John Terry's murder

[coccinelle]

Britain's first (surgically treated) transsexual, Laura Dillon, who became Michael Dillon, and who sought in the latter part of his life to become a Tibetan Buddhist monk, was refused because he was 'third sex' and thus was prohibited, by Buddhist scripture, from becoming one.

But that was only becoming a monk (and there may be magickal reasons why it was seen as incompatible). It was not a condemnation of the condition per se and it is interesting that a 'third sex' recognition exists in Buddhism.

 

[Azrael]

The concept of a third sex is interesting, but separate from the general point that religions are the product of men trying to comprehend the divine, and therefore subject to human error and prejudice.

 

[coccinelle]

And maybe that is what is happening in Jamaica...

 

[Azrael]

Undoubtedly. In which case, the Christian message isn't the root cause.

 

[Ibn Khaldoun]

I just don't buy this half-excuse that these attitudes and behaviours are somehow the fault of the colonial Brits from years ago. Are they suggesting that gays were happily tolerated until the Brits arrived, for one thing?

And presumably these laws were the same in all or most one-time British colonies, and yet somehow they don't behave like this in most of them.

And anyway, so f***ing what? I mean, homosexuality was illegal in the UK until not that far back, but our attitude has (largely) changed, and although there is still prejudice, its nothing like the scale of what goes on in Jamaica.

You are what you do, I'm afraid: and if what you do is to go out and kill random strangers based on your blind prejudice, than that makes you a murderer, and its no-one else's fault. Simple as that.

Giles..

I'm [NOT] trying to excuse the witch hunting and violence against homosexuals at all, but suggest some historical reasons for its prominence. Certainly colonialism has a lot to answer for, even if homosexuality wasn't very accepted before its influence.

 

[coccinelle]

Undoubtedly. In which case, the Christian message isn't the root cause.

Perhaps, it is just people trying to fathom out what is meant by the message "Kill Homosexuals!" in the Bible.

 

[Azrael]

Perhaps, it is just people trying to fathom out what is meant by the message "Kill Homosexuals!" in the Bible.

Leviticus doesn't give gay-bashers a license to kill, but says people found guilty of buggery by a Jewish court can be put to death. To my knowledge gay-bashers in Jamaica haven't set-up a Jewish court.

And you must take one book of the Bible in isolation, and believe the Bible is free of error.

Of course, you can continue to repeat Leviticus 20:13 and imply it's saying something obvious and unanswerable about Christianity. But it's not, really.

 

[coccinelle]

Leviticus doesn't give gay-bashers a license to kill, but says people found guilty of buggery by a Jewish court can be put to death. To my knowledge gay-bashers in Jamaica haven't set-up a Jewish court.

And you must take one book of the Bible in isolation, and believe the Bible is free of error.

Of course, you can continue to repeat Leviticus 20:13 and imply it's saying something obvious and unanswerable about Christianity. But it's not, really.

Leviticus says "If a man has intercourse with a man as with a woman... They shall be put to death: their blood shall be on their own heads" and this is a gay-bashing licence if there ever was one. There is no mention of Jewish Courts for all those millions of people who believe the Bible is God's word.

Quite simply, back in the day the Israelites were trying to separate themselves from what they saw as the licentious behaviour of their neighbours (specifically the Canaanites but you could add the Assyrians/Babylonians and the Egyptians) who not only allowed homosexuality but who had a sacred place for it. Even the Middle Assyrian Laws only prescribed punishment for gay rape (the rapist would be castrated and then raped). So the Israelites were absolutely unique in requiring death for homosexuality.

In Jamaica, as I said, Xtianity is not expressed in the main in the gentle, apologetic way of the C of E communion but in Old Testament fire-and-brimstone bible-bashing. The Old Testament is at the very root of the Jamaican attitude to gays.

 

[Azrael]

There is no mention of Jewish Courts for all those millions of people who believe the Bible is God's word.

Not so. Deuteronomy 16:18 says, "Judges and officers shalt thou make thee in all thy gates, which the Lord thy God giveth thee, throughout thy tribes: and they shall judge the people with just judgment."

If they believe the Bible is God's word, they also believe in this passage from John, and the passages from Acts and Galatians that suspend parts of Jewish law.

So your comments about "Old Testament fire-and-brimstone bible-bashing" miss the point completely: no version of Christianity condones the assault and murder of gay people. Which part of "thou shalt do no murder" do you think they have trouble with?

As you say, Leviticus occupies a specific historic context. It simply does not represent Christianity. The actions described in this thread are as unChristian as it's possible to get.