"Christians" Assault Gay Couple

mainecaptain

Posts: 20,470

It is true, we do not stop sterile hetero's from being together, or marrying. No one says just the very nature of being heterosexual is a sin, although I've heard too many say the very fact we are alive makes us sinners.

And that alone shows either reproduction is not the reason, or the rule is from man not any god.

Otherwise as has been stated, why is homosexuality or activity however you wish to say it, a sin? Why would a god care about such things? We even have people wanting to marry their same sex partner, so it is not even the "sex without marriage" idea, since so many one the religious right, don't want to allow same sex marriage, thus forcing them into premarital sex.

In a way all those folk trying to stop same sex marriage from being legal, are actually forcing people into premarital sex.

Wish people would really think, before making rules other people have to follow

A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious. On the other hand, they do less easily move against him, believing that he has the gods on his side. Aristotle
Never discourage anyone...who continually makes progress, no matter how slow. Plato..
"A life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives" Jackie Robinson

REteach

Posts: 13,195

Nov 2, 2011 -- 8:36PM, TemplarS wrote:
I can only conclude (once again) that it is not a case of following the law because your God demands it, but rather of making your religion demand it because such prejudices have never left society.

I think you nailed it. They can ignore the other 613 laws because Jesus repealed them, but not this one--although Jesus never said anything about it.

I think part of the problem for some people is that it is easier to condemn things they don't want to do anyway, and justify the things they want to do, like eating pork and wearing cotton blend clothing, and women wearing gold wedding bands, despite the fact that Paul said women shouldn't wear gold and pearls.

From what I have learned, I don't think the original proscriptions were entirely related to reproduction. Local cultures may have engaged in same sex activities, either because their culture permitted it, or related to cultic worship practices. Saying "no" to same sex activities could therefore be a way of defining the group. Kind of like school colors.

I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize what you heard was not what I meant...

TemplarS

Posts: 5,159

Nov 2, 2011 -- 10:30PM, mainecaptain wrote:

It is true, we do not stop sterile hetero's from being together, or marrying.

We do not now, it is true; but there are vestiges of such a practice. The Catholic Church once would not marry knowingly infertile couples.

As I recall, at one point in Rome under Augustus there were laws penalizing the unmarried and the childless.

That was then, of course. Nowadays, in western society, it seems, fertility is as much discouraged as encouraged (look at birth rates among many European whites), so it is difficult for us to appreciate a society in which fertility was a critical issue.

You might say this is a social issue, not a religious one, but from time immemorial there has been this very strong tie between fertility and religion. I suspect we are seeing some vestigial remnants of this as well. The idea that sex is only for reproduction, for one.

TemplarS

Posts: 5,159

Nov 3, 2011 -- 8:10AM, REteach wrote:

From what I have learned, I don't think the original proscriptions were entirely related to reproduction. Local cultures may have engaged in same sex activities, either because their culture permitted it, or related to cultic worship practices. Saying "no" to same sex activities could therefore be a way of defining the group. Kind of like school colors.

You're right. This is not a simple issue (sex never is).

But some of the circumstances around homosexuality in older cultures were not entirely benign either.

There were those (men) in ancient Greece, who felt that male-male sex was preferable to hetero sex. But they felt this way because females were viewed as inferior, and hence less worthy as sexual partners. So while homosexuality was accepted (between men, anyway), it came at the expense of a severe misogyny. There was also that nasty little thing about pederasty (men and post-pubescent boys).

I haven't read much more about it, and I'm not sure how much of this sort of practice extended up until NT times in the Greek world; but possibly some of the early Christian attitudes towards homosexuality were in reaction to such practices.

farragut

Posts: 2,867

"There were those (men) in ancient Greece, who felt that male-male sex was preferable to hetero sex. But they felt this way because females were viewed as inferior, and hence less worthy as sexual partners. So while homosexuality was accepted (between men, anyway), it came at the expense of a severe misogyny. There was also that nasty little thing about pederasty (men and post-pubescent boys).

I haven't read much more about it, and I'm not sure how much of this sort of practice extended up until NT times in the Greek world; but possibly some of the early Christian attitudes towards homosexuality were in reaction to such practices."

I understand that this is the common practise today among the Pashtuns. I'll see if I can find the citation.

Ken

Posts: 33,793

I notice that the members who actually believe that homosexuality is a sin are strangely silent. Is it possible that they hold that opinion without having any good reasons for doing so?

mainecaptain

Posts: 20,470

Nov 3, 2011 -- 4:17PM, Ken wrote:

I notice that the members who actually believe that homosexuality is a sin are strangely silent. Is it possible that they hold that opinion without having any good reasons for doing so?

That has always been my opinion as well.

A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious. On the other hand, they do less easily move against him, believing that he has the gods on his side. Aristotle
Never discourage anyone...who continually makes progress, no matter how slow. Plato..
"A life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives" Jackie Robinson

mountain_man

Posts: 34,114

Nov 3, 2011 -- 4:17PM, Ken wrote:
I notice that the members who actually believe that homosexuality is a sin are strangely silent. Is it possible that they hold that opinion without having any good reasons for doing so?

They're just believing what they are told to believe.

Dave - Just a Man in the Mountains.

I am a Humanist. I believe in a rational philosophy of life, informed by science, inspired by art, and motivated by a desire to do good for its own sake and not by an expectation of a reward or fear of punishment in an afterlife.

Ken

Posts: 33,793

Nov 3, 2011 -- 4:57PM, mountain_man wrote:

Nov 3, 2011 -- 4:17PM, Ken wrote:
I notice that the members who actually believe that homosexuality is a sin are strangely silent. Is it possible that they hold that opinion without having any good reasons for doing so?

They're just believing what they are told to believe.

Then I'm telling them to believe that they won't go to heaven unless they send me all their money.

shirleyj227

Posts: 10,784

Nov 3, 2011 -- 5:43PM, Ken wrote:

Nov 3, 2011 -- 4:57PM, mountain_man wrote:

Nov 3, 2011 -- 4:17PM, Ken wrote:
I notice that the members who actually believe that homosexuality is a sin are strangely silent. Is it possible that they hold that opinion without having any good reasons for doing so?

They're just believing what they are told to believe.

Then I'm telling them to believe that they won't go to heaven unless they send me all their money.

Now Ken as we all know they all need to drink my kool-aid to go to heaven. It is yellow and very strong.

Shirley

Beliefnet On Facebook

What's Hot