I am homosexual, what the Bible says
Donating = Loving
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.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
Where does one draw the line?
What about a cake shop refusing to make a wedding cake for a same sex couple? Pretty sure a shop was fined for that in the UK.
It is a tough question that society has to struggle with. But to cry censorship when one store doesn't carry a certain product seems a bit alarmist to me. Maybe I'm old fashion.
"What about a cake shop refusing to make a wedding cake for a same sex couple? Pretty sure a shop was fined for that in the UK."
If a retailer decides to not carry a certain product, that is their right. But in the case of the wedding cake, that shop was providing a service, and decided not to provide their service to a couple just because they were gay.
@ David and Cranky
The ruling was overturned. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/oct/10/uk-supreme-court-backs-b...
However the justoices in the written judgement noted that if they had displayed a sign "no gays served" it wiould have been an offence.
In my childhood I remember going to see a distant cousin in London where his street was alive with signs "no blacks or Irish"
In Melbourne when I arrived it was " No Italians or Slavs" and later "No Vietnamese" . In the eighties in WA Italians an Portuguese were still referred to as "dings"
We had the same issue with a bakery in Colorado refusing to make a wedding cake for a gay couple. It led to lawsuits, national news attention, and so on.
I am on the side of the gay couple, but yet--inside myself--I wondered if I was being a hypocrite in some ways.
If an interracial couple went to a bakery and was refused a wedding cake because mixed marriages are against the bakery's religious beliefs, I would cry "racism" and joyfully open a bottle of champaigne when this bakery gets successfully sued.
But let us imagine another situation: There are Kosher bakeries that follow Jewish dietary laws. Let's suppose that customers came in and wanted a Nazi swastika cake to celebrate Hitler's birthday, and the baker told these neo-Nazis to piss off and get out of his store.
Well . . . I would support the bakery under these circumstances (please note that--culturally, at least--I'm Jewish).
So, we now have two poles. The Nazi swastika cake on one end, and the interracial wedding cake on the other end. Both are instances where religion is used as a reason to be a conscientious objector, yet in one case I support the decision, and in one instance I don't.
Where on this spectrum does the "gay wedding cake" lie, and how do I defend my position that the gay couple is entitled to sue without me being two-faced?
This question isn't as theoretical as it seems. Recently, an interracial couple was refused a wedding venue because of the religious beliefs of the people who own the business.
See link below:
Let us imagine yet a third situation: The swastika is an ancient symbol that's been used in the Hindu religion for thousands of years, and has absolutely no connection with racism or violence in that context. Hitler co-opted (and perverted) this symbol.
Let us suppose that a Hindu couple came into the Kosher bakery to get a swastika cake made up to celebrate the Thaipusam holiday on February 8. Incidentally, this holiday is intended to show thanks and gratitude toward one of Shiva's sons.
A very similar situation might arise from a Buddhist wanting a cake, as the swastika is a symbol of the Enlightened One's footprints. I do consider Buddhism to be one of the most peaceful, tolerant, and inclusive of the world's religions.
Even the extraordinarily deadly Shaolin monks treat inner (and outer) peace as a goal that takes precidence over all else.
If the bakery refused to make the cake, I would be more on the side of the Hindu and/or Buddhist customers . . . yet it's still a swastika-shaped cake, and I can see how any Jewish person might have a problem with doing this.
How do we navigate our way out of this ethical morass without being hypocritical?
See image below:
" I don't believe that freedom of speech allows me to yell "FIRE!!!" in a crowded theatre just for my own entertainment."
Me too. I think you are conflating freedom and licence. There's a difference :
"In moral and legal philosophy, there exists a distinction between the concepts of freedom and license. The former deals with the rights of the individual; the latter covers the expressed permission (or lack thereof) for more than one individual to engage in an activity."
I think at age 17, I came across "The Psychology Of Sex" by Havelock Ellis.
Had quite an impact on me. First he explained how how masturbation is normal, and that it's physically impossible to engage too much. "Thank goodness for that !" I thought at the time . .
Keep in mind that I was a practising Catholic then. Havelock Ellis wrote that homosexuality is a perversion. He didn't rant, after all, he was imply stating a fact ,with which all of his readers (in1890) would agree. Instead of raving ,he explained a simple way of curing homosexuality.
Are you ready for this? THE CURE; The afflicted person need only develop an attraction towards 'boyish girls/women'. So simple, so obvious, so wrong.
Of course books which reinforce one's prejudices can be very powerful. At the time, I thought Ellis was just fucking dandy. (especially the new information that masturbation was normal)
I suggest not laugh too hard as to do so is to throw out the baby with the bathwater.
This book is in the public domain and free in ebook form. (volumes 1 an 2) I read an edited version or just part one, I forget which.
CAVEAT: I read this book ca 1964, so I may have misremembered what I read.
"Henry Havelock Ellis, known as Havelock Ellis (2 February 1859 – 8 July 1939), was an English physician, eugenicist, writer, progressive intellectual and social reformer who studied human sexuality. He co-wrote the first medical textbook in English on homosexuality in 1897, and also published works on a variety of sexual practices and inclinations, as well as on transgender psychology. He is credited[by whom?] with introducing the notions of narcissism and autoeroticism, later adopted by psychoanalysis."
Heading home for dinner ... think I’ll make myself a humble pie to eat ;)
I for one, hate government regulation. If a shop wants to refuse service to anyone, let them do it. If a restaurant or bar wants to allow smoking, they should be allowed to do it. If you don't like it, don't go there. Keep the fucking government out of it and let the business survive or fail based on its decisions. Just my opinion.
Then you will have to regulate advertising and corporate behaviour. Remember the tobacco companies? Cocaine in Cola?
The fug in the streets from fossil fuels?
Self regulation in human society does not work. We always need watchdogs to stop the rogues.
I was discussing that very subject with my wife two weeks ago, as we entered a restaurant and saw the food inspection pass document in the window.
Under the "let it fail on it's own without government interference", the food could be so tainted people get sick. Yes, in the long term the restaurant will develop a reputation that guarantees bankruptcy. But for the people who had to get sick to establish this restaurant should not be in business, they are paying a price to high.
Personally I desire minimal government interference. But I also recognize that there are no other agencies but the government that serve certain public needs, such as food safety.
I think anyone who cooks a lot is aware how hard it is to keep your kitchen spotless. Well, multiply that a few times for a restaurant ,especially a busy one.
From a restaurant, or even a cafe, I expect good food, at reasonable price and for the food not to make me sick. I often go to a franchise cafe where you can watch the cook prepare your meal. First went there about 6 months ago. Had the best calamari I've ever had, including in Greece.
Once, while in China, after an excellent lunch, I was looking for the toilets. Went through the wrong door ,into the kitchen. Fair dinkum, I nearly threw up, it was rancid. Yet I never once got food poisoning in China . I have always thought that stir frying at very high temperatures kills a lot of bugs. Plus the Chinese are fanatical about freshness. A Chinese restaurant cook shops every day,.as all professional cook should imo..
For myself ,I shop most days for fruit and veg, although I often freeze meat and fish.
Kevin... “ How do we navigate our way out of this ethical morass without being hypocritical?”
Time, education, lawsuits and discussion. I like to think we make progress.
Yes, we do make progress . . . at least until someone like Donald Trump comes along, LOL.
As an outsider, Donald Trump does not seem to be an aberration, merely getting closer to the logical end of capitalism, which is fascism, imo.
The claim "home of the free, land of the brave" has been a cynical joke for decades.
I've mentioned this before'. Dwight Eisenhower warned America about the Military Industrial complex when he was leaving office. America ignored him. Today that complex controls an economy on a permanent war footing.
A sign of the rot was the blatant development of the corrupt political lobby system in the US . It's worthy of a banana republic
Donald Trump is a small pimple on the arse of what passes for democracy in the US , irrelevant in the long term . His personal moral bankruptcy and amorality of his administration have been magnified . Imo that is because he is not a professional, politician, is an entitled narcissist, does not understand the role of president and is not very bright. He could have been another Reagan, also not very bright, but savvy and listened to his advisors.. ---as a notoriously corrupt politician in Oz once truly said, to cameras " He knows what side of the fence his bread is buttered greenest on"---Donald Trump does not.
Clip. Eisenhower's farewell speech, warning about the military industrial complex, with commentary.
NOTE: (In an effort to allow Joy to maintain her loving disdain for me, I am putting this reply at the end of the thread so that she will not overlook it in the clutter.... *grin*....)
@Jumping for Joy Re: "Most people would frown upon a 45 year old man getting it on with a 19 year old girl..."
You're joking, right? For one, why the hell would it be anybody's business as long as it is consensual betweem them? Two, funny you didn't mention a 45 year old woman with a 19 year old man. (Which, by the way, was a freakin' FANTASY of mine during my teenage years.) And three, if there are 45 year old men out there able to have an occasional fling with such younger women, then - Hey! - more power to them!
Re: "We all would not hesitate to say even if two adult consenting brother and sister wanted to hook up, it is wrong"
First of all, please explain to me and others what YOU think gives you the right to state what "we all" think or feel. Regardless, as for the brother/sister hook-up.... Once again, how would that be ANY of your business? Sure, there is an increased risk of birth defects if a sister got pregnant by her brother. However, there is such a thing as birth control nowadays. Maybe you've heard of it? (Oh, wait. Nevermind. You believe birth control is a sin. My bad.) Anyway, as long as the bro and sis are being careful in that respect, then who cares? Sure, I may think it a bit "odd", but NOT wrong. And it certainly isn't something that would keep me from hanging out and being friends with them. Same goes for the father/daughter. (Or even mother/son. Which, interestingly enough, you did not bother to address.)
Re: "And most people would agree bestiality is wrong, even if the animal is a willing participant."
What in the jumping-jack-Jesus-flash-blue-ball-blazes does bestiality have to do with consenting adults???? Also, how the FUCK would you know if the animal is consenting or not??? Pretty sure if you asked a sheep if it was consenting, the reply would be, "Naah, naaah," whether it was or not.
Edit to add: Dang! Almost forgot! So, by YOUR OWN admitted feelings about family sexual relations, you must believe God was WRONG to have allowed all of humanity to be started by just one man (Adam) and one woman (Eve). Because, darlin', there HAD TO BE a whole shit-ton of mother-son, father-daughter, brother-sister fucking happening over a very long period of time. (In case you never figured that out for yourself.)
asked a sheep if it was consenting, the reply would be, "Naah, naaah," whether it was or not.
That's goats...sheep go 'mehh'heh'heh'eh to signify consent.....OH! errr, so I have been told, or err, read somewhere, yes read somewhere maybe....*sounds of footsteps retreating in the direction of away* (Faint Voice off) In a, err FOREIGN library....yes, thats it...
Point of order; Catholics do not claim Adam and Eve were literally the first humans, or didn't when I was at school. We were taught that the Book Of Genesis is allegorical, including the Tower Of Babel and Noah. It is only pig ignorant evangelicals who claim bible is the literal, inerrant word of god, as far as I know. .
@Jumping for Joy Re: "Most people would frown upon a 45 year old man getting it on with a 19 year old girl..."
What can I say but ; censored, censored ,censored, censored you arrogant twat.
It's none of 'most people's" , or your business. I stopped caring about opinions of anonymous others when I was 12. Only cared about the opinions of people who could benefit or hurt me, and of course about what the pope said. That was a bit like Donald Trump; a12 year old Aussie kid convinced that a rich, elderly Italian bloke living in Rome gave a flying farnarkle about him.
To be practical .I was divorced by age 45 (Double dipped; she left and by an act of stunning hypocrisy had our marriage later annulled)
Anyway, at that age, no self respecting 19 year old girl would look sideways at me. I'm not complaining mind you. The problem with dating younger women; you have to TALK to them.
For interest sake: It was at age 45 that I last fell in love. (came as a shock, I can tell you) She was 35, divorced with a 12 year old .
I'm now 72 and we parted for the last time in 2011. I love her still ,and will until I lose my marbles. However, she is married to another man and lives in another state, 2000 miles away.
OT what I was taught about adultery : Sex between two people, one of whom is married to a third. Otherwise, sex outside marriage is fornication, and still a mortal sin.
AN entire generation of American teenage boys were extremely grateful to Bill Clinton. It was from him they learned that 'oral' isn't sex.
Inter-species sexual intercourse is the correct term ;)
Quick, call the natural law police!
I can't believe that my own species could be so sick that we invented a special word for it.
I think I'll vomit now, and then gouge out my mind's eye.
@Kevin Re: "I can't believe that my own species could be so sick that we invented a special word for it." (Response to Inter-species sexual intercourse)
Aw, c'mon now, Kev! You mean you've never heard this saying?: "Once you go rabbit, you'll never break the habit." Or if you are not familiar with that one, how about: "Stick it in chicken, come out finger-lickin'."
Anyway, just a little something to toss around in your mind as you try to go to sleep at night... *mischievous snicker*...
Carl Sagan, Dr. John Lilly, and Frank Drake were associated with dolphin communication experiments that involved a female human seducing, and having sex with a young male dolphin.
If this pushed the boundaries of neuroscience, the so be it . . . but everything inside me rebels.
Especially since the dolphin stopped eating and pined away from loneliness and grief when the experimenter moved on after "terminating" the "relationship".
Humans can really suck.
@Kevin Re: "Humans can really suck."
No doubt that is why the male dolphin got so upset when the female human broke up with him... LMAO...
RE: Inter-species breeding?
Oh! That's what that is! I've been holding onto this pic since the last eggnog party and I've been meaning to ask about it.
@Cog Re: Pic
Damn that Paparazzi!... *sudden realization*... Oh, wait... Hey... That was YOU taking that pic, wasn't it? And from that angle, you must have been hiding in the closet. Dammit, I KNEW I smelled rotten bananas in there! But I thought it was just Old Man farting. Go find another hobby, you pervert! Besides, that's a lousy picture, anyway. Hell, even your camera takes pics in crayon.
All that aside, though, what's with the "inter-species" nonsense? Old Man is a tin-man just like me. He told me he just has a tin endoskeleton, though. Sounded reasonable. Of course, I admit I was rather tanked up on cheap Quaker State oil at the time.... *worried look*... Uh, you don't suppose Old Man lied to me, do you? You know, just to take advantage of me and my naive innocence?... *sniffle-sniffle*.... I.. I... I feel so USED.... *tears starting to flow*...
....ahhhh peanut butter.... dwell on that one Kevin ;)
@Whitefire Re: "...ahhhh peanut butter..."
Use creamy, though. Not crunchy. NEVER use crunchy... Oh.... Err-uhhh....Or, uh, you know, so I've been told.... *quickly looking at watch*... Oh, gee, look at the time. Gotta go meet a person at a place to do a thing. Later... *hurriedly exits room*...
Is anyone else seeing the irony of someone who believes in mythical superstition involving the existence of an unevidenced supernatural deity, lecturing others on NATURAL law?
Homosexuality exists, indeed is ubiquitous in nature, ipso facto it is natural. Between consenting adults it also harms no one, despite Joy's bigoted hysteria, and scare mongering duplicity.
Hmmmm... I saw where somebody already asked this in an earlier post, but I never saw a response to it. Must have gotten lost in the mix. Therefore, I will ask it again here, because it was an interesting question....
Do you have any homosexual and/or trans friends with whom you regularly associate?
To forum: And now, ladies and gentlemen, we sit back and wait...
Edit to add: After a bit of backtracking, I finally found it was David K. who originally asked this question. Just wanted to give credit where credit is due.