Jump to content

Homosexuality & Christianity


BeachOfEden

Recommended Posts

My news alert sent me this url to a rather interesting relevent story;

 

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=..._id=72001&rfi=6

 

Additionally Nelson Mandella's son dies of aids in another story below this one.

Personally I have no problem with the relationship if both persons are consenting adults, but it's like the gay marriage issue.

 

Some important highlights;

=====================

 

Curtain drops on incest drama

 

The legal saga of two former Pine Plains' residents, charged with violation of a 100-year-old law, has come to resolution.

In 2004, Charles Thomas, 44, and Nanci Latrell-Thomas, 29, were arrested on a number of charges, including two Class E felonies, each for incest, and filing a false document.

 

Both felonies are punishable by one to four years in jail.

 

 

The Sheriff's Department alleged that Thomas and Latrell-Thomas are, in fact, uncle and niece, and had been engaging in a sexual relationship as part of their marriage. They were married May 2001.

 

In New York State, sexual contact between an uncle and a niece is considered incest under Criminal Procedures Law, Section 255.25.

 

in the last four years, there have been 43 cases of incest, prosecuted to sentencing, in the state.

 

Consanguinity laws vary by state. Both Thomas and Latrell-Thomas have since left the state to live in Texas, according to a confidential source. But, in Texas, it's also illegal for an uncle and niece to be married, whether full blood or half blood.

 

"Uncle/niece relationships are very common in some cultures and are not considered 'wrong,' " Bennett said.

"You and I might find incest repulsive because of our teachings.

 

"When they enacted these laws, maybe they made these decisions on considerations other than genetics," said Smith.

Smith said laws against acts, such as incest, bestiality and sodomy, are based in Judaeo/Christian belief and English common law.

"This law was put into place because of a power differential,"

 

"The incest statute is a 100-year old law, perhaps based on faulty genetic research," said Farley.

"On a case-by-case basis, a jury could find there is no problem with this relationship,"

 

Other sex crimes

Adultery, a class B misdemeanor, is still illegal, but not often prosecuted. Until three years ago, when the law was repealed by the state Legislature, consensual sodomy was a class B misdemeanor.

===================

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/01/06/...ain665228.shtml

 

Important highlights;

 

More than 5 million of South Africa's 45 million people are infected with HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, more than in any other country. An estimated 600 die of AIDS-related complications every day.

 

Mbeki's government has been criticized for its sluggish response to the crisis and for courting dissident theorists who question the cause of AIDS.

 

Until this year, the government refused to provide life-prolonging anti-retroviral drugs through the public health system, citing concerns about their safety and cost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 77
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

> agree with you 100%. The G0y site, which, again, for our viewers at home, is ran by a gay man who holds a passionate belief against anal sex for ANYONe, gay or str8 based on medical/health reasons, and he also ads his bibical views. The problem is that this guy belives he MUST use shocking graphic pictures and sometimes offensive street terms for sexual acts or certain types of people that i believe very well. more often than not, offend BOTH liberal gays and straights as well as conservatives alike.

 

Well it is very graphic. I suppose I might find it erotic if I were a gay guy (?). Perhaps the idea is to show gays that they can be g0y (or something) and enjoy it. Or else it is just an excuse to run another graphic erotic internet site. They may defeat their own purpose. To my knowledge they don't even do the requiste "I'm 18 or older". IMO, if they wanted to introduce g0y eroticism and the issues in a serious way they would really need TWO sites. One that was issue oriented and one with eroticisms. Mind you I don't think they are wrong. Just that they defeat their purposes turning off conservatives they may be trying to reach.

 

 

>A second issue with his site is while he lists some valid points medically and some interesting possible Scriptural views....He has this one page called, "But How Do You Know That he is Straight?" Where he tells step-by-step how gay guys can get their str8 buddies drunk so they can sexually take advantage of them and act like it was just all in fun.

This not ethical.

 

I agree. it isn't. I don't know if it was serious. I actually didn't see it. But still, I think they introduce a valid serious concept. Even if that idea was pure silliness, which it sounds like it wasn't, then it would be self-defeating, as a serious site dedicated to a valid pov.

 

>Treatment of gays to become straight:

>I would guess than anyone so disturbed and upset as well as unhappy enough they feel the need to enter an expensive program akin to Alcoholics Anonymous or a drug treatment program, they are probably far enough gone downhill they are willing to do most anything- up to an including castration, sex change surgery, testosterone killing drugs and so forth.

 

Well I don't know what the current treatment is. Narth describes what is just basically psychotherapy (forming a relationship). I don't know how that would do anything at all.

But I do know that they have previously used adversive conditioning. They strap electrodes to the guys balls and show sexually explicit scenes. If they show men with men and the guy gets aroused they shock him (literally). This was previously the only treatment that was said to have any level of effectiveness. Yikes.

(Punishment as a behavioral method is pretty bad, and tends to be ineffective in the long run anyway.)

 

>Were they openly accepted there wouldn't BE this stigma and all that pain...

 

Yes, I have seen all these Fundie websites about how gays are unhappy, alcoholic at a higher rate, etc. What about loving and accepting the person as he is? And not discriminating? I bet these would cure a lot of the above!

 

>Cases of animal homosexuality

 

You know what the fundies say to all that. a. that they can't really be homosexual since they aren't enjoying it. To me this is illogical. True some sex is for enjoyment, but there was prob. thousands of years of sex between humans who barely enjoyed it (And I think up to really recently women weren't expected to enjoy sex at all). I think it is more lately as we have more free time and privacy that humans can enjoy sex. I think there are big exceptions to that like the Greeks, say. So that means that there was no homosexuality prior to presently. Not so.

 

I read a LONG thing on Narth, one of the "we love gays so much we make them straight" sites about Bonobos having lots of sex, that has been described as homosexual. No, they say, it's not *really* homosexual because they do it for tension and social pressure release in the society. Sounds pretty human to me!!! :-) (Bonobos, I think, I read are more similar to us than they are to chimps, which they are mistaken for, in dna.)

 

b. That ok, just because animals do it doesn't make it natural or something. Of course they don't grant that *we* are animals, so that that kind of makes any discussion kind of come apart.

 

--des

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<Ani-man>Cases of animal homosexuality

 

<Des>

You know what the fundies say to all that. a. that they can't really be homosexual since they aren't enjoying it. To me this is illogical. True some sex is for enjoyment, but there was prob. thousands of years of sex between humans who barely enjoyed it (And I think up to really recently women weren't expected to enjoy sex at all). I

 

Animals (mammals anyway) have ALL the same body parts humans do- including females having a clitorus. I forget what human sexuality book it is in, maybe a Kinsey book, they compared canines to humans and included charts and graphs after wiring subjects up with heart monitors and other devices and noting down the readings during sexual activity. The readings of the physiological responses before during and after sex were nearly identical.

 

There are many documented instances of animal homosexuality as well as cross-species.

I have seen two male donkeys engaging in anal intercourse taking turns being the "female"

 

GREAT article on Sfgate, I saved it thanks!

Edited by Ani-man
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Well it is very graphic. I suppose I might find it erotic if I were a gay guy (?). Perhaps the idea is to show gays that they can be g0y (or something) and enjoy it. Or else it is just an excuse to run another graphic erotic internet site. They may defeat their own purpose. To my knowledge they don't even do the requiste "I'm 18 or older". IMO, if they wanted to introduce g0y eroticism and the issues in a serious way they would really need TWO sites. One that was issue oriented and one with eroticisms. Mind you I don't think they are wrong. Just that they defeat their purposes turning off conservatives they may be trying to reach."

 

My thoughts precisley. Maybe the non-X-rated version could be called "GEY" and explain that the "E" stands for "ethical" gays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<Des>They strap electrodes to the guys balls and show sexually explicit scenes. If they show men with men and the guy gets aroused they shock him (literally).

 

(Punishment as a behavioral method is pretty bad, and tends to be ineffective in the long run anyway.)

 

Ah yes, the old shock therapy "treatment", I happen to know a fellow who in his teens long ago was caught in the barn messing with a cow, grandfather had him "treated" (I don't know all the details) but part of it included shock treatments. The teen is now in his 60's and had permanent neural damage from the shock treatments. The "treatment" failed anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, I am trying to be part of the 21st C so here goes, Aletheia. Yes, I know you were kidding, but I have had a certain "resistance" to using the quotes and smilies (actually I don't like the smilies as they are animated and I have (controlled) epilepsy. I worry about them though. But anyway was on the net back before it was ever graphical.

 

Animals (mammals anyway)  have ALL the same body parts humans do- including females having a clitorus. I forget what human sexuality  book it is in, maybe a Kinsey book, they compared canines to humans and included charts and graphs after wiring subjects up with heart monitors and other devices and noting down the readings during sexual activity. The readings of the physiological responses before during and after sex were nearly identical.

 

Yes, I didn't know the extent of similarity (you are quite the font of a variety of esoteric info, Animan! :-)). Anyway, given how similar are DNA is it shouldn't be surprising. OTOH, you can't use that argument with fundies either. Satan did that to make us think....

I don't think using the rationale for the sexual activity is much of a proof. I'm sure *people* have had sex for thousands of reasons, which might come down to things like wanting power, holding onto position/station, appeasement, aside from things like attraction and love. To say what Bonobos do is that much different than people have done in various situations is just wrong I think. But they are grasping.

 

My thoughts precisley. Maybe the non-X-rated version could be called "GEY" and explain that the "E" stands for "ethical" gays.

 

 

Well, I'm not sure everyone would agree with that on such a sexually explicit site.

:-)

 

 

Ah yes, the old shock therapy "treatment", I happen to know a fellow who in his teens long ago was caught in the barn messing with a cow, grandfather had him "treated" (I don't know all the details) but part of it included shock treatments. The teen is now in his 60's and had permanent neural damage from the shock treatments. The "treatment" failed anyway.

 

That is such a sad story, all the more so since I think that such behavior is fairly normal for teens and older children on farms. I think the shock treatments I talked about are different than shock therapy, but I think only now are some people really questioning just how good runninng electricity thru anybody's body is.

 

 

--des

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have had a certain "resistance" to using the quotes and smilies (actually I don't like the smilies as they are animated

 

I don't mind that you use the >>> to indicate quoted text. I'm used to boards that don't have the quote option.

 

I use a lot of smiles in my posts. I have a "worry" that I come across in my posts as serious, egotistical, etc... I'm hoping that the smilies show that I don't intend my words to come across that way.

 

Epilepsy huh? I've had siezures before, but that was because of a medication that I was on. The seizures were always brought on by blinking lights. They werent' fun at all. I'll try not to use the smilies that are animated. There are only a couple.

 

Hey, back on topic:

 

Did you guys read the penguin article. Too cute.

 

Aletheia

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quoted text..

 

..Hey, back on topic:

Did you guys read the penguin article. Too cute.

 

Well one of my forums uses this same exact Invision board software though a previous version of it, took some getting used to not using html coding as *I* am used to, it can get confusing when there are multiple layers of quoted text unless broken down more specifically

 

Yes, I read the penguin article and saved it thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't mind that you use the >>> to indicate quoted text. I'm used to boards that don't have the quote option.

 

I just figured it out. It isn't really hard. But it doesn't seem to always work.

 

I use a lot of smiles in my posts. I have a "worry" that I come across in my posts as serious, egotistical, etc... I'm hoping that the smilies show that I don't intend my words to come across that way.

 

Well I don't mind the handmade ones, like this. :-)

Actually I see they aren't all animated. They just seem that way.

 

Epilepsy huh? I've had siezures before, but that was because of a medication that I was on. The seizures were always brought on by blinking lights. They werent' fun at all. I'll try not to use the smilies that are animated. There are only a couple.

 

Well it is pretty well controlled (10 years). I just feel like with the animated stuff like this, it still irritates my brain somewhat. I doubt I'll actually have a seizure from them. I am looking at them, they make me look at them. :-}

 

--des

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/02/13/...ain673732.shtml

 

The article in the link above actually shocked this usually unflappable news junkie!

 

Talk about Irony! Alan Keyes, Republican Christian right winger extraordinaire, denounced Cheney's Lesbian daughter as "a hedonist going to hell". Yet today Keyes' daughter announced she is a lesbian. : )

 

This is just too rich. I suppose this could be proof that God indeed has a profound sense of humor (and irony).

 

from the article in the link above:

 

Marcel-Keyes told the Post her parents have thrown her out of the house, stopped speaking to her and refuse to pay for college because she is gay. She said she loves her parents.

 

Looks like Marcel may be the only real Christian in that family, she loves them in spite of their ignorance and rejection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe that Alan Keyes is the same "gentleman" that ran against Barak Obama in IL (rising star in the Dem. party). In his attacks on Obama he claimed that Jesus Christ would not vote for Obama. (To which Obama replied, "I don't know who his polster is!" :-))

 

Yep, pretty shocking and very sad.

 

 

--des

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Let me start by saying thanks for quoting ME. I'm honored. I am the creator & main editor of g0ys.org & I'm watching lives changed by it.

I'll also take a moment to invite you to visit the theology section of the site under the link that reads: "God Hates". Also feel free to join the main Yahoo group. However - if you know somebody currently who is Christian & struggling with same-sex feelings,- PLEASE give them the link to the site. So far, I know of several suicides I've helped prevent.

I started the g0ys movement when after 6+ years of Scripture study on this topic I became absolutely sure that the Scripture forbid certain sexual acts - but N0T same sex attractions & unions. My theology does not discard the use of Scripture -- rather ties more of it together than any "anti-gay" platform ever did. As a matter of fact, I show how that posturing takes (6) scriptures (& a number of foundational principles) out of context to build the LIE that Scripture opposes same-sex relationships. Consider this "reduction method": F00D

All food is basically reconstituded dirt & water. In the old testament, there were restrictions on the FORM that could be eaten. Lobster was an "ABOMINATION" (Same Hebrew word that references the male/male sex act of Lev 22:18). In the new covenant, the restrictions of diet are lifted. Lobster is no longer an "abomination" (unless a person believes it is ... then for him ... it IS). Paul took great steps to talk about weak & strong faith ... and the man with STRONG FAITH can eat what the man of weak, cannot -- because of KNOWLEDGE.

So then ... let's expand this principle: The human body is essentially reconstituted dirt & water. Agree? (See Genesis 1). IF that had previously been a restriction on same-sex intimacy in the old testament (& I'm not saying there was ... but just - IF), then the same principle would apply as does food. You don't get much more intimate than eating something & having it become part of your body! Yet -- whether a lobster or lamb ... you essentially ate reconstituted dirt. In the physical realm - as intimate as two people can be physically involves little more than an exchange of, what is essentially - reconstituted dirt. You kiss & you've kissed modified dirt (pretty as it is). Engage in oral sex? Just dirt; -- & Jesus Himself said: "What goes into a man's mouth CANNOT DEFILE HIM". Think!

The entire homo-sex debate puts great moral weight on actions that ultimately involve - modified dirt. Finally - Galatians 3:28 says that in Christ there is NO MALE & FEMALE. If the concept of gender disintegrates "in Christ", then what also vanishes? ... Sexual orientation! This MUST be if gender becomes irrelivant.

So then: What matters? As Paul said: The 0NLY thing that matters is:

1) The new creation

2) Faith expressing itself in love; - And about this concept the corresponding principle that "Love works N0 ILL toward it's neighbor - therefore love IS the FULFILLMENT of the Law."

If you read the admonitions for husbands & wives in Ephesians -- you will notice that the language is nearly identical as that describing the love between David & Jonathan in 1st Samuel. Do you think this is a coincidence?

Please visit g0ys.org (spelled w. a zer0). We do use a harsher tone than most "Christian" sites ... but you see: Evil masquerades a righteous & too many soft-spoken snakes have been hiding behind gently whispered deadly lies. Please forbear our plainess of speech. Society has become weary of Elizabethian platitudes. Good day.

 

BTW> One poster wrote: "He has this one page called, "But How Do You Know That he is Straight?" Where he tells step-by-step how gay guys can get their str8 buddies drunk so they can sexually take advantage of them and act like it was just all in fun."

The page described does NOT discuss seducing (str8) men. It is a page for helping determine who is g0y (Not a Kinsey 0). The Page is named "G0YDAR". The site has some real depth of thinking: Please read carefully before you offer critique.

 

 

 

Ok..here's that article written by that gay man who calls himslef a G0y and his website is:

 

www.G0ys.org

 

(I have cleaned up his use of terms)

 

This is what he had to write...(keep in mind this is written by a gay man)

 

GAY" has, in many social circles, been made almost synonymous with "DISEASE".  Now why do you suppose that would be?  Let's take a look at the CDC's figures on AIDS infection (for example) in the US for a clue:

 

AIDS Cases by Exposure Category (2002)

 

Following is the distribution of the estimated number of diagnoses of AIDS among US adults and adolescents by exposure category. A breakdown by sex is provided where appropriate.

 

Exposure Category (CDC figures) Male Female Total

Male-to-male sexual contact 420,790 - 420,790

Injection Drug Use 172,351 67,917 240,268

Male-to-male sexual contact and injection drug use 59,719 - 59,719

Heterosexual contact 50,793 84,835 135,628

Other* 14,350 6,519 20,869

 

* Includes hemophilia, blood transfusion, perinatal,

and risk not reported or not identified.

 

The first line should be a wake up call!  Male to male contact: 420,790 cases!  This is as much or more than all other causes of infection combined (& please notice that the 3rd leading cause is a combination of [male/male sex -or- IV drugs])!  But, is the phrase "male/male sexual contact" accurate?  Not really.  Why?  Because there is a form of male/male sexual contact particularly good at spreading HIV (article).  Ironically, it's also a major vector for AIDS spread by male/female sexual contact.  If you want to spread disease, & really let it explode into society in epidemic proportions, - anal "play" is the sexual fetish to participate in:

 

You'll notice that the gender of the person on the receiving end of this act is not disclosed in the picture.  This is because the gender is irrelevant.  In the chart above: 135,628 cases of AIDS were attributed to "HETEROsexual" contact.  What you are not told is the FORM the "Heterosexual contact" took.  People may assume, because of the label "HETEROsexual", that it was penile/vaginal sexual contact.  This is unlikely for (2) reasons.  1) More men are likely to use a condom in penile/vaginal sex to prevent pregnancy; And, 2) contrary to misconception , the vagina is fairly hostile to HIV taking hold, where as the anus will welcome it readily!  Most women infected by HIV became so by participating in anal intercourse, or repeated unprotected vaginal sex with an infected partner (who almost always contracted HIV via anal intercourse or *IV drug use).  The playground acronym for AIDS: "Anally Injected Death Sentence" is not inaccurate in this respect!  AIDS is seldom spread in other ways.

 

Today's lesson: Being gay does not spread AIDS.  Anal "sex" does.  It does so +400% more often than the next statistical bullet! 

 

(No-Stigmas?)

This growing group, that Asserts that anal-sex-play is "gAy.  It's not "gAy" as much as it simply doesn't give a dAmn about the recipient of this outlaw form of pseudo-sex.  Furthermore, the it will stop at nothing to spread participation in this fetish to the ends of the earth.  The ad images shown are examples of mass e-mail marketing, - several e-mails that a junk mail account set up specifically to monitor "gAy" e-mail collects daily.  Look & you'll that that every such e-mail promotes a single theme: Anal "sex" = "GAY".  They" will even expend energy combating the simple truths this website shares with others!  They will call us "oppressive" because we point out that anal sex is indirectly killing people.  TheyT will call us "homophobic", despite the fact that we don't limit the message about the dangers of anal sex to "gAy" men.  They will try to obfuscate & minimize  the dangers of "anal sex" -- despite the fact that the figures on the chart above won't budge for them.  Such people talks about "condom education campaigns", but it becomes obvious over a decade into such campaigns that either the campaigns do not work, or the fact that condoms DO fail (& that people don't always use them), - accounts for the 2002 figures on AIDS charted above!  AIDS may be the ultimate bane of anal sex, but the fact is that "anal intercourse" (if it can even be called that), is a leading vector for virtually ALL sexually transmitted diseases & at levels many times higher!  The mental spectre created in the public mind by images like the ones discribed here are the reason why g0ys do not adopt the "gAy" personna, label & do not want to be Associated with that culture. : Many people do not know to draw a distinction between "gay" & "anal.

 

 

 

Isn't it Romantic? - N0T!

 

Here's a number for you: According to the CDC, condoms fail about 2% of the time during anal sex.  Since it only takes (1) failure to spread HIV, that's 1300% overkill.  Last time I saw an overkill factor like that it was tied to the nuclear weapons program.  Have 1/14th of a nuclear war & everyone is still dead. 

 

Soft Personalities:

 

In psychology, people are sometimes classified based on their willingness to accept a suggestion.  In the minds of susceptible people, a slogan repeated enough times is taken as truth:  "The earth is flat", etc.  Lacking either the willingness or faculty to question blanket statements about reality, these people live in a world made of gossip, myth & half truth; -- And they cannot understand why the people around them succumb to the likes of HIV.

 

  Ask any gay guy who's over 49 where most of his adolescent 'friends' who came out as "gay" after Stonewall are now.  Ask those still alive why they didn't become HIV+ too (the answers will all have 1-thing in common: an avoidance of anal penetration). 

 

 

 

If we g0ys don't act, then the only thing these awesome younger dudes are gonna find are the disease ridden lies of a culture all dead except for a few statistical long-shots.

I for one love these younger dudes, - & many g0ys themselves have kids whom they want to be comfortable to live a life more open & honest, -- & without the stigmas associated with being "gAy". If you could read some of the private feedback to this site!  There are lots of younger dudes in serious pain -- not because they are hott for other guys ... but because they HATE  what mainstream "gAy" media portrays men who love men as being. 

 

But, at the pinnacle of this open detest is the practice of "ANAL-PLAY"; -- And whether done by M/M or M/F couples -- g0ys abhor it.  The good news is that it's so easy to stop that particular practice! Ignorance does form a foundation for excuse -- at least as far as the matter of "intent" is concerned.

 

 

G0YS.ORG is a site devoted to men who love men, but who want nothing to do with anal-penetration or the stigmas associated with it.

Edited by admin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I appreicate the owner of the G0ys site comming here to explains his views and with the exception of that one page (How Do You Know If He's St8?..) I find the G0y's page the best at explaining homosexuality & Progressive Christianity, AIDS awareness and the harm of hate towards Gays. I think it does the best job of warning both str8's and gays of AIDS education and prevention..while at the same time..balancing out Christianity while being fair.

 

The owner of this page once expressed that while it is good that the Liberal Christian churches reach out to gays and understanding that to turn a blind eye to the most dangerous ways to be expressed to AIDS...is really not loving because by turning a blind eye is to reframe from notifying the gay community as well as the str8 from important information regarding their health. And still hope my one gay friend who is a guy pratcices the safe sex advised by this Go0y site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So then ... let's expand this principle: The human body is essentially reconstituted dirt & water.  Agree? (See Genesis 1).  IF that had previously been a restriction on same-sex intimacy in the old testament (& I'm not saying there was ... but just - IF), then the same principle would apply as does food.  You don't get much more intimate than eating something & having it become part of your body!  Yet -- whether a lobster or lamb ... you essentially ate reconstituted dirt.  In the physical realm - as intimate as two people can be physically involves little more than an exchange of, what is essentially - reconstituted dirt.  You kiss & you've kissed modified dirt (pretty as it is).  Engage in oral sex? Just dirt; -- & Jesus Himself said: "What goes into a man's mouth CANNOT DEFILE HIM". Think! 

 

Hi,

Pleased to meet you electronically here! You are right, all "flesh" is basically reconstituted "dust" or as you refer to it as "dirt", made up of minerals, vitamins, metals and organic material, the largest percentage of it all is simply water.

I agree on the oral sex/just dirt statement, it's true, doesn't matter if it is a hamburger, apple, someone's reproductive organ or wood- it's all made of the same stuff- "dirt" and water.

 

 

The entire homo-sex debate puts great moral weight on actions that ultimately involve - modified dirt.  Finally - Galatians 3:28 says that in Christ there is NO MALE & FEMALE.  If the concept of gender disintegrates "in Christ", then what also vanishes? ...  Sexual orientation! This MUST be if gender becomes irrelivant

 

Okay then if sexual orientation becomes irrelevant with that line of thought, then the sexual "aim" no matter what it is directed towards would be an "orientation" when practiced regularly, especially by a percentage of people. The term "orientation" is I suppose a medical/psychiatric one based on observations of this over time. I will wager a guess that you have not read nor heard of the numbers of studies conducted by psychiatrists, sociologists and others on persons who engage in deep emotional and spiratual relationships with animals (which often includes sex) have indicated zoophilia is likely a sexual orientation a certain percentage of people seem to be born with. One sign of this is that it manifests itself almost always pre-puberty just like homosexuality does.

AIDS Cases by Exposure Category (2002)

 

Following is the distribution of the estimated number of diagnoses of AIDS among US adults and adolescents by exposure category. A breakdown by sex is provided where appropriate.

 

Exposure Category (CDC figures) Male Female Total

Male-to-male sexual contact 420,790 - 420,790

Injection Drug Use 172,351 67,917 240,268

Male-to-male sexual contact and injection drug use 59,719 - 59,719

Heterosexual contact 50,793 84,835 135,628

Other* 14,350 6,519 20,869

 

* Includes hemophilia, blood transfusion, perinatal,

and risk not reported or not identified.

 

The first line should be a wake up call!  Male to male contact: 420,790 cases! 

 

Did you notice not one of those figures even mentions zoophilia? this is because animals do not carry the HIV virus! Studies have shown zoophilism is around 3% (with homosexuality being estimated at 5-10% for comparison) yet I know of zero cases of HIV caused by sexual contact with animals. Stick with me a bit on this because I'm heading towards an interesting "question" or observation that ties into scriptures on that.

 

Many people do not know to draw a distinction between "gay" & "anal.

 

Many people do not draw a distinction between bestialists and zoophilists, (or between animal love and animal abuse) the distinction has been discussed in great detail in the book by R.E.L. Masters entitled "Forbidden sexual behavior and morality" 1966, the first 160 pages of this 426 page book is devoted exclusively to "bestiality" and then only some 90 pages to Homosexuality and several other issues follows for the next chapter.

Masters treatment on this iss was profound, progressive and caused considerable controversy when it was published.

 

Ok so to the scripture or sin part, if as some suggest, AIDS is somehow a punishment as a "gay" disease and that "gay" is supposedly condemned in the Bible, then how come babies, childre, heterosexuals get it? and conversely, who is it zoophillic individuals typically contract NONE of these human sexual diseases from animals (or any other harm/illness) as a result?

Pregnancy, Ghonnoreah, VD, HIV, AIDS, Syphilis, influenza, hepatitus and a plethora of others cannot be contracted from or given to animals, not even when engaging in intimate sexual activity, yet the Bible condemns both bestiality and any sex but missionary heterosexuality for producing offspring it seems.

 

HIV/AIDS is at epidemic proportions today with the largest vaffected group being HETEROSEXUAL FEMALES in Africa! not even the USA!! Seems people overlook that minor detail...

 

Persoanlly I find anal ANYTHING extremely gross ( as many do towards zoophilia) it's not something I would want to engage in, the smell, bacteria, e-coli and all the rest.

 

 

Religious perspectives

 

Most organized religions take a critical or sometimes condemnatory view of zoophilia or zoosexuality, with some variation and exceptions.

 

* Passages in Leviticus 18:23 ("And you shall not lie with any beast and defile yourself with it, neither shall any woman give herself to a beast to lie with it: it is a perversion." RSV) and 20:15-16 ("If a man lies with a beast, he shall be put to death; and you shall kill the beast. If a woman approaches any beast and lies with it, you shall kill the woman and the beast; they shall be put to death, their blood is upon them." RSV) are cited by Jewish, Christian, and Muslim theologians as categorical denunciation of zoosexuality. Some theologians (especially Christian) extend this, to consider lustful thoughts for animal as a sin. Alternatively, many Christians and some non-Orthodox Jews do not regard the full Levitical laws as binding upon them, and may consider them irrelevant.

 

* There are several references in Hindu scriptures to religious figures engaging in sexual activity with animals (e.g. the god Brahma lusting after and having sex with a bear, a human-like sage being born to a deer mother), and actual Vedic rituals involving zoophilia (see Ashvamedha). However, Hindu doctrine holds that sex should be restricted to married couples, thereby forbidding zoosexual acts. A greater punishment is attached to sexual relations with a sacred cow than with other animals. However, the Tantric sect of Hinduism makes use of ritual sexual practices, which could include sexual contact with animals.

 

* Buddhism addresses sexual conduct primarily in terms of what brings harm to oneself or to others, and the admonition against sexual misconduct is generally interpreted in modern times to prohibit zoosexual acts, as well as pederasty, adultery, rape, or prostitution. Zoosexuality (as well as various other sexual activity) is expressly forbidden for Buddhist monks and nuns.

 

* Pagans and Wiccans are very loosely organized and teachings vary considerably. A common theme is the connectedness of humans with nature, and the principle "If it does no harm, do what thou wilt" is widely accepted. As such, sexual activity with animals - assuming it is not felt to be harmful to either party - is usually condoned.

Edited by Ani-man
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"yet the Bible any sex but missionary heterosexuality for producing offspring it seems."

 

WHAT?!?!?!

 

sexual researchers have VERIFIED through studies that the "missionary" style of intercourse....89% of the time is NOT satisifying to women..only men. Inlight of this fact, churches/religions that teaches that ONLY this type of sex is to be practiced is ovbiously is pro-male ONLy and does not give consideration to women and what they get of out of sex.

 

Such statements sound like fundamental Catholicsm in nature. It not surprising to find that Mormons and also JW's as well as the fundamental branches of Protestnatism also promote this..after all...all these fundamental faith groups are ran by old white men. :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"yet the Bible any sex but missionary heterosexuality for producing offspring it seems."

 

WHAT?!?!?!

 

sexual researchers have VERIFIED through studies that the "missionary" style of intercourse....89% of the time is NOT satisifying to women..only men. Inlight of this fact, churches/religions that teaches that ONLY this type of sex is to be practiced is ovbiously is pro-male ONLy and does not give consideration to women and what they get of out of sex.

 

Such statements sound like fundamental Catholicsm in nature. It not surprising to find that Mormons and also JW's as well as the fundamental branches of Protestnatism also promote this..after all...all these fundamental faith groups are ran by old white men. :blink:

 

Well it's certainly a lot easier a position on the man's legs!

 

Actually if you obtain a book (used as its out of print) entitled "The beast within: animals in the middle ages" by Joyce Salisbury, Rutledge Press, it covers in depth a lot of how the church has controlled every aspect of society. The reasons were that people were to be seen as above animals and to be above them one had to not act "bestial" like brute beasts.

Interracial sex was once considered to be the same as bestiality, people were elevated to a higher status than animals (or black people)

 

So it was prescribed that people eat sitting instead of reclining, missionary came to be because any other position was seen as "bestial" and too animal like, the list goes on. So it's of no surprise that women were seen as simply incubators for babies and that the man provided the "egg" for the woman to "hatch", medical science proved otherwise.

 

Remember these are the same people who taught the masses that the Earth was the center of the universe and everything revolved around the Earth in 24 hours and that the earth was flat.

Edited by Ani-man
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks to the g0y from g0ys.org. I am happy you are out there encouraging more healthy behavior (sexual and otherwise). And am happy you came to discuss things with us.

 

I would explain to you, though, that many of us here do NOT literally interpret the Bible (that's part, though not the whole, of the Progressive piece). So many of us, myself included, would not worry ubbermost about IF homosexuality was or was not considered immoral during Biblical times. Several of the references have been explained as sexual activity in the temple; others as the purity issues; etc. (Some of these concern the use of blended fabrics!) I believe Paul is at least attributed to have made the comments about sodomy or homosexuality. OTOH, some mysgnostic (sp?) comments have been attributed to Paul as well, some incorrectly so, I understand. OTOH, those who interpret the Bible literally take these statements as Paul's for the most part. The Bible should be viewed in relationship to its own times, and in it's own historical context.

 

OTOH, I would agree that anal sex is prob. harmful over and above any strictly moral concerns. Haven't read a whole lot on this, but my understanding is that AIDs is more difficult (not at all impossible) to transmit thru other types of sex (oral, vaginal, etc.) Other diseases can similarly be transmitted, includign some rare STDs. The idea of an alternative should be a welcome one. I think you give many other valid reasons as well--including those on a strictly feeling level. It's a great thing that you have helped so many.

 

(BTW, I didn't really read the page about getting people drunk, etc. so can't really answer to that. Might have responded to someone else's comments. )

 

My church (UCC) accepts gay pastors, etc. and doesn't ask anyone gay or straight what they do in their bedrooms (or barnyards!!). IMO, the idea that this some non-typical sexual activity is sinful comes from the idea fo what is the norm. (It is interesting how cultural this all is! Apparently many native Americans have no term for this difference. Anyway, the intense interest in SEX by fundamentalists reminds me of the Victorians interest in "knees"! There are so many sins, why this obsession?

 

 

--des

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyway, the intense interest in SEX by fundamentalists reminds me of the Victorians interest in "knees"! There are so many sins, why this obsession?

 

True! And did you know Mae West was arrested for indecent exposure after her performance at a play? This would be around the 1930's

In Victorian times it was scandalous to see a woman's legs, it was like bare breasts in public is today here. Go to Switzerland and their culture doens't have this hangup on breasts, you cen see topless women in the park and no one thinks a second thought about it. But here the laws have this wierd criteria that the underside and the aereola must be covered (maybe mold or something terrible they don't want anyone to see grows under there or something?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

I myself am g0y and would be happy to answer any questions anyone has in regards to their way of thinking. It's great to see someone thats not same sex attracted at least giving us some credit for thinking outside the box. B)

 

 

 

 

Ok..here's that article written by that gay man who calls himslef a G0y and his website is:

 

www.G0ys.org

 

(I have cleaned up his use of terms)

 

This is what he had to write...(keep in mind this is written by a gay man)

 

GAY" has, in many social circles, been made almost synonymous with "DISEASE".  Now why do you suppose that would be?  Let's take a look at the CDC's figures on AIDS infection (for example) in the US for a clue:

 

AIDS Cases by Exposure Category (2002)

 

Following is the distribution of the estimated number of diagnoses of AIDS among US adults and adolescents by exposure category. A breakdown by sex is provided where appropriate.

 

Exposure Category (CDC figures) Male Female Total

Male-to-male sexual contact 420,790 - 420,790

Injection Drug Use 172,351 67,917 240,268

Male-to-male sexual contact and injection drug use 59,719 - 59,719

Heterosexual contact 50,793 84,835 135,628

Other* 14,350 6,519 20,869

 

* Includes hemophilia, blood transfusion, perinatal,

and risk not reported or not identified.

 

The first line should be a wake up call!  Male to male contact: 420,790 cases!  This is as much or more than all other causes of infection combined (& please notice that the 3rd leading cause is a combination of [male/male sex -or- IV drugs])!  But, is the phrase "male/male sexual contact" accurate?  Not really.  Why?  Because there is a form of male/male sexual contact particularly good at spreading HIV (article).  Ironically, it's also a major vector for AIDS spread by male/female sexual contact.  If you want to spread disease, & really let it explode into society in epidemic proportions, - anal "play" is the sexual fetish to participate in:

 

You'll notice that the gender of the person on the receiving end of this act is not disclosed in the picture.  This is because the gender is irrelevant.  In the chart above: 135,628 cases of AIDS were attributed to "HETEROsexual" contact.  What you are not told is the FORM the "Heterosexual contact" took.  People may assume, because of the label "HETEROsexual", that it was penile/vaginal sexual contact.  This is unlikely for (2) reasons.  1) More men are likely to use a condom in penile/vaginal sex to prevent pregnancy; And, 2) contrary to misconception , the vagina is fairly hostile to HIV taking hold, where as the anus will welcome it readily!  Most women infected by HIV became so by participating in anal intercourse, or repeated unprotected vaginal sex with an infected partner (who almost always contracted HIV via anal intercourse or *IV drug use).  The playground acronym for AIDS: "Anally Injected Death Sentence" is not inaccurate in this respect!  AIDS is seldom spread in other ways.

 

Today's lesson: Being gay does not spread AIDS.  Anal "sex" does.  It does so +400% more often than the next statistical bullet! 

 

(No-Stigmas?)

This growing group, that Asserts that anal-sex-play is "gAy.  It's not "gAy" as much as it simply doesn't give a dAmn about the recipient of this outlaw form of pseudo-sex.  Furthermore, the it will stop at nothing to spread participation in this fetish to the ends of the earth.  The ad images shown are examples of mass e-mail marketing, - several e-mails that a junk mail account set up specifically to monitor "gAy" e-mail collects daily.  Look & you'll that that every such e-mail promotes a single theme: Anal "sex" = "GAY".  They" will even expend energy combating the simple truths this website shares with others!  They will call us "oppressive" because we point out that anal sex is indirectly killing people.  TheyT will call us "homophobic", despite the fact that we don't limit the message about the dangers of anal sex to "gAy" men.  They will try to obfuscate & minimize  the dangers of "anal sex" -- despite the fact that the figures on the chart above won't budge for them.  Such people talks about "condom education campaigns", but it becomes obvious over a decade into such campaigns that either the campaigns do not work, or the fact that condoms DO fail (& that people don't always use them), - accounts for the 2002 figures on AIDS charted above!  AIDS may be the ultimate bane of anal sex, but the fact is that "anal intercourse" (if it can even be called that), is a leading vector for virtually ALL sexually transmitted diseases & at levels many times higher!  The mental spectre created in the public mind by images like the ones discribed here are the reason why g0ys do not adopt the "gAy" personna, label & do not want to be Associated with that culture. : Many people do not know to draw a distinction between "gay" & "anal.

 

 

 

Isn't it Romantic? - N0T!

 

Here's a number for you: According to the CDC, condoms fail about 2% of the time during anal sex.  Since it only takes (1) failure to spread HIV, that's 1300% overkill.  Last time I saw an overkill factor like that it was tied to the nuclear weapons program.  Have 1/14th of a nuclear war & everyone is still dead. 

 

Soft Personalities:

 

In psychology, people are sometimes classified based on their willingness to accept a suggestion.  In the minds of susceptible people, a slogan repeated enough times is taken as truth:  "The earth is flat", etc.  Lacking either the willingness or faculty to question blanket statements about reality, these people live in a world made of gossip, myth & half truth; -- And they cannot understand why the people around them succumb to the likes of HIV.

 

  Ask any gay guy who's over 49 where most of his adolescent 'friends' who came out as "gay" after Stonewall are now.  Ask those still alive why they didn't become HIV+ too (the answers will all have 1-thing in common: an avoidance of anal penetration). 

 

 

 

If we g0ys don't act, then the only thing these awesome younger dudes are gonna find are the disease ridden lies of a culture all dead except for a few statistical long-shots.

I for one love these younger dudes, - & many g0ys themselves have kids whom they want to be comfortable to live a life more open & honest, -- & without the stigmas associated with being "gAy". If you could read some of the private feedback to this site!  There are lots of younger dudes in serious pain -- not because they are hott for other guys ... but because they HATE  what mainstream "gAy" media portrays men who love men as being. 

 

But, at the pinnacle of this open detest is the practice of "ANAL-PLAY"; -- And whether done by M/M or M/F couples -- g0ys abhor it.  The good news is that it's so easy to stop that particular practice! Ignorance does form a foundation for excuse -- at least as far as the matter of "intent" is concerned.

 

 

G0YS.ORG is a site devoted to men who love men, but who want nothing to do with anal-penetration or the stigmas associated with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi NeutralThought,

 

I am the person who wrote this. I have two best friends since childhood who are both gay guys. Would you write to me? Also maybe you can also write to one of these friends of mine as well.

 

This is my e-mail:

Jahpslam68_4@hotmail.com

 

Thanks!:)

BeachOfEden

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forgive me I'm stating the obvious, but isn't railing against anal sex as a degenerate form of sexual intercourse on the basis of the HIV argument missing the point just a little? If a committed, monogamous couple -- gay or straight -- decide to incorporate anal sex into their relationship, and they know they're not giving each other or anybody else any sexually transmitted diseases, then how is their anal sex exactly to blame for the world's HIV infection rates? Why should such a couple be made to feel that their choice is somehow disgusting? Isn't the issue really casual sex -- or at least sex without nearly enough personal knowledge on the part of everyone involved? Obviously, I'm perfecly aware that, given the enormous number of casual or less-than-committed sexual relationships out there, anal sex presents a significant health problem. But why blame that on anal sex when, clearly, committed couples who practice anal sex aren't causing STD epidemics?

 

I'm very amused at the strangeness of arguing for anal sex on a Progressive Christianity BBS. :) However it does seem that a forum devoted to sexual morality from a Progressive Christian perspective would be very much appropriate...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those are some very good points you mention about the g0y site. I can offer alil insight if you'd like as to the why's and hows.

 

First, I'llpoint out that the majority of the gay community despises the g0y way of thought. most are self proclaimed atheists, so they totally debunk any scriptural logic or truth immediately.

 

Second the focus of theology on the g0y site is to debunk the misintepretations of the Bible. Make no mistake thru careful reseach without an individual agenda you can find several mistranslations specfically aimed at same sex relations. It's not a gay or straight issue, it's a truth issue for g0ys trying to set the record straight, g0ys don't discriminate whe it comes to telling the truth.

 

Let's face it, we all gravitate to beliefs and ideas and ways of life which we as individuals are comfortable with, thats normal. But it's more or less playing follow the leader. The average person does not actually do research on biblical scripture but takes the word of his/her pastor or priest or reverend. Clearly there is aproblem with this way of behaving as you don't actually LEARN anything you just recycle somoene elses interpretation and stateit as fact when clearly careful research shows this to not be true in regards to scriptures which let's face it, politics and greed of men have always played a significant role in religon, even in Jesus's day.

 

There is no reference in the bible which condemns same sex relations. It's not wishful thinking of religious gays to think that. People talk about Adam and Eve alot, well Eve was pulled from Adam which means on a genetic level Adam was both Male and Female in the beginning (transgendered) We also know thru science that the male is the one who detemrines the sex of a child, not the female. So man has the ability to create both males and females, not the female. that speaks volumes about what Mans beginnings are. Further Adam was greated in God's image, both male and female before Eve was created. Many times Angels were described as neutral beings, male appearance but feminine qualities... ever wonder why? But I digress.

 

g0ys are considered by the gay community to be homophobic, which is funny cause g0ys are self admitted same sex attracted males. So thats a lie but it suits the gay community to say g0ys are.

 

The useof shocking images suits several purposes. It exposes the gay community for the filth it promotes (the shocking images are used to show sexual fetishes such as anal, sex toys, bondage, S&M, all truly perverse habits the gay community allows to be presented. for some reason they feel they should be excluded from being morally held accountable. If it's illegal for a hetero couple to engage in sex with animals then why should the gay community be allowed to? If it's illegal for a man to beat his wife, then why can the gay community promote sexual slavery and S&M and other violent sex acts? They shouldn't be, yet they claim they have a right to and that it's discrimination or your repressing their freedoms. That's just total BS.

 

g0ys draw a sharp line between orientation and behavior. We rely on logic and facts thru exhuastive research that shows (although the government lowered the numbers to control what society learns, as they have always done for the "betterment" of society) g0ys feel that MANY MANY guys are same sex oriented and that it's only because of society's views and programming that guys are taught that any emotion from one guy to another is gay. Were not talking about sex here.

 

Let's look at some odd things within society.

 

Football. Smacking another guys butt is considered male bonding, part of the game (I know I played) why is it ok to smack another guys butt while playing sports?

There are several pictures of well known athletes grabbing other guys crotches on the field and this is not considered gay. In europe men kiss, andits not considered gay. There are so many instances of men showing natural affection for one another. Doesthis mean they are all gay? No way. But it does show that when men are comfortable with each other, then certain boundaries are crossed without a second thought. In high school, guys run around grabbing each other in the crotch, or twacking each other in the crotch and running while their friend falls down clutching himself. This is what guys do. Guys check out each other in locker rooms, this is truth people, not fiction or wishful thinking, some guys aren't even aware they do it.

Guys are made to shower opening with each other, while girls are given privacy...why is that? Just cause were guys were not suppose to care about being naked in front of other people? It's not an issue for me but for a majority of guys it is and also a majority of guys could care less being naked around their buddies. Guys growing up will often experiment with other male friends. Again, not wishful thinking, these are facts but that doesn't mean it's sexual. Men are sexual by nature, peopel who say masturbation is wrong or sinful are usually not men or if they are men they are repeating only what they've been conditioned to say. Men need release on a regular basis otherwise there is great pain involved or has anyone not heard the term "blueballs" it's not a myth I can assure you and it doesn't just come from being excited and then left to ones own devices. I know a guy in the Marines with me who went to medical for blueballs and the doctor told him to masturbate... he was froma extremely religious christian family which taught him this was wrong.

 

So, g0ys do not advocate getting just any guy drunk to have sex with. We respect our friends immensely. The reference to alcohol your referring to is to help a guy relax. It also talks about foot massage which is universally known to relax a person to almost sheer bliss. Also in reference to this is the fact that it helps guys let their guard down. A g0y would not overstep himself and again your thinking gay terms where a guy gets another guy drunk and rapes him or has sex with him. A common joke about marines is whats the difference between a straight marine and gay one. A six pack.

 

g0ys are bout opening up the mind of their fellow man to realize that it's perfectly natural in God's eyes and in nature for guys to be genuinely intimate with each other. That does not mean sex. The idea that guys being intimate with another guy is a gay idea, not a g0y one but it is one that g0ys would like to dispell.

 

Further, since a g0y is usually very selective about his circle of friends, sometimes it takes YEARS to build up the trust, were not talking a casual friend who has not proved their friendship. We use David and Johnathan from the Bible as the model for true male friendship... whether you weant to believe they were lovers or not is beside the point (although any man whose heart is knitted with another and makes a covenant to God with the other guy, sure does seem like they were lovers but not in the GAY sense, in the g0y sense) they clearly had deep seeded love and respect for one another, they were willing to sacrifice their lives for one another and g0ys feel the same way about their male friends. Society witht he help of the gay community has made it so that guys can not show affection for another male without beign thought of as gay. Would you want that label if you as a guy or girl hugged your guy or girl friend?

 

The stigmas associated witht eh gay community are at best repulsive. the gay community tells young guys just finding out their are attracted to other guys that you have to have anal sex. they have names for it all. The older guys tell the younger guys they have to be "bottoms" i.e., receivers. Manyof these guys have no clue or experience to know what to do but because their families have rejected them or they fear rejection they go where they think they are suppose to go (gay club, gay online chats etc) and they fall into the trap the gay community purpetuates.

 

Now do I think all gay men are evil? haha clearly not. But the majority have bought a bad set of goods and are advertising them as great when clearly relaity says they aren't.

 

Anal sex spreads hiv

Condoms are not safe, they break 2% of the time

 

Yet now kids are being educated in sex ed alternativelifestyles and that in regards to the gay lifestyle, two guys who are gay should have anal sex as thats the only way two gay men can have sexual relations. WTF? But the gay community is the one promoting this.

 

So you tell me. Whose the problem. The g0ys who say respect yourself and your friends and fellow man and woman and here's why.

OR

The gay community which says hey anal sex is great, don't do it if you don't want to BUT it's so great and feels so good, specially if you use crystal meth and poppers...cause it makes you really horny so you can have tons of unprotected anal sex cause after you use crystal meth and poppers you don't care cause you've lost your ability to make sound judgements.

 

Hmmm and they wonder why people don't like them?

Again, this is not a blanket coverage for all gay men and women. But unfortunately the ones who are the nice ones who don't do these things, they do not get heard or represented at their PRIDE events... only the most outrageous get that honor.

 

=======================================================

The problem is that this guy belives he MUST use shocking graphic pictures and sometimes offensive street terms for sexual acts or certain types of people that i believe very well. more often than not, offend BOTH liberal gays and straights as well as conservatives alike.

 

While 'some' gay guys might like this approuch, i think the greater majority will end up thinking that one of their own is attacking their own community...kinda like how the fundamentalists call us "CULTS".

 

A second issue with his site is while he lists some valid points medically and some interesting possible Scriptural views....He has this one page called, "But How Do You Know That he is Straight?" Where he tells step-by-step how gay guys can get their str8 buddies drunk so they can sexually take advantage of them and act like it was just all in fun. This not ethical. I mean if a str8 gay was to give this advice to other str8 guys on how to trick the female freinds they think are hot into sex...I think they'd call that date rape.

 

So, while I acknoweldge his good points I see that his bad points and ideas counter act the positive. That was my take.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fred,

 

You make a very good point. Why should it matter if a loving couple whether it be male or female based not engage in anal if they are in a monogomous relationship and at no risk to spreading hiv or getting it. This is where the g0ys research of theology shoots off from the gay accepting churches and the hetrosexual ones as well. g0ys believe it clearly states in the bible that same sex attractions are not wrong but specific acts which cause harm (the anus/rectum lining is very fragile) to a persons body is wrong. Were told to treat our bodies as temples. Further scriptures usually used to condemn "homosexual acts" (this is actually made up latin word) are actually speaking of temple prostitutes or worshipping fertility gods which was a common practice. I believe a popular one was B'aal which actually was satanic in origin. So you could in essense intepret that as anal sex being a form of satanic worship. I'm not saying thats what it is, I'm just saying Love works no ill.

 

I think your right when you mention alot of scriptures do's and don't is in regards to being outside a committed relationship. Morality is very key in the Bible and expected of us at all times. In a committed relationship out of love, you don't have sexual promiscuity, and without that, there is no risk.

 

Although someone mentioned sex with animals in previous post about it being completely safe. Sorry Syphilis came from men having sex with sheep. So animal sex/beastiality is rightly considered wrong.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Forgive me I'm stating the obvious, but isn't railing against anal sex as a degenerate form of sexual intercourse on the basis of the HIV argument missing the point just a little?  If a committed, monogamous couple -- gay or straight -- decide to incorporate anal sex into their relationship, and they know they're not giving each other or anybody else any sexually transmitted diseases, then how is their anal sex exactly to blame for the world's HIV infection rates?  Why should such a couple be made to feel that their choice is somehow disgusting?  Isn't the issue really casual sex -- or at least sex without nearly enough personal knowledge on the part of everyone involved?  Obviously, I'm perfecly aware that, given the enormous number of casual or less-than-committed sexual relationships out there, anal sex presents a significant health problem.  But why blame that on anal sex when, clearly, committed couples who practice anal sex aren't causing STD epidemics?

 

I'm very amused at the strangeness of arguing for anal sex on a Progressive Christianity BBS. :)  However it does seem that a forum devoted to sexual morality from a Progressive Christian perspective would be very much appropriate...

Edited by NeutralThought
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A while back, I read something that struck such a chord of truth that I've posted the article & excerpts many on various systems. It has to do with an innocent minset among guys -- guys who have not been poisoned with "gay male culture" & the ASSociated stigmas. What you are about to read is the collective experience of many guys. Since the widespread proliferation of mass-media, - fewer guys are

experiencing this paradigm because gay-stigmas have contaminated gentle male/male interactions with arse-play. However - there are still clusters of guys who can recall very similar experience to the following:

 

"In 1960, I was 10-years-old and growing up in a working class environment where male homosexual activity was the rule, not the exception. Its predominant manifestation was "sex with equality," thus including mutual masturbation and oral sex, but not anal sex (Bagley, 1997, p. 183). The latter was not even thought about, except for eventually learning that passive anal sex was an activity engaged in

by apparently degraded males who thought themselves to be like women, or were labeled as such because they were accepting the status of being anally penetrated. As for ourselves living in a world where effeminate males did not exist, our sexual activities with other males generally reflected our social relationships: most sex with one's best friend, and lesser sex with lesser friends. We also had girlfriends and knew what was to be done sexually with them as it was so well understood via having learned the word "######" and its clear meaning. This explains why even the thought of "f******" one's best friend was precluded: the activity or related desires was in violation of our equality based male bonding friendships. Sexual activity was also only a small part of our daily activities, and it was not an everyday activity although, at times, it was enjoyed more than once a day.

 

As a young adult, I ventured into learning more about male homosexuality and encountered the Kinsey et al. (1948) study which contained data not at odds with my experiences (Note 3), nor with the similar experiences of my youngest brother who grew up in the same neighborhood. Although he did not engage in homosexual activity, when asked what our neighborhood was like in the 1970s, he explained the

male homo-sex situation as follows: "You know, Pierre, when the tent was set up and most boys came to have a sleep-out, well, I was the only one not having sex" (Bagley, 1997, p. 185)."

 

As explained: "Sex" in the above context was NOT anal. It wasn't even a thought. It is the large number of similar accounts & stories I have heard for years that was one of the primary forces behind forming g0ys.org (After all -- the guys with these stories rarely ever joined the "gay" community or let the accounts become generally known.) these interactions happened LOTS of time in lots of places with lots of guys and the irony is that the "GAY" community is almost totally oblivious to the reality of such encounters! Furthermore, most of the gay community seems unable to grasp the fact that it is considered - on a gut level - to be an abomination to masculinity -in general (for lack of a better term). The loud, queeny mouthpieces & penchant for

gender-FRAUD has become an icon for debased male behavior. The gay male community is up to it's collective arse in arse-fetish (the VERY ACT instinctively shunned by regular guys who are warm on guys.).

 

Within the same article, the following observation was noted: "In 1978, a major new experience involved the learning about so-called "gay-identified" males, many still being teenagers, and they often were gender nonconformable. As a rule, they had also grown up thinking themselves to be the only ones with homo-sex desires in their

neighborhoods, their school, or even in their town or city. Their feelings of isolation had been extreme, resulting in their belief that male homosexuality was exceptionally rare, and many had grown up perceiving themselves to be "freaks." In recent books and papers dealing with gay youth, and on related internet pages, these stories

are repeated, and similar life situations were highlighted in the Australian 'Here for Life' Youth Sexuality Project Final Report.

 

The process of realising a same sex orientation, and either hiding this or being open, often results in: damaged self esteem; distancing from family and peers; attempts to avoid disclosure; distortion of nearly all relationships; increasing sense of isolation; and, sense of inferiority and self loathing. This sense of isolation and negative reinforcement has been shown to increase the incidence of mental health issues in young people, resulting in emotional disorders, self harm and suicide. (Goldfram et

al. 1999)

 

My own adolescent environment, however, precluded having such feelings because desires to have sex with other males, and engaging in such joyful activities, resulted only in knowing that I was part of a majority even if, as with masturbation, my sexual activities with other males were to be private acts (Note 4). It is also doubtful,

given the information available from Ancient Greece, that adolescents boys of the period would have experienced self-hatred and isolation, with associated suicidal feelings, because they had love and sex desires for older males. If suicidal feeling existed, they would likely have been experienced by a male youth who was being ignored by all older males. Therefore, the reported exceptionally high rate of

"suicide problems" for present-day males recognizing their same-gender sexual desires (males who often identify as gay or bisexual) may be a social construction intimately linked to another possible social construction: the increasing rarity of males reporting same-gender sexual desires and related sexual activity in the Western World. As Chauncey (1994) reports on the basis of the evidence:

 

...in important respects, the hetero-homosexual binarism, the sexual regime now hegemonic in American culture, is a stunningly recent creation (p. 13)."

 

What has occurred is summarized by a message - a LIE - promoted by B0TH the Political/religious Reicht AND (say "and") the Straight AND Gay community itself. The LIE ASSerts that same-gender-attraction is a RARITY.

This LIE has gained such a tremendous foothold because of the FILTH pushed about male/male relations by the Gay-male cummunity and the message reinforced by the Religious right with the LIE that the Scriptures forbid same-gender intimacy. (They do not forbid it.

 

See: http://g0ys.org/newthang.htm for an EXHAUSTIVE analysis of said

"Scriptures"). In the USA, it is not unusual for politicians to declare a "State of

Emergency". Perhaps it's time to declare a "State of Stupidity". G0YS.org is the primary group confronting the general misinformation with a side-dish of whoop-ass for B0TH the political left & right.

 

Our message is simple & known by far more 'normal' guys than those that inhabit everything gAy: "Men of good character don't butt-phuck other guys." The sideline message is that "The rectum is not a vagina & no amount of wishful thinking will turn an organ of excretion into something else."

 

Men who live by those simple principles have been hooking up with each other since the beginning of time. However - it's only been the last 30+ years where gender-confusion & all the ASSpects of the enigma have been platformed with the general concept of same-gender attraction. This MISSCLASSIFICATION & the broadly spread message surrounding it has caused guys to believe that their affections for their peers mean that they're "gay" while they believe that "Gay guys = butt phucking". The devastation has yet to be quantified.

 

The advent of the modern "gay-male" phenomina has been a push to get society to accept "anal-sex" as a norm. As a result, STI's like AIDS are exploding across the globe as men AND (say "and") WOMEN engage in that fetish & skew statistics 1000%-2000% in favor of pathogenesis.

 

As media & politicians seem unable to seperate "gay sex" from "anal sex", -- ADDED to the warped politics of the social "accept any behavior" left: The globe in now getting what it DESERVES for turning our backs on moral principle - namely: "Don't do things that spread disease!"

 

The g0ys solution: DisASSociate yourself from their NAME & legacy.

loving another person has N0THING TO DO with some agenda to arse- phuck. However - because of the HUGE MONEY ASSociated with the LIE being pushed (See: http://g0ys.org/lyingfags.htm ), we find it unlikely that the current trend will be reversed anytime soon. Being the case: G0YS standing as a testimony against the political forces on both "sides" will disallow the excuse: "I never heard another

perspective".

 

If "JUSTICE" is a real thing -- then it must be what it is defined as. If it exists - but seems lacking in this world -- then it MUST BE ADMINISTERED BEYOND OUR PERCEPTUAL ACUITY. Got God?

Edited by NeutralThought
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

terms of service