Exactly what is it that is so detestable about same-sex intercourse?

Your thoughts plz...

It does nothing for the human race, it is committed solely for pleasure(i.e. greedy and selfish). Sodomy is being committed and the act has no chance for pro-creation. With that said I don't think the majority of christians care what homosexuals do in their own house. The most vocal care, but the majority don't.

I dunno...I thought that maybe it was a way of separating the Jew's from the Greek philosopher's?

Just a thought...

My opinion, fundys who hate gays are 1) assholes and/or 2) closet cases.

God loves us all the same, Xians just don't seem to get that.

Within the brand of christianity that you're talking about the "detestability" has alot more to do with the fact that many of these xians have been socialized in time and social context when homosexuality was detestible.... in many ways it's simply a reactionary approach to some which they see as threatening the way the world works in their minds.

Jesus says he can't stand gay people But yeah he still loves us all the same. Most dont like gays cause they are annoyingly different, and they are a waste of space in the human race because they do not contribute to the worlds future population(that would be interesting). They are a great laugh though

quote:Jesus says he can't stand gay people

Verse please, otherwise, go away.

Homosexuals are sinners, just like me, just like everyone.

quote:Originally posted by napoleon_complex:

It does nothing for the human race, it is committed solely for pleasure(i.e. greedy and selfish). Sodomy is being committed and the act has no chance for pro-creation. With that said I don't think the majority of christians care what homosexuals do in their own house. The most vocal care, but the majority don't.



Silly infertile people! They definately should not fuck. Everyone should curb the population rather than accelerate the rate of growth. I'd rather have the police hunt down cartels instead of staking out a house waiting for two guys to screw on infrared. What does what a homosexual do with their partners relate to my life? For one, my taxes aren't going to so many kids....

quote:Originally posted by napoleon_complex:

It does nothing for the human race, it is committed solely for pleasure(i.e. greedy and selfish). Sodomy is being committed and the act has no chance for pro-creation. With that said I don't think the majority of christians care what homosexuals do in their own house. The most vocal care, but the majority don't.



/\ Is why religions don't like fags/protection. If a religion has more people theyl be more powerful and have more money. Look @ the pope/vaticin (sp) extremly rich but they tell all there people not to use protection so theres more people to give them money. I just don't like fags there just for the lack of a better word "wierd" its not the whole procreation thing and theres the Gay Pride parades and they want everyone to know there gay http://www.tshirthell.com/shirts/products/a367/a367.gif

[This message has been edited by NightVision (edited 01-16-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by AngrySquirrel:



Silly infertile people! They definately should not fuck. Everyone should curb the population rather than accelerate the rate of growth. I'd rather have the police hunt down cartels instead of staking out a house waiting for two guys to screw on infrared. What does what a homosexual do with their partners relate to my life? For one, my taxes aren't going to so many kids....

I never said those were my feelings, but that is where I think most uber-conservative christians come from. I really don't care what sexuality a person is.

Because sex between a man and a man does not allow procreation, it is a sin... Is it not, thereupon, a sin when a male and a female use a contraceptive? Honestly. I am an atheist, yet I have read a lot of the bible. Christians need to find something else to attempt to change, because homosexuality is something that has been here for ages and will remain for ages.

Setting my Christian beliefs and what God says about the matter aside and answering it as one who is very proud of my homophobia...

Pardon me for talking like this but..

The asshole is an EXIT ONLY orifice... turds dont jump back in, because they want out...

but a man does want back into a hole like he came from.

So then answer me this:

Would you consider me to be sinful if I did not have anal or oral sex with another male, but rather only passionately kissed one? Through kissing, male and female nor male and male nor female and female cannot produce a child... Is it therefore a sin for anyone to kiss, or is the Bible truly biased against simple actions of affection in non-sex manners between people of the same sex?

[This message has been edited by roadtripper420 (edited 01-16-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by roadtripper420:

So then answer me this:

Would you consider me to be sinful if I did not have anal or oral sex with another male, but rather only passionately kissed one? Through kissing, male and female nor male and male nor female and female cannot produce a child... Is it therefore a sin for anyone to kiss, or is the Bible truly biased against simple actions of affection in non-sex manners between people of the same sex?





This also gives me the heebeegeebees. But, first you say passionate, then you say non-sex (implying sex is not on the mind of either of the kissers).

If it were friends kissing as a greeting or "see ya later, dude", as in some cultures, comparible to a quick hug or a hand shake in the usa, i would say that the Bible does not say it is wrong (unless you were betraying a friend, like Judas).

But if there were with "lust in the heart", then that would be adultery, according to Jesus.

I should have rephrased my example.

If I am in love with another man, true love, but he and I do not commit sodomy, is it a sin?

In case if you're wondering, I'm not gay, I'm bisexual, and the example I'm giving is very plausible to me, because I simply refuse to do anything involving things below the belt with a man. The only difference is that I'm an atheist, and I don't really care if it's a sin. I'm just curious (seemingly about a lot of things) what a modern Christian has to say about it.

Homosexuality is not a sin, but sodomy is.

quote:Originally posted by roadtripper420:

I should have rephrased my example.

If I am in love with another man, true love, but he and I do not commit sodomy, is it a sin?

In case if you're wondering, I'm not gay, I'm bisexual, and the example I'm giving is very plausible to me, because I simply refuse to do anything involving things below the belt with a man. The only difference is that I'm an atheist, and I don't really care if it's a sin. I'm just curious (seemingly about a lot of things) what a modern Christian has to say about it.



so this is basically an "academic" question.

but whether it is or not, Jesus said that if you even look at a woman with lust in your heart, it is adultery. i dont think im stretching to say that you could substitute the word 'woman' with 'another person'. adultery is sin.

less academic now: Jesus died for all sins, all we have to do is repent (be sorry for), and accept Grace.

God judges all sins equal, so it doesn't do us any good trying to put them on our own scale. If I killed someone in warfare, I would repent that, but I couldn't change what happened. And if the CO sent us out again, I'd do it again, and regret it again. Doesn't sound like repentance to someone in our society, but there are great pressures to sin in any human society. Even though in the definition of repentance I would have to turn my back on that particular sin and try my best to avoid it, there are too many pressures driving me the other way. There are animals that can be gay, such as rabbits and chimps, and we would define that as a defect brought on by genetic and physical flaws. There are humans who have similar flaws whom few Christians would condemn as hell-bound due to Down Syndrome and autism. In America it is no longer acceptable to abuse asylum patients in the fashion that was typical decades ago. I would consider it ludicrous time to attack a Down Syndrome patient for not being 'productive to society'. The patient may disrupt many processes in the daily life of others, but if I would to execute him in the streets that would be unacceptable to many, especially the mother. I know someone who happens to be lesbian who runs a private school. She is afraid to have it known in public as many people would equate her sexual orientation to the abuse of children. She runs the school very well and with kindness and respect unparalleled in the area. I don't think she would deserve any condemnation for matters unrelated to her service, just as soldiers should not be condemned for doing their job. God judges all sins equal.

quote:Originally posted by roadtripper420:

Because sex between a man and a man does not allow procreation, it is a sin... Is it not, thereupon, a sin when a male and a female use a contraceptive? Honestly. I am an atheist, yet I have read a lot of the bible. Christians need to find something else to attempt to change, because homosexuality is something that has been here for ages and will remain for ages.



Well, the Catholic doctrine does not accept contraception, but the Protestant one does. The Protestants generally consider the Catholics antiquated people with pagan traditions. The Catholics consider the Protestants hypocrites for denying what is considered the only way sexual intercourse should be done. To illustrate the Catholic view, drawing from this Catholic page:

"Sex, from the Church’s point of view, is not for recreation. It is an expression of the union of a loving and giving relationship, plus, it is for procreation. Anything that interferes with the full, open, and giving union of a husband and wife on a spiritual, emotional and physical level is a sin. Contraceptives are just one of the many interferences of this union. (Pregnancy is seen as a gift. It is one of the results of the full and open union between two loving and giving people.)

On another level, sin, in its simplest form, is a choice that a person makes that goes against the will of God. Natural Law is part of God’s Law. The mechanism of sperm/egg fertilization is nature’s way, and thus God’s way, of initiating new human life. Contraception, by definition, is against (contra) the inception of a zygote/embryo/fetus, and thus against the initiation of life. To go against nature, in effect, is to go against God’s will, or God’s method of bringing life into the world.

To interfere with this mechanism is an act of man’s will, not God’s, and therefore, a sin. There is no moral relativism in this reasoning whatsoever. If you make a choice against God, then it is a sin. Simple as that. What you do with the result of that choice is another matter.

So, you decide to use contraception. Okay. You have your reasons. They are valid and practical reasons. But contraception is still a sin. You are going against nature; you are going against God’s will. You are interfering with the process of giving yourself fully and completely to your spouse. (If you are not married, well, we already know what the Church says about that. The sex maybe great, but there is still an interference between giving yourself fully and completely to your partner.)

One may be tempted to say that the theology of the Church has no practical application to the serious problem of overpopulation. Well, it does, but most people do not like the answer. People throughout history want to have their cake and eat it too. (It is tempting to add that this is even more so now days.)

First, the Church says that a man and a woman must be married before engaging in sex. Second, and more importantly, the Church expects people to develop the virtue of temperance. (Funny how you do not hear much about virtues in the postmodern world.) Temperance, in the classical sense, is where a person applies moderation and self-restraint to his or her urges and impulses. (Temperance in the modern sense has been corrupted by the connotation of teetotalers and alcohol.)

Neither of these two points are followed very closely in the world, especially the second one. So how does one “fix” the results of these sins? The pragmatist says contraception.

Pragmatism is about the practical solution to problems. If avoiding pregnancy is viewed as a problem, then contraception is one solution. I personally feel that it is the easy way out the problem. Perhaps that is why so many people choose that option?

In the end, we just have to accept the fact that we are all sinners. Thank God for His mercy."



In my opinion, eventually we all must sin to hold society intact as much as holding virtue for the same purpose. We are all sinners and works alone won't do shit, and it is not our job to judge.

quote:Originally posted by AngrySquirrel:

Well, the Catholic doctrine does not accept contraception, but the Protestant one does.

Even though i am lutheran, i'm not sure whether protestant doctrine accepts contraception. But i think catholic doctrine says that the only contraception allowed is the "rythym method", which would go against God's natural law. I would think that on a theological view, this would compare to what Mose said about divorce vs. what some Jew's said about absolutly no divorce during Jesus time. (At that time there were two conflicting views, and that is why they tried to trap Jesus when they posed this question to Him. Which Jesus responded basically saying what God's word says about it.)

quote:Originally posted by napoleon_complex:

it is committed solely for pleasure(i.e. greedy and selfish).

any form of recreation (video games, sky diving, hiking, reading a book) can also fall under this discription you know.

God destroyed two cities over Homosexuality.



He also, later, destroyed the earth because of it as well.



If that doesn't say zero-tolerance, please tell me what does?



~Saint947

quote:Originally posted by Clifford the Big Red Bong:

any form of recreation (video games, sky diving, hiking, reading a book) can also fall under this discription you know.

But you don't have to commit sins to do those things.

quote:Originally posted by ArmsMerchant:

My opinion, fundys who hate gays are 1) assholes and/or 2) closet cases.

God loves us all the same, Xians just don't seem to get that.

quote:Originally posted by napoleon_complex:

It does nothing for the human race,

Nor does:<UL TYPE=SQUARE>*Heterosexual intercourse *Rape *Our current President (I'd like to think of him as your President though. That is, Not Mine!) *War *Rascism *Cannablism *Religion in schools in the field of Science *Anti-homosexuallality *Most of the people that make up the worlds population *having sex with as many people as you can for sport without caring if you pass on disease *Greed *Selfishness *Excessive consumption *Being unwilling to consider/accept those whom embark in activities you don't agree with, even though they harm no innocent persons *A whole aray of things I won't bother to type...</UL>

quote:it is committed solely for pleasure(i.e. greedy and selfish).

First of all that's FALSE. Second, 3rd, 4th, and so on...

So is: <UL TYPE=SQUARE>*M-F sexual intercourse *Playing *Coming to Totse *Voicing ones oppinions *Healing ppl *Eating *Drinking *Conversating *Coupling *Having kids *Watching Sports *Playing Sports *Reading</UL>

Do ya see where this is going????

quote:Sodomy is being committed and the act has no chance for pro-creation.

So.

quote:With that said I don't think the majority of christians care what homosexuals do in their own house. The most vocal care, but the majority don't.

70 mill voters, +, would STRONGLY disagree...

I'd like to see the stat for that 70 million voter thing.

The Catholic Church is very accepting when it comes to homosexuals. They accept that homosexuality is natural. People in the US did not vote for Bush just because he was anti-gay marriage.

I also said those weren't my views, but the views of the minority christian far-right.

quote:Originally posted by napoleon_complex:

[B]I'd like to see the stat for that 70 million voter thing.

Ummm....where you not here (on earth) for the whole election thing?

Am I the only nerd here? (No, Idiot! This is Totse...) Or, the only nerd here who watches Nightline, and all the other shows like it?

I'll see what I can pull up 4 ya, but I won't post until tomorrow, I HAVE to go and watch TNA.

quote:The Catholic Church is very accepting when it comes to homosexuals. They accept that homosexuality is natural. People in the US did not vote for Bush just because he was anti-gay marriage.

This, I know. They are home to the worlds strongest organisation of religionous fags....They're called Priests.

quote:I also said those weren't my views, but the views of the minority christian far-right.

Yeah, I know. But it was a great opporitunity to point those things out, don't you agree?

It rebutes the arguements of those who ACTUALLY believe that junk.

quote:Originally posted by AngrySquirrel:



Well, the Catholic doctrine does not accept contraception, but the Protestant one does. The Protestants generally consider the Catholics antiquated people with pagan traditions. The Catholics consider the Protestants hypocrites for denying what is considered the only way sexual intercourse should be done. To illustrate the Catholic view, drawing from this Catholic page:

"Sex, from the Church’s point of view, is not for recreation. It is an expression of the union of a loving and giving relationship, plus, it is for procreation. Anything that interferes with the full, open, and giving union of a husband and wife on a spiritual, emotional and physical level is a sin. Contraceptives are just one of the many interferences of this union. (Pregnancy is seen as a gift. It is one of the results of the full and open union between two loving and giving people.)

On another level, sin, in its simplest form, is a choice that a person makes that goes against the will of God. Natural Law is part of God’s Law. The mechanism of sperm/egg fertilization is nature’s way, and thus God’s way, of initiating new human life. Contraception, by definition, is against (contra) the inception of a zygote/embryo/fetus, and thus against the initiation of life. To go against nature, in effect, is to go against God’s will, or God’s method of bringing life into the world.

To interfere with this mechanism is an act of man’s will, not God’s, and therefore, a sin. There is no moral relativism in this reasoning whatsoever. If you make a choice against God, then it is a sin. Simple as that. What you do with the result of that choice is another matter.

So, you decide to use contraception. Okay. You have your reasons. They are valid and practical reasons. But contraception is still a sin. You are going against nature; you are going against God’s will. You are interfering with the process of giving yourself fully and completely to your spouse. (If you are not married, well, we already know what the Church says about that. The sex maybe great, but there is still an interference between giving yourself fully and completely to your partner.)

One may be tempted to say that the theology of the Church has no practical application to the serious problem of overpopulation. Well, it does, but most people do not like the answer. People throughout history want to have their cake and eat it too. (It is tempting to add that this is even more so now days.)

First, the Church says that a man and a woman must be married before engaging in sex. Second, and more importantly, the Church expects people to develop the virtue of temperance. (Funny how you do not hear much about virtues in the postmodern world.) Temperance, in the classical sense, is where a person applies moderation and self-restraint to his or her urges and impulses. (Temperance in the modern sense has been corrupted by the connotation of teetotalers and alcohol.)

Neither of these two points are followed very closely in the world, especially the second one. So how does one “fix” the results of these sins? The pragmatist says contraception.

Pragmatism is about the practical solution to problems. If avoiding pregnancy is viewed as a problem, then contraception is one solution. I personally feel that it is the easy way out the problem. Perhaps that is why so many people choose that option?

In the end, we just have to accept the fact that we are all sinners. Thank God for His mercy."



In my opinion, eventually we all must sin to hold society intact as much as holding virtue for the same purpose. We are all sinners and works alone won't do shit, and it is not our job to judge.

So it looks like most of the priests are gay/sinners. But what if a couple can't have children (tube scarring or something) is that natural protection so it isn't a sin?

quote:Originally posted by Metalligod:

Ummm....where you not here (on earth) for the whole election thing?

Am I the only nerd here? (No, Idiot! This is Totse...) Or, the only nerd here who watches Nightline, and all the other shows like it?

I'll see what I can pull up 4 ya, but I won't post until tomorrow, I HAVE to go and watch TNA.



I don't believe any one candidate got 70 million votes. You're just pulling numbers out of your ass and claiming them to be real. People did not vote for Bush just for the anti-gay marriage stance.

quote:This, I know. They are home to the worlds strongest organisation of religionous fags....They're called Priests.

I'm done talking to you, because if you're not going to make serious replys, then there is no point.

quote:Originally posted by napoleon_complex: I don't believe any one candidate got 70 million votes. You're just pulling numbers out of your ass and claiming them to be real. People did not vote for Bush just for the anti-gay marriage stance.

O my suffering Christ, you're a whinny bitch. I didn't LITTERALLY mean 70 mill, but hell, it is close. The number is 60 mill. And yes the hell people did vote for Bush for the sole purpose of 'Protecing the Sanctity of Marriage'.

It's not my fucking job to spoon feed you. I stated at the end of my comments that I would post what ever information on the matter that I could for you. Did I not?

As a matter of fact, you quoted it. And now you accuse me of 'pulling the info out of my ass'. Well now you can do that for yourself (that is, research the issue). Cause I'm not going to waste my time on someone who bitches as much as you do.

You sorry, shit brained, laughable example of a human being.

quote:Originally posted by napoleon_complex:

I'm done talking to you, because if you're not going to make serious replys, then there is no point.

After this I'm done talking to you as well, you whinny bitch.

The fucking Vatican is a powerful unit and it is overrun with homosexual Priests. The fact is that it's true and you can't swallow it.

Don't fucking take it out on me cause I brought it you your damn attention. I was/am serious with my comment, and anyone who has a functioning brain that isn't controlled by religious bullshit will tell you the same.

THE 'CHURCH' IS A RICH AND POWERFUL ORGANIZATION WHICH IS 'HOME' TO 'TONS' OF HOMOSEXUALS CALLED PRIESTS!

[This message has been edited by Metalligod (edited 01-18-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by Metalligod:

O my suffering Christ, you're a whinny bitch. I didn't LITTERALLY mean 70 mill, but hell, it is close. The number is 60 mill. And yes the hell people did vote for Bush for the sole purpose of 'Protecing the Sanctity of Marriage'.

Why type something if you don't literally mean it. You didn't overexaggerate so I assumed you had no idea what the fuck you were talking about because you didn't know the number of people who voted for Bush.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Issue%20Clusters_Election%20Night.htm



Notice that gay marriage is at the bottom of the list.

quote:It's not my fucking job to spoon feed you. I stated at the end of my comments that I would post what ever information on the matter that I could for you. Did I not?

As a matter of fact, you quoted it. And now you accuse me of 'pulling the info out of my ass'. Well now you can do that for yourself (that is, research the issue). Cause I'm not going to waste my time on someone who bitches as much as you do.

You sorry, shit brained, laughable example of a human being.



I wouldn't want you to spoon feed me info, because it appears that you have a hard time getting your facts straight. You don't say the right number, then you have the balls to accuse me of taking you literally. It's a fucking number, numbers are supposed to be taken literally.

You have trouble listenning to other's opinion you close minded, ignorant piece of worthless shit.

quote:After this I'm done talking to you as well, you whinny bitch.

The fucking Vatican is a powerful unit and it is overrun with homosexual Priests. The fact is that it's true and you can't swallow it.

Don't fucking take it out on me cause I brought it you your damn attention. I was/am serious with my comment, and anyone who has a functioning brain that isn't controlled by religious bullshit will tell you the same.

THE 'CHURCH' IS A RICH AND POWERFUL ORGANIZATION WHICH IS 'HOME' TO 'TONS' OF HOMOSEXUALS CALLED PRIESTS!

A few isolated incidents of sexual abuse by priests. That really constitutes as "TONS".

You're just an idiot who will go out of your way to insult the catholic church.

800 of 50,000 catholic priests in America have been charged with sexual abuse(not all convicted). I really don't see how 800 out of 50,000 shows that Church as a safe haven for pedophiles.

There are terrible priests, but to say the Vatican condones it is just moronic.

quote:Originally posted by napoleon_complex:

But you don't have to commit sins to do those things.

so why the fuck is it a sin to stick you penis into some guys ass? you cant say "because its seflish" because as i said, doing any form of recreation (by yourself. i.e. reading a book) is also greedy and selfish because it does nothing for anyone else.

quote:Originally posted by Fagoneon_cockfest:

Why type something if you don't literally mean it. You didn't overexaggerate so I assumed you had no idea what the fuck you were talking about because you didn't know the number of people who voted for Bush. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Issue%20Clusters_Election%20Night.htm

Notice that gay marriage is at the bottom of the list.

Granted. By the way, that's just ONE of MANY surveys asswipe. This has ALSO been covered by Nightline, Dateline, Talk show hosts, Radio Stations, etc. All over the U.S., dumbass. Your scope is small and so are the selections in the goddamned stitistics you used.

And also, just because people picked one thing, it does NOT mean in any way that the 'gay marriage issue' had nothing to do with thier determination. Whatta hopless twat you are........



quote:A few isolated incidents of sexual abuse by priests. That really constitutes as "TONS".

Again, the world 'tons' was use to EMPHASIVE the issue, it is not to be taken litterally. It seems that you're the only one with a brain incapable of determining such, and distinguishing such things. Take it out on your aunt and uncle who happens to be your parents........

O, and a fucking 'few'? Bitch you should consider Suicide. You stupid cum guzzling cunt, just be-fucking-cause a 'few' were reported that doesn't mean they're the only ones that occured. And FY-FUCKING-I, there are more, and more cases being filed against priests every day.

There are plenty of unreported cases for ever one reported. Not every fucking child molestation/rape committed by a priest gets reported. In FACT most of them don't get reported because people believe either A) No one will believe them, B)They are too embarrassed and/or they feel guilty about it.



quote:You're just an idiot who will go out of your way to insult the catholic church.

Idiot? NOT. As far as going out of my way for anything? Not if it won't put money in my pocket. With that said, I needn't 'go out of my way' to insult something that gives me so many obvious thruths to choose from.

quote:800 of 50,000 catholic priests in America have been charged with sexual abuse(not all convicted).

HAHA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA! OMFG. 800 (a few?).

People I will speak with you now, if you are friends with Napolean, tell him how unintelligent he's proving himself to be. Maybe he'll listen to you.

Like his dumbness stated above, those are the only ones that 'HAVE BEEN CHARGED'. At least, thus far.

quote:I really don't see how 800 out of 50,000 shows that Church as a safe haven for pedophiles.

Cause you're stupid.

quote:There are terrible priests, but to say the Vatican condones it is just moronic.

You shit eating bitch, they do/did condone it. FOR YEARS THEY'VE HELP/HEADED COVER UPS TO PROTECT PRIESTS DUMB ASS IT WAS ALL OVER THE NEWS.

You are such a bitchy idiot, I'm going to call you, Moronna.

:edit:I totally skewed a sentence

[This message has been edited by Metalligod (edited 01-19-2005).]

I think Jesus was a total flamer, and the Bible is nothing but subversive homosexual pornography perpetuated by the gay agenda. Do you know what they really mean in the gospels about Judas being 'hung?'

quote:Originally posted by Charles Thunder:

I think Jesus was a total flamer, and the Bible is nothing but subversive homosexual pornography perpetuated by the gay agenda. Do you know what they really mean in the gospels about Judas being 'hung?'



I'm afraid I would never 'know' Charles...do you?