Gay and Christian

[The Theban Legion]

A thirst without the space... I don't know if I should quote scripture because I don't know if it applies to Chirstians and what they should think of things but I'll give it a try...
Leviticus 18:22 - You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.

Leviticus 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. Their bloodguiltiness is upon them.
Romans 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.
These words might give you some guidance Gaga and help you to understand why others think you to be a misguided or even false Christian.

[Palandy]

A thirst without the space... I don't know if I should quote scripture because I don't know if it applies to Chirstians and what they should think of things but I'll give it a try...
Leviticus 18:22 - You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.

Leviticus 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. Their bloodguiltiness is upon them.
Romans 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.
These words might give you some guidance Gaga and help you to understand why others think you to be a misguided or even false Christian.

I would say that Gaga should trust in himself, and realize that an all-powerful Creator surely did not make a mistake in creating him. Those are the only concepts that should give him "guidance."

[The Southron Nation]

I find the whole basis of this thread to be a little ridiculous. If there really is an all-knowing, all-powerful God who created humanity, then he/she/it would not have revealed his/her/its word in such a way that is so ambiguous, and in many ways, inconsistent. Yes, humans transcribed the Bible; but if the purpose of biblical revelations was to give human beings a code to live by, then why the cryptic nature of the text?

Furthermore, if God created all human beings, then God is responsible for our mental facilities, including rationality and a sense of justice. Why would the entity responsible for the creation of rationality, common sense, and justice make ridiculous decrees condemning acts which are in no way inherently deleterious or unjust? A homosexual relationship is no less inherently harmful for the participants or for other people than a heterosexual one, so why would God prohibit such a relationship? Furthermore, one would question why God will allow his creation to suffer such temptations despite his prohibition on them, especially when one considers that lust, an automatic physiological phenomenon, is a sin. Of course, this line of thinking will only lead one to atheism in the end, as one must further question why a supposedly "good" God would create human beings to suffer in general, or require them to worship him/her/it out of a sense of pride (isn't that a sin?) Any logical deconstruction of religion will lead one to see the ridiculous nature of prohibitions on natural relations, such as homosexuality or masturbation, and consequently, one will uncover the illogical, false nature of religion in general.

you ask for redress of several issues that do not necessarily apply to this thread, thought they are related. feel free to TG me and ill happily discuss it with you (sans bible thumping i promise). but essentially, the Bible is NOT cryptic. the culture as it exists today is NOT the culture that existed at the time of biblical authors. we cannot relate to those people b/c we are not them. you have a hard enough time relating to your parents who are but ONE generation removed from you, how, then, can you possibly expect to understand the passages written by men living 2000 years ago?

i can (as can the catholics) say that i understand it b/c the church that delivered the bible to me and you still exists. i attend its services everyday. the Orthodox Church - and until 1054 the Catholic Church - is the original church written of in the new testament. it has delivered the meanings and definitions of the scriptures for 2000 years. it has not changed its precepts. if the church says that a particular verse means something, then that is what it means. the apostles were, afterall, bishops in the Orthodox/Catholic Church.

the text is not the issue for confusion. the issue for confusion is YOU. you are not alive 2000 years ago.

[Luxemex Intex Zeonex]

Romans Chapter 1: 26-32

26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:


27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.


28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;


29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,


30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,


31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:


32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

And I'm pretty sure that somewhere it says that homo's (bi's including since they also like the same sex) are an abomination in God's eyes.

BTW if you want to quote true Christianity read the real, original biblical texts...not King James Bible

[Tarsonis Survivors]

I find the whole basis of this thread to be a little ridiculous. If there really is an all-knowing, all-powerful God who created humanity, then he/she/it would not have revealed his/her/its word in such a way that is so ambiguous, and in many ways, inconsistent. Yes, humans transcribed the Bible; but if the purpose of biblical revelations was to give human beings a code to live by, then why the cryptic nature of the text?

Furthermore, if God created all human beings, then God is responsible for our mental facilities, including rationality and a sense of justice. Why would the entity responsible for the creation of rationality, common sense, and justice make ridiculous decrees condemning acts which are in no way inherently deleterious or unjust? A homosexual relationship is no less inherently harmful for the participants or for other people than a heterosexual one, so why would God prohibit such a relationship? Furthermore, one would question why God will allow his creation to suffer such temptations despite his prohibition on them, especially when one considers that lust, an automatic physiological phenomenon, is a sin. Of course, this line of thinking will only lead one to atheism in the end, as one must further question why a supposedly "good" God would create human beings to suffer in general, or require them to worship him/her/it out of a sense of pride (isn't that a sin?) Any logical deconstruction of religion will lead one to see the ridiculous nature of prohibitions on natural relations, such as homosexuality or masturbation, and consequently, one will uncover the illogical, false nature of religion in general.

You out smart yourself here chap. You are projecting your own personal views and level of comprehension on an all powerful creator.
I sympothise but it doesn't work that way. You think ants understand why we dont want them in our houses?

[Nobel Hobos]

And I'm pretty sure that somewhere it says that homo's (bi's including since they also like the same sex) are an abomination in God's eyes.

BTW if you want to quote true Christianity read the real, original biblical texts...not King James Bible

Are you seriously suggesting we should argue the subject in Ancient Greek?

[Tarsonis Survivors]

BTW if you want to quote true Christianity read the real, original biblical texts...not King James Bible

Are you seriously suggesting we should argue the subject in Ancient Greek?

I have a friend who would murder small children for the possibility

[The Parkus Empire]

Yeah, I'm unusual, but by golly if the only way you can criticise me is by laughing then I must be doing something right.

That is the only way I have offered you criticism? I obviously phrased my previous posts too politely.

[United German Citizens]

How can you be Gay and Christian? The answer to this question depends how you look at Christianity. Technically speaking, one can not be gay and consider himself or herself a Christian because, for those of you who do not know, the Christian Bible prohibits the practices of homosexuality. This of course, is interpreted through how people thought a couple hundred years ago, back when religious stuff was much stricter like stoning non believers and such. As society is much more relaxed in things nowadays, such as allowing people of a different faith enter and assemble at Christian Churches and places of worship, it might be possible to be gay and Christian. Im no Priest so i dont know, but technically you cannot be a true Christian if you practice homosexuality.

[Korr-Atel]

See my previous post. The choice of words is interesting. I stand to be corrected on my interpretation, by anyone who really understands the Greek or Hebrew originals, but I don't think it's at all obvious what the few anti-gay passages really mean to condemn ... or deprecate. The strong word "abomination" isn't in the original text, the word which was use had a much milder meaning, closer to "distasteful" than "sinful".

What does "lie down with a male the same as you lie down with a woman" actually mean? It seems to rely on the reader knowing the "right" way to have sex with a woman which maybe they did in Biblical times ... but unfortunately, the Bible isn't specific about what is the "right" way. For all we know, copulating face to face may have been the "right" way or ... equally likely ... doing it doggy-style might have been the right way.

We could assume that what distinguishes the "natural use of a woman" is that the penis is put in the vagina. But that really doesn't help because men don't have vaginas so it's technically impossible to "lie with one as with a woman". I also find it hard to believe that no-one had oral sex in those days ... if the Bible doesn't say anything about that (does it?) then presumably God/Jesus doesn't have a problem with it and the rules which apply to "natural" sex are really just about penis-in-vagina.

It seems fertility was a huge deal. You could divorce a woman if she turned out to be infertile (or just get another one while keeping her as domestic help!) Having descendents is offered by God as a reward, so it plainly mattered a lot to people then (as it still does). Could "leaving the natural use of the woman" and an ignorant fear that the male reproductive system will lose its generative function if misused really be the issue here, rather than something being morally wrong about gay sex?

That would be interesting, because it would make bisexuality perfectly OK. Any kind of sex would be OK providing the man was still available to do stud duty

i like your enthusiasm for this but unfortunately, the church was the ultimate authority for determining how specific passages were to be interpreted. and the ancient church has yet to change its mind about what those passages mean. which is not what the conservative protestant christians claim, at all. the ancient church merely said that your sins do not define you. God defines you. repent and seek God. the ancient church was firmly aware that all Christians were sinners, but that wasn't the point of salvation. salvation is not to save us from sin, but to heal us despite sin. homosexuals are sinners, but no less so than the rest of us. and they are in just as much need for healing as heterosexuals. the sinful act is not important as much as the act of repentance.

so the church defines what each verse meant. not individual readers.

I wonder if you know what god actually has in plan for us humans. I don't critique you or your thinking or your church's, but it seems to me as if the church thinks that Christ died in order for us to be able to sin, feel sorry, and let Jesus get the punishment. In theory, if the sin is not as important as the felling sorry, one could continue to sin the same sin and fell sorry again for countless times and get away with it. At least thats what i understand, but if im wrong, please correct me.

[Korr-Atel]

Firstly, I am going to post my two cents here. I don't intend on changing anyone's opinion or thinking, I am just voicing mine. And also please do not try to attack me violently and shove your opinions down my throat, I just recovered from a terrible flu that left me without a voice and my throat still hurting

with that said, I also would like to let everybody reading this to know that i mean no disrespect and that I am sorry if i do.

Here goes;

Personally, I am not Christian, or Catholic, or any other branch that bases of the same religion, mostly because I think that many of these religions are corrupt, filled with pagan customs and traditions and have no true value for the words written within the bible of said religions. But that is for another thread.

I do, however, read the bible and believe to have a good (not perfect or anywhere near it, after all Im just human) understanding of it. This is where i must say that I don't agree with the idea of Gay Christians, which is somewhat contradicting (I am not against the bisexual or any other personal choice either). Based on the Bible, i can understand that god's thoughts on homosexuality are not favorable due to this scripture ( Leviticus 18:22) which states this, "And you must not lie down with a male the same as you lie down with a woman. It is a detestable thing." Now, by this, all that officially use the Christian Bible as base for their believes must then be against the idea of homosexuality and bisexuality and lesbianism. This does not mean that people who practice homosexualities are "a detestable thing" it means that the 'idea' of homosexuality is seen as detestable by god according to the mentioned text.

See my previous post. The choice of words is interesting. I stand to be corrected on my interpretation, by anyone who really understands the Greek or Hebrew originals, but I don't think it's at all obvious what the few anti-gay passages really mean to condemn ... or deprecate. The strong word "abomination" isn't in the original text, the word which was use had a much milder meaning, closer to "distasteful" than "sinful".

What does "lie down with a male the same as you lie down with a woman" actually mean? It seems to rely on the reader knowing the "right" way to have sex with a woman which maybe they did in Biblical times ... but unfortunately, the Bible isn't specific about what is the "right" way. For all we know, copulating face to face may have been the "right" way or ... equally likely ... doing it doggy-style might have been the right way.

We could assume that what distinguishes the "natural use of a woman" is that the penis is put in the vagina. But that really doesn't help because men don't have vaginas so it's technically impossible to "lie with one as with a woman". I also find it hard to believe that no-one had oral sex in those days ... if the Bible doesn't say anything about that (does it?) then presumably God/Jesus doesn't have a problem with it and the rules which apply to "natural" sex are really just about penis-in-vagina.

It seems fertility was a huge deal. You could divorce a woman if she turned out to be infertile (or just get another one while keeping her as domestic help!) Having descendents is offered by God as a reward, so it plainly mattered a lot to people then (as it still does). Could "leaving the natural use of the woman" and an ignorant fear that the male reproductive system will lose its generative function if misused really be the issue here, rather than something being morally wrong about gay sex?

That would be interesting, because it would make bisexuality perfectly OK. Any kind of sex would be OK providing the man was still available to do stud duty

Well, "And you must not lie down with a male the same as you lie down with a woman. It is a detestable thing."
What it is referring to here is just simply the act of sex. It states 'the same as you like down with a woman' because the norm of the day back then was to have sex with women (whatever sex it may be) the bible does in fact talk about other types of sex, for example bestiality. Which is the act of sex between humans and animals. In Leviticus 18:23 it states, "And you must not give your emissions to any beast to become unclean by it, and a woman should not stand before the beast to have connections with it. It is a violation of what is natural."

Now it references males having sex with animals in the first part of that scripture, we know this because men were the ones referred to have emissions in the bible. Now, when you think about it, man could copy the most used sex position in the animal kingdom, 'doggy style' while practicing bestiality. And as for women, when it states "a woman should not stand before the beast and have connections with it" it could refer to the act of 'oral sex' where the animal would lick the female's vagina in order to stimulate it. (as shown in many paintings through history)

hence, people in bible times knew of many sex practices. Remember that i said that Leviticus 18:22 does not mean that people who practice homosexualities are "a detestable (or distasteful) thing" it means that the 'idea' of homosexuality is seen as detestable by god according to the mentioned text. Also right there in Leviticus 18 it continues on to say "(18:24) do not make yourselves unclean by any of these things because by all these things the nations whom I am sending out from before you have made themselves unclean. (those nations in reference are the ones 'in the promised land' before the nation of Israel, they made themselves unclean because they practiced orgies, bestiality, homosexuality and other things seen by god as 'unclean' )"

it continues to say in verse 25, "Consequently the land is unclean, and I shall bring punishment for its error upon it, and the land will vomit its inhabitants out. (by this God stated that he will punish these people that did these unclean things)" and continuing on until chapter 19, God generally warns his people that the should not do these things for fear of them being punished the same way as the nations before them (the nations in the land that was to be Israel) (Leviticus 18:27,28,29,30)

Also, regarding the wife, during the time when the people of Israel were governed by the laws of moses, one could divorce his wife(ves) for any reason, be it fertility or not cleaning the pots and pans of last night's dinner. Mathew 19:3 onwards until 9 states "And the Pharisees came up to him (Jesus), intent on tempting him and saying: 'Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife on every sort of ground?', In reply he (Jesus) said, 'Did you not read that he who created them (God) from [the] beginning made them male and female, and said ''For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and will stick to his wife, and the two will be one flesh?'' so that they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has yoked together let no man pull apart.' They said to him (they the Pharisees him Jesus): 'Why, then, did Moses prescribe giving a certificate of dismissal and divorcing her?' He(Jesus) said to them: 'Moses out of regard of your hardheartedness, made the concession to you of divorcing your wives, but such has not been the case from [the] beginning. I say to you that whoever divorces his wife, except on the ground of fornication, and marries another commits adultery.'"

And true, fertility was very important, i believe the bible explains why (other than the obvious, continuation of the species) but i cant seem to remember where.

Also, i must disagree with your statement "Any kind of sex would be OK..." for bestiality is a type of sex, as are orgies, but those are viewed as unclean by God, and perhaps by modern moral standards as well. ( at least Bestiality). Meaning that other forms of sex (not sex positions), including homosexual sex, is viewed as wrong by god.

Which would be contradicting if you classified anyone as a gay Christian.Of course, that doesn't mean one cant be gay. It depends on the faith you have in the bible being the word of god and whatnot.

[Gagatron]

How can you be Gay and Christian? The answer to this question depends how you look at Christianity. Technically speaking, one can not be gay and consider himself or herself a Christian because, for those of you who do not know, the Christian Bible prohibits the practices of homosexuality. This of course, is interpreted through how people thought a couple hundred years ago, back when religious stuff was much stricter like stoning non believers and such. As society is much more relaxed in things nowadays, such as allowing people of a different faith enter and assemble at Christian Churches and places of worship, it might be possible to be gay and Christian. Im no Priest so i dont know, but technically you cannot be a true Christian if you practice homosexuality.

That's wrong. Even the prostitutes can become Christians.

[Mike the Progressive]

How can you be Gay and Christian? The answer to this question depends how you look at Christianity. Technically speaking, one can not be gay and consider himself or herself a Christian because, for those of you who do not know, the Christian Bible prohibits the practices of homosexuality. This of course, is interpreted through how people thought a couple hundred years ago, back when religious stuff was much stricter like stoning non believers and such. As society is much more relaxed in things nowadays, such as allowing people of a different faith enter and assemble at Christian Churches and places of worship, it might be possible to be gay and Christian. Im no Priest so i dont know, but technically you cannot be a true Christian if you practice homosexuality.

That's wrong. Even the prostitutes can become Christians.

That is one thing I agree with you on. There is this common misconception of Christianity, what we see today is a perverse caricature of what Christ would have wanted, recall that a Christian is a follower of Christ, and Christ himself ate with the prostitutes, and the taxpayers and the other sinners. He didn't hate them, he didn't damn them. I do think that Christianity and homosexuality are at odds with one another, by all definitions it is a 'sin,' but I dismiss the charge that you "cannot be a true Christian if you practice homosexuality..."

[Gagatron]

That's wrong. Even the prostitutes can become Christians.

That is one thing I agree with you on. There is this common misconception of Christianity, what we see today is a perverse caricature of what Christ would have wanted, recall that a Christian is a follower of Christ, and Christ himself ate with the prostitutes, and the taxpayers and the other sinners. He didn't hate them, he didn't damn them. I do think that Christianity and homosexuality are at odds with one another, by all definitions it is a 'sin,' but I dismiss the charge that you "cannot be a true Christian if you practice homosexuality..."

Althoguh really, if you think about it, you're not supposed to stick to your old self and your old habits. Christianity is supposed to change a person to be like Jesus.
That said, I don't know whether Jesus is okay with homesuality or not, he never said.

[Korr-Atel]

How can you be Gay and Christian? The answer to this question depends how you look at Christianity. Technically speaking, one can not be gay and consider himself or herself a Christian because, for those of you who do not know, the Christian Bible prohibits the practices of homosexuality. This of course, is interpreted through how people thought a couple hundred years ago, back when religious stuff was much stricter like stoning non believers and such. As society is much more relaxed in things nowadays, such as allowing people of a different faith enter and assemble at Christian Churches and places of worship, it might be possible to be gay and Christian. Im no Priest so i dont know, but technically you cannot be a true Christian if you practice homosexuality.

That's wrong. Even the prostitutes can become Christians.

Actually thats not totally wrong. the bible does prohibit the practice of homosexuality (along with other related practices) Some people think that the bible is a collection of books divided in what should be listened to and observed (The new testament) and the part of the bible that only applies to the jewish and is too outdated (the old testament).

Some people even agree with James Barr (a biblical scholar and critic) he said that the bible is a declaration of one man's ideals and beliefs and of total human origin. But thats not the point.

The Bible itself states "all scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things strait, for disciplining in righteousnesses, that the man of God be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work." (2 Timothy 3:16,17) referring to the entire bible of that time, from genesis onward.

Hence, if one is Christian, or so called, then he or she would be under all things found in the bible, meaning, one cannot be Christian truly if they practice what is condemned by God, be it found condemnatory in the Old testament or the New one.

Put simply, its not what a 'sect' thinks of it, or how people view it, it is how God views it. It is true that society has changed in many ways, more tolerant in things than what it was 100 or more years ago, but think of it this way. If the entire world is going the wrong way, would you just melt into the crowd and follow it, or would you go against it (based on the bible).

Personally, i am of no religion but i read the bible and have come to the conclusion that most religions based of the Christian bible are corrupted and don't follow what their own bible says, but rather what the doctrines say, or what one so called 'enlightened man' says.

Basically, its a matter of faith, if you believe in what the bible says to be true, then stick to it, if you don't then leave it alone. But one cant go around saying "I believe in the bible and god, but i will only follow this commandment and not that one."

And also, its true, prostitutes can become Christians, True Christians if they leave prostitution behind, false Christians if they continue in it.

[Bottle]

And also, its true, prostitutes can become Christians, True Christians if they leave prostitution behind, false Christians if they continue in it.

I find the fixation on prostitutes amusing, given that nobody ever seems to talk about the men who visit those prostitutes. Apparently, being a poor women who resorts to sex work in order to support oneself is something shameful and filthy, but being a guy who rents out female bodies to masturbate into isn't nearly as big a deal.

[Gagatron]

And also, its true, prostitutes can become Christians, True Christians if they leave prostitution behind, false Christians if they continue in it.

I find the fixation on prostitutes amusing, given that nobody ever seems to talk about the men who visit those prostitutes. Apparently, being a poor women who resorts to sex work in order to support oneself is something shameful and filthy, but being a guy who rents out female bodies to masturbate into isn't nearly as big a deal.

Have you ever read Proverbs? The Bible reproves men who give in to immoral women time and time again.

[Georgism]

That said, I don't know whether Jesus is okay with homesuality or not, he never said.

I reckon he was probably gay/bi.

[Korr-Atel]

That is one thing I agree with you on. There is this common misconception of Christianity, what we see today is a perverse caricature of what Christ would have wanted, recall that a Christian is a follower of Christ, and Christ himself ate with the prostitutes, and the taxpayers and the other sinners. He didn't hate them, he didn't damn them. I do think that Christianity and homosexuality are at odds with one another, by all definitions it is a 'sin,' but I dismiss the charge that you "cannot be a true Christian if you practice homosexuality..."

Althoguh really, if you think about it, you're not supposed to stick to your old self and your old habits. Christianity is supposed to change a person to be like Jesus.
That said, I don't know whether Jesus is okay with homesuality or not, he never said.

Actually, Jesus knew very well that God did not view homosexuality as something good. For example, Mathew 19:4-6 states 'Did you not read that he who created them (God) from [the] beginning made them male and female, and said ''For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and will stick to his wife, and the two will be one flesh?'' so that they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has yoked together let no man pull apart.'

Jesus knew that sexual relations should be limited to a man and a woman united by marriage

[Gagatron]

That said, I don't know whether Jesus is okay with homesuality or not, he never said.

I reckon he was probably gay/bi.

I reckon he was asexual.

[Georgism]

I reckon he was asexual.

I hope he wasn't...

[Dakini]

I find the fixation on prostitutes amusing, given that nobody ever seems to talk about the men who visit those prostitutes. Apparently, being a poor women who resorts to sex work in order to support oneself is something shameful and filthy, but being a guy who rents out female bodies to masturbate into isn't nearly as big a deal.

Have you ever read Proverbs? The Bible reproves men who give in to immoral women time and time again.

So again, only the women are immoral.

Also, am I the only one who finds this thread really funny given Gagatron's views on gender roles?

[Gagatron]

I reckon he was asexual.

I hope he wasn't...

As God in the flesh, He was probably above carnal desires.

[Bottle]

I find the fixation on prostitutes amusing, given that nobody ever seems to talk about the men who visit those prostitutes. Apparently, being a poor women who resorts to sex work in order to support oneself is something shameful and filthy, but being a guy who rents out female bodies to masturbate into isn't nearly as big a deal.

Have you ever read Proverbs? The Bible reproves men who give in to immoral women time and time again.

Thank you for making my point. The prostitutes are "immoral," as opposed to PIMPS or JOHNS being immoral men who are exploiting women.

I completely agree with you that the Bible is a deeply misogynist text, and that Christianity is founded upon the hatred of women and the feminine.

[Korr-Atel]

And also, its true, prostitutes can become Christians, True Christians if they leave prostitution behind, false Christians if they continue in it.

I find the fixation on prostitutes amusing, given that nobody ever seems to talk about the men who visit those prostitutes. Apparently, being a poor women who resorts to sex work in order to support oneself is something shameful and filthy, but being a guy who rents out female bodies to masturbate into isn't nearly as big a deal.

That is also condemned. Men that do so are just as 'unclean' as well.