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.
Okay. Then why aren't evangelical Christians bent on upholding all the "dots' of the Law? Why are they so focused on homosexuality?
The answer to that question brings us full circle: It's because they can't stop thinking about it. They're not obsessed with divorce, or shellfish eating, or beard growth, or shunning women while they're menstruating, or gluttony or sloth or pride. They're obsessed with gay sex, which is why they bring it up at every turn.
Exactly. I love watching loons scream about how "the Bible condemns gay sex!" I always ask them which part of the Bible:
1) The Old part, which also condemns: eating shellfish and pork, going to church while on your period, speaking out against your elders, doing ANYTHING on the Sabbath, and so on. That part of the Bible that has a death penalty for everything from gay sex to CURSING?!
2) The New part, where Jesus basically tells people to stop obsessing over all that nonsense and instead reminds people that the most important law is to love thy neighbor... he also reminds people to remove the plank in their own eye before complaining about the speck in their neighbor's eye.
The right-wing loons want it both ways. They want to parade around their holiness while violating all of the impractical, violent, and insane laws in the Old Testament, but then they want to trot out that same book and the "absolute nature of the Law" when it comes time for them to bash gays. These are the same clowns who scream about how you "can't just follow the parts of the Bible that you like!" while they do EXACTLY THAT every single day!
In the end, they just find gay sex "icky" and wouldn't want to do it - fine, but somehow that equates to "kill all the gays!" And even that is hypocritical since, quite frankly, I think most people would find the concept of the average fat, old, angry gay-hater having sex "icky" - so does that mean they should also be banned from having sex? Maybe anyone who's not a supermodel or under 30 should be banned from physical intimacy for fear of somebody thinking about it and getting grossed out!
I've said it many times, anybody who believes sexual orientation is a choice is most likely bi-sexual or closet gay. I also believe that many of the people who really obsess over gay people are really fighting against what they are suppressing. But, that's just my opinion.
I don't think the point anymore is whether being gay is "natural" or not. Clearly it is. And? Its a huge leap to decide that since gay behavior is "natural", that gay marriage is necessary. A very huge leap and it has not been explained to my satisfaction I am afraid. But, who am I. Nevertheless, I don't believe that one decides the other.
I may be wrong about this, but I suspect that in nature, gay behavior is ONLY observed between beta males that have not succeeded in obtaining mates. It is a secondary source of sexual satisfaction. Humans have not operated by their governing animal instincts for a while, so why is anyone using nature as a validation for human activities? Lesbianism is not natural by the strict definition of natural.
In another thread a female using a male name as a userid kept referring to her wife to the clear confusion of a number of other posters. Eventually the source of the confusion became clear. I don't know... hundreds of years.... thousands of years spent naming and quantifying every nuance of human activity because that's how we roll. Now we want to stand it all on its ear and accept ongoing and escalating confusion in a major theater of human interaction. Who am I.
The most progressive, gay friendly, European country you can think of makes a distinction between Gay Civil Union and Straight Civil/Religious Marriage. IMO such a distinction is not wrong, as long as it confers equal rights and privileges after the fact. As it is, every year fewer and fewer straight couples marry. They can't afford to. The average gay person is more affluent than the average straight person. The Supreme Court doesn't care about the humanitarian aspects. Its the money. It's always the money.
You can't have it both ways. Either every iota and dot of scriptural law is supposed to be obeyed
That is a fallacy called "legalism."
Plenty of Old Testament Scripture was Mosaic law given to the Israelites. As such, it does/did not apply to non-Jews. But keep in mind that we are under the new covenant; salvation comes through grace by faith in Jesus Christ. It is no longer a condition of salvation to perform the rituals and keep the Mosaic law.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marlow
And neither approach challenges the notion that people who rail against gay are most likely consumed by thoughts of gay sex.
I didn't address that; I simply pointed out that Scripture is being misinterpreted and misquoted, in some cases intentionally.
You have done so twice in this thread already, as I have pointed out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hesster
I simply pointed out that people who do profess to follow it only follow it selectively when it suits them.
Stereotype much? Yes, there are some self-righteous hypocrites who sully the reputation of Christians, but judging all of God's followers by the actions of those few is akin to judging all black people by the actions of the Baltimore rioters, all bikers by the actions of the Waco outlaws, or all Muslims by the actions of ISIS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hesster
Condemning homosexuality is no different than a bunch of Jews or Muslims deciding that since they're commanded not to eat pigs, no one else should get to eat pork either.
Incorrect. The Scripture that commands Jews not to eat pork was given only to the Israelites, not to all persons on earth, as evidenced by language stating such. By contrast, the Scriptures condemning homosexuality and other forms of sexual sin are universal; they do not contain the aforementioned language that limits their scope.
You have done so twice in this thread already, as I have pointed out.
Just because you say something doesn't make it so. As I said before, I have discarded the Bible in its entirety.
Stereotype much? Yes, there are some self-righteous hypocrites who sully the reputation of Christians, but judging all of God's followers by the actions of those few is akin to judging all black people by the actions of the Baltimore rioters, all bikers by the actions of the Waco outlaws, or all Muslims by the actions of ISIS.
If someone didn't selectively follow the Bible, they would end up in jail real quick. The Bible commands followers to kill people for all sorts of "crimes" considered trivial in today's world.
Incorrect. The Scripture that commands Jews not to eat pork was given only to the Israelites, not to all persons on earth, as evidenced by language stating such. By contrast, the Scriptures condemning homosexuality and other forms of sexual sin are universal; they do not contain the aforementioned language that limits their scope.
Oh, should I have used shellfish as an example instead? The command not to eat them is only a few passages away from one of the ones fundies love to use against gays. Anyway, it's irrelevant. Why does it matter what the Bible says about homosexuals? The Bible is not a source of universal authority and there is the same amount of actual evidence for the Christian deity as for any other. Which is to say none.
Last edited by Hesster; 05-24-2015 at 05:40 AM..
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.
