Homophobia

[Didymus]

mr rogers was [i]the[/i] man. If he was still alive, he'd be on the men of the square table

[Paddington]

[quote name='Didymus' post='1195417' date='Feb 14 2007, 11:38 PM']
mr rogers was [i]the[/i] man. If he was still alive, he'd be on the men of the square table
[/quote]

Who are the "men of the square table?"

[quote name='Anomaly' post='1195402' date='Feb 14 2007, 11:24 PM']
What is considered 'effeminate' and who is the judge?
[/quote]


To me the most obvious distinction is to separate stuff like flowers/ballet/Jem/decorating from stuff like dressing up to look like a girl and intentionally trying to talk like a girl and, of course, kissing boys.

[maeveangel]

square table? (does he mean round table? or kinda mean geeky-square? )

[maeveangel]

[quote name='Socrates' post='1195393' date='Feb 14 2007, 08:45 PM']
Yes, we are called to help our neighbor, but we are not called to be accepting of sinful behavior. Christ calls sinners (we all are sinners), but He calls us to repent of our sins, and follow Him.
Christ after forgiving the woman caught in adultery, "[b]Go and sin no more[/b]." (John 8:11)

Homosexuality is listed by St. Paul the Apostle as one of the sins which keep one from entering the Kingdom of God:(1 Corinthians 6:9-10)

It is not charity to condone sin, but rather to help the sinner from his sin.
[/quote]


Ok, in I Corinthians 6:9 there is a list of those who will NOT inherit the Kingdom of God. This includes: idolaters, adulterers, thieves, the greedy, drunkards & revilers. These words refer to male prostitutes (stated as "effeminate" in the KJV) and those who patronize them, ("abusers of themselves with mankind" KJV). SEXUAL EXPLOITATION is being condemned here in this verse. St. Paul continues in verses 15-20 speaking about prostitution and explains how sex is debased where there is only seeking after gratification and no love involved. St. Paul's point of reference is that all homosexual sex either takes place as rape, temple prostitution, or regular prostitution and that these "unnatural" sexual acts are linked only to false, pagan religions. He cannot conceive that a person could be born gay and fall in love with a member of the same sex.

And, you may be surprised someday how many gay people you will meet in Heaven.

[peach_cube]

We can all (hopefully) agree that fornication is wrong. Therefore, sexual relations are allowed only in marriage. Marriage is between one man and one woman. It follows then that gay sexual relations, no matter how loving, falls under fornication and is therefore wrong.

[maeveangel]

But when one is not permited to marry and treated as a second-class citizen who does not even have basic civil rights. Again, how would you feel if the government banned heterosexual marriage? Would you obey? Or would you follow your informed conscience? And accept yourself as who you are, which is a heterosexual.

Edited February 15, 2007 by maeveangel

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='maeveangel' post='1195747' date='Feb 15 2007, 08:55 AM']
Ok, in I Corinthians 6:9 there is a list of those who will NOT inherit the Kingdom of God. This includes: idolaters, adulterers, thieves, the greedy, drunkards & revilers. These words refer to male prostitutes (stated as "effeminate" in the KJV) and those who patronize them, ("abusers of themselves with mankind" KJV). SEXUAL EXPLOITATION is being condemned here in this verse. St. Paul continues in verses 15-20 speaking about prostitution and explains how sex is debased

where there is only seeking after gratification and no love involved. St. Paul's point of reference is that all homosexual sex either takes place as rape, temple prostitution, or regular prostitution and that these "unnatural" sexual acts are linked only to false, pagan religions. He cannot conceive that a person could be born gay and fall in love with a member of the same sex.

And, you may be surprised someday how many gay people you will meet in Heaven.
[/quote]

Homosexuality is condemned by God.

Paul is condemning Homosexuality along with the other things listed. He groups them together because they are all grave sins against God.

[quote][url="http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/267"]1 CORINTHIANS 6 AND 1 TIMOTHY 1[/url]

Great strides are taken to prove that 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 and 1 Timothy 1:9-11 do not condemn homosexuality in general, but rather, abusive homosexual practices and male prostitution in particular.

Although the specific type of homosexual behavior mentioned in these two passages may be male prostitution and abusive homosexual practices, this does not in itself argue in favor of “loving, monogamous, homosexual” relationships. In fact, that concept is foreign to the New Testament. Both of these passages do condemn “fornication.” Fornication is a broad term that includes homosexuality. This is so for two reasons: (1) fornication refers to illicit sexual behavior; and (2) all sexual behavior that violates, is contrary to, or in addition to, the heterosexual behavior implied by a monogamous marriage, is illicit. [/quote]

[quote][url="http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/267"]ROMANS 1:26-27[/url]

Clearly the most problematic passage for all who wish to say the Bible does not condemn homosexuality is Romans 1:26-27:

Wherefore God gave them up to the desires of their heart, unto uncleanness, to dishonour their own bodies among themselves. Who changed the truth of God into a lie; and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, [color="#FF0000"]leaving the natural use of the woman[/color], burned in their lust for one another, [color="#FF0000"]men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.[/color]

Proponents of homosexuality have tried to remove the force of this passage by suggesting that either Paul was expressing his own uninspired opinion, or he was merely laying the groundwork for his teaching on grace. So he was mainly concerned with idolatry, and not any sin in particular.

Although a biblical writer’s opinion might indeed appear in Scripture (e.g., 1 Corinthians 7:7), the suggestion that Romans 1:26-27 represents Paul’s uninspired opinion and is at variance with the rest of the Scripture, is erroneous. If we cannot trust Paul to express the will of God on this point, where can we trust him? What will be our standard? Unfortunately, our own opinions become the standard all too often.

The fact is, Paul meant exactly what Christians have long thought he meant—that homosexual behavior is symptomatic of sin in the world. This passage is not to be dismissed as too difficult to understand, or as an isolated passage that somehow is outweighed by an impressive array of passages teaching the opposite. Although this passage does not stand alone, from the standpoint of divine inspiration, one reference is enough.[/quote]

[quote][url="http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/267"]CONCLUSION[/url]

The conclusion is this: every time homosexual behavior is mentioned, it is condemned. The Bible is not homophobic (i.e., obsessively hostile toward homosexuality), but it clearly treats heterosexuality as normative (1 Corinthians 7; Ephesians 5; 1 Peter 3; et al.). These unsuccessful attempts to reinterpret the Bible’s teaching on the subject raise an even more crucial question: What Scripture can be presented that legitimizes homosexuality? [/quote]

Answer NONE


[quote]1 Timothy
Chapter 1:8-11

We know that the law is good, provided that one uses it as law,
with the understanding that law is meant not for a righteous person but for the lawless and unruly, the godless and sinful, the unholy and profane, those who kill their fathers or mothers, murderers,
the unchaste, [b]practicing homosexuals[/b], kidnapers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is opposed to sound teaching, according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted.
[/quote]

[quote]"The law is meant not"... He means, that the just man doth good, and avoideth evil, not as compelled by the law, and merely for fear of the punishment appointed for transgressors; but voluntarily, and out of the love of God and virtue; and would do so, though there were no law.[/quote]

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='maeveangel' post='1195772' date='Feb 15 2007, 09:47 AM']
But when one is not permited to marry and treated as a second-class citizen who does not even have basic civil rights. Again, how would you feel if the government banned heterosexual marriage? Would you obey? Or would you follow your informed conscience? And accept yourself as who you are, which is a heterosexual.
[/quote]

It would not matter if the Goverment saw marriage for what it is or not. God's law is above mans law. Marriage is between one man and one woman.

And "Homosexuals" are not second-class citizens. They do have basic civil rights, they are permitted to marry. Just as a man who wants to marry ten consenting woman, has the same civil rights and is permitted to marry ONE woman.

Marriage is for a single man, and a single woman only. Anything else is not Marriage. The only way to have sex and not be guilty of fornication is to be married. A man and a man can not marry, a woman and a woman can not marry, just as a man and a man can not reproduce naturally, and a woman and a woman can not reproduce naturally.

True sex, Real sex can only happen between One Man, and One Woman, with the sexual organs united. Homosexuals can not have sex, not true sex, not real sex. Sex has only one real purpose and that is to reproduce, homosexuals can not reproduce in homosexual relationships.

The Love in a marriage can only exist in a real marriage. Because God is Love and God Blesses real marriages with His love. A homosexual union is very much against the will of God, as the Holy Scriptures prove, and Holy Mother preaches. So since God is Love and does not love the union because He forbids such a union, true love does not exist between the homosexuals in the relationship.

Edited February 15, 2007 by KnightofChrist

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='maeveangel' post='1195772' date='Feb 15 2007, 09:47 AM']
But when one is not permited to marry and treated as a second-class citizen who does not even have basic civil rights. Again, how would you feel if the government banned heterosexual marriage? Would you obey? Or would you follow your informed conscience? And accept yourself as who you are, which is a heterosexual.
[/quote]
Marriage is the union of a man and a woman.
You have the same civil rights as anyone else. The government cannot ban marriage, but I get your point. We obey the laws of God, not men. Having SSA is a cross to bear, but God gives us only what we can bear in this life. You can friends that you love and cherish dearly, you cannot have sex with them. Sex is NOT the end all goal of life, in spite of what TV says.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='Paddington' post='1195618' date='Feb 15 2007, 12:46 AM']
Who are the "men of the square table?"
To me the most obvious distinction is to separate stuff like flowers/ballet/Jem/decorating from stuff like dressing up to look like a girl and intentionally trying to talk like a girl and, of course, kissing boys.
[/quote]
Square Table: from a beer commercial where men decide 'Man Laws' such as waiting 3 weeks before dating your friends ex-girlfreind (unless she's really hot). Mr Rogers was actually a 'special forces ranger'. Most people thought he was 'femme' and gay when reality was not the case. Condemning/labeling people who 'seem' effeminate as gay is ignorant but society today (and even people themselves) accept being gay if they don't match the stereotype of being masculine.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Anomaly' post='1196239' date='Feb 15 2007, 05:12 PM']
Square Table: from a beer commercial where men decide 'Man Laws' such as waiting 3 weeks before dating your friends ex-girlfreind (unless she's really hot). Mr Rogers was actually a 'special forces ranger'. Most people thought he was 'femme' and gay when reality was not the case. Condemning/labeling people who 'seem' effeminate as gay is ignorant but society today (and even people themselves) accept being gay if they don't match the stereotype of being masculine.
[/quote]
YES and this labeling carp starts so early in life. and kids start thinking "I must be gay" if they like art or music instead of football.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1196247' date='Feb 15 2007, 05:14 PM']
YES and this labeling carp starts so early in life. and kids start thinking "I must be gay" if they like art or music instead of football.
[/quote]
The other half of the equation is labeling boys who like football and would defend themselves physically as being violent neanderthals and unchristian.

[maeveangel]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1195843' date='Feb 15 2007, 11:33 AM']
True sex, Real sex can only happen between One Man, and One Woman, with the sexual organs united. Homosexuals can not have sex, not true sex, not real sex. Sex has only one real purpose and that is to reproduce, homosexuals can not reproduce in homosexual relationships.

[b]Sex has more than one purpose. Again, unity...comes to mind as one of them. Sex is more than just uniting organs & reproduction.[/b]

The Love in a marriage can only exist in a real marriage...So since God is Love and does not love the union because He forbids such a union, true love does not exist between the homosexuals in the relationship.
[/quote]

[b]If true love can only occur in a married, heterosexual couple, then why are some heterosexual couples unhappy? Why are some gay couples very commited & very happy? Yes, I am being flippant. Is the only reason you get married is to have children? (It's beautiful if you are so blessed, but what if you aren't able to conceive?)If you are heterosexually married, i doubt that that was the only reason. Why did you get married? For companionship? For love? So do gay people. i may come back to this...and i will attempt to look at these Scriptures and see how i can reply.But please be patient, it might take awhile! [/b]


[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1195934' date='Feb 15 2007, 01:01 PM']
Marriage is the union of a man and a woman.
You have the same civil rights as anyone else. The government cannot ban marriage, but I get your point. We obey the laws of God, not men. Having SSA is a cross to bear, but God gives us only what we can bear in this life. You can friends that you love and cherish dearly, you cannot have sex with them. Sex is NOT the end all goal of life, in spite of what TV says.
[/quote]


[b]Thank you again for responding and at least "getting my point"! i understand & know that sex is not the end all, be all...and besides don't even watch TV at home! Much of what is on TV is garbage as far as I am concerned. It is much, much more than that...i believe that i was made this way, purposely...that God created me this way...& that He loves me as i am. It would surprise many of you to know that i am pro-life, that i believe in monogamy...i believe in what the Creed says...i guess my main purpose on here is to try to give this topic a human face & to hear what many of you have to say. And perhaps make some people think.Thanks![/b]

[peach_cube]

[quote name='maeveangel' post='1195772' date='Feb 15 2007, 09:47 AM']
But when one is not permited to marry and treated as a second-class citizen who does not even have basic civil rights. Again, how would you feel if the government banned heterosexual marriage? Would you obey? Or would you follow your informed conscience? And accept yourself as who you are, which is a heterosexual.
[/quote]

You are arguing against the definition of marriage. The government is not banning your ability to be homosexual, or to carry out a homosexual relationship, whether short or long term. If you want to see what a real second-class citizen is go and talk to some migrant workers.

How would I feel if heterosexual marriage was banned? I don't need to even think about it. It would be such a self defeating concept that a society that would do such a thing would not last long at all, at the very least they fail to breed the next generation.

Besides the government is not preventing homosexual relationships, they are being denied tax breaks. If the government took away my tax breaks for being married I would still be married. A homosexual couple with tax breaks no matter how it is defined by a government will never be a marriage, because by definition it cannot be.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='maeveangel' post='1196310' date='Feb 15 2007, 06:06 PM']
[b]If true love can only occur in a married, heterosexual couple, then why are some heterosexual couples unhappy? Why are some gay couples very commited & very happy? Yes, I am being flippant. Is the only reason you get married is to have children? (It's beautiful if you are so blessed, but what if you aren't able to conceive?)If you are heterosexually married, i doubt that that was the only reason. Why did you get married? For companionship? For love? So do gay people. i may come back to this...and i will attempt to look at these Scriptures and see how i can reply.But please be patient, it might take awhile! [/b]
[b]Thank you again for responding and at least "getting my point"! i understand & know that sex is not the end all, be all...and besides don't even watch TV at home! Much of what is on TV is garbage as far as I am concerned. It is much, much more than that...i believe that i was made this way, purposely...that God created me this way...& that He loves me as i am. It would surprise many of you to know that i am pro-life, that i believe in monogamy...i believe in what the Creed says...i guess my main purpose on here is to try to give this topic a human face & to hear what many of you have to say. And perhaps make some people think.Thanks![/b]
[/quote]

Why are some heterosexual couples unhappy? Why are some homosexual pairs happy? You would have to ask them:) Statistically the odds are against the homosexual pair.
People can fall in and out of love on a daily basis, but it takes far more than "love" to keep a couple together.
Heterosexual marriage offers unity AND procreation and is what God has intended for us. This is not possible in a homosexual pairing.
God loves all of us, no matter what our handicap is in life.
Why would I be surprised that you are pro-life and believe in monogamy? I know many people with SSA that believe in both. I have an internet friend who has had a chaste companion for 20 years. They consecrated their love to God to keep it safe. Both are good catholics.