:: shrug ::
It’s all fairy stories to me. Not to say there’s no good stuff in the Bible, but there’s crap too.
It is hypocritical and arrogant. But to put it concisely: - even if it’s all literally the word of god - why the fuck should we care? God is not exactly a good example to follow as far as morals are concerned. Even the most basic rules in the commandments - like not killing - are completely disobeyed when god wants them to be disobeyed. God flagrantly orders people to kill children. God is a dick, and anyone who thinks our morals come from Him is mistaken.
Sure. The problem is that there still are people who for some reason take the bible seriously.
More accurately, people think God flagrantly orders them to kill children.
Yeah. When I type the word “God” it’s generally a shorthand for “the literary character called the christian god”.
I would be most interested in Curtis’s reaction to this passage, which should be as relevant to him as the anti-homosexual passages are to our GBLT members.
For God’s sake, it’s from the Mosaic Law which NO LONGER applies to Christians. I cited only New Testament passages not OT ones on homosexuality.
A) What do you think about Jews. Mosaic law still applies to them, right?
B) What reason is there to trust a god that kills and maims and endorses genocide when he states he’s not really like that anymore?
C) Again, for the third time, can you name ANY reason except “god doesn’t like it” against homosexuality? I will accept “I personally think it’s icky”.
No, since everyone IMO should convert to Christanity, but I won’t force them or be one those fundamentalists who try to beat you over your head with Chick tracts.
He hasn’t repeated Sodom and Gomorrah anytime this century, has He?
It’s not natural, other animals only do it rarely.
Other animals also rarely wear clothes and are really humiliated when we make them do so. <shrug> No comment on the divinity of Paul?
OK fine, I’ll let you fight it out with the Jews.
So he didn’t hit you yesterday? Oh he must be a great guy.
First of all, we don’t eat raw meat. Or live in trees. Or fling poo at each other. Or eat each others’ kids. “Natural” is not a good way to judge what’s good for us. Also, as far as I know, homosexual activity amongst animals, is pretty much at the same percentage as amongst humans, with Bonobos - one of our closest relatives - having significantly more homosexual encounters than us*.
ETA: Bonobos are pretty much the most peaceful great apes you can find. And they’ll fuck anyone in sight.
Inspiration!
Animals never talk. Or solve differential equations. It’s not natural.
And actually, animals perform same sex sexual acts all the time. Nothing rare about it.
The rate of same-sex directed sexual behaviors in chordates is about 10%. Right this minute I’m watching a boy cat hump another boy cat. They’re brothers, too.
As Curtis was chastised earlier in this thread for making assertions without citations, I think it meet to supply some backup for that lack paragraph.
Here’s a wikipeidia article to start. I’d do more if I weren’t so freaking lazy.
Were I a fundamentalist, I expect I would explain animal sexuality and animal incest (though the latter is a fairly meaningless term) by blaming it on the corruption of the natural world precipitated by the fall of man. In the eyes of some Xtians, animal behaviors such as predation and sexual “immorality” did not exist before Adam ate that of the Tree of Knowledge of God & Evil. References to the lion lying down with the lamb (without having the lamb as a snack) after the return of Christ are explained as the innocent, pre-fall world being restored; I’m sure animal homosexuality would be too.
Dammit. Beaten to the wiki and the pointing out of the cites in it.
Bah-leted.
I’m going to go a bit further than my previous reply and state this:
The fundamentalist christians who claim that just the last couple of years god has been actively drowning people by the millions have a lot more scripture backing them up than you do. I’m sympathetic towards you since you seem to have the inner morality and decency not to believe that a moral god would do that. My point is that relying on a god concept for your morality is basically declaring yourself incapable of making moral choices. And if you really believe you are incapable of making moral choices, how can you ever make a decision about the morality of following any god?
Isn’t all that Adam and Eve business in the OLD Testament? I’m given to understand that all of that went out the window with the new one.