posted
What if your tatoos give you +2 to hit and glow in the presence of magic? Does that make you bettererer?
Posts: 4534 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Which other species has a law against killing another of the same speicies? I'm not familiar with that one.
Posts: 1533 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, I will agree that the human species has been unique in our invention of powdered wigs, without which judges and the entire legal system would not be possible.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
By the way, it's pointless to discuss a proposition which relies on humans being made in the image of God with someone who doesn't believe in God.
posted
Actually, Dag, I was genuinely curious, and Chad answered my question. Basically, I wanted to know whether it was the creation of any life which was a godly power entrusted to man, or whether the creation of human life was the godly element. That's actually a pretty relevant question, especially with all the genetic modification and stuff going on nowadays.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tom, how is that question relevant? Do you mean that scientists should not pursue the creation of new species of animal?
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Actually, Dag, I was genuinely curious, and Chad answered my question. Basically, I wanted to know whether it was the creation of any life which was a godly power entrusted to man, or whether the creation of human life was the godly element. That's actually a pretty relevant question, especially with all the genetic modification and stuff going on nowadays.
Right - I would answer questions like that myself. In fact, I have. However, once I've explained the basic point, I've often wished I stopped responding to the critiques of the answer.
posted
a) And what will you say when technology allows Same-sex couples to impregnate each other? Will it then not be sinful?
b) What do you hold for ambigious sex children? Because they were born disfigured, they aren't going to be able to enjoy The Highest Enlightment?
Posts: 3060 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged |
Perhaps, though I don't know a single person who does.
I think the vast majority of people simply don't want someone else's highly debatable version of morality thrust upon them. Many of those people believe that a society of people with varying personal moralities can work together civily to agree upon a common public morality, though there is much angry discussion about what should/shouldn't be included in it. Other people do not believe this and prefer bloodshed to tolerance.
quote: But it's not about tolerating anymore, it's about sanctioning that abuse. Officially saying "It's ok".
This seems out of place in the discussion. As this thread was homosexuality from a religious perspective, I've held my tongue thus far. This assertion, though, seems to move the discussion into the realm of secular politics, unless you are specifically talking about some Mormon faction bent on making your church officially sanction homosexuality. If you're talking outside of religion, though, I have to say that it *IS* very much about tolerance. It's also about equal protection and equal rights. And until we live in a theocracy, it is my right as an American to pursue these goals.
Posts: 6394 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
B) Hermaphrodites are pretty rare, and hermaphrodites that don't have a slightly prevailing gender are even rarer. What I assume from situations like this is that God's wisdom will sort things out so that no blessings will be lost.
Not a big comfort, but I doubt that anyone mistakes me for being a very comforting person.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hermaphrodites are a genetic defect or conceptive deformity. When found, all efforts are made to "correct" the deformity. How that correlates to homosexuality (which the argument is that it's a "trait" not abnormality) is a whole 'nother debate.
quote:When found, all efforts are made to "correct" the deformity. How that correlates to homosexuality (which the argument is that it's a "trait" not abnormality) is a whole 'nother debate.
As that "correction" can lead to unbelievable problems for the person, I don't think "correction" is the appropriate term.
quote:And what will you say when technology allows Same-sex couples to impregnate each other? Will it then not be sinful?
I'll say that any man that allows himself to be impregnated and carries the baby to term is eighty times braver than myself. I like the side of the birthing bed that I stand on, thank you very much.
:considers:
Just because God gives us the capacity to invent certain devices, does not always mean that those devices are good to be used. Technology is not moral imperative.
[ October 26, 2004, 01:14 PM: Message edited by: Scott R ]
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Hermaphrodites are a genetic defect or conceptive deformity. When found, all efforts are made to "correct" the deformity.
I really don't want to get into this right now, but suffice it to say that there is a sizeable movement among people of ambiguous gender against such "correction."
[Edit: Hey, look at that. That was my 4000th post.]
quote: When found, all efforts are made to "correct" the deformity.
This was true some time ago, but there is a definite consensus not to "correct" anything which is not a medical necessity (that is, not to "correct" the genitalia, but definitely to make sure that the child does not have an associated mineralocorticoid deficiency), at least not before one reaches majority and can make such decisions for onself.
[Um, what ^they^ said. ]
[ October 26, 2004, 01:14 PM: Message edited by: Sara Sasse ]
Posts: 2919 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am aware of such and respect their wishes. It doesn't negate the abnormality of it to begin with.
We may have a movement some day against repairing cleft palettes.
We already have some opinions and movements on "repairing" the sight of blind people.
But there is a difference between a "trait" and an "abnormality" my point is that a "trait" (as homosexuality claims to be) and an abnormality are two different things.
Posts: 1533 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is, of course, assuming we believe anyone actually knows or understands the "Will of God."
Endless hypotheticals notwithstanding, God has not deemed it necessary to appear to us in no uncertain terms, universally, and explain His desires for His children.
The Catholic take on this particular issue differs from the Mormons from the Lutherans from the Jack Chik followers.
With that in mind, decide what you believe and reconcile it with your faith. And hope, at the end of the day, you were right.
posted
I would be interested in the test one uses to determine if something is a trait or an abnormality, Chad. Since you seem to have special access to it, would you care to enlighten us?
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I read that article... I think I feel sad for the person who wrote it. It reminds me of a book I read ages ago about dealing with homosexuality. Seems... lonely and wrong somehow. To deny oneself the connection they crave.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
But I see Abraham's willingness to sacrifice Isaac, and Isaac's willingness to be sacrificed, in the same way.
Christ said that we must be willing to reject everything in order to follow him. Mother, father, work-- anything that stands between ourselves and Christ needs to be moved aside. CS Lewis notes that Christ does not just want a piece of ourselves, not just MOST of what we are-- he wants all of it.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think...I think, if this is true, if the Lord is really there and we are really his children and there is a plan for us, then it's worth everything.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
To me that is an astronomically big "if". And it's not one for which I'm willing to gamble away the only confirmable chance at happiness any of us really have, which is the here and now.
Posts: 6394 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
But he or she is suffering. They are in pain. Why should they be made to suffer like that? To watch everyone around them fall in love and form families while they are on the outside. It's not right. Things should not be like that. There is enough pain in the world, why create more?
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Why should they be made to suffer like that? To watch everyone around them fall in love and form families while they are on the outside. It's not right. Things should not be like that. There is enough pain in the world, why create more?
Again-- why is there pain AT ALL?
What makes this man's pain worse than anyone else's?
Why is it unjust of God to demand that homosexuals remain unmarried and chaste, but just of Him to demand that heterosexuals who cannot/will not commit to marriage remain unmarried and chaste?
[ October 28, 2004, 01:31 PM: Message edited by: Scott R ]
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Why is it unjust of God to demand that homosexuals remain unmarried and chaste, but just of Him to demand that heterosexuals who cannot/will not commit to marriage remain unmarried and chaste?"
I suppose the answer to this depends on whether you believe actually being homosexual is a choice, or whether there's an involuntary component. Because if it's the latter, it IS less just of God to demand chastity from all homosexuals.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Many heterosexuals remain unmarried involuntarily. Is it also unfair to ask them to remain chaste?
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Because it just is... If he or she is drawn towards a person of the same sex for compassionship and completion then they should be allowed to be with that person instead of denying themselves that joy. Everyone deserves that! Besides, how can someone who is married, in a relationship expect this person, if the opportunity presented itself to turn away from what makes them happy in an unhedinistic sense? Who's to say that GOD didn't send them someone to love? See the book Truth Dare or Promise. A really good book...
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have to agree with Karl - Pavlov's Wager is a fun exercise in justification, but it is significantly less academic when it impacts your life directly.
I know Bev doesn't like my trotting out of the Great Pumpkin, but during these discussions we assume there is one God and a specific path and some of us assume we know what it is.
What bothers me is: just because the entire human population thinks the world is flat doesn't necessarily make it flat. Just because a lot of people tend to believe more or less the same thing doesn't make them correct, either.
quote:I have to agree with Karl - Pavlov's Wager is a fun exercise in justification, but it is significantly less academic when it impacts your life directly.
I know few if any Christians whose life is not impacted just as directly and profoundly by the ramifications of their beliefs.
quote:I know Bev doesn't like my trotting out of the Great Pumpkin, but during these discussions we assume there is one God and a specific path and some of us assume we know what it is.
Trevor, this thread is premised on the existence of God and the validity of Christian doctrine. It's asking a question that starts, "If Christianity..."
How much sense does it make to ask Linus, "If the Great Pumpkin values sincerity so much, how come he does X" and then object to the answer with, "but the Great Pumpkin doesn't exist"?
quote:What bothers me is: just because the entire human population thinks the world is flat doesn't necessarily make it flat. Just because a lot of people tend to believe more or less the same thing doesn't make them correct, either.
Of course, most people have a very mistaken impression about how long ago people realized the earth wasn't flat.
posted
Trevor, I believe you mean "Pascal's Wager". I'm not familiar with any wager Pavlov might have made.
Posts: 1114 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
1. Very true. However, I would suggest that as a rule, the faith of Christians doesn't condemn them for something they feel is beyond their control. It would be similar, from a homosexual's point of view: "You're a bad person because you're orange. Although you can try to be a better person, you still have to look in the mirror every day and realize you're not a good person."
2. Yes Dag, but which Christian doctrine are we referring? And I mention the Great Pumpkin as a way of illustrating my concern that as a Christian or even a would-be Christian, I am asked to select from one of the following answers. But if we choose to challenge the nature of those answers or indeed the question itself, it skews everything else.
3. Also true. And you might find one or two people who still believe it. But when it was commonly accepted fact, it was still no more correct than it is today.
quote: If he or she is drawn towards a person of the same sex for compassionship and completion then they should be allowed to be with that person instead of denying themselves that joy. Everyone deserves that!
It's not about what you deserve at all, Syn.
It is about whom you choose to follow.
Circumstance does not enter into it at all.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually, they do because circumstances have a way of shifting even the most solid beliefs in the face of them for good or ill...
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
I don't believe one is morally justified in the eyes of the Christian/Mormon God, in being disobedient just because circumstances have changed.
I do not believe that God is required, or requires Himself, to give people Nice Things. The only thing that God (in my opinion) is required to give the obedient is the assurance that they are doing His will. All the rest is icing.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote: Why is it unjust of God to demand that homosexuals remain unmarried and chaste, but just of Him to demand that heterosexuals who cannot/will not commit to marriage remain unmarried and chaste?
How is it just of god to provide a divinely sanctioned outlet for those of his creations he has granted attraction to the opposite sex but to endow others of his creations with attraction to their same sex and then deny any divinely sanctioned outlet?
But then again, how is it just of him to provide the means to satisfy the most gluttonous appetite if you happen to be born in the US, but let you starve if you're born in India or Africa?
It's really pointless to ask any of these questions because God always gets to hide behind the curtain of inscrutability. It's amazing, though, that we can claim to know some facts about God, but at the same time claim that his ways and reasons are beyond our limited comprehension.
quote: What makes this man's pain worse than anyone else's?
Well, for one, this man's pain is borne of being given contrary imperatives. Additionally, most spiritual pain comes after the sin. I can tell you that in the case of homosexuality that the pain often comes years before the "sin" is ever committed.
And since we're discussing the justice of God, how is it just that an omniscient being refuses to tell his "chosen people" how to compassionately deal with the homosexuals among them? "God-sanctioned" treatment of homosexuals has run the gamut from stoning to death, through shock-therapy, and has only in the past 15 - 20 years or so reached the enlightened acknowledgement that, well, OK, maybe you won't go to hell simply for being sexually flawed, but you will if you act on it.
Questions of the justice (or lack thereof) of God are pointless because there is no external standard. The justice of God is that which God does no matter how unjust it might seem to any standard conceivable by human beings. The insidious reality is that you can get humans to do or suffer through anything as long as you can promise them sufficient rewards in the "next" life. It's infinitely more effective if the people being placated with promises that it'll all work out in the end don't actually have to experience the specific pain, suffering, torture, starvation, humiliation, etc.
Posts: 6394 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:How is it just of god to provide a divinely sanctioned outlet for those of his creations he has granted attraction to the opposite sex but to endow others of his creations with attraction to their same sex and then deny any divinely sanctioned outlet?
It isn't just, under your premises, Karl. But this life isn't a judgement. Our circumstances in this world are not meant to be fair.
quote:It's really pointless to ask any of these questions because God always gets to hide behind the curtain of inscrutability. It's amazing, though, that we can claim to know some facts about God, but at the same time claim that his ways and reasons are beyond our limited comprehension.
On the contrary-- I believe God will reveal very clearly to individuals the reasons for their own suffering. But He rarely tells anyone else anyone else's story.
quote:most spiritual pain comes after the sin. I can tell you that in the case of homosexuality that the pain often comes years before the "sin" is ever committed.
I can think of no better reason for Christians to reach out EARLY to young people who are feeling the tug of same-gender attraction in support and love.
quote: how is it just that an omniscient being refuses to tell his "chosen people" how to compassionately deal with the homosexuals among them? "God-sanctioned" treatment of homosexuals has run the gamut from stoning to death, through shock-therapy, and has only in the past 15 - 20 years or so reached the enlightened acknowledgement that, well, OK, maybe you won't go to hell simply for being sexually flawed, but you will if you act on it.
Why are God's people such screwheads, in other words. And why doesn't God let them know.
I beleive He does, but that we don't listen.
quote:The insidious reality is that you can get humans to do or suffer through anything as long as you can promise them sufficient rewards in the "next" life. It's infinitely more effective if the people being placated with promises that it'll all work out in the end don't actually have to experience the specific pain, suffering, torture, starvation, humiliation, etc.
Like I said, I don't believe God tells anyone anyone else's story. The Prophets know and reveal God's will to the world, but they do not know how God has told individuals to go about being obedient.
As far as placating goes-- meh. I don't think most Christians even believe that, Karl. The ones I know certainly don't use the 'better place' excuse the way you've described. For me, the important thing is to obtain forgiveness for my own sins, teach my family and those around me Christ's mercy and goodness, and continue in obedience.
That's quite enough forward thinking for me. Heaven can wait.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
We're all much more comfortable judging the sins of others than turning the judging eyes on ourselves.
Posts: 2848 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is a controversial thread, and it touches on subjects that are very important to many people posting in it. It's been mostly civilized so far - I like it.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, if they reach young confused people early it makes matters worse! Love is more... being able to break down a certain wall if you know it will REALLY help the person instead of destroying them. Love is always, always gently and kindly trying to build a person up and truly understand what they are going through with compassion. Sitting there being able to date and marry and touch someone of the opposite sex while a person who is dealing with "same sex attraction" cannot and has to go home with this loneliness and destructive self hatred is NOT a compassionate thing to do. This is the very reason why I have so much trouble with Christianity. I WANT things to be fair. I want the man who falls for a man to be able to be with him because what's to say that if there is a God that God didn't bring this man into his life? How can anyone know? Like it or not, in my view that concept HAS to break to end the cycle of self-hatred, suicide, torture in the name of becoming what you simply cannot be and parents disowning their child for refusing to live like that for the rest of their lives. To me absolutely nothing matters more ethan those connections... Not even God, doctrine or religions is more important.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
]![[Kiss]](graemlins/kiss.gif)
KarlEd
