TV Tropes Org

Forums

On-Topic Conversations:
LGBT Rights and Religion
search forum titles
google site search
Kickstarter Message
TV Tropes Needs Your Help
X
Big things are happening on TV Tropes! New admins, new designs, fewer ads, mobile versions, beta testing opportunities, thematic discovery engine, fun trope tools and toys, and much more - Learn how to help here and discuss here.
View Kickstarter Project
Total posts: [15,728]  1 ... 167 168 169 170 171
172
173 174 175 176 177 ... 630

LGBT Rights and Religion:

Discussion of religion in the context of LGBT rights is only allowed in this thread.

Discussion of religion in any other context is off topic in all of the "LGBT rights..." threads.

Attempting to bait others into bringing up religion is also not allowed.

edited 4th Oct '13 8:26:43 AM by Madrugada

 4276 shimaspawn, Mon, 22nd Oct '12 1:26:20 PM from Here and Now Relationship Status: In your bunk
And there is nothing in the Bible that says homosexuality is a sin. You merely declare it so. Thus it is the same as miscegenation. They're both based on people trying to force the bible to match their preconceived notions of how things should be.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.

-Philip K. Dick
 4277 Pykrete, Mon, 22nd Oct '12 1:33:16 PM from Viridian Forest
NOT THE BEES
All the same, it's good to finally see a Christian preacher openly admit that Christianity was on the wrong side of slavery, the wrong side of womens' rights, and the wrong side of racial segregation. I'm tired of people claiming that "Christianity" was somehow always on the right side of these things.

Erm...abolition and civil rights were very heavily religious movements. People on both sides used their faith as a justification for their actions.

NCC - 1701
And there is nothing in the Bible that says homosexuality is a sin. You merely declare it so

The relevant Scriptures that state homosexuality is contrary to God's intended order have been referenced and rereferenced at least a dozen times just in this thread alone. If you wish to debate the veracity or meaning of those passages, that's a different story, but no, I didn't "merely declare it so."

Could you point to where someone did that in this thread? All I've seen is others accepting that Christians have done good things and bad things, as have all other groups. Thanks!

I'd suggest you reread the earlier pages in this thread and in others discussing religion, particularly Christianity, and its relationship to homosexuality before making that assertion.

hate to say this, but so are yours. Supporting traditional marriage only, whether with Bible-based arguments or no, is marginalising and belittling a group of people.

We've already debunked this false equivalence of 'you don't agree with people's choices - you're belittling them'.
It was an honor
 4279 shimaspawn, Mon, 22nd Oct '12 1:53:26 PM from Here and Now Relationship Status: In your bunk
And those passages have been debunked by biblical scholars in this thread. Even Leviticus isn't talking about sin but instead about social customs and hygiene laws of a particular tribe. The rest either have nothing to do with homosexuality or refer to changing your inherent sexuality as a sin rather than homosexuality. There is nothing in the bible that outright calls it a sin. That's just putting words in God's mouth.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.

-Philip K. Dick
 4280 deathpigeon, Mon, 22nd Oct '12 1:57:59 PM from Bread, It Is Bread that the Revolution Needs! Relationship Status: One True Dodecahedron
Kaspar the Friendly Spook
...The only two places that actually talk about homosexuality are the relevant section in Leviticus and Paul's letter in Romans. The first is mostly talking about ceremonial issues, and the second was specifically talking about people who were naturally heterosexual, and gave that up for gay relations. The other times that are used by Christian fundamentalists to argue against gays are the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, which is not talking about homosexuality at all, and two passages with some mistranslated Greek words, including one really obscure one.
My Blog.

ACAB.

"The great are great only because we are on our knees. Let us rise." - Max Stirner
NCC - 1701
Like I said, if you want to debate the meanings and subtleties and alternate readings of the passages, not just in Leviticus, that is your right. The point is while there is a basis for saying homosexuality is a sin, there's no place with ethnicity and race in regards to sexual attraction is even mentioned in the Bible.

Also, mentioning "the Biblical scholars in this thread" doesn't address the Biblical scholars who don't agree with you who are also in this thread, let alone certified theologians who also believe the Bible is clear in saying homosexuality is wrong.

edited 22nd Oct '12 2:02:08 PM by TheStarshipMaxima

It was an honor
 4282 Morgikit, Mon, 22nd Oct '12 2:03:28 PM from Lavender Town Relationship Status: In season
Queen of Foxes
I'm sure I remember at least one story in the bible where god punishes Hebrews who married foreign women. I'll have to look it up later.

[up]It does call into question just how clear the bible is on the subject.

edited 22nd Oct '12 2:06:25 PM by Morgikit

NCC - 1701
I'm familiar with the passages you mention. I can think of one off the top where the Bible suggested King Solomon's downfall was because he married foreign women.

First of all, and the passages are explicit, the race is not the issue, the issue is the Hebrews followed a strict faith, and these other people in other nations did not, to the point of worshipping idols, a huge no-no in the Scripture. It's no different than saying that there an be complications if a Christian marries a Muslim. Because Arab women are somehow less than? No, but merely because there're fundamental differences between the religious faiths.

However, if we want to debunk anti-race-mixing outright, allow me to oblige

“When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God” Leviticus Chapter 19: Verses 33-34

Mind you, this doesn't even address the fact that a black man dating a Chinese girl in America, isn't race mixing. They're both human and they're both American citizens, so...

Edit:
It does call into question just how clear the bible is on the subject.

Well, the verses are pretty explicit to me, I find no ambiguity in them. But contrary to Shima's assertions, I don't pretend to fathom all of God's thoughts. I go on what I believe to be true, and I let, no, I exhort, others to do the same.

edited 22nd Oct '12 2:14:58 PM by TheStarshipMaxima

It was an honor
 4284 Drunk Girlfriend, Mon, 22nd Oct '12 2:12:46 PM from Castle Geekhaven
[up] I thought Leviticus didn't count?
"I don't know how I do it. I'm like the Mr. Bean of sex." -Drunkscriblerian
Euo will do!
[up][up][up]You might be thinking Ahab and Jezebel, there. And, it's not clear if the Baal and the Queen of Heaven referred to was more along the lines of a split between Israelite and Judaic ideas on Yahweh or something like what people usually translate it as. <shrugs>

It's like relying on Protestant-only texts reviling Catholicism, without any Catholic texts remaining. tongue

edited 22nd Oct '12 2:13:59 PM by Euodiachloris

"When all else failed, she tried being reasonable." ~ Pratchett, Johnny and the Bomb
NCC - 1701
I thought Leviticus didn't count?

Lolwhut! The entire Bible counts. The problem is that fundies, leftstrimists, and others read it in bits and pieces and ignore whole swaths of it. Then they turn around and go "It doesn't make sense."

Yeah, no shit. [lol]

Edit: Oh, one more thing about the Bible being equal opportunity with regards to race, one of the most famous stories in all the Scripture is the Good Samaritan.

edited 22nd Oct '12 2:18:41 PM by TheStarshipMaxima

It was an honor
 4287 Drunk Girlfriend, Mon, 22nd Oct '12 2:19:51 PM from Castle Geekhaven
[up] I could have sworn that you had previously said that the other controversial bits in Leviticus weren't applicable, like the bits that say that homosexuality is punishable by death. Or the ones that say we need to stone disobedient children.
"I don't know how I do it. I'm like the Mr. Bean of sex." -Drunkscriblerian
 4288 Morgikit, Mon, 22nd Oct '12 2:20:44 PM from Lavender Town Relationship Status: In season
Queen of Foxes
Yes, the entire Bible counts. Except for kosher diet laws, animal sacrifices, that long list of people it's ok to execute, etc.
NCC - 1701
Okay gang, listen to me very, very carefully. The Bible is absolute and true. If it says something is a sin, it is a sin. If it says the punishment is stoning, that's the punishment.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaannnnnnddddd.....if the Bible says clearly "This was X covenant, NOW, we do things THIS way, " then that's what it says.

Jesus commanded his disciples to share his Scripture and teachings ONLY respectfully. He specifically said if people don't believe or don't agree with it, you are to say "Ok, thanks, have a nice day, " and leave.

Honestly, it's written all there.
It was an honor
 4290 shimaspawn, Mon, 22nd Oct '12 2:28:20 PM from Here and Now Relationship Status: In your bunk
And by the same logic if it doesn't say something is a sin, as is the case with homosexuality, then declaring it one is unchristian, correct? You're the one who is declaring it to be the be all and the end all. That means you need to actually listen to what it says and not just make things up.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.

-Philip K. Dick
 4291 Pykrete, Mon, 22nd Oct '12 2:30:14 PM from Viridian Forest
NOT THE BEES
While there were Gospel passages typically taken to overturn dietary and execution laws, there was no such passage overturning, say, the rule that forces an heirless widow to marry her brothers-in-law. Yet you'd be rather hard-pressed to find a Christian of any denomination that would say sticking to that one is anything short of horrific.

edited 22nd Oct '12 2:30:33 PM by Pykrete

 4292 Drunk Girlfriend, Mon, 22nd Oct '12 2:31:18 PM from Castle Geekhaven
[up] Pretty much this.

"I don't know how I do it. I'm like the Mr. Bean of sex." -Drunkscriblerian
NCC - 1701
Um, sorry to burst the "See, Starship has no idea what the Bible says!" bubble (lol) but the passages about a widow having to marry her brother-in-law is pretty explicity reserved for brothers that live together; as in they co-habitate, kinda like a polygamous marriage, but not with everyone sharing all the wives.

There are passages about remarriage in Timothy in the New Testament that make it clear that as long as you're divorced and/or a widow, you can marry whoever you please.

Shima, again, Leviticus states you're not to lie with a man as you would with a woman. It's pretty straightforward. If you want to debate what "lie" really means, you can. I don't. I don't begrudge you questioning it. I just take it as what's on the page.

But at no point do I just start fabricating Biblical beliefs for the lulz. The Bible explicity says that's (that being, making up Scripture) actually a pretty severe sin.

edited 22nd Oct '12 2:56:12 PM by TheStarshipMaxima

It was an honor
 4294 shimaspawn, Mon, 22nd Oct '12 2:47:16 PM from Here and Now Relationship Status: In your bunk
Nope. That's not what it says. It says that a man lying with a woman is not part of the culture of the tribe. It doesn't call it a sin. Just that it's not part of their culture. It's described in the same terms as cotton-polyester blends are and I've never heard anyone refer to those as sins.

The Bible calls it a cultural taboo. You're the one declaring it a sin.

edited 22nd Oct '12 2:47:51 PM by shimaspawn

Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.

-Philip K. Dick
 4295 Pykrete, Mon, 22nd Oct '12 2:47:20 PM from Viridian Forest
NOT THE BEES
Jesus also specifically said that divorce is bad, was included at all as a concession to the Israelites being douchebags, and remarrying after it is adultery. One would assume his word takes precedence over Paul. And while we're at it, I actually know a few people who live with their brothers in family housing, it's not unheard of and happens more in poor economy — should widows from those houses be forced to marry the other brothers?

Look, my point isn't lol biblefail — it's a fucking huge book with lots of contradictory passages, dodgy translation, and parts that were probably written under false authorship (like...oh right, Timothy). The point is that applying our own common sense and judgment is something we've been doing the whole time, and is indeed what we're supposed to be doing.

edited 22nd Oct '12 2:56:14 PM by Pykrete

NCC - 1701
[up] Quite correct Pyrete. You actually nailed it precisely on the head. But, one thing you have wrong, divorce is allowed ONLY under the condition that a partner is unfaithful (has an affair). Divorce isn't allowed for any other reason.

So yes, getting a divorce for any other reason is a sin. And remarrying after said divorce is compounding the sin.

Edit: I'm not sure what Bible you're looking at Shima, but the exact word used is "abomination". Not "against cultural taboo" or somesuch. I myself refrain from using that word because it's offensive and I see no reason to go there.

But this idea that the passage is wrong because the Bible is saying it is against the tribal law the same way eating pork is, is, well...severely misguided, imho.

edited 22nd Oct '12 2:55:39 PM by TheStarshipMaxima

It was an honor
 4297 Pykrete, Mon, 22nd Oct '12 2:57:29 PM from Viridian Forest
NOT THE BEES
Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you. - Leviticus 11:12

NCC - 1701
[up] Your point being?

edited 22nd Oct '12 3:01:26 PM by TheStarshipMaxima

It was an honor
 4299 Pykrete, Mon, 22nd Oct '12 2:59:03 PM from Viridian Forest
NOT THE BEES
But this idea that the passage is wrong because the Bible is saying it is against the tribal law the same way eating pork is, is, well...severely misguided, imho.

Granted it was shellfish instead of pork, but yes, the same word is used.

NCC - 1701
Good points Pyrete. But remember that both Both Jesus and Paul pretty plainly said that only the immature still nitpick over dietary law, rather, one should focus on the content of one's heart rather than the contents of one's belly.

That's one thing we have to keep in mind when discussing "Well if shellfish is okay, so's homosexuality".

The Bible has said more than once while the food on your plate is only as important as the nutritional value it provides, the people in your bed are vastly more important. Sexual immorality was always a big deal, in both testaments. Sex was never meant just for procreation, as the fundies say. Sex was meant to be this orgasmic pleasure that literally lit up all the neurons in your nerves. But.......that thrill was supposed to go part-and-parcel with joining another's flesh. Sex is ultimate expression of companionship, so that's why it would never be just another thing like wearing cotton or eating pork.

(Sigh) Sadly, that means that...if you agree....homosexual expression is wrong, then so to is pre-marital sex. Hence, me and the gay guy are both "burning in hell" as the fundies would say.

And while we're at it, I actually know a few people who live with their brothers in family housing, it's not unheard of and happens more in poor economy — should widows from those houses be forced to marry the other brothers?

I get your point. Ah, but, this isn't Isreal, America is not run by prophets and judges, and it's quite clear the same rules don't apply. Remember, even if it wasn't specified as being specific to the old Hebrews, the writings in Timothy overturn such...draconian...measures.

Edit: Pyrete I dig your views. Debating Biblical passages with you and Shima is educational.

edited 22nd Oct '12 3:13:03 PM by TheStarshipMaxima

It was an honor
Total posts: 15,728
 1 ... 167 168 169 170 171
172
173 174 175 176 177 ... 630


TV Tropes by TV Tropes Foundation, LLC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available from thestaff@tvtropes.org.
Privacy Policy