Why have Abrahamic religions and their followers always had such a big issue with homosexuality in particular?

Why have Abrahamic religions and their followers always had such a big issue with homosexuality in particular?
What exactly about a guy putting his dick near another guy warrants them burning in eternal damnation the same as a rapist or murderer?
It stands out as one of the more victimless acts that are punishable at the worst level. And really, even if it isn't harked on that much in any of these Abrahamic texts, it's easily what their followers pay notice to the most.

For most casual members of these religions, they can just pick and choose what they want to believe, and they choose homosexuality as something to get angrier at than murder. Therefore, these religions don't have any ideological or philosophical value to most of their adherents other than to tell gays they'll burn in hell. Which is funny, but also really low IQ.

POSIWID: The Purpose Of A System Is What It Does Shirt $21.68

Yakub: World's Greatest Dad Shirt $21.68

POSIWID: The Purpose Of A System Is What It Does Shirt $21.68

  1. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Sexuality is spiritually extremely potent. Homosexuality is one of the most obvious ways of not doing sex correctly. The victim is you yourself. Simple as.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      >arguments given: none

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        You don't see the argument behind "not doing XYZ correctly is an issue"?

        • 8 months ago
          Anonymous

          Sex=reproduction and nothing else is an idiotic argument.
          Gay sex=anal sex argument is strawman and bandwagon fallacy.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Sex is very clearly a reproductive faculty. If you can't see that, nothing else will make sense, bandwagon or not.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Sex is very clearly a reproductive faculty
            You forgot pair-bonding.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Pair bonding, relaxing, cardiovascular, intimate... I have definitely omitted dozens of attributes that don't contradict my point. Because all of these attributes ultimately play a reproductive role.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >straight men getting a blowjob from a woman is therefore gay sex, since it's not being used to reproduce.
            >straight men jerking off is gay.
            >the human race only has 7 billion people and is in danger of going extinct.
            it's so obvious abrahamic religions banned gay sex (including bjs and masturbation) because they want more babies being born since that translates to more tax money, more soldiers, more power. They're using religion to their own greedy purposes.

            Nature/God wouldn't have created the orgasm if it was just about "reproduction".

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Opiods of the masses.
            you will outgrow this at some point. It means that you are smart and considering all things. As you continue to search, you will find. We've all had to go through that phase.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            You intentionally misuse God’s gifts and complain as if you didn’t see the consequences coming.

  2. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Its not okay unless your between pillaging and need something tight to frick so your boys give up the bussy and its like a rotation thing until they find some women to rape or go back to their wives this is not gay, why is it so hard to understand

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      This is the gayest shit I've ever read in my life, and I'm gay myself.

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        I suppose by your gay logic every man in prison is gay. Its the same shit, you campaign for 10 fricking years and the majority of that time is spent amongst the boys, and you never know wheb your gonna die. Its easy you just think about a sexy girl while youre doing it

        • 8 months ago
          Anonymous

          It's late and I can't be bothered to write another essay for you morons. kys Black person.

  3. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Because it's a natural human instinct to be disgusted by gays, that is if you're not already mentally ill.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      It is a natural human instinct to hate morons, but I don't think they should burn in a fire for all eternity. That's your spiteful israeli lineage speaking for you.

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        >It is a natural human instinct to hate morons
        No it isn't. But besides that, being gay is a choice while being moronic isn't.

        • 8 months ago
          Anonymous

          >No it isn't.
          Sorry to hear you have brain damage.
          >being gay is a choice
          It isn't. Engaging in it is a choice.

  4. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Homosexuality, to some extent, implies thinking for oneself.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      You tell that to yourself homosexual

  5. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    sexuality in (almost) all religions is highly "regulated" and the ideal is a married couple having sex for procreation, everything else is a form of hedonism and weakness because you succumb to your basest desires.
    Homosexuality is failing to contain your most degenerated hedonistic urges, which are also unnatural because they will not even produce a child.
    And this idea of sexual morality is even pre-Christian, see the Stoic Gaius Musonius Rufus' On Sexual Indulgence

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      >which are also unnatural because they will not even produce a child.
      You heard that, infertile couples? Stop having sex right now or burn in Hell.

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        according to Stoicism, yes. This is the logical conclusion which Rufus explicitly said in "What is the Chief End of Marriage?". Well, without the hell-part, Stoicism "just" believed it would be against a virtuous life.

        Everyone desires procreating above all else, so this post is just more israeli nonsense.

        I explicitly picked a non-Abrahamic example, but ok. Wanna do Buddhism or Daoism next?

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      Everyone desires procreating above all else, so this post is just more israeli nonsense.

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Everyone desires procreating above all else
        What are priests, monks, ascetics, etc???

        • 8 months ago
          Anonymous

          People that rejected their natural desires to be degenerates?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >taking dicks up the ass is a natural desire. If you don't partake you are le degenerate
            The insane copes people come up with to justify their homosexualry...

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            All of those groups take dick up the ass.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      >ideal é um casal fazendo sexo para procriação, todo o resto é uma forma de hedonismo e fraqueza porque você sucumbe aos seus desejos mais básicos.
      I know this thread isnt about this, but masturbation is not only natural, as for diogenes, important cynic philosopher and strong influence on stoicism, it would be great if it was possible to erase hunger by rubbing the belly.
      so i don't think God doesn't want you to have sexual pleasure.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      according to Stoicism, yes. This is the logical conclusion which Rufus explicitly said in "What is the Chief End of Marriage?". Well, without the hell-part, Stoicism "just" believed it would be against a virtuous life.

      [...]
      I explicitly picked a non-Abrahamic example, but ok. Wanna do Buddhism or Daoism next?

      Numa Pompilius, the founder of the Roman religion (for simplicity), was explicitly told by Jupiter to forbid and prevent male homosexuality. Whether that means that Jove is okay with lesbians or is confirming the "there are no lesbians" theory is up to you, but he doesn't want the packing of fudge. Also, the Germanics punished male homosexuality with death. Numa lived circa 750BC, the Proto-Germanic language was spoken circa 500BC, Tacitus reports homosexuality being a crime roughly around 0AD in , the Gragas laws confirm homosexuality having been a crime in Scandinavia circa 900AD, homosexuality is a crime in both Zoroastrians and the Vedas (both around circa 1100BC), so we can safely say that disliking homosexuality has a very old (circa 1000BC) Indo-European religious history.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      That doesn't mean that homosexuality has to be barred completely. Then why not allow people to enjoy the passion of homosexual lover while the wife is pregnant?
      >which are also unnatural
      Wanting to ejaculate is very natural.

  6. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    >being gay is a choice
    Willfully ignorant.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Some things correlate with my homosexualry
      >THAT MEANS I HAVE NO CHOICE IN IT

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        >i-it's just a bunch of coincidences, I have a choice in being a hateful piece of shi-I mean you chose to be gay!

        • 8 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Black folk correlate with violent crime and low IQ, that means Black folk have no choice in being moronic violent criminals
          You wouldn't agree with that though, would you?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Nigs are indeed predisposed to be somewhat violent and lazy, but they still have a choice. Homosexuality is not comparable to being a criminal, and can't be transformed to heterosexuality. Exodus closed for a reason.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      what kind of fricking moronic gay pseudo-science is this?

  7. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Why have Abrahamic religions and their followers always had such a big issue with homosexuality in particular?
    They haven't. That's just a recent phenomenon that has nothing to do with Christianity or the Bible. Homosexuality isn't condemned in scripture. Just its utility as a pagan worship practice.

  8. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    What's "natural" for one person may not be "natural" for others. If the word "natural" only exists to reinforce collectivist ideas of what humanity ought to be, then it's a subversive and disingenuous term only meant to diminish a species of individuals.
    Which is about right for the israeli cult of submission.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      >What's "natural" for one person may not be "natural" for others.
      Yeah bud good thing you didn't fall for subversion like relativism huh?

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        You don't have to if you have a consistent perspective. I don't find your death cult to have any value whatsoever.

        • 8 months ago
          Anonymous

          Relativism. Consistent. Right.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            I explicitly don't have a relativist perspective. If I did, I'd consider your israeli garbage valid in its own way.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            You're the one who wrote "What's "natural" for one person may not be "natural" for others. ", right? The sentence that relativizes a term. Complete subjective relativity. Right?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            It isn't natural for you to be on this imageboard, but it ultimately harms no one (other than the people that have to read you're moronic bullshit). It is fine to be a relativist in that sense, yes.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            There is nothing relativistic about what you just wrote.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            OK, israelite.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            cope

  9. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Heterosexual men have ruined sexuality for everyone:
    >give women power, ruining heterosexual relationships forever
    >pretend to believe in ascetic religions to make people feel better at being sexually miserable
    >forbid gay sex, then allow the most outrageous elements of gay people to represent that community and ruin it

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      There is nothing religious about it, its common sense that playing with intestines its one of the most foul, disgusting and unhygienic things one can do with the body. Then it damages society by all the disease they spread, they are the champs of most stds.
      Also '''''homosexuality''''' doesnt exist. Sexuality is that which in species with sexual reproduction unites the male and female gametes. Throwing gametes on weird places is paraphilia, perversion, disorder, not a sexuality. Society needs to take back language from the crazies.

      '''gay sex''' oxymoron. Playing with intestines isnt sex.

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        Christisraelites literally only have word games to back up anything they believe in. Is there a reason you believe someone should burn in eternal hell for something they do amongst themselves or are you just a fricking moron?

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Playing with intestines isnt sex.
        Strawman, bandwagon fallacy. I denounce anal sex.

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        Is swordfighting with your bro okay?

  10. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Reminder that there is zero reason to believe Hadrian was gay and that Antinous was revered in a healing cult because he offered himself as a human sacrifice fir Hadrians health.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous
      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Hadrian
        >Greek
        lol calm down homo

        • 8 months ago
          Anonymous

          No one said he was greek, but it's the same moronic non-argument from coping sandBlack folk like you.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            SandBlack folk have a long history of Bacha Bazi while white people were burning homosexuals like you on a stake, sorry to burst your little bubble.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            More cope from a "white" guy whose ideology is conveniently owned by sandBlack folk.

  11. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Historically, homosexuals were all murderers and lechers and child rapists. Wonder what changed. Oh yeah, that's right, nothing.

  12. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    because all abrahamic religions are ascetic desert religions. at their core, they are proscriptions for survival, not morality. when the quran says
    >dont eat pigs
    it's telling you that hog meat is dangerous and likely to go bad quickly in the desert, while other meats are safer.
    when the old testament says
    >circumcise yourself
    its telling you to cut off your foreskin to keep your nasty dick clean and free of disease, important in a time with little water or bathing.

    so when they say
    >homosexuality bad
    what they're saying is "sexual contact not for the purpose of procreation distracts you from survival, cut it out"

    it's as simple as that. now, as for why people follow stone age desert survival manuals in the modern day, i can't tell you.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      >now, as for why people follow stone age desert survival manuals in the modern day, i can't tell you.
      I think you know why

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      >its telling you to cut off your foreskin to keep your nasty dick clean and free of disease, important in a time with little water or bathing.
      Why are cuties so obsessed with this pathetic cope? You do realize you can pull the foreskin back, right?

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      So why did pagans in plentiful western european countries hang their homosexuals then toss them into bogs? Huh?

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        Are you saying that's justified or do you have an actual point?

        • 8 months ago
          Anonymous

          Completely justified. If the anti-homophilia of the Abrahamic religions stems from survivalism, why would they kill homosexuals in places where survival is quite easy?

          >plentiful western european countries
          i certainly wouldn't call the half-agrarian, half hunter-gatherer lifestyles of european tribes "plentiful"

          Europe is extremely bountiful compared to the deserts of the near east.

          The same pagans that regularly practiced human sacrifice?

          Not the ones in the Bible.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Completely justified.
            Go do it then, sandBlack person.

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        >plentiful western european countries
        i certainly wouldn't call the half-agrarian, half hunter-gatherer lifestyles of european tribes "plentiful"

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        The same pagans that regularly practiced human sacrifice?

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      Sounds like that last thing is a good piece of advice in any environment. Obviously any culture that doesn't encourage sex for procreation won't continue to exist more than a few generations. As an example, Emperor Augustus literally made a law ordering everyone to get married (in Latin: Maritandis Ordinibus) so as to prevent Rome from suffering this fate.

  13. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Why have Abrahamic religions and their followers always had such a big issue with homosexuality in particular?
    The Rabbinicalist (so called israelites) have no issue with it.

  14. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    why do secular americans have an issue with a 35 year old man and 18 year old girl having a consensual relationship?

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      Clearly there's something wrong with the 35 year old if he's hooking up teenagers.

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        why is there something wrong? both are at the peak of their prime respect to gender. That age pairing was common and recommended throughout civilization until the last 20 years in america

        • 8 months ago
          Anonymous

          He should already be married or at least have a gf. Going after barely legal girls is just skeevy. You have nothing in common with her. It's just for sex and everyone knows it.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            and if he marries her? Age doesn't mean you will have something in common, if you don't have the same interest, values and hobbies then being the same age doesn't matter. You're throwing talking points like an npc who has been brainwashed to think age gaps are bad. there's a reason they want you thinking this way

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Him marrying a barely legal girl only solidifies it since the man had less than a year to get to know her and the girl is clearly naive because she married a guy almost twice her age in less than a year, which now makes you look more like an abuser. Like I said, everyone would know you're doing it for sex.
            >Age doesn't mean you will have something in common
            The idea is if you're married with someone it's because you have something in common with them and not choosing at random.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            how does that make them look like an abuser? If the relationship is consensual and there isn't any abuse then he isn't an abuser. You can have many things in common with younger people as mentioned above. Age doesn't mean you will have something in common

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Because you're going after young, naive girls rather than women your age who you can actually relate to and who are a lot less likely to put up your bullshit. There's so many fish in the sea, you would choose the one still in high school who has next to nothing of her own and has barely any real world experience. The relationship comes across as predatory in nature (because it is).

            It would be obvious to everyone that you're only in it for the sex and not an actual connection.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            A younger woman is more pure than an older woman, has less sexual partners most of the time or is a virgin, and will make a better wife. The more partners a woman has, the more her psychology becomes messed up.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            And somehow you sullying her with your impurity at 35 is better than a young man who shares her purity marrying her? This only reinforces the idea that you're an abuser.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            No, because an older man is more mature and ready for marriage and to take care of a woman, provide her with security. A young man cannot provide her with much security and usually going men want to frick around for years or are immature before settling down.

            "Abuser"

            Lol, stfu. Only Americans and Brits think like this. The old world has a totally different viewpoint than you.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            You're grasping at straws. If that's your argument, then it would be more sensible to let only the wealthy have access to women since you could not protect your wife from their guards and weaponry and he clearly has more wits and resources than you given his immense success and power over you. In that case, a wealthy young man has more rights to women than you, some 35 yr old bum that couldn't lock it down with a woman when he was young.

            The fact that you have to go through all of these mental hoops only shows that your belief has no good basis. You're just a weird dude that wants to frick young girls. Be honest.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            But I am 35 years old and wealthy. So I don't get your point. As a 35 year old if I date a 18 year old in america it is considered socially creepy. In the rest of the world it isn't.

            All you're doing is taking what is CURRENTLY socially acceptable in the USA (which these days is laughable) and applying it.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Then you should already be married instead waiting until 35 to marry a young woman and a wealthy young man can marry a young woman.Nothing changes.

            Why won't you just admit you're a pedo? Be upfront about it. We already know it's true.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Pedo means pre pubescent. You're an idiot. Let america go to shit and enjoy your roasties. If you're a female, seethe then at being a roastie.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            The wealthy do have access to more women and always have. What the frick is your point Here?

  15. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    because God gave us free will which is why Abrahamic religious bigots feel the need to take away the free will of others.
    that and focusing on gays is an extremely easy target for them to use as a political tool. Just blame all the woes of the economy/world on the gays and watch the votes come pouring in.

  16. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    It's pretty much sex negative in general but tolerates heterosex because it makes more little believers.

  17. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    There is no proctologist on earth that will recommend anal sex
    A religion prohibiting gay sex is perfectly rational
    Before industrialization, everybody lived at subsistence level, people had like 8 kids and only 3 or 4 would survive to adulthood
    A behaviour that diminished the birth rate was harmful, and it was logical to outlaw it
    Another reason why it made sense for religion to punish homosexuality is public health
    Anal sex is unsanitary, it makes people be in close contact with blood and fecal matter. Before modernity, gay sex would harm your butthole, and also diminish your lifespan through the diseases you would catch, which later you could pass on to other people

    The "anti homosexuality is irrational, makes no sense, exists for no reason" idea modern people have is pure cope.
    It was perfectly rational for religions to have a very negative view of homosexuality.
    Even in the present age, homosexuals have a cartoonish number of sex partners, and the only thing which could moderate their sexual apetite was AIDS for a few years
    Have you forgotten how Monkeypox, very recently, only affected the homosexual community? Imagine that in an iron age enviroment

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      sounds like you're okay with gays giving each other bjs and handjobs

  18. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    >all this equivocation about the health ramifications of buttsex
    so if our sphincters were made of titanium, everyone itt would be cool with guys buttblasting each other, right?

  19. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    If a human chooses homosexuality, they are choosing to do their own will over God's will. Aside from scripture, you know it's against God's will mainly because it's a perversion of the natural order (animals do gay stuff, but lack the intellect or will to control themselves. Humans are held to a higher standard). If the sinner has repented and confessed all grave sins, then he will not go to hell.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      >If a human chooses homosexuality, they are choosing

      Tell me you're bisexual and cosplaying straight without TELLING me you're bisexual and cosplaying straight.

      You know, straight people and gay people aren't making a conscious choice on what to act on. Be who you are, anon.

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        >You know, straight people and gay people aren't making a conscious choice on what to act on.
        Yes they are, that's the entirety of human behavior, being able to control your impulses. You did not choose to have those impulses, but it is definitely your choise to act upon them or not.

        • 8 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Yes they are
          >You did not choose to have those impulses, but it is definitely your choise to act upon them or not.

          You've been mislead. That's not heterosexuality. That's bisexuality with restraint from same-sex conduct.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Why does it have to be one or the other? Why can't I both have no desire to have sex with members of my own gender, while at the same time consciously making the decision to not have sex with the members of my own gender? Both can be true.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Having the self-control to not do things you have no desire to do anyways requires no self-control.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Read Aquinas.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Both can't really be true. If you resolve to not have romantic/sexual relations with the same sex, that's one thing. But if it was never an option, then it's not really a resolve. It's like a principle viewpoint instead.

            Love is love btw

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Both can't really be true.
            Yes they can, I just demonstraded it.
            >But if it was never an option, then it's not really a resolve.
            >Hey do you want to have gay sex.
            >No.
            There.
            >Love is love btw
            Meaningless tautology.

        • 8 months ago
          Anonymous

          Being able to control impulses, and having those impulses are not the same thing.
          I do not need impulse control to not jump off a bridge.
          I do not need impulse control to not eat straight out of a can of sardines.

          Straight guys don't need impulse control to not frick dudes.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Being able to control impulses, and having those impulses are not the same thing.
            I.....know? That was my point. Even if you do have those impulses, you still have the ability to resist them and not act upon them. So homosexuals are not off the hook here, they still made the choice.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Gay people don't have a romantic/sexual impulse toward women. So how is it is a choice if they act in line with the only romantic and/or sexual impulse they do have, which is toward the same sex? You're being cruel and unfair.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >So how is it is a choice if they act in line with the only romantic and/or sexual impulse they do have, which is toward the same sex?
            You can choose to just not do it, straight people make similar choices all the time, when they consciously decide to not have affairs, or have sex with people they know they shouldn't, people are perfectly capable of resisting their desires. It's just homosexuals that go
            >BORN THIS WAY YASSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS QUEEEEEEN
            To free themeslves of the responsibility of their actions.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Choosing not to be faithless to an established partner or not engage in promiscuous or lewd activity is not the same as choosing to not act out even the smallest romantic or sexual impulse that might naturally occur to you. Don't be moronic by conflating the two.

            >To free themeslves of the responsibility of their actions.

            And what is the responsibility? Speak, if you know.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Choosing not to be faithless to an established partner or not engage in promiscuous or lewd activity is not the same as choosing to not act out even the smallest romantic or sexual impulse that might naturally occur to you.
            It is EXACTLY the same, you walk across the street, you see an atractive woman, but you resist your naturally arisign romantic or sexual sentiments towards her because you know you're in a relationship with someone else. In both cases they're resisting theyr natural impulses, because something being "natural" doesn't make it right.
            >And what is the responsibility?
            The responsibility of being degenerates.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >The responsibility of being degenerates.
            You kicked the can down the road. Two consenting adults who as not hurting each other or anyone else have nothing to be held to account for.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Two consenting adults
            Consent means nothing when egaging in depraved behavior.
            >who as not hurting each other or anyone else
            Of course they are, their anuses sure as frick are getting damaged.
            >have nothing to be held to account for.
            Yes, to God.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            <Consent means nothing when egaging in depraved behavior.

            That's a stupid thing to say.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Yes, to God.

            God has a criterion. On account of what, specifically, is there wrongdoing, in relation to god's criterion?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >God has a criterion. On account of what, specifically, is there wrongdoing, in relation to god's criterion?
            Anything that displeases God is what makes it evil. God telling us to not do something is more than enough justification to not do it.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Anything that displeases God is what makes it evil. God telling us to not do something is more than enough justification to not do it.

            Where did God say "Do not be gay or act gay?"

            >inb4 leviticus

            Follow it all or be ashamed for a long time.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            The prohibition on homosexuality is part of the moral law, which still stands, unlike ritual or purity laws which were overturned.

            I honestly don't care what you think is depraved.

            Who cares what you think at all? It's about God.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            You are not God

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            He knows he is not God. The problem is that you still think that you are your own God, like a child. You will grow in wisdom as you keep working through the tough questions.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            I don't reject homosexuality out of my own volition, I reject it because God rejects it.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            When has he rejected it?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Leviticus 18:22
            >You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Proof this is a command from God and for all people?
            Seems to me I remember this being a command given specifically to a Canaanite tribe by their national god.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Proof this is a command from God and for all people?
            I believe it. I don't care if you do.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            I don't believe it and don't care if you do.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            The interpretation of that has been hotly contested for centuries. Need better proof.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Nah, not really, it's only until very recently that liberal theologias started twisting the frick out of the text and engaging in what is basically pilpul to ignore it.
            And here is the thing, even if I were to concede to you that it is contested, you have to admit that it is a perfectly valid and possible interpretation, and one such as myself that interprets it as such is perfectly justified in doing so, it is a completely reasonable reading of the text. So get off my back.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            You aren't interpreting the original Hebrew. You're interpreting an interpretation from the original Hebrew from people who have an extreme bias against homosexuality. You interpretation is inherently biased from the beginning.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >You aren't interpreting the original Hebrew.
            Because it never existed.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >original Hebrew
            The existence of ancient Hebrew is a myth created by modern israelitery.
            Everytime I see a text referred as ancient Hebrew it turns out to be Phonecian.
            In short ancient "Hebrew" is just what israelites like to call Phonecian text.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >The existence of ancient Hebrew is a myth created by modern israelitery.
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Hebrew_writings

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            > Wikipedia article
            Is this a joke?
            Or are you a israelite?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Nothing in your israelitepedia article refutes what I said.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >The prohibition on homosexuality is part of the moral law, which still stands, unlike ritual or purity laws which were overturned.

            No. It's something handed down by a human, with no authority from God. You've got some human in your "God said it and meant it" file. Get ride of it. Purify your regard for god of hearsay and wrong viewpoints.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >No. It's something handed down by a human, with no authority from God.
            I care very little about what a nonbeliever has to say about my Scriptuires.
            >You've got some human in your "God said it and meant it" file.
            The Law comes directly from God.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >I care very little about what a nonbeliever has to say about my Scriptuires.

            I'm not a nonbeliever. I don't think I've be talking with you so long and out of compassion for you if I were a nonbeliever.

            I believe in God and I don't take the words of my parents or a preacher as God's law. I'm able to read the same books they refer to and judge for myself whether they are well-reasoned and well-explained or not. They often are not.

            Do you accept the basic fact that you're misusing your body and introducing a part of your body into an opening that was not meant to receive it?

            There is not "using" or "misusing" the body. The body isn't a resource. There is good bodily conduct and there is bad bodily conduct. There is skillful conduct and unskillful conduct.

            Tell me right now that Gay sex is bad conduct and/or unskillful conduct and I'll continue to speak to you on the basis of what is good and bad and what is skillful and unskillful.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >I'm not a nonbeliever.
            What I mean by nonbeliever is that you're not a Christian, I don't care if you're a theist.
            >There is not "using" or "misusing" the body.
            Of course there is, ask any doctor.
            >Tell me right now that Gay sex is bad conduct and/or unskillful
            Can you conceive a child through gay sex? You know, the reason why sex exists at all?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Can you conceive a child through gay sex? You know, the reason why sex exists at all?

            Did God tell you that's why sex exists or was it a human? What humans are you allowing to play the role of god in your life, piece-by-piece? Stop that and you'll be happier and more at peace.

            I am a christian.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Did God tell you that's why sex exists or was it a human?
            God.
            >What humans are you allowing to play the role of god in your life, piece-by-piece?
            None.
            >I am a christian.
            No, you're not.

            You aren't interpreting the original Hebrew. You're interpreting an interpretation from the original Hebrew from people who have an extreme bias against homosexuality. You interpretation is inherently biased from the beginning.

            >You aren't interpreting the original Hebrew. You're interpreting an interpretation from the original Hebrew from people who have an extreme bias against homosexuality.
            I could say exactly the same about the scholars who contest that meaning, they're also interpreting the original Hebrew from people who have an extreme bias in favor of homosexuality.
            >You interpretation is inherently biased from the beginning.
            So is yours, get off your high horse.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >>Did God tell you that's why sex exists or was it a human?
            >God.
            >>What humans are you allowing to play the role of god in your life, piece-by-piece?
            >None.
            >>I am a christian.
            >No, you're not.

            I think you've started to be dishonest here. I'm not saying that's true. But I think you have.

            Be honest with yourself at least. Be at peace now and later.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >I think you've started to be dishonest here.
            How?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            It's just a feeling/intuition I got from comparing everything you said and didn't say before and how you said it to what you said there and how you said.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >I could say exactly the same about the scholars who contest that meaning, they're also interpreting the original Hebrew from people who have an extreme bias in favor of homosexuality
            Nobody says the bible outright permits homosexuality unlike homophobes who suggest it does. The main consensus among people who actually care for an accurate interpretation is that it's inconclusive given the strange choice of words in Leviticus 18:22. That's why I asked for better proof.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Nobody says the bible outright permits homosexuality unlike homophobes who suggest it does.
            That's quite literally what the Progressive Christian movement bends over backwards defending.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >handed down by a human
            Forged over the entire collective history of Man with philosophies, theologies, and huge institutions dedicated to these questions. You are the outlier.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            If you've taken your preacher for your God just say that. That's stupid and will only be for your long-term suffering in the here-and-now and later. It'd be better if you reason for yourself on the basis of whether something is really well-reasoned or just handed down with the air of authority.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            I would agree with you there. Man is fallible. Man is not God. But, surely you can see the value of wisdom passed down from tradition?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >But, surely you can see the value of wisdom passed down from tradition?

            What is wise, well-reasoned and/or well-explained is worth following, whether it comes from an old man, from a dusty tome, or from a child who is seven years old.

            There is no better criterion than investigation of qualities and rational application of mind.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Could be a bit prideful to disregard the wisdom of traditions. I'm not asking if you take it 100% on Gospel truth, just if you recognize the value in it, even a little.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Could be a bit prideful to disregard the wisdom of traditions.

            I didn't say I disregard the wisdom of traditions. I thought I implied that I do not give more credence to ideas because they seem old. Just because something is old doesn't mean its right. Just because something is young, doesn't mean its wrong.

            I investigate to see if whatever it is it conducive to good or evil, to peace or distress, to contentment or greed and then I act according to what is good and right and praiseworthy by the wise.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Maybe I misinterpreted what you said. Thanks for clarifying. Good luck on your quests. I've got an early morning.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Good night anon. I'm right and I hope you realize it eventually.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            There are many traditions and many bad ones. Tradition is not something that must be valued and lived by in and of itself.
            You can honor your German heritage without sacrificing your enemies to Wotan.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            You are asking the right questions. You will get there. God loves you.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            I honestly don't care what you think is depraved.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >who are not hurting each other
            Anal sex is notoriously harmful to the body of the recipient and introduces a litany of risks for diseases. Who would have thought sticking your dick in shit might not be the best idea?

            >or anyone else
            The diseases, again. Homosexual sex is a behaviour that has no capacity for good beyond a highly subjective "pleasure". Heterosexual sex, in principle, introduces life into the world. What does homosexual sex offer to make it equal to that? A prolapse?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Anal sex is notoriously harmful to the body of the recipient and introduces a litany of risks for diseases. Who would have thought sticking your dick in shit might not be the best idea?

            That's not true. I'd know, I've done it. I've spoken to people who have done it and do do it. I think they know more about what happens during and after sex than someone who, I presume, only knows from non-gays what happens.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Do you accept the basic fact that you're misusing your body and introducing a part of your body into an opening that was not meant to receive it?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            If you have to literally undergo extensive preparation beforehand to reduce the risk of harm, it doesn't really help you prove it is a natural use of the body. You can literally, on a physiological and neurological level feel that a foreign object entering your ass is "wrong" or "sketchy". You do not get this same sensation with heterosexual sex.

            >I care very little about what a nonbeliever has to say about my Scriptuires.

            I'm not a nonbeliever. I don't think I've be talking with you so long and out of compassion for you if I were a nonbeliever.

            I believe in God and I don't take the words of my parents or a preacher as God's law. I'm able to read the same books they refer to and judge for myself whether they are well-reasoned and well-explained or not. They often are not.

            [...]
            There is not "using" or "misusing" the body. The body isn't a resource. There is good bodily conduct and there is bad bodily conduct. There is skillful conduct and unskillful conduct.

            Tell me right now that Gay sex is bad conduct and/or unskillful conduct and I'll continue to speak to you on the basis of what is good and bad and what is skillful and unskillful.

            >There is not "using" or "misusing" the body. The body isn't a resource. There is good bodily conduct and there is bad bodily conduct.

            Literal semantics. Misusing or engaging in bad bodily conduct is conduct that is inherently detrimental to the body or against the principles of the body's design (which do exist). You masticate food using your mouth and teeth, not by taking food and stomping it under your feet. You use your ass to shit, not to insert foreign objects. You use your dick to piss (excreting waste product) and to frick (create biological life).

            >Heterosexual sex, in principle, introduces life into the world.

            You say that like it's a good thing. I don't think it is. The world sucks. Get yourself perfect before trying to create new life.

            >I don't think it is
            I really don't care.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >You can literally, on a physiological and neurological level feel that a foreign object entering your ass is "wrong" or "sketchy". You do not get this same sensation with heterosexual sex.

            So you're speaking for people who have anal sex and women who have vegana sex now?

            Or are have you transgressed the boundary of only saying what you know? I wish you wouldn't say what you don't know to be a fact.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            You don't know what I know.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Heterosexual sex, in principle, introduces life into the world.

            You say that like it's a good thing. I don't think it is. The world sucks. Get yourself perfect before trying to create new life.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            "homosexuality" is not the act of currently engaging in gay sex, it's a sexual preference for men.
            That's the issue here, your first post was conflating sexuality with actively participating in gay sex.
            You don't cease to be straight because you're a virgin for example

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        The Intellect produces many possible courses of action, including taking it up the pooper. The Will chooses the best course of action. I never chose to pursue gay stuff because I know it's wrong, even though they have come up as possibilities. Same reason I don't entertain thoughts of jumping off a high ledge when I get close or swerving to knock down Mail boxes on the road. But, if you endulge those thoughts and invite the Devil to steer your mind, then you become perverse, like gays. But, there's hope for all of us sinners.

        • 8 months ago
          Anonymous

          >I never chose to pursue gay stuff because I know it's wrong, even though they have come up as possibilities

        • 8 months ago
          Anonymous

          That's wild. If you don't want to act on your naturally arising romantic or sexual sentiment toward the same sex, that's you're business. But leave God out of it. That's all YOUR choice.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            I think you understand, but are stumped. You are just trolling at this point.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Someone can't understand and be stumped at the same time. I think you are muddled in your mindfulness. You have personal growth to achieve.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Understand my argument, but are stumped in that you cannot argue against it. Evident by the continued trolling.

  20. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    I think it's a cultural/spiritual bias given religious overtones. In the same way an abusive father or mother might give religious justifications for their abuse, men and women in society do the same for their obscure viewpoints.

  21. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    It seems that humans are preprogrammed to accelerate the destruction of the planet slowly and brutally. Everyone knows this deep down but they pretend not to, homosexuality reminds them of this, and that's why they hate it

  22. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Homosexuality hurts birthrates and familial stability, and Yahweh as in the OT is more concerned with the well-being of the people of Israel rather than with individual morality.. The NT undid those laws, but homosexuality apparently wasn't universal enough to warrant being overturned like the dietary laws were.

  23. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    it's ok OP, even if you won't admit you are a homosexual, we already know you are one and will suffer consequences of such degeneracy, either here or in the afterlife, or maybe both

  24. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    In the criminal justice system,sexually based offenses are considered especially heinous.
    In New York City, the dedicated detectives who investigate these vicious felonies are membersof an elite squad known as the Special Victims Unit.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *