Are Homosexuals going to Hell?

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Jainarayan said: ↑
And besides, we don't believe in Hell.

Yes. But you can appreciate that other people do...?

Actually? No-- I cannot appreciate that other people do. I find it quite sad, that people are content to believe they will spend eternity in some sort of paradise, all the while knowing that most of the planet is being tortured endlessly.

And they think nothing is wrong with that worldview! That is a failure as a human being.

I expect that these people simply have not given it due consideration-- they were told this is "normal" most of their lives, and all sorts of ugly (and false) "justification" was fed them when they were defenseless children.

And now, into adulthood, they never re-examined the whole shtick. Apart from thinking, "I'm glad it's not me".

Which is kind of narcissistic.

But then again, most religion is fundamentally based in narcissism: You have to have a large ego, to believe the Ultimate Creator is aware of little old you, a mere mortal human. And worse-- gives a fork what you do with your dangly bits, or what you eat, or? What you think in your most private thoughts...

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

*affect

And I am not presenting an opinion on people who have sex with same genders, animals, plants or inanimate objects.

Notebook: It is impossible to have "sex" with an inanimate object.

The word you are looking for is 'm@sterbation'.

(since you are being a grammarian, I thought I should serve you up some too)

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Since the law was given so that people would know they are sinners, people who refuse God refuse to call a sin a sin. Since we're all sinners, those who refuse to be humbled and call themselves sinners could be the ones to proud to seek a savior and be saved.

Speak for yourself. You assume that "we are all sinners" but you have absolutely zero basis (or even authority) to make such a claim.

It is insultingly rude of you to make such a presumption. Who gave YOU the authority? And who is he, and who gave HIM the authority? Hint: your bible isn't authoritative. It's your claim. You cannot use your claim to "prove" your claim... that's a logical fallacy.

Not everyone is a sinner-- not by any rational measure of the word "sin". And by rational? I mean without invoking any magic or JuJu or MoJo or any of that superstitious nonsense.

 

[Grumpuss]

No. I am just curious how far you'd let any sort of "authority" keep tabs on your sex life. Contemplating why God gets a pass, to your mind, on anything and everything could be a revealing exercise. Don't knock it until you try it.

Why would you think something as powerful as God would be interested in base sexual pleasures and how many piercings you have in your ding-dong? It's like Patriots fans' thinking that God is making their team win? He doesn't get anything out of it, just because you do.

It can't be sick if it is emulating God's example, now can it?

I sincerely doubt you know for sure if God is fornicating with other same sex gods, hermaphroditic gods, gods with mutilated genitalia, divine beasts or inanimate objects. But feel free to prove me wrong.

Apparently, some people's idea of "god" was borne of man's perversion. For example, the notion that god would actually torture someone for eternity for petty, trivial, benign reasons just to gratify his own ego.

Sounds obsessive. But hey, tell me- do you think God would approve of people molesting horses or sodomizing trees, just because some men do?

 

[Grumpuss]

Notebook: It is impossible to have "sex" with an inanimate object.

The word you are looking for is 'm@sterbation'.

(since you are being a grammarian, I thought I should serve you up some too)

Sadly, no. The word is "paraphilia", and I didn't invent it:

Paraphilia - Wikipedia

Search your brain- there are people who have had sex with animal carcasses, pillows, non-anthropomorphic sex toys, even automobiles.

Update your notebook, Bob.

 

[Father Heathen]

Sounds obsessive. But hey, tell me- do you think God would approve of people molesting horses or sodomizing trees, just because some men do?

Animals can't give informed consent, thus is it rape/abuse, and only an imbecile would attempt to compare that to love between consenting adult humans who possess the ability to reason and communicate. As for "sodomizing trees", I assume you mean using one to masturbate? It would be a strange practice, but hardly anything worth grabbing the torches and pitchforks over.

As for what god approves of, I imagine such a being would be well above such petty, trivial hangups.

 

[LuisDantas]

I sincerely doubt you know for sure if God is fornicating with other same sex gods, hermaphroditic gods, gods with mutilated genitalia, divine beasts or inanimate objects. But feel free to prove me wrong.

I don't know and I see no reason to care. But that is not the point. The matter at hand is whether such a hypothetical God would see fit to bother with people's sexual inclinations when there is no moral issue involved.

And if he did... well, why bother with his opinion then?

 

[Grumpuss]

Animals can't give informed consent, thus is it rape/abuse, and only an imbecile would attempt to compare that to love between consenting adult humans who possess the ability to reason and communicate. As for "sodomizing trees", I assume you mean using one to masturbate? It would be a strange practice, but hardly anything worth grabbing the torches and pitchforks over.

You realize that's semantics, not some kind of biological definition, right?

As for what god approves of, I imagine such a being would be well above such petty, trivial hangups.

Me too, but the more judgmental of atheists on this thread seem to fantasize about it.

I don't know and I see no reason to care. But that is not the point. The matter at hand is whether such a hypothetical God would see fit to bother with people's sexual inclinations when there is no moral issue involved.

And if he did... well, why bother with his opinion then?

Perhaps it could be used as guidance for how to live. Doing good works and not being consumed with self might be what gives us salvation. Otherwise, people would just be high on heroin and banging hired donkey prostitutes 24 hours a day...

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

Why would you think something as powerful as God would be interested in base sexual pleasures and how many piercings you have in your ding-dong? It's like Patriots fans' thinking that God is making their team win? He doesn't get anything out of it, just because you do.

You apparently think He gets a great deal out of it. Why else would He keep a running tally of all these "sins" and then whip the list out on you come time for judgment? If He does anything like that whatsoever, then He takes great interest in our sexual activities, for sure. There is no questioning that. And if He "didn't get anything out of it", why would He do it? Keeping track, I mean? Granted, maybe He doesn't get anything sexual out of it - so He's not a "pervert" by human standards, necessarily. But I would have to wonder what DO you call a being who would have to be CONSTANTLY recording, memorizing and therefore immortalizing every single sexual act performed by human beings?

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Sadly, no. The word is "paraphilia", and I didn't invent it:

Paraphilia - Wikipedia

Search your brain- there are people who have had sex with animal carcasses, pillows, non-anthropomorphic sex toys, even automobiles.

Update your notebook, Bob.

You are still wrong. Sex using inanimate objects isn't actually sex: sex (or more properly, sexual intercourse) must involve at least two persons. It can have more than two, of course.

But you cannot engage in "sexual intercourse" by yourself, no matter which toys you employ.

That is fundamental to the definition of 'sexual intercourse'.

Without bother to click on your favorite link, I suspect you are confusing compulsory behavior with ordinary human ingenuity.

Everyone m@sterbates-- no exceptions (some just lie like a cheap rug about it-- even to themselves).

Some folk get inventive with toys and whatnot. But without at least one partner? It's not sexual intercourse. By Definition.

 

[Grumpuss]

You apparently think He gets a great deal out of it. Why else would He keep a running tally of all these "sins" and then whip the list out on you come time for judgment? If He does anything like that whatsoever, then He takes great interest in our sexual activities, for sure. There is no questioning that. And if He "didn't get anything out of it", why would He do it? Keeping track, I mean? Granted, maybe He doesn't get anything sexual out of it - so He's not a "pervert" by human standards, necessarily. But I would have to wonder what DO you call a being who would have to be CONSTANTLY recording, memorizing and therefore immortalizing every single sexual act performed by human beings?

Wait, so because you can't conceive of the reason, God doesn't do it? That's an odd justification, just so you can claim some bizarre victory over theology.

If my example was murder or stealing organs from babies, I'm guessing you might have more of a problem with it. But sexual deviancy others consider unsavory gets your hackles up? I dunno, maybe complete anarchy and zero consideration for the outcome is right up your alley...

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

You apparently think He gets a great deal out of it. Why else would He keep a running tally of all these "sins" and then whip the list out on you come time for judgment? If He does anything like that whatsoever, then He takes great interest in our sexual activities, for sure. There is no questioning that. And if He "didn't get anything out of it", why would He do it? Keeping track, I mean? Granted, maybe He doesn't get anything sexual out of it - so He's not a "pervert" by human standards, necessarily. But I would have to wonder what DO you call a being who would have to be CONSTANTLY recording, memorizing and therefore immortalizing every single sexual act performed by human beings?

Why indeed. According to some believers: God is the Ultimate Voyeur.

Makes you wonder...... WHY? What does god get out of such behavior?

I cannot imagine anything that does not smack of evil.

And why does the number '1984' keep flashing in the back of my brain?

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

You apparently think He gets a great deal out of it. Why else would He keep a running tally of all these "sins" and then whip the list out on you come time for judgment? If He does anything like that whatsoever, then He takes great interest in our sexual activities, for sure. There is no questioning that. And if He "didn't get anything out of it", why would He do it? Keeping track, I mean? Granted, maybe He doesn't get anything sexual out of it - so He's not a "pervert" by human standards, necessarily. But I would have to wonder what DO you call a being who would have to be CONSTANTLY recording, memorizing and therefore immortalizing every single sexual act performed by human beings?

Ooooh! Ooooh! Kevin Smith's movie Dogma answered the question! Angelic beings are entirely sexless, and they are amused by orgasm-face that humans get right at the end.

That Smith, always coming up with answers to Life's Questions in a movie.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Wait, so because you can't conceive of the reason, God doesn't do it? That's an odd justification, just so you can claim some bizarre victory over theology.

No-- it's not that. It's just that the god who engages in such behavior cannot be good.

 

[Grumpuss]

You are still wrong. Sex using inanimate objects isn't actually sex: sex (or more properly, sexual intercourse) must involve at least two persons. It can have more than two, of course.

But you cannot engage in "sexual intercourse" by yourself, no matter which toys you employ.

That is fundamental to the definition of 'sexual intercourse'.

Without bother to click on your favorite link, I suspect you are confusing compulsory behavior with ordinary human ingenuity.

Everyone m@sterbates-- no exceptions (some just lie like a cheap rug about it-- even to themselves).

Some folk get inventive with toys and whatnot. But without at least one partner? It's not sexual intercourse. By Definition.

Where do you get this idea that I invented this whole concept?

Here's an article from the illustrious Huffington post: here.

Now, I didn't write the article, I didn't edit it or act as the source, and that man definitely isn't my husband. All I'm doing is relaying information. If you want to pretend to be superior by jumping down my throat when legitimate news outlets are regularly using such language, then that's a pretty sad existence.

 

[Grumpuss]

No-- it's not that. It's just that the god who engages in such behavior cannot be good.

Oh, so it's anger at God. Okay, I get it. I don't agree with it, but I hope the two of you can work it out.

 

[ronandcarol]

Are Homosexuals going to Hell?
Right along with every other sinner who doesn't repent!
ronandcarol

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Look up the other religions then. My personal belief is that sinners should be helped and help themselves. No one "condemns" anyone in religion that isn't himself a sinner. Only God can raise up or condemn someone.

Bingo!

So why not leave it to "God" and "the sinner" to sort it out between themselves? Because, unless you actually know God's mind, you don't know whether someone is sinning and even requires whatever help you think you can offer. And too many good people have already been irreparably hurt by those religious efforts to "convert" homosexuals. It can't be done, and only cause terrible hurt.

As it happens, there are many, many Christians who accept that homosexuality is just another human expression of sexuality and love, and while not common, is not "unnatural" in the way that you like to use that word. It is, in fact, perfectly natural -- it happens naturally, people don't wander around selecting their orientation from a coin dispenser.

 

[jonathan180iq]

As many homosexual men and women, as well as those who are transsexual, bisexual, have relations with animals and plants, it is entirely possible, even likely that many of them maintain a personal belief in God. They may even form a devout connection to their divine gods, though it may not necessarily involve the same acceptance or repugnance you feel at learning of such lifestyles.

How one conducts himself/herself in life would therefore follow some kind of path to salvation, whether it be an Abrahamic God, Hindu pantheon, Buddhist spirit, etc. It would follow for those believers who are not living gods, that the rules were designed by others and we can not rewrite them to suit our own subject experience of judgment of ourselves. Being good and chaste and procreating as we are told the god(s) of our faith want can and will clash against what many consider to be impure, disgusting, abominable and a sin against nature. While we hope and expect we have kind and merciless deities to at least partially absolve us when mental derangement is a mitigating factor, what is the effect upon our immortal souls and/or spiritual afterlife when we consciously make deviant choices that are offensive to the faiths?

He's with the angels now?

Please know that what one religion may consider foul and sin-worthy can be quite different than what another may consider tolerable. I am not looking for any rants explaining why one religion's worldview is superior to all others, or how unreasonable or immoral you may personally consider the habits of heathens to be. It's always complicated. Myself, I believe this is a question left up to God to judge who shall be rewarded with bliss and who is damned. To pass judgment on others for what happens in the afterlife, is to speak for God, and is a sin. But we can of course keep asking questions and try to live well, free from chaos.

Is it a sin to deny the sexual act that perpetuates the species, and instead live a life where sexual hedonism is openly embraced for pure enjoyment? And to what extent are the machinations of demons (if you believe in their influence) to be blamed or mitigated against?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

You didn't answer any of my questions. Maybe I should try asking one thing at a time to get maximum mileage out of your attention span:

1. Does spying on people's sexual endeavors make God a pervert?

If you don't mind my butting in here, I always like the idea (I got from a film long ago) of nun's bathing with a shift still on so that they weren't nude -- the supposition being that God's prying eyes could make it through several stories of the convent, but be completely stymied by a bit of linen!