Debating Christianity and Religion

Do you support Christian hatred for gays?

I was inspired to broach this topic after reading a column in the January 2020 issue of Scientific American. The column written by the editors is entitled Time's Up for "Anti-Gay Therapy." According to those editors:

Although medical and psychological associations have asked explicitly that Congress and state governments ban anti-gay conversion (by Christians), there has been a backlash from (Christian) groups like the Liberty Council, which promotes "evangelical values."

The column condemns the "detestable practice" of the attempt by many Christians to alter a person's homosexuality because the practice does "irreparable harm" to people. Forty-two percent of a subgroup who have had this "therapy" inflicted on them have committed suicide.

.

JehovahsWitness wrote: WHY DO CHRISTIANS ACCEPT THE WEARING OF CLOTHES MADE FROM MIXED FABRICS AND THE EATING OF CERTAIN SEAFOODS BUT REJECT HOMOOSEXUAL ACTS?

For Jehovah's Witnesses it is because we believe these prohibitions were part of the mosaic law, all of which were abolished with the death of Christ. Sex outside biblical marriage* is explicitly stated in "the new testament" as being something that should not be tolerated in the Christian congregation and something which, if practices unrepentently, disqualifies a person from being on the road to salvation (see 1 Cor 6:9, 10).

Of course, Christians can ignore the OT and follow the NT.

But following the NT, they cannot divorce or marry a divorced person (1 Corinthians 7:39, Luke 16:18, Mark 10:2-12, Matthew 5:31-32) and NEVER look at a woman with lust (Matthew 5:28)

AND they are not bound by the Ten Commandments since those are OT (Jewish).

JehovahsWitness wrote:
it is because we believe these prohibitions were part of the mosaic law, all of which were abolished with the death of Christ.

So while on earth Christ lived in accordance with all of Scripture and expected others to do so. While Jesus was alive he was in favour of putting practising homosexuals to death - and Jehovah's Witnesses disagree with him on this. Interesting.

It seems odd that just before the crucifixion you could happily kill homosexuals, and then a few minutes later it became wrong to do so.

.

marco wrote:

JehovahsWitness wrote: it is because we believe these prohibitions were part of the mosaic law, all of which were abolished with the death of Christ.

It would be strange if Christ, while on Earth, lived in accordance with all of Scripture and expected others to do so. So while Jesus was alive he was in favour of putting practicing homosexuals to death - but Jehovah's Witnesses disagree with him on this. Interesting.

It seems odd that just before 3 o'clock on Good Friday you could happily kill homosexuals, and then a few minutes later it became wrong to do so.

It doesn't have to make sense. It is just religion.

Worshipers are free to 'interpret scripture' as needed to fit their preferences -- as indicated by tens of thousands of Christian denominations -- disagreeing with one another about 'what God wants' and 'how to get to heaven'.

Zzyzx wrote:
Worshipers are free to 'interpret scripture' as needed to fit their preferences -- as indicated by tens of thousands of Christian denominations -- disagreeing with one another about 'what God wants' and 'how to get to heaven'.

That is fair enough, Zzyzx, but even when students are wrong the good teacher seeks to know the source of their errors. In the same way it is interesting to see how people have come to the irrational conclusion that gay people should be hospitalised or perhaps murdered, should they follow their inclinations. One suspects Leviticus is what did it - but there may be other factors.

Currently 19 pages on the topic. Wow. This just goes to show how much people are trying to force their POVs on to others.
How 'bout we all just mind our own business and let those who want to live the straight life style live it and those who wish to live the gay lifestyle live it?
The only people on this plant that should be concerned what two (or more) consenting adults do privately are those consenting adults.
If there is a God standing in judgement, he (she...it? there's a gender identity issue there, too, that needs considered entirely on its own merits) will judge those consenting adults on their own merits.
If you're not one of those consenting adults, their actions will have zero effect on your afterlife (or current, earthly life).

Say your peace, and move it. Is it really just that simple? Absolutely.
Seeing it otherwise is nothing more than attempting to force your beliefs on to another and/or living vicariously as far as this former Christian can tell.

.

Menotu wrote: How 'bout we all just mind our own business and let those who want to live the straight life style live it and those who wish to live the gay lifestyle live it?

The pious / self-righteous / bigoted seem unwilling to allow personal freedom -- and attempt to control the sex lives of others by coercion, compulsion, conflict, and even violence.

Why is there so much obsession with the sex lives / preferences / practices of others? Perhaps some is attributable to overworked imagination, fantasy, and repressed personal desires.

.

marco wrote: . . but even when students are wrong the good teacher seeks to know the source of their errors.

That is true.

Also, good students learns in spite of their teachers' errors by drawing information from wide-ranging sources and by verifying truth and accuracy.

"Because I said so (or he did, or this book says)" is NOT a reliable path to truth.

Basing decisions on information that cannot be verified is a path to folly.

Zzyzx wrote: .

Menotu wrote: How 'bout we all just mind our own business and let those who want to live the straight life style live it and those who wish to live the gay lifestyle live it?

The pious / self-righteous / bigoted seem unwilling to allow personal freedom -- and attempt to control the sex lives of others by coercion, compulsion, conflict, and even violence.

Why is there so much obsession with the sex lives / preferences / practices of others? Perhaps some is attributable to overworked imagination, fantasy, and repressed personal desires.

Of course it is. You can tell when they vehemently deny those accusations. Which is sad but sometimes that's just life.

marco wrote: While Jesus was alive he was in favour of putting practising homosexuals to death - and Jehovah's Witnesses disagree with him on this.

I dont understand your comment, but I can assure you there is nothing Jesus said or did we disagree with. Indeed I have written several posts in this very thread on that point.

JW

Zzyzx wrote: But following the NT, they cannot divorce

They can but if the divorce is not on the grounds of adultery, it would be viewed as being unscriptural.

Zzyzx wrote: ...and NEVER look at a woman with lust (Matthew 5:28)

That is correct. Although apart from accusations of unrepentent viewing of pornography and the like, the sin of "lustful looking" will be judged by God. Humans can only judge concrete action and discernable attitudes, heart sins are Gods domain.




JW