Today on Blogcritics
Home » Culture and Society » Science and Technology » Homosexuality & Religion

Homosexuality & Religion

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

You young whippersnappers reading this won’t remember Frank Zappa & The Mothers of Invention, one of the great absurdist rock bands of the 60s, but there’s a great line in one of the songs: “I’m not black, but there’s a whole lots of times I’m not proud to be white either.”

Well, I’m not gay, but there’s a whole lots of times I’m embarrassed to be associated with heteros.

There was this fellow in Houston who’d been attending a Methodist Church in South Hill, VA for several months. He sang in the choir. He was a well-known local businessman. Then he made a really silly request of Rev. Edward Johnson, the church’s pastor. He asked to become a formal member of the church.

The good reverend said no. Didn’t want no queers in his church–at least as a member. Go ahead and sing in the choir–everyone knows that gays got great voices. But, shudder, if you become a member, maybe you’ll start practicing your secret deviant homosexual rites and turn all our young people into…gasp…faggots and faggettes.

To be fair, the issue has split the entire Methodist church & the reverend yesterday was put on unpaid lead after giving his supervisors the finger for telling him to admit the unnamed gay fellow. (Not literally the finger of course; he just said no, following in the footsteps of Nancy Reagan but forgetting that she was talking about drugs.)

Seems the Methodist Church is a little like the military. You can join, but you can’t be ordained. That’d be terrible, even though “gay men and lesbians are ‘persons of sacred worth’…” Let’s see, not worth as much as a hetero, which means we heteros are more than sacred. Why, we must be Godly!

“Church member Gary W. Creamer told the Mecklenburg Sun newspaper that Johnson ‘was holding to Biblical principle and that ‘a terrible injustice’ was done to the pastor.”

Excuse me? Injustice done to the pastor? Let’s bring Jesus down and ask him what he’d do….Seems he won’t answer, but I’ll tell you what he’d do. He’d toss the Rev. Johnson out on his ass the way he tossed the money lenders out of the temple. Well, at least I hope he would.

I haven’t read the Bible in years–don’t even own one. But I sure hope the Bible doesn’t preach against homosexuality. If it does, I’ll stop pretending to be a tolerant agnostic and call down the wrath of God on all religion. (Hmm…can an agnostic do that? Oh what the hell, I’ll try.)

I looked up the Sermon on the Mount. Jesus said, “Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, For theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” And “Judge not, that you be not judged.”

I don’t understand it. I never will. Wasn’t Pastor Johnson persecuting the gay guy? Wasn’t he judging him? Does that mean old Pastor J ain’t gonna see the kingdom of heaven but will be judged himself?

What the hell are people so afraid of. Science has virtually proved that homosexuality is no more a matter of choice than eye color or whether you go bald. It’s genetically determined. It’s not evil, it’s not demonic possession, it’s not a decision based on wanting to be a good dancer.

“Hmm, lemme see. I really want to look good at parties, and, frankly, most guys dance like psychotics getting electro-shock therapy. Think I’ll become a homo so I can really dance. That’ll get the chicks.”

Homophobes of the World: Repent. I swear that if there’s a God, you’ll burn in hell for so long that eternity will seem like a couple of minutes. You wreak of evil, you make a mockery of everything Jesus tried to teach. (He was great whether or not he was the son of God.)

And why do I keep capitalizing God if I’m an agnostic. Oh yeah, respect for those who believe–even those who believe that only heterosexuals are deserving of a place in God’s house.

What assholes these mortals be.

P.S. While I was looking for a book on Amazon, I came across the one somewhere on this post. Here’s a review from Library Journal. Helminiak, a Roman Catholic priest, has done careful reading in current biblical scholarship about homosexuality. While cautioning against viewing biblical teaching as “the last word on sexual ethics,” he stresses the need for accurate understanding of what the biblical “facts” are and concludes that “the Bible supplies no real basis for the condemnation of homosexuality.”

Using the studies of Yale historian John Boswell (Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe, LJ 7/94), New Testament seminary professor L. William Countryman, and others, Helminiak examines the story of Sodom (where the sin was inhospitality), Jude’s decrying sex with angels, and five texts-Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, Romans 1:27, I Corinthians 6:9, and I Timothy 1:10-all of which, he concludes, “are concerned with something other than homogenital activity itself.”
In Jamesons Veritas

Powered by

About Mark Schannon

Retired crisis & risk manager/communications expert; extensive public relations experience in most areas over 30 years. Still available for extraordinary opportunities of mind-numbing complexity. Life-long liberal agnostic...or is that agnostic liberal.
  • nugget

    For the most part, I agree with you. But don’t blame the entire methodist church. I grew up methodist and my entire church welcomed homosexuals into their congregation. Like you said, the church split because of this.

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    I am a non practicing Methodist and I agree with the Pastor’s decision not to let the Gay be a member of the Church. The Church has the right to do this. The Church is not the government, “Seperation of Church and State.”

    I also believe that the Pastor shouldn’t have let the man in the Church in the first place.

    And how does the Pastor know that he is gay??? Did the Gay guy walk up to him and say “You have no choice to let me in because I am gay,”????

  • http://redtard@hotmail.com RedTard

    In places where prostitution is legal should churches be forced to allow minister-prostitutes?

    Just because it is legal and popular does not mean that the church must accept it. If you don’t like church policy, go to a church that accepts you or don’t go at all.

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    Nugget, my Methodist Church didn’t allow any Gays. Well nobody that admitted to being gay anyway.

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    I would like to retract comment #4 and also retract my position.

    I just talked to my mother and she told me that they did allow homosexuals in our Church. But they never came because our Church is openly anti-Sodomy. I gay wouldn’t fit in.

    The Church has the legal right to refuse a gay. But Jesus never refused anyone. Even the biggest sinners should be allowed in the Church. The Pastor should have let the Gay man in his congregation and then try to set him right afterwards.

  • nugget

    anthony I’m on your side. My church didn’t hope for or condone sodomy. Some didn’t particularly like jerry curled members or outsiders for that matter, BUT, in its entirety, was a good community who accepted anyone and everyone. It was a good environment and I was and am proud that I grew up in it. (i’m sure you feel the same way about your church)

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    My Church was anti-Abortion, anti-Gay Marriage, anti-Sodomy, anti-adultry, anti-alcohol and still let gays, abortionists, Sodomists, adulteres, and alcoholics in and accept them. That is the Christian way and yes, I am proud even though I am dedicated to end Abortion, Sodomy, Adultry, Homosexuality ect.

  • nugget

    good luck on your crusade. Sounds to me like you are dedicated to idealism rather than the teachings of christ. The Jewish pharisees and sadducees felt the same away about “public” issues as you. You are blind.

  • nugget

    I’m lovin’ the google ads.

  • Baronius

    Not sure I like the new format.

    It’s always an issue for a church, how do you deal with people who are public, unrepentent sinners. You don’t kick out the repetitive sinner if he’s trying to get better (although you may have to protect people from the consequences of his possible relapses). I have no idea what the gay guy was doing, so it’s tough to guess what I’d do in that situation. I can’t speculate on whether the pastor’s actions were right.

    I recently exchanged comments about the subject of the Bible and homosexuality. Someone posted a link to some scholarship like Mark Schannon mentioned in his post script. The arguments were shoddy: a few poorly-researched comments (designed to look thorough) and a lot of emotion. Some Constitutional church/state stuff too: hardly a focused article. I think anyone with experience in Bible study, and no agenda, would find the Bible clear in its opposition to homosexuality.

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    I don’t care if churches want to keep blue-eyed blonds out. What I don’t understand is this hysteria about homosexuality. It’s not a disease, you can’t catch it, and if you think it’s a sin, then I feel sorry for you & your absurd religion.

    There are lots of churches that accept homosexuals as normal, real, decent human beings, and I applaud them. I’m just as critical of the military for the absurd, “don’t fuck, don’t tell” policy. (Can I still say “fuck” on blogcritics? We’ve gotten so upscale.)

    I’m critical of bigotry in all its forms. Now that I think about it, it’s more proof against evolution. Human beings haven’t moved very much since we crawled out of caves.

    And, Baronius, I admitted not having read the Bible for years & my P.S. was clear about just having found that quote on Amazon. I was also clear that if the Bible does preach against homosexuality, I’d call down the wrath of God against the Bible-wielding bigots.

    In Jamesons Veritas

  • Jimmy Shirley

    Leviticus 18 verse 22 {You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination}- 20 verse 13 {If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltiness is on them}
    Romans 1 verse 27 {And in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their persons the due penalty of their error}
    1 Corinthians 6 verse 9,10 {Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolators, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God}
    1 Timothy 1 verse 6-11 {But we know that the law of God is good, if one uses it lawfully, realising the fact that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers and mothers, for murderers and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers and whtever else is contrary to sound teaching, according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted}

    It looks to me that God’s word pretty much comes out against sodomy and sodomites. The Word also preaches that those same people may repent of their evil ways, turn to Christ, and be healed. The problem is, in my humble opinion, is that the sodomites have no intention of turning from their evil ways. They demand the churches accept them as they are and will continue to be. It could be that God made them this way so that they could hail to a higher calling, placing their perverted sexuality on the Cross, dying to their fleshly desires, guiding others to the Cross of Jesus. Instead, they gave themselves up to their desires.
    There is no way they pervert the Word of God. A “church” of sodomites IS NO CHURCH OF THE LIVING GOD.

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    Jimmy, I am ashamed that this world has homosexuals and I am anti-Gay Marriage but Churches are supposed to accept even the biggest sinners.

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    Jimmy, thank you for destroying what little faith I had left in the Bible and organized religion.

    Luckily, most of the Bible was written by sour old men hundreds of years after the fact. When I did some brief research while I was writing my post, I read a lot of the words of Jesus–the Sermon on the Mount in particular.

    I don’t care whether he was the Son of God, a nephew, or just a very wise man, it’s impossible for me to read his words, then read the trash you quoted, and believe that he would approve.

    And as for your beliefs in the evil ways of sodomites…I really don’t know what to say except that I pity you because if there is a heaven and hell, and if God is the kind of deity Jesus describes, then I’m afraid you’re in for a rude awakening when you get there and find the temperature’s just over 2,000 degrees. Won’t matter that it’s dry heat.

    Same goes for you Anthony.

    I hope that, someday, you’ll have a revelation and realize that homophobia is a psychological illness and get help–you’re the one’s with the problem, not the gays.

  • Baronius

    Mark – Sorry if I peed on your shoes. I was aiming for the author on the earlier board, and some may have splashed onto you. (Your article was clear regarding the points you mention in #11.)

    My point was that the passages Jimmy quoted cannot easily be explained away. It is the action, not the orientation, that is condemned, and I think we all lose sight of that. Then again we’ve lost the distinction between “I want” and “I should”. Everyone has an appetite that he shouldn’t satisfy, but in our society every appetite is encouraged. I respect any pastor who indicts the unrepentant sinner, whatever the sin, whatever the orientation.

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    Baronius, not a problem. I’m more frustrated with with your (and many, many) others insistance on seeing homosexuality as a decision people make, an “appetitite.” That’s why you see them as sinners.

    But the science couldn’t be any more clear–homosexuality is a based on one’s genetic makeup. Whether you want to call it a genetic flaw or simply another way for genes to configure is up to you, I suppose, but it ain’t a sin in the theological sense of the word.

    My confusion is similar to what I feel about those who reject evolution because they think it somehow diminishes religion. Except for the extreme fundamentalists who believe we just happened along here 6000 years ago, there’s no competition between the two…but people get so worked up over it.

    I was serious about homophobia being a psychological problem. I don’t care what the Bible says (and remember, we’re reading translations of translations of translations), I think homophobes are as strange as they thing gays are. There’s no solution, I know. But ranting and raving helps.

  • KYS

    Mark,
    You’ve made two great points, which the bashers seem to forget;

    1) Evolution does not conflict with creationism because they address different questions. Evolution asks: What? Where? How? How long?
    creationism asks: Why? Who?
    Apples/oranges; science/faith

    2) Sexual orientation is not a choice. All the bashers pretend that they choose heterosexuality, yet ignore any question about when/how/why they made their “choice”.

  • Jimmy Shirley

    Since some people chose to address me, I shall try to address them and reiterate my point. God’s word is explicit about sodomy and sodomites. I emphasized that the churches may take them in but that the sodomites are not accepted for who and what they are in order for them to always remain the way they were born. I never said they were not born that way. I did say that it could be they have been called by God to a higher blessing, but that they must place their sin on the cross and put to death the feelings of homosexuality. There is no enmity in any of this. A doctor accepts a patient, supposedly, to heal them. Supposedly, the doctor wants the patient to ge better, not stay the same or get worse. This is a fair analogy of the church. As someone once said, “A church is a hospital for sinners, not a showcase for the righteous.”
    Sodomites do not want this. They want to be accepted in their sin, with no intention of ever getting well.

    It looks to me that God’s word pretty much comes out against sodomy and sodomites. The Word also preaches that those same people may repent of their evil ways, turn to Christ, and be healed. The problem is, in my humble opinion, is that the sodomites have no intention of turning from their evil ways. They demand the churches accept them as they are and will continue to be. It could be that God made them this way so that they could hail to a higher calling, placing their perverted sexuality on the Cross, dying to their fleshly desires, guiding others to the Cross of Jesus. Instead, they gave themselves up to their desires.
    There is no way they pervert the Word of God. A “church” of sodomites IS NO CHURCH OF THE LIVING GOD.

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    Mark, Leviticus and its anti-Gay refrences were already written before Jesus was born. If these refrences were incorrect and weren’t what God wanted Jesus would have spoken out against it.

    Now, Jesus would want us to accept homosexuals in our world and Churches. He would want us to preach what is right to them. If they don’t repent then they will be punished, not by us, but by God.

    KYS, not a choice??? I already proved that wrong. See “Principle of Human Nature,” which is posted, by me, at most threads that pertain to the gay subject.

  • KYS

    AG, yes, I know of your posts, and they have been countered quite well by myself and others; in biological and spiritual terms.

    Here’s the thing: christians, buddhists, jews and countless others all claim to have a handle on this subject.

    These different religions have vastly different opinions regarding social justice in general.

    A gay man with a devout faith in god deserves to be a full-fledged member of the church. Who is any man to deny his belief? Who is any man to assert punitive action?

    In the same vein, religion serves to enhance a sense of community. It would suck to think that the community is only valid in terms of secular and sexual preference.

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    KYS, no they haven’t been countered good. You guys countered them by putting words in my mouth and ignoring certain parts.

    __________________

    KYS, I agree. A gay man should be allowed to be a part of a Church. It is the Christian way. The biggest of sinners (murderers, drug adicts, gays, abortion doctors, klansmen, racists, rapists ect.) must be accepted as humans by humans.

    I do not know the Muslim, Hindu, Jewish or any other take on it.

  • KYS

    AG,

    Murderers, (active/violent) klansmen, racists and rapists interfere with human liberties. I don’t accept them.

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    Well, KYS, they do affect society so they should be behind bars. But if for some reason they are out and are trying to get into a Church they should not be turned away because of who they are. We still must try and correct them though.

  • KYS

    Muderers, rapists and violent racists should be jailed even if they play the religion card. Churches who shield these criminals should be burned to the ground.

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    Yes, even if the play the religion card. You misunderstood my comment:

    I said that IF FOR SOME REASON THEY ARE NOT IN JAIL and that they apply for a Church membership then they shouldn’t be turned away.

  • KYS

    For some reason, like…they were never caught? The church shoud turn them in to the authorities.

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    No, for some reason, like…they were set free by LIBERAL judges.

    If they are able to evade the law and apply for membership and let the pastor or priest know that they are evading the law then the pastor or priest shoudl indeed alert authorities.

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    Lots of very good, thoughtful comments, even if I violently disagree with them, I appreciate the tone in this thread.

    That being said, Jimmy, Jimmy, Jimmy (too bad your name is Judy, you know, Cary Grant and all that…where was I?)

    Jimmy, you wrote, “God’s word is explicit about sodomy and sodomites.” Your entire faith seems to be dependent on believing that the Bible is to be taken literally, that there are no errors, no contradictions, nothing that would make God gag.

    If that’s the case, we are world’s apart, my friend. First of all, unless you’re fluent in Aramaic (was that the original language, or did I just make that up?), you’ve never read the Bible. What you’ve read are translations of translations of…well, you get the point…many of which were politically motivated, e.g. The King James version. So you can’t know what God’s word is…all you can know is what people over 5,000 years have written claiming some magical power to intuit His will.

    You wrote, “Sodomites…want to be accepted in their sin, with no intention of ever getting well.”

    Are you so willing to condemn people as sinners based on something I assume you’ve never seen–the actual first writings that went into the Bible? Can you imagine how the Bible would read if Pat Robertson could throw in a chapter or two? Yikes & double yikes.

    Just understand that what to you is faith is to others blasphemy. (I was going to write “bigotry,” but thought blasphemy a bit stronger.) I may have no religion, but I have a powerful ethical foundation for my life, and according to my ethics, your attitudes make you a sinner.

    But I offer to you and those who believe as you do the same you offer to “sodomites:” repent and be forgiven.

    In Jamesons Veritas

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    Mark, I believe it is actually ancient Hebrew that the first Bibles were printed in. I also believe anyone who knows Hebrew can read and understand the original print of the Old Testament (do they even have any original print Bibles???). Jews do speak Hebrew and they follow the same Old Testament that we do. They would have said something to us Christians if that was true.

    Also, who likes the King James Version anyway??? That is a bad example.

    Let’s do a little problem solving:

    We know when Jesus came here that the Old Testament’s words were true because Jesus would have set us straight.

    We know that Jesus spoke Hebrew. We know that the Bible at that time was in Hebrew. Jesus obviously had no problem with the translation of Old Hebrew into new.

    So we can cancel 4,000 of the last 6,000 years since Jesus lived on Earth 2,000 years ago.

    The Hebrew language at the time of Jesus is still spoken today amongst Jews. The Jews read the same Old Testament that we do. They have no problem with it or they would have spoken up when someone would have tried to change it.

    Someone translating Hebrew text into English text would have been caught by now. There are many people who are fluent in both Hebrew and English that would have spoken up by now.

    So we know that the last 2,000 years have been clean ones.

  • http://www.bhwblog.com bhw

    Anthony, there is just so much … to work with when I read your posts.

    Mark, I believe it is actually ancient Hebrew that the first Bibles were printed in.

    The first bibles were, um, handwritten. Those goofy monks didn’t start photocopying them until at least the 17th century (AD).

    Some of the Old Testament was written in Aramaic and the majority in Hebrew, I think. It was later translated into Greek.

    By hand.

    And hand copied by multiple people. [They ran out of toner cartridges.]

    We know that Jesus spoke Hebrew.

    Jesus spoke Aramaic. [Didn’t you see “The Passion of the Christ?”] I don’t know if scholars agree that he spoke or read Hebrew. He may not have.

    Jesus obviously had no problem with the translation of Old Hebrew into new.

    WTF is “new” Hebrew? Or “old” Hebrew for that matter?

    Nevermind.

    Even if Jesus could read Hebrew, he died 2000 years ago. Do you think that Bible transcriptions and translations came to a screeching halt after he died?

    Translations of the Old Testament have gone from Hebrew and Aramaic into Greek and then into English. Over and over and over. Biblical scholars debate constantly about the translation of individual words. And occasionnally new “copies” of old texts are found, such as when the Dead Sea Scrolls were found a while back, which make the scholars look at the old texts in a new light.

    An example of a word that can be debated according to the particular bible translation: the word “homosexual” did not exist until relatively recently. Anyone who quotes a passage from the bible with that word in it is using a translation that is inaccurate, at best, or has an agenda, at worst.

    The Jews read the same Old Testament that we do. They have no problem with it or they would have spoken up when someone would have tried to change it.

    First of all, he might have read it in Greek. But do you really not understand how “the bible” has been compiled, revised, translated, studied, retranslated, debated, etc., etc., over the years?

    Someone translating Hebrew text into English text would have been caught by now. There are many people who are fluent in both Hebrew and English that would have spoken up by now.

    Lots of mistranslations have been “caught” over the centuries. Biblical scholars exist, and they disagree and debate constantly. But the average bilingual Jew doesn’t compare the many different copies of the old handwritten works against each other and against all the published English translations out there. He or she just doesn’t have the time.

    And let’s not even get into the hundreds [or maybe thousands?] of other languages the good book has been translated into.

  • Baronius

    (Well, this should kick up some dust.)

    I’m a Catholic. I recognize the authority of the Bible. I also recognize that you need a separate authority to compile and protect the books of the Bible, as well as to aid in interpretation. I imagine these statements will increase tensions between Protestant commenters and me, but I mention them for a reason. There’s pretty good agreement on which books belong in the Bible, which translations are superior, and why. This church traces itself back to the apostles and has believed and taught consistently for millenia (nearly: in about 25 years it will be “millenia”). So I don’t see sufficient wiggle room to create doubt about the Bible and homosexuality.

  • http://journals.aol.com/vicl04/THESAVAGEQUIETSEPTEMBERSUN/ Victor Lana

    Mark,

    Excellent post!

    What is faith? For me it is that belief in the unseen, the hope that it may be seen, and the truth of a creator who loves us “all.”

    I am a bigger believer in Jesus than I am of the church, which is an institution that is man-made (I say man-made because women didn’t have much say in those days). Jesus never began preaching, stopped and pointed out a few people, and said, “Hey, you’re Samarians, so get out of here.”
    He spoke for everyone: Gentile, Jew, even the horrid Romans.

    So I think what’s happening here is that people of faith are of all denominations, and all are welcome in the Lord’s eyes (since, if you believe it, they are his children).

    Any faith that excludes because of race, gender, or sexual preference isn’t much of a faith to begin with.

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    BHW, thanks for pinch hitting for me. You know more about Biblical history than I, thankfully.

    Baronius, you’re post is very clever but you can’t outsmart this old duck.

    You recognize the “authority” of the Bible. And what pray tell, does “authority” mean? That it’s to be taken literally, that the ethical teachings are to be obeyed? Too much wiggle room there, sir.

    The same with the use of the word “superior” when it comes to translations. Certainly some parts have come down through the ages in better shape than others, but to get from “superior” to “the word of God” requires a leap across the Grand Canyon. You can try it if you want, but I’d advise against it.

    Finally, reread BHW’s last post. The very word “homosexual” is relatively new. I checked my Oxford English Dictionary. The first instance they show is 1897 by Havelock Ellis, commenting on another’s use of the term. There’s a note from Ellis, “Homosexual is a barbarously hybrid term, and I claim no responsibility for it.”

    Now, “sodomy” goes back to the 1200s with much the same definition it has today.

    But, frankly, I wouldn’t care if we discovered that the Bible today is exactly the way it was originally spoken. IT’S WRONG ON HOMOSEXUALITY. Ergo, those who think gays are sinful are wrong. Period. End of story. Get thee to a psychiatrist.

    In Jamesons Veritas

  • http://www.bhwblog.com bhw

    Thanks, Mark, but I’m a rank amateur pulling stuff out of the dusty memories of college religion courses (and a little reading since then).

    But I’m no Phillip Winn. He’s the man around here when it comes to the Bible.

  • Jimmy Shirley

    Some people commentating here must be yankees because yankees were the ones who originated the idea, at least here in the States, that they knew better than God. Then, in the early 1800’s, the phrase they used was a “Higher Law”.– “But, frankly, I wouldn’t care if we discovered that the Bible today is exactly the way it was originally spoken. IT’S WRONG ON HOMOSEXUALITY. Ergo, those who think gays are sinful are wrong. Period. End of story. Get thee to a psychiatrist.”– The one who wrote this must be out of their mind. The Word of God is wrong?! Is it also wrong on adultery, honouring Mom and Dad, stealing? Where does it end? This is a very good example of “original sin” judging good and evil. It was not sex. Read the story again. They sinned when they decided that they know better than God.
    Psalm 14:1-3–“The fool has said in his heart, ‘There is no God’. They are corrupt, they have committed abominable deeds; There is no one who does good. The Lord has looked down from heaven upon the sons of men, To see if there are any who understand, Who seek after God. They have all turned aside; together they have become corrupt; There is none who does good, No not one.”

    As for me, I have owned Bible study books where it is translated literally into English from the Greek and Hebrew, which created gaps in sentences because we have words that did not exist then. Such is the evolution of language. Any way, from the final translation that I read from then, and now, there were no discrepancy’s about the topic at hand. I quoted from the New American Standard Bible, first copyright, 1960.

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    Victor, didn’t see your post earlier. Thanks for the compliment & comment. Now you’re religious faith is one I can respect…if only I could make that leap of faith, but I’m chicken, lol.

    Jimmy, I’m the one who wrote that if the Bible we read is exactly as originally handed down, then it’s wrong on homosexuality.

    And, yes, I’m usually out of my mind, but you’re confusing the Bible with the word of God. (Again, remember I’m an agnostic. I’d love to believe, but I keep asking questions, and God never answers.)

    I cannot, will not believe that any God worthy of the name would condemn homosexuality as sinful. My fight isn’t with God but with the people who wrote and translated the Bible, and with those who hide behind words in the Bible to hide their own bigotry.

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    bhw, Jesus spoke Hebrew. The Passion was about his Crucifixion. During his Crucifixion Jesus spoke in tongues. He spoke Aramaic the moments before he died. It confused all the Greeks, Romans and Hebrews that were present.

    But all through out his life Hebrew was his main language. He read or “knew” the Old Testament. Leviticus and its homophobia was around when Jesus was alive. He said nothing against it.

    Now, many Bibles were translated in Greek, but many remained in Hebrew. I imagine some were probabally translated directly from its Hebrew text into English. But that doesn’t matter.

    The Old Testament, including Leviticus, was always in Hebrew and is still in Hebrew. And that version is exactly the same as the modern English version (exept the Language difference). I am sure that many Jews have read the Old Testament in both Hebrew and in English. I would hope that they would be kind enough to tell us that we are not reading what Abraham, Moses ect have really said.

    Leviticus in Hebrew (untranslated because Hebrew has never changed) contains the same Homophobic refrences as our English Christian translations.

    You got to remeber and understand that at the times of those translations people actually believed in the text, as do I. And those people would have known if there was major error in translation. Many Hebrews spoke both Greek and Hebrew fluently.

    You are correct, the word “homosexual” was not around in those days (it is kind a weird that they would not have a word for a certain noun). The literal translation was “You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female”. In The Living Bible it was summarized to “Homosexuality is forbidden” but at the bottom it shows the literal translation.

    And again, Jesus spoke Hebrew. Aramaic was when he spoke in tongues. Hebrew.

    ———-

    Baronius, what do Catholics think of The King James Version???? Do you prefer The Living Bible or the Holy Bible???

    I am not Anti-Catholic. You got to remember I am Italian. My entire family is Catholic. My Methodist Mom took me away from them. I have considered converting back because Catholism goes directly back to the Apostles.

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    O.k., I concede, the Bible makes specific homophobic references. Assuming it’s not the direct word of God handed down without error, then those who wrote those parts were homophobes.

    Interesting side note: According to the Encyclopedia of Philosophy, “there seems to be a certain amount of justification for considering…that the history of Jewish philosophy commences in Alexandria around the beginning of the Christian Era….The attempt to apply Greek philosophical concepts to Jewish doctrines was made by Philo Judaeus (fl. 20 BC-40 CE.)”

    Now the Greeks were famous for their sinful homosexuality. Maybe the Jews were offended by it and encoded it as part of the Bible, which was then picked up by the Christians. It’s been done before…all the Kosher laws started out as dietary warnings for health reasons…now they’ve become theological rituals.

    While I majored in history, I claim no expertise in this period, but it seemed interesting to me.

    However, all I can say is, “repent thee sinners who would flog and condemn the poor homosexual whose only sin is a genetic makeup different from that of heterosexuals.”

    Homosexuality is not a sin. Bigotry is.

    Repeat that 50 times & you’ll be free.

    In Jamesons Veritas

  • http://alienboysworld.blogspot.com alienboy

    It doesn’t matter what’s written in the book, or bible as they call it. Most of the advice and guidance in there is either outmoded or obvious, don’t let what used to be a positive, if confused, message be turned into a doctrine of hate, there’s far too much of that around already these days.

  • Jimmy Shirley

    Someone said I reference my faith on taking the Bible ‘literally’. I do not. I understand that there are a lot of parables that are not specifically identified as “parables”. But they are, nonetheless. Sodomy and sodomites are a manifestation of a spiritual illness. And that is so of a multitude of things in the modern world. Anything that takes someone away from always being mindful of God is a stumbling block. Movies, music, books of all sorts, causes of all sorts, etc. If it distracts from the Living God, it becomes your god. Dependency upon anything, other than God, becomes your god. Sodomites may become your god, heterosexual may become your god, worship of music becomes your god, etc. Homosexuals are sinful people, as are ALL people. But, a homosexual may not come to God and expect that God will say to him, “you are ok, I am ok”. God will call him a sinner and that he must repent of his sin, or her sin. As we say in the South, “There just ain’t no way around it”.

  • http://www.bhwblog.com bhw

    bhw, Jesus spoke Hebrew. The Passion was about his Crucifixion. During his Crucifixion Jesus spoke in tongues. He spoke Aramaic the moments before he died. It confused all the Greeks, Romans and Hebrews that were present.

    But all through out his life Hebrew was his main language.

    Anthony, with all due respect, you know nothing. How about citing a source?

    Or try clicking here and see what the rest of the world believes is the language Jesus spoke, and not just during the passion.

    Basically, Hebrew was in decline during Jesus’ life. He spoke Aramaic and might not have been able to even read Hebrew, although, then again, he might have.

    But scholars agree that it wasn’t his “main language.”

    You got to remeber and understand that at the times of those translations people actually believed in the text, as do I. And those people would have known if there was major error in translation.

    You have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about. You’re telling fairy tales.

  • http://alienboysworld.blogspot.com alienboy

    Jimmy Shirley, actually, you don’t seem to understand anything. Why would “Sodomy and sodomites” be “a manifestation of a spiritual illness”? One’s sexuality doesn’t have anything at all to do with the state of one’s soul, whatever that may be.

    And this Living God of yours; where exactly is it living? Can I come round it’s house for a cup of tea?

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    Here is my source bhw: The Living Bible Mark 15. 33-34:

    Then Jesus called out with a loud voice, “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?”d (“My God, My God, why have you deserted me?)

    Some of the people standing there thought he was calling for the propthet Elijah.

    (On the bottom of the page)

    d He spke here in Aramaic. The onlookers, who spoke Greek and Latin, misunderstood his first two words (“Eloi, Eloi) and thought he was calling for the prophet Elijah.

    Now this is my figuring. They understood him when he spoke Hebrew, but got confused when he spoke Aramaic.

    And also, it says through out the entire New Testament that he was a Hebrew. Wouldn’t make sense for a Hebrew to speak Hebrew???

    ——–

    Jimmy, do you agree with the Pastor who refused the gay man???

  • http://journals.aol.com/vicl04/THESAVAGEQUIETSEPTEMBERSUN/ Victor Lana

    Respectfully to all, I think Jesus said one thing that puts this into perspective. It was about a woman, supposedly a “sinner” who slept with a man outside of marriage. The context doesn’t matter; the words do. Those who held rocks in their hands ready to stone her to death asked him, “What should we do, rabbi?”

    He responded, “He without sin cast the first stone.”

    Of course, no one threw anything. Flash forward 2000 years and we human beings still are sinners (at least I know I am sometimes). Christ would not throw stones at any of us, no matter what our sexual orientation.

    I cannot forget those words and believe they affect my thinking on matters like this.

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony the Sane and Sensible

    Yes Victor, it is stuff like that that makes me say that the Pastor should have allowed the gay man into his congregation.

  • Jimmy Shirley

    Jimmy, do you agree with the Pastor who refused the gay man???

    In all honesty, I can not say. I do not know the whole situation. In my humble opinion, I think that if a sodomite came to Jesus with an unrepentant heart and demanded that Jesus accept him as he is, I suspect that Jesus would try to minister to him, try to show him the error of his ways. And when the sodomite refused, He may even weep for him.
    Remember, one of the chief sins He preached against was hypocrisy, deceitfulness. He neither preached against homosexuals nor slavery, neither did He preach in favour of them. His focus was of a higher plain. As far as we know, his thought/words on these subjects were not recorded.To ask me that question is to ask me to pass judgement with out sufficient understanding.

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    I’ve got no problem with a Church refusing to allow a gay person to join the congregation provided that the Church Association is paying their full share of taxes and are not exempt from anything because of their “religious” status. Hey, Padre, render unto Caesar what is his! Fork over the cash.

    And for my fellow gay friends who may disagree with me, remember that while a Church may shut its doors on you, your God does not. God dwells in every one of us and does not take up residence in some opulent brick and mortar building smelling of incense and deflowered altar boys. Congregations come and go. God, in whatever form you may regard Him/Her, is forever. As long as you do unto others as you would have them do it to you, you’re all set. A life well lived is more important than a life well tithed.

  • http://www.bhwblog.com bhw

    Now this is my figuring. They understood him when he spoke Hebrew, but got confused when he spoke Aramaic.

    Now I know why the Catholic Church perefers to interpret for the congregation.

    And also, it says through out the entire New Testament that he was a Hebrew. Wouldn’t make sense for a Hebrew to speak Hebrew???

    No, not if the language was essentially no longer being SPOKEN, which Hebrew wasn’t at the time Jesus lived. [Again, Jesus may have spoken Hebrew, but his primary language was Aramaic.]

    You can’t just make up history, Anthony.

    BTW, the Living Bible has been criticized as being a loose paraphrase of another Enblish version and not a careful translation of any older texts at all.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    >>He spke here in Aramaic. The onlookers, who spoke Greek and Latin, misunderstood his first two words (“Eloi, Eloi) and thought he was calling for the prophet Elijah.

    Now this is my figuring. They understood him when he spoke Hebrew, but got confused when he spoke Aramaic.<<

    This is because he was speaking Aramaic and as you quoted, they were Greek and Latin speakers – not Hebrew speakers.

    In addition, the New Testament was written in Greek, not Hebrew or any other language. Little or nothing was written in Aramaic because it was not considered a literary language. The Old Testament was written in Hebrew except for the latest books which were written in Greek.

    As for the King James Version, extremist Anglicans believe it to have been essentially a second revelation of the Bible and that the words contained in it have more authority and are more accurate to the intent of God than any other version of the Bible, even where it is clearly poorly translated from the sources. And the fact is that no other version of the Bible has ever been as quotable or well written, even if it’s full of errors/new revelations.

    Dave

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    I couldn’t resist jumping in here. I do speak Hebrew and do understand the language of the Torah. And, because I have sons studying the Talmud, I have an Aramaic-Hebrew dictionary in the house.

    So let’s set a few things straight. Hebrew has always been the primary language of the Jewish religion. The Judeans living 2,000 years ago spoke Aramaic and used Hebrew for rituals, and understood both. Even before I had an Aramaic dictionary, I could understand the phrase attributed to Jesus, “…. lama sabakhthani?” Aramaic is very close to Hebrew and the structure of the phrase made its meaning very clear.

    The term in Hebrew used to describe the act of a man lying with a man as he would with a woman is “to’evá” – abomination. Put simply, that is how the Holiness Code in Leviticus describes homosexual behavior.

    To answer the original poster about errors in the Torah (the first five books of the Hebrew Bible). When Moses received the Law at Horev 3,300 years go, there was no Kinko’s nearby for him to run to to make a copy. Therefore, something called a “scribal tradition” was developed to make sufe that true copies of the Torah would be made. Without going into details here, suffice it to say that there are three versions of the Torah in use among Jews. There are nine letter level differences between them. This means that of the several hundred thousand Hebrew letters in the Torah, there are NINE LETTERS DIFFERENT. THAT’S IT. It is very doubtful that errors have crept into the Torah over 3,300 years.

    Finally, according to Jewish doctrine, non-Jews (more precisely, people who are not members of the twelve Tribes fo Jacob) are not bound by Jewish law, which is what the Torah is. They are bound by the Seven Laws of Noah – which applies to all the children of Noah – all mankind. One of those laws is not to practice immoral sexual behavior. Effectively, this means that the Holiness Code in Leviticus, as it applies to sexual behavior, applies to all of mankind.

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    Ruvy, like I’ve said before, I’m no Biblical scholar, although I’ve enjoyed all the comments on the history of the Bible.

    I understand that Moses received the ten commandments directly from God. Do Jews believe that the rest of the laws were also given to Moses directly from God and therefore what’s in the Old Testament are God’s words? If that includes the references to unnatural sexual acts, I’m more than disappointed, I’m disgusted.

    However, I can’t help but wonder, though, people being people…are you also claiming that of all these scribes over 3000 years, not one of them had a political agenda and maybe made a change here or there? If, as I posted earlier, a lot of Jewish theology wasn’t codified until the beginning of the common era, and the Greeks were happily engaging in homosexuality–if that offended some of these scribes, what would have prevented them from adding a few choice phrases?

    The reality is, I’m not trying to rescue the Bible, I’m trying to give God an out. (Gosh, could there be a more arrogant statement??? LOL) It is inconceivable to me that God would condemn homosexuality as an abomination given what we know about it today–which, since he’s all knowing, seeing, etc.–he’d have known back then.)

    Anyway, thanks for your post, although all you people who know more than me about Biblical history are going to force me to start doing some research and I don’t have the time!!!

    In Jamesons Veritas

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    Mark, the extent of the homosexuality in Ancient Greece is exaggerated. Don’t believe what you saw in Alexander.

    Juvy, thank you.

  • http://mtredstar@verizon.net MT

    Religion = superstition.

  • nugget

    “Now, Jesus would want us to accept homosexuals in our world and Churches. He would want us to preach what is right to them.”

    Anthony, the latter sentence is a peversion of Jesus’ teachings. Jesus did not command us to teach or preach the law. He commanded his followers to have faith, love, patience, kindness, tune into our spiritual gifts.

    You know that hymn “And They’ll Know We Are Christians By Our Love”?????

    THINK about that real hard.

    It’s not entitled “And They’ll Know We Are Christians By Our Passionate Debates, Lectures, and Rhetoric Berations Online With Foolish Unbelievers And Sinners.”

    hopefully one day you’ll see my point.

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Mark, you’ve raised a few good questions, all of which deserve clear answers.

    1. The way we understand it, Moses received the first Five Books of the Tana”kh (except for the short part describing his death at the very end which Joshua [I think] wrote).

    The remaining books were written by individuals, at various times, but all of whom had Divine inspiration. For example, Amos, describing the day when G-d when would resurrect the “fallen booth of David,” was saying what G-d told him to.

    The Book of Nehemiah is more of an autobiography than anything else, and the Book of Esther, which does not mention G-d at all in the text, has the hidden Hand of G-d all over its text. Within it is hidden a prophecy dealing with the Nuremburg Trials after World War II.

    The remaining books, the ones other than the first five, were ACCEPTED into the Tana”kh about 1,900 years ago, but had been written before that.

    2. The first five books of the Tana”kh (Torah) are considered Law and are considered the Word of G-d. The rabbis have isolated 613 commandments that bind the Children of Israel.

    3. You are entitled to your opinions as to what is in the Holiness Code. It’s big of you to want to give G-d an out. Most of us are worried about G-d giving us an out.

    Consider this. At the end of the Holiness Code dealing with forbidden relationships (Chapter 18 of Leviticus) comes this comment. “Do not become contaminated through any of these; for through all these the nations that I expel before you became contaminated. The Land became contaminated and I recalled its iniquity upon it; and the land disgorged its inhabitants.
    (Lev.18:24-25).

    The next time you read abut Jews opposing “gay pride” parades in Jerusalem, think of this comment above and you’ll understand why.

    4. Finally, a scribe adding whole verses to the Torah would never have gotten away with it. There are too many quality controls in place in the “scribal tradition.” When dealing with Torah scrolls, NOTHING is taken for granted and never has been. Before it is used by a congragation, it is thoroughly checked, letter by letter. Because it is said that Moses received the Torah letter by letter. Making a mistake by one letter is bad enough, but considered human. The page on which the mistake occurs is unsewn from the scroll and buried, and a fresh page done up, letter by letter, at the scribe’s expense. The ink and the parchment used are not cheap. A scribe attempting to add whole verses would never be employed again, and the offending scroll buried. These are Priestly practices dating back to when Moses instructed his own brother Aaron, the first High Priest.

    The practice of publicly reading the Torah is about 2,400 years old, dating from the time of Ezra. Whenever it is publicly read, a person stands on either side of the readerlooking over his shoulder, checking on what the reader says and correcting him on the spot if he makes a mistake. During the service of the reading (Ashkenazim do this after, Sephardim do this before) the scroll is held up for everyone to see as authentic.

  • tcx

    God does not want man to unite the earth (yet), which is why you will never learn the needed truth from scripture.

    There is no “free will”… but there is destiny.

    Creation and evolution are the same, as science and religion are.

    The entire universe is one continuous chain of events. It is entirely deterministic, yet it gives the impression of indeterminism… because of its vastness.

    Pick a random number. I’m willing to bet it was a low number between 0 and a few thousand. A scientist might pick a famous constant. Who picked a number such as 2^53212 ? So you see, it depends entirely on what you have learned a “number” to be as well as what “random” is.

    You can not *will* something. Things are the way they are because god (God, Allah, etc. it really doesn’t matter) chose them to be that way.

    Realize that god transcends any bible. Dinosaurs, etc. are here to prevent people from gaining true insight into the nature of god and to create nonbelievers. So that people can not unite the earth.

    See you in June, down in Arizona Bay.

  • http://www.bhwblog.com bhw

    Juvy, thank you.

    Now THAT’s a Freudian slip if there ever was one.

  • Nancy

    I don’t know what to think, but I don’t like seeing people shut out of an organization that’s SUPPOSED to be for all sinners, not just those self-satisfied persons who consider themselves “saved” (and are probably very, very wrong). I’m also aware that ‘homosexual’ behavior occurs (mainly between males) in almost every animal species on earth. Why? Who knows. But it does, and it’s been documented very thoroughly. To me, this indicates some sort of sub-behavioral code; until they find a gene in DNA for homosexuality, I won’t go so far as to say it’s genetic, but it’s certainly not as willful as it seems – besides, who in their right mind would ever deliberately choose to be gay/lesbian, with all the hell & condemnation & hardships that usually entails in mainstream society? You’d have to be a real nutcase to want to be treated like that, & to opt for it just for kicks, so to speak.

    That said, I sure do like both Mark’s article & Ruvy’s Hebrew/Judaica lessons!

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    Anthony, gosh, I thought the movie Alexander was the literal word of the Greeks. But I did take year-long course in grad school on Plato, was a history major, and have read histories and biographies of the times. I don’t know what you mean by “exaggerated,” but homosexuality was a common and accepted practice in Greece. Sorry. This is one area I do know something about.

    Ruvy–On the other hand, you’ve got me beat 80 ways to Sunday (whatever that means)& I too enjoyed & learned from your post. I can’t help but note, however, that we only have Amos’s word for it that he got his words directly from God. Sorry, the agnostic will always struggle for a way out.

    (By the way, Ruvy, where were you when I did an earlier post about God never answering. Am I right in thinking that God spoke to lots of people in the earlier books of the Bible, but then began to speak to fewer and fewer, and by the New Testament, only spoke to Jesus? Actually, I’m very interested in this because I’m writing a novel where that’s an important subplot…if you’d be willing, I’d love to do some e-mails back and forth on the subject.)

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    Ruvy, the post was “The Voice of God” which you can find under a list of my posts–it’s pretty light hearted. You can get my e-mail by clicking on my name, going to my blog, & then clicking on about me.

    Thanks

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    tcx, and I thought [edited]. What you said in comment 56 was taken directly from my mind. Though I do believe in “free will”.

    Juvy, I find it extremely weird that a language spoken ceremonially would all of a sudden become their main language.

    That would be like us throwing away the English language and go back to speaking Latin.

    Mark, do you also know that the Greeks fought wars amongst eachother??? And were overrun by the small state of Macedonia???

    It seems that their bold experimient didn’t work.

    Also, do you know that the Greeks killed anyone who said something opposite of what the government thinks???

  • steve

    to be gay is a decision one has made. It is a learned behavior, not something inherited genetically. it is nurture, not nature. Therefore, one can chose not to be gay. There must be some misfiring neurons for someone to chose to be gay. If their mind isnt wired properly in a sexual sense, one of our most basic functions…I dont see how these people can be deemed worthy or raising children. it is wrong.

  • http://www.bhwblog.com bhw

    Anthony, the name is Ruvy. RRRRRRRuvy.

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    If it matters to you that much then change the J to an R. You do have that power, don’t you???

    It was an honest typing mistake.

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    Steve, read something before you offer an opinion that flies in the face of mountains of scientific evidence. A personal opinion should be stated as such–other wise, you just come across as ignorant.

    Anthony, the Greeks were both pathetically primitive and unbelievably sophisticated–hey a lot like Americans now that I think about it–but so what?

    We went to war in Iraq with absolutely no idea what we were going to do once we won it.
    140 years ago, we fought the bloodiest war in U.S. history–the Civil War. We got beat by in Vietnam, not as the neocons would have us believe, because of a lack of will, but a complete lack of understanding of the country, the region, and our propensity for backing the wrong people.

    Greek history is replete with unnecessary tragedy…but, then again, so is ours.

    At least they weren’t homophobes, LOL.

    In Jamesons Veritas

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    Mark, we did not loose in Vietnam.

    1) We only lost one objective, freedom in South Vietnam.

    2) But our main goal was to stop the spread of Communism to the rest of Southeast Asia.

    Is Cambodia a Communist state??? Is Thailand a Communist state??? Is Laos a Communist State??? Is Singapore a Communist State??? Is Malaysia a Communist State???

    ——-

    You are all wrong about Iraq. We are doing great.

    ——-

    And how are we like Acient Greece again???

    We are a free nation. Greece wasn’t.

    Greece fell flat on its face. I don’t believe that will happen to in the near future.

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    to be gay is a decision one has made. It is a learned behavior, not something inherited genetically.

    As a gay dude, I can attest that this is a fallacy. It’s not a decision, it’s as basic an instinct as seeking food.

    it is nurture, not nature. Therefore, one can chose not to be gay. There must be some misfiring neurons for someone to chose to be gay.

    Misfired neurons are a result of bad electroshock or ignorance.

    If their mind isnt wired properly in a sexual sense, one of our most basic functions…I dont see how these people can be deemed worthy or raising children. it is wrong.

    Worthy? I can think of dozens of heterosexuals I wouldn’t even consider as parents. Sexuality doesn’t decide the quality of a parent. If you want to argue from that perspective be prepared to learn that gay parents are among the finest parents a child can have. You are entitled to believe that being gay is wrong. You are not, however, entitled to infringe upon my rights because of an opinion that is not based in fact.

  • KYS

    First Steve says that “to be gay is a decision one has made. It is a learned behavior, not something inherited genetically.”

    Then he says “There must be some misfiring neurons for someone to chose to be gay.”

    How does one learn to misfire their neurons (without the benefit of chemical intervention)?

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    PRINCIPLES OF HUMAN NATURE:

    * Males are born with certain parts and females are born with certain parts and these parts fit together like a puzzle so we can reproduce. No Accident.

    * Fifty-One percent of humans are Female, Forty-Nine percent of humans are Male. If you take in consideration that Females tend live a little longer than Males than it would be 50-50. Hence, one woman for every man. No Accident

    * Only five percent of Americans go against the first two priciples, the majority (Fify-Seven percent) of Americans with AIDS or HIV got AIDS or HIV by going against the first two principles. No Accident.

    * Anyone that goes against the first two principles needs help and support from their peers, not special rights.

    * Genes are inheretied from parents, so since gays don’t reproduce how would a “gay gene” exist??? It doesn’t.

    * Humans aren’t special, we are just animals. So why don’t we see gays among lions or zebras or geese??? Because they don’t exist.

    * For you Reiligious people: Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.

    * The only way a child can be born is by a male and a female. This is no accident, because it was intended that these same two male and female people should bring up this child.

    _____

    Then he says ‘There must be some misfiring neurons for someone to chose to be gay.'”

    He meant to say a retardation. But he was trying to be polite.

  • KYS

    Anthony, If you insist upon pasting the same diatribe every time the issue comes up, I respectfully request that you at least fix the spelling errors.

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    You guys are the ones who changed the subject.

  • http://alienboysworld.blogspot.com alienboy

    PRINCIPLES OF HUMAN NATURE:

    * Humans, like most animals, are distributed across a spectrum of sexuality. The bell curve, common to so many human qualities and activities, dictates that there must naturally be people at both ends of the curve. No accident.

    * Spurious and irrelevant statistics will always impress the gullible. No accident.

    * On your stats, 43% of Americans with HIV/AIDS are not gay but infected.

    * Anyone who doesn’t get the first two points is so naive as to be considered unworthy of respect.

    * See the first answer. Repeat continuously until it sticks.

    * Most species of animals display a broader spectrum of sexuality and sexual activity than you imagine. As our understanding of animal behaviour grows, so does this awareness.

  • http://sussfr.blogspot.com Matthew T. Sussman

    Can I request that from now on, all future references to homosexuality be replaced by “teh ghey?” I think that will make these flame wars much more fun.

  • KYS

    “Flame wars”?
    Pun intended?

    lol

  • tcx

    Mr. Grande, you can believe in “free will”… but I promise there is no such thing.

    Forget everything you know about the bible, scripture, and the world for just a moment.

    Pick any animal that comes to your mind. Pick another. And another. And another…

    Bet it wasn’t a “Fossa.” This animal didn’t come to my mind either. I had to use Google and search for “weird animal.”

    The concept of “free will” was created ultimately by god, but in terms of the nature of man… because man could not envision a world where he had no control. He felt despair; hopeless. This should not be the case because there are infinite puzzle pieces, or knowledge, to find in this universe.

    A single person can not know all states of this world. He or she is led to them by god.

    Matter can neither be created nor destroyed. Unless you believe your brain does not operate according to the laws of physics, then you *must* believe there is a precise order to this universe. I’d research “neural nets” and “neurons” just to clarify.

    How is it that you can have both destiny and free will? If you had free will, then you would be able to act against god’s design. And I must say that god’s design is not limited to human actions, either. I think that might be what people don’t see here. Every atom in this universe is where it should be at this precise moment in time.

  • KYS

    TCX,
    An interesting comment, but it doesn’t clarify your stance on the issue. Can you tell us more?

  • RogerMDillon

    “to be gay is a decision one has made.”

    When did you decide to be straight, steve and did he make an inforrmed decision?

    “Though I do believe in ‘free will’.”

    No, you don’t. You make your decisions based on your fear of going to Hell.

  • Baronius

    Ruvy, there is one additional point you could have made. Along with the books of the Law, there were commentaries. If anyone had an ax to grind, he could argue his point in the commentary. It wouldn’t occur to a scribe to change one word of the Law.

    Mark, a phobia is an irrational fear. Is it not possible that someone, somewhere, is fully sane and considers homosexual activity to be wrong? As risky as it is to consider an opposing view sinful, there is perhaps greater risk in believing your opponents to be mentally ill.

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    Anthony, I try really hard not to resort to name calling because I think this has been a fascinating thread, but your comments have absolutely no intellectual, ethical, or religious value.

    If you think we didn’t loose in Vietnam, you’re living in a parallel universe. The fact that the rest of SE Asia didn’t go communist is that the Vietnamese were never truly communists. The Vietnamese and the Chinese have been at war on and off for 4000 years, since Vietnam was the breadbasket of SE Asia.

    The domino theory was myth propogated by a bunch of WWII pseudo-intellectual relics who never studied the history of Vietnam. Ho Chi Mihn appeals to the U.S. countless times for help against the French–he finally accepted Chinese aid because we stupidly decided to take up where the French left off & make the same moronic mistakes.

    You forget the killing fields of Cambodia. Pol Pot a communist? Don’t be absurd. He was Hitler in Asian garb. Communism was never a global threat because there was no global communism. Russia and China almost went to war countless times during our so-called “cold war.”

    We’re doing great in Iraq? Are you on some medication that’s turned your mind to mush? Our so-called Iraqi army patrols in open-bed trucks with no armor. Dozens of Iraqis are being killed every day. We’re making no progress preventing a civil war.

    Read the story of how pathetically lame the Bush Bubble Machine was in planning Iraq, completely failing to even consider what we’d do when we defeated Sadam’s make-believe army.

    Read some goddamn history of Asia before you spout nonsense.

    Your principles of human nature are utter nonsense. There is no gay gene, just like there isn’t a gene for breast cancer or brain cancer. Genetics is a little more complicated than that.

    You’re just pissing me off with your lack of knowledge. Do me a favor and post somewhere else. I’m violating all my own rules of treating everyone here with respect.

    Whew!

    O.k., Baronius, good question, but you first have to tell me why homosexuality is wrong without reference to theological nonsense. (I still maintain that God–who I doubt exists–feels that homosexuality is sinful.)

    Am I overstating the case by calling homophobes mentally ill? I’m not sure…certainly not psychotic, but neurotic? Yeah, I guess i do believe that, just as I believe that racism is a neurosis–one that, alas, virtually everyone suffers from, even those of us most liberal of people.

    I think you defined it correctly, “an irrational fear.” People who call gays sinful, who refuse to allow them to participate fully in all aspects of society are demonstrating an irrational fear that I confess I don’t fully understand.

    But, hey, there’s nothing wrong with being neurotic, having more of them than I can count. What’s wrong is failing to recognize your own neurotic behaviors when they’re pointed out to you (me.)

    Answer your question?

    In Jamesons (thank God) Veritas

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    What I’ve found refreshing is the HBO series, Rome. The entire cast and crew have worked hard to recreate an accurate depiction of what Roman life may have been like 50 years’ before Christ’s birth. The most refreshing part of the viewing experience is to be able to relate to characters who never were touched by Christians. Some may say Romans were hedonistic; others will say civilized. The bottom line is that Roman society wasn’t stained with the guilt, oppression and corruption of Christianity or Islam.

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    Yeah and most of the time it was ruled by ferocious dictators who didn’t give a fuck about what the people thought. The Empire was always plagued by war and the people enjoyed the sight of their fellow people being fed to lions.

    They would probably feed you to the lions, Silas. Because you are guy.

    Oh yeah, did you know how much slaves were in Rome??? Huh???

    Coligula was a great ruler, wasn’t he??? He was bi-sexual you know that??? He molested little boys and raped married women and then talked about his favorite parts with the horified heartbroken husband.

    Is that really the society you want to live in Silas???

    Do you know the Romans also had Gods???

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    “The Vietnamese and the Chinese have been at war on and off for 4000 years, since Vietnam was the breadbasket of SE Asia.”

    $,000 years is a long time. But China was only a Communist country for not much more than 50 years and Vietnam not much more than 30.

    The Soviets and Chinese were going to do everything to spread Communism to where ever they could. SE Asia was all open. The Americans closed it.

    Look around the world today. How many communist countries exist???

    I counted 4. How many did you get???

    It is so few because us Americans didn’t take no shit with Communism. If we would have set back and let the Commies come march right over SE Asia the world would be much different today.

    It is too bad that we didn’t have Truman or Bush in the mid 30’s. World War II would have never happened. The Holocaust would never have happened.

    Communism was real my brother. The Soviet Union was real my brother. The Soviet Union’s goal was to spread its Communism all over so that they could dominate. It was very real.

    Thank God (he exists)we had MacArthur and Truman for the Korean War.

    Thank God (he does infact exist) for the victory in the Vietnam War. It is too bad most people concentrated on the anti-War demostrations to realize what effect we had on the World.

    Thank God (I know he exists) for Bush at this time.
    —–
    I am not going to discuss the war and Iraq here. It is too much for a site that has multiple subjects already.

    —–
    KYS, at least mine wasn’t pulled out of my ass just to show someone up.

    Mine is real.

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    Read the story of how pathetically lame the Bush Bubble Machine was in planning Iraq, completely failing to even consider what we’d do when we defeated Sadam’s make-believe army.

    It’s time for President Bush to adopt an era of glasnost (openess). As a student of Ronald Reagan, a phrase kept calling out from the back of my mind. “Dovyerai no provyerai” were words President Reagan said repeatedly to Gorbachev during some very interesting times. For those who don’t know it means ‘trust but verify‘ — something Americans should take into consideration when going to the polls next year. Do we trust this Administration and the Federal Congress to execute their responsibilities? Or have we become so cynical that we’ve just thrown in the towel? We need to trust our government once again. But to do that, it must be transparent and easily verified.

    I think you defined it correctly, “an irrational fear.” People who call gays sinful, who refuse to allow them to participate fully in all aspects of society are demonstrating an irrational fear that I confess I don’t fully understand.

    I can understand the opposition by those who are immersed in their respective religions. Not all sects within a specific religion are anti-gay. As with everything else, there are factions. Is homophobia an irrational fear because of homosexuality itself? I’ve often thought that male homophobia would disappear for the most part if there were not such a stigma attahed to being ‘gay’. To be called gay, queer, faggot, poof, fairy, homo, etc. is equivalent to being ostracized. We are such products of our environments. We struggle for acceptance daily. Do people really care all that much about what two individuals do in the privacy of their own homes? In the final analysis, is homophobia the fear of gays or the fear of being rejected?

    Coligula (sp) was a great ruler, wasn’t he??? He was bi-sexual you know that??? He molested little boys and raped married women and then talked about his favorite parts with the horified heartbroken husband.

    Caligula‘s reign started out on a positive note. Shortly after becoming emperor he became very ill with something that was regarded as ‘brain fever’. He was a despot who happened to be ‘bisexual’. I don’t think it was sexuality as much as it was an intoxication of power. To blame Caligula on bisexuality is a bit far fetched.

    Do you know the Romans also had Gods???

    Duh. So did the Greeks, Egyptians, Hindus, yada yada yada. Polytheistic religions in total outnumber the Abrahamaic religions. That doesn’t make them wrong. Monotheism is something that has its beginnings in Judaism thousands of years ago. A religion that is polytheistic isn’t necessarily all bad.

  • Baronius

    Mark, that hurts. I’ve been called mentally ill by therapists, neurologists, and a parole board (unanimously), but your comment just hurts. OK, seriously, this is too interesting for me to drop out of the conversation, but I find your position troubling.

    I don’t know if you consider natural law to be theological or not. And I don’t know much about it. But I know that homosexual acts aren’t natural (in the sense of nature as that which is nearly universal), and that homosexual acts aren’t procreative (which is the function of sexual activity). Furthermore, while some sexual interests can be steered toward procreation, like if my officemate’s husband would just die so we could get married and have sex

    Sorry; I lost my train of thought. The homosexual orientation opposes procreative sex. The creep who likes young girls can get a young-looking adult wife, but the person with no heterosexual desire cannot use sex properly.

    Or to answer the question crudely, that doesn’t fit there, it fits there.

  • Roxanna

    On the 23rd of march, 2000, at 7am in the morning, I woke up and decided to be a lesbian.*

    Hell, why not!? Every one else was doing it, must have been the ‘in thing’ at the time.

    Makes me cool right?

    *Sexual preferance is NOT a choice.
    Just as the eye colour you are born with, is not a choice.
    Genetics people! Genetics!

    Also, on the god thing, I dont mind people being religious, thats all good and well, but dont you DARE destroy the world over it.

    The bible, and other such writings were first written at a time where people were supersticious, etc and had no other logical way of explaining things. In history, all civilisations have had a god to two, some times 50 of them, but why? Why all the making up of gods? BECAUSE THEY HAD NO OTHER RATIONAL WAY OF EXPLAINING THINGS!! Much, much much, of the bible has NO legs to stand on in this day and age, why? Because we can explain so many more things then back in the time of ‘jesus’.

    Personaly, I do not believe in the ‘god’ many of you are speaking of, ive never seen him, hes never personaly ‘showen me the way’.
    I do how ever believe in other plains of existance.

    But how, how can there be ONLY one god? Are all the other religions wrong? How do you know that the bible wasnt written by some old guy just for kicks? If ‘god’ does exist (which, I personaly think he dosnt), How do you know hes not just sitting up there laughing his arse off at us all running around like headless chickens? How do you TRUTHFULY know ‘gods’ not black lesbian? Why is he always a white man? … you dont know, do you? You cannot answer any of my questions TRUTHFULY .. how many of you have actualy seen him, truthfuly?

    Religion has caused too many problems in this world already, as far as I can see.
    Be religious, fine, but stop knocking on my door, with free pamphlets and videos trying to convert me.

    Another point, one should NOT push religion on children, no matter how much they believe in their chosen religion.
    When a child/ young adult is old enough, let them make THEIR OWN DECISION on and about religion.

    And here I end my rantings, been needing to get this off my chest for along time. I dont mean much offence to people reading this, maybe a little, but im not trying to be ‘compleatly’ heartless.
    Also, sorry for any spelling mistakes and grammer etc, blame the dyslexia.

  • Roxanna

    After thought:

    This ‘god’ your discusing, is MAN MADE.
    If he ever did truly exist and say/ write any thing at all, it has all be lost, a looong time ago, thru the stupiditys of humans.

    The bibe as you read it, the services you attend, what your church strives for, are most prolly not the world of god at all.

    Tis all man made.

    Also, feel free to bible-bash me, got alot of it at school … wow, that did me a world of good now didnt it?

  • http://Tampa Erma

    I have NO problem with GAY MEN or women who ack like me GOD LOVE THEM ALL the bible says all SOULS are HIS so why not let them in the church so they can know what GOD says about Homas so don”t judge that you be not JUDGE love them treat them like you want someone to treat you are your child or someon you love dearly they are MORE KINDER than some CHRISTIANS i know and that’s MINISTRY

  • http://HEAVEN JESUS

    Why you don”t LOVE those that LOVE? I will not the PEOPLE that you say is GAY you can’t keep them out of heaven .you can put them out of your churches that’s made of bricks but you can’tkeep them out of their church of FLESH which is in their HEARTS they serve me MORE than you so call CHRISTIANS do i love them too so THINK before you cast MY CHILDREN OUT if you do you lift the herd from around you and your FAMILY.THINK> THINK>

  • bhw

    The homosexual orientation opposes procreative sex.

    So does birth control. So does infertility. So does menopause. The sex-as-procreation argument doesn’t fly.

    but the person with no heterosexual desire cannot use sex properly.

    If you ask me, the most “proper” use of sex is PLEASURE. It certainly is the most common use. Procreation seems to be an outcome of the pleasure principle.

    Or to answer the question crudely, that doesn’t fit there, it fits there.

    Actually, as many people have discovered, it fits both there AND there.

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    This is specifically for Silas, because he puts his finger directly on the issue at hand at his comment #67.

    He quotes,
    ‘to be gay is a decision one has made. It is a learned behavior, not something inherited genetically.’

    and he answers,
    ‘As a gay dude, I can attest that this is a fallacy. It’s not a decision, it’s as basic an instinct as seeking food.’

    If a ‘gay’ dude tells you that homosexual behaviour is instinctual, it pays to listen to him. He knows better than any individual who is not ‘gay.’

    But there is a huge difference between an instinct and pursuing that instinct.

    Example: If an Arab terrorist blows away the customers sitting in a pizza parlour, my instinct in response is to take a carbine, and blow away every Arab I can get in my gunsights. Particularly, if a bunch of those killed were my relatives.

    That is not hard for me. I live above an Arab village and on occasion go to a promenade near my home and see Arab women hanging laundry on the roof, or sitting on a deck chair, or what have you, with the kids playing nearby. Arab kids play soccer in the park near this promenade as well.

    Do I follow my instinct? Would you really want to live in a society where I did?

    Let me be clear here. There are plenty of opportunities here for me to want to follow that instinct. There are plenty of terrorist bombings.

    But I don’t.

    G-d, the Living G-d of Israel I believe in, says in no uncertain terms that homosexual behaviour is an abomination. This is in the Holiness Code in Leviticus. It is in plain Hebrew, for anyone to read.

    That means that if I have the instincts to pursue someone of the same sex sexually, and I act on that instinct, I am committing an abomination.

    The difference beteen controlling one’s instincts and surrendering to them is the bright line between civilisation and savagery. I am instructed in Genesis,

    “And Hashem said to Cain, ‘Why are you annoyed, and why has your countenance fallen? Surely, if you improve yourself, you will be forgiven. But if you do not improve yourself, sin rests at the door. Its desire is toward you, yet you can conquer it'”.
    (Genesis 4:6-7)

    One could interpolate sin (Hatát) with instinct. Cain’s intinctual anger at rejection caused him to murder his brother. Though in a more precise sense, (Het – the root for Hatát) means ‘missing the mark.’

    If I take the Holiness Code seriously, I’m forbidden from pursuing homosexual relations – regardless of my instinctual desire.

    Were it true that I had homosexual desire (I don’t), then this prohibition would be a very severe test. But I have to admit, resisting the desire to take a carbine and blow away Arabs when they kill innocent children and women is also a severe test.

  • http://www.bhwblog.com bhw

    Ruvy, if you’re a practicing Jew and you follow the laws of Leviticus, good for you. (You follow all of them, I take it?)

    But your comparison of the choice to act on homosexual desire with the “instinct” to slaughter innocents in an act of revenge … well, what can I say except that it’s offensive, at the very least.

    You can’t compare the urge for murderous revenge with the desire for physical contact with someone you’re attracted to or even love. (We’re speaking of consenting adults, of course.)

    It’s obvious that ALL of us should suppress our urge for murderous revenge. But why should only some people be expected to suppress their natural (aka god-given) instinct to express love and sensuality?

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    If I take the Holiness Code seriously, I’m forbidden from pursuing homosexual relations…

    Hmmm. So much for an all loving and forgiving Deity. In my estimation, God forbids nothing. He/She has afforded every individual free will. We make our own choices and are accountable for the aftermath. To put it into crude terms — love a fag and live a good life or beat a fag and live a ‘good’ life? Which one gets the devout into Heaven first? In our shame we’ve forgotten that sex is not just about procreation. It is also the extension of love of another human being. We’ve taken something basic and beautiful and transformed it into this monster that we dare not confront. That’s a far greater sin in my eyes.

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    Baronius, please don’t be hurt. I figured one neurotic can call another neurotic, neurotic. But in the interests of harmony and good will, I’ll soften that to neurologically challenged, o.k?

    As to “natural law,” I’m not being my normally flip self when I say I’m not even sure what that means? The Oxford English Dictionary talks about “Laws of nature” but the various uses by different people conflict wildly from theological to putting man’s reason above God!

    The Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Baronius, look what you’ve got me doing!!!! I’ve got client work to do & I’m doing research on philosophical issues…like my client’ll pay for that!)…anyway, it has an interesting essay explaining how many different and conflicting ways the concept has been used since the ancient Greeks.

    If one uses the term to mean, “behaviors that are natural in nature,” which can be used as guides to moral behavior, here’s what it says:

    “It is idle to pretend that we can extract a uniform message from naure. Are we, for instance to model ourselves upon the peaceful habits of sheep or upon the internecine conflits of ants? Is the egalitarianism of the beaver of the hierarchical life of the bee the proper exemplar for human society? Should we imitate the widespread polygamy of the animal kingdom, or is there some higher regularity of which this is no more than a misleading instance? [Therefore] it becomes impossible to regard the maxim ‘follow nature’ as a substantive guide to conduct….the damage they do to it as a logical theory would seem fatal, for the nature in terms of which the norms of justice are defined turns out to be internally inconsistent.”

    Based on that, I would think that labelling homosexual acts “unnatural” because of some concept of “natural law” would be logically falacious.

    The only justification for calling it unnatural must lie within theological realms, which I utterly reject as simply bad theology.

    So, we’re back to the psychological…but I won’t bring that up again. And good luck with your office mate’s husband. Just don’t get caught!

    AND…I hereby declare for all to read that I will no longer acknowledge the existence of Anthony Grande. I am embarassed by and apologize for my personal attack on he who will not be named last night and attribute it entirely to the influence of my nectar, Jamesons. But since reasoned discourse with he who will not be named is impossible, I will deny his existence.

    In Jamesons Veritas

  • http://aqualung@bresnan.net MCH

    I feel it’s interesting that the homophobes always refer to the bible and God to make their anti-gay arguments, and yet it (sexual preference) didn’t even make the top 10, ie, the 10 Commandments….

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    You mean there’s no “Thou shalt not hump a person of the same sex?” But, but, but… that’s what Dr. Dobson and Pat Robertson said! And they’re men of Gawd!

    Even this old queer can learn something new. Thanks to Logo, Viacom’s great gay-themed cable network, I’ve learned that homosexuality is quite common in the animal kingdom. Now, right off the bat, some person of God will say, “but they’re animals, they know no better!” Get over it, Louise. We’re here… we’re queer… you’ve nothing to fear! There, I feel better now. I’ve done my gay PSA for this year.

  • Nancy

    Silas, I told you that back in post #58. Why would I make it up?

  • Ben

    JESUS, stick with Aramaic, your english is no to very good.
    The banter has been great to read. Thanks for your collective input.
    I’m confused…If the guy from the original post was singing in the choir, wasn’t the church accepting him, even if they didn’t endorse his “sin” (as defined by the church he was trying to member-up with)?

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    BHW, I don’t mean to offend you in my comparisons, but the issue in both instances is control – self control.

    If you are offended, I’ve gotten my point across. According to G-d (not me, I didn’t write the text) homosexual BEHAVIOUR is an abomination – offensive, to put it mildly.
    So the Entity you should be angry at is G-d. I’m only quoting His Guide.

    I try hard to be an observant Jew, if that is what you mean. I’ve come quite a ways from being an agnostic. Living here makes it somewhat easier. There is no Christmas noise all over the place. The air-raid alarm goes off twenty minutes before the Sabbath and then again right before Sabbath arrives (this is Jerusalem, not Tel Aviv). I don’t have to argue with an employer because I want to work a half day because of a half fast. No one says boo if I take Sukkot off – everybody else takes it off too. In other words, here, I’m in the majority and many features of Jewish life are the norm.

    I was discussing this debate with my younger boy, who goes to a religious school. He commented that a number of kids in his class went to the “pride” parade this year in Jerusalem. According to him, about 25% of the children in his class are homosexuals. According to him, they are the toughest and strongest kids in the class. So there is no issue of “beating up fags” where he goes to school. One could try, I suppose. But the homophobic behaviour referred to by Silas above is not likely to satisfy the fool engaging in it.

    There is the question of how these children will square their orientation with the Holiness Code. I haven’t got a clue. I would comment that his is an all-boys school, so this might explain the numbers a bit, as they seem high.

    This gets to your final question. Why should only some people be required to suppress their sexuality? I guess the answer is that life is not fair.

    Why should my neighbour suffer from cardiac arrest and have to be in a hospital for a year for brain damage while I only get a mild heart attack? The only clear and coherent answer that deals with these issues is that G-d tests us.

    As I said, being asked to suppress one’s sexuality is a very severe test. But maybe, just maybe, there is a reason for the test, and a reward – on this side of the veil rather than the other one.

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    Why thank you, Nancy! Forgive me! I was so blinded by all the anti-gay rhetoric.

    …who in their right mind would ever deliberately choose to be gay/lesbian, with all the hell & condemnation & hardships…

    Sad to admit, but so true, Nancy. I would never want my kid to be gay. But if he/she were gay I’d be there for support and guidance.

    It’s a difficult life especially if one is delegated to the closet. I allowed myself to get wrapped up in the whole denial thing. I lived in the shadows, hiding from my true self. I was so afraid of being exposed as a ‘homosexual’ that it permeated every fiber of my being. I know what it’s like to be beaten, blackmailed and ostracized. It cost me plenty of cash, tons of heartache and indescribable physical pain. When I see people write in such harsh terms against gays, my back hairs bristle. The religious leadership in my faiths (Roman Catholic, Methodist and Mormon) let me down. It wasn’t until I found the love and light of the Universalist Unitarians that I saw there was another way. I was once a conservative Republican because I denied my true self. Now that I am out, free and happy I have remained true to many of my conservative Republican beliefs. And for those who can’t understand why I continue to speak in glowing terms of Ronald Reagan, it’s quite simple. As conservative as he was, he never shut the door on any of his gay friends in his personal life.

  • Nancy

    That’s OK; I think you’re a peach anyway. :)

  • Baronius

    BHW, you hit on a valid point: if the sexual act is about procreation, then birth control is wrong. That’s a toughie for many people, but it is consistent. Any act which prohibits the sex act from leading to conception is immoral, be it homosexuality, contraception, masturbation, et cetera.

    Of course, that only makes sense if sex is about procreation as opposed to pleasure. “As opposed to” – that’s an odd phrase, because there’s no reason sex can’t be both pleasurable and procreative. Ideally, it should be both. By analogy, eating can be both pleasurable and nutritious. If I’m eating for pleasure then throwing up, that’s gluttony. If I’m having sex with a condom on, that’s sinful too.

  • Guppusmaximus

    Jesus accepted sinners because they chose to change their ways when they learned the truth. Why would someone that doesn’t want to change their ways go to church especially when it is an act against God?? It’s the same as someone who does drugs or prostitution… No sin is greater!!
    More than likely, if the pastor accepted the gay man into his church and then asked him to repent that sin(homosexuality) I’m pretty sure the guy would’ve brought on legal action or contacted the media…. F*cking hypocrites!!

  • Anthony Grande

    “If a ‘gay’ dude tells you that homosexual behaviour is instinctual, it pays to listen to him. He knows better than any individual who is not ‘gay.'”

    No, the Gay dudes have a mental block and actually believe that God created them that way.

    Ruvy, in Leviticus it cleary states that “Homosexualality is major sin”.

    Silas, when did I say that monotheism was bad??? And do you like how I destroyed you argument on how Rome is better than America???

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    Good grief, can no one shut Anthony up? If ignorance was the coin of the coin of the realm, he’d be wealthier than Bill Gates.

    Oh rats, I just violated my previous promise not to acknowledge he who must not be named. Oh well, it’s late again and it’s the Irish whiskey that has hold of my soul.

    You who should not be named, your complete lack of knowledge of all things historical, religious, spiritual, and…oh hell, everything else, is only surpassed by your total ignorance of what you speak.

    Ptui. Got that ugly taste out of my mouth. Rinsed with a bit of Jamesons and everything is alright with the world.

    Guppus…you assume that the gays are sinners…if you’d only for a moment question your own bigotry, you’d realize that being asked to repent one’s sins when one is not a sinner except in the eyes of bigots and false prophets has every right to condemn those who chastise him/her/it. Your reasoning is totaly circular and therefore not to be considered.

    Baronius, my friend. I fear we are so far apart, it’s going to hard to even find common ground. I’m a sinner when I masturbate? Should I ever take that terrifying leap of faith and find God, if He/She/It preaches the same odd views of sex, I’m going to jump back over the chasm, renounce my leap of faith and live happily as an agnostic…with the firm and calm believe that the God with whom I want to cavort isn’t so damn Calvinistic.

    In Jamesons Veritas

  • http://gonzo-marx.blogspot.com/ gonzo marx

    ok…let’s have a look, just because i havn’t “talked” with Mark or Silas in quite the while…

    first…what Ruvy stated about the Torah being accurate due to scribal Tradition is absolutely correct…the problems with Translations occur in the New Testament…why is this?…let’s have a look at the History involved to shed some Light…

    before that, allow me to state that Yeshua (Jesus)lifted most of the restrictions of Leviticus, and that NO ONE fully practices them completely today…simple Example…not even the most devout Hassidim goes out and stones an adulterer or misbehaving child to death, which is clearly the called for Punishment in Leviticus…we will toss out the bits about Slavery for your comtemplative Pleasure…

    now, as to the History of the christian “Bible” as we know it today…

    the first iteration of the NT was compiled by Iraneus, the Bishop of Lyon about 180 AD, after he had written his magnum opus “Against the Five Heresies”…which consisted of his Arguments against other sects of early christianity at the time…his Idea was to create a single unifying (read: catholic) Book that would unite the Dogma of the budding christian Faith under one Authoritarian structure…this culminated in Nicea more than a hundred years later by the hand of Constantine, Emperor of Rome

    this is significant for many reasons, not the least of which are borne out in letters from Iraneus to other “bishops” of his sect which said that they should Lie if needed to argue against the “heretics”…

    currently biblical scholars place the writings of 3 of the Gospels around 76-80 AD…during the first Jewish revolt againt Rome…and the last Gospel around 100 AD, during the second Uprising

    as for the accuracies of the translations…check your gospels…the Books that make mention of the Christ’s ( a Greek title, meaning “the Anointed”) last Words are different, in 2 of the Gospels there is mention of a sign placed above his head on the cross….both differ in what the sign says

    simpler still…consider that with the exception of direct Quotes from the Christ…everything else is “divinely inspired” and written by Man…men such as Saul of Tarsus (St. Paul) who wrote most of the diatribes against women as well as homosexuals after the same type of politically convenient “revelation” as Constantine

    proof that this infallible book is indeed quite fallible? (tho the Lessons held within are mostly beneficial)

    ok…try your Ten Commandments…look up the Jewish version…these woudl be word for word taken from the tablets that the alleged fiery finger of Deity carved for Moses…

    compare them to the Roman Catholic…

    now compare both of those with the Protestant

    you will find that they are NOT the same…different order…some very different not only in wording but context and content as well

    just one example…

    so, besides these misunderstandings stemming from the written words of fallible Men over 2000 years ago….what is your problem with consenting adults doing what they Wish as long as they cause no harm to others?

    some folks are so silly in their phobia that it just bloggles my tiny Mind…

    nuff said?

    excelsior!

  • Bennett

    promise not to acknowledge he who must not be named. Oh well, it’s late again and it’s the Irish whiskey that has hold of my soul.

    It’s oh so hard. One of life’s great challenges. Classic though, in dealing with teenagers.

    “Do I point out that he said ‘like’ fifteen times in that sentence alone?”

    Just walk away, Mark. Hey, pour me one a them!

    ;-]

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    Bennet, you’re welcome anytime. In fact, my glass runneth empty, so I’m about to go refill.

    GONZO….where the hell have you been, you reprobate? I’ve been needing your guidance, wisdom, and perspecacity (never could spell that) for ages. In a few sentences, you speak volumes–perhaps you’re that guy the Christians speak of as the “second coming of Christ?” Oy vey, I’ll have to treat you with a lot more respect.

    By the way, just for Gonzo, so no one else read this, I have it on good authority that, originally, there were 20 commandments on four tablets, but Moses was so old that he dropped two of them. God say, “oh what the hell, 10 are going to be tough enough. Forget the others.”

    But I…unyielding seeker of truth…have been compiling commandments 11-20. And when i reveal them, boy are the right wing religious fanatics going to be surprised. Because mine are divinely inspired as well…because as we know…

    In Jamesons Veritas Amen

  • http://gonzo-marx.blogspot.com/ gonzo marx

    no such Hubris from the likes of lil ole me…

    yer Jester has been a bit under the weather, but doing better now

    ya should be seeing occasional flashes of my maddened keyboard peckings a bit more often…

    after all, “Time wounds all heels”, eh?

    Excelsior!

  • tcx

    God does not want man to unite the earth. Thus, all bibles are filled with misconceptions, half-truths, and flat-out lies.

    If you believe in god and believe there is a precise order (design) that god has, then you must believe there is a reason for such silliness as Dianetics, etc. to exist. It is because god does not want you to know the nature, or truth of god.

    Homosexuality is fine because ultimately god designed it that way. Keep in mind my comment on lack of free will. There is no such thing as “free will”… only destiny. It matters little whether homosexuality is genetic or in the mind. Either way, it’s god’s design. The only difference is if homosexuality is in the mind, then that person can change their preference dynamically. In other words, he or she can be changed via man or environment (via god) “on-the-fly.”

    Just know that whatever the case may be (and I believe science is saying genetic now… I don’t keep up with that) it doesn’t matter. Genetics as well as what is stored in your brain (neuron network) is entirely controlled via god’s design.

    That said, there is overlapping truth in both Christianity and Islam. Possibly others.

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    Silas, when did I say that monotheism was bad??? And do you like how I destroyed you argument on how Rome is better than America???

    Believe what you will, AG. You destroyed nothing. And, dude, trust me, you’ll never one up me because your opinion is of no value to me in any way. Come back in 20 years and debate me after you’ve experienced reality in the cold, brutal world in which you live. Wisdom comes with experience long after the first sprouting hairs of puberty.

    I’m a sinner when I masturbate?

    If you are, then so am I. Who on this blog doesn’t masturbate? Who on this blog should masturbate more often?

    GONZO, don’t mean to address you after the above remark but I had to say I am delighted in your return. Your humor, wit and insight were sorely missed by me.

  • Dopey

    Anthony, OK I’m just a brainless drooling imbecile, so you’ll have to help me out here.

    In your posting (# 69) you wrote:
    ” * Fifty-One percent of humans are Female, Forty-Nine percent of humans are Male. If you take in consideration that Females tend live a little longer than Males then it would be 50-50. Hence, one woman for every man. No Accident.”

    If it starts out that there are more women than men (51% as compared to 49%) and considering that females outlived males, then at the end shouldn’t there be more women than men? So, how did you arrive at 50-50? Could you kindly care to explain?

    You also wrote: ” * Genes are inheretied from parents, so since gays don’t reproduce how would a “gay gene” exist??? It doesn’t.”

    But surely we are all aware that there are many married men with children who also regularly frequent gay bars and other homosexual meeting places such as parts of beaches, parks and certain public toilets? Oh yes, gays do reproduce. I know of at least one gay friend who is married and has fathered children.

    You also said that: “* Humans aren’t special, we are just animals. So why don’t we see gays among lions or zebras or geese??? Because they don’t exist.”

    When you say “gays among lions or zebras or geese” do you mean homosexual behaviour in the animal kingdom? Now, let’s take as an example an animal that is very familiar to all of us — dogs. I don’t think I would be wrong if I say that many of us would have witnessed at some time in our lives two or more male dogs enthusiastically mounting each other. There have also been reports in newspapers and magazines of gay couplings observed in apes, fishes, and yes even geese.

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    Silas, I can think of at least one person who I wished masturbated more than posted.

    And that site you linked to–yeesh–religious people can be soooooo weird.

    In Jamesons Veritas

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    Dopey, you’re not an imbecile. What you’ve done is point out that many kids nowadays coast through high school and just don’t get the basics. They don’t know penmanship, spelling, grammar or basic arithmetic. I’ve written about education and its importance to the point where I’ve developed carpal-tunnel syndrome. I guess it’s more important for our high schoolers to learn bigotry, video games and designer fashion tips.

    Insofar as homosexuality in the animal kingdon is concerned, there’s plenty of documentation. Some folks just refuse to believe that such a thing exists in their God’s world. That’s an individual’s right. Suffice it to say, more intelligent members of our species know the truth.

    Mark, I agree on your masturbation point. This is just another human instinct that has to be repressed in favor of a belief system. I wonder if there have been studies done linking the lack of masturbation to mental illness? Better yet, I wonder if there have been studies done correlating masturbation practice and voting trends. I’ll bet very little seed gets “spilled” in the red states.

  • gonzo marx

    to tcx in Comment #109, and the whole “destiny” bit…

    allow me to Quote…
    “you can choose a ready Guide,
    in some Celestial Voice…
    if you choose not to Decide,
    you still have made a Choice.
    you can choose from phantom Fears,
    and a Kindness that can kill.
    I will choose a Path that’s clear,
    I will choose
    FreeWill”

    Rush

    nuff said?

    Excelsior!

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    Silas, I have it on good authority that if you masturbate, you go blind…so I’ve always switched hands. Alas, as I get older, my vision gets weaker and weaker…but, what the hell, it’s worth it.

    Because I also have it on good authority that those who don’t masturbate are 75.45% more likely to commit homicide, 88.3% more likely to commit suicide, 44.346543% more likely to vote Republican, 99.44% more likely to just been mean and canterous.

    I can’t reveal my authority…as a blogjournalist, it’s strictly confidential. So don’t worry, Gonzo, your facts are safe with me.

    Gonzo, speaking of which, did you kill your blog???

    In Jamesons Veritas

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    Is it true that teenage boys who don’t masturbate usually suffer from rampant acne, religious delusions and low comprehension levels in reading and arithmetic?

  • http://www.futonreport.net/ Matthew T. Sussman

    (squeeze-pop)
    jesus killed my unkle
    1+2=5

    Seconds later…

    *fapfapfapfapfap*

    ……

    Baby smooth cheeks!
    We are masters of our own lives!
    War and Peace sure was a quick read! Now I can get onto formulating those Riemann sums for my 8th grade homework!

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    Oh Silas, it’s so much worse than that. I’m afraid to reveal all the problems–premature hair loss, tooth decay, hypothermia, hypochondria, mitochondria, Tourettes syndrome, sleep apnia, bad hair days, uncontrolled urges to fondle sheep, strange attractions to members of their same sex, lack of sexual drive, impotence, incontinence, incompetence…oh I could go on for ever.

    Keep it up!

    In Jamesons Veritas

  • http://www.bhwblog.com bhw

    This is just another human instinct that has to be repressed in favor of a belief system.

    Bill Moyers interviewed that buck-toothed art nun on PBS, and she said that she didn’t belive god would give us toys he didn’t intend for us to play with.

    Gotta love the cloistered sisters.

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    …uncontrolled urges to fondle sheep…

    Brings new meaning to angels heard on high in the fields singing to the shepherds. There was such a preoccupation with sheep amongst the disciples.

  • tcx

    gonzo, I have given proof of the nonexistance. You have quoted lyrics from a band. I’m a Rush fan too, and believe the meek will inherit the earth. But they don’t hold the entire truth. Nor did Einstein.

    Your belief in “free will” has been placed there by god/science (same thing).

    The vast universe operates like a massive machine with all parts interlocked.

    It’s a powerful illusion due to the closed feedback nervous system of humans and the sheer vastness of the universe. For example, touch your finger to your face and an impulse arrives via both the nerves in your face and the nerves in your finger/hand. But let me ask you what moved your finger to your face? A big chain of reactions; all operating according to the laws of physics.

    Pick a letter of the alphabet.

    Bet it wasn’t “lambda.” There is no “free will” because you can only pick from the set of concepts your brain holds at any given time. And the actual process of picking from that set is also bound by the laws of physics. So, for example, if you picked the letter “A”… there was a physical reason for doing so.

    Not everything in this universe is explainable, simply because certain synchronicity events have to happen. In other words, god has to kill time somehow… so certain things which don’t make sense are thrown in. Further providing the illusion of “free will.”

    Certain things *you* might do serve no purpose for yourself, but they do for *other* people. You simply can’t know what is part of your purpose or what is purpose for someone else. For example, I bet you’ve learned something which you only found useful many years later. Or seperated from a friend only to find you need their help later, so you give them a call, etc.

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    Matthew–you’re sick! Love the comments. Takes one to know one, right.

    tcx: I don’t want to get into a dissertation on quantum physics, but you’re about 150 years behind the time. The “universe as machine” theory died when Einstein’s theories led to quantum physics and eventually chaos theory. As far as scientists can tell, the world is probablistic…there is no destiny, no determinism, and it’s hard to figure out where free will fits in (especially given what we’re learning about neurology, the unconscious, and psychology).

    Matter does appear spontaneously in space and disappear just as inexplicably. The separation between energy and matter almost disappears at the quantum level.

    And these aren’t just idle musings–these theories have led to vital discoveries such as IPODs, digital TVs, computers, nanotechnology, and a host of other cool things.

    That doesn’t mean there’s no God and that He doesn’t have a plan–it’s just that if there’s any determinism, it lies outside the physical realm, which is o.k. God can do anything she wants, right?

  • Anthony Grande

    “If it starts out that there are more women than men (51% as compared to 49%) and considering that females outlived males, then at the end shouldn’t there be more women than men? So, how did you arrive at 50-50? Could you kindly care to explain?”

    Well, like I said there are more women than men, only because women tend to live longer. If you still do not understand take a second and think about it.

    “Wow, let’s take as an example an animal that is very familiar to all of us — dogs. I don’t think I would be wrong if I say that many of us would have witnessed at some time in our lives two or more male dogs enthusiastically mounting each other.”

    And I have also witnesed, more than once, a dog humping a fire hydrant or humping someones legs, you point is???

    Dogs are just horny creatures.

    And I am getting sooooo tired of this partisan liberal bullshit on how “supposedly” that there are gays among fish, fleas and other animals.

    Now I happen to be a big animal person and have owned several different kinds of animals:

    I own about a hundred little feeder guppies. The males have colorful tails and the females have plain tails. I sit and watch the ones with colorful tails chasing and trying to court with the ones with plane tails. I have never seen in my entire 10 years of owning and watching these guppies seen a single guppie with a colorful tail chasing and trying to court another one with a colorful tail.

    I have two cocker spaniel males. One is very stupid and young and unfixed. The other is smart and wise and fixed. The stupid young one often humps the other and gets bit. We called him gay. But when my freind brought over her cocker spaniel female the one that we thought might be gay went right after her, went at it for 4 hours straight and got the dog pregnant. It turned out that he was just horny.

    I could go on.

  • T A Dodger

    If it starts out that there are more women than men (51% as compared to 49%) and considering that females outlived males, then at the end shouldn’t there be more women than men? So, how did you arrive at 50-50? Could you kindly care to explain?

    Actually, Anthony got it only half right.
    Slightly more than 50% of all live births are male, not female. He’s right, though, that there are more females than males. Males of any age group are slightly more likely to die than females. So, among the very young there are more males than females, and among the old there are more females than males.

    In the U.S.* there are 1.05 male births for every female birth. Among people over 65, there are .75 men for every woman. Among the population as a whole, there are .97 women for every man. As the population ages, we can expect this number (.97) to drop slightly.

    *This site gives the ratios for a lot of countries, I only included the numbers for the U.S., but the ratios are pretty consistent accross the board.

  • T A Dodger

    I’ll be honest, this debate about animal sexuality seems silly to me. No animals have language (with grammar) but that doesn’t mean it’s un-natural for humans to have language. It’s just unique to us. At the same time, it’s perfectly natural for some animals to hibernate, but that isn’t something that is natural for humans.

    I support equal rights (including marriage rights) for homosexuals, but I find arguments about the “naturalness” of homosexuality to be pointless at best. All behavior displayed by humans is “natural.” We are in our natural habitat. We are not being manipulated by outside forces.

  • http://gonzo-marx.blogspot.com/ gonzo marx

    to tcx…

    you have “proven” exactly as much wiht your thoughts as i have with my quote

    ie: not a fucking thing, really

    example..you wanted me to think of a letter…i chose not to

    my own Thought tends to tell me that nothing is quite as binary as arguments based on a type of pseudo dichotomy that falsely defines everything as an either/or discussion that does not even acknowledge, much less contemplate, the total ramifications and actual Variable possibilities existant in the given situation…

    there are times to try and keep a Solution simple…but the Problems never are…and dumbing down the discussion by not realizing the full scope is not a help for anything…

    and still more Quote…
    “there are those who Think that
    Life has nothing left to Chance.
    a Host of holy Horrors,
    to conduct our aimless
    Dance…

    a planet, of playthings,
    we Dance on the strings;
    of powers we cannot Perceive.
    ‘the stars aren’t aligned’
    or
    ‘the gods, are malign’
    Blame is better,to give
    than receive…

    Rush

    to each their Own…i Respect your feelings on this matter…but reserve the Right to my own Thought

    fair enough?

    Excelsior!

  • http://www.bhwblog.com bhw

    I have never seen in my entire 10 years of owning and watching these guppies seen a single guppie with a colorful tail chasing and trying to court another one with a colorful tail.

    However a recent study with fruit flies (how appropriate!) showed that when a particular gene in the female fruit flies was “turned on” by the researches, those females began acting like males — they tried to court other females.

    Story here. As the story says, one gene reversed sexual orientation.

    And humans are not as different from fruit flies as you might think. We share 2/3 of our genes with the fruit fly.

  • Dopey

    Thank you for the reply, Anthony. Your explanation is accepted. And the matter is now closed. Time to move on.

  • http://www.theamericanright.com/ Anthony Grande

    Bhw, scientist can do amazing things.

    They can make a man look like a woman and they can make a fruit fly act like a woman. You point is…???

    Are you saying that the reason why humans are gay is because someone tampered with their genes???

  • http://www.bhwblog.com bhw

    I’m saying that science is continually illustrating that sexual orientation has a genetic component. There’s probably not a single gene that controls orientation — it’s more biologically complicated than that — but it’s pretty obvious that sexual orientation is not a choice.

  • http://www.bhwblog.com bhw

    There’s probably not a single gene that controls orientation

    I should have prefaced that sentence with, “In humans,”

  • T A Dodger

    I’m saying that science is continually illustrating that sexual orientation has a genetic component.

    I still just don’t see why this is relevant. All human behavior is natural behavior, although almost all of it is learned. Claiming that something is “instinct” doesn’t do anything to prove that it is desirable or inevitable. After all, infidelity is 100% totally natural, but that doesn’t make it acceptable.

    Shouldn’t the question be whether homosexuality is beneficial / harmful / none-of-anyone’s-business?

    For the record, I’m in favor of equal rights (including rights to marriage), I would just never make that argument based on the idea that homosexuality is natural.

  • T A Dodger

    I still just don’t see why this is relevant. All human behavior is natural behavior, although almost all of it is learned. Claiming that something is “instinct” doesn’t do anything to prove that it is desirable or inevitable.

    Sorry, I realise i put this in a way that was potentially unclear:

    I meant basically that, as a semantic matter, learned behavior is still natural behavior, and almost all human behavior is learned.

    I also wanted to say that even if we have a natual “hard wired” tendancy toward a certain behavior, we can be expected to learn not to engage in it if it is found to be socially harmful. I don’t think homosexuality is socially harmful, and I think it’s that point that’s important, not the “natural” basis for homosexuality.

  • http://www.bhwblog.com bhw

    Shouldn’t the question be whether homosexuality is beneficial / harmful / none-of-anyone’s-business?

    The argument is that it’s none of anyone’s business until the government decides to sanction some personal relationships and not others. Then it becomes a civil rights issue.

    Of course, the post had to do with religion and homosexuality, so the issue of what’s “natural” (aka, created by god) tends to come up. And when people make ignorant statements about what happens in nature, those statements need to be corrected.

  • T A Dodger

    the issue of what’s “natural” (aka, created by god) tends to come up. And when people make ignorant statements about what happens in nature, those statements need to be corrected.

    Ah, fair enough.

    I agree that it’s a civil rights issue, and I think people who oppose equal rights need to know that the burden is on them to prove that homosexuality is so harmful that it justifies government discrimination.

    They should also know that going on about homosexuality being an “un-natural” abomination is non-sensical and that they wouldn’t be showing justification for discrimination, even if they won the point 100%.

  • Anthony Grande

    “but it’s pretty obvious that sexual orientation is not a choice.”

    I beg to differ – look at comment #69

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    AG, speaking as an authority on the subject, let me comment that the more you protest the natural proclivity of homosexuality, the more convinced I become that you have something to hide. Thou dost protest a bit too much. Let it go, buddy.

  • steve

    Anthony, thanks for backing me in comment #69. I was trying to be as tasteful as possible. There is no reason the american public should let gays designate what marital values are. they have no moral fiber. there, I said it. Now the pinkos can understand me in plain english. Since the gays are a minority; they have to revolve around our world. Its not the other way around. Americans should not be at their beckoned call. deal with it.

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    You are absolutely right, Steve! We shouldn’t be at your beck and call! We are productive, contributing members to society, the government’s tax coffers and to the economy. We should not designate what marital values are because that is NOBODY’s business, especially the government’s. Marriage within a church is fine for whomever wants it. Civil marriages are just as valid for those who want it. This has been debated ad nauseum but some of you who are so afraid of the issue refuse to let it go. Moral fiber? Steve, you have no idea what my morals are and, frankly, if you think I have no “moral fiber” that is your problem to deal with. I am educated, rational and working in my community to bridge the gaps between all sides of many issues. Being gay is just a part of me, but it doesn’t consume me like it once did. You, on the other hand, seem to be consumed with the issue. I’d strongly suggest that you discuss this preoccupation with your preacher or a mental health professional before you turn into something you are striving never to be. We have our basic civil rights and you or your ilk can’t take them away. Deal with it.

  • RogerMDillon

    “the God with whom I want to cavort isn’t so damn Calvinistic.”

    You’re right. If there’s cavorting to be done, go with Hobbes.

  • http://alienboysworld.blogspot.com alienboy

    steve, you really need to learn to think like a grown up if you want to be taken seriously here.

    It seems to be more a case of the American public limiting the rights of gay people ratrher than gays designating what marital rights are.

    Minorities don’t have to fit in with the ways of majorities, they wouldn’t be a minority if they did that, would they?

    You’re a bit of a minority yourself steve, someone who is so uptight they can’t stand to see other different people living a normal life.

    And Anthony Chico, re your #69 (great number by the way, you may grow to like it when you grow up), you can just go re-read my answer to that nonsense in my answer #72.

    Clearly, in your case, intelligence is not an answer…

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Mark, your comments at #122 found the mark (you found yourself, eh?) in a lot of ways. For those of you who think that the existence of G-d is bound up with determinism or some such silly theory, may I recommend to you the work of Professor Gerald Schroeder, who teaches in town here.

    There are two books in particular – “Genesis and the Big Bang” and “The Science of G-d.” Neither of these deal with homosexuality and the Bible – this particular thread – but they both deal with the convergence of science and religion.

    My favourite story on this subject is from my father, z”l. Two of the world’s most brilliant scientists are struggling up to the highest mountain of wisdom to find a sour and impatient old man sitting at a table, scowling at them.

    “What took you so long?!” Moses exclaimed.

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    69 + 69 = 138. Comments 69 and 138. Is this some karmic joke? Alienboy, you crack me up. I think I’ll go drink some Metamucil. Steve says I have no fiber.

  • http://dianahartman.blogspot.com/ diana hartman

    * Genes are inheretied from parents, so since gays don’t reproduce how would a “gay gene” exist??? It doesn’t.

    There are those who are born with reproductive organs that can’t produce a child. These people were born to people who obviously had working reproductive systems. Using the above logic, since those with nonworking reproductive systems can’t reproduce, there must not be a “nonworking reproductive system” gene.
    What then would explain the existence of those with nonworking reproductive systems?

    If I take the Holiness Code seriously, I’m forbidden from pursuing homosexual relations – regardless of my instinctual desire.

    if acting on instinct is inherently wrong then can we assume you are not pursuing your heterosexual instincts?

  • T A Dodger

    Using the above logic, since those with nonworking reproductive systems can’t reproduce, there must not be a “nonworking reproductive system” gene.

    You don’t even have to go that far. Just say “Two brown eyed people made a blue eyed baby! It must be a witch (or a bastard)!” Have people just not heard of recessive genes? Even if there were one gene for homosexuality (which is extremely unlikely) there are two points to remember:
    1. If the gene was recessive, each of the gay person’s siblings would have a 50% chance of being a “carrier” of the “gay-gene” but straight.
    2. Some gay people do reproduce.

  • Guppusmaximus

    Mark Shannon #104,
    “Guppus…you assume that the gays are sinners…if you’d only for a moment question your own bigotry, you’d realize that being asked to repent one’s sins when one is not a sinner except in the eyes of bigots and false prophets has every right to condemn those who chastise him/her/it. Your reasoning is totaly circular and therefore not to be considered.”

    Really?? Keep rationalizing the justification of sin,my friend… I’m not a bigot nor prophet(so how could I be a false prophet?) I mentioned that there is no greater sin. So, your need to be intoxicated while talking about my saviour is the same atrocity! From your rantings here in this forum I have to question your credibility to denounce the Word of God. You sound more like a science teacher than a Christian. Are you a Catholic or Christian??

    If so, then you cannot denounce the word of God. I do not pull scripture out of context to use for my own judgement so I suggest you read THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE ROMANS in the New Testament…

    Then all you can do is twist it to your own perversion….

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    Ruvy, love the story & comments.

    So, Steve (or are you really Anthony G. with another login–you sound so much alike)…the pinkos???? What century are you living in?

    Oh wait, you were making a pun, “pinkos” as in “pink,” as in the color of gays. FOFL. You riot you. You’re right. I’m going out right now to tell my gay friends to stop telling me to divorce my wife and marry one of them, to stop turning young children in homosexuals with their satanic rituals, to stop befouling our airways with their pinko (wha, ha ha ha ha ha) chatter.

    I seen da light…and it’s pink!

    In Jamesons Veritas

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    From your rantings here in this forum I have to question your credibility to denounce the Word of God. You sound more like a science teacher than a Christian. Are you a Catholic or Christian??

    Guppus, it’s not my rantings that should make you question my credibility to denounce the Word of God, it’s my total lack of respect for anyone’s Word that reeks of bigotry, narrow mindedness, historical error, ethical lapses…oh, and a host of other neat things.

    And I roared at the “science teacher” comment. Do you really believe that science teachers can’t be Christians? Nah…you’re just pulling my leg, like Steve & his pinko pun.

    Anyway, you gave me an out. I’m neither a Christian nor a Catholic, so, according to you, I can denounce the Word of God. Note, however, as much as I say I’m a hard-core agnostic, I’ve never denounced God out of respect for those who believe. (And, to be honest, a modicum of fear that, just in case She really exists, there’s a chance I can do some fancy footwork & wrangle an entrance through the Pearly Gates..)

    By the way, just out of curiosity, what is my perversion? I’ve always regretted being so damned normal in most of my orientations. Maybe there’s something I’ve been missing.

    In Jamesons Veritas

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/7227630 Rose

    Actually it’s not so much God as it is all God’s followers, who use the Bible as an excuse to condemn homosexuality. I do believe in God, but honestly, I don’t hold the power to condemn or choose who crosses into the kingdom of heaven. The only one who holds that power is God Himself. The people who get me are the ones who slam gays as sinners but have engaged in rampant pre-marital sex, something the bible also clearly frowns upon. Look what the bible says with regards to divorce. Divorce does not mean you are loving and honoring your significant other. Do we condemn divorcées? Do you know what else threatens the sanctity of marriage? Adultery, Murder, Domestic Abuse, Verbal Abuse, and anything else you can do to harm your spouse.

  • Jessica

    Is one single person gay on here? I didn’t read through all of the comments, but I was just wondering if anyone who has commented is gay. If you actually know how it feels to be attracted to the same sex and feel like you don’t have a faith to turn to? Let me assure you it sucks. I’m 22. Female. Bisexual. I grew up in a Southern Baptist church. Its really hard.

    It would be nice to be accepted in my church and be able to be open about my sexual preference. Now I can’t read you stuff out of the bible, but I can tell you one thing that I learned in Sunday School when I was 5. God accepts everyone, including people who sin. Including all of you that have judged me. :) I’m happy with who I am. I know that its stupid to hope that one day everyone will be able to accept mine and others choices to be gay. But I do hope that one day people will just tolerate it and realize that its really not that big of a deal.

  • tcx

    gonzo,

    example..you wanted me to think of a letter…i chose not to

    Of course, because in the set of prior “choices” made, S={free will,destiny}, the bias or weight factor is towards “free will” in your neuron network (brain). Look up “bias” and “neuron.”

    my own Thought tends to tell me that nothing is quite as binary as arguments based on a type of pseudo dichotomy that falsely defines everything as an either/or discussion that does not even acknowledge, much less contemplate, the total ramifications and actual Variable possibilities existant in the given situation…

    It’s not a single “either/or.” The entire stack of software you are using to send messages to this bulletin board is incredibly complex, in terms of human complexity. Here is a rough sketch of what happens when you press a single key on the keyboard:

    1) key on keyboard creates circuit, sending signal
    2) keyboard PIC received signal, calls OS software handler
    3) OS software handler received control; interprets key press; stores in memory
    4) application-level software is invoked; looks at key presses in memory; interprets.

    This is extremely simplified and not entirely accurate. Realize this is all done per key press. Again and again. Type a key, the previous steps happen, etc. etc.

    The set of keys on a keyboard is roughly 101 keys. For each key there can be action taken accordingly via software. Is that “variable” enough for you? And yet, the entire stack of software running on your computer is based on binary true/false 0/1 yes/no, etc.

    Follow? Now let me explain the indeterminism part of computer science. There is Godel and his incompleteness theorem and the halting problem. These are related. Basically, and oversimplified, they state that one can not prove everything about a program unless one also knows every *input* to that computer program.

    Thus, a computer program that exists by itself that has no input whatsoever… it can be determined when that program will halt. In other words, there are no external variables.

    But… if a program uses external variables (input), then there is nondeterminism.

    If you follow this… now imagine the entire universe as external input (variables) to your mind.

    Mr. Schannon, you might want to read up on Einstein. He belived more-or-less what I do.

    It’s important to see the dual nature of determinism. What I’m saying is that the entire universe is deterministic, but you would have to be able to see the *entire* thing to predict *every* event. This is basically Godel and the halting problem.

    back to gonzo…
    there are times to try and keep a Solution simple…but the Problems never are…and dumbing down the discussion by not realizing the full scope is not a help for anything…

    You’re right and wrong 😉
    It was Einstein who said something to the effect of “do the simplest that works, but no simpler.” Well… he was wrong. You should always “do the simplest thing that works.” The “but no simpler” clause introduces confusion, whereas “that works” you automatically know whether the solution is fit for the problem. If it’s too simple, then it doesn’t yet meet the requirments of the problem. If it’s too complex, then you find things that really do not fit good.. confusion within the solution.

    Problems are only problems because you can’t see the solution. Look at a problem the right way, understand the nature of the problem, and it all makes sense.

    Please realize, I’m not attacking your beliefs. I’m actually doing this for my own understanding.

    I will leave you with a quote from Einstein:

    A human being is a part of a whole, called by us _universe_, a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separated from the rest… a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty.

    Hmmm.. that Einstein, smart fella 😉

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    Smile, Jessica. I feel your pain. You aren’t alone and there are plenty of us here at Blogcritics. You don’t need a faith to turn to in order to communicate with God. Our God doesn’t discriminate. All are accepted in God’s House. And look at it this way — God keeps the funda-gelicals around because it’s Divine Comedy.

    Funda-gelical. Is that one of the CATS?

  • Anthony Grande

    Comment 138, Steve, don’t worry bro I always got your back. We, the conservatives, are the majority in the real world but here on the internet we are the minority so we got to stick together.

    “Since the gays are a minority; they have to revolve around our world. Its not the other way around. Americans should not be at their beckoned call. deal with it.”

    That is just the thing, Steve. They are not natural. They are not a denomination so they are not a minority.

    It was meant to be a man and a woman (if you need me to argue this then refer to comment 69.) Therefore, we are natural. We are normal. We are not the majority, because being straight is not a denomination.

    And even if gays are a true minority they are not an oppressed minority. They have every right that I have. I, a straight man, can only marry a woman, Silas, a gay man, can only marry a woman.

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    Mr. TCX, thanks for the suggestion, but, based on your comments, I’ve read a lot more by and about Einstein, quantum physicists, astrophysicists, chaos theorists, string theorists…than you.

    Anyone who says the universe is deterministic simply doesn’t understand modern physics. Your primary premise, you would have to be able to see the *entire* thing to predict *every* event is wrong.

    In fact, it drove Einstein nuts because he hated the probablistic nature of reality that evolved from his own theories and spent the last 40 years of his life trying to resolve it. He failed. His comment, “God doesn’t play dice with the universe,” stems from that frustration.

  • T A Dodger

    They are not natural. Ack, this drives me crazy. Here we humans are, in our natural habitat. Hey look, gays exist! They are natural.

    There is nothing we could do that would not be natural behavior. There is almost nothing we could do that would not be learned behavior.

  • http://www.blogcritics.com T A Dodger

    Anyone who says the universe is deterministic simply doesn’t understand modern physics.

    Deterministic predictions only break down at the level of the very small. If you throw a ball into the air, you can still use Newtonian physics to predict where it will go and when it will land there. It has a very large mass (relatively speaking) and thus a very very short wavelength, and its position is very easy to describe/predict.

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    Deterministic predictions only break down at the level of the very small.

    Dodger (A Brooklyn Dodger fan I hope), sorry, but chaos theory explains why while we’ll never be able to predict the weather more than about 24-48 hours out. It’s not a matter of not being to accumulate all the data–it’s that it’s not physically possible to account for all the variables, regardless of how big your computer is.

    I know this is counter-intuitive and confusing, and I fully admit to being thoroughly confused, but as Nels Bohr, one of the founders of quantum physics, said, “If you think you understand quantum physics, you don’t.”

    Sorry…determinism is dead. Newtonian physics works fine at very large levels because the small variations that throw off the precision aren’t measurable or noticable. The world is very weird–relax and enjoy it.

    In Jamesons Veritas

  • T A Dodger

    Newtonian physics works fine at very large levels because the small variations that throw off the precision aren’t measurable or noticable. The world is very weird–relax and enjoy it.

    Oh, I took quantum mechanics recently… I didn’t enjoy it at all :(

    Newtonian physics works fine at very large levels because the small variations that throw off the precision aren’t measurable or noticable.

    Right, it’s just that “very large” when you’re talking quantum mechanics isn’t what the average person would consider “very large” at all.

  • gonzo marx

    tcx sez…
    *Mr. Schannon, you might want to read up on Einstein. He belived more-or-less what I do.*

    then tcx sez…
    *It was Einstein who said something to the effect of “do the simplest that works, but no simpler.” Well… he was wrong.*

    oh the Irony…

    might i suggest Heisenberg and his Uncertainty Principle? or perhaps you have found Schroedinger’s cat for us?

    your attempt at utilizing a computer analogy as an Analogy for the vastly more complex system involved in self deterministic excercise of choice needs work

    i DO appreciate your sharing your own thought and Opinion here

    i just disagree

    fair enough?

    Excelsior!

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    Gonzo, I’m not sure about the Uncertainty Principle.

    And, don’t tell anyone, but I got so furious at not understanding that stupid Schroedinger’s cat experiment that I broke open the box & let the cat out. He’s a lovely little creature, affectionate & good with mice. I’ll send you pictures.

    And…hasn’t this discussion gone on long enough? We’ve convinced all the religious fanatics that we’re right about everything and they’re wrong about everything. What more is there to do?

    Personally, I’m off to discover my navel.

    In Jamesons Veritas

  • nugget

    oh my god gonzo quoted RUSH! hahahahaha. terrible.

    rush lyrics = retarded.

  • http://www.bhwblog.com bhw

    Silas, a gay man, can only marry a woman

    Wrong again. Silas lives in the fine state of MA, where he is free to marry a man if he so chooses.

    And yet another recent poll in MA shows that the voters do not want a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. So it looks like marriage equalilty in MA may just be here to stay.

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    “Rush = Retarded”

    You guys say that because he reveals to the world how stupid you liberals really are.

    99% of Liberals = White Idiots and dependent Minorities

    1% of Liberals = Brilliant white upper class men who are experts on getting the poor and stupid to vote for them at the same time keeping them poor and stupid so that they will keep voting for them.

  • Bennett

    AG – “Rush = Retarded” was an incorrect quote. Nugget actually wrote “rush lyrics = retarded” referring to the BAND, not the JACKASS.

    Just fyi. Reading sucks, eh?

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    Fine Bhw, Steve S, a gay man, can only marry woman. I, a straight man, can only marry a woman also.

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    Anthony, you really can’t be as uniformed, rigid, thoughtless, predictable, formulaic, programmed, emotional, and boring as you appear. This has to be a put on, right? You’re really not a college student but a brilliant satirist putting us on, right? Right? Please tell me I’m right?

    It would such a waste of protoplasm if I were wrong.

    In Jamesons Veritas

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    Silas lives in the fine state of MA, where he is free to marry a man if he so chooses.

    Yes I do! And next year, yes I will! And let me take it a step further. I am also sanctioned by the Commonwealth to perform the solemnization of marriages. I don’t discriminate, either. I perform marriages for any TWO individuals who wish to enter into the contract of marriage. So sayeth the Shepherd, so Sayeth the Flock.

  • http://sussfr.blogspot.com Matthew T. Sussman

    >> “Rush = Retarded”

    Ha! Ha!, you thought he was talking about the song-and-dance man on the radio.

    It’s an ’80s band. Turn off your MTV and listen to ’em.

  • Guppusmaximus

    Mark,

    I wouldn’t call myself a finatic just well informed…To interpret Newton and all those other physicists(?) I would have to read & understand their work…right? So, to actually interpret God you have to read & understand his work,which I don’t feel you have done. The difference for me is that I believe that God created the Universe, so Newton is just a researcher(Infinite vs. Finite) and I’m not that interested in reading his findings. Him and Einstein would never sway my understanding of the truth and considering that Einstein never completed any formal education(except for High School?) just goes to show that God is very evident in our surroundings….Not man.

    As for science teachers being catholic/christian… Of course they could be but with what quotes I see on BC and other websites time to time, I think it would be a very hard task…. Physical vs. Spiritual.

    Sure, Mark, You will always be able to twist the truth into your own perversion(witty prose)and I am sure you will have plenty of people eating out of your hand but, until you are able to read the bible without being afraid of your own consistancy than I fear we will never see ‘eye to eye’….. Peace

    Rose,
    You are correct… Humans(God’s followers or not) have finite minds and by definition are sinners. No sin is greater which I stated in #102. It will always be a Human error when using the bible to judge…

    Silas,
    I can only feel sorry for what you are doing….
    And, Faith is an acceptance that God will be there for you through Good and Bad, it’s not a society of people looking to hurt you…

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    “uniformed, rigid, thoughtless, predictable, formulaic, programmed, emotional, and boring”

    Give an example of each please. I am confused.

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    I can only feel sorry for what you are doing….
    And, Faith is an acceptance that God will be there for you through Good and Bad, it’s not a society of people looking to hurt you…

    Guppus, feel not sorry for me. I am doing nothing wrong. I never said society itself was out to hurt me. To do so would be to suffer from delusions of grandeur. For the most part I believe society is not as immersed in this fundamentalist mentality. Render unto Caesar what is his, period.

    I am disturbed, however, by this supposition that people of faith can only be members of some Judeo-Christian sect. That is a direct insult to the majority of human beings on this planet who are not Jews or Christians. Buddhists, Hindus, Wiccans, even Confucians have faith. Because they do not subscribe to Christianity doesn’t make their faith any less valuable in the scheme of things. This superiority complex that fundamentalists suffer from is in direct opposition to the humilty and love Christ represents. It’s one thing to talk the talk. We all (even us heathens of no faith, morality and charity) talk a good game. When it comes to walking the walk, however, it’s an entirely different story, isn’t it?

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com Silas Kain

    It would such a waste of protoplasm if I were wrong.

    Consider the protoplasm wasted.

  • Guppusmaximus

    Silas,
    Was it not God who said in the bible that there shall not be any other gods before him?? So, if I am a practicing Christian then it is not a superiority complex that I suffer from but a willingness to serve my creator… It sounds to me that you embrace the basic Christian fundamentals but you don’t follow your own religion as a whole.
    I don’t understand the poor setiment about Fundamentals… To adhere to a certain standard and not stray from an integriful interpretation of the bible that most practicing christians abide to is a stable foundation for faith and
    I don’t feel that you can lump all those religions together because Buddhists are entirely more fundamental than Christians.

    “Render unto Caesar what is his…” Remember, to take scripture out of context is not a proper thing to do and we can only learn from God’s word when we understand it as a whole…

    In my honest opinion, I find that most liberal Christians like to twist God’s word to fit their own lives because they don’t feel a need to follow any kind of authority even God’s authority!! I mean it is God’s word were discussing right? If you don’t accept the Bible as a factual, integral document then maybe you should rethink your belief structure….Just my opinion.

    * I never said that I was a Christian role-model but that still doesn’t make God’s word a sham.

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com Silas Kain

    Was it not God who said in the bible that there shall not be any other gods before him?? So, if I am a practicing Christian…

    In all fairness, most Christians revere Christ and St. Paul far more than the Father, Himself. And in Roman Catholicism, you have the Mary cults, the Parade of Saints, the Immaculate Deception and the 12 Stations of the Cross. Roman Catholicism is as monotheistic as Hinduism.

    …Remember, to take scripture out of context is not a proper thing to do…

    Oh, come on now. Isn’t that what you do as well? If there were literal adherence to the Torah and New Testament, there would be polygamy, slavery, rampant murder in the streets and the reduction of women to indentured servitude. We might as well let the Taliban take over because they are far more adherent to their Koran than fundamental Christians are to the Bible.

    If you don’t accept the Bible as a factual, integral document then maybe you should rethink your belief structure….

    As a Unitarian Universalist I find my belief structure quite sound, thank you. The Bible serves as a guide and Book of Reflection. It is not something to be worshipped and elevated to the status of a God. That is only resreved for the Master in monotheistic belief systems.

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Guppus, you would do well to check out folk like Isaac Newton. He was a theololgian, and most of his work did not have to do with gravity but finding the codes in the Bible that he suspected were there.

    He did not have a computer, so he was unable to pull it off. It took an understanding of quantum mechanics before any serious mathematicians were able to decipher codes in the Torah or in any of the books of the Hebrew Bible.

    Science and religion go hand in hand. They are not apples and oranges. And do remember that Christianity is not the only kid on the block, nor the only measure of morality. Also, I’ll clue you in on something that any Jew learned damned fast in the middle of the last (Christian) century. “Good” and “Christian” are not synonyms.

    While you are right that humans have finite minds, that, ipso facto, does not make them sinners. Humans are finite, limited by the fact that they are born and die, and that they are divided into two sexes. G-d, Who can comprehend all probability, is infinite. Humans have tendencies to good and to evil and commit acts of both. All we can do in life is to strive to do good, and not to do evil.

    Finally, and this is directed to Silas as well as you, without commenting on Hinduism, Confucianism, Shinto or other major belief systems of the world that do not stem from sons of Abraham, so far as Jews are concerned, the 613 commandments of the Torah, including the Holiness Code of Chapter 18 of Leviticus, are incumbent upon Jews (and other children of Israel) only.

    ALL humanity is bound by the Seven commandments of Noah. According to this website, http://www.noahide.com/lawslist.htm, two interpretations of the Noahide Laws are listed. In both, homosexual behavior is prohibited. It is important to bear in mind that the Noahide Laws do not secify punishments for their transgression as does the Holiness Code of the Torah in Chapter 20 of Leviticus. In fact, only now are Noahide Courts being developed for this purpose.

    This is part of the work of the re-established Sanhedrin in Israel.

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    ALL humanity is bound by the Seven commandments of Noah.

    Provided that Noah, did in fact exist.

    I totally understand where you are coming from, Ruvy. However, if two people of the same sex live together in light and love what is the problem? If two people, regardless of sex, live together as one and hurt no one, where is the immorality? If two people, of the same sex, raise children who are good, upstanding citizens that contribute to society, what is the sin?

    “Immoral sexual acts” is quite subjective at best. What is immoral? Anything beyond coitus? If that is the case, then I submit 99.87% of humanity will burn in the bowels of Hell. The other .13% will just be delusional. Rape is immoral. Sex with a minor is immoral. Yet, there are passages in the Torah that pretty much condone the same.

  • Guppusmaximus

    Ruvy,

    You make excellent points….

    I do believe that we are Children of God so we are sinners and that’s why Jesus came was to save us from our sins….But, I understand that Jews(Not Messianic Jews)do not believe in Christ as the son of God so I do see your point. When I say finite minds, I mean that we can never fully understand God’s will so considering we can’t fully grasp his will to use the Word to judge others is an erroneus attempt at being good….
    Ruvy…I will have to finish my thoughts later,but thanks for the input…you seem to be the only one here with any real knowledge of your religion. I feel I still have alot to learn but not from the likes of Silas…

    Silas,
    “most Christians revere Christ and St. Paul far more than the Father, Himself….”

    Well, first off, God and Jesus are one…So, to revere Jesus more than God isn’t being very knowledgeable about Catholicism or Christianity.
    To pray to the important people in Christ’s life for answers surrounding his mystery doesn’t make Christians or Catholics any less connected to the Holy Spirit. If Christ didn’t reveal himself to anyone then we wouldn’t be having this discussion….

    “If there were literal adherence to the Torah and New Testament, there would be polygamy, slavery, rampant murder in the streets and the reduction of women to indentured servitude.”

    Well, that’s twisted!! I never got that translation from reading the New Testament and I have never used scripture out of context…Our discussion is over. You seem jaded and probably the last person that I want to talk to about Christ,Love or any other important topics that have an impact on one’s life. Honestly, it’s people like you who turn their back on a group of people for the mistakes of a few!! I bet you were Catholic at one time….

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    So much to say, so little interest in saying it.

    Guppus, I do appreciate your comment #169. I have read the Bible, I’ve studied eastern religions (actually was a teaching assistant in Indian philosophy in grad school), and have a not very hidden jealousy for those who’ve been able to take the leap of faith.

    My problem is that I can’t buy that the Bible is the word of God. Job, Lot’s wife, the great flood, slaying the first born of all the Egyptians…I’m sorry, if that’s the word of your God, I want nothing to do with Him/Her/It.

    I wish my “witty prose” (you are a kind person after all) was as persuasive as you think. Alas, but it ain’t.

    More to the point, I didn’t understand your comment about read the bible without being afraid of your own consistancy. Not being flip, just really didn’t understand it.

    However, even as an agnostic standing on the cliff afraid to take the leap, I maintain there is no necessary inconsistency between faith and science. It’s only when faith becomes distorted because of human errors that the two conflict.

    Most scientists I know (& my work puts me in contact with a lot) have no problem with reconciling their faith with their science. It’s only those who hide behind the literal interpretation of the Bible who have those problems. So….you’re right, it will be very difficult for us to see “eye to eye,” but despite my often too sarcastic tone, I do respect your position, even if I disagree with it. Pax.

    And Anthony, I’ve violated my own standards too often on this series of posts. You’ll just have to take my word for it re: #170.

    In Jamesons Veritas

  • MTS

    Just wanted to say that if Jesus wasn’t the son of God then doesn’t that make him a liar? Then how “great” would He be? Mark if you dont believe your house is burning or you don’t believe you have cancer and either of these are true does your unbelief make them false?

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Silas, as for Noah actually having existed, I can’t provide proof. But, as for his ark having existed, there is a certain amount of proof that an ancient wooden structure, cracked in two or three places, something that closely resembles the structure described in Genesis, does exist on Ararat. Lately, the Turkish government has refused all access by foreigners to Ararat. The reason is rich. The Quran specifies ANOTHER mountain as the one where Noah’s ark landed and finding an ark on Ararat would disprove the Quran!

    As for the meat of your question, I can only refer you to the end of Chapter 18 of the Holiness Code – “Do not become contaminated through any of these; for through all these the nations that I expel before you became contaminated. The Land became contaminated and I recalled its iniquity upon it; and the land disgorged its inhabitants.”
    (Lev.18:24-25).

    We Jews were expelled twice from our homeland. That is historical record, and prophesied in the Torah. And exile has been a bitch. So, since I don’t want a Divine Hand (or Foot) kicking me or my wife and kids out again, I do what I can to obey the Law as I see it. It is a matter of self interest to me that other Jews living here do not practice homosexuality – or the other goodies prohibited in the Holiness Code – for the same reason.

    I have my own opinions on the matter. If homosexual behavior grossed me out, I wouldn’t hide behind a Bible to register my opinions and rip into those who practiced it. I may not necessarily like it myself, and I don’t, but I do have enough understanding to comprehend that those whose instincts lead them this way are not perverts in their own eyes. Sexual behavior engaged in for exploitation is perversion. When it is honestly engaged in for love, it is not.

    But who am I to question my Creator? He has His own views on the matter, and has explained them rather clearly to us Jews. The details at the website I provided in the previous e-mail on the Noahide laws is an interpretation. I can guess that the seven laws of Noah are interpreted this way so as not to provide a snare to those ultimately charged with enforcing them – we Jews. But in the end that is the best I can do.

    That leaves me with the rather lame seeming statement that “life is not fair”. But it isn’t. One man wins 9,000,000 shekels in the Lotto, thousands go without. A man suffers cardiac arrest and lays crippled in a hospital for a year or more while his wife and daughters suffer without him. His neighbour suffers a light heart attack and sits on a computer arguing philosophy. A poor man in Bangladesh catches images of life of homeless Americans while passing an electronics shop and wishes he could be homeless there rather than in Bangladesh. Where is the fairness in all this?

    G-d tests us in life, and His tests are not fun. From what I read, they haven’t been fun for you, and they haven’t been fun for me. And they sure as heck have not been fun for my neighbour lady and her two daughters whose father lies in Herzog Hospital. But there may be something behind those tests that we dumb mortals do not understand. That is what I tell her when she comes by to visit us, and that is what I tell myself.

  • Guppusmaximus

    Mark,

    Well put…

    But,too many times on BC have people tried to make me out to be stupid because I believe in God. I am just here to speak my mind and have a little debate from time to time. My stance has always been to encourage people to read further about any religion(which you have) and not to judge anyone. Ruvy said it just fine for me in #180. I’m not so much disgusted with the act of Homosexuality as I am with what their community is trying to do to my religion. It clearly states that it is wrong…So is murder,spousal abuse(verbal&physical),getting intoxicated,Adultery,etc..and I can honestly say that I am not exhonerated from being a sinner but I always work on changing my ways, which in that one area(Homosexual)gay men/women don’t feel it’s necessary. I guess I have always been under the impression that if you don’t speak up about the things that are wrong you are letting those things become acceptable….

    “until you are able to read the bible without being afraid of your own consistancy…”
    (Oops, spelling error…)
    Consistency-1b : firmness of constitution or character

    My meaning: If you(not Mark) are unsure about the integrity of your morals or convictions then it could be very scary to finally read the truth(The Word) because it would mean that you(not Mark) would have to change your ways…
    I know for a fact that the Bible can put anyone’s head into a spin that’s why people go to college to study it…It’s a life’s work…

    Well atleast we can agree to disagree….
    Cheers

    I need to take a break…my brain hurts

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    Well, first off, God and Jesus are one…So, to revere Jesus more than God isn’t being very knowledgeable about Catholicism or Christianity.

    Guppusmaximus, not all Christians believe that. Insofar as Catholicism goes, there are times St. Jude and St. Anthony are revered more than Christ Himself. It’s not dogma, but it’s certainly part of the superstitious wing of the Catholic Party.

    Well, that’s twisted!! I never got that translation from reading the New Testament and I have never used scripture out of context…

    I don’t think I’ve taken Scripture out of context. The original Mormons have no problem with polygamy because of Scripture. Then, there is the story of Abraham using Sarah’s handmaiden as a surrogate. How can you say that slavery isn’t condoned? Or that women aren’t reduced to indentured servitude in many instances? The New Testament may, indeed, prove that Christ has fulfilled the Scriptures. Many believe that in Christ the Torah becomes obsolete.

    Our discussion is over. You seem jaded and probably the last person that I want to talk to about Christ,Love or any other important topics that have an impact on one’s life. Honestly, it’s people like you who turn their back on a group of people for the mistakes of a few!! I bet you were Catholic at one time….

    Hah! Jaded? Far from it. Important topics that have impact on one’s life? Turn their back on a few people? Where do you get all this trash? Are you sure that you haven’t discarded the Holy Ghost in favor of some skewed demonic possession? And the Catholic comment was the most un-Christlike thing you could say! Talk about jaded, judgmental and turning one’s back!

    Guppus, if you honestly believe all that you spewed, then you haven’t even come close to understanding anything I have said. Those who bask in the Light of Christ are not always the problem. That rests with those who are in positions of power withing the Christian communities. Religion has been the fuel of more human destruction than any other cause. Christ has been the excuse used for repression, possession and slaughter. Oh, but I forgot, the discussion is closed.

  • http://www.bhwblog.com bhw

    Lately, the Turkish government has refused all access by foreigners to Ararat. The reason is rich. The Quran specifies ANOTHER mountain as the one where Noah’s ark landed and finding an ark on Ararat would disprove the Quran!

    Now there’s some FAITH for you!

  • Guppusmaximus

    Silas,

    You have proved my point… The fact that I mentioned Catholicism when referring to your lack of integrity was my experience with people in my own religion who turned their back on Catholicism because of the mistakes made by man.

    “Those who bask in the Light of Christ are not always the problem. That rests with those who are in positions of power withing the Christian communities.”

    In my opinion, that’s what your’re doing by spreading your twisted interpretation of the Bible… You’re in a position of power, aren’t you?

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    The fact that I mentioned Catholicism when referring to your lack of integrity…

    First off, that is a direct insult in my book. I have never attacked your integrity. So much for your achieving the knowledge that Christ has tried to give you.

    In my opinion, that’s what your’re doing by spreading your twisted interpretation of the Bible…

    I don’t spread my interpretation of the Bible. I debate its aspects and seek to find the truth. Granted the truths that each of us recognize are not necessarily shared. How twisted is it to find the good in mankind? How twisted is it to create opportunity from catastrophy? How twisted is it to seek justice for those who cannot seek it for themselves?

    You’re in a position of power, aren’t you?

    I have no power nor do I choose to acquire it.

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    “G-d…”

    Ruvy, all that talk you hear in Israel about “God” being a cuss word in the States is false. Liberalism hasn’t hit us that hard, yet.

    I did not know about that finding you are talking about on Ararat. That is amazing how remnants would still exist after 6,000 years.

    It is interesting how the Turkish government banned visitors from Ararat though.

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    Liberalism hasn’t hit us that hard, yet.

    Liberalism is NOT equivalent to being an atheist. These conservative poofters who keep trying to charge that religion belongs only to the right are delusional. This diatribe about “God” being a cuss word in the States is complete bullshit. “In God We Trust” is on our currency, but let’s face it, money is a God to many people in this world. Anthony, for you to even throw that kind of stuff out there is indicative of the fact that you have no interest in trying to bridge the gap between the left and right. You consistently find ways to slam liberals. But, do me a favor and keep doing it. The more you do it, the worse case you make for rightists and the quicker we can get this country back to the center once again.

    Perhaps the discovery of an ancient church in Megiddo, Israel will provide some of the answers theologians and scholars seek concerning the ancient church. All the truth will be revealed in due course and when it is I wonder how far off from what we’ve been led to believe the truth shall be.

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    There has never really been a left wing in America. Samuel Gompers ended that when he presided over meetings of the American Federation of Labor and reduced social reform in your country to one word – “more.” Had there been a serious syndicalist movement in your country, efforts would have been made at wealth creation which would provided relatively equal distribution of wealth from the very beginning. This was what the kibbutzim were here before they fell prey to wanting to live high on the hog; this is what Egged, the national bus co-operative, was before efforts were made to privatize it. This is what Bank HaPoalim was before the Histadrut collapsed in the ’80’s. This is what the Histadrut (ORIGINALLY the Federation for Hebrew Labor in the Land of Israel) was before it fell prey to the self destructive policies of the Labor party here. And now, Anthony, comes the ironic coda. Many of these efforts failed because G-d was a cuss word among the secular socialists – not in America – but here in the Land of Israel. And that other god – the god of money – has never been dethroned. The secular socialists here tried to do that – but because they had rejected the Living G-d of Israel, they fell prey to the god of money.

    Evidences of G-d are found all over the States – but in your country, He is relegated to a closet, called a church (or synagogue) and hauled out a few times a year to bless the real activities of your cultural life – self gratification and the worship of that other god – money. And then He gets stuck back in His little closet until needed again. The secular politicians in this country, who slavishly worship your culture as though it were a deity, want to shove this very model down our throats here.

    Capitalism, the preferred system of economics in your nation, is a method of wealth creation that leaves many wounds and gashes in the body politic because it is based entirely on greed. American liberalism is a series of little Band-Aids that attempt to cover the gashes. But little is done to stanch the bleeding and relieve the pain of the body politic. In most instances, capitalism relies on an underpaid and relatively servile underclass to succeed. For a time, America escaped that condition of capitalism as it was the only nation to really escape the horrors of World War II. The laboring class, protected to a degree by Samuel Gomper’s American Federation of Labor and the Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) did well. But eventually the greed factor inherent in capitalism reasserted itself and the laboring class has been reduced to an underclass once again, bit by bit. We are now back to the first three sentences of my comments here.

    If I sound like a leftist, that is because I am one – in the true sense of the word. Not in the pathetic and empty sense of the word used here in Israel, where it means anybody willing to kiss the Arabs’ and Americans’ rear ends; certainly not in the sense used in America. Most Americans wouldn’t recognize leftist politics if it slapped them in the face. And definitely not in the sense used today in Europe – Europeans have made the same deal with the devil that the kibbutzniks made here three decades ago – on a much larger scale. They get to keep a bevy of benefits of that socialist parties got them, live the good life of plenty and prosperity, but import an underpaid foreign workforce to wipe their rear ends for them. The French are beginning to pay the devil’s due in a big way. Only the car dealerships are benefitting from the events of the last several days there.

    In a sentence, I believe that the pursuit of social justice and equity is more important than the creation of individual wealth. I am also a descendent of Abraham and am bound by the same “brit” – covenant – that bound Abraham to the Creator. But the covenant of Abraham and pursuit of social justice are not mutally exclusive – when looking at the 613 commandments of the Torah, it is clear that one is part and parcel of the other.

  • nugget

    Ruvy, one question:

    Why do you believe that the “pursuit of social justice and equity” is thematically an issue of wealth? (and by wealth, I mean material wealth)

  • nugget

    normally I just skim over posts here, but ruvy you’ve prodded my sensibilities on this issue of American capitalism.

    have you ever visited the States? You’re lumping all citizens of America with its oftentimes avaricious and imposing foreign policy. No, capitalism does not just yield greed as you claim. Rather, it allows people to be greedy if they choose. Perhaps it enables stingy fortune-filled fat cats to wallow in their capital, e.g. American politicians, et al. But it simulaneously gives birth to social moral freedom. Morality is not imposed. People have the ability to choose whether or not to redistribute wealth themselves. I can’t walk my dog or drive down the street without seeing some charity org. advertisement, benefit concert ad, goodwill store, Family Dollar (a corporate chain, mind you, that charges practically nothing for detergent, clothes, pots/pans..etc), flea markets, and yard sales. you say there is all greed and no redistribution in America???? I say your friggin’ crazy.

    The real greed you are referring to is reserved for the big cities, the over-lawyered corporations and leech-like lobbyists from both parties spitting numbers back and forth at each other with a puppy-like dependence on number-crunching brokerage firms that pitch tents on wall St. I’ll admit the government is way too much of a business here and everywhere else. But don’t attribute that greed to middle America. Capitol Hill may be big in the rest of the world, but it’s pretty small on its own soil. I assume you’d like to pretend that there is no trickle down effect in the US. Only people that fill their pockets and buy new trousers for more pockets? That’s 20% of Americans. Not most.

    There are churches and synagogues across America in which appointed committees budget the tithes and offerings and publish their deposits, handouts, and balance. I was amazed by the amount of aid sent to hurricane victims in Louisiana, Miss, and Alabama. The numbers are staggering, literally. Only in capitalism would this or could this happen.

    The truth is, capitalism allows the greedy to be greedy and the do-gooders to do good. There are millions of little socialists running around this country, giving. I’m sorry you have to see the asshole of America, dirtying up your country’s leaders and teaching them how to idolize, but there are many (millions) in America who stand firm with Israel until the bitter end, regardless of the ugly dotted lines.

  • RogerMDillon

    Rush “is an ’80s band.”

    That would be correct if you didn’t count their first seven albums. Turn off your iPod and listen to them.

    music snobs = retarded.

    Vote for Anthony

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Nugget, I have a bit more familiarity with the United States than you realize.

    I restate a fact that you can’t argue with. Capitalism is a system for creating wealth that distributes its fruits in a most uneven fashion.

    It is because of the extremely uneven distribution of wealth that you NEED to have charities, benefit concerts, goodwill stores, flea markets, and yard sales, soup kitchens and the like.

    Put simply, if you distribute wealth unevenly in the first place, you need to have some mechanism for its partial redistribution. Otherwise, the poor die off and the wealthy HAVE to actually go to work. Wealthy people would rather redistribute the wealth A BIT. Life is more fun for them that way. If you don’t HAVE to work, working is a lot more fun.

    Basically, American domestic politics is a quibble over how much of a redistribution of wealth there should be. How big is that “BIT” I referred to above?

    I have no problem with any of this. If this is how Americans are content to run or ruin their country, that is their business. They should live and be well, and G-d should prosper their hands to the degree that they merit.

    My problem is that the people who hold themselves out to be my leaders worship America as though it were a deity and have done what they can to impose your flawed economic system on this nation. And it stinks.

    So now we also have charities, benefit concerts, goodwill stores, flea markets, and yard sales, soup kitchens and the like. And something we never had before – illegitimacy on a mass scale, homeless people and youth violence.

    The big difference between this nation and yours is that your nation got rich off of war production during WWII and being the pre-eminent economic power immediately afterwards. So when the normal cycle of repressing the laboring class inherent in capitalism resumed, it was not felt unti the mid 1970’s. I refer you to a song of the era – “Allentown”.

    Here, it was felt almost immediately. The Israeli pound, renamed the shekel, dropped in value until prices were being changed twice daily here in markets. The “new” Israeli shekel was created by lopping three zeroes off the old. At that time, the ’90’s, it was worth about $.60 of your dollar. Now it is worth about $.225 of your dollar.

    As if that weren’t bad enough, your culture has been imported as well here. Fast food, shopping malls, an excess of cars, air pollution and – to bring us back to the topic at hand – a celebration of homosexual behavior.

  • ad mutandi

    First your opinion was very well stated and in the words of Puff Daddy, “we feel you.”

    Second, I’d like to tell you a little story about a music director that worked for a church. He was a good Christian by mediocre standards until something deeply philosophical happened to him: he cheated on his wife. The affair was the tinder of church conversation for weeks, so much so the priest actually got the cajones to talk to the music director about the affair. But the director wouldn’t have it, it was “love.” The masque of adultery would not be budged from the director’s smug face, wife and church be damned. Everyone at church still treated the dirtbag nicely, despite of the horror he caused his family and community. But screw them. Finally the director ran away with his young hot bride to be accepted elsewhere in a more enlightened community.

    The moral of the story is what did you expect? It makes me think of when Bill Murray tried to sue his way into the NBA.

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    Ruvy, I’m trying very hard to believe that you are not a bigot but speak from the point of your faith. It gets more difficult with every post. Your critique of America’s lifestyle and its impact on Israel leaves me troubled. Gays were prevalent in the Middle East long before Western influence came in the picture. Lately, I am feeling that all I need do is change a handful of words in several of your posts and come out sounding like a member of the Third Reich. As I said, this troubles me. Are you that filled with hate?

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Silas,

    I’m not filled with hate. My frustrations (which your are picking up) have nothing to do with your behavior or that of gays in America. Whatever my opinions of it, it’s your business. You have suffered in an intolerant society and figured out an intelligent way to cope.

    You’ll hear no criticism of that from me. The day may come in the future when you may have to square up with the Seven Laws of Noah and the Big Guy Upstairs – but that will be, as we say in Hebrew, on your bill. When I face the Big Guy Upstairs, my sins will be on my bill. Like most people, I doubt that I’ll be able to square accounts.

    As you correctly point out, homosexuals were around long before the west meant anything to anybody. There has never been any question of ‘beating up fags’ in the army here. Nor has there ever been discrimination based on sexual orientation in the army. I mention this because the army is the basis of civil society here, providing friendships and lifelong ties. The army is the meat grinder that takes Russians, Yemenis, Poles, Iraqis, Moroccans, Kurds, Frenchmen, Romanians, Algerians, Tunisians and the occasional American and Canadian and turns them into Israelis.

    The guy who is sucking sand next to you with the Galil, or the M16, is the fellow you rely on to get you through the day. What he does with his private life is his own damned business.

    For the most part, that is how things have gone on here.

    But we’ll create a thought experiment so you understand completely what I’m talking about and exactly where I’m coming from. Let’s say we have a small religious community of M’mutzá Yisrael near Modi’in. Everybody who lives there is an observant Jew. This is a normal phenomenon here, by the way, to have whole communities to be observant. In 1980, Avinoam (Noam) Peleg moves into town from Kiryat Shmoneh. In 1982, Ya’acov (Kobi) Shvartz immigrates from the Netherlands. They are both homosexuals, but folks don’t know that. After the local busy bodies try to set them up with available girls for a while and fail, they give up. Especially after Noam and Kobi move into an apartment together, which they buy as shutafím (partners). Noam and Kobi go to shul together each morning before they go to work. It doesn’t take long before their neighbors Nissim and Ruti, and most of the rest of the community, figure out the nature of their relationship. But nobody says anything. What goes on behind closed doors is not their business. As a rule, Nissim walks with Kobi and Noam to shul every morning. When Nissim’s boys are old enough, they join Nissim, Kobi and Noam going to shul together on the Sabbath. They are good friends and neighbors, but Noam and Kobi never display outward signs of their relationship in public.

    This continues for 17 years or so. By now, Noam is going bald, Kobi and Nissim are getting grey hair, and Kobi and Noam go to the induction ceremony for Nissim and Ruti’s oldest son Yossi, who is 18.

    One day in 1999, Nissim and Ruti drive to Tel Aviv to buy some restaurant equipment for their coffee shop. They get near the centre of town and traffic is held up, the roads are closed, and Nissim smacks his head in annoyance. “I just remembered,” he says, “the (gay) Pride Parade is today.” So, the two of them find a place to park the car, call up their oldest daughter, who is managing the shop in their absence, and tell her to hold the fort. It’s gonna be a while.

    Ruti and Nissim have heard of these parades, imports from America, but they’ve never seen one. They figure that they’ll watch for a few minutes and then go buy some halvah, a treat for their kids and for Noam and Kobi.

    Who do they see at the parade, marching, kissing and holding hands? Their neighbors. That night, Nissim goes to the rabbi to have a talk. He’s very disturbed.

    The next morning, Nissim does not walk with Kobi and Noam to shul. When Kobi and Noam get to shul, nobody will sit next to them. Nobody in the community will talk to them. What happened? Why the sudden shunning treatment?

    Everybody, including Kobi and Noam, knew the Holiness Code and understood it. They all knew the punishment for it – stoning – something that could not be done, under the civil laws of the State. But they all knew something else. In order to point the finger at someone, there had to be witnesses. For all the time that Noam and Kobi had lived together, there were no witnesses to their behavior. So, Kobi and Noam were viewed as honest people who went to the reserves each year, guys who went to shul, contributed to charity, paid their taxes, etc. Folks with moral fiber. They were good residents of M’mutzá Yisrael, Yisraelím m’mutza’ím (average Israelis).

    Until they went to the Pride Parade. THEY FLAUNTED THEIR BEHAVIOR. THEY CELEBRATED AN ABOMINATION IN PUBLIC! THIS was what was intolerable to their neighbors, who just happened to be on hand that day. They can’t stone Noam and Kobi, but they can let them know what they think of flaunting an abomination in public.

    G-d created the universe, along with laws of evolution and genetics, which dictate that a percentage of humans and animals will have instincts towards homosexual behavior. Since G-d can contemplate all possibility, G-d probably foresaw this and foresaw that a large percentage of the humans who had instincts towards homosexual behavior would give in to those instincts. For reasons unknown to me, G-d viewed homosexual behavior as an abomination. But, in order to provide for some kind of out for this (and other sins requiring a death penalty) G-d insisted that there be two witnesses to a crime. Thus, I can deduce that “flaunting” this behavior was the sin that the previous inhabitants of the land had been kicked out for. I too, have trouble with the idea that G-d would condemn someone who does what is instinctual to him. As I’ve said earlier, the only reason I can come up that makes sense is that we are tested – and that some tests are a lot more severe than others.

    Now let’s go back to what I posted. The gay pride parades are imports from America which flaunt and celebrate homosexual behavior. That may or may not damage you in the States, but it rflaunting and celebrating homosexual behavior definitely damages us here. That is the point of that quote at the end of the Holiness Code

    I already pointed out that my selfish reasons for not wanting homosexual behavior HERE is that I don’t want that Divine Foot kicking us out yet again. Exile is a bitch.

    But lots of secular Israelis don’t care about such things. They buy the American ideas of self indulgence and seek to indulge themselves, Israel be damned. And THAT IS THE POINT. Americans indulge themselves. The bulwark of this country is “kol Yisraél arevím zeh el zeh” – all Israel is responsible for one another.

    When we Jews abandon that concept – and our government pushes us closer towards doing that daily – we are doomed. In order to do the task that G-d has for us, we can’t afford American self-indulgence.

  • gonzo marx

    oh my stars and garters!!

    so much to deal with, so short a lunch break…

    Ruvy…as for your Story…i just can’t help but think that the couple you mentioned are being shafted even worse than openly gay couples here in the US

    what changed about them? they were still the good neighbors that went to schul, and continued their observances of social custom…all that changed is that they were open about part of who they are…

    but it seems to all come down to that whole Leviticus thing, doesn’t it?

    now, correct me if i am wrong here, but it is my Understanding that over the last few hundred years the rabbinical class has codified and modified much of the Law as set down in Leviticus…no more slavery for instance…no “selling” of daughters to pay off a debt ( can you imagine somebody trying to sell off an Israeli girl after her 2 year army stint!!! good luck)…as you mentioned yourself..no more “stoning” to death of adulterers, misbehaving children or the like…

    even some changes in dietary laws…

    now, a large part of this, again as i understand it from american rabbi(s?) that i have met, are that as times have changed, so has Understanding of much in the Torah…much of this based on the concept that many of the works in the Torah are works of Men that were “inspired”…rather than the direct contact that Abraham, Moses and some others were supposed ot have experienced…and thus, some Words are taken more strictly than others…i also understand that this is a big a bone of contention among sects of Jews as other picadillos are among the “christian” sects, or even the sunni/shi’ia schism for muslims

    to my thinking, homosexuality falls under the category of things that were important in the distant Past…but not as much now

    then, you wanted all the people you could possibly have in your Tribe( whomever you were)…so gay men, who did not produce children, were frowned upon for not bringing more people into the Tribe (similar could be said about the whole catholic/masturbation thing of “wasting seed”)…it made sense then…like the prohibitions against shellfish or pork…

    now, in these times when we know about trichinosis (the bug in pork that killed folks) and the world’s population exceeds 6 billion…finding that 10% of humans are attracted to same sex partners (not to mention the unknown number of bisexual persons) doesn’t seem to be a threat to the numbers of the human “tribe”

    i Respect your Right to follow your Faith, and even envy your certitude to some degree…however, i must always side with the Right of the Individual to pursue their Happiness as long as it causes no harm to others…

    i still have not yet been shown how folks having whatever kind of Relationship they like harms anyone else ( we are talking consenting adults here..ok?) and yet it is very obvious , even from Ruvy’s story…how prejudice and bigotry can hurt good people who have done no Harm….just because they are “different”

    your mileage may vary

    Excelsior!

  • nugget

    “i must always side with the Right of the Individual to pursue their Happiness as long as it causes no harm to others…”

    no harm to others? what exactly does that mean? Who will decide what harm is or is not? I’d like to hear you defend that position, gonzo.

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    “i must always side with the Right of the Individual to pursue their Happiness as long as it causes no harm to others…”

    no harm to others? what exactly does that mean? Who will decide what harm is or is not? I’d like to hear you defend that position, gonzo.

    The Royal Wastral, Gonzo, certainly doesn’t need me to defend him, nugget, and you do raise an important point, but the burden lies equally on you as well.

    If your ears turn red & your stomach churns at the thought of two guys or gals “doin’ in” in the privacy of their own bedroom…or…shudder… walking down the street holding hands, that’s your problem. Why? They ain’t harming you–you are. It’s your idiosyncratic reaction to what should be considered normal behavior.

    If those two guys sneak into your son’s room late at night and start performing satanic rituals to turn him gay…then it’s their problem & you have a right ot be, shall we say, pissed off.

    The Constitution and Bill of Rights lays out the guidelines for correct and incorrect behavior in the United States–NOT THE BIBLE. (Sorry for shouting.) If something offends your religious sensibilities but is a protected right under the laws of the land, sorry, no harm, no foul.

    If a bunch of hypocritical, myopic, religious nutcases try to impose their views through bad laws, then it’s up to the rest of us to fight those laws through the process. Likewise, if a bunch of unwashed, smelly, liberal, pinko, creeps get a bad law passed, it’s up to you to fight it through the process. (Although, for the life of me, I couldn’t imagine what kind of bad law we’d pass…LOL).

    So…we await Senor Gonzo’s response.

    In Jamesons Veritas

  • gonzo marx

    what Mark said…

    but , to clarify in my own Words

    for the legal definition of “harm” we go to the Rule of Law..it is inherent in said Rule..under our Constitution…to delineate what causes “harm”

    and our Liberty, under said Constitution, protects the Individual AGAINST any “tyranny of the majority” under EXACTLY the kinds of circumstances we are talking about…

    what adults do consensually, is NO business of ANYNE else, as long as it does no legally defined “harm” to any other Individual…

    and Mark nails it…just because YOU don’t “like” any kind of behavior, does NOT mean you are “harmed”…by very legal definitions

    when in Doubt, read your Constitution and Bill of Rights…remember the preamble bit, under “pursuit of Happiness”

    nuff said?

    Excelsior!

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    Ah, the glorious “tyranny of the majority,” which so few seem to appreciate as one of the most powerful (kaboom) underpinings of our entire system.

    The USofA, as you all know, is not a democracy, but a republic…primarily because the founding wise guys didn’t trust the people to withstand the ability of demigogues to distort their minds and come up with all sorts of moronic laws–such as the Blue Laws still hiding amidst legal tomes in many New England states.

    Majority doesn’t rule here, thankfully. Anyone, at any time, can be part of a minority that a majority thinks should be tarred, feathered, drawn, quartererd, and otherwise abused…or worse, be made to undergo intrusive therapy and counseling to relieve them of their Satanic homosexual ways.

    Remember Tommy Jones in “Men in Black,” (and I paraphrase): “A person is smart. People are stupid, ignorant, quick to panic, and without any social or moral justication for life….” (O.k., I added that last part.)

    And that’s the truth.

    In Jamesons Veritas

  • http://www.myspace.com/skunkybeer Cassie

    And get this, son:

    And ye shall eat the flesh of your sons, and the flesh of your daughters shall ye eat.–Leviticus 26:29

    Leviticus say, “Can’t be gay, but you CAN eat your children.”

    That is one of my favorite quotes from the Bible, another one is:

    Was God being unfair? Of course not! For God said to Moses:
    “I shall show compassion to anyone I choose and I shall show mercy to anyone I choose.” — Romans 14:15 (Not sure if I got it word for word, but that is what it said.)

    But, you see, the people who are against homosexuality WILL go to heaven. Because they believe Jesus died for their sins, and that’s all you need to believe. Because “your good deeds don’t get you to heaven.” So many Christians have said that so many times to me, but I haven’t gotten around to looking in the Bible to see if that is true. Jefferey Dahmer turned to God in jail and he “went to heaven.” And look at how many people he hurt and killed…. I used to be a Christian, but lost my faith a LONG time ago because Ir ead the whole Bible.

    Bible = fucked.

  • http://someone someone

    Ummmmm….

    Leviticus isn’t saying that you CAN eat your children…

    God is speaking to Moses to let him know how he feels about those who do not follow the commandments:

    “But if in spite of this you will not listen to me, but walk contrary to me, then I will walk contrary to you in fury, and I myself will disciple you sevenfold for your sins. You shall eat the flesh of your sons, and you shall eat the flesh of your daughters.”
    (Lev 26: 27-29)

    Not that that’s much better, but the point is… In Jesus, we see God’s compassion, and through the experiences of those from the Old Testament, we see that God is God, He does what He wants and gets pissed too.

    I suppose since you’ve read the whole bible, you probably already knew that.

    I wish I had answers for how you’ve been hurt, Cassie.

    I’m sure Ruvy, can correct my Leviticus quote since he’s reading it in Hebrew.

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Someone writes,

    G-d is speaking to Moses to let him know how he feels about those who do not follow the commandments:

    “But if in spite of this you will not listen to me, but walk contrary to me, then I will walk contrary to you in fury, and I myself will discipline you sevenfold for your sins. You shall eat the flesh of your sons, and you shall eat the flesh of your daughters.”
    (Lev 26: 27-29)

    There isn’t much to correct here. I might translate the Hebrew to the English a bit differently from you, but since it is the Hebrew that is authoritative, it doesn’t really matter.

    You’ve gotten the point of the text across.

    In fact, what you read above comes true in the Book of Lamentations, which is Jeremiah’s eyewitness account and dirge about the destruction by the Babylonians of his home city.

    The Book of Leviticus is the Holiness Code for the Children of Israel, and the punishment for the continued violations of that code is what was warned about in Leviticus 26 – misquoted by Cassie in May and corrected by a very smart someone today.

    And it happened. I might add that many Jews in the death camps 62-64 years ago had to resort to cannibalism to survive also.

    One would think that the leaders of this country would have learned and had the sense to move on and make sure that this country relied on G-d and not America for its aid – that is how you prevent awful prophecies from coming about – but you can read the headlines for yourselves.

  • http://NBC Star Light

    A sinner comes to church to repent not practice sin.