Let's assume that I agree with the church's teachings, here's what I can't but help to say in response.

 

"Thanks a whole lot God for giving me inclinations that I can't act on that naturally born straight people can, even though my hormones are active, and the urge is just as strong, because religion and society, while not understanding it, frown on it,... and while I'm at it thanks also for having me be born on this planet when I was because from puberty until now roughly 40 years of my sexual peak would have gone unquenched if I had actually bought into the rules that humans claim were yours. Now depending on how you look at it, your church still doesn't recognize gay marriage, but society does, so legally I can start now to have loving sexual activity with a partner if I marry them, but still need to look over my shoulder at the church because they're not on board with that. God why do your humans come up with so many ridiculous illogical rules that obviously defy reality and nature, and apply them in your name?"

 

"Tell me please God, and since you're all knowing I imagine that you can do a better job than your humans have in making sense of it all, because so far now all they continue to do is make themselves look like ignorant fools purporting their interpretation of your wishes and claiming that it's what you demand. Did you create them in your image, or did they create you in theirs?"

 

 

Utterly profound ! I maintain that it's the latter.

A question for those who know more about the Bible than me (and that's probably a majority of you).

 

What did Jesus have to say on the subject? I have heard different interpretations.

Let's assume that I agree with the church's teachings, here's what I can't but help to say in response.

 

"Thanks a whole lot God for giving me inclinations that I can't act on that naturally born straight people can, even though my hormones are active, and the urge is just as strong, because religion and society, while not understanding it, frown on it,... and while I'm at it thanks also for having me be born on this planet when I was because from puberty until now roughly 40 years of my sexual peak would have gone unquenched if I had actually bought into the rules that humans claim were yours. Now depending on how you look at it, your church still doesn't recognize gay marriage, but society does, so legally I can start now to have loving sexual activity with a partner if I marry them, but still need to look over my shoulder at the church because they're not on board with that. God why do your humans come up with so many ridiculous illogical rules that obviously defy reality and nature, and apply them in your name?"

 

"Tell me please God, and since you're all knowing I imagine that you can do a better job than your humans have in making sense of it all, because so far now all they continue to do is make themselves look like ignorant fools purporting their interpretation of your wishes and claiming that it's what you demand. Did you create them in your image, or did they create you in theirs?"

 

There are a few responses that come to mind: one would open up a debate about the objective purpose(s) of sexual intercourse; the other would open up a debate about free will, the devil, and temptation. While over the next few weeks I simply do not have enough time to debate with B-Ball-Fan and Science Friction about the topics, I can leave the Church's stance for anyone who is interested.

 

Sparknotes versions of the Catholic Church's stance on the purpose of sex:

 

1) Sexual intercourse is an act intended for a married man and woman.

2) All instances of intercourse are to be open to pro-creating - since marriage is a contract in which a man and woman become "one flesh."

3) It is absolutely okay and permitted to simply get pleasure out of sexual intercourse - as long as the act itself is open to life and fertility is not suppressed.

 

Meaning (according to the Church), it would be immoral for a gay couple to have sexual intercourse even when they are 'married' (married in the eyes of the state), because no matter how hard they try they do not have the ability to create a new life.

 

Sparknotes version of the Catholic Church's view on free will, the devil, and temptations:

(Note: A lot of CS Lewis quotes/analogies here)

1) Every act we commit either brings us closer to God, or pushes us away from Him.

2) God gave us free will - the choice to either love Him or to not love Him (since if we had no choice, we would live in a world of automata -of creatures that worked like machines- a world that would hardly be worth creating).

3) God giving us free will is what has allowed for evil to exist, because free will, though it makes evil possible, is also the only thing that makes possible any love or goodness or joy worth having.

4) Temptations and immoral inclinations (eg: A straight male's inclination to have sex before marriage) are ways in which the devil is attempting to bring us closer to him and further away from God.

5) God allows these temptations from the devil to occur in order for us to have an opportunity to practice free will and show whether we do love and become closer to God, or if we reject God and push ourselves further away by sinning and giving into the temptations.

 

 

I hope what I have explained is comprehendable, gives you at least a little bit clearer view of why the Church teaches what it does, and I hope it is relevant information in the context of B-Ball-Fan's response to post #15.

 

 

Despite our disagreements, I want to make it clear than I am not saying that you (B-Ball-Fan) are wrong for your thoughts. I have not ever been in your shoes, so it would be unfair for me to judge your response to the Church. Just know that if you ever do have a change of heart with the Catholic Church, God has open arms and will always be there to accept you no matter what, and that the Catholic Church teaches that both of you can still get to heaven.

There are a few responses that come to mind: one would open up a debate about the objective purpose(s) of sexual intercourse; the other would open up a debate about free will, the devil, and temptation. While over the next few weeks I simply do not have enough time to debate with B-Ball-Fan and Science Friction about the topics, I can leave the Church's stance for anyone who is interested.

 

Sparknotes versions of the Catholic Church's stance on the purpose of sex:

 

1) Sexual intercourse is an act intended for a married man and woman.

2) All instances of intercourse are to be open to pro-creating - since marriage is a contract in which a man and woman become "one flesh."

3) It is absolutely okay and permitted to simply get pleasure out of sexual intercourse - as long as the act itself is open to life and fertility is not suppressed.

 

Meaning (according to the Church), it would be immoral for a gay couple to have sexual intercourse even when they are 'married' (married in the eyes of the state), because no matter how hard they try they do not have the ability to create a new life.

 

Sparknotes version of the Catholic Church's view on free will, the devil, and temptations:

(Note: A lot of CS Lewis quotes/analogies here)

1) Every act we commit either brings us closer to God, or pushes us away from Him.

2) God gave us free will - the choice to either love Him or to not love Him (since if we had no choice, we would live in a world of automata -of creatures that worked like machines- a world that would hardly be worth creating).

3) God giving us free will is what has allowed for evil to exist, because free will, though it makes evil possible, is also the only thing that makes possible any love or goodness or joy worth having.

4) Temptations and immoral inclinations (eg: A straight male's inclination to have sex before marriage) are ways in which the devil is attempting to bring us closer to him and further away from God.

5) God allows these temptations from the devil to occur in order for us to have an opportunity to practice free will and show whether we do love and become closer to God, or if we reject God and push ourselves further away by sinning and giving into the temptations.

 

 

I hope what I have explained is comprehendable, gives you at least a little bit clearer view of why the Church teaches what it does, and I hope it is relevant information in the context of B-Ball-Fan's response to post #15.

 

 

Despite our disagreements, I want to make it clear than I am not saying that you (B-Ball-Fan) are wrong for your thoughts. I have not ever been in your shoes, so it would be unfair for me to judge your response to the Church. Just know that if you ever do have a change of heart with the Catholic Church, God has open arms and will always be there to accept you no matter what, and that the Catholic Church teaches that both of you can still get to heaven.

 

Hopefully you understand that I think that you're probably a decent guy. You certainly sound to be. You are where you are with your beliefs, and if that's what gives you peace of mind where you feel like you're headed in the direction that you need to be, I'm all for it, and it's certainly not my place to say otherwise, nor do I have any solid evidence to tell you that you are wrong.

 

As I have expressed to you in the past, I am not completely void of a sense of spiritualism, but I am where I am, and my peace of mind comes from following my instincts of who I am, and what I have experienced in life and spiritually, and often times organized religion, and my instincts do not match up.

 

If I can't solidly get on board with religious dogma, and I view it to be man-made, then I'd be in a serious paradox of following something that I truly do not believe, while shelving what I do believe.

 

It's not a case of me shunning it because it challenges me to go against who I truly am, but because it strongly appears to me to have been man-made, and not evolving from an unseen god as we are told it is.

 

As for now I have a hard time being convinced that the pen in the hands of the men writing the rules were being pushed by an unseen god. Others are convinced of it, and if that's what they truly believe I have no solid evidence to refute it, so it would be pointless of me to say it isn't so just because I don't personally believe it.

 

I have no motive to plead that others see things the way I do, and though it can make for interesting discussion where different people offer points they believe might have escaped others, and while it's a tendency for humans in general to hope that everyone can get in line with a universal mindset, it ultimately results in boiling down to people being where they are with what they think, and though people can certainly alter throughout their lifetime, their views, we'd all be expecting the merely impossible for that universal mindset to become a reality, but the great thing about civilized people is that while that same page thinking is probably idealistic, we at the same time can accept and respect our differences.

we at the same time can accept and respect our differences.

 

The eternal optimist.

As a Christian I am a bit torn on this subject. The Bible teaches that homosexuality is wrong.

 

I have a daughter that is gay. I love her unconditionally and it doesn't bother me one bit. We have very good conversations about the topics that are volatile on this board such as gay marriage. She sees no big deal in the need to get married. She has been with her partner for 18 years. The only up side to getting married for her is the insurance, etc. They still haven't decided on whether they will get married or not.

As a Christian I am a bit torn on this subject. The Bible teaches that homosexuality is wrong.

 

I have a daughter that is gay. I love her unconditionally and it doesn't bother me one bit. We have very good conversations about the topics that are volatile on this board such as gay marriage. She sees no big deal in the need to get married. She has been with her partner for 18 years. The only up side to getting married for her is the insurance, etc. They still haven't decided on whether they will get married or not.

 

 

I'm not as torn. I have a sister who is gay. She recently married her partner of several years and is happy. That's all that matters. The Bible, granted, does not have the best attitude towards homosexuality. However, it also does not say good about a lot of things. Children who misbehave, for example, should be stoned to death according to Scripture. Thus, what the Bible says about homosexuality doesn't mean squat to me. Be homosexual and be happy if that's who you are. Pay no attention to an old book written by very old men who had consumed some very old mushrooms.

I'm not as torn. I have a sister who is gay. She recently married her partner of several years and is happy. That's all that matters. The Bible, granted, does not have the best attitude towards homosexuality. However, it also does not say good about a lot of things. Children who misbehave, for example, should be stoned to death according to Scripture. Thus, what the Bible says about homosexuality doesn't mean squat to me. Be homosexual and be happy if that's who you are. Pay no attention to an old book written by very old men who had consumed some very old mushrooms.

 

Thanks for the advice but I would rather pat attention to the Bible any day than I would you.

Thanks for the advice but I would rather pat attention to the Bible any day than I would you.

 

Okay.

This thread is just another attempt to normalize immorality that is condemned in the Old and New Testaments of the Bible. The Bible does say hate the sin, love the sinner, but one is also to point out to the sinner what he/she is doing wrong. While the world has and never will be perfect, I have seen a lowering of standards over the last 50 years and refuse to stand by doing nothing and allow those who want to lower them more go unchallenged.

This thread is just another attempt to normalize immorality that is condemned in the Old and New Testaments of the Bible. The Bible does say hate the sin, love the sinner, but one is also to point out to the sinner what he/she is doing wrong. While the world has and never will be perfect, I have seen a lowering of standards over the last 50 years and refuse to stand by doing nothing and allow those who want to lower them more go unchallenged.

 

Yeah, I wouldn't want you to let these terrible acts of immorality go unchallenged:

 

1. Bowl Haircuts- . Leviticus 19:27 reads “You shall not round off the side-growth of your heads nor harm the edges of your beard.”

 

2. Football playing must be immoral- Leviticus 11:8, which is discussing pigs, reads “You shall not eat of their flesh nor touch their carcasses; they are unclean to you.”

 

3. Better remove those tattoos - Leviticus 19:28 reads, “You shall not make any cuts in your body for the dead nor make any tattoo marks on yourselves: I am the Lord.”

 

4. Polyester Blends are Evil - Better check that tag on your shirt Mrbballfamily: Leviticus 19:19 reads, “You are to keep My statutes. You shall not breed together two kinds of your cattle; you shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor wear a garment upon you of two kinds of material mixed together.”

 

5. Divorce- Kim Davis is a Three Time Adulterer by this One- Mark 10:11-12, “And He said to them, ‘Whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her; and if she herself divorces her husband and marries another man, she is committing adultery.’”

 

6. Hope you have Both your balls because... Deuteronomy 23:1 reads (this is the God’s Word translation, which spells it out better), “A man whose testicles are crushed or whose penis is cut off may never join the assembly of the Lord.”

 

7. If you are a bastard or even the great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandchild of a bastard, you're in trouble because: Deuteronomy 23:2 reads, “No one of illegitimate birth shall enter the assembly of the Lord; none of his descendants, even to the tenth generation, shall enter the assembly of the Lord.”

 

8. No Bling for MSbbfamily: 1Timothy 2:9 :“Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly garments.”

 

9. Mr and Ms bballfamily, better stay away from Red Lobster: Leviticus 11:10 reads, “But whatever is in the seas and in the rivers that does not have fins and scales among all the teeming life of the water, and among all the living creatures that are in the water, they are detestable things to you.”

 

Beyond shellfish and pig, it also says you can’t eat camel, rock badger, rabbit, eagle, vulture, buzzard, falcon, raven, crow, ostrich, owl, seagull, hawk, pelican, stork, heron, bat, winged insects that walk on four legs unless they have joints to jump with like grasshoppers (?), bear, mole, mouse, lizard, gecko, crocodile, chameleon and snail.

 

10. Wives, if the next door neighbor attacks your hubby, for God sakes don't grab the attacker by the balls: Deuteronomy 25:11-12.

“If two men, a man and his countryman, are struggling together, and the wife of one comes near to deliver her husband from the hand of the one who is striking him, and puts out her hand and seizes his genitals, then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity.”

 

Now , bballfamily, I know what you're thinking , because of Jesus these are things we no longer have to adhere to as law. Isn't that what most Christians think?

 

If you’re going to ignore the section of Leviticus that bans tattoos, pork, shellfish, round haircuts, polyester and football, how can you possibly turn around and quote Leviticus 18:22 (“You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.”) as irrefutable law?

Is it terribly wrong or overly-condescending to introduce a little bit of logic and rational thinking in place of ignorance, bigotry, and narcissism ? Hmmm...

Science Friction you are a man that loves answers I can tell. You have spent hours on Google scouring the old Testament and the Levitical law to be exact to use this as a arguing point with Christians. So here is a challenge as I have heard you say you read everything you can get your hands on. Get you a real Bible( If you dont have one I will be glad to buy you one and mail it to you, I will even get you a Greek/Hebrew word study Bible so you can make sure the English is translated right for your arguements) and read the New Testament from Mathew to Revelation. Not online, but read the book. I think sir you might have a different outlook on some of this stuff if you would seek knowledge like I know you want to. Make sure you tell me when you start because I have something I want to do as you do this great experiment to gain more intellect so you can argue with us Christians.

Science Friction you are a man that loves answers I can tell. You have spent hours on Google scouring the old Testament and the Levitical law to be exact to use this as a arguing point with Christians. So here is a challenge as I have heard you say you read everything you can get your hands on. Get you a real Bible( If you dont have one I will be glad to buy you one and mail it to you, I will even get you a Greek/Hebrew word study Bible so you can make sure the English is translated right for your arguements) and read the New Testament from Mathew to Revelation. Not online, but read the book. I think sir you might have a different outlook on some of this stuff if you would seek knowledge like I know you want to. Make sure you tell me when you start because I have something I want to do as you do this great experiment to gain more intellect so you can argue with us Christians.

 

 

14 times I read it cover to cover from age 12 to age 38. KJV most often , but NIV as well. Learned something new each and every time, Jess. :smug:

SF, look at Romans 1:26-27 and 1 Corinthians 6:9 to see that the New Testament does not allow for homosexuality. Sometimes it is not what you say, but what you do not say.

A question for those who know more about the Bible than me (and that's probably a majority of you).

 

What did Jesus have to say on the subject? I have heard different interpretations.

 

Crickets.