Homosexuality ... How do the "Advocates" deal...

[TJJJ]

Disclaimer... Knowing there are some on this forum who advocate and even participate in the behaviour of homosexuality, I desire to start off the right way. I am coming from a viewpoint that is shared by the majority of America. If I get some of the wording wrong I do not mean this as a slam against anyone so, please, no offense intended. I start this thread in seriousness.

How do those who advocate homosexuality deal with the verse...

1Co 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

If in a standard home,(heterosexual) the head of that woman is the man, how does a home with two men, (homosexual) work? Now there are two heads.

In a home with two women, (Lesbians) now there is no head.

So we have either a home with two heads or a headless home.

With any situations regarding homosexuality that I have ever dealt with there is always a dominant partner and a passive partner. Yet,... I notice that there is always a strife in these situations.

While dealing recently with two young ladies involved in a situation, I observed that there was always a struggle between the two as to who was going to be the "head". It seemed to me that both were trying to fulfill a place of headship that was not theirs and because of their situation they were always in a conflict.

Their fights in the apartment were something to hear about. Very very violent. Obviously their living together relationship did not last long. This is a common problem that happens with many of these situations.

I realize that heterosexual couples also have their fights. I am not saying that just by having a heterosexual relationship will do away with the fighting. It just seems to me that some of the tension that I have observed in the homosexual pairs that I have dealt with, either professionally or even on the job, stems from the problem of headship or lack of it.

What say some on this forum.

Again, I am not slamming anyone, I am asking a question that I feel has merit.

[coadie]

You ask a great question.
The frequency of domestic violence is incredibly high in gay households.

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by TJJJ

Disclaimer... Knowing there are some on this forum who advocate and even participate in the behaviour of homosexuality, I desire to start off the right way. I am coming from a viewpoint that is shared by the majority of America. If I get some of the wording wrong I do not mean this as a slam against anyone so, please, no offense intended. I start this thread in seriousness.

How do those who advocate homosexuality deal with the verse...

1Co 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

If in a standard home,(heterosexual) the head of that woman is the man, how does a home with two men, (homosexual) work? Now there are two heads.

In a home with two women, (Lesbians) now there is no head.

So we have either a home with two heads or a headless home.

With any situations regarding homosexuality that I have ever dealt with there is always a dominant partner and a passive partner. Yet,... I notice that there is always a strife in these situations.

While dealing recently with two young ladies involved in a situation, I observed that there was always a struggle between the two as to who was going to be the "head". It seemed to me that both were trying to fulfill a place of headship that was not theirs and because of their situation they were always in a conflict.

Their fights in the apartment were something to hear about. Very very violent. Obviously their living together relationship did not last long. This is a common problem that happens with many of these situations.

I realize that heterosexual couples also have their fights. I am not saying that just by having a heterosexual relationship will do away with the fighting. It just seems to me that some of the tension that I have observed in the homosexual pairs that I have dealt with, either professionally or even on the job, stems from the problem of headship or lack of it.

What say some on this forum.

Again, I am not slamming anyone, I am asking a question that I feel has merit.

1 Corinthians is written to believers, read by believers, and practiced by believers. As under-shepherds, fellow brothers and followers of Jesus, we have every duty to promote healthy views of sex and marriage.

The other thread about personal liberties is not even in the same ballpark. And when you refer to "head" you should be interested to know what the "head" analogies were in Greco times. They were common. Paul was not original here. He used a popular metaphor to describe families. As Gordon Fee argues, this has nothing to do with hierarchy, one being dominant over the other. It has everything to do with "source of life," showing God's design (and preference). We are taking what is a common Greco-Roman analogy (the Body, Heads, etc) and following the analogy out further than it should be.

What does a "headless" home mean to you anyway? Sounds Stonekingish to me. Your anecdotes about two women fighting is interesting, since I could find the same tension in heterosexual homes. It's usually not about "who gets to be the head" as much as mutual submission and communication.

The fact is, single mother homes are "headless" by your definition as well. As are dead beat dad homes, as are orphans.... sin... it's an ugly thing.

[onefaith2]

Interesting thoughts.. It will be interesting to see the responses. I think I will participate as an observer

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by coadie

You ask a great question.
The frequency of domestic violence is incredibly high in gay households.

And in single-parent homes, and in poor households, and in people of x race and in this geographic area. Do you just pull bigoted facts like this out of your backside?

[aegsm76]

Great thought. I never thought about applying this verse to this issue.
It makes some sense, though.
I will have to think and study on this.
Thanks for the thought!

[TJJJ]

Originally Posted by Socialite

1 Corinthians is written to believers, read by believers, and practiced by believers. As under-shepherds, fellow brothers and followers of Jesus, we have every duty to promote healthy views of sex and marriage.

The other thread about personal liberties is not even in the same ballpark. And when you refer to "head" you should be interested to know what the "head" analogies were in Greco times. They were common. Paul was not original here. He used a popular metaphor to describe families. As Gordon Fee argues, this has nothing to do with hierarchy, one being dominant over the other. It has everything to do with "source of life," showing God's design (and preference).

What does a "headless" home mean to you anyway? Sounds Stonekingish to me. Your anecdotes about two women fighting is interesting, since I could find the same tension in heterosexual homes. It's usually not about "who gets to be the head" as much as mutual submission and communication.

The fact is, single mother homes are "headless" by your definition as well. As are dead beat dad homes, as are orphans.... sin... it's an ugly thing.

My friend, and to use your phrase... fellow brother, please do not think I am starting this here thread to bash anyone, nor to be mean. In many of my threads there is a lot of sarcasm, just venting I guess. I do want all to know that I started this thread in seriousness.

Now to your points. Paul used the meaning head, regarding headship. I know that this was written in Greek to people familiar to that day and age. Of that we are in agreement. But do you not see the principal of what he wrote? We are dealing with headship, of authority, and the proper ways of organization. Do you agree with this or no?

I will ignore the Stoneking reference, that has no bearing on this at all.

You make the comment about mutual submission and communication. I agree. Yet, why is it that the incidents of conflict are dramatically higher in homosexual homes as compared to heterosexual. Yes, there are fights, conflicts, divorces in heterosexual homes, yet... the rates are much much higher in homosexual relationships. I have yet to deal with one homosexual relationship that did not or does not have major strife in the relationship.

Now maybe you are different in what you have seen. I am coming from just my experiences in dealing with this situation. I would be interested in hearing what others think on this matter.

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by TJJJ

My friend, and to use your phrase... fellow brother, please do not think I am starting this here thread to bash anyone, nor to be mean. In many of my threads there is a lot of sarcasm, just venting I guess. I do want all to know that I started this thread in seriousness.

Now to your points. Paul used the meaning head, regarding headship. I know that this was written in Greek to people familiar to that day and age. Of that we are in agreement. But do you not see the principal of what he wrote? We are dealing with headship, of authority, and the proper ways of organization. Do you agree with this or no?

I will ignore the Stoneking reference, that has no bearing on this at all.

You make the comment about mutual submission and communication. I agree. Yet, why is it that the incidents of conflict are dramatically higher in homosexual homes as compared to heterosexual. Yes, there are fights, conflicts, divorces in heterosexual homes, yet... the rates are much much higher in homosexual relationships. I have yet to deal with one homosexual relationship that did not or does not have major strife in the relationship.

Now maybe you are different in what you have seen. I am coming from just my experiences in dealing with this situation. I would be interested in hearing what others think on this matter.

TJJJ, I wasn't offended or taking occasion of an insult. The Stoneking reference was a humorous sarcasm not aimed at you, aimed at the concept.

Regarding 1 Cor being about headship,authority... this is not universally accepted. Not even by some Egalitarian theologians like Fee. But I see your point.

Outside of that, I'm not sure I see much of the rest of your point. 1 Cor indicates God's design for humankind. We fall short of that in so many areas of times through divorce, death, abandonment, drunkenness, abuse, etc... So this brokenness in the home is universal.

I live in a high-dense area of the country where homosexuality is more common (the phenom of city migration where oppressed groups move to for safety), I think we would need to see more research into violent homes. Honestly, it's the first I've heard of it being a unique problem to homosexuals -- and I can't recall any of my gay friends in the past couple years talking about domestic violence.

So I have 3 things:

1) The Text is not about having two heads, no heads or one head. There's more we can discuss about that. So to launch from this point, I can't even find enough there to do that.

2) The Text is to/for believers and followers of The Way.

3) Realization that the brokenness of homes and God's order is universal, not just reserved for homosexuals.

4) Really don't accept the idea that this is unique to homosexuals, or that there is some dramatic increase in rates... and at the end of the day, not sure that even matters.

[TJJJ]

Originally Posted by Socialite

And in single-parent homes, and in poor households, and in people of x race and in this geographic area. Do you just pull bigoted facts like this out of your backside?

You are absolutely right concerning the single parent homes, poor homes and in certain races.

Each present their own particular problems.

Single parent homes,..... where is the headship?

Poor homes... violent trends.

Rich homes .... tendency to higher priced sins is all. ie cocaine and etc.

Different racial profiles ... Cultural problems etc,

But what I am asking is... In Homosexual homes, how do they deal with who is in charge? How do they deal with headship? So far... I have yet to see a successful one. The change rate of partners is very high. Many times we see it thrown out there, from the heterosexual community, that the homosexual is just some sexual deviant that wants as many partners as possible before they all die from aids. ( I am just projecting a attitude of what I have seen).

Yet in my dealing with homosexual couples from a professional standpoint, I do not see the beforementioned promiscuity. I see couples that are trying, in their way, to have as similiar of a relationship as a heterosexual couple. ( Obciously I am not meaning single individuals but couples)

But... for all their trying, why is it that there is always a tension regarding who is in control? Much greater, again, than I have observed in heterosexual couples. I quote no stats as my faith in them is pretty low.

What say you?

[coadie]

Genesis 3

16Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
After the curse, woman by temperament was created to bond to a leader. Women don't like indecisive, whining, self doubting sissies.

Many arguments come from failure to to have ones expectations met. Many expectations are not valid. Pilgrim women didn't date guys that drove a convertible. It would have been an unrealistic expectation.

You hit on a great point about turnover. The high rate of homosexuality promisciousness stems from quickly finding out that some expections will never be met.