So has anyone ever really thought of the reason why...

[Xelebes]

Homosexuality is/was banned, particularily in the religious texts?

What are your hypotheses?

 

[Programmer Cat]

Homosexuality is/was banned, particularily in the religious texts?

What are your hypotheses?

A happy person does not need to seek solace in God. If people are happy, they'll ignore the priests. If the priests go ignored, then they'll have to do honest work, and none of them want that.

 

[CJontherocks]

Hmmmm... my first thought is maybe it was an effort to discredit the Roman/Pagan way of life. Did any other civilizations practice free sexuality before the Greeks and Romans? What about the Egyptians? Was homosexuality/bisexualty in the Roman Empire limited to the privileged elite, or was it okay with everybody?

I'm really confused when it comes to historical timelines compared between different civilizations. But I should think there were religions/civilizations that frowned upon homosexuality long before the Greeks and Romans came along. Anyone know the answer to that?

I just don't know enough specifics about history to make an informed theory. Some will tell you it's 'cause God don't like it.

Perhaps it's because those who were concerned with the advancement of mankind and propagation of the species worried that no one would have kids if everyone was homosexual. And inserting it into a law of religion would have been the best way to reach the most amount of people and have them actually follow the rules. I don't know who those people were, though. Maybe the aliens that built the pyramids.

 

[Xelebes]

Part of me thinks that anal sex is associated with slavery. In the tale of Sodom and Gomorrah, Abraham and his sons are threatened with anal sex (rape). Abraham offers daughters instead but they insist on the men. They'd rather rape the men than rape the daughters - probably because it is easier to rape the women than men - and it is a show of superiority if you can rape men. Abraham flees, burning down the city (God providing the necessary fireworks to the tar industry of Sodom and Gomorrah.)

You may notice that anal sex in jail is usually not done out of actual sexual pleasure but to intimidate other prisoners. Going with that, I can see that anal rape could have been used as a form of enslaving people by intimidating the men. If they can rape you once, what is stopping them from doing it again?

In Greek culture, I know they practiced consensual homosexuality. This was probably used for two reasons: to prevent having women tagging along to the battlefields and to prevent any stigma that might be had out of taking prisoners of war. The second one is a bit more controversial in my mind but it has enough weight to make me write it down on the keyboard.

So yeah, the ban on homosexuality was probably used to stop this form of enslavement.

That's my hypothesis.

 

[FlightyBird]

I think it was about controlling the use of sex - sex is for making babies and that's it. To this day the Catholic church prohibits the use of condoms because sex strictly for pleasure is a sin. It doesn't matter if you're married and can have sex according to God, you still must only do it for the purpose of having children. If you have AIDS, just abstain altogether. Have some control for the good of your soul (hey that's kinda catchy, I should write their slogans =P) In that context, it's not just homosexuality that is a sin, but any sexuality for purposes aside from procreation. I remember hearing a US senator talking about how disgusting it is to have sex for pleasure, to use another person's body in such a degrading way. I think I died a little inside, and also felt very sorry for his wife.

Also, since the Church of the time was so involved in government, it made sense to set up the religion in a way that was convenient for tax laws of the day - set up a strictly defined family structure and say God commanded it to be so, and most people would adhere. Think of it - it's so much easier to say "this is the way it is - man+woman+babies=right, anything else=wrong." That would have made it easy to define a houshold for tax, census (I'm sure there was something like that back then), and whatever other purposes they could come up with. Keeping track of such things must have been really difficult before computers or whatever was used before computers (I suddenly feel very young...) Also, religion doesn't seem interested in ambiguity or diversity. The more uniform you can make you population, the better.

Then there's the problem of promiscuity - before the days of birth control, heterosexual sex alwasy involved the risk of a child, but homosexual sex did not. This left the homosexuals free to engage in sex with multiple partners with no fear of those kinds of reprecussions, and sleeping around was a no-no regardless of the genders involved. I agree that this one is kind of out there, but it was told to me by a Christian, so I thought I'd post it just cause.

Lastly, the fear of something that is different or unusual - it's my understanding and experience that heterosexuality is more common than homosexuality. I'd guess that bisexuals, knowing the risks in being with a same sex partner, would tend towards the social norms to keep themselves out of trouble; I know I'd probably stick to guys if the penalty for being found with a girl was being stoned to death. Given that kind of secrecy, the number of people caught was probably so tiny that it seemed even more rare than it was, making it hugely abnormal, and therefore wrong.

Sorry that was probably too long, but religion interests me greatly, so I usually talk too much...

 

[Xelebes]

Please note that I am prodding at older issues than the Catholic Church. Judaism has similar bans on homosexuality and is where the Christians get most of their rules from on leading a sinless life. The question is, why has any sexuality beyond procreation been banned by some denominations (puritans, for example.)

 

[Programmer Cat]

The question is, why has any sexuality beyond procreation been banned by some denominations (puritans, for example.)

Like I said before: people who are happy and fulfilled don't need to seek solace in religion. Make sex-for-pleasure "sinful" and get people to believe that they are evil for wanting pleasure, and you've got a ready-made market for your own brand of comforting bullshit. The Hebrew priests knew this.

 

[Xelebes]

Not necessarily. Why are we so repulsed by paedophilia?

 

[CJontherocks]

Like I said before: people who are happy and fulfilled don't need to seek solace in religion. Make sex-for-pleasure "sinful" and get people to believe that they are evil for wanting pleasure, and you've got a ready-made market for your own brand of comforting bullshit. The Hebrew priests knew this.

Now that theory has merit.

I'm also very interested in the study of religion, from a historical perspective. I'm going have to read more about this. Was Judaism the first monotheistic religion to ban homosexuality?

 

[Xelebes]

Not sure. The only older monotheist religion that we know of is Zoroastrianism. We might have to do some reading up on this.

But I think the tale of Sodom & Gommorah is a very pertinent story as it is probably the key to why it was banned in the first place as an edict from Abraham himself.

 

[CJontherocks]

So maybe the story of Sodom and Gommorah was used as the precedent to establish the rule of law. I'd have to know if that's the first time homosexuality was said to be wrong. It still doesn't answer the question of why. I'm going to the library.

 

[Xelebes]

I'd have to look up the Necronomicon (Sumerian) and what things have been written about Zoroastrianism. Haven't done my reading on them.

 

[Tymeless]

hmmm scare tactics so the priest can be the only ones that play with the young boys? no on a serious note it was something that was diffrent and people in the past fear what they don't understand or what is diffrent then them. Just like sneezing supposedly left you vulerable to being possessed etc. or exploring the oceans because the church said the world was flat, and you would fall off.

 

[Xelebes]

hmmm scare tactics so the priest can be the only ones that play with the young boys? no on a serious note it was something that was diffrent and people in the past fear what they don't understand or what is diffrent then them. Just like sneezing supposedly left you vulerable to being possessed etc. or exploring the oceans because the church said the world was flat, and you would fall off.

Again, you glance on the modern forms (Christianity and Roman/Babylonian Judaism.) It does not answer why it was even became so unheard of.

 

[DomRick]

As a former staunch right-wing conservative, homosexuality was wrong because the Bible said it was. 'Nuff said. I left that fold over 10 years ago and began studying nature for a "higher power", which I believe is what any religion does at it's core. How we as humans relate that higher power is what differentiates the beliefs. When I found bisexuality and masturbation in nature (sex for pleasure, not procreation), my own mind was free to forgive myself after many years of depression and angst over my personal sexuality. Just my opinion.

 

[Tymeless]

no i'm just looking at things in general the church in all religions just make up rules that have no backing or proof, and since you can't prove it they believe it to be correct.

 

[Xelebes]

no i'm just looking at things in general the church in all religions just make up rules that have no backing or proof, and since you can't prove it they believe it to be correct.

I'm thinking there is some backing up to these rules - just that the priests lost sight of the arguments that saw the creation of these rules and tenants.

 

[Tymeless]

they probably have a reason behind them initially but i'm saying now most of thier rules and ideals have no proof behind them and with science discovering new things daily the religions need to catch up or they won't have much control over the population much longer.

 

[Wolfman1982]

in ancient Japan, homosexuality. And bisexuality wasn´t a sin, and many of the Japanese aristocrats had partners of both genders. By the way.

 

[rjp44]

......

 

[Xelebes]

Give credit where it's due. Quotes from "The Second Messiah" are interesting though.

Whom should I give credit to? I read the Bible and I need to read the Necronomicon and other texts.

 

[Raimondin]

Part of me thinks that anal sex is associated with slavery. In the tale of Sodom and Gomorrah, Abraham and his sons are threatened with anal sex (rape). Abraham offers daughters instead but they insist on the men. They'd rather rape the men than rape the daughters - probably because it is easier to rape the women than men - and it is a show of superiority if you can rape men. Abraham flees, burning down the city (God providing the necessary fireworks to the tar industry of Sodom and Gomorrah.)

You may notice that anal sex in jail is usually not done out of actual sexual pleasure but to intimidate other prisoners. Going with that, I can see that anal rape could have been used as a form of enslaving people by intimidating the men. If they can rape you once, what is stopping them from doing it again?

In Greek culture, I know they practiced consensual homosexuality. This was probably used for two reasons: to prevent having women tagging along to the battlefields and to prevent any stigma that might be had out of taking prisoners of war. The second one is a bit more controversial in my mind but it has enough weight to make me write it down on the keyboard.

So yeah, the ban on homosexuality was probably used to stop this form of enslavement.

That's my hypothesis.

Well, all very probable in "theory." Remember some people don't believe in the Bible as others would even discredit historical references.

I would say homosexuality (and homosexuality's condemnation) has always been a result of it being looked upon as merely a "sex act" (anal sex) rather than as another way of loving someone, or another way of being.

Ok, Heterosexuality might be the only way for "procreation", but it's not the only "form" of sexuality, wherein lies the problem. And therein lies the bane (and hypocrisy) for those religious moralists insisting on their puritanical beliefs wanting to control how and who we should fuck.

As far as going off to the Greek War, why would anybody want to take women into the battlefields? Taking prisoners of war, torture and death were more in the forefront for them than anal rape. I assume most of us are aware of Alexander The Great's sexual procilvities, and also the famous Roman Gladiators prowess went much further than just on the battlefields or in the arena. (Assuming historical data).

Rape (whether Hetero or Homo) is still a violent crimminal act. But I'm not so sure all prison sex is strictly an act of "humilitaion" either. I'm sure there's a good percentage of guys in there digging it, (and digging in).

Anal sex is practised by both hetero and Homo, so, I suppose we all should be enslaved...

 

[John Doe]

Isn't it obvious? Because God told us to.

 

[Vinceant]

I think it was mostly because of Hygiene honestly. A good portion of the old laws in the old testament were there simply because of hygiene problems; most of which Christians don't follow anymore because of things like soap, toilet paper, etc. (you'd be surprised at how random some of them are if you ever read through it; it's a decent laugh). However imagine anal sex without all the semi modern conveniences we all take advantage of everyday, and it's actually not that pleasent sounding; it's most definitely a lot safer now than it used to be.

As far as I'm aware, Homosexuality isn't technically against the rules. Sexual impurity is, however. Mostly when a translated English Bible refers to "Homosexuality", it's referring to sodomy (which obviously isn't exclusive to homosexuals). So, having homosexual tendencies or feelings doesn't ban you to hell like most crazed Baptists would have you believe (at least not according the same doctrine in which they believe, despite foolishly not knowing it). :S Lust in general is a "sin", same as sexual impurity; but homosexuality is not technically a "sin", per se.

Simply reading the Bible in English without knowing the Greek/Hebrew origins is why common Christians are so stupid. -_-

All that being said....do whatever the hell you want. What's 'normal' and what's 'ok' is all subjective and entirely up to you, something most Christians would do well to remember.

 

[Night_Jasmine]

I think it was mostly because of Hygiene honestly. A good portion of the old laws in the old testament were there simply because of hygiene problems; most of which Christians don't follow anymore because of things like soap, toilet paper, etc. (you'd be surprised at how random some of them are if you ever read through it; it's a decent laugh). However imagine anal sex without all the semi modern conveniences we all take advantage of everyday, and it's actually not that pleasent sounding; it's most definitely a lot safer now than it used to be.



Vinceant is right. I suffered through three weeks of Leviticus in Old Testament Survey going over the laws that god laid down to Moses..and 99.999% is due to hygiene and health. Unfortunately, they didn't have the resources the more established cultures had for health and food processing as they were mostly nomadic.

Most of the ancient cultures - Egyptian and others - were more open about sexuality and their medical practices were more advanced. Heck, Egyptians were performing brain surgery!

I think having ancient texts translated by men who were completely devoted to purity wasn't the best thing to do for this bible. I'm not fond of this type of stuff normally but growing up in a Southern Baptist home gave me too much of a view on how close minded people are. In this day and age, they take things TOO literally. Hebrew was a poetic language, to be interpreted, not taken literally.