The Long, Slow Death of My Homophobia
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-05-2017, 10:41 PM
RE: The Long, Slow Death of My Homophobia
BeccaBoo Wrote:It was a rhetorical question.
Of course marriage can evolve.
Why are you sceptical about me being LDS?
Tell me please, what did you want to hear from the First Presidency about homosexual relationship and marriage? What kind of change did you want to happen?
I wanted to talk to those LDS(or former LDS) who oppose Church leaders on these two points:
1)homosexual marriage
2)priesthood for women.
If you help me to understand this I will appreciate. I don't know anyone who opposes Church. Or may be I do but they are not going to admit this for understandable reason.

English is my second language.
I AM DEPLORABLE AND IRREDEEMABLE
SHE PERSISTED WE RESISTED
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-05-2017, 10:55 PM
RE: The Long, Slow Death of My Homophobia
(23-05-2017 10:24 PM)Alla Wrote:  
JesseB Wrote:Your second assertion is baseless and doesnt warrent a response.
No response was needed.

JesseB Wrote:YOUR FIRST ASSERTION HOWEVER........... Read the ........bible, it doesn't ban child rape of foreigners it ........COMMANDS IT. The Jews didn't break any ........covenant doing that, they were ORDERED to do so. What the ......... Alla, you can't tell me you've been here all this time and you haven't learned this already, go grab your bible I'll go get the ...... verses if you really don't know where they are.
Sure, tell me which ones you are talking about.
P.S. Are you OK?

Currently I'm having a very low tolerance for ignorant bullshit. Alla you're not this stupid, I'm convinced of that so what the hell is going on here.

Also
Judges 21:10-24New International Version (NIV)

10 So the assembly sent twelve thousand fighting men with instructions to go to Jabesh Gilead and put to the sword those living there, including the women and children. 11 “This is what you are to do,” they said. “Kill every male and every woman who is not a virgin.” 12 They found among the people living in Jabesh Gilead four hundred young women who had never slept with a man, and they took them to the camp at Shiloh in Canaan.

13 Then the whole assembly sent an offer of peace to the Benjamites at the rock of Rimmon. 14 So the Benjamites returned at that time and were given the women of Jabesh Gilead who had been spared. But there were not enough for all of them.

--Here's just one part where he commands all the women who are virgins be spared to be used as wives, in the law any woman can be taken and given a week to mourn the death of her family then forced to marry the man who killed her family. That's jewish law. As handed down by their god (supposedly since I don't buy any of it, personally. However anyone who buys into the bible has no excuse)

Numbers 31:15-18New International Version (NIV)

15 “Have you allowed all the women to live?” he asked them. 16 “They were the ones who followed Balaam’s advice and enticed the Israelites to be unfaithful to the Lord in the Peor incident, so that a plague struck the Lord’s people. 17 Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, 18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

--Another killing men and boys and woman who are married, but save all the virgins and young girls for sex.

Numbers 5:11-21New International Version (NIV)

The Test for an Unfaithful Wife
11 Then the Lord said to Moses, 12 “Speak to the Israelites and say to them: ‘If a man’s wife goes astray and is unfaithful to him 13 so that another man has sexual relations with her, and this is hidden from her husband and her impurity is undetected (since there is no witness against her and she has not been caught in the act), 14 and if feelings of jealousy come over her husband and he suspects his wife and she is impure—or if he is jealous and suspects her even though she is not impure— 15 then he is to take his wife to the priest. He must also take an offering of a tenth of an ephah[a] of barley flour on her behalf. He must not pour olive oil on it or put incense on it, because it is a grain offering for jealousy, a reminder-offering to draw attention to wrongdoing.

16 “‘The priest shall bring her and have her stand before the Lord. 17 Then he shall take some holy water in a clay jar and put some dust from the tabernacle floor into the water. 18 After the priest has had the woman stand before the Lord, he shall loosen her hair and place in her hands the reminder-offering, the grain offering for jealousy, while he himself holds the bitter water that brings a curse. 19 Then the priest shall put the woman under oath and say to her, “If no other man has had sexual relations with you and you have not gone astray and become impure while married to your husband, may this bitter water that brings a curse not harm you. 20 But if you have gone astray while married to your husband and you have made yourself impure by having sexual relations with a man other than your husband”— 21 here the priest is to put the woman under this curse—“may the Lord cause you to become a curse[b] among your people when he makes your womb miscarry and your abdomen swell.

--Here's gods pro abortion stance that religious folks seem to have forgotten.

Deuteronomy 21:18–21
Embed

A Rebellious Son
18 “If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and, though they discipline him, will not listen to them, 19 then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gate of the place where he lives, 20 and they shall say to the elders of his city, ‘This our son is stubborn and rebellious; he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard.’ 21 mThen all the men of the city shall stone him to death with stones. nSo you shall purge the evil from your midst, oand all Israel shall hear, and fear.

--Here's where god gives permission to murder their children if they don't do as they are told "Little timmy eat your carrots or I'm gonna have the town stone you to death"

Deuteronomy 22:28–29
Embed

28 g“If a man meets a virgin who is not betrothed, and seizes her and lies with her, and they are found, 29 then the man who lay with her shall give to the father of the young woman fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife, because he has violated her. He may not divorce her all his days.

--Got raped? Well guess the guy that raped you won the lottery he gets to keep you.


Question. Should I provide more examples?

DLJ Wrote:And, yes, the principle of freedom of expression works both ways... if someone starts shit, better shit is the best counter-argument.
Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-05-2017, 11:10 PM
RE: The Long, Slow Death of My Homophobia
Under "gods" law women and children are property. It's ok to kill the children, it's ok to rape women provided you're willing to marry her after you rape her (I bet she just loves that). A deadly poison intended to kill unborn children's effectiveness is taken as some sign from god as to the "faithfulness" of a wife (little hint it's not, science, by that I mean reality is consistent. It doesn't change for anyone, not even the non existent thing you call a god). Gays are to be stoned oh but only the guy who bends over, the guy on top is ok cause only the guy bending over is acting like a girl and we can't have that now can we.

The bible also thinks if you look at black wallpaper when you fuck your baby will come out black lol, like I said reality is consistent, if it works in goats it would work in humans (hint it doesn't work in either and never did)

Polygamy, and incest are totally ok


And yet Christians wanna get pissy about gay marriage?

Want a bible verse? I'll give you one. Remove the plank from your eye before worrying about the splinter in someone eases eye. There you go. See I was sent off to a nice religious school I had to memorize the whole damn book to graduate the 6th grade (not joking the test took hours and you had to recite hundreds of verses and you had to do it by either giving the verse number or the verse itself depending on what the teacher wanted so there was no short cuts). And you wonder why I am not a theist, unlike most theists I've read the book. Fastest way to Atheism is to become a pastor. Theists would be amazed at how many clergy are non believers themselves.

DLJ Wrote:And, yes, the principle of freedom of expression works both ways... if someone starts shit, better shit is the best counter-argument.
Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes JesseB's post
24-05-2017, 05:30 AM
RE: The Long, Slow Death of My Homophobia
(23-05-2017 11:10 PM)JesseB Wrote:  Polygamy, and incest are totally ok

Quick note...

While you're correct about the majority of the passages you've mentioned here, there is nowhere in the Bible it says that incest is okay. Indeed, there are numerous, numerous verses specifically prohibiting it.

The story to which you likely refer, Lot and his daughters, is a political story in which the daughters do something detestable (screw their drunk and passed out dad) and therefore give birth to Moab and Ammon, the fathers of the Moabites and the Ammonites, the two primary neighbors of Israel to the east, in what is modern Jordan. In other words, it's a way of calling non-Israelites in the region the products of incest, the most disgusting thing the Israelites could think of by which to slander them.

[Image: divided-monarchy.jpg]

Using that story to say the Bible promotes or condones incest is to ignore many verses, and totally misunderstand the point of the Lot's Daughters story. Sorry to be pedantic about this, but I hear atheists using that particular example all the time wrongly, and it just makes us look bad to people who know the Bible. Or worse, anyway.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like RocketSurgeon76's post
24-05-2017, 05:37 AM
RE: The Long, Slow Death of My Homophobia
(23-05-2017 10:28 PM)Alla Wrote:  Oh, too bad for them. Personally I don't believe he is an idiot.

We heard your nervous laughter. (LOL).
Thanks for confirming EXACTLY what I said.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-05-2017, 07:12 AM
RE: The Long, Slow Death of My Homophobia
(23-05-2017 02:46 PM)JesseB Wrote:  Well.... Women in the workforce is a small problem, not because I'm against equality or women working, but because employers and companies decided now that women are working they can raise prices so that it's almost impossible for a single income to support even 1 person let alone a family. Fucking A the ruling class is shitty.

Again for people who can't read very well, I'm not saying women shouldn't be equal or shouldn't work, I'm saying employers and people who sell goods are worthless cunts for continuing to raise prices on goods and keep wages the same for about the last 100 years. One of the factors that THEY took advantage of was the near doubling of the supply of workers to help make this shitty situation happen.

Rich people have a disease, they are like a fat person who can't regulate themselves literally eating themselves to death. Rich people if not given clear restrictions will continue to gather personal wealth until their disease even threatens their own lives. They have no self control and the only skill or talent they have is how to game the system to gather more resources for themselves, it requires no special intellect but they are benefited by a total lack of empathy (aka psychopathy). In order for an economy to work a certain balance MUST be maintained, however they aren't above destroying a country to gain personal profit then put the burden on the masses which is what the banks did to Greece for example. Sad part is people are generally pretty stupid and don't even know why Greece really failed.

Hopefully that makes sense.
I don't disagree, but consider unbridled capitalism and upwards wealth transfer and the suppression of wages to be a separate issue.

Besides, I very much doubt that putting women into the workforce doubled the workforce. Many even today elect not to be in the workforce, or to be full time career professionals. And many husbands take on homemaking / child nurturing roles when women take the lead as wage earners. My son in law is a househusband, though he doesn't use that term. My current wife traded breadwinner roles with her ex when he went to graduate school, so that happens too -- tag team wage earning.

Another very important thing you're overlooking is that technology generally and networked information technology in particular has increased worker productivity several orders of magnitude starting around 1975. Back in that era people were predicting that we'd all be working 20 hours a week for the same income by now. There is no reason in the world that couldn't have happened -- or no good reason anyway. But of course what HAS happened is that the elites began the erosion of the middle class and the suppression of wages in order to maximize their wealth. This is now turning us into a third world country with an oppressed / exploited class enabling a privileged / monied class.

I think I read somewhere that raising the minimum wage to a (barely) living wage like $15 would add something like 17 cents to the cost of a Big Mac, something most people would not mind, given the benefits and the prospect of less surly / indifferent service at the drive-thru. There is a reason why the elites fight so mightily over such obviously beneficial, compassionate, sustainable and utterly doable things. It is because they do not want an upwardly mobile underclass. They want cheap labor.

So if you're going to argue that women entering the workforce is a "problem" you are going to have to argue the same for information technology and computer networking and robotics and AI. The problem is not those things, it is the failure to channel the benefits of those things to EVERYONE and to improve everyone's standard of living. Instead it has served only to improve the standard of living of the top 1%.

We should not only be working half time for the same wages by now, we should be well on the way to a guaranteed minimum income because as a whole, society has for some time now had enough wealth to guarantee a basic and humane standard of living to all. Nor would all that leisure result in idleness.

Another reason the elites do not want women entering the workforce or IT or any other force for increased productivity is that where this all leads is to everyone having "fuck you money" such that no one has to fear penury and social stigma such that they put up with disrespect and outright exploitation from employers. The elites do not want to pay a living wage or decent benefits -- or any more than is necessary to obtain labor and get the job minimally accomplished to keep their money machines going.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes mordant's post
24-05-2017, 07:44 AM
RE: The Long, Slow Death of My Homophobia
(23-05-2017 10:28 PM)Alla Wrote:  Oh, too bad for them. Personally I don't believe he is an idiot.

But he IS a criminal.
The Trump organization repeatedly and regularly violated the Corrupt Foreign Practices Act, and to this day, that continues. His daughter Ivanka and her husband are also involved. They regularly laundered money for Russian oligarchs, and dealt with criminals in the countries in the ex-Soviet Union. These criminal activities have been detailed in recent issues of the New Yorker, among other places. You support a blatant criminal. The day will come, when Trump will be exposed as the sleazy crook he really is, and will pay the price, legally. It's why he won't let anyone see his taxes, and LIES about "being under audit". He may not have colluded with the Russians, but his associates certainly did. Trump himself should be indicted on a RICO charge, as he ran a corrupt organization.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-05-2017, 08:14 AM (This post was last modified: 24-05-2017 08:20 AM by Emma.)
RE: The Long, Slow Death of My Homophobia
(23-05-2017 09:32 PM)sea_tiger Wrote:  It is social reality in many parts of the world.People have to work within this framework of society. Not all traditions are bad.Present culture is simplifying old traditions ,so it is not without change.

Okay, it's possible that not all traditions are bad- that's probably true. But this tradition is bad. When people are murdered, beaten, arrested, caned, whipped, chained, stabbed, shot, pushed off of tall buildings, beheaded, etc. etc. simply because of who they have sex with- that's fucking bad. It may be that in your community LGBTQ people are just bullied- but even just that leads to higher suicide rates than other minority groups.

Some traditions need to stop being traditions. You can't allow "tradition" to stand in the way of societal health. And a society that punishes LGBTQ people for simply existing is an unhealthy society because its people are being persecuted by others from within. And why? Because of "tradition" or "religion".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Emma's post
24-05-2017, 02:02 PM
RE: The Long, Slow Death of My Homophobia
(23-05-2017 10:41 PM)Alla Wrote:  
BeccaBoo Wrote:It was a rhetorical question.
Of course marriage can evolve.
Why are you sceptical about me being LDS?
Tell me please, what did you want to hear from the First Presidency about homosexual relationship and marriage? What kind of change did you want to happen?
I wanted to talk to those LDS(or former LDS) who oppose Church leaders on these two points:
1)homosexual marriage
2)priesthood for women.
If you help me to understand this I will appreciate. I don't know anyone who opposes Church. Or may be I do but they are not going to admit this for understandable reason.

For years and years I argued against same-sex marriage, within and outside church forums. For the most part, I saw the anguish and suffering homosexuals feel in the church and I believed the Brethren, that their position was of God. What I wanted was help for the LGBTQ community, because they were suffering. Help from God.

My views about the church did not hinge on the LGBTQ issues. My views about same-sex marriage didn't completely depend on the church's view, either: I sought rational, areligious arguments against ssm because I felt rational arguments should be used and I believe there are fundamental differences between same-sex and heterosexual couples. Ultimately, I have realized, as I said in my OP, that the fundamental differences are irrelevant.

Underneath all that was the belief that resolution and enlightenment can be achieved with the help of reason. It just so happened that the positions I held were wrong, but my methods of approaching truth were less wrong. I was wrong about the truth claims of the Mormon church and I was wrong about the relevance of sexual orientation in marriage.

I'm glad to know I was wrong. Learning more and clarifying confusion is much better than thinking I was right.

Here's my take on the LDS Church, its sexism and homophobia: its very roots are intimately tied to legitimizing polygamy by calling it "revelation," and LDS polygamy is inherently sexist and misogynistic. Despite eliminating the practice of polygamy among the living, the Church still carries over its misogyny, and I believe that its homophobia is a result of its sexism. Homosexual relationships cannot work in the church because they would mean women don't need men, and if women don't need men then the New and Everlasting Covenant of Marriage is not needed for everyone who is exalted, and that undermines the totality of the the Restoration of the church.

Mormons need sexism to survive or they are irrelevant.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-05-2017, 03:04 PM (This post was last modified: 24-05-2017 03:09 PM by Alla.)
RE: The Long, Slow Death of My Homophobia
BeccaBoo Wrote:Homosexual relationships cannot work in the church because they would mean women don't need men and if women don't need men then the New and Everlasting Covenant of Marriage is not needed for everyone who is exalted, and that undermines the totality of the Restoration of the church.
Oh, this is what you think? Interesting. Are you sure you were LDS?

I don't know how long you were LDS(if it is even true) but most likely not for a long time. You seem not to know or not to understand the doctrine of exaltation.

Every LDS knows or suppose to know that not only women need men, men need women. No man can be exalted without a woman and no woman can be exalted without a man.
Have you ever understood why a man can not be exalted without a woman? why a woman can not be exalted without a man? You had to understand this if you were LDS.

Imagine if I tell my child:" you don't have to study/to go to school if you don't want to even though it means that you will have no progress, you will be uneducated person". It would make me a horrible mother/parent.
If God permitted homosexual marriage, if He blessed and sanctified it, it would mean that God wouldn't care that some of His children would NOT be exalted ever.
Do you know why it takes a male and female to be exalted? You should, if it is true you were LDS.
Do you know why LDS prophets don't even bother to ask what you wanted them to ask? We already know that no man can be exalted without woman and no woman can be exalted without man. We also know WHY it is not possible for a man to be exalted without a woman, why it is not possible for a woman to be exalted without a man.
Do you, sister?

P.S. I also asked you if you believe in God Elohim and if you have/or had testimony of the First Vision. If your answers are "no" and "no" then never mind my complete post.

BeccaBoo Wrote:then the New and Everlasting Covenant of Marriage is not needed for everyone who is exalted

If you were LDS you would never say this. Nobody can be exalted without marriage. Not one person. There is no any exaltation without marriage. Do you even know why? I am not sure you do.

English is my second language.
I AM DEPLORABLE AND IRREDEEMABLE
SHE PERSISTED WE RESISTED
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: