Sexuality

[Chiibi]

Originally Posted by RadiantBeam

Define "follow the bible". I read it quite a bit when I was a child, especially when I was going through CCD, but I've never literally lived my life in accordance to the bible and what it states.

Well.....I know it's impossible to go EXACTLY with it but I mean...like the major stuff: don't kill, don't steal, don't get drunk, don't sleep with anyone outside of marriage haha people break that one all the time don't worship false gods, and don't sleep with your blood relatives and don't sleep with the same sex, etc.
And.....any other commandments I've forgotten.
^
I'm a bad Christian....

[RadiantBeam]

Originally Posted by Chiibi

Well.....I know it's impossible to go EXACTLY with it but I mean...like the major stuff: don't kill, don't steal, don't get drunk, don't sleep with anyone outside of marriage haha people break that one all the time don't worship false gods, and don't sleep with your blood relatives and don't sleep with the same sex, etc.
And.....any other commandments I've forgotten.
I'm a bad Christian....

So because I've accepted homosexuality and even find it to be just as touching as a heterosexual romance, I'm a bad Christian? That's what you seem to be saying, by your definition. I honestly don't see what being a Christian has to do with sexuality. Even if it relates to your religion, in the end, your personal believes on sexuality are yours alone. It isn't right or fair to generalize by saying "Christians live by the bible" or "I haven't met a Christian yet who doesn't follow the bible".

[Chiibi]

Originally Posted by RadiantBeam

So because I've accepted homosexuality and even find it to be just as touching as a heterosexual romance, I'm a bad Christian? That's what you seem to be saying, by your definition. I honestly don't see what being a Christian has to do with sexuality. Even if it relates to your religion, in the end, your personal believes on sexuality are yours alone. It isn't right or fair to generalize by saying "Christians live by the bible" or "I haven't met a Christian yet who doesn't follow the bible".

o_o
I didn't say "don't accept it or be touched by it". I just said the bible says "Don't participate in homosexual sex".
Seriously, I'm as guilty as liking yaoi/yuri as much as the next anime fangirl...>_>
And believe me, I am not calling you or anyone else a "bad Christian" (except myself). I have no right to judge people when I'm not perfectly innocent and doing so would be very un-Christian-like, anyway.

Well, I mean I haven't met one but that doesn't mean there aren't any...ugh...I guess I said something stupid again...I'm sorry....x.x

[hinakatbklyn]

The higher ups I believe decided that homosexuality is not a good idea. If it's an unwritten rule that's one thing. But none of the commandments mention it being a sin. Let the one upstairs decide or judge who is right or wrong when it comes to homosexuality and who should be forgiven. If the bible is correct, those who asked to be forgiven regardless of their past, he usually forgave them.

[Chiibi]

Originally Posted by hinakatbklyn

The higher ups I believe decided that homosexuality is not a good idea. If it's an unwritten rule that's one thing. But none of the commandments mention it being a sin. Let the one upstairs decide or judge who is right or wrong when it comes to homosexuality and who should be forgiven. If the bible is correct, those who asked to be forgiven regardless of their past, he usually forgave them.

That is very true.

......you're right....it's not actually stated as a commandment.....

Lol, now I'm bloody confused.... I guess what I was trying to say...personally, IF I was homosexual, that'd be a problem because I'd be condemned by pretty much everyone around me (who are all Christians who think homosexuality is bad).

Is what I'm trying to say. It didn't come out right.

[RadiantBeam]

Originally Posted by Chiibi

That is very true.

......you're right....it's not actually stated as a commandment.....

Lol, now I'm bloody confused....

I do remember it being stated at some point in the bible (though I can't recall where) that a man should not lay with another man, because it is unnatural or something like that. Granted, considering how long ago the bible itself was written, I don't tend to put much stock into anything that isn't a story or one of the Ten Commandments. There are so many sub-classes of Christians these days that it's hard to say whether anyone is a "good" or "bad" Christian regardless of their beliefs on sexuality.

[DragoZERO]

Originally Posted by Chiibi

It didn't so much. When I was younger, I really hated going to church and really wasn't an extreme Christian at all.

But I still only liked boys.

Same here. Church was never a big thing with me. Then I was educated and took a scientific point of view on things...I don't go to church now.

And who negative-repped me!? I was not generalizing Christians but um I have yet to meet a Christian who doesn't follow the bible (which is pretty much against homosexuality) so I don't think what I said was wrong at all.

Yeah, I get neg-repped for the stupidest things too. Sometimes its justified, like an insult, but I doubt the person who insulted me first got neg-repped for it. Also, the person who does it has so little rep themselves, it doesn't make a difference.

Originally Posted by hinakatbklyn

The higher ups I believe decided that homosexuality is not a good idea. If it's an unwritten rule that's one thing. But none of the commandments mention it being a sin. Let the one upstairs decide or judge who is right or wrong when it comes to homosexuality and who should be forgiven. If the bible is correct, those who asked to be forgiven regardless of their past, he usually forgave them.

Most of the bible and religion itself is in essence, a method of control. It was written by people who had set views, and they didn't like homosexuality, so that's why its against the church. At least they put no killing, stealing and other bad stuff in there, lol.

[MeoTwister5]

If you look at Bible there's really no line that says "male-male action bad mkay!" and all that. Most anti-homosexual rhetoric for the Catholic Church stems from the God of the Old Testament nuking Sodom and Gomorrah back to the stone age, with a description of why. The rest is mostly religious inferences based what is was considered normal by religious standards in those days. None of the 4 accepted Gospels had cases regarding Jesus dealing with homosexuals. Closest think was a mention in one of St. Paul's letters but I can't remember right now.

Edit - I've said it once and I'll say it again: If you negrep me the least you could do is leave a reason. Common courtesy right?

[synaesthetic]

The primary "case against" homosexuality in the Bible stems from the Old Testament book of Leviticus, in which it is stated that man should not lie with man as womankind, for it is an abomination.

Considering the times in which these verses were penned, it was probably good advice. Sanitary conditions were nonexistent and sexually-transmitted diseases were not at all understood. Condoms weren't even on the drawing board. Diseases that are easily treated today with a round of antibiotics were deadly. Many of the bizarre prohibitions within Leviticus can easily be tied to health and safety concerns.

Oft cited is the prohibition on eating shellfish; why would they care if we ate shellfish? Because as we know now, undercooked shellfish often carry pathogens that can make us very sick.

This is why I tend to butt heads with those who interpret the Bible literally; the book itself is over two thousand years old. It was written in a world so fundamentally different than our own that applying its dogma to the modern world is ludicrous in the extreme.

It doesn't fit the current shape of the world. Square peg, round hole. Trying to force it into place, as many evangelicals and fundamentalists do, will inevitably result in damage to either the peg, the hole or both.

[LeoXiao]

Seeing that sex was supposed to be for procreation in the Bible's view, it makes sense that they would urge their followers to not engage in homosexuality, or sex for the sake of pleasure, for that matter.

[Chiibi]

it makes sense that they would urge their followers to not engage in homosexuality, or sex for the sake of pleasure, for that matter.

Sex for the sake of pleasure with your married partner is perfectly okay. Just pointing that out.
I have my own views about how to interpret the bible...but I'm keeping my mouth shut....

[Dazz]

I'v Seen so much ppl that are christians they go to church every Sunday
but the do not follow the bible,don't read it and don't talk about it
its like Haveing a cookie but not eating it o.o

Im the type of person who don't belives in all this or not belives in 100 % hehe funny

[synaesthetic]

I'm an atheist, and I'm really fine with being an atheist, but I understand that some people need spirituality in their life, so I don't object to it.

What I do object to is people using their faith as a bludgeon to hit others over the head with; unfortunately a lot of Bible literalists do this to me.

[LeoXiao]

Originally Posted by Chiibi

Sex for the sake of pleasure with your married partner is perfectly okay. Just pointing that out.
I have my own views about how to interpret the bible...but I'm keeping my mouth shut....

I'm not a Christian, but that's the underlying reason that I would seen in discouraging homosexuality. So by that logic, it's not homosexuality that is being targeted but all pleasurable sex. This would fit in line with Christian teachings about fornication, and I remembering reading one part about how just looking at a woman with sexual thoughts is a kind of fornication. I think it's not too unreasonable to assume that "good Christians" would strive to eliminate primal sexual urges from their lives entirely; hence, the only reason to have sex would be to produce children.

[cheyannew]

Originally Posted by Chiibi

Sex for the sake of pleasure with your married partner is perfectly okay. Just pointing that out.
I have my own views about how to interpret the bible...but I'm keeping my mouth shut....

Well, sex w/ your unmarried partner is perfectly alright too, provided you're both consenting adults (or consenting people period, I know kids have sex too, it's just generally considered a bad idea lol). Just pointing that out

[cheyannew]

Originally Posted by LeoXiao

I'm not a Christian, but that's the underlying reason that I would seen in discouraging homosexuality. So by that logic, it's not homosexuality that is being targeted but all pleasurable sex. This would fit in line with Christian teachings about fornication, and I remembering reading one part about how just looking at a woman with sexual thoughts is a kind of fornication. I think it's not too unreasonable to assume that "good Christians" would strive to eliminate primal sexual urges from their lives entirely; hence, the only reason to have sex would be to produce children.

You can assume anything you want to, but that's just not feasible. Humans are animals, no matter how much they try to glorify themselves. They will never get rid of those "primal urges". Not even their "holy men" are capable of doing that across the board. Some can, sure, but others can't.

IMO, it's better to give in to those "primal urges" in a safe, respectful to your partner(s) manner, even if it's only once in a while. Given the alternative of penning it up for decades and then molesting an altar boy or something, I'm gonna go with getting it out of your system in a more healthy manner

Also, THANKFULLY, more and more Christians are recognizing that times have changed, and therefore the interpretation of the Bible must also change. These are the progressives who accept homosexuals, women in clergy, and so on. I can't speak on their views on premarital sex since I obviously don't go to their churches, but most Christians I know do engage in premarital sex. Does it make them "bad Christians"? I should think not, considering some have devoted most of their lives to helping others, doing charity work, etc etc.

[DragoZERO]

Originally Posted by LeoXiao

Seeing that sex was supposed to be for procreation in the Bible's view, it makes sense that they would urge their followers to not engage in homosexuality, or sex for the sake of pleasure, for that matter.

It's funny, only humans derive pleasure from sex. I heard dolphins do too, but I'm not sure if that's just a myth.

Originally Posted by Chiibi

Sex for the sake of pleasure with your married partner is perfectly okay. Just pointing that out.
I have my own views about how to interpret the bible...but I'm keeping my mouth shut....

I don't think the church has anything against a married couple having sex for any reason. They won't discuss sex for pleasure though...then agian, they won't talk about sex period. It's making a family.

Originally Posted by LeoXiao

I'm not a Christian, but that's the underlying reason that I would seen in discouraging homosexuality. So by that logic, it's not homosexuality that is being targeted but all pleasurable sex. This would fit in line with Christian teachings about fornication, and I remembering reading one part about how just looking at a woman with sexual thoughts is a kind of fornication. I think it's not too unreasonable to assume that "good Christians" would strive to eliminate primal sexual urges from their lives entirely; hence, the only reason to have sex would be to produce children.

Not so much now, but in the past (30+ years) I would agree. I don't' think the church says anything against because it's so prominent. They won't encourage it but won't say anything against it.

Originally Posted by cheyannew

Well, sex w/ your unmarried partner is perfectly alright too, provided you're both consenting adults (or consenting people period, I know kids have sex too, it's just generally considered a bad idea lol). Just pointing that out

Not according to the church. That's a sin. And I think teenagers having sex is bad. They tend to mess up more and they pay a hefty price for it. I won't object to two adults who are in relationship but will frown against one-night stands.

I myself am against pre-marital sex. And I'm not religious. It's the idea of saving yourself and being with that one person forever (well, if you marry properly). I do sound really corny and cheesy, I know. If anyone has not read Futari Ecchi, you'll get a good idea of the joys of having sex after marriage. The author doesn't take a stand anywhere, but the married couple are so sweet together, lol.

And it'll be next to impossible to find a virgin to marry in this day and age as well.

[Mystique]

Originally Posted by synaesthetic

The primary "case against" homosexuality in the Bible stems from the Old Testament book of Leviticus, in which it is stated that man should not lie with man as womankind, for it is an abomination.

Considering the times in which these verses were penned, it was probably good advice. Sanitary conditions were nonexistent and sexually-transmitted diseases were not at all understood. Condoms weren't even on the drawing board. Diseases that are easily treated today with a round of antibiotics were deadly. Many of the bizarre prohibitions within Leviticus can easily be tied to health and safety concerns.

Oft cited is the prohibition on eating shellfish; why would they care if we ate shellfish? Because as we know now, undercooked shellfish often carry pathogens that can make us very sick.

This is why I tend to butt heads with those who interpret the Bible literally; the book itself is over two thousand years old. It was written in a world so fundamentally different than our own that applying its dogma to the modern world is ludicrous in the extreme.

It doesn't fit the current shape of the world. Square peg, round hole. Trying to force it into place, as many evangelicals and fundamentalists do, will inevitably result in damage to either the peg, the hole or both.

And you my dear are getting a cookie for this.
From the "worst of the bunch" (Catholic) to an athiest such as yourself,

You've saved me time/effort of spelling out the use of the Bible in the 21C, well hey even the old stuffy dudes up in Italy are taking into account the epidemic with STDs/STIs and wondering what to do about the condom rule

There's someone up there who goes 'I was educated and so took a scientific approach...'
As in those who have faith aren't educated in a mental sense, you're trying to say there?
I've bit my tongue, but I couldn't help but notice a light passing of offence sweep over me there. Science is all great but that's what it is.
*Points to her head*
Logic limited to the human mind. Faith requires use of here.
*points to her heart*
It becomes a practice (ideally) to incorporate into your lives to enrich and support your spirit, if one is to believe in the soul/spirit of a human being that is.

Taking out the politics and bullshit that so many 'educated' people use as an excuse to turn atheist or be pessimistic or 'rebel against oppression' as I see as 'reason' more and more in cyberspace land, religion in itself, most of the major lot preach positivism and aren't too different with their core values either.
(And I’m well aware that the Vatican lot have by no means been squeaky clean throughout our history).
That's a very hashed up, super short version there just so you know where I come from/how I see things, though I've kept out of the religion thread for fear that I may slaughter a few people by being overly dramatic or emotional, so for the peace of the greater good, I'm happy to just yap about sex.

Speaking of which, I'd rather nitpick a few posts in here, especially about asexuality.
I know there's someone on Asuki who wrote very informative stuff at the start of this thread, but time/ended up forgetting I've not chased this down.

Keep reminding me, but yeah religion related stuffs, has it's own Religion thread, it seemed too kinda heavy in here on "how to interpret the Bible" rather than sexuality as a general topic

[cheyannew]

Originally Posted by DragoZERO

I myself am against pre-marital sex. And I'm not religious. It's the idea of saving yourself and being with that one person forever (well, if you marry properly). I do sound really corny and cheesy, I know. If anyone has not read Futari Ecchi, you'll get a good idea of the joys of having sex after marriage. The author doesn't take a stand anywhere, but the married couple are so sweet together, lol.

And it'll be next to impossible to find a virgin to marry in this day and age as well.

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. I, on the other hand, would hate to have been married to someone with whom I am not sexually compatible. Therefore I had to test drive before I bought, so to speak. Besides, with divorce rates as high as they are, I personally find it rather silly to "save" yourself, considering so few marriages are actually "forever". You end up missing out on a lot, IMO
And considering *MY* religion is perfectly fine w/ premarital sex, or multiple partners or whatever, then you have a perfect example of why the church isn't always right

If it's right for you, keen, but in this day and age, it's not right for everyone. IMO the "ideals" have to adapt, or the religion faces the possibility or dying out, as so many others have.
Yeah it might take a thousand years, but it's a possibility.

[DragoZERO]

Originally Posted by cheyannew

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. I, on the other hand, would hate to have been married to someone with whom I am not sexually compatible. Therefore I had to test drive before I bought, so to speak. Besides, with divorce rates as high as they are, I personally find it rather silly to "save" yourself, considering so few marriages are actually "forever". You end up missing out on a lot, IMO

Well, I never said I wouldn't touch the girl. You don't have to have vaginal sex to find out if you are compatible. You don't need to do that to enjoy each other's company - there are a lot of alternatives.

Also, this is my opinion and view right now. It could change. I could meet a girl, be in relationship for a long time and well, cave in, especially if she herself is not a virgin.

And "test driving" is not the best way to describe this, although it is very funny.

And considering *MY* religion is perfectly fine w/ premarital sex, or multiple partners or whatever, then you have a perfect example of why the church isn't always right

Religion is not the reason for my stand on this topic. There is also the risk of pregnancy and even though you can use contraception, it's never 100% guaranteed.

If it's right for you, keen, but in this day and age, it's not right for everyone. IMO the "ideals" have to adapt, or the religion faces the possibility or dying out, as so many others have.
Yeah it might take a thousand years, but it's a possibility.

Society is always changing. I too think that religion may disappear in time, but that's not any time soon. People need religion for many reasons.