The you don't want to get involved in this discussion thread (split)

[unioncityvol]

I think it's rather obvious that the bible says its wrong. I mean its called Sodomy. Named after the city destroyed for homosexuality. Religion however is being deemed a non factor when considering things to be socially acceptable or not. Thus people are ignoring its religious relevance. Leading our country to be more and more like Sodom unfortunately. Hopefully our fate is better than theirs.

 

[RockVol]

I'm just waiting for Bruin to post in here.

Soon...

Maybe he is...

 

[OddFuture]

Maybe he is...

Hmmm. I miss Bruin's constant argumentative posts. I never had a problem with the dude.

 

[volprof]

I think it's rather obvious that the bible says its wrong. I mean its called Sodomy. Named after the city destroyed for homosexuality. Religion however is being deemed a non factor when considering things to be socially acceptable or not. Thus people are ignoring its religious relevance. Leading our country to be more and more like Sodom unfortunately. Hopefully our fate is better than theirs.

Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because people were raping one another. The crowd wanted to rape the visiting angels, so Lot did the only other "practical" thing and gave them his daughters. Interpret that action however you will, but do not conflate those people's downfall with homosexuality between consenting adults.

 

[jjay2518]

Sorry, tried to stay away, but couldn't.

Romans 1:26-28

"For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done."

The bible says it is a choice, so you cannot be upset with Christians for believing that it is a choice since our Holy Book says that it is.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm not upset with someone for believing their sexuality is a choice. I just don't agree with it.

I'll play devil's advocate on this because I enjoy the debate. I am far from a biblical scholar though so take this with a grain of salt....I think we can all agree that there are some people who choose to try the other side of things after being straight. What if the passage you quoted is speaking just to that subset of people? What about the people who didn't "give up/exchange natural relations", the ones who have only known homosexuality? Could that passage be interpreted to not include them?

 

[cwbytruckers]

Although no one has said this specifically yet, I know it will come in the days ahead with this debate. For those of you who think homosexuality is simply explainable by being "a person's choice," then I'll give you a task: go and be gay for an extended period of time, particularly in a culture that labels you somehow "other" in doing so. Go. Just go and be gay. Have lots of gay relations. I mean it's just a choice, isn't it? You can be gay too. So go be gay.

Not that simple, is it?

Well said.

 

[RockVol]

.

 

[jjay2518]

Certainly. You can also argue that gravity does not exist.

I don't think it would be a wise argument. Factors like this which limit population (k-value) are brought on by outside sources (think of diseases or viruses). It is not as if our genetics can detect overpopulation, and then start putting more "homo" genes in our genetic code.

For an appropriate example of how these things change: a woodpecker didn't decide to grow a longer beak because it allowed him to penetrate wood better and get more food. It was a slow process in which birds born with longer beaks were healthier, lived longer, and reproduced more because they were able to find a better food source.

The woodpecker population declined because they were overcrowding each other, and viruses that typically got fought off, were passed between each other at faster rates and mutated to the point that their immune systems couldn't combat the virus.

Interesting, I'm by no means claiming expertise on genetics or evolution. More just thinking out loud (or the typing equivalent of that).

Also your point would have been equally valid without the condescending opening.

 

[cwbytruckers]

To everyone who says its a choice. Tell me when you made the choice. I never did. I just am who I am. Doesn't matter if its boys are girls. That doesn't define me. My faith. My parents. My upbringing defines me. And like I said. Doesn't matter if its boys are girls.

 

[RockVol]

I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm not upset with someone for believing their sexuality is a choice. I just don't agree with it.

I'll play devil's advocate on this because I enjoy the debate. I am far from a biblical scholar though so take this with a grain of salt....I think we can all agree that there are some people who choose to try the other side of things after being straight. What if the passage you quoted is speaking just to that subset of people? What about the people who didn't "give up/exchange natural relations", the ones who have only known homosexuality? Could that passage be interpreted to not include them?

I'm not a Bible scholar either and I also love a good debate. No need for the personal attacks that get thrown around so often. The Bible can be interpreted in many different ways. One believer may think it means one thing, while another thinks it means something entirely different. To answer your question, this excerpt is talking about an extremely sinful city that God eventually destroyed. But to be honest, I don't know everything about the Bible or claim to. Guess we'll all find out one day.

 

[seaofORANGE22]

What about it isn't hateful?

I guess it depends on your core belief about the state of man. Whether or not man on his own, deserves heaven or hell.

If it was agreed that you were rotten to the core and you truly believed that, then it might seem a lot more loving to think that a God who created you and your entire world decided to forgive you specifically.

The entire basis for his beliefs is wholly contingent on the idea that none of us deserve God's love, because we constantly reject it and make everything but God the primary god in our lives. Like me and this damn football team we all love.

It's unfair to judge Christ by his Christians. They're mostly the worst of the bunch. But the good ones will be the first to tell you that.

And that being said I totally get how that comes off as self deprecation. But I can't change that. I can only ask that you take a look at it from someone else's shoes.

 

[unioncityvol]

Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because people were raping one another. The crowd wanted to rape the visiting angels, so Lot did the only other "practical" thing and gave them his daughters. Interpret that action however you will, but do not conflate those people's downfall with homosexuality between consenting adults.

Dang it. No wonder I got a C in Old Testament back at Bethel.

 

[Mike4Vols]

Damn train wreck up in here.

 

[jjay2518]

I'm not a Bible scholar either and I also love a good debate. No need for personal attacks that get thrown around so often. The Bible can be interpreted in many different ways. One believer may think it means one thing, while another thinks it means something entirely different. To answer your question, this excerpt is talking about an extremely sinful city that God eventually destroyed. But to be honest, I don't know everything about the Bible or claim to. Guess we'll all find out one day.

Indeed we will.

Sadly it's pretty uncommon for people to be able to civilly discuss these sorts of things. Everyone should explore their belief system well enough to be able to maturely discuss it with others who don't feel the same way. Hats off to you for doing this right.

 

[RockVol]

I can't believe all of this started with just one tweet about Michael Sam!

 

[BlueHalo]

Interesting, I'm by no means claiming expertise on genetics or evolution. More just thinking out loud (or the typing equivalent of that).

Also your point would have been equally valid without the condescending opening.

I'm not either. I just feel that one side gets misrepresented as being unintelligent, about as much as the other side gets credit for being more educated.

As cwbytruckers so clearly shows, that is not at all the reality of the situation.

You can't preach open-mindedness and acceptance of sub-cultures, and then turn your head and make fun of someone for their religion. Drives me crazy how people use hot button phrases to fit their agenda when the moment suits their purpose. These people are as selective in their acceptance of others as the people they condemn.

Edit: didn't mean to be condescending at all. Literally just wanted to make a point that everything was theory. My bad, I can see how it would be taken that way. Honestly, you brought up a good point imo.

 

[volprof]

I can't believe all of this started with just one tweet about Michael Sam!

I can. We love talking about homosexuality as a culture almost as much as we like talking about sports.

 

[RockVol]

Indeed we will.

Sadly it's pretty uncommon for people to be able to civilly discuss these sorts of things. Everyone should explore their belief system well enough to be able to maturely discuss it with others who don't feel the same way. Hats off to you for doing this right.

+1, people get too carried away with politics and beliefs. It causes some people to just flat out hate those who disagree with them. People get too caught up in Republican, Democrat,mConservative, Libral, Straight, Gay, Christian, Atheist, Black, White, Mexican, Asian, etc. In the end we are all humans beings. Hats off to you too.:hi:

 

[seaofORANGE22]

I'm not either. I just feel that one side gets misrepresented as being unintelligent, about as much as the other side gets credit for being more educated.

As cwbytruckers so clearly shows, that is not at all the reality of the situation.

You can't preach open-mindedness and acceptance of sub-cultures, and then turn your head and make fun of someone for their religion. Drives me crazy how people use hot button phrases to fit their agenda when the moment suits their purpose. These people are as selective in their acceptance of others as the people they condemn.

Edit: didn't mean to be condescending at all. Literally just wanted to make a point that everything was theory. My bad, I can see how it would be taken that way. Honestly, you brought up a good point imo.

Really good post

 

[volprof]

The NBC announcer for the Normal Hill event said that the gold medalist handled the hill like he had married her. If we don't keep vigilant, next thing you know there's going to be unnatural relations between men and ski slopes.

 

[ShowSomePride]

Wait, legit question. Is anal sex with a woman considered a sin?

 

[BlueHalo]

Wait, legit question. Is anal sex with a woman considered a sin?

To most women, probably.

 

[unioncityvol]

Wait, legit question. Is anal sex with a woman considered a sin?

If you aren't married

 

[SamQB7]

Another "closet-breaker". Consider the following....

Although it will probably change in the next few years, public bathrooms are separated by gender for modesty (remember that word?) and privacy's sake. This has and is done b/c of the natural attraction between male and female. Considering some (less than 2% of total population) of men are attracted to men, then shouldn't they have their own bathrooms, locker rooms, etc. for modesty and privacy's sake? If you're heterosexual, would you want a man glaring at your manhood? What about your pre-teen or teenage son - who leaves your dinner table at a restaurant b/c nature calls. Would you want a non-heterosexual glaring at him at the stand-up urinal? I'm not saying that all homosexuals behave in this fashion, but I'm not naive, gullible and stupid enough to believe none of them do either (just like a few heterosexual men glaring at hooters at Hooters). So open-minded, accepting of all, nothing-is-outside-the-boundaries thinkers - what do we do now?

Although he is certainly free to declare his sexuality and practice his passions with any of like-mindedness (thanks to many US military personnel and their sacrifices - just try this in Russia, Iran, Irag, Turkey, etc. etc...), I cannot accept it as "natural". Why?

Genitalia sharing between humans, insects, animals, etc. is for pro-creation. Assuming evolution is correct and survival of the fittest is the law of the jungle and further, since homosexuals can't pro-create, do we presume that they are genetic misfits (since they are "born that way" and not made)? If true, proudly admitting that you're homosexual is a bit oxymoronic (proudly admitting you're a genetic misfit). However, if "made", then professions like this are testaments to child-rearing, environment, etc. and if made, then it can be "un-made" as well. Further, if this is to be lumped into the same category as other maladies caused by poor child rearing and/or environment, do we consider it similarly as alcoholism, drug addiction, pornography, poor lifestyles/habits, poverty, etc.?

Either way, I can't accept it as "normal", despite Hollywood's, TV's, media, etc. efforts to convince me otherwise. Do I respect these people and wish them well? Yes, not because they're homosexual, but because they're human. It is possible to disapprove but not disrespect. Fire away - those of you awash in political correctness.

Boom.

 

[volprof]

To most women, probably.

haha!