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.
Is it? Why? The Bible has been revised many times by various Popes. Most of those Popes were likely gay based on the history that we now know. In fact, and it's a fact, the best place for gay men and gay women to work was in the Church for thousands of years. The Bible we have today isn't even close to the original version. Even the current Pope says gay/transgendered people would be cool with Jesus. And despite all the revisionist history of current "Christians," it all started with the Catholics. Get over it. You can't claim to be a Christian and deny the history of the religion. That's almost as silly as believing that someone actually parted the red sea, or put two of every species on a boat, or that Zeus actually walked among the clouds.
The sin of Homosexuality was noted in the Torah. THAT has never changed. Not one iota. It may have been translated and written in other languages, but the original Hebrew has never changed and therefore stands as the original word of God.
The sin of Homosexuality was noted in the Torah. THAT has never changed. Not one iota. It may have been translated and written in other languages, but the original Hebrew has never changed and therefore stands as the original word of God.
...providing you believe that what was written in the Torah was actually "the original word of God" and not the people who wrote the Torah.
But great post. What is the quote from? ETA, OK, Tennyson, in part.
I wrote it myself, but I don't know if I invented it. I often write things I thought I made up on the spot, and then later find it was actually memory of something else. I guess I was feeling a little more poetic as I wrote that sentence, as I had David Grays song "Shine" on my headphones at the time and was just hitting the line about rising from the ashes of his relationship like a bird of flame, and I guess it set off something in me
But as you say, the core of it was a quote from Tennyson.... a wonderful quote summing up the internal struggle he felt between how nature conforms to god's will while seemingly standing in opposition to all he thought god to be.
The core of his quote in turn, the words "tooth and claw"...... to which he added nature and red.... was a phrase that was quite popular at the time however. So he just built upon it as I built upon his.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Norne
It is great for an individual, who is in the end but one little link in the great chain of life. The modern world seems to be all about the individual and his little self. But in the long run is a dead end for the entire species.
Except there is no reason to think it is. Quite the opposite in fact as many things that could arise and destroy a species less capable, we could find ways using our intellect and sciences and mutual support to over come. As I say we are no longer a complete slave to the machinations or vagaries of evolution, nor do we have to live by its tenets or precepts. And this is a good thing.
But the core point of the rebuttal was not just that we have broken free of evolution, but that declaring something to be a "defect" without substance is little more than bias. The user attempted to declare homosexuality an evolutionary dead end or defect, and the simple fact is there is no reason to think it is. At all. Quite the opposite in fact when we actually look at the facts and similarities throughout nature.
I can understand WHY people think homosexuality problematic in evolutionary terms. I was once a lay man to the subject so I can get myself into their head space. But I know better now, as I explained above.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tipsywicket
So does cannibalism. So does hyper-masturbation. So does rape. So does incest and pedophilia. Cats will eat their kittens if they are weak or sickly. Dogs hump inanimate objects. What is your point, that humans that engage in these activities should be embraced because they are engaging in activities proven to be "natural" by the animal kingdom?
Quite the opposite. The point being made is a rebuttal to people who declare homosexuality NOT to be natural.... as if that is problematic.
So the rebuttal is two fold. The first is to point out that it is, in fact, natural.... so the original premise is wrong.
But the second part is actually what you point out yourself. Discussing how "natural" it is is simply irrelevant because, as you point out, natural != good. Plenty of things that are "natural" are things we consider bad.
So the error people make is in thinking we are making a "Homosexuality occurs in nature so it must be good" argument. We are NOT. At all. We are making a "Actually it is natural, but it being natural or not is simply entirely irrelevant on any level" argument.
What tends to shut the anti homosexual up..... as demonstrated on this thread when two people I said it to simply ran away and did not reply.......... is pointing out that very little of what we do as humans can be called "natural" anyway. Ironically a great example being us communicating right now through this electronic forum. That is hardly "natural" is it?
"Natural" is an irrelevant non-argument deflection on the subject of the ethics and morality of homosexuality, it's expression, or its union in marriage. People with an issue with homosexuality need to find a better pedestal to rant from.
I explain just because you can have feelings of someone, does not mean you need to act out on it. I would state that it is a sin, even looking at porn is a sin, or having sex outside straight marriages as well. I state that it is not your sexuality that defines on what you are, but as a Christian on how you stand by Jesus Christ.
I will still allow the child to live under the roof, and will still love the child and with it provide her/his schooling/ food/ clothing needs, but as long as the child still live in the house, he/she will still be bound by my rules of the house.
Because sometimes nature produces defects. It used to be that a species was strengthened when only the strongest or superior were the survivors. Now, humanity nurturers and encourages the defective to survive and even reproduce.
Please. Homosexuality has existed for as long as mankind has been around.
So at least his parents cared enough to attempt to get help for him, yet he was so conditioned by his peer group that this was a bad thing that he chose instead to run away.
No, his parents were so conditioned by their church that they made his life hell until he ran away from the crazy mofos.
So does cannibalism. So does hyper-masturbation. So does rape. So does incest and pedophilia. Cats will eat their kittens if they are weak or sickly. Dogs hump inanimate objects. What is your point, that humans that engage in these activities should be embraced because they are engaging in activities proven to be "natural" by the animal kingdom?
So does love, kindness, family, charity, community, friendship, learning, etc. Why equate homosexuality with the bad in nature and not the good? It is your choice to look at it in a bad light.
The sin of Homosexuality was noted in the Torah. THAT has never changed. Not one iota. It may have been translated and written in other languages, but the original Hebrew has never changed and therefore stands as the original word of God.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mightyqueen801
...providing you believe that what was written in the Torah was actually "the original word of God" and not the people who wrote the Torah.
Yep.
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.