LGBTQ+ Rights and Religion

Not at all. Very interesting. But it just shows how much things can change and how we need to rethink things from time to time and as such relying on texts for moral guidance isn't really the best idea.

Democracy is the process in which we determine the government that we deserve

Well... I'm kind of uncertain on whether homosexuality is a sin or not, but over the last few years I've kind of been persuaded that it isn't. Jesus never said anything about it, so obviously it isn't that important. As for the biblical verses against it - I find the argument that healthy, consensual, monogamous gay relationships as we have now weren't really a thing in Biblical times to be pretty convincing. Maybe the Bible condemns homosexual behaviour as it was seen in Biblical times, but I don't know if you can extend that to a position on modern-day society.

The only argument against it that sort of makes sense to me is the one that says all non-reproductive sex is bad, which would put same-sex relationships about on the same level as people who use protection. The last thing I saw nobody was trying to have those marriages annulled.

So... in essence, I don't think it's a sin, but even if it is, it isn't a very bad one, and it's one of the sins that really affects nobody except the people involved. People need to get their priorities in order.

edited 8th Apr '12 5:14:32 PM by LoniJay

Be not afraid...

The problem is that in modern American protestant theology, the notion that all sins are equal is pretty standard belief. But because they believe that homosexuality and murder are of equal evilness, they view those who commit both with the same level of disdain.

I honestly have no idea why I did that...

edited 8th Apr '12 6:10:29 PM by setnakhte

"Roll for whores."

"Ov"? Who are you, Genesis P-Orridge?

And IIRC it's less a belief that they're equal as much as it's a belief that any sin at all and you're fucked, so the level doesn't really matter.

The 5 geek social fallacies. Know them well.

I was meaning to ask this of another Christian troper but he's stopped replying to my P Ms so I will ask here instead: Has anyone ever considered the possibility that the seemingly arbitrary condemnation of homosexuality is actually a test meant by their God to see if they can adhere to the spirit of his ideals rather then merely the strict letter?

"You are never taller then when standing up for yourself"

If you're going by the 'all sins are equally damning' thing, then that just means that everybody is as bad as each other, because you are not going to find someone who has never sinned.

I don't know... that sounds like kind of a troll-ish thing for God to do.

edited 8th Apr '12 6:20:11 PM by LoniJay

Be not afraid...

...then who wouldn't be doomed to Hell?

If someone wants to accuse us of eating coconut shells, then that's their business. We know what we're doing. - Achaan Chah

@Loni

I was thinking more of a Secret Test of Character.

"You are never taller then when standing up for yourself"

A secret test of character that results in the suffering and death of other people seems... pointless.

Be not afraid...

It only results in suffering and death if humanity fails the test.

This is the actual belief of one my (vary, vary) Christian friends.

"You are never taller then when standing up for yourself"

God as a troll?

It's actually kind of depressing how much sense that would make.

But yeah, while the old guy might not be above trolling us, I find it unlikely that he'd test our character, if only because I'm pretty sure he has people for that.

Besides, it wouldn't make much sense. He probably would have better methods of testing our character.

edited 8th Apr '12 6:37:36 PM by FakeCrowley

You know what I hate? Hypocrites. That and obscure self-referential statements.

Well, who would listen to Satan if they knew he was Satan?

God wouldn't send Satan around to people saying "Oh yeah, God sent me, and he says two dudes having sex is bad."

The 5 geek social fallacies. Know them well.

Well, if God existed and was like this, then you know what? Fuck. Him.

Unbent, Unbowed, Unbroken. Unrelated ME1 Fanfic

You see, my friend thinks that because she says their is no way to reconline that scripture with the core Christian beliefs otherwise.

"You are never taller then when standing up for yourself"

How about cultural context? I.e. when Paul spoke about homosexuality, he was referring to the Greek and Roman practices of the time rather than modern relationships?

Be not afraid...

Yes, actually. He would.

The Satan of the OT/Torah's job is just that. He goes around tempting people to see if they're truly good or not. It's all fine and well if a guy does good all his life, but is that because he's honestly good or because he's in fear of God and/or has always had a lucky life without any need to commit sin?

You know what I hate? Hypocrites. That and obscure self-referential statements.

I know, But that's not what people think Satan does anymore.

People think Satan, they think "Supreme evil in fiery pit and eternal enemy of God" Which if you read the bible you know isn't right, buuut...

People don't read it. X|

The 5 geek social fallacies. Know them well.

Which is why many people only follow the Bible when it suits their needs. A lot of people don't actually pay attention to what guidelines are in the Bible when it applies to them, but are perfectly willing to do so when focusing on others.

edited 8th Apr '12 6:59:57 PM by Boredman

cum

It's a pity, considering it's actually quite a good read.

The 5 geek social fallacies. Know them well.

@L Mage (and possibly L Mage's friend): Sure there is. Think of it this way. A lot of the advice and commandments in the Bible are not meant as general commandments. They're specific orders for specific times, situations and places. If those times, situations and places are not in effect, you don't need to follow those commandments. You don't obey advice given in the Bible about doing a whole host of other things, do you? That's because those bits are no longer relevant. They were intended for the Jews at that point in time, and aren't doing anyone else much good. There're commandments about clothing, farming, diet, and many other things which no Christians follow. So why specifically obey the bits about homosexuality? Those bits are just as irrelevant today. Obey the parts which are clearly directions from God to all creation, for all time.

Really, just love God and your neighbor and you should be just fine.

Except for 4/1/2011. That day lingers in my memory like...metaphor here...I should go.

This is fine and dandy, but the problem is that a very high-level directive such as this one can be easily twisted into supporting anything, with the right amount of imagination. I agree that it all comes to it; but really, any act, no matter how twisted or Obviously Evil, could be rationalized into being a consequence of a sufficiently abstract "love for God and for one's neighbor."

As for the case of homosexuality, I am also inclined to think that it is not a sin, much for the same reasons that others have mentioned. But one thing that is important to remember is that even if it were a sin, it would not follow that it should be outlawed or punished.

Adultery is definitely a sin, for example; but it is clear that punishing it by law, or forcing people not to commit it, would be a very bad idea. Unless there is a reason to think that homosexual relationships pose a serious risk to the well-being of other people or to that of society as a whole (and as far as I know, there is nothing of this kind), homosexual civil marriages should be allowed independently from its status as a sin or not.

edited 9th Apr '12 12:14:35 AM by Carciofus

But they seem to know where they are going, the ones who walk away from Omelas.

This, I think, is not the most helpful possible attitude with which to approach the problem. I have no desire to humiliate bigots; but most importantly, I do not think that people who think that homosexual behaviour is a sin are necessarily bigots.

One can think that homosexual behaviour is not in keeping with the central message of Christianity, and best avoided, without being a bigot or an ignorant or full of hate for gay people. I personally think that they are mistaken; but really, plenty of people who are far more knowledgeable on the subject than I am (the current Pope, for example — I cannot say that I always agree with him, but the "popular" books that he wrote are excellent. I cannot judge his academic theological work, but from what I heard it is top-quality) evidently think otherwise.

Screaming at these people that they are hateful, ignorant bigots is not only false and rude, but it is also not likely to encourage them to consider the possible arguments towards the compatibility of homosexuality and Christianity.

But on the other hand, people who believe that homosexual behaviour is a sin should acknowledge (and, I think, many of them do) that saying that people who think otherwise are depraved, evil people who twist religion in order to support their unsavory practices is just as false and rude. Wrong we may or may not be, but we are sincere. And many of us are not even homosexual, so we really have nothing to gain or lose by taking a position instead of another on this issue. Nothing but the truth, I mean.

I've skimmed through the pdf you linked, by the way. I'll read it more carefully later, but I can say already that it does not seem to be as well-sourced as it should be. And that interpretation of Romans 1:26—27 is very artificial, I think: I did not think that homosexuality was a sin already, but if I thought otherwise that pdf would not have convinced me.

edited 9th Apr '12 3:47:44 AM by Carciofus

But they seem to know where they are going, the ones who walk away from Omelas.

Full of hate? No. Bigotry? I am not so sure. It is perfectly possible to be bigoted without being full of hate. I don't think that the statement "I don't hate you, but your intrinsic nature is sinful", while not being hateful, should be socially acceptable. I know that comparing homosexuality to race has become something of a Godwin, but hear me out. "One can think that black people cannot fully integrate into society, and are best avoided, without being a bigot or an ignorant or full of hate for black people." I think the comparison is valid because I believe that to judge someone on a characteristic which is fundamentally unchangeable is wrong. To view said characteristic as an aberration in the eyes of God is in effect viewing the person as an aberration in the eyes of God, because it is not possible to separate one from the other - and really, the misery and suffering that attempts to do so have caused and continue to cause should be convincing enough to a Christian who believes that suffering is the result of evil.

With cannon shot and gun blast smash the alien. With laser beam and searing plasma scatter the alien to the stars.

From a standard Christian standpoint, all of our natures are sinful. Not intrinsically — that's a result of the Fall, not something built in the design — but still, homosexuals are not special in that.

But they seem to know where they are going, the ones who walk away from Omelas.