Nanatsu no Tsuki wrote:Northern Davincia wrote:How are we defining valid?
LGBT people are people. Right? In the sense of religion, they’re part of God’s creation. Right? God is purported to be loving. Right? God also gives us free will. Right? Therefore they have a right to be who they want to be, even if there are consequences. Right? Because to God, a purported god of love, his creation matters and it has rights.
And free will is also provided to set others on the correct path, such is the case with parents and law enforcement and similar authority figures.
I find absolutely no malice in removing a third arm.
HumanSanity wrote:Northern Davincia wrote:Yes, God loves everyone. He does not, however, love every action we perform.
God should find something better to do with their time than care who we have sex with or whether people born with penises identify as women.
This distinction also doesn't make sense with regards to anything other than homosexuality. Which reveals that opposition to everything else (non-conforming performances of gender, transgender people, asexuality, etc.) is really just moralistic bigotry passing as religion. And also reveals that the original opposition to homosexuality was ALSO still that same arbitrary bigotry.
Does God still love me even though I don't experience romantic or sexual attraction? I don't know. Don't care. Don't know why God cares.
If I didn't identify with my biological sex, I don't know how that's an "action" or why God cares.
What you think of God doesn't really change anything. Asexuality isn't held to the same standard as abstinence is a virtue in Christianity.