Proof homosexual sex is a sin
I can prove homosexual sex is a sin.
1) Any extra marital sex is a sin.
2) marriage is only between a man and a woman
3) ergo there is no such thing as a gay marriage
4) So without marriage all homosexual sex becomes extramarital.
5) ergo homosexual sex is a sin.
56 comments
Prove sin exists, and you might be onto something.
Of course, since trasngression of divine law requires the existence of divine law, which requires the existence of a divine lawgiver, that means you're going to have to prove the existence of God before this proof counts for jack shit.
Good luck.
I'll make the case of #1 not being true.
You feast, you fuck, you are married. Great wedding ceremony, isn't it?
But everything hinges upon the guilt complex you call sin. And sin is defined by the fairy tales you follow written by shepherds who probably spent a considerable amount of time violating their sheep. Now, logically, would you consult someone who’s into bestiality for moral advice?
The chain of logic works.
However, I contend that 2) is invalid. Marriage has been between one man and multiple women in the past, and there have also been some same-sex partnerships in religions other than Christianity.
Ergo the conclusion now fails.
However, I'll still buy that prima facie the Biblical evidence falls on the side of 'it's a sin'. Thanks so much, Paul. Really. :(
Hang on, if marriage is only between a man and a woman, only sex between men and women can ever be "out of marriage" cause they're the only ones allowed to do so.
Therefore I argue no one gives a fuck.
I assume you're using the Bible for your rationales?
1) eating shellfish is a sin
2) Red Lobster encourages you to eat shellfish
3) Ergo, Red Lobster is an abomination unto the lord
4) So, Red Lobster is the cause of all society's ills
5) Ergo, if you were a real Christian, you'd spend every waking hour campaigning against Red Lobster.
-pb
You've just used a chain of logic to try to prove the validity of a biblical assertion, but using another, unproven biblical assertion as the starting point, followed by another unproven assertion that even the bible doesn't agree with. You fail.
Okay, good try but you haven't actually PROVED homosexual sex is a sin, you've simply spouted your beliefs. What you need to do first is PROVE that extra marital sex is a sin, then we can tackle your other remarks.
Extra marital sex? Is that marital sex above and beyond the normal amount? If so, sign me and hubby up!
Seriously, first you have to prove your statements. Don't say the bible says this or that, because then you'll have to prove the bible is true, and you won't be able to. Besides, who cares if gay sex is a sin? Nobody's holding a gun to your head forcing you to do it. If god's going to judge everybody, he'll get to them. Why not stop obsessing about it?
So, you're saying that if we changed the law to allow gays to marry, it would decrease homosexual sin. Then, let's do it. It's what god would want!
Using your logic, I can prove that humans are the actual definers of what "sin" is.
1) Homosexual sex is a sin because it is extramarital.
2) Human society defines what is and is not a legal "marriage."
3) Society determines that same-sex marriages are not legitimate.
4) Ergo homosexual sex is a "sin" because society says it is, not God.
It looks like TheListener has no problem taking creative license with the Bible. Take a look at his signature...
"1 Corinthians 6:9-10 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God."
Nor homosexuals, nor sodomites?
Now, that's close to the NIV translation but not exact. I thought the fundies were more keen on the KJV version...
"9:Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
10:Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God."
homosexual/sodomite =/= effeminate!
Someone's been twisting the word of god to fit his own agenda. I suspect that there's a big ol' FABULOUS closet involved.
I'm also waiting for Biblical support for this supposed "marriage is only between a man and a woman" hogwash you motherfuckers keep harping on. I've been in a monogamous relationship with another man for 6 years and we'd sure like to make it legal and reap the benefits society unfairly denies us because of some archaic goat-herder taboo.
So if inter-racial marriage was banned again, that'd be 'extramarital sex' and thus sinful, too? What about marriage between a rich man and a poor woman?
Your logic comes down to something like, "we oppress gays [by denying them marriage], so homosexuality is wrong".
No, you can't. You have to prove that there's a god who cares about that stuff, first, and that sin is more than a construct to keep the flock in line. You can believe that it's a sin all you like, but that's not proof as not everyone believes the same things you do.
Alrighty then, you have proved that you consider homosexuality is a sin. Congratulations, now all you have to do is prove to all of us who are non-fundies why we should care whether you consider it a sin or not, when we don't care.
To me, a sin is when you do something to harm other people - things like murder, rape, violence, and robbery. Homosexuality is just two consenting adults loving each other.
All men with Scandinavian surnames are hansome, sexy and wealthy.
I have a Scandinavian surname
Therefore I am handsome, sexy and wealthy.
Quod erat demonstrandum
This logic stuff is easy once you get the hang of it.
1) Any extra marital sex is a sin.
Yeah, not getting any sucks. Though you shouldn't condemn others for getting some when you're not.
2) marriage is only between a man and a woman
Well, in ancient times, it was the most logical way to ensure successful reproduction and continuation of the civilization.
3) ergo there is no such thing as a gay marriage
Actually, there is. The real issue is whether or not a state or nation acknowledges it.
The rest is just unnecessary to comment on.
Dear Non-Prophet, there is no (legal) gay marriage in Michigan, it's a DOMA state. However if you get married in Canada or another state you can change your name on your social security card, and hopefully your driver's license. There are a number of gay marriages that take place just north of Michigan in Canada. Are you thinking of Maine?
First, prove that the concept of "sin" has any validity in today's society.
Marriage over here is between two consenting adults, regardless of gender.
There IS such a thing as gay marriage.
Ergo, you are stupid.
"5) ergo homosexual sex is a sin."
Good.
Why should anyone care whether it's a sin or not? All extramarital sex is sinful. I have never been married but I have had sex with five different partners (all female, sorry) in the past. And yes, it was a sin .
What of it?
"Proof homosexual sex is a sin
I can prove homosexual sex is a sin.
1) Any extra marital sex is a sin.
2) marriage is only between a man and a woman
3) ergo there is no such thing as a gay marriage
4) So without marriage all homosexual sex becomes extramarital.
5) ergo homosexual sex is a sin."
Right-wing Fundamental ist Christians have no right to even have an opinion on sex, never mind homosexual sex. I can prove they have no right to have an opinion on such:
1) Marriage is only between a man and a woman, as the likes of TheListener always claim.
2) Any extra-marital sex is a sin. As the likes of TheListener always claim.
3) Jimmy Swaggart.
4) ?????
5) You FAIL. As do the doctrines TheListener's claims - and 'beliefs' - are based on.
image
“1) Any extra marital sex is a sin.”
Ah. So we have to accept the premise that sins are possible, and that you are able to identify them. Feel free to prove any of that.
“2) marriage is only between a man and a woman”
Another premise that not everyone shares. So your ‘proof’ is more of a ‘follow me for my opinion.’
“3) ergo there is no such thing as a gay marriage”
Except there is. Has been for a long time. So your ‘proof’ is based on bigotry and a pretense to moral superiority.
“4) So without marriage all homosexual sex becomes extramarital.”
I assume you also have proofs of God that are just playing with definitions like a game of tetris?
“5) ergo homosexual sex is a sin.”
Yawn. I think you mean ‘ego’ more than ‘ergo.’
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.