Is It Wrong to Think Homosexuality is a Sin?

[ChrisL]

I think that most people, gay or straight, don't really feel a need to march around with a flag and making announcements. At least that's what I would hope. Otherwise, I would have to think it is nothing more than an "attention" issue. Why does anyone have to know or approve?

 

[Bonzi]

I would think that adultery would be considered a bigger sin. After all, you made a commitment and an oath before your god with a "man of God" witnessing your oath to be faithful to your wife or husband. So you actually made a promise to God that you broke.

I don't personally disagree
The Christian folk done in on scripture on Homosexuality because they say it is an "abomination", but, either way, God abhors sins of all kinds

 

[Dragonlady]

I would think that adultery would be considered a bigger sin. After all, you made a commitment and an oath before your god with a "man of God" witnessing your oath to be faithful to your wife or husband. So you actually made a promise to God that you broke.

Not to mention that adultery is listed in the 10 Commandments and homosexuality isn't even mentioned.

My objection to the bakers claiming they wouldn't bake a wedding cake for gays on religious grounds was that they didn't discriminate against adulterers or other sinners, only homosexuals.

If you're claiming religious freedom in discriminating against gays, you'd better be refusing to bake cakes for adulterers, liars, murderers, and blasphemers as well. Anyone who commits a sin which violates the 10 Commandments. Otherwise, you're just a homophobic bigot.

 

[ChrisL]

I would think that adultery would be considered a bigger sin. After all, you made a commitment and an oath before your god with a "man of God" witnessing your oath to be faithful to your wife or husband. So you actually made a promise to God that you broke.

I don't personally disagree
The Christian folk done in on scripture on Homosexuality because they say it is an "abomination", but, either way, God abhors sins of all kinds

Well, I don't think it is included in the Ten Commandments, which I would think are the THE most important Christian laws. Violating any of those would be more of an abomination since the message is quite clear, no?

 

[Bonzi]

What do you think?

If you believe you have a right to believe this, and you are offended, is it OK to voice this?

No. It is not "wrong" to believe that. But it is wrong to use that as an excuse to harm them in any way.

Any Christian that believes we should intentionally harm anyone for Christian sexual sins are exactly like those that wanted to stone the prostitute. If they read the Bible at all, they know it's wrong.

Yes indeed. The problem is progressives feel they have the right to regulate how a person thinks. Which is wrong. You regulate what a person does, not how they think.

I think part of the problem too is that it is felt if it's legal we need to personally be ok with it....this goes for any law .... Just as it's frustrating for Christians that others don't feel as they do, because in their mind, if we all felt and believed as they do it would be a better world, well, Progressives feel the same way...

 

[Bonzi]

I would think that adultery would be considered a bigger sin. After all, you made a commitment and an oath before your god with a "man of God" witnessing your oath to be faithful to your wife or husband. So you actually made a promise to God that you broke.

I don't personally disagree
The Christian folk done in on scripture on Homosexuality because they say it is an "abomination", but, either way, God abhors sins of all kinds

Well, I don't think it is included in the Ten Commandments, which I would think are the THE most important Christian laws. Violating any of those would be more of an abomination since the message is quite clear, no?

Many Christians, unfortunately, are notorious for picking and choosing what biblical passages suit their lifestyle and agenda best.....

 

[ChrisL]

There are things that are legal that plenty of people accept as a necessary evil in our society, like abortion, the death penalty, etc. I don't see how two people who find love (whether that be with another of their same sex or the opposite sex) is considered bad or sinful. What is more important is how do they treat one another? Did they take their oaths seriously?

 

[Votto]

Homosexuality has existed in every culture and throughout history. It has also been observed in animal species. This would indicate that it is not "deviant" behaviour at all, but rather normal behaviour for a small percentage of the population.

The idea that homosexuality is destructive to society is a falsehood. It has no effect on straight people at all.

In Sparta, homosexuality was practiced by pretty much everyone.

In modern society, it is down to around 10%.

It would then indicate that it is culturally influenced in large part.

 

[Votto]

There are things that are legal that plenty of people accept as a necessary evil in our society, like abortion, the death penalty, etc. I don't see how two people who find love (whether that be with another of their same sex or the opposite sex) is considered bad or sinful. What is more important is how do they treat one another? Did they take their oaths seriously?

Who cares if they took their oaths seriously? Since when did someone make you the monogamy police?

Lots of people like to swing or are into polygamy.

So tell us, do you think polygamists are "yucky"? Should the state continue to discriminate against them by not letting them marry?

 

[ChrisL]

There are things that are legal that plenty of people accept as a necessary evil in our society, like abortion, the death penalty, etc. I don't see how two people who find love (whether that be with another of their same sex or the opposite sex) is considered bad or sinful. What is more important is how do they treat one another? Did they take their oaths seriously?

Who cares if they took their oaths seriously? Since when did someone make you the monogamy police?

Lots of people like to swing or are into polygamy.

So tell us, do you think polygamists are "yucky"? Should the state continue to discriminate against them by not letting them marry?

I'm talking about what a god would care about. Why would a god care about which sex you marry as long as you make each other happy?

Not to mention, keeping your oath that you made to him.

 

[Votto]

There are things that are legal that plenty of people accept as a necessary evil in our society, like abortion, the death penalty, etc. I don't see how two people who find love (whether that be with another of their same sex or the opposite sex) is considered bad or sinful. What is more important is how do they treat one another? Did they take their oaths seriously?

Who cares if they took their oaths seriously? Since when did someone make you the monogamy police?

Lots of people like to swing or are into polygamy.

So tell us, do you think polygamists are "yucky"? Should the state continue to discriminate against them by not letting them marry?

I'm talking about what a god would care about. Why would a god care about which sex you marry as long as you make each other happy?

Not to mention, keeping your oath that you made to him.

Why would God care so long as people are "happy" and treat each other well?

In fact, why not just marry your dog assuming both you and your dog ae "happy" and treat each other well?

 

[ChrisL]

There are things that are legal that plenty of people accept as a necessary evil in our society, like abortion, the death penalty, etc. I don't see how two people who find love (whether that be with another of their same sex or the opposite sex) is considered bad or sinful. What is more important is how do they treat one another? Did they take their oaths seriously?

Who cares if they took their oaths seriously? Since when did someone make you the monogamy police?

Lots of people like to swing or are into polygamy.

So tell us, do you think polygamists are "yucky"? Should the state continue to discriminate against them by not letting them marry?

I'm talking about what a god would care about. Why would a god care about which sex you marry as long as you make each other happy?

Not to mention, keeping your oath that you made to him.

Why would God care so long as people are "happy" and treat each other well?

In fact, why not just marry your dog assuming both you and your dog ae "happy" and treat each other well?

Because dogs can't consent to marrying. Duh. Dogs aren't people, stupid.

 

[BreezeWood]

.
christians have been crucifying the free spirited throughout history using their book as a pretext for violence this thread is an example for those type of individuals.

Who?

.

If believing the Bible is childish, sure. I think any non believer would feel this way, yet we do have freedom of religion and I would hope living harmoniously as possible in spite of conflicting beliefs would be the goal, even if living harmoniously means as little interaction with those who beliefs anger you

your type, those in this thread that defend the 4th century christian bible ...

until the crucifiers are brought to Justice the 1st century will never be realized part of that will be the thorough cleansing of the 4th century book that has had periods of revisions but lacks the necessary effort for its dismissal as heresy in regards to its purpose and idolatry.

 

[Votto]

There are things that are legal that plenty of people accept as a necessary evil in our society, like abortion, the death penalty, etc. I don't see how two people who find love (whether that be with another of their same sex or the opposite sex) is considered bad or sinful. What is more important is how do they treat one another? Did they take their oaths seriously?

Who cares if they took their oaths seriously? Since when did someone make you the monogamy police?

Lots of people like to swing or are into polygamy.

So tell us, do you think polygamists are "yucky"? Should the state continue to discriminate against them by not letting them marry?

I'm talking about what a god would care about. Why would a god care about which sex you marry as long as you make each other happy?

Not to mention, keeping your oath that you made to him.

Why would God care so long as people are "happy" and treat each other well?

In fact, why not just marry your dog assuming both you and your dog ae "happy" and treat each other well?

Because dogs can't consent to marrying. Duh. Dogs aren't people, stupid.

Do animals consent to being locked away in zoos or killed and eaten?

You're telling me they need a consent to have sex? Really?

What about the dog that humps your leg?

And you call me stupid?

 

[Dragonlady]

There are things that are legal that plenty of people accept as a necessary evil in our society, like abortion, the death penalty, etc. I don't see how two people who find love (whether that be with another of their same sex or the opposite sex) is considered bad or sinful. What is more important is how do they treat one another? Did they take their oaths seriously?

Who cares if they took their oaths seriously? Since when did someone make you the monogamy police?

Lots of people like to swing or are into polygamy.

So tell us, do you think polygamists are "yucky"? Should the state continue to discriminate against them by not letting them marry?

Yes and yes.

 

[Dragonlady]

There are things that are legal that plenty of people accept as a necessary evil in our society, like abortion, the death penalty, etc. I don't see how two people who find love (whether that be with another of their same sex or the opposite sex) is considered bad or sinful. What is more important is how do they treat one another? Did they take their oaths seriously?

Who cares if they took their oaths seriously? Since when did someone make you the monogamy police?

Lots of people like to swing or are into polygamy.

So tell us, do you think polygamists are "yucky"? Should the state continue to discriminate against them by not letting them marry?

I'm talking about what a god would care about. Why would a god care about which sex you marry as long as you make each other happy?

Not to mention, keeping your oath that you made to him.

Why would God care so long as people are "happy" and treat each other well?

In fact, why not just marry your dog assuming both you and your dog ae "happy" and treat each other well?

Because dogs can't consent to marrying. Duh. Dogs aren't people, stupid.

Do animals consent to being locked away in zoos or killed and eaten?

You're telling me they need a consent to have sex? Really?

What about the dog that humps your leg?

And you call me stupid?

 

[Votto]

There are things that are legal that plenty of people accept as a necessary evil in our society, like abortion, the death penalty, etc. I don't see how two people who find love (whether that be with another of their same sex or the opposite sex) is considered bad or sinful. What is more important is how do they treat one another? Did they take their oaths seriously?

Who cares if they took their oaths seriously? Since when did someone make you the monogamy police?

Lots of people like to swing or are into polygamy.

So tell us, do you think polygamists are "yucky"? Should the state continue to discriminate against them by not letting them marry?

Yes and yes.

What place is it of yours in a secular utopia to say that someone's sex choices are "yucky"?

Are you a polygophobe?

 

[GreenBean]

Is it wrong to think that hating people for whom they choose to love is a sin?

Again, the left is bringing up the word hate. Love who you want, I don't care, however I don't need to approve of the behavior, and I can be tolerant at the same time.

I'm not sure why those on the left can't understand that concept.

I think hate is the correct term. Extreme hate

Hate to the point you don't want them in the military, don't want them teaching your kids, don't want them adopting kids, don't want them to be able to marry

Re; 1.] ...."you don't want them in the military" Not true , they'd make great fodder for the machine guns.

2.] "don't want them teaching your kids," Teachers should be someone to look up to ... a closeted fag or dike would be just fine as a teacher but the minute they come out of the closet - see ya !


3. ] "don't want them adopting kids' ... there's little reason Lesbians shouldn't be able to adopt, they are not the greatest role models but they are certainly better than an orphanage. So far as Gay men are concerned absolutely fkng no way should they ever be permitted to adopt children Gay males are the most prolific child molesters Humanity has ever produced.


4.] "don't want them to be able to marry" .... don't really give a rats ass if they wallow in their own cum infested diseased degeneracy alone or together ..


5.] You seem to be confused or are trying to confuse others ... aren't you the same guy who used to be Norton the sewer guy and then Mugs mahoney ???

Thanks for proving my point about who the real sinners are

Still can't come up with a decent comeback - I would have thought you honed your skills but alas you'll always be a dumbass

 

[GreenBean]

Being gay is fine. I mean, really, who cares? It doesnt effect anyone except for that person and who he/she chooses to be with
You can think of it in any way you want. Being wrong or "sinful" is completely subjective.
Voice it if you want!

Gay men in the US account for under 10% of the population, yet they account for well over half off all AIDS and STD cases in the US. This is a fact supported by the CDC.

However, even though the economic costs to society Dims will never see this as a reason to not encourage such behavior as "normal" and "good"..

Christian Conservatives passed laws to imprison gays long before there was AIDs and when the deadly STD of the day was syphillis- which was rampant among straight men.

And of course, you and your fellow travellers would just as happily imprison lesbians- regardless of their levels of AIDs and STDS.

And your point is?

Why did you leave out the Salem witch trials and Crusades?

WTH is wrong with you?

Jesus never advocated about locking anyone up, neither did he condemn anyone except the religious leaders of his day. Neither did he advocate for government to save us all.

As for the Catholic church...............well.

Quit Whimpering or You Will Go Out With a Bang

The Crusades set back Islamic World Conquest 500 years. By the time the jihadis got to the gates of Vienna in 1683, they were corrupt and had lost their religious commitment. They dawdled for weeks; their last chance to save the jihad came on SEPTEMBER ELEVENTH of that year.

Why do you Dhimmis take it for granted that everybody thinks the Crusaders were evildoers? Eisenhower titled his World War II book "Crusade in Europe." Under a language polluted by New Age sewage, that would imply he fought for the Nazis.

Of course the Crusaders weren't 'evildoers' when they sacked the Christian city of Constantinople- setting up the eventual fall of Constantinople to Islam.

They were just good Christians doing God's work.

That was the Liberal faction ....

 

[Syriusly]

Gay men in the US account for under 10% of the population, yet they account for well over half off all AIDS and STD cases in the US. This is a fact supported by the CDC.

However, even though the economic costs to society Dims will never see this as a reason to not encourage such behavior as "normal" and "good"..

Christian Conservatives passed laws to imprison gays long before there was AIDs and when the deadly STD of the day was syphillis- which was rampant among straight men.

And of course, you and your fellow travellers would just as happily imprison lesbians- regardless of their levels of AIDs and STDS.

And your point is?

Why did you leave out the Salem witch trials and Crusades?

WTH is wrong with you?

Jesus never advocated about locking anyone up, neither did he condemn anyone except the religious leaders of his day. Neither did he advocate for government to save us all.

As for the Catholic church...............well.

Quit Whimpering or You Will Go Out With a Bang

The Crusades set back Islamic World Conquest 500 years. By the time the jihadis got to the gates of Vienna in 1683, they were corrupt and had lost their religious commitment. They dawdled for weeks; their last chance to save the jihad came on SEPTEMBER ELEVENTH of that year.

Why do you Dhimmis take it for granted that everybody thinks the Crusaders were evildoers? Eisenhower titled his World War II book "Crusade in Europe." Under a language polluted by New Age sewage, that would imply he fought for the Nazis.

Of course the Crusaders weren't 'evildoers' when they sacked the Christian city of Constantinople- setting up the eventual fall of Constantinople to Islam.

They were just good Christians doing God's work.

That was the Liberal faction ....

That was the Crusader faction.

Tragic story actually

The Crusaders looted, terrorized, and vandalized Constantinople for three days, during which many ancient and medieval Roman and Greek works were either stolen or destroyed. The famous bronze horses from the Hippodrome were sent back to adorn the façade of St Mark's Basilica in Venice, where they remain. As well as being stolen, works of immeasurable artistic value were destroyed merely for their material value. One of the most precious works to suffer such a fate was a large bronze statue of Hercules, created by the legendary Lysippos, court sculptor of Alexander the Great. Like so many other priceless artworks made of bronze, the statue was melted down for its content by the Crusaders. The great Library of Constantinople was destroyed as well.[9]

Despite their oaths and the threat of excommunication, the Crusaders systematically violated the city's holy sanctuaries, destroying or stealing all they could lay hands on; nothing was spared, not even the tombs of the emperors inside the St Apostles church.[10] The civilian population of Constantinople were subject to the Crusaders' ruthless lust for spoils and glory; thousands of them were killed in cold blood.[11] Women, including nuns, were raped by the Crusader army,[12] which also sacked churches, monasteries and convents.[11] The very altars of these churches were smashed and torn to pieces for their gold and marble by the warriors.[10]