so… I was talking to God earlier and he/she/it mentioned that anyone who eats peanuts are going straight to Hell, but the gays are alright.
Dude if that’s your reasoning all gods are messed up, as are all legal systems whether based on deities or not. Pederasts and those who wish to engage in bestiality have to choose, but those who wish to engage in adult human sex do not. Pyromaniacs and serial killers have to choose, but those with no destructive uges do not. Kleptomaniacs have to choose, but those who have no desire to steal do not. Rapists have to choose but those who engage only in consensual sex do not. Drug addicts have to choose, while those with no addictions do not.
Come on, in every society and every legal system some things are illegal that are based upon deep-seated desires for at least some people. It just happens that if you believe in most gods your punishment is likely to be a stretch of torment and damnation rather than, or possibly in addition to, whatever human based punishment you recieve.
Just because something is based on a deep rooted desire, or linked to a very neccesary reward/pleasure centre in the human brain doesn’t mean we have to indulge in it. Nor does it mean that any judge, whether human or divine, is wrong for insisiting upon punishment for commiting that crime.
OK absoul, what does she have to say about gay elephants then?
Gaspode gets a little nippy at my facetious comment.
spooje, though, will not insinuate that Gaspode has equated homosexuality with disease and criminal behaviour.
Or at least he will try not to.
Straights do not choose to be to be straight. If you say you choose to be straight, you are pretty much admitting that you are sexually attracted to members of the same sex, but have made a conscious decision not to act on it. We never had to think about it, because small-minded bigots never told us our sexual orienatation was sinful and would damn us for all eternity. If it was in the Bible, we would correctly state that the Bible says a lot of things that seem ridiculous and wrong today that we choose to ignore. I suggest we stop the whole ‘God hates homosexuality’ stuff. It’s not a disease, it’s not a crime, and it harms no one.
And, just for spooje’s enlightenment, did God actually tell somebody that he hated homosexuality like he gave the commandments, or did somebody simply write that God hates it and we bought it hook, line and sinker?
[sub]I should really learn to mind my own business[/sub]
Oh for goodness sake—peanuts, bananas, chocolate chips . . . Spooje is on the right track here. A better analogy: let’s say someone found a first edition of the bible in which this “God” person had originally said that heterosexuality was the one that was evil, and that everyone must cohabit with their own sex.
OK, then, could you “choose” to be gay?
spooje:
No, your view of G-d is messed up. You make it sound like gay sex is the only thing forbidden by the Bible. Hell, even heterosexual sex is forbidden is you’re not married to the other partner.
Amend your statement: homosexuals have to make that choice but heterosexuals do not.
On the other hand, let’s think about another biblical prohibition, say, that of working on the Sabbath. Let’s say you have a homosexual who’s easy-going and not particularly money-hungry and a heterosexual workaholic. Whose choice, vis a vis obedience to G-d’s rules, is tougher?
Everyone has their temptations. To get hung up on the sex thing is myopic and lends itself to a view of religion that is just plain wrong.
Chaim Mattis Keller
Well, CM, looks like I’m damned all the way around.
What’s up with ‘G-d’ stuff. Your ‘o’ not working?
So – how does God feel about raisins?
"To get hung up on the sex thing is myopic . . . "
—You’re right. Being straight or gay is not just about “sex,” it’s about falling in love and living openly and honestly with your mate. And any religion that sees anything wrong in that is, well . . . NOT a religion that deserves adherents.
Oh, fer cryin’ out loud, spooje. I’m an atheist, but I see no reason to be deliberately and needlessly insulting. You’ve been around the SDMB long enough to know that cmkeller is an Orthodox Jew, and that Judaism contains prohibitions concerning writing down the name of the Lord on media that are considered disposable.
Sheesh.
First of all, I met God, and She is black. And her name is Eris. And She’s one crazy bitch.
Second of all, no one cares about the peanuts…what is cared about are those smarmy restaraunts where everyone leaves the shells around.
CM, myopic indeed. Very nice post. “Why do I have to choose about sex?” ; “For the same reason I have to choose about {blank}. And we both have to choose between {blankety-blank}.”
Yeah, I know, any religion which makes you choose between God and the Devil is so incredibly narrow minded that only idiots would adhere to it; they should offer a whole platter of gods and goddesses(to be PC) to suit every personality. And any society which forces people that want to share pleasurable feelings with animals to NOT do so should have a revolution.
I think the point is what you consider to be reasonable expectation of coersion. I find that, in light of the topic presented, your reaction was just as unreasonable. :shrug:
Aynrandlover, I do not have the slightest idea of what you just said or whose side you’re on. I hope you are not seriously equating homo- (or hetero-) sexuality with bestiality, though?
Incidentally, my defense above of Chaim’s use of “G-d” is not meant to imply that I also defend his statements vis a vis religion/homosexuality/peanuts/working on the Sabbath. I understand them, but I don’t agree with them. (Not that he cares 
)
Is this mean to be a statement of scientific fact or a belief? Science has yet to demonstrate a conclusive genetic link to homosexuality – and it certainly hasn’t demonstrated that genetics alone would cause homosexuality.
I’m not interested in taking sides on this debate, but I do think we should steer away from reckless statements about the genetic foundation for gayness. Shoddy attention to science can only hurt homosexuality advocates in the long run. Unfortunately, they have also become increasingly common, thanks in part to the popular press.
Really? I didn’t know that.
By the way, spooge, thanks for asking. I was wondering about that G-d business, too.
Of course I’m equating them, just not in the way it might seem on the surface. The common link between all these things is that some people feel compelled or self-willed to do them, and other people feel it is a choice. One you accept as bad, and should be condemned, and another you feel is ignorant. Being a proponent though not practicer of bestiality I find its name dragged through the mud particularly upsetting.
That’s sex for ya.
Ever see “In the Mouth of Madness”? I’m trying to say that it isn’t an unreasonable position, just a difficult one. We do not define spirituality and/or morality statistically. That is, IF that god existed s/he wouldn’t give a hoot that you didn’t like it: those are the rules. I was just hoping to make the comparison that we can’t throw out a rule just because we don’t like it. If that were the case, that damn gravity thing would get a wake-up call.
People who hold religious beliefs are compelled to do so as self-evident metaphysical truth. They then choose which “side” to take (unless they’re buddhists), and take the rules that come with it.
Yep, that’s about right. IMHO all belief in the supernatural is infantile. People created gods and goddesses to explain natural phenomena, to enforce tribal behavioral standards, and to reconcile the individual’s place in his society. We now know that thunder isn’t caused by Thor hurling his hammer and sickness isn’t caused by demons. We have laws and courts to enforce proper behavior, so we have no need for religious taboos, and you can choose any philosophy you like to give your life existential meaning. It’s high time for humanity to put away belief in mythological figures and to become an adult species that faces reality head-on, not obscured by faith in imaginary sky-spirits.
That goes for elves, fairies, Jesus, Buddha, Allah, crystals, ghosts, angels, demons, pantheism, astrology, and supply-side economics.
The previous post is supposed to be in the “Religion is Infantile” thread.
But it worked perfectly well here, too, Goboy.
Aynnie, dear, I am still having a hard time deciphering your sarcasm from your actual opinions. Maybe it’s me. I have a cold.
That’s because I wasn’t sarcastic in any part of my last post.
Were I to turn it into a question to you, it would be “Why is bestiality rightfully bad but calling homosexuality bad is narrow-minded?” I see both as somewhat distasteful. some people like them individually, some people may even like both.
But the query had something to do with hypothesizing God exists, and so there was some set standard of goodness, and so why did the homosexuals have to choose? That is, “Those heteros always get all the breaks.” As someone who doesn’t believe in God like that, it is easy to wonder the same thing. However, if one did believe in God like that it would be hard to see why it was such a big deal: that’s the way things are. Don’t eat meat on Fridays, whatever. Some rules are harder to keep. How convenient that you happen to hate meat anyway, so to speak. How convenient that you are a hetero and not a homo. How convenient that you don’t find sex with animals pleasing or enticing.
I am not “equating” those things in the way I think you mean, I am simply trying to shine more light on cm’s post.
Summary: it isn’t “convenient”, it just is. To say one didn’t choose sexual preference is just like saying one doesn’t choose to love red meat, or be allergic to wheat, etc. There are compromises, and there are compromises, to paraphrase the infamous JDT. Some get off lucky. Some get off any way they can.
Now that I’m done defending religion I will dazzle and amaze you by pulling a full-sized bulldozer out of my hat. [sub]Ladies and Germs in the front, you might want to move for a moment[/sub]
I think Goboy or Matt or Esprix or Andygirl would do a much better job of this than I can . . . But I would say that homosexuality is a consenting relationship between two people, which does no one any harm. Bestiality (or pedophilia) is an assault on a helpless creature against its will, and has everything to do with “sex,” not “love.”
Guys, a little help, here? [. . . Never thought I’d be in an argument like this with another atheist!]