posted on October 21, 2001 06:53:06 PM newluvbuggI find it irritaitng that if I happen to hold the same belief as a principal taught by one of the main christian religions I'm considered brainwashed or not thinking for myself but if I go against mainstream christianity then I'm open minded and think for myself.
A well put statement that does sum up many of the dialogs I've seen lately.
posted on October 21, 2001 07:14:21 PM new
I think that there's an overlooked aspect in the basis of the restraints of homosexuality in societal settings, though chum touched it in passing.
The formation of norms which do not sanction homosexuality are more likely brought by the need of the tribe to survive and grow than by any word from god in any form, since we all know that there was no god before man thought him up. (applause)
Put simply, homosexuality interferes with procreation and tribes(using that term to describe any primitive grouping) could not continue without new members.
A tribe of homosexuals will by attrition cease to exist, and to prevent that homosexuality would be discouraged.
Over much time the simple and practicle needs of the tribe are written, applied, and have morality attached to them as the method of choice for enforcement.
posted on October 21, 2001 07:20:19 PM new
I have a friend who has all the feminine mannerisms that you see stereotyped in a gay man. He is married and I have never asked him if he is bi or anything about his sex life.
What amazes me is that there is some sort of pattern recognition that gay men seem to have that works so fast it is literally at a glance.
We have been walking down the street with this couple and had a car stop in the road and a couple fellows lean out the window and hit on this guy and yell that they will be back for him. This is in an area far from his home where nobody could possibly be familiar with him.
He has learned some pretty nasty quick verbal responses to deal with it.
posted on October 21, 2001 07:23:07 PM new
I'm nor sure why God made you so darn cute KRS. I would have made you with horns on your head if I were Him.
posted on October 21, 2001 07:24:03 PM newBut what you said, Spaz, can not apply to me because I believe the scriptures to be the inspired word of God and therefore without human flaw
My first question would be why, terri? Because men told us it is? The same men who wrote it? Pretty good deal for them, wouldn't you say? Here, better behave in the ways set forth in this Bible because if you don't, you go to hell. So sayeth God -- God according to us, that is.
And don't forget the years of interpretation and oral tradition that passed before the Bible was ever set down in print. Take the gospels, for example. Compared to the Old Testament, they're fairly recent. Even so, the earliest of the gospels was written 100 years after the death of Christ. What happened in those 100 years? Who added to the story? Who edited things out? Who changed a word or two? Who forgot something important? The gospels are attributed to men like Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, but Bible scholars believe that unknown individuals wrote at least some of them. These people were human, and they were flawed. Heck, they may have been drunk at the time. We just don't know.
I suppose this is where faith comes in. You either buy it lock, stock and barrel or you don't.
I have faith. I have faith that God is the inspiration in us to do good, and to love the best we can. To help, and not to hurt. To appreciate beauty and to try to create some ourselves. To explore, to share ... all those things.
I have no faith in man or man-made rules, man-made churches, etc. Religion is power, and power corrupts. It's arrogant to think that religious leaders are immune or without flaw. In fact, history offers a body of evidence to the contrary.
posted on October 21, 2001 07:27:04 PM newPut simply, homosexuality interferes with procreation and tribes(using that term to describe any primitive grouping) could not continue without new members.
Okay, that's true.
Apples to apples, though...
edit:
attempts to get closed minded individuals to get "out of the box" have failed.
posted on October 21, 2001 07:36:10 PM new
I don't know. According to science, no 2 females, or 2 males cannot reproduce, but that does not mean it is wrong. Someone mentioned that no animal is homosexual. I have heard that there are a couple species of animals that act out in a homosexual way, but I cannot think of which ones, I believe one was wolves?
Is homosexuality wrong? I have no idea. I don't care what a persons sexual preference is. I guess the only one that knows that answer, whether it is 'right' or 'wrong' or a 'sin' is God himself. And I haven't talked personally to him lately on that particular subject
posted on October 21, 2001 07:46:10 PM new"just maybe, if the tribe of females hooked up with the tribe of males, they could make babies"
In the first case where did the separately oriented tribes come from? Did god create homosexual groupings? La! Wouldn't that be the peaches! But in the next, if such an expedient arrangement (invasion?) were made, what of the babies then? No, there would need to be a nurturing environ and there would need to be a supply system. Hunters and mothers--just as it was when god came along and adopted the people for his own.
posted on October 21, 2001 07:54:13 PM new
First of all the word sin isn't even in my vocabulary. Sin is defined as an offense against God. I don't believe in God, so there is no sin for me to consider.
I remember having to go to confession every Sat as a kid to confess my sins. Duh, I was a kid and didn't really have anything to confess so I would make things up. You also would have to say how many times you committed the sin. For examble, I would say, Father I swore 10 times. I didn't swear (actually still don't much) so then I would feel quilty for lying to the prist which was a sin. It was so confusing!
I also wondered if people that were mean to other people, like treating blacks so badly, confessed that to the priest. Confusing again, because, no one thought that was sin. Huh, to me that was a big sin.
posted on October 21, 2001 08:09:41 PM new NearTheSea if I thought about it I could probably even remember them.
krs - smile to you to! My justification for that is how I looked at from a childs point of view. It was drilled into my head so much! Sin Sin Sin. I feel so much better now. This board is like going to confession, but more fun.
posted on October 21, 2001 08:19:52 PM new
I see homosexuality in Freudian terms. That is to say (to put it politely), homosexuality is a mistake. However, I don't believe I make ethical judgements about it.
I am offended by certain homosexual behaviors, the outwardly gay or "flaming" type; however, the same behavior in heteros offends me also. I don't need to have your sexuality shoved in my face, no matter what it is.
I also acknowlege that many of the social giants (entertainers) and people I respect (musicians) are gay. I don't believe it's pure coincidence.
You would think that if homosexuality were purely a genetic trait, it would have died out long ago. Most likely there are environmental factors as well. Freud believed that homosexuals fail to transfer their libido onto a proper object, instead fixating on their own likeness as a sexual object. So for Freud it was purely a developmental issue. That's my best understanding, anyway.
Religion is a whole other subject. You can argue that Christ finished the law. Which is great, until you stop to think that 99.999% of us will be drawing the automatic damnation card. Given a choice between Jesus and Jehovah, I find Jehovah more "human." Jesus just introduced another layer of separation between God and Man.
posted on October 21, 2001 08:34:42 PM new
What would be a great way to control someone?
How about we tell them that they'll never be perfect and that just about anything that feels good is a sin? Don't touch yourself, don't touch someone of the same sex, don't touch someone of the other sex w/out benefit of marriage. Of course, orgasms feel great, so you might as well try to keep people from breathing. But if you convince them that almost all sex is a sin, you've got them emotionally cowering, thinking they're imperfect, looking to the church, the bible, ANYTHING to just stop being a filthy sinner.
posted on October 21, 2001 08:39:22 PM new
Stockticker said : I don't think that any human being has the right to tell another human being what they ought to feel.
Behavior is a different matter entirely. Treat everyone the way you yourself would like to be treated is a darn good guide to follow when interacting within a society.
Terri said : I should be able to hold to my belief based on scripture and no one should cast them at me either.
Which means the same thing but said different ways. I will reiterate that I agree with both of them. I have no problem with someones sexual preference, nor do I go out of my way to degrade or insult those who think differently than I do. What I DO "resent" is the insistence that I change, or I am a bigot, or I am unfair, or I am prejudiced because I dont choose to follow along with that persons own beliefs. In other words, I do not think these things of the person who thinks or feels or does differently than I am. I accept them "as they are" or "how they treat me as an individual" and all I expect from them is the same courtesy.
Do I believe it is a "sin"? I dont know. I dont know enough about the Bible nor am I in the position to say anyone is a "sinner". Do I think its "ok"? I dont know, because I have never experienced it nor had the desire for it and who am I to say what is "ok" and what is not? Do I condemn it? That I can say a positive NO. What I DO condem is the anger directed to those who wont conform to any set belief, just because they "say so", no matter who is doing the "saying".
posted on October 21, 2001 08:52:58 PM new
I have no faith in religion, my faith is in God. If God is omnipitent, he surely can control edits. Plus, we have the Holy Spirit to guide us.
Choco, I don't know why anyone made you go anywhere to confess since God would have listened to you on the bus. That is a good example of religion v. faith.
posted on October 21, 2001 08:58:28 PM new I would hope in time they ask God for forgiveness and many do.
If I believed in a God, my God would ask homosexuals to forgive Him for putting them in a world full of intolerance and hate.
-------
I just love how the faithful pick and choose which "sins" will send another to Hell.
A sin is a sin, is a sin, is a sin, folks. There are no degrees.
Before I saw the light, I was very involved with a church in the 70s: church choir; children's choir director; pianist when organist was ill; secretary to the pastor; president of women's fellowship, etc.
Some members of my S.S. class told me I was going to Hell for smoking (harming God's Temple and all that).
Excuse me?!?!? I don't get "points" for my good deeds? I'm to be condemned to Hell for this one weakness?
Of course, some of them conveniently overlooked their own over-indulgence in food, which could lead to heart failure, high cholesterol, etc., therefore, harming God's Temple.
And, the affairs with other men's/women's spouses.
Oh, and my husband and anyone else who did not attend church were going to Hell, too.
If I believed in a Hereafter, I would look forward to spending eternity with my closest friends.
------
I cannot believe I am still up at this time of night, discussing religion, of all things. I must be nuts!!!!
posted on October 21, 2001 09:09:53 PM newI don't get "points" for my good deeds?
Only if you are saved Femme. There are two "judgments" one for belivers and one for unbelievers (Revelations). I will be happy to be heaven's toilet scrubber.
The difference between those who are saved and those who are sinners is that those who are saved acknowledge that they are sinners.
Whether you are in church or not makes no difference what-so-ever.
posted on October 21, 2001 09:18:38 PM new
Terri, the majority of those who believe themselves saved are also hell-bound. Wearing God on one's sleeve is no guarantee that one is a club member.
posted on October 21, 2001 09:27:17 PM new. I now generally prefer the "don't ask, don't tell" approach so that I don't feel obligated to say anything one way or another...which may be somewhat cowardly but at least everyone is happy. I will/do avoid outward public displays but I would never be unkind if it were not graphic
I guess I can understand this because it's how I feel about Christian fundamentalists, who, in my experience, are far more bent on inflicting their lifestyle and attitudes upon the rest of the population than gays or any other group. Certainly there's no gay equivalent to Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, Reverend Donald Wildmon, etc.
posted on October 21, 2001 09:28:46 PM new
krs:
If there is a God, then yes, He did create homosexuals so it therefore is not a sin.
IMO, homosexuality does not create a tribe as you imply.
We are all meant to co-exist or "God" wouldn't have made it this way, would he have?
edit:
attempts to get closed minded individuals to get "out of the box" have only succeeded in making me look like a Maroon.
[ edited by zoomin on Oct 23, 2001 06:58 AM ]
posted on October 21, 2001 09:31:50 PM new
In western cultures, at least, homosexuality & homosexual behavior was common and pretty much tolerated until the advent of Christianity. In the animal kingdom a wide variety of animals, from beetles to Bonobo chimps, have been observed in homosexual behaviors.
posted on October 21, 2001 09:33:37 PM newTo say that survival of a "tribe" is based on its ability to procreate makes a BIG leap to assume each "tribe" lives in a bubble. The huntersd need the gatherers and so on. Only the "tribes" can choose to segregate and discriminate. IMO, each and every "tribe" is important and has value to the others.
I think somebody's been watching too much Survivor.
[ edited by spazmodeus on Oct 21, 2001 09:34 PM ]
This topic is 11 pages long: 1new2new3new4new5new6new7new8new9new10new11new
