Homosexuality in Australia (1 Viewer)

[proletariat]

Lol dude, originally I started out systematically going through all the various pieces of BS within this argument with Bible quotes and everything lol, but then I realised it was probably all in vain, so I stopped. This is because of three main reasons.

1) This isn’t your argument, you simply copied and pasted it from a random website. Anyone can do this, but it just defeats the purpose if all we are doing is copying walls of text at each other.
2) As you didn’t write this argument, I doubt (no offense meant) your ability to actually defend it against any points I bring up against it, so me taking the time to go through all of it would actually be sort of a waste on my part, as it probably won’t lead into any further discussion between us or continue the debate.
3) The argument is irrelevant because it doesn’t matter if Jesus was gay.

I will address this though:



Firstly, a reference to something doesn't mean the Bible promotes or condones a behaviour. The Bible features incest, adultery and murder, but it doesn't support any of them, just as it doesn't homosexuality. But anyway....

And lol those people are just idiots, and in all honestly even as a Christian I would deliberately distance myself from them. Just so you know, I have never made such a stupid assertion myself in this thread, nor would I support one who did.

God hates sin, God loves all people, but all people sin (each in different ways to others OFC). Homosexuality is one sin, murder, theft, slander, sex outside of marriage, not obeying your parents etc. etc are others. There are a lot of sins, and everyone is guilty of perpetrating one or the other (actually a lot of them really) at different points in their lives. This means that gays are no worse (or better) than anyone else in the long run.

Basically Christians have a moral obligation to oppose sin (every sin). Now we’re no-where near perfect and sin ourselves a lot, but the difference is, we recognise when we do, and we appreciate that such behaviour is unacceptable, and try to avoid doing it in the first place. The (main) criticisms towards homosexuals from Christians is the blatant pride many gay people take in sinning as well as the various movements, promoting homosexuality as normal and acceptable, when frankly it isn’t.

To say "God hates fags" however would demonstrate a severe lack of understanding of the Christian faith, in fact neglecting one of the core messages which echoes throughout both the Old and New Testaments; basically the notion of to “love thy neighbour”. When Jesus was asked to summarize His religion, He said to “love God and love your fellow man”. I would argue, people supporting the notion that “God hates fags” are doing neither (and definitely not the second to say the least).

***

Now in all honestly I wouldn’t be bothered if Jesus was in fact gay/bi (however just so you know the “evidence” presented in the article is like to be frank; totally pissweak). What you fail to realise is being gay is not a sin in itself. It’s having homosexual sex, or “lying with another man as you would a women” which is the sin. Christ abstained His entire life, and so even if He was gay He successfully resisted the temptations that would have led Him into sinning. Even if Jesus was gay (which we have no evidence to support the notion but w/e), it doesn’t demonstrate that gay sex is acceptable, nor would it present a contradiction in the Bible’s message regarding homosexuality. It is preferable for a person to abstain their entire life (both straight and gay people). However, if a person is unable to do so, marriage (to one of the opposite sex) and subsequently sex within marriage exists as a morally acceptable alternative.

Ah, so you stopped midway? Then that questions whether you could actually defend your religion, or you just couldn't be bothered.

Its not my work, but nothing says that I cannot defend and speak for it.

I'll address Jesus being gay, and also the aspect of how god dislikes homosexual activities and David engaged in them.

Of course, as you said, I cannot speak for it with complete knowledge since it is not my work but nonetheless, valid points can be made out of that piece of writing.
______________

The biblically famous David had a homosexual relationship with King Saul's son, Jonathan. When they first met, they became "soul mates" in an encounter best described as "love at first site" (1 Samuel 18:1-5). Jonathon loved David even more than his own father, putting himself in harms way to protect the life of his lover, David (1 Samuel 19:1-7). King Saul became jealous of David and was determined to kill him. This made Jonathan so upset that he couldn't eat. Jonathan then snuck off to a field to lay with David, holding him in his arms, kissing and weeping like the lovesick couple they were (1 Samuel 20:31-42). When Jonathan's father, King Saul, found out about the homosexual affair, he confronted Jonathan with the fact that he knew that he was gay and then he blamed it on Jonathan's mother, calling her "perverse" and "rebellious" (1 Samuel 20:30). Later when Jonathan died, David admitted that [Jonathan's] "love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women." (2 Samuel 1:25-26) The Bible claims that homosexuality was a punishment which God gave to those who worshiped idols or committed other forms of blasphemy. (Romans 1:18-27).

I'm going to go as far as to say King Saul's jealousy is just inferred into christian beliefs. If the church of that time disliked homosexuals, they could easily make the 'revised bible' infer a different meaning. That God (King Saul) disliked homosexual activity because it was driving him and his son apart. Love is not a sin.

From the modern Christian model, we can assume that Jesus loved all of his disciples, yet the Bible specifically describes one disciple as "the disciple that Jesus loved" (John 19:26, 20:2, 21:7,20). This disciple is described as "lying on Jesus' breast" at the last supper (John 13:23, 25). What Jesus did with this specific disciple to earn him the title "the disciple that Jesus loved" can only be imagined but it's not too difficult to get a pretty clear picture seeing them snuggling with each other in public. Jesus himself was a homo. This is further supported by scriptures which describe Jesus displaying inappropriate behavior for a man to be showing to other men, such as lust (Mark 10:21), suggesting that men should be kissing him (Luke 7:45), describing men sharing the same bed (Luke 17:34).

And yeah. Jesus never engaged in any homosexual activities, but he keeps on talking suggestively to other men. Flirting. Even if it wasn't god's intention on his son being homosexual, there is written evidence of this.

"...the young man, looking at Jesus, loved him and began to beseech him that he might be with him...they went into the house of the young man, for he was rich. And the young man, looking at Jesus, loved him...and after six days Jesus gave him an order; and when the evening had come, the young man went to him, dressed with a linen cloth over his naked body. And he remained with him that night, because Jesus taught him the mystery of the kingdom of God."(Secret Gospel of Mark).

 

[SeCKSiiMiNh]

Out of interest, what would you describe as being, whatever it is that would classify a person as "homosexual" or "heterosexual"?

please rephrase

 

[SeCKSiiMiNh]

found this:

The following letter has been circulating in a few LGBTQ community. It’s written by the mother of a gay child in Vermont, in response to a letter to the editor.

Many letters have been sent to the Valley News concerning the homosexual menace in Vermont. I am the mother of a gay son and I’ve taken enough from you good people. I’m tired of your foolish rhetoric about the “homosexual agenda” and your allegations that accepting homosexuality is the same thing as advocating sex with children. You are cruel and ignorant. You have been robbing me of the joys of motherhood ever since my children were tiny.

My firstborn son started suffering at the hands of the moral little thugs from your moral, upright families from the time he was in the first grade. He was physically and verbally abused from first grade straight through high school because he was perceived to be gay.

He never professed to be gay or had any association with anything gay, but he had the misfortune not to walk or have gestures like the other boys. He was called “fag” incessantly, starting when he was 6.

In high school, while your children were doing what kids that age should be doing, mine labored over a suicide note, drafting and redrafting it to be sure his family knew how much he loved them. My sobbing 17-year-old tore the heart out of me as he choked out that he just couldn’t bear to continue living any longer, that he didn’t want to be gay and that he couldn’t face a life without dignity.

You have the audacity to talk about protecting families and children from the homosexual menace, while you yourselves tear apart families and drive children to despair. I don’t know why my son is gay, but I do know that God didn’t put him, and millions like him, on this Earth to give you someone to abuse. God gave you brains so that you could think, and it’s about time you started doing that.

At the core of all your misguided beliefs is the belief that this could never happen to you, that there is some kind of subculture out there that people have chosen to join. The fact is that if it can happen to my family, it can happen to yours, and you won’t get to choose. Whether it is genetic or whether something occurs during a critical time of fetal development, I don’t know. I can only tell you with an absolute certainty that it is inborn.

If you want to tout your own morality, you’d best come up with something more substantive than your heterosexuality. You did nothing to earn it; it was given to you. If you disagree, I would be interested in hearing your story, because my own heterosexuality was a blessing I received with no effort whatsoever on my part. It is so woven into the very soul of me that nothing could ever change it. For those of you who reduce sexual orientation to a simple choice, a character issue, a bad habit or something that can be changed by a 10-step program, I’m puzzled. Are you saying that your own sexual orientation is nothing more than something you have chosen, that you could change it at will? If that’s not the case, then why would you suggest that someone else can?

A popular theme in your letters is that Vermont has been infiltrated by outsiders. Both sides of my family have lived in Vermont for generations. I am heart and soul a Vermonter, so I’ll thank you to stop saying that you are speaking for “true Vermonters.”

You invoke the memory of the brave people who have fought on the battlefield for this great country, saying that they didn’t give their lives so that the “homosexual agenda” could tear down the principles they died defending. My 83-year-old father fought in some of the most horrific battles of World War II, was wounded and awarded the Purple Heart.

He shakes his head in sadness at the life his grandson has had to live. He says he fought alongside homosexuals in those battles, that they did their part and bothered no one. One of his best friends in the service was gay, and he never knew it until the end, and when he did find out, it mattered not at all. That wasn’t the measure of the man.

You religious folk just can’t bear the thought that as my son emerges from the hell that was his childhood he might like to find a lifelong companion and have a measure of happiness. It offends your sensibilities that he should request the right to visit that companion in the hospital, to make medical decisions for him or to benefit from tax laws governing inheritance.

How dare he? you say. These outrageous requests would threaten the very existence of your family, would undermine the sanctity of marriage. You use religion to abdicate your responsibility to be thinking human beings. There are vast numbers of religious people who find your attitudes repugnant. God is not for the privileged majority, and God knows my son has committed no sin.

The deep-thinking author of a letter to the April 12 ‘05 Valley News who lectures about homosexual sin and tells us about “those of us who have been blessed with the benefits of a religious upbringing” asks: “What ever happened to the idea of striving . . . to be better human beings than we are?”

Indeed, sir, what ever happened to that?

 

[breezy221090]

This debate is a vicious cycle. I remember having the exact same debate with the same arguments 12 months ago. The truth is that in the Bible there's nothing that states that homosexuality is any worse than any other sins whether that's getting a tattoo, wearing cotton or having sex for non-procreation purposes. I'm sure everyone posting on this forum has committed a sin. Jesus died to forgive our sins. So were all in the same boat gay or not . Problem solved= we're all as bad as each other.

 

[SeCKSiiMiNh]

Soft mum and soft son. Need to harden the fuck up. Blacks in America, they have some real problems.

then imagine being a black homosexual.....

lol homosexuals are a minority in all race

 

[SeCKSiiMiNh]

p.s. I jest. Don't stone me with your homo cavalry.

lol the irony.

 

[0bs3n3]

found this:

lol.

Stupid women.

GG disproving stereotypes kk?

 

[Titburger]

People who are relying on scripture to attack homosexual marriage, please read this -

Gay Marriage: Our Mutual Joy - Newsweek.com

and tell me that you can truthfully base your arguments and ideas of marriage from the bible

 

[neo o]

Oh dear, not again! May I suggest that you try "Gays and Islam" for your next thread?

PS: I'm going to do my best to run this off the rails, because threads like this NEVER die.

From 10 Dec 2005, 1:23 PM. A thread that's been active for over four years, on an issue that shouldn't be contentious.

 

[ilikebeeef]

It is illogical to use The Bible as a "reason" "why" people should not be gay. The Bible is a flawed work of fiction, what a shame people take it as truth. Who is to say what others should like?

For the heterosexuals who oppose homosexuality, think of it this way: How would you feel if you were shunned by society because you were the only one straight?

 

[Durga]

It is illogical to use The Bible as a "reason" "why" people should not be gay. The Bible is a flawed work of fiction, what a shame people take it as truth. Who is to say what others should like?

For the heterosexuals who oppose homosexuality, think of it this way: How would you feel if you were shunned by society because you were the only one straight?

+1.

If you want to use the Bible, or God for that matter, to try and argue against the pro-choice movement that covers homosexuality, euthanasia and abortion, then the onus is on YOU to provide proof or substantial evidence that this God exists. We are a secular society, and we should not be changing our laws because a specific set of religions do not agree with them.

 

[NewiJapper]

Most of society realises homosexuality is regarded as a normal thing nowadays.

I think the problem is religious people think our government runs on the basis of religious groundings. In the past, yes, most governments did, but we are approaching a new age and a new ideology of acceptance in our society. People are starting to realise commen sense is better than a dictational book.

God bless homos.

 

[Anonymous-]

Allah says no bum sex. Please accept allah's law.

Allah akhbar.

 

[SylviaB]

gosh this thread is boring now

 

[NewiJapper]

Did Name_Taken die or something...?

 

[Bereie]

homosexuality bla bla the bible says it's wrong bla bla we invented morality

 

[ilikebeeef]

homosexuality bla bla the bible says it's wrong bla bla we invented morality

We (as a species) invented the Bible.

 

[0bs3n3]

We (as a species) invented the Bible.

Biology =/= history.

Prove it was written by some random power-crazed egomaniac all in one go. Then get an historian to agree with you.

GO!

 

[Name_Taken]

We (as a species) invented the Bible.

Sorta like how, if God doesn't exist, how we invented a set of universal rights for ourselves, which we are for some obscure reason forever entitled to?

 

[Name_Taken]

Did Name_Taken die or something...?

Sorry.