Homosexuality, Culture, and Theology

[NUance]

How about it JJ and Landlord, do you dislike gay people? If you were in charge of hiring someone, would you hire a gay person if he/she was slightly more qualified than any other applicants? If you had a child, would you let them be friends with a gay kid?

 

I ask these questions because I don't think a person is necessarily bigoted due to disapproval of homosexuality. And that seems to be the twist this thread has taken. Carry on.

[EbylHusker]

I'll thank you for not putting words into my mouth. Nowhere I have I said, or even come close to implying, that anyone in this thread is bigoted or hates gays. I haven't even implied such a thing with my posts.

 

As for the instinct, it's impossible to judge the instinct and not be judging the person in this case. What some people in this thread are saying is that heterosexual people should be able to enjoy the pleasure that the instinct of having sex brings, but there is something wrong wtih homosexual sex, so those people should deny their instinctual urges. Keep in mind, Landlord's list of "bad things" is entirely false and can't be backed up with anything other than blatant anti-gay propaganda. So you can't say that homosexual sex is actually harming anyone any more than heterosexual sex.

 

Saying it's alright for people to be gay, but then believing they should deny themselves the instinct of sex, it's just a sideways attempt at judging gay people. It allows the person to hide behind saying things like, "Hey, I'm not against gay people. I just have an issue with them having sex. I'm not a homophobe or anything..." In that way, it's extremely convenient and just a way for the person to deny they're actually judging homosexuals and their sexual orientation.

[The Dude]

 

I actually have the book Craig references and have read it and it provides sources, but it's boxed up somewhere getting ready to move. I was going to pull it out but I think it's just better for me to bow out of the conversation. The people that know me best know that I'm reasonable and know my heart in loving and accepting and fighting for all wronged people. If I haven't communicated that well that's on me, but on the other hand if a good number of you aren't able to comprehend that you can be genuinely and passionately loving and supportive of people while still having a conviction that they are doing harm to themselves, then I'm not going to convince you.

 

Regardless of different conclusions I'm glad to see that a lot of people seem to be passionate about fighting for the oppressed, because I think that's the real necessity more than anything else.

 

I don't think trying to spread propaganda that attempts to depict homosexual men as sex-crazed, disease-riddled drug addicts is the best way to communicate that you're passionately loving and supportive of your gay friends, no.

 

I can understand being concerned about your friends. Nobody wants to see their friends have to deal with drug addiction or depression or whatever. I get it. I can even understand worrying about whether or not your friends are having safe sex. But whether or not they're having gay sex? Not sure that's a line you have any business crossing in the first place.

 

Although I can understand how not crossing that line would make it difficult to convince them they're damaged, and Jesus can fix them. Because that's the endgame here, right? That's more or less the good Dr. Craig's motives, yes?

[knapplc]

 

There aren't enough negative points for me to award to this post. It is the single dumbest post I have ever seen on this board EVER. Including my dumb posts. If ever there was an EXACT example for Ad Hominem attack...it's what you said right here. Go after the person instead of the issue.

 

No offense, meant to you as a person, but dude, you just swept all your argument with Landlord right out the window by going after him.

 

And oddly enough, it's Landlord that has remained civil and on point this entire time. Gotta give him props for not letting it get personal.

 

 

ad hom attack.... no. Landlord asked where he'd not adhered to the Bible. I showed him where in answer to his question. Had he not wanted something like that pointed out, he shouldn't have made that statement.

 

What you're upset about is not that I "attacked" Landlord, it's that those are actual instances of commandment violations on this very board.

 

It was a further example of the fact that sin is not being treated equally here - "their" sin is lesser than "my" sin, therefore I have the moral standing to denounce. That's demonstrably not true.

[EbylHusker]

And yes, in the end, this comes down to the belief that, "Homosexuals are damaged in some way, but if they tried hard enough, they could fix themselves or at least deny their damaged sexual urges." No matter how many attempts at obfuscating it with false data are made, that's what is being said.

[Junior]

 

 

 

Maybe, just maybe, I can do my part to fight for their acceptance and rights so that they can live the same quality of life that I do.

 

Trying to do exactly the same thing from the exact same motivation in my life dude

 

 

 

 

By spreading horribly inaccurate, bigoted misinformation about homosexuals and their lifestyles?

 

 

 

Do you know what bigoted means? I'll throw out a few varying definitions just to approach this at all angles.

 

 

big·ot·ed

ˈbigətid/Submit

adjective

having or revealing an obstinate belief in the superiority of one's own opinions and a prejudiced intolerance of the opinions of others.

I guess I think that I'm right about stuff (like every human ever), but I don't really consider my thoughts superior to anyone else's, and I don't have any problem with anyone else's opinion at all.

big·ot noun \ˈbi-gət\

: a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc. : a bigoted person; especially : a person who hates or refuses to accept the members of a particular group (such as a racial or religious group)

There's no people that I dislike, nor do I hate or not accept any people groups.

Bigotry is the state of mind of a bigot: someone who, as a result of their prejudices, treats or views other people with fear, distrust or hatred on the basis of a person's ethnicity, evaluative orientation, race, religion, national origin, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, socioeconomic status, or other characteristics.

Again, I don't have any fear, distrust or hatred towards any person or people. I've had gay roommates, I've shared beds with gay friends, etc. There's no basis for that.

big·ot·ed [big-uh-tid] Show IPA

adjective

utterly intolerant of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own.

I'm not intolerant of anything or anyone. I'm in support of people doing whatever they want - I vote for and support same-sex marriage - I have no problem with people's actions. Disagreement and intolerance are not the same thing.

Now take a look at those definitions and then look back through this thread and see some of the comments directed back at me and see if they're applicable.

I'm done here.

 

 

 

Hahaha. You're the victim? Hahaha. Well, that's one way you could go with it.

 

You spread completely unsourced, factually inaccurate, and yes, BIGOTED lies about homosexuals and you think you are the victim?

[knapplc]

 

 

 

There aren't enough negative points for me to award to this post. It is the single dumbest post I have ever seen on this board EVER. Including my dumb posts. If ever there was an EXACT example for Ad Hominem attack...it's what you said right here. Go after the person instead of the issue.

 

No offense, meant to you as a person, but dude, you just swept all your argument with Landlord right out the window by going after him.

 

And oddly enough, it's Landlord that has remained civil and on point this entire time. Gotta give him props for not letting it get personal.

 

 

ad hom attack.... no. Landlord asked where he'd not adhered to the Bible. I showed him where in answer to his question. Had he not wanted something like that pointed out, he shouldn't have made that statement.

 

What you're upset about is not that I "attacked" Landlord, it's that those are actual instances of commandment violations on this very board.

 

It was a further example of the fact that sin is not being treated equally here - "their" sin is lesser than "my" sin, therefore I have the moral standing to denounce. That's demonstrably not true.

 

 

Oh well by all means then, it's perfectly acceptable to go back through posting history with the entire focus being to disparage another person to weaken their argument and ignore the topic.

 

Carry on.

 

 

Believe that I want to disparage Landlord all you want. I've hung out with him, shared beers with him, and hope to do so again. But yeah - I hate him, or whatever, because that fits your agenda today.

[JJ Husker]

How about it JJ and Landlord, do you dislike gay people? If you were in charge of hiring someone, would you hire a gay person if he/she was slightly more qualified than any other applicants? If you had a child, would you let them be friends with a gay kid?

 

I ask these questions because I don't think a person is necessarily bigoted due to disapproval of homosexuality. And that seems to be the twist this thread has taken. Carry on.

I do not dislike gay people. I have a few friends and neighbors who are gay. In my book they are no less entitled to anything than a hetero person. I have been accepting of gay people dating back to my teen years in the 70's. We had a gay neighbor who we were very close to. There was never any concern expressed by my parents about being "around" him. It may seem lame by todays standards but that was actually pretty enlightened behavior in the 70's and 80's.

 

I am in charge of hiring people and their sexual orientation would have zero impact on the decision to hire or retain an employee.

 

I have children and I know for a fact my son (the older one) has some gay friends. I am well acquainted with a couple of them and I go out of my way to greet them or talk to them when I run into them because they are very nice and well spoken kids. I am sure my daughter will have gay friends as well. It has no bearing whatsoever on if I approve of them as friends of my kids or not.

 

Thank you for the questions NUance. You have nailed what I find disturbing in this thread. Too many people want to jump to the conclusion that a person is a bigot because they think some behavior is a little off or *gasp* a sin. I understand that this issue gets focused on WAY too much by Christian church folk. I hate that and wish people would spend that time worrying about the log in their own eye. But, when the issue is out there for discussion, as it is in this thread, yes I think the behavior can be sinful, just like I think numerous kinds of heterosexual can be sinful; out of wedlock, adulterous, etc.

 

I am a sinner and I am not bigoted against myself. I don't hate myself. Why should recognizing one of many things as a sin in another person cause people to think I am bigoted against or hate those people? IMO, we're ALL sinners and it doesn't matter what particular sins are involved. I think some people struggle so hard with the concept of sin, or church, or a higher power, that they simply cannot look at the issue in the same way a believer does. All they can focus on is the word "SIN" and they think calling anything is too judgemental and therefore hateful and therefore bigoted. That isn't necessarily the way it is.

[ShawnWatson]

Can you guys imagine if sd'sker and count'bility pro created? We'd have a goddamn gaypostrophist on our hands.

[tschu]

Believe whatever you want, but if your belief negatively affects a group of people, that's where I draw the line. And the problem with belief is that it manifests itself in words and actions, consciously, subconsciously, in decisions and in politics and in negative stereotypes and contributes to an unaccepting culture that destroys peoples lives.

[EbylHusker]

No views are being repressed here. I do not see anyone deleting or censoring posts, or preventing anyone from posting something in some way. As you say, a person has a right to their beliefs, but as soon as you start expressing those beliefs, people have every right to respond and disagree or agree. That is what is going on here. Stop beating the repression drum, nothing like that is going on here.

[tschu]

It's only a matter of time before someone busts out the "freedom of speech" argument too. That'll be hilarious.

[Junior]

Blitz, your post really isn't relevant. He has the right to say that he believes homosexuality is a sin. And he has a right to believe homosexuality is a sin. And I have a right to tell him he's full of it when he posts factually inaccurate, unsourced information "supporting" his particular beliefs. That's what people are attacking him for. And repressed? Give me a break, no one is preventing him from speaking his mind. Freedom of speech is a wonderful thing. A person has the right to say something stupid. And I have the right to tell him that he is.

[EbylHusker]

The ridiculousness of that statement (repression) can only be truly expressed with...

 

[BigRedBuster]

And yes, in the end, this comes down to the belief that, "Homosexuals are damaged in some way, but if they tried hard enough, they could fix themselves or at least deny their damaged sexual urges." No matter how many attempts at obfuscating it with false data are made, that's what is being said.

 

That all depends on why someone is gay and if they want to change.

 

Before everyone goes on attack, let me explain.

 

There are many reasons why someone is gay. Many times, they have no idea why and it very well could be simply that they are made that way. They never have had any desire to be with the opposite sex and they have no recollection of ever feeling that way....they simply always have been and always will be gay.

 

There are some people who are gay because of other reasons too. I worked with a woman in college who was a lesbian. She wasn't always a lesbian but when she was in HS, she was date raped so badly that she never could trust being with another man. So....she found the love and safety she desired with another woman. Now, she had a long discussion with me about that over beer one night and she admitted that if she really wanted to, she could go to therapy and if she found the right man she could work really hard at being able to trust a man again. She just simply said that she is happy being how she is and doesn't see a reason to change. I thought that was an extremely healthy way of looking at her life and I admired her for that.

 

Her opinion was that there are more gay people like her than what people want to admit. No, I don't have a source to post on that. It's simply one opinion from one lesbian that I happened to be friends with and have a conversation with.

 

Any of these other reasons why someone is gay doesn't make it any more wrong to be gay in our society and they shouldn't be discriminated against for how they are. However, just to simply make a blanket statement that gay people can't be "fixed" is sort of wrong also.