About the whole acting upon it is a sin thing; I don't buy it.
If God wanted it to be a sin, why wasn't it included in the commandments?
I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess you haven't actually read the book.
I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess you haven't actually read the book.About the whole acting upon it is a sin thing; I don't buy it.
If God wanted it to be a sin, why wasn't it included in the commandments?
I have; I couldn't ungergone Confirmation without it.
I'd like to think that I'm a bit more open minded and true to myself that other people who are either religious posers or actually closed minded Catholics/Christians.
I have; I couldn't ungergone Confirmation without it.I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess you haven't actually read the book.About the whole acting upon it is a sin thing; I don't buy it.
If God wanted it to be a sin, why wasn't it included in the commandments?
Huh. Normally I only hear the "the Ten Commandments are the be-all-end-all" from people who haven't actually read it. Apologies if that wasn't what you meant to imply, but wording it the way you did heavily suggests such.
I would go link down the various scriptures where the subject is mentioned, but that's derailing the topic.
Also, I don't know what Confirmation is. It's not mentioned in the Bible anywhere.
Also, I don't know what Confirmation is. It's not mentioned in the Bible anywhere.
This should help.
Also, I don't know what Confirmation is. It's not mentioned in the Bible anywhere.This should help.
Ah. Yeah that's not anything I've ever seen done. (That's actually pretty common with me, if it's tradition rather than command/example out of the text, I'm likely not familiar with it and don't practice it.)
Alrighty folks, I'll get out of your hair and end this less-than-mandatory threadjack. [/derail]
So if I am understanding you correctly a person, who happens to be gay, has no responsibility for their actions? But a fat person always does?No, that's far more extreme and black and white, I did qualify it with most, and more. Not entire. But, if your born overweight, you do have to try and keep healthy, and most overweight people are not naturally so, nor are they among the subset of the population who can't attain a healthy weight. If your gay, your not responsible, for being gay. Just like a black person shouln't be held accountable for thier choice to be black, or tall person for their choice to be tall. It's not a choice.
Most people don't choose to be fat, but it's something you can change, that's detrimental to your health and well-being. So their really not comparative issues, notice I say healthy weight above. I am not pro-skinny, or crach dieting, or weight-loss for superficial reasons done in harmful ways. I am however, pro-health. An adult does have a certain responsibility for their own body. Not that you should be fired for having a few extra pounds if it doesn't interfere with your job, just that weight is not at all in the same ballpark as race, or height or sexuality.
I wish I could have gotten back to this sooner. I was not trying to cause a flame war here people. I wanted clarification.
Thank you for your response, sorry if mine ended up as overly aggressive. I have seen to my mind too many justifications for various things that end up in the same response. I was born that way/ The devil made me do it. I do not buy either one. Yes some people have leanings one way or the other, I will not tell them they should or should not do anything or not. I have enough trouble making my own choices to have to make choices for someone else. We all have to take personal responsibility for our choices and our own actions.
I didn't think you were trying to be provocative, its just important to me that I wasn't coming across in a very balck and white way, its complex and I accept that.
I wouldn't justify anything, including being fat for gay people more than fat people, or straight people, or any other adult. My point was simply that being gay is not your choice, acting responsiply on adult sexual needs is in no way wrong, and in no way more or less moral or ethical than straight sex. If everyone thought that, you wouldn't need affirmative action, because it wouldn't be a problem. The real sign that we've moved on, will be when people can't understand why its an issue, when the drama and controversy seems pointless and ridiculous. A bully doesn't care if you hate him, but find him proposterously silly, and suddenly he's on uneasy footing.
|
About the whole acting upon it is a sin thing; I don't buy it.
If God wanted it to be a sin, why wasn't it included in the commandments?
Because a bunch of Wandering post-egyptian ex slaves drunk on rotten goatmilk didnt consider it a sin...like paedophilia. If it aint on the list, Mosus likely indulged himself in the lifestyle of cultleader-with immediat family armed with swords to keep the objectors in line.
Because a bunch of Wandering post-egyptian ex slaves drunk on rotten goatmilk didnt consider it a sin...like paedophilia. If it aint on the list, Mosus likely indulged himself in the lifestyle of cultleader-with immediat family armed with swords to keep the objectors in line.About the whole acting upon it is a sin thing; I don't buy it.
If God wanted it to be a sin, why wasn't it included in the commandments?
Wasn't gonna derail, but since you did bring it up.... It IS on the list. Twice.
|
|
Wasn't gonna derail, but since you did bring it up.... It IS on the list. Twice.Because a bunch of Wandering post-egyptian ex slaves drunk on rotten goatmilk didnt consider it a sin...like paedophilia. If it aint on the list, Mosus likely indulged himself in the lifestyle of cultleader-with immediat family armed with swords to keep the objectors in line.About the whole acting upon it is a sin thing; I don't buy it.
If God wanted it to be a sin, why wasn't it included in the commandments?
gNinja'd
Let's kill all the cheaters too.
…and parent cursers.
If you're Jewish, yes, that would be expected. As Leviticus - along with the rest of the OT - is the rule-of-law for Jews. And as YD was talking about Moses and the Jews wandering about in the wilderness, that would be their laws and therefore yes, that would have been the proper punishment.
Never did I say WE should do that, as I don't think anyone here is a practicing Jew. I ask politely that you not use "let's do this" style comments to imply I suggested such.
And hopefully that clears up that, so this derail can once more be ended.
It IS on the list. Twice.
You bringing up Leviticus in general was bad form, though. You say you accept that Christ's redemption of man represents a new covenant with God that supercedes the Old Testament rules, in which case you can go ahead and shrimp. Fine. But you can't have it both ways -- citing Leviticus to condemn gays as sinners (which you seemed to be doing), but ignoring the old Law in its entirety yourself (which you later said you were doing).
EDIT: Unless your point in bringing it up was specifically in regards to Moses, in which case you're right -- but that distinction wasn't at all clear from your post.
Never did I say WE should do that, as I don't think anyone here is a practicing Jew.
I apologize for implying you were supporting the obvious hypocrisy of using Levitical law.
EDIT: Unless your point in bringing it up was specifically in regards to Moses, in which case you're right -- but that distinction wasn't at all clear from your post.
I should probably have cleared that up, yes, but I thought it was fairly obvious since I quoted YD who mentioned Moses by name.
(If I'd wanted to comment on NT law on the subject, I would have quoted Romans anyway.)
|
|
EDIT: Unless your point in bringing it up was specifically in regards to Moses, in which case you're right -- but that distinction wasn't at all clear from your post.I should probably have cleared that up, yes, but I thought it was fairly obvious since I quoted YD who mentioned Moses by name.
(If I'd wanted to comment on NT law on the subject, I would have quoted Romans anyway.)
Well to be honest with the way YD posts it is hard to make any sense of anything he says 99.99% of the time.
(If I'd wanted to comment on NT law on the subject, I would have quoted Romans anyway.)
Yeah, I was wondering about that omission -- now I get it. Thanks.
Well to be honest with the way YD posts it is hard to make any sense of anything he says 99.99% of the time.
That's why we love him. Making sense is for other people. He's... well, he's the Dingo. 'Nuff said.
Well to be honest with the way YD posts it is hard to make any sense of anything he says 99.99% of the time.That's why we love him. Making sense is for other people. He's... well, he's the Dingo. 'Nuff said.
This is very true.
(If I'd wanted to comment on NT law on the subject, I would have quoted Romans anyway.)Yeah, I was wondering about that omission -- now I get it. Thanks.
No worries. I'm not crazy enough to start that firefight and this isn't the right thread for it anyway... we've derailed this far enough as it is.
[/hijack]
Well to be honest with the way YD posts it is hard to make any sense of anything he says 99.99% of the time.
If YD is from the Northern Territory (Sort of a State of Australia but not with full statehood). He could be whacked out on anything :-) those guys lick cane toad for highs. He strikes me as a very odd "intelligence" (referencing his string theory, theories).
If YD is from the Northern Territory (Sort of a State of Australia but not with full statehood). He could be whacked out on anything :-) those guys lick cane toad for highs. He strikes me as a very odd "intelligence" (referencing his string theory, theories).
Well to be honest with the way YD posts it is hard to make any sense of anything he says 99.99% of the time.
I thought he was British, my mistake.
I thought he was British, my mistake.If YD is from the Northern Territory (Sort of a State of Australia but not with full statehood). He could be whacked out on anything :-) those guys lick cane toad for highs. He strikes me as a very odd "intelligence" (referencing his string theory, theories).
Well to be honest with the way YD posts it is hard to make any sense of anything he says 99.99% of the time.
He bangs on a bit about Canada so I am not 100% sure where he is from.
If you're Jewish, yes, that would be expected. As Leviticus - along with the rest of the OT - is the rule-of-law for Jews. And as YD was talking about Moses and the Jews wandering about in the wilderness, that would be their laws and therefore yes, that would have been the proper punishment.
Never did I say WE should do that, as I don't think anyone here is a practicing Jew. I ask politely that you not use "let's do this" style comments to imply I suggested such.
And hopefully that clears up that, so this derail can once more be ended.
I'm a practicing Jew, but many of those laws (and especially the punishments) are considered out of date now. It's crazy, but we don't stone unruly children either. Almost as if the religion evolved to accommodate human learning.
You'll notice that only male on male homosexuality was forbidden. If you have seven wives, your G-D needs to be tolerant of some girl on girl action, you know?
Our cultures evolve. Polygamy was ok in ancient Israel, not ok in most countries today. Cultural evolution is a good thing, and the more enlightened we become, the better people we can be. Judaism arose in a climate very hostile to homosexuals, and it reflects that hostility. It also arose in a climate not friendly to women's rights and carried very harsh, very permanent punishments for a ton of things. That worked for them back then. It doesn't work for us today, and so either the law or the interpretation of the law has to change. I'm ok with not stoning unruly brats. And I don't think those who wear garments of mixed threads, those who cut their beards or those who eat pork are going to forfeit eternity either. Even if I avoid the bacon.
Our cultures evolve.
If I understand them correctly, most Christian fundamentalists believe that the Fall introduced steady decay into the world, so that all human-driven change is inherently in the "wrong direction." With this understanding, a culture doesn't evolve, it "goes to Hell in a handbasket," and therefore we need to "return to out traditional values." By that standpoint, one very stubbornly adheres to a literal reading of Scripture, especially the New Testament -- and never, ever admits that some of the things in there might be better off modified.
I'm not saying that anyone on this thread is of that stripe (although some are closer than others) -- only that there are an awful lot of them around (my workplace is overrun), and that they are usually quite clear that in condemning homosexuals and denying them equal rights, they are "doing God's work" and "saving the fabric of our nation."
NOTE: All those quotation marks are for a reason: they're quotes from various people I've talked with about this stuff.
Even if I avoid the bacon.
I just resisted the urge to make a jab here. Mostly because I myself am a vegetarian. :D
Thats Just because you haven't been able to kill a single gnome. Your just a bad kobold.I just resisted the urge to make a jab here. Mostly because I myself am a vegetarian. :DEven if I avoid the bacon.
Yez, terrible. We are very dizzapointed.
EDIT: We're really off topic, so I'm relocating this to the appropriate thread, Kirth/Kain.
I'm not saying that anyone on this thread is of that stripe (although some are closer than others) -- only that there are an awful lot of them around (my workplace is overrun), and that they are usually quite clear that in condemning homosexuals and denying them equal rights, they are "doing God's work" and "saving the fabric of our nation."
It's a grown-up nation. It can spare some fabric and show a little more skin. Doesn't need a burqa.
|
|
Wasn't gonna derail, but since you did bring it up.... It IS on the list. Twice.Because a bunch of Wandering post-egyptian ex slaves drunk on rotten goatmilk didnt consider it a sin...like paedophilia. If it aint on the list, Mosus likely indulged himself in the lifestyle of cultleader-with immediat family armed with swords to keep the objectors in line.About the whole acting upon it is a sin thing; I don't buy it.
If God wanted it to be a sin, why wasn't it included in the commandments?
But they aint real bibles...it aint on the Collection of Ten Commandments...:/
But they aint real bibles...it aint on the Collection of Ten Commandments...:/Wasn't gonna derail, but since you did bring it up.... It IS on the list. Twice.Because a bunch of Wandering post-egyptian ex slaves drunk on rotten goatmilk didnt consider it a sin...like paedophilia. If it aint on the list, Mosus likely indulged himself in the lifestyle of cultleader-with immediat family armed with swords to keep the objectors in line.About the whole acting upon it is a sin thing; I don't buy it.
If God wanted it to be a sin, why wasn't it included in the commandments?
And as we've already said, the Ten Commandments is not the be-all-end-all of Jewish law ;) There's more to it.
Please relocate to the appropriate thread. :)
|
|
But they aint real bibles...it aint on the Collection of Ten Commandments...:/Wasn't gonna derail, but since you did bring it up.... It IS on the list. Twice.Because a bunch of Wandering post-egyptian ex slaves drunk on rotten goatmilk didnt consider it a sin...like paedophilia. If it aint on the list, Mosus likely indulged himself in the lifestyle of cultleader-with immediat family armed with swords to keep the objectors in line.About the whole acting upon it is a sin thing; I don't buy it.
If God wanted it to be a sin, why wasn't it included in the commandments?
And as we've already said, the Ten Commandments is not the be-all-end-all of Jewish law ;) There's more to it.
Please relocate to the appropriate thread. :)
YOu're right...we should realy get back to the criticism of life choices-as unacceptable as they may be to the Majority (Suddenly Democracy is only palatable when there isnt an angry mob...Huh?).
I'm not so sure about the critisism aspect YD. I for one have enjoyed the topic even when it was derailed.
The fact that we as adults are able to talk about homosexuality at all in an enviroment that promotes exchange of ideas is a huge victory from the shame and embaresment of just a few decades ago.
As I've posted earlier the youth of today are going to grow up and wonder what all the fuss was about and I find that to be a very good thing.
|
|
I'm not so sure about the critisism aspect YD. I for one have enjoyed the topic even when it was derailed.
The fact that we as adults are able to talk about homosexuality at all in an enviroment that promotes exchange of ideas is a huge victory from the shame and embaresment of just a few decades ago.
As I've posted earlier the youth of today are going to grow up and wonder what all the fuss was about and I find that to be a very good thing.
On the contrary...there will always be new bigotries. Now that they have backed up the whole African Humans v. Non African Part neanderthal Human with science - it will become the big stick that fuels a new Era of Racism. I'm Calling it NEORACISM: A Genetically proven Difference between Africans and Non-African (or you can call it primary nexus human v. multi-vector exodus hominid).
|
|
On the contrary...there will always be new bigotries. Now that they have backed up the whole African Humans v. Non African Part neanderthal Human with science - it will become the big stick that fuels a new Era of Racism. I'm Calling it NEORACISM: A Genetically proven Difference between Africans and Non-African (or you can call it primary nexus human v. multi-vector exodus hominid).I'm not so sure about the critisism aspect YD. I for one have enjoyed the topic even when it was derailed.
The fact that we as adults are able to talk about homosexuality at all in an enviroment that promotes exchange of ideas is a huge victory from the shame and embaresment of just a few decades ago.
As I've posted earlier the youth of today are going to grow up and wonder what all the fuss was about and I find that to be a very good thing.
Whatchu talken' about Willis?!?!
On the contrary...there will always be new bigotries. Now that they have backed up the whole African Humans v. Non African Part neanderthal Human with science - it will become the big stick that fuels a new Era of Racism. I'm Calling it NEORACISM: A Genetically proven Difference between Africans and Non-African (or you can call it primary nexus human v. multi-vector exodus hominid).I'm not so sure about the critisism aspect YD. I for one have enjoyed the topic even when it was derailed.
The fact that we as adults are able to talk about homosexuality at all in an enviroment that promotes exchange of ideas is a huge victory from the shame and embaresment of just a few decades ago.
As I've posted earlier the youth of today are going to grow up and wonder what all the fuss was about and I find that to be a very good thing.
Are you sure this is the case? Where did your read or see this, I'm fairly damned sure that neanderthals could not interbreed with homo sapiens any more than could other species, they were too genetically different. If you can show me to a paper or article from a reliable source with genuine counter evidence, I'd be very interested.
|
|
Are you sure this is the case? Where did your read or see this, I'm fairly damned sure that neanderthals could not interbreed with homo sapiens any more than could other species, they were too genetically different. If you can show me to a paper or article from a reliable source with genuine counter evidence, I'd be very interested.On the contrary...there will always be new bigotries. Now that they have backed up the whole African Humans v. Non African Part neanderthal Human with science - it will become the big stick that fuels a new Era of Racism. I'm Calling it NEORACISM: A Genetically proven Difference between Africans and Non-African (or you can call it primary nexus human v. multi-vector exodus hominid).I'm not so sure about the critisism aspect YD. I for one have enjoyed the topic even when it was derailed.
The fact that we as adults are able to talk about homosexuality at all in an enviroment that promotes exchange of ideas is a huge victory from the shame and embaresment of just a few decades ago.
As I've posted earlier the youth of today are going to grow up and wonder what all the fuss was about and I find that to be a very good thing.
There have been several recently I shall endeavor to find the links for you.
There have been several recently I shall endeavor to find the links for you.
I found a few, very interesting.
On the contrary...there will always be new bigotries...
I think the next big Racism will be the Transhumanist teens/twenty-somethings who get bio/cyber implants and are connected 24/7 to the Web 3.0 VS. Us old-fogies who remain unplugged/unmodified and use external devices to communicate non-locally.
I don't need my internet dumbed down!
|
|
On the contrary...there will always be new bigotries...I think the next big Racism will be the Transhumanist teens/twenty-somethings who get bio/cyber implants and are connected 24/7 to the Web 3.0 VS. Us old-fogies who remain unplugged/unmodified and use external devices to communicate non-locally.
Cyberpunk FTW
I don't need my internet dumbed down!
Worse, the youngsters can't imagine a classless RPG... or even a RPG that isn't an CRPG!
"Get off my graph-paper map, you whippersnappers!"
I don't need my internet dumbed down!Worse, the youngsters can't imagine a classless RPG... or even a RPG that isn't an CRPG!
"Get off my graph-paper map, you whippersnappers!"
+1
+1+2
Wait! This thread is starting to look like maths.
Wait! This thread is starting to look like maths.+1+2
HeroLab is already working on an update.
Whatchu talken' about Willis?!?!
THIS.