Gay Marine’s homecoming kiss goes viral

[The Lawspeaker]

That happened back in December

I bet most of us men don't mind seeing that. Tis a shame though: as the one on the right is pretty good-looking.

[rhiannon]

Absolute moral truth? What is that? Oh, you mean the absolute moral truth in the Bible? The same Bible that accepts slavery, genocide, infanticide, incest and sex slavery? The same Bible that tells us that eating shellfish and working on the sabbath is worthy of the death penalty, but doesn't seem to have a problem with child raping pedophiles? The same Bible that teaches us that the Abrahamic god is vengeful, petty, spiteful and wrathful... but he loves us?

[YOUTUBE]MeSSwKffj9o[/YOUTUBE]

R. I. P. George Carlin.

God that was fucking funnier than snot.

Thanks Hev! I needed that this morning

[rhiannon]

I bet most of us men don't mind seeing that. Tis a shame though: as the one on the right is pretty good-looking.

Rather odd how most men go for the girlie porn.

Most women don't go for two gay dudes gettin' it on, that's for sure, lol

[ficuscarica]

@ Hevneren:

If you are taught to love everyone, even your enemies, with self-sacrifing love you obviously can´t keep a slave. It was allowed in the Old Testament times, but Jesus said some things were allowed back then because the hardness of people´s hearts, although it wasn´t God´s original plan.

You don´t need to condemn everything specifically when you have clear principles, and pedophilia is clearly against both the biblical principle of sex being limited to the life of a married, adult couple and against the principle of loving all people.

Inbreeding wasn´t a problem back then according to biblical teaching because there were less diseases and problems. All the decay came after the first sin. Human lifespans became shorter and shorter in the centuries after Adam´s fall.

Suffering is a direct result of sin. After Jerusalem was cruelly destroyed by the Babylonians the prophet Jeremiah said that it was still God´s grace that they didn´t end up worse. As everyone has infinitely great sin in opposing God everyone experiences grace by not already being in eternal hell.
Also, the creation was perfect in the beginning, but the earth´s soil was cursed because Adam sinned. Everything began to decay from that moment on.

God did not create us evil, but neutral. Adam decided for the evil and thus he and the humans after him became evil. It´s the spiritual inheritance if you want to put it that way, working just like in physical nature: elephant gets elephant babies, evil man gets evil babies.
Not God created us evil, but we become evil through Adam and the natural law of inheritance.

When babies suffer it isn´t different from adults, because sooner or later they would act evil, too. However, some say they will go to paradise because they have not yet acted according to their evil nature.

The bible teaches humans are evil, that doesn´t mean they can´t do good things to some degree. Yet everything is defiled by the fact that all the apparently good things aren´t done in appreciation and honouring of God, which, as I have said, is the greatest sin, as it is sin against an eternally good being.

God made everything so it´s upon him to decide how to reconcile humans with him. Jesus, God, made this decision on his own, so who am I to critisize him? He can do whatever he wants with his creation. I think being thankful is a more appropriate reaction.
Something endlessly precious was paid for endlessly evil sin. Apparently that´s enough in God´s eyes and so it is in mine. I wouldn´t have any other chance, because no just judge would simply forgive infinitely great evil without something being paid for it and I have nothing infinitely great to pay..

[Balmung]

The sexuality of a person and who they choose to fuck/kiss has never bothered me, ever. I honestly don't get how some people can be so bothered by it, but thats just me.

[Queen B]

I bet most of us men don't mind seeing that. Tis a shame though: as the one on the right is pretty good-looking.

I find it as disturbing as two gay men kissing

The sexuality of a person and who they choose to fuck/kiss has never bothered me, ever. I honestly don't get how some people can be so bothered by it, but thats just me.

As long as they do what they want to in their bedroom, doesn't bother me either.

[jerney]

I actually support all gay rights EXCEPT gays serving openly in the military (or ideally at all). Mainly because it must also be awkward for a gay man given how you have to shower out in the open right next to other guys even and the closeness to other men who may, or may not, at times be fully clothed.. yeah, no. It just isn't a conducive and motivated environment.

Just like any random straight person is not attracted to every man/woman they see, gay men aren't attracted/turned on by a person just because they have a penis. I'm willing to bet 99% of gay men are only interested in other gay men and even then still have preferences just like anyone else on this planet. The chance of a gay man becoming interested in one of his straight, fellow soldiers is slim to none IMO

[Hevneren]

As to "genocide", God chose a particular group of people through whom he was going to achieve his plans, to reach other people. So if in that way certain people had to die, then those are his creatures and it's up to him to decide if they should live or die, like the lives of any of us depends on his mercy.

What puzzles me is that Christians can find a moral justification for genocide, labeling whole tribes (including children) as "evil", and yet they don't think you can morally justify two men kissing.

So, let me get this straight. You see no problem with Yahweh putting a stamp of approval on the killing of thousands of people, but you take an issue with two men loving each other? Or am I misinterpreting something?

Especially that it is said that they were evil people, so God saw that there was no use of their living as they were not going to change for the better in future.

Yes... evil people... all of them...

As much as we hear about Christian compassion and repentance, there seems to be different standards for different people. I thought Christians believed in redemption and second chances? Why would these people you mentioned have to die? Why were they unable to be redeemed while child rapists and murderers can get redeemed by the thousands in prison?

As to Adam and Eve and the further reproduction among siblings, that happened only in the first period and afterwards it was not allowed, that's why in all Christian systems you see that incest is condemned and there are certain established rules for that. For example in the Armenian church if the couple has any blood connection, then it must be over 7 generations for the couple to be allowed to get married by church.

All well and good, but this doesn't explain how the entire human race (7 billion people) can come from two human beings, especially not without incest. It's impossible, if we are to take the story literally.

There is much injustice and pain in this world but initially it was not designed like that. God had created a Paradise for his creatures. It was because of the sin that we live in this world now, where there's the presence of the evil,

So, because some people did bad things, innocent babies must suffer? These innocent babies don't deserve paradise because of what someone else did wrong? How is this moral and just, Eva?

Again, how can someone justify babies suffering, while saying two men kissing is wrong?

but still God had mercy and did not abandon people, and even sent his Son to wash the sin and reestablish his relationship with humans, to give people the answers to their questions, to comfort and lead them in their lives, because without him it's very difficult and bitter.

I respect that you have faith and I have no problem with Jesus Christ, but my problem is that someone can say it's just and moral for an innocent person (in this case Jesus) to suffer for what I or anyone else has done. If I have done something wrong, how can I learn anything or become responsible for my own actions if someone else is going to be punished for it? It doesn't teach moral integrity and responsibility.

Here's an allegory: There's two people. One is person A, the other person B. One day A goes for a walk and sees a wallet with a lot of money in it. A feels tempted to take the money. He checks to see if someone sees him, and then he takes the money and leaves. Later, B walks by and sees the owner of the wallet being angry, and some onlookers tell the owner "I think this person (B) did it!", so they gather around and throw rocks at B.

In this allegory, the culprit (A) was not punished, the money was not found and an innocent person (B) was punished. In addition, the punishment wasn't appropriate compared to the crime. This is how I see the killing of Jesus Christ, and the threat of hell.

Sometimes the Old Testament sounds too strict and cruel to us, but you should consider the period, the mentality of those people. God speaks the way you can understand. Like when you are a little child, your parent will not let you play with matches, but if he says it now it will sound irrelevant. That's why not everything should be understood word for word, many things said there concerned particular climate, region, people and mentality.

If there are passages that shouldn't be read literally, then how do we know what to read literally and what to read as allegory? How can we know that "do not lie with another man" is literal, while other passages on slavery and genocide are allegorical?

[Phil75231]

The sexuality of a person and who they choose to fuck/kiss has never bothered me, ever. I honestly don't get how some people can be so bothered by it, but thats just me.

This answers a lot of it, IMO

Truth is, there's a lot of things each of us believe that seem like "human nature" or "unnatural", but are actually deeply coded cultural memes engraved deep within our psyche. Look no further than the Australian Aborigine attitude toward eating insects and their larvae vs the prevailing Western attitude toward doing the same. Ditto for the Islamic and Indian attitudes toward Westerners eating pork and beef, respectively. This thread I started in fact focuses in large part on this aspect of human behavior.

If culture so heavily shapes what kinds of foods are delicious vs distusting, then what is there to prevent culture from shaping our attitudes toward sexual practices?

NON-religious reasons have to do with either (a) simply not being "normal" or (b) traditional definitions of manliness and scorn for those men who are well outside that traditional definition. People should just be allowed to be their real selves, unless that "real self" directly threatens others lives, health (physical or mental), physical wholeness, political liberties, human rights, money, property, bank accounts, etc.

[Eva]

What puzzles me is that Christians can find a moral justification for genocide, labeling whole tribes (including children) as "evil", and yet they don't think you can morally justify two men kissing.

So, let me get this straight. You see no problem with Yahweh putting a stamp of approval on the killing of thousands of people, but you take an issue with two men loving each other? Or am I misinterpreting
something?

Yes... evil people... all of them...

As much as we hear about Christian compassion and repentance, there seems to be different standards for different people. I thought Christians believed in redemption and second chances? Why would these people you mentioned have to die? Why were they unable to be redeemed while child rapists and murderers can get redeemed by the thousands in prison?

Well, on a big scale, death does not mean much to God, what matters is the death of the soul. If there were any good people among those tribes, then God is just and they inherited the eternal life. That's how it is viewed in the eyes of God. But at that particular period those people would have to die for the rest of generations of humanity to have the chance to be saved on a big scale, it's not about just this short life.
The murderer if not in this life, will get his punishment in the afterlife.

All well and good, but this doesn't explain how the entire human race (7 billion people) can come from two human beings, especially not without incest. It's impossible, if we are to take the story literally.

why not? I think it's quite possible

So, because some people did bad things, innocent babies must suffer? These innocent babies don't deserve paradise because of what someone else did wrong? How is this moral and just, Eva?

Again, how can someone justify babies suffering, while saying two men kissing is wrong?

As I said those babies who are suffering will get their paradise, but the souls of those men kissing will be lost. This whole life is like a test in the eyes of God. You pass the test, you get the prize, if you don't pass, you are lost for God and that is what's painful for him.

I respect that you have faith and I have no problem with Jesus Christ, but my problem is that someone can say it's just and moral for an innocent person (in this case Jesus) to suffer for what I or anyone else has done. If I have done something wrong, how can I learn anything or become responsible for my own actions if someone else is going to be punished for it? It doesn't teach moral integrity and responsibility.

Here's an allegory: There's two people. One is person A, the other person B. One day A goes for a walk and sees a wallet with a lot of money in it. A feels tempted to take the money. He checks to see if someone sees him, and then he takes the money and leaves. Later, B walks by and sees the owner of the wallet being angry, and some onlookers tell the owner "I think this person (B) did it!", so they gather around and throw rocks at B.

In this allegory, the culprit (A) was not punished, the money was not found and an innocent person (B) was punished. In addition, the punishment wasn't appropriate compared to the crime. This is how I see the killing of Jesus Christ, and the threat of hell.

Well the sacrifice of Jesus, just shows God's endless love towards people.

If there are passages that shouldn't be read literally, then how do we know what to read literally and what to read as allegory? How can we know that "do not lie with another man" is literal, while other passages on slavery and genocide are allegorical?

Spiritual fathers have done a great work within years and given us all the explanations. I can't do better than them well e.g. there are such passages in the Old Testament like what you should wear.. which go very much into details and so on. In the new testament it's broader: it just says you should dress decently not to be a temptation so on..