Everyone Who Claims Homosexuality is a Sin is Bisexual

[dianaiad]

That's very easy for you to say, and it smacks of entitlement.

Yeah? How am I any more entitled to have sex outside marriage bonds (in my belief system) than you are in yours?

How am I 'entitled' in any way, here? I'm a widow whose husband died 23 years ago. I am no more 'entitled' according to my beliefs, to go bed bouncing than you are. If I find someone I love, and he loves me, and we want sex, well, marriage is what we will do. That won't happen, because I'm nearly seventy and have a medical problem that nobody needs to deal with, or pay for. Still, I don't see any entitlement going on there.

Nor do I think it's 'easy to say.'

I'm not 'preaching' anything I don't live, after all.

The sin lies in dehumanizing some in favor of misapprehended and outdated cultural mores. To deny someone her or his ability to express love physically, to deny someone the intimacy to which every human being is entitled, to shame them by calling their identity "sin," is to separate them from society and to make them "less than" everyone else. That is dehumanizing and it's a form of violence. No, it's not impossible to resist the sex act, but why should they be expected to do that?

Because the belief system the hold to says so?

I mean, if it does NOT, then, go for it. Not my problem.

Fact is, homosexual marriage is a legal thing in this country, and religions simply don't have any say in that matter. Fact is, these people are as fully human as you, with all the rights and privileges you have. Fact is, God doesn't have a problem with their sexual activity; YOU do.

I only have a problem if the 'sinner' claims to believe something...and then complains because his/her belief system calls something s/he wants to do a 'sin.' That's called 'hypocrisy.'

If they belong to a belief system that says fine...go have sex, or fine, you marry each other, then, well, fine. Not my problem.

It's only a problem if you claim to believe the same things I do and then blame ME because you want to violate those beliefs. Not my fault. Your choices.

No, Gay people are not less moral, less ethical, or less human than you or I. And they should be allowed the ability to physically express their love exactly the same as you and I do, without fear of reprisal.

No problem. Go get married. Go have sex. Enjoy. But why do you insist that I APPROVE? My approval isn't necessary, you realize, and frankly, if you don't claim to believe as I do, i have no right to disapprove. Go. Have fun. I'll bake your cake and find the bride/bride or groom/groom topper with the rainbow icing. My daughter and I will photograph the whole thing (we know how to 'do' same sex weddings now...and you don't 'do' them the same way you shoot heterosexual weddings; the pictures come out looking agonizingly embarrassingly silly if you try) We'll wish you well and buy appropriate wedding gifts, and when you come home from your honeymoon, we'll invite you both to pizza night. Or whatever.

Because you are being true to YOUR beliefs. You aren't getting my point here, sojourner. This isn't about whether gays shouldn't do whatever...it's about being hypocritical.

It's about claiming to honestly believe in something, and then blaming that something (and others who believe in it) for YOUR inability to be true to those beliefs. If you honestly find those beliefs are wrong, then go find some you like better, and live according to them. But don't blame ME if you don't want do do that.

My own beliefs mean that *I* cannot have sex outside marriage bonds. Now you tell me what the hell is different between that and a belief that tells you that homosexuals cannot do that? Same/Same. I could go find a belief system that would allow me to sleep around, just as you can. I didn't do that. My choice.

And your choices are yours. You want to have sex and/or get married? Go. Do it. Blessings on you. IF your personal beliefs allow this, glorious. You're golden. If they don't, then...you are sinning.

and it's not my fault.

 

[sojourner]

Yeah? How am I any more entitled to have sex outside marriage bonds (in my belief system) than you are in yours?

I didn’t say that. I said “express their love in a physical way, like heterosexuals do.” You’re entitled because you’re in the majority and you don’t have to worry about holding your lover’s hand in public.

How am I 'entitled' in any way, here?

See above. You’re in the majority. The social mores are on your side.

Still, I don't see any entitlement going on there

One sure sign that you’re entitled is blindness to the entitlement.

I'm not 'preaching' anything I don't live, after all

You were married without fear of social judgment and being ostracized.

Because the belief system the hold to says so?

No, because your voice is part of the prevailing social chorus.

But why do you insist that I APPROVE?

See above. If you’re not resisting the violence, you’re complicit in it.

 

[Kilk1]

Everyone who claims homosexuality is a sin must necessarily be bisexual. Here is why.

According to the traditional definitions of sin, sin must always involve a choice. Thus, the claim that attraction to the same sex is sinful implies that attraction to the same sex is a choice. But no one chooses who they are sexually attracted to. Nevertheless, people who are bisexual can choose to ignore one aspect of their sexuality, so that they can have the illusion of choice. This is why we see so many bisexual people claim to have "found Jesus," and "repent" of their homosexuality, and make the "choice" to be heterosexual. In reality, they are simply choosing to ignore the homosexual aspect of their sexuality and choose to only focus on the heterosexual aspect.

For people who are either 100% heterosexual or 100% homosexual, sexual orientation is not a choice. For instance, I could not choose to be attracted to men, even if I wanted to be. In the same way, a homosexual person could not choose to be attracted to the other gender if they wanted to be. A person who is 100% heterosexual or 100% homosexual would understand this, which begs the question, why do so many Christians, especially pastors, claim that homosexuality is a choice? I think that the only logical answer is that bisexuality is fairly commonplace in the population, and likely even more common among Christian pastors.

So, since our conclusion implies bisexuality is likely much more common in Christian pastors than in the rest of the population, we should encourage these pastors to celebrate their bisexuality, rather than trying to mask it in homophobic preaching. A study has already confirmed that homophobic men who claim to be heterosexual have measurable responses of arousal to gay porn, while non-homophobic heterosexual men do not. See this study, which verifies my ideas. Is homophobia associated with homosexual arousal? - PubMed - NCBI

Here are two definitions of homosexuality, from Merriam-Webster:

1 : sexual attraction or the tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex : the quality or state of being homosexual
2 : sexual activity with another of the same sex

Most of what you're saying assumes the first definition when in reality, the second definition may be what's under discussion. Did you know that when many people say homosexuality is a choice, they refer to the act, not necessarily the attraction?

 

[SugarOcean]

You're wrong. The bible does not state that homosexuality is a sin. Do you know why the bible states that the homosexual act is sin? If not, it'd be a good thing for you to find out, yes?

Except that in biblical times people were not aware of sexual orientation.
Therefore, when the scriptures say homosexuality is a sin they're not referring to orientation. They're referring to the act itself.

That's why the scriptures condemning homosexuality speak to the act. Not the individual who is homosexual. Because there was no orientation identity in bible times. God's plan was for sex between one man and one woman. That, if you will, would be construed today as heterosexual orientation.

However, in biblical times orientation was not a word. People who followed God's teachings understood God made man and woman and sex was to then be between one man and one woman. The act of sex with the same sex was a sin. And that individual was also a sinner.
The bible condemns sexual immorality in straights as well.


Leviticus 18:22
You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.

Leviticus 20:13
If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.

 

[sojourner]

Except that in biblical times people were not aware of sexual orientation.
Therefore, when the scriptures say homosexuality is a sin they're not referring to orientation. They're referring to the act itself

They DON’T say that homosexuality is a sin. They refer to acts only. It’s modern people who eisegete the texts.

That's why the scriptures condemning homosexuality speak to the act. Not the individual who is homosexual. Because there was no orientation identity in bible times. God's plan was for sex between one man and one woman. That, if you will, would be construed today as heterosexual orientation

Just because the ancients didn’t have a good grasp of human sexuality doesn’t mean that heterosexuality is “God’s Plan.” Since when do humans dictate what God’s plan is?

However, in biblical times orientation was not a word. People who followed God's teachings understood God made man and woman and sex was to then be between one man and one woman

We have a much better understanding of human sexuality these days.

You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination

Do you know why it says so?

 

[SugarOcean]

They DON’T say that homosexuality is a sin. They refer to acts only. It’s modern people who eisegete the texts.


Just because the ancients didn’t have a good grasp of human sexuality doesn’t mean that heterosexuality is “God’s Plan.” Since when do humans dictate what God’s plan is?


We have a much better understanding of human sexuality these days.

Do you know why it says so?

Genesis 1:27 So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. 28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply..."

“Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.” Genesis 2:29

"If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act."
Leviticus 20:13

 

[dianaiad]

I didn’t say that. I said “express their love in a physical way, like heterosexuals do.” You’re entitled because you’re in the majority and you don’t have to worry about holding your lover’s hand in public.


See above. You’re in the majority. The social mores are on your side.


One sure sign that you’re entitled is blindness to the entitlement.


You were married without fear of social judgment and being ostracized.


No, because your voice is part of the prevailing social chorus.


See above. If you’re not resisting the violence, you’re complicit in it.

Bull.

You conveniently omitted all the portions of my post which diametrically prove you incorrect about this.

You want to hold your lover's hand in public? Feel free. Not my place to criticize.

this is all about, and ONLY about, what YOUR belief system says. Not what mine says. not what Joe Blow or Jane Doe says. What YOU believe.

I do not insist that you approve of my own system and actions...and you clearly don't, and have nothing but contempt for it, so why is it important that I, with a belief system you don't believe in or approve of anyway, APPROVE of yours?

That's just plain stupid.

 

[Road Less Traveled]

Genesis 1:27 So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. 28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply..."

“Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.” Genesis 2:29

"If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act."
Leviticus 20:13

"If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act."
Leviticus 20:13

Is there a possibility that the exegesis behind this text can be referring to telling lies as opposed to 2 people laying next to each other?

 

[Road Less Traveled]

There was no Hebrew or Greek word for "homosexual." Words we like to translate as such actually have different shades of meaning than that.

It is believed or perhaps known that ‘homo’ was from Greek and sexual was from late Latin, and the combination wasn’t first used until around the mid-late 1800’s. Leading many to ponder why that combination was inserted into script written much much longer ago.

 

[Kenny]

No, because other's suffer because of your deed.

No... insurance covers it.

A bisexual who simply decided to try the other road. No biggie. It happens quite frequently, sometimes flip-flopping quite a few times in a bisexual's life.

That isn't his story, no matter how you spin it.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Seems kinda contrived and overwrought.

I don't know.
I must admit that it's a line of thinking I had a few times as well, when hearing (idd mostly homophobic) people talking about how it's a "lifestyle choice". I, being a heterosexual male, having always found that very bizar...

I don't experience that as a "choice" at all.

When some hot girl walks by, I naturally and spontanously check her out. I must make a conscious decision to not look (or stare ). It just happens. It's practically instinctive.

But with guys, I have the opposite... If some guy gets naked in front of me, I instinctively look the other way. I don't want to see some guy's package! But I love looking at boobies.

These are not "choices" that I make. It's just how I am. One just interests me and the other doesn't.

So, what is it about those other people that makes them really perceive this as some "choice"? Why don't those people experience their sexual orientation like I do? They seem to really believe it is a choice, so surely they must be perceiving it as such as well. Why else would they claim it?



And idd, as the OP states.... I really can't imagine anything other then being bisexual, to make ones sexuality feel like a "choice" you can make.

If you have another explanation on how a person could perceive his sexual orientation as being a "choice" (meaning that they could get sexually aroused from same-gender sex, if they would "choose" to engage in it), then please, I'm all ears.

But I can't come up with one.

 

[sojourner]

Genesis 1:27 So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. 28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply..."

“Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.” Genesis 2:29

"If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act."
Leviticus 20:13

I can’t help what the ancients believed. But I don’t support a system that buys in to bigotry through the misplaced hubris of asserting “God said it’s ok to discriminate.”

 

[sojourner]

You conveniently omitted all the portions of my post which diametrically prove you incorrect about this

I included the parts that are cogent to the argument.

You want to hold your lover's hand in public? Feel free. Not my place to criticize

Don’t mistake me for someone I’m not.

this is all about, and ONLY about, what YOUR belief system says. Not what mine says. not what Joe Blow or Jane Doe says. What YOU believe

This is about systemic violence under the guise of religious piety.

I do not insist that you approve of my own system and actions...and you clearly don't, and have nothing but contempt for it, so why is it important that I, with a belief system you don't believe in or approve of anyway, APPROVE of yours?

As other LDS on this forum will clearly tell you, while I’m not Mormon, I do respect your beliefs. But other Mormons here are less zealous about carelessly throwing around the word “sin” when it comes to those who identify differently than they do. That’s what I have a problem with. That’s why your entitlement is showing.

 

[sojourner]

Is there a possibility that the exegesis behind this text can be referring to telling lies as opposed to 2 people laying next to each other?

No. The text is clear. It refers to sexual activity.

 

[charlie sc]

The sin lies, not in who one is attracted to, but what one does about it.

So, for you, is gay sex sinful or not?

 

[charlie sc]

Well slap me in the *** and call me Sally!

Ask your boyfriend to do that to you. Not us.

 

[Cooky]

Ask your boyfriend to do that to you. Not us.

He does.

 

[dianaiad]

I included the parts that are cogent to the argument.

Don’t mistake me for someone I’m not.


This is about systemic violence under the guise of religious piety.


As other LDS on this forum will clearly tell you, while I’m not Mormon, I do respect your beliefs. But other Mormons here are less zealous about carelessly throwing around the word “sin” when it comes to those who identify differently than they do. That’s what I have a problem with. That’s why your entitlement is showing.

"Sin" is going against one's own belief system. It is NOT going against someone else's.

If you know about LDS beliefs, you know this: it is a sin for me to drink coffee, because I promised not to drink coffee.
It is NOT a sin for you to drink coffee, because you don't share my belief system and you made no such promise.

It is a sin for an LDS homosexual to act upon his or her attraction.

It is NOT a sin for a homosexual who doesn't share a belief that acting upon that attraction is sinful.

That is my point, and my whole point, except this:

If I do not condemn someone who is honestly acting according to his or her beliefs, but only point out hypocrisy when that is what is happening, I ALSO refuse to allow anybody to accuse me of 'entitlement' (such a left wing racist, white supremicist bit of propagandistic clap trap) because I AM true to my own beliefs, and because I refuse to accept criticism because I do.

Also, you have absolutely no right to expect me to accept what *I* consider to be 'sin' WITHIN MY OWN BELIEF SYSTEM, because YOU don't think whatever it is, is sinful according to yours.

You think that it is wrong for the LDS folks to believe that acting upon homosexual urges is a sin? fine. Don't be LDS. Be something else that DOES accept that behavior.

As for 'being entitled..." Entitled to WHAT, exactly?

Does it matter which sex one is attracted to, if acting on that attraction is considered 'sinful' by one's own beliefs? There is no difference between you (general you, don't get personal here) being told that it is a sin according to the beliefs you claim to hold to act upon your attraction to someone of your same sex, and me being told the same thing regarding the opposite sex.

Sex outside of marriage bonds is, according to my beliefs, sinful. If you have beliefs that allow same sex marriage, then there is ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENCE between you (again, general you) and me.

If your beliefs do not accept same sex marriage, then you have a choice; stay where you are and do the very hard thing, go find a belief system that does allow gay marriage....and go find a spouse to be happy with, or be a hypocrite and blame everybody else for YOUR refusal to either fish or cut bait.

Whatever you choose, it's NOT my 'sense of entitlement' (and you have no idea just how irritating that particular accusation is to me, especially right now) that is causing YOU (again, general you) a problem. Go. Be happy. Leave me out of it. It's. Not. My. Fault.

And it's not. my. doing.

I do not blame, or judge, anybody for being true to his or her own beliefs. I only blame, AND judge, those who insist that I accept within MY belief system, the things you like in yours. I do not demand that of you. Stop demanding that of me.

 

[dianaiad]

So, for you, is gay sex sinful or not?

For me, within my belief system, it is.

For those who do not share my belief system?

That depends entirely on what THEIR belief system teaches.

I just don't see why I should have to change MY belief system...or that the belief system itself should change, to make others happy. If you don't like it, find a belief system that agrees with you and be happy.

Either way, I'm not responsible for your (again, general 'you,') happiness or sense of 'sinfulness.'

I do believe that my belief system is right, of course. If I didn't, I'd find another belief system and then I'd think that THAT one was right. I would hope that this is true for everybody, because any other approach is the sheerest hypocrisy.

I believe that my belief system is right. I do not expect those who do not share it to abide by its rules, however.

I don't know how much you know about the LDS...but we have something called the '12 Articles of Faith.' They are a pretty solid statement of our basic beliefs, and unique among (at least, I have never found anything similar anywhere else) is the following statement:

Articles of Faith,
#11: “We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.”

Freedom of religion. Freedom of belief. Freedom of conscience.

We WILL try to convert you, but never at the point of a gun....or law. Indeed, the only time the church got involved in LAWS about this issue was the California Prop 8 campaign, where the church was attempting to defend itself against others forcing THEIR religious views upon US.

The church, after all not only did not object to, but was supportive of, the California provisions that gave gay couples every single right that heterosexual married couples had. It was only when the gays (and (i do remember this very well) decided that they were going to force us to recognize gay marriage IN OUR RELIGION and IN OUR TEMPLES that it balked. And yes, that IS what they wanted to do. I had many conversations with gay activists who came out and said precisely that.

And isn't that what THIS conversation is all about? You are doing the same thing here. You aren't content with me baking gay wedding cakes, photographing gay weddings, seeing gay marriages AS marriages legally. You aren't happy with my saying that gay marriages aren't 'sinful' if the participants don't honestly see them as sinful. You are insisting that I absolve you of sin AS A MORMON....even when you aren't a Mormon, will never be a Mormon, and don't agree with our beliefs.

Please read that Article of Faith one more time. Yes, the second half of it is vital; 'allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where or what they may."

Pay attention to the first half, as well. WE CLAIM THE PRIVILEGE OF WORSHIPING ALMIGHTY GOD ACCORDING TO THE DICTATES OF OUR OWN CONSCIENCE..."

You go be sinful...or not...according to your conscience. That is your right and your privilege. you do NOT have the right to insist that we follow YOUR rules within OUR belief system.

As in...get over yourselves. Go. Be happy. I don't HAVE to approve of your lifestyle. Only you do. Should you decide to convert to the CoJCoLDS, THEN you would have a problem, but as long as you aren't LDS, I don't see where any of you have the right to tell me that I have a 'sense of entitlement' because I would be sinning if I had sex with a man outside marriage bonds, and am not tempted to have sex with a woman outside those bonds.

What a bunch of absolute claptrap.

 

[sojourner]

"Sin" is going against one's own belief system. It is NOT going against someone else's

You neglected in your earlier posts to qualify your condemnation with “wrong for me.” Now you’re backpeddling?

You think that it is wrong for the LDS folks to believe that acting upon homosexual urges is a sin?

Yes. It’s wrong inasmuch as that opinion is based on “biblical precedent.”

If I do not condemn someone who is honestly acting according to his or her beliefs, but only point out hypocrisy when that is what is happening

And I’m only pointing out the hypocrisy of a Christian who bases discrimination upon biblical precedent.

As for 'being entitled..." Entitled to WHAT, exactly?

A straight, cisgender identity that falls within the majority, who is able to enact that identity without fear of reprisal, disenfranchisement or judgment.

If your beliefs do not accept same sex marriage, then you have a choice; stay where you are and do the very hard thing, go find a belief system that does allow gay marriage....and go find a spouse to be happy with, or be a hypocrite and blame everybody else for YOUR refusal to either fish or cut bait

Why does it have to be hard? What can’t the system (church) do the very hard work of acknowledging that they’ve been wrong? The Catholics were able to man up about the flat earth.

Whatever you choose, it's NOT my 'sense of entitlement' (and you have no idea just how irritating that particular accusation is to me, especially right now) that is causing YOU (again, general you) a problem. Go. Be happy. Leave me out of it. It's. Not. My. Fault

Sorry; you’re in it. You chose that when you posted.

I do not blame, or judge, anybody for being true to his or her own beliefs

It’s not about belief. It’s about being treated as fully human. Your argument is no different than Jim Crow and separate but equal. It’s a cover up for bigotry.