Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Assuming you're talking about the Bible, there's plenty and it's generally negative when looked at in isolation. However, there's also plenty about love as virtue, setting aside the whole notion of "sin" and concerning yourself with your own shortcomings and not the shortcomings of others that makes coming to conclusions about homosexuality less clear than the so-called Religious Right would generally have you believe.
Leviticus 18:22
oop, sorry; your right. Thank You:yes:. Finally(not you but finally someone even looks to see about my question.):bow:
Maybe it is a weak argument, but it is stronger and more realistic than the egalitarian ideal. But even if I cited some examples, like the disconnect between sex and parenting seen in at least one study, you would still want something more. You would dismiss indications of social disintegration everywhere and the collapse of populations in many European countries so eagerly exemplified by the homosexual community as having nothing to do with society sanctioning homosexual behavior. The "liberal" mind (which isn't liberal at all in the classical sense of the word) is so self-absorbed it cannot make correlations: it cannot see the interrelatedness of all things, it cannot see that everything is connected and nothing happens in isolation. It wants only to satisfy its "infantile claims to entitlement, indulgence and compensation." It wants freedom to be synonymous with license. It mistakes tolerance for weakness and thinks it can get its way by creating and reinforcing perceptions of victimization.
Your whole argument so far has been an exercise in special pleading. You completely discount the possibility of unintended negative consequences of the status quo.
And all your pleading is from the infantile, self-indulging, self-pitying and undisciplined mindset whose values are derived from the very values you protest.
Ah. Ad hominem. Let nobody say you're a one-trick pony when it comes to logical fallacies.
And all your pleading is from the infantile, self-indulging, self-pitying and undisciplined mindset whose values are derived from the very values you protest.
I trust that in time you will get tired of the merry-go-round and step outside the system.
And rabbits chew their cud, apparently. :areyoucra
Yeah... but then you get into whether Christians inherit the status of "God's Chosen People" along with (or instead of, in some versions) the Jews. There's a fair bit of talk in the Epistles about physical vs. spiritual circumcision and the like, so cases have been made either way.
Yeah, I suppose attempted gang-rape of guests could be considered a form of inhospitality... very, very extreme inhospitality.
I don't have reason to doubt you. However, I've found that arguing that parts of the Bible are later interpolations doesn't work well with many Christians.
Again, I don't have reason to doubt you. I was just trying to give the verses normally cited against homosexuality, and I did note that there was another side to the issue of interpreting the Bible's message about homosexuality.