Homosexuality

  • Thread starter Thread starter jeanne71350
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Seeker2010 said:
If God can talk to people, why isn’t he? If he really wants me to follow the Bible (or Torah, or Koran, or which ever holy book is right), can he not just tell me so directly? Believe you me, if he did, and I believed it was legitimate and not some mental illness on my part, I would. No discussion, no debate.

God requires something called “faith”, even if just a scintilla to begin with.
But he’d rather punish me for all of eternity for deciding some guys from thousands of years ago who claimed to speak with him didn’t really do so.

He’d rather not “punish” you. If you truly made an effort to see what he does want for you, you’d think differently.

Homosexuality is an abomination, right? Says so right there in the Bible, Leviticus 20:18 (I think.) Ergo, because it says so, right there in Leviticus, God thinks homosexuality is an abomination.

No, not “ergo”. God thinks homosexual behavior is an abomination, and so it says in Leviticus, not the other way around as you stated.

But within the lines of Leviticus are other things God thinks is bad. Not stoning disobedient children. He instructs us to put to death anyone who works on the Sabbath. (Sure hope I never have a need for emergency medical care on a Sunday.) The whole multi-crop and multi-fabric things. All right there in the same book where God declares homosexuality as an abomination.

So, is Leviticus the word of God? Do the rules and regulations therein still apply, or no? Cause if they don’t, you can’t point to it and say, see, right there, it’s an abomination. But if they do, why are ya’ll skipping over the other parts? Shouldn’t you be marching in the street demanding justice for those who work the Sabbath? Those who wear cotton and linen together?

If you’re really interested in the answer and are not being thick, read back a few posts. Scripture is to be read in its entirely, not cherry picked. The Old Testimate is fulfilled in the New, through Christ, and we are not as Christians bound to Levitical law. That is not to say that many of the precepts do not still hold, as in the Ten Commandments.

You’re setting up a false dichotomy of Scriptural interpretation. It’s a little more complicated than “either this holds true or not”.
Click to expand...
 
I believe the evidence substantiates the claim that homosexuals are born that way. I don’t think this is a desire that anyone “chooses” on their own accord. Homosexuals represent a small percentage of the overall polulation, and they are often subjected to name-calling and violence. To think that someone would choose this for themselves simply defies logic. So if God made them that way, I cannot comprehend that he would ask them to forego a lifetime of physical intimacy. Yes, we all have our crosses to bear in life, but this goes above and beyond. I also try to have empathy. I cannot change from being a heterosexual, so I cannot bring myself to ask another human to deny who they are at their very core. As someone who has had a libertarian mindset for the entirety of my adult life, I treat this issue with profound indifference.
 
Newbie2 said:
Scripture is to be read in its entirely, not cherry picked.
Click to expand...
Which is exactly what I’m accusing you of doing. You take the verse that condemns homosexuality and go “See? It’s right there.” Yet you ignore others from the very same book. I mean, it’s one thing if, for this or that reason, Leviticus had been ‘overturned’ so to speak, but you’re taking the parts you like and ignoring the ones you don’t.

Perfect example, I give you Leviticus 11:10:
And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you:
Click to expand...
Does that mean eating oysters (and man, do I love oysters) is the moral equivalent of having a gay lover? For right here, God himself has declared them both abominations, has he not?

If 18:22 is still applicable, why wouldn’t 11:10 be as well?

Or does 18:22 only apply to Israelis? After all, Leviticus 18:1-5 tells us:
1 The LORD said to Moses, 2 "Speak to the Israelites and say to them: 'I am the LORD your God. 3 You must not do as they do in Egypt, where you used to live, and you must not do as they do in the land of Canaan, where I am bringing you. Do not follow their practices. 4 You must obey my laws and be careful to follow my decrees. I am the LORD your God. 5 Keep my decrees and laws, for the man who obeys them will live by them. I am the LORD.
Click to expand...
So I guess a strict interpretation is that homosexuality is an abomination, but only if you are an Israelite.

Next time I meet someone gay, I’ll make sure to find out if they are, so I can let them know they’re in trouble.
 
Seeker2010 said:
Which is exactly what I’m accusing you of doing. You take the verse that condemns homosexuality and go “See? It’s right there.” Yet you ignore others from the very same book. I mean, it’s one thing if, for this or that reason, Leviticus had been ‘overturned’ so to speak, but you’re taking the parts you like and ignoring the ones you don’t.

Perfect example, I give you Leviticus 11:10:

Does that mean eating oysters (and man, do I love oysters) is the moral equivalent of having a gay lover? For right here, God himself has declared them both abominations, has he not?

If 18:22 is still applicable, why wouldn’t 11:10 be as well?

Or does 18:22 only apply to Israelis? After all, Leviticus 18:1-5 tells us:

So I guess a strict interpretation is that homosexuality is an abomination, but only if you are an Israelite.

Next time I meet someone gay, I’ll make sure to find out if they are, so I can let them know they’re in trouble.
Click to expand...
Now I know you’re just being thick. I referenced the New Testament, and you’re completely ignoring my argument.

Toodles.
 
Newbie2 said:
Now I know you’re just being thick. I referenced the New Testament, and you’re completely ignoring my argument.
Click to expand...
Got it. You can’t explain why shellfish is no longer an abomination, but homosexuality still is. Ultimately, that’s the result I expected.
 
Seeker2010 said:
Got it. You can’t explain why shellfish is no longer an abomination, but homosexuality still is. Ultimately, that’s the result I expected.
Click to expand...
because Catholics are not bound by Leviticus. You are trolling now.:mad:
 
NE_Catholic said:
because Catholics are not bound by Leviticus.
Click to expand...
Time out.

You’re not bound by Leviticus, but you use Leviticus to point out that God thinks homosexuality is an abomination. But when I ask why eating shellfish, once declared an abomination by the EXACT SAME book, no longer is, you accuse me of trolling??

Fine Leviticus doesn’t apply, but that means 18:22 doesn’t apply either.

Fact: The book of Leviticus calls homosexuality ‘an abomination’.

Fact: Catholics, and other Christians, use that fact in their condemnation of homosexuality.

Fact: The book of Leviticus calls eating shellfish ‘an abomination’.

Fact: When I point that inconvenient truth out, I am told Leviticus does not apply and accused of trolling.

You’re trying to have your cake and eat it, too.
 
Seeker2010 said:
Time out.

You’re not bound by Leviticus, but you use Leviticus to point out that God thinks homosexuality is an abomination. But when I ask why eating shellfish, once declared an abomination by the EXACT SAME book, no longer is, you accuse me of trolling??

Fine Leviticus doesn’t apply, but that means 18:22 doesn’t apply either.

Fact: The book of Leviticus calls homosexuality ‘an abomination’.

Fact: Catholics, and other Christians, use that fact in their condemnation of homosexuality.

Fact: The book of Leviticus calls eating shellfish ‘an abomination’.

Fact: When I point that inconvenient truth out, I am told Leviticus does not apply and accused of trolling.

You’re trying to have your cake and eat it, too.
Click to expand...
no we don’t. What were you once, Baptist? You have no clue about Catholicism. I suggest a little reading before trolling.
 
NE_Catholic said:
no we don’t.
Click to expand...
You don’t consider homosexuality an abomination? What do you suppose I would find if I searched CAF for posts with those two words in them?

Or is homosexuality declared an abomination elsewhere in the bible besides Leviticus?
 
I haven’t read all 9 pages of this site, but thought I’d add my comments because I live in San Francisco, and the homosexuals have literally taken over the city. They live in what was a middle class neighborhood. Several of my friends grew up in the neighborhood and went to the Catholic school there. They had to close the school because there just weren’t enough children to fill the school. I honestly don’t know whether or not they’ve also closed the Church.
I might add that if the military changes the “don’t ask, don’t tell” rule it will ruin the military – BECAUSE a couple of years ago I was going downtown on our street car system, and there must have been something going on with the “gays” downtown – the street car was full of them and they were literally all over one another – kissing, hugging, etc., etc. I was totally amazed because I believe that this behavior is something that should be private.
As for the latest situation with the “gays” – marriage, my final comment is “I don’t care what they call it, but it isn’t MARRIAGE”!!!
 
Christopher68 said:
I believe the evidence substantiates the claim that homosexuals are born that way. I don’t think this is a desire that anyone “chooses” on their own accord. Homosexuals represent a small percentage of the overall polulation, and they are often subjected to name-calling and violence. To think that someone would choose this for themselves simply defies logic. So if God made them that way, I cannot comprehend that he would ask them to forego a lifetime of physical intimacy. Yes, we all have our crosses to bear in life, but this goes above and beyond. I also try to have empathy. I cannot change from being a heterosexual, so I cannot bring myself to ask another human to deny who they are at their very core. As someone who has had a libertarian mindset for the entirety of my adult life, I treat this issue with profound indifference.
Click to expand...
Please provide evidence that homosexuals are born that way.

Thank you,
Ed
 
Barb3 said:
I haven’t read all 9 pages of this site, but thought I’d add my comments because I live in San Francisco, and the homosexuals have literally taken over the city. They live in what was a middle class neighborhood. Several of my friends grew up in the neighborhood and went to the Catholic school there. They had to close the school because there just weren’t enough children to fill the school. I honestly don’t know whether or not they’ve also closed the Church.
I might add that if the military changes the “don’t ask, don’t tell” rule it will ruin the military – BECAUSE a couple of years ago I was going downtown on our street car system, and there must have been something going on with the “gays” downtown – the street car was full of them and they were literally all over one another – kissing, hugging, etc., etc. I was totally amazed because I believe that this behavior is something that should be private.
As for the latest situation with the “gays” – marriage, my final comment is “I don’t care what they call it, but it isn’t MARRIAGE”!!!
Click to expand...
Yes, once private behavior has gone public and I agree with you on the “marriage” concept.

God bless,
Ed
 
Just my two cents…

First off I am a man who is attracted to other men. I choose to live in chastity which for me is celibacy.

Second, I am a catholic.

I can say that I have been attracted to men all my life, and I came from a traditional family unit. I grew up in a small town (150 people total) with a mom and dad who loved me and raised me in the church and I have a great relationship both of them. I never lacked for a father figure and actually I would be quite masculine. I like to play sports, work on my car, talk about the weather, and wear plain old jeans from walmart and whatever t-shirt I got for free at some campus event. I have two younger sisters.

I can remember being attracted to men as young as 7 or 8 and all the school I always found boys to make me feel funny. Set my heart racing and the like. I always hid my sexuality because I heard what people said about “gays”. They were abominations, unnatural, the world would be better without them. This kind of talk made me hate myself to the point I tried to end my life. Thank God that I was unsuccessful.

In college I converted from the methodist church to catholicism. It was in the catholic church that I learn that it is not a sin to feel attracted to the same sex! The only part that is a sin is to act out those urges with another man. In fact, its not a sin to have platonic gay friends. I have many and it is through them and the sacraments that I am drawn closer and closer to God and my cross becomes lighter.

One thing I must say is gay teen suicide isn’t due to them being gay, it’s due to people not reaching out in loving and saying “The attraction you feel is ok, you can’t help that you are that way and I love you” then helping them learn chastity. If you tell a teen they are an “abomination” or “un-natural” or “going to hell” it will cause irreparable harm and will drive them away from a God that wants to love them and a church that wants to show them how to bear the heavy cross they carry.
 
edwest2 said:
You misunderstand and you offer no evidence. Here a few words about this from the Catholic Medical Association:

narth.com/docs/hope.html

God bless,
Ed
Click to expand...
I “misunderstand” because I don’t see the issue the same way you do? :rolleyes:

I read the link you posted. A quick google search found the following link as well:

news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/05/0510_050510_gayscent.html

I have no doubt that there are papers saying that people are born gay as well as those saying that they’re not, and that the information would be slanted in a manner that validates that side’s views on homosexuality in general.

But research aside, you have not commented on my statement that it defies logic that someone would “choose” to be a persecuted minority.
 
I think we need to further define “born that way” i.e. genetically predisposed vs. other factors.

I don’t think there’s any doubt that some kids are oriented toward members of the same sex since early childhood. Does that mean that they’re genetically predisposed? No evidence so far, and there may not be any.

But such points are moot, as it’s ultimately the behavior that we consider immoral, regardless of the reason for the orientation. Homosexual advocates will say otherwise i.e. that such behavior is genetically predetermined, which is pretty much saying we’re not any higher than animals and cannot control our desires.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top