Pete Buttigieg calls out Mike Pence during his speech at the LGBTQ Victory Fund Brunch
Pete Buttigieg tells Mike Pence "if you have a problem with who I am, your quarrel is not with me. Your quarrel, sir, is with my creator." while speaking at the LGBTQ Victory Fund Brunch.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Article is LOCKED by moderator [smarty_function_ntUser_get_name: user_id or profile_id parameter required]
Who is online
77 visitors
Is being gay a choice, or are we made gay and if we are made gay, did god make you gay?
When my childhood friend, who was raised in the Church of the Salvation Army finally came out to his parents when he was 50, his parents were shocked and horrified. His mother was the one who came to a similar conclusion. She said, "I don't believe that god makes mistakes." It was the only time I've heard that, until listening to this speech.
What do you think?
*WARNING* Do not make this article political.
I've heard that one, too, from evangelicals who are convinced that no one is made gay, because if they were, that would be a mistake made by God. But what human being gets to decide that anything in God's Creation is a mistake? Who is worthy to make that judgment? So, Person A doesn't behave like Person B. That doesn't mean Person B is a mistake. Unfortunately, human beings - including a lot of really devout ones - have a long history of hearing God's word and then getting it totally wrong or ignoring it outright.
Someone please make a note of the day and time because I am agreeing with Tacos on the issue of LGBT. People don't choose to be LGBT. They just are and have always been LGBT.
Wow, Tacos, some days you simply amaze me. We don't agree on much but this we can definitely agree on.
You really are a nice guy
Excellent post.
What they said.
It's a choice for some and for others it's a natural attraction they feel and act on. When you bring God into it you have to question whether the Temptation is from God and Choice is up to the Individual. Did God create Thieves and Murderers or did they just succumb to temptation. Who hasn't been tempted to do something they know is wrong. Sometimes the Church, Government, or Public Opinion deems something as wrong but individuals believe otherwise. Are they right or wrong, did they succumb to their temptations and are now justifying their actions by claiming everyone else is wrong. Some people like to do wrong, it arouses and excites them.
Did you choose to be heterosexual? You can't just "choose" to be sexually attracted to men if you're not wired that way.
And you're comparing things that don't harm anyone else - which therefore aren't wrong - with things that DO harm others and are therefore wrong.
People in jail do it all the time. It's just like masturbation, very few people are sexually attracted to their hands but they think about other things that sexually excite them while using their hands to masturbate. Also not all Gay People wanted Homosexuality to be normalized, it is the forbidden fruit aspect of gay sex that arouses them (or at least it used to be). Liberals are always saying everyone is different yet they still try to put people into ridged little groups but the truth is everyone truly are individuals.
Zuksam,
I don't understand what you mean by being put into little groups.
In nature, animals are gay. They don't make a decision to be gay. They just are.
There are also physiological differences between straight brains and gay brains. They show up clearly on MRI.
So given that we know their brains are different and given that in this soiceity, it is far easier to be straight than to be gay. So I really doubt it is a choice.
Did you watch the video?
Anyone saying homosexuality does not exist in nature never visited a farm.
Our farm was practically a gay pride parade. Bulls humping other bulls. Rams ramming rams. Hogs being pigs. Cocks toppin roosters. Even my dog Sadie, who was female, would mount the pussy cats. There is plainly nothing unnatural about warm blooded mammals seeking sexual satisfaction. What do you think happens in a pasture containing 100 in season cows with only one bull? Yep, lots of cow on cow action going on. You have to laugh at anyone contending that sex is unnatural when most domesticated animal's prime objective seems to be to make their stinky bits tingle...
You have to be joking.
What I mean is they make a designation of what it means to be Gay and how and why they become Gay and they state it like it's a scientific determination when it's not. Why do some who've never been in a Gay relationship enter into one " Maybe most Gay people were born that way but not all. Some go that way because of bad experiences. Some are attracted to one particular same sex person. You can't State "this is the way it is" if there are exceptions.
Perhaps it is more a matter of availability and sex drive. Some animals will hump a leg.
There are exceptions to almost everything. That is why in science there is so little that they say has been proven. What we do know, is that when self-identifying gays take MRI's, their brains are different from straight brains. That is science.
I can not speak about bi-sexuality since I have not seen a study on it.
They were born that way. Most people are bisexual to some degree according to the Kinsey scale.
They're lucky - they are wired to be sexually attracted to both men and women, and therefore have twice as large a dating pool as straight or gay people!
Seriously, JBB...I really do bleive all that cow-on-cow action going on out in the pasture is about dominance.
I could be wrong because I do believe that there is same sex relationships in the animal world
I think that may fall under the, "acts, not orientation", category.
Gee zuksam, you seem to have a unique personal insight.
Or is it just fantasy? H/T Queen
How the hell do you come up a comment that has no basis in fact or reality.
Are you homophobic, an evangelical, who attempt to use the Bible as their basis for their bigotry?
Religious disposition, sexual disposition, racial disposition....None of these should matter.
Better questions should be, is this person and their friends interesting to be around? Can you learn from this person? Are they nice to others? The rest is just embroidery.
Very well said.
I listened to this young man, and you couldn't get more apple pie than he is. I was actually very impressed by his composure and demeanor. I hope he makes a dent in the democratic nominees. Even if he doesn't win, he is a refreshing voice.
I would only add:
Do they make you laugh.
My very christian brother-in-law claimed that our sister-in-law coddled our nephew so much she made him gay. Sitting at the dinner table with my mother-in-law and brother-in-law...I couldn't believe what I was hearing. Our nephew had just 'come out', but frankly it was quite obvious for years. I asked him a very simple question, "What mother would want her child to be so different that he would become a part of a group ostracized by many Christians?" He sputtered and then kept on with his ranting. My mother-in-law smacked his arm and told him to 'listen to what she has to say'. I continued as best I could. I don't know if anything I said made any difference.
I believe that sexual preference is an instinct we are born with...whether God, or our parents genes, created or contributed to that instinct is a question I can't answer.
That question is debatable, isn't it? Does it need to be answered anymore? Gay's have been fully accepted in modern American society and have, at the very least, as much rights as everyone else.
What do you think?
I think the question reminds me of one we used to get in high school from a certain teacher. She always a point to be made and I always knew exactly what it was. In that spirit, I will say "gays are born that way"!!! (unfortunately, I won't be getting an A for that).
*WARNING* Do not make this article political.
That was so very hard to do based on the full context of the quote you chose.
how false can you get
I can only hope that your comment was made in ignorance.
There is NO Federal protection for 'Gays' in America.
In most states, a gay person can loose their job or precluded from employment, be evicted or denied housing, be denied public accommodation, refused the right to adopt and foster children. Recently, states are passing legislation to allow 'Gays' to be denied medical care. All merely based on their sexual orientation.
Anyone who claims that the LGBT community enjoys 'as much rights as everyone else' is ether ignorant or obtuse.
God who? A God that "makes no mistakes"?
Are your referring to the vindictive Asshole who flooded the Earth and wiped out everything that wasn't on Noah's Ark? I guess the dead babies were intentional.
Though I myself am non-religious, I would say we are who we are and come in differing shapes, sizes and thought. Nature ( or if you wish, the god of your choice) makes that determination, it is up to us and others to accept it as it is.
As an aside, I really hope Mayor Pete garners more attention, this young man has his stuff together from what I have seen and heard thus far.
I totally agree with you luther. That is exactly what I would have said.
[deleted]
Please no politics. Thank you.
Buttigieg, a politician who made a political speech, is running against Trump.
Buttigieg's eloquence puts shame to the verbal diareah spewed by Pence...
JBB,
The point of his speech was about being gay. That is the aspect I wish to discuss here. If you would like to do an article on this, please feel free to do so. Otherwise, please keep the topic to his experience as a gay man.
NO !
He's actually running against other Democrats right now !
Can we focus on the content part of his coming out and the struggles he faced?
What Struggles ?
Like AOC struggles ?
He's running for President, and he's waaaaay younger than I am....37. (talk about Struggles
)!
Coming out as a gay man.
She is not the subject of this.
And his age is irrelevant to this.
That's not an accomplishment !
He waited to "Announce" he was gay in an essay in 2015 about himself. He had already been Mayor of South bend since 2011. Back then it was all about his "Young Age". ( Youngest Mayor like in EVER ! )
One day we may have an 8 year old gay dog for mayor, the way things are going these days !
IT WOULD BE JUST ANOTHER ONE OF THOSE ….. FIRST THINGS AGAIN !
"Special" labels are terrible and "Warped" for this country !
Youth isn't why he was elected as Mayor of South Bend. Stop with the BS.
A comment with no value.
So I guess you're over the 'America First' thingy.
Please immediately inform Trump that America isn't 'Special' and tell him that his agenda is warped.
Me ?
You just are what you are.
But don't make it some kinda "Special" thing to throw in my face, to get more of what you personally want !
I have heard others claim gay persons want "extra" rights, but I've never heard an actual example of any "extra" rights they've asked for. Can you clarify what you believe is the "some kinda Special" you seem to refer to?
I never said anything negative about "Rights" as spelled out in the "Constitution".
Okay, so if not rights, what were you referring to when you said "But don't make it some kinda "Special" thing to throw in my face"? and "to get more of what you personally want!"? What "more" do you believe they are asking for?
Actually "LISTEN" to your own representatives running for "President of the United States" !
They spell out what "Special" is, quite well.
You do actually listen and comprehend what your "Representatives" say, Don't you ?
I'm hearing they want to be treated as any other American would be, with dignity and respect. I do not hear any request to be treated as "special" or that they are asking for something "more" than anyone else is. You say "they spell out what 'special' is", if that's true you should be able to easily explain what you mean instead of trying to evade the question with deflection.
I wasn't speaking about the candidates needs for themselves .
Holy Shit !
That's all he appears to have or he would answer the question !
So what are you talking about?
"Me? You just are what you are. But don't make it some kinda "Special" thing to throw in my face, to get more of what you personally want !"
I understood what you meant by "You just are what you are." in relation to this article. What I don't understand fully is the follow up or rather the need for your follow up if you've never experienced some example of where someone "just being what they are" has demanded that they be considered 'some kind of Special' where they get "more" of something from secular society. All I'm asking is to give examples or confirm that you were just speaking in hypothetical terms if you can't site actual examples.
The "Special" promises being made by the "Left" candidates, just for "Special" people.
Do you listen to the Democrat Candidates these days ?
Have you read the article above ?
Pete Buttigieg was, is ….. something, so Pence can't speak, as Pete is "Special" now ! Wonder when he'll apologies for something, to help those Other "Special" People too !
What special policies/rights are being promised to special people, that you do not already enjoy
It saddens me that some people see being treated equally as, "special". For decades the religious folks were able to say, "we can marry, you gay people cannot!". The second that talking point was removed, the religious started to complain that their belief system was being oppressed.
Equality = oppression? I don't even know where to start..
.
Also, if God hates gay's so much, why does she keep making them? Odd...very odd.
.
You are exactly true. This is the famous quote about the very same idea,
Apparently, their god isn't as perfect as they believe. But their omniscient god also creates people who sin and blames them for being imperfect instead of making people who don't sin.
IIM,
I agree it doesn't make you special. I am not sure what you mean by being thrown in your face. Did you watch the video? This gentleman isn't doing that at all.
I'm not worried about "This" gentleman, I'm watching those on the "Left" that want to be "President of the United States of America" !
They are awash/Pandering in "Specialism" promises !
Don't ya luv "ism's" ?
I would/ wouldn't choose a candidate because of them being gay or not. I vote based on issues.
I wasn't speaking about what the "Specific" person running was or wasn't. I was speaking of what they Promise everyone else !
You just demanded, "No Politics", from me above yet here you are discussing what? Politics. Which, by the way, made no sense at all considering the topic is political and the subjects are politicians. I commented on the eloquence of Buttigieg who is a politician who made a political speech. His comments referenced another politician. So, WTF?
JBB,
90% of that video he is talking about his experiences as a gay man and how faith, love, and country combine with that. He makes 1 small remark that is political. I didn't want to focus on that. I asked nicely not to right from the get-go.
I was raised to vote for who I thought would do the best for the country, not just me. And I will stop there regarding politics. (Apologies to PH).
Such as claiming discrimination when not getting the job they want.
When did this happen?
That's "Issue" is already in the "Constitution" and the "State Laws" !
See.....
That just shows that "Congress" can't officially "Secure" their own rules and laws, yet they want to make MORE RULES and LAWS, so the voting public will vote for them...."Reference" the bazillion "Lefties" now running for President and promising the world to the "Minority" !
The "Majority" already know the Rules and Laws. Follow those Rules and Laws. That's why they are having fun cookouts on the weekend, while the Minority whine and Cry days on end.
Really? You have never heard of a discrimination lawsuit regarding sexual orientation? Need to get out more?
You have never ever read an article about a person claiming they where either denied or fired from employment because of their sexual orientation?
Not getting the "Cake" you want makes for better headlines.
I know people who were fired when they came out because the boss/owner was a homophobic bigot.
A business owner doesn't have the right to deny equal service because of their religious beliefs. They must do the job when you have the money to pay. People also cannot be charged more for the same service because they are LGBT or a different religion/race.
It IS discrimination when someone doesn't get hired, or gets fired, due to their sexual orientation. Are you saying they should just put up with it, same as black people used to have to do?
Your sooooo WRONG !
"The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 7-2 decision Monday that a Colorado baker had the constitutional right to deny service to a gay couple in 2012 because of his religious beliefs."
The Supreme Court didn't rule on whether Phillps could deny equal service because of his religious beliefs. They said that the state could not call him a religious bigot. Read the last paragraph of the decision because the crucial issue of denial of service was kicked down the road.
That has nothing to do with "Colorado baker had the constitutional right to deny service to a gay couple in 2012 because of his religious beliefs."
It specifically says...he had the right to deny "Service", which was your entire premise.
This is YOUR own Quote:
YOUR Comment 4.3.6 = "A business owner doesn't have the right to deny equal service because of their religious beliefs."
Did you forget on purpose ?
Jack Phillips most certainly does not have the right to deny service in a public business because of his religious beliefs. The SCOTUS decision is Masterpiece Cake Shop never said that he did.
You picked that out of some opinion piece or some "Twit" posting huh !
Is that why you didn't "Link" it ?
My post in 4.3.11 is the last 3 paragraphs of the majority decision written by Justice Kennedy in Masterpiece Cake Shop.
It matters NOT !
It was an opinion on a 7 to 2 ruling "For" Jack Phillips.
This also came from Kennedy:
" In this case, Kennedy concluded, the Colorado Civil Rights Commission's consideration of Phillips' case was "compromised" by the comments of one of seven commissioners at a public hearing — comments that Kennedy said disparaged Phillips' faith as "despicable" and comparable to comments made by those who sought to justify slavery on religious grounds."
Yes it does matter.
You are incorrect.
A SCOTUS decision is an opinion by the 9 judges and it is federal law.
Is it an opinion, or is it because they actually "Know THE Law" !
"Feelings"....NOTHING MORE THAN "FEELINGS" …………...
The law can be interpreted in many different ways.
Didn't you take a high school civics class as a graduation requirement?
Your choice of random capitalizations doesn't help your questionable claims.
By some.....not ALL !
Didn't you take a high school civics class as a graduation requirement?
Your choice of random capitalizations doesn't help your questionable claims.
That was soooo cute !
Opinion ?
Do you think it's ok to fire someone from their job because they are LGBT?
So you support discrimination based on sexual orientation?
Prove it sunshine
Yep several, try google very educational
Buttigieg regurgitates the classic sinners rationalization for their disobedience to God. Most sinners engage in this kind of denial seeking to make God change His standards of right and wrong.
it is a fools errand and one that self condemns them to hell unless they repent and stop sinning.
Homosexual behavior clearly is self craving instead of obedience to God
“As you yield freely and fully to the dynamic life and power of the Holy Spirit, you will abandon the cravings of your self - life. For your self - life craves the things that offend the Holy Spirit and hinder him from living free within you! And the Holy Spirit’s intense cravings hinder your old self - life from dominating you! So then, the two incompatible and conflicting forces within you are your self - life of the flesh and the new creation life of the Spirit. But when you are brought into the full freedom of the Spirit of grace, you will no longer be living under the domination of the law, but soaring above it! The cravings of the self-life are obvious: Sexual immorality, lustful thoughts, pornography,
Galatians 5:16-19
“May we all act as good and respectable people, living today the same way as we will in the day of His coming. Do not fall into patterns of dark living: wild partying, drunkenness, sexual depravity, decadent gratification, quarreling, and jealousy. Instead, wrap yourselves in the Lord Jesus, God’s Anointed, and do not fuel your sinful imagination by indulging your self-seeking desire for the pleasures of the flesh.”
Romans 13:13-14
Jesus declared “But those things which proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and they defile a man. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies.”
Matthew 15:18-19
Fornication was defined by Judaism as all sex outside of the marriage of a man and a woman
Keep your religious beliefs out of politics and secular law and nobody cares who you hate.
Matthew 7.1:6 also said this,
First of all, I didn’t judge him. God will judge him. I repeated what God says about it and what He has set as the consequences, not my setting the consequences
Secondly, That is a common misapplication of the passage which DOES NOT forbid judgment but says you must not judge by your own standards of right and wrong, but by God’s.
we are commanded by Jesus to judge with righteous judgement in that passage and elsewhere
"Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment.” John 7:24
Him we preach, warning every man and teaching every man in all wisdom, that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus. To this end I also labor, striving according to His working which works in me mightily.
Colossians 1:28-29
You did judge him when you said this,
Not all Christians have the same interpretation of the Bible that you and other conservatives do. Their beliefs are as valid as yours, despite your disagreement.
I agree, There are many ways to interpret the bible. This is the way you chose to read it. I know other ministers who do not.
To be fair, there are quite a few conservative Christians in here who don't have that interpretation either.
That is not judging him no matter how you try and twist it
secondly only those who deny the Word of God’s clear teachings and instead embrace a worldly standard have a different “interpretation”. I’m simply giving the clearly stated teachings of Jesus and using the definitions of the original language and the Torah as N’dea stood by those who heard Jesus
“Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city. But outside are dogs and sorcerers and sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and whoever loves and practices a lie. “I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you these things in the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, the Bright and Morning Star.” Revelation 22:14-16
The Greek word here for sexually immoral is porneia which for Jews and the Christian Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15 includes ALL sex outside of the marriage of a man and a woman
“For it pleases the Holy Spirit and us that we not place any unnecessary burden on you, except for the following restrictions: Stay away from anything sacrificed to a pagan idol, from eating what is strangled or with any blood, and from any form of sexual immorality. You will be beautiful believers if you keep your souls from these things, and you will be true and faithful to our Lord Jesus. May God bless you!”
Acts 15:28-29
Every sect believes that their interpretation is correct, just as every religion believes that only their god(s) exists.
This is why the strict separation of church and state is necessary so the state is kept neutral on the issue of religious freedom and our laws apply to all people equally. The state cannot enforce religious morality because there are as many ideas of what is or isn't moral as there are of who is or isn't god.
If we allow one religion to gain control of government, the next obvious fight is which sect has power. We must learn from the experiences in Northern Ireland and the middle east when the various Islamic sects fight for political power in a very bloody fashion. Their own actions are the best example of why church and state must be kept absolutely separate if we are to have a stable government with equal rights for all instead of just the dominant religion having freedom.
Funny how there are so many religions, and something like 33,000 sects within Christianity - apparently your god's teachings aren't that clear, or all Christians would agree on what they say and there wouldn't be all these Christian sects. Only an arrogant fool would claim to personally be able to interpret the bible, and state that every other Christian is wrong.
These fundamentalists who are so hung up on what other people do in bed ... I find that quite disturbing.
Are they wired that way, to be so obsessed with other people's sex lives? I mean, there are tons of other sins that are considered just as bad, but it's like a porn addition or something to them. It must suck to have such an unhealthy view of sex, and to have such an obsession.
I wonder if this obsession explains why so many extremist religious leaders molest their congregations, often including children.
I think that most of them are closeted and jealous because LGBT people are being who they are while religious conservatives try to deny the fact that they are gay/bi/trans and think that others must be forced to do likewise.
That's your choice, not everyone elses
I seriously doubt Jesus would refuse to make a cake for a gay couple, Jesus accepted everyone.
Jesus taught the golden rule in Matthew 7:12,
The hell you didn't. When people use the bible to cover bigotry it shows a complete lack of What Christ teaches
Quit trying to make up thing you judged him and there is no getting around it
LFOD,
I have a question for you and I am not trying to be a wise guy. Did you ever have a gay thought? Is there anything that could turn you gay (outside of the word of god)?
I know I am straight and have always been straight. My gay friends have never been straight. Animals don't choose to be gay. Gay brains are different structurally. How do you square that with your beliefs? Who made the gay brian? it has to be god.
In my lifetime I’ve had all kinds of sinful thoughts and acted upon some of them before I committed myself to obeying God. Christians are commanded to
1. Deny the flesh and it’s lustful desires
2. Bring our minds into obedience to our spirit so as to not gratify our impulses and thoughts
3. Be holy as God is holy
God made no one homosexual. Everyone has their own weaknesses to overcome. He does not contradict Himself
no animal is homosexual. They have no soul and thus lack any moral compass to choose between right and wrong. Animals also try to have sex with our legs or any inanimate object. Attaching human choices to the animal kingdom is ridiculous, but some persist in it.
This standard against sexual immorality according to Rabbinic tradition, predates even the Torah, back to the Noachidic law given to Noah after the flood
The Rabbinical Council of America and The Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America reaffirm the following foundational principles and beliefs in unambiguous and unmistakable terms:
Homosexual behavior is, and has always been, absolutely forbidden by Jewish law and tradition. Any attempt to characterize Jewish law and tradition to the contrary must be rejected.
The only legitimate form of sexual behavior is that which takes place between adult men and women, within the sacred institution of marriage, as traditionally defined and permitted.
Under no circumstances can Jewish tradition or law countenance a notion of so-called "Same-Sex Marriage" rituals or status under religious auspices. In our view, the term "marriage" by its very definition cannot be construed or applied to same-sex relationships. To do so is to deprive the term of its fundamental and defining meaning. The institution of marriage, and family life, as defined and practiced for thousands of years as between a man and a woman, a father and a mother, respectively, is far too important and essential to the bedrock of society and civilization as we know it, to be thus undermined by those who presume to redefine its essence.
At the same time we reaffirm that those who, in spite of their acceptance of these principles, have difficulty in living up to these standards, should be treated with compassion, sensitivity, and understanding, in our synagogues, in the Jewish community, and in society at large.
We further note that Passover, commemorating the Exodus from Egypt, is an especially appropriate time to reaffirm these principles. As Leviticus 18 makes clear, the liberation was not only from slavery and infanticide, but also from the sexual depravity practiced in ancient Egypt, which, as understood by the Sages of blessed memory (Sifra Lev. 132), included the legitimization of same-sex marriages.
We thus call upon our fellow Jews and fellow citizens to stand opposed to any attempt, whether judicial, legislative, or religious in nature, to bestow the sanctity of marriage upon same-sex couples.
This is only a religious belief that is not supported by facts. Science says that people are born gay. Your disagreement does not overrule facts and do those facts need you to agree for them to be true.
Obviously, that is wrong, since their brains are structurally different. Who made their brains?
Yet, by Jewish law, you are not allowed to discriminate against them and they should remain part of the community:
We feel what we feel. Some feelings we can change, and some we can't. Sometimes what we feel is subject to modification, and sometimes it's not. Totally and unequivocally not. And yet, the law is absolute.
As much as we know about human sexuality, we don't yet know enough. We're all, as individuals and as a society, still learning. In the last half century, we've come a long way in our understanding of human sexuality, and in redefining a cultural moral code. Some of what we've come to accept as a society is long, long overdue. And some of what we've come to accept undermines the very dignity of human sexuality. But, we're learning.
We do know this, though: we know that among other sexual behaviours, Torah law expressly forbids the specific act of male homosexuality.
And we do know this: Torah law forbids bigotry; homophobia is prohibited.
And we do know this: too many Jewish girls and boys, Jewish women and men, have suffered too much for too long. And we know that most of that suffering is caused by the environment around them. We do know this: when we become judges of another person, we behave contrary to Torah law.
Jewish interpretation is very different from Christian. All of the 613 have equal weight. Being gay carries no more weight than doing work on the Sabbath or eating pork.
btw.. please note that the ban is only on men, which is kind of interesting. Not women, not pedophilia. That is inexplicable.
What a crock. Have you ever hunted or fished?
Seen an "animal" do whatever is necessary to survive, escape or turn and fight?
Seen an animal express kindness to another, even a different species?
You delude yourself with human choices about gods......
Yes I have hunted and fished. And been a farmer, and had pets. That changes nothing that I stated
The Torah itself does NOT prohibit premarital sex - just because some rabbis have decided to set their own rules as if they were gods doesn't make it true. Hell, if we follow your rule, we should all commit incest, because after the imaginary flood there were so few people left that they were screwing their close relatives.
Why is it any of your fucking business? Is your god such a bumbling fool that he can't handle it himself if it really bothers him that much? We're talking civil licenses here - nobody's trying to force churches or synagogues to conduct marriages they disapprove of, such as between gay people, or between Catholics and Baptists or Catholics and Jews.
Do you plan to stone the millions of people who quite happily engage in sex without marriage? Remember, straight people (according to your bonkers philosophy) who have sex outside of marriage are EVERY BIT AS IMMORAL as gay people. So .. let's not allow them to marry either, correct?
People who discriminate against others are immoral, plain and simple. And the comments you quoted from that rabbis.org are insane.
There are about other denominations even within the Orthodox community that don't follow this, never mind the Conservative, Reform, Reconstructionist, Mizrahi, etc:
The state is not forcing any religion to perform a religious ceremony because a religious ceremony is not one of our constitutional rights. The state has never forced any church to marry anyone, even if the couple in question was white, hetero and a member of the congregation, so you don't have to worry that the state could force you to marry an LGBT couple against your beliefs.
The Obergfell decision only applied to a secular marriage and not a religious sacrament of matrimony.
Wrong, if you believe in God, he made all men/women so he made homosexuals, transgenders, no genders...etc.
And, after he did, he said _ "Oopps" and destroyed them.
Hmmmmm.
Really, who is being destroyed, as far as I know all the above mentioned are still here.
Most birds mate for life. They just don't have random sex. In the bird world, there are gay couples. In fact, a penguin couple was trying hard to hatch a stone together. These animals have the same differences going on in their brains as do humans. How do you explain that?
Check out rams. You'll find that just as with humans, about 10% of rams are apparently exclusively homosexual. Also, among the animals who engage in both same-sex and opposite-sex mating, hormonal differences have been documented between those who engage in only opposite-sex mating.
And dogs hump for a lot of different reasons - it's often just about dominance.
Maybe he's referring to the biblical claim of a global flood where God said he saw mankind that he created and regretting making them so he decided to destroy them all along with possibly trillions of innocent animals and species that would simply have no way of fitting on the supposed ark. I can only surmise that was the "Ooops" he's referring to.
Can you prove what an animal is or isn't thinking? If so that's much bigger news than an openly gay Presidential candidate.
Btw, homosexual behavior has been found in over 1500 species. It's not a "rare" thing by any means, and we don't have any evidence as to what they are "thinking" when they behave either heterosexually or homosexually.
mmm...wonder where natural reproduction comes from? It seems more natural that a species would want to reproduce.
Procreation is one of the strongest biological urges - but for many species, the sex drive is just as strong when no procreation is possible.
I'm glad humans aren't one of those species where, if the father dies or disappears, the new male kills his offspring instead of raising them.
There are many animal species that display gay behavior,
Does the existence of gay people bother you? Do you feel that gay men might try to seduce you?
The sex drives purpose is to procreate. Perhaps animals are catching up with humans, but from an evolution point sex drive was for survival not pleasure. If copulation wasn't satisfying, most species including humans would have been extinct thousand of years ago.
I am glad we are not like the praying mantis...
Ah yes, sinners, sinners, sinners! You've already jumped to the conclusion that anyone should give even two shits about what you define as sin. And then you waste our time quoting scripture that has ZERO to do with our laws. We are not a theocracy. Are they breaking any secular laws? Nope. Are they wanting "extra" rights? Nope. Is anyone demanding that you be gay? Nope.
You may want America to be more like the UAE or other Muslim countries, where blasphemy towards the Christian God is punishable and sin is legislated, but thankfully our founders wanted the exact opposite. They intentionally separated Church and State, they had seen how the two had operated in Europe for the prior thousand years and didn't want to repeat those same mistakes.
Once any religion can prove their God is real, and that their God is the arbiter of morality, then and only then, would I accept the excuse that something is a "sin" and thus should be banned by law.
Exactly. Notice how people invent their own gods (gods are created in human's image, not the other way around) and their immoral gods all hate the same things they hate?
Oh, please. Virtually nobody these days falls for the crap about people having to be married to have sex. And the Torah itself does not prohibit premarital sex.
As I noted previously, Orthodox Judaism disagrees with you
Pornea as used in the Greek Septuagint text of the Old Testament and in the Greek New Testament -Sexual immorality which includes homosexuality is clearly part of that definition and no amount of twisting words can change that.
All of these fell under the definition of fornication (found in Book of Leviticus)
"...against [a man] having union with his mother."
"...against [a man] having union with his sister."
"...against [a man] having union with the wife of his father."
"...against [a man] having union with another man's wife."
"...against [a man] copulating with a beast."
"...against a woman copulating with a beast."
"...against [a man] lying carnally with a male."
"...against [a man] lying carnally with his father."
"...against [a man] lying carnally with his father's brother."
"...against engaging in erotic conduct that may lead to a prohibited union. [That is, petting by persons whose marriage would be illicit.]"
While the Torah does not explicitly mention lesbianism, the Sages included it, along with other illicit sexual practices, to fall within the proscription of following in the ways of Egyptian traditions (Sifra Leviticus 18:3)
A man and women are even prohibited from being in a closed room alone together if they are not married, a law called yichud, nor are they allowed to have physical contact (a law referred to as negiah).
Who the hell cares what Orthodox Jews think? Extremist Muslims have similar views. So do Extremist Christians. And they're all nuts.
Again, the Torah did not forbid premarital sex.
And the extremist whackjobs are hypocrites, since incest was very much supported by God's own actions. First cousins would have been having sex - and children - with first cousins, which genetically we know is a very bad thing.
So again, since single straight people having sex are every bit as immoral according to these whackjobs as gay people, shouldn't they be forbidden to marry too? Maybe you should stone them?
Those are bad translations. Go directly to the Torah to find proper translations.
There are no Egyptian traditions.
That is only a Hassidic practice. The only time men and women are closed off from one another is other orthodox traditions is in prayer since they don't want men to become distracted.
In ancient Jewish marriage, a couple was considered "married" when they became betrothed. The actual marriage ceremony often consisted of a colorful procession from the brides fathers home, to the home of her betrothed where they would leave the crowd and go inside her new home and consummate the marriage while the processions partied outside. But who cares what they did back then, it has no bearing on what we choose to do in a secular society not bound by the Torah or any other religious doctrines. Are we to start burning the surviving widows along with their deceased husbands corpses just because that's been done by some people in other countries in the past? Why should anyone in any secular society agree to laws based on a specific religions doctrines?
Oh, and why, looking at the long "against a man having union with" list, does it conspicuously leave out "...against [a man] having union with his daughter."? It has just about every other variation of taboo copulation, but doesn't bother mentioning what most I think would be one of the more obvious "don't do's". Thoughts?
Good point, the Hasidim are the really extremist Jewish sect. Many Orthodox Jews are not nearly that extreme.
That's just gross, and the fact that the OT covers it is even more disturbing.
So is a trip to Cinnabon, but I don't think anyone is going to Hell for either one. And by the way, I was attracted to my wife because she was hot, not because I was trying to obey God. I think that's true for most couples.
In what translation of the Bible are you finding the word "pornography?"
When you read the Bible as some kind of checklist of what to do and what not to do, you are missing the point. It's about being good to others and loving God instead of worshipping other things. It doesn't mean to abstain from anything that feels good. You can love God and still enjoy the things of life. You just don't prioritize them over more important matters. This is why going to a wedding with Jesus means never-empty glasses of good wine. Jesus enjoyed a good party just like anyone. (John 2:1-12)
Not that precisely. The word is "porneio" and it was used in several contexts, but is probably more fairly thought of as a general term meaning "illicit sex," whatever that might mean. That could be adultery, prostitution, incest or idolatry, but it's not some kind of limitation based on heterosexual marriage specifically. Extreme legalism is contrary to Jesus' teachings.
Hiding behind particles of the bible for bigotry
I want to say something that bothered me very much yesterday afternoon on my way home. The local right wing talk show host decided to feature Mayor Buttigieg on his show last night.
The radio asshole had the gall to quote Corinthians I or II where Paul lumped all sorts of criminals in with homosexuals. The radio asshole made much of this. What bothered me about it is that Gays don't hurt anyone. Criminals and adulterers do. It's unfair to lump criminals, adulterers and Gays into the same pile.
And if I could have, I would have told that same radio asshole that Jesus never said a word about homosexuality. Paul did, but Paul is not Jesus, now is he?
It's what some in the religious conservative movement have done for about as long as anyone can remember. Most recently, the past half century or so, one of the most common implication from religious conservatives has been that "gay" should be considered synonymous with "pedophile" (even though the vast majority of sex abusers are heterosexual).
"Researcher Carole Jenny found, in a 1994 study, that “a child’s risk of being molested by his or her relative’s heterosexual partner is 100 times greater than by someone who might be identified as homosexual.” Of the 93,000 sexually abused kids in the US in 1999 (the last year of available statistics), half of the children were sexually abused by their parents (Sandusky), while other relatives committed 18 percent of the offenses. In other words, sexual orientation isn’t a factor in determining child sexual abuse."
I am sorry people but I have to close the article since I have no one to moderate it. Thanks for your participation.