Should homosexuality be promoted?

Post Reply New Topic

There is no proof that they committed genocide to the Midianite people. The virgin(s) were spared because they could not have been the whores whose diseases have killed more then 40,000 jews.

The Jews did invent homosexuality. Prior to that, you did not define people's orientation by the sex's involved in the act, because men frequently had sex with men, boys, their wives, and young virgins. You cannot name another ancient culture who had prohibitions against a man having sex with a man, gay or straight.

You cite the greeks, and they rank amongst the most sexist society in the ancient world. Their man-man/boy love was also at the expense of women and a woman's inherent worth in society. Why is that to be glorified? The role of woman was subjugated to just two roles: running the house and sexual pleasure. That's it! She has no inherent worth beyond those two roles, and all of this was because of the glorification of the male form, male psyche, and male-male love.

Why is it noble for any of those ancient monsters to have done what they did? Yes, we have them to thank for the spread of culture, enlightenment and civilization to the backwaters of humanity, but might makes right is a hellish foreign and domestic policy, and you saw nothing but murder, rape of both sexes, torture, separating of families, selling women and children off into slavery, systematic starvation, ethnic cleansing, the loss of so many cultures, languages, ways of looking at the world, I mean its endless. I would hardly glorify Greek, Babylonian, Egyptian, or Roman acquiring of ancient lands. Women were property, children were property, everything was easily swappable.

Name one of those that were a slave-safe zone wherein if a slave escaped from somewhere and made it into one of those empires, they were regarded as free men, and could not be returned to their foreign captors? Name one of those who elevated the worth of women half of that of the Jews? Name any of those which had prohibitions on the way you could eat and treat animals? Child rights? There were none beyond ancient Israel.

^^^^^
Didn't they beleive in stoning adulteresses to death ?and if you had sex with an animal(gross) you got put to death.

I'm not aware of any proof outside the Bible. But, neither have I researched it.


That isn't why. They just had a virgin fetish.

I wouldn't give them credit for that.


Well, Rome, after Christianity was adopted.


I think that with all of the man-on-man stuff, the female role was more to gestate new citizens rather than to provide sexual pleasure. You never heard of what went down in Lesbos?

I wasn't stating that anyone was worthy of glory. Only that the inhibition of homosexuality among Hebrew soldiers may have made them less capable than other soldiers, and that homosexuality among soldiers could turn them into a more cohesive fighting unit.

How would I know?


I think that Hindus, Buddhist and Jains had special rules regarding animals from ancient times. Saying that "there were non beyond ancient Israel" smacks of hyberbole.
Jews not eating pork, cheeseburgers and ostriche meat is just plain silly.
Did Jews really elevate the worth of women?

I am speaking strictly from within the Bible. There is no proof that the Jews carried out that so called genocide.




No. They had a prostitute fetish. Prostitutes can give you sex more easily then a virgin could, as it would require rape and potentially risking your life for free sex. The prostitutes were what gave the israeli's the diseases that wiped out maybe half of their population.




Well you can't name any ancient people who defined sexual orientation by the sex of those engaging in the act. It was a Jewish invention.



Yes, but pre Judaism and Pre Christianity was a very rotten world.




Yes but they had no rights beyond their societally designated functions. They had no worth beyond those roles. The same goes for homosexuality in the germanic and franco tribes, every single middle-eastern tribe, the chinese, and the world over. The elevation of the male as the ideal, be it mans intellectual and philosophical achievements, or the male form as the ideal, has, unfortunately, always come at the de-elevation of the woman. What went down with the lesbian love is bitter sweet. Sweet because they had someone to love and be loved by, and bitter because of the constraints of reality and society in those times that allowed them no other options.

There was no female creation story in all of the middle east, from north africa to afghanistan. The one group of people, 3000 years ago, who had a creation story in which woman is made is the Jews.

I would vote, but theres no "WTF is this " option

Since your avatar appears to be the picture of the Government is not God PAC, who have said this, which I have a loss for words on this one, I'm thinking you want it promoted.



I guess this is the part where you say outrageous things about homosexuality, and when I confront you, you cry about it being a religious opinion? If you're going to be doing this, just start whining now instead of me taking it to the next page or two. It's rather disgusting you think gays and people who are pro-gay rights should accept incest as well.

Last edited by iBlockhead on 09 Nov 2012, 5:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I don't deny that, though, it would be a distraction in a military campaign and used to emasculate those they captured. The ancient israelites were here to conquer the world with their ethics. Their ethics now permeate much of what we take for granted as the laws of the world, but those assumptions we all hold, such as the immorality of mother-son sex, was conceived in the desert by a small group of nobody's.



Because none existed. Just as San Francisco is an immigrant safe zone and federal agents cannot round up illegals who find refuge in its perimeters, so was ancient Israel, the only known example of its kind in its day to offer refuge to any slave who managed to run away from its captor. The commandment is so because they were once slaves in the lands of Egypt, they should be the first to know what it is like to be unfree.



The Hindu's, Buddhists, and Jains had special rules but they equated human life with animal life. Because every living thing was all one of the same, just karma shaped in the form of a human, stuck in samsara seeking moksha, it is no of no consequence when Hindu armies would battle in their great epics. It wasn't a matter of right or wrong, because we're all going to die anyways, and come back in the next life as another representitive of this "one-ness" or energy form that we all belong to. Just fulfill your duty as a warrior. The Jewish Torah is human centered, in that humans do matter, and we have to live like this life is all there is, even if another exists after it. Religious humanism is what it is, and that is how I define myself.

The rules that established kashrut were done with the understanding that our ethics as a nation is tied in with the food culture we have. People today mistaken sterilized meat counters, well-lit walkways, and glizty marketing for modernity and progress, but now a package of meat has no mental differentiation from boxed cereal or canned peaches. The removal of ones self from the land that sustains us is what leads to the machine farming and big-Agriculture that we have. We don't recognize that a life has been taken so that we may eat. Which is why the torah, which has a preference for strict vegan diet, made a compromise following Noah's landing the arc. So that we Jews would never elevate animal life above human life as the Hindu's, Buddhists, and Jains do. And that if we must consume meat, we have to do so ethically. Jews are not allowed to hunt, so that we may not kill off half of the animal kingdom just to satisfy ourselves. Even when killing an animal, we are not allowed to drink its blood. Because, we value life, and to symbolize that valuation, its life-source(its blood) is drained back into the earth as a observance that the animal's life belongs to God, and its life/soul is something we can never own.

The Jews elevated the worth of women higher then any other ancient culture. This was 3000 years ago when this torah was conceived in the form of an oral tradition, and it is said that these stories date back as far as 12,000 years ago from the inhabitants of this part of the world. Its view of women were more elevated then anything pre 1950's. It is arguable that its view of woman is still more elevated then the notions that 90% of the worlds population holds in 2012. It has no equal.

You don't need an invitation to ever join the conversation.

Sounds great. Is your avatar the corpse you left behind when you ran from the Evolution thread? Instead of this being another thread where someone dances around the ToS bashing gays indirectly because they cannot do it directly as much as they really want to, I'd much rather you answer my question on that thread instead.

That is a completely reasonable response if you said I should accept incest if I am pro-gay rights. I think we are even now. I did change your response to the one you changed it to, remember.

Last edited by iBlockhead on 09 Nov 2012, 6:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I don't like dealing with 4 different people who deal with nothing I say.

Feel free to lend your opinion to this discussion, the other side has been largely quiet. I have not violated anything other then differing with those on PPR. There have been no gay bashing in here.

I was merely commenting on the pervasiveness of this Jewish text called the Torah in the rise of the west.

Exactly; this is what is going to happen. You find it completely acceptable to say I need to accept incest if I want to be pro-gay rights, yet somehow that's not an attack on gays.

So let's just cut to the chase: if I'm pro-gay rights, you want me to accept an illegal activity as well to be even-handed on this. So the obvious question is, if I'm supposed to accept this form of illegal acitivty, then (I'm going to try this again as previously): do you believe that homosexuality should be criminalized, and if so, what is the punishment? And where do they go after they die if they don't reverse their course?

I have to remind you, that you are under NO OBLIGATION to answer to anything I post, as much as I want you to. I mean, NO ANSWER AT ALL. You can completely walk away from this, and since you're Jewish I cannot say you want to avoid saying they're going to Hell because I don't know what version of the afterlife you believe in. I cannot force you to answer this question, I can only ask that you should answer it. All I have to say is, if you start dancing, that doesn't mean 'no'. I'm only asking this once, and I will not repeat it if you do not answer this and I will leave it alone if you don't. That's the deal. Don't say I'm not fair, I did change your post to the more accurate one.

EDIT: There appears to be a delay and I just read your post. We should hold a poll if what you said in defense of it actually made sense, because that was a terrible delivery if you meant that.

It should be made as much fuss about as heterosexuality. IE none.
I just want to get it out of people's minds that homosexuality is somehow a big deal, if we could just calm down life would be so much easier.

Market and Church, I would like you to know something:

I spend my time on the internet looking for arguments. No, not by trolling, I just find things people are arguing about and weigh in. I've argued against Twilight on Twilight forums. I've argued about religion everywhere. I've argued politics, I've argued science with creationists, I live with a man who believes in the Illuminati.

And despite all of this, your comments in this thread are the stupidest things I've ever heard in my entire goddamn life. Your confirmation bias is rampant, as is your lionization of ancient Hebrew culture. News flash: Jews, like all other human beings, are products of their time. Their culture during and before the life of Christ was precisely as wretched and monstrous as those of their neighbors. They took slaves, sold human beings as property, murdered their fellows during "divinely sanctioned" lynchings and practiced genocide - just like everyone else. The only real difference is that they lost (a lot) and ended up as the slaves of several cultures with superior military or sometimes cultural resources (see: Egypt and Rome).

As for folks being pro-homosexual also being pro-incest, I would like to point out there there's a moral and practical dimension you missed. To wit:

- If a man and a man, or a woman and a woman, choose to have sex the only risk they take is with each other (sexually transmitted infections), which is also a risk in heterosexual relations.

- If a mother and son, or a brother and sister, or a granddaughter and grandfather or what have you choose to have sex (leaving out all of the incestuous relationships that result from child grooming or straight-up abuse and rape of a more common variety) then they're risking bringing another human being into the world, one that is likely to be damned to a life of misery due to various defects and deficiencies caused by the close genetic relationship of their parents.

I suppose a case could be made for same-sex incest or sterile incest, but that's for society and the laws it produces to decide, not me (especially since you wouldn't get me to write the legalize on that document at fraggin' gunpoint).

We on the same page now? Good.