I drive a lot with my car because of work and I often listen to the info radio channel. A few day ago they tackled the topic of homophobia and a possible source to all of this.
They mentioned that religions like christianity and islam are the source for people actually being homophobic because of verses like this: "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."
So, what the theists and also atheists on this board think about this? Are you homophobic in the sense of not being tolerant towards them or even hating them?
I myself don't bother with gays and transgenders and whatever people call themself. I'm pretty tolerant if it comes to them. They live their lifes and I live my own. I also wouldn't mind having gay friends.
But I also think that homophobia is being spread by religious people. I tend to point at those people standing on the street with those signs hating them.
Define "homophobia". Generally "phobias" are the "irrational fear of something". Are we talking about someone literally being afraid of homosexuals like they're afraid of spiders, snakes or heights?
If you mean homophobia to be anything else but that, consider not using the word "homophobia" at all, because IT ISN'T ACTUALLY A PHOBIA. The word "phobia" has a specific meaning. You just can't tack it on to whatever you like and expect it to stick.
orangeWIZARD: Define "homophobia". Generally "phobias" are the "irrational fear of something". Are we talking about someone literally being afraid of homosexuals like they're afraid of spiders, snakes or heights?
If you mean homophobia to be anything else but that, consider not using the word "homophobia" at all, because IT ISN'T ACTUALLY A PHOBIA. The word "phobia" has a specific meaning. You just can't tack it on to whatever you like and expect it to stick.
I refer to this:
Homophobia encompasses a range of negative attitudes and feelings toward homosexuality or people who are identified or perceived as being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT).[1][2][3] It can be expressed as antipathy, contempt, prejudice, aversion, or hatred, may be based on irrational fear, and is sometimes related to religious beliefs.[4]
orangeWIZARD: Define "homophobia". Generally "phobias" are the "irrational fear of something". Are we talking about someone literally being afraid of homosexuals like they're afraid of spiders, snakes or heights?
If you mean homophobia to be anything else but that, consider not using the word "homophobia" at all, because IT ISN'T ACTUALLY A PHOBIA. The word "phobia" has a specific meaning. You just can't tack it on to whatever you like and expect it to stick.
Like it or not, homophobia is a thing and not a word Peh invented.
As for the question at hand....religion is responsible for tons of stupidity in the world...
orangeWIZARD: Define "homophobia". Generally "phobias" are the "irrational fear of something". Are we talking about someone literally being afraid of homosexuals like they're afraid of spiders, snakes or heights?
If you mean homophobia to be anything else but that, consider not using the word "homophobia" at all, because IT ISN'T ACTUALLY A PHOBIA. The word "phobia" has a specific meaning. You just can't tack it on to whatever you like and expect it to stick.
I refer to this:
Homophobia encompasses a range of negative attitudes and feelings toward homosexuality or people who are identified or perceived as being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT).[1][2][3] It can be expressed as antipathy, contempt, prejudice, aversion, or hatred, may be based on irrational fear, and is sometimes related to religious beliefs.[4]
I refuse to participate any further in a discussion about "homophobia" as long as the word is continued to be used. I do not wish to propagate its use by sustaining a discussion about it.
orangeWIZARD: Define "homophobia". Generally "phobias" are the "irrational fear of something". Are we talking about someone literally being afraid of homosexuals like they're afraid of spiders, snakes or heights?
If you mean homophobia to be anything else but that, consider not using the word "homophobia" at all, because IT ISN'T ACTUALLY A PHOBIA. The word "phobia" has a specific meaning. You just can't tack it on to whatever you like and expect it to stick.
I refer to this:
Homophobia encompasses a range of negative attitudes and feelings toward homosexuality or people who are identified or perceived as being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT).[1][2][3] It can be expressed as antipathy, contempt, prejudice, aversion, or hatred, may be based on irrational fear, and is sometimes related to religious beliefs.[4]
I refuse to participate any further in a discussion about "homophobia" as long as the word is continued to be used. I do not wish to propagate its use by sustaining a discussion about it.
Fair enough. What's your opinion on people who ostracize, discriminate or despise people who are attracted to the same sex? Do you believe the major source of these feelings is mainly religion or do you think there are other major influences?
Fair enough. What's your opinion on people who ostracize, discriminate or despise people who are attracted to the same sex? Do you believe the major source of these feelings is mainly religion or do you think there are other major influences?
I think it's a bad thing to do, and the people that do it are bad people. Yes, I believe it mainly comes from religion, or rather, people taking what the bible says at face value without doing any close examination of it, which religion, as a whole, is fond of doing.
In my opinion, a closer examination of the bible reveals that Christians should be helping sinners of all sorts not treating them as outcasts.
Fair enough. What's your opinion on people who ostracize, discriminate or despise people who are attracted to the same sex? Do you believe the major source of these feelings is mainly religion or do you think there are other major influences?
In my opinion, a closer examination of the bible reveals that Christians should be helping sinners of all sorts not treating them as outcasts.
WTF???????????????
Dude, even if your stance is to help, to see homosexuals as sinners is not much better.
And no, i'm not gay (just saying, since there is the weird assumption that, if you defend gays you are one yourself).
Dude, even if your stance is to help, to see homosexuals as sinners is not much better.
Dude, everyone is a sinner. Stop getting caught up over the word sin.
Sure, i'll got with that; but the problem is the use of "bible" and "sin" in the same sentence about this, which shows the problem expressed in the OP of religion being the main culprit of homophobia (or whatever OW wants to call it).
The problem with OW's post is that, in the first paragraph he is saying that people that do it are bad people and that the main problem comes from religion being taken at face value (i agree on both accounts), but in the second paragraph he is branding homosexuals as sinner and worthy of being helped, like they are doing something wrong or don't know any better. IMO, that's falls into the holier-than-thou attitude...
As for the question at hand....religion is responsible for tons of stupidity in the world...
This.
I also been wondering about the the following questions for a while now regard to the source of homophobia.
My first question is: Why God only created beautiful male angels? Its strange that the Bible rarely mention female angels.
My second question. When the Jews petitioned for Jesus crucifixion, it was spread through hatred and intolerance. Does those having homophobia share the same view as those who help killed Jesus?
Everyone is a sinner,so i do as the bible tells us what to do and tell them the gospel.In a loving manner may i hasten to add as well.I always remind myself im no better as a sinner.
Sure, i'll got with that; but the problem is the use of "bible" and "sin" in the same sentence about this, which shows the problem expressed in the OP of religion being the main culprit of homophobia (or whatever OW wants to call it).
The problem with OW's post is that, in the first paragraph he is saying that people that do it are bad people and that the main problem comes from religion being taken at face value (i agree on both accounts), but in the second paragraph he is branding homosexuals as sinner and worthy of being helped, like they are doing something wrong or don't know any better. IMO, that's falls into the holier-than-thou attitude...
What on earth? If everyone is a sinner then there's nothing homophobic about pointing it out. Simple as that.
@spacekobra But it rather sounds like that homosexuals are sinners, because there are homosexuals. This is what Isildur is arguing against and that's probably also what OW is implying. Homosexuality is not a sickness and shouldn't be seen as one. But I would also understand the opposite, because it's avoiding a living being from passing on its dna. I would also agree that it is a genetical error. But, if these people enjoy the way they are so let them be.
That's stupid. It's not really about what we think at all.
Put it this way, if you believe in an all powerful, all knowing, all good being (lets ignore your actual beliefs and whether or not this is possible for a moment here). And then that being tells you not to eat grapes there is likely a good reason to not eat grapes. What we call sin is you not listening to what the being tells you to do. Rebellion against God.
So if you eat grapes you sin by eating grapes not by having grapes as a decoration for your fruit platter. If you commit homosexual acts, not the act of being homosexual but committing the act then you sin.
Spacekobra: That's stupid. It's not really about what we think at all.
Put it this way, if you believe in an all powerful, all knowing, all good being (lets ignore your actual beliefs and whether or not this is possible for a moment here). And then that being tells you not to eat grapes there is likely a good reason to not eat grapes. What we call sin is you not listening to what the being tells you to do. Rebellion against God.
So if you eat grapes you sin by eating grapes not by having grapes as a decoration for your fruit platter. If you commit homosexual acts, not the act of being homosexual but committing the act then you sin.
Your comparision is flawed and probably also your understanding of how homosexuality works. If you are designed to be homosexual, then you do what you've been designed to do. You can't choose to be homosexual as much as you can't choose to be female or male. But, as far as I know there are different kinds of argumentations for how people become homosexual. The one argumentation is by genetic causes and the other is by environmental causes. But I remind you that homosexuality is also part of the animal kingdom and it would be nice to know what the environmental influences are for animals to become homosexual when it is not caused by the genes. Also keep in mind, that everyone starts out as a female in the womb and it is later being determined wether the person become a male or female. Check out the evolution of the male. I'm saying this, because it could give you a hint. Back to the sin part. Is it therefore fair to call someone a sinner if he is designed to sin?
Are you saying homosexuals have to engage in homosexual sex? Otherwise known as they cannot live a life of celibacy?
I used grapes because grapes are seemingly harmless but if I was told not to eat them I would. I don't have to eat grapes I just choose to because I think they are delicious and I'm not wrong in doing so. If it turns out I was wrong then I have problem do I not?
People don't have to have premarital sex, they just do. People don't have to get drunk but they do. People don't have to lust but they do. The list goes on. I don't know if homosexuality is nature, nurture, both or something in between but the fact of the matter is that your tendencies isn't the sin. Its acting on them.
The fact of the matter is that God didn't intend for homosexuality so its breaking his design. That's why its labelled as a sin. It wasn't there when he designed humans, it came after the fall of man. Whether or not its nature is not really the point of why its a sin. And again, there are plenty of things deemed acceptable that are labelled as sins. The point of the matter is that God (an omni-max being) says it shouldn't be done and so there's a good reason to believe that.
That's the Christians thought on the matter. If you're not a Christian and you end up being right in the end then who cares? Christians jobs aren't to separate the righteous from the sinners, there wouldn't be anybody on the righteous side if that were the case. We're to treat them like anybody else and love them. They have their sins we have ours.
Spacekobra: Are you saying homosexuals have to engage in homosexual sex? Otherwise known as they cannot live a life of celibacy?
Are you seriously asking this? "God: "Sorry that I've made you gay. Please keep yourself from having sex with another person of the same sex while you are at it. You know, that's a sin, because I said so. Read the bible goddamnit!" You don't think that this is kind of offensive?
I used grapes because grapes are seemingly harmless but if I was told not to eat them I would. I don't have to eat grapes I just choose to because I think they are delicious and I'm not wrong in doing so. If it turns out I was wrong then I have problem do I not?
People don't have to have premarital sex, they just do. People don't have to get drunk but they do. People don't have to lust but they do. The list goes on. I don't know if homosexuality is nature, nurture, both or something in between but the fact of the matter is that your tendencies isn't the sin. Its acting on them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hormone and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_arousal God designed us in a really fucked up way, don't you think? Try not having sex with the one you love for the rest of your life. Let's see if your instincts and your body will get the better of you. But can you actually compare the love between to people with eating a grape?
The fact of the matter is that God didn't intend for homosexuality so its breaking his design. That's why its labelled as a sin. It wasn't there when he designed humans, it came after the fall of man. Whether or not its nature is not really the point of why its a sin. And again, there are plenty of things deemed acceptable that are labelled as sins. The point of the matter is that God (an omni-max being) says it shouldn't be done and so there's a good reason to believe that.
Well, you know. If you argue from a christian perspective then there is obviously nothing wrong with that. God said that and so be it. Screw the opinion and scienfitic explanations of others. The world seems to be a lot easier to grasp that way.
That's the Christians thought on the matter. If you're not a Christian and you end up being right in the end then who cares? Christians jobs aren't to separate the righteous from the sinners, there wouldn't be anybody on the righteous side if that were the case. We're to treat them like anybody else and love them. They have their sins we have ours.
I agree on this, but it's too sad that there exists enough morons to make the life of other people more difficult than it should be.
Sure, i'll got with that; but the problem is the use of "bible" and "sin" in the same sentence about this, which shows the problem expressed in the OP of religion being the main culprit of homophobia (or whatever OW wants to call it).
The problem with OW's post is that, in the first paragraph he is saying that people that do it are bad people and that the main problem comes from religion being taken at face value (i agree on both accounts), but in the second paragraph he is branding homosexuals as sinner and worthy of being helped, like they are doing something wrong or don't know any better. IMO, that's falls into the holier-than-thou attitude...
What on earth? If everyone is a sinner then there's nothing homophobic about pointing it out. Simple as that.
Yes, there is. If you say "sinner" as a figure of speech than sure, there is nothing wrong; but if you use it in a religious stance (which the the problem here), you are giving it an all different connotation. This: "a closer examination of the bible reveals that Christians should be helping sinners", is not a figure of speech.
Spacekobra: Put it this way, if you believe in an all powerful, all knowing, all good being (lets ignore your actual beliefs and whether or not this is possible for a moment here). And then that being tells you not to eat grapes there is likely a good reason to not eat grapes. What we call sin is you not listening to what the being tells you to do. Rebellion against God.
It's not that simple as God's existence is not of general acceptance, so you can't just label things as you please, taking them for granted and just expect people to accept them at face value. If you say "take the premise of", then you also need to accept the premise of the contrary, that there is no God and as such, to view homosexuality as a religious sin is wrong. You can't do that, can you? All this discussion comes from religious people taking their subjectivity as the truth.
Spacekobra: The fact of the matter is that God didn't intend for homosexuality so its breaking his design. That's why its labelled as a sin. It wasn't there when he designed humans, it came after the fall of man.(...)The point of the matter is that God (an omni-max being) says it shouldn't be done and so there's a good reason to believe that.
And how you do know that? Were you there when he created humans? Did you talked to the guy? You say there wasn't homosexuality when he first designed humans...well...since there was only Adam (male) and Eve (female), it would be a little hard since there were no triggers, no two of the same gender. In the end, it's not a good example.
The point of the matter is that, if God is omniscient, if God knows the past, present and future....how didn't he knew that homosexuality would become a thing, why did he gave humanity those tendencies? And before someone plays the "free-will" card, there can't be free-will to something that doesn't exist, free-will only exist because we have tendencies and urges and ideas and whatnot....those, according to religion, were given by God.
Well, you know. If you argue from a christian perspective then there is obviously nothing wrong with that. God said that and so be it. Screw the opinion and scienfitic explanations of others. The world seems to be a lot easier to grasp that way.
And this is why there's no stinking point in debating this topic. There is a hurdle that we cannot climb which is overcoming the whole God thing.
So its not you, its just there's no point in continuing. We approach the problem way too differently to be able to even reach a middle ground.
Yes, there is. If you say "sinner" as a figure of speech than sure, there is nothing wrong; but if you use it in a religious stance (which the the problem here), you are giving it an all different connotation. This: "a closer examination of the bible reveals that Christians should be helping sinners", is not a figure of speech.
Nowhere in the bible does it say Christians are above sinners. So no, you just don't get it.
It's not that simple as God's existence is not of general acceptance, so you can't just label things as you please, taking them for granted and just expect people to accept them at face value. If you say "take the premise of", then you also need to accept the premise of the contrary, that there is no God and as such, to view homosexuality as a religious sin is wrong. You can't do that, can you? All this discussion comes from religious people taking their subjectivity as the truth.
Okay so completely ignore everything and just say exactly what I said for you to ignore for the discussion at hand. This is why nobody can make progress on debates. Why should I establish square one for why a Christian believes something is a sin?
And how you do know that? Were you there when he created humans? Did you talked to the guy? You say there wasn't homosexuality when he first designed humans...well...since there was only Adam (male) and Eve (female), it would be a little hard since there were no triggers, no two of the same gender. In the end, it's not a good example.
Gee if only there was a book about this! Like entire books talking about nations that engaged in acts that God didn't agree with *cough* Judges *cough* Corinthians *cough* etc *cough*.
The point of the matter is that, if God is omniscient, if God knows the past, present and future....how didn't he knew that homosexuality would become a thing, why did he gave humanity those tendencies? And before someone plays the "free-will" card, there can't be free-will to something that doesn't exist, free-will only exist because we have tendencies and urges and ideas and whatnot....those, according to religion, were given by God.
This misses the whole point of what sin is and how people are supposed to react to it.
Okay so I'm not replying anymore. No point at all. Call it a cop out whatever I literally do not care. This was completely pointless since anything I write will be tossed out the window and dismissed as wrong. This is a perspective problem. You guys aren't Christians I get it. But if pointing out what your (this is not about the existence) creator saying is best for you is a problem then we haven't even got out of the book of Genesis and there's 65 other books that help create a full picture.
Put it this way, if you believe in an all powerful, all knowing, all good being (lets ignore your actual beliefs and whether or not this is possible for a moment here). And then that being tells you not to eat grapes there is likely a good reason to not eat grapes. What we call sin is you not listening to what the being tells you to do. Rebellion against God.
So if you eat grapes you sin by eating grapes not by having grapes as a decoration for your fruit platter. If you commit homosexual acts, not the act of being homosexual but committing the act then you sin.
Your little dilemma can be easily solved by deducting God from your equation.
You believe its a sin because someone forced their idea down your throat until you gag yourself with submission and obedience. Your grapes eating is a good example because once again you're forced to obey someone else idea through submission and obedience.
Now watch this video and maybe you'll get a better idea on what I'm talking about
Spoiler: Click to ViewPHA+ZnJlZSB5b3Vyc2VsZjwvcD4=