Absolute Anime

Justice Corrigan noted her in dissenting opinion In Re Marriage Cases, the traditional understanding of marriage did not change under Loving.

And Leviticus 18:22--"Do not practice homosexuality; it is a detestable sin"

Athos wrote:Justice Corrigan noted her in dissenting opinion In Re Marriage Cases, the traditional understanding of marriage did not change under Loving.

And Leviticus 18:22--"Do not practice homosexuality; it is a detestable sin"

That's the great thing about the Bible. We can ignore it, because it's a disgusting, out-dated immoral, repulsive piece of [censored].

Athos wrote:Justice Corrigan noted her in dissenting opinion In Re Marriage Cases, the traditional understanding of marriage did not change under Loving.

Which is why I didn't assert any juridical parallels between the two, among other reasons. The analogy was superficial at best.

Athos wrote:And Leviticus 18:22--"Do not practice homosexuality; it is a detestable sin"

You have to understand that that chapter--actually, the whole Book of Leviticus--was a torah addressed to the Israelites who had only begun its settlement on the land of Canaan, written to ensure the survival of the tribe. The tribe of Levi was a close-knit, patriarchal community of priests, and relatives often lived within close proximity of each other, so it was considered spiritually and pragmatically dangerous to engage in sexual relations other than what's used for procreation (especially since the Canaanites were, in the eyes of the Levites, a perverse and sexually idolatrous group of peope, and they were specifically warned not to assimilate with them). It's the same reason why they wrote a series of laws (Leviticus 11:9-11) prohibiting the consumption of certain animals used in pagan worship. The scripture's historical context shows that it was incestual sodomy that was frowned upon, not homosexuality in general. In fact, the reference to 'homosexuality' was admitted anachronistic translation bias made by prejudiced translators.. there wasn't even a word for 'homosexuality' until ~the mid 19th century. The fact that homosexuality is only addressed three or four more times in the Bible (only once in the New Testament, none by Jesus) should be enough to validate this notion.

Allow me to clarify the comment Jamie made ealier.I have a preacher friend dude so I've heard this several thousand times.

The Bible doesn't necessarily say God frowns upon homosexuality, he frowns upon all sin.
But, to most churches, homosexuality is a major sin, that(and abortion) have corrupted most modern day churches. It's basically all they give a [censored] about now.

In the Bible, Jesus never once condemned homosexuality by itself, and he was the one that actually walked on Earth. Not God. So how do we know what "Gods" views on homosexuality are?

We don't.

I myself, am an Agnostic because of the fact most churches are basically corrupt. And as Locke said:

Raoul Duke wrote: That's the great thing about the Bible. We can ignore it, because it's a disgusting, out-dated immoral, repulsive piece of [censored].

Alright. Well now for my views.

Homosexuality should be tolerated completely. They're people, with needs. And they also have feelings.

What would happen if America was ran by gay people, and forbid straight marriage?

Love is love. People just need to drop it.

I think this issue was already covered, but.. why can't gays get married?
The only logical explination(sp?) I can think of, is because it's against the Bible.
What about freedom of religion? If people are Atheist (or something else, that allows gay marriage) Can they get married?

Seems like Christians have Gays by the nads. ]:

Previously under California law, before the ruling of the State Supreme Court in Marriage Cases you pretty much had 2 civil unions. You had marriage. Marriage (as defined by Proposition 22) is a civil union between a man and a woman. Then you had same sex couples who could enter into what was called as a domestic partnership or civil union (I forget which). Legally, there was no distinction. They had all the same rights as benefits and responsibilities as the other. Now, when Marriage Cases went to the Court a 4-3 decision stuck down Proposition 22. Perhaps it begs the question, "why not make them the same thing?" Well, a good majority of the People in California don't want it that way. Which leads to a point Justice Baxter made in his dissenting opinion--if they both have the same rights, benefits, and responsibilities, then how is there discrimination? Bad move for the Court to strike down Prop. 22 because of that, now there's a more aggressive law -- Prop 8. Arguments in re Prop 8 are on Dec. 10.

Nelly wrote: Seems like Christians have Gays by the nads. ]:

Rofl. The penultimate irony. Christian's are gay?

If I'm not mistaken, I believe there is a faction that are.

Raoul Duke wrote:

Nelly wrote: Seems like Christians have Gays by the nads. ]:

Rofl. The penultimate irony. Christian's are gay?

Sure seems like it.

Athos wrote:If I'm not mistaken, I believe there is a faction that are.

Of course. I am more interested in the anti-homosexual Christian's who have homosexuals by the balls. That's great stuff.

Raoul Duke wrote:

Athos wrote:If I'm not mistaken, I believe there is a faction that are.

Of course. I am more interested in the anti-homosexual Christian's who have homosexuals by the balls. That's great stuff.

Sarcasm or not, that made me laugh.

Mista Cola wrote:

Jamie Madrox wrote:because i know that in the bible it says that marraige should be between a man and woman and that god frowns on homosexuality

Nowhere in the Bible does it say that.

Of course it does! God sees homosexuality as an abomination!
Why do you think He destroyed Sodom & Gomorrah?

God commands Israel: "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination." (Lev 18:22)

"If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them." (Lev 20:13)

Paul says in the New Testament: "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God." (1 Cor 6:9)

God created man and woman to come together as one flesh, as a pair, physically and mentally. Not two men, and not two women. "Love" is not the matter at hand.

Our country was founded by Christians, and 54 out of 55 of the writers of the Constitution were Christians (the 55th was a Deist). You want to see something interesting? Do you know your state's constitution? In the Preamble of every state constitution, thanks is given to God.

I know we are in a dark time, where the fear of God does not exist. But there is one truth about the afterlife - heaven, hell, and God. And He is who He is, not who you want Him to be; that's why He gave us the gospel, so we could know Him. The only redeeming chance we have is to trust in Jesus and turn ourselves away from sin. Flame me all you want, be as stubborn as you want, make fun of me for sounding like some Bible-thumper, I don't care. Just get out the Bible and read it some time. Don't wait until you die to figure out that heaven and hell are real, and you're going to the wrong place.

Nelly wrote:
But, to most churches, homosexuality is a major sin, that(and abortion) have corrupted most modern day churches. It's basically all they give a [censored] about now.

In the Bible, Jesus never once condemned homosexuality by itself, and he was the one that actually walked on Earth. Not God. So how do we know what "Gods" views on homosexuality are?

We don't.

I myself, am an Agnostic because of the fact most churches are basically corrupt. And as Locke said:

Actually, my church is most concerned with the great commission. In a nutshell, that's evangelizing.

Jesus is God. He's the second person in the Holy Trinity, and even when He was here on earth, He was fully God and fully man. So we know exactly what the Lord's view on homosexuality is from the Bible. He's not some distant thing that can't be figured out, which is what most people want to believe so that they don't have to own up for their actions. But I like the rash logic that because He didn't walk around preaching, "homosexuals are wrong!" that clearly, He's cool with it, contrary to other passages in the Bible.

And you're confusing religion with relationship. Churches are man-made, and fallable. The key to salvation and transformation is a relationship with Jesus, not following the rules of religion. So turning away from God on the premise that "churches are basically corrupt" (which is not true anyway) is just another excuse to live life on your own terms, without having to be responsible for your actions.

Mista Cola wrote: You have to understand that that chapter--actually, the whole Book of Leviticus--was a torah addressed to the Israelites who had only begun its settlement on the land of Canaan, written to ensure the survival of the tribe. The tribe of Levi was a close-knit, patriarchal community of priests, and relatives often lived within close proximity of each other, so it was considered spiritually and pragmatically dangerous to engage in sexual relations other than what's used for procreation (especially since the Canaanites were, in the eyes of the Levites, a perverse and sexually idolatrous group of peope, and they were specifically warned not to assimilate with them). It's the same reason why they wrote a series of laws (Leviticus 11:9-11) prohibiting the consumption of certain animals used in pagan worship. The scripture's historical context shows that it was incestual sodomy that was frowned upon, not homosexuality in general. In fact, the reference to 'homosexuality' was admitted anachronistic translation bias made by prejudiced translators.. there wasn't even a word for 'homosexuality' until ~the mid 19th century. The fact that homosexuality is only addressed three or four more times in the Bible (only once in the New Testament, none by Jesus) should be enough to validate this notion.

Oh boy...

Is it even logical that God would create man and woman to be together, but only forbid the Israelites to pursue homosexuality during this specific time? Do you really see God saying, "You guys need to procreate right now, so don't have buttsecks with anyone in your family, but later on, go for it!"

The fact that the word 'homosexuality' didn't exist until the mid 19th century is part of your argument? Are you serious? So when the Bible talks about a "man lying down with a man", that doesn't mean GAY to you? Prejudiced translators? Good grief, I'd love to see proof on that. God is big enough to create the world, and He's big enough to preserve His word, even thoughout translations.

Typical conservative Christian claims.. Easily refuted.

Dreams wrote:Of course it does! God sees homosexuality as an abomination!
Why do you think He destroyed Sodom & Gomorrah?

Inhospitality and discourtesy to guests. Ezekiel 16:48-9 "As I live, says the Lord God, your sister Sodom and her daughters have not done as you and your daughters have done. This was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy." It's commonly agreed upon by numerous theologians (David Bartlett, Reuven Kimelman,..) that it wasn't necessarily homosexuality that caused the extermination of the Sodomites, it was sexual subjugation and disrespect to visitors.

Ever notice the enormous emphasis the Bible's authors put on hospitality? Great enough that a seemingly prudent man like Lot felt compelled to offer his virgin daughters to get gang-raped in place of two strangers? It largely stems from the fact that God's people were once refugees and exiles themselves. Appropriately, it became a sort of a de facto moral imperative for those who are well-off to provide support and protection to visitors--an institution that the inhabitants of these cities refused to observe.

You claim that punishing homosexuality is the central motif of this story. In Jeremiah 23:14, the sins of Jerusalem are compared to the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah: "But in the prophets of Jerusalem I have seen a more shocking thing: they commit adultery and walk in lies; they strengthen the hands of evildoers, so that no one turns from wickedness; all of them have become like Sodom to me, and its inhabitants like Gomorrah." Notice how homosexuality isn't even mentioned. Does it really make sense then, to make a comparison (In Ezekiel, I forgot which verse, an analogous equivalence between Jerusalem and S&G was denoted), when the whole foundation of one side is completely irrelevant to the other?

And how do you explain the lack of mention of homosexuality in any of the future allusions to Sodom in the Bible? (Romans 9:29, Isaiah 3:9, Luke 17:29, Peter 2:6, etc.)

Dreams wrote:God commands Israel: "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination." (Lev 18:22)

"If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them." (Lev 20:13)

Lol, "Abomination."

"And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of all the living creatures that are in the waters, they are an abomination unto you," - The Bible
Hahaha, let's stone everyone who eats lobster and catfish~ ;d

Or: "A woman shall not wear man's clothing, nor shall a man put on a woman's clothing; for whoever does these things is an abomination to the LORD your God." - Deuteronomy 22:5

"That you shall say, Your servants' trade has been about cattle from our youth even until now, both we, and also our fathers: that you may dwell in the land of Goshen; for every shepherd is an abomination to the Egyptians." - Genesis 46:34
See where I'm getting at?

What's funny is that a lot of these laws are Mosaic laws from the Old Testament, which you seem to venerate as an inerrant mandate for your ethical standings. My advice is to try to understand that the Bible is not inerrable. The people who wrote it did so as applicable to their historical backgrounds and cultures. Most of it wasn't meant to be taken literally.

Dreams wrote:Paul says in the New Testament: "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God." (1 Cor 6:9)

Do you realize that Paul was a human being capable of error? Many of his writings are widely considered pseudepigraphical (falsely credited to him). It's exemplified by how he seems so misogynistic in one scripture and egalitarian in the next: "...the women must keep silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak out, but must place themselves in submission, as the oral law also says." (1 Cor 14:34) as opposed to: "Indeed, all of you who were baptized into the Messiah have clothed yourselves with the Messiah. Because all of you are one in the Messiah Jesus, a person is no longer a Jew or a Greek, a slave or a free person, a male or a female" (Galatians 3:27-8).

So no. Paul is probably one of the least reliable sources in the Bible.

Dreams wrote:Our country was founded by Christians, and 54 out of 55 of the writers of the Constitution were Christians (the 55th was a Deist). You want to see something interesting? Do you know your state's constitution? In the Preamble of every state constitution, thanks is given to God.

What's your point?

Dreams wrote:I know we are in a dark time, where the fear of God does not exist. But there is one truth about the afterlife - heaven, hell, and God. And He is who He is, not who you want Him to be; that's why He gave us the gospel, so we could know Him. The only redeeming chance we have is to trust in Jesus and turn ourselves away from sin. Flame me all you want, be as stubborn as you want, make fun of me for sounding like some Bible-thumper, I don't care. Just get out the Bible and read it some time. Don't wait until you die to figure out that heaven and hell are real, and you're going to the wrong place.

I'm not here to flame or make fun of you. I'm actually a Christian who has read the Bible several times (and still do sometimes). I'm just confused as to why so-called Christians take this stance and inevitably fall into moral ambivalence. The only other reason (besides bigotry) I see why they would have such a skewed perspective is because they have a cursory, superficial understanding of God's Word.

Besides, on what other issue could you find Mormons criticizing the morality of other people's marriages?

Dreams wrote:Is it even logical that God would create man and woman to be together, but only forbid the Israelites to pursue homosexuality during this specific time? Do you really see God saying, "You guys need to procreate right now, so don't have buttsecks with anyone in your family, but later on, go for it!"

This has to be the most irrational argument against homosexuality I've heard so far. The logic behind God creating man and woman has nothing to do with a man having sex with another man. Do I even need to elaborate? -_-
As I said, Leviticus wasn't written to be applied to contemporary times. It was part of the "Holiness Code" of early post-exilic Israel that would be anachronistic if used in today's politics.

Dreams wrote:The fact that the word 'homosexuality' didn't exist until the mid 19th century is part of your argument? Are you serious? So when the Bible talks about a "man lying down with a man", that doesn't mean GAY to you? Prejudiced translators? Good grief, I'd love to see proof on that. God is big enough to create the world, and He's big enough to preserve His word, even thoughout translations.

There are less than ten references on homosexuality in the whole Bible.. about 4 out of 5 of which are either mistranslated or ambiguous. It's one of the reasons why it's subject to so much exegetical criticism.

Even if it was explicitly stated, you would just disregard the whole panoptic ethos of "love thy neighbor" because of a few verses here and there?

Mista Cola wrote: Most of it wasn't meant to be taken literally.

Paul is probably one of the least reliable sources in the Bible.

I'm actually a Christian who has read the Bible several times (and still do sometimes). I'm just confused as to why so-called Christians take this stance and inevitably fall into moral ambivalence. The only other reason (besides bigotry) I see why they would have such a skewed perspective is because they have a cursory, superficial understanding of God's Word.

I cannot argue with you on this any further - I know exactly where this is going, a battle of legalism to get us further away from the actual issue. You might think of yourself as a Christian, but you have proven you're not actually a follower of Jesus, and you have definitely proved you are not born again. Until you step past your intellectualism and actually find faith, like the Bible says, it will be impossible for you to please God. No amount of research is going to clearly reveal the Word to you, and until you actually accept Jesus's free gift of salvation, you will only have a "cursory, superficial understanding of God's word."

Unfortunetly, you have fallen into the trap of distorting the word of God (which is indeed infallable, as it was written by God through men, not by men alone - 2 Tim 3:16) into what you want it say, rather than accepting the truth as it is. But this thread alone is a perfect picture of the deception Satan has used in this nation to make everyone believe that tolerance at all costs is the proper attitude, even when it does clearly go against God's word. None of your arguments convinced me of anything (perhaps because I actually have the Holy Spirit living within me).

God designed man to be united to his wife (woman) and to become one flesh. He did not design man to be with man, or woman to be with woman, or people to pursue love with anyone or anything they desire. Homosexual marriage should not be legal.

(And seriously, I can't emphasize being born again enough. If you had known me a few years back before I found Christ, I'd be laughing and vomiting at what I just wrote, but now I know the truth. Jesus transforms a bitter bisexual sadomasochist like me into someone with peace, joy, and eternal life? And some people try to tell me He's not even real? Ahahahahaha!)

Dreams wrote: I cannot argue with you on this any further - I know exactly where this is going, a battle of legalism to get us further away from the actual issue. You might think of yourself as a Christian, but you have proven you're not actually a follower of Jesus, and you have definitely proved you are not born again. Until you step past your intellectualism and actually find faith, like the Bible says, it will be impossible for you to please God. No amount of research is going to clearly reveal the Word to you, and until you actually accept Jesus's free gift of salvation, you will only have a "cursory, superficial understanding of God's word."

Unfortunetly, you have fallen into the trap of distorting the word of God (which is indeed infallable, as it was written by God through men, not by men alone - 2 Tim 3:16) into what you want it say, rather than accepting the truth as it is. But this thread alone is a perfect picture of the deception Satan has used in this nation to make everyone believe that tolerance at all costs is the proper attitude, even when it does clearly go against God's word. None of your arguments convinced me of anything (perhaps because I actually have the Holy Spirit living within me).

God designed man to be united to his wife (woman) and to become one flesh. He did not design man to be with man, or woman to be with woman, or people to pursue love with anyone or anything they desire. Homosexual marriage should not be legal.

(And seriously, I can't emphasize being born again enough. If you had known me a few years back before I found Christ, I'd be laughing and vomiting at what I just wrote, but now I know the truth. Jesus transforms a bitter bisexual sadomasochist like me into someone with peace, joy, and eternal life? And some people try to tell me He's not even real? Ahahahahaha!)

It's arguments like this that makes so many people resent Christianity.