Go to Religion in the Modern World
- Add a comment
- Go to The inevitable change of Christianity towards homosexuality
redwood
i did an analysis of Romans -- check it out.
posted by
Xeno-x
on June 20, 2006 at 4:16 PM
| link to this | reply
Many Christians do not go out of their way to convert gays to ex-gays...that's not the point...the point is to bring a person to a realization of the sin in their lives (not necessarily the homoeseuality, but any kind of sin condemned in the Bible)...and to bring them to Christ. The knowledge of Christ, and an understanding of the Bible then convicts people of their sin so that they want to change. It very seldom has anything to do with what a Christian does or says, but how a person responds to the grace of God and His mercy...I can't expect you to understand it...especially if you are hostile towards it, so I'm done explaining.
Xeno-x...also, just because those denominations are embracing homosexuality does not make me want to run out and hug it myself. I completely understand that there are people involved, but I will not give up my view that it is a choice, simply because I've studied it and it's what I've found to be true. God would not condemn it if it were not a choice, therefore it must be, even without everything else. But, I also know that homosexuality is along the same lines as a drug addiction (not in the eyes of man, but in the eyes of God)...all of it is bad and sin, and therefore all of it must be addressed. The person is still loved and desired by God, but their sin is detestable to Him, and so it must also be to me, although I will still seek to show God's love to the people struggling with it (even if they do not see themselves as struggling). Cricket ><>
posted by
pkcricket
on June 20, 2006 at 4:03 PM
| link to this | reply
pkcricket - sorry, but that is just bullshit
No one is arguing that some people cannot modify their sexual behaviour, of course some can but most do so for all of the wrong reasons. The biggest single reason is to gain acceptance amongst those who, against all reality, maintain the position that you are outlining now. You can believe that Christian communities are doing great things in "converting" gays to ex gays, you can believe that the ridiculous premise of changing an individual's sexual preferences is possible but eventually you will be exposed to the truth. The picture you are having presented to you is a self serving image that is more fantasy than reality.
posted by
gomedome
on June 20, 2006 at 3:11 PM
| link to this | reply
There were a lot of things thrown my way based on my comment, but I haven't the time nor the energy right now to argue them, or at least, defend myself. One thing I will put out are the countless many who at one time lived a homosexual lifestyle, and when they experienced the salvation of Jesus Christ, they turned from it completely, never to return, and are leading healthy heterosexual lives with children and the works. There are more than you think. Now, if it were only part of a person's make-up, their sexuality, then these men and women would not be able to turn from this lifestyle. But was a choice they made and never took back to reject the homosexual lifestyle and live as heterosexuals. I'm not sure if it will answer enough for you, or even make you think, but it makes me think...and I thought I'd throw it out there. Thanks. Cricket ><>
posted by
pkcricket
on June 20, 2006 at 3:01 PM
| link to this | reply
Xeno-x - I had an unusual exposure to the gay community, at least unusual
for a middle class heterosexual male from the suburbs.
I owned a bar about 15 years ago, inheriting a clientel that was comprised of a large number of gay patrons. Over the first few months of ownership the bar turned almost completely gay right before my eyes. The straight clientel began to no longer frequent the establishment as the gay patrons increased in number. It was quite an experience for me, business was better than ever but I had to learn an entire new brand of tolerance. In speaking with my gay clients, especially one particular day where a few of them were discussing conversion therapy that they were considering, how these people are forced to live is heartwrenching. Many had restraining orders against their own family members, just as many were outcasts from their families, all could claim a lifetime of beatings, threats and ostracism. After this experience, it did not matter to me that the thought of two men having sex makes me want to puke, I promised myself that I would not be a party to making anyone's life this miserable. Some of the callous comments we have seen here on this issue demonstrates for us how quickly some people forget that we are speaking of human beings. To maintain that a person's sexual preferences are a choice simply demonstrates their ignorance.
posted by
gomedome
on June 20, 2006 at 1:11 PM
| link to this | reply
ukie - one thing that I never mentioned is that I find same sex attraction
disgusting as well.
But I acknowledge that it is only my own preferences that instill this feeling within me. I do know that if I had to prove that my own sexaul preferences were the result of suffering from a physical or emotional affliction just to gain acceptance within society that I would tolerate that circumstance for about 5 seconds.
posted by
gomedome
on June 20, 2006 at 12:47 PM
| link to this | reply
whatever it's called...
it seems like one's private lives should be respected. One of my kids lives a gay lifestyle, but he's not flamboyant or weird. I'm not comfortable seeing men kiss and dance or anything else called sexy in their circle. It just discusts me. I can't help it. This isn't because the Bible says so...it's just how I was born. However, that doesn't mean I don't ever think of or fantasize or have done something I'd be ashamed of publicly. I love my son, he's one of my best friends. I like his friends, even if they're effeminate...I just hope my son uses wisdom and stays happy and healthy. There isn't anything he can do that'll ever stop my loving him. I know he loves Jesus, who is the final judge in all of this. I cannot condem him or any other fag I know.
posted by
QuailNest
on June 20, 2006 at 12:31 PM
| link to this | reply
faux pas
I should have said isn't, instead of aren't...
posted by
QuailNest
on June 20, 2006 at 12:18 PM
| link to this | reply
the more you are around homosexuality the more yo uunderstand that it is no
a choice.
I am amazed that so manypeople here talk about homosexuals -- but how many have they known?
I know and know of dozens -- am around many more than that -- and a gay pride festival is coming to St. Louis this weekend where thousands will be in attendance. it's been here every year for several years now.
get to know them and you see that they did not choose -- they really were born homosexual.
some people need to come out of isolation and get a life I think.
posted by
Xeno-x
on June 20, 2006 at 12:17 PM
| link to this | reply
gomedome
I came up with that same conclusion...I searched the scriptures for anything against female fornicattion...maybe that's an oxymoron. But, then again, just because i-pods and cell phones aren't mentioned in the Holy Scriptures, it doesn't mean the misuse or existance of any of these modern technologies aren't addressed.
posted by
QuailNest
on June 20, 2006 at 12:16 PM
| link to this | reply
ukie - we are not speaking of non sexual relationships here
The subject being discussed is homosexuality and how some folks proliferate discrimination against gays based on their own religious beliefs. And specifically that the times and some interpretations of the bible are changing.
posted by
gomedome
on June 20, 2006 at 12:13 PM
| link to this | reply
sex is in the eye of the beholder
I have lots of same sex relationships...my mom, my sister, my daughter (I'm a lady), I even have had numerous same sex friendships with girls and women my whole life. Many of them have been intimate, and even a couple (my mom and daughter) originated from sexuality. But, it's not homosexuality. It's not sin.
Do you mean same sex sex -vs- same sex relationships?
posted by
QuailNest
on June 20, 2006 at 12:09 PM
| link to this | reply
TVBlogger - and then these individual interpretations run smack into
the rights of others within our society.
Like where does it say that we have a right to impose our personal religious beliefs on others? It certainly isn't written anywhere that we have a right to create a hostile living environment or promote discrimination against any group. Some of these people just don't get it. Why do they feel that they have a right to express their disdain for what any consenting adults do that falls within the laws of our countries?
posted by
gomedome
on June 20, 2006 at 10:10 AM
| link to this | reply
And something I forgot in my last comment...
This is why it's important not to take an individual's interpretation of Scripture, but look at Scripture itself...that does not change and will not change (contrary to some belief), and is the bedrock for true Christianity. Cricket
I hate to break it to you, but the scripture is nothing more than individual interpretation. The bible is a collection of words. They have no meaning whatsoever until a conscious mind reads them, attaches meaning to the words and then creates an interpretation of what those words mean when placed together. Whatever beliefs you hold about the Bible, is either your interpretation or the interpretation of scholars and theologians which you happen to agree with. Any interpretations you don't agree with, are simply labeled heretical.
posted by
TVBlogger
on June 20, 2006 at 9:52 AM
| link to this | reply
scriber - lesbians seem to get a bye on all fronts
even in the bible, there doesn't seem to be any prohibitions against "woman laying down with woman"
posted by
gomedome
on June 20, 2006 at 9:18 AM
| link to this | reply
redwood -- you should read the history of conversion therapy
written by someone other than a Christian organization. Then you will see just how far the Christian world has their head up their asses on this issue. Conversion therapy basically works like this; The Christian majority that dominates our societies has created a hostile living environment for homosexuals based on their own inherent prejudices and their religious beliefs. A number of gay persons not being able to cope with this environment and wanting not to be alienated from family and community wants very much to modify their sexual behaviour. Even to the point of hiding or burying the sexual preferences that define them as persons. With great expectation they enter a gay conversion therapy program sponsored by some Christian church. A small number of those attempting to modify sexual behaviour against their sexual preferences succeed and manage to remain with family and friends within the religious community. These few are held up as examples of success but it is selective reasoning at its very worst. The vast majority of those who enter gay conversion therapy fail in modifying their sexual behaviour, they most often leave the unwelcoming environment of the church and are quite often further alienated from family members. Suicide rates skyrocket in this failed group, family divisions are exacerbated and generally speaking, very few who enter the program exit as happy, well adjusted adults in a loving heterosexual relationship. Yet the Christian groups that are involved in this insanity claim success? Give me a break and yes you are being fed and swallowing propaganda if you think that the exception that you cite of two persons meeting at a support group has any relevence to reality.
posted by
gomedome
on June 20, 2006 at 9:15 AM
| link to this | reply
lesbianism seems more acceptable between two beautiful women.
posted by
scriber
on June 20, 2006 at 9:04 AM
| link to this | reply
David2006 -ultimately no one is asking anyone to "approve" of homosexuality
We have every right to keep our heterosexual homophobia and distaste for another person's sexual preferences intact. What we don't have a right to do is to continue to create a hostile living environment for any segment of our society based on our own beliefs (religious or otherwise) or our own preferences.
posted by
gomedome
on June 20, 2006 at 8:58 AM
| link to this | reply
It seems to me that Roman's chapter 1 (yes I know, St. Pauls words, not
Jesus) is in the New Testament. But there are those who say that you can't interpret Romans 1 at face value like us dumb-assed fundies have a tendency to do.
The Bible also has a lot to say about being an "overcomer". I have heard of "alternative lifestyle" men and women attending discussion sessions. I have heard that there have been many instances of these people surprising themselves by falling in love with a member of the opposite sex at these sessions.
But perhaps these situations are just a fabrication of "Christian Fundamentalist Propaganda".
posted by
redwood
on June 20, 2006 at 8:57 AM
| link to this | reply
TVBlogger - me too
"I'll just continue to work on being the best human being I can be and let them fight it out amongst themselves."
posted by
gomedome
on June 20, 2006 at 8:54 AM
| link to this | reply
strat - thank you and the logic is so basic isn't it?
Like why would anyone subject themselves to how society treats gays voluntarily? I've seen families destroyed by this issue and know of at least 2 suicides by people that had developed such low self esteem courtesy of society's treatment of them. This is somehow a choice?
posted by
gomedome
on June 20, 2006 at 8:52 AM
| link to this | reply
Homosexuality is a sin, but a forgivable one.
Homosexually is also condemed in the New Testament. Also Jesus said had the Sodomites (gays and other sexual deviants) witnessed His Mirracles. They would have repented and there city would still exist. We are to be ready to forgive a Homosexual, before, after, and, when they are ready to stop being what they are, but that only expresses tollerance, not approval. I don't nor will I ever approve of anything that is Homosexual, but I won't try to harm them or keep them from doing it. That is true Christian attitude about it. Hating them and protesting their daily functions that are no different than our own is wrong and evil. Such a person is not a real Christian but a fake. I don't care if they get married, go to church, run for office or anything else. They can do that, I just won't participate or vote for them. I'll let God deal with the rest.
posted by
David2006
on June 20, 2006 at 8:43 AM
| link to this | reply
Silly logic
I love how Christians can only really quote Old Testament passages concerning homosexuality... but wait... Christ was the new convenant that made the laws of the Old Testament obsolete? And hmmmmm, Christ never mentioned homosexuality once. Hmmmmmm. I also find it funny how this one is embarrassed that one calls themselves a Christian and that one is embarrassed this one calls themselves a Christian. Since the Christians can't even figure out what being Christian is, I'll just continue to work on being the best human being I can be and let them fight it out amongst themselves.
posted by
TVBlogger
on June 20, 2006 at 8:29 AM
| link to this | reply
I believe Gome's got it right. It simply comes down to common sense.
To wit: No one in their right mind would deliberately sign up for a lifetime of abuse, discrimination, stress, and hatred just because they want to be different. True, as in all aspects of life, there are a marked few who do things for the sake of shock or rebellion, but by and large, I believe most people realize that everyday life is tough enough without taking on significantly more trouble voluntarily.
posted by
strat
on June 20, 2006 at 8:29 AM
| link to this | reply
Cricket et al again
Persian empire, of course. One could also add Babylobia, Assyria, Sumeria, etc etc
posted by
ariel70
on June 20, 2006 at 8:02 AM
| link to this | reply
Pccricket et al
Sorry to slither uninvited into this discussion, but something that you stated Cricket, caught my attention.
Homosexuality was usually -- altho' of course, not invariably -- far from being abusive in Greece or elsewhere in the ancient world. Homosexuality was extremely prevalent, and bore no stigma at all in Attica ; in the Perian Empire and many other places in the East ; including, one might add, China.
Both Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar wre practicing homosexuals ( of Caesar it was said that he was " Every woman's man, and every man's woman."
As an atheist, as far as I'm concerned homosexuality is merely a different way of loving another person ; if I were a Christian, my attitude would be radically different.
posted by
ariel70
on June 20, 2006 at 8:01 AM
| link to this | reply
redwood - now you are confusing issues
The AIDS epidemic on the African continent is primarly a heterosexual issue and irrelevant to any discussion of gay acceptance. What you are attempting to use as justification for your inherent prejudices is typical however.
posted by
gomedome
on June 20, 2006 at 7:59 AM
| link to this | reply
If homosexuality were not a behavior, then it would not produce any results
Read the life expectancy statistics. The expected life span of "alternative lifestyle people" is decades less than that of "straight people". And AIDS is just the tip of the iceberg. And if having similar statistics as the African continent in regard to sexually transmitted diseases is your idea of "living in the 21st century", I respectfully have to disagree. I got a new Ruger 10/22 rifle for Father's Day. Now if you guys will excuse me, I think that I will go and "shoot some nonbelievers for Jesus".
posted by
redwood
on June 20, 2006 at 7:47 AM
| link to this | reply
redwood -- behavior?
that's disputable.
if hermaphrotism (see my post) is due to hormonal differences, then why cannot homosexuality be?
if homosexuality is a natural part of other animals, why not humans?
posted by
Xeno-x
on June 20, 2006 at 7:34 AM
| link to this | reply
redwood -first off, sexual orientation is not a behaviour in the true sense
Behaviour can be modified where as a person's sexual orientation cannot. This need not be an issue just as racial considerations need not be an issue. It all starts with the acceptance of two very simple premises, everyone needs to and has a right to make a living and anyone in my country legally gets exactly the same deal I have with all of my inherent rights. If anyone is denied these two basic considerations simply because others within society believe that they should be, it only stands to reason that you and I could be next. I have to agree however that bringing the general populace kicking and screaming into the 21st century is one big pain in the ass.
posted by
gomedome
on June 20, 2006 at 7:34 AM
| link to this | reply
as a legislative issue, it is a real pain in the ass.
The U.S. Supreme Court in 1986 upheld the state's right to have anti-sodomy laws. In 2002 (Lawrence vs Texas), the Supreme Court reversed that ruling on the basis of "right to privacy". Fine. Except now there is nothing private about it, this has become a totally public issue. Our state (and 16 others) have expanded their civil rights commissions to include "sexual orientation" (a behavior) along with racial and ethnic minorities (something you are born with) in regard to discrimination laws. How do you arbitrarily prove or disprove someones "orientation"? And this is another issue that can produce tons of unneeded litigation for employers, renters, bankers etc. The only people who will benefit wil be the attorneys. What two people do behind closed doors is none of my business. If these people insist on making it my business via the legislatures or the courts, I resent it. And I don't care who knows that I resent it!
posted by
redwood
on June 20, 2006 at 7:08 AM
| link to this | reply
PKCRICKET
i've written about homosexuality and the bible quite a bit myself.
and our Bishop (I am an Episcopalian) is right -- I've said that --
leaving out Leviticus (you can't use one part of this book without using all the rest [and most Christians say that the entire book is passe]), you have to see the statements of the New Testament as being addressed to the Greek world in particular of that first century -- wheremany homosexual acts were abusive, as opposed to the loving relationship, just as in heterosexuals, of today. You have to read your history and understand the historical setting.
not just the Episcopal Church, but the Disciples of Christ, I think Methodists, and maybe Presbyterians (although I can't say for sure about these latter two), and others are accepting homosexuality.
I have put together a post on hermaphroditism, which is due to hormonal differences -- so don't you think homosexuality is similar?
posted by
Xeno-x
on June 20, 2006 at 6:41 AM
| link to this | reply
Sunnybeach7 - thank you
posted by
gomedome
on June 20, 2006 at 6:31 AM
| link to this | reply
pkcricket - how can you write such a comment with a straight face?
You even mention Leviticis. Are we to now assume that you condone slavery as well? Or are you cutting and pasting whatever you want from the bible to suit yourself? You see, that's the point here, all Christians live an edited version of the prohibitions and life guiding precepts as found in the bible. Insist all you want that a gay person is making a conscious choice about their sexual preference, maintaining this lie is the only way to reconcile a perspective that just doesn't make any sense. Either your God is fallible and makes mistakes as he did in creating these people, or the bible is not infallible and absolute. Every Christian on this planet has shown us that the bible is not absolute and subject to reinterpretation as the world changes. The view of homosexuality by the Christian religion has to change, the entire position is premised on same sex attraction as being a choice made by sinners which all common sense shows us that it is not. This position is undefendable, it is not a choice, no matter how many heterosexual bobbing heads you can get to agree that it is.
posted by
gomedome
on June 20, 2006 at 6:29 AM
| link to this | reply
I cannot agree with this woman. She has denied the validity of the Bible and its application for it. If you'll notice, God's proclamations against homosexuality were made all the way back in Leviticus, throughout the Old Testament, and through Paul's writings. I think she is in apostacy for saying such a thing. I also believe that it is possible to "love the sinner, hate the sin" as you put it, because I have done so myself. I'm really ashamed and upset that this woman calls herself a Christian, because she is not representing the Bible, but has cut and pasted what she feels relevant to her own life and compromised on an important issue. This is why it's important not to take an individual's interpretation of Scripture, but look at Scripture itself...that does not change and will not change (contrary to some belief), and is the bedrock for true Christianity. Cricket ><>
posted by
pkcricket
on June 20, 2006 at 3:42 AM
| link to this | reply
Good post
posted by
Afzal_Sunny7
on June 19, 2006 at 10:22 PM
| link to this | reply