• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is Homosexuality sinful and/or unnatural?

Is homosexuality wrong and/or unnatural?

  • Total voters
    128
Blackdog said:
The idea of "obey me or burn" is not what it is about. It is about love God above all things and treat others as you wish to be treated, that IS the summation of the law, period.

The assumption is not ridicules, but it is not the point of Christs teaching. It is a guid for spiritual salvation, you have free will you can accept it or not.

My point is when you start throwing things out to fit your life style and choices, where does it end? In the end anything can be justified this way.
Click to expand...

Bold part: And what does it say happens when you do not accept it?
 
Homosexual activity is perfectly natural to a person who is homosexual. To a homosexual heterosexual activity would be unnatural. The same is true in reverse. One needs only know the persons orientation to know what is natural and what is not for that person. It would be just as wrong to force a heterosexual person into same sex relationship as it is for society to expect a gay person to act and live straight.
 
Verthaine said:
Pardon me,I'm the new guy,and I may be mistaken,but are you saying that there is something wrong with making up new gods as one see's fit.
I'm a Discordian and we Discordians do it all the time.

Why should I be limited to believing in some gigantic robe and sandal wearing perpetually pissed off bearded white guy sitting on a throne up in the clouds when I can have a hot babe like ERIS as my personal deity.
Let's face it,no one on this forum has ever proven that THE SUPREME ONENESS OF THE MULTIVERSE is actually the Judeo-Christian God.So my Goddess is just as valid as your God,wouldn't you agree.

Now if you had said "according to your beliefs" I wouldn't be writing this,because then you are stating an opinion.
Everyone has a right to their own opinion (and you know what they say about opinions).
But the above statement you made seems to me that you are stating it as a fact.
An opinion does not necessarily equal a fact.

It seems to me Christians have never had problem a using the Bible to justify things like slavery,ethnic cleansing,religious oppression,land theft,torture,genocide....etc.
It seem all three monotheistic religions has serious "can't play well with others" issues.
You never hear about us Discordians using the Principia Discordia or The Book of Eris as an excuse to commit horrible atrocities on our fellow lifeforms,now do you?
Click to expand...

virtually positive you're in the wrong thread.
 
theplaydrive said:
This is a common misrepresentation of people's words. It's not that people just make up a God to fit with a lifestyle; it's that the God of X religion does not make sense according to their own reason. In other words, it's that some aspect of the Bible or the Koran or some other religious text make them uneasy and hesistant to accept the words inside of them. This is a pretty common saying that illustrates the problem:
Click to expand...

Being a Christian is #1 believing that Christ is your Saviour. We are taught about him and his teachings through the Bible. If you are going to make something up, you are no longer a Christian are you?

theplaydrive said:
If you think the Christian God and the Bible sound right and you're comfortable believing in them, go right ahead. Maybe God's telling you something that he isn't telling others. But to belittle other beliefs who feel something wrong or uncomfortable with your God and your Bible as just "making up their God to fit with a lifestyle to justify things" is obnoxious and shows an inability to understand and respect how others come to their own conclusions.
Click to expand...

Who is belittling anyone? This is what the Bible says and what Nuke again implied and many others, end of story.

As for my comment it is exactly correct to what Nuke said. If you throw away this part and that to fit your own beliefs regardless of what the scripture says, you can justify anything, period.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Bold part: And what does it say happens when you do not accept it?
Click to expand...

The Bible says you will not be saved. We don't know what hell is. It could be separation from God, or it could be a lake of fire, we don't know for certain.

No one has been judged yet, nor has anyone come back to say? ;)
 
Last edited:
Verthaine said:
Pardon me,I'm the new guy,and I may be mistaken,but are you saying that there is something wrong with making up new gods as one see's fit.
I'm a Discordian and we Discordians do it all the time.

Why should I be limited to believing in some gigantic robe and sandal wearing perpetually pissed off bearded white guy sitting on a throne up in the clouds when I can have a hot babe like ERIS as my personal deity.
Let's face it,no one on this forum has ever proven that THE SUPREME ONENESS OF THE MULTIVERSE is actually the Judeo-Christian God.So my Goddess is just as valid as your God,wouldn't you agree.

Now if you had said "according to your beliefs" I wouldn't be writing this,because then you are stating an opinion.
Everyone has a right to their own opinion (and you know what they say about opinions).
But the above statement you made seems to me that you are stating it as a fact.
An opinion does not necessarily equal a fact.

It seems to me Christians have never had problem a using the Bible to justify things like slavery,ethnic cleansing,religious oppression,land theft,torture,genocide....etc.
It seem all three monotheistic religions has serious "can't play well with others" issues.
You never hear about us Discordians using the Principia Discordia or The Book of Eris as an excuse to commit horrible atrocities on our fellow lifeforms,now do you?
Click to expand...

This is off topic. Please read the OP and feel free to join in.

PS: Your religion is a joke...

Discordianism is a religion, or parody religion, that worships Eris (also known as Discordia), the Greco-Roman goddess of chaos. It was founded circa 1958–1959 by Malaclypse the Younger with the publication of its principal text, the Principia Discordia.

Discordianism is a "Ha Ha, Only Serious" 'joke',[1] using humor to subversively spread what its members regard as a valid philosophy. To keep said beliefs from becoming dangerous fanaticism, they rely on self-subverting Dada-Zen humor, with varying degrees of success. It is regarded as a joke religion, though to what degree is disputed.[2] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discordianism
 
Last edited:
Kal'Stang said:
How do you know that they only destroyed one?
Click to expand...

Because of the evidence I posted...

http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/99998-homosexuality-sinful-and-unnatural-141.html#post1059558373

http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/99998-homosexuality-sinful-and-unnatural-142.html#post1059558802

http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/99998-homosexuality-sinful-and-unnatural-142.html#post1059558866 <---Never even responded to this one.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/99998-homosexuality-sinful-and-unnatural-143.html#post1059558953

Please point out some evidence that says they destroyed or burned other books than what I have mentioned?

Again:

Concerning manuscripts that were burned at the order of Constantine, there is really no mention of such a thing actually happening at the order of Constantine or at the Council of Nicea. The Arian party's document claiming Christ to be a created being, was abandoned by them because of the strong resistance to it and was torn to shreds in the sight of everyone present at the council. Constantine, and the Council of Nicea, for that matter, had virtually nothing to do with the forming of the canon. It was not even discussed at Nicea. The council that formed an undisputed decision on the canon took place at Carthage in 397, sixty years after Constantine's death. However, long before Constantine, 21 books were acknowledged by all Christians (the 4 Gospels, Acts, 13 Paul, 1 Peter, 1 John, Revelation). There were 10 disputed books (Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2-3 John, Jude, Ps-Barnabas, Hermas, Didache, Gospel of Hebrews) and several that most all considered heretical—Gospels of Peter, Thomas, Matthaias, Acts of Andrew, John, etc.

Liberal scholars and fictional authors like to purport the idea that the gospels of Thomas and Peter (and other long-disputed books) contain truths that the church vehemently stomped out, but that simply has no basis historically. It is closer to the truth to say that no serious theologians really cared about these books because they were obviously written by people lying about authorship and had little basis in reality. That is one reason why a council declaring the canon was so late in coming (397 AD), because the books that were trusted and the ones that had been handed down were already widely known. - Did Constantine decide what books belonged in the Bible?
 
Last edited:
Removable Mind said:
Is the following possible?

infalliblebible.jpg
Click to expand...

There are two things we need to discuss about circular reasoning: It is (1) absolutely unavoidable and (2) not necessarily fallacious. Circular reasoning is unavoidable to some degree when proving one's ultimate standard. An ultimate standard cannot be proved from anything else, otherwise it wouldn't be ultimate. Therefore, if it is to be proved, it must use itself as its own standard of judgment by which any decision is made.
 
Blackdog said:
The Bible says you will not be saved. We don't know what hell is. It could be separation from God, or it could be a lake of fire, we don't know for certain.

No one has been judged yet, nor has anyone come back to say? ;)
Click to expand...

Doesn't the Bible refer to hell as a lake of fire and eternal torment?

Revelation 21:8
But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.”

Revelation 20:10
And the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

Matthew 25:41
“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.
Click to expand...

Sure sounds like threats to me. Threats are usually used to control people right? And the only ones that I know that want to control people are those that are greedy and power hungry.
 
Blackdog said:
Because of the evidence I posted...

http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/99998-homosexuality-sinful-and-unnatural-141.html#post1059558373

http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/99998-homosexuality-sinful-and-unnatural-142.html#post1059558802

http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/99998-homosexuality-sinful-and-unnatural-142.html#post1059558866 <---Never even responded to this one.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/99998-homosexuality-sinful-and-unnatural-143.html#post1059558953

Please point out some evidence that says they destroyed or burned other books than what I have mentioned?
Click to expand...

Any evidence you have is at best circumstantial and based off of what those in power want you to know. Do you know everything that our government does? Do you believe that they do things that we never find out about (IE no proof of)? Do you think that they falsify documents? If you answered yes then why is the same not applied to those that wrote the bible?

Also I did respond to that one. Page 145 post 1448
 
Last edited:
Blackdog said:
Being a Christian is #1 believing that Christ is your Saviour. We are taught about him and his teachings through the Bible. If you are going to make something up, you are no longer a Christian are you?
Click to expand...
This has nothing to do with the points Nuke and I made.

Who is belittling anyone? This is what the Bible says and what Nuke again implied and many others, end of story.

As for my comment it is exactly correct to what Nuke said. If you throw away this part and that to fit your own beliefs regardless of what the scripture says, you can justify anything, period.
Click to expand...
Reducing people's religious beliefs to justification and to picking things in order to fit a lifestyle is belittling. Nothing in Nukes post suggests picking and choosing to justify anything - this is a strawman. Your posts in response to me and her show that you take any rejection of certain parts of the Bible as 1) Less than your take on the Bible. 2) Done for the purpose of justification. Neither of these things is true.

Moreover, you continue to imply that people are "making up gods" based on Christian teachings as if the Christian God is particularly original. Almost any God that anyone believes in will have similarities with the God in Christian teachings - it doesn't mean that someone is picking and choosing parts of the Christian God to believe in in some sneeky/slimy little way - it means that ideas of God exist and they are often similar.

Moreover, your repeated use of phrases like "throw away this and that" continue to misrepresent the words in Nuke's post. Again - it isn't about picking and choosing to justify - it's about following whatever agrees with one's heart and reason.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Any evidence you have is at best circumstantial and based off of what those in power want you to know.
Click to expand...

So even though no evidence at all exist to say otherwise, this must be the case? Well I guess we can't trust any history then because conspiracy theory's are so much more credible.

Kal'Stang said:
Do you know everything that our government does? Do you believe that they do things that we never find out about (IE no proof of)? Do you think that they falsify documents? If you answered yes then why is the same not applied to those that wrote the bible?
Click to expand...

I have a tin foil hate for sale? I mean really man, no proof, just conjecture on your part. I mean what the hell do thousands of years worth of biblical scholars and historians know anyway, charlatans! :lol:
 
Blackdog said:
There are two things we need to discuss about circular reasoning: It is (1) absolutely unavoidable and (2) not necessarily fallacious. Circular reasoning is unavoidable to some degree when proving one's ultimate standard. An ultimate standard cannot be proved from anything else, otherwise it wouldn't be ultimate. Therefore, if it is to be proved, it must use itself as its own standard of judgment by which any decision is made.
Click to expand...


I'm assuming that "on behalf of all religions" that uses the bible as the core source of their beliefs - you are choosing to claim that the bible falls outside the circular logic fallacy. Am I understanding you correctly?
 
theplaydrive said:
This has nothing to do with the points Nuke and I made.
Click to expand...

It has everything to do with the point I made and you tried to derail.

theplaydrive said:
Reducing people's religious beliefs to justification and to picking things in order to fit a lifestyle is belittling.
Click to expand...

I did not "pick" anything. If they are "Christians" they are submitting or supposed to God's will, not their own.

Matthew 11:28-29 "Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest," he added, "Take my yoke upon you and learn from me."

theplaydrive said:
Nothing in Nukes post suggests picking and choosing to justify anything - this is a strawman
Click to expand...

Lets see...

It doesn't matter how good a person is. That is a control thing. One of the things that has led some people, such as myself, away from Christianity, because I choose to believe that a good God would look into a person's heart and not be so petty as to expect people to believe in a book, such as the Bible, just because people thousands of years ago believed that they were telling others what God wanted and how to get to Heaven. I believe that God does not care what religion people follow or what small petty rules a person obeys, as long as they essentially live by the golden rule, do unto others as you would have them do unto you, and try to love each other. All the rest of the rules, including those about homosexuality and others, seem to me to be something that men would care about, not God. That is why I don't trust the Bible, because it does not fit with what my view of a good God is and it could have easily been manipulated by any of the many people who were responsible for it, from the writers of the text to the compilers and the translators and the changers.

Please read next time. I am certain you can now figure out the rest.

theplaydrive said:
Your posts in response to me and her show that you take any rejection of certain parts of the Bible as 1) Less than your take on the Bible. 2) Done for the purpose of justification. Neither of these things is true.
Click to expand...

Absolutely and unlike you or Nuke, I have posted historical evidence saying you are both wrong. So where is your proof as lip service means little in the realm of debate.

theplaydrive said:
Moreover, you continue to imply that people are "making up gods" based on Christian teachings as if the Christian God is particularly original. Almost any God that anyone believes in will have similarities with the God in Christian teachings - it doesn't mean that someone is picking and choosing parts of the Christian God to believe in in some sneeky/slimy little way - it means that ideas of God exist and they are often similar.
Click to expand...

Best excuse I have heard all day. You know what they say about excuses?

You do realize I am talking specifically about those who say they are Christian, right? :doh I mean that has only been my argument for the whole thread. :doh

theplaydrive said:
Moreover, your repeated use of phrases like "throw away this and that" continue to misrepresent the words in Nuke's post. Again - it isn't about picking and choosing to justify - it's about following whatever agrees with one's heart and reason.
Click to expand...

Not if they call themselves Christian. What part of this did you miss? Or is it because you have absolutely no evidence to back up the rest of your argument?
 
Gracious. It is as though my mother has risen from the dead and started beating people up with Bible verses again. Red, bolded, and everything.
 
Removable Mind said:
I'm assuming that "on behalf of all religions" that uses the bible as the core source of their beliefs - you are choosing to claim that the bible falls outside the circular logic fallacy. Am I understanding you correctly?
Click to expand...

You can make your own judgment on it. I am just pointing out a fact that not all circular arguments are indeed a fallacy.
 
That is not a Bible verse, lol.
 
Blackdog said:
You can make your own judgment on it. I am just pointing out a fact that not all circular arguments are indeed a fallacy.
Click to expand...

I posted a very clear graphic that provides the fallacy sequence.

Give us an example that uses a circular argument that doesn't lead to a fallacy conclusion.
 
Removable Mind said:
I posted a very clear graphic that provides the fallacy sequence.

Give us an example that uses a circular argument that doesn't lead to a fallacy conclusion.
Click to expand...

I told you take it for what you will. Has nothing to do with my arguments or the points I have made.

Trying to get back on topic, but people keep coming up with already refuted stuff we have gone over many times already. Have nothing to do with Gay's and natural or unnatural, just attacks on Christians or the core principles of said religion.
 
Blackdog said:
Nothing confusing about it. Being attracted to the same sex is not a sin. No place in the Bible does it say it is. ACTING on it in thought or action is the sin.

It is not that difficult.
Click to expand...

Blackdog said:
Not really.



How is "claiming you are gay" giving in to temptation? Either you are attracted to men or women, no sin involved in an attraction.



This has nothing to do directly with attraction. Plenty of gay men and women are gay but good practicing Christians who do not give into the thoughts or physical acts. Makes them no less gay.



I said nothing like this. If you have yet to figure it out, I don't know what to tell you.



Again already covered this.

See above.
Click to expand...

It is confusing because you voted homosexuality is wrong and unnatural. Yet you say there are homosexual Christians. :2wave:

Do you mean just homosexual acts and thoughts are sinful? The same-sex attraction is a temptation from Satan; or do you not believe Satan tempts people?

Would you please explicitly and clearly state your position on this?
 
Wake said:
It is confusing because you voted homosexuality is wrong and unnatural. Yet you say there are homosexual Christians. :2wave:
Click to expand...

Because some are.

Wake said:
Do you mean just homosexual acts and thoughts are sinful? The same-sex attraction is a temptation from Satan; or do you not believe Satan tempts people?
Click to expand...

Sorry the Devil made me do it does not fly with me. We have plenty of sin right from the beginning, you know the whole original sin thing. Now don't get me wrong, I believe that the devil is out there roaring like a lion and tempting. Being tempted is not nor ever has been a sin.

Wake said:
Would you please explicitly and clearly state your position on this?
Click to expand...

The problem is not me or my statements, it's you.

You think temptation is sin and that is the problem. Please point out anyplace in the Bible where temptation is a sin? It's not as if we aren't all tempted allot, it's part of the human condition no matter who you are.

Now like I said, I guess you have no sin? You are the one righteous person on the planet? The one person who has a right to throw that stone and sit in judgment!

I freely admit I may be a stickler about the laws of the Bible, but damn, to convict someone purely because they were tempted. I suggest you take the mote out of your eye brother.
 
Blackdog said:
I told you take it for what you will. Has nothing to do with my arguments or the points I have made.

Trying to get back on topic, but people keep coming up with already refuted stuff we have gone over many times already. Have nothing to do with Gay's and natural or unnatural, just attacks on Christians or the core principles of said religion.
Click to expand...

IMO... The word "SIN" in the thread title totally took the premise out of the " natural" realm into the "supernatural". There is absolutely no way to offer an empirical interpretation of homosexual behaviors as somehow conveyed by an alleged supernatural being.

The heart of the religious arguments are drawn from the bible. The disagreement lies with the bible's authority to be an instrument used by humans for the purpose ridicule, persecution, judgment or to imply that there will be an eternal punishment for being homosexual by the inspirer of the bible.

BTW... You can't use the premise of an argument to prove itself to be valid.
 
Removable Mind said:
IMO... The word "SIN" in the thread title totally took the premise out of the " natural" realm into the "supernatural". There is absolutely no way to offer an empirical interpretation of homosexual behaviors as somehow conveyed by an alleged supernatural being.
Click to expand...

Just going by the Bible.

Yes it has little to do with it. The problem is as soon as you say you disagree because you are Christian, well you know.

Removable Mind said:
The heart of the religious arguments are drawn from the bible. The disagreement lies with the bible's authority to be an instrument used by humans for the purpose ridicule, persecution, judgment or to imply that there will be an eternal punishment for being homosexual by the inspirer of the bible.
Click to expand...

Please point out where I or anyone else in this thread used the Bible for "ridicule, persecution, judgment or to imply that there will be an eternal punishment for being homosexual by the inspirer of the bible."

None of us have done this or would justify that kind of attitude on these forums.

Removable Mind said:
BTW... You can't use the premise of an argument to prove itself to be valid.
Click to expand...

Says you.
 
Blackdog said:
Because some are.



Sorry the Devil made me do it does not fly with me. We have plenty of sin right from the beginning, you know the whole original sin thing. Now don't get me wrong, I believe that the devil is out there roaring like a lion and tempting. Being tempted is not nor ever has been a sin.



The problem is not me or my statements, it's you.

You think temptation is sin and that is the problem. Please point out anyplace in the Bible where temptation is a sin? It's not as if we aren't all tempted allot, it's part of the human condition no matter who you are.

Now like I said, I guess you have no sin? You are the one righteous person on the planet? The one person who has a right to throw that stone and sit in judgment!

I freely admit I may be a stickler about the laws of the Bible, but damn, to convict someone purely because they were tempted. I suggest you take the mote out of your eye brother.
Click to expand...

There are none. To be homosexual is to accept such homosexual thoughts and actions. A straight man can have homosexual temptations and fight them off.

You seem to think Satan does not tempt people to be homosexual. Temptation isn't wrong, but giving into the temptation and claiming oneself homosexual is. Why vote it's wrong if you think there are homosexual Christians?

I have no problem. If you want to save your integrity, don't say that again.

I did not say temptation is sin. Giving into it is. Furthermore, temptation comes from Satan, does it not? If it does come from Satan, is it good? Indeed we are all tempted. We know the hooks come from Satan. Saying you're homosexual by giving into such temptation is sin; thus another hook that has snagged you. I think man is born in sin and that Satan sends many temptations.

You implying that I think I have no sin only harms your credibility. I made no such claim.

Even Jesus was tempted; but he didn't give into it. Same with homosexuality. It's a sin. You can be tempted. Giving into the temptation by saying/"accepting yourself" as homosexual is sin. You err because you think one can be homosexual yet not give into the temptation of the lifestyle of homosexuality. The claim of "being a homosexual Christian" is a sinful thought that is post-temptation.
 
Wake said:
There are none. To be homosexual is to accept such homosexual thoughts and actions. A straight man can have homosexual temptations and fight them off.
Click to expand...

So why can't a homosexual?

Wake said:
You seem to think Satan does not tempt people to be homosexual. Temptation isn't wrong, but giving into the temptation and claiming oneself homosexual is.
Click to expand...

Claiming and acting on are 2 very different things.

Wake said:
Why vote it's wrong if you think there are homosexual Christians?
Click to expand...

Read answer above.

Wake said:
I have no problem. If you want to save your integrity, don't say that again.
Click to expand...

You do, and it is you. Has nothing to do with my integrity.

Wake said:
I did not say temptation is sin. Giving into it is. Furthermore, temptation comes from Satan, does it not? If it does come from Satan, is it good? Indeed we are all tempted. We know the hooks come from Satan. Saying you're homosexual by giving into such temptation is sin; thus another hook that has snagged you. I think man is born in sin and that Satan sends many temptations.
Click to expand...

Being tempted again is not a sin, period.

Next?

Wake said:
You implying that I think I have no sin only harms your credibility. I made no such claim.
Click to expand...

You don't have to. You seem to think someone being gay without anything else but an attraction makes them sinners. It does not according to the Bible.

Wake said:
Even Jesus was tempted; but he didn't give into it. Same with homosexuality. It's a sin. You can be tempted. Giving into the temptation by saying/"accepting yourself" as homosexual is sin.
Click to expand...

Admitting who and what you are is no sin, the accepting the action or thought is a sin. Would you feel more comfortable if they were liars about who and what they are? Would that some how make it all better?

Wake said:
You err because you think one can be homosexual yet not give into the temptation of the lifestyle of homosexuality. The claim of "being a homosexual Christian" is a sinful thought that is post-temptation.
Click to expand...

And you err because I know people who are, and really good Christians to boot, and that makes you wrong.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom