Bryan Fischer: imprison all gays

[The Duchess of Zeon]

I have always wanted to know what this temptation is exactly. For something to be tempting enough that it might be persuasive it has to offer some benefit to counter-act the risk.

So what is this benefit with homosexuality? Does anal sex with another man (as opposed to a women) just feel that much better? I would not think so. We will call that a wash.

Is there some sort of perverse pleasure in pissing god off? No.

In exchange we get ridicule, hate, hate crimes, and second class citizenship. With what precisely are we being tempted?

Homosexual sex. You're being tempted with homosexual sex, and conservatives assume everyone is a child who will be tempted to do something just because their parent, God, told them not to. So it is, in fact, a perverse pleasure in pissing god off that you're being tempted with. "C'mon, you know you wanna do it.." is the level of discourse of most of these people to start with.

[Spoonist]

I have always wanted to know what this temptation is exactly. For something to be tempting enough that it might be persuasive it has to offer some benefit to counter-act the risk.

It would be more of a pissing on the electrical fence type of temptation.

[Liberty]

Well that works if you give them obscure laws from leviticus or some such. However I have found it IRL quite useful to ask first does the NT supercede the OT? Then you ask then which sins did JC on several occasions speak up against?
Shouldn't those sins that JC then found to be the worst be the ones you should engage the most effort against as a christian?
If they agree to all of that. Just pick out a bible and show them that it is possesion and divorce. Then ask how many times JC spoke up against things like homosexuallity...

The part that I quoted deals with God handing down his commandments to Moses on Mt. Sinai, so I'm not sure what definition of obscure you're using here. Generally most Christians put the Commandments God gave to Moses on as high a pedestal as anything Jesus ever said, at any rate.

God gave Moses lots of commandments, not just ten. While fundies do still put a lot of emphasis on the "ten commandments" (which are not actually numbered in the Bible), they generally dismiss the others as being superseded by the new testament. I mean come on, they eat seafood, they wear clothing made of mixed substances, etc, and those things are banned with just the same language as homosexuality is, and all three are condemned in the law God gave to Moses.

Of course, Christian Reconstructionists believe that the old testament was not superseded, and that it still applies. There aren't many of them, though.

[General Zod]

God gave Moses lots of commandments, not just ten. While fundies do still put a lot of emphasis on the "ten commandments" (which are not actually numbered in the Bible), they generally dismiss the others as being superseded by the new testament. I mean come on, they eat seafood, they wear clothing made of mixed substances, etc, and those things are banned with just the same language as homosexuality is, and all three are condemned in the law God gave to Moses.

Which is specifically why I didn't say "ten commandments".

Of course, Christian Reconstructionists believe that the old testament was not superseded, and that it still applies. There aren't many of them, though.

Of course the passage I quoted is also one of the primary justifications for Christian bigotry against homosexuals. Wankers that think the OT was handwaved away are pretty hilarious though, given Jesus specifically says otherwise. Just ask any of them if the Ten Commandments are still important if the OT doesn't apply anymore.

[Simon_Jester]

Of course the passage I quoted is also one of the primary justifications for Christian bigotry against homosexuals. Wankers that think the OT was handwaved away are pretty hilarious though, given Jesus specifically says otherwise. Just ask any of them if the Ten Commandments are still important if the OT doesn't apply anymore.

I'd vote for giving them a pass on caring about the Ten Commandments if they normally apply a broad-spectrum "no petty bullshit rules" policy that's consistent in not being bigoted against gays, things like that.

Most of the Ten Commandments are either things that actually make sense regardless of your religious beliefs (not robbing people), or that are sort of a necessary precondition for having religious beliefs in the first place. If you've already decided to worship some god, you're not going to ignore the commandments that say how to worship it. That would be self-defeating.

[Molyneux]

Of course the passage I quoted is also one of the primary justifications for Christian bigotry against homosexuals. Wankers that think the OT was handwaved away are pretty hilarious though, given Jesus specifically says otherwise. Just ask any of them if the Ten Commandments are still important if the OT doesn't apply anymore.

I'd vote for giving them a pass on caring about the Ten Commandments if they normally apply a broad-spectrum "no petty bullshit rules" policy that's consistent in not being bigoted against gays, things like that.

Most of the Ten Commandments are either things that actually make sense regardless of your religious beliefs (not robbing people), or that are sort of a necessary precondition for having religious beliefs in the first place. If you've already decided to worship some god, you're not going to ignore the commandments that say how to worship it. That would be self-defeating.

Which Ten Commandments?

[Alyrium Denryle]

Well that works if you give them obscure laws from leviticus or some such. However I have found it IRL quite useful to ask first does the NT supercede the OT? Then you ask then which sins did JC on several occasions speak up against?
Shouldn't those sins that JC then found to be the worst be the ones you should engage the most effort against as a christian?
If they agree to all of that. Just pick out a bible and show them that it is possesion and divorce. Then ask how many times JC spoke up against things like homosexuallity...

The part that I quoted deals with God handing down his commandments to Moses on Mt. Sinai, so I'm not sure what definition of obscure you're using here. Generally most Christians put the Commandments God gave to Moses on as high a pedestal as anything Jesus ever said, at any rate.

God gave Moses lots of commandments, not just ten. While fundies do still put a lot of emphasis on the "ten commandments" (which are not actually numbered in the Bible), they generally dismiss the others as being superseded by the new testament. I mean come on, they eat seafood, they wear clothing made of mixed substances, etc, and those things are banned with just the same language as homosexuality is, and all three are condemned in the law God gave to Moses.

Of course, Christian Reconstructionists believe that the old testament was not superseded, and that it still applies. There aren't many of them, though.

Which is particularly funny because all of levitical law was only ever supposed to apply to the jews. Gentiles are excluded.

[Rye]

I have always wanted to know what this temptation is exactly. For something to be tempting enough that it might be persuasive it has to offer some benefit to counter-act the risk.

So what is this benefit with homosexuality? Does anal sex with another man (as opposed to a women) just feel that much better? I would not think so. We will call that a wash.

Is there some sort of perverse pleasure in pissing god off? No.

In exchange we get ridicule, hate, hate crimes, and second class citizenship. With what precisely are we being tempted?

They view it along the same lines as drug use. They believe you are being tempted by SATAN, therefore the worldly nature of it is embellished and is magically more attractive to you, due to your perception being distorted. They see you as people ensnared in an addiction to Satan's perversion and lust, and that's what drives you. Their only exposure to lust has been through mountains of repression and self-recrimination (for instance, when they look at porn), so they assume all lust works that way and is a failing, rather than a normal part of human biology that they've eroticised out of proportion through repression.

[Darth Wong]

Which is particularly funny because all of levitical law was only ever supposed to apply to the jews. Gentiles are excluded.

jegs2 used to point that out as a way of excusing the Bible for its atrocities (as if that somehow exonerates the God who mandated all of these things), but he never managed to explain why we should respect the Ten Commandments anyway, since the Ten Commandments were also part of this exclusive Jewish covenant.

[Darth Wong]

I have always wanted to know what this temptation is exactly. For something to be tempting enough that it might be persuasive it has to offer some benefit to counter-act the risk.

Considering how many fervent anti-gay crusaders turned out to be closeted homosexuals, I can't help but wonder if this whole "homosexual temptation" argument is actually an inadvertent admission of suppressed homosexual desire. It does help explain some of their fervour: a man who must constantly suppress his own gay desires will no doubt be angry at others who do not put themselves through this self-made hell.

They view it along the same lines as drug use. They believe you are being tempted by SATAN, therefore the worldly nature of it is embellished and is magically more attractive to you, due to your perception being distorted. They see you as people ensnared in an addiction to Satan's perversion and lust, and that's what drives you.

Yeah, but that still requires that they see homosexuality as something that would tempt otherwise heterosexual people, hence their bizarre belief that more people will turn gay unless homosexuality is constantly shunned by society. Nobody seriously worries about Satan's perversion and lust tempting people to fuck squirrels, or that squirrel-fuckers will start spreading their desires to others if we don't make a point of regularly condemning squirrel-fucking. Most people think such acts are just due to the individual having mental problems, rather than the kind of infectious cult that they visualize homosexuality to be.

[eion]

I have always wanted to know what this temptation is exactly. For something to be tempting enough that it might be persuasive it has to offer some benefit to counter-act the risk.

Considering how many fervent anti-gay crusaders turned out to be closeted homosexuals, I can't help but wonder if this whole "homosexual temptation" argument is actually an inadvertent admission of suppressed homosexual desire. It does help explain some of their fervour: a man who must constantly suppress his own gay desires will no doubt be angry at others who do not put themselves through this self-made hell.

Oh I'd buy that. Some of the most homophobic assholes I know have also been seen spending quite a bit of time at gay bars picking up guys (or as they would say, ministering to the sinners, ministering all night long.)

[Eleas]

Homosexual sex. You're being tempted with homosexual sex, and conservatives assume everyone is a child who will be tempted to do something just because their parent, God, told them not to. So it is, in fact, a perverse pleasure in pissing god off that you're being tempted with. "C'mon, you know you wanna do it.." is the level of discourse of most of these people to start with.

Ah, I see. You're saying rebellion itself is temptation. You know, that makes a disturbing amount of sense. When you start cracking down on everything that's fun, the natural impulse will be to secretly want to buck authority and have fun. Ergo, if something is forbidden, that obviously means doing it must feel good.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

There also seems to be an unspoken assumption among many people that homosexuality can be taught to young children and that they may end up being susceptible to homosexual temptation in later life. This is more blatantly clear in political campaigns such as the Briggs Initiative in California that sought to fire all teachers suspected of being gay. In the prop 8 campaign, we suspect that the ads about gay marriage being taught in schools were most effective for young parents who have very young kids. In contrast, older parents with older kids do not seem to respond that well towards those ads. The thought of their young kids being taught about homosexuality is a very uncomfortable concept to many young parents - so much that they are willing to vote to take away the rights of others.