The Bible Does Not Make Being Gay wrong

Well if what I posted as abominations according to the bible ex. "Unclean things (Lev. 7:21). Leviticus 11:7 And the pig, because it parts the hoof and is cloven-footed but does not chew the cud, is unclean to you." How is it considered "prioritise" when they clearly neglect, ignore, do not obey, fail to follow, and any other word you can think of that means they did follow or listen to that particular verse. Would you like to talk about more verses Catholics neglect? Let me list a few. "EX 21:17, LE 20:9, DT 21:18-21 A child who curses his parent(s) is to be put to death. A stubborn and/or rebellious child is to be put to death." I know for a fact I have told a priest I have disrespected my parents before and I have cursed to my parents face before yet I am still living today. "LE 19:19 A cloth garment made of two kinds of material must not be worn." What is quite interesting is that priests contradict this statement in the Bible every time they hold mass. "Five different materials were used to create the priestly garments: gold techelet, sky-blue wool dark-red wool crimson wool twisted linen" Those are a few examples of the neglections of other verses of the Bible. Let us also consider that many Catholics say you cannot take the Bible 100% literal and 100% figurative. Why are some verses allowed to slide yet being gay is still wrong only from what the bible says? back on subject. Are you trying to argue Gays do not acknowledge God? That he has abandoned them? Maybe you should read http://gaycatholic.info... and look around God says he loves everyone. Except those who follow then turn their back on God "There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay, or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation." So if God created us all then why are there different sexual orientations? Well quite simple God allowed there to be. If he thought gays were an abomination he would not allow there to be the possibility. "Here is another argument for your "christian" viewpoint argument. Do Christians need to obey the Old Testament Law? No. However, the Old Testament Law does provide guidelines for living the Christian life. The "moral" laws given to the Israelites describe practical ways to love God and others. (Read more: http://www.compellingtruth.org...)" Many scholars argue that Christians are not held to the Old Testament. Also with the four gospels of Matthew, Luke, Mark, and John not once is Homosexuality mentioned by Jesus. Not. Once. I find that quite compelling if being Gay was such an abomination why did Jesus not mention it once? Here is a video by a Reverend who explains homosexuality and the Bible shown to me by a friend. Here is Matthew Vines who is Gay and Christian and makes a very interesting argument here is a link to a website. http://www.christianpost.com... Also if Gays are such an abomination why is the Pope even considering them? "Pope Francis says the issue of gay marriage should be studied and not dismissed out-of-hand, a senior Roman Catholic cardinal has revealed."http://www.telegraph.co.uk... "Does it not repeatedly put homosexuality amongst all of the aforementioned wrong doings?" Actually it does not in all honesty here is a fantastic argument and questions you should think about. "seven passages in the Bible that refer directly to homosexual behavior, and none of them are associated with Jesus. Compare that to the more than 250 verses on the proper use of wealth or more than 300 on our responsibility to care for the poor and work for justice, and you appreciate quickly that homosexuality was not exactly a major theme of the Bible." "Do the passages refer to anything like the phenomena of life-long, monogamous or mutually consensual same-gendered relationships that we know of today? (It's worth noting that the word "homosexual" was not present in the ancient world but was instead invented in the 19th century.) The second issue we've only alluded to: Whether or not the passages refer to the phenomenon we are describing today, are we bound to ethical determinations made by persons living in vastly different cultures and times and whose understanding of the world and of God's activity was shaped and limited by their own cultural viewpoints." There is considerable debate on at least two questions about these passages. 1) Do they refer to consensual homosexual practice, to cultic prostitution or to male pederasty (where an adult male has sex with a younger boy, either as a coming of age ritual or on a commercial basis)? 2) Are the New Testament authors pointing to specific behavior they have witnessed, or are they using a common "catalogue of complaints" against Gentiles (as there are similar complaints in other first-century Jewish writings about Gentiles)? Of these verses, the Romans passage is often cited as a "lynch pin" text because the Apostle Paul seems to make his argument on the basis of the natural order ("natural" vs. "unnatural" passions). But at another place Paul uses nature to justify his position on the proper length of men's and women's hair and the need for women to wear head coverings (1 Corinthians 11:2-16). As it turns out, arguing from nature was a common rhetorical device in Paul's day, employed by many contemporaries of the Apostle, and was similar to saying today, "The conventional wisdom is..." "So back to Romans . . what do the verses tell us will happen when people, having known God, turn their backs on Him? God will abandon them to themselves and their lives will get worse. Repeat, worse. This is that one really bad sin we have all heard about since childhood "blaspheming the Holy Spirit": having known He exists and now denying that He does. THAT is the thing spoken of in Romans. THAT is what the recipients of the Letter to the Romans had done- they turned from God. They weren't gay; they were people who turned back to their old ways of idolatry, part of which was same sex behavior in their temple rites an in prostitution in their worship experiences." http://canyonwalkerconnections.com... Just some things to think about while making your decision on whether the bible is enough to say being gay is wrong. My main argument here is if Catholics do not follow all of the "rules" and verses in the Bible then why is the one about gays held with such high importance. How can that be what everyone relies on? Leviticus also said many other things that were completely ridiculous. just look some up. Leviticus also made statements that contradicted genesis? which one is of more importance Genesis or Leviticus? Which one do followers of God follow more? http://www.telegraph.co.uk... http://www.compellingtruth.org... http://www.apa.org...# http://gaycatholic.info... https://www.templeinstitute.org... http://infidels.org... http://canyonwalkerconnections.com... http://www.huffingtonpost.com...