I am homosexual, what the Bible says

227 posts / 0 new
Last post
NewSkeptic's picture
Joyless,

Joyless,

Thanks so much for your dissertation. What I got out of it was a definitive definition of a term.

You said

"You do realize that all people during that time, even the non believing pagans believed that as well, right? It was a barbaric time when people had no problem killing someone for stealing a loaf of bread or talking back. It was actually God’s people who began to hold their people to a higher standard. They are the ones who attempted to come up with some societal rules. They are the ones who said we should take care of our widows, not beat our slaves to death, etc. And eventually it would be Christians who took it even further and fought for the end to things like slavery all together. The Old Testament rules were an attempt to meet a barbaric culture where it was and take baby steps to eventually help people realize what love is. "

...which I will now adopt as a definitive explanation for the phrase...

Crock of shit.

Thanks much.

David Killens's picture
@ Joy

@ Joy

"Many people are religious who do not advocate killing homosexuals. So, it’s wrong to say believing a certain lifestyle is immoral is not in itself fostering hate."

It is. Beliefs lead to actions. Additionally, this also leads to others just standing by when atrocities are committed.

"It was a barbaric time when people had no problem killing someone for stealing a loaf of bread or talking back. It was actually God’s people who began to hold their people to a higher standard. They are the ones who attempted to come up with some societal rules. They are the ones who said we should take care of our widows, not beat our slaves to death, etc. And eventually it would be Christians who took it even further and fought for the end to things like slavery all together."

Your knowledge and understanding of history is lacking. At no time inhuman history did anyone just randomly kill or steal without consequences. Even in the most primitive small tribes, if you did that, the tribe would either drive you out or kill you.

Societal rules were inaugurated right from the beginning, you seem to have forgotten the Chinese, the Babylonians, and the Egyptians.

CyberLN's picture
Joy, please provide your

Joy, please provide your definition of adultery.

Joy--'s picture
“Joy, please provide your

“Joy, please provide your definition of adultery.”

Being married and having sexual relations with someone who is not your spouse.

Tin-Man's picture
@Joy

@Joy

What is YOUR definition of "immoral"?

Joy--'s picture
“What is YOUR definition of

“What is YOUR definition of "immoral?”

Morality is that which is known by all men who have the use of reason to know what is right and good vs. what is wrong and bad based on observation of the world we live in and man’s relationship with this world. Immorality would be that which is contrary to the moral law.

Tin-Man's picture
@Happy-happy joy-Joy Re:

@Happy-happy joy-Joy Re: "Morality is that which is known by all men who have the use of reason to know what is right and good vs. what is wrong and bad based on observation of the world we live in and man’s relationship with this world. Immorality would be that which is contrary to the moral law."

The color white is that which is known by all men who have the use of prisms to know what is red vs. what is violet based on observation of the the light we see coming from the rainbows in the sky under which we live and man's relationship with unicorns. Black would be that which is contrary to the color white.

Excellent. Glad we got that cleared up... *thumbs up*...

Cognostic's picture
RE: JOY

RE: JOY

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha .... "Moral Law" .... Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha .... Now I know who you are talking about!

CyberLN's picture
Is it still adultery if the

Is it still adultery if the spouses agree to have extra-marital sex? When there is no lying, cheating, sneaking around?

Joy--'s picture
“Is it still adultery if the

“Is it still adultery if the spouses agree to have extra-marital sex? When there is no lying, cheating, sneaking around?”

I think so. Social research shows how problematic the scenario you suggest can be. Someone inevitably gets hurt and if children are involved the hurt and damage are magnified. What you suggest is a bad idea and for good reason.

CyberLN's picture
Interesting...whether it be

Interesting...whether it be extra-marital sex, or sex between the same gender, or, I suppose any number of other scenarios, (all consenting) you seem to find it appropriate to stick your nose (so to speak) into others’ bedrooms and tell them they are wrong. How dictatorial!

Joy--'s picture
“Interesting...whether it be

“Interesting...whether it be extra-marital sex, or sex between the same gender, or, I suppose any number of other scenarios, (all consenting) you seem to find it appropriate to stick your nose (so to speak) into others’ bedrooms and tell them they are wrong. How dictatorial!”

We all do this. Most people would frown upon a 45 year old man getting it on with a 19 year old girl – such set ups typically receive quite a bit of judgment. We all would not hesitate to say even if two adult consenting brother and sister wanted to hook up, it is wrong. We have no problem saying a 40 year old dad should not have even consensual sex with his 20 year old daughter. We have laws that forbid polygamy, even if consenting. And most people would agree bestiality is wrong, even if the animal is a willing participant. How dictatorial!

David Killens's picture
@ Joy

@ Joy

"Most people would frown upon a 45 year old man getting it on with a 19 year old girl – such set ups typically receive quite a bit of judgment. We all would not hesitate to say even if two adult consenting brother and sister wanted to hook up, it is wrong. We have no problem saying a 40 year old dad should not have even consensual sex with his 20 year old daughter. We have laws that forbid polygamy, even if consenting. And most people would agree bestiality is wrong, even if the animal is a willing participant. How dictatorial!"

How did we get from two consenting adults of a large age gap to bestiality? Do you equate the two as equally sinful? Why did you sneak the "bestiality" card in the end of that paragraph?

IMO if a 45 year old man hooks up with a 20 year old, give him a medal !!!

Sheldon's picture
Joy "Most people would frown

Joy "Most people would frown upon a 45 year old man getting it on with a 19 year old girl"

Unlike you I won't make the absurd and risible claim to know what most people think, but I will tell you categorically that this wouldn't even register as any of my business, let alone raise an objection from me. Why on earth would it?

Joy "We all would not hesitate to say even if two adult consenting brother and sister wanted to hook up, it is wrong"

My but you do love making facile sweeping generalisations, I sense you're lining them up for a reason as well, unsurprisingly as bigots often use the slippery slope fallacy to object to the harmless natural loving relationships of two consenting adults. Siblings are at risk of producing offspring that have a high likelihood of being physically and mentally impaired, but beyond that I can't think of any moral objection. Then again as I've said before, what I find objectionable is hardly a sound basis for morality, in truth only a narrow minded bigot would think their own distaste of something is a sound basis for declaring it immoral.

Joy "We have no problem saying a 40 year old dad should not have even consensual sex with his 20 year old daughter. "

...and down the fallacious slope she goes, again the facile nature of this latest claim in your fallacy is evident in you not even pretending to say why you'd object here.

Joy "We have laws that forbid polygamy, even if consenting. "

Indeed, but not to stop groups of any number of people, of all sexual persuasions and proclivities from making the beast with 2 backs, or any number of backs come to that. Now since again your claim is demonstrable facile, ask yourself why one is illegal, but the other not? As an example of how specious it is for you to cite individual laws as indicators of what is moral, the Nazis for example had a raft of laws that were demonstrably immoral, so care to guess where you're going awry here?

Joy "most people would agree bestiality is wrong, even if the animal is a willing participant. "

Unless you're claiming to be Dr fucking Doolittle, I'm at a loss as how you can infer an animal can give consent, that said you have made a raft of claims to know what most people are thinking, so who fucking knows what other powers you're assigning yourself. You clearly are religious, and are clearly cherry picking religion's archaic morals for the bits that mesh with what you choose to find objectionable, it's hilarious you think we won't notice this bias or the bigotry behind it.

Edited: For grammar, typos and clarity.

David Killens's picture
Sheldon, it is obvious Joy is

Sheldon, it is obvious Joy is grossly ignorant on many areas. For example, the upholders of religion in Europe, the royal families, inbred like horny rabbits. In fact Charles VI, the Holy Roman Emperor was a Habsburg, a lineage famous for inbreeding.

aperez241's picture
"Most people would frown upon

"Most people would frown upon a 45 year old man getting it on with a 19 year old girl – such set ups typically receive quite a bit of judgment. "

You better say: " Most ridiculous, sanctimonious, jealous, envious, closed-minded people would frown..." I am a 66 year old man hooked up with a 24 year old man and we rock! His family and friends and my family and friends welcome our relationship and are enthusiastically supportive.

Sheldon's picture
aperez241 "You better say: "

aperez241 "You better say: " Most ridiculous, sanctimonious, jealous, envious, closed-minded people would frown..." I am a 66 year old man hooked up with a 24 year old man and we rock! His family and friends and my family and friends welcome our relationship and are enthusiastically supportive."

For what it is worth so are complete strangers like myself, hopefully this helps offset the nasty bigotry expressed by theists like Joy.

Tin-Man's picture
@Aperez Re: "His family and

@Aperez Re: "His family and friends and my family and friends welcome our relationship and are enthusiastically supportive."

Hell yeah, dude!... *enthusiastically patting on back*... Damn, I hope I still have that kind of drive in me when I hit my sixties! What is your secret?

David Killens's picture
@ aperez241

@ aperez241

"I am a 66 year old man hooked up with a 24 year old man and we rock!"

Good for you !!!

Whitefire13's picture
One of my boys is gay. He

One of my boys is gay. He dreams of oral sex and not anal. From my understanding, some are givers and not takers. Hey... out of curiosity does “oral” sex fit the same description as “ anal” - you know - a place where the “ cock” isn’t suppose to go? If so, than garsh-darn-it, I may have sucked my way into hell.

Tin-Man's picture
@Whitefire Re: To Joy - "..

@Whitefire Re: To Joy - "...out of curiosity does “oral” sex fit the same description as “ anal” ... If so, than garsh-darn-it, I may have sucked my way into hell."

Hey, no worries. Being a duly anointed priest of The Church of the Latter-Day Dude, I have heard your confession, and you are forgiven. For your penance, perform four Hokey-Pokies, turn yourself around, and drink three White Russians. Now, my child, go forth and sin some more. Amen...

Joy--'s picture
“does “oral” sex fit the same

“does “oral” sex fit the same description as “ anal” - you know - a place where the “ cock” isn’t suppose to go?”

There is a degree of oral stimulation that can be perfectly fine as foreplay within a marital relationship, but when we deny the fulfillment of the sexual act to its natural end ordered to procreation we end up hurting ourselves and others. Sex becomes something where another human being isn’t even needed. It becomes a simulation of sex and more of an act of mutual masturbation.

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ Joy

@ Joy

So, I am amazed at your 'rules for the bedroom'....how do you plan on enforcing them?
Or do you just continue looking down your long and pointy nose at those having joyous, consensual and fun sexual activity?

Is there a specific punishment for "too much " oral stimulation? Who decides? When? Is there an alarm clock I can set so we don't exceed your limits?

How about my wife is having a period and doesn't want full sex but is randy as hell? Do I ignore her needs or do I manually and/or orally please her and get condemned for the mutual masturbation thing?

I have so many questions....

(Edit added red wings)

Joy--'s picture
“So, I am amazed at your

“So, I am amazed at your 'rules for the bedroom'....how do you plan on enforcing them?”

I never claimed to want to legislate anything. I think gossip and being a jerk to someone is wrong too, but I have no intention of pushing for legislation about talking behind someone’s back. If something is wrong, we should all not be afraid to speak out against it. It doesn’t mean we want to press charges.

“How about my wife is having a period and doesn't want full sex but is randy as hell? Do I ignore her needs or do I manually and/or orally please her and get condemned for the mutual masturbation thing?”

A woman’s period usually lasts about 3 days – doesn’t seem unreasonable to be able to hold off. We have to sometimes hold off when our spouse is traveling, or sick, or tired. Also, you can have sexual intercourse when a woman is on her period. To tell you the truth, it would be a lot less messy than engaging in manual or oral stimulation when she is menstruating so I truly don’t see a dilemma in your scenario.

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ Joyless

@ Joyless

A woman’s period usually lasts about 3 days – doesn’t seem unreasonable to be able to hold off. We have to sometimes hold off when our spouse is traveling, or sick, or tired. Also, you can have sexual intercourse when a woman is on her period. To tell you the truth, it would be a lot less messy than engaging in manual or oral stimulation when she is menstruating so I truly don’t see a dilemma in your scenario.

So it is only the "mutual masturbation" bit that offends your limited imagination is it?

I never claimed to want to legislate anything Strawman.
I asked how you intended to enforce your "rules"

If something is wrong, we should all not be afraid to speak out against it.
I think long nosed prudery is utterly repugnant and I will fucking speak out against it.

I think you are trying to claim (by roundabout and underhand means) that there is an "objective morality" that we all unconsciously subscribe to or "rebel" against.

Please, if that is your basis for your fucking ridiculous set of rules do tell us straight out instead of pissing about like a fart in a colander.

Joy--'s picture
“I think you are trying to

“I think you are trying to claim (by roundabout and underhand means) that there is an "objective morality" that we all unconsciously subscribe to or "rebel" against..”

What exactly is roundabout or underhanded in my posts? And yes, of course moral truth is objective. To attempt to argue the contrary is self refuting . . .

Joe: There is no such thing as truth

Sue: Is that true?

We all know and act as if moral truth exists on a daily basis and rightly so.

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ Joyless

@ Joyless

and yes, of course moral truth is objective.

Bollocks. Lala land. Morality is a human construct and is entirely subjective. You can see it evolving in our societies if your read any history at all.

Morality is based on man as a social animal. These behaviours can also be seen in many animal societies that show empathy and compassion, as well as homosexual behaviour.

I have seen so many high nosed twats prance in here preaching absolute morality (god given of course) and have seen them shot down in flames, wounded by their own hubris or the examples set in their own holy books.

I say again bollocks. So fuck right off with your "objective truth" its just a result of your stultified thought processes.

Joy--'s picture
“Morality is a human

“Morality is a human construct and is entirely subjective”

Actually a quick Google search shows amazing debates between some brilliant minds who have been unable to prove morality is subjective and in fact such opinions have actually been debunked. Even atheist hero Sam Harris admits morality is objective. He simply says that doesn’t mean we need to believe in God. Of course he also can’t demonstrate where said objective morality comes from.

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ Joy

@ Joy

tually a quick Google search shows amazing debates between some brilliant minds who have been unable to prove morality is subjective

Citations and links please.

You are spouting absolute bollocks and misunderstand the difference between objective and subjective.

Of course he also can’t demonstrate where said objective morality comes from. I suspect you cant back up your claims either.....

NewSkeptic's picture
Joyless,

Joyless,

That's not at all what Harris says. It order to be objective, you first have to agree on a goal. That goal setting is always subjective. Once you agree on a goal, then and only then can you begin to look at acts that affect that goal objectively.

Pages

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.