Kalasin's Blog

You and your conclusions are beyond wrong, they are morally and ethically reprehensible. You are a disgusting human being, please do not breed or preach ever.

I had here a big paragraph regarding "everyone is filthy in God's sight" ad then i decided to read page 2 of comments before posting. I see it alludes to what is called "The Original Sin" . For someone that was brought up in a religion that is full of some petty "far out" mythological stories, somehow, the entire "Original Sin" business has seemed more far out than anything else. Just because it is the classical case of getting the hook in, and then reeling them in at your leisure.

With that being the dogma, the creed, you just cant win. Your life is one long penance even if you want to do everything right. Not just yours, but of all mankind for all generations to come. I doubt if god is so mean as to subject his alleged best creation to such an existence, for all time, with no hope of redemption.

Feel free to tell me "Strange are His ways and it is not for us to question them". But then it is Him that gave us the ability to question. I r confused now.

That's sort of the basis of the Gospel, that you don't have to do penance. The Bible teaches that God's grace is a complete work, and that no amount of good deeds on the behalf of anyone can really accomplish anything.

With that being the dogma, the creed, you just cant win. Your life is one long penance even if you want to do everything right. Not just yours, but of all mankind for all generations to come. I doubt if god is so mean as to subject his alleged best creation to such an existence, for all time, with no hope of redemption.

Huh? The whole point of Christianity - of Christ - is that there is redemption. You can win. You might not like the method but you fundamentally misunderstand Christianity if you think there is no hope.

Personally, I've always thought God was just a massive elitist.

I had Westboro Baptist Church protest outside of my high school last year. It was only 3 people who showed up, including a 8 year old boy. Westboro Baptist Church is mostly family members of the founder and is in no way a widespread group or belief. They've gained widespread media but that is about it.

yea pretty much this. I live in the Southern United States and can assure you they're not a big thing here.

Some of you may know that I’m an evangelical Christian' date=' and that I therefore believe that the Bible is infallible.[/quote']

Nothing created by man is infallible. You'd best learn this quick.

Just when you think Francesca couldn't get any more disgusting.

So essentially, I believe that we should love homosexuals, and treat them with gentleness and respect, while not accepting homosexual activity as right.

... What.

WHAT.

"Homosexuals should be respected, but we should condemn homosexuality."

ARE YOU READING WHAT YOU ARE WRITING?

This is reflected by the rise in AIDS and other sexual diseases which came about because of the sexual revolution of the twentieth century

Yes yes AIDS is a Homosexual disease and the homosexual agenda is going to turn as all gay and condemn to hell forever and ever. Find some new material.

The primary purpose of this little article is not actually to debate about whether or not homosexuality is sinful, however. It’s rather to make the point that there is a spectrum of people who hold that homosexuality is sinful.

In other words this post is not worth the cost in electricity that is need to broadcast out of my screen. You take no position on it, other than the contradictory one, and basically say NOTHING of value.

Freedom of Religion should also mean Freedom from Religion. Why should other elements of society adopt your religions values?

I believe the Bible's only reference to homosexuality was something something about the people in Sodom committing a sin?

I see nothing wrong with homosexuality. If two guys/girls want to hug, make out, roll each other in bed, fine. I think pretty much most things (i.e. diseases, mainly AIDS) which people blame on homosexuality is really the result of anal sex. That stuff is nasty, it leads to some nasty bleeding and pain, and the direct blood contact makes it far easier for diseases to spread. If the Bible was condemning anything, the unnatural act of anal sex was probably it.

It's probably kinky or whatever to some, but gay or not, it hurts your partner. Leave it to the experts and professional stunt people.

Not that I'm personally taking any religious stance on that kind of thing, just a thought on a possible interpretation.

I believe the Bible's only reference to homosexuality was something something about the people in Sodom committing a sin?

I see nothing wrong with homosexuality. If two guys/girls want to hug, make out, roll each other in bed, fine. I think pretty much most things (i.e. diseases, mainly AIDS) which people blame on homosexuality is really the result of anal sex. That stuff is nasty, it leads to some nasty bleeding and pain, and the direct blood contact makes it far easier for diseases to spread. If the Bible was condemning anything, the unnatural act of anal sex was probably it.

It's probably kinky or whatever to some, but gay or not, it hurts your partner. Leave it to the experts and professional stunt people.

Not that I'm personally taking any religious stance on that kind of thing, just a thought on a possible interpretation.

Its not a a matter of the act itself, its a matter of social stigmatization leading too poor education on important topic. Just like abstinence only education doesn't actually teach kids anything useful so increases the rate of teen pregnancies, and prostitution is dangerous because it cannot be regulated. Imagine how much better off they'd all be if they had the ability to demand condom use?

When common knowledge is incomplete or in many cases outright wrong (you can't get pregnant the first time!) it leads to bad assumptions and worse practices. The AIDS epidemic in Africa for example is so out of hand because many still don't actually believe that HIV causes AIDS. There are ad campaigns running that tell you anti-viral medication is bad for you ffs! People there are pushing the idea that a multi-vitamin pill will cure aids.

It all comes down to proper education on a subject. Where information and understanding is lacking bad things start happening.

Stopped reading there.

If you hold my beliefs in that much contempt, then yes, what I wrote isn’t for you.

Interesting tidbit about the Westbuo Baptist Church, in 2007 it had just 71 members, and Fred Phelps has 12 children, several of which are lawyers (arguably a successful tactic as many times as they've been sued)

At any rate, I don't particularly love them.

I don’t think you understand what I meant by ‘love’, but I’ve tried my best to explain already. The type of love I advocate is unconditional and undeserved.

dude, why do you care so much who other people love?

I don’t really. For several years I was completely apathetic towards the issue of homosexuality. It’s just that it’s quite a major issue in Western culture at the moment, and people often press me to give my view, so I decided to spend some time thinking about it, and the above article is the result.

Paul has an argument to counter this view, though it's not specific to homosexuality. There was a view going around in his time that sinning was alright because all was forgiven and thus more sin would equate receiving more forgiveness. Paul responded to that by saying, "certainly not!" (in the Greek one of the strongest rebuttals he could make), that sin of any kind saddens God and that just because it is forgiven doesn't mean that it's any less bad. Furthermore, the reason homosexuality (and all sexual sins) are regarded as more serious than the rest is not only because they are contrary to God's designs for humans, but also they are a sin against oneself. Basically, as far as the Bible is concerned there is no such thing as a victim-less crime.

I’m not suggesting that we continue to sin, rather that we ask for forgiveness and try to be better people.

Ha ha ha, oh jeez. Original sin? What a perfect way to corral the ignorant into celestial debt before they are even born. What a fantastically effective scam. I can't believe this is still official doctrine.

I never said anything about original sin. I don’t believe that God holds us guilty for crimes our parents and/or ancestors commit.

While I commend you on putting thought into this, it seems that the conclusion you came to was one preordained by your upbringing, probably the same pronouncement your parents or preacher would have come to, and so not actually an original thought at all.

Wrong on both counts, I’m afraid. I was indeed brought up as a Christian, but fell away from Christianity a couple of years ago and stopped attending church. I reconverted as a result of my own realisation of my own wretchedness and need for forgiveness. After that, I didn’t attend church for about three years, because I found it boring and unhelpful. Recently I have started to meet up with a group of Christians on Sunday nights for dinner and discussion, but that’s not a conventional church by any means, and our pastor hasn’t even discussed homosexuality.

I had here a big paragraph regarding "everyone is filthy in God's sight" ad then i decided to read page 2 of comments before posting. I see it alludes to what is called "The Original Sin" . For someone that was brought up in a religion that is full of some petty "far out" mythological stories, somehow, the entire "Original Sin" business has seemed more far out than anything else. Just because it is the classical case of getting the hook in, and then reeling them in at your leisure.

With that being the dogma, the creed, you just cant win. Your life is one long penance even if you want to do everything right. Not just yours, but of all mankind for all generations to come. I doubt if god is so mean as to subject his alleged best creation to such an existence, for all time, with no hope of redemption.

Feel free to tell me "Strange are His ways and it is not for us to question them". But then it is Him that gave us the ability to question. I r confused now.

I responded to the whole original sin thing earlier in my response. I don’t believe in it. My belief is that every human being is guilty because of his or her own sin.

You and your conclusions are beyond wrong, they are morally and ethically reprehensible. You are a disgusting human being, please do not breed or preach ever.

Are you serious?

... What.

WHAT.

"Homosexuals should be respected, but we should condemn homosexuality."

ARE YOU READING WHAT YOU ARE WRITING?

How is what I’m saying contradictory? I’m trying to advocate kindness and love towards everyone, including homosexuals, while not celebrating what they do.

In other words this post is not worth the cost in electricity that is need to broadcast out of my screen. You take no position on it, other than the contradictory one, and basically say NOTHING of value.

Did you read the second half of my article? What I said was actually quite important and worth saying.

KP, I’ll respond to your post later. It’ll take some time to write out a response and I’ve had an exhausting day at uni today.

If you hold my beliefs in that much contempt, then yes, what I wrote isn’t for you.

I don't hold your beliefs in contempt at all, I'm atheist myself, but I can accept that other people find solace in religion, however your opening gambit of, da biblez totes rules > everything is just pure rubbish, how anyone can take anything as the final and ultimate word and opinion on anything is beyond me, and shows a clear lack of critical thinking in my opinion.

That is why I stopped reading where I did, not because you have faith, but because your faith prohibits you from free thought and critical thinking.

I believe the Bible's only reference to homosexuality was something something about the people in Sodom committing a sin?

That's... not true?

How is what I’m saying contradictory? I’m trying to advocate kindness and love towards everyone, including homosexuals, while not celebrating what they do.

Tolerating homosexuals and their actions does not constitute celebrating them. You are entitled to your belief that the homosexual lifestyle is sinful and immoral, however narrow-minded and bigoted such a view may be, but just as forcing you to engage in homosexual intercourse would be wrong, so is the converse.

On another note, the prevalence of diseases amongst homosexuals is irrelevant to whether or not their lifestyles are "...right or wrong." Individuals that receive blood transfusions are more likely to contract HIV/AIDS than those that do not, and whites are more likely to be diagnosed with cystic fibrosis than those that are not white, but this does not mean that the lives or activities of individuals with either of these illnesses are inherently wrong.

Haf your getting close... the WestBro Church is all about law-suits and damages. They'll tort you to death. I suspect they are living in they're own hell.

I strongly agree with...the name of your blog. Good choice.

I don't hold your beliefs in contempt at all, I'm atheist myself, but I can accept that other people find solace in religion, however your opening gambit of, da biblez totes rules > everything is just pure rubbish, how anyone can take anything as the final and ultimate word and opinion on anything is beyond me, and shows a clear lack of critical thinking in my opinion.

That is why I stopped reading where I did, not because you have faith, but because your faith prohibits you from free thought and critical thinking.

The very fact that she arrives to a different conclusion than WBC means that the Christian subset of people DOES have free thought and critical thinking. They are operating within the context of a specific document, much like lawyers operate with the context of something called "The Constitution" to determine legality of certain rules. Well, until they decide the Constitution now has a set of lungs and a heartbeat.

Tolerating homosexuals and their actions does not constitute celebrating them. You are entitled to your belief that the homosexual lifestyle is sinful and immoral, however narrow-minded and bigoted such a view may be, but just as forcing you to engage in homosexual intercourse would be wrong, so is the converse.

On another note, the prevalence of diseases amongst homosexuals is irrelevant to whether or not their lifestyles are "...right or wrong." Individuals that receive blood transfusions are more likely to contract HIV/AIDS than those that do not, and whites are more likely to be diagnosed with cystic fibrosis than those that are not white, but this does not mean that the lives or activities of individuals with either of these illnesses are inherently wrong.

The problem is, I think, that we have a different understanding of what right and wrong are. You see, I believe in objective right and wrong. This means that, for example, Stalin was wrong to kill millions of people regardless of whether he believed that what he was doing was wrong or not. The same goes for homosexuality. If homosexuality is objectively wrong, then homosexuals should not have homosexual sex.

I strongly agree with...the name of your blog. Good choice.

Hehe. It was a good book.

I never said anything about original sin. I don’t believe that God holds us guilty for crimes our parents and/or ancestors commit.

I see.

Wrong on both counts, I’m afraid. I was indeed brought up as a Christian, but fell away from Christianity a couple of years ago and stopped attending church. I reconverted as a result of my own realisation of my own wretchedness and need for forgiveness. After that, I didn’t attend church for about three years, because I found it boring and unhelpful. Recently I have started to meet up with a group of Christians on Sunday nights for dinner and discussion, but that’s not a conventional church by any means, and our pastor hasn’t even discussed homosexuality.

You can take the wolf out of the wild but you can't the wild out of the wolf, as the saying goes. My point is that, despite your falling away and recent guilt wracked conversion, that you haven't provided any thoughts original to the subject and are only thinking inside the paradigm provided from your upbringing. No surprise, really, considering that the majority of people given the information you have would come to the same conclusion. We are remarkably good machines in that respects. The fact that you fell away and returned to a comfortably familiar dogma is a frequently related story.

Congratulations on urging love to everyone, but perhaps you should spend more time thinking about what really is a sin and why it is so, and see if what to consenting adults do actually falls into that category. Then ask yourself what justification or reasoning would ancient jews have for making such a pronouncement.

I fear for the mental health of people who believe fairytales are reality and think they can tell the rest of the world they have to live by the rules of the same fairytale.

The problem is, I think, that we have a different understanding of what right and wrong are. You see, I believe in objective right and wrong. This means that, for example, Stalin was wrong to kill millions of people regardless of whether he believed that what he was doing was wrong or not. The same goes for homosexuality. If homosexuality is objectively wrong, then homosexuals should not have homosexual sex.

The problem is that you are discounting the views of everyone that would argue that homosexuality is not a sin and that there is no such thing as objective morality. Your sense of right and wrong is fundamentally skewed by your belief in a higher power and what you suppose this entity's perspective of morality to be, and therefore cannot be objective or impartial. Further, because whether or not something is morally right or wrong is indeterminable, neither you nor anyone else has any basis on which to stake claims that something is objectively morally right or morally wrong.

The problem is that you are discounting the views of everyone that would argue that homosexuality is not a sin and that there is no such thing as objective morality. Your sense of right and wrong is fundamentally skewed by your belief in a higher power and what you suppose this entity's perspective of morality to be, and therefore cannot be objective or impartial. Further, because whether or not something is morally right or wrong is indeterminable, neither you nor anyone else has any basis on which to stake claims that something is objectively morally right or morally wrong.

Actually, my very belief in God gives me a standard by which to judge what is right and wrong, because what is right is consistent with God's character. The existence of other people's opinions on morality doesn't prove that morality is not objective, just as the fact that some people believe the earth is flat does not make the issue subjective.

Are you serious?

I am quite serious. You may not think yourself wretched and vile, most people would consider themselves righteous and good. But try to believe me, you really are wretched. Your every opinion is vile. You are corrupted, possibly beyond redemption.

You are revolting. What makes you so horrible is that you think you are just, you think you are loving. You are the opposite of everything you believe yourself to be.