Pro-Gays, is incest immoral?

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote Originally Posted by Nick M

Ryan White disagrees with those who say faggotry does not harm anybody else.

If you want to talk about harm...
Ryan White spent as much time fighting the hate and ignorance of those who wanted to claim AIDS as some kind of divine retribution against gays than he did fighting the virus itself.

Actually I'm more interested in talking about the people who engage in an extremely high risk behavior that disproportionately contracts AIDS and because of their disease ridden lifestyle, people like Ryan White and Elizabeth Glazer are dead.

We can also talk about because of innocent people like Ryan White and Elizabeth Glazer contracting AIDS and dying from it because of the tainted blood that they received during a transfusion, those people who engage in an extremely high risk behavior that disproportionately contract AIDS were for years (and currently are) prohibited from donating blood.

As Nick says (and the FDA seems to agree) :

Those dead souls from the grave disagree with those who say that homosexuality does not harm anyone else.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

I don't approve of incest ,bestiality, pedophilia , necrophilia etc...

But homosexuality is ok. (Finished that sentence for ya).

But as far as I am concerned, if it is two gays having consensual sex in private, it is not , cannot and must not be considered a crime of any kind . Or even a misdemeanor.

How about two brothers, a mother and daughter or a father and son?

Some gays have died of AIDS? Yes. But every year in America, far more people die from respiratory diseases caused by smoking , die from alcoholism or accidents caused by intoxication etc , drunk driving ,
from unhealthy diet and using dangerous illegal drugs such as cocaine and heroin etc than from AIDS .

Many of those people engaged in homosexuality, because as I'd shown in another thread, the LGBQ so-called "community" is over represented when it comes to smoking, alcoholism, etc. etc. etc.

Quite a few people who are straight die from unsafe heterosexual sex, too .Gay sex is NOT harmful in and of itself . UNSAFE sex is the deadly thing, whether you are straight, gay or bisexual.

The CDC disagrees:

Countless gay people, male and female have lived to ripe old ages despite being gay . This is a fact .

Gotta love those government subsidized AIDS cocktails.

Today, more heterosexual people die from AIDS related illnesses every year than gay people
all over the world. The AIDS virus could not care less whether you are gay, straight or bisexual.

I wonder why the HIV/AIDS virus disproportionately is contracted by homosexuals in the US and Europe? One would think that if HIV/AIDS were A heterosexual problem in other parts of the world that heterosexuals in the US and Europe would equally contract it as well.

 

[glassjester]

So answer your own question already.

I gave my answer, numerous times.

What's your opinion on the matter?
Do you believe incest is immoral?
Do you believe incestuous marriage should be legal?

It's just two questions.

 

[glassjester]

That looks like a literal interpretation to me. I'm willing for you to clarify.

Ok.

At some point in time, members of our species (or perhaps an even earlier species) became sentient. Well there had to be a first, right? And a second?

And you'd agree (maybe) that self-awareness is necessary for any true free will or moral choices to be made, yes? An animal, operating only on instinct, for example, is not thought to be just or unjust, and is not really free to choose its actions. Not in the way a human is.

Those first two true persons acted, in some way, unjustly, fully knowing that what they freely chose to do (the first earthly creatures able to freely choose anything) was not the right thing to do.

Upon knowing right from wrong, they freely chose to do wrong.
And we all tend to do the same.

Was their sin eating a fruit off a tree? I don't know.
But the story provides information about Man's relation to himself, and to God, and to morality.


Maybe that's too long-winded an explanation.
But it's my understanding of original sin, and of the first two people.
It's far from a literal interpretation.

 

[glassjester]

I would ask you to please stop lying but i can't imagine you would actually do so.

I see that I have lied by saying you are pro-incest.
I'm sorry.

I don't wish to be a liar, and I did not mean to do so.

Please feel free to correct me.

 

[Nameless.In.Grace]

A question for people that do not believe homosexuality is immoral, or intrinsically disordered.

Do you believe incest is morally wrong? Why/why not?

Additionally, do you believe bans on incestuous marriage are unconstitutional, and incestuous couples should be allowed to marry? Why/why not?

I don't know, ask Abraham, who was married to his Half-Sister Sarah.



https://66.media.tumblr.com/12874ad129101f65b78f0609c6a8696f/tumblr_nlr719SZJK1qcfnyho1_400.gif

Sent from my HTC One M9 using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[glassjester]

I don't approve of incest

Not even homosexual incest?

 

[annabenedetti]

Ok.

At some point in time, members of our species (or perhaps an even earlier species) became sentient. Well there had to be a first, right? And a second?

And you'd agree (maybe) that self-awareness is necessary for any true free will or moral choices to be made, yes? An animal, operating only on instinct, for example, is not thought to be just or unjust, and is not really free to choose its actions. Not in the way a human is.

Those first two true persons acted, in some way, unjustly, fully knowing that what they freely chose to do (the first earthly creatures able to freely choose anything) was not the right thing to do.

Upon knowing right from wrong, they freely chose to do wrong.
And we all tend to do the same.

Was their sin eating a fruit off a tree? I don't know.
But the story provides information about Man's relation to himself, and to God, and to morality.


Maybe that's too long-winded an explanation.
But it's my understanding of original sin, and of the first two people.
It's far from a literal interpretation.

But you believe Adam and Eve were the two original people of humankind, correct?

So in this chart, how do you think everyone found spouses?

http://www.opbm.org/images/from-Adam.gif

 

[glassjester]

But you believe Adam and Eve were the two original people of humankind, correct?

So in this chart, how do you think everyone found spouses?

http://www.opbm.org/images/from-Adam.gif

Yes, the first two members of humankind.

A human, theologically speaking, and according to the teachings of the Church, is a duality of body and rational soul. Man is not just his body, and Man is not just his soul.

"Adam" and "Eve" are how we refer to the first two examples of such creatures.
I do not believe they were the first or only hominid organisms.

I believe evolution took place over billions of years before these creatures came about.
That's not a literal interpretation of Genesis.
I would need to hold to a literal interpretation of Genesis to use your chart.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote: Originally posted by glassjester
Additionally, do you believe bans on incestuous marriage are unconstitutional, and incestuous couples should be allowed to marry? Why/why not?

I don't know, ask Abraham, who was married to his Half-Sister Sarah.

������������

https://66.media.tumblr.com/12874ad129101f65b78f0609c6a8696f/tumblr_nlr719SZJK1qcfnyho1_400.gif

Sent from my HTC One M9 using TheologyOnline mobile app

A favorite of the LGBTQueer movement: bringing up incestuous relationships in the Old Testament.

We can turn to Leviticus to see where God stands on both incest and homosexuality.

'No one is to approach any close relative to have sexual relations. I am the LORD.
Leviticus 18:6

You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination.
Leviticus 18:22

It must drive you and your fellow LGBTQ activists close to the brink of insanity knowing that God did make some rare exceptions for inner family relationships, but not once, I repeat not once has He ever approved of homosexuality.

 

[annabenedetti]

Yes, the first two members of humankind.

A human, theologically speaking, and according to the teachings of the Church, is a duality of body and rational soul. Man is not just his body, and Man is not just his soul.

"Adam" and "Eve" are how we refer to the first two examples of such creatures.
I do not believe they were the first or only hominid organisms.

I believe evolution took place over billions of years before these creatures came about.
That's not a literal interpretation of Genesis.
I would need to hold to a literal interpretation of Genesis to use your chart.

Humani Generis:

37. When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains that either after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parent of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled with that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the Teaching Authority of the Church propose with regard to original sin, which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam and which, through generation, is passed on to all and is in everyone as his own.[12]

​

 

[annabenedetti]

God did make some rare exceptions for inner family relationships, .

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

God did make some rare exceptions for inner family relationships,...

http://www.gotquestions.org/incest-in-the-Bible.html

Yet the behavior that you, Art and NIG defend was dealt with harshly by God. He realized that it was such an abomination (i.e. it was a despicable behavior) that he told the Jews to put to death anyone caught engaging in it.

He burned down the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah and in modern times acknowledged that homosexuality is such a filthy behavior that He gave those who engage in it HIV/AIDS.

Boy anna, no wonder you HATE God as much as you do.

 

[annabenedetti]

Quote Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

God did make some rare exceptions for inner family relationships,...

Yet the behavior that you, Art and NIG defend was dealt with harshly by God. He realized that it was such an abomination (i.e. it was a despicable behavior) that he told the Jews to put to death anyone caught engaging in it.

He burned down the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah and in modern times acknowledged that homosexuality is such a filthy behavior that He gave those who engage in it HIV/AIDS.

Boy anna, know wonder you HATE God as much as you do.

Do you believe in a literal interpretation of Genesis? Adam and Eve as first humans?

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Do you believe in a literal interpretation of Genesis? Adam and Eve as first humans?

As opposed to?

 

[annabenedetti]

As opposed to?

glassjester's view.

 

[glassjester]

For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains that either after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parent of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents.

It is presumptious for you to attempt to instruct me on the doctrines of my own faith.
I am aware of the teachings of the Church on this matter, and I have not contradicted them.

What is Man?
According to the catechism:

356 Of all visible creatures only man is "able to know and love his creator".219 He is "the only creature on earth that God has willed for its own sake",220 and he alone is called to share, by knowledge and love, in God's own life. It was for this end that he was created, and this is the fundamental reason for his dignity:

and

362 The human person, created in the image of God, is a being at once corporeal and spiritual. The biblical account expresses this reality in symbolic language when it affirms that "then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being."229 Man, whole and entire, is therefore willed by God.

There had to be a first, right?

And it is a matter of logical necessity that all human beings directly descend from two common ancestors, a male and a female. Those common ancestors, are the "Adam" and the "Eve" to which Genesis refers.

From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Most_recent_common_ancestor#Patrilineal_and_matrilineal_MRCA

Mitochondrial Eve and Y-chromosomal Adam have been established by researchers using genealogical DNA tests. Mitochondrial Eve is estimated to have lived about 200,000 years ago. A paper published in March 2013 determined that, with 95% confidence and that provided there are no systematic errors in the study's data, Y-chromosomal Adam lived between 237,000 and 581,000 years ago.

This topic, while interesting and worthy of discussion, has taken us far afield of the OP.

You have said that you believe incest is immoral.
And that incestuous marriage should not be legalized.

I would be interested to know your moral arguments against incest and incestuous marriage.

 

[annabenedetti]

It is presumptious for you to attempt to instruct me on the doctrines of my own faith.

No it's not at all presumptuous of me to remind you of what the church teaches.

I am aware of the teachings of the Church on this matter, and I have not contradicted them.

And I'm aware that you're being rather inconsistent.

What is Man?
According to the catechism:

Here's my opportunity join you in your high dudgeon, since while I'm a lapsed Catholic, I'm still a Catholic.

But I won't.

There had to be a first, right?

And it is a matter of logical necessity that all human beings directly descend from two common ancestors, a male and a female. Those common ancestors, are the "Adam" and the "Eve" to which Genesis refers.

You're completely sidestepping the obvious.

This topic, while interesting and worthy of discussion, has taken us far afield of the OP.

We're right smack in the middle of the OP. It's just not going the way you imagined.

You have said that you believe incest is immoral.
And that incestuous marriage should not be legalized.

I would be interested to know your moral arguments against incest and incestuous marriage.

I'd be interested in your finishing what you started.

 

[glassjester]

I'd be interested in your finishing what you started.

I'm trying!

You've said that you believe incest is immoral.
What's your moral argument against it?

You've said that incestuous marriage should not be legalized. Why?

 

[annabenedetti]

I'm trying!

Then follow through:

And allowing such perversions is simply the logical consequence of supporting homosexuality.

Yet, people such as The Horn, with feigned ignorance, continue to ask, "How can you compare homosexuality to incest?"

Did God allow incest in the Bible so that there would be descendants from Adam and Eve?

Or is there no real Adam and Eve?



- And The Horn is right on target, as are several others who've attempted to tell you that you're attempting to compare two kinds, not two degrees.