Homosexuality is...

How does Kingcool know what 'most people ' believe?

To be charitable to Kingcool, I suspect he was talking about most people who follow an Abrahamic religion.

I asked dparrot whether he/she thought homosexual relationships morally wrong purely because of his/her religion. The reason I asked that is this:

I personally cannot find anything at all inside me that could possibly see homosexual relationships as in any way morally wrong. I'm not homosexual myself and, like a lot of heterosexual men, tend to be a bit "grossed out" by the thought of two men being... intimate with each other. But there are other things that "gross me out" too. For example, I find the taste of apple pie disgusting. But I don't think it's immoral to eat it! I don't want to ban it!

I would consider it morally wrong to condemn same sex relationships because it would cause needless suffering to people who gain happiness and fullfillment in them.

So, if for some reason I wanted to become, for example, Christian, I would face the problem of having to force myself to accept a moral judgement that I feel deeply in my "gut" is wrong. I don't see how that would be possible.

Of course, this is aside from the fact that some people seem to think that the Bible doesn't actually condemn same-sex relationships and that any such interpretation is a mistranslation. I don't know. I'm no Biblical expert.

---

Florestan:

I just read your last post on this subject (after I wrote the above). It sounds to me like a very good interpretation of Christian teaching. I certainly can't see any argument against it! It's just that many other Christians (and Muslims etc) seem to take a much more inflexible position and take the attitude that you have to accept everything in the Bible (Koran etc) or nothing at all. They say you can't pick and choose.

Personally, I do pick and choose! "Love thy neighbour" = great! "Don't be gay" = wrong!

But I can see why they would say that you can't pick and choose. Because picking and choosing basically means making up your own mind and ignoring the religious decrees. I guess they think there's a danger of the decrees becoming redundant.

Hi Steve3007,

I think that the reason homosexuality is regarded as a sin by Christians, is because it goes against the natural order of God's creation. God created Adam and Eve, a man and a woman to be a couple, with the ability to reproduce by mating together. Personally, I have nothing against homosexuals, ultimately it is their own choice to live in that way. But if we look throughout the animal kingdom, from which it is claimed by science that we evolved, males do not mate with other males (what would be the point?). Therefore, there is something inherently unnatural about homosexuality, if humans are the only creatures upon the earth that engage in it?

Being a theist, I would say that homosexuality is morally wrong because it goes against what God has directly commanded. I think that God's opinion on homosexuality in Leviticus 20:13 is straight-forward when he says: "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood [shall be] upon them." Harsh yes, but I think it unlikely that it is a mistranslation, I'm not an expert on the bible either though.

I think that the reason homosexuality is regarded as a sin by Christians, is because it goes against the natural order of God's creation. God created Adam and Eve, a man and a woman to be a couple, with the ability to reproduce by mating together. Personally, I have nothing against homosexuals, ultimately it is their own choice to live in that way. But if we look throughout the animal kingdom, from which it is claimed by science that we evolved, males do not mate with other males (what would be the point?). Therefore, there is something inherently unnatural about homosexuality, if humans are the only creatures upon the earth that engage in it?

The fact is that it does occur apart from humans in nature. For example, consider http://www.news-medical.net/news/2006/10/23/20718.aspx. All you have to do is search with Google and information about homosexuality occuring in the animal kingdom will present itself.

Oh Fanman,

Where to begin!

These are the kinds of pronouncements, based on selective ignorance and unwillingness to take ownership of your own predjudices, that tend to make me feel irrationally hostile towards Chrisitianity, just when I was beginning to like it! I will try to remind myself that you are just one person and do not by any means represent all of Christian thought.


OK, so anything that is "unnatural", that is not what we were "designed to do" is a sin, yes? Or is it just the "unnatural" things that you, via the proxy of your religion, disaprove of? Other "unnatural" things that we do are acceptable yes?

So happiness and suffering have nothing to do with it? The thing that matters is that we act as we were designed to act?

Sexuality in both humans and other animals has a far more complex function than merely the creation of offspring.

Personally, I have nothing against homosexuals, ultimately it is their own choice to live in that way.

This is the kind of statement that makes my blood boil with its hypocricy. It's the abdication of responsibility for your own opinions by pretending they're the opinions of somebody else. "It's nothing to do with me! Don't shoot the messenger. It's not my fault that you're going to hell."

If you believe something come out and say it. Don't hide behind the righteous anger of your imaginary big brother. Enough of this good-cop bad-cop routine! I prefer the more direct hostile homophobic remarks I hear around me at work. At least they're honest!

But if we look throughout the animal kingdom, from which it is claimed by science that we evolved, males do not mate with other males (what would be the point?).

OK. So we know your opinion of the theory of Evolution and have a pretty good idea of your understanding of what it says.

In talking about the animal kingdom "from which it is claimed we evolved" you betray your belief in this persistent and destructive fallacy, as exemplified in the mythologies of religions like Christianity, that human being are the lords and masters of nature; the pinnacle of creation. We are told that we are special, as a birthright. And this idea is erroneously projected onto the theory of Evolution.

We did not "evolve from" the animal kingdom. We are an integral part of that kingdom. If we want to feel special we need to do it through our actions and insights, not because we have powerful friends in high places.

OK, so you're saying that any behaviour of ours which is uniquely human, which is different from the way that other animals behave, is wrong? This is the basis on which you're arguing here, isn't it?

Therefore, there is something inherently unnatural about homosexuality, if humans are the only creatures upon the earth that engage in it?

Yes, it seems that is your argument. So is living in houses and wearing clothes a sin? Is flying in an aeroplane a sin? Man hath not wings! We were not designed to take flight!

But, in actual fact, homosexuality is not uniquely human at all. It occurs extensively in many other animals. This is the fact. The theories about why this might be are interesting, but I'm guessing you wouldn't be interested as they're part of Evolutionary theory. I'm guessing that by this point you're saying "la la I'm not listening".

I think that God's opinion on homosexuality in Leviticus 20:13 is straight-forward

Do you believe that we should obey all the commandments in the book of Leviticus? Or just the ones that you personally happen to agree with?

Here are some of my favourites:

19:19: "Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee."

Get rid of those cotton/polyester mix shirts now! (Personally I have nothing against people who mix fabrics, but it saddens me that they persist in their sin. I'm only thinking of their poor immortal souls.)

21:9: "And the daughter of any priest, if she profane herself by playing the whore, she profaneth her father: she shall be burnt with fire."

20:27: "A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones: their blood shall be upon them."

and so on.

Think! Think! Think for yourself!

Florestan:

I just read your last post on this subject (after I wrote the above). It sounds to me like a very good interpretation of Christian teaching. I certainly can't see any argument against it! It's just that many other Christians (and Muslims etc) seem to take a much more inflexible position and take the attitude that you have to accept everything in the Bible (Koran etc) or nothing at all. They say you can't pick and choose.

Personally, I do pick and choose! "Love thy neighbour" = great! "Don't be gay" = wrong!

But I can see why they would say that you can't pick and choose. Because picking and choosing basically means making up your own mind and ignoring the religious decrees. I guess they think there's a danger of the decrees becoming redundant.

First of all: The bible is long and life is short. It is difficult to simply choose in the bible what you like and dismiss what you don't like. That said, Christianity becomes in my view completely brainwashed if you have no feeling of importance in the bible at all. There are things in the bible which are very important. For example the 10 commandments. And it is not forbidden to think. For example it is very obvious that Jesus is - as it is written in the bible - "new wine". It is something completely obvious that Jesus and the Christians dismissed a lot of old rules the Jews are still sticking on. That's the new wine. By the way, historically, when Christianity was founded there was a strong tendency in the young Christian movement to dismiss the old testament completely. They didn't do that.

Therefore, as I think, Christianity is for me new wine and it is important how Jesus behaves against the old testament. In my view he simply emphasizes the really important points like love to your neighbour and the 10 commandments.

And then Christianity is a religion of forgiving. Forgiving in my view means forgiving, forgiving means not that you talk about sins all the day. That converts a religion of forgiving into a religion of sins.

And by calling Christianity "new wine" for me what is written in the bible about homosexuality is not very important. Jesus for many is seen as the redeemer of many cruelties of the old testament. And this is very obvious and it has nothing to do with choosing what I like in Christianity.

And what I would call a brainwashed reading of the bible is when you simple aren't able to see that it is written by people. If for example St. Peter in a letter greets some people, it is obvious that St. Peter greats some people, it would be completely foolish to think that god through the mouth of St. Peter greets some people. And if for example somebody claims "I don't like St. Paul." that certainly doesn't mean "I don't like god."

I know all this are thoughts dangerous for Christianity for it may lead to "relativism" but it can't be wrong to emphasize the teachings of Jesus as a Christian, this is simply a matter of importance and Jesus at no point argued against homosexual behaviour.

Regards
Florestan

Thanks for those thoughts Florestan. I greatly admire the core teaching of Christianity and have no doubt that it has inspired many people to great acts of philanthropy and good. I'm glad to see that faith does not have to be blind and unthinking!

HI Xenos,

That is the first report I've read about homosexuality in the animal kingdom, I'll take it with a pinch of salt.

Hi Steve3007,

Why have you taken my post so personally and seemingly been offended by it? I don't have anything personal against homosexuals. But I do believe that a sexual relationship between 2 men is a sin.

Just a constant stream of reasons not to use the bible as code of moral understanding. It started with an excuse to burn little old ladies who owned cats, then stoning adulterers, then burning heretics and now it's excommunicating homosexuals from the church. Am I just a little annoyed with this sanctimonious view that religion is above my heathen morals? Yes I am.

Ok good, so would all the religious zealots who believe that homosexuals are going to hell, would you all please announce yourselves. Share with us where in your text specifically it says that being homosexual is a sin, and you will go to hell(or some horrible negative thing).

In the old testament there is no hell(as in the Jewish belief). In the new testament Jesus forgives all sins.

What is the religious issue?

According to the modern Islamic scholar Yusuf al-Qaradawi's summary:
"The jurists of Islam have held different opinions concerning the punishment for this abominable practice. Should it be the same as the punishment for zina, or should both the active and passive participants be put to death? While such punishments may seem cruel, they have been suggested to maintain the purity of the Islamic society and to keep it clean of perverted elements."

Above a chart on the worlds major relgions.

Because the old testament says being gay is sinful.
Most people believe it to be wrong because of their religion.

Ok good, so would all the religious zealots who believe that homosexuals are going to hell, would you all please announce yourselves. Share with us where in your text specifically it says that being homosexual is a sin, and you will go to hell(or some horrible negative thing).

In the old testament there is no hell(as in the Jewish belief). In the new testament Jesus forgives all sins.

What is the religious issue?

If thats truth then there is no point in being religious because everyone will spend eternity in paradise. And to me, knowing i will spend all of eternity doing the same thing is hell.

Only people who have faith that Jesus saves all sins, is what wanabe forgot to put kingkool, but he is right.

Even murderers? If so, god is sick and twisted.

That's why there are other religions.

As I said in the opening post this sex is just another form as art of course it can have dangerous implications, but if practiced responsibly there is no danger. There is no need to judge people who celebrate their individuality differently than our selves, so long as they are safe and responsible.

Hi Xris,

Xris wrote:

Just a constant stream of reasons not to use the bible as code of moral understanding. It started with an excuse to burn little old ladies who owned cats, then stoning adulterers, then burning heretics and now it's excommunicating homosexuals from the church. Am I just a little annoyed with this sanctimonious view that religion is above my heathen morals? Yes I am.

I have to disagree with you here. In my experience the bible acts as not only as a moral guide, but also as a deterrant for committing immoral acts. Really, the bible is a book that is full of wisdom if read with an open mind. The book of proverbs for example, gives wise counsel on how one should conduct themselves in order to lead a moral life. God aborring homosexuality is from the old testament. Admittedly, Jesus never said anything about homosexuality being a sin. His message, was that all one has to do is believe in him, put God first and love thy neighbour in order to go to heaven. Many Christians believe that Jesus advent and doctrine supersedes the laws and doctrine of the old testament, so it is possible that homosexuals could go to heaven, based upon Jesus' doctrine?

You said in another thread that the majority regard Christianity as insignificant. Do you think that the world that we live today, a world that regards Christianity as insignificant, is a world that reflects morality? Perhaps if Christian morals were at the centre of each persons moral core / conscience, the world would be in a better state than it is today?

I think the reason that the old testament laws were so harsh, is so that they would have high efficacy as a deterrent for people. You have to remember that those laws were written to suit those particular people thousands of years ago. One can see that they have perhaps become outdated, because Christ completely changed the method by which we can come to God - we need not follow those old laws now.

Would it be possible for you to take the relgious discussion elsewhere, please?

Hi Wanabe,

I think that my post was related to this topic.

fanman. If you believe in god then any teachings that you find in the bible have to be gods. As I do not believe in god, I believe all teachings are created by man, I can adjust my morals with understanding . The Bible simply uses the power of belief to enforce those teachings in the way of sacred laws and they become dogmatic, unchanging. The problem that arises from this dogmatic attachment? Many sacred laws remain cruel and outdated. If the faithful simply accepted them as man made we would have no conflict. The bible tells us to burn witches , adulterers, heretics and even St Paul encourages slavery. You believe the bible tells us homosexuality is an evil but in your heart you can not find it wrong. It may have guided many moral views but it has also tortured and killed thousands in the name of god. We have moved on from simple biblical dogmatic scriptures, we need to remove ourselves from a book that was written over two thousand years ago.