christian law making regarding homosexuality

[ecuworrier]

as a gay person one finds the drama of AndyHB on the Ugandan Anti-Gay legislation and his efforts to encourage folks to sign a petition allegedly to protest against the death penalty oddly unappealing .....  it's like er what's the catch? and how can someone who would be a dead person or a person necessarily disenfranchised from the political process er vote?(not suggestin anyone should not vote if you wannA vote then vote!)

so maybe folks here do think that the only good gay is a dead gay ... so here's the place to make your case..

but i am interested to know that if christians want to be in charge of the legislature say of this country then what laws would they want to put into place regarding gays ?


GOD BLESS!

Peace and Love,

[Jan]

The same laws and rights that we have for everybody else - why should gay people be treated any differently? Why should a persons sexuality matter so much?

[EliB]

I fully agree with Jan. I don't think a person's sexuality matters one bit....this is not a part of the Bible that I agree with! Everyone should be treated equally....but I DO mean EQUALLY - and NOT for a person's sexuality to be used for positive discrimination the way race has used for far too long!

I DO hope Ecu that the implication isn't that you think we think that the only good gay is a dead gay!

[Martin]

I agree with Jan.

Obviously I'm happy to sign a petition against the Ugandan Anti-Gay legislation, but I can't help thinking that Andy started his thread as an attempt (failed) to establish his credentials as a non-homophobe. 

There is a glaring inconsistency from Christians who invoke the Levitical code to support the idea that God condemns homosexual partnerships, and yet are prepared to throw away the second half of the verse - that those who break this rule must be put to death.  It's usual for Christians who do this to invent 'reasons' why the penalties of the Hebrew law should no longer be carried out, and also quite usual for then to invent other reasons why those laws were justifiably God's requirement at the time they were written.

The truth is, of course, that it has never been right to operate any sort of homophobic prejudice within the law (or outside it), and until the Church realises this, they will continue to work against the Way of Love rather than for it.

[AndyHB]

Obviously I'm happy to sign a petition against the Ugandan Anti-Gay legislation, but I can't help thinking that Andy started his thread as an attempt (failed) to establish his credentials as a non-homophobe. 

Whilst I don't regard myself as a homophobe anyway, Martin - your suggestion that this is anything other than an appeal to ensure that an utterly atrocious piece of legislation is defeated, if not beaten by Parliamentary time-out, is typical of your attempts to tell me what I believe.

I am not even going to start to debate the rest of your post, save to point out that the Levitical code is of minimal importance in most Christians' arguments against the current attitude to homosexuality: even the staunch supporters of Anglican Mainstream and other such groups have left that far behind them in the development their arguments.


ecu, as a Christian and as someone who believes that the death penalty has no validity at all, I started the thread in order to highlight the fact that human beings were being threatened with death for being human.  We can go into the rights and wrongs of homosexual relationships and SS intercourse elsewhere: whatever those might be, this is NOT the way to deal with it.

[Martin]

save to point out that the Levitical code is of minimal importance in most Christians' arguments against the current attitude to homosexuality: even the staunch supporters of Anglican Mainstream and other such groups have left that far behind them in the development their arguments.

That's very obviously untrue.  The issue of homosexuality is encountered a lot on Christian websites.  In almost every case the verses from Leviticus are used to attempt to support the common homophobic view.  You know that to be the case Andy, you don't fool anyone when you try to make out that it is not. 

[Jan]

save to point out that the Levitical code is of minimal importance in most Christians' arguments against the current attitude to homosexuality: even the staunch supporters of Anglican Mainstream and other such groups have left that far behind them in the development their arguments.

That's very obviously untrue.  The issue of homosexuality is encountered a lot on Christian websites.  In almost every case the verses from Leviticus are used to attempt to support the common homophobic view.  You know that to be the case Andy, you don't fool anyone when you try to make out that it is not.

Its a shame if Leviticus or Deuteronomy is taken any notice of really these days - given that most of us would have by now failed (over and over) in following those rules & regs (mixed fibres in clothing, women wearing jeans, shellfish,  etc etc not to mention people owning other people as property). As far as I understand anyway, Gentiles do not have to follow the Law of Moses. Also followers of Christ are not under the law of Moses (Eph.2:15).

Anyway - no point in going over old ground. We have done this one already to death guys and gals - haven't we?

[Boudi]

Anyway - no point in going over old ground. We have done this one already to death guys and gals - haven't we?

[AndyHB]

Anyway - no point in going over old ground. We have done this one already to death guys and gals - haven't we?

Clearly, Martin doesn't think so.  Perhaps he has problems accepting that one can disagree with something or someone - as I do with Osama - yet still regard death as an inappropriate punishment.

[Martin]

Anyway - no point in going over old ground. We have done this one already to death guys and gals - haven't we?

Clearly, Martin doesn't think so.  Perhaps he has problems accepting that one can disagree with something or someone - as I do with Osama - yet still regard death as an inappropriate punishment.

No I don't have problems with the fact that you don't want to kill gays Andy, I believe you when you say you don't, but I think you have used this issue as a way of painting yourself to be non-homophobic, when in actual fact you are quite a nasty homophobe, and I think others see through that.

I'm glad though, that the Christian church is slowly changing, that the homophobes are slowly, but surely loosing the argument. It's a shame that the world is leading the Church when it comes to being fair-minded and non-discriminatory, but it will not be that many years before the Christian homophobic voice is in a massive minority.

[AndyHB]

Not to prolong the debate too far, I'd go as far as to say that the homophobic voice throughout society, including the Church, is already fairly limited.  I realise that you and others want to define homophobia as anything that argues against the normalisation of homosexual practice, but unfortunately the legislation doesn't do that.  It is still perfectly legitimate to express a view on the rights and wrongs of it.  Unless we move into dictatorship, the right to express an opinion will always be sacrosanct here in the UK.  The right to express a evidence-supported one is not only a right, its a scientific requirement.

[Martin]

It is still perfectly legitimate to express a view on the rights and wrongs of it.  Unless we move into dictatorship, the right to express an opinion will always be sacrosanct here in the UK.  The right to express a evidence-supported one is not only a right, its a scientific requirement.

Nobody here, but nobody has suggested that you do not have the right to express a homophobic view. It's just that everybody else also has the right to name it 'homophobic' and, more to the point they are in the right when they do so.  You have never been able to back up your prejudice with evidence.  Many people have challenged you to do so and, on the rare occasions that you have presented anything, on closer analysis the evidence has undermined your stance rather than supporting it. 

[EliB]

I've always thought that "homoPHOBIA" is the wrong term for hatred based on sexuality.....ok, so some people hate what they're afraid of....but I think in this case, the word "phobia" is inappropriate/out of context!

Probably an unpopular opinion - but it is what I think...

[Jan]

I've always thought that "homoPHOBIA" is the wrong term for hatred based on sexuality.....ok, so some people hate what they're afraid of....but I think in this case, the word "phobia" is inappropriate/out of context!

Probably an unpopular opinion - but it is what I think...

Probably right Eli - but I guess with language, once a name is given for something it tends to stick and be understood in a certain way sometimes regardless of its origins in language.

As far as I understand, the word ' homo' means 'man' in latin (as in homo sapiens which means "wise man" or "knowing man), but it means the word 'same' in Ancient Greek (apparently) - but phobia comes from the Greek word Phobos which means irrational fear, so then we have the word homophobia as an irrational fear of man or an irrational fear of the same (if that makes sense) - its origin then has nothing really to do with hating (or even being afraid of)  gay people.

[AndyHB]

As far as I understand, the word ' homo' means 'man' in latin (as in homo sapiens which means "wise man" or "knowing man), ...

to tweak very slightly, it means 'mankind' or 'human'.

... but it means the word 'same' in Ancient Greek (apparently)

Whereas the Latin word is a noun, the Greek word is a prefix, as in homophone (two or more words that sound the same but have different meanings ie to, too and two) or homograph (two or more words that are spelled the same way but pronounced differently ie sow [plant seeds] and sow [a female pig]).

- but phobia comes from the Greek word Phobos which means irrational fear, ... its origin then has nothing really to do with hating (or even being afraid of) gay people.

The wikipedia article on homophobia highlights the fact that - whilst irrationality can come into play here - the term homophobia covers a multitude of 'sins', some of which have no irrationality in them at all.  Unfortunately, people like Martin like to use it as a term of abuse and almost emotional blackmail, making out that the irrationality element is the most important.  Some of the alternative terms listed in the article seem interesting - though not necessarily all that helpful.  For instance, the term 'homosexophobia' again highlights the idea of irrational fear which very few people actually feel.