Crazy Christian Lady on Homosexuality

Post Reply New Topic

This might be a great time to ask a question I've always wanted an answer to. If it is ever discovered that homosexuality is genetic, then would is still be a sin? Wouldn't that be like making having brown eyes a sin? You couldn't help having the genetics, after all.

Judith

By saying "still be", you're assuming that it is one now, which is debatable.

Most Christians who are against homosexuality are actually against homosexual acts, rather than the orientation itself. Assuming that homosexuality is wrong the question reduces to: if you had a genetic predisposition to stealing, does that mean stealing's okay? After all, you can control your actions, even if you can't control your impulse.

I'd generally consider anyone who's against the orientation to be ignorant or stupid.

All we are is the result of our genetics and our environment, so if you take the stance of "it's not someone's fault because they are genetically inclined to X" "they can't help it because Y" then you're left unable to hold anyone responsible for anything.

"Any man who looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart."


That would be probably the majority of people in my state. So your description sounds accurate.

The justification for religious homophobia is found in the book of Leviticus.... roughly one page before it also condemns wearing clothing of more than one fabric.

The fact of the matter is that much of the rules found in the old testament are thrown out by none other than Jesus, who quite plainly states that those rules existed because people weren't yet ready to live without them.

I doubt it is deterministically genetic. A much more likely explanation is that orientation is a product of the brains development, and that certain genetics increase the probability, but that the metabolism of the mother and/or fetus are the keys - in particular, the exposure of the fetus to particular levels of hormones and molecular signals. I believe that autism is an analagous process which involves different parts of the brain.

1. I hate, loathe, and in all other ways despise the word "homophobia". If you take it literally, it means "fear of sameness". Well, it has nothing to do with avoiding monotony. However, "homosexophobia" doesn't exactly flow right, so I can ignore that. But what does it mean? The way most people use it, you might think it refers to a type of hate. But they also use it to describe a lack of comfort. So if I jump or look uncomfortable if a guy tries to hug me, I'm a "homophobe". Never mind that I don't like physical contact period (with the exception of close family and pretty girls).

It also gets used, almost always, to play a "heads I win, tails you lose, and by the way, have you stopped beating your wife yet?" kind of game. You don't exactly have to argue your position if the other side is all just a bunch of dirty homophobes, right?

Sorry about the rant, that's just a really big pet peeve of mine.

2. Some of the ancient Hebrew laws were purity laws not much observed these days. Some of them were, or were based on, solid moral principles, and are no less valid today. Adultery and murder were banned then and are just as banned now. Mixing cloth and not working on Saturdays, not so much.

Which category homosexuality fits in is the question.

A pretty good guideline is just to follow what Jesus said. "Love God, and love thy neighbor as thyself." Or, for an expanded version in another passage, the instruction was just to follow the ten commandments. "Thou shalt hate gay people" is not in the ten commandments. Don't commit adultery, don't murder, and observing the Sabbath are among those commandments.

If you see a pretty girl, and look away quickly, as opposed to staring, I would say you're not "looking at her with lust" in the sense of this passage. It has to do with intent.

(Note: I'm not claiming to be a paragon of virtue in this department.)

Also, if you look at the rest of the speech this is taken out of, you'll find a parallel comparison (anger/murder), and in general, the overall bent of the speech is "Quit being legalistic. Don't just go through the motions. Don't be a hypocrite."

I'd say it has to do with the parts of yourself you can control, not those you can't.

Well put.

Or anywhere else.

Actually the prohibition against homosexuality is at the foundation of western civiliazation.
Plato wrote an expansive piece against it.
It is just a fact, for a civilation to thrive sexual energy must be turned into reproduction wich homosexuality doesnt accomplish.

Source? Look, in every culture, heterosexuality has been the norm, and homosexuality has existed. There really doesn't appear to be any way of changing someone's sexual orientation, so homosexuals aren't going to reproduce regardless of how much anyone hates them. And by your reasoning, birth control is EVIL!! !

Laws, Symposium, Phraedrus
And birth control is evil

It depends on what a "commandment" is. There are, of course, THE Ten Commandments, which are included as part of over 600 Mitvot, but what about Leviticus 18:22, Leviticus 20:13, and Deuteronomy 22:5?

Leviticus 18:22 - "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."

Leviticus 20:13 - "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them."

Deuteronomy 22:5 - "The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God."

Most people live only by those commandments, mitzvot, and guidelines that support their particular lifestyles and ignore the rest, regardless of sexual orientation / preference.

Are you Catholic?

I don't see any great evil in birth control. If everyone were like the Irish, this world would be far too crowded. Anyways, simply because Plato wrote it doesn't mean it's true.

Well, no, it is found in both the New and the Old Testament. So, this characterization of it only being Leviticus is false, and a mischaracterization by those who dislike Christian opposition to homosexuality. I mean, I already cited 1 Cor 6:9, which states:

1Co 6:9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality,

and there is also 1 Timothy 1:9-10

1 Timothy 1:9-10 understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, (10) the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine,

Both of these are in the found in the ESV if one doubts the translation I am using. Now, we can argue that Christianity is wrong, but considering homosexuality to be immoral is much more established than laws on cloth, or a number of the other things that people try to draw as equivalent to homosexuality found in Leviticus.

Last edited by Awesomelyglorious on 29 Jul 2008, 5:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.