Same-Sex Marriage: Point of View

[Heltonia]

so what you're saying is God's word is wrong?

No. He's saying that you yourself have been lying, unwittingly perhaps, about God's word.

I said go to bed.

[Liriena]

Lev 18:22-23 "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination." Lev 20:13 "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death." 1 Cor 6:9 "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals" 1 Tim 1:9-10 "realizing the fact that (civil) law is not made for a righteous man, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers" Rom 1:26-27 "For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.

You know, I was thinking about getting married but who wants to go though all that trouble of meeting girls and dating right? Do you suggest I go down the biblical route of raping a girl and then paying off her father so that she is forced to marry me?

God says it's ok...so...I guess you could.

[Heltonia]

Lev 18:22-23 "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination." Lev 20:13 "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death." 1 Cor 6:9 "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals" 1 Tim 1:9-10 "realizing the fact that (civil) law is not made for a righteous man, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers" Rom 1:26-27 "For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.

You know, I was thinking about getting married but who wants to go though all that trouble of meeting girls and dating right? Do you suggest I go down the biblical route of raping a girl and then paying off her father so that she is forced to marry me?

A logical fallacy. Not everything that is taught in the bible is a way to live your life. Some stories are cautionary tales.

[Essos]

You know, I was thinking about getting married but who wants to go though all that trouble of meeting girls and dating right? Do you suggest I go down the biblical route of raping a girl and then paying off her father so that she is forced to marry me?

A logical fallacy. Not everything that is taught in the bible is a way to live your life. Some stories are cautionary tales.

That is another law from Leviticus. Please try again.

[Liriena]

No. He's saying that you yourself have been lying, unwittingly perhaps, about God's word.

I said go to bed.

You truly are fighting very hard to get that "Obtuse of the Year" award, aren't you?
You know? You only get one chance to make a good first impression...and...really? I think nobody's impressed so far by your total incapacity to follow a simple argument and actually answer it in a half-decent manner.

[Heltonia]

I said go to bed.

You truly are fighting very hard to get that "Obtuse of the Year" award, aren't you?
You know? You only get one chance to make a good first impression...and...really? I think nobody's impressed so far by your total incapacity to follow a simple argument and actually answer it in a half-decent manner.

I applaud u for your commitment to troll me not in 1 but 2 threads simultaneously while claiming your need to "take a nap" as you say. Unfortunately Im not your mother, keep it to yourself.

[Heltonia]

A logical fallacy. Not everything that is taught in the bible is a way to live your life. Some stories are cautionary tales.

That is another law from Leviticus. Please try again.

I dont know about you, but I think promoting rape in the sake of promoting homosexuality is grossly missing the point wouldnt you agree?

[Liriena]

A logical fallacy. Not everything that is taught in the bible is a way to live your life. Some stories are cautionary tales.

It's from the Book of Leviticus, so it's not a fallacy. It's prefectly relevant, since you yourself quoted Leviticus as a source for your opposition to homosexuality.
And Leviticus is obviosuly not a cautionary tale. At all. It's quite blatantly a code of laws (for Levites).

[Transhuman Proteus]

So -

First - you're not saying what she said is wrong.
Second - you're not proving what she said is wrong.

Jesus said nothing about homosexuals or how one should feel about them (he certainly never delved into incorrect psychology or science as you did). The section you quoted doesn't apply to all people, or even Christians for that matter. The section you quoted says nothing in regards to anything of any psychological or scientific relevance.

So you remain wrong in pretty much everything you have said.

so what you're saying is God's word is wrong?

You can't even show "God" is saying what you are saying.

God is irrelevant, and you are entirely wrong.

To reiterate - no psychological body agrees it is a mental illness, the Bible doesn't say it is, Jesus doesn't say it is, the section of the bible you quoted applied only to a certain group of people, the Bible still doesn't say it is a mental illness, you are wrong.

[Liriena]

That is another law from Leviticus. Please try again.

I dont know about you, but I think promoting rape in the sake of promoting homosexuality is grossly missing the point wouldnt you agree?

Now that is a strawman. And an obvious one at that.

Congratulations for your latest logical fallacy!
Here, take a cookie!

[Heltonia]

I dont know about you, but I think promoting rape in the sake of promoting homosexuality is grossly missing the point wouldnt you agree?

Now that is a strawman. And an obvious one at that.

Congratulations for your latest logical fallacy!
Here, take a cookie!

Am I wrong?

[Fnordgasm 5]

You know, I was thinking about getting married but who wants to go though all that trouble of meeting girls and dating right? Do you suggest I go down the biblical route of raping a girl and then paying off her father so that she is forced to marry me?

A logical fallacy. Not everything that is taught in the bible is a way to live your life. Some stories are cautionary tales.

Really? Seeing as Deuteronomy 22:28 doesn't begin with the header "This is a cautionary tale" who decides which of God's infallible words to take as "cautionary tales" and which to take at face value as they are written?



While you trying to worm your way out of that here's another question for you. It doesn't take much research to find arguments that the whole "God mandates victims marries rapists" is the result of a mistranslation. I'm sure that is what you are about to type. However if the Bible as God's word is infallible surely such mistranslations should not be possible unless God wills it to be so? How infallible is this word if it is allowed to be interpreted and translated by such fallible men?

[Liriena]

Now that is a strawman. And an obvious one at that.

Congratulations for your latest logical fallacy!
Here, take a cookie!

Am I wrong?

Actually? You are. Your detractor was not in any way, even by the most deluded stretch of your imagination, promoting rape as some sort of justification to promote homosexuality. Only excruciatingly bad reading comprehension skills could have led anyone to derive such a conclussion from that.

[Transhuman Proteus]

Now that is a strawman. And an obvious one at that.

Congratulations for your latest logical fallacy!
Here, take a cookie!

Am I wrong?

Yes, since no one is promoting rape to promote homosexuality.

People are pointing out to you that a book you wish to use to attack homosexuality also advocates other things which you shouldfind bad and wrong and not acceptable. So if you believe we should be doing everything the Bible says, in Leviticus or the OT, then you are the one who who is promoting rape. You are saying "The OT is correct and applies to us and a girl who is raped should be made to marry her rapist providing he pays her father".

So you remain on 0 things you've gotten correct.

[New Chalcedon]

Are you Christian? If so, please quote to me chapter and verse where Jesus says that it homosexuals are Bad People(TM).

Lev 18:22-23 "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination." Lev 20:13 "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death." 1 Cor 6:9 "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals" 1 Tim 1:9-10 "realizing the fact that (civil) law is not made for a righteous man, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers" Rom 1:26-27 "For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.

And none of these are from Christ - i.e., the Gospels. They are from Old Testament lawmakers and Jesus' hangers-on.

Do you know what Jesus - Himself - said about homosexuality?



That's what Jesus said about homosexuality. He did have something to say about how you should treat your fellow human being:

And behold, a lawyer stood up to put him to the test, saying, "Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" He said to him, "What is written in the law? How do you read?" And he answered, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself." And he said to him, "You have answered right; do this, and you will live."

But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?" Jesus replied, "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him, and departed, leaving him half dead. Now by chance a priest was going down that road; and when he saw him he passed by on the other side. So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was; and when he saw him, he had compassion, and went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine; then he set him on his own beast and brought him to an inn, and took care of him. And the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, 'Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.'

Which of these three, do you think, proved neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?" He said, "The one who showed mercy on him." And Jesus said to him, "Go and do likewise.

Jesus sets the standard for love of the fellow human, and you fail it miserably. With your thinly-disguised hatred of those whose only crime is to be different from you, you are the Pharisee of modern days: you proudly proclaim your own piety and quote selectively at great length from holy texts to support it, yet you are the whited sepulcher - all dust, bones and forlorn regrets within.

[New Chalcedon]

You really don't get it, do you?
They are not programmed the same way. A paraphilia, like pedophilia, is not even remotely the same, on neurological terms, as a sexual orientation, like homosexuality. Their origins and nature are different.
And child molestation involves committing a crime against a minor.
Homosexual intercourse, in principle does NOT.

Homosexuality is not a crime. Pedophilia is a crime.

pedophilia is a philia. Child molestation is a crime. Get your facts straight.

Semantics is the last refuge of those who lose on substance.

[Hathradic States]

Am I wrong?

Yes, since no one is promoting rape to promote homosexuality.

People are pointing out to you that a book you wish to use to attack homosexuality also advocates other things which you shouldfind bad and wrong and not acceptable. So if you believe we should be doing everything the Bible says, in Leviticus, then you are the one who who is promoting rape. You are saying "Leviticus is correct and applies to us and a girl who is raped should be made to marry her rapist providing he pays her father".

So you remain on 0 things you've gotten correct.

Easier argument that makes you seem less like a hating atheist to the guy.

Bring up pork. And cheeseburgers. And all that other food good Christians eat that are banned in the book of Leviticus.

[Liriena]

pedophilia is a philia. Child molestation is a crime. Get your facts straight.

Semantics is the last refuge of those who lose on substance.

And a baseless appeal to semantics at that.
He pretty much repeated the same things I just said, and then apparently claimed I'd said otherwise.

[Heltonia]

Am I wrong?

Actually? You are. Your detractor was not in any way, even by the most deluded stretch of your imagination, promoting rape as some sort of justification to promote homosexuality. Only excruciatingly bad reading comprehension skills could have led anyone to derive such a conclussion from that.

Rape is not homosexuality. I dont even...

[Fnordgasm 5]

Actually? You are. Your detractor was not in any way, even by the most deluded stretch of your imagination, promoting rape as some sort of justification to promote homosexuality. Only excruciatingly bad reading comprehension skills could have led anyone to derive such a conclussion from that.

Rape is not homosexuality. I dont even...

No.. you don't, do you?

[Liriena]

Actually? You are. Your detractor was not in any way, even by the most deluded stretch of your imagination, promoting rape as some sort of justification to promote homosexuality. Only excruciatingly bad reading comprehension skills could have led anyone to derive such a conclussion from that.

Rape is not homosexuality. I dont even...

I didn't say it was. Don't put words in my mouth. You are not convincing anyone with your schoolboy antics.

[Transhuman Proteus]

Yes, since no one is promoting rape to promote homosexuality.

People are pointing out to you that a book you wish to use to attack homosexuality also advocates other things which you shouldfind bad and wrong and not acceptable. So if you believe we should be doing everything the Bible says, in Leviticus, then you are the one who who is promoting rape. You are saying "Leviticus is correct and applies to us and a girl who is raped should be made to marry her rapist providing he pays her father".

So you remain on 0 things you've gotten correct.

Easier argument that makes you seem less like a hating atheist to the guy.

Bring up pork. And cheeseburgers. And all that other food good Christians eat that are banned in the book of Leviticus.

That's what I would have gone with, but someone else started that tangent so I've just stuck with it.

Actually? You are. Your detractor was not in any way, even by the most deluded stretch of your imagination, promoting rape as some sort of justification to promote homosexuality. Only excruciatingly bad reading comprehension skills could have led anyone to derive such a conclussion from that.

Rape is not homosexuality. I dont even...

So you are saying the Bible is wrong? You don't think a girl should be made marry her rapist provided he pays the father?

Or you're saying the Bible is right only when talking about homosexuality, but wrong on other times?

If you are saying it is all right and we should follow all of Leviticus it is an all or nothing thing.

[New Chalcedon]

You know, I was thinking about getting married but who wants to go though all that trouble of meeting girls and dating right? Do you suggest I go down the biblical route of raping a girl and then paying off her father so that she is forced to marry me?

A logical fallacy. Not everything that is taught in the bible is a way to live your life. Some stories are cautionary tales.

The Deuteronomy (Deuteronomy is OK, right? After all, you consider OT laws binding enough to quote them) passage that Fnordgasm is referencing is this:

If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.

Bear in mind - this is no cautionary tale. It is the law as laid down for Old Testament Jews, as you yourself have quoted approvingly to support your opinions of what modern law should be.

So, I will rephrase Fnordgasm's question such that you cannot pretend to miss the point in order to dodge it:

Do you believe that all parts of the Bible should be followed, including those which would mandate a rape victim marrying her rapist (among many other similarly objectionable ones) or are you simply cherry-picking in order to justify your bigotry?

[Hathradic States]

Easier argument that makes you seem less like a hating atheist to the guy.

Bring up pork. And cheeseburgers. And all that other food good Christians eat that are banned in the book of Leviticus.

That's what I would have gone with, but someone else started that tangent so I've just stuck with it.

Who started it? o.O

[Heltonia]

Easier argument that makes you seem less like a hating atheist to the guy.

Bring up pork. And cheeseburgers. And all that other food good Christians eat that are banned in the book of Leviticus.

That's what I would have gone with, but someone else started that tangent so I've just stuck with it.

Rape is not homosexuality. I dont even...

So you are saying the Bible is wrong? You don't think a girl should be made marry her rapist provided he pays the father?

Or you're saying the Bible is right only when talking about homosexuality, but wrong on other times?

If you are saying it is all right and we should follow all of Leviticus it is an all or nothing thing.

So you would overlook over all those sins just so you can let a man wed another man?