Homosexuality

[Eevee]

1) I have offered the book because someone may be interesed in finding out my reasoning without having to read my poorly worded and explained posts.

I am not interested in someone else's reasoning. I am interested in yours. If yours is merely copy-pasting someone else's, something is wrong.

3) With regards to Evolution ve Creation Evolutiopn is the changing of one species into another.

No, it's not. It is the genetic adaptation of a population to its environment over successive generations.

4) 'only six or seven verses in the bible bention same-sex behavour.' So if a football rulebook didn't mention stabbing anothe player it would be alowed?

Stabbing people is mentioned in another rulebook. Homosexuality is not.
Stabbing people also causes other people undue harm. Homosexuality does not.
You are, once more, leaning back towards merely assuming homosexuality is a bad thing without explaining why. I believe I have diffused every one of your reasons thusfar.

6) I have my beliefs, and stated them (however badly) im my first post. I also believe in god and the bible for reasons irrelavent to this thread and none of this counter evidence seems to me to make as much sence as my opinions (clearly it makes more sense to you).

If it is wrong, tell me why. If you just don't like it because you have been told what the Bible is "supposed" to say and I am disagreeing, well, that's not an argument and maybe you should put some more thought into your perception of the universe.

7) Nowhere have I said 'stop being gay' or 'accept my beliefs' (other than asking people (I think) to understand that my veiw can be held). My opinion is based on evidence from a book I believe to be accurate.

I believe you have said that homosexuals should stop feeling as they do, just a mere couple pages back.
I understand that your view is technically possible to hold, but that does not change that it is unfounded and potentially socially harmful.
The mythology you subscribe to is and should be irrelevant to this discussion. Society should not be held to the arbitrary dictation of the deities you choose to worship.

8) A husband is the head of the family, which means he makes decisions and is responsible for the family.

This is terrible and sexist and I am sorry for any woman who ends up having to deal with an attitude like this from you.

9) What does something some man said over 1000 years after jesus died have to do with the bible being 'sexist'

I am assuming you know who Martin Luther is and why he is important. I would think that his interpretation of the Bible would say something about it and what it has led people to think.

 

[Icalasari]

*Didn't read everything, but did pay attention to most of Time Psyduck's posts, and alot of everybody else's*

I would like to argue on the front of religion (at least Christianity, anyways) being invalid for this debate. Look, if he doesn't like homosexuals, then wouldn't he have struck them all down? And before you use the free will argument, well, I will break out another argument. In the end, why should it matter if one is homosexual? God is all forgiving, right? Then he would forgive homosexuals if being one/acting on it is a sin. If one is sent to hell anyways, then that brings up several issues.

Either:
1) God is a prick and we are all going to hell anyways for, even unconsciously, sinning. Might as well have fun then

Or:

2) God is not almighty, in which case, why should we listen to him?

EDIT: With the head of the household thing, well, with Hebrews, in ancient times, the wife was pretty much a slave of the husband, and the husband could kill his own children if they disobeyed

 

[Vladimir Putin's LJ]

Look, if he doesn't like homosexuals, then wouldn't he have struck them all down?

I remember reading somewhere that at one point he did kill off all the gays in the world for some reason but I don't remember when or why :/

 

[Icalasari]

I remember reading somewhere that at one point he did kill off all the gays in the world for some reason but I don't remember when or why :/

O.o Then I guess the answer is 1) God is a prick and we are all going to hell anyways for, even unconsciously, sinning. Might as well have fun then

 

[Alexi]

O.o Then I guess the answer is 1) God is a prick and we are all going to hell anyways for, even unconsciously, sinning. Might as well have fun then

Well, let's hit the gay bar. :D Anyone wanna join me?

 

[Shiny Grimer]

The thing about God not killing all the gay people is... well, some Christians reasoned that God lets us do as we please after having given out God's word and so we can choose to do as God says or ignore it. You can kill, rape, and burn peoples' houses, but you'll only get it coming on 'Judgement Day'.

I personally disagree with this idea, but I wanted to throw it out since people think 'God hasn't smited sinners yet so clearly they're not sinning!' is a good argument.

EDIT: With the head of the household thing, well, with Hebrews, in ancient times, the wife was pretty much a slave of the husband, and the husband could kill his own children if they disobeyed

Is this supposed to be an excuse for the blatant sexism in the Bible? 'People used to do it, so it's ok'. Please clarify on this.

 

[Icalasari]

Is this supposed to be an excuse for the blatant sexism in the Bible? 'People used to do it, so it's ok'. Please clarify on this.

I just pointed that out because I think that was what Time Psyduck was referring to when he said:

8) A husband is the head of the family, which means he makes decisions and is responsible for the family.

 

[Time Psyduck]

The book Explains what the bible says. It givesan interpretation which makes sense to me and since I cannot put it better than in the book. yet again, If you do not want to don't read the book. I suggested the book incase anyone wants to. Clearly you don't so why contine to make an issue of it?

Regarding 8) the husband is head which means he has to ulitamtly make decisions but he also has to look after his wife. He should talk with and consult with his wife and the wife may have a lot of rsponsibility and a hand in desicion-making, but the man has the final desicion.

Yet again I have worded the point very badly.

The fact is that you have made me realise something: My issues on homosexuality are at the end of my reasoning.

Just because a man is signficant in history doesn't mean that what he said can be considered as part of the bible. If his words made people such as yourself think the biblewas sexist, then clearly he did the bible a diservice.

I'm going away for a week, so i won't be around. Therefore feel free to go back to your original mass agreement with each other.

 

[nyuu]

The book Explains what the bible says. It givesan interpretation which makes sense to me and since I cannot put it better than in the book. yet again, If you do not want to don't read the book. I suggested the book incase anyone wants to. Clearly you don't so why contine to make an issue of it?

several of us HAVE read it.

Regarding 8) the husband is head which means he has to ulitamtly make decisions but he also has to look after his wife. He should talk with and consult with his wife and the wife may have a lot of rsponsibility and a hand in desicion-making, but the man has the final desicion.

You still haven't given a reason for this. Why is the husband of a male/female couple the head? what is so superior about his guy-brain and guy-genitals that he gets to fall back on "I have a penis, your argument is invalid"?

Just because a man is signficant in history doesn't mean that what he said can be considered as part of the bible. If his words made people such as yourself think the biblewas sexist, then clearly he did the bible a diservice.

...buh?

you justify statments from the bible, not the other way around. your argument is not correct just because a similar statement is in a book

 

[opaltiger]

Regarding 8) the husband is head which means he has to ulitamtly make decisions but he also has to look after his wife. He should talk with and consult with his wife and the wife may have a lot of rsponsibility and a hand in desicion-making, but the man has the final desicion.

I really hope you don't mean this in a modern day context, because if you do... Well, prepare to be disillusioned when you grow up. Majorly.

 

[Time Psyduck]

What I mean (and yet again have failed to explain properly) is that the husband effectivly has the 'casting vote' in the marriage. This does not mean women have no say.

I dont mind if you've read the book, I don't mind if you don't want to. I mind when you continually complain about the fact that I have given a suggestion of where more information may be found.

 

[EvilCrazyMonkey]

I mind when you continually complain about the fact that I have given a suggestion of where more information may be found.

That's not what we're complaining about.
We're complaining about the fact that we have to read a whole book to keep up with your "argument," yet all you have to do is read everyone's points in this thread, which you still fail to do.

 

[Time Psyduck]

That's not what we're complaining about.
We're complaining about the fact that we have to read a whole book to keep up with your "argument," yet all you have to do is read everyone's points in this thread, which you still fail to do.

You don't have to read the book, which is what I havetried to say several times. I intended to stop posting at least twice, but both times people proceded to make posts which I considered it irresponsible of me to ignore.

I'm not making anymore posts because as I said, my veiws on this subject are linked to a large range of off-topic elements, so me even being here is a wast of time.

I've also edited my initial post to include something which I now realise should have been there in the first place. I apologise for the inconveniece.

 

[EvilCrazyMonkey]

You don't have to read the book, which is what I havetried to say several times. I intended to stop posting at least twice, but both times people proceded to make posts which I considered it irresponsible of me to ignore.

I'm not making anymore posts because as I said, my veiws on this subject are linked to a large range of off-topic elements, so me even being here is a wast of time.

Your posts are incoherent without this "book."
And, though the sad truth, is an argument. If you want to put one up, then quote every person and reply to them.

 

[GameFreakerZero]

Regarding 8) the husband is head which means he has to ulitamtly make decisions but he also has to look after his wife. He should talk with and consult with his wife and the wife may have a lot of rsponsibility and a hand in desicion-making, but the man has the final desicion.

...
You know, I'd read the book you keep talking about but I fear that the amount of face palming I'd need to do would result in me pushing my nose into my skull, and you only seem to be proving it.

Seriously, how can you actually believe in such an outdated and irrelevant idea as, "the man has the final say on everything, and runs the family", as if the presence of a penis seems to make all his ideas coherent, and the presence of ovaries makes you dumb?

Yet again I have worded the point very badly.

I seriously don't see how you could actually word such a sexist ideal positively.

Just because a man is signficant in history doesn't mean that what he said can be considered as part of the bible. If his words made people such as yourself think the biblewas sexist, then clearly he did the bible a diservice.

Hey, if we can exempt this guy from the Bible, why can't we just exempt every bit about homosexuality and then everyone can go have sex with whomever they want?

 

[Furretsu]

thx time psyduck I needed something else in my sig

 

[Eevee]

Just because a man is signficant in history doesn't mean that what he said can be considered as part of the bible. If his words made people such as yourself think the biblewas sexist, then clearly he did the bible a diservice.

I consider your views on homosexuality to be doing the Bible a disservice. Now what? Or are you, again, just judging the Bible by (and using it to defend) the things you independently believe?

I'm going away for a week, so i won't be around. Therefore feel free to go back to your original mass agreement with each other.

Yes, heaven forbid we not condemn people who are doing nothing harmful.

What I mean (and yet again have failed to explain properly) is that the husband effectivly has the 'casting vote' in the marriage. This does not mean women have no say.

This still fails, and that you are even trying to defend a position like that is pretty

.

But this is clear backpedaling anyway; you just said the wife "may have a hand in decision-making", which is a far cry from two equals where one happens to have the tie-breaker vote merely by virtue of owning a penis.

 

[Furretsu]

I'm going to take a wild guess and say Time Psyduck isn't even 13 yet.

I mean, I was just like that when I was 11-12.

 

[Vladimir Putin's LJ]

vaginas and boobs make people too stupid to decide for themselves hth

 

[Icalasari]

X3 I like how Time Psyduck keeps saying, "The man is the head of the household" X3. I am almost CERTAIN he must be getting that from somewhere in the Old Testament.

*shrugs* Just finished reading a good fiction, why not take a crack at another one?

I'm going to take a wild guess and say Time Psyduck isn't even 13 yet.

I mean, I was just like that when I was 11-12.

*Shrugs* The priest we had at the church *glares at his school for making mass mandatory* would have presented these same arguments, and he has got to have been in his late 50's, maybe even late 60's

Still, everybody has to admit that Time Psyduck is at least making more of an attempt than Tropiking did