wow... discrimination at its finest

On the original topic: The group, from the little excerpt posted, does not seem to be a hate group, they simply want members to not sin. As somebody said, there aren't exactly huge numbers of diehard Christian homosexuals anyway.

And for the rest of this thread, as silly as it has been, I'll make it short and sweet, and those who want one of my semi-famous lecture posts can PM me.

Romans 1.

24Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator–who is forever praised. Amen.

   26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

Before anyone starts the argument that God caused homosexuality, I advise doing some research.

Second: To those who want to know why we don't follow all the rules of the Old Testament:

Acts 15.

22Then the apostles and elders, with the whole church, decided to choose some of their own men and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They chose Judas (called Barsabbas) and Silas, two men who were leaders among the brothers. 23With them they sent the following letter: The apostles and elders, your brothers, To the Gentile believers in Antioch, Syria and Cilicia: Greetings. 24We have heard that some went out from us without our authorization and disturbed you, troubling your minds by what they said. 25So we all agreed to choose some men and send them to you with our dear friends Barnabas and Paul– 26men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27Therefore we are sending Judas and Silas to confirm by word of mouth what we are writing. 28It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: 29You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things. Farewell.

Basically, Gentiles should follow the rules about food sacrificed to idols, about eating blood, about eating strangled animals and from sexual immorality.

Third, as for my opinion on the whole 'homosexuality would destroy humanity' and so on...

I believe that if an act, should it be practiced by every single person on earth, would result in the destruction of the human race, it should be VERY CAREFULLY considered before being allowed into law. I won't go into the nature vs whatever bit, because that always turns into a debate.

Back on topic: This group is allowed to do what they have done. I think, procarbinefreak, you're being a tiny bit too sensitive (don't take this as an attack, think of it as constructive criticism). It doesn't even mean that homosexually oriented people can't join, they just can't be having homosexual sex/any other sex prohibited by their rules. Remember that by those rules, the other members are also abstaining from having sex, something many students find baffling and unthinkable. They ask nothing of homosexuals that they do not ask of themselves. There are in fact college students who don't have sex.

And by the way, 'drunkenness' doesn't mean not having alcohol, it simply refers to not being totally smashed. The Bible ENCOURAGES drinking of wine and so on, just in moderation.

bravo Adminal Senn.

AdmiralSenn wrote: Romans 1. ... sexual impurity ... shameful lusts...exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones...abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another...Men committed indecent acts with other men...

Except with the "lust for one another" part, this is so awfully vague.  I'm still not sure if this is about homosexuality or doggystyle.

What is a "shameful lust"?  "Indecent acts"?

This Biblical argument is becoming very circular...

... as for my opinion on the whole 'homosexuality would destroy humanity' and so on... I believe that if an act, should it be practiced by every single person on earth, would result in the destruction of the human race, it should be VERY CAREFULLY considered before being allowed into law.

If you propose outlawing every act that would lead to the destruction of the human race if practiced by every single person on earth, nothing would be legal.

If everybody had steak for dinner, we would destroy the ecosystem.  If everybody had fish for dinner, we would destroy the ecosystem.  If everybody chopped down a tree, we would destroy the ecosystem.  If everybody took a crap at the same time, we would die from the stink.

That is an irrelevant standard.

Moreover, it is wrong.  Homosexuality doesn't make you sterile.  You just don't get pregnant from homosexual sex.  Plenty of homosexuals have natural children.

Speaking of which - if everybody always had sex with condoms, the race would die out.  Should condoms be illegal?

How about vasectomies - if everybody had one of those, we would also die out.

I don't buy this argument.  Not even a little bit.

Edited by Clark Kent

Senn,

I wouldn't have taken that as a personal attack anyway... this is a debate... throw out your opinion. 

I know i'm being a little too liberal about this, but its what i wanted to do.  I just think its kinda wierd that they say follow the rules of the scripture, and there are so many outrageous rules that would have to be followed.... but whatever!  the situation made the news

Allow me to restate:

I will make inferences about the meanings of things, including the Bible.  Inferences are necessary and appropriate for most things.

BUT - we are not talking about "most things".  We are talking about declaring behavior/feelings/people/something EVIL and a SIN and an ABOMINATION.

For that, we ought to hold ourselves to a higher standard.

What if Congress passed a law:  "Shameful lusts are punishable by 10-15 year in prison."  You would have riots, because that is an incredibly vague standard.

When you are creating a law - Biblical or otherwise - there NEEDS to be clarity, otherwise it isn't a law at all.  If you have to guess at what it means, it is useless.  The Bible is so vague as to be useless. 

Can I take a stab at what it means?  Sure.  I also think that homosexuality is what Paul was discussing.  But is "think" or "pretty sure" good enough when you are going to condemn somebody to eternal damnation?  I would hope for something better than "pretty sure".

I don't see what the problem is.

It seems simple enough to me... If you agree with the club's policies, you can join... If not, then don't join; I'm sure there are other Christian clubs on campus.

I'm sick of people feeling they are entitled to be allowed everywhere. Sometimes you're just required to STAY OUT. I can't go in a girls' restroom, but they have nicer mirrors! OH NOEZ! DISCRIMINATION!

Dune wrote: *Stealth* wrote: Dont like it, Dont join their Club.... Seems pretty simple to me. Your not a hardcore christian if your homosexual anyway, So I dont see where the problem is... There are plenty of hardcore christians that are homosexuals. Just like thare are plenty of hardcore christians that eat meat on Fridays of lent.

That’s Catholics not christians!

Gatyr wrote: Evolution IS, simply because it SHOULD be that way. Did certain species of birds gain longer beaks to reasch farther into trees and holes to get food, or trees in Africa begin making spikes to prevent getting eaten by the many herbivores there because thats the way luck, or some supreme being said it IS going to be like that? Or did those evolutions occur because if they had a desire to survive, they SHOULD adapt like they did?

This is only true if you assume that evolution is guided, which is a circular argument...

It means no relation ships beyond that of a normal productive relationship between two men. Lie together, means have sex, indulge in inpure acts. Of course its vaugue when you pick through it with a fine toothed comb with the objective of disproving it. These passages are prohibiting homosexuality, not the acts. You are getting hung up on the acts, thats not what is important. Its the lifestyle that is being prohibited.

Edited by DBibeau855

ForceRedeemer wrote: That’s Catholics not christians!

And comments like this are why I fear the average "christian".