Total Posts:117|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Homosexuality and the Bible

rawrxqueen
Posts: 32
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2009 6:55:29 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
Do you believe it is a sin to be gay? If so, do you also find it a sin to get a divorce? And that remarrive is also a sin? Do you believe that it is discovered that a bride is not a virgin that she should be stoned to death? Do you believe that if married person has sex with someone else's husband or wife, that both adulterers be stoned to death? Do you find it a sin for a married couple to have sexual intercource druing a woman's period? Do you believe that if a man dies childless, his widow is ought to have intercourse with each of his brothers in turn until she bears her deceased husband a male heir?

These are all things that the bible says. Don't believe me? Check Deuteronomy 22:13-21, Deuteronomy 22:22, Mark 10:1-12, Leviticus 18:19, Mark 12:18-27, and Deuteronomy 25:11-12.
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2009 7:56:15 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
I get your point: The Bible says a lot of stupid and ruthless crap. There's also the parts about it being a sin to wear cotton, eat rabbits or lobster, cut your hair, shave, touch anything that a menstruating woman has touched, for a woman to wear pants, etc. Basically, Christians have shunned the words of the Bible except for what has entered the status quo and what is convenient for them. It's quite obvious that the Church (establishment and the people) are entirely hypocritical. I honestly feel deeply saddened by it. Because what do they believe happens if they sin?

"I will appoint over you sudden terror, consumption, and fever that wastes the eyes...Then if you walk contrary to me and will not hearken me, I will bring more plagues upon you... I will let loose the wild beasts among you, which shall rob you of your children... You shall eat the flesh of your sons, and you shall eat the flesh of your daughters. And I will... cast your dead bodies upon the dead bodies of your idols..." (Leviticus 26:14-30).

What's worse is that even if you don't know you've sinned, you're still phucked. "If anyone touches an unclean thing... and it is hidden from him, and he has become unclean, he shall be guilty". (Lev. 5:2) And "If anyone sins, doing any of the things which the Lord has commanded not to be done, though he does not know it, yet he is guilty." (Lev. 5:17)

I feel lucky and blessed to not be a part of Christianity anymore. Christians feel that they're the ones who are superior, happier, etc. but in reality shunning religion was the most spiritually fulfilling endeavor of my life. I'm totally okay with trying to find and/or understand God, and even being spiritual and knowing God in your own way... or whatever... but to subscribe to a religion with that type of doctrine is sick, and you'd think that in this day and age, rational people wouldn't allow themselves to be continued to be manipulated through such outdated and UN-loving philosophy.
President of DDO
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2009 11:42:12 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/17/2009 10:06:29 AM, Mirza wrote:
theLwerd, what is your position on pedophilia?

Pedophilia has absolutely NOTHING to do with homosexuality. To relate the two is ignorant and disgusting. To be a pedophile means that you have a mental illness. Homosexual love and behavior is expressed though two consenting individuals of sound mind. Pedophiles violated the rights of small children who have no way to protect themselves or the capacity to do so. What you're doing is drawing a correlation between unrelated occurrences, ultimately committing a huge slippery slope fallacy. Furthermore, that is completely dodging the reality that the Bible (or Koran) is completely hypocritical in its message, and so are its followers.
President of DDO
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2009 11:54:18 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/17/2009 11:45:45 AM, MistahKurtz wrote:
*gets popcorn*

There is no good response to what I've said, so I doubt it'll be much of a show :)
President of DDO
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2009 12:27:40 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/17/2009 11:54:18 AM, theLwerd wrote:
At 11/17/2009 11:45:45 AM, MistahKurtz wrote:
*gets popcorn*

There is no good response to what I've said, so I doubt it'll be much of a show :)

Everything you said was agreeable, at least on my part.

You know what I think atheists should do in those public debates whenever Christians act morally superior? Bring a Bible with them and just read off Deuteronomy and Leviticus. Then the Christian will be utterly humiliated and can't defend it. What sane person person would stand there and defend stoning people, keepig slaves, and performing genocide as moral righteousness?
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
alto2osu
Posts: 277
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2009 12:27:57 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Not that I want to hijack this thread or anything, but in a very loose sense of the term, the entire human race is pedophilic :) Or, at the very least, neophilic. Yea for sexual selection (I was reading this and it made me think about that specifically).

That said, I don't think I will ever understand the link story between homosexuality and like sex with barnyard animals, children, etc. Nor do I get the link story between homosexual unions and the dissolution of the state of marriage.
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2009 12:32:59 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/17/2009 12:27:57 PM, alto2osu wrote:
Not that I want to hijack this thread or anything, but in a very loose sense of the term, the entire human race is pedophilic :) Or, at the very least, neophilic. Yea for sexual selection (I was reading this and it made me think about that specifically).

That said, I don't think I will ever understand the link story between homosexuality and like sex with barnyard animals, children, etc. Nor do I get the link story between homosexual unions and the dissolution of the state of marriage.

I thought pedophilia referred to an adult experiencing a sexual preference for prepubescent children... so I don't follow?

I agree with you about the ridiculous connections :)
President of DDO
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2009 1:05:51 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/17/2009 11:42:12 AM, theLwerd wrote:
Pedophilia has absolutely NOTHING to do with homosexuality. To relate the two is ignorant and disgusting. To be a pedophile means that you have a mental illness. Homosexual love and behavior is expressed though two consenting individuals of sound mind. Pedophiles violated the rights of small children who have no way to protect themselves or the capacity to do so. What you're doing is drawing a correlation between unrelated occurrences, ultimately committing a huge slippery slope fallacy. Furthermore, that is completely dodging the reality that the Bible (or Koran) is completely hypocritical in its message, and so are its followers.
I did not compare homosexuality to pedophilia, if that is what you think I did. I just asked you a simple question.

You think it is absurd that the Bible, Qur'an etc. consider homosexuality a sin, but you consider pedophilia as something cruel, although there is as much evidence supporting the fact that pedophiles' sexual orientation towards children is the same as homosexuals' sexual orientation towards the same sex. Some homosexuals respond by saying, "Well, whatever the truth is, it is wrong to do that to kids." -- Let me ask, do you think it is fair that pedophilia looks cruel in your eyes, but not homosexuality? Because the Abrahamic religions are against both, not the people, but the lusts.

You said, "To be a pedophile means that you have a mental illness", which means that pedophilia is not like homosexuality, but a mental illness. If you ask me, I'll tell you that both are unnatural. How hypocritical is it that you think pedophiles are mental ill, but homosexuals are not [I'm not saying they are]? What evidence do you have to support your claim? Can you prove to me that a homosexual is not mental ill, and that a pedophile is? Is that what you call equality? I do not defend pedophiles, but I do argue against the fact that they are "mental ill", while homosexuals are "normal".

"Homosexual love and behavior is expressed though two consenting individuals of sound mind" -- Does it mean that pedophilia is a choice, perhaps, and that homosexuality is not? To me, none of those sexual orientations are a choice, but I do believe there is remedy for them. Some people usually get outrageous when I say that. But you know what? I don't care the slightest. I am just being fair. You believe pedophilia is a mental illness, but homosexuality a natural orientation, while I believe both are unnatural, and therefore do not treat pedophilia and homosexuality differently in any way, although I do treat the acts differently.

Do you seriously wonder why people cannot accept homosexuality? As much as you cannot accept pedophilia, which is - if homosexuality too - not a choice, other people cannot accept homosexuality. Even if the acts are different, the orientations are just as unnatural.
alto2osu
Posts: 277
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2009 1:27:51 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/17/2009 1:05:51 PM, Mirza wrote:
At 11/17/2009 11:42:12 AM, theLwerd wrote:
Pedophilia has absolutely NOTHING to do with homosexuality. To relate the two is ignorant and disgusting. To be a pedophile means that you have a mental illness. Homosexual love and behavior is expressed though two consenting individuals of sound mind. Pedophiles violated the rights of small children who have no way to protect themselves or the capacity to do so. What you're doing is drawing a correlation between unrelated occurrences, ultimately committing a huge slippery slope fallacy. Furthermore, that is completely dodging the reality that the Bible (or Koran) is completely hypocritical in its message, and so are its followers.
I did not compare homosexuality to pedophilia, if that is what you think I did. I just asked you a simple question.

You think it is absurd that the Bible, Qur'an etc. consider homosexuality a sin, but you consider pedophilia as something cruel, although there is as much evidence supporting the fact that pedophiles' sexual orientation towards children is the same as homosexuals' sexual orientation towards the same sex. Some homosexuals respond by saying, "Well, whatever the truth is, it is wrong to do that to kids." -- Let me ask, do you think it is fair that pedophilia looks cruel in your eyes, but not homosexuality? Because the Abrahamic religions are against both, not the people, but the lusts.

You said, "To be a pedophile means that you have a mental illness", which means that pedophilia is not like homosexuality, but a mental illness. If you ask me, I'll tell you that both are unnatural. How hypocritical is it that you think pedophiles are mental ill, but homosexuals are not [I'm not saying they are]? What evidence do you have to support your claim? Can you prove to me that a homosexual is not mental ill, and that a pedophile is? Is that what you call equality? I do not defend pedophiles, but I do argue against the fact that they are "mental ill", while homosexuals are "normal".

"Homosexual love and behavior is expressed though two consenting individuals of sound mind" -- Does it mean that pedophilia is a choice, perhaps, and that homosexuality is not? To me, none of those sexual orientations are a choice, but I do believe there is remedy for them. Some people usually get outrageous when I say that. But you know what? I don't care the slightest. I am just being fair. You believe pedophilia is a mental illness, but homosexuality a natural orientation, while I believe both are unnatural, and therefore do not treat pedophilia and homosexuality differently in any way, although I do treat the acts differently.

Do you seriously wonder why people cannot accept homosexuality? As much as you cannot accept pedophilia, which is - if homosexuality too - not a choice, other people cannot accept homosexuality. Even if the acts are different, the orientations are just as unnatural.

At that point, you have to consider every sexuality as "unnatural," since heterosexuality is just as much of a choice as any other orientation. Generally, pedophilia is considered deviant because of the given culture. I realize that this, in and of itself, is contentious, but our social norms and the laws that those translate as dictate that pedophilia is "wrong." Age of consent is a product of myriad cultural and biological factors. However, control or lack thereof isn't exclusive to pedophilia or homosexuality. What makes them different in contemporary context is age of consent, primarily (and all of the ideologies that back it up).

If we are speaking from a U.S. perspective specifically, then there is no reason that homosexuality should be considered unnatural to the point of illegality or censure. Pedophilia, on the other hand, is an entirely different ball game, since it specifically involves minors, and the U.S. has specific and long standing consent laws. This negates, of course, the ability of a minor to consent to sexual acts with someone who is their senior.

However, the principle of liberty dictates that, once the age of consent is reached, homosexual practices are well within the legal rights of any U.S. citizen. I would quote John Stuart Mill, but that seems hokey.

PS- I say pedophilic or neophilic with regards to natural selection because we are essentially hairless ape descendants :) As we moved from australopithicus on down the evolutionary line, we specifically sexually selected those who possessed younger and younger features (compare human features to ape infants, if you like, but it's still pretty removed from what we were actually breeding with at the time) due to their instinctual "appeal." Hence, human beings look as they do now because our ancestors sexually desired those who looked as children. Creepy creepy :D
alto2osu
Posts: 277
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2009 1:33:54 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Oh- I would also say that pedophilia does not necessarily restrict itself to prepubescence, but rather to the general child-like features. For example, wanted to have sex with a 12-year-old female would still be considered pedophilic, though that girl may be able to biologically reproduce.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2009 1:38:24 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/17/2009 1:27:51 PM, alto2osu wrote:
At that point, you have to consider every sexuality as "unnatural," since heterosexuality is just as much of a choice as any other orientation. Generally, pedophilia is considered deviant because of the given culture. I realize that this, in and of itself, is contentious, but our social norms and the laws that those translate as dictate that pedophilia is "wrong." Age of consent is a product of myriad cultural and biological factors. However, control or lack thereof isn't exclusive to pedophilia or homosexuality. What makes them different in contemporary context is age of consent, primarily (and all of the ideologies that back it up).
No, not every sexual orientation is "unnatural". There is a reason for why there straight people are the majority, and have never been a minority. Science has no evidence whatsoever to prove that homosexuality and such are as natural as heterosexuality. Also, whatever you believe, the point is that homosexuals consider pedophiles as being "mental ill", but themselves as being just as "normal" as others. If they condemn the act of pedophilia, then fine, but if they think that pedophilia is a mental illness while homosexuality is normal, then they are undoubtedly wrong. As I said, pedophilia is not more of a choice than homosexuality is. It also has no connection between any mind-related illnesses, like schizophrenia or something else.

If we are speaking from a U.S. perspective specifically, then there is no reason that homosexuality should be considered unnatural to the point of illegality or censure. Pedophilia, on the other hand, is an entirely different ball game, since it specifically involves minors, and the U.S. has specific and long standing consent laws. This negates, of course, the ability of a minor to consent to sexual acts with someone who is their senior.

However, the principle of liberty dictates that, once the age of consent is reached, homosexual practices are well within the legal rights of any U.S. citizen. I would quote John Stuart Mill, but that seems hokey.
I am not talking about the rights of homosexuals or pedophiles, but about the sexual orientations. Homosexuals think that pedophiles should have a cure, but when religious people tell them that they should have a cure, they become outrageous. They probably don't even want to hear that some people believe that there is a remedy for them.

PS- I say pedophilic or neophilic with regards to natural selection because we are essentially hairless ape descendants :) As we moved from australopithicus on down the evolutionary line, we specifically sexually selected those who possessed younger and younger features (compare human features to ape infants, if you like, but it's still pretty removed from what we were actually breeding with at the time) due to their instinctual "appeal." Hence, human beings look as they do now because our ancestors sexually desired those who looked as children. Creepy creepy :D
See, I don't believe in the theory of evolution, but your theory about why humans look like this today is pretty funny.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2009 1:40:30 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
What is more "natural" about being attracted to the same sex, compared to being attracted to youngsters? It is a completely invalid.
Zetsubou
Posts: 4,933
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2009 2:46:35 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/17/2009 1:40:30 PM, Mirza wrote:
What is more "natural" about being attracted to the same sex, compared to being attracted to youngsters? It is a completely invalid.

This sound alot like the debate on transexuality and sex changes, a 9 year old boy convinced himself his body is an abnormability. Whats more abnormal "a mutation that made you 100% boy" or "being a phycopath*."

Psychopath genreally speaking. Being a psychopath just means you're metally abnormal. Not such a bad thing if you think about it.
'sup DDO -- july 2013
Lexicaholic
Posts: 526
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2009 2:52:27 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/17/2009 1:40:30 PM, Mirza wrote:
What is more "natural" about being attracted to the same sex, compared to being attracted to youngsters? It is a completely invalid.

Everything is natural. That includes pedophilia. Not everything is acceptable behavior, however, no matter how natural it is. Engaging in pedophilia can cause harm to minors. Engaging in homosexual behavior, without more, does not. Hence, it is entirely proper to discriminate against one activity and not the other. If we argued what was right by nature, I would have the right to kill territorial competitors, hold slaves and commit cannibalism. All perfectly natural activities, especially for man. Nature is a terrible selector for morality.
http://mastersofcreationrpg.com... - My new site and long-developed project. Should be fun.
Zetsubou
Posts: 4,933
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2009 3:23:58 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/17/2009 2:52:27 PM, Lexicaholic wrote:
At 11/17/2009 1:40:30 PM, Mirza wrote:
What is more "natural" about being attracted to the same sex, compared to being attracted to youngsters? It is a completely invalid.

Everything is natural. That includes pedophilia. Not everything is acceptable behavior, however, no matter how natural it is. Engaging in pedophilia can cause harm to minors. Engaging in homosexual behavior, without more, does not. Hence, it is entirely proper to discriminate against one activity and not the other. If we argued what was right by nature, I would have the right to kill territorial competitors, hold slaves and commit cannibalism. All perfectly natural activities, especially for man. Nature is a terrible selector for morality.

I just had to point out how much of pseudo-philosophy this is.

Natural: Of, relating to, or concerning nature. [Rational]

You are speaking in terms of Sociology everything Natural in the rational state. Everything is only natural in the physical and in the material. In Sociology, Nature is just the conformist Values and Norms you accept and keep the acceptance or non acceptance of homosexuals not pedophiles is one example. The argument is whether it is a Psychological unconscious Choice or just thinking "dis gal is a buff ting". Nature for Morality is the one and only way to find morality - from society.

What do mean causes pedophiles cause harm? The action of Sex? Metal harm?
'sup DDO -- july 2013
Harlan
Posts: 1,880
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2009 4:08:38 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
I just had to point out how much of pseudo-philosophy this is.

Natural: Of, relating to, or concerning nature. [Rational]

You are speaking in terms of Sociology everything Natural in the rational state. Everything is only natural in the physical and in the material. In Sociology, Nature is just the conformist Values and Norms you accept and keep the acceptance or non acceptance of homosexuals not pedophiles is one example. The argument is whether it is a Psychological unconscious Choice or just thinking "dis gal is a buff ting". Nature for Morality is the one and only way to find morality - from society.

What do mean causes pedophiles cause harm? The action of Sex? Metal harm?

No, sociology is a phenomenon of the material world. The actions and thoughts of humans are directed by brains, which are as physical as any other matter that has existed. A biological phenomenon of the human, neurological system is just as natural as something which is easier to predict.

So yes, everything that occurs is natural, in an objective sense.
Harlan
Posts: 1,880
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2009 4:10:55 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
And it is not a sin or a cruelty for one to be a pedophile, as one cannot help nor should try to help his own thoughts and natural desires. It could be much more harmful to try to satisfy such desires, though, since children are innocent and vulnerable, and are not always capable of making good decisions.
MistahKurtz
Posts: 400
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2009 4:32:26 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Pedophilia: sexual relations between one as deemed by society to not comprehend the ramification and implications of their actions with one who does understand such things and comprehends that the younger partner does not.

Homosexuality: sexual relation between two consenting adults who society deems to be in control of their own lives, minds and bodies.

Now if you could, just to set the record straight here, please discern why there is a logical connection between the two, other than you think they're both icky.

Now, if we look at your oft-ignored Holy Book, do you think that the omission of anything about pedophilia is therefore an endorsement or a recognition that it is not a sin? Furthermore, do you think that homosexuality is wrong because it is mentioned as wrong by the bible? Does that therefore mean that you recognize everything as listed as sin in the bible to be wrong?

Let's look at some of your enlightening comments

There is a reason for why there straight people are the majority, and have never been a minority.

That's why black people, men, left-handed people and children are all inherently wrong.

there is as much evidence supporting the fact that pedophiles' sexual orientation towards children is the same as homosexuals' sexual orientation towards the same sex.

Let's see it, then.

the Abrahamic religions are against both, not the people, but the lusts.

Yes, right. According to the bible, sex not for the sake of reproduction is wrong. I guess we'll all be in the higher stages of hell, abused eternally by violent cyclones.

How hypocritical is it that you think pedophiles are mental ill, but homosexuals are not [I'm not saying they are]?

Oooh you make me want to just kiss you.

Do you seriously wonder why people cannot accept homosexuality?

Yes, whenever me and my boyfriend walk the down the street holding hands, we're usually tarred and feathered and sometimes hit with stones. We are, however, always crucified. Good to know that some people still have consistency.

See, I don't believe in the theory of evolution, but your theory about why humans look like this today is pretty funny.

Your case is only getting stronger with each word you say.

How does it feel to know that you're being thrashed by two mentally ill people?

High five to L for being just another crazy queer.

But really though Mirza, I don't just love you, I am in love with you. Maybe we could get coffee some time?
Neumax
Posts: 39
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2009 5:09:16 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Homosexuality isn't necessarily the choice of the person who is gay. It's not like one day you wake up and say, "Hey, I wanna be gay!". Most of the time, being gay isn't a choice.
A true optimist would think that the glass is half awesome.
TheSkeptic
Posts: 1,362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2009 5:22:54 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
In an idealistic sense, I'd support pedophilia. The only issue that we should be concerned with is consent, and of course most people cut it off at the "line of being an adult" - namely 18 or 21. Of course, this is a much too broad and vague distinction; there's some 16 year olds who I know that are much more rational than older adults. If anything, I'd prefer them to have the power to vote and the latter not.

Of course, age and intelligence go hand in hand many times but not always; and that's why idealistically there are some pedophilic relationships I'd support. However, it's just so hard to find a clear cut case that I don't see much purpose in attempting to legalize pedophilia. Especially since if the two individuals truly love each other, then can just wait until the child grows up.
Harlan
Posts: 1,880
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2009 5:26:55 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Yes, I think that civil rights should be for all people exempting younger people. I think this is likewise for consent to sex (at least when one party involved is an adult). I don't know where that line should be drawn, but it obviously has to be drawn somewhere betwixt the unconscious infant and the mature adult.
MistahKurtz
Posts: 400
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2009 5:35:46 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/17/2009 5:22:54 PM, TheSkeptic wrote:
In an idealistic sense, I'd support pedophilia. The only issue that we should be concerned with is consent, and of course most people cut it off at the "line of being an adult" - namely 18 or 21. Of course, this is a much too broad and vague distinction; there's some 16 year olds who I know that are much more rational than older adults. If anything, I'd prefer them to have the power to vote and the latter not.

Of course, age and intelligence go hand in hand many times but not always; and that's why idealistically there are some pedophilic relationships I'd support. However, it's just so hard to find a clear cut case that I don't see much purpose in attempting to legalize pedophilia. Especially since if the two individuals truly love each other, then can just wait until the child grows up.

First off, you should recognize that pedophilia generally recognizes a sex act with someone under the age of 13. What you're technically talking about is statutory rape, of which the American laws are awful. In the U.S, some of the previous people I've dated (who were one or two years older than I) would be considered sex offenders

The law here in Canada is pretty decent on this. The legal age of consent is 16, and one under that age is protected if they have consensual relations with one 3 years older or younger than themselves. (The former consent age was 14, with a gap of 5 years. I have reservations about this.)
King_da
Posts: 4
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2009 5:50:57 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/17/2009 6:55:29 AM, rawrxqueen wrote:
Do you believe it is a sin to be gay? If so, do you also find it a sin to get a divorce? And that remarriage is also a sin? Do you believe that it is discovered that a bride is not a virgin that she should be stoned to death? Do you believe that if married person has sex with someone else's husband or wife, that both adulterers be stoned to death? Do you find it a sin for a married couple to have sexual intercourse during a woman's period? Do you believe that if a man dies childless, his widow is ought to have intercourse with each of his brothers in turn until she bears her deceased husband a male heir?

I do not believe that it is a sin to be gay. Humans are born with this. It is, however, as sin to practice homosexuality.

In some situations it would not be a sin to get a divorce. But in most, it is corrupting God's intent on marriage. Remarriage is permissible in cases of death to the partner or in a permissible divorce.

Should the bride be stoned? No. Remember, the Bible was written A LONG time ago. Plus, I'm not sure that the Bible says that it is ok, rather it was just a background part of the verse.

If a married person has sex with someone else's husband or wife, should both adulterers be stoned to death? No. Remember, the Bible was written A LONG time ago. Plus, I'm not sure that the Bible says that it is ok, rather it was just a background part of the verse.

Is it wrong for married couples to have sex during the wife's period? I am actually in deep thought on this one. I know that the Catholic Church is against it, but i don't know.

Do you believe that if a man dies childless, his widow is ought to have intercourse with each of his brothers in turn until she bears her deceased husband a male heir? No.
feverish
Posts: 2,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2009 5:55:59 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/17/2009 1:38:24 PM, Mirza wrote:
There is a reason for why there straight people are the majority, and have never been a minority.

Reproduction?
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2009 5:58:07 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/17/2009 5:50:57 PM, King_da wrote:
I do not believe that it is a sin to be gay. Humans are born with this. It is, however, as sin to practice homosexuality.

In some situations it would not be a sin to get a divorce. But in most, it is corrupting God's intent on marriage. Remarriage is permissible in cases of death to the partner or in a permissible divorce.


Should the bride be stoned? No. Remember, the Bible was written A LONG time ago. Plus, I'm not sure that the Bible says that it is ok, rather it was just a background part of the verse.

If a married person has sex with someone else's husband or wife, should both adulterers be stoned to death? No. Remember, the Bible was written A LONG time ago. Plus, I'm not sure that the Bible says that it is ok, rather it was just a background part of the verse.

Is it wrong for married couples to have sex during the wife's period? I am actually in deep thought on this one. I know that the Catholic Church is against it, but i don't know.

Do you believe that if a man dies childless, his widow is ought to have intercourse with each of his brothers in turn until she bears her deceased husband a male heir? No.

I'm wondering why you cherry-pick all of these responses. Why is it that the practice of homosexuality is a sin, while it's not alright to stone virgins?

The vigor with which the Bible declares things is no different. Why is it that time can allow us to look the other way on some things but not other things?

The only plausible answer is that morality is not stagnant. The Bible is a good photograph of how morality used to be, but that says nothing about now.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
TheSkeptic
Posts: 1,362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2009 5:59:18 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
First off, you should recognize that pedophilia generally recognizes a sex act with someone under the age of 13. What you're technically talking about is statutory rape, of which the American laws are awful. In the U.S, some of the previous people I've dated (who were one or two years older than I) would be considered sex offenders

Can we not agree that some 13 year olds are probably more rational/intelligent and thus more suitable and deserving of rights than some adults?
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2009 6:01:16 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/17/2009 5:59:18 PM, TheSkeptic wrote:
First off, you should recognize that pedophilia generally recognizes a sex act with someone under the age of 13. What you're technically talking about is statutory rape, of which the American laws are awful. In the U.S, some of the previous people I've dated (who were one or two years older than I) would be considered sex offenders

Can we not agree that some 13 year olds are probably more rational/intelligent and thus more suitable and deserving of rights than some adults?

Yes, but the percentage is so low that judging people based on age is more practical for our government than judging people based on their intelligence.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.