If your kids turn out gay, would you kill them as Bible/Islam imply?

[Joy4Uall]

So if, say, my religion (just say), taught that being straight is wrong (our "prophet" tells us that), and that being gay is the only correct way

I think people would smell a rat, unless they were nihilistic in the extreme.

In other words they would NOT abide by that religious ruling....just like gays should NOT be expected to follow the religious ruling of Christianity (that gay sex is wrong.)

The religion wouldn't get off the ground, unless a huge number of people thought it a good idea to kill off the human race.

Correct. But you still wouldn't abide by it's teachings of no straight sex, just like gays shouldn't be influenced by the hatred for them in the Bible and Islamic texts.

 

[Joy4Uall]

Which has nothing to do with choice, except that of the parents.

Neither is being gay or straight. The choice is acting upon their desires like 13 years having sex, but there is no choice in their desires to have sex.

So if, say, my religion (just say), taught that being straight is wrong (our "prophet" tells us that), and that being gay is the only correct way, YOU'D refrain from having (straight) sex? Keep in mind that the invisible man ("god") saying that gay sex is wrong is so savage, so barbaric, that he tortured, brutally, an innocent man just to make a point to another invisible man (the devil)....I'm talking about his brutal torture of Job, in the Bible. So we can't take his morality, his teachings, his ethical stand, seriously. I think that most pet chimps are more ethical than said invisible friend is - do chimps ruthlessly torture, savagely, their own "children" just to make a point? No, they don't - so chimps are more ethical than the Christian god is.

If that were true, you and your religion would never have been heard of.

Good point - not as much reproduction by gay folks. But would YOU abide by that restriction....or is the Bible wrong for doing the same thing (restricting gay sex)? Please tell us.

Not any reproduction? WTF is wrong with you, saying not as much?

Gays can and do have children through surrogate wombs, and from sperm donors.

 

[Tilly]

So if, say, my religion (just say), taught that being straight is wrong (our "prophet" tells us that), and that being gay is the only correct way

I think people would smell a rat, unless they were nihilistic in the extreme.

In other words they would NOT abide by that religious ruling....just like gays should NOT be expected to follow the religious ruling of Christianity (that gay sex is wrong.)

Gay people can do what they want though, can't they?
If they lived in an Islamic hellhole, they'd likely have to worry about being heinously murdered in the here and now.

 

[Tilly]

So if, say, my religion (just say), taught that being straight is wrong (our "prophet" tells us that), and that being gay is the only correct way

I think people would smell a rat, unless they were nihilistic in the extreme.

In other words they would NOT abide by that religious ruling....just like gays should NOT be expected to follow the religious ruling of Christianity (that gay sex is wrong.)

The religion wouldn't get off the ground, unless a huge number of people thought it a good idea to kill off the human race.

Correct. But you still wouldn't abide by it's teachings of no straight sex, just like gays shouldn't be influenced by the hatred for them in the Bible and Islamic texts.

As far as I can see, religions require people to make choices in all sorts of areas of life. At least most people can choose whether or not they want to be Christian or not. If they don't like the message or the requirements, no one forces them to Be Christian.
Same can't be said of so many Islamic countries and communities.
So I'm not sure why you are more concerned about a Christian hell you don't even believe in, rather than the persecution and MURDER of gays in the here and now in Islamic countries.

 

[Tilly]

So if, say, my religion (just say), taught that being straight is wrong (our "prophet" tells us that), and that being gay is the only correct way

I think people would smell a rat, unless they were nihilistic in the extreme.

In other words they would NOT abide by that religious ruling....just like gays should NOT be expected to follow the religious ruling of Christianity (that gay sex is wrong.)

The religion wouldn't get off the ground, unless a huge number of people thought it a good idea to kill off the human race.

Correct. But you still wouldn't abide by it's teachings of no straight sex, just like gays shouldn't be influenced by the hatred for them in the Bible and Islamic texts.

I don't want gay people to be influenced by any religion they don't want to be influenced by.

 

[Tilly]

So if, say, my religion (just say), taught that being straight is wrong (our "prophet" tells us that), and that being gay is the only correct way

I think people would smell a rat, unless they were nihilistic in the extreme.

In other words they would NOT abide by that religious ruling....just like gays should NOT be expected to follow the religious ruling of Christianity (that gay sex is wrong.)

The religion wouldn't get off the ground, unless a huge number of people thought it a good idea to kill off the human race.

Correct. But you still wouldn't abide by it's teachings of no straight sex, just like gays shouldn't be influenced by the hatred for them in the Bible and Islamic texts.

If I couldn't meet the requirements of the religion, I would opt out of the religion.

 

[irosie91]

if you imagine that adolf could have accomplished his genocidal program without
the PRIMING of the same canon law that legalized the inquisition and pogroms for
centuries---thruout the catholic, protestant and eastern orthodox ------you are damned naïve. The Hungarians were not particularly
"Nazi" in orientation-----nor were the Italians nor were the Poles

By your logic, then the US Constitution is responsible for slavery and every member of Congress and every state that ratified the Constitution is responsible for slavery.

Your rejoinder, divine person----makes no sense at all. Slavery of black
persons in the USA was the result of the beliefs of the people of the USA----
who considered it a good idea and ----IN GENERAL---not a contradiction of
church doctrine. Was chattel slavery ever outlawed by DA CHURCH?

Are you saying the US invented slavery? Are you seriously claiming that if it wasn't for the Protestants fleeing Catholic Europe that slavery would never have existed in the Americas, much less the world? Wow. I'd really like to see you back that up.

Meanwhile, some light reading while you gather your facts:
Slavery in Ancient Aztec, Mayan and Inca
Slavery in Aztec society was in some ways more humane than in Western cultures. While some slaves were punished criminals or prisoners of war, others sold themselves or their children into slavery due to economic hardship. Slaves could free themselves by repaying their purchase price. They could marry and own property, and their children were born free.

An Aztec slave market (right) (Historia … de Nueva España). The slave has a wooden collar around his neck, which could indicate either ill treatment by the owner or bad behavior by the slave. A collared slave could gain freedom by running inside the ruler’s palace.

you AGAIN make no sense. At no point did I suggest that the AZTECS did not engage in slavery. Slavery has existed now and then in various forms thruout
the world------in CHRISTIAN NORTH AND SOUTH AMERICA-----slavery was----in general of the most brutal CHATTEL TYPE------a left over from the ROMAN
EMPIRE------the first, second reichs. The slavery in Merry old England-----
was a child of the roman empire form too------and ----also various forms \of INDENTURED slavery (not dependent on race)

Agreed. If only Jesus was a ethical, as caring, as compassionate as Scientific Humanism, then he would have taken a mere 15 seconds out of his life of teaching ethics and said "write this down - end slavery w/in the next 30 years". But, alas, Jesus can't live up to the ethical/loving/caring standards of Scientific Humanism, so because of that MILLIONS more people had to suffer from barbarity than if he was caring enough to utter those few words. Jesus, you screwed up, dude.

I do not recall Jesus mentioning slavery at all. ------so you claim that ANY
person for the past ten thousand years who did not mention slavery as an
evil has been an unethical bastard?

 

[Joy4Uall]

By your logic, then the US Constitution is responsible for slavery and every member of Congress and every state that ratified the Constitution is responsible for slavery.

Your rejoinder, divine person----makes no sense at all. Slavery of black
persons in the USA was the result of the beliefs of the people of the USA----
who considered it a good idea and ----IN GENERAL---not a contradiction of
church doctrine. Was chattel slavery ever outlawed by DA CHURCH?

Are you saying the US invented slavery? Are you seriously claiming that if it wasn't for the Protestants fleeing Catholic Europe that slavery would never have existed in the Americas, much less the world? Wow. I'd really like to see you back that up.

Meanwhile, some light reading while you gather your facts:
Slavery in Ancient Aztec, Mayan and Inca
Slavery in Aztec society was in some ways more humane than in Western cultures. While some slaves were punished criminals or prisoners of war, others sold themselves or their children into slavery due to economic hardship. Slaves could free themselves by repaying their purchase price. They could marry and own property, and their children were born free.

An Aztec slave market (right) (Historia … de Nueva España). The slave has a wooden collar around his neck, which could indicate either ill treatment by the owner or bad behavior by the slave. A collared slave could gain freedom by running inside the ruler’s palace.

you AGAIN make no sense. At no point did I suggest that the AZTECS did not engage in slavery. Slavery has existed now and then in various forms thruout
the world------in CHRISTIAN NORTH AND SOUTH AMERICA-----slavery was----in general of the most brutal CHATTEL TYPE------a left over from the ROMAN
EMPIRE------the first, second reichs. The slavery in Merry old England-----
was a child of the roman empire form too------and ----also various forms \of INDENTURED slavery (not dependent on race)

Agreed. If only Jesus was a ethical, as caring, as compassionate as Scientific Humanism, then he would have taken a mere 15 seconds out of his life of teaching ethics and said "write this down - end slavery w/in the next 30 years". But, alas, Jesus can't live up to the ethical/loving/caring standards of Scientific Humanism, so because of that MILLIONS more people had to suffer from barbarity than if he was caring enough to utter those few words. Jesus, you screwed up, dude.

I do not recall Jesus mentioning slavery at all. ------so you claim that ANY
person for the past ten thousand years who did not mention slavery as an
evil has been an unethical bastard?

He was a self-righteous self-proclaimed moral teacher for all time, basically. The main book about him approves of slavery. I'd have taken 15 seconds out of my life to say "end slavery w/in the next 30 years". Would you have? If not, then you might want to love humanity as much as I do.

You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show.

Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephesians 6:5 NLT)

Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT)

In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of beating slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong.

The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12:47-48 NLT)

 

[Joy4Uall]

By your logic, then the US Constitution is responsible for slavery and every member of Congress and every state that ratified the Constitution is responsible for slavery.

Your rejoinder, divine person----makes no sense at all. Slavery of black
persons in the USA was the result of the beliefs of the people of the USA----
who considered it a good idea and ----IN GENERAL---not a contradiction of
church doctrine. Was chattel slavery ever outlawed by DA CHURCH?

Are you saying the US invented slavery? Are you seriously claiming that if it wasn't for the Protestants fleeing Catholic Europe that slavery would never have existed in the Americas, much less the world? Wow. I'd really like to see you back that up.

Meanwhile, some light reading while you gather your facts:
Slavery in Ancient Aztec, Mayan and Inca
Slavery in Aztec society was in some ways more humane than in Western cultures. While some slaves were punished criminals or prisoners of war, others sold themselves or their children into slavery due to economic hardship. Slaves could free themselves by repaying their purchase price. They could marry and own property, and their children were born free.

An Aztec slave market (right) (Historia … de Nueva España). The slave has a wooden collar around his neck, which could indicate either ill treatment by the owner or bad behavior by the slave. A collared slave could gain freedom by running inside the ruler’s palace.

you AGAIN make no sense. At no point did I suggest that the AZTECS did not engage in slavery. Slavery has existed now and then in various forms thruout
the world------in CHRISTIAN NORTH AND SOUTH AMERICA-----slavery was----in general of the most brutal CHATTEL TYPE------a left over from the ROMAN
EMPIRE------the first, second reichs. The slavery in Merry old England-----
was a child of the roman empire form too------and ----also various forms \of INDENTURED slavery (not dependent on race)

Agreed. If only Jesus was a ethical, as caring, as compassionate as Scientific Humanism, then he would have taken a mere 15 seconds out of his life of teaching ethics and said "write this down - end slavery w/in the next 30 years". But, alas, Jesus can't live up to the ethical/loving/caring standards of Scientific Humanism, so because of that MILLIONS more people had to suffer from barbarity than if he was caring enough to utter those few words. Jesus, you screwed up, dude.

I do not recall Jesus mentioning slavery at all. ------....

He ALSO didn't say "the texts got it wrong - don't harm gays, treat them as equals." He SHOULD have, but didn't. If one speaks up for gay rights then in that important non-trivial issue one has risen to a higher ethical plane than even Jesus.

 

[Joy4Uall]

By your logic, then the US Constitution is responsible for slavery and every member of Congress and every state that ratified the Constitution is responsible for slavery.

Your rejoinder, divine person----makes no sense at all. Slavery of black
persons in the USA was the result of the beliefs of the people of the USA----
who considered it a good idea and ----IN GENERAL---not a contradiction of
church doctrine. Was chattel slavery ever outlawed by DA CHURCH?

Are you saying the US invented slavery? Are you seriously claiming that if it wasn't for the Protestants fleeing Catholic Europe that slavery would never have existed in the Americas, much less the world? Wow. I'd really like to see you back that up.

Meanwhile, some light reading while you gather your facts:
Slavery in Ancient Aztec, Mayan and Inca
Slavery in Aztec society was in some ways more humane than in Western cultures. While some slaves were punished criminals or prisoners of war, others sold themselves or their children into slavery due to economic hardship. Slaves could free themselves by repaying their purchase price. They could marry and own property, and their children were born free.

An Aztec slave market (right) (Historia … de Nueva España). The slave has a wooden collar around his neck, which could indicate either ill treatment by the owner or bad behavior by the slave. A collared slave could gain freedom by running inside the ruler’s palace.

you AGAIN make no sense. At no point did I suggest that the AZTECS did not engage in slavery. Slavery has existed now and then in various forms thruout
the world------in CHRISTIAN NORTH AND SOUTH AMERICA-----slavery was----in general of the most brutal CHATTEL TYPE------a left over from the ROMAN
EMPIRE------the first, second reichs. The slavery in Merry old England-----
was a child of the roman empire form too------and ----also various forms \of INDENTURED slavery (not dependent on race)

Agreed. If only Jesus was a ethical, as caring, as compassionate as Scientific Humanism, then he would have taken a mere 15 seconds out of his life of teaching ethics and said "write this down - end slavery w/in the next 30 years". But, alas, Jesus can't live up to the ethical/loving/caring standards of Scientific Humanism, so because of that MILLIONS more people had to suffer from barbarity than if he was caring enough to utter those few words. Jesus, you screwed up, dude.

I do not recall Jesus mentioning slavery at all. ------so you claim that ANY
person for the past ten thousand years who did not mention slavery as an
evil has been an unethical bastard?

Just the ones that claim to be the all-knowing "son of god".

 

[irosie91]

Your rejoinder, divine person----makes no sense at all. Slavery of black
persons in the USA was the result of the beliefs of the people of the USA----
who considered it a good idea and ----IN GENERAL---not a contradiction of
church doctrine. Was chattel slavery ever outlawed by DA CHURCH?

Are you saying the US invented slavery? Are you seriously claiming that if it wasn't for the Protestants fleeing Catholic Europe that slavery would never have existed in the Americas, much less the world? Wow. I'd really like to see you back that up.

Meanwhile, some light reading while you gather your facts:
Slavery in Ancient Aztec, Mayan and Inca
Slavery in Aztec society was in some ways more humane than in Western cultures. While some slaves were punished criminals or prisoners of war, others sold themselves or their children into slavery due to economic hardship. Slaves could free themselves by repaying their purchase price. They could marry and own property, and their children were born free.

An Aztec slave market (right) (Historia … de Nueva España). The slave has a wooden collar around his neck, which could indicate either ill treatment by the owner or bad behavior by the slave. A collared slave could gain freedom by running inside the ruler’s palace.

you AGAIN make no sense. At no point did I suggest that the AZTECS did not engage in slavery. Slavery has existed now and then in various forms thruout
the world------in CHRISTIAN NORTH AND SOUTH AMERICA-----slavery was----in general of the most brutal CHATTEL TYPE------a left over from the ROMAN
EMPIRE------the first, second reichs. The slavery in Merry old England-----
was a child of the roman empire form too------and ----also various forms \of INDENTURED slavery (not dependent on race)

Agreed. If only Jesus was a ethical, as caring, as compassionate as Scientific Humanism, then he would have taken a mere 15 seconds out of his life of teaching ethics and said "write this down - end slavery w/in the next 30 years". But, alas, Jesus can't live up to the ethical/loving/caring standards of Scientific Humanism, so because of that MILLIONS more people had to suffer from barbarity than if he was caring enough to utter those few words. Jesus, you screwed up, dude.

I do not recall Jesus mentioning slavery at all. ------so you claim that ANY
person for the past ten thousand years who did not mention slavery as an
evil has been an unethical bastard?

He was a self-righteous self-proclaimed moral teacher for all time, basically. The main book about him approves of slavery. I'd have taken 15 seconds out of my life to say "end slavery w/in the next 30 years". Would you have? If not, then you might want to love humanity as much as I do.

You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show.

Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephesians 6:5 NLT)

Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT)

In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of beating slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong.

The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12:47-48 NLT)

neither Paul nor Luke ever met Jesus------I do not know who Timothy was-----.
There are no lines ATTRIBUTABLE to Jesus in which Jesus APPROVES
of slavery or disapproves. Of course if you BELIEVE that Jesus was "GOD"--
and his words constitute LAW------you got a problem with his incomplete
career. Your post is silly

 

[irosie91]

Your rejoinder, divine person----makes no sense at all. Slavery of black
persons in the USA was the result of the beliefs of the people of the USA----
who considered it a good idea and ----IN GENERAL---not a contradiction of
church doctrine. Was chattel slavery ever outlawed by DA CHURCH?

Are you saying the US invented slavery? Are you seriously claiming that if it wasn't for the Protestants fleeing Catholic Europe that slavery would never have existed in the Americas, much less the world? Wow. I'd really like to see you back that up.

Meanwhile, some light reading while you gather your facts:
Slavery in Ancient Aztec, Mayan and Inca
Slavery in Aztec society was in some ways more humane than in Western cultures. While some slaves were punished criminals or prisoners of war, others sold themselves or their children into slavery due to economic hardship. Slaves could free themselves by repaying their purchase price. They could marry and own property, and their children were born free.

An Aztec slave market (right) (Historia … de Nueva España). The slave has a wooden collar around his neck, which could indicate either ill treatment by the owner or bad behavior by the slave. A collared slave could gain freedom by running inside the ruler’s palace.

you AGAIN make no sense. At no point did I suggest that the AZTECS did not engage in slavery. Slavery has existed now and then in various forms thruout
the world------in CHRISTIAN NORTH AND SOUTH AMERICA-----slavery was----in general of the most brutal CHATTEL TYPE------a left over from the ROMAN
EMPIRE------the first, second reichs. The slavery in Merry old England-----
was a child of the roman empire form too------and ----also various forms \of INDENTURED slavery (not dependent on race)

Agreed. If only Jesus was a ethical, as caring, as compassionate as Scientific Humanism, then he would have taken a mere 15 seconds out of his life of teaching ethics and said "write this down - end slavery w/in the next 30 years". But, alas, Jesus can't live up to the ethical/loving/caring standards of Scientific Humanism, so because of that MILLIONS more people had to suffer from barbarity than if he was caring enough to utter those few words. Jesus, you screwed up, dude.

I do not recall Jesus mentioning slavery at all. ------so you claim that ANY
person for the past ten thousand years who did not mention slavery as an
evil has been an unethical bastard?

Just the ones that claim to be the all-knowing "son of god".

it is not clear to me that Jesus claimed to be the "SON" of the all knowing
"GOD" or even had enough TIME whilst living to express all of his notions

 

[Divine Wind]

Wrong. WITHIN those 6 are many many subdivisions - they can't agree on SHIT, that's because it's not really from an all-knowing magic invisible man who lives in the sky.

Logical fallacy. Nice try, kid. When you get past Philosophy 101 in college, maybe you'll be able to have a logical discussion with adults. Here, let me help you get started: Thou shalt not commit logical fallacies

 

[Divine Wind]

So, you're not a Christian who believes in love thy neighbor and turning the other cheek, so what are you? Someone who wears Christianity as a mask to justify hurting others?

You're making assumptions. Love the sinner, hate the sin.

Then why do you hate both?

Typical, you are clueless to what you are talking about.

On the contrary, the fact you are so defensive and cannot back up your opinions with fact proves which of us is the fucking clueless idiot.

Can we also agree that because JESUS "cannot back up [his] opinions with fact" (i.e. he in 2000 years has never been able to produce a court-room level of evidence to his divinity - we just have unverified stories passed down verbally!) that JESUS is "the fucking clueless idiot", as well?

Ummmm, Jesus died about 2000 years ago. He's not saying anything. However, people like you continue to speak for him, regardless of how logical or illogical those words may be.

 

[Divine Wind]

it is not clear to me that Jesus claimed to be the "SON" of the all knowing
"GOD" or even had enough TIME whilst living to express all of his notions

Another fallacy. Brits talk about what King Arthur said or did. Was Arthur completely fabricated or was he a real person with others commenting on his legacy, rightly or wrongly?

 

[Divine Wind]

Are you saying the US invented slavery? Are you seriously claiming that if it wasn't for the Protestants fleeing Catholic Europe that slavery would never have existed in the Americas, much less the world? Wow. I'd really like to see you back that up.

Meanwhile, some light reading while you gather your facts:
Slavery in Ancient Aztec, Mayan and Inca
Slavery in Aztec society was in some ways more humane than in Western cultures. While some slaves were punished criminals or prisoners of war, others sold themselves or their children into slavery due to economic hardship. Slaves could free themselves by repaying their purchase price. They could marry and own property, and their children were born free.

An Aztec slave market (right) (Historia … de Nueva España). The slave has a wooden collar around his neck, which could indicate either ill treatment by the owner or bad behavior by the slave. A collared slave could gain freedom by running inside the ruler’s palace.

you AGAIN make no sense. At no point did I suggest that the AZTECS did not engage in slavery. Slavery has existed now and then in various forms thruout
the world------in CHRISTIAN NORTH AND SOUTH AMERICA-----slavery was----in general of the most brutal CHATTEL TYPE------a left over from the ROMAN
EMPIRE------the first, second reichs. The slavery in Merry old England-----
was a child of the roman empire form too------and ----also various forms \of INDENTURED slavery (not dependent on race)

Agreed. If only Jesus was a ethical, as caring, as compassionate as Scientific Humanism, then he would have taken a mere 15 seconds out of his life of teaching ethics and said "write this down - end slavery w/in the next 30 years". But, alas, Jesus can't live up to the ethical/loving/caring standards of Scientific Humanism, so because of that MILLIONS more people had to suffer from barbarity than if he was caring enough to utter those few words. Jesus, you screwed up, dude.

I do not recall Jesus mentioning slavery at all. ------so you claim that ANY
person for the past ten thousand years who did not mention slavery as an
evil has been an unethical bastard?

He was a self-righteous self-proclaimed moral teacher for all time, basically. The main book about him approves of slavery. I'd have taken 15 seconds out of my life to say "end slavery w/in the next 30 years". Would you have? If not, then you might want to love humanity as much as I do.

You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show.

Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephesians 6:5 NLT)

Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT)

In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of beating slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong.

The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12:47-48 NLT)

neither Paul nor Luke ever met Jesus------I do not know who Timothy was-----.
There are no lines ATTRIBUTABLE to Jesus in which Jesus APPROVES
of slavery or disapproves. Of course if you BELIEVE that Jesus was "GOD"--
and his words constitute LAW------you got a problem with his incomplete
career. Your post is silly

Yes, Joy4Uall is silly, but he's also a young atheist, not a theist. He's not proselytizing, he's disputing belief in anything beyond the physical.

 

[Divine Wind]

So if, say, my religion (just say), taught that being straight is wrong (our "prophet" tells us that), and that being gay is the only correct way

I think people would smell a rat, unless they were nihilistic in the extreme.

In other words they would NOT abide by that religious ruling....just like gays should NOT be expected to follow the religious ruling of Christianity (that gay sex is wrong.)

Jesus gave only two commandments. Neither of which was being anti-gay. Are you gay, Joy4Uall ?

 

[ScienceRocks]

No,

I'd completely accept them and respect their choice. If they came out as transgender I'd do the same.

Fuck religious fascism!

 

[irosie91]

So if, say, my religion (just say), taught that being straight is wrong (our "prophet" tells us that), and that being gay is the only correct way

I think people would smell a rat, unless they were nihilistic in the extreme.

In other words they would NOT abide by that religious ruling....just like gays should NOT be expected to follow the religious ruling of Christianity (that gay sex is wrong.)

Jesus gave only two commandments. Neither of which was being anti-gay. Are you gay, Joy4Uall ?

what two commandments did Jesus invent?

 

[Divine Wind]

So if, say, my religion (just say), taught that being straight is wrong (our "prophet" tells us that), and that being gay is the only correct way

I think people would smell a rat, unless they were nihilistic in the extreme.

In other words they would NOT abide by that religious ruling....just like gays should NOT be expected to follow the religious ruling of Christianity (that gay sex is wrong.)

Jesus gave only two commandments. Neither of which was being anti-gay. Are you gay, Joy4Uall ?

what two commandments did Jesus invent?

Love God and love your neighbour.