how do you reconcile being LGBT+ with your religion?

[Necroghastia]

Let's see... two of those are by Donald P. Sullins, a Catholic University of America prof. who... jesus christ, I'm seeing a shitload of anti-LGBT stuff out of from a quick google. And one of those seems to have been retracted at that?
And the other one is 23 years old.
Meanwhile in actual academia

I think I beat you to the punch, Necro.

Dang, good writeup.

I'm not asking you to upload porn to nationstates, good lord.

Imagine I do decide to change my sexual orientation. How could I prove that I had done so?

Also, are you even going to acknowledge this?

}
The one that was retracted, sure. The other two you literally dismiss because you don't like the guys that made the studies.

Soooo that's just telling me you're not even going to bother with any critique, because that's not an honest characterization.

[Marinixa]

Imagine I do decide to change my sexual orientation. How could I prove that I had done so?

Actually, the expectation is for you to admit you couldn't change your orientation. If you could, that'd be evidence of bi/pansexuality more than anything else.

I absolutely could change it. Bisexuality is more complicated than that, bisexuals often have cyclical involuntary attraction. Or so they claim.

The one that was retracted, sure. The other two you literally dismiss because you don't like the guys that made the studies.

No, I actually criticized them on the grounds of bias rather than personal animosity, and also on methodological grounds, if you had actually paid attention.

You literally cited that those people were "homophobic" as if that means anything when conducting a study.

[Necroghastia]

Actually, the expectation is for you to admit you couldn't change your orientation. If you could, that'd be evidence of bi/pansexuality more than anything else.

I absolutely could change it. Bisexuality is more complicated than that, bisexuals often have cyclical involuntary attraction. Or so they claim.

No, I actually criticized them on the grounds of bias rather than personal animosity, and also on methodological grounds, if you had actually paid attention.

You literally cited that those people were "homophobic" as if that means anything when conducting a study.

Gren literally did not.

[New Westmore]

Actually, the expectation is for you to admit you couldn't change your orientation. If you could, that'd be evidence of bi/pansexuality more than anything else.

I absolutely could change it. Bisexuality is more complicated than that, bisexuals often have cyclical involuntary attraction. Or so they claim.

No, I actually criticized them on the grounds of bias rather than personal animosity, and also on methodological grounds, if you had actually paid attention.

You literally cited that those people were "homophobic" as if that means anything when conducting a study.

I'm sorry, but the bad faith arguing in this post is just... idk, it's definitely a step above reeking. Anyway, the way I see it, while environmental and societal pressures can absolutely affect the way you express your sexuality (I don't think I would have ever figured out my true sexuality if it wasn't for the community I used to be in at the time of my discovery), it is not the sole driving factor behind why someone may be gay, straight, trans or whatever. Pretending that this isn't the case is disingenuous and ignorant of the complexity and nuancy that goes into the very concept of human sexual behaviour.

[Grenartia]

Actually, the expectation is for you to admit you couldn't change your orientation. If you could, that'd be evidence of bi/pansexuality more than anything else.

I absolutely could change it. Bisexuality is more complicated than that, bisexuals often have cyclical involuntary attraction. Or so they claim.

No, I actually criticized them on the grounds of bias rather than personal animosity, and also on methodological grounds, if you had actually paid attention.

You literally cited that those people were "homophobic" as if that means anything when conducting a study.

I never said that word. I did assert that they had an anti-queer bias, which absolutely matters when they're conducting studies on queer people, and especially matters when those studies involve attempting to make queer people no longer queer. Just as it would matter if the author of a study on race and crime statistics were a card carrying klansman.

[Vakhgala]

"arsenokoitai" and "malakoi" (old/ancient greek)
"mish-ke-bay ‘ish-shah" and "to’eivah"(ancient hebrew)

Neither "arsenokoitai" nor "malakoi" mean "homosexuality". At least not contemporaneously to when Paul was writing.

And based on that level of inaccuracy, I have good reason to doubt your knowledge of ancient hebrew.

You can choose to control those tendencies and when you ignore those tendencies, they slowly dissapear, like it did with me, and, many others. Psychology, sociology and philosophy says that you can change your sexual orientation by changing your social construct, which i did.

Many "ex-gays" have said that before, and all of them later admitted that was a lie. Therefore, I see no reason to believe you're the exception.

Repeating my earlier statement.

I'm sorry to burst your bubble of denial, kid, but if you have to "fight those homosexual tendencies", you're queer. And there's no changing it. And no God worth your worship would demand you repress something that is harmless. (inb4 you try to shovel some already-debunked bullshit about how it "isn't harmless")

They do not mean homosexuality directly, but mean "men who have s3x with men" or "males who lay with other males"

[Unogonduria]

Tell me the original Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic words that mean "homosexuality". Go on. Do it.

"arsenokoitai" and "malakoi" (old/ancient greek)
"mish-ke-bay ‘ish-shah" and "to’eivah"(ancient hebrew)

MALAKA!

[Grenartia]

Neither "arsenokoitai" nor "malakoi" mean "homosexuality". At least not contemporaneously to when Paul was writing.

And based on that level of inaccuracy, I have good reason to doubt your knowledge of ancient hebrew.





Repeating my earlier statement.

I'm sorry to burst your bubble of denial, kid, but if you have to "fight those homosexual tendencies", you're queer. And there's no changing it. And no God worth your worship would demand you repress something that is harmless. (inb4 you try to shovel some already-debunked bullshit about how it "isn't harmless")

They do not mean homosexuality directly, but mean "men who have s3x with men" or "males who lay with other males"

An assertion which is hotly contested by biblical scholars.

Also, you can say the word "sex" without self-censoring. It makes you seem childish, especially since its not even a slur.

[Humanlonia]

They do not mean homosexuality directly, but mean "men who have s3x with men" or "males who lay with other males"

An assertion which is hotly contested by biblical scholars.

Also, you can say the word "sex" without self-censoring. It makes you seem childish, especially since its not even a slur.

Lady, I think this is a verbatim or nearly verbatim text from the Bible, and not an example of self-censorship.

[Ci Arovannea]

An assertion which is hotly contested by biblical scholars.

Also, you can say the word "sex" without self-censoring. It makes you seem childish, especially since its not even a slur.

Lady, I think this is a verbatim or nearly verbatim text from the Bible, and not an example of self-censorship.

Did they put threes in place of Es?

[Humanlonia]

Lady, I think this is a verbatim or nearly verbatim text from the Bible, and not an example of self-censorship.

Did they put threes in place of Es?

I just didn't see that. I don't how, but I member other text.

[Grenartia]

Did they put threes in place of Es?

I just didn't see that. I don't how, but I member other text.

It happens to the best of us sometimes.

[Humanlonia]

I just didn't see that. I don't how, but I member other text.

It happens to the best of us sometimes.

I guess I somehow read the second part of the sentence without even seeing the first. That's what caffeine does to people. I don't think I'm one of the best at it, so it's not surprising.

[Jedi Council]

Neither "arsenokoitai" nor "malakoi" mean "homosexuality". At least not contemporaneously to when Paul was writing.

And based on that level of inaccuracy, I have good reason to doubt your knowledge of ancient hebrew.





Repeating my earlier statement.

I'm sorry to burst your bubble of denial, kid, but if you have to "fight those homosexual tendencies", you're queer. And there's no changing it. And no God worth your worship would demand you repress something that is harmless. (inb4 you try to shovel some already-debunked bullshit about how it "isn't harmless")

They do not mean homosexuality directly, but mean "men who have s3x with men" or "males who lay with other males"

The repression is strong with this one.

[Pasong Tirad]

They do not mean homosexuality directly, but mean "men who have s3x with men" or "males who lay with other males"

An assertion which is hotly contested by biblical scholars.

Also, you can say the word "sex" without self-censoring. It makes you seem childish, especially since its not even a slur.

Case in point (the point being that this is still debated by religious scholars), from religious studies and early Christian history scholar Jennifer Knust:

How has arsenokoitai been translated?

Arsenokoites is a compound built from the more common Greek words arsen (“male”) and koite (“bed” or possibly “sexual intercourse”). Scholars have offered several proposals to explain this combination, with two emerging as predominant:

a. The Septuagint phrasing of Lev 18:22 and Lev 20:13 inspired Paul (or someone else) to coin the term. In Greek, Leviticus may use the terms “male” and “bed” (but not the compound arsenokoites) to forbid Israelite men from sexually penetrating other men (the Hebrew phrase translated by the Greek is also otherwise unattested). Paul may have had these commandments in mind when inventing or using the term.

b. The term was designed to censure the sexual exploitation caused by some men. Men with bad characters were frequently associated with abusing others for their own pleasure.

If option (a) is correct and sex between men is in view, it is still not clear which sexual partner is being condemned by the term and for what. If (b) is correct, the issue may not be sex at all. Neither explanation is satisfactory, however, and scholars remain divided.

When ancient Christian writers after Paul employ the term, they also do not define it. Instead, they either simply cite Paul’s list of wrongdoers, embed arsenokoitai in a different list (such as that in 1Tim 1:10), or link arsenokoitai to other wicked deeds. The Sibylline Oracles, for instance, use arsenokoites in a warning against “stealing seeds,” perhaps building on the Levitical concern for preserving male sperm (Sib. Or. 2.71–73). The second-century Christian apologist Aristides of Athens, on the other hand, uses arsenokoites to denounce the behavior of the Greek gods (Apol. 9.2–3). In these and similar examples, the figure and practices associated with the arsenokoites are treated with scorn, but the specific actions involved are not obvious.

This ambiguity is reproduced in English vernacular translations. The sixteenth-century Tyndale Bible, the first to translate the term directly from the Greek, employs the phrase “abusers of themselves with mankind.” This same translation was preserved in the Authorized (King James) Version (1611) and then adjusted to “abusers of themselves with men” in both the Revised Version (1885) and the American Standard Version (1901). The Revised Standard Version (1952), a direct heir to these earlier translations, chose “sexual perverts” instead, perhaps in response to a psychological understanding of sexuality emerging in the 1950s. The New Revised Standard Version departed from precedent and rendered arsenokoitai as “sodomites.” As is now widely recognized, however, “sodomites” employs a muddled medieval Latin term that unnecessarily confuses matters (in antiquity, a “sodomite” referred to a person from the city of Sodom). The NRSVue chose to translate arsenokoitai as “men who engage in illicit sex,” with an explanatory footnote “meaning of Gk uncertain.” This translation signals the likelihood that the term was coined based on the Greek version of the Levitical commandments while also acknowledging the current lack of consensus about the word’s specific meaning.

The tl;dr is included in this wall of text, but will restate here at the bottom for those who can't focus without text-to-speech or Subway Surfers in the background:

If option (a) is correct and sex between men is in view, it is still not clear which sexual partner is being condemned by the term and for what. If (b) is correct, the issue may not be sex at all. Neither explanation is satisfactory, however, and scholars remain divided.

[Ardangarh]

An assertion which is hotly contested by biblical scholars.

Also, you can say the word "sex" without self-censoring. It makes you seem childish, especially since its not even a slur.

Lady, I think this is a verbatim or nearly verbatim text from the Bible, and not an example of self-censorship.

I think perhaps we should not use 2000 year old books as the source of our morality maybe?

[Humanlonia]

Lady, I think this is a verbatim or nearly verbatim text from the Bible, and not an example of self-censorship.

I think perhaps we should not use 2000 year old books as the source of our morality maybe?

We were waiting for you arriving, captain.

[Ardangarh]

I think perhaps we should not use 2000 year old books as the source of our morality maybe?

We were waiting for you arriving, captain.

I am honoured to be here sir ∠(‘-‘ )

[Humanlonia]

We were waiting for you arriving, captain.

I am honoured to be here sir ∠(‘-‘ )

∠(‘-‘ )

[Vrijlanden]

This bugs me a lot. I don't hate gay people, I think they should have the same rights as straight people, but you are not "born" gay. You choose it, maybe not fully consciously, but it's the environment and, probably mostly, personal will that most likely make you gay as there is no proof of such a thing as a "gay gene".

Do it, then. Choose to not be heterosexual.

I was forcibly kissed at age 14 by a stalker named Deric. I felt really grossed out afterwards. So there's literally a biological imperative to sexuality that isn't purely choice.

[Dreiswelt]

Do it, then. Choose to not be heterosexual.

I was forcibly kissed at age 14 by a stalker named Deric. I felt really grossed out afterwards. So there's literally a biological imperative to sexuality that isn't purely choice.

It's generally said the homosexuality is a mix between nature and nurture, with a larger emphasis on nature.However, such traumatic experiences would impact your sexual orientation

[Northern Socialist Council Republics]

I was forcibly kissed at age 14 by a stalker named Deric. I felt really grossed out afterwards. So there's literally a biological imperative to sexuality that isn't purely choice.

...I think that if some stalker forcibly kissed you against your will when you were 14, that would gross you out even if you were attracted to the gender of the stalker in question.

This isn't a sexuality thing. It's a consent thing.

[Grenartia]

I was forcibly kissed at age 14 by a stalker named Deric. I felt really grossed out afterwards. So there's literally a biological imperative to sexuality that isn't purely choice.

...I think that if some stalker forcibly kissed you against your will when you were 14, that would gross you out even if you were attracted to the gender of the stalker in question.

This isn't a sexuality thing. It's a consent thing.

Pretty much this. Its a terrible thing to have happen to you, no doubt. But its going to impact you in ways other than which gender(s) you do or don't prefer.

However, such traumatic experiences would impact your sexual orientation

The available science contradicts that assertion.

[Dreiswelt]

However, such traumatic experiences would impact your sexual orientation

The available science contradicts that assertion.

https://michaelgquirke.com/how-trauma-a ... sexuality/

Yeah, it can't really change your sexuality, but it can influence sexual behaviour. My apologies

[Vakhgala]

Lady, I think this is a verbatim or nearly verbatim text from the Bible, and not an example of self-censorship.

I think perhaps we should not use 2000 year old books as the source of our morality maybe?

We already do
Most morals come from abrahamic religions, such as dont murder