Christianity and homosexuality

[sledheavy]

ok, so I've been wanting to just ask this for a freakin' while. And frankly I love the comment because everyone I know (i.e. conserv. republican types) that hear it gets CoMpLeTeLy pissed.

If god didn't desire gays, why did he create a prostate? Or more corrrectly, why'd he put it so close to the anus?

maybe this was already discussed on the forum, but I swear the reaction is classic.

Honestly though. I think it's interesting that the majority of classic nations (if politically correct) all experienced some form of homosexuality along their timeline.

[Cathar1950]

13 year old boy getting tied up and sodomized by two men, and saying something to the effect that 'we didn't know of the full extent of the evils of homosexuality'

That is a good example of the double standard.
Now the boy was not a victum of homosexuality, he was raped and abused.
This has happened to many a girl or woman by men. Do we say this is the danger or evils of hetrosexuality?

[micatala]

13 year old boy getting tied up and sodomized by two men, and saying something to the effect that 'we didn't know of the full extent of the evils of homosexuality'

That is a good example of the double standard.
Now the boy was not a victum of homosexuality, he was raped and abused.
This has happened to many a girl or woman by men. Do we say this is the danger or evils of hetrosexuality?

Exactly.

Whenever statements are made about homosexuality, I think it is a good exercise to restate the statement and replace the 'homo' with 'hetero' as Cathar has done here and see whether the statement becomes completely ridiculous. If it does, it pretty clearly indicates the original statement was fallacious at best.

[sledheavy]

13 year old boy getting tied up and sodomized by two men, and saying something to the effect that 'we didn't know of the full extent of the evils of homosexuality'

That is a good example of the double standard.
Now the boy was not a victum of homosexuality, he was raped and abused.
This has happened to many a girl or woman by men. Do we say this is the danger or evils of hetrosexuality?

Exactly.

Whenever statements are made about homosexuality, I think it is a good exercise to restate the statement and replace the 'homo' with 'hetero' as Cathar has done here and see whether the statement becomes completely ridiculous. If it does, it pretty clearly indicates the original statement was fallacious at best.

Well yeah, and as I mentioned I wasn't appauled at the story as much as I was the reaction. But just for s&g, I'll humor you two:

'....we don't know the full extent of heterosexuality'.

lol.

[disbelief]

[If god didn't desire gays, why did he create a prostate? Or more corrrectly, why'd he put it so close to the anus?

I am unaware of any evidence that says that god created human being or any other life on this planet for that matter. That said not being a medical student I could not say what would have made the prostate develop in the area of the male anatomy as it has. It is a shame that certain religious books have put down people for their sexual preferences. I am not sure that one is born that way but not being homosexual I could not say that a person has had those desires for as long as they have been alive.
As for myself if a person wants to be a homosexual or they are genetically predisposed to be this way who am I or anyone else for that matter to say that this is wrong? I think that if this is the way a person lives then society should really mind its own business. Also, the fact that many states have banned gay marriage and they have tried this on the federal level to me is very sad. The government and the religious groups that run the politicians are trying to control the actions of people that love each other enough to make a life long civil commitment to one another this is wrong and it is time more considerate americans stood up and told the politicians and religious leaders enough is enough.

[Cathar1950]

[If god didn't desire gays, why did he create a prostate? Or more corrrectly, why'd he put it so close to the anus?

I am unaware of any evidence that says that god created human being or any other life on this planet for that matter. That said not being a medical student I could not say what would have made the prostate develop in the area of the male anatomy as it has. It is a shame that certain religious books have put down people for their sexual preferences. I am not sure that one is born that way but not being homosexual I could not say that a person has had those desires for as long as they have been alive.
As for myself if a person wants to be a homosexual or they are genetically predisposed to be this way who am I or anyone else for that matter to say that this is wrong? I think that if this is the way a person lives then society should really mind its own business. Also, the fact that many states have banned gay marriage and they have tried this on the federal level to me is very sad. The government and the religious groups that run the politicians are trying to control the actions of people that love each other enough to make a life long civil commitment to one another this is wrong and it is time more considerate americans stood up and told the politicians and religious leaders enough is enough.

I think it is sad too.
I wonder what state the idea of marriage is in when the fear of a few homosexuals getting married is going to distroy the institution.
It is like the preacher that complains that if we don't outlaw Homosexuality then everyone will be gay. I am wondering if the only thing keeping him from being gay is the law and the bible.

[disbelief]

It is like the preacher that complains that if we don't outlaw Homosexuality then everyone will be gay. I am wondering if the only thing keeping him from being gay is the law and the bible.[/quote]

That is a good question. I am not sure what the preacher is thinking about with saying something like that. I myself could careless what a person does in the privacy of their own home.

I like the quote attributed to Thomas Jefferson on issues like that
" If my neighbor says their is one god or twenty gods, this neither picks my pocket, nor breaks my leg"

If it does not cause me physical pain, or a financial burden I could really careless what people do in their homes.

[Chimp]

If it does not cause me physical pain, or a financial burden I could really careless what people do in their homes.

to paraphrase JC..."..those who are not against us are with us..."

Ultimately, it shouldn't matter what you or I think, as long as every person is given
the same basic rights. With gay marriage this is not the case.

-random sidebar...most "church" weddings are not made legal by the church being
involved, but by the signing of a marriage license. So the main areas of contention
regarding Gay marriage are in fact secular.

[McCulloch]

-random sidebar...most "church" weddings are not made legal by the church being involved, but by the signing of a marriage license. So the main areas of contention regarding Gay marriage are in fact secular.

In my jurisdiction, there are two ways to get legally married. One is by a secular civil official. The other is to have it done by a religious leader who has been licensed by the secular authorities to process the paperwork. Either way, it is the signing of the marriage license, witnessed by an appropriate authority that makes it legal. Some recognized religious leaders would be willing to perform same-sex marriages, but the legislation does not require it. It is the same as many things. Religious groups are allowed to discriminate based on attributes which would be illegal for any other organization.

[reality101]

ok, so I've been wanting to just ask this for a freakin' while. And frankly I love the comment because everyone I know (i.e. conserv. republican types) that hear it gets CoMpLeTeLy pissed.

If god didn't desire gays, why did he create a prostate? Or more corrrectly, why'd he put it so close to the anus?

maybe this was already discussed on the forum, but I swear the reaction is classic.

Honestly though. I think it's interesting that the majority of classic nations (if politically correct) all experienced some form of homosexuality along their timeline.

wow dude i really dont see wut a prostate has to do with butt sex
but the prostate is what helps make cemene it functions with the dick (i tried to use the more properword but it came up as "xxx") not the anus
but on a different note
the idea that God dosnt like gays is inaccurate
God loves all mankind it is the ACT of homosexuality that He frowns on not the gay person
being gay and having gay urges is not sinfull it is acting on those urges that is the sin

[sledheavy]

ok, so I've been wanting to just ask this for a freakin' while. And frankly I love the comment because everyone I know (i.e. conserv. republican types) that hear it gets CoMpLeTeLy pissed.

If god didn't desire gays, why did he create a prostate? Or more corrrectly, why'd he put it so close to the anus?

maybe this was already discussed on the forum, but I swear the reaction is classic.

Honestly though. I think it's interesting that the majority of classic nations (if politically correct) all experienced some form of homosexuality along their timeline.

wow dude i really dont see wut a prostate has to do with butt sex
but the prostate is what helps make cemene it functions with the dick (i tried to use the more properword but it came up as "xxx") not the anus
but on a different note
the idea that God dosnt like gays is inaccurate
God loves all mankind it is the ACT of homosexuality that He frowns on not the gay person
being gay and having gay urges is not sinfull it is acting on those urges that is the sin

Let me clarify this really, really old topic.

I made the reference referring to how it stimulates arousal. The testees make semen but they also do the same thing as admin. arousal. A lot of other properties of the genitalia have their own functions but ultimately lead to that one particular goal, yes? Why then would it be positioned where it is (in or near or up against the anal cavity), if a vast majority think that being gay is unnatural?

*Keep in mind it's a hypothetical question because no one can answer.

I'm just stating how interesting or circumstantial it seems.

Saying that 'god doesn't like gays' is inacurate because I didn't say it, lol. I said didn't desire, referenced in the context of 'didn't intend'. And I too find that a little left field.

(and I'm sorry for that confusion on not saying what I'm meaning)

But for example, if god sets up man's biology so that a man and a women make a baby (which this view seems the most obvious views of some conservative christians) then being a homosexual would be unnatural to their views altogether.

I'm not saying that's right or wrong, but that's straight, strong evidence on natural reproduction. Whether or not people or creatures 'naturally' find homosexuality is beside the point.

A point to be made is that in order for a majority of people to be tolerant, and be content with another group of people, the first step they typically make is disproving some of this evidence that holds them back from being so accepting.

You're right though, a lot of people and (hypothetically god too) probably take on the idea of 'hate the sin, love the sinner' or 'don't hate them, hate what they do' and that's probably as true as it is virtuous and fallible. God still talks about smiting, and though that's irrelevant to the main point, it's still something we should consider.

What DOES on the other hand seem likely probable to me is the idea if we have a religious mass intending to agree certain circumstances and conditions, they're far more likely to abide by the codes and principles which are fundamentally taught and administered.

Hence the pope making a recent statement that catholicism (a somewhat more stricter or 'devoted' form of christianity) is the true path of christianity, or something to that effect.

not everyone will find tolerance if not convinced, they're going to side with what they've known regardless of civil principles. And then we'll find the consequences of a divided religion or nation yet again. Regardless if it's just the 10-15% of a population I'm talking about.

And If you are talking global, there's a lot more to consider.

Religous peoples might only go as far to consider the civil liberties of the homosexual individual, and not much else. I can't say.