MetalGuardian
Banned
Ah, yeah. I was getting ready to talk about how he's just quoting a full Bible verse, but I looked it up... verse 22 is the one talking about homosexuality, and verse 23 talking about bestiality. No need to combine the two in the post unless he's trying to draw the comparison, but maybe that is in fact what the author of Leviticus is trying to do anyway.http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=39410470&postcount=367
Maclaren77 believes homosexuality is the same as raping animals (bestiality, which is obviously not consensual by any human definition.)
Canuck76 says "Yeah i stand behind that 100%. That's what i believe."
Still, as reprehensible as verse 22 is, I still think it would be logically inconsistent to not see homosexuality as a perversion (maybe even in the same way bestiality is a perversion, if that is what the verse is trying to convey) if you are a Christian. If you don't believe that verse, what grounds would you have to believe the verses about eternal life? If one verse is wrong, how can you be certain any verses are right?
This goes back to me suggesting attacking and undermining the religious doctrine itself is more useful than berating the religious person. The religious person is just a product of the text they have put their faith in.