Showing posts with label homosexuals. Show all posts
Showing posts with label homosexuals. Show all posts

Saturday, July 7, 2012

Homosexuality is a Sin



Hell is other people.
 -- Jean Paul Sarte

Nothing gets things going here at Western Hero like a good theological debate, or better yet, a poor one.  

I admit that I am ill-equipped to discuss deep theological matters. I have done quite a bit of study, and I read The Bible every day, but when a religious throwdown breaks out, I must rely on the arguments of scholars, because I don't have the depth.
 
Mention homosexuality, or some other hot-button issue, and the relativists move in, demanding that all Christianity change its millennia-old beliefs that came from God. Even worse, some will posit the ridiculous notion that homosexuality is not a sin under Jewish and Christian law!  

No scholarship, no reasoned debate based in biblical exegesis or historical hermeneutics, not even a link to a cogent argument. Just a post-modern stamp of the feet:  Because I say so!

Well... I'm here to help.

The "Homosexuality is OK" Argument

Like the anti-homosexual argument, it starts with Leviticus:
22 “‘Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable. (Leviticus 18:22)
13 “‘If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads. (Leviticus 20:13)
Reverend Timothy Shirley takes the Levitical argument against homosexuality and turns it on it's head in a short, well-written piece. Here is his conclusion:
Bottom line -- the arguments suggesting and concerning homosexuality in Leviticus as well as in all of scripture, must be treated equally. The Bible is not a cafeteria, there can be no picking and choosing! The rules of interpretation must be consistent across the board. Therefore, the Leviticus text must be critiqued as a whole, and not willy-nilly in order to defend or condemn a particular point of view. A verse taken out of its context is never an appropriate rule of measure for doing biblical exegesis and interpretation with integrity. This is especially so with the Book of Leviticus. A little common sense never hurt either! (Leviticus and Homosexuality)
A further argument along this same line says that if you agree with it, you must agree with all of it, including the execution of people who commit homosexual acts.

For a treasure trove of thoughtful Christian writing that ministers to gay Christians, see Whosoever Magazine.

The "Homosexuality is a Sin" Argument

Reverend Shirley is right; we cannot pick and choose what we like and don't like from the scriptures. Where the Levitical argument breaks down though, is that Christian objection to homosexuality does not rest solely upon that book.

Paul condemns homosexuality in the book of Romans:
26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error. (Romans 1, 24-27)
He speaks harshly of it again in 1 Corinthians:
9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men[a] 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. (1 Corinthians 6, 9-10)
Again in his first letter to Timothy:
9 We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, 10 for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine 11 that conforms to the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me. (1 Timothy 1, 9-11)
So it is an absurdity to say homosexual acts are compatible with Christianity.

The Old Testament Condemns Homosexuality

The other problem with the Levitical argument is that other parts of the Old Testament reinforce the book's admonition against homosexual acts.
While the Old Testament’s ceremonial requirements are no longer binding, its moral requirements are. God may issue different ceremonies for use in different times and cultures, but his moral requirements are eternal and are binding on all cultures. (Catholic Answers - Homosexuality)
This long excerpt from the same source explains it well. Taking all passages and commentary as a whole, it is clear that the Old Testament condemns homosexual acts:

The rejection of homosexual behavior that is found in the Old Testament is well known. In Genesis 19, two angels in disguise visit the city of Sodom and are offered hospitality and shelter by Lot. During the night, the men of Sodom demand that Lot hand over his guests for homosexual intercourse. Lot refuses, and the angels blind the men of Sodom. Lot and his household escape, and the town is destroyed by fire "because the outcry against its people has become great before the Lord" (Gen. 19:13).

Throughout history, Jewish and Christian scholars have recognized that one of the chief sins involved in God’s destruction of Sodom was its people’s homosexual behavior. But today, certain homosexual activists promote the idea that the sin of Sodom was merely a lack of hospitality. Although inhospitality is a sin, it is clearly the homosexual behavior of the Sodomites that is singled out for special criticism in the account of their city’s destruction. We must look to Scripture’s own interpretation of the sin of Sodom.

Jude 7 records that Sodom and Gomorrah "acted immorally and indulged in unnatural lust." Ezekiel says that Sodom committed "abominable things" (Ezek. 16:50), which could refer to homosexual and heterosexual acts of sin. Lot even offered his two virgin daughters in place of his guests, but the men of Sodom rejected the offer, preferring homosexual sex over heterosexual sex (Gen. 19:8–9). Ezekiel does allude to a lack of hospitality in saying that Sodom "did not aid the poor and needy" (Ezek. 16:49). So homosexual acts and a lack of hospitality both contributed to the destruction of Sodom, with the former being the far greater sin, the "abominable thing" that set off God’s wrath.
(Source: Catholic Answers - Homosexuality)

While I appreciate studies and arguments that are controversial but grounded in historical analysis and educated study, I have no patience for off-the-cuff comments ungrounded in any scholarship whatsoever, especially when they mischaracterize God's word.

So while snarky comments about not eating BLTs or wives leaving the house during their period in conformance with Leviticus are funny, they all deal in false equivalence and a superficial understanding of the scriptures.

You can argue that Christianity itself is wrong in declaring homosexuality immoral, you can reject its teachings, but you cannot argue that the two are in any way compatible. A clear reading of the Bible shows that idea to be the absurdity that it is.

Catholic Catechism on Homosexuality
Christian and American
Catholic Bible 101 - Homsexuality

Friday, March 16, 2012

Footloose in Iraq

News from Baghdad that "young men in tight T-shirts and skinny jeans are being beaten to death with cement blocks and dumped in the streets” is now coming to light in the West.

We took out Saddam Hussein, the Arab firewall containing the Persians, and the Iraqis are celebrating their freedom by bombing Christians out of their churches and killing gays.

AP News and the New York Times report that gays, emos, and others who do not conform the the Islamist straightjacket are being targeted and killed.
"We warn in the strongest terms to every male and female debauchee," the Shiite militia hit list says. "If you do not stop this dirty act within four days, then the punishment of God will fall on you at the hands of Mujahideen." (AP News)
A cynic observes the constant chaos in the Middle East, interrupted only by tyranny, and observes that some people just need a dictator. I also wonder who is crazier, the people who live there, or westerners who crash in thinking they can make a difference?

When Self-Expression is Lethal

If Hollywood were not stilted and braindead, it would have remade “Footloose” in Iraq, focusing on its Emo community. To be gay, Christian, or emo, are all genuine human rights, and their expression springs from the human soul. Those dead young men were only trying to live their lives as they saw fit. They were not harming anyone but the haters who are so insecure in their faith that they must murder all nonconformist threats to it...
But over the past month, threatening letters began appearing in Shiite neighborhoods across Baghdad, residents said.
One of the fliers, scanned and posted online, addresses dozens of gay men by name and nickname. It warns people identified as Japanese Haider, Allawi the Bra, Mohammed the Flower and others: Reform your behavior, stop being gay, or face deadly consequences. 
“Your fate will be death if you don’t quit doing this,” one leaflet warns. “Punishment will be tougher and tougher, you gays. Don’t be like the people of Lot.”
Another flier circulating around the Zayouna neighborhood appears addressed to emo youths. It tells them to cut their hair, not to wear the clothing of devil worshipers, and not to listen to metal, emo or rap music. And if they refuse, “God’s punishment will be come down upon you,” the letter says. (NY Times)
It took them killing gays for the New York Times to wake up. Yes, they reported on Christian killings, but it took the killing of gays to change the tone and tenor of their reporting.  Regardless, I am glad the press is reporting this.  It is a gruesome human rights violation.

At what point will liberals realize that the Islamist fetish is not compatible with the gay one?

At some point, and perhaps this is one of them, they will have to drop one for the other. The choice is clear: Being gay is a legitimate exercise of ones rights; being a self-proclaimed Flaming Sword of God who murders others is a grotesque stain upon humanity.  I understand the gossamer optimism at the first whiff of the Arab Spring, but Islamists (as opposed to everyday Muslims) lurk, and too many people too easily fall under their sway.

This and other sad episodes remind us of the sad fact that we cannot change other societies, and we should stop trying. The soldier who snapped and murdered those Afghans shows us that such chimeric pursuits can end up killing our own souls. 

Tuesday, January 17, 2012

The Smudge

A hateful little gay leftist named Damned Smudge pulled quite a coup a few years back, essentially linking Rick Santorum with gay sex in Google searches.
Here’s Smudge’s definition of “santorum”: “The frothy mix of lube and fecal matter that is sometimes the byproduct of anal sex.” (Mark Judge - The Deceit of Damned Smudge)
This is illustrative of much of the left. Vile hatred and not much else. The joke's not even funny, no word play or clever turn of a phrase or playing off of some trait.  The name Santorum conjurs up perhaps a Latin dictate from a Pope, not the disgusting after-effects of a butt-plumber break-in.

How sick is it to smear another by imputing to them your own sickeningly foul practices? 

Smudge has harmed his own cause, and that of his fellow tromboning tea-baggers.  By employing such sordid gay sex imagery, he reminds live-and-let-live people of goodwill who normally do not ponder these things why they find such practices so repellent.  "Maybe queers are deviant after all..." 

It's a revealing peek into the mind of a flamboyant self-loather. A gay man who attacks a straight man by linking him to the messy byproduct of a common gay sex practice. Progressives, the supposed champions of human rights, oppose right to work laws, revel in the Caligula circus that is abortion, and gleefully "out" closeted gay people.

The backdoor burglar who pulled the Santorum prank is a smudge left on a bus station bathroom stall after a little tea room sex, probably with a closeted Republican. Worse, his vindictive unfunny smear harms his cause.  Mark Judge probably speaks for quite a few people:
It took me a few years, a job with a lot of gay people, and an essay by Gore Vidal to disabuse myself of the notion I learned as a kid that gay people, especially gay men, are people who think constantly about sex, often filthy unhealthy forms of sex, and that they have no impulse control. I learned that gay people are just like everyone else.
Yet the visibility, indeed the celebration, of Damned Smudge in the media and the culture -- not to mention his demented and dehumanizing sex column -- has brought back that old stereotype. (Mark Judge - RCR)
What do you think?