The 10 commandment do not enumerate a restriction barring homosexuality as a cardinal sin. While, murder on the other hand, is a cardinal sin. Some Christians today say murder is forgivable -- so homosexuality, not listed, should certainly be forgivable correct? This claim makes me uncomfortable because it reads between the lines too much. It does pose some questions to consider. How does "born again" play into the mix? If you're born again, do you get away with murder? Does that mean the 10 commandments aren't absolute? Does it mean, inductively, I am right and that homosexuality is forgivable?
This is part of the issue with religion and homosexuality. It's all up for interpretation. Technically you're right, as you mention below, all sins are equal in the eyes of God (at least supposedly with catholicism that's how it is), and confession is supposed to wipe your slate clean and forgive your sin, no matter how great. But that's not the way it works. Society picks and chooses what it wants to hold more deplorable. In my mind religion needs to be taken out of it entirely and people need to realize that it is nothing to "forgive." I've said it before and I'll say it again: with all the hate out there in the world, people loving each other is not the problem.
Arctyrael said:
How about society and a teenager growing up gay? Is it acceptable in a modern society to let our children agonize over these intolerant perspectives? Teenagers commit suicide over this. They understand the hate in the limited scope that they see.
This implies that homosexuality is a choice. While the debate rages on, I firmly believe it
isn't a choice. It isn't about "letting" our children agonize. It's about letting people be who they are and not be persecuted for it. Government made it illegal to discriminate on the basis of race, disability, other factors that are not factors of choice. A homosexual's life would be no more or less difficult than anyone else's, but it is complicated by the stigma that is attached to them by society.
Arctyrael said:
So much of the gay community is portrayed as a sexual, lust filled desire, just waiting for sex at every turn. I would compare this to what I know the heterosexual community to be, but that is not my point. My point is, just as there are heterosexual couples out there that live by the bible, there are gay couples out there, as well, that live by the bible. If they feel being gay is a sin as Leviticus says, then asking God to forgive the weakness is enough. They can't change and be straight... The murderer makes a choice, and dear blessed, why would anyone choose to be gay? Their only hope is to do Gods bidding in the imperfect way he expects of all his children.
This is what it comes down to - and what any religion should come down to. Your relationship with God or Buddha or Vishnu or whoever the hell you worship should be very personal and very private. Why should someone need to sit in a booth in the dark and speak in hushed whispers to an intermediary to beg forgiveness from another human being when they can close their eyes and speak to their god directly? We make a production of forgiveness when in the end, someone's salvation or condemnation is really none of anyone else's business.
Arctyrael said:
So then, if a homosexual relationship was a relationship -- albeit sinful -- based in the fundamentals of Christianity it is no more sinful than the lives of any number of heterosexual Christians. A sin is a sin no matter how great; a transgression against God. God said it only takes faith the size of a mustard seed to redeem oneself -- how insignificant must the sin be to damnation, provided along the way, you never ask for salvation? My point is, no particular sin is any worse than any other sin and they do not aggregate on quantity (What about 10 commandments? *read above again*). You are either saved or not. Humans are weak. Would God fault one of his children for an inherent weakness if that child fervently upheld himself/herself to the glory of God? That goes against everything I have ever heard from any preacher/pastor.
Exactly. If you are a faithful person, it should be looked upon as no worse than any other sin. If you're a Christian, the bible tells that Jesus spent time with the prostitutes and the criminals and the "sinners". He didn't shun them; he didn't ignore them or cast them aside, and he didn't tell them they were going to burn in hell. He told them basically those who believe in me will be forgiven. You (and I mean general you) can't preach love and tolerance only to turn around and condemn people when it isn't your place to judge.
Arctyrael said:
So if we are not to judge others, which means not to interpret God's intentions applied to his children, should Christianity as a religion forbid gay marriage? After all, the religion will still know that the participants of a gay relationship will be judged by God on their day of reckoning. If being gay is a sin, then the couple will get what’s coming, and the religion will still have followed the bible by not judging. Win - Win. If homosexuality is not a sin, or at the very least forgivable, then discrimination occurring today is a large hullabaloo over nothing.
There's a lot of things that Christians and other religious groups
shouldn't do that they do. Like I said, society dictates religious law. It's been that way for centuries, and it will continue to be so, whether it be "my religion is right, yours is wrong and you should die for it" or "hey, let's burn her, she's a witch" - societal pressure has and always will dictate the terms of what is "acceptable" and what is punishable. What other people do shouldn't be any of anyone else's damned business, but they will always make it so. People largely don't change.
Arctyrael said:
To end with, notice I never once mentioned the government. Why? The government is not a part of the debate and it never should be. It is a government for its entire people and that is a freedom you exercise every day you wake up and practice Christianity. If you lived in Iran, you would be executed if you spoke of Christianity to any Muslim. No government should sanction any form of religious marriage. Instead, unions, or secular marriage, should be viewed with an acceptable tolerance of people whose background differs from yours. It allows you to be happy for people with a varying lifestyle. It prevents you from taking away joys that should rightfully be theirs.
We only live once – you have to do it right the first time, and let other people do the same.
The unfortunate thing is, the government is a bigger part of it than the churches - because while churches only have the societal pressures to place on people, the government is making the laws to enforce barring people from their inalienable rights. At least in this country, it is our right to have "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" and it is disgusting to know that that only applies if you play by the rules of the people in power. It's the same type of garbage we fought for our independence as a country for, and how many years down the road, we're inflicting the same injustice on our own people "for the common good."
