• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

It's a sin to oppose same sex marriage

Yeah I get it. Anyone who does not agree with your subjective opinion is an agent of Satan and evil incarnate. Convenient way to never evaluate your beliefs. Worked well for people who burned witches, including King James.

Not MY subjective opinion. The opinion of biblical scholars for the last 500 years. I will take there studied opinion over yours.
 
Not MY subjective opinion. The opinion of biblical scholars for the last 500 years. I will take there studied opinion over yours.

Funny. You talk for ALL biblical scholars for the last 500 years. And yet it was Biblical scholars who helped shape my opinion.
 
Funny. You talk for ALL biblical scholars for the last 500 years. And yet it was Biblical scholars who helped shape my opinion.

I am going by the standard reading in it's original Hebrew, Greek and a little Aramaic. You are going by incorrect information. The Bible is very clear about what is right and wrong and how to be saved.
 
I am going by the standard reading in it's original Hebrew, Greek and a little Aramaic. You are going by incorrect information. The Bible is very clear about what is right and wrong and how to be saved.

Bull. You are going by an out of historical context version where you choose the words that best fit your current cultural perspectives.
 
Bull. You are going by an out of historical context version where you choose the words that best fit your current cultural perspectives.

Not really... But you are entitled to your incorrect opinion. I mean hell you thought part of the Bible was written in latin, so I will stand by exactly what I said...

2 Cor 11:13-15 (Phi) "God's messengers?" They are counterfeits of the real thing, dishonest practitioners masquerading as the messengers of Christ. Nor do their tactics surprise me when I consider how Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. It is only to be expected that his agents shall have the appearance of ministers of righteousness--but they will get what they deserve in the end.
 
That is my argument.

For years I have asked people to explain why homosexuality is a sin in the Bible. Why would God care. For years they have been unable to provide a decent argument.

They generally respond that it is a sin because God said so or it is "unnatural" a.k.a. not part of God's design, but that is insufficient for an argument. Understanding the rational for why something is a sin is just as much a part of Christian theology and knowing that it is a sin.

So I will make an argument for why homosexuality is a sin in the Bible.

It's a sin because homosexuality is an act of adultery. It is sexual activity that traditionally occurs outside of marriage. It generally occurs outside of a monogamous relationship and it serves no purpose towards creating a family.

But things have changed. We are no longer in ancient Rome. Now the moral thing to do is to allow same sex couples to marry and to encourage same sex couples to adopt and form families.

To oppose this idea is to commit the sin of legalism. To emphasize the letter of the law over the spirit of the law.

Some would argue that marriage is defined in the Bible as between one man and one woman. That is not the case. Nobody ever asked Jesus if same sex unions are outside of the marriage covenant. All anyone asked Jesus was whether men could divorce their wife for any reason, and Jesus responded to that question within the context of that question. Many have taken his response out of context and in their own opinion, have argued that it is an absolutist definition for marriage as between one man and one woman. What they have failed to do is explain the rational behind that absolutist definition.

I have never heard an argument as to how same sex marriage would be outside of the spirit of the law. All I have ever heard is that homosexuality is not obedience to the law.

Forget the physical act of sex, that alone isn't really the issue. The larger point is that the primary purpose of sex, within Catholicism, simply put, has the creation of new life at its core as does the purpose of marriage. If you then look (don't have to agree) at the purpose of sex as to create a new life, and if you look at life as sacred (again don't have to agree) then you can begin to at least understand (again not agree) the Catholic position on why marriage should be between and man and woman, and why fornication and/or adultery are sins. Keep the focus on purpose/result not the act itself, life creation and sanctity of life and it makes a bit more sense, even if it is not convincing. I find the focus on homosexual sex as a sin interesting, since purely from a statistical stand point they would represent a tiny fraction of the sinners pool of fornicators.

Three things that are absolute truths within Catholicism, 1. All human beings are sinners and all loved by God equally, 2. As Catholics/Christians we are commanded to love God, our neighbors, our enemies and ourselves 3. No one can maintain #2 100% percent of the time which is why #1 is an absolute truth.
 
Last edited:
God saw it the other way.

But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his. So whenever he went in to his brother's wife he would waste the semen on the ground, so as not to give offspring to his brother. 10 And what he did was wicked in the sight of the Lord, and he put him to death also.

it had nothing to do with him masterbating and everything to do withh him purposly not giving his brother a child.

God gave the mosaic law.

But that's not what I said is it? It's not about what I want, it's about what HE made me NEED.


Yes. The divorce rate is dramatically lower for those people who wait for marriage because they are much more mature. How could anyone disagree with that?


With respect, I think a better question would be what parts were not.

He provided the means by which that need is fulfilled.

Such leads to rampant fornication. It would be much better if the average age were around twenty.

Name one part that was.
 
He provided the means by which that need is fulfilled.
Yeah, get married way too early just so you can have sex, in keeping with the terms and conditions God supposedly put on it for some reason.

Such leads to rampant fornication. It would be much better if the average age were around twenty.
A higher divorce rate is better than fornication? I think our priorities are exactly opposite there.

Name one part that was.
Written by men? Oh I dunno, let's see...

- The part that forbids mixing linen and wool in the same garment.
- The part that forbids mixing different species of seeds in the same garden/vineyard.
- The part that says pigs and shellfish are not clean to eat. (Why not just command us to cook it thoroughly?)
- The parts that call for ritualistic animal sacrifices.
- The parts that call for the death penalty if you curse your father or mother, or work on the Sabbath.
- The part that says a rape victim must marry their rapist.
- The parts that support slavery and/or talk about slavery as being a normal part of life, instead of condemning it every chance it gets like it does non-compliant sexual relations.
- The part where God supposedly sent a bear to maul a couple of teenagers just for teasing Elisha about being bald.
- The part that permits no woman to teach or have authority over a man.
- The extra Cainan mentioned in Luke's account of the lineage from Adam to Jesus, as compared to Genesis and Chronicles.
- The entire pointless book of Song of Solomon.
- All the magic, miracles, visions, and predictions about the future.

It's really pretty obvious to anyone who looks: The Bible is about 20% godliness and 80% BS.
 
Yeah, get married way too early just so you can have sex, in keeping with the terms and conditions God supposedly put on it for some reason.


A higher divorce rate is better than fornication? I think our priorities are exactly opposite there.


Written by men? Oh I dunno, let's see...

- The part that forbids mixing linen and wool in the same garment.
- The part that forbids mixing different species of seeds in the same garden/vineyard.
- The part that says pigs and shellfish are not clean to eat. (Why not just command us to cook it thoroughly?)
- The parts that call for ritualistic animal sacrifices.
- The parts that call for the death penalty if you curse your father or mother, or work on the Sabbath.
- The part that says a rape victim must marry their rapist.
- The parts that support slavery and/or talk about slavery as being a normal part of life, instead of condemning it every chance it gets like it does non-compliant sexual relations.
- The part where God supposedly sent a bear to maul a couple of teenagers just for teasing Elisha about being bald.
- The part that permits no woman to teach or have authority over a man.
- The extra Cainan mentioned in Luke's account of the lineage from Adam to Jesus, as compared to Genesis and Chronicles.
- The entire pointless book of Song of Solomon.
- All the magic, miracles, visions, and predictions about the future.

It's really pretty obvious to anyone who looks: The Bible is about 20% godliness and 80% BS.

Fornication and divorce are both moral evils. A society which disapproved of one would likely disapprove of the other. The difference is that people in such a just society would be more inclined to fornicate than too divorce, since divorce is public.

Written by cavemen.
 
That is my argument.

For years I have asked people to explain why homosexuality is a sin in the Bible. Why would God care. For years they have been unable to provide a decent argument.

They generally respond that it is a sin because God said so or it is "unnatural" a.k.a. not part of God's design, but that is insufficient for an argument. Understanding the rational for why something is a sin is just as much a part of Christian theology and knowing that it is a sin.

So I will make an argument for why homosexuality is a sin in the Bible.

It's a sin because homosexuality is an act of adultery. It is sexual activity that traditionally occurs outside of marriage. It generally occurs outside of a monogamous relationship and it serves no purpose towards creating a family.

But things have changed. We are no longer in ancient Rome. Now the moral thing to do is to allow same sex couples to marry and to encourage same sex couples to adopt and form families.

To oppose this idea is to commit the sin of legalism. To emphasize the letter of the law over the spirit of the law.

Some would argue that marriage is defined in the Bible as between one man and one woman. That is not the case. Nobody ever asked Jesus if same sex unions are outside of the marriage covenant. All anyone asked Jesus was whether men could divorce their wife for any reason, and Jesus responded to that question within the context of that question. Many have taken his response out of context and in their own opinion, have argued that it is an absolutist definition for marriage as between one man and one woman. What they have failed to do is explain the rational behind that absolutist definition.

I have never heard an argument as to how same sex marriage would be outside of the spirit of the law. All I have ever heard is that homosexuality is not obedience to the law.

Why can't it be this: Religious people marry in the eyes of their god and according to their faith.
Everyone else can marry in accordance with their beliefs as well.

Worry about yourself. (general you)

The government just takes notes on it all.

If a religion leads people to think something is a sin - then, to those people, it's a sin and they shouldn't do it.

But individual religions cannot govern the laws of the land.
 
Why can't it be this: Religious people marry in the eyes of their god and according to their faith.
Everyone else can marry in accordance with their beliefs as well.

Worry about yourself. (general you)

The government just takes notes on it all.

If a religion leads people to think something is a sin - then, to those people, it's a sin and they shouldn't do it.

But individual religions cannot govern the laws of the land.

I generally agree with this idea.

"Marriage" ought to be a religious decision and secular contracts the province of the state government. The primary interest of the government in couples living together has to do with taxes and property, nothing at all with personal faith, religion etc.. So why not get government out of the marriage business altogether and only into the civil union business. That way any couple can go to any church they like get "married" within the context of any faith they follow and then go to the town hall and get their Civil Union completed to make the state happy and secure their property will properly distributed if they split.

Most religious people view marriage as a commitment to God not to the town hall. But it is essential that legally we all play by the same rules.
 
I find the focus on homosexual sex as a sin interesting, since purely from a statistical stand point they would represent a tiny fraction of the sinners pool of fornicators.

Yes, very interesting.

Three things that are absolute truths within Catholicism, 1. All human beings are sinners and all loved by God equally, 2. As Catholics/Christians we are commanded to love God, our neighbors, our enemies and ourselves 3. No one can maintain #2 100% percent of the time which is why #1 is an absolute truth.

These are two premises and a conclusion that I believe--that the Father loves all His children, that we are to love one another, and that because we all fall short, we should never forget that we and even our enemies our loved beyond our human understanding.
 
We were created by God as homosapiens and there ain't nothin' like a good homosapien.
 
Back
Top Bottom