Homosexuality Or Legalism--Which Is Worse?

[Felicity]

Originally Posted by pelathais

In ancient cultures - and many modern ones, "homosexual behavior" is an important part of the male dominance hierarchy. The "dominant" male in the relationship is not considered "gay" or effeminate. He's a "man's man" and is taking control. In America we see this played out mostly in our prisons. In the Middle East where homosexuality is condemned officially by Islam- the dominant male's behavior is excused while his victims are mocked and condemned.

I think that it is this type of dominance that we all find repugnant when we think of the evils of homosexual behavior. It's simply a twisted way for men to organize themselves. It's abusive, manipulative and controlling. And, the non-sexual manifestations are very similar to what we have seen from our "legalists."

Legalists are abusive, manipulative and controlling. For me, after having spent some time studying anthropology, the legalist is as repulsive as the homosexual. I tend to lump their destructive behaviors together. I often felt defiled after an encounter with a manipulative legalist. I sat in a board meeting once that I could only describe as being akin to a homosexual gang rape.

Anthropologist Ann Druyan (Carl Sagan's widow) describes behaviors among chimpanzees (cannibalism, throwing feces, marking territories, sex for status) that mirror dysfunctional churches.

Good heavens Pelathais. That's a pretty graphic and disgusting picture/analogy you paint there!

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

... Disorder is the state that natural things resort to if not tended to. Houses fall into disrepair, civilizations becomes barbaric without law and government, gardens become overgrown and wild.....does anything good and orderly come out of an explosion? ie: the big bang? Do natural laws come about through destruction?

Just a quibble here, but an important one; the "Big Bang" was not an explosion. The phrase itself was popularized by Sir Fred Hoyle who didn't believe the universe had a beginning. Along with his astronomy, Sir Fred was a lover of the Vedic literature of India and of course the Hindu faith stated that there was no creation event; just Rama being and begetting over and over again. The phrase was coined and used at first by critics of the idea that there even was a Genesis-like beginning. Those who repeat that notion are in fact repeating an outdated atheistic argument; or an argument that was minted out of sympathies for non-Christian faiths.

The "Big Bang" event was an expansion or unfolding of space over time - something that continues to happen even as we speak. Space itself is expanding. This phenomenon is not analogous to an explosion where things are scattered randomly. In fact, the matter within that space is forming and interacting along very specific patterns. Thus the "walls" of galaxies in space are filaments of matter reaching out and clumping together like cobwebs, or human neurons, depending on how romantic you want to be.

The "Big Bang" might be better understood as the "Big Bloom," think of the way a flower's petals unfold.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Felicity

Good heavens Pelathais. That's a pretty graphic and disgusting picture/analogy you paint there!

I did it again. I'm sorry, but that's they way it felt. Men humiliating and abusing other men for the purpose of attaining a higher status within the tribe; what else do you compare it to?

Are there any other ancient patterns of behavior into which we might sort this phenomenon?

[berkeley]

is
this
thread
for
real????

[Amos]

Originally Posted by Felicity

Good heavens Pelathais. That's a pretty graphic and disgusting picture/analogy you paint there!

I have sat through an ugly board meeting or two myself, but to compare them with homosexual gang rape is utterly ridiculous.

There is no comparison.

Other stronger words come to mind, but I will refrain.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by pelathais

I did it again. I'm sorry, but that's they way it felt. Men humiliating and abusing other men for the purpose of attaining a higher status within the tribe; what else do you compare it to?

Are there any other ancient patterns of behavior into which we might sort this phenomenon?

Political struggles for power. The Democratic and Republican parties.

Ancient patterns? The nation of Israel after the split from Judah. The throne wasn't always inherited but overthrown by someone seeking a higher status.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Amos

I have sat through an ugly board meeting or two myself, but to compare them with homosexual gang rape is utterly ridiculous.

There is no comparison.

Other stronger words come to mind, but I will refrain.

He's comparing the underlying attitudes. The desires that are driving the actions. I agree with him to a point because not all deviant sexual behavior is violent or ruled by the same passion.

There are different types of abuse such as physical and mental. A similar analogy to homosexual gang rape and an ugly board meeting might be something like physical abuse of a wife is worse than mental abuse. I'm not so sure because I've experienced mental abuse and the torment and pain is different but IMO just as painful. The main difference is mental abuse leaves scars that can't be seen.

[OP_Carl]

Originally Posted by Amos

I have sat through an ugly board meeting or two myself, but to compare them with homosexual gang rape is utterly ridiculous.

A ridiculous assertion on a ridiculous thread?

Shiver me timbers!

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Just a quibble here, but an important one; the "Big Bang" was not an explosion. The phrase itself was popularized by Sir Fred Hoyle who didn't believe the universe had a beginning. Along with his astronomy, Sir Fred was a lover of the Vedic literature of India and of course the Hindu faith stated that there was no creation event; just Rama being and begetting over and over again. The phrase was coined and used at first by critics of the idea that there even was a Genesis-like beginning. Those who repeat that notion are in fact repeating an outdated atheistic argument; or an argument that was minted out of sympathies for non-Christian faiths.

The "Big Bang" event was an expansion or unfolding of space over time - something that continues to happen even as we speak. Space itself is expanding. This phenomenon is not analogous to an explosion where things are scattered randomly. In fact, the matter within that space is forming and interacting along very specific patterns. Thus the "walls" of galaxies in space are filaments of matter reaching out and clumping together like cobwebs, or human neurons, depending on how romantic you want to be.

The "Big Bang" might be better understood as the "Big Bloom," think of the way a flower's petals unfold.

I've never heard it put that way. It still lacks a beginning of matter. For specific patterns (laws) to develop for this expansion, much like a complex living organism that develops from basic cellular division with structure and cohesion rather than randomness, IMO, points to a designer.

[Ferd]

Good grief.