Why has religion been so strongly against homosexuality throughout history?
>>1068804
Which one?
>>1068804
Because homosexuality is an abomination
>>1068824
Amen
>>1068820
Almost all of them.
>>1068804
Religion? Pretty much most civilized societies in most levels have been, check your facts you biased mongrel.
>>1068824
Let's hypothetically say it is. So what?
>>1068804
If you're talking about Christians, not actually.
During the earlier years of Christianity, there's a thing called "brother making", pretty much a form of marriage for homosexual couples.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodom_and_Gomorrah
>>1068804
It's different.
>>1068828
Name some
One of the viewpoints i've been taught was that it wasn't necessarily viewed as completely abhorrent in some civilizations, but was still publicly deemed immoral due to the fact it wasn't great for the propagation and sustainment of a society.
Different reasons depending on the religion. Sometimes they didn't really care depending on the circumstances, like the Hindus and Greeks, and they didn't really think of fucking another guy as 'homosexuality', as we know it today. But still, the question is too general to answer in a useful manner.
What's curious to me is that lesbian sex is almost never mentioned historically. When talking about same-sex relations further than like 200 years ago it's nearly non-existent.
>>1068856
>No sex
>No romantic implication
>But if we stretch it out really really far we can say fag marriage is an old tradition that society needs back
Homos are insufferable
can homosexuals make babies? If you tell people they are required to only fuck the opposite sex, then you won't have to worry about population dwindling as much. Same thing with how pigs and "dirty animals" are banned for being prone to causing disease and death. A Mormon family is expected to have at least 5 children, meaning a much larger growth of potential Mormons.
>>1068804
Religious rules usually have practical functions, though they may look outdated nowadays. When it comes to male homosexuality, the reason is pretty simple: men shouldn't "waste" their "seed". If you can use your "seed" to increase the clan's numbers, but prefer to "waste" it around, you're being disloyal to your clan. Same goes for sodomy.
>>1068804
I'm not really that knowledgeable about religion but isn't the premise of your question wrong? Only the Abrahamic relgions are against homosexuality I think. Hinduism, Buddhism, and other major non-Abrahamic relgions dont condemn it.
Homosexuality is unusual; non-conforming to gender roles.
1) "Unusual" leads to xenophobia. People used to be poor and dumb in a lot of places for a long time. Poor and dumb people are particularly susceptible to being suspicious of anything strange.
2) Large religions were heavily institutionalized and conservative. Gotta have power over them peasants and keep them under control. No deviation from your role in society allowed.
>>1068897
During early days of Christianity it wasn't as big and as institutionalized. It was more like a hippy movement, free love for everybody.
>>1068931
Because Hinduism and Buddhism weren't "centralized" and used to control people. It was more like a social class. You could have your own god and your own way to worship Buddha in each town.
>>1068828
Which ones?
>>1068804
There were plenty of religions which did not condemn homosexuality, they didn't survive because they failed to procreate.
>Make broad accusations against religion
>Doesn't even specify which ones
>Tee hee I mean just the Abrahamic religions
Fuck you
>>1068946
Homosexuality was never a huge problem for procreation.
My inclination is that when most people see a heterosexual couple holding hands or kissing it gives you a "aww that's cute" sort of feeling, whereas when they see homosexuals doing the same it produces an unfavorable reaction. If true, this indicates some biological bias against it, which is similar to other instinctive reactions most people have to things, such as instinctively feeling good about acts of altruism and instinctively reacting against acts of malice.
It's gross, nothing more to it than people institutionalizing taboos. They're always be the butt of jokes because of that too, a society might be tolerant of it, but most straight people innately find it off-putting.
>>1069000
> aww that's cute
I was disgusted no matter of homo or hetero it was.
Abrahamic religions are the ones mainly against it. Indo-European warriors in the bronze age and up to the iron age commonly had partnerships with a fellow soldier that included sex. The best evidence is seen chariot pairs is Celtic forces. In Celtic society, it wasn't uncommon for men to prefer this relationship and leave sex with women for procreation.
>>1069015
You're disgusted when you see a heterosexual couple holding hands? the fuck kinda asshole are you?
Homosexuality is anathema to the concept of the family unit and gender identities. It has a cancerous effect on the very foundations of patriarchal society, and the church as an inherently conservative institution therefore opposes it
>>1068934
>If you even look at a woman lustfully it's a sin
>free love
Fucking hell you're retarded, kill yourself fag.
>>1068804
Because male pair-bonding can destroy conventional societies on any number of levels and religions generally play a role in maintaining societies. Nobody gives a shit about powerful men having fuccbois on the side because there are minimal social implications and nobody gives a shit about lesbians because it's not like they can avoid getting married and pregnant anyway.
>>1069034
>hasn't read New Testament
>>1069000
>everything people do is biological
All people aside from retards and perverts also tend to hold their stool and go to the toilet instead of releasing a pile of shit on the spot in their pants whenever they feel like it. It's not biological, it's learned behavior.
>>1068947
Whenever atheists use the word religion that's always what they mean
>>1069048
Learning is biological
>>1069046
What like Corinthians 6:9
Or Matthew 5:28?
>>1069060
learning how to tickle the prostate with a dick is biological
>>1069059
Do you think atheists from Asian society or Muslim ones that won't kill them are as cringe worthy as ex Christians?
>>1069046
I'd reccomend you do read
Men who fuck men,women who fuck women, drunkards, fornicators, people who partake in orgies, thieves, idolaters, those prone to wrath, etc. are pretty explicitly stated to be damned and St. Paul outlines guidelines for excommunicating people (the incestuous man)
>>1069069
There is nothing cringe worthy at being an atheist.
>>1069069
Probably not
It's mostly Americans from evangelical households
European atheists for instance just don't care
>>1069062
Quoting passages from the Bible is gay. You have just contradicted yourself.
>>1069076
Inherently no, but then you get the shitters that build atheist churches and come to the conclusion that they "FUCKING LOVE SCIENCE" and shit like that
>>1069028
The "family unit" as we know it is a modern construct. Men had multiple wives (or vice versa is some select cultures like in Tibet), concubines, etc. I don't see how homosexuality goes against a patriarchal society, it actually supports a male/soldier culture, seen by pre-christian indo-europeans.
>>1069073
Meanwhile Jesus himself said that you should love everybody, that God forgives thieves and those prone to wrath and etc. and he loves them too. It's up to interpretation at best.
>>1069095
St. Paul never says he doesn't either
Christ says that they'll go to hell if unrepentant and St. Paul in the very next letter to the same church instructs them on letting the excommunicated man back in because he repented from his incest. All St. Paul's "condemnations" are just telling Christians who are fucking up to stop and correct their errors. Christ also said to "sin no more"
>>1069095
Jesus also left it up to Peter as the head of the Apostles to decide.
>What you bind on Earth shall be bound in heaven
And vice versa
Eh
>>1069095
This too. I think the bible is written to fully express God the best that a book can. Each individual piece is true (in context of course) while also being true as a whole. I think the bible is meant to show the intense wrath that God is capable of while also showing his boundless love and grace
>>1069028
>Homosexuality is anathema to the concept of the family unit and gender identities
2 fallacies are in this statement
>Family unit and Gender identities have been static, resembling modern ones.
And
>Homosexuality as a third sex complete with marriage. Like modern homofaggotry
Historically, plenty of societies saw Homoshit as either a sexual fetish or a male friendship upgrade. You still had to marry for a whole lot of reasons. Cultural duty, familial duties, etc.
>patriarchal society
Yeah, you'd have to explain why Homoshit happened and was a non-issue to the likes of the Greeks and the Chinese. Very patriarchal those two.
>>1069117
That's literally manipulating impressionable people using the Good Cop Bad Cop trick. It has many names in history.
>>1069128
It's not manipulation though. It's just showing you what happens if you choose to not accept God's grace. It's very clear and straightforward, the exact opposite of manipulation
>>1069127
Oh look its the
>I have no knowledge so I must shitpost post
>>1069141
Interrogation can also be very clear and straightforward: you don't say what you're asked - you get hit.
>>1069095
To that end everyone should be welcome in the church, yes. Nutbags like Steven Anderson who want to kill all gay people definitely have the wrong idea but just as well, the message explicitly isn't "do whatever you want". When Jesus went among the prostitutes and deviants he said "go, and sin no more".
In other words, you can be a gay christian, but you can't be having sex with men. You're just going to have to repress that.
>>1068874
>feigning this much ignorance
Islam
>>1069173
It makes me sad that he takes his hatred for gays to such an extreme level, though I do understand his anger and that fact that homosexuality is very sinful. He's very on point about everything else I've heard him talk about in my opinion, but his outspokenness about his extreme hatred for homosexuality turns people off from hearing him discuss the bible very knowledgably. I can understand not wanting unrepentant homosexuals who make no effort to change into the church, but wishing death on someone is taking it too far in my opinion. Hate the sin, but pray for the sinner, even if you have to cut yourself off from them
>>1068804
>Why has society been so strongly against homosexuality throughout history
Fixed. Religion is society.
>>1069158
It's more like this
Someone gives you a gift with the condition that you must acknowledge that they gave you that gift in order to keep it. If you choose not to then you don't get to keep it
>>1069036
This. Wish the old times were back
>>1069216
> If you choose not to then you don't get to keep it.
And then you get hit. Take the damn gift!
>>1069190
That's not "almost all religions"
>>1069225
Why wouldn't you take the gift of eternal bliss? Is that really so cruel of God to give you the choice between eternal bliss and eternal suffering? God is offering himself to you forever. You can choose not to have him but a life cut off from a loving God is suffering. He's told us this. Why would you complain about not having compassion and love in your life if you knowingly rejected it?
>>1069242
Pls take your life-denying death cult somewhere else.
>>1069260
Great response...how exactly is it life-denying? Do you just spout memes when you don't have an answer?
>>1069242
The manipulators are the people offering the idea. The idea of the God has nothing wrong with it.
>>1069048
I didn't say everything people do is biological, I postulated that in this instance the near universal disapproval of homosexuality in laws and social customs until very recently may originate in biological tendencies.
people say this is an abrahamic issue, but that's plainly false. Homosexuality is taboo or outright scorned in Hindu, Sikh, Zoroastrian, Shinto, Bhuddist, etc. cultures among others.
it seems the historical examples of social approval of homosexuality are the exception to the rule, and/or potentially false.
>>1069287
This is a shit thread anyway began by a vague statement.
>>1069319
>Homosexuality is taboo or outright scorned in Hindu, Sikh, Zoroastrian, Shinto, Bhuddist, etc. cultures among others.
>Hindu
>Sikh
>Zoroastrian
>Shinto
>Buddhism.
Alright then. Burden is on you to specify how these thought Homoniggery is Taboo.
Especially in Hinduism's case. That religion is balkanized as fuck.
>>1068891
Probably because women aren't as sexual as men. So the prevalence of it wouldn't be as easily known.
>>1068891
maybe because it's not possible for lesbians to have sex.
I'm drunk as shit and you're all faggots
>>1069325
no expert on the matter, but for starters homosexuals are widely discriminated against in India and although there is a hindu concept of a "third gender" it's not exactly a celebrated aspect of hinduism.
>>1068804
It hasn't. Abrahamic religion has. No one knows why.
My edgy hardcore atheist self from three years ago would say that opposing things like homosexuality is basically a religion's way of growing itself; in other words, religions that advocate for reproduction (be fruitful and multiply), as well as disapprove of things that limit reproduction (abortion, homosexuality, masturbation) tend to be more popular for fairly obvious reasons. My agnostic self now doesn't give a shit
>>1068804
Because it's the church of the devil and they hate every trait of mankind.
http://pastebin.com/Yj53GrxN
The east largely was very mixed about it but the west was against it, in the most simplest sense, because early-until-modern society support innate purposes to things. This is how homosexuality as disordered came about.
Of course there is possibly more going on but that's the common intellectual basis.
For people saying that it's because homosexuals don't produce offspring, it's very unlikely that would be the cause, for two reasons:
1) In cultures where homosexual relations were not oppressed homosexuals often did take wives/husbands and produce offspring anyway.
2) Even in the most liberal contemporary countries where social discrimination against homosexuals is low, where homosexuals are given full and equal rights, and where homosexuals can live open and full lives, the number of people who are homosexual is still a tiny percentage of the population, usually around 1% +- 0.5%
In other words, the rise in rate of reproduction that would be a consequence of persecution of homosexuals, would be so small (close to zero) as to be unnoticeable and immaterial.
>>1069359
>GOD DOESNT WANT ME TO STICK MY PEEPEE IN THINGS! HE'S A BIG MEANIE!!
>>1069266
>Great response...how exactly is it life-denying?
Because everything comes down to the afterlife. It doesn't matter if you're the mightiest leader of men that your people has ever produced or a dim-witted, celibate coward whose greatest achievement is keeping the slugs off of his cabbages; if you jump through the right hoops (virtually all of which involve restrictions on worldly acts) you both end up in paradise while someone that doesn't jump through those hoops, no matter the impact of their physical existence, is essentially a loser in the long run. It's a surgical denial of the will to power in favor of submission to a higher power - and His worldly servants, of course
>Do you just spout memes when you don't have an answer?
This is literally my second post in the thread and my first was almost two hours ago.
>>1069377
Where do I say that?
>Let's lie about what he says, maybe people will not check out!
>>1069373
pure speculation, but in a tribe of 100 people if one of them happens to be healthy but doesn't procreate that could be problematic for the survival of the tribe. I could see how such a situation would create social pressure to conform.
>>1069378
So because there's even more life than just the very short time we have here on Earth that makes Christianity life-denying?...Because more value is placed on benefitting others and being connected with the entity that gave you everything in life, it's life-denying? It seems like thinking that there's only 80 years on earth before it all ends and spending your life indulging in hedonistic pleasure such as collecting as much money as you can and hollow selfishness would be more life-denying
>>1069383
> that could be problematic
There is literally no difference. Other people could procreate a little more and all main resources are shared between tribe members anyway. Basically chief would got one more son instead of homo Joe and thats it
>>1069381
Where did I say that?
>let's lie about what he says, maybe it will discredit the point he was making which obviously wasn't a literal quote from what I wrote
>>1068804
Which ones?
There's nothing against it in Shinto for example. Similarly with many native american religions.
>>1068804
If they pressure the homosexuals into heterosexual marriage, the population will spread faster. Thus, the religion also spreads faster.
>>1069025
Maybe he's asexual.
>>1068840
when you start asking morally relative questions like that, you should really just kill yourself, because you've admitted that there is no meaning to life, be it yours or anyone elses.
disregarding all this, do you really have to think about why something "abominable" is bad? it's a detriment to individual and public health, and so, every society that isn't lead by namby pamby relativist faggots have, drawn, quartered, tarred and feathered the cock-mongling wretches and for good reason.
>>1069479
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6iHZi-z7H4o
>>1068804
It's simple, because two men cannot have children. The main religions look down on having sex for any other cause than to make children, and a homosexual couple cannot do that.
Therefore, in a religious sense, being a good person and being a homosexual cannot go hand in hand.
>>1069497
Uh... what?
>>1069489
Nope.avi
Being gay was a-ok before all the crazed paranoid religious heads started banning it in medieval times.
>>1068897
wtf are you talking about
I just stated a fact, that's all. You sounded like a triggered SJW, pham.
>>1069513
You forgot to mention that the whole reason behind this is the proliferation of the faith meme through the manufacturing of progeny.
If you can indoctrinate more vulnerable toddlers, you can assure the continued existence of your doctrinal exemption from hell, taxes, and whatever other power plays the faith culture makes in the mean time.
>>1069489
Well that's completely inaccurate.
>>1068947
Dude, saying that "homosexuality was condemned in religion" is like saying "Europe was catholic." It's a pretty obvious statement, and you'd have to be literally autistic not to understand what OP was referring to.
>>1069526
It happened that slaves and effeminate men were used as slutholes to quench the primal thirst. The pounders of the holes were not gay in the modern sense. They had wives and offspring and so on, and were loyal to them. The effeminate men were not seen as true men by the society because they lacked virtue. In many ways they were outcasts. They did not uphold nor would they continue the memes that made the society strong.
>>1068804
If your followers don't have kids, your faith dies.
>>1068804
The only ones that come to mind that have vitriolic hatred of homosexuality are the abrahamic ones and religions based on them, and I'm guessing thats because of old world strict cult insanity that has gone way too far.
Otherwise they don't state anything about it or mention it in a good light.
>Why has Abrahamic religion been so strongly against homosexuality throughout history?
fify, and the answer is because Abrahamic religions love naive intervention into society, they're basically the proto-SJWs
>>1068824
T H I S
H
I
S
Because Religions think that sex should be an activity perpetuated with the sole purpose of procreation between marriage. In order to do that you need a penis and a vagina. Anything outside that structure violates God's law.
"In another tale, Amaterasu retreats from conflict with her brother Susa No O into a cave, depriving the Earth of sunlight and life. In order to coax Amaterasu from the cave, the deity of humour and dance, Ame No Uzume, performs a bawdy sexual dance that involved exposing her breast and vulva, and inviting Amaterasu to admire them. On Amaterasu's stepping out of the cave, the transgender kami Ishi Kori Dome held up a magical mirror, and the combination of the dance and her reflection fascinate Amaterasu so much that she does not notice other spirits closing the cave entrance behind her"
Just like my favorite animes
Because striving for women as a man is a instinctive impulse. Everything that deviates from that is seen as unnatural.
Someone red pill me on Christianity. Mainstream Christian thought says jesus said love and all in the Bible is overruled by it.
What's stopping me from committing sin if Jesus died for them?
Couldn't I just fuck a man and say but muh forgiveness?
>>1072664
Jesus also said "sin no more".
>>1068804
Look at the establishment of each religion compared to world population. We're living at a time where the biggest concern about mankind getting wiped out is too many people but even 200 years ago that was nowhere near true.
Religion lives because it is passed on. It is the modern version of oral history. You couldn't pass it on as a homosexual, it was detrimental to society. Those barriers are gone now and whaddya know, homosexuality only bothers people clinging to religion.
>>1068891
sappho
>>1072688
>homosexuality only bothers people clinging to religion
*society
nice hitlerdubs btw
>>1072686
I like to quote that at all the people who say that Christians aren't supposed to judge. They generally shut up fast afterwards.
>>1072709
John 7:24
Stop judging by mere appearances, but instead judge correctly.
>>1068891
>What's curious to me is that lesbian sex is almost never mentioned historically.
>Who is Sappho
I think women are just less prominent historically than men. Also people for some reason care less about lesbians. You never hear people complain about "muh butch lesbians forcing their lifestyle on us"
>>1068824
>abomination
>>1072729
Exactly.
And as a Catholic what really infuriates me is when people quote that one encyclical about the "primacy of conscience." Nobody ever bothers to remember that it also says the supremacy of the conscience is dependent on the conscience being 'well-formed.' What is a well-formed conscience? It's a conscience that's been taught and developed within the Church's teachings. So it's going to accord with the Church on nearly every occasion.
Liberal Catholics are a fucking cancer. It's especially hateful because when it IS time to be radical and extreme they're usually nowhere to be found.
>>1068804
its complicated
since patriarchal culture is fundamentaly a question of male to male relation and organisations of males, where both mutual respect and obedience to specified authority and order are important, anything that affects phisical and emotional relation betveen men can be problematic and disruptive or beneficial and useful, both for individuals and groups
men are always ready to fuck, and lots of things easily become habitual, so removing the injunction against male to male sex is like breaking open a huge social and sexual can of worms, it leads to promiscuity and is often seen as perverse fornication, asociated with frivolity and general decadence, as well as contagious disease and other crap, it leads to sexualisation and objectification of males, especialy young ones, even in ways that most males generaly would rather avoid, and so its a rather slippery slope into pederastry
at the same time it is highly compatible with macho, collectivist and militaristic tendencies, often being a unofficial institution in military or religious organisations, which wouldt be seen necesarily as a bad thing if it wasnt for the fact it progressively degenerates into institutionalised rape and domination, which people generaly dont see kindly to, and at the same time it promotes collective homogenity and group cohesion, which powers that be often dislike as it actualy empowers people
so in many ways its ambiguous, it can be seen as reinforcing obedience and eroticising loyalty, while at the same time screwing up onedimensional notions of obedience to institutionalised power, it can enrich and greatly strenghten male relations, turning friends into lovers, or it can reduce the entire thing to a vulgar relation of power and sexual violence, it can make one see beauty and value in other men or just turn everione into walking fuck meat, it can be the deepest most reciprocal form of intimacy or abject humiliation and forced subjugation
its just complicated
I would say it goes beyond natalism, but this may just be my personal political opinions seeping through.
It unifies a society. It brings a stronger meaning to the concept of a family. When you think of a family, you unquestionably think of a mother, father, and kids. And when kids grow up, they grow up the same way all of their friends grow, and their parents grew, and their grandparents grew.
When you add homosexuality into the mix you mess with the family. The solid structure, being the family, that unified you with your society and your entire family lineage is gone when you allow people to embrace homosexuality. Then kids who grew up in confident family homes grow confused and depressed because everything they have known, the love from their mother and father, has been tarnished.
If religion hates homosexuality to promote family and procreation...
Why are clergy so often celibate?
>>1069090
>I don't see how homosexuality goes against a patriarchal society, it actually supports a male/soldier culture, seen by pre-christian indo-europeans.
This is basically correct.
>>1072891
if only they were just that...
Because putting things up your ass is medically retarded.
>Uncle Joe can't go on the hunt because he has a prolapsed colon from taking Cousin John's dick, and Cousin John can't either because he picked up a couple different diseases that are rotting his bowels out from the inside from when he fucked a few dozen other men last summer because there's no feminine restraint on male-only sexuality, so the entire tribe is going to starve to death this winter
>>1072957
more likely;
>the entire hunting party fell apart when mike put a spear trough toms arm after tom had a jealousy induced fist fight with paty leader over catching him fucking mikes younger brother, since apparently the dumb fucks fell in love last summer and been screwing for months and told no one, but mike blamed it all on tom, cause his kid brother dindu nuffin as allways
>our respective clans are now on something of a warpath and we all wish the little bitch kept his legs closed or tom just fucked a goat like a normal person... at least no one died this time
>>1068804
because its antithetical to life
>>1068931
>Surely the other religions I know nothing about must love sodomy!
>>1069095
>Meanwhile, my third-hand, half-remembered understanding of Jesus said, "Do whatever the fuck you want. It's 2016!"
