Homosexuality in Australia (1 Viewer)

[Will Shakespear]

Dude I rkn...

Who do they think they are?

god hating fag enablers

 

[Name_Taken]

god hating fag enablers

Lol...

 

[Graney]

It represents a central pillar to the gay rights movement, don't mock it lol.

"We are not responsible for our actions, our genes made us gay". Some even have the gall to blame their imperfections on God, "He created me like this" etc.

What they fail to realise is that having a desire to do something and actually doing it are two different things. We have never condemned the desire towards others (of the same or opposite sex), it is the physical behaviour of homosexuality which represents the "abomination".

You're assuming individuals have free will and the ability to choose to act or not act, which is a more contentious position than you might expect.

Determinism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

They don't like to think it, but they are no different to the stupid rednecks who bash up gays

You're suggesting that committing unprovoked physical violence against another person, is morally equivalent to two individuals freely choosing to engage in a consensual relationship.

!

 

[NewiJapper]

you're suggesting that committing unprovoked physical violence against another person, is morally equivalent to two individuals freely choosing to engage in a consensual relationship.

+1

 

[Name_Taken]

You're assuming individuals have free will and the ability to choose to act or not act, which is a more contentious position than you might expect.

Determinism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Do you believe in this?

Religion altogether aside, I find the notion that a person is unable to govern their own actions as simply wrong. Our actions are largely influenced by our situation and past of course, but I wouldn't nearly go as far to suggest that we have little or not control over them, or that the future is pre-determined.

You're suggesting that committing unprovoked physical violence against another person, is morally equivalent to two individuals freely choosing to engage in a consensual relationship.

I ackowledge the obvious differences between the two, but they are both morally wrong and people in both situations tend to deny their actions as being under their control as a means of escaping personal responsibility, and that was the connection I was trying to make.

 

[bio_nut]

I've had some pretty passionate debates with Christians about determinism and predestination, interesting concepts.

 

[Titburger]

I ackowledge the obvious differences between the two, but they are both morally wrong and people in both situations tend to deny their actions as being under their control as a means of escaping personal responsibility, and that was the connection I was trying to make.

So instead of refuting the claim that sexuality is inherently genetic you have claimed that the bible cannot be used to promote an agenda? Good job contradicting yourself there kiddo.

 

[xeuyrawp]

[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/04AVRslVRbY&hl=en_GB&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/04AVRslVRbY&hl=en_GB&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]

lol name taken sounds like these church dudes in this clip

edit: part 3 might interest you.

'There is nothing wrong with a 5th-grade understanding of god, as long as you're in the 5th grade.'

 

[Name_Taken]

So instead of refuting the claim that sexuality is inherently genetic

There is no proof of this.

Homosexuality is a behaviour. The lust itself may to an extent be governed by genetic influences (however this has yet to be seen) but even so that would not make homosexuality (as in the act) any less of a sin.

Once again I will bring up the example of some people having a genetic disposition to alcohol abuse or violence, this factor however does not excuse them or anyone else from the fact that such behaviours are unacceptable.

you have claimed that the bible cannot be used to promote an agenda? Good job contradicting yourself there kiddo.

The Bible can't be used to promote an individuals agenda. It doesn't affect me personally what gay people around the globe do, I am not doing this for fun, but because I believe homosexual sex is wrong and by extension, am obliged to oppose any movement which would promote homosexuality as an acceptable "alternative".

I'm not promoting my own agenda, but that of the Bible itself.

Yes the Bible says homosexual sex is an abomination, and in the OT goes as far as saying it is punishable by death by stoning. However, Christ also said, let he who has not sinned be the the one to cast the first stone (not exact quote, but words to that effect). The Bible also teaches us that any sin can be forgiven, that all people are equal in the eyes of God and to "love thy neighbour".

Its not wrong to use the Bible to condemn homosexuality as a behaviour, or to defend marriage, but it is wrong to use it as a weapon to justify the harrassment and vilification of homosexuals, who are no greater sinners than anybody else.

Christs message is not for the righteous but for the misguided and immoral, for those who presently lack faith in Him.

 

[SeCKSiiMiNh]

name_taken hun, i would like to invite you back to my hovel and educate about homosexuality... in person. By that, I mean you and I making some sweet, sweet love. What say you?

 

[Titburger]

So if two homosexuals proclaim there love for each other and express this love physically, who else is affected by this 'sin'? Why should it be on the same level of sin as murder and rape when it occurs between consenting adults? You always bring up the point of their selfish stance against life but how is this better than hiding behind a heterosexual marriage (as many homosexuals do) and raising children into a family that does not provide a loving but rather a sterile and bleak environment for a child to grow up within? And how is this "stance against life" any different to priests who choose a life of celibacy and thus deny their 'god given ability' to reproduce? You have continually failed to answer these questions and as such are making your views seem very foolish.

 

[supercalamari]

Dude seriously, what is it that I'm saying is hard to understand?



Forget the Bible for a minute, the male and female body were made for each other (whether you believe they were made by God or by nature is irrelevent). That much is undeniable.

Now back to the Bible... Homosexuality is a sin, please don't make me have to explain all of that again.

Homosexuality is not a sin.

"The homosexuality the New Testament opposes is the pederasty of the Greco-Roman culture; the attitudes toward pederasty and, in part, the language used to oppose it are informed by the Jewish background."
Robin Scroggs, Professor of Biblical Theology,
Union Theological Seminary, New York City.
Genesis 19:1-25
Some "televangelists" carelessly proclaim that God destroyed the ancient cities of Sodom and Gomorrah because of "homosexuality." Although some theologians have equated the sin of Sodom with homosexuality, a careful look at Scripture corrects such ignorance.


Announcing judgment on these cities in Genesis 18, God sends two angels to Sodom, where Abraham's nephew, Lot, persuades them to stay in his home. Genesis 19 records that "all the people from every quarter" surround Lot's house demanding the release of his visitors so "we might know them." The Hebrew word for "know" in this case, yadha, usually means "have thorough knowledge of." It could also express intent to examine the visitors' credentials, or on rare occasions the term implies sexual intercourse. If the latter was the author's intended meaning, it would have been a clear case of attempted gang rape.


Horrified at this gross violation of ancient hospitality rules, Lot attempts to protect the visitors by offering his two daughters to the angry crowd, a morally outrageous act by today's standards. The people of Sodom refuse, so the angels render them blind. Lot and his family are then rescued by the angels as the cities are destroyed.


Several observations are important.

First, the judgment on these cities for their wickedness had been announced prior to the alleged homosexual incident.


Second, all of Sodom's people participated in the assault on Lot's house; in no culture has more than a small minority of the population been homosexual.
Third, Lot's offer to release his daughters suggests he knew his neighbors to have heterosexual interests.


Fourth, if the issue was sexual, why did God spare Lot, who immediately commits incest with his daughters? Most importantly, why do all the other passages of Scripture referring to this account fail to raise the issue of homosexuality?

Ezekiel 16:48-50

states it clearly. The people of Sodom, like many people today, had abundance of material goods. But they failed to meet the needs of the poor, and they worshipped idols. The sins of injustice and idolatry plague every generation. We stand under the same judgment if we create false gods or treat others with injustice.

Leviticus 18:22 & 20:13
Christians today do not follow the rules and rituals described in Leviticus. But some ignore its definitions of their own "uncleanness" while quoting Leviticus to condemn "homosexuals." Such abuse of Scripture distorts the Old Testament meaning and denies a New Testament message. "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination." These words occur solely in the Holiness Code of Leviticus, a ritual manual for Israel's priests. Their meaning can only be fully appreciated in the historical and cultural context of the ancient Hebrew people. Israel, in a unique place as the chosen people of one God, was to avoid the practices of other peoples and gods.


Hebrew religion, characterized by the revelation of one God, stood in continuous tension with the religion of the surrounding Canaanites who worshipped the multiple gods of fertility cults. Canaanite idol worship, which featured female and male cult prostitution as noted in Deuteronomy 23:17, repeatedly compromised Israel's loyalty to God. The Hebrew word for a male cult prostitute, qadesh, is mistranslated "sodomite" in some versions of the Bible.


What is an "Abomination"?
An abomination is that which God found detestable because it was unclean, disloyal, or unjust. Several Hebrew words were so translated, and the one found in Leviticus, toevah, is usually associated with idolatry, as in Ezekiel, where it occurs numerous times. Given the strong association of toevah with idolatry and the canaanite religious practice of cult prostitution, the use of toevah regarding male same-sex acts in Leviticus calls into question any conclusion that such condemnation also applies to loving, responsible homosexual relationships.

Romans 1:24-27
Most New Testament books, including the four Gospels, are silent on same-sex acts, and Paul is the only author who makes any reference to the subject. The most negative statement by Paul regarding same-sex acts occurs in Romans 1:24-27 where, in the context of a larger argument on the need of all people for the gospel of Jesus Christ, certain homosexual behavior is given as an example of the "uncleanness" of idolatrous Gentiles.


This raises the question: Does this passage refer to all homosexual acts, or to certain homosexual behavior known to Paul's readers? The book of Romans was written to Jewish and Gentile Christians in Rome, who would have been familiar with the infamous sexual excesses of their contemporaries, especially Roman emperors. They would also have been aware of tensions in the early Church regarding Gentiles and observance of the Jewish laws, as noted in Acts 15 and Paul's letter to the Galatians. Jewish laws in Leviticus mentioned male same-sex acts in the context of idolatry.


The homosexual practices cited in Romans 1:24-27 were believed to result from idolatry and are associated with some very serious offenses as noted in Romans 1. Taken in this larger context, it should be obvious that such acts are significantly different from loving, responsible lesbian and gay relationships seen today.


What is "Natural"?
Significant to Paul's discussion is the fact that these "unclean" Gentiles exchanged that which was "natural" for them, physin, in the Greek text, for something "unnatural," para physin. In Romans 11:24, God acts in an "unnatural" way, para physin, to accept the Gentiles. "Unnatural" in these passages does not refer to violation of so-called laws of nature, but rather implies action contradicting one's own nature. In view of this, we should observe that it is "unnatural," para physin, for a person today with a lesbian or gay sexual orientation to attempt living a heterosexual lifestyle.

I Corinthians 6:9
Any consideration of New Testament statements on same-sex acts must carefully view the social context of the Greco-Roman culture in which Paul ministered. Prostitution and pederasty (sexual relationships of adult men with boys) were the most commonly known male same-sex acts.

In I Corinthians 6:9, Paul condemns those who are "effeminate" and "abusers of themselves with mankind," as translated in the King James version. Unfortunately, some new translations are worse, rendering these words "homosexuals." Recent scholarship unmasks the homophobia behind such mistranslations.


The first word - malakos, in the Greek text-which has been translated "effeminate" or "soft," most likely refers to someone who lacks discipline or moral control. The word is used elsewhere in the New Testament but never with reference to sexuality.


The second word, Arsenokoitai, occurs once each in I Corinthians and I Timothy (1:10), but nowhere else in other literature of the period. It is derived from two Greek words, one meaning, "males" and the other "beds", a euphemism for sexual intercourse. Other Greek words were commonly used to describe homosexual behavior but do not appear here. The larger context of I Corinthians 6 shows Paul extremely concerned with prostitution, so it is very possible he was referring to male prostitutes. But many experts now attempting to translate these words have reached a simple conclusion: their precise meaning is uncertain.


One thing is abundantly clear, as Paul stated in Galatians 5:14:

"...the whole Law is fulfilled in one statement,
'You shall love your neighbor as yourself".​

Metropolitan Community Churches | Not a Sin, Not a Sickness

 

[supercalamari]

Forget the Bible for a minute, the male and female body were made for each other (whether you believe they were made by God or by nature is irrelevent). That much is undeniable.

I never denied that, and I don't think that any gay people would deny that. We simply don't feel the (I'm presuming) heterosexual attractions that you do.

Its not wrong to use the Bible to condemn homosexuality as a behaviour, or to defend marriage, but it is wrong to use it as a weapon to justify the harrassment and vilification of homosexuals, who are no greater sinners than anybody else.

'Defend marriage'

Hahahahahhaa. You should fight for banning divorce before you even try denying civil rights to loving, committed partners. To do anything else would be hypocritical.

Thankyou for realizing we're just normal sinners. Now go and fight against global poverty, commercialism or something slightly more heinous then love.

 

[SeCKSiiMiNh]

lol just watch the youtube clip i posted up and it'll answer all your questions. for your convenience:

[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/04AVRslVRbY&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/04AVRslVRbY&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]
[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/392g7HxmfUM&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/392g7HxmfUM&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]
[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/HNT-4rfSlUo&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/HNT-4rfSlUo&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]
[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/4ocWWkAAdQU&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/4ocWWkAAdQU&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]
[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/cC4d4JMNYsA&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/cC4d4JMNYsA&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]
[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/pDURHGt0tNQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/pDURHGt0tNQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]
[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/zvSsyDbyA1s&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/zvSsyDbyA1s&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]
[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/VTXjG9UMxvc&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/VTXjG9UMxvc&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]
[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/jlcHauEoRl0&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/jlcHauEoRl0&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]
[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/2SpD1CAoS8Y&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/2SpD1CAoS8Y&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]

those against homosexuality aren't put in a very positive light tbh.

 

[Name_Taken]

I never denied that, and I don't think that any gay people would deny that. We simply don't feel the (I'm presuming) heterosexual attractions that you do.

The desire does not equate to the behaviour.

'Defend marriage'

Hahahahahhaa. You should fight for banning divorce before you even try denying civil rights to loving, committed partners. To do anything else would be hypocritical.

I do oppose no-fault divorce. This thread is about homosexuality, stop asking me to deviate from this.

What is civil marriage? (Religion aside) wouldn't you say it is society's stamp of approval (in a way) regarding the legitimacy of certain relationships, to encourage them, because they serve a particular social interest (i.e. procreation, or would you say its something else)?

With this in mind, what purpose do same sex relationships serve society, that which would justify the government giving them social support to secure their stability (in marriage)?

What (in your opinion) is the purpose of (civil) marriage? What makes the union between a grown man and women so special to the state, that the government regulates and protects it? What makes this type of union so special and more important, to the state, than all others?

Its not becuase they are based on love else, why doesn't the government regulate or monitor our friendships (they're based on love as well you know)?

I invite you to conclude that it is because these relationships alone (in comparison to other relationships between individuals; homosexual relationships, friendships etc) are the means through which new life is created, and the next generation of people are raised in a stable, loving environment.

Apart from a concern for children the government has no reason to regulate private relationships (apart from, ofc cases of abuse where intervention may be required). Do you disagree?

 

[Name_Taken]

And how is this "stance against life" any different to priests who choose a life of celibacy and thus deny their 'god given ability' to reproduce? You have continually failed to answer these questions and as such are making your views seem very foolish.

Not having sex is not a sin.

Not producing life as a result of your absinence - your sacrifice to God, is not a sin either.

However having sex, abusing it, in ways it was not intended, for your own physical pleasure, that is the sin.

Pleasure is not the sin, it is acceptable to have sex in the context for which it was designed and for it to be pleasurable. Sex in this way would not be a violation of its purpose, whether that time, the (heterosexual) couple were able to concieve or not.

 

[SeCKSiiMiNh]

Not having sex is not a sin.

Not producing life as a result of your absinence - your sacrifice to God, is not a sin either.

However having sex, abusing it, in ways it was not intended, for your own physical pleasure, that is the sin.

Pleasure is not the sin, it is acceptable to have sex in the context for which it was designed and for it to be pleasurable. Sex in this way would not be a violation of its purpose, whether that time, the (heterosexual) couple were able to concieve or not.

lol then why would god put the prostate where it's reachable up the males rectum? for females with strap-ons?

lol and why do we need to keep producing now? our population would reach an exploding level of 36million by 2050 (an article i read in smh).

and have you watched the 10 clips yet?

 

[Name_Taken]

lol then why would god put the prostate where it's reachable up the males rectum? for females with strap-ons?

lol and why do we need to keep producing now? our population would reach an exploding level of 36million by 2050 (an article i read in smh).

and have you watched the 10 clips yet?

Prostate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Read what it does, and then wonder about why it is where it is... Like seriously, like that wasn't obvious.

Other than that, it could just be there to taunt those tempted to sin


EDIT: On the second bit, ever thought that the numbers of people born each year might be less if people weren't obsessed about sex as a means to have fun and abstained until marriage, or better yet, for their entire lives (which is considered to be preferable)?

 

[Titburger]

With this in mind, what purpose do same sex relationships serve society, that which would justify the government giving them social support to secure their stability (in marriage)?

And what are the adverse effects of same sex marriages? I really don't see how this is going to have any effect on society for the worse. It is not going to encourage people to become gay in the same way that when segregation and discrimination of black people stopped, people didn't suddenly become black. Do you really think by denying marriage to homosexuals that you are going to make them go away? What are you trying to achieve, I really don't understand

 

[Slidey]

Not having sex is not a sin.

Not producing life as a result of your absinence - your sacrifice to God, is not a sin either.

However having sex, abusing it, in ways it was not intended, for your own physical pleasure, that is the sin.

Pleasure is not the sin, it is acceptable to have sex in the context for which it was designed and for it to be pleasurable. Sex in this way would not be a violation of its purpose, whether that time, the (heterosexual) couple were able to concieve or not.

Eh, get the fuck out of Australia you intolerant bigot.