Why do Christians like to fixate so much on homosexuality?

Post Reply New Topic

Nah. At best, it might just be silent.

All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.

He goes on from there.

That is very insightful, Philologos. Policing feels like this:

Whatever is not prohibited is permitted.

Silence implies consent.

How do you square the absence of edict with this ...


??

Not that I have any great opinion on the matter of homosexuality, but that "silence implies consent" sounds to me like way too much room for no common sense or for no personal moral judgment or for any contrary opinion possibly held in common among any.

The phrase

doesn't state what those "unnatural" sexual relations were. Modern men probably want to interpret this as an indictment of Lesbianism, given the current anti-gay attitudes in vogue, plus Paul's famous penchant for whining, rebuking and criticizing.

Haven't you ever watched any girl-on-girl videos? Lesbianism isn't "unnatural" at all. Far from it. Women have very beautiful and luscious bodies, and have been having natural sexual relations with each other ever since women have existed. Online poles have shown that women are much more likely than men to report themselves as bisexual. Why shouldn't they share their beautiful, luscious bodies with each other?

The only sexual problems that the Bible identifies are men putting their peckers where they don't belong, and women engaging in bestiality. If God doesn't have a problem with Lesbianism, then why should anyone who reads the Bible?

Next you'll probably tell us that women shouldn't even masturbate or take a ride on a sybian. Whom are they harming? No-one, that's whom.

I am not sure that applies in Canon Law or other potential applicable systems.

I reiterate:

All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.

By the way, you may be interested to know I just heard there is a bookout examining sexual attitudes / rules among - I think - the Essenes. If you want I could find the reference. Not my pidgin - I do not fixate on these topics.

What might be your speculation?


Again, I am not making any statement about homosexuality. The immediate discussion here is about common sense and/or autonomous personal values.

Bestiality.


You can't just use "common sense" and convict someone of a crime that doesn't exist. If there isn't a law against something, then you are free to do it. Ask any Libertarian.

I suppose that an evangelist who wanted to be crystal clear would want to write a new commandment:

I was speaking of one's own common sense in relation to one's own actions.


Nah. I am bent toward monarchy.

(I mean 'policing' in the softer, social context.)
There is an ongoing debate within the atheist community about how much respect should be granted to religious people and ideas.
The debate is loud, harsh, and visible to people outside the atheist community. I do not see such a debate occurring within the Christian community.

WHICH Christian community, Daddy-O? In this country alone there are more distinct religious organizations - many of whom will not give certain others the time of day - that some countries have adult citizens. Okay, so I did not check numbers - I am not sure it is possible, there is no master registry, and that statement may be less than accurate. But there are lots, they are NOT linked in any master unity.

There are also large numbers of actual and nominal Christans who are unaffiliated.

I took policing to mean social as you meant it.

Let us suppose I spoke up. Wait - I have - though I am no activist - spoken up and said certain things about God, Jesus, the two great commandments, right and wrong. I have labelled people unChristian jerks.

Who is paying attention? Who is going to pay attention? I will tell you - I have been telling at least a few people each year what is what and why and how to act on the info for a pretty fair suum of years, Almighty few have heard, let alonde listened. Forget about acting on it.

Let's say that among these heatedly arguing atheists there is a clear plurality in favor of benign neglect toward Catholic laity. And let us say Godless Sam in Nashville wants to blast Catholic laity every chance he gets. What are the rest of the "atheist community" going to do about it? Post a vote of censure? Cancel his membership in the Strident Atheists?

I do not see why atheists get to be a community when Christians don't. God knows.

I think your data are wrong.
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/200 ... -42.0.html
quote:
This is not just a Christian response. I can certainly say the objectives of the bill have the total support of most of Uganda, not just Christians, but also Muslims and Roman Catholics. It would not be right to talk about how Christians feel. They're all agreed on the objectives. There will be a difference of opinion on the details of the bill.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Uganda
quote:
According to the Pew Global Attitudes Project poll in 2007, 96% of Ugandans said that homosexuality should be rejected by society, making it one of the highest rejection of homosexuality in the 45 countries surveyed.[3] A poll conducted in 2010, however, in the wake of Uganda's anti-homosexuality bill, revealed that 11% of Ugandans viewed homosexuality as being morally acceptable, while only 2% of respondents (per country) in Cameroon, Kenya, and Zambia found homosexuality to be morally acceptable.[4]
A new bill has been introduced to parliament, providing for harsher penalties for homosexuals, including the death penalty for repeat offenders.
...On 13 October 2009 Ugandan MP David Bahati introduced the Uganda Anti-Homosexuality Bill which would broaden the criminilization of same-sex relationships in Uganda, introducing the death penalty for repeat convictions, HIV-positive people engaging in sexual activity with people of the same sex or with those under 18.[11] Under this bill, individuals or companies promoting LGBT rights would be penalized, Ugandan citizens would be required to report any homosexual activity within 24 hours or face a maximum penalty of three years imprisonment, and Uganda would request extradition if Ugandan citizens were having same-sex relationships outside the country.

In other words, having a long-term monogamous gay relationship (ie, 'repeat offense') may soon be punishable by death in Uganda, and family members who find out that their brother or sister or child is gay could be thrown in prison for three years for not turning them in to the police.
Americans 'helped' in Uganda:
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/12/02 ... complicit/




Aside from Wesboro, which has a policy of being as hateful as possible in order to gain money from lawsuits when people lose control over them, I almost never see Christians standing up in public and saying, 'those Christians are being hateful, and that is not what Christianity is about.' I occasionally see stories in the paper about this or that 'nice' congregation that welcomes gay people in a sort of, 'love the sinner hate the sin,' way, or even more rarely a story about a church who welcomes everyone as they are as long as they're not causing anyone any harm.

I do not see Christian leaders standing up and saying to people like Pat Robertson, 'You are wrong. There is nothing wrong with gay people, and your words and your re-education centers are hurtful to many people.' All I see is those Christian leaders standing up to non-Christian people like Harris or Mehta and saying, 'You are wrong, we love everybody!' which does exactly nothing to stop the actual physical and psychic harm done by the more vocal leaders.

@LKL

The condemnations occur, people just don't report on it.

The Vatican Condemned the Ugandan Bill;
http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/vatic ... i-gay-laws

The Catholic Church Bishops in Uganda condemned it saying '(It is)at odds with the core values” of Christians.
http://opiniojuris.org/2010/05/13/churc ... -gay-bill/

The Anglicans have also
http://epfnational.org/epf-news/episcop ... avid-kato/

This was reinforced by the archbishop of York
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/n ... nalty.html

And archbishop of Canterbury, Rowen Williams who called it 'genocide'
http://baptistplanet.wordpress.com/2009 ... gislation/

Many of the Bishops of the Church of Uganda have also condemned it; saying it was 'little short of state sponsored genocide'
http://www.guardian.co.uk/katine/2009/d ... ality-bill

Pastor Rick Warren condemned it:
'All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.' That is why I'm sharing my heart with you today," Warren said. "As an American pastor, it is not my role to interfere with the politics of other nations, but it IS my role to speak out on moral issues."
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/mega-chu ... i-gay-bill

It was bought up at the National Prayer Breakfast with President Obama; a gathering of the US's religious leaders called on the President to oppose the bill.
http://www.religiondispatches.org/archi ... _breakfast

So can we agree that condemnations take place. It seems just about most major Christian leaders have spoken out against these laws.

However, I have not heard Sam Harris rebuke someone for being anti-catholic.

“Gender, race and impairment all relate to what a person is, whereas homosexuality relates to what a person does.” Two men can't reproduce,








____________________________________________________
I like all Earthicans, and God has his favorites.

Yeah. So?