Would Jesus speak out against homosexuality today?

[Mr. Sluagh]

How can we admit to needing something that we don't even know exists?

I think in this case the we should be substituted with I. You're presuming your own reality and experiences upon Aaron.

I think NightOwl was speaking for other atheists when she said "we", not projecting her experiences onto Christians. She was responding to Aaron's presumptuousness in claiming that atheists arrogantly deny that we need God when, according to our own reality and experiences, we have no reason to believe that God exists, so whether we need Him is a moot point.

(NightOwl can correct me if I'm wrong, as can any other atheists who might object to having she and I project onto them.)

[whoosanightowl]

How can we admit to needing something that we don't even know exists?

I think in this case the we should be substituted with I. You're presuming your own reality and experiences upon Aaron.

I think NightOwl was speaking for other atheists when she said "we", not projecting her experiences onto Christians. She was responding to Aaron's presumptuousness in claiming that atheists arrogantly deny that we need God when, according to our own reality and experiences, we have no reason to believe that God exists, so whether we need Him is a moot point.

(NightOwl can correct me if I'm wrong, as can any other atheists who might object to having she and I project onto them.)

Mr S.
That was precisely what I was trying to express, but you did it much better. Thanks!

[jakobk]

Yeah I think he would be at the forefront making sure people understood homosexuality was wrong, along with adultery, stealing music, not lying, not putting people ahead of material things, porn and many other things. Yet I suspect he would be the first to forgive a terrorist, a rapist, a child molester or a wife beater.

I'm an atheist and a homosexual (I feel like I'm at a 12 step meeting saying that) and I have no problem with people having whatever views they like and speaking out about them - I'm pretty much an extremist against thought and speech crime nonsense. I don't know exactly what Jesus might have said about homosexuality if he'd mentioned it but Christians do seem to talk about it (quite a lot recently). The puzzle I can't solve quite is that nobody has been able to explain to me coherently why homosexuality is wrong on the Christian account. I realise there's a straightforward answer along the lines of It's wrong because God says it's wrong but when I talk to Christians only a very few seem to really believe that our moral intuitions and reasons count for nought and that God is the only source of moral values (well, officially I think some Orthodox Presbyterians do (the transworld depravity calvinist folks) but one on one even they seem to waver).

Anyway, looking at the list of things that Aaron cited above, many people would be able to agree that adultery, stealing, lying, valuing things above people and even pornography are wrong and give reasons. What reasons can be given for saying that homosexuality is wrong or is it just that God says so?

Regards,

Jakob

[NH Baritone]

Yeah I think he would be at the forefront making sure people understood homosexuality was wrong, along with adultery, stealing music, not lying, not putting people ahead of material things, porn and many other things. Yet I suspect he would be the first to forgive a terrorist, a rapist, a child molester or a wife beater.

I'm an atheist and a homosexual (I feel like I'm at a 12 step meeting saying that) and I have no problem with people having whatever views they like and speaking out about them - I'm pretty much an extremist against thought and speech crime nonsense. I don't know exactly what Jesus might have said about homosexuality if he'd mentioned it but Christians do seem to talk about it (quite a lot recently). The puzzle I can't solve quite is that nobody has been able to explain to me coherently why homosexuality is wrong on the Christian account. I realise there's a straightforward answer along the lines of It's wrong because God says it's wrong but when I talk to Christians only a very few seem to really believe that our moral intuitions and reasons count for nought and that God is the only source of moral values (well, officially I think some Orthodox Presbyterians do (the transworld depravity calvinist folks) but one on one even they seem to waver).

Anyway, looking at the list of things that Aaron cited above, many people would be able to agree that adultery, stealing, lying, valuing things above people and even pornography are wrong and give reasons. What reasons can be given for saying that homosexuality is wrong or is it just that God says so?

Regards,

Jakob

Welcome, Jakob, to the forum! It's been a bit thin on the openly-gay atheist front. (sometimes I feel like Sammy Davis, Jr. in the rat pack, but even he wasn't the only Jew.)

Now that you've lit the fuse, I hope you stick around for the fireworks.

[crazylegsmurphy]

jakobk, welcome!

You count on my support. (as cheesy as that sounds)

[tirtlegrrl]

Hi Jakob! Welcome to the forum. Looking forward to reading your posts!

[whoosanightowl]

NHB,
I love your (new?) signature!

CHRISTIAN DENOMINATIONS: Arguing over the color of the threads in the Emperor's new clothes.

[whoosanightowl]

Hi Jakobk, and welcome to the forum!
I agree with you that Christians have no basis for counting homosexuality among other moral offenses such as lying, cheating, stealing, killing, etc. since like all sexual encounters, as long as it's between consenting adults, there are no victims.
So how can something be wrong if there are no victims? That's where their notion of God comes in. It's wrong because they believe he says so, and regardless if you or I even acknowledge the existence of this God, we are expected to follow his rules according to many Christians.
Sue

[Pseudonym]

Hi, Jakob, and welcome to the forums.

The puzzle I can't solve quite is that nobody has been able to explain to me coherently why homosexuality is wrong on the Christian account.

That's a difficult question to answer. I think it helps to observe that "homosexuality" as a sexual orientation, is not mentioned in the Bible at all.

What is condemned is certain sexual practices. And most of those mentions are likely to refer to specific behaviours that were considered wrong, such as certain pagan religious practices (i.e. cult prostitution).

And on the other hand, the Bible has some quite nice things to say about stable, monogamous different-sex love and relationships, but nothing at all to say either way about the same kind of same-sex relationships.

So I think it's possible to see that, on balance, some could come to the conclusion that homosexuality is contrary to the divine order. But even if you came to that conclusion, I can't understand how someone could come to the conclusion that it's the most horrid kind of social evil in the English-speaking world today, especially when our societies have so much greed and usury going on.

[crazylegsmurphy]

The way I see it is there are two things that need to be looked at to determine if homosexuality is wrong or unnatural.

First, is there any scientific evidence to support the idea that homosexuality is common across the entire animal kingdom and if so, why. If it turns out that it is in fact common and has benefits, then it could be argued that is as natural (God given or not) as any other sexual preference.

Secondly, what moral implications does homosexuality have? Can it be demonstrated that homosexuality is morally wrong using data that supports this?

Whenever Christians are asked to give specific reasons it kinda goes one of two ways IMO. One way is to passionately state it is wrong because the bible says so, end of story. The other way is a wide gray area of wishy washy, skirt around the issue reasons that don't really come out and say it's wrong, but sort of passively aggressively say it is. The classic line is something like, "I personally don't have anything wrong with gay people, I have lots of gay friends...but....well..."

I am still looking for some solid explanation outside of the bible to show me that homosexuality is wrong. I have not heard a single one so far....not ever, and definitely not in this thread.

[NH Baritone]

NHB,
I love your (new?) signature!

CHRISTIAN DENOMINATIONS: Arguing over the color of the threads in the Emperor's new clothes.

Thanks. Occasionally I come up with one that I like.

[Samwise]

Hi All, I'm wondering, does anyone who believes homosexuality is normal consider incest normal as well? For example: having sex with your mother.

I'm still on the fence on homosexuality matter btw...

[tirtlegrrl]

Hey Samwise,

I personally think that people classify acts as "good" or "bad" depending upon what they are trying to achieve. "Good" ideas or actions move you in the direction you want to go, and vice versa. For example, if you want your family to live and be happy, rescuing them from the house when it is burning is "good", and encouraging your children to play in traffic is "bad". This way of looking at things is useful because it can apply to human/divine relationships as well; in Christian thinking, one desires to please God; therefore, doing what God says is "good" (and may OR may not result in good outcomes for you on this planet) and worshiping something else is "bad". Human morality is subjective to and determined by humans, whether or not some God-ordained standard exists.

So to answer your question about incest on purely human grounds, incest could be considered "bad" by most people because it leads to inbreeding and poor health for subsequent generations due to diminishing genetic diversity. (I was going to say that it's less "normal" than homosexual behavior, but I don't know the current statistics on familial child abuse and I'm afraid non-consensual incest might be more "normal" than anyone would like to know.) On the other hand, if you don't care about future offspring and your mom is really, really hot, incest might be "good" in your estimation. But it's unlikely to catch on seeing as it leads to poor results health-wise and most people want healthy offspring and aren't attracted to their mothers. (I am against certain animal purebreeding trends for this very reason; it's bad for the health of the animals.) I guess that we're assuming from previous threads that "normal" equals "good", but there are a large number of exceptions to this. Losing bone mass as you age is "normal" for older women, but that doesn't mean it's desirable!

Societal morality in my view is just individual desires writ large, and the society then produces individuals who are likely to keep following similar desires, until either the society collapses due to too many "bad" (anti-survival) choices or outside forces, or a combination of the above. Or groups splinter off and propagate THEIR slightly different view of morality, and then the two societies make war with each other...ad infinitum. Societies that advocate certain behaviors will survive longer than societies that do not.

I don't think that homosexual relationships have any problems that don't also beset straight relationships. I think the "it's unnatural" argument is stupid...it's natural for gays to have gay sex! Are gay people not part of the natural world like everybody else? It's not unnatural, just relatively unusual. I don't understand the appeal of having sex with a woman...I think it's gross. But nobody's rights are being violated when two women have sex...as long as it's consensual. I don't want to live in a society in which people are forced to have sex against their will, so I support laws that create a society in which consensual sex is respected and non-consensual sex is discouraged.

I realize my little utilitarian view of morality probably has flaws related to my understanding of human psychology... but it's what I'm working with for the time being. It's better than "somebody told me God says so".

[mitchellmckain]

Hi All, I'm wondering, does anyone who believes homosexuality is normal consider incest normal as well? For example: having sex with your mother.

I'm still on the fence on homosexuality matter btw...

Normal? What does this mean? In the other thread Jim argues that abstaining from sexual activity isn't normal. His reasoning seems to be that the vast majority do not do this. Doesn't an application of this same argument say that homosexuality is not normal either? This is why I suggested coining the term "sexual bigotry" for attitudes about what sort of sex life is to be considered "normal". Another argument for "normality" might be based on biological function, but the conclusions are identical for sexual absinence does not fulfill the proper biological function any more than homosexuality. Of course there are serious flaws in both of these arguments.

A statistical observation is inadequate because it is not only the current statistical status quo that is important but questions about what should be the case - what we want to be the case or what would be the ideal for the well being of the individual or humanity as a whole. Thus the statistical norms of times past where people kept slaves and treated women as property are things that have been rejected for good reason by modern humanity.

I would argue the reasoning from biological function is inadequate because that is not where our humanity lies, and that we are way past being dominated by biological imperatives and instincts. The far greater guidance for human action in modern humans are the needs of the mind, such as for love, entertainment, creative expression and the all the needs of the human community. I ask you to take notice that when I say love I am not speaking of something that can be reduced to biological function where homosexuality would have no place.

The free secular society operates on a different standard than these. The question we must ask in regards to any activity is whether we can scientifically prove that this activity is harmful? I believe that the answer in the case of homosexuality is no, but that the answer for most types of incest is yes - it is biologically, psychologically and sociologically harmful.


As for the title question of this thread? I do not know. However the Bible does seem to speak against homosexuality. The Bible seems to consider this to be a sin, but then so are many many other things that human beings do all the time -- and so I see no reason to single out homosexuals. Personally when it is put in such terms of sexual preference, contrasting homosexuality versus heterosexuality, as if it were a matter of what flavor of ice cream you prefer, then I really don't see much difference personally. If it is a matter of love, however, well then that is somewhat different. It seems to me that love for someone of the opposite sex would be preferable for many reasons, but then we can say the same thing about a great many economic, religious and social considerations too but the fact is that love quite often pays no attention to these either.

[jakobk]

Hi All, I'm wondering, does anyone who believes homosexuality is normal consider incest normal as well? For example: having sex with your mother.

I'm still on the fence on homosexuality matter btw...

Normal is a strange word isn't it? It seems poised between "natural" and "common". Incest is natural but not common (rather like cancer); homosexuality is natural and not common (relative to heterosexuality). Normal of course isn't a moral category.

Jakobk