EPTGay StarCraft Players - Page 269
| Forum Index > TL Community |
Don't post in this thread to say "gay gamers are like everyone else, why do they have a special thread?" It is something that has been posted numerous times, and this isn't the place for that discussion. For regular posters, don't quote the trolls. | ||
|
Smat
United States301 Posts
| ||
|
happyft
United States470 Posts
On March 10 2012 02:41 Smat wrote: I just don't understand why God would make me gay and simultaneously make it a sin. Doesn't compute. Unless he doesn't like me for some reason. So... this is quite a can of worms you're opening up... I don't want to side track the thread, so I don't want to post too much about this. ...The short answer is "I don't know." ...The long answer is that God didn't make you gay, you were probably born with it. We're all born with sin in our lives -- some are more obvious and socially unacceptable than others. Alcoholism, gambling addiction are known to be genetic. I think everyone can admit that everybody's at the very least a little bit selfish. And then there's pride, anger, lust, etc. Nobody was born without sin, unfortunately. But nonetheless, God loves everybody, including gay people. This is an immutable fact. + Show Spoiler [Further down the rabbit hole...] + So the question then becomes, "Why does God allow us to be born with sin?" In fact, why not extend the question to, "Why does God allow evil?" This would be side-tracking the thread totally ... but the short answer is nobody knows for 100% sure. Even the smartest and most knowledgeable theologians say, "I can't give you a 100% satisfactory answer." What we do know is that God hates evil, does not want evil to happen, but nonetheless allows it to happen. I surmise it's because God, in desiring to create humans with a free-will to love (along with it the capacity to hate), allows it to happen for our sake. What I mean is, if we were to ask God to eliminate evil from the world, that would probably be akin to asking Him to remove all of human kind. If we were to ask God for perfect justice, well ... everyone would be in a lot of trouble. If we were to ask God to remove our capabilitiy to perform evil, well ... would you still be able to call us human? Like I said, it's a tough question, and nobody can really give a 100% satisfactory answer... | ||
|
Klondikebar
United States2227 Posts
| ||
|
Zaros
United Kingdom3692 Posts
God is omnibenevolant, but being gay is a sin , but you cant choose if you are gay or not , so god wants you to sin, so god isnt omibenevolant. | ||
|
Iyerbeth
England2410 Posts
Anyway, my closest friend for many years was the most devout Christian I've ever known, a fact which to this day surprises me because it's usually the most devout I have the most trouble with. To be sure, we definately disagreed on pretty much everything that religion was even vaguely connected with, but our friendship was built carefully avoiding those issues not least because we were both very able to defend out corner intellectually honestly. My point is though, that on the issue of homosexuality he was of the mind that it is a sin, although I knew him well enough to claim for an absolute fact he wasn't homophobic. Eye oppening to be sure. Anyway, the point of this introduction is two fold. First, there are logically consistant ways around the issue, and giving the short answer of "I don't know" is as honest an answer aas anyone can give so I at least appreciate that point of view. So far as I can see from your two posts you aren't trying to impose your beliefs on anyone, and you don't claim to be all knowing of God's mind. Going a step further to argue for the legal rights of others based on respecting the laws of your country is admirable also, and if I'm not getting my holy books mixed up actually further supporting your faith (sorry, I'm too tired to fact check, I think that was the Bible but I've read 4 holy books so I usually prefer to check before posting but I've been awake for a very long time and my head isn't up to the task). My point that I've missed entirely though is that you can believe something is a sin and not believe that it's a fault on God's behalf or that it's a sin any worse than others or that it should be legislated against. An example would be that in order for a person to be happy they may have had to be allowed to be gay but that it's viewed as a sin that requires salvation through Jesus, in much the same way as many other sins that people indulge in to be happy. I don't find that entirely convincing, but my point is that it is possible for someone to hold a logically consistant view of a God thal allows people to be gay and considers it a fault. The second reason for my rambly introduction was to simply point out that sometimes it's ok to be able to overlook our differences if we agree on how we should treat people when it comes down to it, regardless of why we believe it. I imagine there are a few people in this thread who would have legitimate reasons to be upset with religion, and I'm honestly not too fond of any religion myself, but I'm way too tired to end this sentence the way I want. My point is, thanks for posting happyft and maybe we should avoid any actual religion bashing in response to the post. Maybe I'm being too soft I don't know. I'm going to go sleep I think, lol. | ||
|
Troxle
United States486 Posts
Two, when the Bible was written a long time ago the world was in desperate need of population. The world back then had about as many as three hundred million people (basic Google search for info, if someone has more accurate info that claims otherwise feel free to post it). That's about as many people as the U.S. spread across the entire world. So Native Americans, Asians, Europeans, Romans, etc...the need for reproduction was a big deal. Especially when a lot of the stronger barbarian tribes would kill everything they conquered. Of course they would be against homosexuality when the need for population was high in demand. Thirdly, the Bible contradicts itself a lot. The Old Testament and the New Testament butt heads at almost every turn. Most "devout" Christians only barely follow the New Testament. Its a fact, they hardly know any of the verses from the Old Testament, and the ones they do know are usually Psalms, Proverbs, Genesis, Exodus, and maybe Numbers. Yet they can probably site you every Gospel verse, all the letters, and everything else in New Testament save for maybe the Book of Revelation. This being said, if they are truly a "devout" Christian they will understand "Love your neighbor as you love yourself" to mean love everyone despite theirs sins, their gender, their race, their upbringing, their religion, etc... I don't want to start another religions stand on homosexuality again. There are discussions on the topic throughout the thread and they all have good points on both sides, but I'd rather keep to the Constitution and the separation of Church and State, which unfortunately our government seems to forget. But without further ado...Klondikebar! New topic go! :D | ||
|
happyft
United States470 Posts
On March 10 2012 05:43 Iyerbeth wrote: My point that I've missed entirely though is that you can believe something is a sin and not believe that it's a fault on God's behalf or that it's a sin any worse than others or that it should be legislated against. An example would be that in order for a person to be happy they may have had to be allowed to be gay but that it's viewed as a sin that requires salvation through Jesus, in much the same way as many other sins that people indulge in to be happy. I don't find that entirely convincing, but my point is that it is possible for someone to hold a logically consistant view of a God thal allows people to be gay and considers it a fault. Hm, going to have to ask you to reword this, I don't quite entirely follow what you're trying to say here, haha. But all the same, thanks for the response. On March 10 2012 05:04 Klondikebar wrote: Umm...except that homosexuality is found all throughout nature but sins are only found in humans. If dogs and cats where alcoholics and gamblers I might have some sympathy for your position, but I don't anymore. I used to be religious but it burned me too hard. Sorry to hear about religion burning you. In regards to sin, it's defined as disobedience to God -- irregardless of whether it can be found in animal behavior or not. And also, some animals eat their young -- does that make it okay, just because animals do it? On March 10 2012 05:17 Zaros wrote: Well the whole religion situation is stuck in a sort of anti loop which tbh i just find it funny tht people believe; God is omnibenevolant, but being gay is a sin , but you cant choose if you are gay or not , so god wants you to sin, so god isnt omibenevolant. The way I see it, just because you are born with an affinity towards the same sex does not mean you must act upon those desires. If for example someone was born with a nicotine addiction, does not mean they must smoke (however impossible it may be). And I'm of the belief that God especially loves the most those who are born under the hardest of circumstances -- He for sure knows the struggles and pain you go through. On March 10 2012 06:32 Troxle wrote: + Show Spoiler + I let go of my religious beliefs a long time ago. But any true devout Christian will understand a few facts about the Bible. One it was written by man who heard God and put his word to text. This text has gone through multiple versions and translations over two thousand years roughly since the first verses were written and a lot of translation from the original is lost. We are fallible, its a fact of life, no one is perfect. Two, when the Bible was written a long time ago the world was in desperate need of population. The world back then had about as many as three hundred million people (basic Google search for info, if someone has more accurate info that claims otherwise feel free to post it). That's about as many people as the U.S. spread across the entire world. So Native Americans, Asians, Europeans, Romans, etc...the need for reproduction was a big deal. Especially when a lot of the stronger barbarian tribes would kill everything they conquered. Of course they would be against homosexuality when the need for population was high in demand. Thirdly, the Bible contradicts itself a lot. The Old Testament and the New Testament butt heads at almost every turn. Most "devout" Christians only barely follow the New Testament. Its a fact, they hardly know any of the verses from the Old Testament, and the ones they do know are usually Psalms, Proverbs, Genesis, Exodus, and maybe Numbers. Yet they can probably site you every Gospel verse, all the letters, and everything else in New Testament save for maybe the Book of Revelation. This being said, if they are truly a "devout" Christian they will understand "Love your neighbor as you love yourself" to mean love everyone despite theirs sins, their gender, their race, their upbringing, their religion, etc... I don't want to start another religions stand on homosexuality again. There are discussions on the topic throughout the thread and they all have good points on both sides, but I'd rather keep to the Constitution and the separation of Church and State, which unfortunately our government seems to forget. But without further ado...Klondikebar! New topic go! :D 1 - the Jews were especially meticulus about copying their texts. For this reason the Old Testament is one of the most historically reliable texts, given how little change there were from copy to copy over the ages. And the New Testament also has a multitude of copies before it was put into canon and made into the Bible as we know it today in ~200-300 AD. It's not like the Bible was a bunch of tales handed down by word of mouth, y'know. And there were not multiple translations over time -- the Old Testament was written in Hebrew, and the New Testament in Greek. 2 - I think you're trying to argue that homosexuality as a sin was more a civil law thing, to keep the order and to benefit society, rather than disobedience to God. However, it appears that one of the reasons Sodom & Gomorrah were struck down by God in Genesis (way way before Mosaic Law came to pass) was due to their homosexual relations -- among others like murder, brutality, and being unhospitable. 3 - And I would posit that the Old Testament and New Testament work together at almost every turn -- the OT points to the NT in many ways. But yes, most Christians know their NT better than their OT. I've read through most of the OT several times, but I have to admit some of the minor prophets were hell to get through, I couldn't make sense of them at all. But the major prophets are freaking awesome. OK NO MORE OF THIS FROM ME GOODBYE FOREVER | ||
|
Zaros
United Kingdom3692 Posts
On March 10 2012 08:08 happyft wrote: Hm, going to have to ask you to reword this, I don't quite entirely follow what you're trying to say here, haha. But all the same, thanks for the response. Sorry to hear about religion burning you. In regards to sin, it's defined as disobedience to God -- irregardless of whether it can be found in animal behavior or not. And also, some animals eat their young -- does that make it okay, just because animals do it? The way I see it, just because you are born with an affinity towards the same sex does not mean you must act upon those desires. If for example someone was born with a nicotine addiction, does not mean they must smoke (however impossible it may be). And I'm of the belief that God especially loves the most those who are born under the hardest of circumstances -- He for sure knows the struggles and pain you go through. 1 - the Jews were especially meticulus about copying their texts. For this reason the Old Testament is one of the most historically reliable texts, given how little change there were from copy to copy over the ages. And the New Testament also has a multitude of copies before it was put into canon and made into the Bible as we know it today in ~200-300 AD. It's not like the Bible was a bunch of tales handed down by word of mouth, y'know. And there were not multiple translations over time -- the Old Testament was written in Hebrew, and the New Testament in Greek. 2 - I think you're trying to argue that homosexuality as a sin was more a civil law thing, to keep the order and to benefit society, rather than disobedience to God. However, it appears that one of the reasons Sodom & Gomorrah were struck down by God in Genesis (way way before Mosaic Law came to pass) was due to their homosexual relations -- among others like murder, brutality, and being unhospitable. 3 - And I would posit that the Old Testament and New Testament work together at almost every turn -- the OT points to the NT in many ways. But yes, most Christians know their NT better than their OT. I've read through most of the OT several times, but I have to admit some of the minor prophets were hell to get through, I couldn't make sense of them at all. But the major prophets are freaking awesome. OK NO MORE OF THIS FROM ME GOODBYE FOREVER i expect some sort of warning/ban for tht so indeed goodbye forever! | ||
|
Dust2Dust
United States7 Posts
Thank you for starting this thread, Mora. Hope to see ya around the threads again! | ||
|
Al Capwn
United States16 Posts
lately i have been feeling weird about this feeling and slightly more curious, but i dont think i could ever kiss a guy | ||
|
TWThoth
New Zealand48 Posts
Sorry to hear about religion burning you. In regards to sin, it's defined as disobedience to God I was born the way I am, I do not 'choose' to disobey any deity in that regard, since the choice was not mine to make. In that sense how can it be disobedience, if I am not able to make the choice about obeying or not? (at least from my experience). The natural point you would use against this is of course this one: The way I see it, just because you are born with an affinity towards the same sex does not mean you must act upon those desires. While it is true that I don't have to act on my desires, they are my only desires, I do not feel anything for the opposite sex. With this in mind, why should I not be allowed to act upon my desires when my heterosexual counter-parts do so on a daily basis?, because, again, the choice was not mine to make about having said desires and I suspect, they had no say in their affinities either. anyway, with that out of the way... I found a group at my university, I am not forever alone! :D (at least not anymore), university is amazing @__@. | ||
|
Axero
United States307 Posts
On March 10 2012 08:47 TWThoth wrote: I don't normally like to get involved in such discussions, but you brought up a point which I found interesting I was born the way I am, I do not 'choose' to disobey any deity in that regard, since the choice was not mine to make. In that sense how can it be disobedience, if I am not able to make the choice about obeying or not? (at least from my experience). The natural point you would use against this is of course this one: While it is true that don't have to act on my desires, they are my only desires, I do not feel anything for the opposite sex. With this in mind, why should I not be allowed to act upon my desires when my heterosexual counter-parts do so on a daily basis?, because, again, the choice was not mine to make about having said desires and I suspect, they had no say in their affinities either. anyway, with that out of the way... I found a group at my university, I am not forever alone! :D (at least not anymore), university is amazing @__@. You have us, you were never alone! ♥ | ||
|
Klondikebar
United States2227 Posts
| ||
|
neoghaleon55
United States7435 Posts
On March 10 2012 08:41 Al Capwn wrote: i am straight and not attracted to men at all..... except i love the male reproductive organ..... lately i have been feeling weird about this feeling and slightly more curious, but i dont think i could ever kiss a guy haha I don't care for the male reproductive organ at all! Yet I still see myself as part of this group. Plus, the reason you can't see yourself is because you were raised not to see yourself kissing a guy. I still feel kind of weird dancing with another guy...but it's all social stigma, really. | ||
|
kentriarch
Singapore61 Posts
On March 10 2012 08:08 happyft wrote: Sorry to hear about religion burning you. In regards to sin, it's defined as disobedience to God -- irregardless of whether it can be found in animal behavior or not. And also, some animals eat their young -- does that make it okay, just because animals do it? Sorry, I had to grammar police this! Irregardless is not a standard word! It is regardless. It is just pet peeve of mine sometimes. But also, yes, I have double standards too when it comes to correcting non-standard english. Anyway, as a final comment on this issue du jour. I think it is important for both sides to try and respect each other's position and try to reconcile. It is extreme ideologues on each side that gives each other a bad name. EDIT: OH! Now that I am officially on the Kennigit train, can we please have a plan of action to get him into a pair of speedos? | ||
|
dragonborn
4781 Posts
http://i.imgur.com/TdKHI.jpg User was warned for this post | ||
|
Klondikebar
United States2227 Posts
| ||
|
Axero
United States307 Posts
On March 10 2012 10:34 dragonborn wrote: i think this thread need this.(he is talking about lastshadow) Just because something contains the word gay doesn't mean it needs to be re-posted here. We're all capable of opening more than just this thread. | ||
|
Barburas
United Kingdom247 Posts
On March 10 2012 10:34 dragonborn wrote: i think this thread need this. Talking about people's private lives if they haven't given you permission to do so is kinda a douchey thing to do. | ||
|
kentriarch
Singapore61 Posts
| ||
| ||
