Not that I'm gay, just wondering. I could understand that in the times when the bible was written, it was important to keep marriages between men and women, to keep up the population growth e. But now, as 7 billion people on the planet, I don't see any reason why gay people shouldn't be married?
Tell me pls!
What's so wrong with being homosexual?
Moderator: Moderators
Re: What's so wrong with being homosexual?
Post #61[Replying to post 55 by lia15]
NONE of the above answered my question as to WHY homosexuality is considered to be IMMORAL . . .
NONE of the above answered my question as to WHY homosexuality is considered to be IMMORAL . . .
-
enviousintheeverafter
- Sage
- Posts: 743
- Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2015 12:51 am
Re: What's so wrong with being homosexual?
Post #62[Replying to post 61 by KCKID]
(Probably wise to not hold your breath on this count; there is no tenable answer to your question; holding that homosexuality is immoral is incoherent, mere word-salad)
(Probably wise to not hold your breath on this count; there is no tenable answer to your question; holding that homosexuality is immoral is incoherent, mere word-salad)
-
enviousintheeverafter
- Sage
- Posts: 743
- Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2015 12:51 am
Post #64
[Replying to post 63 by Kiaku]
But that's exactly what I mean- someone's "existence being (morally) wrong" isn't even coherent; rightness and wrongness can only intelligibly be attributed to actions, things that one does (or fails to do), and ones that are volitional (matters of choice/control) at that. But being gay isn't an action, and its not something that can be chosen/controlled- so calling it "wrong" (or "right") simply doesn't make any sense, its a category error, like talking about the number 3 smelling bad or a triangle being neurotic- the rightness/wrongness of homosexuality is not even a matter for valid debate, as there isn't even an intelligible proposition here to discuss.
But that's exactly what I mean- someone's "existence being (morally) wrong" isn't even coherent; rightness and wrongness can only intelligibly be attributed to actions, things that one does (or fails to do), and ones that are volitional (matters of choice/control) at that. But being gay isn't an action, and its not something that can be chosen/controlled- so calling it "wrong" (or "right") simply doesn't make any sense, its a category error, like talking about the number 3 smelling bad or a triangle being neurotic- the rightness/wrongness of homosexuality is not even a matter for valid debate, as there isn't even an intelligible proposition here to discuss.
Post #65
Oh, there's been a way 'around' the nonsense of a 'person's existence' being in and of itself immoral. I don't know if it's made it's way to all the pews yet, but I've heard it here; it's homosexual sex that is 'immoral', not the poor homosexual whom is loved so much they must be told repeatedly that they are immoral.enviousintheeverafter wrote: [Replying to post 63 by Kiaku]
But that's exactly what I mean- someone's "existence being (morally) wrong" isn't even coherent; rightness and wrongness can only intelligibly be attributed to actions, things that one does (or fails to do), and ones that are volitional (matters of choice/control) at that. But being gay isn't an action, and its not something that can be chosen/controlled- so calling it "wrong" (or "right") simply doesn't make any sense, its a category error, like talking about the number 3 smelling bad or a triangle being neurotic- the rightness/wrongness of homosexuality is not even a matter for valid debate, as there isn't even an intelligible proposition here to discuss.
All they need to do is be celibate or choose to have sex the normal way. And stop shoving themselves in the faces of decent Americans and their innocent children.
If a person is a Christian and lesbian and chooses to do this willingly, power to them, and we'll be here for ya if that doesn't work out.
Isn't that generous of the Christians? To engage with the problem long enough to announce gays and lesbians aren't abominations as long as they never get gay married? I wonder where some of them get the gall to pronounce their solutions with such authority, to people who they've practically forced into opposition with them? The nerve it takes just might be a supernatural thing, because I don't see any evidence for earning or deserving said authority.
-
enviousintheeverafter
- Sage
- Posts: 743
- Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2015 12:51 am
Post #66
Sure- but that homosexual acts are immoral is a different claim than that homosexuality is immoral, and certainly quite a few people hold the latter. That homosexual acts, rather than homosexuality itself, are immoral ultimately isn't something that can plausibly/credibly be defended, but you're right that it at least avoids the incoherence I mentioned.Hamsaka wrote: Oh, there's been a way 'around' the nonsense of a 'person's existence' being in and of itself immoral. I don't know if it's made it's way to all the pews yet, but I've heard it here; it's homosexual sex that is 'immoral', not the poor homosexual whom is loved so much they must be told repeatedly that they are immoral.
-
Jolly_Penguin
- Apprentice
- Posts: 102
- Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2014 11:06 pm
Post #67
"Homosexual acts are immoral" is defended only with "Because God Says So".
Some people hate because they are told to hate. It is no different than with racism or nationalism. They are told to hate the identity of the other, so t hey do. It is basic ingroup/outgroup tribalism dynamics. The outsider is "Deviant" etc.
Some people hate because they are told to hate. It is no different than with racism or nationalism. They are told to hate the identity of the other, so t hey do. It is basic ingroup/outgroup tribalism dynamics. The outsider is "Deviant" etc.
Post #68
I wonder if sexual repression plays a role too. The general quality of 'imagery' offered by anti-gay rhetoric (now they'll wanta marry their dog/sister/daughter) tells me some Christians have found a powerful scapegoat for their sexual guilt. What else accounts for the hatred (fear)?Jolly_Penguin wrote: "Homosexual acts are immoral" is defended only with "Because God Says So".
Some people hate because they are told to hate. It is no different than with racism or nationalism. They are told to hate the identity of the other, so t hey do. It is basic ingroup/outgroup tribalism dynamics. The outsider is "Deviant" etc.
Tribalism is about resources, keeping and procuring them and having a powerful public identity. I don't get, though, why all the hatred. It's classic for feeling threatened, actually.
-
help3434
- Guru
- Posts: 1469
- Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2013 11:19 pm
- Location: United States
- Has thanked: 6 times
- Been thanked: 26 times
Post #69
[Replying to post 65 by Hamsaka]
Yeah, the message is that they are immoral unless they completely suppress their sexual and romantic desires their whole lives. Straight people are expected be abstinent outside of marriage, but of course they are allowed to date those they are romantically and sexually attracted to, and to have a sexually fulfilling marriage. When straight people break the law of chastity it is treated as a lesser sin than same sex relations.
Yeah, the message is that they are immoral unless they completely suppress their sexual and romantic desires their whole lives. Straight people are expected be abstinent outside of marriage, but of course they are allowed to date those they are romantically and sexually attracted to, and to have a sexually fulfilling marriage. When straight people break the law of chastity it is treated as a lesser sin than same sex relations.
Post #70
[Replying to post 3 by Moses Yoder] The bible only condemns anal sex (Romans 1:27 Leviticus 18 & 20) as disgusting/abomination, and obviously doesn't even mention anything about female homosexuality, including Romans 1:26. Indeed, Jesus even asked his followers to accept that some men such as Paul (2Cor 12:7-8) remain celibate because they were born as homosexuals (Matt 19:12).
