What is your belief about homosexuality?

[Storm]

I don't have a low opinion of Christians. Many are very nice and are people with beliefs like anyone else. What I do have a problem with are people who make condescending claims to others, coming off as superior, and are unwilling to even consider taking the very same medicine they are doling out on everyone else. And you have not just stated what you believe "period", you tell everyone else to accept your god, "give him a try", that they will meet your god and need to accept him. blah blah blah. But when the same types of things, same statements, same questions are put to you you blow them off. You have put to people that they will meet your god and what will they say to him...debate with him...etc. There have been those here who have deigned to entertain your notion and have responded with how they would react upon such a meeting. You, however, will not entertain the same notion that you put forth only from a different direction. Why are you above answering the same type of posts, same types of questions, that you feel you have a right to put to others here?

Is proselytizing still against the rules...?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I voted "natural and good". I think that heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality, pansexuality, asexuality, etc. are all wonderful things.

 

[Storm]

What is sad is that you think that because a christian believes what the Bible says, that homosexuality is an abomination to God, that makes them homophobic. That is so not true. I am a very tolerant person to all kinds of people. I would love for you and others to be tolerant of me.

Oh, but the Bible doesn't say that. It was written before the concept of inherent sexual orientation even existed.

Even if it did say such a thing, you still don't believe what the Bible says, do you? I'm betting you don't believe that it's ok to persecute people for eating shellfish or wearing blended fabrics, and you haven't said a single word regarding divorce, which Christ Himself spoke strongly against, while saying nary a single word regarding same sex pairings.

So, if you're not a homophobe, then why exactly do you pick that one thing to come in and preach about?

 

[Ingledsva]

What is sad is that you think that because a christian believes what the Bible says, that homosexuality is an abomination to God, that makes them homophobic. That is so not true. I am a very tolerant person to all kinds of people. I would love for you and others to be tolerant of me.

But what does it actually make you - when you have been shown - that the usual anti-homosexual verses - ARE NOT ACTUALLY ABOUT HOMOSEXUALS - and you choose to stick to the party line ANYWAY?

What does that make YOU?


*

 

[Rick O'Shez]

What is sad is that you think that because a christian believes what the Bible says, that homosexuality is an abomination to God, that makes them homophobic. That is so not true. I am a very tolerant person to all kinds of people. I would love for you and others to be tolerant of me.

So the Bible says homosexuality is an abomination to God. But is it an abomination to you?

And would it have been an abomination to Christ?

 

[Jumi]

Just curious as to what everyone's outlook is.

I voted natural and good. I hope everyone will be able to enjoy their lives to their fullest as they are and not receive hate and judgment from fellow humans for things that do not hurt anyone. For homosexuals homosexuality is most natural.

Sin, like karma is a religious concept that I do not believe in.
For me it doesn't make sense that we have people fighting against their nature because an interpretation of scripture declares it sinful. If God existed wouldn't it be better to leave the judging to him?

I could have voted indifferent because homosexuality is out of my realm of experience and I have no interest in it. What other people do with their lives isn't a concern for me. In my opinion indifference is a high form of respect in itself as seen in the animal kingdom.

 

[Storm]

So the Bible says homosexuality is an abomination to God. But is it an abomination to you?

And would it have been an abomination to Christ?

If it was, He never said. Divorce, otoh....

 

[McBell]

Is proselytizing still against the rules...?

Doesn't seem like it...

 

[Dr. Strange]

I don't see why the word 'natural' should be part of the discussion. What does it mean for something to be or not to be natural? I also don't get why everyone thinks its important whether sexuality is a choice or not. People should just be treated fairly and equally. End of story.

Why? Because Romans 1: 26-27 uses three words to describe same-sex acts and one word is translated unnatural.

 

[Dr. Strange]

I believe that it is unnatural.I am a Christian and try to adhere to the Laws of God.Even from a non religious standpoint one can see that it is not natural.If a man and another man try to procreate,they cannot.If a woman and another woman try to procreate ,they cannot.Only a man and a woman can procreate naturally.It takes a man and woman to create life naturally.

A lot is at stake in Romans 1: 26-27.
So, what was given up for "natural" (physiken)? "Unnatural"(para physin) or "what is by nature." What was the nature of men at that time? Men to have sex with men was natural when Paul wrote this verse. Paul's point here is that Christ was neutral about human sexuality.

In every usage of the word "atimia" Paul is not referring to moral judgement. When Paul refers to "degrading" passions, he is not referring to what is wrong but what does not have social approval.

Verse 27 uses the word "aschemosyne" translated shameless and means "not according to form." So what Paul is saying is that it is not appropriate.


There is a separation between verses 24-27(sexual matters) and verses 28-32(list of evils.) Paul was really writing about two different things. Speaking about things that were unconventional and things that were wrong.
Verse 31,32 wraps Paul's message up saying:

But what was it that Paul was talking about? I refer to footnotes:

1,18-32:The conversion of the Gentiles through the gospel preaching constituted the divine indictment against paganism, which error had benighted and moral depravity had corrupted. It was the evil will of the pagan world that provoked the divine anger and abandonment (v18). Contrary to nature itself which provides evidence of God's existence, power, and divinity through creation(19f), pagan society misread the evidence, fashioned gods of its own that could not exert any moral restraint, and indulged its perverse desires through every kind of wickedness(21-32; cf Wis 13, 1-14, 31). NAB1970.

So, what Paul was referring to was pagan idol worship just as it was in Leviticus.

Quotes and ideas above were taken from Daniel A. Helminiak's book, What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality. And yes he was a priest in the Catholic Church and he is homosexual.

Oh ya, by the way, a woman can bear a child without man's sperm. I not so interested in how bearing children has to do with what is natural or unnatural concerning homosexuality. But I will say that, bearing children is not what Paul was talking about.

What becomes apparent to me regarding modern versions of the Bible identifying homosexuality as a sin, is that those versions are way off course, straying from the context of the epistle. Translations become interpretations that are unfounded. The above discussion is just one case in point.

 

[Dr. Strange]

-- Animals Lack the Means to Express Their Affective States

'"To stimuli and clashing instincts, however, we must add another factor: In expressing its affective states, an animal is radically inferior to man.

Since animals lack reason, their means of expressing their affective states (fear, pleasure, pain, desire, etc.) are limited. Animals lack the rich resources at man's disposal to express his sentiments. Man can adapt his way of talking, writing, gazing, gesturing in untold ways. Animals cannot. Consequently, animals often express their affective states ambiguously. They "borrow," so to speak, the manifestations of the instinct of reproduction to manifest the instincts of dominance, aggressiveness, fear, gregariousness and so on.'"


The Animal Homosexuality Myth
by Luiz Sérgio Solimeo

A Conservative Antigay Zoologist and His Detractors
"Animals respond to easily perceptible stimuli without significant cognitive response- which may be true in some instances, but this seems to disregard the whole science of animal behavioural studies, which examines how animals come to behave in certain ways. And in any case, who is doing the anthromorphic imposition of human social values in this context? Why, Solimeo. Animals lack the means to express their emotions. Incorrect. Granted, they are not analogous to human responses, but they do seem to experience particular emotional orientations toward significant others, and express intimacy through specific observable body language and vocalisations. It is not always ‘dominance’ related- although usefully, Solimeo has to admit that animals and birds engage in sexual behaviour for reasons beyond reproducing their own kind." A Conservative Antigay Zoologist and His Detractors

 

[katiemygirl]

But what does it actually make you - when you have been shown - that the usual anti-homosexual verses - ARE NOT ACTUALLY ABOUT HOMOSEXUALS - and you choose to stick to the party line ANYWAY?

What does that make YOU?


*

You have shown me your opinion about those verses I cited. Homosexuality is a sin. It is immoral just as adultery, fornication, bestiality, and incest are. God hates all forms of immorality. The only kind of sex, which is acceptable to God, is between a husband and wife, male and female. If it makes you feel better to name call, feel free. God is your judge as He is mine.

 

[katiemygirl]

It's because people mistake tolerance for acceptance. Tolerance is putting up with something although you don't agree with it, nothing more.

Well said. I don't accept homosexuality, but I tolerate homosexuals. I hate the sin but love the sinner.

 

[katiemygirl]

Oh, but the Bible doesn't say that. It was written before the concept of inherent sexual orientation even existed.

Even if it did say such a thing, you still don't believe what the Bible says, do you? I'm betting you don't believe that it's ok to persecute people for eating shellfish or wearing blended fabrics, and you haven't said a single word regarding divorce, which Christ Himself spoke strongly against, while saying nary a single word regarding same sex pairings.

So, if you're not a homophobe, then why exactly do you pick that one thing to come in and preach about?

I didn't pick homosexuality to preach about. The original poster chose the topic. If you'd like to discuss divorce, which God also hates btw, feel free to start a thread about that topic. Same goes with the other things you mentioned.

 

[Storm]

I didn't pick homosexuality to preach about.

Really? Is someone holding a gun to your head, forcing you to preach?

It doesn't matter who started the topic, you're still responsible for your own words and your own hypocrisy.

By the way, God doesn't hate. You do.

 

[katiemygirl]

Really? Is someone holding a gun to your head, forcing you to preach?

It doesn't matter who started the topic, you're still responsible for your own words and your own hypocrisy.

By the way, God doesn't hate. You do.

I wasn't aware that stating my opinion was preaching. I'd say you are the one filled with hatred for anyone who disagrees with your view of homosexuality. You probably think God is filled with hate also because He sees homosexuality as a sin and an abomination.

 

[katiemygirl]

God doesn't want christians to judge nonchristians. Nor does he want us to condemn anyone. But He does give us the right to discern evil from good. If God says homosexuality a sin, then it is a sin. End of discussion.

With that said, I'll be moving on. My best to all.

 

[Storm]

I wasn't aware that stating my opinion was preaching.

There are degrees. Didn't you say the mods already explained to you?

I'd say you are the one filled with hatred for anyone who disagrees with your view of homosexuality.

Of course you would. People like you are always desperate to believe that other people are no better.

You probably think God is filled with hate also

I just said "God doesn't hate."

because He sees homosexuality as a sin and an abomination.

Your sockpuppet is not God. Sorry, but I know God.

 

[Storm]

Well said. I don't accept homosexuality, but I tolerate homosexuals. I hate the sin but love the sinner.

That's a load of bull, and we all know it.

"One of the readings from the Lectionary for this third Lent Sunday is Romans 5:1-11. As I reflected on this passage this morning I was reminded of its power and the way it subverts the oft quoted bumper-sticker cliche “God Loves the Sinner but Hates the Sin”
The Myth of “Love the Sinner, Hate the Sin”

"The problem with this as a moral strategy, which is a routine refrain for the traditionalist view of homosexuality, is that it is nearly indistinguishable from hate the sin and the sinner."
Love the Sinner, Hate the Sin

"labeling anyone a “sinner” creates an us/them scenario, which is almost always a pretext for scapegoating them. It also implies that we occupy the moral high ground, that we have the inside edge on truth, and all sorts of other self-righteous thoughts. Like all scapegoating maneuvers, pointing out the sins of others–even in a benevolent way–conveniently blinds us to our own sin."
Love the sinner–period

 

[Drolefille]

Tolerate and love are very different things, how can one "tolerate" homosexuals and love them at the same time.

Also I wonder where bisexuals fall into this, I mean do we get "liked" instead of "loved"? Are we above or below "tolerate" since we can fake being straight?