Jokes1 min ago
female homosexuality
18 Answers
The Jewish and Christian prejudice against homosexual practice derives from Leviticus, that long list of do's and don'ts for Jews, which says that when a man lieth with a man as with a woman it is an abomination.
Does this mean that female homosexuality is OK?
When the Christian church eventually accepts women bishops will they then object to lesbian bishops? If so, on what grounds?
Does this mean that female homosexuality is OK?
When the Christian church eventually accepts women bishops will they then object to lesbian bishops? If so, on what grounds?
Answers
1 to 18 of 18
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by chakka35. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
My personal opinion aside, as far as I'm aware, sex within christianity is just a tool for reproduction so I guess it would be frowned upon as two women can't reproduce as obviously two men can't, (leaving artificial insemination, surrogate motherhood etc... out of it all of course).
Also, sex should only be had during marriage and I'm not sure how the CoE is coming along but the Catholic Church is still pretty adament that this is a man and a woman thing and they're not even allowed to have sex before they get married so it could be another few centuries before they shift theur opinions, (being the progressive organisation they are!)
Also, sex should only be had during marriage and I'm not sure how the CoE is coming along but the Catholic Church is still pretty adament that this is a man and a woman thing and they're not even allowed to have sex before they get married so it could be another few centuries before they shift theur opinions, (being the progressive organisation they are!)
Maybe at the time Leviticus was conjured up, the writers hadn't considered lesbianism. The role of women being what it was, it may have been a deep, dark , unmentionable secret known only to those who practised it.
I imagine the grounds for objection, if there were any, would be that 'man' can be taken to mean 'human', but whichever way you look at it, if the church wants to find something in the bible to back their case, they'll find it. We all know the bible doesn't mean what it says - unless, of course, the church wants it to.
I imagine the grounds for objection, if there were any, would be that 'man' can be taken to mean 'human', but whichever way you look at it, if the church wants to find something in the bible to back their case, they'll find it. We all know the bible doesn't mean what it says - unless, of course, the church wants it to.
-- answer removed --
In my opinion all religions would do well to accept that any loving relationship only serves to further the acceptance of any god and makes our experience of this life better.
And besides, how other than denouncing such would an institute composed almost of exclusively of 'celibate' males for thousands of years make sure that it's followers believed they were sacrificing to serve them by 'denying the flesh'!
And besides, how other than denouncing such would an institute composed almost of exclusively of 'celibate' males for thousands of years make sure that it's followers believed they were sacrificing to serve them by 'denying the flesh'!
Octavius, you're getting very tetchy nowadays.
How do the above answers amount to the subject being 'debated ad infinitum'? I have yet to have a single answer from a person who follows the Church's dictum on homosexuality, which is obviously what my question requires.
And I never take part in slanging matches.
How do the above answers amount to the subject being 'debated ad infinitum'? I have yet to have a single answer from a person who follows the Church's dictum on homosexuality, which is obviously what my question requires.
And I never take part in slanging matches.
I was hoping that some devout Christian or Jew who has strong feelings against male homosexuality extends those feelings towards female homosexuality and, if so, for what religious reason.
I reckon you were hoping for some controversy. It was done to death a couple of weeks back. Nevermind.
Anyway, you said When the Christian church eventually accepts women bishops will they then object to lesbian bishops? If so, on what grounds?
naomi said Maybe at the time Leviticus was conjured up, the writers hadn't considered lesbianism..... if the church wants to find something in the bible to back their case, they'll find it
I provided the most likely Bible text that would probably used by "devout" Christians to level their objections. Although as naomi says, they could use anything they choose and make it seem apt to their argument.
Simple really. And I aint tetchy. Well not right now anyway.
I reckon you were hoping for some controversy. It was done to death a couple of weeks back. Nevermind.
Anyway, you said When the Christian church eventually accepts women bishops will they then object to lesbian bishops? If so, on what grounds?
naomi said Maybe at the time Leviticus was conjured up, the writers hadn't considered lesbianism..... if the church wants to find something in the bible to back their case, they'll find it
I provided the most likely Bible text that would probably used by "devout" Christians to level their objections. Although as naomi says, they could use anything they choose and make it seem apt to their argument.
Simple really. And I aint tetchy. Well not right now anyway.
Oh dear, Octavius I described you as tetchy because you seemed to interpret (not for the first time) a perfectly straightforward unloaded question of mine as some sort of challenge. 'Are you looking for a slanging match?' was quite a strange thing to ask.
The comments I have received so far are interesting and welcome but not answers to my question, if you read it again.
I agree with naomi that the unknown writer of Leviticus hadn't even thought of lesbianism, but since my question was not "Why didn't the author of Leviticus include females?" naomi would not claim for a moment that her comment was an answer to it.
Your highlighting of the two verses in Romans is perfectly fair, but Paul was not laying down a decree from God. In any case, he was a Jew and would therefore have been brought up on Leviticus as all Jews were.
What I am looking for, Octavius, (and now may not get) is an answer from someone who is firmly opposed to male homosexuality for Biblical reasons, and will tell me whether he or she is equally opposed to female homosexuality and, if so, why.
Is it not a fair and reasonable thing to ask?
The comments I have received so far are interesting and welcome but not answers to my question, if you read it again.
I agree with naomi that the unknown writer of Leviticus hadn't even thought of lesbianism, but since my question was not "Why didn't the author of Leviticus include females?" naomi would not claim for a moment that her comment was an answer to it.
Your highlighting of the two verses in Romans is perfectly fair, but Paul was not laying down a decree from God. In any case, he was a Jew and would therefore have been brought up on Leviticus as all Jews were.
What I am looking for, Octavius, (and now may not get) is an answer from someone who is firmly opposed to male homosexuality for Biblical reasons, and will tell me whether he or she is equally opposed to female homosexuality and, if so, why.
Is it not a fair and reasonable thing to ask?
Sorry I thought you were looking for the potential (biblical) stance from the 'Church' rather than individual exclamations of 'abhorrent', 'it's unnatural', 'its an abomination' or 'God made Adam & Eve, not Madam & Eve' since you quoted biblical text in the first place.
Ok, so lets hope a fundamentalist homsexual hating right wing christian trots along sometime soon to provide you with an answer that you'll accept.
Ok, so lets hope a fundamentalist homsexual hating right wing christian trots along sometime soon to provide you with an answer that you'll accept.
@Chaka35.
I'm a Christian. The bible has always allowed women to teach scripture to men and women, just that women were not allowed to teach their husbands the scriptures. In answer to your question, true believers do not prejudice against anyone. Jesus taught us to love thy neighbor as thyself. We are to accept everyone BUT not accept their sexual or moral practices if it conflicts with God's laws and statutes. Homosexuality is a sin. Regardless of gender.
You would not allow an alcoholic to teach about how to give up alcohol if he himself were still drinking alcohol.
So how is a practicing homosexual going to teach about the sin of homosexuality when, they themselves practice it openly ? I hope I have answered your question to some degree. May the lord Jesus keep you and protect you.
I'm a Christian. The bible has always allowed women to teach scripture to men and women, just that women were not allowed to teach their husbands the scriptures. In answer to your question, true believers do not prejudice against anyone. Jesus taught us to love thy neighbor as thyself. We are to accept everyone BUT not accept their sexual or moral practices if it conflicts with God's laws and statutes. Homosexuality is a sin. Regardless of gender.
You would not allow an alcoholic to teach about how to give up alcohol if he himself were still drinking alcohol.
So how is a practicing homosexual going to teach about the sin of homosexuality when, they themselves practice it openly ? I hope I have answered your question to some degree. May the lord Jesus keep you and protect you.
RavenD, thank you for your post; you're just the sort of believer I wanted an answer from.
What is your specific religious basis for saying that homosexuality is a sin, regardless of gender (by which I assume you mean 'sex')? Leviticus says that male homosexual practice is an abomination but it makes no mention of female homosexuality.
And homosexuality is something you're born with, isn't it? Like left-handedness. Do you make a distinction between the natural inclination and the indulgence of it?
I don't understand your last paragraph. Which practising homosexual is trying to teach whom what?
What is your specific religious basis for saying that homosexuality is a sin, regardless of gender (by which I assume you mean 'sex')? Leviticus says that male homosexual practice is an abomination but it makes no mention of female homosexuality.
And homosexuality is something you're born with, isn't it? Like left-handedness. Do you make a distinction between the natural inclination and the indulgence of it?
I don't understand your last paragraph. Which practising homosexual is trying to teach whom what?
We have already established that about Leviticus, so then we look to Romans for any specific female homosexual reference. Christians (generally) believe that the sexual act of homosexuality is a sin, and thus accept nhomosexuals but not what they do in the bedroom. Same old story.
I would imagine the homosexual 'teaching about the sin of homosexuality' would be the lesbian Bishop to which your original q refers.
I would imagine the homosexual 'teaching about the sin of homosexuality' would be the lesbian Bishop to which your original q refers.
1 to 18 of 18
