What is your view on this picture?

" " " " " Subject?

According to the Law of Moses, and by extension according to the Christian faith, homosexuality is a sin.


But so long as you do not adhere to either faith, it's not a problem. If you do, well then, you gotta sort out some things. For one, the Bible would then not be the Word of God fully and completely. If that is so, then it's content is suspect, and if so, then you'd have to ask yourself which parts are true, which aren't etc., from a moral viewpoint. You can see how it gets to be a huge problem.


Edit: Can I ask what the point/purpose is? Just curious.

Why don't you say something about the subject before expecting others too? You aren't really making people feel comfortable about the subject by not addressing it yourself first...

I like the picture as a picture. I hate the content and the ideas it provokes.

Okay. Its not a Sin as such, but i do not like homosexuals. So it is more true than false. But calling it a Sin is too harsh maybe against Religion's its a sin, but to people nowadays, its not, apart from me. lol

Most of the homosexuals I know are kinder, funnier, more insightful, more reasonable, and more mature than you. Should I hate them just because they're...gay? Because they prefer men? That's stupid.

Most important commandment is to love. Love thy God, Love thy neighbour. Hating on homosexuals is not loving thy neighbour.

Have you seen American Beauty?

It's odd, isn't it?

Someone could argue then as follows:


We love those among us who are homosexual. That is why we will try everything in our power to help them overcome it. That includes forbidding homosexual relations with other men (or women). They might not like it, and think that we hate them, but they are sick and need help. We know what's best for them, and they will thank us in the afterlife.


You can see how the Bible can be interpreted differently, right? And how easy it is to manipulate it to adhere to your own ideas of right and wrong. Heh.

Most people in the world are more intellectual, funnier and more charming than you, but i dont have to say that to boost my point, so please, give the insults a rest.

Yes, why cant you hate them because they are gay? :???:

You just DID say it.

It was meant as an insult, but if you look closely, it also implies that homosexuals can be just as "wholesome" and fun as the norm. There's only that ONE minor difference.

This thread as turned into yet another "I'm better than you, no I am," thread. Sigh.

Sad, ain't it?

Hating somebody for their sexual preference is wrong, even if you don't agree with them. I don't condone homosexuality, but I don't hate gays.

Do you hate people who are straight but promiscous, since that is a sin too?

I wouldn't hate you unless you don't like Manchester United :wink:

The subject matter was there. The intelligent conversation wasn't.

That minor difference is important though:

Who doesn't???

Damn breeders, overpopulating the planet ](*,)



:wink:

I love Manchester United :wink:

Then you are good in my book :grin:

No its not....I'm taking this from the New Jerusalem version, Genesis 19:1-8

When the two angels reached Sodom in the evening, Lot was sitting at the gate of Sodom..."My lords," he said, "please come down to your servant's house to stay the night and wash your feet..." They had not yet gone to bed when the house was by the townspeople, the men of Sodom both young and old, all the people without exception. Calling out to Lot they said, 'Where are the men who came to you tonight? Send them out to us so that we can have intercourse with them.'
Lot came out to them at the door and, having shut the door behind him, said, "Please, borthers, do not be wicked. Look, I have two daughters who are virgins. I am ready to send them to you, for you to treat as you please, but do nothing to these men since they are now under the protection of my roof."

So lets get serious here, the fact that we're using a passage that talks about throwing one's virgin daughter's to the crowds to do to as they deem fit as the difinitie passage on morality and sin in ferernce to sexuality is already seriously problematic. Secondly, the term all the "men" of the two comes from the Hebrew "anasheem", which is also the word for "people" since there is no genderless noun for that. Think of all the old raomance languages, etc. There is no gender nuetral word for "people" it is the word "man." That should be clued in by the bold statement that "everyone in the town came." So why everyone assumes it was just men there in the first place in a silly mistranslation. Finally, the last bolded section is the reason for Sodom's offenses. They were about to mistreat "guests" that had already been promised safe passage, etc. Note how he at no point says sex is bad, just that the two guests had been promised a safe refuge and that Lot did not want to do back on his promise to them and allow the town to mistreat travellers. It was a very big deal for Jews at the time. Travellers were always supposed to be welcomed into fellow Jews' houses when travelling. That was part of the diasporadic concepts of ensuring the longevity of the race. So the offense was to mistreat guests, nothing more, as should be indicative of the fact that its apprently fine to force Lot's two daughters in leiu of the company.

Reading the Bible is remarkably amnesiac nowadays... I caution anyone to say its actually written that sexual interactions (especially affectionate and not aggressive ones) are an official "sin." But then again, go right ahead and throw sell your daughters off...hey, if you're going to read Genesis 19 at all, and go at it by the word, your family gets what's coming to it.

If my Dutch Darling Bergkamp still plays for Arsenal, than sorry, Man U isn't my #1. :wink:

Ahh Dolce. Always good for conversation.

Basterd

Ok, Dolce. Arsenal, you are in trouble now :wink:

Who is it you like?