This is a placeholder text
Group text
by Myracle on 30 July 2010 - 16:07
Frankly, I'd oppose anyone being awarded a degree in anything, who cannot read, research and analyze.
Anyone drawing the false conclusion that the Bible contains condemnation of homosexuality, clearly can do none of the above.
If you want to say anything other than heterosexual, cisgendered existances are wrong? Go right ahead. That's your right.
You're beliefs aren't supported by the Bible, however, and insistance that they are is a compelling argument that you lack critical thinking skills.
Anyone drawing the false conclusion that the Bible contains condemnation of homosexuality, clearly can do none of the above.
If you want to say anything other than heterosexual, cisgendered existances are wrong? Go right ahead. That's your right.
You're beliefs aren't supported by the Bible, however, and insistance that they are is a compelling argument that you lack critical thinking skills.
by Two Moons on 30 July 2010 - 17:07
Still at it I see.....lol
by raymond on 30 July 2010 - 17:07
The Code of Ethics prohibits counselors from discriminating based on a number of factors, including gender identity and sexual orientation. "Counselors do not discriminate against clients, students, employees, supervises, or research participants in a manner that has a negative impact on these persons," the code says.
Simply because one does not agree with the so called "code of ethics" does not predispose a counselor to discriminate against a transgenderd person! On the contrary a person who holds to a judeo christian belief system would be in my opinion better suited as a counselor than any one else! the christian code of ethics prohibits discrimination in any form or practice1 against anyone! If you truly think that the bible does not condemn homosexuality then you are guilty of the inability to read,research or analyze as you accuse me! And one trait you have in common with others of your persuasion is your statement that my beliefs are not supported by the bible and the absurd and rude accusation that I lack critical thinking skills! I presumed that your comments were directed towards me !should you wish to discover the scripture verse that is of a condemning nature and prohibits the sexual intercourse of two same sex's I am afraid you will be disappointed! Now my dear mudwick please copy and paste any comment I have made that was directed towards you intended to insult or discredit! I say shame on you for your rude behavior! If those disparaging remarks were not directed towards me I say excuse me !
Simply because one does not agree with the so called "code of ethics" does not predispose a counselor to discriminate against a transgenderd person! On the contrary a person who holds to a judeo christian belief system would be in my opinion better suited as a counselor than any one else! the christian code of ethics prohibits discrimination in any form or practice1 against anyone! If you truly think that the bible does not condemn homosexuality then you are guilty of the inability to read,research or analyze as you accuse me! And one trait you have in common with others of your persuasion is your statement that my beliefs are not supported by the bible and the absurd and rude accusation that I lack critical thinking skills! I presumed that your comments were directed towards me !should you wish to discover the scripture verse that is of a condemning nature and prohibits the sexual intercourse of two same sex's I am afraid you will be disappointed! Now my dear mudwick please copy and paste any comment I have made that was directed towards you intended to insult or discredit! I say shame on you for your rude behavior! If those disparaging remarks were not directed towards me I say excuse me !
by Myracle on 30 July 2010 - 17:07
Okay, can you show me where the Bible condemns homosexuality?
Which verse? The one in I Corinthians or the one in Timothy? Neither condemn homosexuality- they condemn pederasty.
One can only speculate as to why the Catholic church would actively mis-translate passages of the Bible condemning older men having sex with young boys.
As far as her not being damaging as a counselor... do you think it'd be damaging to tell someone who has been raped that they are *choosing* to have PTSD as a result?
Which verse? The one in I Corinthians or the one in Timothy? Neither condemn homosexuality- they condemn pederasty.
One can only speculate as to why the Catholic church would actively mis-translate passages of the Bible condemning older men having sex with young boys.
As far as her not being damaging as a counselor... do you think it'd be damaging to tell someone who has been raped that they are *choosing* to have PTSD as a result?
by raymond on 30 July 2010 - 18:07
“You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination” (Leviticus 18:22; see also Leviticus 20:13).This verse strictly condems the sexual acts committed between persons of the same sex! Now claiming that one is actually not a woman but a man or visa versa is an irrelevant issue! the tools one is created with are meant specifically for a single purpose ! That of procreation between a man and woman! Any other purpose is a perversion of it's intended purpose! sexual relations between a man and woman were intended to be pleasurable but in the context of it's purposePlease understand that it is not my intention to condem anyone or pass judgement because of issues they have sexually or any way else! Just as the scripture clearly spell out the behavior required of us a counselor with judeo christian values is perfectly suited to be a counselor! Hatred and persecution are clearly prohibbitted by the scripture! Thers is only one law and it is the law of love1 I doubt that the catholic church has intentionally mistranslated original texts! I am positive they teach unscripitural doctrine! I also find it difficult to believe that someone would choose to have emotional difficulties as a result of sexual mistreatment! That counselor was gravely in error! Now to grade homosexuality as a sin more grevious than lieing is not true! From the whitest lie to the most terrible crime all are reprehensible in Gods sight! the homosexual down the street is no closer to hell than the jay walker next door! All have sinned and fallen short of God standard! It is not my goal to condemn anyone! But after all the truth is still the truth! You are most welcome here no matter what your persuasion is! I am commanded to love you as myself!
by Two Moons on 30 July 2010 - 18:07
How about beasts in the field?
is that ok?
sorry guys..um and gals.... can't help it.
Where is Diane when ya need her........
is that ok?
sorry guys..um and gals.... can't help it.
Where is Diane when ya need her........
by rainforestscouts on 30 July 2010 - 19:07
MW,
Unless you are using a different translation than most, there are certainly biblical passages that can be easily interpreted as condeming the practice of homosexuality (Leviticus for example). That being said, Jen, to believe that it is an immoral act does not necessarily define someone as a homophobe or a hater. I'm not sure where the Bible suggests that the earth is the center of the universe.
A doctor would not be denied a degree based on his belief in Christian Science, but may have his license revoked if he failed to practice western medicine.
If the ABA had taken the hardline stance that you are describing the APA as having taken, there would have been no room for arguement concerning separate but equal. Prior to 1973 changes to the DSM, homosexuality was classified as a disorder. The APA acknowledged that some in the profession considered homosexuality a pathology.
The global warming debate is going the same way now. In light of evidence to the contrary, we are repeatedly told that the "science is settled". Now, even in the face of evidence of tweaking, hiding, and tampering with data, those who have questions are marginalized. If the APA's brand of science is legitimate, it will withstand the scrutiny of this grad student.
Whether or not homosexuality is a choice, there are some interesting questions that come to my mind at first glance. If we will only allow agreement among the "pedigreed", who will explore these questions? For example: If lesbians are attracted by nature to other women, why are so many attracted to women that have masculine features? It seems like among all the lesbian couples I've known there has always been at least one "butch". It seems to me that if their genetic predisposition is the same as mine, they would also be attracted to the same feminine features.
Unless you are using a different translation than most, there are certainly biblical passages that can be easily interpreted as condeming the practice of homosexuality (Leviticus for example). That being said, Jen, to believe that it is an immoral act does not necessarily define someone as a homophobe or a hater. I'm not sure where the Bible suggests that the earth is the center of the universe.
A doctor would not be denied a degree based on his belief in Christian Science, but may have his license revoked if he failed to practice western medicine.
If the ABA had taken the hardline stance that you are describing the APA as having taken, there would have been no room for arguement concerning separate but equal. Prior to 1973 changes to the DSM, homosexuality was classified as a disorder. The APA acknowledged that some in the profession considered homosexuality a pathology.
The global warming debate is going the same way now. In light of evidence to the contrary, we are repeatedly told that the "science is settled". Now, even in the face of evidence of tweaking, hiding, and tampering with data, those who have questions are marginalized. If the APA's brand of science is legitimate, it will withstand the scrutiny of this grad student.
Whether or not homosexuality is a choice, there are some interesting questions that come to my mind at first glance. If we will only allow agreement among the "pedigreed", who will explore these questions? For example: If lesbians are attracted by nature to other women, why are so many attracted to women that have masculine features? It seems like among all the lesbian couples I've known there has always been at least one "butch". It seems to me that if their genetic predisposition is the same as mine, they would also be attracted to the same feminine features.
by Abhay on 30 July 2010 - 19:07
Moons,
I'm still waiting for NoCurs to answer the question from 3 days ago.
by sueincc on 30 July 2010 - 19:07
Ever heard of the term "lipstick lesbians"? Not all hetero women are attracted to one type of man either, believe it or not, every hetero womans idea of the ideal man isn't necessarily "Ken" or "GI Joe". What you might see as an effeminate male, some women might see as refined. Also don't forget a woman's biggest sex organ is between her ears, for a woman attraction is rarely encompassed 100% in the physical. Attraction and Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Also to go a step further, it is now better understood that sexuality and attraction is a very fluid thing, many people are attracted to both men and women, most lean more one way than the other, rarely is it split down the middle for hetero or homo sexuals. I have no doubt that very idea scares the hell out of some people!
by Myracle on 30 July 2010 - 19:07
Christians don't believe in the mitzvah. Or do you also not eat pork?
Dogs were also considered vile animals not fit for ownership in the Old Testament.
Regardless, Christ's sacrifice on the cross abolished those laws.
What did Christ have to say about homosexuality? Nothing.
What does the New Testament have to say about homosexuality? Nothing.
Are you aware of the historical context of the Holiness Laws contained in Leviticus? They were specifically warning against adopting the cultural practices of their Mediterranian neighbors [idolatry, forcible sodomy and pederasty]. You cannot take a passage of the Bible out of context- it perverts the meaning, and is a sin.
Further, that passage of Leviticus in Hebrew uses two different words. Correctly translated, it reads that a man [the Hebrew world for adult male is used here] shall not lay with a YOUNG man [the Hebrew word for son or boy-child is used here.] Again, a condemnation of pederastic incest. Not surprising, as the verses preceeding it are all concerning incest as well.
[Note that nowhere else in the chapter is having sex with one's own son forbidden. Why? Because its covered in this verse.]
The second passage of Leviticus, proscribing death for men who lay with another man as a woman, is again, incorrectly translated. Again we see the use of the two different words, the first an adult male, the second a boy-child. This verse is actually proscribing the murder of a child for having been the victim of child molestation. Given that the Bible actually condones and encourages rape in several portions of the Old Testament, this is not particularly shocking.
However, none of this is relevant, since Christians do not consider the laws of the Old Testament binding, as Christ's sacrifice on the cross abolished those laws.
Dogs were also considered vile animals not fit for ownership in the Old Testament.
Regardless, Christ's sacrifice on the cross abolished those laws.
What did Christ have to say about homosexuality? Nothing.
What does the New Testament have to say about homosexuality? Nothing.
Are you aware of the historical context of the Holiness Laws contained in Leviticus? They were specifically warning against adopting the cultural practices of their Mediterranian neighbors [idolatry, forcible sodomy and pederasty]. You cannot take a passage of the Bible out of context- it perverts the meaning, and is a sin.
Further, that passage of Leviticus in Hebrew uses two different words. Correctly translated, it reads that a man [the Hebrew world for adult male is used here] shall not lay with a YOUNG man [the Hebrew word for son or boy-child is used here.] Again, a condemnation of pederastic incest. Not surprising, as the verses preceeding it are all concerning incest as well.
[Note that nowhere else in the chapter is having sex with one's own son forbidden. Why? Because its covered in this verse.]
The second passage of Leviticus, proscribing death for men who lay with another man as a woman, is again, incorrectly translated. Again we see the use of the two different words, the first an adult male, the second a boy-child. This verse is actually proscribing the murder of a child for having been the victim of child molestation. Given that the Bible actually condones and encourages rape in several portions of the Old Testament, this is not particularly shocking.
However, none of this is relevant, since Christians do not consider the laws of the Old Testament binding, as Christ's sacrifice on the cross abolished those laws.
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top