Is homosexuality an abomination?

[anotheratheisthere]

Yes.

The Bible says that homosexuality is an abomination. (Leviticus 18-22)

On the same page, it uses the exact same word to describe eating shellfish. (Leviticus 11-10 and 11-11)


Please heed the word of God:

Being gay is an abomination.

Eating shrimp is an abomination.


Being gay is just as much an abomination as eating shrimp.

Eating shrimp is just as much an abomination as being gay.


If you ever ate a shrimp cocktail you committed as grievous a sin as the most pervert homosexual.

If you ever had gay sex, you committed as grievous a sin as the most pervert shrimp cocktail eater.


If you are a gay Christian who judges and condemns people for committing the abomination of eating lobster, then you're a hypocrite.

If you're a Christian who eats lobster and you judge and condemn people for committing the abomination of being gay, then you're a hypocrite.


Gay people and people who eat seafood are abominations! Both groups are disgusting! You make me sick! How can you POSSIBLY want to have gay sex and/or eat shrimp, clams, oysters and lobster? PERVERTS!

I think we should amend the Constitution to specify that marriage is between a man and a woman.

I think we should amend the Constitution to specify that anybody who eats lobster, shrimp, clams or oysters will be deported and/or waterboarded.

[McCulloch]

America is a secular nation, and no law should be formed on the basis of religion.

Many of our laws are, and Christians have as much right to influence public policy as anybody.

Which laws would those be?
Yes, Christians do have as much right to influence public policy as anyone else. However, they do not have the right to expect that their governments will enact laws based on theology, dogma or items of faith.

[East of Eden]

"Sodomy" wasn't about homosexuality, but greed and lack of concern for the needy, according to the author of Ezekiel, which you hold to be the word of God.

Sodom was guilty of other sins besides the sexual sin mentioned in Genesis. 'Pride' used in Ezekiel is used in the Bible to describe those who ignore God's commands such as on homosexuality. Ironic the gay movement used that very word to describe themselves.

At any rate, I'm not convinced it matters that the Bible arguably condemns homosexuality. America is a secular nation, and no law should be formed on the basis of religion.

Many of our laws are, and Christians have as much right to influence public policy as anybody.

My neighborhood is full of sinners. The Bible strongly condemns eating shellfish and calls it an "abomination." The death penalty is prescribed for working on Sunday. A maintenance man recently pressure-washed my house on Sunday. Am I personally responsible for stoning him to death, or am I equally guilty and to be put to death too, for allowing him to do it? I need Christian help to cleanse my neighborhood of all these abominations!

If I were a member of the Bronze-age theocracy of Israel, you might have a point. Jesus made all foods cleaned, and stopped the stoning of the woman caught in adultery.

[East of Eden]

America is a secular nation, and no law should be formed on the basis of religion.

Many of our laws are, and Christians have as much right to influence public policy as anybody.

Which laws would those be?

Our laws prohibit violating the 6th, 8th, and 9th Commandments, and if you're in the military, the 7th. Does that make us a theocracy?

Yes, Christians do have as much right to influence public policy as anyone else. However, they do not have the right to expect that their governments will enact laws based on theology, dogma or items of faith.

We disagree. We have such laws today.

[East of Eden]

Yes it was. Where do you think the term 'sodomy' came from?

From ignorant people that misinterpreted the Jewish scriptures.

Here are a couple of Jews who disagree with you:


Philo
The Hellenistic Jewish philosopher Philo (20 BC - 50 AD) described the inhabitants of Sodom in an extra biblical account:
"As men, being unable to bear discreetly a satiety of these things, get restive like cattle, and become stiff-necked, and discard the laws of nature, pursuing a great and intemperate indulgence of gluttony, and drinking, and unlawful connections; for not only did they go mad after other women, and defile the marriage bed of others, but also those who were men lusted after one another, doing unseemly things, and not regarding or respecting their common nature, and though eager for children, they were convicted by having only an abortive offspring; but the conviction produced no advantage, since they were overcome by violent desire; and so by degrees, the men became accustomed to be treated like women, and in this way engendered among themselves the disease of females, and intolerable evil; for they not only, as to effeminacy and delicacy, became like women in their persons, but they also made their souls most ignoble, corrupting in this way the whole race of men, as far as depended on them" (133-35; ET Jonge 422-23).[17]
Josephus
The Jewish historian Josephus used the term “Sodomites� in summarizing the Genesis narrative: “About this time the Sodomites grew proud, on account of their riches and great wealth; they became unjust towards men, and impious towards God, in so much that they did not call to mind the advantages they received from him: they hated strangers, and abused themselves with Sodomitical practices� "Now when the Sodomites saw the young men to be of beautiful countenances, and this to an extraordinary degree, and that they took up their lodgings with Lot, they resolved themselves to enjoy these beautiful boys by force and violence; and when Lot exhorted them to sobriety, and not to offer any thing immodest to the strangers, but to have regard to their lodging in his house; and promised that if their inclinations could not be governed, he would expose his daughters to their lust, instead of these strangers; neither thus were they made ashamed." (Antiquities 1.11.1,3 [2] — circa AD 96). His assessment goes beyond the Biblical data, though it is seen by conservatives as defining what manner of fornication (Jude 1:7) Sodom was given to.

Wikipedia

[McCulloch]

America is a secular nation, and no law should be formed on the basis of religion.

Many of our laws are, and Christians have as much right to influence public policy as anybody.

Which laws would those be?

Our laws prohibit violating the 6th, 8th, and 9th Commandments, and if you're in the military, the 7th. Does that make us a theocracy?

If this were true, then yes, it would. However, the USA does not have any laws that prohibit violating any of the ten commandments. The USA does have some laws which do coincide with ancient religious laws. The laws were not enacted because they were seen to be voiced by God, but because they were deemed to be necessary for the orderly functioning of society.

[East of Eden]

America is a secular nation, and no law should be formed on the basis of religion.

Many of our laws are, and Christians have as much right to influence public policy as anybody.

Which laws would those be?

Our laws prohibit violating the 6th, 8th, and 9th Commandments, and if you're in the military, the 7th. Does that make us a theocracy?

If this were true, then yes, it would. However, the USA does not have any laws that prohibit violating any of the ten commandments. The USA does have some laws which do coincide with ancient religious laws. The laws were not enacted because they were seen to be voiced by God, but because they were deemed to be necessary for the orderly functioning of society.

You don't know, and it's none of your business, what the motivation for someone's vote is. There is no Constitutional violation here, short of the federal government establishing a national church.

[micatala]

America is a secular nation, and no law should be formed on the basis of religion.

Many of our laws are, and Christians have as much right to influence public policy as anybody.

Which laws would those be?

Our laws prohibit violating the 6th, 8th, and 9th Commandments, and if you're in the military, the 7th. Does that make us a theocracy?

If this were true, then yes, it would. However, the USA does not have any laws that prohibit violating any of the ten commandments. The USA does have some laws which do coincide with ancient religious laws. The laws were not enacted because they were seen to be voiced by God, but because they were deemed to be necessary for the orderly functioning of society.

You don't know, and it's none of your business, what the motivation for someone's vote is. There is no Constitutional violation here, short of the federal government establishing a national church.

I doubt McCulloch is suggesting that your rationale for your voting decisions is at issue. I agree, you can vote for whatever reason you wish.

However, your comment is avoiding the point. The point is not how people vote, it is what is enacted into law. A long tradition of court rulings says that if the primary purpose or effect of a law is to promote a particular religious view, that law is unconstitutional.

[East of Eden]

America is a secular nation, and no law should be formed on the basis of religion.

Many of our laws are, and Christians have as much right to influence public policy as anybody.

Which laws would those be?

Our laws prohibit violating the 6th, 8th, and 9th Commandments, and if you're in the military, the 7th. Does that make us a theocracy?

If this were true, then yes, it would. However, the USA does not have any laws that prohibit violating any of the ten commandments. The USA does have some laws which do coincide with ancient religious laws. The laws were not enacted because they were seen to be voiced by God, but because they were deemed to be necessary for the orderly functioning of society.

You don't know, and it's none of your business, what the motivation for someone's vote is. There is no Constitutional violation here, short of the federal government establishing a national church.

I doubt McCulloch is suggesting that your rationale for your voting decisions is at issue. I agree, you can vote for whatever reason you wish.

However, your comment is avoiding the point. The point is not how people vote, it is what is enacted into law. A long tradition of court rulings says that if the primary purpose or effect of a law is to promote a particular religious view, that law is unconstitutional.

What Congress does and what motivates a voter in the privacy of a voting booth are two different things.

And to quote Justice Potter Stewart: "We err in the first place if we do not recognize, as a matter of history and a matter of the imperatives of our free society, that religion and government must necessarily interact in countless ways."

[micatala]

America is a secular nation, and no law should be formed on the basis of religion.

Many of our laws are, and Christians have as much right to influence public policy as anybody.

Which laws would those be?

Our laws prohibit violating the 6th, 8th, and 9th Commandments, and if you're in the military, the 7th. Does that make us a theocracy?

If this were true, then yes, it would. However, the USA does not have any laws that prohibit violating any of the ten commandments. The USA does have some laws which do coincide with ancient religious laws. The laws were not enacted because they were seen to be voiced by God, but because they were deemed to be necessary for the orderly functioning of society.

You don't know, and it's none of your business, what the motivation for someone's vote is. There is no Constitutional violation here, short of the federal government establishing a national church.

I doubt McCulloch is suggesting that your rationale for your voting decisions is at issue. I agree, you can vote for whatever reason you wish.

However, your comment is avoiding the point. The point is not how people vote, it is what is enacted into law. A long tradition of court rulings says that if the primary purpose or effect of a law is to promote a particular religious view, that law is unconstitutional.

What Congress does and what motivates a voter in the privacy of a voting booth are two different things.

And to quote Justice Potter Stewart: "We err in the first place if we do not recognize, as a matter of history and a matter of the imperatives of our free society, that religion and government must necessarily interact in countless ways."

I basically agree with both points.

I am not sure how this refutes, or even addresses my point.



Certainly religion has been an integral part of the history of the U.S. In my view this has had both beneficial and negative manifestations. However, it is also clear that this country exists largely because of people seeking to flee religious persecution in the form of governments and people imposing their religions views on others who did not share those views. It is also clearly a concern expressed by those who drafted the constitution.

Part of freedom of religion is the freedom to follow one's own beliefs and NOT have to follow the beliefs of others. Thus, any law, whether enacted by the voters or by congress, that has the effect of making everyone follow the religious views of some, unless that law has a clear secular purpose, violates the spirit of the constitution, and we have many examples of such laws being officially declared unconstitutional.

This includes bans on gay marriage.

[JohnPaul]

micatala wrote:

Certainly religion has been an integral part of the history of the U.S. In my view this has had both beneficial and negative manifestations. However, it is also clear that this country exists largely because of people seeking to flee religious persecution in the form of governments and people imposing their religions views on others who did not share those views. It is also clearly a concern expressed by those who drafted the constitution.

It is widely overlooked by people today that the "concern" expressed by the drafters of our constitution when they placed the guarantee of freedom of religion in the Bill of Rights, was not a reaction against the religious tyranny previously experienced by the colonists in Europe, but was inspired and directed specifically against the Puritan theocracies in the New England colonies. The Puritans brought their especially virulent religious tyranny to America and had already given us such "legal" atrocities as the Salem Witch Trials. After some struggle, representatives from such relatively free colonies as Pennsylvania and Virginia succeeded in including a ban on such Puritan-style theocratic tyranny in America when they drafted our constitution.