Why do Christians condemn LGBTQ as Evil?

[user 139760]

No, but think about it, it is interesting to not just collate opinions but also to think for oneself.
Islam started in a society that was 600 years more 'advanced' than christianity did.
Sure, in itself it had less time to evolve, but the society it was generated in, had already evolved for 6 centuries more than christianity did.
Just imagine that a new religion would start 600 years from now.
That religion would grow up in a society we can't even begin to imagine, but it should be way more advanced in every respect than our own, just because of the people that will start it will do so with all the philosophical and technological knowledge from 6 centuries in the future.
Would you expect that new religion to be less advanced than all religions of today, but having evolved for 6 centuries more?

Personally, I grew up in a catholic environment, but I became an atheist, in part this was due to my doubts about my sexual preference and the way religion acts upon those people.
I don't know how things are in the US, but I think violence towards gay people comes a lot more from islamic communities than from christian communities.
If you look at the worst places in the world to be gay, almost all of them are islamic countries, or countries with a large muslim community.
In those countries there are laws that make it illegal to be gay, and you might get killed for them.
Those laws are mostly based on the shariah.

I know all of that. I also have my own opinions.
But I don't share them.
Religious debate is not allowed on the forum.
I believe I already answered the question. The subject is far more complex than "Islam did it". I personally know several Muslims who support lgbtq causes. Even at the risk of their health.
Give it time. It's all that can be done.

 

[insecure]

Religious debate is not allowed on the forum.

In that case, this forum topic should not be permitted then, because it specifically asks about religion, and as people have different opinions, it can only lead to a kind of debate.

I believe I already answered the question. The subject is far more complex than "Islam did it". I personally know several Muslims who support lgbtq causes. Even at the risk of their health.
Give it time. It's all that can be done.

Of course it will always be a little bit more complex than that.
However, look at this list objectively.
This is a list of safest and most dangerous countries to visit for gay people.
Just look at how many of those most dangerous places are predominantly muslim countries.

https://www.gaytimes.co.uk/life/her...angerous-countries-for-lgbtq-people-to-visit/

 

[user 139760]

In that case, this forum topic should not be permitted then, because it specifically asks about religion, and as people have different opinions, it can only lead to a kind of debate.

Of course it will always be a little bit more complex than that.
However, look at this list objectively.
This is a list of safest and most dangerous countries to visit for gay people.
Just look at how many of those most dangerous places are predominantly muslim countries.

https://www.gaytimes.co.uk/life/her...angerous-countries-for-lgbtq-people-to-visit/

No it isn't. The topic specifically asks about lgbtq and Christians, you're derailing it into a debate about wether Islam is evil or not. THAT is debating religion. It's no more, no LESS evil than Christianity, it's all the same garbage.

But the thread is specifically about LGBTQ. People. If you're argument is that Islam is worse, it really doesn't matter and is completely besides the topic. This isn't a Christianity vs Islam vs other religions debate.

If murder were allowed tomorrow morning, I'm sure you'd see the Westboro Baptist Church fuzzy wuzzies go on a spree. Hate of homosexuals is exclusive to religion in general, not Islam in particular. It's all the same garbage.

 

[insecure]

No it isn't. The topic specifically asks about lgbtq and Christians, you're derailing it into a debate about wether Islam is evil or not. THAT is debating religion. It's no more, no LESS evil than Christianity, it's all the same garbage.

But the thread is specifically about LGBTQ. People. If you're argument is that Islam is worse, it really doesn't matter and is completely besides the topic. This isn't a Christianity vs Islam vs other religions debate.

If murder were allowed tomorrow morning, I'm sure you'd see the Westboro Baptist Church fuzzy wuzzies go on a spree. Hate of homosexuals is exclusive to religion in general, not Islam in particular. It's all the same garbage.

You sound just as dogmatic as many religious people.
All religions HAVE to be equally bad, because of some form of balance.

While as an atheist I am not a fan of religion, I do think there is a hierarchy in dangerousness of religions.
If all of them were equally intolerant, the list of most dangerous places to visit for LGBTQ+ would contain just as many islamic, christian, buddhist, ... countries.
It clearly does not, yet I did not create this list.

But if I understand correctly it is perfectly OK to open a topic called "Why do muslims condemn LGBTQ as Evil?", it is only forbidden to compare religions one with the other.
Actually, I could not find this rule.
What I did find is "posting content which promotes hatred of any race, ethnicity, sex, gender, or religion".
I don't think my posts did that.
You could say that the title of this topic does.
It specifically points the finger at christians.

 

[user 190541]

While as an atheist I am not a fan of religion, I do think there is a hierarchy in dangerousness of religions.
If all of them were equally intolerant, the list of most dangerous places to visit for LGBTQ+ would contain just as many islamic, christian, buddhist, ... countries.
It clearly does not, yet I did not create this list.

Judging by world-historical events, clearly, Christianity is the single most dangerous religion that has ever come to be on the face of the Earth. Islam is a rather meek religion by comparison. Muslim potentates have a long history of showing tolerance toward other religions, particularly Abrahamic faiths. Christian kings and clergy, on the other hand, not so much.

Obviously it's a mistake to believe Islam is intrinsically any more reactionary than Christianity is. Islam united the Arabian Peninsula and ushered in a Middle-Eastern golden age. Christianity was responsible for a considerable animosity toward the legacy of Antiquity, and the short-sightedness of early Christians is the reason why so much of the cultural production of the classical world has been lost, at least in part.

Think about it, islam is 600 years younger than christianity, that also means it developed in a society that should be 6 centuries more advanced than christianity, yet it remains a religion that is very brutal in many respects.

On the contrary, Christianity was born in Roman Judaea, a relatively advanced and affluent province in the Roman Empire. Islam came to be in the Medina-Mecca axis, a rather backwards region of the world by comparison, even by the 7th century. That Islam was able to beat the odds and accomplish so much is proof of its once progressive character.

 

[Unsigned]

Islam started in a society that was 600 years more 'advanced' than christianity did.

I don't want to get involved in the discussion going on here, but I will say one thing regarding the above.
It is very debatable that the Roman Empire during Pax Romana (when Christianity started) was less advanced than whatever it was they had in Saudi Arabia in 600 AD. They called it the "dark ages" for a reason.

 

[insecure]

Judging by world-historical events, clearly, Christianity is the single most dangerous religion that has ever come to be on the face of the Earth. Islam is a rather meek religion by comparison. Muslim potentates have a long history of showing tolerance toward other religions, particularly Abrahamic faiths. Christian kings and clergy, on the other hand, not so much.

I don't know where you get that impression.
If you simply read the history of islam it is full of violence, and I am not talking about the worldly leaders, but the book itself and the history of its leader (Muhammed), which is inherently violent.
The list of most dangerous countries for LGBTQ is full of islamitic countries, you simply ignore this fact, some of those countries have laws that have the death penalty for it.
These days you have movements like ISIS, Al Qaeda, etc, all terrorists who show no respect for other religions.
You don't find that same violence with other religions.

What you are doing is simply taking all violent events, and then mapping them to the religion that that ruler has.
The king was christian, so christianity was wrong.
Fact is that in most cases this was not even in the name of that religion, this is clearly different from violent groups like ISIS, who explicitly state their objective to create an islamic state.

 

[user 139760]

You sound just as dogmatic as many religious people.

Whatever floats your boat.
I'm not going to debate religion. I think the question's been more than answered.
But hey, go ahead, get your jollies off.

 

[Minus]

I could not find this rule.

"Debate of religion is forbidden." Is on the heading of the 'Up for Debate' forum. That does not mean that it is acceptable to have religious debates elsewhere.

A Lonely Life Code of Conduct

 

[user 190541]

I don't know where you get that impression.

I got it from something called a history book. I believe you'll find it very enlightening.

Just to end this discussion, as it's turning into one of religion, and, as the admin stated, it's against the rules, lemme point out that this is a historical fact. It's not up for debate. Christian kingdoms have been less tolerant than its Muslim counterparts throughout history. And, yes, the reason for this lack of tolerance was religious zeal, persecution of Muslims and Jews throughout Europe was done, indeed, in the name of religion, in the name of Christ and Christendom. Again, this is not up for debate. This is a historical fact.

 

[Unsigned]

@Mr Preuss

So Charles Martel and his army persecuted those trying to invade their homeland?
And The Spaniards were persecuting their oppressors when they finally drove them out?
I think history is pretty clear as to who were the instigators/aggressors.

 

[user 190541]

@Mr Preuss

So Charles Martel and his army persecuted those trying to invade their homeland?
And The Spaniards were persecuting their oppressors when they finally drove them out?
I think history is pretty clear as to who were the instigators/aggressors.

Sure, if you think the Muslim/Jewish family next door are oppressors/aggressors/instigators or whatever.

Seriously, dude?

 

[user 190541]

Because this is the people that had their lands and property stolen, that was forced to leave their homes, their country, or that was quite simply put to death because of their faith. I don't know if the issue here is a matter of misinterpretation or just plain ignorance. Again, these are facts. In the end, it's the common people that pays the price, it's the common people that always suffers. You'd do well to put aside this 4chan-esque idea and learn this lesson from history, because it's true.

 

[Minus]

The thread was asking "Why do Christians condemn LGBTQ as Evil?" and it seems that topic has run it's course. Which religion is the worst is getting into the area of debate.