Homestar Runner Wiki Forum
http://forum.hrwiki.org/

Your honest opinion on homosexuality
http://forum.hrwiki.org/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=5638		 Page 1 of 18
Author:  Needle Dog [ Tue Oct 25, 2005 8:27 am ]
Post subject:  Your honest opinion on homosexuality
Alright, we've all heard the differences between liberal folks and conservative folks on this issue, but I'm interested in hearing your true views. I know it's a religious issue with some of you, but indulge me. As a challenge, I would like to hear your views on gay rights without hearing any bible quotes or any religious views at all. I just want to hear you real views on this dispite your religious views. I want your honest opinion on this, whether you're religious or not. If you are religious,and gays aren't accepted, tell me what you personally think about it.
Author:  Tintin [ Tue Oct 25, 2005 11:01 am ]
Post subject: 
I'm a Christian and I don't believe homosexuality is right. I think we should accept them as fellow humans and treat them with respect but I don't believe in need to condone the behaviour/lifestyle to accept them.
To say I shouldn't bring the Bible into it is just ludicrious, since its God's Word and the foundation of morals and laws.
There's my opinion.
Author:  DJ Soul Camel [ Tue Oct 25, 2005 11:11 am ]
Post subject: 
There is absolutely no valid reason to call homosexuality wrong. It's just two people who love each other and who happen to be of the same sex
Author:  Trev-MUN [ Tue Oct 25, 2005 11:58 am ]
Post subject: 
I'm a Christian and I personally think there's nothing wrong with homosexuality. Despite this, part of what Tintin said hits my mark: I think we should accept them as fellow humans and treat them with respect.

I apologize for breaking the ground rules, but I figure it needs to be said:

For those who claim the Bible (and therefore God) condemn homosexuality, I highly doubt God condemns someone for having such feelings for someone of the same sex.

I've stated why in the homosexual marriage thread--from all that I have seen, it is fellow men who have, as recorded in the Bible, condemned homosexuality. Didymus will likely correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that only Moses (in the writings of Leviticus) and Paul (in his own letters of the New Testament) condemned homosexuality. Paul refers to Leviticus in his condemnations, and much of what is written in Leviticus--the laws specifically--seem to be set down by Moses and not God to me, rather than the personal relevations that took place on Mt. Sinai.

For that reason I distrust claims of the Bible condemning homosexuality.
Author:  Ch'mera [ Tue Oct 25, 2005 3:37 pm ]
Post subject: 
I feel that we are(or at least should be) all allowed to have our own preferences and orientations. Stating that homosexuality is wrong compared heterosexuality is much like saying pasta tastes bad compared to pizza. It depends entirely on opinion. I, personally, find the idea of homosexuality a little... unnerving, but I try not to discriminate between those who share my opinion and those who do not.
Author:  JoeyDay [ Tue Oct 25, 2005 3:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Your honest opinion on homosexuality
Needle Dog wrote:
I just want to hear you real views on this dispite your religious views.

Leaving aside the topic at hand, I just want to point out that my religious views are my real views. It's not like I have a set of "real" views and then when I go to church on Sunday I swap them out for a bunch of fairy-tale religious views.

On topic, let me first admit that I used to be somewhat homophobic, but I've had a lot of friends who are gay and I think I've gotten over that. My political views fall somewhere in between conservatism and libertarianism. When Utah had a vote to amend our state contitution to make gay marriage illegal, I voted against it. It still passed with flying colors since Utah is about the most republican state in the union, and I've waffled on my vote several times since then. I'm torn between a solid belief that homosexuality is a sin (again, since my religious views are my real views, I can't define that without bringing the Bible into it) and an earnest desire to value people and their individual choices. It's a fine line to walk and, if we're being honest here, I'm not sure I walk it the right way most of the time.
Author:  Didymus [ Tue Oct 25, 2005 3:50 pm ]
Post subject: 
Perhaps it has only been recorded by Moses and Paul, but the problem still remains: are Moses and Paul authorized representatives of God or not? If not, then none of what they had to say applies, not even the Ten Commandments. In that case, biblical scholarship and biblical religion are a waste of time. I'm not willing to go that route. But I would add that Acts 15, written by St. Luke, also applies.

In another thread, it was discussed as to whether other Old Testament laws, particularly ceremonial and dietary laws, should also be binding today. The problem there, which was completely overlooked, is that ceremonial and dietary laws were never binding on Gentiles in the first place.

Now I know Needle Dog said not to use the Bible, but how can he expect me not to, when the Scriptures are what inform my attitude? And my understanding from the overall teaching of Scripture concerning human sexuality is that God intended for humans to express their sexuality within the sacred bonds of marriage. In the very beginning of creation, he gave man and woman to each other and blessed their union. At best, homosexuality is a warping of those natural desires, being misdirected at the same sex, rather than the opposite. I do not profess to know the precise cause, whether cultural, psychological, or even physiological, but I am convinced that is it could only exist in a fallen world, not in the perfect one intended by God. It was not God's plan.

Now as for how homosexuals should be treated: I do not believe that homosexual behavior should be condoned by society. But for me, this issue, like so many other issues concerning human sexuality, is primarily one of pastoral care. Just like people who live in other types of sinful behavior, they need to know that God loves them unconditionally, and yet that God has better plans for them. Or as C. S. Lewis put it, "He loves us as we are, but he loves us enough not to leave us as we are." The key is that God provides a new identity and a new life to anyone who comes to him through Jesus Christ. Doesn't mean that the old desires will just disappear. Doesn't mean he'll just zap you and make you perfect in a heart beat.

And Trev, I do not believe God condemns people based on feelings at all. If that were true, then even seeing pics of QC would get us all in trouble. But I am not convinced that God intended for men to be with other men, or women to be with other women. The problem comes in that unholy sexual desires, when indulged (and I'm not talking about just homosexual desires, but also pornography, promiscuity, adultury, etc.), lead us away from God by taking us outside of his will. This is where the danger is.

Like Tintin and Trev, I think the key is recognizing that homosexual people are just that: people. And, just like the rest of us, people in need of God's love.
Author:  InterruptorJones [ Tue Oct 25, 2005 3:54 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Your honest opinion on homosexuality
JoeyDay wrote:
and an earnest desire to value people and their individual choices


Just so everyone's clear, homosexuality isn't a choice. That's not my opinion, that's the opinion of the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Counseling Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the National Association of School Psychologists, and the National Association of Social Workers, i.e. the most respected medical and mental health organizations in the world.

But I agree with Joey, here: asking people to separate their religious views from their "real" views is unrealistic, because for many people they are truly one in the same.

However, Tintin's argument that the Bible is "the foundation of morals and laws" is nonsense. It's the foundation of a particular set of morals and laws, yes, but most (if not all) of them reflect moral consenses (consensuses?) and taboos that predate it by centuries, if not millennia.
Author:  StrongRad [ Tue Oct 25, 2005 3:56 pm ]
Post subject: 
Joey's post pretty much sums it up for me. My religious views ARE my real views. With that said, I don't ALWAYS stick to them.

One thing I would add to what Joey posted that would further define my thoughts on the subject is that I've slowly been shifting towards apathy... I'm not gay, so I really have no feelings on the subject. If gays want to get married, who cares? It's not like marriage is such a holy thing nowadays. If banning gay marriage would "save" marriage, I might not have a problem, but, umm, last time I checked two people of the same sex who love each other and want to be have some piece of paper saying they love each other doesn't even come close to "I've known you a week, let's get married and then get a divorce 2 weeks later" marriages on my "Things that destroy the sanctity of marriage" list.

If homosexuality is a sin, then those guilty of it will be judged and punished accordingly. If it is a sin, then those guilty of it will be punished the same as someone who murders, lies, cheats, or just plain isn't saved.

The last time I went to church at home, the preacher was talking about homosexuality and the like and he said "While this is NOT an endorsement of homosexuality in ANY way, you need to remember that a sin is a sin, and all sins are equal, somehow people tend to forget that. So, before we go around pointing fingers, remember every time you point a finger, you have 3 more pointing back at you."

Some people kinda got mad at him for that, but that was just because he was pointing out that the "holier than thous" aren't any more holy than the rest of the people..
Author:  Didymus [ Tue Oct 25, 2005 3:58 pm ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
However, Tintin's argument that the Bible is "the foundation of morals and laws" is nonsense. It's the foundation of a particular set of morals and laws, yes, but most (if not all) of them reflect moral consenses (consensuses?) and taboos that predate it by centuries, if not millennia.

Which does not in any way invalidate them nor disprove their divine authorship in Exodus.
Author:  InterruptorJones [ Tue Oct 25, 2005 4:04 pm ]
Post subject: 
StrongRad wrote:
Some awesome stuff.


StrongRad, let's have a marriage. Let's have a marriage license. Seriously, you're my new favorite Christian.

Didymus wrote:
Quote:
However, Tintin's argument that the Bible is "the foundation of morals and laws" is nonsense. It's the foundation of a particular set of morals and laws, yes, but most (if not all) of them reflect moral consenses (consensuses?) and taboos that predate it by centuries, if not millennia.

Which does not in any way invalidate them nor disprove their divine authorship in Exodus.


Right. I just take issue with people who suggest that the Bible is somehow the origin of all morals, laws, good-with-a-capital-G, and cute puppies. The laws were already there; God just said, "okay, these ones are mine," and stamped them with his seal.

Image

Or, at least, that's how it goes in the Bible.
Author:  StrongRad [ Tue Oct 25, 2005 4:15 pm ]
Post subject: 
InterruptorJones wrote:
StrongRad wrote:
Some awesome stuff.


StrongRad, let's have a marriage. Let's have a marriage license. Seriously, you're my new favorite Christian.

Wow, praise from IndianaJones. I WOULD marry ya, but, umm, I think Roxy and Holly would both have a problem with that... They could get married, too! Problem solved.

Anyways, yeah, I think that most Christians feel something along the lines of what I said. I truly think/hope that tards like Fred Phelps are in the minority of our ranks, kinda like I would like to think that people like Bill O'Reilly represent the (VERY VERY VOCAL) minority of republicans..
Author:  Didymus [ Tue Oct 25, 2005 4:18 pm ]
Post subject: 
InterruptorJones in a wedding dress?? AAA JIBBLY JIBBLY JIBBLY JIBBLY!!
Author:  Trev-MUN [ Tue Oct 25, 2005 5:16 pm ]
Post subject: 
Does this mean StrongRad is James Bond?

Anyway. As has been demonstrated, many people have personal views that line up with the views of their religion, if they have one. It's very hard to seperate opinions on this.

Interestingly enough I've seen some homophobic agnostics/atheists in the past, so you can't really say hatred/fear/opposition to homosexuality is due to religion ...

Quote:
The problem comes in that unholy sexual desires, when indulged (and I'm not talking about just homosexual desires, but also pornography, promiscuity, adultury, etc.), lead us away from God by taking us outside of his will. This is where the danger is.


The general thing is that Jesus denounced lust, aye? Lust can take many forms, and sexual immorality can also take many forms.

It's just I ponder what's sexually immoral in God's eye--are we truly living by what Jesus has said? Or are we merely attempting to prevent taboos that He never frowned upon? Is sexual immorality only sinful when taken to excess or harm for others?

These are things I often contemplate. Anyway, I think the toast could use a lively shade of edible butter-flavored yella paint.
Author:  Helmut [ Tue Oct 25, 2005 5:26 pm ]
Post subject: 
Darn this short time between classes!!! Anydangway, I'll say a little something here.

Didymus, as always, well said. I have a hard time disagreeing with you.

On the topic of whether or not homosexuality is a choice . . . I agree that it isn't a choice, but how homosexuals carry and present themselves sure is. On that note, going around flaunting yourself in a gay pride parade intending "I'm here, I'm queer, hand me my rights," is no way to go about gaining respect for yourself or obtaing rights. Many individuals that would otherwise support gay rights are turned off by the (Alan Keyes term coming) selfish hedonism that oozes out of gay pride parades and deomonstrations. No assessment of the gay rights movement can end in praise; instead of flaunting gay porn in their parades they should stress the humilty of homosexuality: a tolerant eloquence instead of a shameless exhibition. Well that was a little rhetorical, but oh well. To Honors Rhetoric class!!!
Author:  InterruptorJones [ Tue Oct 25, 2005 5:28 pm ]
Post subject: 
Trev-MUN wrote:
Interestingly enough I've seen some homophobic agnostics/atheists in the past, so you can't really say hatred/fear/opposition to homosexuality is due to religion ...


I think the only difference between an atheist homophobe and a Christian one is that the Christian one tends to fall back on his faith as justification for his hatred. Oh, the irony. (However, the atheist homophobe will sometimes try to use (fake) science to do the same, which is even worse in my book.)

Unfortunately, there's a bit of a vicious cycle involved with the religious angle. Some people hate gays just because they do, and then they look to the Bible to try and figure out some kind of justification for it. But then these same people, once they think they've found it, turn around and use their twisted version of Biblical truth to convince otherwise good Christians (and, most tragically, their children) to practice hate against their fellow man.

thesgman wrote:
Many individuals that would otherwise support gay rights are turned off by the (Alan Keyes term coming) selfish hedonism that oozes out of gay pride parades and deomonstrations. No assessment of the gay rights movement can end in praise; instead of flaunting gay porn in their parades they should stress the humilty of homosexuality: a tolerant eloquence instead of a shameless exhibition.


I find it painfully apparent that you've never actually attended a gay pride parade.
Author:  Beyond the Grave [ Tue Oct 25, 2005 5:50 pm ]
Post subject: 
I have no problem with homosexuality. I can't condemn it, because condemning it would mean that I would condemn a member of my family. I have a cousin who is gay.
Author:  seamusz [ Tue Oct 25, 2005 6:11 pm ]
Post subject: 
There is a big difference between condemning a wrong act and condemning the person who commits the act.

I have family who have chosen to follow a homosexual lifestyle yes I said chosen, and that doesn't change that they are an awesome person and I don't love them any less, but I do not agree with their choice. They know that I don't approve of it, and I think that they would think less of me if I lowered my standards just because of their choices. Have a backbone and stand for what you believe even if it may not seem by others to be eduacated or correct.



On a side note, I think that a lot of athiest/agnostics/non-Christians suffer from acute Christian-phobia in the same way that some think that Christians suffer from homophobia (this is all generally speaking of course)
Author:  Helmut [ Tue Oct 25, 2005 6:56 pm ]
Post subject: 
InterruptorJones wrote:
I find it painfully apparent that you've never actually attended a gay pride parade.


Colorful and unclear statements abound in my writing! Perhaps 'amusement' or 'recreation' would've been better in place of 'hedonism'; that's a part of any celebration. As for 'instead of flaunting gay porn in their parades', I intended to note a difference between gay porn and gay pride; I didn't intend it to be taken literally: if gays want rights and support, they shouldn't emphasize it with a poster depicting two men kissing and reading "Support Gay Rights!"; there are more conservative and perhaps respectable ways to go about it.

I confess I don't fully approve of the gay rights movement at this time, but I can't say I'll never approve of it: for having much experience with homosexuals in terms of friendship and acquaintanceship, I've seen gays' humbleness and humility while common perception, at the least where I come from, either by misinformation or watching Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, is that of exhibitionism; and, while I used to view gays as such, I now view them as 'normal', if that's an acceptable term; moreover, IJ, I have been to only one gay rights parade, and attending it only resurrected those views of shamless exhibitionism.
Author:  Didymus [ Tue Oct 25, 2005 7:03 pm ]
Post subject: 
I object to the basic premise of QEFTSG, which is essentially that straight guys have no sense of style and are total slobs, whereas gay men are fashion fanatics and always look good. I worked with a gay chaplain at the VA hospital a year ago, and I always looked better and more stylish than he did (sorry, Tony, but it's true). Notice that I scored "Hot" on my Clique test.
Author:  Helmut [ Tue Oct 25, 2005 7:08 pm ]
Post subject: 
Many people think I'm gay because my favorite outift is wool pants with a vertically striped button down dress shirt . . . and my choice of footwear, sunglasses and jackets influence it as well. It's a shame that people assume narcissists are gay :)
Author:  InterruptorJones [ Tue Oct 25, 2005 7:17 pm ]
Post subject: 
thesgman wrote:
if gays want rights and support, they shouldn't emphasize it with a poster depicting two men kissing and reading "Support Gay Rights!"; there are more conservative and perhaps respectable ways to go about it.


What, exactly, is unrespectable about two men kissing? I constantly see movie posters and book covers prominently displayed that feature men kissing women or vice versa; should such "flaunting" of heterosexual relations be discouraged as well, lest people stop taking heterosexual rights seriously?
Author:  Helmut [ Tue Oct 25, 2005 7:37 pm ]
Post subject: 
InterruptorJones wrote:
What, exactly, is unrespectable about two men kissing? I constantly see movie posters and book covers prominently displayed that feature men kissing women or vice versa; should such "flaunting" of heterosexual relations be discouraged as well, lest people stop taking heterosexual rights seriously?


In my opinion, there's nothing unrespectable about two men kissing; nevertheless, encouraging someone uncomfortable with homosexuality to support gay rights with images that likely fuel the fire of their uncomfortable feelings will, most likely, be ineffective. People don't take gay rights seriously, that's the problem. If a gay rights parade evoked the thought, "What will they say to garner support," instead of, "Oh my, oh my, what are they going to do this time," then they'd be on the right track.

Too bad they don't have gay rights parades more often; I could go to some and really see what homosexuality is all about.
Author:  What's Her Face [ Tue Oct 25, 2005 7:50 pm ]
Post subject: 
thesgman wrote:
In my opinion, there's nothing unrespectable about two men kissing; nevertheless, encouraging someone uncomfortable with homosexuality to support gay rights with images that likely fuel the fire of their uncomfortable feelings will, most likely, be ineffective. People don't take gay rights seriously, that's the problem. If a gay rights parade evoked the thought, "What will they say to garner support," instead of, "Oh my, oh my, what are they going to do this time," then they'd be on the right track.


There may be a point there. I've had gay people tell me that they're really opposed to the militancy of some gay activists, and by what they've called "shock tactics" in gay pride marches.

Though I'd say that posters like those would be perfectly acceptable - the point of gay pride is to show that you don't care about the nay-sayers.
Author:  Helmut [ Tue Oct 25, 2005 7:56 pm ]
Post subject: 
What's her face wrote:
Though I'd say that posters like those would be perfectly acceptable - the point of gay pride is to show that you don't care about the nay-sayers.


True, but, if you don't care about the nay-sayers, then why try to gain their support?
Author:  What's Her Face [ Tue Oct 25, 2005 8:02 pm ]
Post subject: 
I wouldn't say gay pride is about gaining support - it's more about increasing awareness and the gay community's strength against homophobia. Whether you embrace or disregard that awareness is up to you, but the gay pride message is that you're not going to make them feel ashamed.
Author:  Helmut [ Tue Oct 25, 2005 8:10 pm ]
Post subject: 
What's her face wrote:
I wouldn't say gay pride is about gaining support - it's more about increasing awareness and the gay community's strength against homophobia. Whether you embrace or disregard that awareness is up to you, but the gay pride message is that you're not going to make them feel ashamed.


Agreed.

Somewhat . . . okay, mostly.
Author:  Prof. Tor Coolguy [ Tue Oct 25, 2005 8:19 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Your honest opinion on homosexuality
JoeyDay wrote:
Needle Dog wrote:
I just want to hear you real views on this dispite your religious views.

Leaving aside the topic at hand, I just want to point out that my religious views are my real views. It's not like I have a set of "real" views and then when I go to church on Sunday I swap them out for a bunch of fairy-tale religious views.

On topic, let me first admit that I used to be somewhat homophobic, but I've had a lot of friends who are gay and I think I've gotten over that. My political views fall somewhere in between conservatism and libertarianism. When Utah had a vote to amend our state contitution to make gay marriage illegal, I voted against it. It still passed with flying colors since Utah is about the most republican state in the union, and I've waffled on my vote several times since then. I'm torn between a solid belief that homosexuality is a sin (again, since my religious views are my real views, I can't define that without bringing the Bible into it) and an earnest desire to value people and their individual choices. It's a fine line to walk and, if we're being honest here, I'm not sure I walk it the right way most of the time.


First off, Needle Dog; if one is religious in any sense of the word then their religious views are their real views. Religious views are something you base you life on, not just you Sunday mornings.

I strongly agree with Strong Rad, if two people love each other (nevermind the sex of the two people) then they should be able to get a piece of paper that says that they love each other and allows them to control the other's estate if the other died and the like. But I'd also like to add something; if homosexuality isn't a sin (because if you believe in true love and the fact that love is a partly devine experence then it must be all part of the big guy's plan) then there should be no punishment. Just because it was Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve it doesn't mean that it isn't a natural behavior.
Author:  What's Her Face [ Tue Oct 25, 2005 8:37 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Your honest opinion on homosexuality
Prof. Tor Coolguy wrote:
Just because it was Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve it doesn't mean that it isn't a natural behavior.


On the point of how natural it is, I will point to my gay penguin story. Dunno if it's enough to prove the point, but it is Teh Cute all the same. ^_^
Author:  Needle Dog [ Tue Oct 25, 2005 8:47 pm ]
Post subject: 
I just want to see what you think about gays personally, whether your religion shaped your view on the subject or not. I'm sure that you must have an opinion dispite your religion, whether it agrees with what you've been taught or not. If you disagree with homosexuality purely because your religion tells you it's bad without forming an independent opinion, I find that scary.
Page 1 of 18 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/