CreateDebate


Debate Info

27
33
Yes No
Debate Score:60
Arguments:48
Total Votes:68
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes (22)
 
 No (25)

Debate Creator

Kinda(1649) pic



Can you be homosexual and Christian/Religious without sin?

So can you be homosexual AND religious at the same time without facing the consequence of hell for your sexuality?

I'm focusing on Christianity I think there's more gay christians than other religions, but all input is tolerated.

I know there are several references to homosexuality in the Bible and it strongly condemns it.

So how can you be gay and Christian?

Or more importantly

According to Christianity will you be punished for being a homosexual? - and what does that mean to a believer?

 

Yes

Side Score: 27
VS.

No

Side Score: 33
3 points

Well, Christian doctrine is what I study the most and I've studied it enough to know that being a homosexual is not a sin. The sin is engaging in homosexual relations.

w/e, I'll give a lesson:

In the Old Testament, mainly, Leviticus (mostly) focuses on sex. Sex is bad. The only reason to EVER have sex is to have a child. The bible is scattered on the subject of marriage, but basically a couple must be bound to each other before having a child so that the child can grow up with a dedicated mother and father (in ways, the bible has some good incite, but people take it literally and fuck shit up).

Now, any sex that isn't for the purpose of having a child is bad, as I said before. So, this includes bestiality, oral sex, sodomy and gay sex. Gays can't give birth to children, so if you are to engage in sexual relations with that of the same sex you are sinning.

If you have sex before marriage, you are sinning (back to the whole "need a well constructed family" thing). This is actually why gay marriage was never recognized as necessary. Gays have no purpose (well, had no purpose) for getting married since they could not start a family. Obviously in these days with government benefits (which should be stopped) and adoption, these arguments are all obsolete, but in order to defeat the enemy you must first UNDERSTAND (something most of you assholes, gay or straight, don't seem to realize) the enemy. We all soon realize that the enemy isn't much of a bad person, just misunderstood. Then, we kick their ass with their misunderstood bullshit.

Side: yes
Kinda(1649) Disputed
3 points

Isn't that splitting hairs? Being homosexual and engaging in homosexuality??

I don't really disagree with you.. otherwise

Side: No

He may even be splitting pubic hairs, but I up voted him just the same ;)

Side: yes
Avedomni(78) Disputed
1 point

That depends on whether one believes that controlled desires are sinful in their own right, as opposed to only actions being sinful. One could, if dispositioned toward believing the Bible, make the argument that God gave homosexuals such desires so that they might have greater opportunity to prove their faith by not fulfilling in them.

Side: yes
August(33) Disputed
1 point

What in the world are you talking about? I thought we were disputing gays in christianity. If anything you just gave me a stornger debate.

You say that you study the bible, well I have some information for you, in the King James bible it never says that sex is bad. besides if the only acceptible time to have sex was to have a child then Guy's are still not able to live as a christian without sin. They still can not have children. sure they can adopt and there is nothing wrong with that, but how can they have sex, it would still be forbiden. in Romans 1:26-27 it reads;

"26.For this cause God gave them up unto a vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

27. and likewise also the men, leaveing the natural use of women, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseamly, and reciveing in themselves that recompence of the error which was met."

Here God condems the pairing of men to men and women to women. Therefore there is no way they can be Christain and live without sin, acording to christians.

Side: No
ThePyg(6738) Disputed
1 point

The ACT OF HOMOSEXUALITY. A homosexual doesn't HAVE to have sex, ya know...

that was the point I was making.

Side: yes
2 points

haha I think this discussion was started because of the statement I made about being a gay Christian. But you know, if it causes argument and controversy, I won't put any labels on myself. I love God with all my heart and will worship him for eternity, I also find attraction in men, but more importantly, find love in my boyfriend. So that's it, regardless of what anyone else says, nothing else really matters.

Side: yes
1 point

Hey look, I have nothing against you, just so you know. I wanted to let you know that I think that it is wonderful you love God. Many of my friends are Gay's, I just do not agree with your point of veiw.

Side: No
1 point

First of all, everyone sins.

Now that we have that out of the way -is being homosexual a sin?

Not technically, acting on it is. So I guess technically; yes.

Side: yes
1 point

I personally believe that the church has misinterpreted God's wishes over the centuries. Yes, God said marriage is between man an woman, but being gay is something you're born with. And since God wants His children to be happy, then I don't see how He would possibly be against homosexuality unless He wants gays to suppress their feelings.

Homosexuality is natural, not a sin. This would be like saying farting is a sin or having ADD is a sin.

Side: yes
Kinda(1649) Disputed
1 point

I think that's one of the worst arguments I've heard.

Because God wants you to be happy you should be able to do whatever makes you happy? You can think of a million reasons why thats wrong.

Also the part where you're born gay. You're not. Unless you can find undisputed or nearly undisputed evidence you are - So far I haven't found any.

Farting - No

ADD - No

Adulterers - Yes.

Side: No
MKIced(2511) Disputed
1 point

Does being gay hurt anyone in a logical way? The only way I can see it hurt people is if you have a situation in which a bigoted parent is "hurt" or embarrassed that his child is gay. Other than that, homosexuality does not hurt people any more or less than heterosexuality.

As I've said before, God wants us to be happy. That means we should not suppress our feelings to appease others, but make ourselves have inner turmoil. Obviously, we also shouldn't hurt others, but sometimes that's necessary.

Side: yes
jep93(17) Disputed
1 point

No there is not completely conclusive evidence that people are born gay. However, there is also even less evidence to support that you become gay solely through life experiences and development. Gay men have brain anatomy that looks similar to a heterosexual woman, there are numerous positive correlations between physical attributes and the prevelance of homosexuality, a twin has a higher chance of being gay if his brother is gay, fruit flies can have their sexuality changed by the gene replacement, and than there's all the evidence that goes against the hypothesis that homosexuality comes from development. Oh and plus the very simple truth that you can just ask a gay person and more than likely they will say they were indeed born gay.

Side: yes
August(33) Disputed
1 point

just so you know, men and women are born with weaknesses, they are given to us by God to make us stronger. saything this does that make gay's an acception to the rule that men must overcome sin? No, just because you are born with it does not mean that God is going to give you a free pass.

Side: No
1 point

Christians that I hear nowadays still attempting to formulate biblical foundation for their arguments to classify homosexuality as sinful no longer go the route of Leviticus (18:22; 20:13) or Pauline doctrine (1 Cor 6:9; 1 Timothy 9:10), because, as some of the earlier posters clearly enunciated, many Christian theologians believe that the Mosaic law in Leviticus only pertained to male homosexuality (people in this forum noted that females were entirely omitted in the discussing of homosexual relations).

There's also stuff about the translation of 1 Cor 6:9 and the concept of "homosexual" as we understand v. how sexuality was understood in the relevant time period, and how the bible seems to specifically condemn the receiver of anal sex in a male homosexual relationship.

However, there is a new wave of arguments coming from a more difficult-to-dismantle theory about the "natural" model of sexuality as originally modeled by God's choice to create Adam and Eve (Christians make it a frequent point that, alas, God did not create a Steve to accompany Adam). Some/Many Christians also now realize the difficulty of their approach in using Leviticus in a technical way to classify homosexuality as a sin. Instead they interpret it as a symbolic model for heterosexuality. I say this theory is more difficult to dismantle because it is an interpretation of text spanning multiple passages, much like the concept of trinity, and it's very difficult to say someone's literary interpretation is wrong when they are not making basic factual statements about the text.

In light of the somewhat recent Proposition 8 ballot measure in California concerning the state-wide inclusion of homosexual couples in marriage, it also seems that some Christians are arguing that the model couple (Adam + Eve) is also the ideal way to raise children, and that having two dads or two moms would be wrong to the children. But I suppose that argument is much more tamable since it can be confronted by empirical data.

Side: yes
Kinda(1649) Disputed
2 points

Interpretation and outright condemnation is 2 different things.

The Bible can be 'interpreted' as for the Holy Trinity...

But it outright condemns homosexuality. I don't think there's any suggestion that it is ok to be homosexual.

Can somebody please show me where Christianity can be interpreted to not condemn homosexuality.

Side: No
YosefLevi(15) Disputed
1 point

@Kinda: Well, the previous debaters here and I did mention that the bible does not necessarily outright condemn our Western concept of homosexuality. It condemns specific narrow behaviors between two males (but as mentioned before, there is no talk about female-female activity). That is how some Protestant theologians interpret Christianity to NOT condemn homosexuality (as we understand it). The Vatican, on the other hand, does not condemn homosexuality per se, but does condemn homosexual actions.

If you want to talk about what the bible says "outright", that is what it says. If you want to delve more deeply about why the Hebrews (or if you believe Moses specifically authored the Torah) didn't seem to mention female homosexuality, then you need to read between the lines in the bible. Some Christians "interpret" it to suggest an ideal model of sexuality that extends even to female homosexuals, and some don't. Some Catholics believe that the internal state is not sinful and that the outward expression is sinful.

I believe that trying to apply our concepts of sexuality to that time is only somewhat meaningful, as I am not sure we will always keep our concepts of sexuality. Perhaps scientists will one day find a better way to describe and prescribe analytic terms to human sexual behavior? Perhaps we will have a superior theory to explain sexuality and do away with the old discrete (but not really) categories of homosexuality and heterosexuality as bipolar realms; perhaps we will adopt the Kinsey concept of a sexual continuum, or perhaps, instead of defining sexuality on an internal psychological state, we may simply define sexuality based off of actual behavior?

Scientists discard constructs as more useful and predictive/explanatory theories come up. I'm just saying to keep an open mind as we presume our understanding of sexuality to be true and apply it to the Hebrews, assuming they had the same concept, and that our concepts will stand the test of time.

Side: yes
1 point

You can be gay and religious because the only way being gay is a sin is if it were a choice and its not. It can't be against nature if other animals are doing it also. Besides in my opinion it would only be a sin is if a straight decided to be gay just for the sex. In the bible it says the same thing about LUSTING after man but it didn't say anything about loving them the way a straight man would love a women and vice versa.

Side: yes
1 point

I would say no to this question, simply because christians believe, that no one except God is sinfree.

Therefore, nomatter being gay or not, a person live in sin.

But I said yes, because I don't see homosexuality as a bigger sin than for example lying, cheating or stealing.

Side: Yes
1 point

Yes. 2 Samuel 1:26 is proof of that. :)

Side: Yes
0 points

Any religion is about being always good to others. It in no way restricts our sexual orientation . Even in the excavations found from our ancestrol periods, there are paintings depicting gay sex. So, dont confuse gay/lesbian as commiting a sin in religion. Hari Om!!

Side: Why Not
0 points

God made man and women to be one. Not women and women or man and man. How can a man procreate with another man or a women with another women.

Side: yes
YosefLevi(15) Disputed
1 point

@Jose: Why start the whole argument from the beginning and ignore the arguments of both those who agree AND disagree with your point of view? It's totally undoing the work everyone has done and re-doing it all over again. This is a comment that doesn't build upon, challenge, or reframe what anyone has said here.

Side: No
Jose12(11) Disputed
0 points

no no no no no no no no no big no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no way!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Side: No
3 points

The bible doesn’t indicate that gay Christian women are sinners because they are gay. Factually speaking, the subject of homosexual women is not addressed in the text of the Bible. Is that a comforting fact for female homosexuals who call themselves Christian? Not so fast!

The bible doesn’t indicate that pedophiles are sinners because they are pedophiles. In fact, the subject of pedophilia is not explicitly or implicitly addressed in the Bible. Now, does that mean that pedophile Christian Priests are Holy even when they are pedophiles?

No, I am not suggesting that pedophiles and homosexual women are equally with or without sin. What I am alluding to is the fact that the Bible doesn’t either condemn or justify all of man’s deeds. Yet, there are times when there is an obvious question of conscience that must be morally or not morally answered.

Side: No
August(33) Disputed
1 point

Um...Im on yourside but that argument makes no sence so can I just say...what?

Side: No
3 points

What is it about my post that you find to be non-sense?

Is it the absence of conclusions inferred from premises?

I presented the facts, and it remains in the hands of others to determine what they infer from those facts.

Side: No
2 points

I don't really feel the need to quote passages from the Bible. I think what is more important is the opposing side's input.

Side: No
1 point

god made AIDS for a reason so he obviously wants us to be like a man and a woman

not a man and a man

Side: No
Explorer(187) Disputed
1 point

god made AIDS for a reason so he obviously wants us to be like a man and a woman

AIDS infects the straight community as well. It in part has spread so well in the homosexual population due to the fact that anal sex spreads the disease much easier then vaginal sex and other kinds of sex. The odds are roughly this. If you want sources to back it up I could show you.

Oral Sex- Same as having oral sex

Vaginal Sex-10x easier to get then oral sex

Anal Sex- 50x easier to get then anal sex

Side: No
0 points

No, you cannot be Christian and be homosexual without sin. Yes, you can be religious and homosexual without sin. The fact that you put "Christian/Religious" in the title implies that you think if you are not Christian than you cannot be religious at all. That is a load of bull shit. Just remember, that you Christians use our Torah as the basis of your whole religion, claiming it as your own!

Side: No
Kinda(1649) Disputed
1 point

I'm not even christian btw.

Secondly read the whole OP and you can see why I put Christianity.

Side: No
1 point

I think that is a very good way to put it. a homosexual cannot be a christain without sin, but they can be religious.

Side: No
Kinda(1649) Disputed
1 point

Lol that is the same thing. What religion allows homosexuality??

Side: No