Should homosexuality be promoted?

Post Reply New Topic

Trichinosis,yuk,you can get it from eating bear meat if it's not cooked good.^^^^

Could be worse. They just found out a lot of people are walking around with tapeworms in their brain. Nasty creatures, they get everywhere if you don't catch it quick. And some people are apparently stupid enough to use them to lose weight,

First of all, they weren't yet called "Jews": just "Israelites" or "Hebrews." And, that is how wars were fought in the olden days. What sort of proof are you looking for?




The Midianite women weren't prostitutes: they were just very, very, very hospitable people. And, look at how the Israelites repaid them for their hospitality. If you are looking for good, kindly people in the ancient world: the Midianites were them. And, there is absolutely nothing to suggest that the Midianites had been the cause of the epidemic. It would seem to have been Yahweh's doing, if anything.


The Bible contains no such definition.


Guess what? The world is still a very rotten place.


What are you trying to get at?


I doubt that the Jews were the only ones to have fabricated a creation myth that accounted for the existence of women.
Other religions included both Gods and Goddesses. According to the Jews, God created Man in His own image, and the woman later, as an after-thought, so that the man could have a companion and plaything. The Jewish God is a purely masculine figure. The Woman is the one who gets the blame for Man's downfall: she is the one who coquettishly persuaded him to eat that forbidden fruit, and she got the bigger punishment between the two.

It was called "Starting a Stimulating Discussion", like all of the other OP's threads.

If I implied, let me clarify then:

There is a male-female ideal. Every prohibition that exists exists to prop up the male-female bias. Reread my original post. Or, I'll restate it below in a simpler manner.

It is not implied that Gays should have not have a problem with incest. I then went on to make the case for appreciating incest from a secular point of view.

Rather,

That even gays, a group which has been driven underground for much of western history by prohibitions that source itself from the same origin as the prohibition on brother-sister love and animal-human sex shows the pervasiveness of the bible in shaping the way we see things. Sexuality hasn't always been as fixed as we perceive it to be.

I cannot simplify it anymore. That said, there is to be no punishment for man-man love in my perspective. You tell them that God says he doesn't approve of this for the reasons I've elaborated, and then move on with your life. They may stay with their partner, find another, adopt children, move through careers, buy a home, or do whatever they want, you are to love them no differently then you would another heterosexual member of your life.

Again, you are arguing with me, not every person who has ever had a position against homosexuals. You are inferring their reasoning as my own, and I will not defend what, for the most part, I find indefensible.

Uh huh.....

Roots:
It is a reactionary response to the order that God intended, and the fluidity of sexuality. God's intended order is a male-female ideal.


Sex Between Syblings:
Well what about recreational sex between your syblings. Mom and dad are gone, there's nothing good on TV, and we have protection. No babies will be made, and even then we have some pills we can pop to insure that. We have our fun, we obviously consent to blowing each others minds, no diseases are spread, her boyfriend doesn't know, my girlfriend won't know, our parents won't know, what is wrong with what we're doing?


Sex With Animals:
As I've said, what if you could scientifically minimize every possible risk with having sex with an animal, prove that it was enjoying it too, and that there were no harm to either groups, would beastiality be moral then? And if not, why exactly? What is your secular reasoning? It's unnatural? WHo cares? What in nature hasn't broken a few rules... What if the animal's brain waves registers pleasure mid-act and develops a liking to the process? It's safe, both parties consent to it, and neither are hurt psychologically or physically.

The bible's position is that an incestuous society and/or an incestuous family setting makes it a toxic environment for a functional family to exist, especially if the fathers always raping the daughters, or lending their sons to be raped by their friends, or their sons can challenge the father for rulership of the family by displacing him and marrying mom, or if your children are always screwing each other every chance they get, its not a healthy environment and it is the undoing of the institution of the family. That didn't stop fathers from raping their daughters or from men raping boys, but they did so knowing it was immoral. There is hope for the world if we know what is and isn't moral. There is no hope for the world if we behave unethically and don't know it.

It has nothing to do with consent. Nor does it have anything to do with health. Or even the possibility of harming one or more of the participants.

This is why I cannot take seriously your statement in another thread that the GOP ought to hold the line on the male-female ideal but reform itself to be friendly to gay interests..especially when your recommendation is nothing but a recapitulation of that good ol separate but equal schools arguments from Mississippi.

Well entertain for a moment the idea for a second. Separate, but equal. Removed of that Mississippi Jim-crow south context. Does it carry its weight intellectually? Is it possible.. to be separate, but equal? What is our barometer for equality... did the civil rights acts make whites love blacks? Would you not argue that the sexes are separate, but equal? I mean the examples are endless of two things that range in difference from slightly different to fundamentally different, and yet their relationship to each other is still EQUAL!

And if separate but equal, removed of that historical context, is possible, given in the spirit that it I have intended, illustrated in every post I make, in what ways then do you think I am applying it? And try to come to your conclusions without assuming my intentions or inferring that I'm a racist. (not that you are saying that I'm racist.)

There is that context in the history of this country though. You cannot just think about these things as vacuum thought experiments. Yes, without the context of Jim Crow, separate but equal is a possibility. But it's because of Jim Crow that we know that separate but equal is a paper argument and in the real world where people live, there will be suffering because some people hate gays/blacks and unfortunately those people are gatekeepers that hold back the rights of gays/blacks. Separate but equal is an argument that critics of equality use in order to maintain the status quo in ideas because it can be predicted that it will lead to a poverty in distribution of justice to minorities. Separate but equal is a precedent that the minority group are not equals. They are not equals because the dominant group has decided that those people need to be separated from the in group because they are different. This is simple play ground politics here.

On top of all of that, would separate but equal gay marriages be performed in the same courtrooms as heterosexual pairings? Why or why not? If it's a why not, then I find it pretty contradictory for a small government lover to ask for an expansion in government to accommodate the same sex group.

Arrant Pariah: http://www.wrongplanet.net/posts208619-start150.html

I make my argument there, it is rather long, but following it as it is evolved over the following pages, I make the case that the suggestion that Genocide occurred has no proof from internal evidence...

Also: http://www.wrongplanet.net/postxf164586-0-75.html

I explain here the inherent case for Eve in the biblical Jewish creation myth. I can't think of another near east society that had women in its creation involved... to the best of my knowledge, the samarians, egyptians, babylonians, assyrians, did not have a woman in their creation myth.

The woman does not get the blame for man's downfall in the torah. We infer that, but the text does not state that. I will not re-explain all of that, but feel free to revive that thread of you discover any issues. I can repost the postings here as well, but I want to keep your thread focused to Homosexuality.

On the lesbians, I am merely saying that the women of Greek society sometimes engaged in lesbian acts out of the miserable reality that they had no worth, very often unloved or mistreated. I'm with them. It is better to be with each other and loved then to simply conform to life and lead a meaningless existence.

Danny, I am speaking about homosexuality in all of the world. We should not allow homosexual marriage in the world, and the world should, for goodness sakes, be kinder to the Gay and accept them as an equal. When I speak of Abortion, I am speaking to all of the world as well, as ethics don't end at our borders.

"Separate but equal" in the jim crow south was just "separate", removed of any sense of equality. I don't see how it applies when it was only "separate, but equal" in name only... there was no meaningful attempt at equality. Forcing people to go to the back of the bus is not equal. Neither is denying them service at a diner because of their skin color.

If "0" is no government, and "20" is 100% government, I would hover between a "7" and a "12" - Where I am on the size and role of government, I'm not too sure. I'm saying that it should be titled differently. Call it Carriage or Barriage or Farriage or Garriage. Leave marriage as the societal bias, one that gays should also affirm too. We are doing this, of course, for society's sake, that men and women grow up and marry each other. The Gay should say: "You know, I know I am gay, but I also know that most people's sexuality are not as fixed as some might say, so in the spirit of doing the right thing, I support marriage, I support it as being a healthy societal bias, and I wish men and women would grow up and marry each other and keep that institution alive."

What Gays want is equality. If they had equality, there would not be a movement in the millions amongst both gays and non-gays trying to fight for marriage, because they think marriage is what will make them equal in society's eyes. If we had just treated them lovingly in the first place, supporting them, their sexuality, through their careers, as they age, the families they start, this movement for marriage equality would be nonexistent.

I think that sexuality being fluid and all that people who are still atleast a majority percentage heterosexual will still marry the opposite sex no matter the legal status and name of what we call gay marriage. Why do you think heterosexual people need to be societally peer pressured to have sex with the opposite sex? I think that's what comes naturally.

I'm chiming in here sort of late. But, I think gay "rights" should be promoted, and gays should be encouraged to live their lives freely, rather then living in fear of social ramifications.
I don't know how you would encourage homosexuality any more than you could encourage someone to be black - you just are, or you aren't.
As for gay marriage - I live in Washington state where I am happy to say we gave gay citizens the right to marry by popular vote. I see gay marriage and gay rights in general as the new civil rights movement.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Is this why women become Lesbians? Because they have no worth, are unloved and mistreated? Well, I suppose that I can see turning to Lesbianism, if a woman has had nothing but bad experiences with men.

Of course, women have such nice, soft bodies that jiggle here and there. Who wouldn't like them?

I think that women should be encouraged to enjoy each others bodies--not just women who have had bad experiences with men. You make Lesbians out to be a bunch of pathetic losers.

You can find some translations of some of Sappho's poetry here:

http://www.sappho.com/poetry/sappho.html



Sappho had a good life, was honored in ancient Greece, and promoted sexuality between women.