S
Sniper_Spike777
Guest
My stance is very strong on that its wrong. I just want insight into scriptural proof that God wants man and wife. I want to know your opinions, therefore it is a debate nothing more.
CCGR
Member
The Bible is clearly against it however we are called to love the sinners and not the sin.
Kidan
Moderator
As CCGR said, the Bible is clear that it is wrong. Yet we should not abuse those whom perform this sin. It is no worse a sin than lying or adultery.
As for Biblical resources. The creation story, tells that marriage is for a man and woman. The OT Law gives numerous examples of forms of sexual sins that are worthy of death, and homosexuality is one of those.
Yet for the NT, we are still told that marriage is for man and woman, and while we're not to stone homosexuals, we are still not to condone their actions, for it is still wrong. I know Paul wrote on it, and I'm fairly certain Peter did also, although I can't remember exact Biblical references for I'm at work and left my Bible at home
.
The biggest thing though, is that all sexual conduct should be performed within the bounds of a marriage covenant, and the marriage covenant is always between God, a man and a woman. All other sexual activity falls under either fornication or adultery (and it could actually be argued that all fornication is adultery, but that's another debate)
As for Biblical resources. The creation story, tells that marriage is for a man and woman. The OT Law gives numerous examples of forms of sexual sins that are worthy of death, and homosexuality is one of those.
Yet for the NT, we are still told that marriage is for man and woman, and while we're not to stone homosexuals, we are still not to condone their actions, for it is still wrong. I know Paul wrote on it, and I'm fairly certain Peter did also, although I can't remember exact Biblical references for I'm at work and left my Bible at home
The biggest thing though, is that all sexual conduct should be performed within the bounds of a marriage covenant, and the marriage covenant is always between God, a man and a woman. All other sexual activity falls under either fornication or adultery (and it could actually be argued that all fornication is adultery, but that's another debate)
Ultima Avatar
New Member
Let's start em both.
Is it? Adultery is extra-marital affairs. Fornication is just...whoever, whenever, wherever, whyever, however (now that's...different). Outside of marriage or inside. All adultery is fornication but not all fornication is adultery. Euclid, thank you much!
As for references: Romans 1:22-27 deals with these types, lesbians and homos alike. Paul had been in Rome, and they have what we like to call "gay baths" where people are gay and take baths. Wow. Also Nero had a little kid he really was very fond of, like Michael Jackson-fond. "It's a bootiful ting." -Jackson
That's some for you. Also God made man and woman for man and woman...not anything else. There is possibly every other type of sexual relationship that is ungodly in the Books of the Law. Beastiality, homosexuality, adultery, fornication, with your sister or mother or father.
Let me share something I JUST realized...I entered this into my diary just now.
6/10/03 2:58 I just realized what it’s all about: Christ came, as He said, to fulfill the Law…why I can’t revert to the Law to support myself in such sins as homosexuality and the results they beg for (stoning, et cetera) is thus: if at any point I come under the wrath of the Law I am as no better. And I have no sacrifices to offer to cleanse myself except Christ…and I can’t bounce between the Law to condemn the world and use Christ to wash away my self-condemnation.
Instance: “Homosexuals are wrong! I wish they’d all get together and be burned or stoned alive! God hates it!” True enough. It’s all true. I do believe that should happen.
But: I have sex with a babe. Before marriage or not with my wife (who shall be a babe, I ensure you). That’s wrong in it of itself. Desirable of stoning according to the Law. Now what happens? I’m stuck. Using the same Law to condemn others I have myself become condemned. I cannot perfect others or myself by the Law.
Only Christ can do that…therefore love is what I must share.
Also today the laws have changed. I can have sex with whoever I want to and not get in trouble so long as they're over fifteen. Sweet!
But then I call myself a Christian. And then the Law says to fornicate is wrong.
What happens? Stuck in a rock and a hard place.
Ciao for now.
Is it? Adultery is extra-marital affairs. Fornication is just...whoever, whenever, wherever, whyever, however (now that's...different). Outside of marriage or inside. All adultery is fornication but not all fornication is adultery. Euclid, thank you much!
As for references: Romans 1:22-27 deals with these types, lesbians and homos alike. Paul had been in Rome, and they have what we like to call "gay baths" where people are gay and take baths. Wow. Also Nero had a little kid he really was very fond of, like Michael Jackson-fond. "It's a bootiful ting." -Jackson
That's some for you. Also God made man and woman for man and woman...not anything else. There is possibly every other type of sexual relationship that is ungodly in the Books of the Law. Beastiality, homosexuality, adultery, fornication, with your sister or mother or father.
Let me share something I JUST realized...I entered this into my diary just now.
6/10/03 2:58 I just realized what it’s all about: Christ came, as He said, to fulfill the Law…why I can’t revert to the Law to support myself in such sins as homosexuality and the results they beg for (stoning, et cetera) is thus: if at any point I come under the wrath of the Law I am as no better. And I have no sacrifices to offer to cleanse myself except Christ…and I can’t bounce between the Law to condemn the world and use Christ to wash away my self-condemnation.
Instance: “Homosexuals are wrong! I wish they’d all get together and be burned or stoned alive! God hates it!” True enough. It’s all true. I do believe that should happen.
But: I have sex with a babe. Before marriage or not with my wife (who shall be a babe, I ensure you). That’s wrong in it of itself. Desirable of stoning according to the Law. Now what happens? I’m stuck. Using the same Law to condemn others I have myself become condemned. I cannot perfect others or myself by the Law.
Only Christ can do that…therefore love is what I must share.
Also today the laws have changed. I can have sex with whoever I want to and not get in trouble so long as they're over fifteen. Sweet!
But then I call myself a Christian. And then the Law says to fornicate is wrong.
What happens? Stuck in a rock and a hard place.
Ciao for now.
MeanMrMustard
New Member
I think it's neither right or wrong, consenting adults who are homosexual are not hurting anyone. You don't need to pass judgement on them and tell them what they're doing is wrong, because it simply isn't. Unless they are themselves Christian, they are not subject to the rules and judgements from the bible, and there is no valid reason to oppose homosexuality in general besides "cause the bible said so".
"Unless they are themselves Christian, they are not subject to the rules and judgements from the bible, and there is no valid reason to oppose homosexuality in general besides "cause the bible said so"."
Er, according to our priciples it IS wrong, therefore we believe they are doing wrong. Not everyone agrees with us, but that makes no difference. Sorry to break it to you, not everyone is into a relative morality universe either.
Er, according to our priciples it IS wrong, therefore we believe they are doing wrong. Not everyone agrees with us, but that makes no difference. Sorry to break it to you, not everyone is into a relative morality universe either.
Ultima Avatar
New Member
Umm...your logic's flawed Mustard. "If a homosexual says they're Christian then they're subject to the Bible..." Can you tell me exactly what hell is for then? Christians? And the lake of fire at the end of it all? Christians? God made heaven and hell for Christians? Why? Half the world ain't Christian, and that's what hell is for. Those who reject God to his face, and the Lake for the ending judgement as well. And if those who don't say they're Christian are subject to the Bible...then what happens when Christ says: "I am the way, the truth and the life?" Does that mean the homosexuals get their own heaven and hell for gays?
Yeah.
Yeah.
T
Tom Kazansky
Guest
I'm going to use the Theory of Relativity to prove you wrong here. You see, with respect to the Bible, homosexuality is wrong. With respect to homosexuals who are not Christianity, homosexuality is perfectly fine. What you believe depends entirely on your "frame of reference". For example, think simultenaity. Light travels at a finite speed right? Ok, take two lamp posts, place them 10 metres apart, and stand directly in between them. Get a friend, who is 10 metres perpendicular to the lamp on YOUR RIGHT, which makes him about 14.142 metres away from the lamp on your left. The lights both go on, and they appear to go on at precisely the same time WITH RESPECT TO YOU. Will your friend get the same result? That's relativity. Therefore, it is perfectly in reason for those who follow the Bible to say that they disagree with the practice, and you are unable to say that we are incorrect because it's relative to our "frame of reference" that we are making that conclusion.[b said:
I love Einstein!
Ultima Avatar
New Member
Uhh...light and homosexuality don't...mix, Tom. Your example's okay but lacking.
What Mustard, I believe from his posts, supports is relative morality. Nobody's right and nobody's wrong unless someone believes otherwise to the person. That's it. Parking space example: old lady wants it and I want it. It's wrong to me if she takes it but right to her and vice versa. Who cares? It's all relative to the person.
What Mustard, I believe from his posts, supports is relative morality. Nobody's right and nobody's wrong unless someone believes otherwise to the person. That's it. Parking space example: old lady wants it and I want it. It's wrong to me if she takes it but right to her and vice versa. Who cares? It's all relative to the person.
T
Tom Kazansky
Guest
Read it again. It shows "frame of reference".
MeanMrMustard
New Member
I think you sort of missed my point, its sort of hard to explain. My point wasn't that just because they dont believe in the bible means that it isn't still immoral to you, it was that it doesn't matter. I think it's safe to say most openly gay people aren't Christian. So they're all already sinful and destined for hell as far as you're concerned, what does it matter if they're homosexual? It wont make any difference to them, and they aren't doing you any harm.
It's like me and say prayer, I think prayer is a foolish waste of time... for me. It's something I wouldn't want to do or take part in, but I dont have any problem at all with you doing it. I have no problem with friends who pray, but I feel very uncomforable if I'm around them while they're doing it. I don't want prayer to stop worldwide, I'm not threatened or scared by it, and it doesn't really harm or affect me, I'm totally indifferent to other people doing it. Why dont Christians have the same view of homosexuality as athiests do about prayer for example?
It's like me and say prayer, I think prayer is a foolish waste of time... for me. It's something I wouldn't want to do or take part in, but I dont have any problem at all with you doing it. I have no problem with friends who pray, but I feel very uncomforable if I'm around them while they're doing it. I don't want prayer to stop worldwide, I'm not threatened or scared by it, and it doesn't really harm or affect me, I'm totally indifferent to other people doing it. Why dont Christians have the same view of homosexuality as athiests do about prayer for example?
Well sort of, although thats much too simple. I really like to avoid general rules and statements on things like morality, each case is different, nothing is black and white.[b said:
Ultima Avatar
New Member
Ah. Like, say, mass murder. Right? Did it to please God. Yep. Went into the mall with a knife, took a lot of young beauties, and carved them up real good, then hung them up on the carousel for all to see.
Was that right or wrong ? What would you say?
Well what it matters is that we aren't to sit down and be idle while we watch our friends and peers hop on the highway to hell. That's one thing that matters to us. Another is that we are called to love others...and if we love them we will not hold back from them the message of the gospel of Christ. For sure. We're called to share that with all. And that includes the homosexuals. The reasons it should bother us is because we have God inside of us. And God hates things that are not of him (sin) and homosexuality is NOT of God.
That's why it matters. If the dude in prison is a convicted killer I will not keep silent as I watch him wait to be led to the metal table. (He probably wouldn't...a few years later and he's out, but whatever. For sake of fantasy let's imagine he DOES get the death penalty.) I will tell him my beliefs and I will confront him with this: You had your entire life to do what? Take another's life? And what did they want to achieve in this life? You don't know, we won't know, and now they can't. But you are still alive. What happens when you die? Et cetera. Beliefs. Blah. Gospel. Again and again if necessary.
We are not to stay still and be silent.
Was that right or wrong ? What would you say?
Well what it matters is that we aren't to sit down and be idle while we watch our friends and peers hop on the highway to hell. That's one thing that matters to us. Another is that we are called to love others...and if we love them we will not hold back from them the message of the gospel of Christ. For sure. We're called to share that with all. And that includes the homosexuals. The reasons it should bother us is because we have God inside of us. And God hates things that are not of him (sin) and homosexuality is NOT of God.
That's why it matters. If the dude in prison is a convicted killer I will not keep silent as I watch him wait to be led to the metal table. (He probably wouldn't...a few years later and he's out, but whatever. For sake of fantasy let's imagine he DOES get the death penalty.) I will tell him my beliefs and I will confront him with this: You had your entire life to do what? Take another's life? And what did they want to achieve in this life? You don't know, we won't know, and now they can't. But you are still alive. What happens when you die? Et cetera. Beliefs. Blah. Gospel. Again and again if necessary.
We are not to stay still and be silent.
MeanMrMustard
New Member
Wow using the extreme example of murder, how very unique of you. Murder harms and involves others. Homosexuality or prayer do not. They are very different and cannot be compared. I was hoping people would see that without my having to specifically point it out.[b said:
So do you hate Hinduism, atheism and any other practice that is not of god just as much? Most Christians have a special hatred towards homosexuality, if what you're saying is true then you should view homosexuals no different than you view Muslims for example.[b said:
Ultima Avatar
New Member
Actually, uh, I'm not supposed to hate anybody. Christ has called us to love. Not hate. God is not a God of hate (save against sin), but one of love. And love does include punishment. So don't point out to me that God punishes us.
And well, Hinduism, Islam, homosexuality and murder are all in the same bag. Ain't of God. Sin is sin. Some sin, some will argue, is greater than others. Others will argue that all sin is the same in the eyes of God. Gays or Hindus are all the same in God's eyes in that they are lost and without him.
And why not murder? It doesn't affect anyone else...does it? What if my judgement is clouded at the moment and I think it only affects me? I mean, the whole world sucks, therefore the whole world must suffer, because I do not like the whole world.
And I beg to differ that prayer does not harm or involve others. There are Scripture references that support and verify that prayer actually does involve others, in fact causing things to happen. "Whenever two or more are gathered in My name, I am there." And God makes things happen. Prayer makes things happen dude. They definitely involve others.
In fact, I'm involving a deity by prayer (be it one or many). Now is it wrong or right? Or do you think people pray to hear themselves talk and ask for things or to praise some God they made up in their heads?
And homosexuality doesn't involve others? What? Have you not read the headlines lately. Episcopalian pastor, an openly gay man. HE WAS MADE A PASTOR! He is in charge of a congregation of people and HE, a gay man, is supposed to tell them to obey a God that specifically tells us NOT to be gay.
Now correct me if I am wrong (and please do so) but...what? Christianity is quickly becoming a laughingstock thanks to the morons that run the Church and tell who can and can't be in it, or what is done by it.
We are hypocrites to the core, and I feel, that if I had not been a Christian beforehand, I would hate to brand myself that title and share the name "Christ" with any other people that call themselves followers of such and openly despise and disobey him.
And then we had several legal battles over homosexuality. It being a felony to have homosexual sex while being homosexual is okay. Just don't practice it. Big debates over that. Gay bars cause concern, raise eyebrows by the straights of this world, parents. Et cetera. Movies made to encourage good feelings towards gays (and we might as well make some to be nice to the suicide bombers...matter of fact I think I'll make a video to encourage it. Power to Palestine!). Books written for gays. Books written about gays. Gay musicians getting prizes and being proud about their gayness.
ET cetera.
It involves others. Now what?
And well, Hinduism, Islam, homosexuality and murder are all in the same bag. Ain't of God. Sin is sin. Some sin, some will argue, is greater than others. Others will argue that all sin is the same in the eyes of God. Gays or Hindus are all the same in God's eyes in that they are lost and without him.
And why not murder? It doesn't affect anyone else...does it? What if my judgement is clouded at the moment and I think it only affects me? I mean, the whole world sucks, therefore the whole world must suffer, because I do not like the whole world.
And I beg to differ that prayer does not harm or involve others. There are Scripture references that support and verify that prayer actually does involve others, in fact causing things to happen. "Whenever two or more are gathered in My name, I am there." And God makes things happen. Prayer makes things happen dude. They definitely involve others.
In fact, I'm involving a deity by prayer (be it one or many). Now is it wrong or right? Or do you think people pray to hear themselves talk and ask for things or to praise some God they made up in their heads?
And homosexuality doesn't involve others? What? Have you not read the headlines lately. Episcopalian pastor, an openly gay man. HE WAS MADE A PASTOR! He is in charge of a congregation of people and HE, a gay man, is supposed to tell them to obey a God that specifically tells us NOT to be gay.
Now correct me if I am wrong (and please do so) but...what? Christianity is quickly becoming a laughingstock thanks to the morons that run the Church and tell who can and can't be in it, or what is done by it.
We are hypocrites to the core, and I feel, that if I had not been a Christian beforehand, I would hate to brand myself that title and share the name "Christ" with any other people that call themselves followers of such and openly despise and disobey him.
And then we had several legal battles over homosexuality. It being a felony to have homosexual sex while being homosexual is okay. Just don't practice it. Big debates over that. Gay bars cause concern, raise eyebrows by the straights of this world, parents. Et cetera. Movies made to encourage good feelings towards gays (and we might as well make some to be nice to the suicide bombers...matter of fact I think I'll make a video to encourage it. Power to Palestine!). Books written for gays. Books written about gays. Gay musicians getting prizes and being proud about their gayness.
ET cetera.
It involves others. Now what?
M
Mr_Eon
Guest
Interesting, interesting, interesting...
I vaciliate between admiring Christians for being open enough to admit that they consider their subjective viewpoint an objective standard (Which EVERYBODY does unconsciously) and wishing they could be stamped out for it.
You can't use numbers in morals - Tom tried, and that's why his example failed to connect. The fact is that morality is subjective. Let's look at killing for an example. An objective measurement of death would be to say that a soldier has killed 20 people in his battlefield career. Nobody can argue with the numbers, regardless of your moral position they are empirically either right or wrong, either he did or he didn't kill 20 people. Speaking subjectively, of course, he either vanquished 20 foes or else comitted 20 murders - or somewhere in between. Now THAT would be something you could have an argument about - and it is possible to perceive of two logical people having two entirely different and equally "correct" answers to that question.
Which is my way of saying that, for your sakes, I hope you're right. Because karmically speaking, Hell would be packed full of Christians.
Eon
I vaciliate between admiring Christians for being open enough to admit that they consider their subjective viewpoint an objective standard (Which EVERYBODY does unconsciously) and wishing they could be stamped out for it.
You can't use numbers in morals - Tom tried, and that's why his example failed to connect. The fact is that morality is subjective. Let's look at killing for an example. An objective measurement of death would be to say that a soldier has killed 20 people in his battlefield career. Nobody can argue with the numbers, regardless of your moral position they are empirically either right or wrong, either he did or he didn't kill 20 people. Speaking subjectively, of course, he either vanquished 20 foes or else comitted 20 murders - or somewhere in between. Now THAT would be something you could have an argument about - and it is possible to perceive of two logical people having two entirely different and equally "correct" answers to that question.
Which is my way of saying that, for your sakes, I hope you're right. Because karmically speaking, Hell would be packed full of Christians.
Eon
T
Tom Kazansky
Guest
[b said:
How did it fail to connect? It did show that it's subjective, which is what "frame of reference" is all about. I used the numbers so that you could calculate values and show that your friend, who was a different distance away from each light, would have had a valid arguement that the light closer to them actually went on first. The bottom line was still relativity.
Kidan
Moderator
Yes, but we as Christians believe that God has set forth a standard by which we should live.
Love your neighbor, don't get drunk, don't commit sexual sins, etc. etc.
We also believe those rules apply to everyone. This talk about morality and what not is fine. Yet we still have to look at it in this way: Are these the rules or not.
Using Eon's soldier example. While this soldier is in the battlefield, he would get a medal for killing those twenty soldiers (maybe/maybe not, just an example) yet if he was a civillian he would be charged with a crime for murdering twenty civillians. Once he becomes a civillian, he has to follow the same rules as all of us other civillians in that we don't murder. It is a rule, a standard which everyone has to live by (Notice I do recognize a difference between killing and murder, and the discussion of that difference is a topic for a different post). We shall not murder. IF we do murder, we are subject to imprisonment and /or death. It's the entire concept of law.
Now if we applied this relative morality to the law the way people want to apply it to Christian standards of conduct, then when does it become wrong to murder? Steal? Cheat? Vandalize? If this relativity is applied to all standards of conduct then civilization falters and we revert to barbarism.
So in summary. Christians have a standard of behavior, that we believe applies to everyone. This entire debate is not over relative morality, but rather whether or not we're misguided in our beliefs that the rules apply to everyone.
Now I have a question. Can you tell me of anyone who enjoys being lied to? Who actually wants people to lie to them, on a daily consistent basis for the purpose of either a)embarrasing or b)hurting themselves (the person being lied to)?
and if you can't, ask yourself this. If NOONE wants to be lied to, would the rule "Lying is wrong" be a relative or a static morality? And if it's a static morality, how does that fit into the worldview that all morality is relative?
Love your neighbor, don't get drunk, don't commit sexual sins, etc. etc.
We also believe those rules apply to everyone. This talk about morality and what not is fine. Yet we still have to look at it in this way: Are these the rules or not.
Using Eon's soldier example. While this soldier is in the battlefield, he would get a medal for killing those twenty soldiers (maybe/maybe not, just an example) yet if he was a civillian he would be charged with a crime for murdering twenty civillians. Once he becomes a civillian, he has to follow the same rules as all of us other civillians in that we don't murder. It is a rule, a standard which everyone has to live by (Notice I do recognize a difference between killing and murder, and the discussion of that difference is a topic for a different post). We shall not murder. IF we do murder, we are subject to imprisonment and /or death. It's the entire concept of law.
Now if we applied this relative morality to the law the way people want to apply it to Christian standards of conduct, then when does it become wrong to murder? Steal? Cheat? Vandalize? If this relativity is applied to all standards of conduct then civilization falters and we revert to barbarism.
So in summary. Christians have a standard of behavior, that we believe applies to everyone. This entire debate is not over relative morality, but rather whether or not we're misguided in our beliefs that the rules apply to everyone.
Now I have a question. Can you tell me of anyone who enjoys being lied to? Who actually wants people to lie to them, on a daily consistent basis for the purpose of either a)embarrasing or b)hurting themselves (the person being lied to)?
and if you can't, ask yourself this. If NOONE wants to be lied to, would the rule "Lying is wrong" be a relative or a static morality? And if it's a static morality, how does that fit into the worldview that all morality is relative?
The soldier example isn't that great. Kidan already explained why.
I think this is the 3rd time we've gotten on this subject over the last year.
Eon, what MAKES something wrong or right? If the ABC natives say it's ok to murder and they are proud to murder, does that make it ok? If I suddenly step into their society do all my moral ideas suddenly change? Do you really want to live in a world where there are conflicting and different morals all over the place?
Is murder wrong? If so, what makes it wrong? Is lying? Swindling? Stealing? What if I morally feel it's ok to harm other people? Who is right? Who is wrong?
If morality is relative, who makes the rules? And how can you tell someone else they are wrong?
[b said:
I think this is the 3rd time we've gotten on this subject over the last year.
Is murder wrong? If so, what makes it wrong? Is lying? Swindling? Stealing? What if I morally feel it's ok to harm other people? Who is right? Who is wrong?
If morality is relative, who makes the rules? And how can you tell someone else they are wrong?
Ultima Avatar
New Member
Dude, SSquared man, it's like, all in the, like, bad karma, dude.
I kid. Observe: I am a civilian. Not a soldier (there's a difference). Soldier is cleared to kill. That's what he's for. He's not here to play pattycake with the "other side." He's here to kill or capture them or heck, avoid any conflict, and in any way possible, end whatever fight we're in. That's a soldier.
A civilian has to, uh, be civil. He can't kill or take captive anyone that has a skirmish with him. That's illegal. Also, I can't go kill Druglord Phil, even though he is on the run from the law, highly sought after, and a repeat murderer. Why? Because it's for the law to handle. I can't. But if I'm killed by Druglord Phil, tough luck, right? If Druglord Phil comes into my home and shoots a .44 at me, but I duck and stab him through his eye and he dies, I get in trouble for manslaughter. Why? He came into my house and fired a shot at me. If I had been hit what would have happened? Quite possibly my death. It's either him or me. Maybe I could have just hacked off his hand too and let him bleed to death.
But if a soldier does that, it's perfectly fine (so long as it's not in civilian environment). That's what they're paid for, trained for, and there for.
Now Mr. Bob may argue that it's immoral either way, that murder is murder is murder. Miss Anne, however, believes that soldier's killing is not the same as my killing of Druglord Phil.
Morals become argued here.
And we have a base for morals and the type. We have laws, commandments, not suggestions. They are our doctrine, our commands to follow. God is not one who suggests: He is a commander.
Now. Homosexuality. Gay Guy 1, a practicing homo, believes he's a Christian, even though God specifically says not to be gay. Gay Guy 2 has professed his sins to Christ and believes he's a Christian, and does think it's wrong to be gay and is trying to reform to straightness. Gay Guy 3 says: "Screw you all, I do what I want." All three of them are killed separately by forces of nature. All three gay guys are presented before God. Which one, if any, are going to be admitted to heaven?
And if any are, who's to say you're right or wrong?
And now I ask: if murder does become legal, would you appreciate being murdered? Or watching someone else get murdered (I'm sure we all would at some point in time...but then we'd probably feel bad about it later)? Would you really like that? I don't like the way your brother is looking out me: BANG. And you? What's up with the tears? SLASH!
Morals have to have a basis lest we all tend to a state of chaos. Morals are there for right or wrong. Murder, as we all have deemed, is wrong. Killing, as in war, is not necessarily wrong. Not all killing is murder but all murder is killing.
I kid. Observe: I am a civilian. Not a soldier (there's a difference). Soldier is cleared to kill. That's what he's for. He's not here to play pattycake with the "other side." He's here to kill or capture them or heck, avoid any conflict, and in any way possible, end whatever fight we're in. That's a soldier.
A civilian has to, uh, be civil. He can't kill or take captive anyone that has a skirmish with him. That's illegal. Also, I can't go kill Druglord Phil, even though he is on the run from the law, highly sought after, and a repeat murderer. Why? Because it's for the law to handle. I can't. But if I'm killed by Druglord Phil, tough luck, right? If Druglord Phil comes into my home and shoots a .44 at me, but I duck and stab him through his eye and he dies, I get in trouble for manslaughter. Why? He came into my house and fired a shot at me. If I had been hit what would have happened? Quite possibly my death. It's either him or me. Maybe I could have just hacked off his hand too and let him bleed to death.
But if a soldier does that, it's perfectly fine (so long as it's not in civilian environment). That's what they're paid for, trained for, and there for.
Now Mr. Bob may argue that it's immoral either way, that murder is murder is murder. Miss Anne, however, believes that soldier's killing is not the same as my killing of Druglord Phil.
Morals become argued here.
And we have a base for morals and the type. We have laws, commandments, not suggestions. They are our doctrine, our commands to follow. God is not one who suggests: He is a commander.
Now. Homosexuality. Gay Guy 1, a practicing homo, believes he's a Christian, even though God specifically says not to be gay. Gay Guy 2 has professed his sins to Christ and believes he's a Christian, and does think it's wrong to be gay and is trying to reform to straightness. Gay Guy 3 says: "Screw you all, I do what I want." All three of them are killed separately by forces of nature. All three gay guys are presented before God. Which one, if any, are going to be admitted to heaven?
And if any are, who's to say you're right or wrong?
And now I ask: if murder does become legal, would you appreciate being murdered? Or watching someone else get murdered (I'm sure we all would at some point in time...but then we'd probably feel bad about it later)? Would you really like that? I don't like the way your brother is looking out me: BANG. And you? What's up with the tears? SLASH!
Morals have to have a basis lest we all tend to a state of chaos. Morals are there for right or wrong. Murder, as we all have deemed, is wrong. Killing, as in war, is not necessarily wrong. Not all killing is murder but all murder is killing.
Ultima, I'm not sure if your whole post was to me or Eon. If it was to me, my post had nothing to do with the soldier example. My topic of murder was simply to use as a point of reference for relative morality. It was not meant to continue the soldier example.
I believe we both agree on this subject.
Anyway, just checking.
I believe we both agree on this subject.
Anyway, just checking.