Who are we to judge homosexuality/others?

[neo-x]

We don't categorize Hetrosexuality as a choice do we?

Heterosexuality is a natural process, for which we have organs to prove but by natural I do not mean that heterosexuality is something that just takes over you by genetic construct . It is a choice in the end but it is not viewed as such because it flows in the natural order of our body. In Afghanistan, one of the highest rated countries where homosexuality is a norm, indicates that homosexuality is a choice. You do not make millions of Afghan men homosexual in a day because their genes acted so, all at once, can you now? There they have boys as collections for their lusts and more so that the more they have, the more respectable they are viewed in that culture.

So you really out to stop making the hetero-homo comparison. The criteria for judging one is not of the other. We know homosexuality fails in reproduction, proof enough that our bodies were not designed for that purpose, or even if someone believes in evolution, well evolution proves you wrong. Your bodies are clear proof of heterosexuality as a natural system, the act of of going homosexual, just proves that heterosexuality is indeed a choice as is homosexuality, on which we must choose to act or not.

By the way, if our sexuality is a genetic process, hard-wired in us, homo or hetero, on which we have no control at all, no choice, then God is simply unfair. Atleast that is what your proposition entails in the end.

[PaulSacramento]

We don't categorize Hetrosexuality as a choice do we?

Heterosexuality is a natural process, for which we have organs to prove but by natural I do not mean that heterosexuality is something that just takes over you by genetic construct . It is a choice in the end but it is not viewed as such because it flows in the natural order of our body. In Afghanistan, one of the highest rated countries where homosexuality is a norm, indicates that homosexuality is a choice. You do not make millions of Afghan men homosexual in a day because their genes acted so, all at once, can you now? There they have boys as collections for their lusts and more so that the more they have, the more respectable they are viewed in that culture.

So you really out to stop making the hetero-homo comparison. The criteria for judging one is not of the other. We know homosexuality fails in reproduction, proof enough that our bodies were not designed for that purpose, or even if someone believes in evolution, well evolution proves you wrong. Your bodies are clear proof of heterosexuality as a natural system, the act of of going homosexual, just proves that heterosexuality is indeed a choice as is homosexuality, on which we must choose to act or not.

By the way, if our sexuality is a genetic process, hard-wired in us, homo or hetero, on which we have no control at all, no choice, then God is simply unfair. Atleast that is what your proposition entails in the end.

Look at my post and I said that we CHOOSE to act on our sexual urges.
What I also said was that having homosexual URGES is no less a choice than having hetrosexual urges.

[BavarianWheels]

We don't categorize Hetrosexuality as a choice do we?

Heterosexuality is a natural process, for which we have organs to prove but by natural I do not mean that heterosexuality is something that just takes over you by genetic construct . It is a choice in the end but it is not viewed as such because it flows in the natural order of our body. In Afghanistan, one of the highest rated countries where homosexuality is a norm, indicates that homosexuality is a choice. You do not make millions of Afghan men homosexual in a day because their genes acted so, all at once, can you now? There they have boys as collections for their lusts and more so that the more they have, the more respectable they are viewed in that culture.

So you really out to stop making the hetero-homo comparison. The criteria for judging one is not of the other. We know homosexuality fails in reproduction, proof enough that our bodies were not designed for that purpose, or even if someone believes in evolution, well evolution proves you wrong. Your bodies are clear proof of heterosexuality as a natural system, the act of of going homosexual, just proves that heterosexuality is indeed a choice as is homosexuality, on which we must choose to act or not.

I'd agree that our bodies are not designed for homosexuality (as I am a believer in God and His design), however nor were our bodies designed to die or fall to disease or any other plight that has come to humanity as a result of sin. If you're going to cite evolution, then you'll have to accept that there are instances of animal homosexuality and hermaphrodites in both the animal kingdom and in (granted rarely) humanity and therefore "natural". My stance then, is that homosexuality has not yet been proven to be or not to be genetic. I therefore err on the side of giving the homosexual the benefit of the doubt. I assume that the vast majority do not choose their sexual preference, but very well may be wired for it, not as a result of God's impotence at creating perfect humans, but that sin in the world has allowed for the perversion of His original design.

My belief on this matter is that heterosexuality is of God's original design and that homosexual acts are an abomination. The homosexual person is not an abomination, but a child of God, no less loved and no more a sinner than I.

By the way, if our sexuality is a genetic process, hard-wired in us, homo or hetero, on which we have no control at all, no choice, then God is simply unfair. Atleast that is what your proposition entails in the end.

Oddly enough, SIN is "hard-wired" and we are of no choice in the matter...

[PaulSacramento]

Abomination is a bit strong:
Definition of ABOMINABLE
1
: worthy of or causing disgust or hatred : detestable <the abominable treatment of the poor>
2
: quite disagreeable or unpleasant <abominable weather>

I prefer deviant because that is what it is, a deviant behavior/urge from the norm.
I don't think that homosexuality causes feelings of disgust and certainly not hatred or at least it shouldn't.
I know that some people have VERY strong negative feelings towards the behaviour of SOME homosexuals but I don't think anything good comes out od using a term like abomination IMO.

[BavarianWheels]

Abomination is a bit strong:
Definition of ABOMINABLE
1
: worthy of or causing disgust or hatred : detestable <the abominable treatment of the poor>
2
: quite disagreeable or unpleasant <abominable weather>

I prefer deviant because that is what it is, a deviant behavior/urge from the norm.
I don't think that homosexuality causes feelings of disgust and certainly not hatred or at least it shouldn't.
I know that some people have VERY strong negative feelings towards the behaviour of SOME homosexuals but I don't think anything good comes out od using a term like abomination IMO.

I have no issue with this. I think whether the word used is abomination or deviant, the implication is clear.

[PaulSacramento]

True, but I have found that certain words may convey meanings that while WE don't feel that way, those hearing them can feel in ways that we never meant and no christian wants to be the "stumbling block" to anyone.
No one wants to be the "spiteful and hateful Christian" that leads to the "gentiles Blaspheming God", know what I mean?

[Tina]

True, but I have found that certain words may convey meanings that while WE don't feel that way, those hearing them can feel in ways that we never meant and no christian wants to be the "stumbling block" to anyone.
No one wants to be the "spiteful and hateful Christian" that leads to the "gentiles Blaspheming God", know what I mean?

Abomination is the word used in the Bible. It conveys a certain meaning for a reason. To get the point across loud and clear. I've been reading the posts about homosexuality. I am just as sinful as a homosexual just to be clear. But I'm confused on what the issue is here or the question. Is it- if acting on homosexuality temptation sinful or is it -are homosexuals born homosexual?
Well GOD says its sinful so it is
And why would GOD make or allow it to be genetic after saying its an abomination?

[jlay]

Just a friendly tip. Don't tell your wife that her cooking is an abomination.

[BavarianWheels]

And why would GOD make or allow it to be genetic after saying its an abomination?

Are you a sinner? If so, when did you first choose to sin?

[BavarianWheels]

Just a friendly tip. Don't tell your wife that her cooking is an abomination.

Good tip...jotting that one down.

[PaulSacramento]

True, but I have found that certain words may convey meanings that while WE don't feel that way, those hearing them can feel in ways that we never meant and no christian wants to be the "stumbling block" to anyone.
No one wants to be the "spiteful and hateful Christian" that leads to the "gentiles Blaspheming God", know what I mean?

Abomination is the word used in the Bible. It conveys a certain meaning for a reason. To get the point across loud and clear. I've been reading the posts about homosexuality. I am just as sinful as a homosexual just to be clear. But I'm confused on what the issue is here or the question. Is it- if acting on homosexuality temptation sinful or is it -are homosexuals born homosexual?
Well GOD says its sinful so it is
And why would GOD make or allow it to be genetic after saying its an abomination?

Abominatio nis just one reading of the Hebrew word "sheqets" and many things are an abomination in Leviticus, many of them dietary restrictions that most of us don't follow, would that make us an abomination as well?
Many will say no because the Jewish dietary laws do not apply to us, but of course the issue of homosexuality being a sin does indeed apply to a Christian.
My point is that there is NO NEED to use a word with such negative connotations when "sin" is more than enough to convey the issue with a particular act.
IMO we do NOT judge a homosexual as sinful, that is up to God and Christ, BUT we do judge the ACT as sinful and quite wrong for a Christian.
Do we still accept a homosexual?
I guess that would depend on what the individual Christian understands as accept.
But it is true that we are to love the homosexual and through that love to hopefully be there for them IF they need our help and to pray for them.

[mlynchrules]

Hello all, sorry for being gone for so long. I had a lot of family things going on plus I had to study for my end of term final exams so I wasn't able to do a whole lot on the internet during that time. Now that I am back, however, I do have a fresh question to ask of you. I know that most of your beliefs state that homosexuality itself is not a sin, but more so homosexual ACTS. I want to find out more what you mean by a homosexual act. Let's say that two men enter into a relationship where they both love each other but are not sexually engaged, meaning that hugging and kissing is the most intimate that it gets. They get married (in a state in which it is legal) and adopt a child. This is all a hypothetical situation, but I am curious to see if you would consider any of this to be sinful. Thoughts? I'm glad to see that this topic stayed somewhat active when I left, I'm very happy that I was able so start an at least somewhat engaging topic for everyone here. I hope that you are all well!

[Philip]

"This is all a hypothetical situation"

Yes, it is SO hypothetical that you would probably be extremely hard pressed to ever find even one such example of gay people going as far as marriage, but yet not "consummating" their relationship sexually.

But God judges the heart, and for two of the same sex to marry also shows that they are in direct rebellion to God's laws and wishes, which would also be an indication of their hearts, at least in regards to being willing to submit to God's authority - especially over such an important issue as marriage. And why would they marry - UNLESS they believe it is perfectly alright to have all of the sexual rights God ordained to be part of heterosexual, Godly unions?

[Graceismine]

Hello all,

I am a very devoted Christian and have been a participant in a Catholic Church for my entire life and I have a lot of really strong beliefs about God and Jesus and Christianity in general. This being said, there is one thing that I have a lot of difficulty believing. This thing is that we, as Christians, should condemn homosexuality as well as other non-heterosexual orientations. I believe first of all that God created everyone in the way that He wanted the to be and that He loves all of His creations as they are. Also, I don't believe that it is our responsibility to judge others. I think that is God and only God's job. Our job as Christians is to spread God's love to the world. Plus we do live in a world that is not without sin. Everyone is a sinner. Even if you do for whatever reason believe that homosexuality is a sin, who are you to judge them? As is said in John 8:7, "So when they continued asking Him, He lifted up himself, and said unto them, 'He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone'". I thank for your time and also your opinions and look forward to hearing back from you!

Homosexuality obviously is an abomination to God above all other sins . He destroyed cities because of it and He denounces it strongly in both the Old and New Testaments. Who are we to judge homosexuals??? IMO we don't unless it is happening in the Church. I think this Scripture can be applied to the church

1Pe 4:17 For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?

When we look at the commandments given by Paul we must realise he is speaking to the Church not to the world. Having said that I do believe that the church needs to let the world know what it stands for. I don't see much of that at this point in time. We need a revival I suppose before that can happen and because we condone homosexuality in our midst that is unlikely to happen any time soon.

[mlynchrules]

"He denounces it strongly in both the Old and New Testaments"

Can you show me where in the New Testament does God or Jesus condone homosexuality? I don't recall any passages offhand. You are correct that homosexuality is not condoned in the Bible, but the Bible also condones farmers selling their daughters as slaves. So I still fail to see how we can say that that is wrong now, but homosexuality can never be correct. And why is homosexuality an abomination above all other sins? What is so inherently evil about it that makes it worse than murder, rape, genocide, and so many other things that are so much more obviously harmful to society?