From: JLOCK00@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU (Joseph L. Lockett)
Newsgroups: tx.politics,rice.politics,rice.galor
Subject: Homosexuality and the Bible: Refutations (Long)
Date: 2 Sep 92 03:20:09 GMT
Organization: Rice University

A quick warning: this gets a little long.
But it's required reading for you, Rick.
 
In article <16854DE4D.TROTH@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU>
troth@ricevm1.rice.edu (Rick Troth) preaches:
 
>In article <1685314B1.JLOCK00@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU>
>JLOCK00@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU (Joseph L. Lockett) writes:
>>                                                                Much
>>of the furor over homosexuality derives from a mistranslation in the
>>King James Bible -- 'sexual aberrancy', or some such, was translated
>>by zealous clerics as 'homosexuality', so while it really should have
>>applies to rape and such crimes,   ...
>
>        No,  it's  "homosexuality".   It's spelled out in hard-to-
>mistranslate wording in Romans ch1 v27.   The balance is found in
>the first part of John ch8.   Leviticus ch18 v22 is also pretty hard
>to mistranslate.
 
Okay, Rick, I delayed my response until I could run to the library.
And, pardon the verbiage, but you're feeding me a crock of shit.
 
I have read ALL of John 8.  I see the story of Jesus and the adulteress,
and not casting the first stone.  I see some stuff wherein Jesus shows
the Israelites that he's the son of God.  Diddly-squat on homosexuality.
Are you sure you've read this book?
 
Yes, Romans 1:27 pretty specifically rules out homosexuality.  But, as
I've already mentioned on this thread, Paul is a sexist, homophobic
prick.  Actually, I think a fair-sized group of Biblical scholars figure
the man was gay himself, and repressed it in himself and others all his
life.  No wonder he's so retentive it's amusing.
 
More from the pen of that apostolic wonder, Paul.  All quotes taken from
the New Jerusalem Bible, so that Rick won't have to limp through the
Elizabethan English of his beloved King James (who was himself gay, by
the way, according to many interpretations):
 
1 Cor 7:21-22 "If when you were called, you were a slave, do not think
it matters -- even if you have a chance of freedom, you should prefer to
make full use of your condition as a slave."
 
Eph 6:5 "Slaves, be obedient to those who are, by human reckoning, your
masters, with deep respect and sincere loyalty."
 
Ohmigod!  Harriet Tubbman was a serious sinner!  Of course, she started
off at a disadvantage anyway, seeing as how she was one of those icky women.
 
1 Cor 11:5-6 "And for a woman to pray or prophesy with her head uncovered
shows disrespect for her head; it is exactly the same as if she had her
hair shaved off.  Indeed, if a woman does go without a veil, she should
have her hair cut off too; but if it is a shameful thing for a woman to
have her hair cut off or shaved off, then she should wear a veil."
 
So when is Phyllis Schlafly going to go for the Sinead O'Connor look?
Gee, this is almost as much fun as following Islamic _sharia_ law....
 
A bit later in that book, btw, The Apasshole Paul gives that famous dictum
against men having long hair that caused so much furor in a local public
high school.  Also there is the line "woman is nothing without man."  Which
is, of course, nothing next to the well-quoted but oft-ignored...
 
Eph 5:22 "Wives should be subject to their husbands as to the Lord... a
husband [is] the head of his wife... Wives should be subject to their
husbands in everything."
 
BULL!!
 
So, are we all convinced yet that Paul is an irredeemable schnook?
 
Then, of course, there's the venerable book of Leviticus.  I kinda like:
 
Lev 19:13 "You will not keep back the laborer's wage until next morning".
Doesn't this imply I should get paid daily instead of semi-monthly? :-)
 
Lev 19:19 "You will keep my laws. You will not mate your cattle with those
of another kind; you will not sow two kinds of grain in your field; you
will not wear a garment made from two kinds of fabric."
 
Gosh, Rick, no hamburgers for you.  And off with the cotton-poly, like
I said.
 
Lev 19:26-27 "You will not round off your hair at the edges or trim the
edges of your beard."
 
Rick Troth, do you get a Theologically Correct Haircut at the barber's?
 
Then there's Lev 19:17, where no-one with any infirmity can make offerings
to God.  Try laying THAT one on the Americans with Disabilities Act.
 
Rick Troth, when you present Leviticus and Paul as evidence against
homosexuality, I am led to believe that you either haven't read the Good
Book or else that you are indescribably stupid.  Which is it?
 
I don't think Jesus anywhere mentions homosexuality in any of the Gospels,
by the way.  Tacit approval?
 
>>                             (You see, I used to be a fairly devout
>>Episcopalian, until it seemed to get in the way of good sense....)
>
>        That's interesting.   I should put you in touch with my
>Assembly-of-God--turned--Episcopalian friend.   He entered that
>denomination,  among other reasons,  because he likes to  "think".
 
Yeah, I liked to think, too.  I still do.  I presume you don't, thus
the disapproving quotation marks.  I found it hard to keep logic intact
when presented with a holy text so riddled with idiocies.
 
Joseph L. Lockett
jlock00@ricevm1.rice.edu
 
I don't speak for Rice University, and they don't for me.