Skip to main content

Condemned for a lifestyle "choice"? Another ridiculous argument by the uber-religious against homosexuals

I got into an interesting (sort of) discussion with someone very close to me last week. Somehow, the discussion transitioned to homosexuality. I guess his wife, due to being a die-hard Christian, still isn't okay with the concept. This guy then said he doesn't necessarily agree it's a sin, but wanted to play devil's advocate and saying that these individuals would be condemned to hell unless they changed their lifestyle, because they'd die sinners.

I'm agnostic, so I am rather convinced (unless I can be proven wrong) that it is virtually impossible for a person to either prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a God does or doesn't exist. Given that and having been raised a Christian, I can't understand the before-mentioned logic.

According to Christianity, there was a man whom lived a perfect life and died as a sacrifice for man's sins. If people believe him to be the savior and ask forgiveness for their sins, they will live eternally in a paradise referred to as heaven. Since this man felt the need to do this, it can be presumed that everyone else is sinful to a certain extent. It's also stated that, in God's eyes, all sins are equal. Whether I tell a little white lie, cheat on an exam, commit adultery, etc., they're all sins and will be forgiven if asked, in conjunction with believing that Jesus is the savior and son of God.

Okay, so given all of that, what makes the homosexual lifestyle, even if it is considered sinful, worse of a crime in God's eyes than a heterosexual's lifestyle? Whether one is heterosexual or homosexual, according to The Bible, they live a sinful life. So how can we say that a homosexual will not be saved due to their "sinful" lifestyle, if one wants to refer to it as such, when heterosexuals live a sinful lifestyle? Isn't this a bit of a double-standard? So how is orientation relevant in this argument? If I'm gay, I will inevitably sin according to organized religion. If I'm straight, I will inevitably sin according to organized religion. Why on earth would, if the story is true, I be permitted to enter heaven given all the sins I've committed, while a homosexual is prohibited due to his or her orientation? Logically speaking, this makes absolutely no sense to me and even though I can appreciate a person playing devil's advocate to stimulate thought and conversation, this was a very poor attempt at doing that.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun
2 comments
Read more

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i
Post a Comment
Read more

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"
Post a Comment
Read more