If someone claims to be a follower of Jesus Christ, then Homosexuality would be in opposition to God's law. (Or as God calls it, a Sin)
I think in our culture we get hung up on the term 'Homosexuality', instead of understanding God's heart behind the matter. When God speaks of sexuality in the bible, he refers to the body as a 'Holy Temple' and condemns all acts of sexual perversion; including sex outside of marriage, having an affair, pornography, homosexuality, lesbianism, incest, and prostitution to name a few.
In God's eyes, Adam who is Dating Steve (Homosexuality), is just as wrong as Dave and Cindy who are having sex outside of marriage.
I think people who believe in Jesus has done a poor job of accepting those who struggle with sins such as Homosexuality, so I want to personally apologize.
As US presidential runner recently said: "There are only 10 basic laws that we needâ¦"
Even though I dislike the man and his views, I enjoy this one quote. He is saying that essentially that some on the most important things to follow in life are the 10 Commandments, which are more or less guidlines that anyone regardless of religon can follow. All other rules and laws either supplement tose rules or are largely unneeded. Take in mind this is just a brief run down.
Homosexuality is no where on that list...maybe because it was not a major issue or anyone really cared?
In fact...in many of the great civilizations on this world those 10 guidlines were followed and same sex relations were viewed as normal and healthy. Such examples are the Greeks, Romans and Feudal Japanese. If these cultures from which we in our current day owe everything to found nothing wrong with homosexuality, why should we?
A lot of Asian cultures and even Native American tribes had a lot of people that would change gender appearances. They were said to possess two souls. As you (Devoidless) wrote, there are numerous cultures were it wasn't even a thing. It was just part of it. The Greeks believed that was an important part of an apprenticeship.
God created Man and Woman in his image, and therefor He can define what is acceptable and what is not acceptable. In the Bible, it mentions that God created Adam and Eve to be together, and in the story in Genesis, you get his blueprint of what marriage and relationships should be like.
1 Man and 1 Woman being untied together in marriage.
Aww...such a cliche. I have heard that 'Adam and Steve' numerous times.
I would in theory make sense that there would be a man and a woman to start things off. Otherwise, there would not be more any more people. But fast forward thousands of years. There are enough people to sustain human life, that it does not matter if two people of the same sex get together. They are not doing any harm, in fact, they are in a way helping the burden of the planet by not making more people, who would make more people, and so on and so on. So, in a sense, homosexuality is the best form of birth control which does not harm or help anyone in the long term.
Those were all put in generalized terms, as I realize that lesbian couples can have children but for the sake of this argument I left that out.
Opposing homosexuality because of religious reasons is fine if that's your thing, but the argument will never advance beyond a descriptive ethical stance to a normative one. I have never *ever* heard a convincing argument about the "wrongness" of homosexuality.
What do you mean by natural? And what do you mean "meant for one another?" Whether or not we can reproduce asexually is irrelevant. As rational beings, we do things - like sex - because we want to. In humans, sex is intrinsically valuable because we enjoy it for its own sake. You can argue that people have plenty of sex to make babies, but I would bet far fewer people would have sex at all if it
