Religion, Homosexuality, the Usual
Pages
| Author | Topic: Religion, Homosexuality, the Usual |
|---|---|
|
Babelicious
Member # 3149
|
written Monday, June 28 2004 09:07
Profile
Homepage
The point I'm making is that your God is a bloody-minded, petty god, and if he exists, I'm not having any part of the worship of such an evil entity. Ask Matthew Shepherd what harm fundamentalism has caused. Ask the 12,000 innocents dead in Afghanistan and the thousands in Iraq. Ask the Jews of Europe -- and, for that matter, the Arabs of Palestine. Ask the innocents of the Children's Crusade and those slaughtered by the Seljuk Turks. Fundamentalism in all religion is a scourge. An ergot of humanity. [ Monday, June 28, 2004 09:09: Message edited by: Andrea ] -------------------- Beatoff Valley: A story told out of order. Posts: 999 | Registered: Friday, June 27 2003 07:00 |
|
Apprentice
Member # 4580
|
written Monday, June 28 2004 09:28
Profile
quote:I see where you are coming from, I only use the word "belief" for the sake of the argument. But, Gays are generally nice people, at least all the ones I have known were. quote:Following that White people are a scourge that should be eradicated. Ask all the Jews that were victims of a white man named Hitler, or all the ethnic minorities that are victim of the KKK. And how about Joseph Stalin, who is responsible for the deaths of millions of his own people through famine and purges. White People are an evil race that seek nothing but destruction, and death. They are an ergot of humanity. Note: I am White. :rolleyes: Posts: 14 | Registered: Saturday, June 19 2004 07:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 3320
|
written Monday, June 28 2004 09:35
Profile
What is it with the idiotic interpretations of Soddom and Gommorrah? Your verse was a piece of crap. Soddom and Gommorrah had nothing to do with homosexuality and I find it disgusting that people still find it so. This whole entire Biblical battle over the sins of those cities comes from the one phrase found in the original texts. The correct phrase was, "...to know them." The sex translation was another interpretation, which is completely false. Included below is a link to some info from a site that explains this and corrects this outrageous idea. Soddom and Gommorrah If you would all please take the time to read this information, you will understand why such a simple phrase could bring about so much misunderstanding. But to let people go on saying this to others would be a crime and I cannot allow that so I am going to try to get the truth out if I can. -------------------- (Looks around in the Study) Colonel Mustard: "Just checking." Mrs. Peacock: "Everything all right?" Colonel Mustard: "Yep. Two corpses. Everything's fine." "Keep your wits about you, the game is afoot!!" - Sherlock Holmes Posts: 935 | Registered: Friday, August 8 2003 07:00 |
|
Babelicious
Member # 3149
|
written Monday, June 28 2004 09:37
Profile
Homepage
That's a faulty comparison. Being white is not a philosophy or religion, it is a state. It doesn't suggest any philosophy, whereas being a fundamentalist Christian does. A correct version would say that since Hitler killed so many people, Nazism is a scourge. Which it is. -------------------- Beatoff Valley: A story told out of order. Posts: 999 | Registered: Friday, June 27 2003 07:00 |
|
By Committee
Member # 4233
|
written Monday, June 28 2004 09:40
Profile
"Evolution is right to some people. And why do they think it's right? Because scientists say so. What dumb reasoning." As a technicality, all results of scientific experimentation are inferred, because scientists always have to account for error. It might be an error of .00000000000000000001% or so, but because it's there, results can't be said to be true or truth. That being said, science has generally done a better job of convincing me that its theories are probably correct, at least here on Earth, than religion. I'm more willing to take their word than the seminarians' word - I can at least see and touch science's results. The problem I find with the Bible is that no one *really* knows the context in which it was written anymore, and this results in gross misinterpretation. The origins of the texts included span at least a thousand years, and the writers of these texts come from quite different backgrounds. Without an understanding of the original context, how are we to interpret any of these writings seriously? I think that what Americans at least should keep in mind is that the Bible is not U.S. law, and while Christians may find it necessary to follow these rules, it is not within their rights to impose them upon other Americans, if the framers of the constitution had anything to say about it. The U.S. is not a theocracy, and neither Leviticus nor Acts can be upheld in court. So let the gays be! For the record, I am straight and I believe in a creator. I don't believe, however, that anyone on Earth has enough of an understanding to see what's really going on or understand - kind of like we're all missing a sense (like a blind person lacks sight) that allows for a new, "better" appreciation of existence. In that sense, we really are all like the sheep in the Bible's metaphors. How I wish we (or at least I) could "see!"  [ Monday, June 28, 2004 09:51: Message edited by: Andrew Miller ] Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00 |
|
Skip to My Lou
Member # 40
|
written Monday, June 28 2004 09:55
Profile
Homepage
To begin this post, I would like to make clear that the following statements are derived from information from my church?s Prophet, other ordained leaders, and scriptures. From scripture and modern revelation it is shown homosexuality is a serious sin. God?s plan is for marriage between a man and a woman, not for men with men and women with women. This does not mean homosexuals are bad people. They can be good people who are confused, have made a mistake, or were just never taught that it was wrong. Along with Andrew Miller?s statement, I agree that the Bible is not U.S. law. If you choose to be homosexual, that is your choice and you have every right to make it. However, there is a difference between allowing you to make your choice and changing laws to pander to it. God doesn?t change, but society does. When society changes sometimes rules no longer apply or need to be changed. The flood was not God changing His mind and deciding to destroy the people, but the people changing to the extent where they needed to be destroyed. Different sins do have different levels seriousness. Shoplifting is most definitely not on the same level as rape and murder. Hell is not actually a pit of flames and demonic torture. These are more metaphors of how you would feel knowing you could have been more but are stuck in hell for eternity with no chance for progression. However, we have been told that we will be able to count on one hand the number of people that end up going there. Those generally thought of who will be going to ?hell? (murderers, etc.) will be going to the lowest of the 3 degrees of heaven. Satan is not working with God nor is he His tool. Satan chose not to follow God?s plan and was cast out with those who followed him. Now miserable and unable to progress they seek to bring everyone down to their level with the opinion that if they can?t go to heaven, neither should you. I find it difficult to view religions whose basis is try to be like Jesus as an ?insidious and terrible force?. I recall some time ago that there were catholic priests under investigation for sexual harassment. This doesn?t mean the God the Catholics worship supported their actions. You cannot base an opinion on God upon faulty examples such as the crusades, etc. People are human and make mistakes. God allowing these actions to occur is not the same as God supporting them. I agree entirely with Eldiran. My religion can be extremely difficult to follow at times, but I try anyway because I have found it to be true. It also follows that ?anything worth having is worth working for.? To Andrew Miller: I have ?seen? and it was a great experience. -------------------- Need a pet? Need cheap labor? Buy a Moose! Take the Personality Test! INTJ 100% 78% 44% 44% Huzzah for the Masterminds! Posts: 1629 | Registered: Wednesday, October 3 2001 07:00 |
|
Apprentice
Member # 4580
|
written Monday, June 28 2004 10:02
Profile
quote:No it is not, A Christian is a person and is part of a group of people. A White is a person and is part of a group of people. So the comparison is fine. On an individual level a White persons "philosophy or religion" is his culture, if he was Black he would have a different culture, he would have been raised differently, he would think differently. This is no different from being a Christian or a Morman or any thing else. Posts: 14 | Registered: Saturday, June 19 2004 07:00 |
|
Shake Before Using
Member # 75
|
written Monday, June 28 2004 10:36
Profile
If you are born white, you are always white. If you are born a Christian, you are not necessarily always a Christian. Personal belief vs. state of being. End of story. Posts: 3234 | Registered: Thursday, October 4 2001 07:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Monday, June 28 2004 10:49
Profile
Homepage
Ack... wow... do some people really do believe that being homosexual is a choice? Careful with your wording there. Having homosexual relationships is a choice, just as having heterosexual ones is, but being homosexual is not. If it were, why on Earth would anyone choose it? Razor, Djur's criticism of your statement is valid. Being white does not mean that a person has a set of beliefs that will directly influence that person's actions, whereas being a fundamentalist Christian does mean exactly that. Judging all fundamentalist Christians by what a few do feels like bigotry to me, but then again, I've never met a fundie that didn't annoy me, so whatever. (I have met Christians and even conservative Christians that didn't, but not fundamentalist ones.) As an extension of AM's point, the reason that I believe in evolution is that it makes sense to me. A class in high school bio was enough to convince me that the theory was sound and offered no internal contradictions. After several attempts to study religion, I don't think I've found one that was completely internally consistent. (I found the part in Exodus where God keeps repeating over and over again that his people should keep the Sabbath forever and ever pretty funny, knowing the ending of THAT story.) That's not to say that they're wrong, just that they're, well, not as easily convincing. And science does assert some things that don't really make any sense. Quantum mechanics, for example. I'm willing to believe the results of quantum for the time being simply because I don't know better, but I'm studying physics right now, and I'll actually do experiments in a year or two that verify quantum for myself. Religion, on the other hand, is not verifiable, at least not while you're alive. Unless you personally witness a god, a miracle, or a prophet, you can't know for certain which religion is correct, and unlike scientific experiments, you can't just follow a set procedure to see religious evidence. So yeah. On another note, I try not to judge people when I find out that they're religious, because that seems prejudiced to me, regardless of how much I may disagree with them. -------------------- Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!! (The home of BoA's HLPM v1.1!) Rate my scenarios! Northern Kingdom 0: Prologue High Level Party Maker Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 517
|
written Monday, June 28 2004 10:57
Profile
All kinds of things have been justified by the Bible, and by perversions of Christian teachings. However, I find nothing in the New Testament to justify war full stop, and certainly believe that the Crusades were the response of a church that had made itself into a political entity to a challenge to its source of power, not a prayer-motivated, Bible-based course of action. The fact that some so-called Christians have comitted horrific acts should serve as a warning to us that someone calling themselves a Christian is not above judgement, and it should warn us against accepting the word of those who claim they have equal authority with God too blithely, but it should not imply that God is in favour of everything people claim He is, or that He would support any war that any Christian ever fought in. Extremist Moslems have committed horrific acts; I wouldn't condemn Islam as a philosophy of violence, because it isn't. Christians who quite frankly were motivated by anything but God's love have done unthinkable things, but this is not a reflection on God. -E- EDIT: Oh, and I'm a fundie. Unfortunately, the majority of people seem to have no idea what this means anymore, so I'll go into a little detail: A fundamentalist would believe that their particular holy book, in my case the Bible, was written with the involvement of their God, rather than as the opinions of a bunch of people as to what God thought. A fanatic, which is what I've found fundies are often confused with, is someone who believes that their particular dogma transcends reason: in other words, no matter what you say, I'm going to be right. A conservative doesn't have to be religious: they're just someone who believes that the moral standards of yesteryear still have a place in today's society. They often happen to be Christians because the morals of yesteryear were for the main part based on Christian standards, as opposed to those of today. -E- [ Monday, June 28, 2004 11:06: Message edited by: Omlette ] -------------------- Let them eat cake! Polaris Boards: The System is Up. Perennially. Posts: 2314 | Registered: Tuesday, January 15 2002 08:00 |
|
Apprentice
Member # 4580
|
written Monday, June 28 2004 11:20
Profile
quote:Wrong, I do not have to be white I can dye my skin and act like some one form another race. (or even sex) Being white is a state of mind. Posts: 14 | Registered: Saturday, June 19 2004 07:00 |
|
Skip to My Lou
Member # 40
|
written Monday, June 28 2004 11:24
Profile
Homepage
quote:My apologies if I seem to be proselytizing. My religion has a prophet whom I've seen in person, I have family members and friends who have experienced or seen miracles, and we actually have a set procedure for recieving personal religious evidence. "Evidence" may not be the word exactly, but the kind of spiritual confirmation cannot be denied or blown off as a fluke. -------------------- Need a pet? Need cheap labor? Buy a Moose! Take the Personality Test! INTJ 100% 78% 44% 44% Huzzah for the Masterminds! Posts: 1629 | Registered: Wednesday, October 3 2001 07:00 |
|
One Thousand Slimy Things
Member # 66
|
written Monday, June 28 2004 11:36
Profile
quote:Michael Jackson. Enough said. -------------------- KhothMk2: I'll get you some day ^_^ Posts: 995 | Registered: Thursday, October 4 2001 07:00 |
|
Shake Before Using
Member # 75
|
written Monday, June 28 2004 11:56
Profile
quote:It's still a state of being. Being alive is a state of being, too! You can change that, too! KILL YOURSELF [ Monday, June 28, 2004 11:57: Message edited by: Imban ] Posts: 3234 | Registered: Thursday, October 4 2001 07:00 |
|
Bob's Big Date
Member # 3151
|
written Monday, June 28 2004 12:09
Profile
Homepage
I am not of the belief that a just God and a God worth worshipping would damn someone eternally for the way He created them, or for the family they were born into worshipping Him the wrong way or not at all. Think of it this way: What would your reaction be to someone who says retarded people are a scourge, retardation is against the will of God, and so forth? Homosexuality is not by any means a disability, but there's good evidence to suggest it's inborn. And even if it isn't, it's still pretty damn hard-and-fast; camps where homosexuals are 'converted' merely suggest that Freud might have been right about bisexuality and that with enough subtle psychological abuse, anyone can be superficially switched one way or another. For the religious sorts who approve of that sort of thing in the audience: what would you think if someone set up camps for the specific purpose of mentally browbeating straight people into homosexuality? Nothing good, I wouldn't think, even if there were a social stigma on heterosexuality... -------------------- They want to have a war to keep their factories They want to have a war to keep us on our knees They want to have a war to stop us buying Japanese They want to have a war to stop industrial disease They're pointing out the enemy to keep you deaf and blind They want to suck your energy, incarcerate your mind Give you Rule Brittania, gassy beer, page three Two weeks in Hispania and sunday striptease Meanwhile, the first Jesus says, "I'll cure it soon Abolish Monday mornings and Friday afternoons" The other one's out on hunger strike, he's dying by degrees How come Jesus gets industrial disease? Posts: 2367 | Registered: Friday, June 27 2003 07:00 |
|
Shock Trooper
Member # 4154
|
written Monday, June 28 2004 13:36
Profile
Even being the straight Christian that I am I can't say that I am positive that God has condemned homosexuality. I don't think it is moral, from what I've read in the Bible and deduced myself, but I won't impose that opinion on others. I assume that when people become (are born?) gay that it is simply another challenge for them in life to overcome such a thing and to not indulge themselves in homosexual relationships. When one is born a cripple, or born with a mental retardation, it is something they will have to deal with. But God understands what you have been given to work with, and he'll judge what you make by that; I'm sure God doesn't expect a retarded person to be as moral as a normal person, or perhaps not even for them to accept Christ (because maybe they can't.) Being homosexual isn't the sin; it's having sexual relations with one of the same sex that is (in my opinion.) Forgive me if what I just said is jumbled or unclear. I'm trying to cram too many thoughts into too few sentences here. [ Monday, June 28, 2004 13:51: Message edited by: Eldiran ] -------------------- You're a moron if you think I'm not. Posts: 213 | Registered: Friday, March 26 2004 08:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 2984
|
written Monday, June 28 2004 13:59
Profile
Homepage
Mmh. So being homosexual is a disease? I'm not sure if that's the right approach to the issue... -------------------- Visit The Santharian Dream and its RP board. Or the Encyclopaedia Ermariana! Got a brain? Go to Polaris! "It is as if everyone had lost their sense To a conspiracy for downfall and desperance And a wisp it is they have chosen as their beacon." Reinhard Mey (freely translated). Posts: 8752 | Registered: Wednesday, May 14 2003 07:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Monday, June 28 2004 14:04
Profile
Homepage
Given that Omlette defined words that I used, I gather that post was mostly for my benefit. Since those were pretty much the definitions that I was working with as I posted before, it doesn't really change anything. One exception: by fundamentalist, I meant literalist -- one who believes that the text in question was specifically the exact words that God intended and therefore should be taken literally. As for Alex, I can only say that if that set procedure actually worked for everyone who used it, that religion would get a lot more publicity than it does right now. I can't say anything with regard to miracles or prophets without knowing specifics about what happened, but in general, such things tend to be tremendously unverifiable. Not that they're not true, just that they're not demonstratably true, for the most part. Er, and Razor? Even if you dye your skin, you'd have to reshape your skull in order to pretend to be black or Asian. Ethnicity is cultural, but RACE is not. -------------------- Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!! (The home of BoA's HLPM v1.1!) Rate my scenarios! Northern Kingdom 0: Prologue High Level Party Maker Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
Apprentice
Member # 4580
|
written Monday, June 28 2004 14:19
Profile
quote:Yes you would you would have to do many things. But if a man can change his sex he can change his race. As Swap your title for my said "Michael Jackson. Enough said." Posts: 14 | Registered: Saturday, June 19 2004 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 335
|
written Monday, June 28 2004 14:24
Profile
Homepage
quote:But the OT came directly from God, and God does not change. We have reached an impasse, haven't we? And I'd hardly call something written 2000 years ago the "New" Testament, though of course some of it is indeed more recent than that. Homosexuality is to a large extent genetically determined. Does God set people up and load the dice against them in the sin game? I've heard variations on the theme of "Yes, because..." and none of them satisfy me. Either God is cruel or He is not. If He is not, there is nothing wrong with homosexuality. If homosexuality has to be a sin, it belongs at the very bottom of the list. Why? Because it doesn't harm anyone. The vast majority of sins deal with loving one's neighbor, or rather failures to do so. Homosexuality brings as much happiness to homosexuals as heterosexuality brings to heterosexuals. Where's the problem? Again, it may be a sin, but it's even more minor than name-calling. On the side issue of race: As far as I know, nobody has ever committed atrocities and justified it by saying, "I'm white, so they deserve it." Ever. ?Alorael, who finds it far more easy to believe that mankind is fallible and has done a first-rate job in butchering the holy word of God than to believe that God is petty, vengeful, and bigoted. God would have produced a better-edited set of Scriptures! [ Monday, June 28, 2004 14:29: Message edited by: Alorael 2: Crystal Spam ] Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Monday, June 28 2004 14:28
Profile
Homepage
AFAIK, sex change operations only give the appearance of a change. We still can't make someone who was born a man get pregnant, though, nor make someone who was born a woman capable of making another woman pregnant. I could be wrong. Someone know differently? EDIT: Actually, come to think of it, the point that I was making was irrelevant. If being a particular race were a state of mind, then one wouldn't have to change one's body in order to change from one race to another. But one does. QED. EDIT 2: And yeah, what Alorael said sounds like a reasonable way of thinking about it. Of course, it requires taking the point of view that the Bible (as it is right now) has been corrupted a bit, but hey, that's the price you pay for being reasonable, I guess. [ Monday, June 28, 2004 14:32: Message edited by: Kelandon ] -------------------- Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!! (The home of BoA's HLPM v1.1!) Rate my scenarios! Northern Kingdom 0: Prologue High Level Party Maker Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
...b10010b...
Member # 869
|
written Monday, June 28 2004 16:42
Profile
Homepage
Kelandon's right about sex change operations: they're pretty good nowadays about constructing a convincing anatomy and even retaining sexual function, but it still isn't possible to change a person's biological sex. Kelandon's comment does raise an interesting side point, though: what about intersex people? Who are they supposed to be having sex with? About 1 in every 1000 people is born with some degree of ambiguous genitalia. A story made the news in Australia a couple of years ago, for example, about a happily married man who went to a fertility clinic and was told that he was unable to conceive children because genetically, he was 100 per cent female, despite the fact that his external genitalia were 100 per cent male. What position is this person in? From a religious perspective, is he male or female? Is his marriage valid? Should he be having sex with men, women, or nobody at all? Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00 |
|
By Committee
Member # 4233
|
written Tuesday, June 29 2004 07:50
Profile
Whether homosexuality is hard-coded into us genetically, be it a definite dominant-recessive trait or a matter of a seemingly simple developmental mutation (as it doesn't seem to be so uncommon that people are homosexual), homosexuals still can make a choice to express and practice their sexuality, just as heterosexuals can exercise that choice. Whatever one's particular opinion of any sexuality, whether backed by religion or no, I believe people should have a right to exercise their own choice, provided that the choice does not directly effect the lives of others. If two people, regardless of their genders, wish to have an intimate relationship, they should be free to do so. Furthermore, if U.S. law provides special benefits to couples in a committed, intimate relationship, I think it is unconstitutional to discriminate against particular combinations. To do so brings religion into the law, where, at least in the U.S., it does not belong. Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Tuesday, June 29 2004 09:15
Profile
Homepage
Having given it some thought, I think I should amend/clarify what I said earlier. I have never MET a fundie that didn't annoy me. But I have heard of fundamentalist Christians who have been great human beings. There's an argument to be made that Martin Luther King Jr, for instance, was a fundamentalist Christian. So yeah. I know they're out there, even if I haven't met them. Anyone who believes marriage is and should be between a man and a woman want to take on Thuryl's question? It seems like an interesting one, and it's just sort of been sitting there. -------------------- Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!! (The home of BoA's HLPM v1.1!) Rate my scenarios! Northern Kingdom 0: Prologue High Level Party Maker Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
Warrior
Member # 4583
|
written Tuesday, June 29 2004 10:57
Profile
Homepage
Someone said: "Satan is not working with God nor is he His tool. Satan chose not to follow God?s plan and was cast out with those who followed him. Now miserable and unable to progress they seek to bring everyone down to their level with the opinion that if they can?t go to heaven, neither should you." That's wrong, from the translated book that Abraham wrote to his sons about the sacred magic of God and how to apply it, forgot the title. Anyways, it stated that Satan, Lucifer, Asmodee, and Beelzebub are the four generals who command thousands of sub-spirits who carry out God's command or those of his worshippers who prove themselves pure. This has nothing to do with the subject but I just wanted to point that out. -------------------- "Fall in CHAOS!!!" Dark Archon. Posts: 74 | Registered: Saturday, June 19 2004 07:00 |