Is it antichristian to battle antihomosexual discrimination?

Post Reply New Topic

Top ten anti-Christians act of 2011 ( http://defendchristians.org/news/top-te ... s-of-2011/ ) include two acts of violence against anti-choice people for which there does not seem to exist any actual source. But as much as real events go, the list includes things like this one:

Which is currently winning...

Or...

.

So, a question for WP' self-acclaimed Christians: Do you consider attempts to reduce discrimination against homosexual people to be anti-Christian attacks?

Or anti-Islam even?

Of course not. I consider Christ's call to love our neighbor to be far more important than the frenzied anti-gay commandments in Leviticus (which also calls for smashing pottery touched by a woman during her menses), and Paul's condemnation of of homosexual prostitution is more often than not misinterpreted.
One of my oldest friends, who was also my best man, is gay, so I'd be a hypocrite if I condemned him for who he is. And incidentally, he himself is a practicing Catholic.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Depends on what message you derive from the bible.

Is it anti-Christian and Jewish to wear clothes made from two different materials?

It seems for once I am in agreement with the Bible

The issue is simple:

By defending and aiding the marginalized group, we have to marginalize the marginalizers. We cannot say "These people are ok being gay" without effectually saying "You are wrong to think these people are not ok being gay". The issue is that the latter group is mostly driven by religion. So, while a person may be Christian and have no problems with homosexuality, even be a gay Christian, the major opposition to homosexuality is from mainstream Christianity, where a LOT of people are going to have to back down or be marginalized to support gay rights.

The principle is basically the same way that civil rights undermine the KKK.

And his Pope does not approve of his lifestyle, which will always be the problem. The Catholic church has so committed to opposing homosexuality, that it is difficult to imagine a world where they officially back down.

wow talk about a dubble negative

Christians get themselves so vexed over these issues. They don't even read the bible properly.

Well at least they're not stoning gays to death now. Surely that's some improvement?

Well I wonder what would Jesus think........from what I know of the guy he probably does not like the idea of discrimination against homosexuals or any other group of people really. And I thought christians where supposed to be followers of Jesus, its almost like he died just so they could all totally miss the point.

Sometimes discrimination is necessary - and indeed desirable - to ensure a person or society's continued wellbeing and safety.

"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" (Leviticus 20:13).

"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled" (Matthew 5:17-18).

I think Christians are making excuses again.

Well I am talking about discriminating against someone based on their sexual orientation, race, gender and things like that, not the general use of the word discimination which just implies you like some things more than others. I mean when I drink beer I discriminate, I hate bud-light so I don't drink it. So yes discrimination can serve its purpose but hating someone because of their sexual orientation, race, gender, disability or whatever does not.

Does Jesus ever even mention the bible.......nope, because it did not exist yet when he was around. So bible verses do nothing to prove to me that Jesus would be cool with discrimination against homosexuals.

The Tanakh (i.e., Hebrew Bible), whence comes Leviticus, certainly did exist in the time of Jesus. To what do you believe He was referring when He said "think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill"?

The Tanakh and the Bible are not the same thing.....so that is kind of irrelevent to my point.