What do religions or you say about homosexuality?

[Berserk]

Here I merely wish to clear up one widespread misunderstanding--the false consensus that Jesus Himself never addresses the issue.   He apparently does in Matthew 19:12:

"Some are EUNUCHS BY BIRTH; others were made that way by men, and others have become eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven."

In Hebrew/Aramaic the term "eunuch" often bears a figurative meaning.  Thus, the NIV rightly translates the assertion "others have become eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven" as "others have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of heaven."   In rabbinic Judaism, the expression "eunuchs by birth" can bear the figurative sense "those who for whatever reason lack a conventional sex drive."   Gays would have presumably been included under this umbrella.   In Jewish society most of these gays would have been well closeted.  

This observation is important for two reasons.  (1)  There is no censorious tone in Jesus' reference to these people.   (2) The modern concept of sex orientation is absent in the ancient world.   But Jesus' phrase assumes nothing "unnatural" about the "eunuchs from birth" and their implied lack of a heterosexual sex drive.

[Nostic]

I think everyone's a potential homo and heterosexual

You are pretty messed up, I'll never understand you. Pumpkin pie kicks [edit].

LOL, blunt as ever. If nothing else, you sure do set yourself apart Tyciol.

[Joerii]

I think everyone's a potential homo and heterosexual

Yes, some good research supports this. For those interested, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eve_Sedgewick check out this site.

I myself believe that most people are no 100 % attracted to men or woman, that it's always a little mixed, it's just mixed differently for different people. A person with 50/50 attraction to both sexes might choose not to express his/her gay side, or be a happy bisexual. It even happens all the time that people ( men for example that are, say, 95% gay ) choose to live a hetero ( and probably MISERABLE ) life because there culture forces them to be.

Any thoughts ?

[who_am_i]

it always amazes me how this generations will gain acceptance with things that have repulsed the last generation. In my believe I am against. I do believe souls are asexual but this realm unfortunately for some people is physicaland I'm sorry but you're never going to convince me nature, God,
the universe intended men to be with men. you know our generation really should shape up because before you know it in 50 years from now were going to have the same argument but it's not going to be with homosexuals. its going to be with pedophiles. No one gets sent to Hell we do a fine job of volunteering for the job.

[soma-sight]

Homosexuality is a sin.

[J.K.]

When I contemplate homosexuality I actually don't consider scripture.  I'm reminded of a quote from Blake, as I recall.. - "Both read the Bible day and night, but thow read'st black where I read white."  I'm aware that two equally intelligent and reverent people can look at the same thing and form different opinoins.

Nature, however, gives me a different perspective that's not so easily misinterpreted.  I'm reminded that single cell organisms never really die.  They simply split themselves, forming a carbon copy, and thus unless one is smashed or becomes damaged or something - in essenese they have eternal life. - A great change occurs, however, the moment you introduce sexual reproduction into the mix.  At that moment in nature you have the first instance of death.  And what this tells me (in my own interpretation) is that at some point along the evolutionary chain nature made a decision that the concept of "male/female - He created them" was literally something of such value it was worth dying for.

A hopeless romantic's notion perhaps - but lol -that's me..  

Having said that then it should prolly come as no suprize that I see homosexuality as something goes against nature - and something that exists in contradicion to the evolutionary progress of man - which I see as  Divine.  Nevertheless, I'm rarely outspoken on the issue.  The reason is twofold..

1)  Like most folks (and in this I would include those who are overtly anti-gay) I can imagine two people of the opposite sex sincerely  falling in love with one another.  I can also further imagine that their sexual preference (in some cases) has largely been formed by some rather nasty hetrosexual parents and an unhappy childhood.  Again, not in all cases but some.

If that be the case, it seems rather odd for God to comdemn the child later in life when God should have been there protecting the child earlier in life. - We come through our parents but we are not 'of our parents.'  And certainly one of the duties of a Creator would be to look over His creation.  If He has failed to do that, then it's simply afront to reason that  the child should have to bear the price for his absence of protection.

2) The biggest reason I'm not usually vocal about it though is because, especially lately, it seems to be the issue most from the far right are using to see themselves as "goodness" - when that's really just an illusion.

Two cases in point.  First, homosexuality is now being hailed as "that which will destroy the insitution of marriage in this country." - But duuuuuhhh... Look around.  Those who are doing that are for the most part the far right-wing Protestants - who in case you haven't noticed are the very ones who did destroy the concept of 'marriage - life ever after.'

Serial monogomy aint marriage..      And imho, that's exactly what you have condoned by the right-wing Protestant faith.  The biblical concept of marriage was torn down by the Protestants long before the homosexuals were even an issue.  By shifting the focus now onto the homosexuals rather than themselves, however, they're able to see themselves as 'goodness.'

This is an illusion.

Then (and I don't mean to be graphic but just give another example of how folks fail to look within) there is also the issue of fantasies about bi-sexual girls.  I'm willing to bet that 80% of the men we see on our televisions condeming homosexuals go home after making their speech and indulge in a bit of this fantasy themselves - up to and including to the point where the fantasy becomes real or at least real enough.  And thereafter exit the experience kinda forgetting about it and not considering themselves "gay."

What I would suggest though is that if a hetrosexual man finds within himself the entertainment of this fantasy - he's just as much attracted to homosexuality as the participants he's envisioning.  He may not be homosexual himself - but he's attracted to the same thing.'

I wonder how many anti-gay male pastors have within themselves this fantasy?  I wonder how many have even taken the time to consider what it makes them? - I dare to venture it's very few.

In the end then, I'd just say that whatever the issue is - the answer is not finding the sin outside you.  It's finding the sin within.  I'd also suggest that the more vocal a person becomes in pointing out sin apart from themselves (it's over here, it's there, it's that) the more clearly we can see that the person has not yet taken the inward journey.

[Nostic]

it always amazes me how this generations will gain acceptance with things that have repulsed the last generation. In my believe I am against. I do believe souls are asexual but this realm unfortunately for some people is physicaland I'm sorry but you're never going to convince me nature, God,
the universe intended men to be with men. you know our generation really should shape up because before you know it in 50 years from now were going to have the same argument but it's not going to be with homosexuals. its going to be with pedophiles. No one gets sent to Hell we do a fine job of volunteering for the job.

[Nostic]

Nature, however, gives me a different perspective that's not so easily misinterpreted.  I'm reminded that single cell organisms never really die.  They simply split themselves, forming a carbon copy, and thus unless one is smashed or becomes damaged or something - in essenese they have eternal life. - A great change occurs, however, the moment you introduce sexual reproduction into the mix.  At that moment in nature you have the first instance of death.  And what this tells me (in my own interpretation) is that at some point along the evolutionary chain nature made a decision that the concept of "male/female - He created them" was literally something of such value it was worth dying for.

A hopeless romantic's notion perhaps - but lol -that's me..  

LOL, when I read that, I get something totally different. How I see it is, once you introduce duality into the picture, death must ensue. Immortality is WHOLE, so when you split it, you no longer have immortality.
I think the greater point is not to focus on anyone outside of yourself, but to focus within. People, in general, look for that other person to fill that void that they have within themselves. But it's never enough. There will still be something missing.

I have a theory actually about why it seems that homosexuality appears to be on the rise. Weather that is the case or not, I have no idea, but at the very least, it's obvious that it's more visible than before. Anyway, my theory: I think people, over many lifetimes have already tried the "heterosexual thing". They have thoroughly experienced it, know what it's like, and have seen that the opposite sex does not fulfill them. So in time, over lives, they decide to see if the same sex will instead make them fulfilled. It's a fruitless effort however. It's not about that other person, male or female. There will never be a total satisfaction until you are whole within yourself. Until, within yourself, you have perfectly balanced, incorporated, and thus transcended both principles (the feminine and the masculine), there will be no rest.

[Frank]

Hello:

It is an argument I have heard before that homosexuality is somehow against nature. As if "nature" were a separate thing that just came about by chance. Which always makes me giggle as we created it. Likewise, we created the notion of evolution. It's just a believe construct and has no bearing in the wider reality.

When we choose to come to this place we call here, we all participate as male and female plus one "other". That is, either as homosexual male or a homosexual female. So everyone has at least 3 parallel focuses (and some have even more). There is nothing whatever abnormal about being homosexual. I am my heterosexual male focus and I enjoy playing that role immensely. I just hope my parallels are enjoying the same in their respective roles. After all, that is what we are here to experience and it sure beats fighting each other over whose god is the rightest.

Procreation is a construct we engage in for the benefits of our experience. It has nothing whatever to do with the survival of our species, lol.

Yours,
Frank

[Rob]

Sorry to inform those who might disagree but homosexuality is natural in pretty much all species, in that it has been observed in nature. Monkeys, birds, fleas, you name it, they've all been spotted being a bit gay at times.

No, I'm not joking!
This would seem to imply it is natural in humans.

The argument has been stated elsewhere (not on this site) that the eating of offspring also occurs in nature, but that doesn't mean we should do it. This argument is false because, to the best of my knowledge, homosexuality in universal in nature, whereas murdering your children isnt.

Rob

[no_leaf_clover]

There was an interview on the Daily Show one night with someone who worked at a zoo and noted that he had noticed animals within the zoo permanently pairing off with a member of the same sex. I thought it was interesting. This stuff does appear to be pretty 'natural' in places.

[karnautrahl]

The people that claim homosexuality is a sin and is against nature strike me as being a bit bound in a very narrow perspective for all kinds of reasons-of their own.

I know my sexuality is not wrong. I have had a number of years to think about it. A number of years to examine my own heart and meditate on the issue. No qualms about my lifestyle pop up. Qualms about my choices of partner(s) have done of course. Now I have met my soul mate.

It's not about the "sex", never was, people get hung up on that. It's nonsense to be hung up on the physical act, as if that's the most important thing you can do with your partner! Narrow minded to say the least.
It's about the mental, emotional and spiritual connection you have with another being.

I feel that a few people's minds would literally crack if they had to open them to allow for the fact that such relationships can be and are as deeply natural and soul connecting as heterosexual relationships. Shame really, but I guess some peoples very narrow boxes are supremely comforting to what might otherwise be seen as an insecure mind.

Inguma, I've seen the same stuff too. I seen it happen as well .

[Frank]

"... if that's the most important thing you can do with your partner! Narrow minded to say the least. It's about the mental, emotional and spiritual connection you have with another being."

Yeah, absolutely right, well said!

Yours,
Frank

[Telos]

I know my sexuality is not wrong. I have had a number of years to think about it. A number of years to examine my own heart and meditate on the issue. No qualms about my lifestyle pop up. Qualms about my choices of partner(s) have done of course. Now I have met my soul mate.

It's not about the "sex", never was, people get hung up on that. It's nonsense to be hung up on the physical act, as if that's the most important thing you can do with your partner! Narrow minded to say the least. It's about the mental, emotional and spiritual connection you have with another being.

Do you think it's possible to have just as strong an emotional, mental and spiritual connection with someone without having sex?

[karnautrahl]

Yes, definitly, very very definitly. I speak from my current relationship.
We don't have to argue either, we read each other's minds easily (though he's a skeptic). We are different enough, wildly so in many ways that there's variety but we like enough things together so that it's easy to share good times.
I'm lucky however because I have a particular sexual interest that normally would scupper a relationship based on any sex so i am slightly biased. I do not feel a lack however, niether does he.
Sex is either loving procreation in a heterosexual relationship or perhaps the giving of sensual pleasure between a couple. I'm guessing obviously from my own experiences but yes, I'm confident that I've met my soul mate and don't need to add extra security with sex particularly.