Difference between revisions of "Talk:Homosexuality"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Bible quote from New Testament insufficient)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
[[Talk:homosexuality/archive_Set1|Archives]]
 
[[Talk:homosexuality/archive_Set1|Archives]]
  
== Bible quote from New Testament insufficient ==
+
== Answering a question - sort of ==
 +
''August, by the way, what do you think of Conservapedia homosexuality article in terms of the factual evidence it presents?''
  
The Conservapedia page about homosexuality page quotes
+
It may present factual evidence. But it is practically unreadable: One can only hope that Aschlafly will take this as an example for his upcoming course in [[Persuasive Writing]] and helps to improve it. Every time I try to read it, I stumble upon so many atrocities that I have to stop. But it has its magic - for me as a foreigner it highlights the many traps in which I often find myself caught!
<blockquote>
+
Romans 1:26-27 - For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.
+
</blockquote>
+
but people forget that St. Paul continues in stronger wording
+
<blockquote>
+
Romans 1:28-31 In other words, since they would not consent to acknowledge God, God abandoned them to their unacceptable thoughts and indecent behaviour. And so now they are steeped in all sorts of injustice, rottenness, greed and malice; full of envy, murder, wrangling, treachery and spite, libellers, slanderers, enemies of God, rude, arrogant and boastful, enterprising in evil, rebellious to parents, without brains, honour, love or pity.
+
</blockquote>
+
and that St. Paul ends with the strongest wording in the New Testament on homosexuality, the verdict of God on homosexual behaviour:
+
<blockquote>
+
Romans 1:32 They are well aware of God's ordinance: that those who behave like this deserve to die -- yet they not only do it, but even applaud others who do the same.
+
</blockquote>
+
(verses are from the New Jerusalem Bible at www.catholic.org)
+
In my opinion however one should also bear in mind that the Bible forbids one to kill, but instructs us to love one another as we love ourselves. But one should keep in mind that God is master of life and death and He is allowed to kill, so we should not be surprised that homosexual behaviour ends up with getting HIV/Aids.
+
Furthermore the people I see before me when reading these harsh verses are the people with homosexual behaviour that want to have nothing to do with God and who actively promote this kind of behaviour, not the people who want to reunite with God and are searching for a way out of their behaviour.
+
But the lesson is that, unlike what many people are thinking, God condemns homosexuality in the New Testament, through the voice of St. Paul, apostle of Jesus Christ, as hard as in the Old Testament.
+
So perhaps the verses Romans 1:28-31, but at least the verse Romans 1:32, can be put into the Conservapedia page on homosexuality? Better be warned in time, than rue it when too late.
+
  
:There is a discussion on the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Homosexuality page on the same comment. Please join to keep the discussion balanced. [[User:Jgamleus|Jgamleus]] 01:14, 3 March 2013 (EST)
+
{|class="wikitable"
 +
|'''Homosexuality''' is the condition of "sexual desire or behavior directed toward a person or persons of one's own sex."
 +
|no problem with this sentence
 +
|-
 +
|
 +
'''Theories on how people become homosexual'''<br>[[Causes of Homosexuality|Homosexuality has a number of causal factors]] that influence its ultimate origination in individuals; these factors will be addressed shortly. In addition, homosexuality has a variety of effects on individuals and [[society]] at large which will be subsequently elaborated on.  Next, some of the historical events, [[Religion|religious]] matters, and [[law|legal]] matters relating to homosexuality will also be covered. Finally, the latter part of the 20th century has seen a [[Homosexuality Research|large body of research]] on the [[Causes of Homosexuality|causes]] and effects of homosexuality; this will also be studied.
 +
|''these factors will be addressed shortly'' - ''will also be covered'' - ''this will also be studied'': Three times we are told that something is explained in the future. One time would be enough. And besides a repetition of actions, we see the same words popping up in such a short section: ''also'', ''matter'', ''factor'', ''effect'', ''individual'' and naturally ''homosexuality''.
 +
|-
 +
|
 +
'''Biblical statements concerning homosexuality and secularism/homosexuality'''<br>Below are some [[Bible]] verses that condemn homosexuality: However, the bible cannot be interpreted literally, if this was the case then rebellious children would be killed: Deuteronomy 21:18-21. Also, Women may not speak in church: Cor 14:33-36. The bible is not a collection of dogmatic and strict rules, it is a book of God that promotes compassion, faith in God, truth, and love.
 +
* [[Leviticus]] 18:22 - You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.
 +
* [[Leviticus]] 20:13 - If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their [[blood]] guiltiness is upon them.
 +
* [[Romans]] 1:26-27 - For this reason [[God]] gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.
 +
* [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%206:9;&version=31; I Corinthians 6:9] (NIV) - Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
 +
*[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Timothy%201:8-11;&version=49; I Timothy 1:8-11 (NASB)] - "But we know that the [[Mosaic Law|Law]] is good, if one uses it lawfully, realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and [[sin|sinners]], for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching, according to the glorious [[gospel]] of the blessed [[God]], with which I have been entrusted."
 +
|
 +
*Bible or bible?
 +
*Verses should be quoted in parentheses - the abundance of colons is irritating (especially when more than two sentences are linked in this way).
 +
*''Also, Women [sic] may not speak in church'': ''also'' doesn't seem to be the right word to show that you don't subscribe to this sentence!
 +
*The whole section is unclear, you should have divided it into two parts, one for the Old, the other for the New Testament!
 +
*You should stick to one translation, NASB '''or''' NIV.
 +
|}
  
==Gender Correction==
+
Generally I don't criticize others for their writing: As I'm not a native speaker this could be seen as presumptuous (you like it when someone uses this word self-mockingly, don't you?) But here, so many flaws are obvious to me that I've to ask myself what I've missed because of my lack of knowledge!
Dr. Nadia El-Awady is a female, but the pronouns used to refer to her are male pronouns.
+
  
== length of article ==
+
I'm sure that I committed many of the atrocities of which I accuse you in my comments (even in this one) - but I'm not writing the flagship-articles in this encyclopedia. And my errors can be corrected easily: obviously the articles to which I contribute aren't locked.
  
This article is very long, making it inconvenient to read.  Most of the sections here seem to have their own pages.  Editing is locked for regular users, so I can't do it, but has there been any discussion condensing the article to make it more reader-friendly? --[[User:JHunter|JHunter]] 16:25, 26 January 2012 (EST)
+
I hope that my comments help you to improve your article.
:I was actually thinking of adding some material: '''Black pastors confront [[Southern Poverty Law Center]] for smearing as ‘hate groups’''' pro-family organizations opposed to [[homosexual agenda]]. [http://americansfortruth.com/2012/01/16/press-conf-black-pastors-confront-southern-poverty-law-center-for-smearing-pro-family-organizations-opposed-to-homosexual-agenda-as-hate-groups/] Reverend Dr. Patrick Wooden declared that it is wrong to compare “my beautiful blackness” with [[homosexuality|homosexual]] perversion.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 18:41, 26 January 2012 (EST)
+
  
::I fail to see how that, or much of this article for that matter, is pertinent to an explanation of the general concept of homosexuality.  Reading through an article with 29 sections of text is just laborious.  Especially when most of the sections appear to already have their own articles.  This is one of the flagship articles here, making it so over the top that newcomers are discouraged from reading it might be counterproductive to the cause. --[[User:JHunter|JHunter]] 23:23, 26 January 2012 (EST)
+
[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 15:35, 12 January 2012 (EST)
:::Why don't you write an alternative article and see if the owner of the site likes it better? Show Conservapedia how it's done. I wish you the best should you decide to pursue this endeavor. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 23:51, 26 January 2012 (EST)
+
:::::I'll take that bet. --[[User:JHunter|JHunter]] 00:06, 27 January 2012 (EST)
+
::::::Can you show us outstanding well researched works you have composed already? If so, where are they? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 00:41, 27 January 2012 (EST)
+
::::::::In journals you've never heard of and books you'll never read.  More seriously, you have offered a friendly competition.  It is audacious, but I accept your challenge.  Out of sportsmanship, we should let the articles speak for themselves instead of starting an argument on the talk page. --[[User:JHunter|JHunter]] 01:44, 27 January 2012 (EST)
+
  
I regret that so-called "conservatives" (as meaningless a term as "liberals") have been so easily fooled by the whole "homosex-/gay" fraud of degenerate fascist propaganda that enslaves not just the lawless fascist lamestream media and Demo-nazi ringleaders but most of the world as well
+
::Regarding the flaws in this article and regular users not being able to edit it, that's the trouble with attempting to construct any reference or resource based off of a pre-formed ideology; a certain level of (rather blatantly undemocratic) censorship must be practiced in order to keep the project in line with its ideological goals.
(sadly including most if not all Bible translations since the 19th century who have perverted the true meaning of arsenokoitai by grossly mistranslating it as "homosexual" which is a bogus word of the aforementioned degenerate fascist propaganda machine that didn't exist much before the 18th century, almost nineteen centuries after Jesus)
+
that is well-refuted and exposed as a propaganda fraud by "The gay invention" at http://touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=18-10-036-f
+
Also relevant is Dr. Reisman's exposing of the vile fascist child-molesting degenerate Alfred Kinsey at www.DrJudithReisman.org showing how Kinsey has almost single-handedly (with much help from Indiana University) decimated America's morals jurisprudence by deceiving gullible politicians and judges over the past decades. Sadly all one must do is repeat lies often and long enough and fools will believe anything. [[User:RusseDav]] 09:52, 03 March 2012 (EST)
+
  
==Pediatricians Renew Call for HPV Vaccine for Boys==
+
::Certainly anybody with any significant experience dealing with gay friends/family members/co-workers/classmates/neighbors/employees can cite several fundamental flaws with this article and many of the other articles on conservapedia that relate to homosexuality. By rejecting mainstream psychological, biological, sociological, and anthropological consensus as resulting from the "liberal bias in academia" (which, trust me, does not actually exist), these articles must rely on fringe sources and exaggerated stereotypes.
*''The HPV vaccine has been available and recommended for girls and young women since 2006, because it's highly effective at preventing cervical cancer. Since then, other cancers thought to be caused by HPV have increased, including anal cancer and some head and neck cancers....If we include both girls and boys, we could have a potential impact on HPV transmission.'' [http://healthfinder.gov/news/newsstory.aspx?docid=662176]
+
'''Question:''' if homosexuality is genetic, and not a choice, why would ''all boys'' need to be vaccinated? [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 08:06, 28 February 2012 (EST)
+
:'''Answer''' because HPV can be transmitted by heterosexual sex as well.  Did you really need to ask that question? [[User:Davidspencer|Davidspencer]] 09:46, 28 February 2012 (EST)
+
::Homosexuality is a choice and it is a bad choice. See: [[Homosexuality and choice]] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 13:05, 22 March 2012 (EDT)
+
  
==Bible Quotes==
+
::For instance, while gay and bisexual men do, on average, have a '''slightly''' higher number of lifetime sexual partners than straight men, the numbers are not nearly as high as many of the sources cited on Conservapedia claim them to be.  For instance, in the United States the mean number of lifetime sexual partners for heterosexual males is pretty consistently estimated to be around 7 (this number does not change much across demographics--even evangelical Christian males average 7 partners in their lifetimes).  Among MSM (the academic term for gay and bisexual men) in the United States, the average lifetime number of sexual partners ranges between 9 and 12 (depending on the conditions of the study).  There are outliers in both groups, straight men reporting more than 100 lifetime sexual partners and MSM reporting similar statistics, but the relative incidence of this is roughly congruent between both groups.  Assuming ~50 years of sexual activity for the average male over his lifetime (another, fairly consistent statistic), even at the high end, this means that MSM have one additional sexual partner '''per decade''' when compared to straight men.  In light of the facts, the assertion that gay men are "dangerously promiscuous" is patently ridiculous.
  
I have noticed that this page has quotations of verse from multiple forms of the Bible, including the King James, New American Standard, and New International Bibles. Should we not stick to one single version, so as to preserve the validity of our quotations of scripture? [[User:TheV|TheV]] 08:37, 11 May 2012 (EDT)
+
::Finally, these articles all overlook the occurrence and cultural significance of MSM in history and non-Western cultures.  I say MSM here because "homosexuality" is a rather recent Western cultural concept.  In India, for instance, the "hijra" are a population that have existed for ''at least'' two thousand years.  Hijra are biologically male, although some prefer to identify themselves as female (and, for them, the western term "transgender" may be the closest equivalent), but they constitute a "third sex" that conventionally takes the passive role in physical relations with nominally straight males.  Additionally, the Hijra have an essential ceremonial function in many Hindu traditions (especially in northern India and in Bangladesh), and have historically been accepted as respected members of their communities. By Western standards, straight males who form physical relationships with hijra would be viewed as bisexual or homosexual.  Another similar, and often cited, example is the "berdache" in the Zuni culture (many other Native American tribes have an equivalent)--these are men who occupy a social role that is a mix between the traditional male and female roles.  Such people were often historically allowed to marry men occupying the traditional male role, and were often (but not always) accepted as important members of their communities.  As another example, in early Christian societies (although it was predominantly a Byzantine phenomenon), ἀδελφοποίησις (literally, "brother making") has been interpreted as a form of consecrated same-sex union (this interpretation is, admittedly, somewhat controversial, but the academic consensus is that many of these unions were indeed romantic in nature).
  
Which is the correct version?
+
::I know that this is a rather long argument for a talk page, so I am going to end it hereMy general points are that homosexuality is a ubiquitous phenomenon in human societies and that many gay stereotypes that are thrown around in conservative political discourse are not firmly grounded in factIn my opinion, the conservative movement is better served by focusing on political values, such as individual liberty and economic sustainability, than attacking the individual liberties (or very existence of) a small minority of people. I am aware that this an unpopular notion among social conservatives, but there are many more significant issues facing the American people at this time (e.g. unemployment) than Tim and Larry up the street deciding to start a family. --[[User:RudrickBoucher|RudrickBoucher]] 19:09, 13 January 2012 (EST)
 
+
== Homosexuality and human rights ==
+
I suggest to add section with above name on recent ruling of European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in Strasbourg. The interesting text reads like this:
+
 
+
"The Strasbourg ruling won praise from campaigners against same-sex marriage. ...
+
 
+
Norman Wells, of the Family Education Trust, said: ‘For too long campaigners have been using the language of rights in an attempt to add moral force to what are nothing more than personal desires. ‘In many cases they have bypassed the democratic process and succeeded in imposing their views on the rest of the population by force of law. ‘We are seeing the same principle at work in the Government’s sham of a consultation on same-sex marriage.’He added: ‘The ruling from the ECHR will embolden those whose concerns about same-sex marriage and adoption are not inspired by personal hatred and animosity, but by a genuine concern for the well-being of children and the welfare of society. ‘Instead of rushing to legislate without seriously considering the views of the electorate, the Government should be encouraging a measured public debate on the nature and meaning of marriage.’"
+
 
+
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2117920/Gay-marriage-human-right-European-ruling-torpedoes-Coalition-stance.html#ixzz1urjB46xx
+
 
+
Gay marriage is not a 'human right': European ruling torpedoes Coalition stance [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2117920/Gay-marriage-human-right-European-ruling-torpedoes-Coalition-stance.html#ixzz1urhwV1gH Read more]
+
 
+
--[[User:AK|AK]] 16:04, 17 May 2012 (EDT)
+
::AK, the article is about 50 pages long right now. I would suggest creating a separate article that could be linked to from the main article. Here is where you could start creating the article: [[Homosexuality and human rights]]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 06:32, 25 May 2012 (EDT)
+
 
+
== Opinions? ==
+
 
+
I'm wondering if some of the content is too much based on opinions, such as the opinion that 'homosexuality' rather than homosexual acts are what is condemned by the Bible. I am very conservative and I found some of the content rather inflammatory, rather than objective. But that's just my impression of it, and I am new to Conservapedia.
+
--[[User:Nissalovescats|Nissalovescats]] 10:16, 29 May 2012 (EDT)
+
 
+
It is worrying that there are a lot of statements without any references that are drawing absolute conclusionsThese need to be backed up otherwise this is opinion and not fact.
+
 
+
::What are your thoughts about the [[Homosexuality and health]] information? Also, what are your thoughts about the information in the [[Homosexuality and murders]] and [[Homosexuality and obesity]] articles? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 11:09, 29 May 2012 (EDT)
+
 
+
== homosexulality and religion: ==
+
 
+
it is a proven fact that jesus christ never spoke against homosexuality. in fact, jesus himself in all records of his life never once condoned those of different beliefs. hundreds of years after the death of christ, passages pertaining to the diminishment of the rights of women, the reasons for hatred against those of other or no religious beliefs, and the lessons that homosexuality is unnatural were added by people like Constantine and king James. if you feel you are a "true christian," then listen to the words of your lord savior, not a roman emperor who wasn't even born a christian.
+
 
+
:Whoever posted this (when i know not) was unsurprisingly anonymous, as it is clearly an absurd polemic. Not is this "red letter" hermeneutic that restricts Biblical moral teaching to only  what Jesus said in the gospels invalid, but so it the argument from silence that it relies on.
+
 
+
:The Lord did not personally write any Scripture down, and the gospel of John promises more revelation from Jesus, (Jn. 16:12-15)  and the same Holy Spirit that inspired the writers who wrote the Lord's words also inspired the O.t., which Jesus quoted as well as the rest of the writings which were because manifest as Scripture. And the  fact is homosexual relations are only condemned wherever they are dealt with and are nowhere sanctioned, despite the laborious attempts by pro homosexual polemicists to force sex into passages it does not belong in.  See [[Homosexuality and biblical interpretation]]
+
 
+
:Moreover, restricting morality to what Jesus specifically addressed would also allow pedophilia, bestiality and other things.
+
 
+
:Moreover, the Lord did condemn homosexual relations by specifying that what God sexually joined together was male and female, (Mt. 19:4-6) leaving all other sexual relations as fornication, and which He condemned. (Mk. 7:21-23)
+
 
+
:God made man and women uniquely compatible and complimentary, in more ways than the physical aspect, and only joined them in marriage, which Jesus Himself specified. (Gn. 2:18-24; Mt. 19:4-6)  Homosexual unions are only condemned by God in the Scriptures by design and decree, in principle and in precept.
+
 
+
:It is because of this that pro homosexual polemicists engage in sophistry in trying to negate the injunctions against homosexual relations and find sanction for the same, and the hermeneutics they must use  would also negate any moral  law, and the authority of the Scripture themselves.
+
 
+
:However, some of the first Christians were likely former homosexuals, (1Cor. 6:9-11) and there is room at the cross for all who want the Lord Jesus over sin, and believe upon Him to save them who died for them, and rose again. And who thus are baptized and follow Him, to the glory of God. [[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 21:21, 6 December 2012 (EST)
+
 
+
==New pertinent story==
+
 
+
Is the strong cultural focus on sex as a reproductive tool the reason masturbation and homosexual practices seem to be virtually unknown among the Aka and Ngandu? That isn't clear. But the Hewletts did find that their informants -- whom they knew well from years of field work -- "were not aware of these practices, did not have terms for them," and, in the case of the Aka, had a hard time even understanding about what the researchers were asking when they asked about homosexual behaviors.
+
 
+
"Homosexuality and masturbation are rare or nonexistent [in these two cultures], not because they are frowned upon or punished, but because they are not part of the cultural models of sexuality in either ethnic group." http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/12/where-masturbation-and-homosexuality-do-not-exist/265849/
+
 
+
And note that pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness (Ezek. 16:49)  was concomitant with Sodom which was given to fornication, including that of the most perverse sort. (Ezek. 16:50; Jude 1:7) [[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 21:32, 6 December 2012 (EST)
+
:::Daniel1212, thanks. I can incorporate this into the article in 2013 or request that you be made a sysop. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 02:53, 29 December 2012 (EST)
+
::::Daniel1212, I added your material to the article. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 17:31, 29 December 2012 (EST)
+
 
+
== Why? ==
+
 
+
Why is "Conservative" so obsessed with homosexuality? [[User:BryanF|BryanF]] 23:10, 28 December 2012 (EST)
+
:Am I? The burden of proof is always upon the claimant.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 02:48, 29 December 2012 (EST)
+
::Look at the number of articles on the topic you have authored. [[User:BryanF|BryanF]] 09:52, 29 December 2012 (EST)
+
:::How many are there and when was the last one created? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 14:04, 29 December 2012 (EST)
+
::::You can't count? [[User:BryanF|BryanF]] 14:07, 29 December 2012 (EST)
+
:::::By the way, which article you like better? [[Gay bowel syndrome]] or [[Homosexuality and MRSA]]? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 14:08, 29 December 2012 (EST)
+
::::::I see you still haven't made your case. Semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 14:16, 29 December 2012 (EST)
+
:::::::Adversus solem ne loquitor. [[User:BryanF|BryanF]] 17:31, 29 December 2012 (EST)
+
BryanF,
+
 
+
7 reasons why the [[Question evolution! campaign]] will be a boon to single women and a bane to [[homosexuality|homosexual]] activists. [http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/12/why-question-evolution-campaign-will-be.html]
+
 
+
Conquering [[evolution|Darwinism]] with the help of a key Christian organization and through collaborative efforts.[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/12/conquering-darwiinism-with-help-of-key.html]
+
 
+
Have you heard of [[Essay: Conservapedia obsessive compulsive disorder|Conservapedia obsessive compulsive disorder]].  I think you may have it.
+
<font color="grey">
+
[trolling removed][[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 05:59, 30 December 2012 (EST)
+
</font>
+

Revision as of 23:21, 22 April 2013

Archives

Answering a question - sort of

August, by the way, what do you think of Conservapedia homosexuality article in terms of the factual evidence it presents?

It may present factual evidence. But it is practically unreadable: One can only hope that Aschlafly will take this as an example for his upcoming course in Persuasive Writing and helps to improve it. Every time I try to read it, I stumble upon so many atrocities that I have to stop. But it has its magic - for me as a foreigner it highlights the many traps in which I often find myself caught!

Homosexuality is the condition of "sexual desire or behavior directed toward a person or persons of one's own sex." no problem with this sentence

Theories on how people become homosexual
Homosexuality has a number of causal factors that influence its ultimate origination in individuals; these factors will be addressed shortly. In addition, homosexuality has a variety of effects on individuals and society at large which will be subsequently elaborated on. Next, some of the historical events, religious matters, and legal matters relating to homosexuality will also be covered. Finally, the latter part of the 20th century has seen a large body of research on the causes and effects of homosexuality; this will also be studied.

these factors will be addressed shortly - will also be covered - this will also be studied: Three times we are told that something is explained in the future. One time would be enough. And besides a repetition of actions, we see the same words popping up in such a short section: also, matter, factor, effect, individual and naturally homosexuality.

Biblical statements concerning homosexuality and secularism/homosexuality
Below are some Bible verses that condemn homosexuality: However, the bible cannot be interpreted literally, if this was the case then rebellious children would be killed: Deuteronomy 21:18-21. Also, Women may not speak in church: Cor 14:33-36. The bible is not a collection of dogmatic and strict rules, it is a book of God that promotes compassion, faith in God, truth, and love.

  • Leviticus 18:22 - You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.
  • Leviticus 20:13 - If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their blood guiltiness is upon them.
  • Romans 1:26-27 - For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.
  • I Corinthians 6:9 (NIV) - Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
  • I Timothy 1:8-11 (NASB) - "But we know that the Law is good, if one uses it lawfully, realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching, according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted."
  • Bible or bible?
  • Verses should be quoted in parentheses - the abundance of colons is irritating (especially when more than two sentences are linked in this way).
  • Also, Women [sic] may not speak in church: also doesn't seem to be the right word to show that you don't subscribe to this sentence!
  • The whole section is unclear, you should have divided it into two parts, one for the Old, the other for the New Testament!
  • You should stick to one translation, NASB or NIV.

Generally I don't criticize others for their writing: As I'm not a native speaker this could be seen as presumptuous (you like it when someone uses this word self-mockingly, don't you?) But here, so many flaws are obvious to me that I've to ask myself what I've missed because of my lack of knowledge!

I'm sure that I committed many of the atrocities of which I accuse you in my comments (even in this one) - but I'm not writing the flagship-articles in this encyclopedia. And my errors can be corrected easily: obviously the articles to which I contribute aren't locked.

I hope that my comments help you to improve your article.

AugustO 15:35, 12 January 2012 (EST)

Regarding the flaws in this article and regular users not being able to edit it, that's the trouble with attempting to construct any reference or resource based off of a pre-formed ideology; a certain level of (rather blatantly undemocratic) censorship must be practiced in order to keep the project in line with its ideological goals.
Certainly anybody with any significant experience dealing with gay friends/family members/co-workers/classmates/neighbors/employees can cite several fundamental flaws with this article and many of the other articles on conservapedia that relate to homosexuality. By rejecting mainstream psychological, biological, sociological, and anthropological consensus as resulting from the "liberal bias in academia" (which, trust me, does not actually exist), these articles must rely on fringe sources and exaggerated stereotypes.
For instance, while gay and bisexual men do, on average, have a slightly higher number of lifetime sexual partners than straight men, the numbers are not nearly as high as many of the sources cited on Conservapedia claim them to be. For instance, in the United States the mean number of lifetime sexual partners for heterosexual males is pretty consistently estimated to be around 7 (this number does not change much across demographics--even evangelical Christian males average 7 partners in their lifetimes). Among MSM (the academic term for gay and bisexual men) in the United States, the average lifetime number of sexual partners ranges between 9 and 12 (depending on the conditions of the study). There are outliers in both groups, straight men reporting more than 100 lifetime sexual partners and MSM reporting similar statistics, but the relative incidence of this is roughly congruent between both groups. Assuming ~50 years of sexual activity for the average male over his lifetime (another, fairly consistent statistic), even at the high end, this means that MSM have one additional sexual partner per decade when compared to straight men. In light of the facts, the assertion that gay men are "dangerously promiscuous" is patently ridiculous.
Finally, these articles all overlook the occurrence and cultural significance of MSM in history and non-Western cultures. I say MSM here because "homosexuality" is a rather recent Western cultural concept. In India, for instance, the "hijra" are a population that have existed for at least two thousand years. Hijra are biologically male, although some prefer to identify themselves as female (and, for them, the western term "transgender" may be the closest equivalent), but they constitute a "third sex" that conventionally takes the passive role in physical relations with nominally straight males. Additionally, the Hijra have an essential ceremonial function in many Hindu traditions (especially in northern India and in Bangladesh), and have historically been accepted as respected members of their communities. By Western standards, straight males who form physical relationships with hijra would be viewed as bisexual or homosexual. Another similar, and often cited, example is the "berdache" in the Zuni culture (many other Native American tribes have an equivalent)--these are men who occupy a social role that is a mix between the traditional male and female roles. Such people were often historically allowed to marry men occupying the traditional male role, and were often (but not always) accepted as important members of their communities. As another example, in early Christian societies (although it was predominantly a Byzantine phenomenon), ἀδελφοποίησις (literally, "brother making") has been interpreted as a form of consecrated same-sex union (this interpretation is, admittedly, somewhat controversial, but the academic consensus is that many of these unions were indeed romantic in nature).
I know that this is a rather long argument for a talk page, so I am going to end it here. My general points are that homosexuality is a ubiquitous phenomenon in human societies and that many gay stereotypes that are thrown around in conservative political discourse are not firmly grounded in fact. In my opinion, the conservative movement is better served by focusing on political values, such as individual liberty and economic sustainability, than attacking the individual liberties (or very existence of) a small minority of people. I am aware that this an unpopular notion among social conservatives, but there are many more significant issues facing the American people at this time (e.g. unemployment) than Tim and Larry up the street deciding to start a family. --RudrickBoucher 19:09, 13 January 2012 (EST)