Religious Education Forum  

Welcome Guest to ReligiousForums.com . You are currently not registered. When you become registered you will be able to interact with our large base of already registered users discussing topics. Some annoying Ads will also disappear when you register. Registering doesn't cost a thing and only takes a few seconds. We provide areas to chat and debate all World Religions. Please go to our register page!
Home Who's Online Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   Religious Education Forum / Everything But the Kitchen Sink / General Discussion / Current Events
Sitemap Popular RF Forums REGISTER Search Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-27-2013, 03:57 PM
Skwim's Avatar
Skwim Offline
Religion: Agnostic
Title:Prolific Member
Shield of 10,000 Thoughts: Awarded for contributing 10,000 posts - Issue reason: For 10,000 posts. Congrats Skwim. 
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: US of A
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,250
Frubals: 774
Skwim flicks used frubals out the car windowSkwim flicks used frubals out the car windowSkwim flicks used frubals out the car windowSkwim flicks used frubals out the car windowSkwim flicks used frubals out the car windowSkwim flicks used frubals out the car windowSkwim flicks used frubals out the car windowSkwim flicks used frubals out the car windowSkwim flicks used frubals out the car window
Default Evangelical Protestants show largest increase in acceptance of gay marriages . . .

. . . although they still anchor the bottom of the chart.

"For the first time, just over half (51 percent) of the public favor same-sex marriage, while 42 percent are opposed. The number of states allowing same-sex marriage doubled, from nine to 18. A Supreme Court decision required the federal government to treat legally married same-sex couples as it would treat heterosexual couples. The court also dismissed a California Proposition 8 appeal on procedural grounds, thereby allowing same-sex.

source
Broken down by increase in acceptance over the last 12 years the five categories of religious affiliation are as follows
Evangelical Protestants. . . . . 77%
White mainline Protestants . . 45%
Catholics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37%
Religiously unaffiliated. . . . . .21%
Black Protestants . . . . . . . . .06%
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-28-2013, 01:09 PM
BlandOatmeal Offline
Religion: Bible-believer, O&NT
Title:BANNED
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Pacific Northwest
Gender: Male
Posts: 645
Frubals: 19
BlandOatmeal gives frubals to the homeless
Default

Skwim, I have never seen you before on RF, so I am not "following you around" and "trolling" you. Neither have I been bullying you, or anything of the sort; yet somehow,*edit*

Homosexuality is defined in the Bible as an "unclean" thing. Does anyone here know what "unclean" means? Read a book on hygeine. When you stick your fingers in someone else's nose, then lick your fingers, this is called "unclean". In modern medical terms, we say it is unclean because it transmits germs. The Bible, on the other hand, understood about uncleanness long before anyone knew what a germ was.

One thing considered "unclean" in the Bible, is when fluids that belong inside one person's body are exposed to another person, or to the public. That is why menstruating women are considered "unclean" during their periods, and not allowed into the temple. A person with any sort of a discharge is likewise considered "unclean", simply because he IS unclean.

In male-female sex, there is an exchange of bodily fluids between two people only; and this exchange is meant to be confined to that couple or that marriage family (in the case of polygamy). Having sex within a marriage, then having sex outside of that marriage, is considered an UNCLEAN act, because it propagates bodily fluids to the public. Anyone with the most rudimentary knowledge of sexually transmitted diseases understands this.

Homosexuality is unclean -- not because of any "moral" or "religious" reasons. It is unclean, because bodily fluids are improperly exchanged and propagated.

By your chart, you show that Evangelicals have in the past understood, and continue to understand, the very obvious and true nature of these things. The fact that they are beginning to lose sight of these basic facts is no cause for rejoicing.

Last edited by Quagmire; 12-29-2013 at 06:07 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-28-2013, 01:26 PM
nilsz's Avatar
nilsz Offline
Religion: Secular humanism
Title:Sophomore Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 195
Frubals: 29
nilsz is the leader of a covert group of mutant frubals
Default

I suppose you regard monogamous homosexuality as equally unclean as monogamous heterosexuality, then, BlandOatmeal, and could perhaps be encouraged by allowing same-sex marriage.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-28-2013, 01:34 PM
Skwim's Avatar
Skwim Offline
Religion: Agnostic
Title:Prolific Member
Shield of 10,000 Thoughts: Awarded for contributing 10,000 posts - Issue reason: For 10,000 posts. Congrats Skwim. 
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: US of A
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,250
Frubals: 774
Skwim flicks used frubals out the car windowSkwim flicks used frubals out the car windowSkwim flicks used frubals out the car windowSkwim flicks used frubals out the car windowSkwim flicks used frubals out the car windowSkwim flicks used frubals out the car windowSkwim flicks used frubals out the car windowSkwim flicks used frubals out the car windowSkwim flicks used frubals out the car window
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlandOatmeal View Post
Skwim, I have never seen you before on RF, so I am not "following you around" and "trolling" you. Neither have I been bullying you, or anything of the sort; yet somehow, you have conspired with the honchos at RF to get my post deleted from here. RF is trying to bully me into not talking about this subject, but I will talk about it.
I had absolutely nothing to do with your post being deleted. I only complain about posts when they involve plagiarism. Someone else is responsible for getting your post and my reply removed from the thread.

Quote:
Homosexuality is defined in the Bible as an "unclean" thing.
Please cite the passage and the Bible version you're taking it from.

Quote:
Homosexuality is unclean -- not because of any "moral" or "religious" reasons. It is unclean, because bodily fluids are improperly exchanged and propagated.
Please cite your source explaining why these body fluids (whatever they may be) are "improperly exchanged and propagated" when occurring between two women or two men.

Quote:
By your chart, you show that Evangelicals have in the past understood, and continue to understand, the very obvious and true nature of these things. The fact that they are beginning to lose sight of these basic facts is no cause for rejoicing.
Obviously, in the face of absolutely no evidence, you love to read reason into results. So be it. As for myself, such self-serving exercises aren't worthy of further comment. Have a nice day.
__________________

Last edited by Skwim; 12-28-2013 at 02:37 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-28-2013, 02:09 PM
dyanaprajna2011's Avatar
dyanaprajna2011 Offline
Religion: Buddhism
Title:Dharmapala
Shield of Creativity: Awarded for wonderfully original and innovative thinking - Issue reason: For your original threads and posts over the years. 
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Midwest
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,519
Frubals: 530
dyanaprajna2011 is saving for surgery to lift these saggy frubalsdyanaprajna2011 is saving for surgery to lift these saggy frubalsdyanaprajna2011 is saving for surgery to lift these saggy frubalsdyanaprajna2011 is saving for surgery to lift these saggy frubalsdyanaprajna2011 is saving for surgery to lift these saggy frubalsdyanaprajna2011 is saving for surgery to lift these saggy frubalsdyanaprajna2011 is saving for surgery to lift these saggy frubalsdyanaprajna2011 is saving for surgery to lift these saggy frubals
Default

It's good to see this trend. Hopefully it will continue. Maybe one day, we'll look back, and wonder why we didn't act sooner to have homosexuals given the same rights, that they deserve, as women and blacks, and everyone else.
__________________
Want to know more about Buddhism, or just hang out with Buddhists? Join the group here!

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum.../buddhism.html A group for Buddhists or anyone interested in Buddhism!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-28-2013, 02:15 PM
BlandOatmeal Offline
Religion: Bible-believer, O&NT
Title:BANNED
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Pacific Northwest
Gender: Male
Posts: 645
Frubals: 19
BlandOatmeal gives frubals to the homeless
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nilsz View Post
I suppose you regard monogamous homosexuality as equally unclean as monogamous heterosexuality, then, BlandOatmeal, and could perhaps be encouraged by allowing same-sex marriage.
Hello, nilsz

You make some interesting points about "monogamy", etc.; but if you had been privileged to see my original post, you would find that I did not even mention these things there. Rather, I referred to the physical uncleanness of homosexual acts, where organs intended for other purposes are used as sex organs.

Unclean practices are unclean, period. Rectums are not vaginas, and never will be -- whether monogamously or polygamously or any other way.

Last edited by Badran; 12-28-2013 at 06:40 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-28-2013, 02:19 PM
dyanaprajna2011's Avatar
dyanaprajna2011 Offline
Religion: Buddhism
Title:Dharmapala
Shield of Creativity: Awarded for wonderfully original and innovative thinking - Issue reason: For your original threads and posts over the years. 
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Midwest
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,519
Frubals: 530
dyanaprajna2011 is saving for surgery to lift these saggy frubalsdyanaprajna2011 is saving for surgery to lift these saggy frubalsdyanaprajna2011 is saving for surgery to lift these saggy frubalsdyanaprajna2011 is saving for surgery to lift these saggy frubalsdyanaprajna2011 is saving for surgery to lift these saggy frubalsdyanaprajna2011 is saving for surgery to lift these saggy frubalsdyanaprajna2011 is saving for surgery to lift these saggy frubalsdyanaprajna2011 is saving for surgery to lift these saggy frubals
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlandOatmeal View Post
Hello, nilsz

You make some interesting points about "monogamy", etc.; but if you had been privileged to see my original post, you would find that I did not even mention these things there. Rather, I referred to the physical uncleanness of homosexual acts, where organs intended for other purposes are used as sex organs. I avoided any mention of these things in my more recent post, in the hope that this would keep a "concensus" of censors from deleting it.

Unclean practices are unclean, period. Rectums are not vaginas, and never will be -- whether monogamously or polygamously or any other way.
If this is the case, why the silence from conservative Christians on heterosexual sex acts that...hm...how to say this...are nearly the same as male homosexual sex acts?
__________________
Want to know more about Buddhism, or just hang out with Buddhists? Join the group here!

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum.../buddhism.html A group for Buddhists or anyone interested in Buddhism!

Last edited by Badran; 12-28-2013 at 06:40 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-28-2013, 02:32 PM
BlandOatmeal Offline
Religion: Bible-believer, O&NT
Title:BANNED
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Pacific Northwest
Gender: Male
Posts: 645
Frubals: 19
BlandOatmeal gives frubals to the homeless
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skwim View Post
I had absolutely nothing to do with your post being deleted. I only complain about posts when they involve plagiarism. Someone else is responsible for getting your post and my reply removed from the thread.
I'm sorry I jumped to conclusions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skwim View Post
Please cite the passage and the Bible version you're taking it from.

Please cite your source explaining why these body fluids (whatever they may be) are "improperly exchanged and propagated" when occurring between two women or two men.

Obviously, in the face of absolutely no evidence, you love to read reason into results. So be it. As for myself, such self-serving exercises aren't worthy of further comment. Have a nice day.
Skwim,

I don't know how it's "obvious" what I love to read. What sort of self-serving exercise are you engaging in, in accusing me of these things? I read into the results, that you thought it was significant that Evangelicals were "coming around" to the majority opinion that homosexual marriages were somehow equivalent to heterosexual ones. What you intended beyond that was not explicitly stated, but I think it's fair to suppose that you thought the majority was somehow "right" on this matter. If that is not what you implied, then I apologize for reading you wrong, and look forward to you telling us that you did NOT imply this and that you, like me, do not agree with the majority opinion.

Concerning what the Bible says about homosexual acts, there are numerous passages, including the following:

Leviticus 18
[5] Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments: which if a man do, he shall live in them: I am the LORD.
[6] None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to him, to uncover their nakedness: I am the LORD.
[7] The nakedness of thy father, or the nakedness of thy mother, shalt thou not uncover: she is thy mother; thou shalt not uncover her nakedness.
[8] The nakedness of thy father's wife shalt thou not uncover: it is thy father's nakedness.
[9] The nakedness of thy sister, the daughter of thy father, or daughter of thy mother, whether she be born at home, or born abroad, even their nakedness thou shalt not uncover.
[10] The nakedness of thy son's daughter, or of thy daughter's daughter, even their nakedness thou shalt not uncover: for theirs is thine own nakedness.
[11] The nakedness of thy father's wife's daughter, begotten of thy father, she is thy sister, thou shalt not uncover her nakedness.
[12] Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy father's sister: she is thy father's near kinswoman.
[13] Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy mother's sister: for she is thy mother's near kinswoman.
[14] Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy father's brother, thou shalt not approach to his wife: she is thine aunt.
[15] Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy daughter in law: she is thy son's wife; thou shalt not uncover her nakedness.
[16] Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy brother's wife: it is thy brother's nakedness.
[17] Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter, neither shalt thou take her son's daughter, or her daughter's daughter, to uncover her nakedness; for they are her near kinswomen: it is wickedness.
[18] Neither shalt thou take a wife to her sister, to vex her, to uncover her nakedness, beside the other in her life time.
[19] Also thou shalt not approach unto a woman to uncover her nakedness, as long as she is put apart for her uncleanness.
[20] Moreover thou shalt not lie carnally with thy neighbour's wife, to defile thyself with her.
[21] And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: I am the LORD.
[22] Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.
[23] Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion.
[24] Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you:
[25] And the land is defiled: therefore I do visit the iniquity thereof upon it, and the land itself vomiteth out her inhabitants.

All those verses talk about unclean activities which DEFILE THE LAND -- in other words, which cause the spread of disease, of genetic weakness, and of social discord. What every one of these has in common, is the exchange of fluids -- except, perhaps, the one about passing one's seed through the fire to Molech; but even there, this may simply be a euphemism. The laws concerning menstruating women and leprosy also concern communicable diseases, so there can be little doubt that this was a major factor in these prohibitions.

You asked, I answered. As you said to me, your self-serving questions are not worthy of further answers. Cheers.

Last edited by BlandOatmeal; 12-28-2013 at 02:37 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-28-2013, 02:40 PM
BlandOatmeal Offline
Religion: Bible-believer, O&NT
Title:BANNED
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Pacific Northwest
Gender: Male
Posts: 645
Frubals: 19
BlandOatmeal gives frubals to the homeless
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dyanaprajna2011 View Post
If this is the case, why the silence from conservative Christians on heterosexual sex acts that...hm...how to say this...are nearly the same as male homosexual sex acts?
Was this a rhetorical question? Or were you talking to me? The "silence" you seem to be noticing, comes from the fact that the survey was about homosexuality, not about other violations. As Jesus said,

"Ask, and ye shall receive" -- but do it on another thread.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-28-2013, 03:27 PM
Penumbra's Avatar
Penumbra Online!
Religion: Philosophy
Title:Administrator
Shield of The Writer: Awarded for commendable contribution to the articles and journals at Religious Forums - Issue reason: For careful and thorough articulation of your thoughts in your posts over the years. Shield of The Renaissance Woman: Awarded to a real polymath, a person with many talents or interests who contributes greatly to a wide range of discussions and debates - Issue reason: For your knowledge and understanding of a wide variety of topics through the years. Shield of Knowledge: Awarded for outstanding demonstration of high knowledge in a particular field - Issue reason: For your excellent knowledge on a variety of different topics Shield of Labour: Awarded for admirable hard work and development of a cause - Issue reason: Valuable contributions to the forum as a staff member. Shield of 10,000 Thoughts: Awarded for contributing 10,000 posts - Issue reason: For contributing 10,000 posts! SPECIAL AWARD:Shield of the Thinker: Awarded for the remarkable ability to ponder carefully and think critically about all subjects they encounter - Issue reason:  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: United States
Gender: Female
Posts: 14,574
Frubals: 1127
Penumbra wants to have frubals declared a soveriegn nation and be their ambassador
Penumbra wants to have frubals declared a soveriegn nation and be their ambassadorPenumbra wants to have frubals declared a soveriegn nation and be their ambassadorPenumbra wants to have frubals declared a soveriegn nation and be their ambassador
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlandOatmeal View Post
Homosexuality is unclean -- not because of any "moral" or "religious" reasons. It is unclean, because bodily fluids are improperly exchanged and propagated.
People have such narrow and incorrect views of the broad spectrum of what homosexuality actually is.

Homosexuality is not synonymous with anal sex between males. Not all gay males have that sort of sex. Then of course there is sex between females; that's homosexual sex too.

Then of course, 40% of heterosexual people report having tried anal sex, and considering that heterosexual people greatly outnumber homosexual people, that means that the majority of people that have had anal sex in the US at least once, are heterosexuals.

Plus, there is all the oral sex, unprotected vaginal sex, among the heterosexual population which vastly outnumbers homosexual people. Yet so much attention gets focused on homosexuals, and people want to give them unequal rights.

Plus, condoms.
__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:18 PM.


Copyright ReligiousForums.com

SEO by vBSEO ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.