just spiralled until I was completley unaware of what was right and what was wrong, and I confused both all the time. I had no direction.
But the bible gave me direction. The narrow path. And I say these things so that perhaps you can learn from my experience or relate to it in any way.

We all have something deep within - a conscience if you like - that MAY WELL be God-given. Yes, the words that are written concerning Jesus, a caring friend, a considerate church family, etc. can bring about a change of heart from bad to good. And, of course, this is terrific if that's what 'the sinner' desires. It's a personal thing. But, homosexuality per se is NOT a bad thing so a 'change of heart' or a 'change of orientation' (?) is entirely unneccesary. One's sexual orientation should not be something that is dependent upon ANYONE to 'change'.

We don't have to live alone. We have a God who loves us. We should worship him with all our heart and soul. Look at all the blessings he has given us! There has never been anything good in our lives that has not come from Him. We are his children.

Great. But what does that have to do with homosexuality?

 

[psalm1:3]

SORRY kcid can't reply to all of it. you obviously have your opinion. let us just leave it at that.

 

[KCKID]

SORRY kcid can't reply to all of it. you obviously have your opinion. let us just leave it at that.

Yes, I admit that my post IS rather lengthy, psalm. However, responding to your post DID take some thought, time, and effort on my part so I would appreciate your simply not dismissing it. That's kinda rude, y'know.

As for my having an opinion ...don't YOU have opinions that dictate what you write? Of course it's my opinion. God forbid the day when our opinions become outlawed. It would seem, however, that some Christians regard 'thinkers' as somehow being a threat.

 

[Shane Roach]

As far as this issue of following the Bible is concerned, it is not proper to say that simply because someone trusts the Bible more than they trust some new liberal scholar or someone who is dismissive of Paul that they worship the Bible and not God.

I'm not a Bible literalist, though I am so close to it that most people cannot tell the difference, and I have no problem with people generally classifying me as such, but the point remains that Paul was arguably responsible for establishing the Gentile church, and since the Jewish portion of the church more or less folded, the Gentile church is the only church that remains. If you want to try to dismiss those writings which are the very foundation of the church, I think it will take more than just insulting the intelligence of people who trust the Biblical testimony more than newly invented ones.

Love is not defined Biblically as license. It is illegitimate to continually try to cast people who explain Biblical principles as if they are being legalistic or lack charity. If liberal thinkers cannot defend their beliefs based on the Bible, then they need to just accept that they are claiming authority that many Christians simply do not cede to them in terms of defining what is proper church discipline, teaching, or practice.

If you choose to separate yourself from the mainstream of Christianity, own that. Do not cast aspersions on those who choose not to follow your lead into this new territory you believe you have found.

 

[b&wpac4]

As far as this issue of following the Bible is concerned, it is not proper to say that simply because someone trusts the Bible more than they trust some new liberal scholar or someone who is dismissive of Paul that they worship the Bible and not God.

I'm not a Bible literalist, though I am so close to it that most people cannot tell the difference, and I have no problem with people generally classifying me as such, but the point remains that Paul was arguably responsible for establishing the Gentile church, and since the Jewish portion of the church more or less folded, the Gentile church is the only church that remains. If you want to try to dismiss those writings which are the very foundation of the church, I think it will take more than just insulting the intelligence of people who trust the Biblical testimony more than newly invented ones.

Love is not defined Biblically as license. It is illegitimate to continually try to cast people who explain Biblical principles as if they are being legalistic or lack charity. If liberal thinkers cannot defend their beliefs based on the Bible, then they need to just accept that they are claiming authority that many Christians simply do not cede to them in terms of defining what is proper church discipline, teaching, or practice.

If you choose to separate yourself from the mainstream of Christianity, own that. Do not cast aspersions on those who choose not to follow your lead into this new territory you believe you have found.

I find myself agreeing with almost your entire post.