AtheistNexus.org discussion on Adultery Vs. homosexuality in reference to Melbourne, Australian Priest in the RCC who was exommunicated for blessing a same-sex relationship in 2009

Adultery V Homosexuality
Posted by Doug on February 19, 2009 at 8:59pm in Theism, Deism, & All Things Religious
View Discussions
.


Here in Brisbane Aust a local Catholic Priest is being removed from his church for blessing Homosexual unions ( amongst other sins) but giving a blessing to Gays in stable loving relationships is the big one.
 There has been much public outrage for and against and much public comment about the horrendous sin of homosexuality and how it is disgusting to god etc etc etc.
 I went back to good old Leviticus and to my reading Homosexuality is no more or less of a sin than adultery blasphemy or disrespect for parents.
 I am wondering why you never seem to see fundies picketing divorce courts with banners saying "God Hates Adulters" ?
 It seems to me they are very selective about who they hate and what sins are higher on their hate lists :-)
Leviticus
20:10 And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.
20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.
20:9 For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him.
24:16 And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name of the Lord, shall be put to death.
Tags: Leviticus, adultery, gays, homosexuality



 Like 

.
Share Twitter
  



Views: 4
▶ Reply to This
..


Replies to This Discussion
 Permalink Reply by Buffy on February 19, 2009 at 10:26pm
You wouldn't expect them to crusade against anything that would result in them having to change their own behavior, would you? That wouldn't bring in the converts or $$$.
 They're nothing if not hypocrites.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by LeaT on February 20, 2009 at 4:26am
I think we must understand where the idea of what we find socially accepted norms or not come from, because it is not so strange actually that homosexuality which is still very controversial is considered worse in terms of sin than adultery or even sex before marriage.
 The reason why is simply that adultery and sex before marriage etc are all socially accepted behaviors in our society, as we are far more sexually liberated than they were when the Old Testament was written. In addition, it should be noted that Jews lived/lives with a cosmology very much determined by kinship, but generally here in the West we don't. If you consider kinship to be the most important governing and controlling your life, then things which would dishonor you and in addition your kin (since the kin is you and vice versa) are all considered immoral acts.
 Now, in a world where kinship doesn't matter, the moral laws that govern say, disrespect to your kin and your parents are no longer important in our society, as disrespect your own "kin" and your parents is now a socially accepted behavior. Homosexuality however is, not but for other reasons than disrespect. I would most likely believe that the reason why at least some people find homosexuality and crossgenderism wrong is because it doesn't "feel right", since during the past 200 years we have been governed with the idea of evolution, male is supposed to mate with female and the only ways to determine gender is to look at what sex you were born with.
 It is actually a very interesting question why people would consider homosexuality wrong, and I am sure different anthropologists with different approaches would give different answers. In the bottom line though, I still believe it's because of how we view sexual acts with a hint of evolution, you are only supposed to have sex with someone to further the species. This too, is probably a remnant of when our societies in the West too, were kinship-based. We just sort of integrated that idea into a modern concept.
 Also, it also says, I believe it is in Levicitus too, that women are prohibited to leave their houses during their periods in case of tainting others (and no one is supposed to visit her as well except her female friends, since, lo and behold, they are already tainted so then it's fine!), but I don't see any woman in the Western world actually practice this today. Yet still, the idea of the female taint with the menstruation fluids live on in the ideas of repressed female sexuality.
 Ok, now I'll just shut up ;)
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Dawn K on February 20, 2009 at 8:15am
No one ever said there was logic behind their hate. It seems to me that anyone that takes the bible as the literal word of god can't help but be hypocritical. It simply is not possible to correctly follow everything in the bible and live in today's world.
 I believe it's the "otherness" of homosexuality that makes it a bigger sin. I suspect the bible is only their justification. Up until recently most people assumed that they didn't know any of those perverted types because they were all firmly in the closet. More importantly it didn't touch (or so they thought) any of their circle of friends or family. It's only been very recently that people have had to deal with the fact that their friends, family, pastors and leaders might very possibly be gay. Even when they did have to deal with it, it was a simple matter to sweep it under the rug, plug up your ears and sing "lalalalalala". They can't do that anymore and as a result they have to "crucify" anyone who dares to support what they hate.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by dusk on March 24, 2009 at 12:03am
no leviticus only says that for men to have gay sex is an abomination, it looks over lesbianism totally.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by FreeThinker on March 24, 2009 at 5:56am
They probably didn't have dildos back then. :D
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Doug on March 24, 2009 at 6:01am
Like Queen Victoria they probably did not believe women did that kind of thing !
 Failing that if it did not involve reproduction they probably were not concerned what women did !!!
▶ Reply


                

http://www.atheistnexus.org/forum/topics/adultery-v-homosexuality

















Adultery V Homosexuality
Posted by Doug on February 19, 2009 at 8:59pm in Theism, Deism, & All Things Religious
View Discussions
.


Here in Brisbane Aust a local Catholic Priest is being removed from his church for blessing Homosexual unions ( amongst other sins) but giving a blessing to Gays in stable loving relationships is the big one.
 There has been much public outrage for and against and much public comment about the horrendous sin of homosexuality and how it is disgusting to god etc etc etc.
 I went back to good old Leviticus and to my reading Homosexuality is no more or less of a sin than adultery blasphemy or disrespect for parents.
 I am wondering why you never seem to see fundies picketing divorce courts with banners saying "God Hates Adulters" ?
 It seems to me they are very selective about who they hate and what sins are higher on their hate lists :-)
Leviticus
20:10 And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.
20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.
20:9 For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him.
24:16 And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name of the Lord, shall be put to death.
Tags: Leviticus, adultery, gays, homosexuality



 Like 

.
Share Twitter
  



Views: 4
▶ Reply to This
..


Replies to This Discussion
 Permalink Reply by Buffy on February 19, 2009 at 10:26pm
You wouldn't expect them to crusade against anything that would result in them having to change their own behavior, would you? That wouldn't bring in the converts or $$$.
 They're nothing if not hypocrites.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by LeaT on February 20, 2009 at 4:26am
I think we must understand where the idea of what we find socially accepted norms or not come from, because it is not so strange actually that homosexuality which is still very controversial is considered worse in terms of sin than adultery or even sex before marriage.
 The reason why is simply that adultery and sex before marriage etc are all socially accepted behaviors in our society, as we are far more sexually liberated than they were when the Old Testament was written. In addition, it should be noted that Jews lived/lives with a cosmology very much determined by kinship, but generally here in the West we don't. If you consider kinship to be the most important governing and controlling your life, then things which would dishonor you and in addition your kin (since the kin is you and vice versa) are all considered immoral acts.
 Now, in a world where kinship doesn't matter, the moral laws that govern say, disrespect to your kin and your parents are no longer important in our society, as disrespect your own "kin" and your parents is now a socially accepted behavior. Homosexuality however is, not but for other reasons than disrespect. I would most likely believe that the reason why at least some people find homosexuality and crossgenderism wrong is because it doesn't "feel right", since during the past 200 years we have been governed with the idea of evolution, male is supposed to mate with female and the only ways to determine gender is to look at what sex you were born with.
 It is actually a very interesting question why people would consider homosexuality wrong, and I am sure different anthropologists with different approaches would give different answers. In the bottom line though, I still believe it's because of how we view sexual acts with a hint of evolution, you are only supposed to have sex with someone to further the species. This too, is probably a remnant of when our societies in the West too, were kinship-based. We just sort of integrated that idea into a modern concept.
 Also, it also says, I believe it is in Levicitus too, that women are prohibited to leave their houses during their periods in case of tainting others (and no one is supposed to visit her as well except her female friends, since, lo and behold, they are already tainted so then it's fine!), but I don't see any woman in the Western world actually practice this today. Yet still, the idea of the female taint with the menstruation fluids live on in the ideas of repressed female sexuality.
 Ok, now I'll just shut up ;)
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Dawn K on February 20, 2009 at 8:15am
No one ever said there was logic behind their hate. It seems to me that anyone that takes the bible as the literal word of god can't help but be hypocritical. It simply is not possible to correctly follow everything in the bible and live in today's world.
 I believe it's the "otherness" of homosexuality that makes it a bigger sin. I suspect the bible is only their justification. Up until recently most people assumed that they didn't know any of those perverted types because they were all firmly in the closet. More importantly it didn't touch (or so they thought) any of their circle of friends or family. It's only been very recently that people have had to deal with the fact that their friends, family, pastors and leaders might very possibly be gay. Even when they did have to deal with it, it was a simple matter to sweep it under the rug, plug up your ears and sing "lalalalalala". They can't do that anymore and as a result they have to "crucify" anyone who dares to support what they hate.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by dusk on March 24, 2009 at 12:03am
no leviticus only says that for men to have gay sex is an abomination, it looks over lesbianism totally.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by FreeThinker on March 24, 2009 at 5:56am
They probably didn't have dildos back then. :D
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Doug on March 24, 2009 at 6:01am
Like Queen Victoria they probably did not believe women did that kind of thing !
 Failing that if it did not involve reproduction they probably were not concerned what women did !!!
▶ Reply

.



http://www.atheistnexus.org/forum/topics/adultery-v-homosexuality