God does not hate gays

[inkonpaperhero]

I stand against all the hate and bigotry that ignorant Christians promote in the name of loving their God.
That said, I am about at my wit's end with everyone saying that it is an absolute fact that Christianity opposes homosexuality.
All of the passages used to promote this theory can be refuted. The Bible has been translated countless times by the hopelessly corrupt in order to manipulate the population and distort the original messages for their own purposes.
You are using your religion as an excuse to ostracize a group of people who are just as legitimately people as you are. Very Christ-like of you.

Prove me wrong.
Back me up.
Discuss.

[Joanna Banana]

Yes, she's right in fact lesbians have the lowest HIV rate in America. So, God must love those lesbians!

[XOX]

If you judge the lowest rate of HIV infection as a form of love from 'god', then of course, god love lesbians the most.

[M]

I like my gay sex before marriage, thanks. Mostly because gay marriage is mostly illegal, but even if it wasn't, I'd still have gay sex outside of it.

And you know what, Scottie?

Nothing is going to happen to me for it. Nothing but geat, totally gay, totally sinful-in-the-eyes-of-fictional-boss-man sex.

And gays are going to exist, and gay sex is going to happen, and soon people who think like you will be frowned upon and seen as improper. Your grandchildren, or maybe your great-grandchildren, will tell their friends how their grandpa Scottie thought the gays were immoral and that they were 'wrong' because of who they had sex with. And you know what else? They will feel ashamed because of that.

[Caitlin Vivien]

Agreed. I'm just waiting for everyone to move into the 21st century. Women, blacks, and GAYS are all equal.

[Bunnyish]

TRUE THAT.

[Kelli C]

i concur!!! hells yes.

[Elzam V. Branstein]

"Prove" you wrong?

...You might as well ask the people who disagree with your opinion to prove that God exists, or God do not exist. In terms of ethical issues, there is no "proving" or "disproving." There are only choices that an individual makes. For those homosexuals who choose to pursue their lifestyle, I cannot say anything else. After all, it's not up to me to change their minds.

My only obligation is to share my opinions in a respectful manner. And this is an issue that's been bugging me during the course of reading the 70 some page thread. It seems that whenever a counterpoint is brought up by the Christian side, it is instantly FIATed out as being "bigotry" or "hate." That, by itself, is a signal to me that this topic isn't really about a discussion of the topic of homosexuality, but more of an excuse to flamebait.

My stance on the issue is quite clear. To me, homosexuality is a sin. I disagree with it. However, I feel that the marriage issue is overrated. If it was up to me, I'd simplely instate an elevated version of civil unions and take a step back by offering same-sex couples with all the rights that a normal couple will need. My only request? Don't force the churches into doing something they disagree with.

People, people. You ask the Christians to be more tolerant, yet it seems to me that you really aren't interested in a compromise as much as squishing out the opinions of the other side altogether. I can only hope that you take this post in good cheer and consider, at least, meaningful discussion.

[Aaron]

Anyone who replies to a comment on the first page ought to be shot...

And I disagree. Ethics can be rationally derived. The only basic choice is if you believe ethics should be about promoting society or individual. I say individual, because the idea that we should be allowed to experiment on human beings of low value (without their consent) in order to save the lives of human beings of higher value is odious to me, and that is where choosing society over individual rights eventually leads.

Everything from there is about how to insure the rights of the individual, and what those rights are. I tend to go with the most basic ones, life, freedom, property. Why is stealing wrong? It's not because I choose to think it's wrong, it's because it deprives another individual of their basic right to keep what they own. Why is murder wrong? It's not because I choose to think it's wrong, it's because it deprives another individual of their basic right to life. Ethics are not "choices that an individual makes".

From this perspective, drugs can only be wrong insofar as they harm an individual not using them, or if they deprive someone of freedom. From this perspective homosexuality can only be wrong insofar as it hurts others. That's what the poster meant by "prove to me through rationally derived ethics": show how homosexuality hurts people.

For the record, I agree, the government should gtfo "marriage", and churches can marry whomever they want to whomever they want. My only request? Don't riot at another church for marrying gays who want to be married.

[Decepticon]

"My only request? Don't force the churches into doing something they disagree with."

Why are you all so stupid?

No one wants to force the churches to do anything. Marriage is a LEGAL entity. It is the LEGALITY of it that people want changed.

No one cares if churches say no to gay marriage.

What we care about is judges in secular court rooms saying no to gay marriage.

As for civil unions: Look up Brown vs Board of Education of Topeka. Even if the rights are equal (which they are currently not, and cannot be so long as states can choose not to allow them), the institutions can never be fully equal so long as they remain separate.

Separating institutions like that puts an emotional and psychological burden on the excluded--a constant reminder that though they have the same rights, they are not truly equal and can never be allowed into the same institutions as the white straight folk are. It's discrimination, and shouldn't be allowed.

Edit:

"it is instantly FIATed out as being "bigotry" or "hate.""

Because it is... and...

"To me, homosexuality is a sin."

Then you aren't christian. You're jewish.

The Old Testament was the contract that God had with humans before the birth of Jesus Christ, which created the New Testament--a new set of laws for humans to follow in order to receive salvation. The New Testament amounted to little more than love thy fellow man, take Jesus into your heart, and feel bad when you don't do these things.

All the little laws that Christians like to tote around are actually Old Testament, pre-Jesus, contractual obligations, which are no longer valid. The Old Testament is, basically, the contract that the Jews followed. And even they don't follow all of it.

Leviticus, Old Testament, the only place where homosexuality is decried as a sin straight out, also outlawed planting seeds next to each other and wearing clothes made up of multiple fabrics--ALSO as abominations.

I sure hope you've never worn a nylon poly blend you fake wanna-be Christian hell bound bastard.

[Aaron]

Uh... No, that's not his political leanings if I understand right. He is not saying "civil unions for gays, marriages for heteros, equal rights for both". He and I both are saying that the government should not even use the world "marriage" anywhere in any legal document. That every spot where the word "marriage" currently exists should be re-written with "civil union".

That is the only proper way to separate church and state.

[Decepticon]

The concept of marriage existed long before the concept of Jesus. Hell the term 'marry' (though spelled mari) existed before Christianity as a legal entity in proto-indo-european languages.

Why change the wording now?

[Aaron]

Because marriage has never applied to homosexuals, and since the time of Jesus has become a religious concept. Personally, despite being completely straight, I don't want the state telling me who I can and can't marry. Marriage has become more than merely political or any such thing, it has siphoned a deeper sort of meaning that does not need to be determined by the state.