Homosexuality: What's up with that? (V.2)

Not giving specific reasons is the simplest way to avoid debate. After all, what's to rebut?

 

I'm not sure what kind of specifics you're looking for. In this case, it seems pretty simple overall, and I've stated my position.

 

I think what most people are asking is why do religious people think Homosexuality is wrong? I will give you an example, I just talked to my sister yesterday who is VERY Christian, and she REFUSES to acknowledge that our brother is gay and therefore, insists on calling his boyfriend, his roommate. I also remember at my nephew's wedding, her wanting to know when my brother and his b/f were leaving, before people started realizing they were together. I have asked her why she is so paranoid about our brother being gay and all I ever get from her is because God said it was wrong. Unfortunately, until God him/herself comes down and tells me to my face it is wrong, and gives me more than 'Because I said so' I have to say, Why?

Jaded

 

Well, you've stated that you think it's wrong, that your reasons are not religious, but not what those reasons are.

 

But that brings us back to God's intentions being perfect - thus, homosexuality, as a part of nature, should be seen as a part of God's plan.

But this assumes that the universe is exactly as God intended, which precludes the possibility of free will.

I believe it's God's will that we be free, and that it's also God's will that we freely submit to Him.

Adam freely chose to rebel against God. That Adam was free to chose was part of God's will; that Adam chose rebellion over obedience was not.

(Likewise, Jesus freely chose to submit to God's will throughout His life, particularly at Gethsemane. His life was in all respects part of God's will -- that He was free and that He freely chose to obey.)

If Adam's disobedience was not part of God's will, neither is the consequences. Therefore, at least part of the universe (the consequences of sin) is outside God's will. So it's altogether possible that the tendency to homosexuality is likewise outside of His will.

 

Well to use an extreme example, one could argue that because males are born with foreskins, the foreskin is God's plan. But in the Bible he commands all Jews to get rid of it. So is the foreskin the result of sin? Is being intact God's plan, or is circumcision?

 

Circumcision for the Jews was a sign of devoting one's life to God. To be "different" from the rest of the world. So to answer your question, circumcision was God's plan for the OT Jews.


I suppose it didn't/doesn't matter either way for the rest of us.

 

Notice also that circumcision only followed the fall: it was a physical way Jews to distinguish themselves from a fallen world. Had the world not fallen, presumably, circumcision would have been unnecessary.

 

Circumcision at the time had medical benefits, some of which are still espoused by those in favor of it. Less chance of infection, etc. It was instituted among the Jews for health reasons, and written into their literature to prevent objections.

 

Oh? Do you have any evidence of this, by any chance?

 

It's far more realistic than a voice from the heavens telling them what he wants their penises to look like. Show me evidence that God wrote the Bible.

 

To say that Adam's fall was not part of God's plan seems silly to me. "Hey, Adam, whatever you do, don't eat that fruit! No, sir! Don't eat it! I'll just cover my all-seeing eyes for a while and...go over here. Now, don't eat that fruit!"

Yeah, right. This isn't about free will in my book. God may as well have commanded them to eat that bloody fruit. Take a look at some of the proto-Sumerian myths on which this story was based - it's about embracing duality, not "original sin" or a "fall from grace". What was this omniscient God expecting his little humans to do in this situation? In this tale, there is no way that I can blame the humans. God knew what was going to happen. It was a part of his plan.

EDIT: Spelling (Kool Aid demands a sacrifice)

 

Having to debate religious arguments against homosexuality seems so silly to me!
But as many people tend to take the words of the Bible in great regard, let's do it.

Bubba wrote:
So it's altogether possible that the tendency to homosexuality is likewise outside of His will.
Your wording seems to suggest that you think this (homosexuality = sin) is an hypothesis?

 

I still find it odd that anyone could presume to know the will of God, in regards to homosexuality or anything else.

 

Basically, homosexuality is a sin.

Practicing it, promoting it, glorifying it is all sinful.

That's established.

However, it's also sinful to persecute homosexuals. It is not sinful to object to the myth that it's comletely okay to practice homosexuality.

 

Basically, homosexuality is a sin.

Says who? God? Prove it. There's a book that says it if you have a mistranslation, but there's no reason to believe that God wrote this book.

Practicing it, promoting it, glorifying it is all sinful.

Again, says who?

That's established.

It is? By whom? Perhaps in your mind it is, because you have chosen to believe this. That by no means makes it "established".

However, it's also sinful to persecute homosexuals. It is not sinful to object to the myth that it's comletely okay to practice homosexuality.

Yes, because as we know, scientists and psychologists are much more likely to promote myths than books written thousands of years ago.

EDIT: Mark-up codes [Elvis is eating my brain]

 

And while we're at it DM, are you going to answer our questions in regards to your double standards in the workplace?

 

I always thought sins were those listed in the Ten Commandments, later substituted by Jesus's commandments ("You shall love your neighbor as yourself", and "Love God above everything", or something to the effect). Great Jesus.

 

No, no - sins are whatever bother Christians enough that they can dig up vague statements in the Bible to condemn them.

 

First, let me say that I do not believe that homosexuality is a sin. I am simply trying to explain where I think the error is in the argument.

Doing a search on Google for homosexuality and sin, I came up with the following notation. It is at http://www.freejesus.net/views/sin.php
Adultry = Child Molesters = Homosexuality = Bestiality
First, let?s get beyond the misspelling of Adultery, shall we?

This is clearly trying to equate homosexuality as a sin under the seventh commandment, "Thou shalt not commit adultery.? (Exodus 20:14).

Adultery is defined in my ArsLexis Noah Lite (ver. 0.65) dictionary as ?extramarital sex that willfully and maliciously interferes with marriage relations.? Extramarital clearly means that at least one of the parties is married and that they are not married to each other. Also note that the definition does not say anything about same-sex relations.

Since it is clear to anyone except the ?freejesus.net? author that adultery does not equal homosexuality, this means that homosexuality is not a sin under the seventh, or any other for that matter, commandment. We straight people can probably agree that homosexuality and bestiality are not to our liking, but God did not say it was a sin.

I invite anyone to show me, chapter and verse, where the Bible says homosexuality is a sin.

 

Oh boy - here we go. Paul? Hey, Paul? You're needed in the JC again. Yes, I know.

 

Darth Mischievous: You are free to regard homosexuals however you want. What I am curious to know, is, should homosexuals be treated the same as everyone else under American law in the United States?

 

Religious sites are full of crap when it concerns homosexuality and child molestors. Hey fundies, remember that child molestors are mostly heterosexuals despite molesting little boys they're still hetero.

 

Kuana_Tori: homosexuals should be protected like any other person under the law. However, this does not include the institution of marriage.

CrwnPuppet, you can believe what you want on the matter. Homosexuality is sinful in all three monotheistic religions.

Here is a quote from Paul to the Romans (New Testament):

For their women exchanged the natural sexual relations for unnatural ones, and likewise the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed in their passions for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in themselves the due penalty for their error...Though they know God's decree that those who do such things deserve to die, they not only do them but approve those who practice them.

There is also the concept of forgivness if one turns from their ways and repents.

 

Hey fundies, remember that child molestors are mostly heterosexuals despite molesting little boys they're still hetero.

I can't see why most people don't realize that.

There is also the concept of forgivness if one turns from their ways and repents.

You don't understand. Homosexuals can't control their attraction to the same sex. There's no way that they should apologize for something that was not their fault. Would you demand that a mentally retarded person apologize for not worshiping God?