LGBTQ+ Rights and Religion

Them/Us, Monkey Sphere?

Bonobos.

Well, a cursory googling brought this up.

Although bear in mind that my argument is on the "Souls don't exist so you don't need them for rational thought" side of the argument and not the "everything has a soul" side.

Although frankly I don't see how that one has any less merit than the "humans are special" idea.

edited 18th Oct '13 12:22:22 PM by Elfive

This is definitely one for the more general-purpose religion/mythology thread.

Addiction to sex and porn are a thing. And pornography (live-action or fictional) has been known to cause a whole lot of detrimental effects, such as raising tolerance to imagery and causing the viewer to seek more extreme things because they can no longer be aroused by anything else. Hell, you can go on any fanfiction site, pick out a sex story, read the comments, and have your notions of humanity rather quickly destroyed by people (usually an overwhelming majority of those commenting) that appear to genuinely hold some rather terrifying notions of what constitutes consent.

However, that's all a pretty far cry from a healthy and supportive relationship with someone of the same sex.

Only if you're in a denomination that ascribes to transubstantiation. Most Protestant strains don't. Predominantly American denominations like Methodism believe the communion bread/wine reflect symbolism and/or a spiritual presence but reject transubstantiation.

The doctrine is mostly local to Catholicism and Orthodox.

edited 18th Oct '13 1:06:05 PM by Pykrete

Just to be clear here, I'm not saying that I hate people who are gay. I don't agree with the lifestyle, but if they are gay, then so be it. After all, they are people as well, and everyone deserves to be treated as equals.

So we good? I don't want to start a flame war or anything.

Yes, I'm aware of that.

Nah, that's fine. I don't approve of the religious lifestyle but I let that lie unless someone actually asks me what I think.

edited 18th Oct '13 1:14:25 PM by Elfive

What lifestyle?

The one where you enter a healthy monogamous relationship and never cheat or divorce. Honestly I think heterosexuals should try that one sometime.

Certain denominations do explicitly refer to and condemn "homosexual lifestyle" in their doctrine. As a side note, every time I see the word come up, I can usually narrow their denomination to about three.

It's likely an artifact of the most visible groups that acted out over the last century — swingers, which very much would constitute a "lifestyle". The notion of gays as "screw anyone with a willing cornhole" is unfortunately still very, very prevalent and used to condemn actual relationships by proxy, and the notion of a homosexual couple is only just starting to force its way into the consciousness of our more stodgy elements.

It was also not remotely unique to homosexuals. Actually, gays tend to have a considerably higher rate of success in marriage when it's allowed to them. The divorce rate among gays in Denmark, for instance (which has allowed them to marry for some 30 years now) is in single digit percentages — literally an order of magnitude below that of heterosexuals.

edited 18th Oct '13 1:34:24 PM by Pykrete

Both alcoholism and porn addiction fall under "emotional addiction". I am reluctant to call either of these a disease, as that implies that it's something that just happens to you; something you have no control over.

Alcoholism is closer to qualifying, at least. It can lead to physical dependence and has extremely powerful chemical withdrawal symptoms.

Self-inflicted at the outset, sure, but it's perpetuation is not remotely confined to the psychological. It actually fucks you up when you try to kick it.

edited 18th Oct '13 1:32:36 PM by Pykrete

In sex/porn addiction what you actually get addicted to is probably the endorphins an orgasm releases.

Yeah, if it was something you had total control over, it wouldn't be an addiction by definition. Now of course it's a spectrum and the addict isn't entirely helpless to deal with their disease, but then again a diabetic isn't entirely helpless in the face of their sugar imbalances if you want to argue that way.

BACK TO LGBT RIGHTS AND RELIGION. L Dragon 2, is there actually any difference in rights that you would argue for based on your religious beliefs? What are your thoughts on homosexual marriage?

Kiiiinda. Endorphins and opioid receptors are a big bag of O-chem I'd have to ask a friend about the details of, but the long and short of it is a) yes, native endorphins can cause dependence under extreme circumstances, and b) we mean extreeeeme, and not exactly along the usual mechanism for that. So, probably not what's going on in a standard case of sex addiction.

Sex/porn addictions tend to have more to do with ritualization, progressive obsession, and isolation by seeking solitary activity or impersonal affairs — the endorphins just kind of make it hit a shitload harder than most other things of that field.

Anyway, yeah. Topic.

edited 18th Oct '13 1:59:55 PM by Pykrete

While I don't agree with it, I do respect someone's decision if they choose to marry another of the same sex.

That said, I've just never really seen the whole debate as being such a huge deal as it's been made out to be be the media.

So, you don't think your religious concerns are justification for treating LGBTQ individuals any differently under the law?

Well, the Bible does say to treat others as you would yourself, and that's what I believe. Also this:

"If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3 If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing." -1 Corinthians 13

edited 18th Oct '13 2:08:28 PM by LDragon2

Don't get what that Scripture quote is supposed to mean, but if you're not up for legal discrimination we are cool.

Where do you draw the line on the classification of hate crimes?

Pretty much whenever someone beats or lynches someone simply for their ethnicity, sexuality, or belief.

And the passage basically says that, even with all the wisdom, knowledge, and good deeds in the world, if there is no love in those actions, then it is meaningless.

So... anything less than beating and lynching is not a hate crime?

Actually, if we want to go on the proven effects of increased access to pornography. I.E. the ones that actual scientific studies have been conducted on, and not just speculation that hasn't been tested with scientific rigger. Then all we know about Porn is that:

A) Science has been unable to find men who haven't partook in porn to do a study on effects because all men look at porn.

B) Increased access to pornography decreases the amount of sexual violence in the community.

These are the actual scientific studies on porn. Not just people making baseless claims.

Yes, I was going to question the idea that all pornography is bad because masturbation and such decreases the pressure of people to get together and have sex right away all the time, and, well, masturbation and pornography kind of go together.

Which isn't mutually exclusive to what I said either.

How would they know if those were the effects of porn if there is no control group?

How do they know the reduction of violence is an effect of porn if there's no control group?

None of the effects I listed are even particularly unique to porn. It's how the brain works with regard to pretty much every enjoyable stimulus ever.

edited 18th Oct '13 2:32:15 PM by Pykrete