Yuku free message boards
Username or E-mail:
Password:
Forgot
Password?
Sign Up
Grab the Yuku app
Search:
Divorce Care and Support
>
General
>
formal discussion: biological vs. choice
0 Points
Search this Topic:
Remove this ad
«Prev
1
2
Next»
Jump
Public Forum
DCS Information
DCS Suggestions and Complaints
Current Events
Spiritual Stuff
General
Swap Meet
Around The House
Prayer List
Re: formal discussion: biological vs. choice
Author
Comment
jhall0626
formal discussion: biological vs. choice
#1
[-]
Posts
: 113
Aug 24 07 12:52 AM
Reply
Quote
More
My Recent Posts
I've always been interested by this debate. Primarily because I always question why it really matters, whether it's a choice or not seems rather moot to me. If I want to be romantically involved with a dark-haired woman, does the fact that it's a choice give anyone the right to make altruistic judgments on my choice?
Does the fact that some (and I emphasize some) interpretations of the Bible call it a sin, make it so? Assuming it is a sin, should we use that as justification to deny them the same rights as a married couple? If so, should unmarried couples that live together be denied those rights as well, or be judged on the same grounds?
Arguing from a religious perspective gets far more difficult. Once a person is WELL studied on the intricacies of the Bible (which I'm not, I only repeat that which smarter people have already said), you'll find there is some debate about homosexuality in the Bible.
I won't bring up the big "debate" on the Old Testament, other than to say there is a great deal of differing opinion on proper translations of words in Leviticus.
The most often cited passage as a complete rebuke of homosexuality by the Bible, at least in my experience, is Romans 1:26. Paul (the author of Romans 1:26) was also known to accept the practice of slavery (Philemon 1:15) and oppression of women (1 Corinthians 14:34). Furthermore, occasional some people use Romans 1:26 to justify their judgments of others, when they forget that Paul warned not to in the next passage (Romans 2:1).
Ignoring all of that, some interperet the meaning much differently than the more widely-accepted viewpoint:
"When the scripture is understood correctly, it seems to imply that it would be unnatural for heterosexuals to live as homosexuals, and for homosexuals to live as heterosexuals." (http://hcqsa.virtualave.net/bible.html).
I Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy 1, suffer a similar fate as Leviticus. The King James Version uses an improper translation of the Greek word "arsenokoitai" to mean homosexual, when in fact "paiderasste" is the proper word for homosexual.
One thing that's important to note... "arsen" means male an "koitai" means bed. And prior to this passage, the word has never been seen in any other Greek text. IE: Paul made the word up.
I think one of the fundamental problems with this debate, is the "pick and choose" method for determining sin that modern religions use today. I don't blame those that practice the religion... most of us (myself included) don't speak Hebrew or Greek. Perhaps that's why I have started really identifying with the "St. Thomas Christians" the more I read.
Sorry for the long post, and I hope it doesn't upset anyone. For me, it's about approaching a controversial issue with an open mind.
For those that want more reading on the subject:
http://thetrueenglishtranslationofthebible.blogspot.com/
It gives a far better explanation than mine, and far more in depth analysis on specific passages :).
Public Forum
DCS Information
DCS Suggestions and Complaints
Current Events
Spiritual Stuff
General
Swap Meet
Around The House
Prayer List
Share This
Email to Friend
del.icio.us
Digg it
Facebook
Blogger
Yahoo MyWeb
«Prev
1
2
Next»
Jump
Divorce Care and Support
>
General
>
formal discussion: biological vs. choice
Click to subscribe by RSS
Click to receive E-mail notifications of replies