CreateDebate



Welcome to CreateDebate!

CreateDebate is a social tool that democratizes the decision-making process through online debate. Join Now!
  • Find a debate you care about.
  • Read arguments and vote the best up and the worst down.
  • Earn points and become a thought leader!

To learn more, check out the FAQ or Tour.



Be Yourself

Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.

Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.


FB
Facebook addict? Check out our page and become a fan because you love us!


pic
Report This User
Permanent Delete

Allies
View All
pic


Enemies
View All
None

Hostiles
View All
None

RSS Vixadium

Reward Points:13
Efficiency: Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive).

Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high.
68%
Arguments:13
Debates:0
meter
Efficiency Monitor
Online:


Joined:
10 most recent arguments.
0 points

The US has separation of church and state. Your personal and religious ideologies have no right to determine law or government policy. If you wanna avoid homosexuals, avoid them. But in no way should they be locked up just because of your irrational fear.

vixadium(13) Clarified
1 point

I'm talking about in the caption of the video, not what you said

1 point

Haha okay good, I'm glad it was just a joke. Sometimes people say stuff on here (while being completely serious) which is incredibly terrifying.

1 point

If artificial insemination were used, how would here be incest?

I am honestly confused about this video and how homosexuality is related to incest.

-2 points
1 point

I'm not sure if youre a troll or not, I am honestly really confused. Jesus in no way was a conservative. Have you read the Bible? Even if political parties existed then, he would have been considered a liberal. He favored poor over the rich, encouraged help for the sick and elderly, turned the other cheek, and hated money and capitalism. Thats the opposite of the GOP. In what way could he have been considered a republican?

1 point

I've spent countless hours debating the fact that homosexuality, as we know it today, is not forbidden according to the bible.

But since some people are still confused about this, for the sake of arguing we will just say that modern homosexuality is condemned in the bible.

Even with this fact, homosexuals should still not be stoned. The US has separation of church and state according to the first amendment. Thus, one religions ideologies have no right to determine the law of the land.

1 point

In the old testament it also claims that polygamy should exist, children can be killed if a child disobeys his parent, and that if you do not hate your family you cannot love God. But, we don't listen to that, do we.

What are you trying to say about the connection between recreational marijuana and gay marriage? Neither gay marriage nor marijuana are mentioned in the bible.

1 point

Good job trying to pick and choose verses that you think you can shoot holes in (or at least google someone else's list). However you failed miserably at the shooting of the holes.

Since you too agree there are holes, why don't you just do it for me. We both agree there are holes in the bible having to do with the fact that homosexuality is a sin, so maybe the verdict is that its not. There is no passage that has been validated or translated in every version and translation that directly state that homosexuals are committing sin.

Homosexuality is only briefly mentioned in fewer than 10 of the over 30,000 passages of the bible. Clearly, homosexuality is a much bigger deal to modern Christians than it was to the author's of the Bible. Most of the bible aims to teach Christians how to act in a way full of love and fairness. So, due to the fact that in the New Testament this attitude is emphasized so much more than homosexuality is, aren't many Christians committing much more sinful behavior toward gay persons?

Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye. — Luke 6:41-42

If we are to look at Biblical passages condemning homosexuality, we should move past those in the Old Testament. Christians rarely follow the rules of the Old Testament, and if they did they would still be polygamous.

The New Testament was written when the Roman conquerers openly and frequently raped other males. This was amoral and repulsive to Paul, as it would have been to any person (gay or straight).

Anyway, here are the three references in the New Testament to homosexuality:

Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. — 1 Corinthians 6:9-10

But lets look at the other translations:

Wycliffe Bible (1382): "Whether ye know not, that wicked men shall not wield the kingdom of God? Do not ye err; neither lechers, neither men that serve maumets [neither men serving to idols], neither adulterers, neither lechers against kind, neither they that do lechery with men"

King James Version (1611): "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind"

Amplified Version (1987): "Do you not know that the unrighteous and the wrongdoers will not inherit or have any share in the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived (misled): neither the impure and immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor those who participate in homosexuality"

I guess it depends on the version you're reading.

We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine. — 1 Timothy 1:9-10

Again:

Wycliffe Bible (1382): "..and witting this thing, that the law is not set to a just man, but to unjust men and not subject, to wicked men and to sinners, to cursed men and defouled, to slayers of father, and slayers of mother, to manslayers [witting this thing, that the law is not put to a just man, but to an unjust and not subject, to unpious men and sinners, to cursed men and defouled, to slayers of fathers, and slayers of mothers, to menslayers] and lechers, to them that do lechery with men, lying-mongers and forsworn, and if any other thing is contrary to the wholesome teaching."

King James Version (1611): "Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine"

Amplified Version (1987): Knowing and understanding this: that the Law is not enacted for the righteous (the upright and just, who are in right standing with God), but for the lawless and unruly, for the ungodly and sinful, for the irreverent and profane, for those who strike and beat and [even] murder fathers and strike and beat and [even] murder mothers, for manslayers,[For] impure and immoral persons, those who abuse themselves with men, kidnapers, liars, perjurers--and whatever else is opposed to wholesome teaching and sound doctrine

But, keep in mind that today scholars agree that Timothy and Titus both were an unknown Christian writer and not original to Paul.

Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error. — Romans 1:26-27

This passage has been debated for centuries, yet still no clear interpretation has been found. Most still claim that as the conceptual modality needed to provide the blanket condemnation did not exist during this era, thus homosexuality as a whole was not being condemned. Most argue that Paul was against certain acts of homosexuality and heterosexuals choosing to commit homosexual acts. Some older, conservative translations even claim that this was just about men having unnatural sex with women. Furthermore, when taken in context to the passage as a whole, it can be inferred that homosexual behavior is being described as a punishment for greater sins that were committed by the people.

Homosexuality, as defined during the time of Paul, is as follows (according to the classical oxford dictionary): "...the sexual penetration of male prostitutes or slaves by conventionally masculine elite men, who might purchase slaves expressly for that purpose, was not considered morally problematic."

All homosexual acts he witnessed during the time were coercive and forced. Thus it is likely he was not referring to homosexuality, but mostly rape.

As homosexual couples as we know them did not exist during the time the New Testament was written, the Bible speaks of homosexual acts between heterosexual couples, not in a homosexual couple.

As homosexual couples as we know them today did not yet exist, no one was "out of the closet", we know that Paul was speaking about these acts in a way directed towards heterosexuals, and we have no idea what he would say to homosexual couples today.

"It may feel to a straight Christian that their instinctive negative reaction to homosexual sex arises out of the Bible. But all of us necessarily view the Bible through the lens of our own experiences and prejudices, and we must be very careful to ensure that lens does not distort our vision or understanding of God's sacrosanct word."

1 point

But Onan knew that the child would not be his; so whenever he slept with his brother’s wife, he spilled his semen on the ground to keep from providing offspring for his brother. 10 What he did was wicked in the Lord’s sight; so the Lord put him to death also.

-Genesis 38:9-10

The United States, according the the first amendment of the constitution, has separation of church and state. Just because a passage in the bible may condemn the "pull out" method, it doesn't mean that it should be illegal in the United States. Religion does not determine laws. If you don't believe in using birth control, don't. But your religion will not and should not determine the future of others. Besides, if we are to follow that one verse we should also follow rules against round haircuts (Leviticus 19:27), football ( Leviticus 11:8), fortune-telling (Leviticus 19:31), tattoos (19:28, shellfish (11:10), wearing gold (1 Timothy 2:9) and countless other idiosyncrasies we tend to disregard. So why would we just follow that one part of the Bible and ignore the rest? So, even if we were to have a government based on the laws of the church, we would have to follow every other rule, that even you, Truthdude, ignore.

Secondly, contraception is necessary and making it illegal would be foolish. Not only does contraception control population growth and insurmountably curb the number of abused and neglected children, but it is also a huge benefit as far as public health. Many forms of birth control protect against sexually transmitted diseases. So, if we have a way of protecting humans from disease, why would we throw that away? Furthermore, birth control has been instrumental in the development of tools to improve women's health more specifically. Now, women are able to control menstrual cycles and hormonal levels in a way that was impossible in the past.

Leave your religion out of this one.

Vixadium has not yet created any debates.

About Me


I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know!


Want an easy way to create new debates about cool web pages? Click Here