Sodom, Greece, Rome and homosexuality.

[AlAyeti]

Does allowing for diversity include parents having no voice in what their children are forced to be taught and have to accept?

Do Christians and the many other cultures and belief systems opposed to homosexuality have the right to have their culture and religious views respected in society when it comes to decent and natural sexual behavior in the education system and in public?

Are homosexuals demanding accesss to children under the label of diversity and anti-hate legislation?

This seems the number one issue between average and normal "family" people and the homosexual agenda.

Can there be laws passed that keeps homosexuality from becoming forced on children and families that oppose it, without the homosexual community and homosexual action organizations crying discrimination?

Is there such a thing anymore as heterosexual rights?

[melikio]

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline ... rview.html

More interesting intersting info. The following excerpt hits closely to MANY experiences I've had, as it relates to those who are abjectly anti-homosexual:

Attitudes are likely to serve a defensive function when an individual perceives some analogy between homosexual persons and her or his own unconscious conflicts. Subsequently, that person responds to gay men and lesbians as a way of externalizing inner conflicts and thereby reducing the anxiety associated with them. The conflicts specific to antihomosexual prejudice presumably involve a person's gender identity, sexual object choice, or both. For example, unconscious conflicts about one's own sexuality or gender identity might be attributed to lesbians and gay men through a process of projection. Such a strategy permits people to externalize the conflicts and to reject their own unacceptable urges by rejecting lesbians and gay men (who symbolize those urges) without consciously recognizing the urges as their own. Since contact with homosexual persons threatens to make conscious those thoughts that have been repressed, it inevitably arouses anxiety in defensive individuals. Consequently, defensive attitudes are likely to be negative.

And that might also explain some of this:

http://www.postfun.com/pfp/sex/lolite/homotest.html

-Mel-

[kiwimac]

Homosexuality, like all human expressions of sexuality can be both positive and negative. However, it is NOT innately negative. Evidence for this is obvious in the lives of homosexual men and women who live in long-term, monogamous partnerships which put heterosexual serial polygamy in a very bad light indeed.

As for the statement made that Jesus spoke about homosexuality, well I'll let someone a little less likely to have an anyeurism answer that;

Jesus never taught for or against homosexuality. This raises the question, if homosexuality truly is a sin worthy of eternal damnation, as some believe it is, then why didn't Jesus discuss it? He certainly preached at length concerning every other sin listed in 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 and Timothy 1:9-10. Why would He leave this one out?

"God is not the author of confusion" (1 Corinthians 14:33) therefore I cannot see Him leaving out such a critical sin from His discussions. A more plausible explanation is that God has never been concerned about homosexuality, or heterosexuality for that matter. Each are equally part of Gods plan of creation. It is only mankinds fears and prejudices that have concocted this monstrous imaginary sin, not God. Jesus talked at great length concerning many other issues such as love, mercy, grace, reaching the lost, the ministry of reconciliation, stewardship, and the healing of body, soul and mind. Yet at times the church seems more preoccupied with a subject He never taught about, than about the matters He did.

Scripture says that when we see Jesus, we have seen the Father (John 14:9; Hebrew 1:3). Since Jesus never talked about the issue we can deduce that neither Jesus nor the Father is concerned about homosexuality. Instead, He preached "the good news to the poor" and proclaimed "freedom for the captives and recovery of sight for the blind", to "release the oppressed", and proclaimed the "year of the Lord's favor" (Luke 4:18-19) to all who would accept Him. Teaching us that we would do well to focus our thoughts upon Jesus and turn away from the prejudices of men.

Source: http://tinyurl.com/fjd34

Kiwimac

Priest and Theologian

[Cathar1950]

I think there is a real danger from people that promote fear real or unreal.
Know one is forcing his or her view or homosexuality on anyone. It does not destroy the family or marriage. It does not corrupt churches or the message that Christians proclaim. I saw an add for CMC(Community for Moral Correctness) last night. I am sure it is a moneymaker. But messages like theirs only focuses on peoples fears as if some how they got rid of all gays the world would be a better place. People at the 700 club that claim to be for family values have higher divorce rates then other. I don't think children are being indoctrinated by any gay agenda. All that is being ask for are the same rights afforded others. Children should be taught about sex as their needs warrant the knowledge.
I am not for gay pride any more then I am for heterosexual pride.
Christians in this country often have a lower self-esteem then is required to be healthy functioning individuals in the community of other humans.
Humans are not perfect but we are also not totally depraved either.
I would rather see people pride but humility is also a good virtue.
I have always understood the church as community and we can all use a sense of community and shared sympathy both in churches and the larger world.

[melikio]

Homosexuality, like all human expressions of sexuality can be both positive and negative. However, it is NOT innately negative. Evidence for this is obvious in the lives of homosexual men and women who live in long-term, monogamous partnerships which put heterosexual serial polygamy in a very bad light indeed.

Wow, this makes sense.

But it sparked a thought that is always with me: When I first started out on life's journey (knowing I was somehow different), I didn't realize then what I know so well now. That most homosexual people need much compassion and love, and not the "fixing" so many Christians often desire to impose upon them.

I was once a child, ALONE with what seemed like the most terrible secret in the whole world (to some adults, it surely is); there was no one I really could trust. Now, it's likely they were there to talk to, but because of how this and many other societies tend to STIGMATIZE homosexuals, a child who realizes this is somehow connected to them, will very often internalize their "secret".

Without a doubt, that "thing" they've bundled up inside of them will come to the front (one way or the other; spiritually, socially, positively, negatively...etc.). I know, because being gay for me, was as related to "religion" as anything could be. And what was so sad, is that I REALLY COULDN'T TRUST the Christian people around me, or I didn't truly KNOW I could trust them. It's almost like they would TELL God, and see to it that I be sent to hell for having that particualr sexual-orientation. So, I comparmentalized that part of me, and tucked it all into a "safe" place (or so I thought).

In time, that part of me seemed to be drawn out, almost unwillingly by society itself. And with little compassion did those who were MOST concerned about my repressed sexuality (though they didn't know what I had inside) seem to go after the answers they found so elusive.

And if there is ANYTHING that theologians, pastors and others could teach that would really help... is to instill the importance and value of applying gentleness, compassion and love, rather than swinging the gut-rending sword so many Christians enjoy wielding. For although I was/am a well-controlled man (sexually, socially and otherwise), the hammering and cutting which came from those who so often speak of faith, hope and love, eventually turned me away from anything "Christian" for a very long time; I wanted NOTHING to do with that which I could associate only with DEEP pain and suffering; I did lose my faith in Christian people, but IMO miraculaously held onto the basic concepts of love I saw in Jesus Christ.

Now, what I say here is the hyper-condensed version or a lifetime of experiences (most of them "religious" or associated to it). And the point is NOT to focus sympathy on myself, but to point out what is so very often WRONG about the fashion in which many Christians handle the "comission" they perceive themselves as receiving from God. And I culdn't express more strongly, how much of NOTHING (or destructive) religion with the compassion and love stripped out of it truly is. And as I have always implied:

Not that any person MUST see homosexuality as good or right, but that they KNOW (in their heart) that it is good and right to show those they believe have sinned the abundant grace they were shown by Jesus on the Cross. And despite all the various arguments and positions, I know homosexual people (along with others), need grace, love and compassion as much as anything else which Christians today are focusing upon; God put those elements in place, to help all of us do what we can in NO WAY do for ourselves.

Honestly, people are "difficult", but love can help with nearly anything concerning people.

-Mel-

[melikio]

I think there is a real danger from people that promote fear real or unreal.
Know one is forcing his or her view or homosexuality on anyone. It does not destroy the family or marriage. It does not corrupt churches or the message that Christians proclaim. I saw an add for CMC(Community for Moral Correctness) last night. I am sure it is a moneymaker. But messages like theirs only focuses on peoples fears as if some how they got rid of all gays the world would be a better place. People at the 700 club that claim to be for family values have higher divorce rates then other. I don't think children are being indoctrinated by any gay agenda. All that is being ask for are the same rights afforded others. Children should be taught about sex as their needs warrant the knowledge.
I am not for gay pride any more then I am for heterosexual pride.
Christians in this country often have a lower self-esteem then is required to be healthy functioning individuals in the community of other humans.
Humans are not perfect but we are also not totally depraved either.
I would rather see people pride but humility is also a good virtue.
I have always understood the church as community and we can all use a sense of community and shared sympathy both in churches and the larger world.

Amen.

You said in a nutshell what more people of religion (the world wide) need to be saying/promoting.

It gives me hope to see that some people can look beyond fear, hatred, and other negative emotions so often used to control human beings. That (fear and compulsion) is exactly the kind of religion I believe people need to let simmer down for a good while. And I often pray that comes to be.

-Mel-

[1John2_26]

Homosexuality, like all human expressions of sexuality can be both positive and negative. However, it is NOT innately negative.

A blanket statement proves very little without supporting evidences. Homosexuality by the very nature of the act in males is very dangerous and painful. In women it is entirely "fruitless" in the "multiply" department. There is no support for same-gender sexual relationships anywhere in the Hebrew or Christian Bible.

Evidence for this is obvious in the lives of homosexual men and women who live in long-term, monogamous partnerships which put heterosexual serial polygamy in a very bad light indeed.

What is serial polygamy? If it means promoscuity then there is no doubt that the gay community and culture is the grand prize winner in that category. Even San Francisco had to close down their bath houses. If it means divorce rate, then monogamy does not mean one lover at a time, while your sex partner seeks amorous affairs approved by his or her partner in a lifestyle defined by licentiousness.

As for the statement made that Jesus spoke about homosexuality, well I'll let someone a little less likely to have an anyeurism answer that;

First post where Jesus licensed and approved of and supported homosexuality? Where is the celebration, support, promotion or even mention of the lifestyle comparable to God making man and women for a lifetime together?

That would be the logical step.

Then of course the next would be listing the Biblical text that supports, promotes, celebrates, condones and highlights the accpetance of same-gender sex acts and marriage relationships?

Quote:
Jesus never taught for or against homosexuality. This raises the question, if homosexuality truly is a sin worthy of eternal damnation, as some believe it is, then why didn't Jesus discuss it?

He didn't discuss teenage pregnancies either, or, abortions to help out the wayward youth. Does this license abortion for birth control? "No one is getting hurt" as it is a choice made by the consenting individual?

He certainly preached at length concerning every other sin listed in 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 and Timothy 1:9-10. Why would He leave this one out?

The obvious answer is that same-gender sex acts were out of the scope of presentation as anything but a sin act needing correcting. Just a sexual sin like so many others that just needed repentance and forgiveness to wipe out the sin as far as the east is from the west. There is not one shred of support for same-gender sexual relationships be equaled to man-woman anywhere from Genesis to Malachi (though the Tanakh does not end with Malachi). Jesus never read the New Testament this side of the ascension. A theologian knows this all too well. Even David and Jonathan married women and had children.

"God is not the author of confusion" (1 Corinthians 14:33) therefore I cannot see Him leaving out such a critical sin from His discussions.

"God is not the author of confusion," may be the most oppositional thing every written against homosexuality.

A more plausible explanation is that God has never been concerned about homosexuality, or heterosexuality for that matter.

That would be convoluting Biblical truth to such an extreme as to place the word heresy firmly in the concept.

Each are equally part of Gods plan of creation.

Not according to Jesus. God created man and woman for marriage is utterly immutable.

It is only mankinds fears and prejudices that have concocted this monstrous imaginary sin, not God.

Man shall not lie with a man as with a woman it is a destestable thing. How in the world can a theologian concoct that same sex sex is something that God was not concerned about?

Jesus talked at great length concerning many other issues such as love, mercy, grace, reaching the lost, the ministry of reconciliation, stewardship, and the healing of body, soul and mind. Yet at times the church seems more preoccupied with a subject He never taught about, than about the matters He did.

What "Church" would that be? Jesus was clear that if Sodom and Gomorrah would have had His visitation they "would have repented." Raping angels in the form of male humans by real male humans is inhospitable and homosexual.

Scripture says that when we see Jesus, we have seen the Father (John 14:9; Hebrew 1:3). Since Jesus never talked about the issue we can deduce that neither Jesus nor the Father is concerned about homosexuality.

Hautiness comes to us from the Hebrew in Ezekiel. What an interesting word comapred to a modern word known as "Gay."

Jesus never talked about issues of homosexuality because it was not important enough to reclassify abomination.

Instead, He preached "the good news to the poor" and proclaimed "freedom for the captives and recovery of sight for the blind", to "release the oppressed", and proclaimed the "year of the Lord's favor" (Luke 4:18-19) to all who would accept Him.

What were those last six words? Blind people were healed. Homosexuals demand that they do not suffer from any malady.

Teaching us that we would do well to focus our thoughts upon Jesus and turn away from the prejudices of men.

The human anatomy is prejudiced indeed. Humans do not eat through their eye sockets. The design of the human body craeted by God has no need of redefining.

Gay evangelicalism: (http://www.gaychurch.org/Gay_and_Christ ... uality.htm) . . . .certainly seems to show that we are entering the time of the great apostasy of the Church.

From wikipedia:

First Timothy 4

Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils.

Even Jesus warned:

"Then many will fall away, and they will betray one another and hate one another. And many false prophets will arise and lead many astray. And because of the increase of lawlessness, the love of many will grow cold. But the one who endures to the end will be saved. And this good news of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the world, as a testimony to all the nations; and then the end will come." Gospel of Matthew 24:10-14(NRSV)

Source: http://tinyurl.com/fjd34

Kiwimac

Priest and Theologian

Priest of what branch of what religion? And, theologian studying whom and what?

1 John 2:26 (New American Standard Bible)

These things I have written to you concerning those who are trying to deceive you.

[Scrotum]

A blanket statement proves very little without supporting evidences. Homosexuality by the very nature of the act in males is very dangerous and painful. In women it is entirely "fruitless" in the "multiply" department. There is no support for same-gender sexual relationships anywhere in the Hebrew or Christian Bible.

A blanket statement proves very little without supporting evidences.

[melikio]

He didn't discuss teenage pregnancies either, or, abortions to help out the wayward youth. Does this license abortion for birth control? "No one is getting hurt" as it is a choice made by the consenting individual?

No, he (Jesus) didn't have a specific answer for every human behavior.

But what so many Christians have done, is invent applications from their intrpretations of Scripture. And if that's what they want/intend to do, so be it; that is what often comes of religious beliefs.

The problems come when people actually think that it is "right" to impose their "religion" upon other human beings. Can you show me where the Bible supports such religion should be administered by compulsion (especially outside of Hebrew Law)?

You see, what has happened, is that extremists throughout time, have misused and manipulated religion, to control others. And while that seems like the norm to many (who accept that kind of thing), others realize religion (the Bible, Christianity and other things) weren't meant to be used as so many have done.

Some speak of the Bible, as if everyone sees in it the exact same things in it; well, they do not and never have. It only takes a cursory view of history to know that. And it's nothing new for somone to pull the "apostasy" card, when they think/believe that the era for their form of "Christianty" (or particular sect) is in decline.

1John, all I can see that you bring homosexuals (forget homosexuality), is hatred and rejection; in my mind you haven't shown much else, if anything. Anyone should be weary of the things you say or imply; test everything (as you so often point out). You've taught me how intuitively recognize (bigoted) religious dogma, more effectively than I ever thought I could. I thank you for that. Now I can be certain to steer clear of it more readily, and help others to recognize it also.

-Mel-

[melikio]

A blanket statement proves very little without supporting evidences. Homosexuality by the very nature of the act in males is very dangerous and painful. In women it is entirely "fruitless" in the "multiply" department. There is no support for same-gender sexual relationships anywhere in the Hebrew or Christian Bible.

A blanket statement proves very little without supporting evidences.

BINGO!!

The very thing 1John accuses a person of doing, he does blatanly. Others have pointed this out to 1John repeatedly; yet he continues to believe that the majority of what he shares is something other than "opinion".

Not that there is anything wrong with sharing what one thinks/believes, but that accepting scrutiny (to have one's beliefs or opinions questioned is a common and acceptable thing). It seems to me that 1John and many others want to RULE OVER HOMOSEXUALS. And I see about ZERO reasons why homosexuals and other normal, reasonable human beings shouldn't resist that period.

What 1John seems to believe is "anti-Christian", is nothing more than him reacting to those that oppose HIS particular view of what Christianity (or the Bible) is. Rather than being a follower, he pretends/assumes to be some messenger-enforcer (in his own mind); finding or inventing reasons or justification to thwart the very free will which God has placed within every human being.

And that's not to imply God (if He exists) approves of any and everything we do (or want to do), but to say that those who would wield Christianity as a "control" measure in this world, SHOULD be scrutinized (tested) period (even to a far greater degree than others).

Far too many lies and abuses have stemmed from those who pose as God's appointed guardians at the gates of morality and/or human liberty (not just Christians per se); beware of those who so willingly/boldly seem to accept such a role; beware.

-Mel-

[Jose]

It is only mankinds fears and prejudices that have concocted this monstrous imaginary sin, not God.

Man shall not lie with a man as with a woman it is a destestable thing. How in the world can a theologian concoct that same sex sex is something that God was not concerned about?

You raise some interesting points here. I would ask:

1) How do you know that god really was concerned about any of this? You have only a book that claims to be the word of god. There are other books that claim to be words of gods, too. How can anyone tell which one, if any, is the real word of a god? What if all of them are stories written by Man? If the latter, then this notion of "sin" is, indeed, a monstrous imagining concocted from mankind's fears and prejudices.

2) How do you know the correct interpretation of the term "as with" in the passage to which you refer? I'll offer some other phrases, to illustrate my concern.

• one does not kill with a sword as with a gun
• a bird does not travel with its wings as with its feet
• one does not win the game with a basketball as with a baseball
• man does not witness the world with his eyes as with his ears

Could it be that you are mis-reading this passage? Could it be that it is more a "manual of style" than anything else? Could it really be saying that the manner in which man lies with man should be different from the manner in which man lies with woman? Besides, who cares about lying--your concern is always with sex, not sleep.

3) The injunction about lying with man in the same manner as lying with woman is from a portion of the bible that puts forward a number of other requirements. Yet, Christians seem quite happy to ignore most of them. Why is it considered OK to pick and choose? How can we justify claims of biblical support for one viewpoint, while completely ignoring the biblical injunctions against other actions? Is it just a matter of choosing what's convenient? Is it that cultural norms have changed? Is it that the price of lambs has increased to where it is unsound economic policy to sacrifice them, or that medical knowledge has advanced to where we know leprosy is a bacterial disease that is unaffected by dabbing blood on ears and toes?

For example, can you explain to us how we decide which of the following we may ignore?

Lev. 11:7-8
And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be clovenfooted, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean to you.
Of their flesh shall ye not eat, and their carcase shall ye not touch; they are unclean to you.

Lev. 14--how to cure leprosy
[2] This shall be the law of the leper in the day of his cleansing: He shall be brought unto the priest:
<snip the bit about killing a bird over running water and dipping another bird in its blood>
<snip the bit about shaving the hair, beard, and eyebrows>
[14] And the priest shall take some of the blood of the trespass offering, and the priest shall put it upon the tip of the right ear of him that is to be cleansed, and upon the thumb of his right hand, and upon the great toe of his right foot:

Lev. 18:22
Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

Lev. 19:19
Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee.

Lev. 19:27
Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard.

Lev. 20:9
For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him.

Lev. 20:13
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.

Lev. 20:27
A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones: their blood shall be upon them.

Lev. 23:16-18
Even unto the morrow after the seventh sabbath shall ye number fifty days; and ye shall offer a new meat offering unto the LORD.
Ye shall bring out of your habitations two wave loaves of two tenth deals: they shall be of fine flour; they shall be baken with leaven; they are the firstfruits unto the LORD.
And ye shall offer with the bread seven lambs without blemish of the first year, and one young bullock, and two rams: they shall be for a burnt offering unto the LORD, with their meat offering, and their drink offerings, even an offering made by fire, of sweet savour unto the LORD.

????????