Homosexuality

[Revolte]

Yes. But personally, I don't have those urges.

Wait, what? I think if you think you can choose to be gay, then you're in the closet. No offense though, I just think that's the logical application for that statement.

[Charles Darnay]

No, I get what your saying. I guess the issue here is, I'm not vocal about it. But the minute I say that I believe it's a sin, I'm suddenly lumped in with bigots, which is why I posted here in the first place. I actually have to disagree with your explaination of "sin". You're describing what a right-wing preacher would do. Jesus ate and kept company with "tax-collectors and sinners". He didn't behave in the way you're suggesting. My bi-sexual friend knows what I believe. But she also knows I'm not going to shove my beliefs down her throat because I feel she needs to be a "better person." She IS a good person and we have fun on our "Mommy-day-outs." If she one day comes to agree with me biblically, then that's great. If not, that's her choice, and she won't be any less my friend for it.

So sinners can be good people? Why label them at all. No, I'm not suggesting you use the word to the same extent that a bigot preacher does, but there is a moral judgement in the word, whether you accept it or not. We alone cannot choose the societal connotations of our words

[Darcy88]

You obviously skipped over many of my other comments.

First of all, I DON'T watch Fox news. I have no interest in opinion media and will certainly not let it dictate what I should think.

Secondly, as I said before, I DON'T CARE if gay marriage is accepted in this country one day. I hope this isn't too political a statement, but as you're the one that brought it up, if I agree with with a politician on everything but he/she supports gay marriage, I'm not going to vote (and I do vote) for the other candidate on that reason alone. I do my very best not to let my religious veiws sway my politcal ones. (I know, what a radical concept!)

I believe in the teachings of the Bible and I don't let someone just tell me what the Bible says. I study it for myself to the best of my abilities. Therefore, I would be a hypocrite to say that I don't believe that homosexuality is a sin. But I also earlier admitted to having trouble with sins of my own so I'm certainly not going to be the one to "cast the first stone". The people that form the hateful pick lines are the bigots. You'll never see me among them.

Oh, and Juniper, if that's your opinion, then fine, you are entitled to it. But you don't seem to be respectful of mine. Yes, it does hurt that I'm being stereotyped into a group of people with which I don't belong. Therefore, in my opinion, you are no better than the hateful picketers.

The part of the bible which calls homosexuality an abomination was written at a time when the bisexual Hellenistic culture was competing with the Jewish one and young men were going to gymnasiums to work out nude instead of going to Temple to study the Torah. So the priests tried to demonize the Greeks and Macedonians, a great way of doing that being to demonize them for their bisexuality.

It was simple propaganda. The bible has to be open to interpretation. A too literal reading and you can justify any kind of discrimination.

The message of love was far more hammered-home in the gospels than that of discrimination. I doubt if Jesus were ministering today he'd be wasting his time trying to deny a group of people the right to marry. I'm sure he would be working on world hunger and ending war and overpopulation and economic trouble and a million other causes before the issue of gay marriage even entered his mind.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

The message of love was far more hammered-home in the gospels than that of discrimination. I doubt if Jesus were ministering today he'd be wasting his time trying to deny a group of people the right to marry. I'm sure he would be working on world hunger and ending war and overpopulation and economic trouble and a million other causes before the issue of gay marriage even entered his mind.

Word.

[tonywalt]

[QUOTE]

The part of the bible which calls homosexuality an abomination was written at a time when the bisexual Hellenistic culture was competing with the Jewish one and young men were going to gymnasiums to work out nude instead of going to Temple to study the Torah.

Damn, should I stop working out nude?

[the facade]

Word.

Double Word.

[cacian]

The part of the bible which calls homosexuality an abomination was written at a time when the bisexual Hellenistic culture was competing with the Jewish one and young men were going to gymnasiums to work out nude instead of going to Temple to study the Torah. So the priests tried to demonize the Greeks and Macedonians, a great way of doing that being to demonize them for their bisexuality.

It was simple propaganda. The bible has to be open to interpretation. A too literal reading and you can justify any kind of discrimination.

The message of love was far more hammered-home in the gospels than that of discrimination. I doubt if Jesus were ministering today he'd be wasting his time trying to deny a group of people the right to marry. I'm sure he would be working on world hunger and ending war and overpopulation and economic trouble and a million other causes before the issue of gay marriage even entered his mind.

I doubt marriage was even on the agenda at the time I am sure marriage is fairly newish concept and was not during Jesus time.
Marriage came about with the birth of cathedrals and church buildings and as far as now these buildings were not about when Jesus was around.
Notice the manger being the place of birth of Jesus.
Oh manger is French means ''to eat'' used with reference to people.

The part of the bible which calls homosexuality an abomination was written at a time when the bisexual Hellenistic culture was competing with the Jewish one and young men were going to gymnasiums to work out nude instead of going to Temple to study the Torah. So the priests tried to demonize the Greeks and Macedonians, a great way of doing that being to demonize them for their bisexuality.

It was simple propaganda. The bible has to be open to interpretation. A too literal reading and you can justify any kind of discrimination.

The message of love was far more hammered-home in the gospels than that of discrimination. I doubt if Jesus were ministering today he'd be wasting his time trying to deny a group of people the right to marry. I'm sure he would be working on world hunger and ending war and overpopulation and economic trouble and a million other causes before the issue of gay marriage even entered his mind.

It goes to show how civilisation such as the greeks who exceeded in art and architect and yet manage to drop a bomb on their own cultured self by running aroung naked in arenas without a care in the world. So much knowledge and wealth and nothing to show for it or at leat in the clothing department. One would feel for very sorry for those fashionistas who would have spend hours on end trying to execute artistic designs to impress their rulers only to find out it was wasted on these nude wannabe fit.

[Darcy88]

I doubt marriage was even on the agenda at the time I am sure marriage is fairly newish concept and was not during Jesus time.
Marriage came about with the birth of cathedrals and church buildings and as far as now these buildings were not about when Jesus was around.
Notice the manger being the place of birth of Jesus.
Oh manger is French means ''to eat'' used with reference to people.

No, just no. The peoples of the mediterranean and beyond were marrying centuries and probably thousands of years before Jesus. I don't know where you got this idea from but marriage was an institution established LONG before Christ.

You have a God who came to the earth and made the sermon on the mount. You read the sermon on the mount and then ask yourself whether a one so wise as that would really be taking the trouble today to deny rights to a long-despised group of people. It can easily be argued that the message of the gospels is positive towards homosexuals. For a long time in the western world homosexuals were stupidly hated and to a large degree this bigotry still exists. Christ was about promoting the welfare and pride of the weakest - of the poor, the ill, the despised, the righteous.

If people want an excuse to discriminate against gays.....the bible is hardly the place to go to find justification. The origin of their hatred lies only in their own hearts and any scriptural corroboration is mere projection, the result of confirmation bias and simple ignorant misreading.

[Alexander III]

I doubt marriage was even on the agenda at the time I am sure marriage is fairly newish concept and was not during Jesus time.
Marriage came about with the birth of cathedrals and church buildings and as far as now these buildings were not about when Jesus was around.
Notice the manger being the place of birth of Jesus.
Oh manger is French means ''to eat'' used with reference to people.

Call me crazy but I am quite sure the Greeks and Romans had marriage, and even then no one thought of it as a novel concept but a rather old one.

[Charles Darnay]

Call me crazy but I am quite sure the Greeks and Romans had marriage, and even then no one thought of it as a novel concept but a rather old one.

You're crazy! Jesus came down to earth and clearly sad:

"Look guys, I know you have been around for thousands of years, and i've been watching you. I even hid out in that bush you set on fire a while back....but seriously, this massive orgy thing has to stop. That is why I have invented this thing called marriage: it's when you pick one partner and stay with them (until you get bored or find some seriously flaw and then do everything you can to get rid of that person. ) This will solve all our problems."

Unfortunately this part was taken out of the Sermon.

[Bluehound]

Apparently the institution of marriage pre-dates reliable recorded history. But if it was all recorded, I bet there would be examples of same sex marriages and poly marriages as the norm in some cultures or groups especially before the ceremony got so tangled up with religion.

I for one think that it is far more important for people to be happy, than to be forced to live a lie.

Would anyone want to be married to someone who was actually gay , just because in their developmental years , parents, teachers and peers forced them to hide their true selves and act straight ?
It is better for everyone if we are all aloud to express ourselves truthfully, that way less people will get hurt.

In my own experience I knew I was Bi from a very early age, I was attracted to both sexes before I even understood what attraction was, so there is no doubt in my mind that it is something you are born with and fighting it just makes everyone unhappy.

As for the bible view of things I have to agree that it was written at a very different time to our own, the bible that we read today is only a very small part of what was written anyway , there were probably loads of bits taken out that said love who you want and women are not the inferior sex.
Plus I am sure that there were political reasons for wanting other nations to believe you were a large force of fertile men with loads of offspring ready to take up arms when they grew up.

And Jesus seems like a pretty cool guy to me, he wouldn't be encouraging us to hate people for any reason let alone something that is not their fault.

[Helga]

I for one think that it is far more important for people to be happy, than to be forced to live a lie.

Would anyone want to be married to someone who was actually gay , just because in their developmental years , parents, teachers and peers forced them to hide their true selves and act straight ?
It is better for everyone if we are all aloud to express ourselves truthfully, that way less people will get hurt.

As for the bible view of things I have to agree that it was written at a very different time to our own, the bible that we read today is only a very small part of what was written anyway
.

We on the ice are very liberal and I said before that we allow everyone to get married (in the church too). But there is a group here called 'the cross' (there are probably groups like that all over the world) they think they can make you stop being gay. This was a big issue here a while back, mainly because it's a small country and almost everything becomes a big issue.

Oh and about the bible, what about that missing part they found in 'Red Dwarf' that explains a lot.

[cacian]

[QUOTE]

No, just no. The peoples of the mediterranean and beyond were marrying centuries and probably thousands of years before Jesus. I don't know where you got this idea from but marriage was an institution established LONG before Christ.

Ok. Prove it.

You have a God who came to the earth and made the sermon on the mount. You read the sermon on the mount and then ask yourself whether a one so wise as that would really be taking the trouble today to deny rights to a long-despised group of people. It can easily be argued that the message of the gospels is positive towards homosexuals. For a long time in the western world homosexuals were stupidly hated and to a large degree this bigotry still exists. Christ was about promoting the welfare and pride of the weakest - of the poor, the ill, the despised, the righteous.

One of the reasons why marriage came about was because homosexuality was feared to become the norm. In order to single out those who do not conform to
a) religion-
b) straight sex
is then punished using marriage as a sacrilege only to those who obey god and are straight.

If people want an excuse to discriminate against gays.....the bible is hardly the place to go to find justification. The origin of their hatred lies only in their own hearts and any scriptural corroboration is mere projection, the result of confirmation bias and simple ignorant misreading.

People do not need excuses because the religion does it for them.

Call me crazy but I am quite sure the Greeks and Romans had marriage, and even then no one thought of it as a novel concept but a rather old one.

there are no records of marriage certificates but there are thousands of books and literary material dating back to the pharoahs even.

[Darcy88]

[QUOTE=cacian;1158178]

Ok. Prove it.

EVERY GREEK AND ROMAN PRIMARY SOURCE, PREDATING CHRIST BY CENTURIES, SPEAKS OF THE INSTITUTION OF MARRIAGE, OFTEN IN GREAT DETAIL.

Proved. Next!

[Charles Darnay]

Ok. Prove it.

Plato (almost 400 years before Jesus) makes numerous references to marriage and marriage laws in The Republic. He also reportedly died at a weeding feast.

Hammurabi's Code (long before Jesus) references marriage laws and the rights of women after marriage many times.

The law of marriage has nothing to do with laws of homosexuality. The idea of homosexual acts and marriage are two separate matters in the ancient world. The purpose of marriage was strictly business. A man married a woman so he could take possession of her (and then have kids to take possession of them). A man would not marry another man because a man would never take possession of a man who he respected, only slaves.