Does the bible condemn homosexuality?

quote:

---

I was talking about her "Welcome to Crazytown" line.

---

Ya know... since posting to you, I've realized that the crazytown reference had something to do with a commercial. I've been trying but I can't place it. Maybe I don't watch enough FOX.

quote:

---

But propaganda, specifically "catchy" propaganda has to be nipped in the bud, before people accept it as a shortcut to thinking.

---

Well... you know... the battle for the mind of North America will be fought in the video arena.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

1) I never meant to stir the ire of the anti-anti-tobacco crowd, any more than if I had said "Can you hear me now?" I would have had the intent of stirring the ire of the anti-cell phone crowd. It amazes me how much of an overreaction I got to the saying "Welcome to crazytown".2) You should take your spanking and turn it back on yourself (again). Read my first post - I said in this country.3) You stated: "Certainly all evidence in the Bible supports the idea that God supports the latter." (in reference to a choice between homosexuality and murder).I suggest that you take more time before you post. ------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

Wrong! Although I am not on board with the campaign to wipe tobacco from the face of the earth, this has nothing to do with my problem and I said this quite clearly.I am anti-propaganda and I admittedly overreact anytime I see it. Here's a way to think about it. If I had quoted some punchy remark made famous in an anti-semitic propaganda film circulating in 1930's germany, or a "witty" anti-abortion or anti-homosexual propaganda film today, you would probably find it offensive. You would probably be offended even if you knew that wasn't what I was espousing, because it would be legitimating that line of thinking.Maybe I am wrong. Maybe you wouldn't care.If not, let me put it another way. I hate propaganda because it dumbs people down. It replaces logical argument with purely emotional appeals, and excuses the use of fallacies in the future. When important subjects are being discussed, I think it is of the utmost importance not to let quick quips and humorous put downs become popularized.Whether someone gets sprint is not important. Whether we should legislate tobacco products and how we should do so, is very very very important. Those "truth" ads should be condemned by anyone that believes in real discourse and personal freedom.Still overreacting? Probably. uh oh, that was bad of me. Naughty holmes certainly does deserve a spanking.Then again... Uh oh, maybe you should take more time before posting. Look again and you will see it was in reference to to a choice of LAWS AGAINST homosexuality or murder. I thought God would be in favor of a law against the latter.Naughty rei. Now we both deserve a good spanking. Shall we arrange for a nice spanking session?------------------
holmes

Hello, Holmes! You need to catch a clue: Every Commercial Is Propaganda. What, is this particular issue bothering to you because it's from the government? Then would you have overreacted if I had used the phrase "Be all that you can be", or anything to that effect? Don't be ridiculous. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the phrase "welcome to crazy town". A) It was completely apt here, B) that commercial did not invent it, and C) even it if had, it would be utterly irrelevant.2) Apology taken, and3) My apology.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

What does MONEY have to do with it. I went on RADIO out of Providence on the longest lasting gay radio show with an open BIBLE at paYPhone only to find the gay hosts both male and female on the other end listening to me simply READ passages. All had ears. There were no clingons etc. In the end the one host refused to talk and the other simply said I made the listener's "head" spin. All I did was read the BIBLE. HOw hard is that? And on Air yet. Propganda is irrelevant. My father was in public relations all his life explaining why ATT was replacing workers with telephones and later why UCF was always correct even if Syracuse had a better Quaterback but I am not back yet more later.

quote:

---

In the end the one host refused to talk and the other simply said I made the listener's "head" spin.

---

We love you, Brad.

I don't claim to speak for everyone, and unfortunately I wasn't among the listeners to the radio program in question. Additionally, I haven't had to deal with gay hosts since I made a drunken comment about that simply dreadful show "Will & Grace" at Sandy's last cin-club soire. However, I think I share the sentiments of many when I say that the confusion probably stemmed from the fact that Brad may not express himself verbally with the same terse clarity as he does in his written posts. I could be wrong.{edited to add:}I'd really like to see an entire forum dedicated to the issue of homosexuality. How many times do I have to apologize for the post that caused the admins to shut down the "What's your position on homosexuality?" thread??
------------------
I would not let the chickens cross the antidote road because I was already hospitlized for trying to say this!-Brad McFall[This message has been edited by MrHambre, 09-22-2003]

I caught that clue years ago. Once again, I thought I made it clear what I was upset with. If it makes things any clearer (mirroring the atheist-agnostic thread) I am a vocal opponent of Propaganda subset Cultural/Intellectual/Political issues, and not Propaganda subset Sales/Personal Choice issues.The first has to do with REAL issues that lead to laws which affect OTHER PEOPLE'S personal freedoms, not to mention the proper development of reason within our culture when faced with such issues.The second subset has to do with FRIVOLOUS or PERSONAL choice.I think it is slightly disengenuous to pretend there is no difference between the two. Personally, if I lived in 1930's Germany I could tell the qualitative difference between a commercial for the finest German Bratwurst, and a "commercial" telling me that Jews are Rats (suggesting they should be exterminated like them), or that Poland is a threat to national security using catchy hyperbolic rhetoric.My problem with the latter two are not just their message, but the technique used. If we accept this technique on such important issues, it will be used more and more and dumb down the content of public discourse. That is the point of course! The leaders want us to remain stupid and kneejerk (according to their refexes).I worry that the people who make our sales commercials are now making our "public policy" commercials, and I try to convince everyone to reject popular catch phrases and lines of argument they are trying to manufacture.You can reject my call to reject this. You can even use Lenny Bruce's argument that adopting and overusing a phrase will steal the power from it. Maybe so. But I still think the very attempt to manufacture public opinion is an insult to human intelligence and out to be publicly reviled so that it is an unpopular practice.This is surely my opinion and your disagreement with my opinion is duly noted. I will not bring up my opinion on such subjects with you again.2) thanks for accepting my apology3) apology takenNow let's go pick on the real bad guys.------------------
holmes

I think this is a good idea since it keeps popping up everywhere, though I could see admins discounting it for being too focused.Perhaps a better forum would be Intolerance. Then all sorts of topics which also keep popping up, like abortion, same sex marriage, gun control, anti-smoking and other topics related to moral/ethical judgement could be addressed.------------------
holmes

Please explain how you come to the conclusion that an act between two consenting adults is as bad as taking a person's life. Because it's NOT what people consent to... it's what God allows. In God's eyes, both acts are sin and that's all that matters to God.If you'd actually met and spoken to anyone who is gay or bi, you'd come to realize that most of them are Christians in this country! A 'homosexual Christian' is as much an oxymoron as is a 'drunkard Christian', a 'gluttonous Christian', a 'lying Christian', a 'thieving Christian', ... etc ... you get the idea.

​

Of course, people employ selective reading of the Bible and extreme contortionism in order to justify what they wish to act upon. That explains the many practiced abominations that are believed to be 'okay with God'. Homosexuality is but one of these.

​

Homosexualism is not the unpardonable sin. The homosexual need only to repent to God and to cease the practice - period. To attempt to justify it as "okay with God" is where it really starts getting ugly (and ugly it is).They believe in God and Jesus as much as the average American. No... I'd say that they believe in THEIR version of God and Jesus ("as much as the average American"). 'Their version' is what needs a'fixin'.Nor do they "worship their sexual lusts" any more than anyone else in their age/gender group, from my experience. Maybe... maybe not - that's beside the point. God forbids it and that's all that matters. Of course, if you don't believe in God then anything goes (and it usually does).

​

Without God, homosexual behavior cannot be ethically condemned - not 'really' since the absolute foundation for ethics would be missing.

​

That, IMHO, is the essence on this subject - hope you got something out of this.

​

Joralex

I want to start by saying that I read your posts that were pointed out in the "post of the month" forum and found them well assembled, even if I did not agree, and so I hope to see you approach this topic in the same way. Clarity is really needed here.I get what you mean by God's allowance being the prime determiner of what is wrong... no matter how strange people may find his commands.However what is in question here, and you did not address it in specific, is where God states that homosexuality is wrong.Rei is not alone in believing (well I would say "knowing") that other than English and Latin translations, the earlier Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek versions do NOT include statements directly condemning homosexuality. The earlier language refers only to male prostitution.If this is inaccurate, what passages do you feel condemn homosexuality, or why does it appear that the earlier texts refer to male prostitution if they meant homosexuality?My own assessment is that it might still fall under the catchall of "fornication", but that is clearly not as "bad" as murder to God. Or at least I would think not having a direct commandment against it might make it a "lesser" sin.Thanks in advance.------------------
holmes

I have to ask, if God hates homosexuality, why then is there a genetic component to being gay? Remind me where God forbids homosexuality?

Hi, Joralex. Thank you for the calm, well-worded reply. I will try to respond in kind.As Holmes pointed out, the linguistic issue needs to be addressed. How can qadeshah accurately be translated as "prostitute", but qadesh be translated as "homosexual"? It actually has a whole lot more to do with worship of pagan gods and godesses than sexuality.A few other points:1) Where is being a lesbian condemned?2) Where are other elements of the GLBT community, such as transsexuals (both m2f and f2m) condemned (I assume that you include them as well)?

quote:

---

A 'homosexual Christian' is as much an oxymoron as is a 'drunkard Christian', a 'gluttonous Christian', a 'lying Christian', a 'thieving Christian', ... etc

---

Or a divorced Christian? (more common, proportionally, than divorced atheists/agnostics).Ignoring the linguistic issue presented above, there's another problem with this: what parts of the bible you choose to follow, and which you choose not to. Do you sacrifice doves to cure mildew? No? If your argument is that "Jesus was the last sacrifice" (not in the text, but let's just pretend that it is), we can get into some of the more esoteric commandments. Do you wear clothes made from two different kinds of fabric? Do you have a female relative who has short hair, or who teaches? I could go on for quite a while... there are many, many commandments in the bible that are no longer followed. On what grounds do you get to pick and choose?

quote:

---

Homosexualism is not the unpardonable sin. The homosexual need only to repent to God and to cease the practice - period.

---

If they have the sort of success found in the ex-gay organizations, then that's pretty sad. Do you want me to get into the ex-gay organizations? They have been such a dismal failure, with one huge scandal after another, that it's almost comedic. From Paulk and his trip to the gay bar, and his ex-lesbian wife who never had a girlfriend, to the founders of Exodus International who left the organization and had a commitment ceremony, to the numerous scandals of Homosexuals Anonymous to the string of closures across the United States to the rates of suicide among their members, it has been one of the most ineffective campaigns in history.Also, I would be interested in some more things being explained.1) The major statistical difference in finger lengths in the gay community, especially in lesbians. I can also get into other biological differences if you'd like - there are a good number of them (ranging from the extremely high ratio of left-handedness to the sizes of components of the brain)
2) The presence of intersex babies. If there are intersex bodies, why not intersex minds?

quote:

---

Without God, homosexual behavior cannot be ethically condemned - not 'really' since the absolute foundation for ethics would be missing.

---

Actually, I agree to that. There are no absolutes in a world without some omniscient, omnipotent deity. It is something that all remotely philosophical atheists deal with. From the "no purpose" point, humans inherently gravitate toward existentialism, in which they define things to be relevant and have meaning. For me, that choice was humanist ideals - concern for humanity and life itself. It is an arbitrary definition, for sure. But it is one that adds meaning to reality, giving purpose to existence.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

quote:

---

Of course, if you don't believe in God then anything goes (and it usually does).

---

This is precisely why, as an atheist, I make sure to kill at least three orphans every day, and then have sex with the open wounds I made on their bodies.After all, without God, how could I possibly have a moral code of any kind?

quote:

---

Without God, homosexual behavior cannot be ethically condemned

---

Honestly, I strongly encourage you to spread this idea as far and wide as possible, because it's dead-on true.

Rei writes:

quote:

---

What, is this particular issue bothering to you because it's from the government?

---

Um, thetruth.com is a government site? Hmmm...from what I can find, it's funded by the American Legacy Foundation, a 501(c)(3) organization, through money acquired in the settlement agreement.Is this enough to claim that it is a "government" group?------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!