• Hi all. We have had reports of member's signatures being edited to include malicious content. You can rest assured this wasn't done by staff and we can find no indication that the forums themselves have been compromised.

    However, remember to keep your passwords secure. If you use similar logins on multiple sites, people and even bots may be able to access your account.

    We always recommend using unique passwords and enable two-factor authentication if possible. Make sure you are secure.
  • Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
  • If you're still waiting for the e-mail, be sure to check your junk/spam e-mail folders

Homosexuality & Politics in the 21st Century

LDSman

Well-Known Member
I provided a link the document which defines proves statutory rape is a crime in Louisiana, and you refuse to provide any that provides an exception, and until you do, I will not provide another link.
Bull. I posted a link the last time you brought up this stupid argument.


http://new.dhh.louisiana.gov/assets.../REQUIREMENTSFOROBTAININGAMARRIAGELICENSE.pdf
Marriage under the age of eighteen (18) is prohibited by law, except as follows: Applicants over the age of sixteen (16) but less than eighteen (18) must have the signed consent of both parents, or an order from a Judge of Juvenile Court.


And that does not change the fact that his show's ratings took a nosedive, despite predictions of a higher ones on the season opener.

And yet it's still the highest rated cable tv show.

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/tag/duck-dynasty-ratings/
 

Steampunk

One Truth Prevails
"If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."

- Leviticus 20:13

That one-sentence phrase from an Old Testament book which nobody ever reads or quotes from otherwise in modern times is the reason the fundamentalist people claim they oppose it "out of religion".
See my post to Silver, who responded in basically the same way you did:
2 things:

1) I said modern day Christians. Many times on this site, I have gone through how we are no longer under the Mosaic law.
2) Does this scripture say that the Homosexual desires are wrong? No, it doesn't. I said show me a scripture that says that Gays should be killed, as in "Someone who has a sexual attraction to the same gender".

Ad if God claims to be forgiving he can't be a hypocrite and not forgive certain people.
Well, yes. But he gives the forgiveness to those who realize what they're doing is wrong and change it. He wouldn't forgive someone who just keeps doing what is wrong without any regard to other people.

Plus if God didn't want us doing or thinking certain things he could easily wipe us out. But he hasn't, so things must be fine.
Not to get off topic, but there are several passages that suggest that he may do this very thing sometime soon.
 

Maedar

Banned
In that case, Spock, there is absolutely nothing that says so.

Which means, without that one line from Leviticus, there is nothing in the Bible AT ALL that says homosexuality is sinful, evil, or wrong in any way, which means that there is absolutely no grounds for a Christian to use religion as an excuse for opposing it.

In other words, thanks for helping prove my point.


LDS, that is not a link to a lawbook, that is a link to a community flier.
 

Steampunk

One Truth Prevails
In that case, Spock, there is absolutely nothing that says so.

Which means, without that one line from Leviticus, there is nothing in the Bible AT ALL that says homosexuality is sinful, evil, or wrong in any way, which means that there is absolutely no grounds for a Christian to use religion as an excuse for opposing it.

In other words, thanks for helping prove my point.
Silver had a similar response, to which I replied:
Let me expand on one or two things here:
The Bible clearly does not approve of Homosexual acts. And although Jesus never mentioned it, it is mentioned in the NT.
The Bible clearly does not condemn Homosexual Desires/Feelings, to the contrary, there is actually a passage that seems to acknowledge, that you can have Homosexual desires/feelings, and still be acceptable to god. [1 Corinthians 6: 9-11]
The Bible, never mentions the subject of Homosexual marriage. But seeing as Homosexual acts, are clearly not condoned, then the answer to that is more inferred. Now, technically, one could argue that Homosexuals could be married, and if they do not have sex, then that would be acceptable. But there are arguments to that as well.
I feel like I'm repeating myself.

(Side note: Just call me Ansem if you want, I'm used to being called that anyways.)
 

Maedar

Banned
Where other than Leviticus does it say this?

Because I look up all claims made by Conservatives on the internet to check them. They don't realize how easy that is.

Just quote the passage.
 

I Pink Elephant

Shiny Hunter
Oh, didn't realize there was a thread tackling this subject.

Well, as a bisexual atheist you can probably guess where I stand on the subject. I fully support gay marriage and adoption, even if I don't actually believe in the idea of marriage myself (I don't believe that you need a ceremony or piece of paper to have a committed and loving relationship, and I believe that even in this day and age, there are still people out to shame unmarried couples, as well as single parents and the like). If a church doesn't want to perform a gay wedding then, while I think it is a shame given how these people simply wish to sanctify their union with God, that's fine. But there are churches and faiths who do support gay marriage, and I don't see why they should be denied. I don't believe that anyone, be they government or religion, should have any say in how consenting adults marry or consummate their relationship.

I hope that soon every state in the US will be free to perform same-sex marriages. Thankfully it seems like the wind is in the right direction when it comes to equality, but things can change. I mean, look at whats happening in Russia. And some of the opinions that spew forth form the extreme ends of the Republican party genuinely frighten me as a human.

Oh, and while this is not a thread about religion, I do feel I should say that I have no problems with religion despite being an atheist. I believe in equality for all, and people should have the right to believe whatever religion they want. I just don't think the right to a religion forebodes such opinions from criticism or scrutiny, nor do I believe that such opinions should be pushed on others, or used to treat people differently.

I may live in England but I know a bit of what's going on in America. Recently gay marriage was legalised, you may be surprised that it was our right wing party the Conservatives.

Oh, fellow Brit here! I still can't believe Cameron pulled that off. The one respectable thing he has managed to do in his time as PM.
 

Steampunk

One Truth Prevails
Romans 1:26,27
That is why God gave them over to uncontrolled sexual passion, for their females changed the natural use of themselves into one contrary to nature; 27 likewise also the males left the natural use of the female and became violently inflamed in their lust toward one another, males with males, working what is obscene and receiving in themselves the full penalty, which was due for their error.

1 Timothy 1:9, 10
recognizing that law is made, not for a righteous man, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, ungodly and sinners, disloyal and profane, murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, manslayers, 10 sexually immoral people, men who practice homosexuality, kidnappers, liars, perjurers, and everything else that is in opposition to the wholesome teaching

1 Corinthians 6:9-11
Or do you not know that unrighteous people will not inherit God’s Kingdom? Do not be misled. Those who are sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, men who submit to homosexual acts, men who practice homosexuality, 10 thieves, greedy people, drunkards, revilers, and extortioners will not inherit God’s Kingdom. 11 And yet that is what some of you were. But you have been washed clean; you have been sanctified; you have been declared righteous in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and with the spirit of our God.

In this passage, it says men who once practiced homosexuality, but then stopped are acceptable to god, and note that it says nothing about the desire. The desire could still fully be there, and they would still be acceptable.
 

Maedar

Banned
Here's the King James version of each of those passages:



"For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

"And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet."

Romans 1:26


"Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,

"For wh0remongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine."

- 1 Timothy 1:9, 10


"Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

"Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

"And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God."

Corinthians 6:9-11


I have no idea who translated your version, but he must think that homosexuality is the only type of perversion there is, because he clearly thinks that ALL sex crimes involve gays. All three passages are a condemnation against sexual crimes in general.
 
Last edited:

Steampunk

One Truth Prevails
Okay, first let me say, that I do not see hardly any difference between the 2 different translations, do you care to point out what you are referring to?
The translation I provided, mentioned specifically(Other than Homosexuality):
"sexually immoral people"
"Those who are sexually immoral"
"adulterers"

Second, as someone who uses many Bible translations, I have found that King James is one of the most easily twisted to the wills of the user.
 

Maedar

Banned
Second, as someone who uses many Bible translations, I have found that King James is one of the most easily twisted to the wills of the user.

True. Your translator twisted them into anti-gay propaganda.

Want me to find another version that's just as old? Like I said, Ansem, you make a claim, I can Google it to check it myself.
 

Steampunk

One Truth Prevails
True. Your translator twisted them into anti-gay propaganda.
Find me a translation that makes it extremely clear that those verses do not condemn Homosexual acts.

Those verses condemn several sexual acts, which include, but are not limited to: Homosexuality, Adultery, Rape, Incest.
The translation I used, simply didn't sugarcoat the fact that Homosexual acts are not condoned.
Want me to find another version that's just as old?
Fine, but I have my own criteria when judging a Bible translation.
It must use the Tetragrammaton (יהוה, YHWH, Yahweh, Jehovah), where it was in the original text, if it cannot be trusted in a simple matter such as that, it cannot be in other areas.

I have a few other criteria, but that's the biggest one for me.
 

Maedar

Banned
Find me a translation that makes it extremely clear that those verses do not condemn Homosexual acts.

Show me one that

Those verses condemn several sexual acts, which include, but are not limited to: Homosexuality, Adultery, Rape, Incest.
The translation I used, simply didn't sugarcoat the fact that Homosexual acts are not condoned.

What translation are you using?

I'm sorry, Ansem, but I have never seen a version of the Bible which contains the word "homosexual" that is considered legit any more than the one that says Adam and Eve wore breeches made of fig leaves. That is a modern word.

Fine, but I have my own criteria when judging a Bible translation.
It must use the Tetragrammaton (יהוה, YHWH, Yahweh, Jehovah), where it was in the original text, if it cannot be trusted in a simple matter such as that, it cannot be in other areas.

You proved my point again. That is not the Christian criteria (being ancient Jewish script), which means it does NOT prove that the Bible means modern Christians can use it as an excuse to condemn homosexuality.
 
Last edited:

Steampunk

One Truth Prevails
What translation are you using?

I'm sorry, Ansem, but I have never seen a version of the Bible which contains the word "homosexual" that is considered legit any more than the one that says Adam and Eve wore breeches made of fig leaves. That is a modern word.
The 2013 Revision of the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures.
In the 1984 Edition, the passage at 1 Corinthians 1:9-11 reads like this:
What! Do YOU not know that unrighteous persons will not inherit God’s kingdom? Do not be misled. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men, 10 nor thieves, nor greedy persons, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit God’s kingdom. 11 And yet that is what some of YOU were. But YOU have been washed clean, but YOU have been sanctified, but YOU have been declared righteous in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ and with the spirit of our God.

What is another way to say "Men who lie with men"?(lying, meaning intercourse), in our modern language? Homosexual acts. That is the whole purpose of the 2013 Revision of The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, is translating the Bible in modern English, that can be understood by anyone.

You proved my point again. That is not the Christian criteria (being ancient Jewish script), which means it does NOT prove that the Bible means modern Christians can use it as an excuse to condemn homosexuality.
Huh? Gods name was common among the Jews, and then the Jews developed an unscriptural superstition that Gods name should not be spoken, but there is nothing in the Bible that backs that superstition up, and Gods servants in the Bible never held back from using gods name.
 

PinkiePieFox

Team Flare Grunt
And same here pink elephant! I was learning today in Government and Politics about how David Cameron was able to do it, mostly was a huge influx of demand for it on the internet and pressure groups so he thought 'Why not?' and passed it through. I'm surprised the rest of his party and the house of lords actually went through with it! Maybe they aren't hopeless after all. Well, they've still made plenty of mistakes and continue to do so... sigh.

Also I have a baptist friend who's verdict on gay marriage was 'hate the sin and not the sinner' I actually thought was kinda mean. Now I may come across a bit crude but I'll try to make it not so in what I am about to say. I see little difference in the sexual activities that straight couples can get up to then couples of the same sex. I think it's time everyone grew up on the matter, it is not happening in the streets (I'd hate to see straight people getting up to the same things in the streets) and doesn't harm anyone. But of course, if people find it repulsive then it is up to them, but they shouldn't make people stop just because they find it gross. I find people cracking their fingers and knuckles completely gut wrenching but I wouldn't tie their hands together behind their back. But that's just me.

In Greek times it was actually encouraged, because it would mean men would have a better bond with each other in battle and would fight harder to protect each other. So it's not like it is a new weird thing, animals can do things humans do too. It's perfectly natural despite what people say. I also would encourage gay couples because they're more likely to adopt a child who needs a loving home then a straight couple. Also the church's priest can deny to marry any couple, if gay marriage is legalised everywhere then the odd priest who doesn't feel comfortable marrying a gay couple isn't going to be such a huge problem, people may get offended but there are plenty of other priests who are more then happy to marry a gay couple. Priests and bishops also have to keep their homosexuality or bisexuality a secret, which I find personally wrong. They should have freedom as much as everyone else.
Because I personally believe in equal opportunity too. (tee hee I write a lot)
 

Maedar

Banned
A Bible translated in 2013?

As in, right when the whole gay marriage debate started, huh?

Honestly, Ansem, read the writing on the walls...
 

Maedar

Banned
Spock, this is ridiculous, for all you know, this translation could have been made by some Jim Bakker wannabe. You won't even post a link to it.
 

Maedar

Banned
A work by a Jehovah’s Witness author who refuses to credit himself?

Yup, sure. Seems authentic.

(Sarcasm there.)
 

Peter Quill

star-lord
How about you guys get off the whole religion tangent and actually do something relevant to homosexuality thanks
 
Top