Jump to content
Islamic Forum
Aburafay

Is Sodomy Prohibited In Divine Law

Recommended Posts

Who said anything about forcing? It is keeping people away from sin that we are talking about.

my friend, who are you to determine what is sin and what is not sin? Because you are a muslim you feel that only Islam is right and everyone else is wrong, and that entitles you to label right and wrong? The right and wrong defined by your religion remain applicable only to people of your religion. You have no authority and no right to attempt to enfore Islamic way of life outside Islam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds
my friend, who are you to determine what is sin and what is not sin? Because you are a muslim you feel that only Islam is right and everyone else is wrong, and that entitles you to label right and wrong? The right and wrong defined by your religion remain applicable only to people of your religion. You have no authority and no right to attempt to enfore Islamic way of life outside Islam.

This is very true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To guide people who go astray is a responsibility in Islam.
In another post in this thread, you cited a couple of instances in which the "guidance" consisted of killing the sodomites. One of those was confessing before a sharia court.

 

So let's just say, hypothetically, that two men are having sex in the privacy of their homes, and not speaking publicly about it. The rumor is, however, that they're having sex in the privacy of their homes. Since they don't invite four adult witnesses to watch when they do this, no one can prove it.

 

The rumors persist in spite of their discretion, and they're hauled before the sharia court, and are asked point blank if they're having sex with each other.

 

At this point, it seems to me that they have two options: tell the truth, and face certain death at the hands of the religion of peace, or lie and resolve to be more careful in the future. I have no idea what the penalty for lying to the sharia court is, but hopefully it isn't as extreme as the penalty for sodomy.

 

Have I accurately stated Aburafay's position?

 

Personally, I can't see how homosexuality between consenting adults harms society. I'm ambivalent about whether the definition of marriage should be expanded to include homosexual unions, but if it happens I'm not going to be too upset about it.

 

Even in this secular society, there are laws which have no justification outside of religious belief. The good thing about living in a secular society is that such laws are almost never enforced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To guide means teaching people to do the right things, at least I understand these words so (English is not my mother tongue). And of course, we have the responsibilty to tell the people when they are sinning.

 

Yes, guidance is teaching. True, we have to tell people when they sin that it is not in their interest as they will be responsible for their acts on the Day of Judgement.

 

I don't say this is all we have to say :D

 

I am sorry, I did not get your meaning in this. In Islam, an individual is only responsible to just say it, so that the sinner realises that he is sinning. It is the court that can punish the evil-doer, so that the society knows the dangers of the sin.

 

 

Matthew 12:24 Jesus told them another parable: The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field. 25 But while everyone was sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and went away. 26 When the wheat sprouted and formed ears, then the weeds also appeared. 27 The owner's servants came to him and said, 'Sir, didn't you sow good seed in your field? Where then did the weeds come from?' 28 'An enemy did this,' he replied. The servants asked him, 'Do you want us to go and pull them up?' 29 'No,' he answered, 'because while you are pulling the weeds, you may root up the wheat with them. 30 Let both grow together until the harvest. At that time I will tell the harvesters: First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned; then gather the wheat and bring it into my barn.'

24

æóÖóÑóÈó áóåõãú ãóËóáÇð ÂÎóÑó¡ ÞóÇáó: «íõÔóÈøóåõ ãóáóßõæÊõ ÇáÓøóãóÇæóÇÊö ÈöÅöäúÓóÇäò ÒóÑóÚó ÒóÑúÚÇð ÌóíøöÃÇð Ãöí ÃóÞúáöåö. 25 æóÈóíúäóãóÇ ÇáäøóÇÓõ äóÇÆöãõæäó¡ ÌóÇÃó ÚóÃõæøõåõ¡ æóÈóÃóÑó ÒóæóÇäÇð Ãöí æóÓóØö ÇáúÞóãúÃö¡ æóãóÖóì. 26 ÃóáóãøóÇ äóãóÇ ÇáúÞóãúÃõ ÈöÓóäóÇÈöáöåö¡ ÙóåóÑó ÇáÒøóæóÇäõ ãóÚóåõ. 27 ÃóÃóåóÈó ÚóÈöíÃõ ÑóÈøö ÇáúÈóíúÊö¡ æóÞóÇáõæÇ áóåõ: íóÇÓóíøöÃõ¡ ÃóãóÇ ÒóÑóÚúÊó ÃóÞúáóßó ÒóÑúÚÇð ÌóíøöÃÇð¿ Ãóãöäú Ãóíúäó ÌóÇÃóåõ ÇáÒøóæóÇäõ¿ 28 ÃóÌóÇÈóåõãú ÅöäúÓóÇäñ ÚóÃõæøñ ÃóÚóáó åóÃóÇ! ÃóÓóÃóáõæåõ: ÃóÊõÑöíÃõ Ãóäú äóÃúåóÈó æóäóÌúãóÚó ÇáÒøóæóÇäó¿ 29 ÃóÌóÇÈóåõãú: áÇó¡ áöÆóáÇøó ÊóÞúáóÚõæÇ ÇáúÞóãúÃó æóÃóäúÊõãú ÊóÌúãóÚõæäó ÇáÒøóæóÇäó. 30 ÇõÊúÑõßõæåõãóÇ ßöáóíúåöãóÇ íóäúãõæóÇäö ãóÚÇð ÃóÊøóì ÇáúÃóÕóÇÃö. æóÃöí ÃóæóÇäö ÇáúÃóÕóÇÃö¡ ÃóÞõæáõ áöáúÃóÕøóÇÃöíäó: ÇÌúãóÚõæÇ ÇáÒøóæóÇäó ÃóæøóáÇð æóÇÑúÈõØõæåõ ÃõÒóãÇð áöíõÃúÑóÞó. ÃóãøóÇ ÇáúÞóãúÃõ¡ ÃóÇÌúãóÚõæåõ Åöáóì ãóÎúÒóäöí

 

Don't understand why you made this quotation. Its not relevant to the post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes so you will be forcing them not to commit an act which is a sin (from your point of view). I know you act out of kindness, because you honestly believe you are saving them but they don't agree with your beliefs so you are forcing them to act in accordance with your beliefs. I hope you can see this!

 

Forcing someone not to do something overlaps with keeping someone away from sin. They are two different ways of saying the same thing in this case!

 

Totally disagree. Forcing is not the responsibility of the individual. Just telling the person not to sin is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
my friend, who are you to determine what is sin and what is not sin? Because you are a muslim you feel that only Islam is right and everyone else is wrong, and that entitles you to label right and wrong? The right and wrong defined by your religion remain applicable only to people of your religion. You have no authority and no right to attempt to enfore Islamic way of life outside Islam.

 

Again a post that isn't worth replying as the poster hasn't bothered to read the first post of the topic, and the posts by various members, notably 'looking by'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, guidance is teaching. True, we have to tell people when they sin that it is not in their interest as they will be responsible for their acts on the Day of Judgement.

In other postings, You seem to prefer punishment to guidance.

 

It is the court that can punish the evil-doer, so that the society knows the dangers of the sin.

The society does not consist of believers only.

 

Don't understand why you made this quotation. Its not relevant to the post.

It shows that Jesus told us not to kill the sinners. First You complain we should obey to the commandments of the Lord, and when I show You what he said you say it is irrelevant?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Again a post that isn't worth replying as the poster hasn't bothered to read the first post of the topic, and the posts by various members, notably 'looking by'.

yea that was off topic but that's in response to your arrogant ways of trying to implicitly establish what you believe to be divine law as true.

Edited by 3dshocker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In another post in this thread, you cited a couple of instances in which the "guidance" consisted of killing the sodomites. One of those was confessing before a sharia court.

 

You misunderstand. Guidance and punishment are two different things.

 

So let's just say, hypothetically, that two men are having sex in the privacy of their homes, and not speaking publicly about it. The rumor is, however, that they're having sex in the privacy of their homes. Since they don't invite four adult witnesses to watch when they do this, no one can prove it.

 

The rumors persist in spite of their discretion, and they're hauled before the sharia court, and are asked point blank if they're having sex with each other.

 

At this point, it seems to me that they have two options: tell the truth, and face certain death at the hands of the religion of peace, or lie and resolve to be more careful in the future. I have no idea what the penalty for lying to the sharia court is, but hopefully it isn't as extreme as the penalty for sodomy.

 

Have I accurately stated Aburafay's position?

 

I do not believe and deal with rumours. Bring facts to the table and we shall discuss. Facts should not be generalisations based on isolated cases.

 

Personally, I can't see how homosexuality between consenting adults harms society. I'm ambivalent about whether the definition of marriage should be expanded to include homosexual unions, but if it happens I'm not going to be too upset about it.

 

Even in this secular society, there are laws which have no justification outside of religious belief. The good thing about living in a secular society is that such laws are almost never enforced.

 

Do you also feel there is no harm in consenting adults having extra-marital affairs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In other postings, You seem to prefer punishment to guidance.

 

Do I? Guidance is for individuals to partake on individuals. Punishment is for the shariah court to exercise on sinners.

 

The society does not consist of believers only.

 

True. But the improvement in society from Divine Laws rests on the shoulders of those who believe in them. Otherwise, lust and greed dictate the direction.

 

It shows that Jesus told us not to kill the sinners. First You complain we should obey to the commandments of the Lord, and when I show You what he said you say it is irrelevant?

 

The Lord in my understanding is the Creator and Jesus (on him be peace) was one of His messengers. The Divine Law has always been to kill adulterers, and sodomists are considered as adulterers in Divine Law. That one incident does not change the law. It may have had some specific reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yea that was off topic but that's in response to your arrogant ways of trying to implicitly establish what you believe to be divine law as true.

 

What I believe? I beg your pardon!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Totally disagree. Forcing is not the responsibility of the individual. Just telling the person not to sin is.

 

Ok so your position is that you should walk up to gay people and tell them they are naughty people and will burn in hell. When they tell you that they disagree, what then? Are they allowed to live their lives freely without fear of persecution, or would you advocate making homosexuality illegal and gay civil unions as invalid?

 

If the law says homosexuality is illegal, then society is denying them their right to be who they are based solely on a religious belief that homosexuality is wrong. They are being forced or oppressed or whatever. If you support anti-homosexual laws then you support forcing people not to be homosexual (when it is their nature in their opinion).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
True. But the improvement in society from Divine Laws rests on the shoulders of those who believe in them. Otherwise, lust and greed dictate the direction.

 

:D Wow... Just wow...

 

What if I believe that religion is the root of all evil and gather together enough people to my belief and for the betterment of society religion is made illegal. It rests on our shoulders to save these people from false beliefs and the waste of time that my group thinks religion is.

 

So say America becomes a fundamentalist christian nation, it would then be their duty to impose their divine law on the entire world, afterall it is for the good of the global society. Otherwise the direction would be dictated by falsehoods and untrue beliefs!

Edited by Liberté

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you also feel there is no harm in consenting adults having extra-marital affairs?
I believe the harm to society in consenting adults having extra-marital affairs is equivalent to the harm to society in consenting adults engaging in polygamy, and I don't endorse either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But the improvement in society from Divine Laws rests on the shoulders of those who believe in them. Otherwise, lust and greed dictate the direction.

History tells us that the set of people who improved society was not identical to the set of people who believed. Of course there is an overlap, I heard one historian saying that the (Christian) methodist movement saved England from the atrocities of a revolution like the French one, but You will find other examples rather easily.

 

One thing that has turned out fatal is the very point Jesus forbid us to do: to enforce the own beliefs on others. Be it "conversion" by force, or be it enforcing a "divine law". In a democratic society, this can only be doen by the majority, and even then there are limits to this (because of human and minority rights).

 

The Lord in my understanding is the Creator and Jesus (on him be peace) was one of His messengers.

Not just "a messenger", He is the Messiah, which means he is the messenger announced by all prophets sent before Him to the Jews. I suppose Liberté will disagree that Jesus is the Messiah, but she will confirm that the Messiah is more than an ordinary messenger.

 

The Divine Law has always been to kill adulterers, and sodomists are considered as adulterers in Divine Law. That one incident does not change the law. It may have had some specific reasons.

You may speculate about that, but it is no isolated incident:

 

Matthew 5:38 You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' 39 But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40 And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. 41 If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

38

æóÓóãöÚúÊõãú Ãóäøóåõ Þöíáó: Úóíúäñ ÈöÚóíúäò æóÓöäøñ ÈöÓöäòø. 39 ÃóãøóÇ ÃóäóÇ ÃóÃóÞõæáõ áóßõãú: áÇó ÊõÞóÇæöãõæÇ ÇáÔøóÑøó ÈöãöËúáöåö¡ Èóáú ãóäú áóØóãóßó Úóáóì ÎóÃøößó ÇáÃóíúãóäö¡ ÃóÃóÃöÑú áóåõ ÇáúÎóÃøó ÇáÂÎóÑóº 40 æóãóäú ÃóÑóÇÃó ãõÃóÇßóãóÊóßó áöíóÃúÎõÃó ËóæúÈóßó¡ ÃóÇÊúÑõßú áóåõ ÑöÃóÇÃóßó ÃóíúÖÇðº 41 æóãóäú ÓóÎøóÑóßó Ãóäú ÊóÓöíÑó ãöíáÇð¡ ÃóÓöÑú ãóÚóåõ ãöíáóíúäö. 42 ãóäú ØóáóÈó ãöäúßó ÔóíúÆÇð¡ ÃóÃóÚúØöåö. æóãóäú ÌóÇÃó íóÞúÊóÑöÖõ ãöäúßó¡ ÃóáÇó ÊóÑõÃøóåõ ÎóÇÆöÈÇð!

 

Our You may listen to our messenger Paul:

 

1.Corinthians 5:11 But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat. 12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13 God will judge those outside. Expel the wicked man from among you.

11

ÃóãøóÇ ÇáÂäó ÃóÞóÃú ßóÊóÈúÊõ Åöáóíúßõãú ÈöÃóäú áÇó ÊõÚóÇÔöÑõæÇ ãóäú íõÓóãøóì ÃóÎÇð Åöäú ßóÇäó ÒóÇäöíÇð Ãóæú ØóãøóÇÚÇð Ãóæú ÚóÇÈöÃó ÃóÕúäóÇãò Ãóæú ÔóÊøóÇãÇð Ãóæú ÓößøöíÑÇð Ãóæú ÓóÑøóÇÞÇð. ÃóãöËúáõ åóÃóÇ áÇó ÊõÚóÇÔöÑõæåõ æóáÇó ÊóÌúáöÓõæÇ ãóÚóåõ áöÊóäóÇæõáö ÇáØøóÚóÇãö. 12 ÃóãóÇ áöí æóáöáøóÃöíäó ÎóÇÑöÌó (ÇáúßóäöíÓóÉö) ÃóÊøóì ÃóÃöíäóåõãú¿ ÃóáóÓúÊõãú ÃóäúÊõãú ÊóÃöíäõæäó ÇáøóÃöíäó ÃóÇÎöáóåóÇ¿ 13 ÃóãøóÇ ÇáøóÃöíäó Ãöí ÇáúÎóÇÑöÌö¡ ÃóÇááåõ íóÃöíäõåõãú. ÃóÇÚúÒöáõæÇ ãóäú åõæó ÔöÑøöíÑñ ãöäú Èóíúäößõãú.

 

Please notice the difference between the believing sinner that should be thrown out of the church (unless he repents, of course), and the unbelievers "outside".

 

The law in the Torah was given to prepare a people chosen by God for the coming of the Messiah. This law was never meant for all "Gentiles", neither from a Jewish viewpoint nor from a Christian one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok so your position is that you should walk up to gay people and tell them they are naughty people and will burn in hell. When they tell you that they disagree, what then? Are they allowed to live their lives freely without fear of persecution, or would you advocate making homosexuality illegal and gay civil unions as invalid?

 

If I know they are gay, and I know them, I will. If they disagree, I will have done my job. I am not required to do anything more. I do not need to advocate anything. Homosexuality is an abhorrent crime and sin in the eyes of those who believe.

 

If the law says homosexuality is illegal, then society is denying them their right to be who they are based solely on a religious belief that homosexuality is wrong. They are being forced or oppressed or whatever. If you support anti-homosexual laws then you support forcing people not to be homosexual (when it is their nature in their opinion).

 

There is no right of anyone to sin. Illegality is something relating to humans which is secondary. Sin is primary as it relates to your Creator. Choice is yours. That smells like GWB. You are either with us or against us. I either support homosexuality or I am in favour of forcing people to stop. There is nothing in the middle. How utterly ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:D Wow... Just wow...

 

What if I believe that religion is the root of all evil and gather together enough people to my belief and for the betterment of society religion is made illegal. It rests on our shoulders to save these people from false beliefs and the waste of time that my group thinks religion is.

 

So say America becomes a fundamentalist christian nation, it would then be their duty to impose their divine law on the entire world, afterall it is for the good of the global society. Otherwise the direction would be dictated by falsehoods and untrue beliefs!

 

Lot of rambling, but no sense. Do you know what you have written?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What are you talking about? It IS what you believe.

 

It is what all believers believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I believe the harm to society in consenting adults having extra-marital affairs is equivalent to the harm to society in consenting adults engaging in polygamy, and I don't endorse either.

 

Do you believe in the institution of marriage? Apparently you do. If you do, there is a vast difference between consent only and a marriage solemnised by someone in authority, with witnesses present, and in compliance with the Laws of the Creator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
History tells us that the set of people who improved society was not identical to the set of people who believed. Of course there is an overlap, I heard one historian saying that the (Christian) methodist movement saved England from the atrocities of a revolution like the French one, but You will find other examples rather easily.

 

There is a big difference between what I said and what you are saying. I said that the responsibility rests on the shoulders of believers through implementation of Divine Laws. What has happened in the past in Europe is not necessarily the rule.

 

One thing that has turned out fatal is the very point Jesus forbid us to do: to enforce the own beliefs on others. Be it "conversion" by force, or be it enforcing a "divine law". In a democratic society, this can only be doen by the majority, and even then there are limits to this (because of human and minority rights).

Not just "a messenger", He is the Messiah, which means he is the messenger announced by all prophets sent before Him to the Jews. I suppose Liberté will disagree that Jesus is the Messiah, but she will confirm that the Messiah is more than an ordinary messenger.

 

Nobody is talking about enforcing beliefs - conversion or Divine Law. So you believe that man's will is more important than Divine Will? If you live in an atheist-majority environment, what do you think your responsibility and course of action shoiuld be?

 

Do you agree with the text in my first post as Divine Law? If you do, are you not agreeing to a man changing Divine Law, if Jesus (on him be peace) was indeed a man? And, if he indeed said what he is purported to have said?

 

I don't know about Liberte, but I disagree. He was nothing more than a messenger. All messengers were chosen from amongst the best.

 

By the way, until I last saw the profile, Liberte was a male, unless you know something that I don't. :D

 

 

You may speculate about that, but it is no isolated incident:

 

Matthew 5:38 You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' 39 But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40 And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. 41 If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

38

وَسَمِعْتُمْ أَنَّهُ قِيلَ: عَيْنٌ بِعَيْنٍ وَسِنٌّ بِسِنٍّ. 39 أَمَّا أَنَا فَأَقُولُ لَكُمْ: لاَ تُقَاوِمُوا الشَّرَّ بِمِثْلِهِ، بَلْ مَنْ لَطَمَكَ عَلَى خَدِّكَ الأَيْمَنِ، فَأَدِرْ لَهُ الْخَدَّ الآخَرَ؛ 40 وَمَنْ أَرَادَ مُحَاكَمَتَكَ لِيَأْخُذَ ثَوْبَكَ، فَاتْرُكْ لَهُ رِدَاءَكَ أَيْضاً؛ 41 وَمَنْ سَخَّرَكَ أَنْ تَسِيرَ مِيلاً، فَسِرْ مَعَهُ مِيلَيْنِ. 42 مَنْ طَلَبَ مِنْكَ شَيْئاً، فَأَعْطِهِ. وَمَنْ جَاءَ يَقْتَرِضُ مِنْكَ، فَلاَ تَرُدَّهُ خَائِباً!

 

These are totally different scenarios. Punishment by Divinne decree is totally a different subject as quoted in my first post in this topic. Please don't confuse the issue.

 

Our You may listen to our messenger Paul:

 

1.Corinthians 5:11 But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat. 12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13 God will judge those outside. Expel the wicked man from among you.

11

أَمَّا الآنَ فَقَدْ كَتَبْتُ إِلَيْكُمْ بِأَنْ لاَ تُعَاشِرُوا مَنْ يُسَمَّى أَخاً إِنْ كَانَ زَانِياً أَوْ طَمَّاعاً أَوْ عَابِدَ أَصْنَامٍ أَوْ شَتَّاماً أَوْ سِكِّيراً أَوْ سَرَّاقاً. فَمِثْلُ هَذَا لاَ تُعَاشِرُوهُ وَلاَ تَجْلِسُوا مَعَهُ لِتَنَاوُلِ الطَّعَامِ. 12 فَمَا لِي وَلِلَّذِينَ خَارِجَ (الْكَنِيسَةِ) حَتَّى أَدِينَهُمْ؟ أَلَسْتُمْ أَنْتُمْ تَدِينُونَ الَّذِينَ دَاخِلَهَا؟ 13 أَمَّا الَّذِينَ فِي الْخَارِجِ، فَاللهُ يَدِينُهُمْ. فَاعْزِلُوا مَنْ هُوَ شِرِّيرٌ مِنْ بَيْنِكُمْ.

 

Please notice the difference between the believing sinner that should be thrown out of the church (unless he repents, of course), and the unbelievers "outside".

 

So, Paul is saying that the sinners should be expelled from the Church.

 

The law in the Torah was given to prepare a people chosen by God for the coming of the Messiah. This law was never meant for all "Gentiles", neither from a Jewish viewpoint nor from a Christian one.

 

So, the example of the people to whom Prophet Lot (on him be peace) was sent was just in vain? It was only meant to prepare the people, and then allow them to practice sodomy. The maximum punishment, according to you is expulsion from church, and even Paul has the authority to abrogate Divine Law. I find that quite unique when compared to Islam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lot of rambling, but no sense. Do you know what you have written?

 

Yes a satire of the walking contradiction that is you.

 

It is what all believers believe.

 

Don't you see that just because a large group agrees that something is wrong, that doesn't make it true. There are people who don't believe homosexuality is wrong or right. There are even people who may not even believe in the concepts of "wrong" and "right". So how is it just to impose a law which states homosexuality is forbidden just because your so called "divine " law says it is abhorrent.

 

Nothing should be banned. :D Not even stupid beliefs.

Edited by Liberté

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is what all believers believe.

So? :D

 

Even if all believers do believe that (and if by believers you mean all religious people, which would exclude all those priests that are gay), it still doesnt give them the right to force 'devine law' on everyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes a satire of the walking contradiction that is you.

Don't you see that just because a large group agrees that something is wrong, that doesn't make it true. There are people who don't believe homosexuality is wrong or right. There are even people who may not even believe in the concepts of "wrong" and "right". So how is it just to impose a law which states homosexuality is forbidden just because your so called "divine " law says it is abhorrent.

 

Nothing should be banned. :D Not even stupid beliefs.

 

Stupidity in thinking is a curse, and must be banned as it has no direction. It is worse than (I have to repeat myself) the baser animals who have no thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So? :D

 

Even if all believers do believe that (and if by believers you mean all religious people, which would exclude all those priests that are gay), it still doesnt give them the right to force 'devine law' on everyone.

 

Again I read the word 'force'. Why do you people feel so threatened? Or is it your conscience pricking you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×