I was wondering if anyone who considers homosexuality a sin, could tell me what is wrong with it.
I'm talking in the sense of utilitarian morals. How does homosexual intercourse, or homosexual marriage, increase the suffering in the world?
Homosexuality
Moderator: Moderators
Re: Homosexuality
Post #191It is against God's plan for humanity, in that it isn't alligned with what God wants a family to be.razovor wrote: I was wondering if anyone who considers homosexuality a sin, could tell me what is wrong with it.
True happiness is only found in God. As said above, homossexuality is against God and therefore is an act that distances the ones doing it from God. Therefore, no happiness.I'm talking in the sense of utilitarian morals. How does homosexual intercourse, or homosexual marriage, increase the suffering in the world?
- Goat
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24999
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 207 times
Re: Homosexuality
Post #192pmprcv wrote:It is against God's plan for humanity, in that it isn't alligned with what God wants a family to be.razovor wrote: I was wondering if anyone who considers homosexuality a sin, could tell me what is wrong with it.
True happiness is only found in God. As said above, homossexuality is against God and therefore is an act that distances the ones doing it from God. Therefore, no happiness.I'm talking in the sense of utilitarian morals. How does homosexual intercourse, or homosexual marriage, increase the suffering in the world?
That is your belief, based on your religions interpretation of an ancient book.
How do you know that that book is right? Except for this book, how do you know WHAT God wants?
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�
Steven Novella
Steven Novella
Re: Homosexuality
Post #193Not MY belief, as in only mine, but of my entire religion. Furthermore, it's not based only on the Bible. Nevertheless, it was implied that we were to respond from owr religious point of view - since in the OP, words such as sin were mentioned - which I did.Goat wrote: That is your belief, based on your religions interpretation of an ancient book.
Off-topic.How do you know that that book is right?
Off-topic.Except for this book, how do you know WHAT God wants?
- Goat
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24999
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 207 times
Re: Homosexuality
Post #194No, it is not off topic.. You made a claim 'Because God said so' and then said 'Your entire religion said so'..pmprcv wrote:Not MY belief, as in only mine, but of my entire religion. Furthermore, it's not based only on the Bible. Nevertheless, it was implied that we were to respond from owr religious point of view - since in the OP, words such as sin were mentioned - which I did.Goat wrote: That is your belief, based on your religions interpretation of an ancient book.Off-topic.How do you know that that book is right?Off-topic.Except for this book, how do you know WHAT God wants?
And, I want to know 'HOw do you know God said so'?
Because you said so, and your religion said so? What makes you think you can speak for God?
It's not off topic for you to be challenged to back up your claim.
I want you to back up your claim about what God wants.
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�
Steven Novella
Steven Novella
Re: Homosexuality
Post #195That's hugely off-topic. If you want, make a new one and we'll discuss it there, as the questions you asked are way to complex and unrelated to homesexuality to be discussed on this topic.Goat wrote: And, I want to know 'HOw do you know God said so'?
Because you said so, and your religion said so? What makes you think you can speak for God?
- Goat
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24999
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 207 times
Re: Homosexuality
Post #196pmprcv wrote:That's hugely off-topic. If you want, make a new one and we'll discuss it there, as the questions you asked are way to complex and unrelated to homosexuality to be discussed on this topic.Goat wrote: And, I want to know 'HOw do you know God said so'?
Because you said so, and your religion said so? What makes you think you can speak for God?
You made a claim specifically about God and homosexuality,.. and that is exactly what I want you to support.
How do you know what God said wants for family and homosexuality. You made the claim, you are avoiding the question. In other words. you are not supporting your claim, verses rule number 5.
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�
Steven Novella
Steven Novella
Re: Homosexuality
Post #198And you don't see how those sources aren't reliable, right?
There are two questions:
1. Is there a God?
2. What does God require of us?
If you haven't supported the first, then we hardly have to accept any answer you have for the second.
However, it's worse than that. Let's both, for sake of argument, accept that the Bible is the closest understanding of God.
It still leaves us all wanting for an answer, since as evidenced, there are multiple conceptions of the Christian God.
The Second question hinges on:
"Assume the Bible is the most accurate depictions of God, How accurate is it in assessing such questions?"
The Bible, after all, could be 1% correct about what God wants, but correct that God exists. Or it could be 100% correct and we simply have to work it out.
However, evidence suggests it is not 100%, but less. How less?
Are Paul's thoughts on homosexuality accurate to what God thinks? How do we know anything about the process of creating doctrine?
What answers could one possibly give that would vet and verify the process in which the Bible was created? How was doctrine created? By God or Man?
These are questions that must be answered in order for YOUR assessment of how God feels about homosexuality and your RELIGION decides how God feels about homosexuality.
Thinking about God's opinions and thinking about your own opinions uses an identical thought process. - Tomas Rees
Re: Homosexuality
Post #199Because they aren't.Ooberman wrote: And you don't see how those sources aren't reliable, right?
As I previously stated, I have no problem debating this, but it will get so dense and derailed that it will completely stray away from the topic of homessexuality, so maybe we could discuss this somewhere else.1. Is there a God?
Detailed in Cathechism. Information on Catholic doctrine is everywhere, if you bother searching for it.2. What does God require of us?
What evidence? And for what kind of analysis, a literal one? How is that relevant for the Catholic stance on Biblical significance?However, evidence suggests it is not 100%, but less. How less?
- Goat
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24999
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 207 times
Re: Homosexuality
Post #200So, you are basically accepting other people's words and interpretations about what God wants, rather than knowing yourself.
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�
Steven Novella
Steven Novella