# God, Gays, and Christianity **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 9, 2002, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-gays-and-christianity/127731 "2002-09-09T23:08:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Sparc](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/65b543/32.png) [@Sparc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sparc)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2002, 1:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-gays-and-christianity/127731/41 "2002-09-11T01:23:36Z")
So that you know were I am coming from: Respectful atheist who embraces Christian morals, in some regards rather old fashioned OT style. Taking off from the principle that Christian morality must for practical reasons be a somewhat floating concept over the centuries, let me try to parse what **His4Ever** posted in her latest post. > [@](#): > > Anyway, there’s no specific statement anywhere that I know of telling us which laws are still valid and which aren’t. I feel that it’s kind of common sense. Fine, so there is an opening to select according to some kind of guideline. His4Ever provides it thus: > [@](#): > > I believe the Lord is more concerned with our hearts and moral conduct, than with what kind of fabric we’re wearing. But then goes ahead and contradicts the caveat that this creates by saying; > [@](#): > > God decides what is right and wrong, not us. We can’t decide something is right just because of the number of people doing it. If He says it’s wrong, it’s still wrong. I know that His4Ever alludes to morals specifically and has tried to eliminate customs and practices such as dress code. However this creates a problem. If it is so that only God decides it is not possible to make this interpretation: > [@](#): > > I believe the Lord is more concerned with our hearts and moral conduct, than with what kind of fabric we’re wearing. If God decides God decides, right? In such a rigid format there is no other option than to live according to the very letter of the Bible. This becomes problematic on several levels in modern society. Some of the dictates of the bible are downright illegal as well as immoral by modern standards: > [@](#): > > \*\*\*Deuteronomy 21:21 \*_[punishment for a disobedient son]_ > > 1. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear. > > _ **Deuteronomy 21:10-13** _ > > 1. When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies, and the Lord thy God hath delivered them into thine hands, and thou hast taken them captive, > > 2. And seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife; > > 3. Then thou shalt bring her home to thine house, and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails; > > 4. And she shall put the raiment of her captivity from off her, and shall remain in thine house, and bewail her father and her mother a full month: and after that thou shalt go in unto her, and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife. Which is vigilante murder for a trifle and enslavement, mighty nice of the lawmakers to give her a full month to get used to it though. Obviously the alleged word of God in these cases needs to be ignored on grounds of modern morality and the covenants of Universal Human Rights. Interestingly enough some of the dictates against trans-gender behavior and same sex relationships are also laid down in the fifth book of the bible: > [@](#): > > _ **Deuteronomy 22:5** _ > > 1. The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the Lord thy God. > > _ **Deuteronomy 23:17** _ > > 1. There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel. How can one ignore the dictates of chapter 21 but uphold the dictates in chapter 22 and 23? His4Ever tries to draw the line at what we embrace between what is and isn’t moral issues. All of the above applies to morals or the execution of justice towards infringements of these moral codes. By default this must open the possibility to read the bible selectively from modern context, otherwise the book becomes obsolete in so many ways that we cannot embrace the wisdom that it contains at it’s heart and intent. I would very much like to hear how **JerseyDiamond** and **His4Ever** proposes that we resolve the conflict of embracing Deuteronomy 22:5 and 23:17 while discarding (as we must) 21:21 and 21:10-13 ---
**Author:** ![Sparc](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/65b543/32.png) [@Sparc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sparc)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2002, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-gays-and-christianity/127731/42 "2002-09-11T01:40:41Z")
BTW I meant no disrespect by the lower case B on Bible. I’m just frightfully dependent on my spell check since I am dyslexic, which also makes the letter B extra difficult - MS spell check doesn’t correct a lower case B on Bible and even with several rereads in preview I still didn’t spot it until rereading again after posting… sorry. Sparc ---
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2002, 2:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-gays-and-christianity/127731/43 "2002-09-11T02:02:30Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by His4ever \* > > > [@](#): > > > > _9. Presuming the political power to do so, to what extent is a Christian required or permitted to impose his moral standards on those who hold different moral standards?_ > > Christians should vote on these matters according to what they know (believe) to be right and wrong. Most probably wouldn’t, in good conscience, vote to legalize something they believe to be wrong. (a) Does this mean Christians should support sodomy laws? (Laws which make private homosexual acts by consenting adults a crime.) (b) If the answer to (a) is yes, should Christians also seek to outlaw idolatry? (That is, to repeal the First Amendment’s free exercise of religion clause, and similar state constitutional provisions, as they apply to non-Christians or to non-Judeo-Christians or wherever Christians feel “idolatry” begins.) © If the answer to (a) is yes, and the answer to (b) is no, why should Christians seek to impose a Biblically-based view of what is right and wrong in the one case, but not in the other? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2002, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-gays-and-christianity/127731/44 "2002-09-11T14:28:27Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Polycarp \* > _1. Is there a God?_ Yes. > [@](#): > > _2. Does such a God have opinions on human moral behavior?_ No. God does not have ‘opinions’ on moral behavior. An opinion holds some degree of uncertainty. What is moral is whatever God says it is. If there were no God, there would be no such thing as moral (or immoral) behavior. God is the standard of morality, not simply a person with thoughts to share. Nor even any need to justify a position. **Should** I be able to accelerate objects with mass beyond the speed of light? The question is meaningless. **Should** we disagree with God on what is right? Same problem. > [@](#): > > _3. Is such a God identical to the historical God of Judaism and Christianity?_ Yes. > [@](#): > > _4. Is the Bible as it stands an accurate record of such a God’s views?_ Sort of, but not exactly. The Bible says what God wants it to say. It contains a number of different literary forms, aimed at a number of different audiences and concerning itself with a number of different points of view. The purpose - the only purpose - of the Bible is to present the life, works, and teachings of Jesus. This includes the Old Testament as well as the New. The Old Testament is important because it presents a context out of which Jesus speaks. We need to understand the Old Testament in order to understand Jesus. > [@](#): > > _5. What does the Bible have to say about homosexuality?_ The Bible mentions homosexuality only to condemn it, both in the OT and the NT. No references to it can be construed as either laudatory or neutral. I think there can be little doubt but that it was universally understood by Jewish and early Christian writers that homosexual behavior was not simply a violation of ceremonial law, but a moral wrong in and of itself. I also don’t believe that the idea of homosexuality as a primary sexual orientation existed at the times when Scripture was written. Heterosexuality was taken as a given by all parties - probably including those who were gay. > [@](#): > > _6. Is a “literal” reading of the passages answering question 5 an accurate representation of what God has to say?_ No. > [@](#): > > _7. To what extent is the Law of the Bible applicable to people today, Christian or not?_ The Law of the Bible is Matthew 22:35-40. It is applicable to all people, at all times, under all circumstances. > [@](#): > > _8. What is the proper reaction of a Christian towards a gay person? Why is this the proper reaction?_ See the answer to 7 above. > [@](#): > > _9. Presuming the political power to do so, to what extent is a Christian required or permitted to impose his moral standards on those who hold different moral standards?_ To the same extent that the others are allowed to impose their moral standards on Christians. Fortunately or otherwise. It is when these come into conflict that the arguments break out, because there is no consensus on one moral standard. It’s like a teacher who wants to lead a Bible study in school after hours. Is she imposing her religion on others, because of the implied authority she holds as a teacher which makes this improper, or is she having her rights under the First Amendment violated by having her Bible club treated differently than drama or photography? There is no consensus. For Constitutional issues, there is the Supreme Court to resolve what the Constitution ‘really’ says. Even then, precedent can be overturned, which is why the side that has what it wants always wants to freeze everything in place and the other wants new justices. There is no such authority for morality. In other words, we can’t always determine what God wants us to do. Another complicating factor is that it is an act of charity to warn someone that they are committing some act that will put them in danger. This is true, even if they are offended by hearing it. My drunken friend might be insulted by my insisting that he not drive himself home. The friendship could even be broken over the issue. This does not excuse me from trying to prevent him from driving. Neither does the fact that he does it a lot, and has always gotten away with it before. Neither would it if he drives home drunk every weekend, and never has an accident at all. It is certainly true that there are more effective ways to dissuade a drunk from driving than by being abusive or insulting. These are counter-productive. But this does not mean that I should shut up about it altogether; this would be a violation of the law of charity. This is turning into a book. Sorry. I look forward to reading what everyone has to say. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![MrVisible](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@MrVisible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrVisible)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2002, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-gays-and-christianity/127731/45 "2002-09-11T15:34:48Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Shodan \* > Another complicating factor is that it is an act of charity to warn someone that they are committing some act that will put them in danger. This is true, even if they are offended by hearing it. My drunken friend might be insulted by my insisting that he not drive himself home. The friendship could even be broken over the issue. This does not excuse me from trying to prevent him from driving. Neither does the fact that he does it a lot, and has always gotten away with it before. Neither would it if he drives home drunk every weekend, and never has an accident at all. In the case of drunk driving, the danger they’re facing is demonstrable, real, and able to be proven with empirical evidence. Besides which, they’re demonstrably putting other people in danger. It’s not only charitable, but humanitarian, to convince someone not to drive drunk. I’ve done so on occasion myself. In the case of homosexuality, the danger is not demonstrable. If you believe that being homosexual puts me in danger of going to hell, and you warn me of it, you have no verifiable evidence to support your position. You’re presuming, with no evidence to support the presumption, that your understanding of how the universe works is superior to my own. Additionally, there is a good possibility that stating these opinions, advocating that homosexuals are hell-bound sinners, creates a societal climate that puts homosexuals in real, demonstrable danger. The act of presumptuously warning us of an unverifiable and possibly mythical danger is putting us in real, actual physical danger. Not to mention making our lives more difficult by supplying a religious basis for discrimination. So, why do it? ---
**Author:** ![gobear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/8dc957/32.png) [@gobear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gobear)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2002, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-gays-and-christianity/127731/46 "2002-09-11T15:57:04Z")
In addition to **Mr. Visible** ’s refutation of **Shodan** ’s equating of homosexuality to drunk driving, let me add that, contrary to the unfounded assertions of fundamentalists, the US is **not** a Christian nation. Our founders established a policy of strict neutrality to religion, neither to help or hinder. so the government may not forbid **Shodan** to pray in his church, but it also may not make **Shodan** ’s church the state religion–which is what the fundies are trying to do. They wish to impose their relgious views on the reast of us when they wish to write their fear of homosexuality into the law by opposing gay rights legislation. ---
**Author:** ![Tygr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/df788c/32.png) [@Tygr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tygr)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2002, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-gays-and-christianity/127731/47 "2002-09-11T19:08:18Z")
Still trying to cogently & succinctly formulate my answers. Busy as I am, it may take a while. Meantime, I’ll address one or two things that just happened. Actually, the charitable/Christian thing to do would be to keep your friend from getting drunk in the first place… > [@](#): > > You’re presuming, with no evidence to support the presumption, that your understanding of how the universe works is superior to my own. Of course he is. This is the nature of faith. Additionally, regarding the societal impact of proselytizing, he is also beholden to see that no evil is committed in the name of God, as this disobeys the Third Commandment. So witnessing to/admonishing people who would use the word of God to commit evil is an even greater responsibility than warning a “drunk driver”, because, as is demonstrated here on these Boards, being a believer and doing evil turns non-believers against the cause of God. See Romans 2:23-24, referencing Isaiah 52:5. ---
**Author:** ![Esprix](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/esprix/32/7899_2.png) [@Esprix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Esprix)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2002, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-gays-and-christianity/127731/48 "2002-09-11T23:01:21Z")
_{sigh}_ Even just reading this thread gets my bile up, so I’ll just stick to the OP. _1. Is there a God?_ I don’t know. _2. Does such a God have opinions on human moral behavior?_ If he/she/it were to exist, I am inclined to believe that he/she/it wouldn’t give a damn; and if it did, what a petty, cruel god it would be. _3. Is such a God identical to the historical God of Judaism and Christianity?_ I hope not, as half the time he seems all-loving, and half the time he seems like a spoiled brat (Divine Weasel, indeed). _4. Is the Bible as it stands an accurate record of such a God’s views?_ I say no. _5. What does the Bible have to say about homosexuality?_ As it is currently interpreted, it seems fairly clear that it is against the practice of homosexual sex. What it might have _originally_ said on the topic I don’t know - I was neither there, nor can I read the language it was originally written in. _6. Is a “literal” reading of the passages answering question 5 an accurate representation of what God has to say?_ I sure hope not. _7. To what extent is the Law of the Bible applicable to people today, Christian or not?_ Perhaps if people stuck to the spirit of those stories, or perhaps stuck with the message of love, it might be a pretty good thing. Sadly, very few Christians seem to read it that way. _8. What is the proper reaction of a Christian towards a gay person? Why is this the proper reaction?_ “God be with you.” Anything other than that is vindictive, unsubstantiated and bigoted, IMHO. _9. Presuming the political power to do so, to what extent is a Christian required or permitted to impose his moral standards on those who hold different moral standards?_ Not at all, even if you ignore that whole inconvenient “separation of church and state” thing. This entire topic depresses me to no end. Sadly, the constant hashing and rehashing only serves to reinforce the fact that I will never be a Christian. Esprix ---
**Author:** ![Sparc](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/65b543/32.png) [@Sparc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sparc)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2002, 11:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-gays-and-christianity/127731/49 "2002-09-11T23:24:49Z")
**Esprix…** You’re so right and yet so wrong. I don’t know if you read my previous post or not, but in case not I’ll just say that the so called Christians that pretend that our sexual orientation is condemned by their religion are also pretending that slavery, murder, and genocide are not supported by the same book. The fact is that the Bible supports believing all of those things, yet it does not from a Christian perspective. The very essence of Christianity demands that a believer take unto him/herself the word of Jesus and that involves in part discarding the Old Testament. Jesus never, not ever, was said to have condemned us in the texts of the New Testament. I couldn’t care less from a religious perspective since I do not believe in the Semitic God, nevertheless there are parts of the morality of the same religions that our culture does well in upholding. Furthermore; yes it is important to debate it since we are by force faced with a society that revolves, or at least pretends to revolve around these moral principles. I don’t know if me saying so makes any difference, but he fact is still that real Christians have no choice but to love you and understand that whether or not you are damned is neither none of their business, nor is it as certain as some of them pretend. Sparc ---
**Author:** ![MrVisible](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@MrVisible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrVisible)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2002, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-gays-and-christianity/127731/50 "2002-09-11T23:25:05Z")
**Esprix** , be of good cheer. The more this argument goes on, the more the straight supremacists have to state their points, and the more obvious it becomes that they haven’t got a leg to stand on. The reasonable Christians will see that they don’t want to be associated with the kind of hate being perpetrated by the zealous bigots in the group, and will reconsider the possibility that everyone should be treated as human, regarless of their sexual orientation. You and I both know there are only two real causes for the anti-homosexuals’ hysteria: “It’s icky” and “God says it’s icky.” It’s not enough, by a long, long shot, to persecute people for. We just have to keep being persistent in getting the message out there. ---
**Author:** ![grendel72](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/91b2a8/32.png) [@grendel72](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/grendel72)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2002, 11:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-gays-and-christianity/127731/51 "2002-09-11T23:26:30Z")
> [@](#): > > _1. Is there a God?_ Debatable and debated at length in other threads elsewhere. Discussion on this needs to be limited to an assertion of what you think. Possibly. > [@](#): > > _2. Does such a God have opinions on human moral behavior?_ Assumed w/r/t a positive answer to question 1. Deists may have other views. This seems incredibly unlikely to me. > [@](#): > > _3. Is such a God identical to the historical God of Judaism and Christianity?_ Assume this for purposes of this thread. **Freyr** , I love you, but _please_ don’t hijack this into a debate on whose god says what. Not likely. > [@](#): > > _4. Is the Bible as it stands an accurate record of such a God’s views?_ There are issues to be addressed here. No, it is an accurate record of the views of ancient jews. > [@](#): > > _5. What does the Bible have to say about homosexuality?_ It’s bad. > [@](#): > > _6. Is a “literal” reading of the passages answering question 5 an accurate representation of what God has to say?_ No. > [@](#): > > _7. To what extent is the Law of the Bible applicable to people today, Christian or not?_ It is certainly applicable to Christians. It has nothing to do with me. > [@](#): > > _8. What is the proper reaction of a Christian towards a gay person? Why is this the proper reaction?_ I see this one as the most critical question of the lot, given the attitudes presented in threads touching on the subject recently. Personally, I think they can believe whatever they like. If they insist on preaching their belief in a god of hate rather than love, I will state my opposition to their beliefs as strongly as I am able. > [@](#): > > _9. Presuming the political power to do so, to what extent is a Christian required or permitted to impose his moral standards on those who hold different moral standards?_ Christians have no legal _or moral_ right to force their beliefs on others. ---
**Author:** ![JerseyDiamond](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/8491ac/32.png) [@JerseyDiamond](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JerseyDiamond)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2002, 1:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-gays-and-christianity/127731/52 "2002-09-12T01:28:06Z")
\*\*\*1. Is there a God? \*\*\* Yes. \*\*\*2. Does such a God have opinions on human moral behavior? \*\*\* yes \ ***3. Is such a God identical to the historical God of Judaism and Christianity?** \* yes \*\*\*4. Is the Bible as it stands an accurate record of such a God’s views? \*\*\* yes _ **5. What does the Bible have to say about homosexuality?** _ The following: > [@](#): > > \*\* 2 Peter 2:4-9\*\* 4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; > 5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly; > 6 And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly; > 7 And delivered just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked: > 8 (For that righteous man dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing, vexed his righteous soul from day to day with their unlawful deeds;) > 9 The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished: Also: > [@](#): > > **Jude 1:7** Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. And > [@](#): > > \*\* Romans 1:24 - 27\*\* 24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: > 25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. > 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 recompense of their error which was meet. Also > [@](#): > > \*\* 1 Corinthians 6:9 \*\* > 9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, And > [@](#): > > \*\* Romans 13:13\*\* Let us walk honestly, as in the day; not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying. Also > [@](#): > > **1 Timothy 1:9-11** Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, > 10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine; > 11 According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust. And > [@](#): > > \*\* Revelation 21: 8\*\* But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death. \*\*\*6. Is a “literal” reading of the passages answering question 5 an accurate representation of what God has to say? \*\*\* Yes. Where God intends for us to interpret symbolically, He makes it obvious. Many of the OT prophecies have already been literally fulfilled. When something makes absolutely no sense literally, then it should be used symbolically. Now you might say that we can’t be sure of how to interpret it because we aren’t sure if the Bible is accurate, well, there are more than 5000 manuscripts dating from the 1st Century onward with which modern translations can be compared and their accuracy determined. There are lectionaries (1st and 2nd century sermons or written lessons) which quote a lot of the Bible. I am almost certain that all the NT and a part of the OT can be found in these documents. I need to do more research on it. The Dead Sea Scrolls contain almost all the OT and pre-date the time of Christ. [http://home.sprynet.com/~eagreen/kjv-3.htm](http://home.sprynet.com/~eagreen/kjv-3.htm)[http://www.gospelcom.net/faithfacts/maps\_m.html](http://www.gospelcom.net/faithfacts/maps_m.html) [http://www.creatingfutures.net/f4.html](http://www.creatingfutures.net/f4.html) \*\*\*7. To what extent is the Law of the Bible applicable to people today, Christian or not? \*\*\* This is applicable to everyone at all times. > [@](#): > > **26 He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou? > 27 And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself. > 28 And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live.** I think what people need to remember is that to love God is to put worldly things behind them. There are lots of laws in the OT. All the dozens of laws about the land, foods, and rituals of Israel don’t pertain to us. Keeping of any of these laws cannot get us into heaven anyway. > [@](#): > > **10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. > 11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: > 12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;** _ **8. What is the proper reaction of a Christian towards a gay person?** _ They should be shown love and compassion just as anyone else. Not because they are gay, but because they are humans. They should be made aware of the Bible and we should pray they they obey God. It doesn’t matter if you are gay or straight, fornication is a sin for both. We were told to stop sinning and follow Jesus. It is necessary that gays also experience forgiveness and transformation in church. I remember a pastor of mine saying that he would never deny anyone from coming to his church, but they may end up walking out if they refuse to give up the sin, and he preaches against homosexuality. _ **Why is this the proper reaction?** _ Because we are to love one another. If you love someone, you want them to know the truth. Love is wanting the best for someone. \*\*\*9. Presuming the political power to do so, to what extent is a Christian required or permitted to impose his moral standards on those who hold different moral standards? \*\*\* We should let the Bible and its values be known. After you have shared that with whomever, you have to let God convict the heart of that person. As long as you did your part, you are done. Just let it be known. If you are asked more questions, then you guide the person towards God. If they don’t care what you have to say and they think you are full of it, then let it be. Your job is done. ---
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2002, 1:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-gays-and-christianity/127731/53 "2002-09-12T01:33:15Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Shodan \* > > > [@](#): > > > > _9. Presuming the political power to do so, to what extent is a Christian required or permitted to impose his moral standards on those who hold different moral standards?_ > > To the same extent that the others are allowed to impose their moral standards on Christians. Fortunately or otherwise. > > It is when these come into conflict that the arguments break out, because there is no consensus on one moral standard. > > It’s like a teacher who wants to lead a Bible study in school after hours. Is she imposing her religion on others, because of the implied authority she holds as a teacher which makes this improper, or is she having her rights under the First Amendment violated by having her Bible club treated differently than drama or photography? There is no consensus. > > For Constitutional issues, there is the Supreme Court to resolve what the Constitution ‘really’ says. Even then, precedent can be overturned, which is why the side that has what it wants always wants to freeze everything in place and the other wants new justices. > > There is no such authority for morality. In other words, we can’t always determine what God wants us to do. So, Shodan, what _laws_ with respect to homosexuality and homosexual acts by consenting adults do _you_ think Christians should advocate in the United States today? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2002, 2:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-gays-and-christianity/127731/54 "2002-09-12T02:01:50Z")
> [@](#): > > So, Shodan, what laws with respect to homosexuality and homosexual acts by consenting adults do you think Christians should advocate in the United States today? Probably very little. “That government is best which governs least”. Although I say this more as a conservative Republican than a Christian. If you are asking how much effort the state should invest in arresting people for violating the sodomy laws, I would also say very little. Not the state’s concern. Nor do I advocate a theocracy in any real sense. I don’t believe it is possible for the government to force us to love one another, and we are all better off not having it try. As I said, the entanglements trying to balance competing rights off against each other are complex and difficult to resolve. If that is what you are asking. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2002, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-gays-and-christianity/127731/55 "2002-09-12T02:07:18Z")
> [@](#): > > If you are asking how much effort the state should invest in arresting people for violating the sodomy laws, I would also say very little. Not the state’s concern. Just one last clarification: Do you think there should be laws against consensual sodomy at all? Do you think they should remain on the books, with little effort to enforce them, or (if it’s not the state’s concern) do you think they should be repealed? ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2002, 2:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-gays-and-christianity/127731/56 "2002-09-12T02:38:34Z")
ResIpsaLoquitor, I’m fairly familiar with the account of why the Catholic Church thinks it is immoral. But that is not the same question as simply: why is it immoral? In the abscence of particular theology, or even the in prescence of one, it still seems to come down to “that’s not what God likes.” Even if I believed in God, I’d have to respond: so what? “God doesn’t like that” or “that’s a neat symbol for the relationship of…” aren’t moral arguements. Calling something a sacrement and another thing a taboo doesn’t really answer the question of why something is good or bad: it bypasses the question entirely. And to boot, a lot of the rationale, most of which is metaphorical anyway (which doesn’t really work in the context of a moral discussion), is poetic, not necessary. There’s nothing inherently more binding about the actual act of sex than there is a proctologist sticking his finger up my ass. What about cunnilingus? Should I have to marry my surgeon before he can reach inside my body? If these questions seem silly, then perhaps that gives some sense of how much I think the descriptions here really are matters of poetic interpretation, dosed with a good measure of cultural bias, and not in any sense objectively real or necessary understandings. As far as I can tell, there are many ways for people to be happy, many sorts of fulfilling relationships. Some sexual, some non. If you want to convince me that having sex with a particular someone is bad, then you are going to have to explain why it is bad in terms of values and harms that aren’t simply presumed by some authority, but are actually recognized by the beings participating. ---
**Author:** ![Sparc](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/65b543/32.png) [@Sparc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sparc)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2002, 3:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-gays-and-christianity/127731/57 "2002-09-12T03:18:52Z")
**Jersey,** Fornication doesn’t do it as grounds you know. That would only condemn the homosexuals who are promiscuous, together with the heterosexuals who are. Monogamy is not a hetero only game, I might tell you. > [@](#): > > _JerseyDiamond_ > > There are lots of laws in the OT. All the dozens of laws about the land, foods, and rituals of Israel don’t pertain to us. Keeping of any of these laws cannot get us into heaven anyway. What about the dilemma I presented you with **Jersey**? Care to explain how you deal with that in context of what you just said as quoted above. I’d really like to know what you have to say about Deuteronomy 21, 22 and 23. Sparc ---
**Author:** ![dreamer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/6bbea6/32.png) [@dreamer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dreamer)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2002, 4:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-gays-and-christianity/127731/58 "2002-09-12T04:26:23Z")
There’s an awful lot going on in Deuteronomy 21, 22, and 23. I’m just curious what you are asking for **Jersey’s** opinion on. ---
**Author:** ![JerseyDiamond](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/8491ac/32.png) [@JerseyDiamond](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JerseyDiamond)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2002, 6:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-gays-and-christianity/127731/59 "2002-09-12T06:38:35Z")
**Deuteronomy** > [@](#): > > Verses 10-14 By this law a soldier was allowed to marry his captive, if he pleased. This might take place upon some occasions; but the law does not show any approval of it. It also intimates how binding the laws of justice and honour are in marriage; which is a sacred engagement. > > Verses 15-17 This law restrains men from disinheriting their eldest sons without just cause. The principle in this case as to children, is still binding to parents; they must give children their right without partiality. > > Verses 18-21 Observe how the criminal is here described. He is a stubborn and rebellious son. No child was to fare the worse for weakness of capacity, slowness, or dulness, but for wilfulness and obstinacy. Nothing draws men into all manner of wickedness, and hardens them in it more certainly and fatally, than drunkenness. When men take to drinking, they forget the law of honouring parents. His own father and mother must complain of him to the elders of the city. Children who forget their duty, must thank themselves, and not blame their parents, if they are regarded with less and less affection. He must be publicly stoned to death by the men of his city. Disobedience to a parent’s authority must be very evil, when such a punishment was ordered; nor is it less provoking to God now, though it escapes punishment in this world. But when young people early become slaves to sensual appetites, the heart soon grows hard, and the conscience callous; and we can expect nothing but rebellion and destruction. see: [http://www.ccel.org/h/henry/mhc/mhc/deuteronomy.html](http://www.ccel.org/h/henry/mhc/mhc/deuteronomy.html) I’m not sure exactly what your question is about Deuteronomy. It was the second giving of the law. We are not bound by the laws of the OT if that’s what you are asking. When a man has a wife or a woman has a husband, they should be with only each other. They are married, so they can have sex. > [@](#): > > 2 Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every\*\* man\*\* have his own **wife** , and let every woman have her own husband. > 3 Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. > 4 The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife. **Wife** ----GunE, (Greek) which literally means “woman” may be used for “wife” (as in idiomatic English: my or the woman.) **Husband** ---- aner (greek) means “man” (or “husband”) I never said that gays cannot be monogamous. So if you are saying homosexual sex it is ok with the Bible _because you are monogamous_, that doesn’t make it ok. I may not be totally clear about what you are asking. I apologize if I am totally off . ---
**Author:** ![Mars\_Horizon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mars_horizon/32/2804_2.png) [@Mars\_Horizon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mars_Horizon)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2002, 12:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-gays-and-christianity/127731/60 "2002-09-12T12:00:03Z")
**Jersey** , correct me if I am wrong, but what you are saying is that **fornication** is always wrong. The key being that: Heterosexual fornication is defined as any sexual relations outside the bounds of marriage. Homosexual fornication is defined as any sexual relations **period**. Correct? IMHO, my summation above represents the general attitude of modern fundamentalist Christians towards “fornication”. And this is where the disconnect comes in. Because more moderate or liberal Christians will say that _in certain cases_, homosexual relations are OK, such as between “committed partners” and such. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-gays-and-christianity/127731.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-gays-and-christianity/127731.md?page=4)