Please select the category that most closely reflects your concern about this content,
so that we can review it and determine whether it violates Civility 101 or isn't
appropriate for some other reason.
Abusing this feature is also a violation of Civility 101.
Explanation:
There has been no shortage of controversy as gay people assume increased roles as parents and married couples in our society, but almost nowhere has this conflict been more intense than in the church. Many religious leaders have condemned homosexuality, calling it a sin or even an abomination, but for millions of gay people around the world, there is nothing inherently sinful about their sexual preferences.
Biweekly updates on new debates and experts
Please check your email to confirm your subscription.
© 2008-2010 Opposing Views, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Opposing Views, Inc. is not responsible for the content posted on this website. Please view full disclaimer under Terms
Not isolated
"Transcendent" moral law
I'm not sure what you mean by "Authors like CS Lewis in "Mere Christianity" have argued how there is a moral law that trascends religions". To me religious moral laws already inappropriately "transcend" the secular human realm. I haven't read the book you mention, but what can possibly transcend the law of god as interpreted by those charged to do so?
In any case, my major concern is that the source of religious moral laws (in this case, the law against homosexuality) is god and not man. Proper moral law must be based on the nature of humans, not on the nature of god. "Do what god says" is not a moral law, because it does not ask what behaviors are good or bad for people AS people. It simplistically says that being good consists of obeying the rules (as defined by the bible). By this improper "moral law" homosexuality is a sin because, as I said, it violates the arbitrary law set down in a dusty old book.
In contrast "Live and let live" (for example) IS a proper moral law because it respects the nature of humans as individual moral beings with independent minds who live and relate to one another through mutual recognition, respect, and consent. By this proper moral law homosexuality is NOT a "sin" because it does not violate the rights or fundamental humanity of anyone else.
You also say the "...bible has to be analised literally, symbolically and historically". This is a contradiction. It can be taken literally or NOT literally. It either IS the literal word of god, or its open to interpretation. If it IS the literal word of god, then you cannot re-interpret any part of it to your liking. And if its NOT the literal word of god, then it is not the authoritative law for human behavior or anything else, for that matter. It is hypocrisy to take parts of the bible literally while "interpreting" other parts. And once you "interpret" it, either symbolically or historically or in any other way, you have put your judgement (or the judgement of other humans) above the word of god.
- SidAirfoil
September 11, 2008 8:38AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Who was God talking to all these years?
I really want to know what "Law" was passed down since the 10 Commandments? I will not dispute Moses account, but there were no other witnesses. Not a single commandment about homosexuals.
Seems a sin of omission on Gods part? Even the churches and religious organizations, dispute any contemporary claims for "hearing" from God.
Those people you claim are "charged" to do so, are none the less just other people. They are all there because they choose to be. No more than you or me to interpret anything. God has also seen fit not to drop a list of people from heaven, charging anyone to do anything.
Like any corporation, the religious organizations all get some good people and some bad people. Like any good employee they also protect their jobs. Where you get this fantasy about God and people is well beyond any sane comprehension. If it werwe a bad thing, God would not have allowed animals to "suffer" the same malady.
I once knew a farmer. He had a prize bull that was a flaming homosexual. They had to "milk" the bull to impregnate the cows. It isn't all that uncommon on the farm. Why should it be so in the cities?
- tomcat2200
September 14, 2008 1:34AM
Reply to this Recommend
(3)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
The Law of Moses and the dignity of man
Tomcat2200,
The 10 commandments you reference are actually a part of the Hebrew Torah, meaning Law that was give to Moses from God. The 10 commandments are as significant part of the Mosaic Law. Two clear prohibitions against homosexuality are made by God through Moses in the Law.
" 'Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable." (Leviticus 18:22, NIV)
" 'If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads." (Leviticus 20:13)
You compare the act of animals to the acts of humans. Animals indulges in all kinds of beastly behavior but to compare this to human homosexuality is actually out of place. For one humans are created above animals and we know right from wrong in a general sense which animals cannot. Furthermore animals have know self identity and are entirely incapable of rational thought, a bull cannot think itself homosexual anymore then it can think itself a bull, it just is a bull. Animals have instincts that they act on and when taken out of nature, eg. a farm, they are more inclined to all kinds of more unnatural behaviors including apparently homosexual acts.
Peace,
Spencer
- Periannath December 29, 2008 12:07PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
not really.
Animals are indeed capable of rational thought, and tons of animals have self idenity complexes... where are you getting your info ?
Leviticus is Old Testement, ntm Lev is a set of rules for Hebrew Males... Are you Hebrew?
- zman676
April 16, 2009 12:12AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Beg to differ.
Lets first start with a working and shared definintion of "rational."
Rational: "Having or exercising the ability to reason. Consistent with or based on reason; logical: rational behavior." (American Heritage Dictionary)
You ask where I am getting my info; where are you getting yours? There is some controversy as to whether animals are capable of rational throught, however, the vast majority of people including scientists do accept an animal as a rational creature. For example, recently there was a women in CA who had a pet chimp. Without warning and without rational basis the chimp went "ape" on her girl friend and almost killed her. Professionals in the field, including zoologists, vets, other biologits etc. often reference that these types of things happen because they are "wild animals." To expect rational behavior from an animal is absurd.
Furthermore, from a Biblical point of view, regardless of how literaly one interpreates the creation accounts there is a clear distinction between man and the animals. Namely they alone were made in the image and likeness of God, recieved from a him a rational that is in likeness to him (which animals do not) and were given dominion over the earth (including the animal kingdomm).
Philosophically we can know that animals are not capable of considering sylogistic reasoning, understand logic. A dog does not think about where it would go to college or what it wants to do with its life. The earliest philosophers and through the present age have noticed a distinction from animals and humankind.
To argue that because an animal does something means it is ok for humans is ludicrist. Animals eat there own kind, commit acts of aggression including murder and many other atrocious behavior if we tried to understand this rationaly. However, we know that they are animals and they do that kind of thing based on instict and conditioning.
Yes Leviticus is Old Testements. Leviticus is not just a rule book for Hebrew males it was given to the whole people of Israel as with the rest of the Torah. No I am not ethnically Hebrew alhtough I do consider myself a "child of Abraham" through the promise, i.e. by faith .
Shalom,
Spencer
- Periannath April 16, 2009 5:37PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Faith doesn't make you a Jew
To be a Jew, you have to either go through a conversion process, or have a Jewish mother. You can consider yourself all you want, but in the eyes of Judaism, you don't count.
- quantummechanik
June 8, 2009 1:55AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
sorry for the misunderstanding
Sorry for the misunderstanding. I never said I was Jewish or was a Jew but that I am by faith a child of Abraham.
- Periannath June 8, 2009 3:00PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
"Christ... fully reveals man to himself"
The late Pope John Paul II was noted for quoting often the phrase "Christ...fully reveals man to himself." from "Gaudium et Spes." In the Christian tradition God and his commands are not "up there" far away in some Platonic other but right here, now in the present among us. God came to Abram, his glory dwelt on Mt. Sinai with Moses, John the Baptist preached "the Kingdom of God is at hand," Jesus, "it is among us" and Jesus the Christ himself is the incarnation of God. God's Word came present not "up there" but in time, in history, in the lives and languages of a real culture of and society amongst real individuals.
Universal moral law is only true in so much as it is indeed universal and based in the common good. Not the good of an individual or a group but as it is the good for all. In order for this to be so it must somehow exist ontologically in its own right, objectively and not in the will of man for the will of man is not only corrupt but subjective. In this case the only moral law that can actually be true and universal is that law which is given from God. Any other attempt for man to construct there own law, there own morals, there own understanding of right and wrong, good and evil is in fact from the evil one. To do so would nuance the falsity that we are god, or anyway like God. (see Genesis 3). Rather God calls us into relationship with him not only because it is the good for us to do but because it is the purpose for which we are created. God not only calls us to himself as an action of doing but as an action of being because it is who we are, after all God calls us into being.
How is it reconciled then, that we as humans need a morality that is actually attainable that isn't beyond our reach that is as you said "for people." God knows that his law is to high for people to achieve (see Romans 7). This is precisely why he came not as other but as man and in doing so made the way for man to experience not only holiness and righteousness (as accorded by his law) but true peace with God and right relationship with him. Jesus' humanity is evidence that it is possible and he is the way to our eternal Father, our divine Creator. Jesus affords the way we must choose weather one will take that, accept God's offer of freedom and redemption or continue to neglect him and his holiness by living in sin. Societies likewise, can compromise the truth and go on living "as every man sees fit" with the illusion of justice by "living and letting live." But dies this "live and let live" really provide true justice? What about the injustice of psychological distress within a man, is this accounted for? Not because "live and let live" only accounts for interpersonal relationship not the inner justice of man. Or how about acts of "so called freedom" that actually bring further bondage? Are they ok if only consent is given? Prostitution, fornication, drunkenness, consumerism? All of these things go on under the guise of false justice, ie. live and let live, but in reality they continue to demean the integrity and intrinsic value of the human person. The justice based in the reality that all men are created equal is the justice of God for he has endowed men with such unalienable rights as life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Each human person, all men, all women, those who believe they are homosexual and those who do not, those born, those unborn, those dying they are all worth so much to God that he he gave his only begotten son to die that whosoever believes in him will not perish but have everlasting, full, life. Christ speaks the freeing word, the word of liberty over all those who call on his name as they become who they truly are before sin and bondage and oppression came to foul our fallen race. Jesus saves. Jesus calls us to our original purpose, he is the fulfillment of our happiness. True morality and justice accounts to the full truth of the human being and human experiance accroding to him who knows all things and all things about us, according to him who walked among us and made a way for real people, and who calls us into realtionship with him and gives us to the power to live holy, lives of right action and right being by putting His Spirit in those who believe in him. This Spirit is the Lord the giver of life, who reigns with the Father and the Son, One God overall, for all, in love with all.
including you friend,
Peace,
Spencer
- Periannath December 29, 2008 11:53AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
I challenge you to explore all of the scripture that . . .
SidAirfoil,
If you REALLY believe the bible is "God's Word" not man's and as you say "In any case, my major concern is that the source of religious moral laws (in this case, the law against homosexuality ) is god and not man",
then I challenge you to explore all of the scripture that I have assembled at http://WhatkindofGod.org/ and swear on the bible that you believe all of the horrible statements attributed to "God" in the bible! including for example:
"No one born of a forbidden marriage (no "bastard") nor any offspring from such a marriage may enter the assembly of the LORD, not even in the tenth generation."
If Deuteronomy 23:2 is taken seriously (which Conservatives must do, if they take the scriptures as seriously as they claim) , then these are the inevitable consequences :
Not only are all the "bastard" children of the faithful to be unjustly punished (for something they had no power over), but all of the following as well:
all of their children, (2nd generation)
their grand-children, (3rd generation)
their great-grand-children, (4th generation)
their great-great-grand-children, (5th generation)
their great-great-great-grand-children,
their great-great-great-great-grand-children,
their great-great-great-great-great-grand-children,
their great-great-great-great-great-great-grand-children,
their great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grand-children as well,
(which could number into the hundreds if not thousands of offspring).
This also has serious ramifications going BACKWARDS, i.e. ,
Can you be absolutely sure that you yourself aren't a bastard?
How can you be sure that neither of your two parents was?
What about your 4 grand-parents?
What about your 8 great-grand-parents?
etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc.,
- Rayosun
September 10, 2009 5:05PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.