Homosexuality from an Orthadox Jew - Dr. Laura Schlesinger

reply to post by hmdphantom


Why all the hate? Why dont you point that hate towards rapists, murderers, child molesters etc. Gay people dont harm anyone. Yes, you will get bad gay people, just like you get bad straight people. Are you one of these people that belive that gay people choose to be gay?

Originally posted by hmdphantom
Homosexuality is not allowed in any religion.

Sorry to burst your bubble there, but Homosexuality is welcomed in all the Pagan faiths, always has been, always will be.

And on the subject of the original post, I'll be copying that down and using that every time I see some religious fanatic using the traditional bible excuse for their homophobia from now on.

reply to post by hmdphantom


Homosexuality is not new. It exists in thousands of species. Homophobia only exists in one; Humans.
So, which is more natural, the Homophobic human or thousands of species around the world without fake doctrine and man-made fiction to follow?

I'd trust the natural behavior of thousands of species across the planet more than the opinions of a group of delusional people reading from a book.

reply to post by boymonkey74

It is natural to have same sex relations, just look in nature.

i'm going to take issue with this line, as it is illogical.

in nature, rape, murder, incest and necrophilia have often been witnessed, but we have laws against all those things. using nature as a pattern to be emulated leads down some gruesome paths.

personally i think that if two people love each other, they should be able to be together. i'm a christian, and i think homosexuality is wrong, but i also believe god gave everyone free will. do what you want, so long as you don't harm someone who doesn't consent.

being christian, i struggle with the old testament laws. yes, jesus did make them irrelevant, but some of them seem so brutal. it was a different time, and many of them were for health-related reasons, such as the "uncleanliness" of a woman on her period, or the quarantine that follows touching a dead animal carcass. i suppose this is where faith comes in.

Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
reply to post by boymonkey74

 

It is natural to have same sex relations, just look in nature.

i'm going to take issue with this line, as it is illogical.

in nature, rape, murder, incest and necrophilia have often been witnessed, but we have laws against all those things. using nature as a pattern to be emulated leads down some gruesome paths.

personally i think that if two people love each other, they should be able to be together. i'm a christian, and i think homosexuality is wrong, but i also believe god gave everyone free will. do what you want, so long as you don't harm someone who doesn't consent.

being christian, i struggle with the old testament laws. yes, jesus did make them irrelevant, but some of them seem so brutal. it was a different time, and many of them were for health-related reasons, such as the "uncleanliness" of a woman on her period, or the quarantine that follows touching a dead animal carcass. i suppose this is where faith comes in.

edit on 20-12-2011 by Bob Sholtz because: (no reason given)

yes, the old testament was brutal. People back then where brutal, so its kind of logical that the old testament was written by man, and the thoughts of man, not God.

If God thought being gay was wrong, then why let peple be born gay?

Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
reply to post by boymonkey74

 

It is natural to have same sex relations, just look in nature.

i'm going to take issue with this line, as it is illogical.

in nature, rape, murder, incest and necrophilia have often been witnessed, but we have laws against all those things. using nature as a pattern to be emulated leads down some gruesome paths.

No, because the difference is the ability to have morals.
These things do occur in the Human race too, obviously. There is a very big difference between what is natural and what is morally right on a Human level.

You'll see plenty of religious people suggesting homosexuality is "unnatural", this is an oxymoron. Something cannot exist in nature if it is unnatural.

What they mean to say is that it is socially unacceptable, in which case they are again wrong, because almost every society accepts that it exists and doesn't persecute others because of it.

What these religious people are left with is the fact that they, personally, don't agree that others should be able to live the lifestyle of their choice. They won't say that, because it exposes the root of their intention; to control and dictate to others. It shows them to be simply Homophobic and really no better than any other dictator we have seen on Earth throughout our history.

This isn't aimed at you by the way, I did read your whole post, but my mind started rolling and I had to go with it

reply to post by detachedindividual

The real problem few speak about is that we all have a view of what we 'aught to do' but no-one does what they believe they 'aught to do'.

It is not so much that we violate some natural law or some law imposed on us...
...but that we violate our own rules...
...this disconnect is the real human problem.

Originally posted by detachedindividual
reply to post by hmdphantom

 

Homosexuality is not new. It exists in thousands of species. Homophobia only exists in one; Humans.
So, which is more natural, the Homophobic human or thousands of species around the world without fake doctrine and man-made fiction to follow?

That's not true.

We have documented evidence of many 'human-like' behaviours in animals, including the notion of homosexuality and phobias. However, as we can not actually talk to the animals to find out what they are thinking we try to describe their behaviour with similar humanisms.

It is called anthropomorphism.

It is excellent for giving another person an approximation or a description for an event, but should never be used for any form of scientific study.

Sorry, this is one of those things that really irks me. I would love to be able to know what my dogs think, and I hope one day that humans can, but until that technology is invented, we can't.

Originally posted by peck420

Originally posted by detachedindividual
reply to post by hmdphantom

 

Homosexuality is not new. It exists in thousands of species. Homophobia only exists in one; Humans.
So, which is more natural, the Homophobic human or thousands of species around the world without fake doctrine and man-made fiction to follow?

That's not true.

We have documented evidence of many 'human-like' behaviours in animals, including the notion of homosexuality and phobias. However, as we can not actually talk to the animals to find out what they are thinking we try to describe their behaviour with similar humanisms.

It is called anthropomorphism.

It is excellent for giving another person an approximation or a description for an event, but should never be used for any form of scientific study.

Sorry, this is one of those things that really irks me. I would love to be able to know what my dogs think, and I hope one day that humans can, but until that technology is invented, we can't.

I dont really care about animals. Gay human beings did not choose to be gay, just like i did not choose to be straight, i just am. I what really annoys me are the people who put gay people in the same group as child molesters.

reply to post by Jay-morris

yes, the old testament was brutal. People back then where brutal, so its kind of logical that the old testament was written by man, and the thoughts of man, not God. If God thought being gay was wrong, then why let peple be born gay?

no. desperate times call for desperate measures. living a nomadic life was hard, and the laws needed to keep them alive and functioning were tough, but they needed to be.

i don't think anyone is born gay. humans don't have absolute free will, but part of it is a voluntary decision.

Please add to existing thread. Here