Why does homosexuality anger conservative Christians more than other sins? (abomination, believe)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Other than God making one man, then giving him one wife. And Jesus seemed to support the notion of one man, one wife.
The Bible doesn't record God telling any man that it's a GOOD thing to take multiple wives, nor did he command any man to do so. But that's what men do--we take God's plans and we muck them up.
how do you reconcile Adam breeding with his daughters?
Other than God making one man, then giving him one wife. And Jesus seemed to support the notion of one man, one wife.
The Bible doesn't record God telling any man that it's a GOOD thing to take multiple wives, nor did he command any man to do so. But that's what men do--we take God's plans and we muck them up.
If God was so concerned about one man, one wife, why was He unable to follow His own instructions? David had multiple wives, and AFTER his adultery He told David through Nathan that He, God Himself, would have given him more wives.
Don’t tell me that God made an exception. You’ve already insisted one man, one woman existed since Genesis. And isn’t your god “unchangeable?”
In addition God apparently had no problem with whores or prostitutes or with men marrying sisters in spite of the Leviticus instructions to the opposite.
So stop with the hypocritical one man, one woman bovine excrement. You remain biblically ignorant and morally bankrupt outside of a rule book. Even atheists have a much more advanced sense of morality. While I may disagree with them regarding God’s existence virtually all of them have exceed your so-called morality. They don’t need to run to an idol to determine right or wrong. Neither do Jesus followers—-you know, that spiritual entity that you have yet to meet. Your idol is blocking your limited vision.
If those gay men married their risky behavior would decrease. What about the Los rate of HIV among lesbians? Does that mean that this is fine! What about gay men who have had only a single sex partner and both are faithful?
You just can't accept reality, can you? You have to twist, dodge and throw it back on me with all these irrelevant questions. The funny thing is since SSM is legal and supposely mostly accepted (another lie from your side) then these STD rates should be going DOWN, don't ya think? The stats are showing that it isn't the norm for gay men to stay faithful. They are just as promiscuous maybe even more so after SSM was legalized.
Quote:
Originally Posted by badlander
What about a heterosexual couple who have sex prior to marriage? 8s that a sin that harms others?
Yes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by badlander
Yes committing offenses that harms others is wrong. But it is not every gay, lesbian, straight man or straight woman who is promuisious or diseased. What about them?
What about them? They have a right to live that way if it makes them happy. Just doesn't make it suddenly not be sin.
Quote:
Originally Posted by badlander
What is it that you wish for gay people?
Not to be allowed to marry?
Not to be allowed to have sex?
My wish is for them to leave Christian businesses alone.
Yea, if your version of god is so small that he cares so much about what I do with my privates with another consenting adult, married or not, he isn't worth my time.
I lived with my husband for over 5 years before getting married. Guess those 5 years really ticked off your version of God, huh?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TroutDude
Completely silly, isn't it?
The Omni-Max Creator of the Universe(s) is keeping a list of who does what with their naughty bits.
Reminds me of this Christian song . . .
He sees you when you're sleepin'
He knows when you're awake
He knows if you've been bad or good
So be good, for goodness sake
He's makin' a list and checkin' it twice
He's gonna find out who's naughty or nice . . .whoops, sorry . . .wrong song
Neither articles the one you linked to even mention gays. Yes it is true that the decrease in concerns about HIV was suggested for a reason for the increase in STD but it did not mention homosexuals at all that I could see.
Unless HIV is strickly a homosexual disease, it is the Christian article that is adding gay men that the articles they linked did not.
Did you read the BBC or Telegraph articles? If not, why not?
I can go directly to the source, but you will still deny the FACTS. Here is a statement directly from the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control:
Quote:
During this period, syphilis diagnoses were consistently higher among men, with rates doubling from 6.1 per 100 000 in 2010 to 12.1 in 2017. Between 2007 and 2017, close to two-thirds (62%, 94 015 of the 152 233 cases where sexual orientation was known) were reported among men who have sex with men
Are you going to deny it now? Two-Thirds. That's a majority. And we are not even talking about HIV here. We are talking about another STD that has reached all time high level. Why on earth would you encourage people to keep engaging in lifestyle that fosters such risky behavior and spreads diseases like this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by badlander
The articles mentioned the need to use condoms to prevent the spread of STD. Yes that is good advice and should be headed.
Or better yet, stop having male to male sex with multiple partners. And lesbians aren't immune to the health risks either.
Quote:
There is evidence that lesbians may have a higher rate of PCOS than heterosexual women.
And nothing in the three articles presented any harm done to others by two women marrying or even two men marrying or a man and a woman living together unmarried. So none of those sins are so bad because they do not harm anyone else.
Well that's not reality. We wouldn't be seeing these alarming rates if most gay people were staying monogamous. This is Europe which has had legalized SSM longer than the US.
I can go directly to the source, but you will still deny the FACTS. Here is a statement directly from the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control:
Are you going to deny it now? Two-Thirds. That's a majority. And we are not even talking about HIV here. We are talking about another STD that has reached all time high level. Why on earth would you encourage people to keep engaging in lifestyle that fosters such risky behavior and spreads diseases like this?
Well that's not reality. We wouldn't be seeing these alarming rates if most gay people were staying monogamous. This is Europe which has had legalized SSM longer than the US.
Just one question
When have I ever encouraged people to have risky sex? When?
Other than God making one man, then giving him one wife. And Jesus seemed to support the notion of one man, one wife.
The Bible doesn't record God telling any man that it's a GOOD thing to take multiple wives, nor did he command any man to do so. But that's what men do--we take God's plans and we muck them up.
I have no problem looking at the creation story and then looking at basic reproductive biology and saying the one man one wife model is the norm. Should be the basic family unit.
Yet we are discussing outliers to the norm in this topic, specifically homosexuals. Is God requiring all to follow a norm when there are those who fall outside it? The human body has a norm, a child is born and should have ten fingers and ten toes. Should have a normal brain that develops cognitively along a standard path. But not all are born in the norm.
Should we call those with birth defects or bodies that otherwise don't fall into a norm an abomination or sinners or somehow less than in God's eyes?
There is the story of the man born blind, John Chapter 9. This question was asked of Jesus, was the man born blind because of his sin or his parents sin? Jesus said no, but that the glory of God may be revealed. He then healed him of his blindness. Then the folks in his hometown accused him of deceit.
Do you guys not see yourselves as the ones in the blind guy's hometown? Pointing to folks outside the norm and accusing them of sinning or the product of sin because part of them (their sexuality) is not the norm?
Why do we not have an example of Jesus "curing" someone of sexuality outside the norm? If it is so vile and such an abomination to him, wouldn't he have spent more time exorcising sexual demons or rerouting brains and emotions to think and feel to the norm?
Why is it that a blind person can be a part of our church and we don't put any heavy trip on them to get healed? Jesus did heal blindness. Why are we that concerned about their innate sexuality than he was? He didn't speak about it. He came close when he spoke about eunuchs. Some born that way, some forced into it by men, some choosing to become such. Did he condemn any of them? No. People outside the sexual norm. He didn't condemn. "The one that accepts this should accept this." His commentary on the subject.
Sex has been made a taboo by the church to a point that it wasn't made so in the bible. Yes, God did set a standard with his creation. Natural procreation happens through that norm. But those that fall outside the norm are not condemned and have a place in the family. David and Solomon did not follow the norm. They penned parts of the scriptures. At many churches, they would have been flat out rejected.
God isn't as prudish as you guys think he is. And all that is from where? The bible. And pretty literal at that.
Other than God making one man, then giving him one wife. And Jesus seemed to support the notion of one man, one wife.
The Bible doesn't record God telling any man that it's a GOOD thing to take multiple wives, nor did he command any man to do so. But that's what men do--we take God's plans and we muck them up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saintmarks
I have no problem looking at the creation story and then looking at basic reproductive biology and saying the one man one wife model is the norm. Should be the basic family unit.
Yet we are discussing outliers to the norm in this topic, specifically homosexuals. Is God requiring all to follow a norm when there are those who fall outside it? The human body has a norm, a child is born and should have ten fingers and ten toes. Should have a normal brain that develops cognitively along a standard path. But not all are born in the norm.
Should we call those with birth defects or bodies that otherwise don't fall into a norm an abomination or sinners or somehow less than in God's eyes?
There is the story of the man born blind, John Chapter 9. This question was asked of Jesus, was the man born blind because of his sin or his parents sin? Jesus said no, but that the glory of God may be revealed. He then healed him of his blindness. Then the folks in his hometown accused him of deceit.
Do you guys not see yourselves as the ones in the blind guy's hometown? Pointing to folks outside the norm and accusing them of sinning or the product of sin because part of them (their sexuality) is not the norm?
Why do we not have an example of Jesus "curing" someone of sexuality outside the norm? If it is so vile and such an abomination to him, wouldn't he have spent more time exorcising sexual demons or rerouting brains and emotions to think and feel to the norm?
Why is it that a blind person can be a part of our church and we don't put any heavy trip on them to get healed? Jesus did heal blindness. Why are we that concerned about their innate sexuality than he was? He didn't speak about it. He came close when he spoke about eunuchs. Some born that way, some forced into it by men, some choosing to become such. Did he condemn any of them? No. People outside the sexual norm. He didn't condemn. "The one that accepts this should accept this." His commentary on the subject.
Sex has been made a taboo by the church to a point that it wasn't made so in the bible. Yes, God did set a standard with his creation. Natural procreation happens through that norm. But those that fall outside the norm are not condemned and have a place in the family. David and Solomon did not follow the norm. They penned parts of the scriptures. At many churches, they would have been flat out rejected.
God isn't as prudish as you guys think he is. And all that is from where? The bible. And pretty literal at that.
I'm more Fundie than you guys lol.
Can someone PLEASE explain to me why some others on this thread would not agree with the above excellent post from Saintmarks?
And < sigh > ...I just know that they won't agree. Is it because of sheer obstinacy that they SO dig in their heels on this subject? Or, is something else preventing the light of the truth from getting through? 'They' often make references to Satan who I personally don't believe in as a literal being. However, sometimes I do have to pause and wonder if this 'Satan' character, if real or, at least, real to them, is more operating in their lives than in the lives of those they persistently condemn.
If those gay men married their risky behavior would decrease. What about the Los rate of HIV among lesbians? Does that mean that this is fine! What about gay men who have had only a single sex partner and both are faithful?
What about a heterosexual couple who have sex prior to marriage? 8s that a sin that harms others?
Yes committing offenses that harms others is wrong. But it is not every gay, lesbian, straight man or straight woman who is promuisious or diseased. What about them?
What is it that you wish for gay people?
Not to be allowed to marry?
Not to be allowed to have sex?
These are questions not accusations. I am not sure because you stated that you opposed SSM (I think) but you keep bringing up statistics that is primarily about unattached individuals.
And why is christian.org carrying health issues about gays? Car and Driver or Popular Mechanics don't but Christian sites seem to carry so many stories about gays.
By the way your quote uses the word suggests not placing the blame directly on. Can I be safe to assume you changed the wording as a bit of editorizing?
It's concern trolling. They pretend to be concerned, but they don't give a damn about the LGBTQ community.
I wish Jeff would go to music. He's good at it, at least when he talks about it.
Please send your passion in music, Jeff, that might give the world another perspective.
Not joking, you truly seem at least as passionate about music than with the bible. Put your energy where it has a chance.
Good luck !
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
