Gay Marriage and Homophobia
- Thread starter Liamson
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
You should not and cannot impose equality or equal value on things that are not the same and aren’t even of equal value. Indeed, contrary to what egalitarians may think, the very concept of equality assumes the existence and necessity for hierarchy. After all, if equality exists in the world, so must inequality–just as darkness and lightness only make sense in relation to the other. For there to be lightness, there has to darkness. We notice lightness as a contrast to darkness, and we notice darkness in contrast to lightness. If darkness was all we knew, we wouldn’t even notice it. If lightness was all we knew, we wouldn’t notice it either. We say some things are of equal value because we are aware of inequalities that exist all around us. We may argue that some inequalities are artificial, constructed, falsely premised, or unjust. But, we must also acknowledge that most inequalities are natural, normal, welcome, beneficial, and not the product of injustice. Some people are smarter than other people. Some animals are faster than other animals. Some animals are stronger than other animals. Some people are stronger than other people. These inequalities are facts and the products of nature. We become aware of equality only because inequality is an overwhelming fact of life and nature. Because so many things and creatures are unequal and different, we take notice when we see things that are equal in form or value. For example, we notice that a tiger is stronger than a cheetah– inequality. But, we may observe that a tiger is roughly of equal strength as the lion. And we may note that the cheetah is faster than a tiger or lion. And we may say that a car going 60 mph is roughly as fast as a cheetah–equal speed. So, we are aware of the concept of equality because it exists in contrast to inequality that we see all around us in nature and human society.
Taking notice of equality and forcing equality are two different things. It’s one thing to say it would be nice if all people were equally smart, but an agenda that tries to pretend that all people are of equal intelligence makes no sense. Or, it’s pretending that homosexuality is just as legitimate as heterosexuality. Sane people know that the basic fact of sexuality concerns its reproductive nature. The reason why people feel sexual pleasure is because God created sex to be as pleasurable as possible so as to encourage members of the opposite sex to mate in order to produce offspring to pass on the DNA. That's how its done, infertility or not, a penis and a vagina were meant for each other.
Oh and btw, I think you missed my first and second post, entirely. Or if you did read it, you might have skimmed just a wee bit.
I read it, thats why I brought up the point that if someone practices Sodomoty (rape) he or she is a rapist....in fact the original translation to the king james.
your first and second posts, in fact are demeaning.
-Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.
Hear Israel-The Lord your god is one, you are to love the Lord your God with all of your heart, with all of your strength, with all of your soul and mind...Love your neighbor as yourself
-I could go on...and frankly, many who God uses as examples in the Bible out rightly disobeyed God...and yet God chose to use him or her. The mere fact is that homosexuality as we understand it now to be, is only mentioned a mere 6 times in the bible, and yet loving our neighbor, the need for community, looking after those less fortunate are mentioned so much more. If one does not do this, is there a label? Or does he or she use the excuse –I’m a Christian and I believe homosexuality is wrong---- all of a sudden, all is ok?
Also, what gives you privilege to treat the LGBT population as scum...as you describe it to be? As "unequal"....as a agenda (which there is no ulterior agenda, people want to love who they love. This happened when those who are mixed races wanted to date, but the "Unequally yoked" card was played and was seen as a sin) The bible is used for a conservative agenda more than anything else...and they twist and nullify facts.
Are you afraid of this population? a lack of understanding that you have to slaughter the LGBT population, claim inequality and a certain "disgusting behavior?"
your first and second posts, in fact are demeaning.
-Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.
Hear Israel-The Lord your god is one, you are to love the Lord your God with all of your heart, with all of your strength, with all of your soul and mind...Love your neighbor as yourself
-I could go on...and frankly, many who God uses as examples in the Bible out rightly disobeyed God...and yet God chose to use him or her. The mere fact is that homosexuality as we understand it now to be, is only mentioned a mere 6 times in the bible, and yet loving our neighbor, the need for community, looking after those less fortunate are mentioned so much more. If one does not do this, is there a label? Or does he or she use the excuse –I’m a Christian and I believe homosexuality is wrong---- all of a sudden, all is ok?
Also, what gives you privilege to treat the LGBT population as scum...as you describe it to be? As "unequal"....as a agenda (which there is no ulterior agenda, people want to love who they love. This happened when those who are mixed races wanted to date, but the "Unequally yoked" card was played and was seen as a sin) The bible is used for a conservative agenda more than anything else...and they twist and nullify facts.
Are you afraid of this population? a lack of understanding that you have to slaughter the LGBT population, claim inequality and a certain "disgusting behavior?"
1
We can't eliminate portions of the Bible by saying there are topics covered in greater proportion. That's kind of a form of discrimination. You're saying since there are more of one thing, we can ignore the part that isn't as covered.
The Bible has things that all want to embrace. Love, empathy and forgiving. But it also has those parts that are harder to embrace.
We can't necessarily pick and choose. And this goes both ways!
People can't pick and choose verses on homosexuality and obsessively harp on that to the exclusion of others. On the other hand, folks can't take all the nice feel good verses and harp on those at the expense of excluding those verses they dislike.
The Bible has things that all want to embrace. Love, empathy and forgiving. But it also has those parts that are harder to embrace.
We can't necessarily pick and choose. And this goes both ways!
People can't pick and choose verses on homosexuality and obsessively harp on that to the exclusion of others. On the other hand, folks can't take all the nice feel good verses and harp on those at the expense of excluding those verses they dislike.
Are you kidding me? I never said scum, you said scum. Stop trying to label my efforts as something that they are not. If a person practices Homosexuality, that makes them a homosexual, not because I said they are but, because that is what they have called themselves. Slaughter? Really? Is this Iran, where we run around and collect stones? Is this the Westboro Baptist Church?
Where do you come up with this stuff? I'm guessing you missed the part of my first post where I talked about how if I didn't think that bad singing was good singing, that would make me a badsingophobe. What if I thought a car that didn't run was just as good as a car that did run, would that make me a brokedowncaraphobe?
Am I afraid or have a lack of understanding?
No, on the contrary my "Understanding" is probably better than most.
I know of no other way to illustrate the uselessness of identifying homosexuals as a civil rights group. They are not a people, they are individuals who make decisions and self-identify with a specific culture and lifestyle. So if they are unequal, and this is the point I made in the previous post, it is because they have chosen to be and identify with that. As has been the case with most of my posts, you are only reading only what you want to read.
As a person who dates people of mixed races, that is a ludicrous statement. Trying to Label me as a Racist, is really pretty low and kind of beside the point. I feel sorry for conservatives, because I'm to guess that Liberals won't let them use the Bible to justify their positions regarding anything. Which actually is part of my reasoning for having only cited it once, and in a rather tongue in cheek way too.
Making things equal that are not equal, is a violation of your sensibilities. I've illustrated I think more than 3 times, if I'm counting right (not that the incorrect way to count should be equal to the correct way, as an incorrect counting method can't actually solve any equation and is pretty useless.) If you haven't figured it out yet, I don't know how to make it more clear to you.
Where do you come up with this stuff? I'm guessing you missed the part of my first post where I talked about how if I didn't think that bad singing was good singing, that would make me a badsingophobe. What if I thought a car that didn't run was just as good as a car that did run, would that make me a brokedowncaraphobe?
Am I afraid or have a lack of understanding?
No, on the contrary my "Understanding" is probably better than most.
I know of no other way to illustrate the uselessness of identifying homosexuals as a civil rights group. They are not a people, they are individuals who make decisions and self-identify with a specific culture and lifestyle. So if they are unequal, and this is the point I made in the previous post, it is because they have chosen to be and identify with that. As has been the case with most of my posts, you are only reading only what you want to read.
As a person who dates people of mixed races, that is a ludicrous statement. Trying to Label me as a Racist, is really pretty low and kind of beside the point. I feel sorry for conservatives, because I'm to guess that Liberals won't let them use the Bible to justify their positions regarding anything. Which actually is part of my reasoning for having only cited it once, and in a rather tongue in cheek way too.
Making things equal that are not equal, is a violation of your sensibilities. I've illustrated I think more than 3 times, if I'm counting right (not that the incorrect way to count should be equal to the correct way, as an incorrect counting method can't actually solve any equation and is pretty useless.) If you haven't figured it out yet, I don't know how to make it more clear to you.
T
Why can't we be friends? Why cant we be friends?
YouTube - Why Can't We Be Friends - Bridge to Terabithia mix
YouTube - Why Can't We Be Friends - Bridge to Terabithia mix
To what extent, Liamson, should the same arguments be applied to members of other faiths? They should not, as you argue, be recognized as civil rights groups as they chose this identification. And at best they are practicing a perversion of Christianity, at worst a path straight to hell. Should they be allowed to call themselves a religion in law in the same sense as Christianity or must they be forced to find another, comparable name? If it occurs that, say, Buddhists become unpopular and are hunted, they deserve no civil rights recognition as a group per se because they chose that path?
The arguments you apply to this particular sin become scary when applied to mere apostasy, not to mention idolatry. I suppose, though, since it your theocracy you imagine coming out on top that you're ok with no civil rights recognition for any groups who happen to disagree, to their own peril.
The arguments you apply to this particular sin become scary when applied to mere apostasy, not to mention idolatry. I suppose, though, since it your theocracy you imagine coming out on top that you're ok with no civil rights recognition for any groups who happen to disagree, to their own peril.
By the way, I may regret using the hypothetical situation of the persecuted Buddhists. Instead, let's consider the actual cases of #1) the religious use of peyote and #2) the legal protections extended to Sikhs so that they can carry kirpans into places where everybody else must be disarmed.
In both cases, individual religious groups have been given extra legal abilities. According to the arguments I've read above, however, it seems like this would be considered a mistake. Is this a correct interpretation?
In both cases, individual religious groups have been given extra legal abilities. According to the arguments I've read above, however, it seems like this would be considered a mistake. Is this a correct interpretation?
Umm. You choose to be a christian. other people choose to be buddhist, jewish, wiccan, etc. I guess we shouldn't protect their rights either. Or people who choose to be a republican or democrat. Religious beliefs and political affiliation are protected and those are DEFINITELY chosen. EVEN if people choose to be gay (they don't, for the most part), your argument can be used for these two groups, as well.
J
You argue that because homosexuals are born gay (I don't know, nor care) it's okay. What if some day we found that rape is all in the genes? What if we find that various things the bible clearly outlines as sin, is all in the genes? Would you then extend your arguement of "born that way, don't be a hater!" to others?
J
I don't think you understand what I was asking. I will lay this out a little better.
One of the arguements you and other Pro-Gays use to support your reasoning that Homosexuality is perfectly permissible and not sinful is that they are born that way, that God made them that way... etc etc...
Would you be okay with that kind of arguement?
One of the arguements you and other Pro-Gays use to support your reasoning that Homosexuality is perfectly permissible and not sinful is that they are born that way, that God made them that way... etc etc...
Would you be okay with that kind of arguement?
Rape and murder actually harm people. Homosexuality does not. You really need to realize that it's not the same thing.
Listen, I... no, I can't even lie and say I appreciate what you're trying to do... But, give up. I take nothing you say with any intention of believing it/changing my mind. I know what I believe and what I KNOW is right. Whether you like it or not, I could care less.
The sufficient response will be that we should extend equivalent rights to all religious practitioners. I'm interested to see if they'll go that far, however, because some religious groups have been given rights that other groups do not have. A consistent application of their stance would actually require the removal of (admittedly uncommon) rights from some groups. I'd be interested to know if they'd go this far, to meddle in the well-established practices of other religions.
The sufficient response here would be to extend equivalent rights to all political parties. This is pretty much the case these days. It wasn't always, however. For instance, being a card-carrying Communist was not too long ago enough to lose you all your rights. But I could sign up here as a Communist and nobody would bat an eyelash. I really don't think they have much to answer for here.
They can respond in a coherent manner, but they'd have to explicitly out themselves as theocratic, not democratic. At that point the conversation really comes to a halt. There is still room for conversation with those who express democratic ideals, but if someone wants to run the country by God's law, "error has no rights."
At this point, you and I are left have no recourse but to express our disagreement, as we already have. You know, knock the dust from our sandals, that sort of thing.
The sufficient response here would be to extend equivalent rights to all political parties. This is pretty much the case these days. It wasn't always, however. For instance, being a card-carrying Communist was not too long ago enough to lose you all your rights. But I could sign up here as a Communist and nobody would bat an eyelash. I really don't think they have much to answer for here.
They can respond in a coherent manner, but they'd have to explicitly out themselves as theocratic, not democratic. At that point the conversation really comes to a halt. There is still room for conversation with those who express democratic ideals, but if someone wants to run the country by God's law, "error has no rights."
At this point, you and I are left have no recourse but to express our disagreement, as we already have. You know, knock the dust from our sandals, that sort of thing.
yes, one WHO practices homosexuality is a homosexual...the King James doesnt even have a name for this word and was added when the NIV and so forth came out (good translations, but this along with a few other translations of certain verses were not thought out)
who decides if this population is Unequal? who decides if any population group is unequal....of course the individual but many LGBT people do not identify as such...so another voice...those who oppose are coming in and yelling it. With misunderstanding and hate.
I was not labeling you as a racist, this was a example what "labeling" and misunderstanding has done in the past.
Do you believe those who choose this way of life should be jailed or even killed here in the states? Do you believe as you are describing in your eyes a "lower form of life" should be kicked to the curb and sent away? in fact how about everyone who cant reproduce...or all of the single parents...or those on welfare...or those who LOVE their KIDS in a relationship that is not a mom, dad, 2.5 kids with the white picket fence, should they just loose his or her kid because your definition of family is unacceptable? Do you think that kid may be loved less, if at all? Or perhaps they could be loved more than a passive father and work hungry mother? maybe...no family is perfect...and everyone has something or someone that makes his or her family "unacceptable" or "unequal" in any manner other than the eye of the beholder.
who decides if this population is Unequal? who decides if any population group is unequal....of course the individual but many LGBT people do not identify as such...so another voice...those who oppose are coming in and yelling it. With misunderstanding and hate.
I was not labeling you as a racist, this was a example what "labeling" and misunderstanding has done in the past.
Do you believe those who choose this way of life should be jailed or even killed here in the states? Do you believe as you are describing in your eyes a "lower form of life" should be kicked to the curb and sent away? in fact how about everyone who cant reproduce...or all of the single parents...or those on welfare...or those who LOVE their KIDS in a relationship that is not a mom, dad, 2.5 kids with the white picket fence, should they just loose his or her kid because your definition of family is unacceptable? Do you think that kid may be loved less, if at all? Or perhaps they could be loved more than a passive father and work hungry mother? maybe...no family is perfect...and everyone has something or someone that makes his or her family "unacceptable" or "unequal" in any manner other than the eye of the beholder.
^Strawman Much?^
You kind of ran with this one. No worries I suppose I would have done the same. I can really only speak for Americans on this one and say that we have the freedom of religion. You could worship whatever you wanted. However, we don't have an amendment that includes freedom of Marriage, where you can marry whatever sex you want.
I don't know if I would call it a theocracy, more like Straight Dave's Man Slammin MaX-OuT! ;-)
Well, I have no idea what choice you are on about or what it has to do with what I am talking about. I suppose if I had taken the bait from before I would wonder what position I was trying to defend here but, I didn't so there isn't really any competition for your moral high ground.
And if you are just talking about Choice or Religious freedom, then you've kinda ran away with it too. If I knowingly choose to participate in a group that engages in an activity that is perceived by its members to be equivalent to another activity but, in reality its not, would I cry foul when society as a whole rejects my notion of equality? Is Polo with horses the same as water Polo with horses? To me, one seems okay and the other, remarkably unnatural.
Ok, you seem intent on misrepresenting my position. If marriage and gay-marriage were equal then gay marriage would just be called marriage. Am I right? But there exists a difference between gay-marriage and marriage, so to call them equal is kind of a stretch. Equivalent to saying that Counterfeit money is just as good as real money because, we don't want to hurt the feeling of people who have counterfeit money, regardless of the consequences it has on the economic system. When little sally goes to buy ice cream with monopoly money, is society at large at fault for her being denied ice cream? Should Sally sue because her rights were violated? (She would probably win in California)
What are you talking about with being jailed and killed? Where have I said "Lower life form." Stop Being ridiculous and stick to the points.
If you do not understand that marriage serves a purpose and that marriage promotes stability, I would not expect you to understand why being a single mother is harder than being a married woman. I don't expect you to understand why a 50% divorce rate is unacceptable. I don't expect you to understand why being a deadbeat dad is unacceptable. I agree that no family is perfect but when did we stop trying and throw the nuclear family out the window in favor of Government funded irresponsibility? If we are trying to stop filling prisons, fixing the oldest institution known to man is the first place to start. From such a thing, such a thing comes.
You kind of ran with this one. No worries I suppose I would have done the same. I can really only speak for Americans on this one and say that we have the freedom of religion. You could worship whatever you wanted. However, we don't have an amendment that includes freedom of Marriage, where you can marry whatever sex you want.
I don't know if I would call it a theocracy, more like Straight Dave's Man Slammin MaX-OuT! ;-)
Well, I have no idea what choice you are on about or what it has to do with what I am talking about. I suppose if I had taken the bait from before I would wonder what position I was trying to defend here but, I didn't so there isn't really any competition for your moral high ground.
And if you are just talking about Choice or Religious freedom, then you've kinda ran away with it too. If I knowingly choose to participate in a group that engages in an activity that is perceived by its members to be equivalent to another activity but, in reality its not, would I cry foul when society as a whole rejects my notion of equality? Is Polo with horses the same as water Polo with horses? To me, one seems okay and the other, remarkably unnatural.
Ok, you seem intent on misrepresenting my position. If marriage and gay-marriage were equal then gay marriage would just be called marriage. Am I right? But there exists a difference between gay-marriage and marriage, so to call them equal is kind of a stretch. Equivalent to saying that Counterfeit money is just as good as real money because, we don't want to hurt the feeling of people who have counterfeit money, regardless of the consequences it has on the economic system. When little sally goes to buy ice cream with monopoly money, is society at large at fault for her being denied ice cream? Should Sally sue because her rights were violated? (She would probably win in California)
What are you talking about with being jailed and killed? Where have I said "Lower life form." Stop Being ridiculous and stick to the points.
If you do not understand that marriage serves a purpose and that marriage promotes stability, I would not expect you to understand why being a single mother is harder than being a married woman. I don't expect you to understand why a 50% divorce rate is unacceptable. I don't expect you to understand why being a deadbeat dad is unacceptable. I agree that no family is perfect but when did we stop trying and throw the nuclear family out the window in favor of Government funded irresponsibility? If we are trying to stop filling prisons, fixing the oldest institution known to man is the first place to start. From such a thing, such a thing comes.
1) in certain countries people are killed and prisoned for being LGBT, "corrective rape" is even being used
2) Marraige is a union between two who love each other.
3) yes being a single parent can be harder than being married
4) I know of families who are on welfare because one has died, or another has lost a Job.
5) Did I mention dead beat dad?
---yes I understand...yes the system needs to be changed...in many ways.
The Nuclear family isnt real....its a fabricated view of perfection. as You even said, there are no perfect families.
So, we are called to love in community...to help each other out. And do not assume what I do and do not understand.
2) Marraige is a union between two who love each other.
3) yes being a single parent can be harder than being married
4) I know of families who are on welfare because one has died, or another has lost a Job.
5) Did I mention dead beat dad?
---yes I understand...yes the system needs to be changed...in many ways.
The Nuclear family isnt real....its a fabricated view of perfection. as You even said, there are no perfect families.
So, we are called to love in community...to help each other out. And do not assume what I do and do not understand.
I don't think its the system as much as it is the culture. Dependency, Legality and entitlement have replaced Independence, Entrepreneurship and service.
You were right you didn't bring up dead beat dads. I did because I see it as a symptom of the decay of marriage and overall of society.
I'm not suggesting that Welfare should be abolished, I'm saying it is a symptom of a deeper issue. In some communities, it is no longer the exception rather, it is the expectation.
And no it should never "take a village" to raise a child. A Mother and Father will do quite nicely.
You were right you didn't bring up dead beat dads. I did because I see it as a symptom of the decay of marriage and overall of society.
I'm not suggesting that Welfare should be abolished, I'm saying it is a symptom of a deeper issue. In some communities, it is no longer the exception rather, it is the expectation.
And no it should never "take a village" to raise a child. A Mother and Father will do quite nicely.