Why is homosexuality wrong?

[Ladewig]

The slippery slope argument has already been proven to be correct. When activist judges struck down anti-miscegenation laws allowing blacks to "marry" whites, Christian folk warned it would lead sooner or later to the homosexuals copying the black activists and demanding the special right to marry whoever they please.

Eh. I'm not impressed anymore. Your early work was edgy and inflammatory. Now you are just phoning it in. If you are not going to try harder, then I am just going to stop reading your comments.

Low and behold, just a generation later that is exactly what is happening.

I will give you a point for "low and behold." The spelling police will be irked by that one.

 

[XenonII]

You are right.
Anal sex isn't wheat bread. But neither is regular sex so I fail to see your point.

Your logic is baffling.


no


You seem rather preoccupied with anal sex. Why do you think about it so much?



You keep trying to replace the term gay with sad. That's a rather gay thing to do.


You are following heretical texts. You are a heretic.

Anal sex spreads disease. Anal sex is a very good way for AIDS and other STDs to be transmitted. It's why homosexual males are 5000 times more likely to be infected with AIDS than a normal person.

I'm not pre-occupied with anal sex, i'm fighting against sin and the liberals hijacking of American culture.

There is nothing gay about the homosexual's disease stricken and life shortening lifestlye.

At least I have logic, unlike the liberal. It is the liberal that is the heretic and denies Christ.

 

[slingblade]

So? There's plenty of other sources that point to the fact that homosexuals are vastly more prone to molesting children than heterosexuals. The Catholic Church is a famous example of homosexuals running amok and satisfying their perverted lust for underage boys.

Show us some of these facts.
Dollars to doughnuts your sources are all going to be Fundie hate-rags.


Is your last name Chick, by any chance?

 

[scotth]

There are 2 schools of theological thought regarding the OT and NT.

One school of thought says that anything said in the OT that isn't reversed in the NT still stands. An example would be Jesus, in the NT, repealing the dietary laws when he said it isn't what goes into a man that makes him unclean, but that which comes out of a man. This was said in direct response to a violation of the OT dietary laws. Thus, it is a reversal of the OT law.

The other school of thought is that anything said in the OT must be repeated in the NT or it can be assumed it is no longer in effect.

The idea is that prior to Jesus, mankind was under the Law. The Law was not intended to be the way things ought to be, man could never attain salvation by trying to uphold the entirety of the Law. The purpose of the OT Law was to put a spotlight on how incapable mankind was to attain the holiness God requires.

When Jesus came he put aside the Law in the sense that he fulfilled it himself and those who have faith in him benefit from his fulfilling it as if they themselves had fulfilled it. Some of the law was meant as an archetype of the christ.

Regardless of whether one subscribes to the first or 2nd view, the condemnation of homosexuality stands because Paul repeated it in Romans, a book in the NT.

So, the NT doesn't reverse the prohibition, but it does repeat it. Since we have a condemnation in both the NT and OT there is no room for doubt that the present position of the church is to view homosexuality as an abomination unless one wishes to be a liberal Christian that doesn't take the bible seriously or one wishes to interpret plain language in a unique and fanciful manner.

Well, Jesus had this to say on it:


"For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:18-19 RSV)

"It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid." (Luke 16:17 NAB)

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place." (Matthew 5:17 NAB)

It seems pretty clear that, at most, only things that were specifically repealed would not still hold.

You still have 2 giant problems.
1) If you believe that, you should be killing women who are found not to be a virgin on her wedding on her father's doorstep, stoning disobedient children, keeping slaves, and on and on.
2) You still haven't provided the slightest cause for us to believe that their is any validity to the bible at all.

 

[INRM]

Homosexuality could only be argued as wrong in the fact that homosexuals aren't as likely to wish to procreate.

Otherwise, there's no real moral issue to it. Most humans are bisexual, some are more straight, others more gay, there are some who are purely gay and some that are purely straight, but it's rare. There are also some people who are pretty much purely bisexual.


INRM

 

[Achán hiNidráne]

Anal sex spreads disease. Anal sex is a very good way for AIDS and other STDs to be transmitted. It's why homosexual males are 5000 times more likely to be infected with AIDS than a normal person.

Evidence?

I'm not pre-occupied with anal sex...

You could have fooled us.

...i'm fighting against sin...

There is no such thing as "sin."

...and the liberals hijacking of American culture.

The only group doing any hijacking American culture and the freedom (there's that word again) are Bible-humping, wannabe tyrants like yourself.

There is nothing gay about the homosexual's disease stricken and life shortening lifestlye.

Evidence?

At least I have logic, unlike the liberal. It is the liberal that is the heretic and denies Christ.

What does logic have anything to do with Christianity (or any other religion)?

 

[XenonII]

In a single post, you have just stated that the new covenant makes Old Testament law unnecessary when it's a law you don't like, and then pulled a law out of Deuteronomy to justify a stupid clothing rule. Do you have no shame at all?

It's the mosiac law of Leviticus that's no longer neccessary for Christians to adhere to. The prohibition of men and women dressing up like glorifyed trannies still stands. Indeed it is more relevant today than ever before now that such an abomination, like homosexuality, runs rampant.

 

[articulett]

So because animals engage in a particular behavior that makes it ok for humans too as well? I guess cannibalism is a perfectly fine lifestyle choice for humans then seeing as animals engage in that particular behavior. IF homosexuality is "ok" because animals allegedly engage in that behavior then cannibalism is as well.

Well your holy book didn't prohibit it... and it seems like it's fine with pedophilia and rape as well--and torture--and stoning those whose lifestyle you don't agree with it. That's a mighty fine book you get your morals from... No wonder there are so many fine upstanding moral examples in Christianity like... um... let's see... well, Hitler was a Christian... um... but I guess he wouldn't count--though he did stem the tide of Jews, and I'm sure that fits in with your bigotry...

XenonII is a fabulous example of biblical morality, isn't he? Faith is scary folks. Keep it away from the kiddies. It clearly retards thinking and encourages hatred--while making the faithful arrogant and utterly blind to his own hypocrisy, immorality, and ignorance. Too much faith and you get Fred Phelps and/or Xenon II. Be afraid. Be very afraid.

Oh, XenonII, you and Muslim fundamentalists would really get along-- did you know they have no homosexuality in Iran? They feel exactly like you do about it. I think they are the only other sect where a large number of the fundamentalists are young earth creationists. You fundies have so much in common!

 

[scotth]

I've had to use them, too, ever since my hysterectomy. I must be unnatural. Someone save me. Help.


Oh, and if I have teh anal secks with my husband, does that mean I'm a lesbian, too?

He'll be so happy! And so will I!

Sex is for procreation only (according to Xenon). If there is no chance of children, god apparently doesn't want you having sex anyway.

(hopefully it is obvious that I do not endorse this opinion)

 

[bruto]

It's the mosiac law of Leviticus that's no longer neccessary for Christians to adhere to. The prohibition of men and women dressing up like glorifyed trannies still stands. Indeed it is more relevant today than ever before now that such an abomination, like homosexuality, runs rampant.

Indeed, you do have no shame at all, obviously. So now can you tell me whether you consider Martin Luther King to have been a Christian?

While you're at it, quotation marks are for quotations, unless you mean to mark a word as being misapplied, as I might call you a "christian" or "reasonable." I notice above that you enclosed the word "marry" in quotation marks when applied to interracial couples. If nothing else you wrote in this long and sickening thread were offensive, that alone would, in my mind, mark you as a reprehensible bigot of the lowest order. I echo previous remarks, and add to the chorus: you are scum.

 

[articulett]

It's the mosiac law of Leviticus that's no longer neccessary for Christians to adhere to. The prohibition of men and women dressing up like glorifyed trannies still stands. Indeed it is more relevant today than ever before now that such an abomination, like homosexuality, runs rampant.

Oh, so you cherry pick whom to hate and which biblical laws are still in place. I take it that you aren't giving your money to the poor and the whole thing about it being easier for a camel to get through the eye of a needle than it is for rich guy to get into heaven doesn't worry you either. I bet you pay no heed to that "pray in the closet" part either.

Well, I guess peodphilia, bigotry, torture, and the like are fine with your god--just so long as you keep that sabbath day holy.

Say--but what if the Amish are right--and technology is a tool of Satan designed to distract you from winning your heavenly rewards-- shouldn't the only thing you really read be the bible--aren't you sinning by being here? I don't remember god saying the internet was okay. Don't you have a rapture to prepare for?

 

[Achán hiNidráne]

Homosexuality could only be argued as wrong in the fact that homosexuals aren't as likely to wish to procreate.

Why is not wanting to procreate immoral?

Not to derail the thread (any further, that is) but given that there are 6 Billion people on this planet--and rising--taxing our resources, our economies, our environment, and each other; wouldn't knocking that number back a few billion over the next few generations be a good thing for the future of humanity?

 

[scotth]

Gluttony is also a sin.

You keep telling us stuff we already know about your book without addressing the problem that it is pretty painly a human, not a devine creation.

 

[firecoins]

This thread is gay.

 

[DoubtingStephen]

The Catholic Church is a famous example of homosexuals running amok and satisfying their perverted lust for underage boys.

XenonII, would you say that a Catholic priest is not a True Christian? Certainly a True Christian would never be a Catholic priest, would they?

I've been waiting for the No True Scotsman internecine quarreling between the various Christian death cults. If only they would use up just 10% of their energy attacking each other! It would be like a vacation in the comfort of my own queer home.

Maybe we could have ballot measures in each state to decide if Catholics should be allowed to Destroy the Sanctity of Marriage. Or Methodists. Oh and Presbyterians. There are just so many One True Faiths! How is a gurl to choose? None of them seem very style conscious or fabulous.

No need to worry about the Quakers, they don't kill anybody so nobody takes them seriously as a religion.

Are Jewish people conspiring with Satan to promote the librul homo agenda in order to destroy society too?

At least we have clearly identified tolerance as public enemy number one, and a tool of the Homosexual Agenda club. So why should Fundamentalists have to tolerate Catholics? What happened to Freedom of Religion?

 

[scotth]

Indeed, you do have no shame at all, obviously. So now can you tell me whether you consider Martin Luther King to have been a Christian?

I don't consider him much of one, to his credit.

Much of his strategy was borrowed from Gandhi, a Hindu. And, while he called upon the symbolism of Moses and the freeing of his people, he didn't embrace the rest of the relevant biblical narative. He wasn't calling for the slaughter of the rest of America.

 

[Achán hiNidráne]

It's the mosiac law of Leviticus that's no longer neccessary for Christians to adhere to.

Not according to your Bible:

Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or tittle shall nowise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven.

Mathew 5: 18-19

I think we chalk this up as another contradiction in the (...snicker...) "infallible" word of your perfect God.

But hey, even it weren't a contradiction, and OT law really no longer applies to Christians, then I guess THEY CAN engage in homosexual acts without condemnation from their deity.

The prohibition of men and women dressing up like glorifyed trannies still stands.

You do realize that there wasn't exactly that much difference in how men and women dressed in ancient times when these laws where allegedly written, do you? In point of fact, given how humans are built genitally, I would say that we got it ass backwards: Men should be the ones in loose-fitting, unconfined garments. Meanwhile, women, whose exterior genitalia is not as pronounced as a male's, would probably be more comfortable in trousers.

And, as stated elsewhere, I'd really like you to tell a Scotsmen in highland garb that he's a "dressing up like glorifyed trannies" (sic)... right before you end up chewing your own teeth, laddie.

Indeed it is more relevant today than ever before now that such an abomination, like homosexuality, runs rampant.

So if the rules demand by Leviticus are "more relevant today" then perhaps the punishment needs be a bit harsher than stoning? What do you suggest? Firing squad? Hanging, followed by drawing and quartering? A good-old fashioned lynching?

You truly are a barbarian.

 

[Damien Evans]

Many lesbians engage in anal sex with men. A lesbian is simply a woman who partakes in unnatural sexual activity with another female, plenty do however also engage in perverse heterosexual acts with males or at least did before they chose to become lesbians.

You just out-stupided yourself

 

[slingblade]

Sex is for procreation only (according to Xenon). If there is no chance of children, god apparently doesn't want you having sex anyway.

(hopefully it is obvious that I do not endorse this opinion)

It will take someone far braver than I to inform my darling he can't have his bedtime snack anymore just because my baby-maker's in a red biohazard bag in a landfill somewhere.

Besides, if that's really the case, why didn't Gawd make us more like all those animals that ovulate only once a year? Does He have shares in Tampax, or something?

 

[Achán hiNidráne]

It will take someone far braver than I to inform my darling he can't have his bedtime snack anymore just because my baby-maker's in a red biohazard bag in a landfill somewhere.

Besides, if that's really the case, why didn't Gawd make us more like all those animals that ovulate only once a year? Does He have shares in Tampax, or something?

Well, you're SUPPOSED to pop out a baby for Jesus every nine months as long as you have functioning ovaries. However, now that you have rendered yourself barren, you are a hell-bound abomination engaging in perverse, unproductive sex with your husband who might not be a Christian or a member of the same race.

Shame on you!