Landbeck, I would like to answer on question you offered on b2.
Posted by
David (aka David)
Dec 19 '13, 09:13
|
"Do you think religion-based clothing or eating practices are good analogs for the basic relationships comprising society?"
Politely, the answer is yes. I am wearing a cotton/polyester blend as we speak. I wear clothing every day. Like the rest of humanity, I wear clothing exponentially more often than I have sex.
This aspect is exactly where the argument falls asunder. You are trying to diminish one philosophy by minimizing it relative to another. I trained as a religious historian in college and I can say with confidence that the Bible has thousands of tenets that have not withstood the test of time. Thankfully, the main ones still do. Those are why the document is described as living. Even people who do not believe in God would struggle to argue with the ones that were physically written in stone.
In attempting to prioritize an arbitrary sin is profound, a person loses their way. At its core, Christianity is about love and acceptance, as are most major religions. The corruption occurs throughout history when people have attempted to inject personal bias into individual interpretations.
Some of the finest people I know, many of them on this board, are homosexual. If their sexuality finitely determines their inability to pass the gates of Heaven, then I wouldn't want to be in Heaven, either. The concept would be innately flawed. Fortunately, I know with all the conviction in my heart that embracing the love of humanity and the rules that stem from such behavior is what my creator asks of me.
You are a good man with a great sense of humor and a heart you strive to keep pure. Please consider the words above and reduce the argument to its most basic form. Is your religion about love and acceptance or judgment and intolerance?
I'm not asking for a debate about this or even a reply. I simply request that you consider my words.
|
Responses:
|