SkipCaptcha
731
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 86:
Line 86: + + + + + + + +
→Article on Sodomy?: new section
If you want an easily-shareable recap for your friends here's a pic: http://i.imgur.com/gtPLU7a.jpg
If you want an easily-shareable recap for your friends here's a pic: http://i.imgur.com/gtPLU7a.jpg
== Article on Sodomy? ==
To me "homosexuality" is kind of an ambiguous term and might include persons who merely prefer the company of the same sex, like boys who prefer to play with boys at some stage of their life (nothing sexual). The Apostle Paul seems not to have been attracted to women (or anyone else) sexually because he had the gift of celibacy (no itch, 1 Cor 7). Biblically the sin is men-lying-with-men and women-lying-with-women, not even the temptation is a sin, though lust is also a sin. So I am thinking that an article needs to be written on sodomy, persons practicing sexual activities characteristic of the city Sodom, which was destroyed, though I realize that sodomy in modern English may mean other things as well.
The language used in a controversy is important; I think that liberals typically try to win arguments by controlling the terms of the debate, typically coming up with "talking points" like "love" in this case, or "non-discrimination." If we speak about fornication, that is quite different in connotation from being sexually active (who wants to be an inactive bore, not involved in life?) If we debate the ills of insertion of the membrum virile into the posterior orifice, that is quite different from debating "gay" (happy & carefree) vs homophobia (a phobia being an irrational fear).
So what do you think? Should there be an article on Sodomy, focusing on the actual acts done with their physiological and spiritual consequences?