Homosexuality

Author: TheUnderdog

Posts

Total: 125
SkepticalOne
SkepticalOne's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 1,720
3
3
7
SkepticalOne's avatar
SkepticalOne
3
3
7
-->
@thett3
I'm a Catholic and pretty okay with the status quo where a church can refuse to marry a gay couple
I really dont care what churches do behind their doors (provided its consensual). I doubt this notion of gay people besieging churches to get married is a serious worry in the real world. People go to churches where they feel welcome. If a church is not LGBTQ supportive, most queer people will find greener pastures rather than link themselves to a tribe which does not support them.
SkepticalOne
SkepticalOne's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 1,720
3
3
7
SkepticalOne's avatar
SkepticalOne
3
3
7
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
What should happen to a man that lies with another man as one lies with a woman?
Nothing.
I agree with that. Does Leviticus 20:13 agree with us?
It depends. Are we going strictly by what the original Hebrews states, or how that Hebrew has been translated and interpreted since?

The original Hebrew says a man shall not lie with a male as with a woman. If it were meant to address homosexuality, why would the hebrew word for man not have been used to represent both individuals? Maybe because the law wasn't addressing man/man relations, but man/boy relations.  A boy is male, but not yet a man.
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@SkepticalOne
It wasn't until the last 100 years or so that the word 'homosexuality' started appearing in the Bible. 

I'm unsure about that.
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
I don't want a marriage or a civil union.  Both are too expensive and I don't want that commitment.
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@Theweakeredge
You're going based on your own intepretation that therefore the entire church should be allowed to discriminate??? DO you not understand what kind of precedent that sets?
There are times when religion allows for things to be done that otherwise wouldn't be allowed.  Religious freedom is how people go to heaven.  If I had to pick between gay people getting a civil union or priests burning in hell for not following the bible the way they saw fit, I would pick the former.
Mesmer
Mesmer's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 516
3
2
4
Mesmer's avatar
Mesmer
3
2
4
-->
@thett3
This is objectively wrong. Per the Bureau of Justice Statistics in 2019 "There were 5.3 times as many violent incidents committed by black offenders against white victims (472,570) as were committed by white offenders against black victims (89,980)." Since white people outnumber black people in the US around 6-1 this ratio should be reverse. If white people were the most dangerous people, as you allege, the ratio should actually be 7+ white on black crimes for every black on white crime, the reality is the exact opposite. 

Firstly, this is based.

Secondly, he's not interested in reading any studies that don't support his narrative: "As for your studies? They're bullshit. I don't care to engage further than that". He didn't even read the first study he posted, and I know this because it contradicts the argument he made for homosexual marriage: "... our findings indicate that children particularly benefit from same-sex couples compared to opposite-sex couples if the couple is cohabiting rather than married."

This guy seems to be the type to Google his arguments, copy-and-paste the first study he finds wherein the abstract agrees with him, and leave it at that. Watch him call your referenced argument "bullshit" or "racist" and leave it at that.

TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@TheMorningsStar
It was like 10 pages but I caught their first argument.  Their first argument was the term, "homosexuality" wasn't invented until the 1800s.  However, these same people often claim the Bible was referring to pedophilia.  But the term "pedophilia" wasn't invented until around the same time.   So saying that the verse couldn't be talking about homosexuality is like saying the verse couldn't have been talking about pedophilia, because neither term was invented back when the Bible was being written.

But it's possible the verses that condemned homosexuality weren't referring to homosexuality.  We can't be sure.
thett3
thett3's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,064
3
2
7
thett3's avatar
thett3
3
2
7
-->
@Mesmer
Firstly, this is based.
I’m tired of being lumped into a group and then having that group slandered. At this point I basically view this sort of racist rhetoric as both incitement to violence and intentionally devised to divide and demoralize the population. It’s so disgusting 

SkepticalOne
SkepticalOne's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 1,720
3
3
7
SkepticalOne's avatar
SkepticalOne
3
3
7
-->
@TheUnderdog
It wasn't until the last 100 years or so that the word 'homosexuality' started appearing in the Bible. 

I'm unsure about that.
Ok. 
TheMorningsStar
TheMorningsStar's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 398
2
3
7
TheMorningsStar's avatar
TheMorningsStar
2
3
7
-->
@TheUnderdog
Their first argument was the term, "homosexuality" wasn't invented until the 1800s.  However, these same people often claim the Bible was referring to pedophilia.  But the term "pedophilia" wasn't invented until around the same time.
The purpose behind that was that the terms that were used before this point tend to sometimes be used to refer to both homosexuality and other things, and so when you read the terms you need to look at the broader context.

For example, the Leviticus verses. They almost seem like a clear cut condemnation of homosexuality, but that is only if you cut out 'מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אִשָּׁ֔ה' from the verse. The fact that that part is in there means there must be a broader context to the verse. The sentence is a clear and complete sentence without 'מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אִשָּׁ֔ה' and would be the clearest condemnation of homosexuality if written that way, and so one has to ask why it isn't written in that way. The conclusion, thus, is that 'מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אִשָּׁ֔ה' adds a context that makes it not a universal condemnation of homosexuality but a specific type of male-on-male relation.

The issue is that we simply don't know what it might mean. We can know it isn't talking about all homosexual relations but we do not know what the specific nuance is simply due to incomplete understanding of the language at the time Leviticus was written and there being no equivalent usage of 'מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אִשָּׁ֔ה' that would give us insight on what it could mean in these verses.

It is more important to read his work on the verses themselves as that is what he is going to grad school for than the intro.


Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@FLRW
no, its a crusader catholic from the Christian Kingdom of Jerusalem

Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@thett3
Agree with everything you said. Also want to point out that amazingly the FBI STILL doesn't disaggregate Hispanic people from White people in their statistics so a large chunk of that 41.1% is Hispanic. Once you adjust for age Hispanics don't have a much higher rate of violent crime than white people do so it isn't the majority of the 41%, perhaps a quarter, but still.

And the suggestion that white people are the most arrogant is just laughable. I've never seen a more self loathing group of people in my life. This kind of rhetoric scares me to death
yeah it is scary- theres absolutely zero reason to hate your race but white people have been tricked into thinking that their own race is evil and that they are colonizers, etc, etc. the effect can be seen everywhere EVERYWHERE

and thx for the info on the FBI statistics.

Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@Mesmer
lmao your 100% right, thett3 is giga-based chad and theweakeredge is a cringe atheist leftist
dfss9788
dfss9788's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 152
1
2
2
dfss9788's avatar
dfss9788
1
2
2
-->
@TheUnderdog
If your a gay person and you want to spend the rest of your life with another gay person, why can't you just get a civil union instead of a marriage?  Marriage is a religious institution.

Because of this I think gay people should get civil unions/secular marriages so they aren't forcing the church to do something that violates their religious beliefs.
Civil unions are inferior because they frequently don't come with certain legal benefits, like federal recognition for tax and other purposes along with recognition in other states should the couple move from one to the other.

What does the church have to do with marriage? People get marriage licenses at a courthouse and a judge or county clerk solemnizes.
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@dfss9788
Civil unions are inferior because they frequently don't come with certain legal benefits, like federal recognition for tax and other purposes along with recognition in other states should the couple move from one to the other.
I'm unsure if your right here, but if you are, then give civil unions the same benefits as marriages and in 2015, the supreme court ruled that civil unions were legalized and recognized everywhere in the US.
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@FLRW
Yes, didn't God really kill Jesus because he was gay? 
No and homosexuality should not be punished with the death penalty.
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Incorrect - over-patrolling in black communities lead to this increased statistic. Furthermore, I never said anything about what people oppose, I'm talking about fundamentalism - which White people tend to be apart of more often. I said nothing about them supporting gay marriage more, please read more thoroughly. 
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@Theweakeredge
Incorrect - over-patrolling in black communities lead to this increased statistic. Furthermore, I never said anything about what people oppose, I'm talking about fundamentalism - which White people tend to be apart of more often. I said nothing about them supporting gay marriage more, please read more thoroughly. 
LOL over-patrolling??? what complete and utter bullshit

also, is anti-gay marriage a fundamentalist position?
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@thett3
"The United States is estimated to consist of about 97% rural areas, though only about one-fifth of the population resides in these areas.[1] According to the U.S. Census Bureau, rural areas are less dense, more sparsely populated areas.[2] Because rural areas are faced with unique challenges, police in rural areas may face complications and issues that police officers in urban areas do not. These problems can place a strain on rural police departments, making their jobs more difficult. For example, officers in rural police departments typically must travel longer distances and experience longer wait times for backup when responding to calls for service.[3] Additionally, research has shown that smaller police departments, like those found in rural areas, spend less money per officer and resident, but have higher clearance rates than departments in urban areas.[4] This article will discuss issues in rural policing such as recruiting, maintaining, and training officers, technology used by rural departments, community relations, bias-based policing, factors influencing stress among officers, and data illustrating rates of offenses reported to the police and rates of arrests in rural Illinois counties."

I restate my case against Franklin, over-policing in poorer areas, where there are more black people, leads to increases in the stats. 

thett3
thett3's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,064
3
2
7
thett3's avatar
thett3
3
2
7
-->
@Theweakeredge
I restate my case against Franklin, over-policing in poorer areas, where there are more black people, leads to increases in the stats. 
Bullshit it does. It’s high time you start treating black people as human beings capable of moral agency and stop blaming every bad thing in their community on whitey.

The difference in rates of violent crime are far, far too vast to be explainable by differences in enforcement. Homicide is the best way to disprove this because enforcement standards have to be absolutely garbage tier for them not to be investigated. And the homicide statistics are crystal clear—they aren’t correlated with wealth or whiteness at all. 

Also if you think it’s easier to get away with a crime in a cushy suburban white neighborhood or a small town than it is in the ghetto that only shows your own lack of life experience

thett3
thett3's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,064
3
2
7
thett3's avatar
thett3
3
2
7
-->
@Theweakeredge
You are alleging that the reason there is a difference in crime rates is due mostly to enforcement. Your allegation is that there are literally hundreds of thousands of white on black crimes annually along with the millions of white on white crimes required to make the rates close to equal that go totally unreported. Do you have even the slightest evidence to support that? 

Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Yes, overpolicing, as I cited against Thett:
"The United States is estimated to consist of about 97% rural areas, though only about one-fifth of the population resides in these areas.[1] According to the U.S. Census Bureau, rural areas are less dense, more sparsely populated areas.[2] Because rural areas are faced with unique challenges, police in rural areas may face complications and issues that police officers in urban areas do not. These problems can place a strain on rural police departments, making their jobs more difficult. For example, officers in rural police departments typically must travel longer distances and experience longer wait times for backup when responding to calls for service.[3] Additionally, research has shown that smaller police departments, like those found in rural areas, spend less money per officer and resident, but have higher clearance rates than departments in urban areas.[4] This article will discuss issues in rural policing such as recruiting, maintaining, and training officers, technology used by rural departments, community relations, bias-based policing, factors influencing stress among officers, and data illustrating rates of offenses reported to the police and rates of arrests in rural Illinois counties."

Black people make up only 8 less in rural areas than Urban areas despite the relatively small population in the rural areas. Furthermore, rural areas are easier to segregate due to their history of redlining. 

"Poverty frequently grips America’s minorities, many of whom live and work in isolated rural areas. Rural blacks living in small towns in the South, for example, face longstanding traditions of racial discrimination and economic oppression. More recently, Hispanics have dispersed from gateway cities into new rural destinations in the Midwest and South, often to work for low wages in meatpacking plants, agriculture, or construction. Poverty rates in America’s Indian reservations are exceedingly high. More than one-half of residents in some reservation communities are poor. Social exclusion and isolation in poor communities often reinforce racial and class inequality. Indeed, geographic and social mobility often go hand in hand. To get somewhere in life often means you have to go elsewhere. Unfortunately, rural minorities, elderly people, and the uneducated poor have few residential options that represent a step forward. Those who move often circulate between poor neighbor"
Finally, the history of segregation and concentrated poverty increases the rates of crimes, further explaining the gap. Again, have some nuance. 
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@TheUnderdog
Discrimination is not one of those things bud, the bible says nothing about going to hell for marrying gay people. Read me the verse that does and you might convince me. 
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@thett3
Um, the actual STUDIES demonstrate this fact, black people are segregated and kept in poorer places of concentrated poverty, where over policing happens, this is empirically true.

"Hispanics now comprise 17% of the American population; African Americans are 13%, East Asians 5%, and whites 63%. The Hispanic population is concentrated along the southern border with Mexico, in states such as Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas; many Hispanics also live in Florida, after migrating there from Cuba. A segment of the Hispanic population in the United States consists of unauthorized immigrants: about 6 million persons of Mexican origin are residing in the country illegally, out of a total of 53 million Hispanics (USA population in 2013 was 316 million). Their migration/ citizenship status renders their relations with the police somewhat different than whites and African Americans. In general, Hispanics have a worse relationship with the police than whites but better than African Americans. This pattern can be traced to both the historical conditions under which each group entered the country as well as their contemporary treatment CPS 35 Ethnic profiling en interne diversiteit bij de politie.indd 129 3/04/15 13:59 Ronald Weitzer & Rod K. Brunson 130 CPS 2015-2, nr. 35 by officers and their group-level perceptions of the police. Rather than a single ‘minority group’ orientation to the police, the general pattern is a racial hierarchy ta"

Now, you can continue to ignore evidence - but you trying to paint me as the "oh my god why don't you just make them responsible for their actions!" dude allows me to know that you're a bullshiter. You aren't interested in actually following evidence, which was clear to me from you admitting you cherry-picked, I don't know why I figured you'd accept evidence, my bad. 

TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@Theweakeredge
Discrimination is not one of those things bud
If the gays have alternatives such as getting married by the state, then there is no need to force the church to do your bidding.

the bible says nothing about going to hell for marrying gay people. Read me the verse that does and you might convince me. 
"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"
(1 Corinthians 6:9, NIV)(https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/1%20Corinthians%206%3A9).  Marriage sets the precedent for sex and the church doesn't support same sex marriage which leads to sex.
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@Mesmer
Dude, you have failed to actually cite your source here, merely linked to your other debate page. I don't care to dig through your homework, I've explained that three times now - also - I literally already disected one of your arguments - you like to cite uncomprehensive or just plain out non-sourced reports. Cool, but when I actually have a source you just want to harp on one quote and not actually respond to arguments. Fine by me, but you don't have any high ground to speak of. 
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@TheUnderdog
That doesn't say that marrying two people who are gay will send you to heaven, you aren't c omprehending what I'm posting dude.

Also, mistranslation alert:
"Most of Leviticus 18 deals directly with incest. Notably, the list of laws from Leviticus 18 is reordered in Leviticus 20.  In Leviticus 18 the order of the topics is ambiguous, but in chapter 20 the so-called homosexual law appears within a list referring to incest.[21] Lings’ linguistic study leads him to conclude that Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 continue the theme of incestuous relationships.[22] Thus, the passage should be paraphrased: “Sexual intercourse with a close male relative should be just as abominable to you as incestuous relationships with female relatives.”[23] Lev. 18:22 and 20:13 forbids male incestuous relations."
thett3
thett3's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,064
3
2
7
thett3's avatar
thett3
3
2
7
-->
@Theweakeredge
Black on white crime is 5.3x the reverse according to the official statistics. Black people are 13% of the population but commit around 50% of the homicides. According to the official statistics. Your argument is that actually whites commit crimes at the same rate but the police just decline to prosecute them or don’t catch them because enforcement is lax in lily white towns (which is hilariously wrong btw). Where are the bodies? Do people get regularly mugged walking down the street in a white suburb but the police just don’t get there in time? Put up or shut up. 

Great point about Hispanics btw. If the police are so racist and just let whites get away with murder and only enforce laws against minorities how come once you adjust for age (and definitely once you adjust for poverty) the Hispanic crime rate is pretty close to the white crime rate? Why don’t Hispanic people also represent a wildly disproportionate percentage of homicides in the statistics that you allege without evidence are not accurate?  


TheMorningsStar
TheMorningsStar's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 398
2
3
7
TheMorningsStar's avatar
TheMorningsStar
2
3
7
-->
@TheUnderdog
1 Corinthians 6:9
The word that is translated as "men who have sex with men" is 'arsenokoitai'. This word first appears in Paul's writings, he coins the term. He does not, however, pull it from nowhere. He combines the words 'arsen' and 'koiten' from the Septuagint translation of Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13. As such to understand what, exactly, Paul means here we must understand what is meant in Leviticus or have some other source from Paul or near Paul's time that can give a clear answer. We do not have the latter, so the former is what is required in order to try to understand context, and I already commented about these verses in post #70. You really should read the link I gave you thoroughly.
thett3
thett3's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,064
3
2
7
thett3's avatar
thett3
3
2
7
-->
@Theweakeredge
I don’t understand how you can feel comfortable falsely accusing an entire race of people of collectively committing millions of more crimes annually than they actually do.