Then and Now religious views

That that is even a question is just morally insane.

 

When we are having conversations about faith, or anything else on this forum, we need to be very careful to read the entirety of what people write in a thread and not snip out a few lines or quotes to reject or critique another's point of view. When we behave like that people may feel targeted or attacked for their views. This is an important standard, because some people of faith (and I use the word some very deliberately) behave in exactly the same way towards the Bible and other works of holy scripture. Lines are often snipped from the Bible to undergird prejudice towards the LGBTQ community and other groups in society and it's wrong on so many levels, yet it happens again and again.

The numerous authors of the Bible and other works of holy scripture had no concept of homosexuality as we understand it in the modern context. How could they? As pointed out by @quebec, homosexuality is a modern concept (mid 19th century) to describe consensual love and intimacy between two people of the same sex. In their centuries of writings the authors of scripture were addressing a very different set of sexual behaviours, which often amounted to coercion and domination. This is where context and scriptural literacy become so important and it goes back to my earlier post in this thread about the need to engage in real study of the development of religious beliefs and traditions with a questioning mindset and a willingness to investigate and research ideas without bias, including athiestic bias.

I could write pages and pages on this subject. I have written pages and pages on it. It's sufficient to say that a careful and mature reading of holy scripture will present us with a very different perspective on the supposed sinfulness of same sex love and intimacy (homosexuality).

 

But there was a strong passage- even commandment about adultery, which all sex outside of marriage falls under. It seems ancient Hebrew societies had strong taboos against non male female monogamous practices.
That is my greater point. It is clearly a sin in that tradition but its a sin equal with drunkenness, anger, and pre martial sex, its just not a greater, special sin.
On a little side note, I am not religious, but I have read about it, and I don't think people condemn others, they condemn behavior. That is at least what 'they' say. So does everyone. We call people homophobic. that's judging and condemning behavior.

I am not saying that people do not do that, what I am saying is there were broader arguments against homosexuality (and other forms of anything outside sex for procreation) in multiple religious (clearly in Islam, some forms of Hinduism, Buddhism, Tao, Judaism, some pre pagan religions) , philosophical, and cultural traditions across time and place. Plato, I think argued against it as against nature. So this wasn't just a few lines from the bible, or some misinterpretation or mistake its part of a framework to manage a society.

I don't think you don't know this or intended it to mean so but this 'only six references' makes it sound like it was something very isolated, where many cultures where focused on creating a strong monogamous family unit of male and female.

People can argue that's no longer relevant, or times have changed, or they can argue that this should not change. But I do take issue with the idea that it was just driven by a few theologians for some nefarious purpose. It was part of a broader framework to uphold and manage a society.

If an apocalypse happened and we went back to the stone age, and our survival depended on division of manual labor, our acceptance of issues like gender or even male/female labor integration would probably change very quickly.

 

That feeling is not productive. You didn't ask to feel how you feel. We don't know how things will turn out in any aspect of our lives. If you feel that way, the guilt mongers win. That would be the people who are white, comfortable, conservative, have 2+ kids, and go to church. That means they get to make the rules. I say no.

I would try to reconcile your sexuality with being okay spiritually. Some members here have done that, some are working on it, and some haven't started. That's more of an observation than a judgment. I am in the middle category - I'm working on it and feeling better as I go.

 

That is the 'soft bigotry' that I see so much in this community.
So I guess this is ok in your eyes since they are not white and Christian?
https://www.economist.com/britain/2...parents-oppose-lgbt-lessons-in-primary-school
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-47040451
https://twitter.com/nwarikoo/status/1579611348744679428

"The proportion of African Americans who indicated that homosexuality was “always wrong” was 72.3% in 2008, largely unchanged since the 1970s. In contrast, among white respondents, this figure declined from 70.8% in 1973 to 51.6% in 2008,"
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2974805/

you would NEVER say something so hateful about anyone but white Christians.