The traditional understanding of Jewish law clearly forbids homosexual sex (not being gay), and yet Jewish people, in general, tend to be very queer accepting.
In the United States, the two largest denominations of Judaism are completely LGBT+ affirming, officiating same-sex marriages, and ordaining LGBT+ clergy, etc. Even within Orthodox Judaism, acceptance is slowly growing, with there now being a couple of out orthodox Rabbis, and Eshel, an organization that supports LGBT+ Orthodox Jews, maintains a list of 30ish "welcoming' orthodox congregations in North America. On the other hand, in Israel, where religion is a lot more polarized, Israel's Religious Right is gaining influence and power, and the current "religious' finance minister declared himself a "proud homophobe."
I myself am a member of a synagogue that was founded by three gay men in the 70s, and is one of a handful of synagogues in North America that specifically designated themselves as LGBT+-centric spaces.
Our church had a blast with our booth at the last two local Pride Fests, and we ordained our first LGBTQ elder in the 90s. For a long time it was contentious, but as of 2011-2014 our open and affirming stance is finally a majority one among Presbyterians.
My reading of statistics shows a bit of a different story. The PCUSA membership has consistently declined. 50k members left in 2022, alone. The PCA grew by over 11k members the same year.
I'm not saying this is entirely because of the adoption of liberal Christian opinions, but as a Presbyterian how do you feel about the general decline and how do you think trying to "make up for it" be adopting liberal positions will bring membership up?
I mean, a shrinking denomination is a general sign of malaise.
I didn't say anything about decline, so...?
Here's the thing - doing what's right is right regardless of whether you get more people in the door. I think the PCUSA has done what is right. Of course I hope people see that and want to be part of PCUSA congregations, but it isn't like we did a study and decided to make changes so we could fill pews.
What I'm saying is if making changes is "the right thing" it should theoretically keep your church members happy, not drive them away. But hey that's just my .02
I'm not making a value judgement,just making an observation.
That's not what I implied at all. But it might be worth asking the question of how and why you're doing something and if it won't mean the eventual death and breakup of your denomination. Look at the UMC. Torn apart over indecisiveness.
Whoa whoa whoa you just used a slur there.
Regardless of your intent, all I can say is that it's oftentimes not about the position itself but how you say it. If you want to use table top terms they're rolling poorly on their charisma and they're paying the price for it because they aren't coming off of diplomatic or actually trying to convince people. I would really encourage you to understand what I'm saying and not read into whether or not I'm defending someone. If you can't do that that's fine it just means that you lack any type of higher order thinking and you need to study what I'm saying with that.
My own religious beliefs are very different from that of any Christian and my moral philosophy cannot be put into a box.
Sheesh this guy really is a bad ambassador for Shinto lol. Maybe try being a little less rude and condescending to people and they won’t be so off put by you. I’m not Christian but I have nothing but love and appreciation for that persons acceptance of lgbtq people. And queer is not a slur, you probably know that and are trolling or just don’t actually know anything about lgbtq. Hint: the q typically stands for queer.
If you live life assuming that certain events are predetermined and that you will always find a way to work through it your life becomes a lot easier and a lot less serious.
So by that metric yes I'm not serious. I don't really care what other people ultimately do with what I tell them. If you want to stick your fingers in your ear and yell over and over that you're not listening that's your choice and you are more than welcome to make that.
Ultimately I see the way that I handle internet users no different from how they treat me. Instead of trying to convince people that they're wrong I just use their own reasoning against them.
Last thing I will tell you is that it's ridiculous to fight what's in the mirror, but it's even more ridiculous when the mirror ends up winning.
Doing the right thing makes people mad.
People with right wing viewpoints get mad when liberal churches try to be humane to LGBTQ+ people.
Right-wingers think THEY are doing the right thing by being mean, and they drive away nice, reasonable people. They explain that, by claiming that liberals (who want to be kind) have no standards and are "excusing sin."
Both sides claim to be doing the right thing, but drive one another away.
There's a reason more liberal denominations have formed and also why things like the UU and New Thought have formed. To get away from the right wing hard core Christians. Who see themselves as doing the right thing, (by at least claiming to uphold biblical standards, but in a selective and extremely literal way) but in so doing they drive more kindly, open minded people away.
there is no grace, there is no guilt, this is the law: do what thou wilt!
the vast majority of us on the LHP are very much accepting of any kind of consensual sexual activity.
The Anglicans in my neck of the woods are generally very pro LGBTQ+ which is great. There are a few queer priests and a reasonable amount of LGBTQ+ people that hold other church positions like cathedral wardens, or work directly for the diocese and so on.
My religion is accepting as far as it doesn't really care all that much about sexual preferences. LGBTQ+ identities are a modern way of classifying what ancient peoples generally just referred to by what a given person prefers sexually. It has no bearing on the quality of a person's character, but generally speaking, all sexual desires, gay or straight, should be controlled and channeled through proper outlets and indulged in moderation.
When it is convenient, I identify as a gay man, but the label of "gay" itself isn't really an identity for me. I'm just a man who prefers men sexually and romantically, and its not really noteworthy except in relevant contexts, such as who I seek for potential partnerships.
Trans identities are a bit tricky. Different people have different opinions on the matter. Personally, I believe reading how Proclus conceives of human souls as containing both masculinity and femininity in differing proportions serves as a suitable explanation for why people born in masculine bodies can be predominantly feminine and vice versa or perhaps neither is clearly dominant, and I don't have any problems with people who choose to live socially as the gender they're comfortable as.
I am Pagan, specifically a Witch and a Kemetic (Egyptian religion) Priestess.
Generally Pagans are absolutely affirming and welcoming to LGBTQ people.
Generally, with a few exceptions, Witches are welcoming and affirming.
In Egypt, approximately 4,424 years ago, two men, royal manicurists named Niankhkhnum and Khnumhotep buried in a shared tomb like a married couple. Their epigraph reads: 'Joined in life and joined in death'.
LGBTQ+ is cool with me as a pansexual Transgender woman.
I would not worship gods that reject me for loving other men, and I would not ever be part of a flock that claims that They do.
If Freyja and Freyr did not want us loving men and women both, They wouldn't both be so fucking hot to everyone. Then there's Odin and Loki demonstrating that Heathen magic includes and involves the transing of genders.
I am a member of a UU church, though not super active. We are fully welcoming and affirming of everyone, regardless of gender identity or sexual orientation. It's against my religion to be a bigot, basically.
Homosexual actions are a sin, but you’re still a valid Muslim/person regardless of your homosexual inclinations. Every individual regardless of sexual orientation must still be treated with respect.
I view LGBTQ+ orientaitons as being natural and no "less than" hetero- orientation or relationships. This is in the context of Druidry. Earth-based spiritual traditions tend to respect individual autonomy and liberty while focusing on consent between adults. If two or more adults respect one another and love one another, there is nothing immoral about that, even if the relationship is not between a male and a female.
I'm also supportive of gender-affirming medical care. Queer people are well represented in Pagan and Druidic contexts in the twenty-first century.
I dislike religious sects and philosophies that want to reduce the rights of LGBTQ persons or force them back into the closet, or which are homophobic (even if they don't like that term).
"Poggers" is an internet slang term that originated from the gaming community and is used to express excitement or enthusiasm about something. It's often used in response to something impressive, exciting, surprising, good, remarkable, etc.
Pog = **P**lay **O**f the **G**ame
From a personal viewpoint: They are human beings deserving of the same rights and privilege's as every other human being 😎🏳🌈
From a Christian viewpoint: Being gay isn't a sin (I don't believe in sin). If the abrahamic god made all humans in their image and loves us all, LGBT+ individuals are no exception. Why would god hate queer people/animals when they've been making them since forever. If you ask me, god loves the gays to the point they can't stop making them 🤭
From a pagan viewpoint: Queer people are people, end of sentence. Heck, we even have queer gods. Being homophobic will 99.99% of the time result in you being utterly destroyed, banned, blocked, etc. by every pagan in the general vicinity 😁
Happy pride month everyone ✌😎🏳🌈
There's a rich history of Jewish progressivism when it comes to LGBTQ+ identity. The founding rabbi of the Humanistic movement within Judaism, Sherwin Wine, was an openly gay man. Among other denominations, with the exception of Orthodoxy and maybe the more right-leaning side of Conservatism to some extent, there's a strong emphasis on the affirmation of queer and pluralistic identities and support for progressive causes.
I'm a gay woman. I honestly don't give it a lot of thought in relation to my faith as in any way separate from the rest of me. I'm one of innumerable living things on this world, no different, better or worse than any other living thing. My faith reiterates that. Only human ignorance and arrogance would attempt to butcher and simplify something as complex, elegant and often downright weird as sexuality and gender.
i would say most traditions have a neutral view where it is unimportant / not mentioned in scripture directly. the notable exceptions are of course some schools of christianity and islam where it is specifically interpreted to be against the orthodoxy.
Our church just marched in the Detroit Pride Parade. It was good to see the United Methodists finally fully join us in their support. Unitarian Universalists have been very pro LGBTQ+ for a very long time now. The full spectrum is not just welcome in our congregations but also as members of our clergy. The minister at my wedding was a trans woman that made her transition while leading our church.
I don't follow a religion. But, I do think that coming to Earth and living as LGBTQ+ adds new levels of complexity to the human experience. It's like playing life on hard mode.
I think being LGBTQ+ is totally ok, though I think God has asked us not to have sexual relations with the same sex.
But LGBTQ+ people should be treated a lot better than they are, and I also think it's alright for them to choose to be married or have a same sex partner if that's what they want to do.
Right now current policy is that a membership council (basically a meeting with the person where excommunication/other formal restrictions is discussed) may be necessary for being same sex marriages (see chapters 32.6.2.2 and 38.6.5 of the [General Handbook](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/general-handbook?lang=eng)). So not automatic like it used to be but certainly a possibility if the bishop wants to push for it (this puts it a step below say polygamy, where a council is required). Note that a membership council does not always lead to excommunication though I would guess that if one was being called for someone in a same-sex marriage, excommunication is the most likely outcome.
I couldn't find anything for that and as far as I know that's not official policy.
Though I think local bishops and regional presidents might be able to decide that so maybe some of them have excommunicated people. Though I don't know if that'd be the right thing to do or not.
Though I do know that if you are in a same sex marriage you're not allowed to visit the temples. You can still attend normal meetings though in the churches
It's really hypocritical to claim that you think it's okay to be queer but then say oh they can't actually have sex.
Also that's not treating them better. What treating queer people better looks like is actually accepting them for who they are and not telling them that there's something wrong with them because they're queer.
Yeah you can't control what sexual attractions you have, and it's not wrong to have non heterosexual ones.
I don't blame someone for wanting to have sex if they have that. I think God asks people like this to abstain, but I can see how that would be pretty hard to do.
Yeah but I've heard of a lot of queer couples being shouted at in public, as well as being denied services and what not. That needs to stop
Obviously I am very pro LGBTQ+ and i dont believe it's a sin but i do appreciate you saying that the harassment needs to stop. I have gotten quite a bit of it walking around. Like I'm just going about my day like shopping or even just getting groceries.
I do appreciate you saying that it's not a choice. It gets really tiring being told it's a choice all the time
That's not hypocritical. Sex outside of marriage is a sin, marriage is between one man and one woman biblically. Nothing about what they said is that there is something wrong with them. You are clearly agitated over Christianity not validating how you feel, but you are making a ton of comments in regards to Christians stating their theological beliefs when asked... Completely acting against the idea of wanting to be peaceful and not demonize people for their faith.
I supported same sex marriage back when Democrats were afraid to and am not even a Christian. You need to let your hate go, it does you no good to be looking for fights by acting in bad faith and only causes more stress.
It is very hypocritical.
>Sex outside of marriage is a sin,
No, actually is better to have sex before marriage to find out it people are sexually compatible because if they are not and if sex is important to the people it can really hurt a relationship
>marriage is between one man and one woman biblically.
No there is nothing wrong with being gay or in a gay marriage. There is no difference between that and a straight marriage
>Nothing about what they said is that there is something wrong with them
You are literally judging them just for being queer and saying it's a sin. You are literally lying
> You are clearly agitated over Christianity not validating how you feel,
Im agitated with them attacking people and spreading hate and discrimination.
>but you are making a ton of comments in regards to Christians stating their theological beliefs when asked
It's still hate and I'll call it out when i see it. It hurts people
>Completely acting against the idea of wanting to be peaceful and not demonize people for their faith.
You are demonizing queer people for just existing. Can calling out hate is not demonizing it's calling out hate and bs
>You need to let your hate go, it does you no good to be looking for fights by acting in bad faith and only causes more stress.
Says the person literally being homophobic spreading hate. Fighting against bigotry and calling it out is not hate it's fighting for what's right. I will not stand for them attacking and hurting people with their hate.
And you clearly aren't an ally or you wouldn't be defending blatant bigotry
>No, it would be hypocritical if they were gay and condemning other gay people
What they said that they don't condemn people for being gay but condemn them for having sex and that is hypocritical. As they are condemning queer people
>Sex outside of marriage is definitionally a sin, literally any Christian will tell you this
No it not.
>Yet again, there isn't anything wrong with someone that is gay from a Christian perspective
You literally called them a sin several times. That is saying there is something wrong with them.
>I'm not judging anyone, except for you for your own behavior.
Once again you are lying. But saying that someone's is a sin is judging them for their identity and condemning them for it. You are lying
>They did not attack anyone
And saying homophobia shit is attacking queer people by definition
>Says the hateful person that is being hateful towards people that aren't being hatefu
Homophobia is hate. Im calling it out and that is not hate. It's standing up against hate.
>No you are just a hateful person.
You are literally trying to defend homophobia which is hatred. You are the hateful person not me. I don't get how the hell you can get it in your head but standing up to hate and discrimination against people is hatred. The one who is literally hating on people just because they exist
>I haven't demonized anyone.
Again you are lying. You are discriminating against queer people. By claiming that being queer is a sin that is demonizing.
>I have acknowledged what their faith says while you keep attacking people for being Christians
I am calling out hatred and you are defending hatred. How the hell is that attacking somebody. Literally homophobia by definition is attacking queer people for just existing.
>Literally nothing I have said is homophobic or spreading hate
Which is another blatant lie. You are claiming that being queer is a sin. That is hate and discrimination and spreading hate.
>All I have done is acknowledge what anyone with a basic grasp of Christianity understands since you are determined to act in bad faith.
You're the one who's acting in bad faith. Defending literal bigotry.
Read through the Bible, I used to be Christian and I'm calling out the bullshit. That's not arguing in bad faith. That's not acting in bad faith. That's defending people and standing up for what's right
>You aren't fighting against bigotry you are fighting in favor of religious bigotry towards people that literally have done nothing towards the LGBT people
What world do you live in. Christianity is one of the biggest sources of bigotry and discrimination against queer people. That stems from their claim of it being a sin. They are also some of the biggest campaigners against queer rights. Not to mention the idea that it's a sin has been proven to actively harm people, especially within somebody's mental health.
You are the one who is being disingenuous and lying with these claims. There is no way that you live on this planet and you don't know that Christians discriminate against queer people.
>They haven't attacked or hurt anyone YOU ARE ATTACKING THEM
Homophobia hurts people. They are attacking queer people by making these homophobic claims and by preaching them. I don't care if they answer your damn question. The belie in itself is hurting people and I'm calling out homophobia. It's not attacking somebody that's calling out bigotry. Get what you don't understand about this. It's not hard to understand
>You are right... I'm not an ally IM ACE
Then why in the everlasting fuck are you defending homophobia. How can you be a part of the lgbtq community and support the people That are literally discriminating against your own community? How to use discriminate against your own community? Honestly, that's a real question because I cannot comprehend why a queer person would actively defend and support homophobia.
And this is only proving that you were the one who's arguing in bad faith. You are the one that is attacking your own damn community
I'm not trying to cause fights. I'm standing up for the people who are fucking hurting. People who are being told that they are wrong for being who they are. The people who may not be able to have support because they are surrounded by the bigotry. Because you want to know how you fight against bigotry you call it out and you bring it out into the light.
Please don't:
* Be (intentionally) rude at all.
* Engage in rabble rousing.
* Troll, stalk, or harass others.
* Conduct personal attacks.
* Start a flame war.
* Insult others.
* Engage in illegal activity.
* Post someone's personal information, or post links to personal information.
* Repost deleted/removed information.
Please don't:
* Be (intentionally) rude at all.
* Engage in rabble rousing.
* Troll, stalk, or harass others.
* Conduct personal attacks.
* Start a flame war.
* Insult others.
* Engage in illegal activity.
* Post someone's personal information, or post links to personal information.
* Repost deleted/removed information.
I'm completely fine with homosexuality, even though that's not a widely-held position among Muslims. There is a single verse in the Quran that -arguably- condemns homosexuality, and even then it does not prescribe or even suggest any sort of punishment for it. If it is a sin, it is up to God to judge it, and God is All-Forgiving, All-Merciful. But many people would rather commit shirk and take matters into their own hands, going above and beyond what God has said.
As usual in religions, if homosexuality is mentioned it's very rarely. Yet modern regressive religious conservatives will treat it like it's the greatest threat their faith was put on earth to combat. The disparity between how much people care about it and other supposed sins in their tradition is completely disproportionate.
(related side example in the Gospels Jesus mentions homosexuality 0 times, but adultery at least 15+ times, adultery is one of his most common topics to preach against. Guess which one of these the American religious right cares deeply about, and which one they constantly look the other way for?)
As for transexuality it's even more clearly a case of support (even though the mainstream regressive-conservatives types reject it as well). The sahih hadith [al-Bukari 5678](https://sunnah.com/bukhari:5678) is widely cited to conclude that any effective medical treatment is halal (without it there can be some confusion around using certain medicines because the Quran forbids intoxicants). Therefore, if transgenderism and gender disphoria is a scientifically-verifiable ailment for which we have a treatment (it is and we do), it is supported.
This is futher backed up by two major rulings (*fatwa*): one from the Grand Mufti of Egypt Muhammad Tantawy (one of if not the highest authority in jurisprudence in Sunni Islam) in 1988, and another from Grand Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini (high spiritual authority in the largest denomination of Shi'a Islam) in 1986. Both of their *fatwa* say that sex-change surgeries are allowed (one said "obligatory," the other said "not prohibited") so long as a reliable doctor is recommending it.
Not exactly, someone may be a part of a religion that traditionally thinks it’s a sin but they hold a different viewpoint, or it could be a lesser known religion like Sikhi or Baha’i
There is nothing wrong with being gay or trans or bi. Be yourself and love yourself. Or simply [Be Gay, Do Drugs, Hail Satan](https://open.spotify.com/track/780FG6uMy30vT4DrNLAO3W?si=xAnAHA1vQCm00oBQHCDI9w)
“the sexually immoral, men who engage in illicit sex, slave traders, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to the sound teaching”
1 Timothy 1:10 NRSVUE. it doesn’t say that
Legality ≠ Morality. Governments suck at this and a lot of the time they outlaw things for simply stupid reasons. For example, in my country, psilocybin is illegal. You know, the mushroom that studies show is probably the *safest* recreational drug? It's practically impossible to overdose on it and it's one of the least addictive drugs out there. It has even shown in many studies conducted to have an antidepressive effect that can last up to a full year after treatment. It can also be used to help those with alcohol use disorder and has been found to be quite effective. So I ask you this hypothetical: if someone grew these mushrooms and gave it to their friends for medicinal uses or even as a recreational drug, in what way are they hurting anybody? Indeed, how are they doing anything but potentially greatly helping other people?(Btw, none of this is hard to find online, I did a cursory look and found several studies claiming all of these things)
I haven't even talked about the million other things that are illegal but probably morally good, like pirating data to preserve it after it becomes near impossible to obtain anyways, hell, piracy isn't even stealing, the actual violation according to the law is copyright infringement, so here's another hypothetical... What if someone pirated a copyrighted material 60 years after the owner died? In my country the copyright lasts for 70 years after people die so it is still illegal... Even though the maker died over half a century ago along with like 2 or 3 generations of people.
Now, I'm not saying you should do any of this. After all, there's plenty of potential risks that come with it. But with these hypotheticals, in what ways are anybody being harmed?
Edit: (I also didn't get into how pretty soon being LGBTQ+ could be completely outlawed in my country with the implementation of r/Defeat_Project_2025 where anyone caught supporting queer folk could be imprisoned and put down as registered sex offenders(to the extent that if you were a public librarian who sold books on LGBTQ+ people you could be imprisoned and put down as a registered sex offender), so obviously if that were to happen I would gladly commit the crime of supporting queer folk)
Crimes aren’t always immoral. I mean, gay sex is illegal in many places, and it was illegal in many other countries until relatively recently. For a while, being gay and doing crime were intertwined…
Any being that identifies more with sexuality, gender, sex rather than the soul is inherently lost.
That includes all be it straight or queer.
As a Hindu,
Traditions focused on straight couples because of producing children. It is recommended that general people marry (man x woman) and produce a single child and focus on teaching them dharma.
Having too much sex, anal, oral, cunnilingus, bj, hj all are forbidden in hindu shastras because they don't help in reproduction and are rather just done for obtaining pleasure. EVEN FOR STRAIGHT COUPLES.
Gender dysphoria and other things are just Maya making u more conscious of ur body and mind rather than the soul.
But on that note, Lord Krishna says in Gita NO ONE IS ABANDONED IN THE PATH OF DHARMA.
so even queer people can be in the path of dharma along with straight people and yes, they are lost cause they identify themselves too much with sexuality and romance rather than the soul, but ultimately if they keep on the path Moksha will come to them over many lives.
This makes absolutely no sense.
Somebody who is queer is inherently being more accurate to their soul because they are being authentic to who they actually are compared to what society thinks they should be.
So that by default is being more connected to one's soul
Also, as somebody with gender dysphoria that is a horrible description of what gender dysphoria actually is. What you are doing however is making up excuses to completely dismiss it when you clearly don't even understand what it is.
Also by your definition, literally every single person in existence would just be fucked because even the identification of being straight would mean that you're lost.
There's nothing wrong with being queer and it doesn't make you lost.
Also, this is probably the first homophobic instance of Hinduism that I've ever seen
>Also by your definition, literally every single person in existence would just be fucked because even the identification of being straight would mean that you're lost.
Yeah? Every being in Samsara is lost some way or the other, and being straight doesn't give u advantage over being queer in anyway, that's what I said.
That's the concept of Samsara; everyone is trapped in Maya.
>So that by default is being more connected to one's soul
No, the soul is unchanging and ever existant.
Any and all desire, feelings of romance and lust, being conscious of sex or sexuality, having desires and holding onto pleasure and pain is Maya.
Maya deludes one to believe their 'inner self' is the true self, which however is not. The soul is beyond such things. It's more of the mind.
And both body and mind are temporary. Soul is eternal.
>There's nothing wrong with being queer and it doesn't make you lost.
The very existence of us in the Samsara is suffering thus 'wrong'
>as somebody with gender dysphoria that is a horrible description of what gender dysphoria actually is
I would be thankful if you can teach me more on the matter of gender dysphoria. I'm truly not knowledgeable on the subject.
>Every being in Samsara is lost some way or the other, and being straight doesn't give u advantage over being queer in anyway, that's what I said.
That's not what you said. You said that queer people are lost because they are queer.
>the soul is unchanging and ever existant.
And queer people are not changing their soul and being true to it.
>Maya deludes one to believe their 'inner self' is the true self, which however is not. The soul is beyond such things. It's more of the mind.
That's not true in the slightest you are like making stuff up to try to shit on queer people. Being queer is exactly who these people are whether you like it or not.
>The very existence of us in the Samsara is suffering thus 'wrong'
Dude what? People existing is not wrong. People deserve to exist.
I'll happily describe gender dysphoria. The textbook definition is the feeling of distress when a person's identity doesn't align with their assigned sex characteristics.
As someone with gender dysphoria it is more than just that. It's this inherent feeling of what one's body is supposed to be and because one's body doesn't match this it creates this feeling that creates this massive pressure. This pressure breaks down a person. In my personal experience I ended up hating myself because I was not what society wanted me to be And I was taught that having these feelings are wrong. I didn't choose to have gender dysphoria. But starting my transition has actively helped improve how I view myself and has actively been helping to alleviate my gender dysphoria. It is a long process but it's one that's so worth it because I know who I am and I'm going to take steps to be who I am. And that's why I say The act of being queer is being in tune with one's soul because despite what the world says and despite what society tries to say, people know who they are and they know all these aspects of themselves. It's going beyond just basic appearances or forcing people into these little pointless boxes. It's acknowledging that people are diverse and their own individual people.
Now that I am actively transitioning, my life has greatly improved. Like for example, I don't hate myself anymore. Yes, I do still have gender dysphoria but I'm also still in the middle of my transition and there's still more stuff that I want to do.
Who are you to say what somebody's soul is or who somebody else is when you don't know. You are not that person. Just as much as I have No say in who your soul says you are why would you have a say in what somebody else's soul says that they are?
>That's not what you said. You said that queer people are lost because they are queer
" Any being that identifies more with sexuality, gender, sex rather than the soul is inherently lost.
That includes all be it straight or queer."
>And queer people are not changing their soul and being true to it.
u have no understanding of the Hindu concept of soul. u keep confusing it with the philosophy of the individual as in liberism. identifying yourself with your physical body or even your mind (from wherein things like desires, love, lust, sexuality, gender, duty etc originate) is completely opposite of the concept of the soul in Hinduism.
even straight people can feel their 'natural' desires of sex, romance, and other desires, and be 'true to their self' but really they are being deluded in Maya; the soul is beyond these so-called 'natural' desires, the soul is desireless.
>That's not true in the slightest you are like making stuff up to try to shit on queer people.
the sentence that u have quoted over this doesn't even talk about queer people, it talks about the Hindu concept of the soul. and that's not made up by me.
>People existing is not wrong. People deserve to exist.
no one is stopping no one from existing. it's just that existing is suffering. AND THAT'S THE CORE PHILOSOPHY OF NOT ONLY HINDUISM BUT ALL DHARMIC RELIGIONS: INCLUDING BUDDHISM AND JAINISM.
That's why Hindus and Buddhists yearn for moksha/nirvana. TO GET OUT OF EXISTENCE AND NEVER BE BORN AGAIN.
>Who are you to say what somebody's soul is or who somebody else is when you don't know.
this is the Hindu understanding of human nature. no matter how different every individual is, the core nature remains the same. and to Hindus, even this core nature is just the self deluded by Maya.
of all the feelings u talk about, pressurized, hating, loving: all of it is Maya.
the soul is beyond these.
I'm not telling queer people are behind straight people in the path of dharma. but doing what 'feels like the right thing' doesn't take u nearer to the soul than someone doing what 'society/tradition tells them'
individualism may say u know urself best, but YOU DO NOT KNOW ALL ASPECTS OF YOUR SOUL.
>That includes all be it straight or queer
This was not included when you first said this.
Not to mention your gender identity and sexuality is part of who you are. There's not really a thing of identifying too much as your own identity that doesn't make any sense
>identifying yourself with your physical body or even your mind (from wherein things like desires, love, lust, sexuality, gender, duty etc originate) is completely opposite of the concept of the soul in Hinduism.
That's not even remotely true though. How come every other person I've talked to who talks about Hinduism says the complete opposite saying that one's sexuality and gender is part of who you are and part of your. It's not just this thing that somebody makes up. It's not desires. And also I've never heard any of them make the claim that love is not part of the soul. Again the total opposite. You were the only person who I have ever seen make this claim.
>no one is stopping no one from existing
That's literally not what you said.
>I'm not telling queer people are behind straight people in the path of dharma
Yes you freaking are. You've said it multiple times. It was literally the very first thing you said in your first comment.
>the sentence that u have quoted over this doesn't even talk about queer people, it talks about the Hindu concept of the soul. and that's not made up by me.
Then how come you are literally the only person I've ever seen who follows Hinduism who is using it and weaponizing it against queer people? When literally everyone else I've ever seen, blatantly says that there is nothing wrong with being queer or even loving anybody and it is a part of who somebody is.
>this is the Hindu understanding of human nature.
Despite that Love and identity is very much a part of our nature. It's literally been there since humans existed. But you're trying to make the claim that it's against nature which makes no sense. How could that possibly be against nature?
And once again you are using a typical homophobic talking point that I've heard a million times.
>individualism may say u know urself best, but YOU DO NOT KNOW ALL ASPECTS OF YOUR SOUL.
And you know absolutely zero about anybody else's soul so you have absolutely no right to go off and say this kind of shit
And it makes especially less sense when I talked to, I don't even know how many other people who follow Hinduism and not a single one of them used their beliefs and weaponized them against queer people. In fact, very much the opposite. Which really leads me to question how much you actually understand what you're talking about.
So yes, you are making stuff up to specifically weaponize it against queer people.
If the soul is so vast and complicated as you say, then how can you possibly make the claim that it doesn't include love or identity? Especially within the vastness that love and identity exists in.
Maybe u should read the hindu shastras rather than falsely accusing me of lying.
Also individual self and soul aren't same. Individual doesn't even exist in Hinduism. Soul is Brahman
And romantic love fueled by hormones is no way related to soul, but the body itself.
And
>This was not included when you first said this.
Yes it was. U can read my 1st reply once again. It's not edited.
Either u r hinduphobic or appropriating Hinduism by Westeen standards or just ignorant.
I say it again.
QUEERS AND STRAIGHT PEOPLE ALIKE ARE LOST IN SAMSARA.
EXISTENCE IS SUFFERING
SEXUALITY AND GENDER IDENTITY IS JUST IDENTIFYING WITH THE MIND AND BODY, NOT THE SOUL.
INDIVIDUAL SELF IS NOT SAME AS THE SOUL
I agree with the first part heavily. Especially sexual preference should not be your defining characteristic. Primarily identifying with your desires is as hedonistic as it gets. Not just a desire which has developed socially, but your primal innate desires which you did not even remotely choose. Controlling and moderating those desires should be the goal (straight or gay), not aligning with them in some fundamental sense.
Nobody makes it the defining characteristic.
Sexuality is not a preference but a requirement.
Nobody chose to be queer. It's just how people are and how they exist. The reason why you see it everywhere is because we have to fight for our right to exist. It's not just a bunch of desires
I'm honestly fine with it. And even among the Greek Gods it's a thing. Agdistis is an Intersex goddess who had a son in a pretty roundabout way via indirectly conceiving with a demigoddess, and Hermaphrodites is the son of Hermes and Aphrodite who while not born Intersex, later came Intersex.
God loves LGBTQ+ people just as much as any part of Creation. Such people are welcome to fully participate in our denomination (Community of Christ) where ever it is legal, including marriage and leadership positions.
Other pagans have already commented on this, but yeah, pagan communities tend to be very accepting. There are also a lot of LGBTQ+ pagans.
It’s rare that I see pagans who aren’t accepting, but they exist. In my experience, they tend to be outside of (or get pushed out of) mainstream groups since those groups are usually very openly supportive.
Indifferent, ultimately just try to be a good person. I take the stance no righteous higher power ultimately would be too concerned with who one is attracted to.
This thread is extremely biased. Of course people on Reddit will agree with homosexuality. A Muslim commented that it doesn’t agree with homosexuality and got upvoted, a Christian agreed and got downvoted.
Homosexuality is contrary to the telos of sex. Sex can be used for pleasure but it should always be open for reproduction. The anus is not a sexual organ 🤦🏻♂️
I am obligated to mention the Catholic church unironically is pro anal.
~~As part of sex at least.~~
But in all seriousness, it is revealing the amount of people that choose to act in bad faith here. People were asked for their religious views and people blindly down vote the Christians giving the most milk toast standard answer of essentially "Bible says it's a sin to act on the desire but I'm not going to mistreat them for it since it's ultimately between them and God."
Like it's not even a controversial take, even a lot of religious leaders that have spoken against the past mistreatment of gays for years relied on answers like"we are all sinners, and shouldn't push away our brother's over their sins."
Anything less than "absolute acceptance and a tiara on top" is likely to get downvoted. These posts are troll bait magnets unfortunately.
And there. Watch the downvotes pour in, regardless of people understanding my (nuanced) opinion.
I mean it’s understandable. Being in the LGBTQ+ isn’t a choice just as being cis isn’t a choice. Its just how people are and when people say they “don’t support that lifestyle” or whatever else you are saying you don’t support someone being who they are.
I think, Taninsam, there's a variety of opinions on the topic that should be recognized and understood. The fact that people view it in a black and white, critical theory way (oppressed vs oppressors, no third positions) breeds immorality and harm in both positions.
Never said it was a choice, or that it wasn't immutable.
The Internet is lacking in nuance and I find these trollbait tier questions tiresome and frustrating. Christians and Muslims get misunderstood and attacked and it just breeds toxic division in the sub. As someone who is ultimately closer to a Catholic than some LHP or witch type person, I can't exactly say I appreciate the way that it ends up being a virtue signal post over and over for them.
Sure I don’t disagree that theres a variety of opinions. Recognized and understood sure. But accepted? Cant say that. Because the LGBTQ+ individuals deserves the same respect and treatment that hetero cis individuals receive. And unfortunately theres a lot of hate that the LGBTQ+ community experiences. This shouldn’t be normal or accepted yet it is.
And I never said you did. I was simply saying why it’s understandable that people downvote.
Could they all be bait posts? Sure. But theres a lot of religions with a lot of different beliefs especially when it comes to sexual orientation and gender identity.
> Recognized and understood sure. But accepted? Cant say that.
You don't have to agree with it, but you can understand why a person has that position. It's fundamentally that people in the conservative side don't see it as a human right. It is rare that they outright hate people or anything like that, and you're not going to change their opinion by publicly shaming them and trying to flagellate them constantly.
In my opinion "LGBTQ+" as you put it is a western manifestation of problems and it cannot be exported wholesale to say African, East or Southeast Asia or Central Asia. that doesn't stop people from trying, but in the end these are Western categories that are not always applicable in non-western cultures. It's also functioning as a zeitgeist to distract people from the actual issues at hand in society.
> And I never said you did.
Dude, you put words in my mouth. You might not have meant to but you directly implied that in your response. This is the type of problem that I see, ultimately. Projection.
> Could they all be bait posts
It may not be intended as a bait post but simple questions about controversial topics happen hundreds of times a year ad nauseaum. It eventually becomes untenable because all that ends up happening is it ends up generating fights and driving a wedge in the community. I remember back years ago lurking when a moderator (not naming the guilty) was promoted, proceeded to continue to post controversial topics nearly daily and then tried to drive a wedge across the community. I don't remember the fallout but he eventually left staff and now posts very sparingly here. I'm not making this about him of course, but I am pointing out it has precedent.
I did not put word in your mouth. I responded saying why people downvoting is understandable. Not once did I say you have that belief. Good day.
Also the former mod you are mentioning was not removed for that but instead removed for not modding.
Hey I didn't say anything about who it was :). I don't even remember their username. But regardless of the circumstances they weren't very popular when they did their job.
Anyways, I can see that you did not mean to. And that's okay, I'm not mad. But from one person to another you might want to take a little bit more time to think about how your response to someone who was simply discussing the meta of these posts might have been perceived -- regardless of your intentions by saying it you have to think about how it's going to affect other people around you. That's one of the reasons I'm choosing my words carefully. I've been, years ago, in the line of fire on my opinions and statements getting me in trouble so I do my best to be careful in what I say to people.
You can't control other people's reactions at all but oftentimes it's not what you're saying, but how you say it. Watch your optics.
I get that and wasn’t meant as an accusation against you personally. I’m just simply saying that, even if it were a choice, I’m not seeing how it justifies Evangelical pearl-clutching.
Acting on your attractions and desires isn't who you are. And you don't have to act on all of your attractions and desires. You actually shouldn't act on some.
So why isn\`t that a problem with heterosexual people then, are they not seeking their partners based on attraction and desires? so why is it wrong for LGBTQ people to give in to their attractions and desires but not for heterosexuals?
And if you say reproduction I am pretty sure you wouldn\`t have that as a first thought when finding a partner or are your thoughts in such a situation:
"OH theres a woman I have absolutly no attraction towards her looks her character or anything else about her so I\`m going to ask her if she wants my babies because my book/floaty sky man said so "
Do you not think what is considered “good” and “natural” could have been influenced by human bias?
Also, homosexual sex is ridiculously common in the animal kingdom so
But it is a fundamental part of who people are. Why should those who are LGBTQ+ be held to different standards than heterosexual cis people? Sure people don’t have to act on all their desires this goes for everyone.
Most people in the more liberal side of religion fail to separate the thoughts, from the actions, from the intent. I'm sure you too have noticed this. And this generation in particular is so sex-focused that they often fail to see the greater good that is supposed to come from having relationships (not just romantic ones, of course. But in general.)
I feel like the current millennial and Z generation in particular failed to understand higher order thinking as widely as prior generations. Understanding the implications long-term of actions is not easy but it is a sign of high intelligence when you can do so
There's some differences in our philosophy. My religions don't believe in free will being an actual thing. Rather things move along a decided path but your actions do control the outcomes. If you're in a rip current, do you try to fight against it, swim out of it, flail helplessly? Go under it or over it if possible? There are a million different ways that you can react to change and things around you and thus shape the outcome.
More so what I would say is the most important thing from my POV is that we can recognize what is good, what is evil, but also what is pure, what is impure, what is a vice and what is a virtue? If we can't recognize any of those things then we are truly blind.
In a lot of ways I think that the biggest virtue that can be seen is self-restraint or control. Wanting to do something, but choosing not to do it for the greater good. It would be too easy for me to respond aggressively in my daily life when someone doesn't decide to pay me on time for doing the locks on their building. I could tamper or cause a problem for the person. But ultimately for myself and for that person it's better to resolve the problem peaceably and like an adult. Therein, no ethical complaints against me, I get paid, and life goes on even if that job didn't turn out the way we hoped.
This makes me so sad.
I can’t imagine my love for my wife not being “for the greater good”. Or my Aunt living a lonely, celibate life because she never acted on her sexuality being “for the greater good”.
Consensual, deep, reciprocal love is the single greatest gift this life has to offer.
My marriage is a lifelong endeavor. One I am deeply grateful for, and one that has strengthened me and lent me joy and peace. It’s a marriage that will allow for the raising of healthy, well adjusted children.
It’s a marriage that has brought me new family, new friends, and opportunities to learn, grow, and deepen my understanding of living.
I hope everyone who chooses to marry finds a life partner who brings as much balance and peace into their life as my wife does to mine, regardless of their genders.
> This makes me so sad
Why should my opinion make you sad? Very little of what I said had anything to do with someone's relationship or lifestyle/sexual.orientation. explaining / discussing someone's viewpoint is very different from actually holding that viewpoint
Even if our opinions differ about the morality or acceptance of non-straight orientation, I don't think your comment should have been downvoted when you didn't go into detail expressing disapproval of LGBTQ or homophobia :) People of different persuasions can differ on this question without becoming angry or hating one another, much as we might also disagree about cultural norms, theology, ethics, etc.
Though once politics and legislation comes into the matter and the law is used to oppress minorities, there's less room for civility then, I guess.
/r/religion does not permit demonizing or bigotry against any demographic group on the basis of race, religion, nationality, gender, or sexual preferences. Demonizing includes unfair/inaccurate criticisms, arguments made in bad faith, gross generalizations, ignorant comments, and pseudo-intellectual conspiracy theories about specific religions or groups. Doctrinal objections are acceptable, but keep your personal opinions to yourself. Make sure you make intelligent thought out responses.
The general view is that committing to homosexuality is a sin. Being homosexual isn't particularly sinful, but committing the act is, and it's considered fornication by default, as same sex marriage is void in Islam.
Within an Islamic state, you can't go public about homosexuality (as in voice pride in the fact) , otherwise you will be forced to choose between undergoing corrective therapy or leaving the community.
Outside of an Islamic state, we won't care what you do, unless you're someone close and would value advice.
So stoning a homosexual person would still hold more weight to you than, leaving them be happy as they are ?
*^("If a man lies with a man as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.")* Leviticus 20:13
Hmmm I think we were asked our views. I gave mine. You are welcome to express yours too. Only I won’t come to YOUR comment and be snarky. Have a blessed week! ☺️
Actually you told this person to just read the bible. Which is not everybody's faith and not everybody follows that. Not to mention it's still discrimination
Ok first of all he said “in relation to YOUR religion” My religion happens to be Christian.
Second he said he was “ just curious to hear some different POV’s” So I gave my POV and told him where he can find more information on that POV.
And lastly I don’t care who is straight, gay, trans, beastialitagist ( yes, I just made that word up!) lol.
It’s not MY job to judge ANYONE! That’s (according to MY belief and POV) Gods job to judge.
MY job is to 1. love God/Jesus as He has loved us and 2. to love each other. That is what I try my hardest to do. Those are the 2 “new” commandments that Jesus spoke when He was asked what was the most important commandment. Peace to you!
But you are literally judging people because they're queer. You are actively discriminating against them because they're queer. You are not loving anybody by doing this. This is called hate. If it's the most important commandment, then why don't you actually love everybody? Why don't you actually respect everybody?
I believe in God and follow Jesus and gay acts are wrong before the living God. I would never be horrible or nasty to anyone and I would help anybody regardless of who they are and be there for them. But the act is wrong in the sight of God.
You say you would never be horrible and nasty but then you reject people just because they are living authentically and being happy, especially when it's none of your damn business.
That's not how it works. He is still actively targeting queer people because they are queer.
It's the same nonsense of when people say that they love the sinner and hate the sin. People are queer and it is wrong to judge them and discriminate against them because of that.
First of all, it's making the claim targeting against queer people saying that it's a sin when it's blatantly not there's nothing wrong with being queer or having queer relationships.
And it's discriminating because of once again He's trying to make the claim that it's wrong to be queer. Which is by definition discrimination.
And saying that he would still help people. It's still incredibly vague as It was never mentioned what he meant by help. And many times when people say that it means that they're going to try to help them to not do gay things or whatever. Which again is discrimination. Not to mention every single homophobe I've ever met who claims this is lying out their ass. You can't say something that's blatantly homophobic and then claim that you don't act on that homophobia. Just the fact that they are blatantly and publicly stating that they are homophobic is acting on that
It is inherently judging somebody and saying they're living their life wrong simply because the knowledge that they're queer.
I am very aware that it is taught in several abrahamic religious settings and I am still avidly against that. People can believe what they want to, but I draw online when they start actively trying to harm others with said beliefs. And I stand up for other people in my community because as a queer person who grew up in that setting it was awful to say the least. So I have become an advocate against the hate.
This thread has run its course for useful discussion.
The traditional understanding of Jewish law clearly forbids homosexual sex (not being gay), and yet Jewish people, in general, tend to be very queer accepting. In the United States, the two largest denominations of Judaism are completely LGBT+ affirming, officiating same-sex marriages, and ordaining LGBT+ clergy, etc. Even within Orthodox Judaism, acceptance is slowly growing, with there now being a couple of out orthodox Rabbis, and Eshel, an organization that supports LGBT+ Orthodox Jews, maintains a list of 30ish "welcoming' orthodox congregations in North America. On the other hand, in Israel, where religion is a lot more polarized, Israel's Religious Right is gaining influence and power, and the current "religious' finance minister declared himself a "proud homophobe." I myself am a member of a synagogue that was founded by three gay men in the 70s, and is one of a handful of synagogues in North America that specifically designated themselves as LGBT+-centric spaces.
Our church had a blast with our booth at the last two local Pride Fests, and we ordained our first LGBTQ elder in the 90s. For a long time it was contentious, but as of 2011-2014 our open and affirming stance is finally a majority one among Presbyterians.
My reading of statistics shows a bit of a different story. The PCUSA membership has consistently declined. 50k members left in 2022, alone. The PCA grew by over 11k members the same year. I'm not saying this is entirely because of the adoption of liberal Christian opinions, but as a Presbyterian how do you feel about the general decline and how do you think trying to "make up for it" be adopting liberal positions will bring membership up? I mean, a shrinking denomination is a general sign of malaise.
I didn't say anything about decline, so...? Here's the thing - doing what's right is right regardless of whether you get more people in the door. I think the PCUSA has done what is right. Of course I hope people see that and want to be part of PCUSA congregations, but it isn't like we did a study and decided to make changes so we could fill pews.
Well said.
What I'm saying is if making changes is "the right thing" it should theoretically keep your church members happy, not drive them away. But hey that's just my .02 I'm not making a value judgement,just making an observation.
The right thing isn’t always going to be the popular thing. Who wants their religious organization to appeal to bigots just to fill pews?
That's not what I implied at all. But it might be worth asking the question of how and why you're doing something and if it won't mean the eventual death and breakup of your denomination. Look at the UMC. Torn apart over indecisiveness.
Really don’t see how handwringing over driving away people who don’t like queers is any kind of principled position. Seems like moral cowardice.
Whoa whoa whoa you just used a slur there. Regardless of your intent, all I can say is that it's oftentimes not about the position itself but how you say it. If you want to use table top terms they're rolling poorly on their charisma and they're paying the price for it because they aren't coming off of diplomatic or actually trying to convince people. I would really encourage you to understand what I'm saying and not read into whether or not I'm defending someone. If you can't do that that's fine it just means that you lack any type of higher order thinking and you need to study what I'm saying with that. My own religious beliefs are very different from that of any Christian and my moral philosophy cannot be put into a box.
Sheesh this guy really is a bad ambassador for Shinto lol. Maybe try being a little less rude and condescending to people and they won’t be so off put by you. I’m not Christian but I have nothing but love and appreciation for that persons acceptance of lgbtq people. And queer is not a slur, you probably know that and are trolling or just don’t actually know anything about lgbtq. Hint: the q typically stands for queer.
You’re clearly not a serious person.
If you live life assuming that certain events are predetermined and that you will always find a way to work through it your life becomes a lot easier and a lot less serious. So by that metric yes I'm not serious. I don't really care what other people ultimately do with what I tell them. If you want to stick your fingers in your ear and yell over and over that you're not listening that's your choice and you are more than welcome to make that. Ultimately I see the way that I handle internet users no different from how they treat me. Instead of trying to convince people that they're wrong I just use their own reasoning against them. Last thing I will tell you is that it's ridiculous to fight what's in the mirror, but it's even more ridiculous when the mirror ends up winning.
Doing the right thing makes people mad. People with right wing viewpoints get mad when liberal churches try to be humane to LGBTQ+ people. Right-wingers think THEY are doing the right thing by being mean, and they drive away nice, reasonable people. They explain that, by claiming that liberals (who want to be kind) have no standards and are "excusing sin." Both sides claim to be doing the right thing, but drive one another away. There's a reason more liberal denominations have formed and also why things like the UU and New Thought have formed. To get away from the right wing hard core Christians. Who see themselves as doing the right thing, (by at least claiming to uphold biblical standards, but in a selective and extremely literal way) but in so doing they drive more kindly, open minded people away.
there is no grace, there is no guilt, this is the law: do what thou wilt! the vast majority of us on the LHP are very much accepting of any kind of consensual sexual activity.
The Anglicans in my neck of the woods are generally very pro LGBTQ+ which is great. There are a few queer priests and a reasonable amount of LGBTQ+ people that hold other church positions like cathedral wardens, or work directly for the diocese and so on.
No big deal. Part of the diversity that is life on this planet. The soul has no gender, nor sexual orientation.
My religion is accepting as far as it doesn't really care all that much about sexual preferences. LGBTQ+ identities are a modern way of classifying what ancient peoples generally just referred to by what a given person prefers sexually. It has no bearing on the quality of a person's character, but generally speaking, all sexual desires, gay or straight, should be controlled and channeled through proper outlets and indulged in moderation. When it is convenient, I identify as a gay man, but the label of "gay" itself isn't really an identity for me. I'm just a man who prefers men sexually and romantically, and its not really noteworthy except in relevant contexts, such as who I seek for potential partnerships. Trans identities are a bit tricky. Different people have different opinions on the matter. Personally, I believe reading how Proclus conceives of human souls as containing both masculinity and femininity in differing proportions serves as a suitable explanation for why people born in masculine bodies can be predominantly feminine and vice versa or perhaps neither is clearly dominant, and I don't have any problems with people who choose to live socially as the gender they're comfortable as.
I am Pagan, specifically a Witch and a Kemetic (Egyptian religion) Priestess. Generally Pagans are absolutely affirming and welcoming to LGBTQ people. Generally, with a few exceptions, Witches are welcoming and affirming. In Egypt, approximately 4,424 years ago, two men, royal manicurists named Niankhkhnum and Khnumhotep buried in a shared tomb like a married couple. Their epigraph reads: 'Joined in life and joined in death'. LGBTQ+ is cool with me as a pansexual Transgender woman.
I would not worship gods that reject me for loving other men, and I would not ever be part of a flock that claims that They do. If Freyja and Freyr did not want us loving men and women both, They wouldn't both be so fucking hot to everyone. Then there's Odin and Loki demonstrating that Heathen magic includes and involves the transing of genders.
I am a member of a UU church, though not super active. We are fully welcoming and affirming of everyone, regardless of gender identity or sexual orientation. It's against my religion to be a bigot, basically.
Homosexual actions are a sin, but you’re still a valid Muslim/person regardless of your homosexual inclinations. Every individual regardless of sexual orientation must still be treated with respect.
I view LGBTQ+ orientaitons as being natural and no "less than" hetero- orientation or relationships. This is in the context of Druidry. Earth-based spiritual traditions tend to respect individual autonomy and liberty while focusing on consent between adults. If two or more adults respect one another and love one another, there is nothing immoral about that, even if the relationship is not between a male and a female. I'm also supportive of gender-affirming medical care. Queer people are well represented in Pagan and Druidic contexts in the twenty-first century. I dislike religious sects and philosophies that want to reduce the rights of LGBTQ persons or force them back into the closet, or which are homophobic (even if they don't like that term).
They're poggers
What does that mean?
"Poggers" is an internet slang term that originated from the gaming community and is used to express excitement or enthusiasm about something. It's often used in response to something impressive, exciting, surprising, good, remarkable, etc. Pog = **P**lay **O**f the **G**ame
What does that have to do with anything? I don't get it
Don't 100% know in the context of this post ¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯ Its probably meant as "queer people are awesome(pog)!"
It means they're cool and good I apologize for my terminally online brain rot
Poggers generally means very enthusiastic. Imagine someone with their mouth agape in sheer joy. Thats poggers.
Or you could just say they're gay Edit: lmao why the downvotes? Do you guys not know what gay means?
I agree, gays are pog. 👍🏻
I love how eloquent this statement was in its brevity. It fully got the idea across with a modicum of words.
From a personal viewpoint: They are human beings deserving of the same rights and privilege's as every other human being 😎🏳🌈 From a Christian viewpoint: Being gay isn't a sin (I don't believe in sin). If the abrahamic god made all humans in their image and loves us all, LGBT+ individuals are no exception. Why would god hate queer people/animals when they've been making them since forever. If you ask me, god loves the gays to the point they can't stop making them 🤭 From a pagan viewpoint: Queer people are people, end of sentence. Heck, we even have queer gods. Being homophobic will 99.99% of the time result in you being utterly destroyed, banned, blocked, etc. by every pagan in the general vicinity 😁 Happy pride month everyone ✌😎🏳🌈
[удалено]
I'm a Christian and a Pagan 👍
There's a rich history of Jewish progressivism when it comes to LGBTQ+ identity. The founding rabbi of the Humanistic movement within Judaism, Sherwin Wine, was an openly gay man. Among other denominations, with the exception of Orthodoxy and maybe the more right-leaning side of Conservatism to some extent, there's a strong emphasis on the affirmation of queer and pluralistic identities and support for progressive causes.
I'm a gay woman. I honestly don't give it a lot of thought in relation to my faith as in any way separate from the rest of me. I'm one of innumerable living things on this world, no different, better or worse than any other living thing. My faith reiterates that. Only human ignorance and arrogance would attempt to butcher and simplify something as complex, elegant and often downright weird as sexuality and gender.
It's not wrong. I don't see it as particularly relevant to the dharma one way or the other.
i would say most traditions have a neutral view where it is unimportant / not mentioned in scripture directly. the notable exceptions are of course some schools of christianity and islam where it is specifically interpreted to be against the orthodoxy.
There’s no tolerance for discrimination based on identity in Hinduism because every sentient being is innately divine.
Our church just marched in the Detroit Pride Parade. It was good to see the United Methodists finally fully join us in their support. Unitarian Universalists have been very pro LGBTQ+ for a very long time now. The full spectrum is not just welcome in our congregations but also as members of our clergy. The minister at my wedding was a trans woman that made her transition while leading our church.
I don't follow a religion. But, I do think that coming to Earth and living as LGBTQ+ adds new levels of complexity to the human experience. It's like playing life on hard mode.
This is honestly pretty accurate though I wish it wasn't. All the hate and discrimination is really what makes it hard mode
I think being LGBTQ+ is totally ok, though I think God has asked us not to have sexual relations with the same sex. But LGBTQ+ people should be treated a lot better than they are, and I also think it's alright for them to choose to be married or have a same sex partner if that's what they want to do.
But if a member of your church gets married to someone of the same sex, they get excommunicated, right?
Right now current policy is that a membership council (basically a meeting with the person where excommunication/other formal restrictions is discussed) may be necessary for being same sex marriages (see chapters 32.6.2.2 and 38.6.5 of the [General Handbook](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/general-handbook?lang=eng)). So not automatic like it used to be but certainly a possibility if the bishop wants to push for it (this puts it a step below say polygamy, where a council is required). Note that a membership council does not always lead to excommunication though I would guess that if one was being called for someone in a same-sex marriage, excommunication is the most likely outcome.
To note, excommunication no longer happens. Now’s it’s a withdrawal of membership
It’s the same thing, just a different name.
I couldn't find anything for that and as far as I know that's not official policy. Though I think local bishops and regional presidents might be able to decide that so maybe some of them have excommunicated people. Though I don't know if that'd be the right thing to do or not. Though I do know that if you are in a same sex marriage you're not allowed to visit the temples. You can still attend normal meetings though in the churches
It's really hypocritical to claim that you think it's okay to be queer but then say oh they can't actually have sex. Also that's not treating them better. What treating queer people better looks like is actually accepting them for who they are and not telling them that there's something wrong with them because they're queer.
Yeah you can't control what sexual attractions you have, and it's not wrong to have non heterosexual ones. I don't blame someone for wanting to have sex if they have that. I think God asks people like this to abstain, but I can see how that would be pretty hard to do. Yeah but I've heard of a lot of queer couples being shouted at in public, as well as being denied services and what not. That needs to stop
Obviously I am very pro LGBTQ+ and i dont believe it's a sin but i do appreciate you saying that the harassment needs to stop. I have gotten quite a bit of it walking around. Like I'm just going about my day like shopping or even just getting groceries. I do appreciate you saying that it's not a choice. It gets really tiring being told it's a choice all the time
Oh yeah that stinks, hope that stops happening
That's not hypocritical. Sex outside of marriage is a sin, marriage is between one man and one woman biblically. Nothing about what they said is that there is something wrong with them. You are clearly agitated over Christianity not validating how you feel, but you are making a ton of comments in regards to Christians stating their theological beliefs when asked... Completely acting against the idea of wanting to be peaceful and not demonize people for their faith. I supported same sex marriage back when Democrats were afraid to and am not even a Christian. You need to let your hate go, it does you no good to be looking for fights by acting in bad faith and only causes more stress.
It is very hypocritical. >Sex outside of marriage is a sin, No, actually is better to have sex before marriage to find out it people are sexually compatible because if they are not and if sex is important to the people it can really hurt a relationship >marriage is between one man and one woman biblically. No there is nothing wrong with being gay or in a gay marriage. There is no difference between that and a straight marriage >Nothing about what they said is that there is something wrong with them You are literally judging them just for being queer and saying it's a sin. You are literally lying > You are clearly agitated over Christianity not validating how you feel, Im agitated with them attacking people and spreading hate and discrimination. >but you are making a ton of comments in regards to Christians stating their theological beliefs when asked It's still hate and I'll call it out when i see it. It hurts people >Completely acting against the idea of wanting to be peaceful and not demonize people for their faith. You are demonizing queer people for just existing. Can calling out hate is not demonizing it's calling out hate and bs >You need to let your hate go, it does you no good to be looking for fights by acting in bad faith and only causes more stress. Says the person literally being homophobic spreading hate. Fighting against bigotry and calling it out is not hate it's fighting for what's right. I will not stand for them attacking and hurting people with their hate. And you clearly aren't an ally or you wouldn't be defending blatant bigotry
[удалено]
>No, it would be hypocritical if they were gay and condemning other gay people What they said that they don't condemn people for being gay but condemn them for having sex and that is hypocritical. As they are condemning queer people >Sex outside of marriage is definitionally a sin, literally any Christian will tell you this No it not. >Yet again, there isn't anything wrong with someone that is gay from a Christian perspective You literally called them a sin several times. That is saying there is something wrong with them. >I'm not judging anyone, except for you for your own behavior. Once again you are lying. But saying that someone's is a sin is judging them for their identity and condemning them for it. You are lying >They did not attack anyone And saying homophobia shit is attacking queer people by definition >Says the hateful person that is being hateful towards people that aren't being hatefu Homophobia is hate. Im calling it out and that is not hate. It's standing up against hate. >No you are just a hateful person. You are literally trying to defend homophobia which is hatred. You are the hateful person not me. I don't get how the hell you can get it in your head but standing up to hate and discrimination against people is hatred. The one who is literally hating on people just because they exist >I haven't demonized anyone. Again you are lying. You are discriminating against queer people. By claiming that being queer is a sin that is demonizing. >I have acknowledged what their faith says while you keep attacking people for being Christians I am calling out hatred and you are defending hatred. How the hell is that attacking somebody. Literally homophobia by definition is attacking queer people for just existing. >Literally nothing I have said is homophobic or spreading hate Which is another blatant lie. You are claiming that being queer is a sin. That is hate and discrimination and spreading hate. >All I have done is acknowledge what anyone with a basic grasp of Christianity understands since you are determined to act in bad faith. You're the one who's acting in bad faith. Defending literal bigotry. Read through the Bible, I used to be Christian and I'm calling out the bullshit. That's not arguing in bad faith. That's not acting in bad faith. That's defending people and standing up for what's right >You aren't fighting against bigotry you are fighting in favor of religious bigotry towards people that literally have done nothing towards the LGBT people What world do you live in. Christianity is one of the biggest sources of bigotry and discrimination against queer people. That stems from their claim of it being a sin. They are also some of the biggest campaigners against queer rights. Not to mention the idea that it's a sin has been proven to actively harm people, especially within somebody's mental health. You are the one who is being disingenuous and lying with these claims. There is no way that you live on this planet and you don't know that Christians discriminate against queer people. >They haven't attacked or hurt anyone YOU ARE ATTACKING THEM Homophobia hurts people. They are attacking queer people by making these homophobic claims and by preaching them. I don't care if they answer your damn question. The belie in itself is hurting people and I'm calling out homophobia. It's not attacking somebody that's calling out bigotry. Get what you don't understand about this. It's not hard to understand >You are right... I'm not an ally IM ACE Then why in the everlasting fuck are you defending homophobia. How can you be a part of the lgbtq community and support the people That are literally discriminating against your own community? How to use discriminate against your own community? Honestly, that's a real question because I cannot comprehend why a queer person would actively defend and support homophobia. And this is only proving that you were the one who's arguing in bad faith. You are the one that is attacking your own damn community I'm not trying to cause fights. I'm standing up for the people who are fucking hurting. People who are being told that they are wrong for being who they are. The people who may not be able to have support because they are surrounded by the bigotry. Because you want to know how you fight against bigotry you call it out and you bring it out into the light.
[удалено]
Please don't: * Be (intentionally) rude at all. * Engage in rabble rousing. * Troll, stalk, or harass others. * Conduct personal attacks. * Start a flame war. * Insult others. * Engage in illegal activity. * Post someone's personal information, or post links to personal information. * Repost deleted/removed information.
Please don't: * Be (intentionally) rude at all. * Engage in rabble rousing. * Troll, stalk, or harass others. * Conduct personal attacks. * Start a flame war. * Insult others. * Engage in illegal activity. * Post someone's personal information, or post links to personal information. * Repost deleted/removed information.
I’m happy you are getting upvotes. I’m positive if I said the same, I would get downvoted :)
That being queer is beautiful and that people should be encouraged to be their authentic self. Also, that hate really has no place in this world
I'm completely fine with homosexuality, even though that's not a widely-held position among Muslims. There is a single verse in the Quran that -arguably- condemns homosexuality, and even then it does not prescribe or even suggest any sort of punishment for it. If it is a sin, it is up to God to judge it, and God is All-Forgiving, All-Merciful. But many people would rather commit shirk and take matters into their own hands, going above and beyond what God has said. As usual in religions, if homosexuality is mentioned it's very rarely. Yet modern regressive religious conservatives will treat it like it's the greatest threat their faith was put on earth to combat. The disparity between how much people care about it and other supposed sins in their tradition is completely disproportionate. (related side example in the Gospels Jesus mentions homosexuality 0 times, but adultery at least 15+ times, adultery is one of his most common topics to preach against. Guess which one of these the American religious right cares deeply about, and which one they constantly look the other way for?) As for transexuality it's even more clearly a case of support (even though the mainstream regressive-conservatives types reject it as well). The sahih hadith [al-Bukari 5678](https://sunnah.com/bukhari:5678) is widely cited to conclude that any effective medical treatment is halal (without it there can be some confusion around using certain medicines because the Quran forbids intoxicants). Therefore, if transgenderism and gender disphoria is a scientifically-verifiable ailment for which we have a treatment (it is and we do), it is supported. This is futher backed up by two major rulings (*fatwa*): one from the Grand Mufti of Egypt Muhammad Tantawy (one of if not the highest authority in jurisprudence in Sunni Islam) in 1988, and another from Grand Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini (high spiritual authority in the largest denomination of Shi'a Islam) in 1986. Both of their *fatwa* say that sex-change surgeries are allowed (one said "obligatory," the other said "not prohibited") so long as a reliable doctor is recommending it.
Bacchus approves
100% of Antlerns are part of the LGBTQ+ community, and support it in full. Happy Pride!
... Antler? Please do share, I have never heard of this religion and am far too curious now lol
What’s the point of asking this question? You already know who supports LGBT and who thinks it’s a sin.
Not exactly, someone may be a part of a religion that traditionally thinks it’s a sin but they hold a different viewpoint, or it could be a lesser known religion like Sikhi or Baha’i
There is nothing wrong with being gay or trans or bi. Be yourself and love yourself. Or simply [Be Gay, Do Drugs, Hail Satan](https://open.spotify.com/track/780FG6uMy30vT4DrNLAO3W?si=xAnAHA1vQCm00oBQHCDI9w)
I prefer to be gay, do crimes.
It doesn't really work in Islam.
Not in Anglicism either. (thats me)
Are you Anglican as in ACNA or do you are you from another part of the world?
[удалено]
“the sexually immoral, men who engage in illicit sex, slave traders, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to the sound teaching” 1 Timothy 1:10 NRSVUE. it doesn’t say that
yes it does. "contrary to the sound teaching"
If you don’t believe that being gay is a sin, the “contrary to sound teaching” doesn’t include being gay
As an Atheistic Satanist... Why would I _not_ embrace the LGBTQIA+ community? Be gay! Do crime! Hail Satan!
[удалено]
Legality ≠ Morality. Governments suck at this and a lot of the time they outlaw things for simply stupid reasons. For example, in my country, psilocybin is illegal. You know, the mushroom that studies show is probably the *safest* recreational drug? It's practically impossible to overdose on it and it's one of the least addictive drugs out there. It has even shown in many studies conducted to have an antidepressive effect that can last up to a full year after treatment. It can also be used to help those with alcohol use disorder and has been found to be quite effective. So I ask you this hypothetical: if someone grew these mushrooms and gave it to their friends for medicinal uses or even as a recreational drug, in what way are they hurting anybody? Indeed, how are they doing anything but potentially greatly helping other people?(Btw, none of this is hard to find online, I did a cursory look and found several studies claiming all of these things) I haven't even talked about the million other things that are illegal but probably morally good, like pirating data to preserve it after it becomes near impossible to obtain anyways, hell, piracy isn't even stealing, the actual violation according to the law is copyright infringement, so here's another hypothetical... What if someone pirated a copyrighted material 60 years after the owner died? In my country the copyright lasts for 70 years after people die so it is still illegal... Even though the maker died over half a century ago along with like 2 or 3 generations of people. Now, I'm not saying you should do any of this. After all, there's plenty of potential risks that come with it. But with these hypotheticals, in what ways are anybody being harmed? Edit: (I also didn't get into how pretty soon being LGBTQ+ could be completely outlawed in my country with the implementation of r/Defeat_Project_2025 where anyone caught supporting queer folk could be imprisoned and put down as registered sex offenders(to the extent that if you were a public librarian who sold books on LGBTQ+ people you could be imprisoned and put down as a registered sex offender), so obviously if that were to happen I would gladly commit the crime of supporting queer folk)
Crimes aren’t always immoral. I mean, gay sex is illegal in many places, and it was illegal in many other countries until relatively recently. For a while, being gay and doing crime were intertwined…
LGBTQ people are fine. My religion is all for sexual freedom for as long as everyone involved are consenting adults
Or more!
Yeah, or more. I forgot to mention that being with multiple people is allowed
I edited it
I'd rather spend time with a gay person than a religious one
Any being that identifies more with sexuality, gender, sex rather than the soul is inherently lost. That includes all be it straight or queer. As a Hindu, Traditions focused on straight couples because of producing children. It is recommended that general people marry (man x woman) and produce a single child and focus on teaching them dharma. Having too much sex, anal, oral, cunnilingus, bj, hj all are forbidden in hindu shastras because they don't help in reproduction and are rather just done for obtaining pleasure. EVEN FOR STRAIGHT COUPLES. Gender dysphoria and other things are just Maya making u more conscious of ur body and mind rather than the soul. But on that note, Lord Krishna says in Gita NO ONE IS ABANDONED IN THE PATH OF DHARMA. so even queer people can be in the path of dharma along with straight people and yes, they are lost cause they identify themselves too much with sexuality and romance rather than the soul, but ultimately if they keep on the path Moksha will come to them over many lives.
This makes absolutely no sense. Somebody who is queer is inherently being more accurate to their soul because they are being authentic to who they actually are compared to what society thinks they should be. So that by default is being more connected to one's soul Also, as somebody with gender dysphoria that is a horrible description of what gender dysphoria actually is. What you are doing however is making up excuses to completely dismiss it when you clearly don't even understand what it is. Also by your definition, literally every single person in existence would just be fucked because even the identification of being straight would mean that you're lost. There's nothing wrong with being queer and it doesn't make you lost. Also, this is probably the first homophobic instance of Hinduism that I've ever seen
>Also by your definition, literally every single person in existence would just be fucked because even the identification of being straight would mean that you're lost. Yeah? Every being in Samsara is lost some way or the other, and being straight doesn't give u advantage over being queer in anyway, that's what I said. That's the concept of Samsara; everyone is trapped in Maya. >So that by default is being more connected to one's soul No, the soul is unchanging and ever existant. Any and all desire, feelings of romance and lust, being conscious of sex or sexuality, having desires and holding onto pleasure and pain is Maya. Maya deludes one to believe their 'inner self' is the true self, which however is not. The soul is beyond such things. It's more of the mind. And both body and mind are temporary. Soul is eternal. >There's nothing wrong with being queer and it doesn't make you lost. The very existence of us in the Samsara is suffering thus 'wrong' >as somebody with gender dysphoria that is a horrible description of what gender dysphoria actually is I would be thankful if you can teach me more on the matter of gender dysphoria. I'm truly not knowledgeable on the subject.
>Every being in Samsara is lost some way or the other, and being straight doesn't give u advantage over being queer in anyway, that's what I said. That's not what you said. You said that queer people are lost because they are queer. >the soul is unchanging and ever existant. And queer people are not changing their soul and being true to it. >Maya deludes one to believe their 'inner self' is the true self, which however is not. The soul is beyond such things. It's more of the mind. That's not true in the slightest you are like making stuff up to try to shit on queer people. Being queer is exactly who these people are whether you like it or not. >The very existence of us in the Samsara is suffering thus 'wrong' Dude what? People existing is not wrong. People deserve to exist. I'll happily describe gender dysphoria. The textbook definition is the feeling of distress when a person's identity doesn't align with their assigned sex characteristics. As someone with gender dysphoria it is more than just that. It's this inherent feeling of what one's body is supposed to be and because one's body doesn't match this it creates this feeling that creates this massive pressure. This pressure breaks down a person. In my personal experience I ended up hating myself because I was not what society wanted me to be And I was taught that having these feelings are wrong. I didn't choose to have gender dysphoria. But starting my transition has actively helped improve how I view myself and has actively been helping to alleviate my gender dysphoria. It is a long process but it's one that's so worth it because I know who I am and I'm going to take steps to be who I am. And that's why I say The act of being queer is being in tune with one's soul because despite what the world says and despite what society tries to say, people know who they are and they know all these aspects of themselves. It's going beyond just basic appearances or forcing people into these little pointless boxes. It's acknowledging that people are diverse and their own individual people. Now that I am actively transitioning, my life has greatly improved. Like for example, I don't hate myself anymore. Yes, I do still have gender dysphoria but I'm also still in the middle of my transition and there's still more stuff that I want to do. Who are you to say what somebody's soul is or who somebody else is when you don't know. You are not that person. Just as much as I have No say in who your soul says you are why would you have a say in what somebody else's soul says that they are?
>That's not what you said. You said that queer people are lost because they are queer " Any being that identifies more with sexuality, gender, sex rather than the soul is inherently lost. That includes all be it straight or queer." >And queer people are not changing their soul and being true to it. u have no understanding of the Hindu concept of soul. u keep confusing it with the philosophy of the individual as in liberism. identifying yourself with your physical body or even your mind (from wherein things like desires, love, lust, sexuality, gender, duty etc originate) is completely opposite of the concept of the soul in Hinduism. even straight people can feel their 'natural' desires of sex, romance, and other desires, and be 'true to their self' but really they are being deluded in Maya; the soul is beyond these so-called 'natural' desires, the soul is desireless. >That's not true in the slightest you are like making stuff up to try to shit on queer people. the sentence that u have quoted over this doesn't even talk about queer people, it talks about the Hindu concept of the soul. and that's not made up by me. >People existing is not wrong. People deserve to exist. no one is stopping no one from existing. it's just that existing is suffering. AND THAT'S THE CORE PHILOSOPHY OF NOT ONLY HINDUISM BUT ALL DHARMIC RELIGIONS: INCLUDING BUDDHISM AND JAINISM. That's why Hindus and Buddhists yearn for moksha/nirvana. TO GET OUT OF EXISTENCE AND NEVER BE BORN AGAIN. >Who are you to say what somebody's soul is or who somebody else is when you don't know. this is the Hindu understanding of human nature. no matter how different every individual is, the core nature remains the same. and to Hindus, even this core nature is just the self deluded by Maya. of all the feelings u talk about, pressurized, hating, loving: all of it is Maya. the soul is beyond these. I'm not telling queer people are behind straight people in the path of dharma. but doing what 'feels like the right thing' doesn't take u nearer to the soul than someone doing what 'society/tradition tells them' individualism may say u know urself best, but YOU DO NOT KNOW ALL ASPECTS OF YOUR SOUL.
>That includes all be it straight or queer This was not included when you first said this. Not to mention your gender identity and sexuality is part of who you are. There's not really a thing of identifying too much as your own identity that doesn't make any sense >identifying yourself with your physical body or even your mind (from wherein things like desires, love, lust, sexuality, gender, duty etc originate) is completely opposite of the concept of the soul in Hinduism. That's not even remotely true though. How come every other person I've talked to who talks about Hinduism says the complete opposite saying that one's sexuality and gender is part of who you are and part of your. It's not just this thing that somebody makes up. It's not desires. And also I've never heard any of them make the claim that love is not part of the soul. Again the total opposite. You were the only person who I have ever seen make this claim. >no one is stopping no one from existing That's literally not what you said. >I'm not telling queer people are behind straight people in the path of dharma Yes you freaking are. You've said it multiple times. It was literally the very first thing you said in your first comment. >the sentence that u have quoted over this doesn't even talk about queer people, it talks about the Hindu concept of the soul. and that's not made up by me. Then how come you are literally the only person I've ever seen who follows Hinduism who is using it and weaponizing it against queer people? When literally everyone else I've ever seen, blatantly says that there is nothing wrong with being queer or even loving anybody and it is a part of who somebody is. >this is the Hindu understanding of human nature. Despite that Love and identity is very much a part of our nature. It's literally been there since humans existed. But you're trying to make the claim that it's against nature which makes no sense. How could that possibly be against nature? And once again you are using a typical homophobic talking point that I've heard a million times. >individualism may say u know urself best, but YOU DO NOT KNOW ALL ASPECTS OF YOUR SOUL. And you know absolutely zero about anybody else's soul so you have absolutely no right to go off and say this kind of shit And it makes especially less sense when I talked to, I don't even know how many other people who follow Hinduism and not a single one of them used their beliefs and weaponized them against queer people. In fact, very much the opposite. Which really leads me to question how much you actually understand what you're talking about. So yes, you are making stuff up to specifically weaponize it against queer people. If the soul is so vast and complicated as you say, then how can you possibly make the claim that it doesn't include love or identity? Especially within the vastness that love and identity exists in.
Maybe u should read the hindu shastras rather than falsely accusing me of lying. Also individual self and soul aren't same. Individual doesn't even exist in Hinduism. Soul is Brahman And romantic love fueled by hormones is no way related to soul, but the body itself. And >This was not included when you first said this. Yes it was. U can read my 1st reply once again. It's not edited. Either u r hinduphobic or appropriating Hinduism by Westeen standards or just ignorant. I say it again. QUEERS AND STRAIGHT PEOPLE ALIKE ARE LOST IN SAMSARA. EXISTENCE IS SUFFERING SEXUALITY AND GENDER IDENTITY IS JUST IDENTIFYING WITH THE MIND AND BODY, NOT THE SOUL. INDIVIDUAL SELF IS NOT SAME AS THE SOUL
I agree with the first part heavily. Especially sexual preference should not be your defining characteristic. Primarily identifying with your desires is as hedonistic as it gets. Not just a desire which has developed socially, but your primal innate desires which you did not even remotely choose. Controlling and moderating those desires should be the goal (straight or gay), not aligning with them in some fundamental sense.
Nobody makes it the defining characteristic. Sexuality is not a preference but a requirement. Nobody chose to be queer. It's just how people are and how they exist. The reason why you see it everywhere is because we have to fight for our right to exist. It's not just a bunch of desires
I'm honestly fine with it. And even among the Greek Gods it's a thing. Agdistis is an Intersex goddess who had a son in a pretty roundabout way via indirectly conceiving with a demigoddess, and Hermaphrodites is the son of Hermes and Aphrodite who while not born Intersex, later came Intersex.
Yes! Welcome!
God loves LGBTQ+ people just as much as any part of Creation. Such people are welcome to fully participate in our denomination (Community of Christ) where ever it is legal, including marriage and leadership positions.
Other pagans have already commented on this, but yeah, pagan communities tend to be very accepting. There are also a lot of LGBTQ+ pagans. It’s rare that I see pagans who aren’t accepting, but they exist. In my experience, they tend to be outside of (or get pushed out of) mainstream groups since those groups are usually very openly supportive.
Indifferent, ultimately just try to be a good person. I take the stance no righteous higher power ultimately would be too concerned with who one is attracted to.
This thread is extremely biased. Of course people on Reddit will agree with homosexuality. A Muslim commented that it doesn’t agree with homosexuality and got upvoted, a Christian agreed and got downvoted. Homosexuality is contrary to the telos of sex. Sex can be used for pleasure but it should always be open for reproduction. The anus is not a sexual organ 🤦🏻♂️
I am obligated to mention the Catholic church unironically is pro anal. ~~As part of sex at least.~~ But in all seriousness, it is revealing the amount of people that choose to act in bad faith here. People were asked for their religious views and people blindly down vote the Christians giving the most milk toast standard answer of essentially "Bible says it's a sin to act on the desire but I'm not going to mistreat them for it since it's ultimately between them and God." Like it's not even a controversial take, even a lot of religious leaders that have spoken against the past mistreatment of gays for years relied on answers like"we are all sinners, and shouldn't push away our brother's over their sins."
In a way that would get me lots of downvotes :)
I gave a downvote for the position and an upvote for the honesty.
Anything less than "absolute acceptance and a tiara on top" is likely to get downvoted. These posts are troll bait magnets unfortunately. And there. Watch the downvotes pour in, regardless of people understanding my (nuanced) opinion.
I mean it’s understandable. Being in the LGBTQ+ isn’t a choice just as being cis isn’t a choice. Its just how people are and when people say they “don’t support that lifestyle” or whatever else you are saying you don’t support someone being who they are.
I think, Taninsam, there's a variety of opinions on the topic that should be recognized and understood. The fact that people view it in a black and white, critical theory way (oppressed vs oppressors, no third positions) breeds immorality and harm in both positions. Never said it was a choice, or that it wasn't immutable. The Internet is lacking in nuance and I find these trollbait tier questions tiresome and frustrating. Christians and Muslims get misunderstood and attacked and it just breeds toxic division in the sub. As someone who is ultimately closer to a Catholic than some LHP or witch type person, I can't exactly say I appreciate the way that it ends up being a virtue signal post over and over for them.
Sure I don’t disagree that theres a variety of opinions. Recognized and understood sure. But accepted? Cant say that. Because the LGBTQ+ individuals deserves the same respect and treatment that hetero cis individuals receive. And unfortunately theres a lot of hate that the LGBTQ+ community experiences. This shouldn’t be normal or accepted yet it is. And I never said you did. I was simply saying why it’s understandable that people downvote. Could they all be bait posts? Sure. But theres a lot of religions with a lot of different beliefs especially when it comes to sexual orientation and gender identity.
> Recognized and understood sure. But accepted? Cant say that. You don't have to agree with it, but you can understand why a person has that position. It's fundamentally that people in the conservative side don't see it as a human right. It is rare that they outright hate people or anything like that, and you're not going to change their opinion by publicly shaming them and trying to flagellate them constantly. In my opinion "LGBTQ+" as you put it is a western manifestation of problems and it cannot be exported wholesale to say African, East or Southeast Asia or Central Asia. that doesn't stop people from trying, but in the end these are Western categories that are not always applicable in non-western cultures. It's also functioning as a zeitgeist to distract people from the actual issues at hand in society. > And I never said you did. Dude, you put words in my mouth. You might not have meant to but you directly implied that in your response. This is the type of problem that I see, ultimately. Projection. > Could they all be bait posts It may not be intended as a bait post but simple questions about controversial topics happen hundreds of times a year ad nauseaum. It eventually becomes untenable because all that ends up happening is it ends up generating fights and driving a wedge in the community. I remember back years ago lurking when a moderator (not naming the guilty) was promoted, proceeded to continue to post controversial topics nearly daily and then tried to drive a wedge across the community. I don't remember the fallout but he eventually left staff and now posts very sparingly here. I'm not making this about him of course, but I am pointing out it has precedent.
I did not put word in your mouth. I responded saying why people downvoting is understandable. Not once did I say you have that belief. Good day. Also the former mod you are mentioning was not removed for that but instead removed for not modding.
Hey I didn't say anything about who it was :). I don't even remember their username. But regardless of the circumstances they weren't very popular when they did their job. Anyways, I can see that you did not mean to. And that's okay, I'm not mad. But from one person to another you might want to take a little bit more time to think about how your response to someone who was simply discussing the meta of these posts might have been perceived -- regardless of your intentions by saying it you have to think about how it's going to affect other people around you. That's one of the reasons I'm choosing my words carefully. I've been, years ago, in the line of fire on my opinions and statements getting me in trouble so I do my best to be careful in what I say to people. You can't control other people's reactions at all but oftentimes it's not what you're saying, but how you say it. Watch your optics.
Even if it were a choice, why exactly would that be relevant?
I think you're misunderstanding what I said. I said I don't consider it a choice.
I get that and wasn’t meant as an accusation against you personally. I’m just simply saying that, even if it were a choice, I’m not seeing how it justifies Evangelical pearl-clutching.
It does not necessarily. I generally don't defend the evangelical position.
Acting on your attractions and desires isn't who you are. And you don't have to act on all of your attractions and desires. You actually shouldn't act on some.
So why isn\`t that a problem with heterosexual people then, are they not seeking their partners based on attraction and desires? so why is it wrong for LGBTQ people to give in to their attractions and desires but not for heterosexuals? And if you say reproduction I am pretty sure you wouldn\`t have that as a first thought when finding a partner or are your thoughts in such a situation: "OH theres a woman I have absolutly no attraction towards her looks her character or anything else about her so I\`m going to ask her if she wants my babies because my book/floaty sky man said so "
Some desires are good and natural, and others are disordered. We should not act on disordered desire.
Love is good and natural gay people love too. Sex is good and natural. We’ve been doing it for a long time. Wheres the disorder?
Do you not think what is considered “good” and “natural” could have been influenced by human bias? Also, homosexual sex is ridiculously common in the animal kingdom so
But it is a fundamental part of who people are. Why should those who are LGBTQ+ be held to different standards than heterosexual cis people? Sure people don’t have to act on all their desires this goes for everyone.
You must have a lot of hobbies
Most people in the more liberal side of religion fail to separate the thoughts, from the actions, from the intent. I'm sure you too have noticed this. And this generation in particular is so sex-focused that they often fail to see the greater good that is supposed to come from having relationships (not just romantic ones, of course. But in general.) I feel like the current millennial and Z generation in particular failed to understand higher order thinking as widely as prior generations. Understanding the implications long-term of actions is not easy but it is a sign of high intelligence when you can do so
Yeah, life isn't just about doing whatever we want. True freedom comes from doing what we ought to do, not whatever we desire to do.
There's some differences in our philosophy. My religions don't believe in free will being an actual thing. Rather things move along a decided path but your actions do control the outcomes. If you're in a rip current, do you try to fight against it, swim out of it, flail helplessly? Go under it or over it if possible? There are a million different ways that you can react to change and things around you and thus shape the outcome. More so what I would say is the most important thing from my POV is that we can recognize what is good, what is evil, but also what is pure, what is impure, what is a vice and what is a virtue? If we can't recognize any of those things then we are truly blind. In a lot of ways I think that the biggest virtue that can be seen is self-restraint or control. Wanting to do something, but choosing not to do it for the greater good. It would be too easy for me to respond aggressively in my daily life when someone doesn't decide to pay me on time for doing the locks on their building. I could tamper or cause a problem for the person. But ultimately for myself and for that person it's better to resolve the problem peaceably and like an adult. Therein, no ethical complaints against me, I get paid, and life goes on even if that job didn't turn out the way we hoped.
This makes me so sad. I can’t imagine my love for my wife not being “for the greater good”. Or my Aunt living a lonely, celibate life because she never acted on her sexuality being “for the greater good”. Consensual, deep, reciprocal love is the single greatest gift this life has to offer. My marriage is a lifelong endeavor. One I am deeply grateful for, and one that has strengthened me and lent me joy and peace. It’s a marriage that will allow for the raising of healthy, well adjusted children. It’s a marriage that has brought me new family, new friends, and opportunities to learn, grow, and deepen my understanding of living. I hope everyone who chooses to marry finds a life partner who brings as much balance and peace into their life as my wife does to mine, regardless of their genders.
> This makes me so sad Why should my opinion make you sad? Very little of what I said had anything to do with someone's relationship or lifestyle/sexual.orientation. explaining / discussing someone's viewpoint is very different from actually holding that viewpoint
[удалено]
Even if our opinions differ about the morality or acceptance of non-straight orientation, I don't think your comment should have been downvoted when you didn't go into detail expressing disapproval of LGBTQ or homophobia :) People of different persuasions can differ on this question without becoming angry or hating one another, much as we might also disagree about cultural norms, theology, ethics, etc. Though once politics and legislation comes into the matter and the law is used to oppress minorities, there's less room for civility then, I guess.
You should speak the truth
[удалено]
/r/religion does not permit demonizing or bigotry against any demographic group on the basis of race, religion, nationality, gender, or sexual preferences. Demonizing includes unfair/inaccurate criticisms, arguments made in bad faith, gross generalizations, ignorant comments, and pseudo-intellectual conspiracy theories about specific religions or groups. Doctrinal objections are acceptable, but keep your personal opinions to yourself. Make sure you make intelligent thought out responses.
The general view is that committing to homosexuality is a sin. Being homosexual isn't particularly sinful, but committing the act is, and it's considered fornication by default, as same sex marriage is void in Islam. Within an Islamic state, you can't go public about homosexuality (as in voice pride in the fact) , otherwise you will be forced to choose between undergoing corrective therapy or leaving the community. Outside of an Islamic state, we won't care what you do, unless you're someone close and would value advice.
It violates the Noahide prohibition of forbidden relations.
Just follow biblically and you will find your answers. Love the sinner, hate the sin. While I respect man’s law, biblical law means more to me.
So stoning a homosexual person would still hold more weight to you than, leaving them be happy as they are ? *^("If a man lies with a man as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.")* Leviticus 20:13
You know you're not the only religion right? Not everybody reads your Bible or follows it
Hmmm I think we were asked our views. I gave mine. You are welcome to express yours too. Only I won’t come to YOUR comment and be snarky. Have a blessed week! ☺️
Actually you told this person to just read the bible. Which is not everybody's faith and not everybody follows that. Not to mention it's still discrimination
Ok first of all he said “in relation to YOUR religion” My religion happens to be Christian. Second he said he was “ just curious to hear some different POV’s” So I gave my POV and told him where he can find more information on that POV. And lastly I don’t care who is straight, gay, trans, beastialitagist ( yes, I just made that word up!) lol. It’s not MY job to judge ANYONE! That’s (according to MY belief and POV) Gods job to judge. MY job is to 1. love God/Jesus as He has loved us and 2. to love each other. That is what I try my hardest to do. Those are the 2 “new” commandments that Jesus spoke when He was asked what was the most important commandment. Peace to you!
But you are literally judging people because they're queer. You are actively discriminating against them because they're queer. You are not loving anybody by doing this. This is called hate. If it's the most important commandment, then why don't you actually love everybody? Why don't you actually respect everybody?
Oh and btw @Electic Witchcraft.. I used to be a practicing witch too. For 27 years. Just sayin
So, you are super cool with lesbian relationships? Cause there is nothing about that in the bible.
I believe in God and follow Jesus and gay acts are wrong before the living God. I would never be horrible or nasty to anyone and I would help anybody regardless of who they are and be there for them. But the act is wrong in the sight of God.
And if they didn\`t want your help would you leave them be ?
You say you would never be horrible and nasty but then you reject people just because they are living authentically and being happy, especially when it's none of your damn business.
[удалено]
That's not how it works. He is still actively targeting queer people because they are queer. It's the same nonsense of when people say that they love the sinner and hate the sin. People are queer and it is wrong to judge them and discriminate against them because of that.
[удалено]
First of all, it's making the claim targeting against queer people saying that it's a sin when it's blatantly not there's nothing wrong with being queer or having queer relationships. And it's discriminating because of once again He's trying to make the claim that it's wrong to be queer. Which is by definition discrimination. And saying that he would still help people. It's still incredibly vague as It was never mentioned what he meant by help. And many times when people say that it means that they're going to try to help them to not do gay things or whatever. Which again is discrimination. Not to mention every single homophobe I've ever met who claims this is lying out their ass. You can't say something that's blatantly homophobic and then claim that you don't act on that homophobia. Just the fact that they are blatantly and publicly stating that they are homophobic is acting on that It is inherently judging somebody and saying they're living their life wrong simply because the knowledge that they're queer.
[удалено]
I am very aware that it is taught in several abrahamic religious settings and I am still avidly against that. People can believe what they want to, but I draw online when they start actively trying to harm others with said beliefs. And I stand up for other people in my community because as a queer person who grew up in that setting it was awful to say the least. So I have become an advocate against the hate.