Talk:Homosexuality and religion/Archive 4

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

External links modified

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 13 external links on Homosexuality and religion. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:19, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Homosexuality and religion. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:25, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

"Biting the bitter peel"

Latest comment: 5 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Homosexuality and religion#Confucianism Really? I can't seem to find this in any Internet sources outside of reference to this Wikipedia article... PseudoSkull (talk) 23:49, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Removed. Mathglot (talk) 05:42, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

It can be really unfortunate when this sort of thing happens... A (presumably) wrong fact has been passed around to many other websites for years who used this Wikipedia article in their pursuit of knowledge. PseudoSkull (talk) 14:58, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Gay god

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I haven't seen any source of the sources in the section that calls Tu'er Shen gay god. I tried searching in Google I also didn't find any source that calls him gay god. I started a similar discussion here Talk:Religion and sexuality. --SharabSalam (talk) 21:39, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Argument on Wicca & Neo Paganism and Satanism section

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Doreen's poem or book, Charge of the Goddess Is not law. When she wrote it, I think it's fair to conclude she did not mean homosexuality. She seems to have been straight, she married two men over the course of her lifetime. If Neo Pagans and Wiccans use it well enough, fair deal, but the Wiccan rede "and it harm do what thou wilt" in basis is also coming under scrutiny as just a mere poem or guideline for early practicing witches of the craft.

If Homosexuals and such want to be Pagan, then good for them. But don't try and post sources that say it is encouraged when that may not have been the case.

In the Case of Satanism, Theistic or Laveyian, The Church of Satan has become notorious for lewd sexual acts in graveyards, in ritual and even to members of congress which can be seen via their website. I am not sure if this helps the view that Homosexuality is considered a healthy practice. If anyone reading this believes that homosexuality is a safe, encouraging and supportive healthy practice alone, then good for you, but why do we need to see what Religious doctrines before or current have to say about the matter? If the Elders say it should not be practiced then of course people for the cause are going to go elsewhere to see what religious or spiritual doctrines say on the matter.

If done for the intimacy of it, or even the personal connection and you are both exclusive with just one another, then practice, but when it comes to propaganda supporting controversial acts, i.e. Religious doctrines in support of Gay Lifestyle, it is just as controversial as the practices in question.

Personally I am both a Dark Pagan, and a Spiritual Satanist with my own "Branch of Spiritual Satanism" and the idea that Theistic Satanism supports is the exclusive version and not the power bumping grind up on you in public to get attention media crisis seen at most pride events. Anything done to get attention isn't based on Love. I also don't know of any Gods that were "Out" because Homosexuality is not of the Gods. It is of Mankind or Mammon. If you can find anything on Mammon then well, there you go.

My Branch which is personal still and not recognized as a true Church or Chapter yet, does not support Homosexuality in it's Paganism or Spiritual Satanism branches. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anamassien (talk • contribs) 02:55, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Conversion Therapy

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

On the page "Homosexuality and religion," it is listed that "Several organizations assert that conversion therapy can help diminish same-sex attraction." I have added a citation needed, controversial, and dubious - talk links. However, the question is why was this not flagged or marked by any individual where a claim of several organizations are made, though no source is provided. Whoever added this should be reviewed for abuse.

PSYCHREL (talk) 22:34, 31 January 2021 (UTC)PSYCHREL

Did you read the Conversion therapy article? Also, as far as the claim that "whoever added this should be reviewed for abuse", please remember to assume good faith, statements like that are not helpful to the project. - Adolphus79 (talk) 00:03, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Section: 'Indian' (?) religions

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Shouldn't it be Dharmic religions? That is the correct way of to referring to any religion that follows the path of Dharma rather than the path of Abraham. There is no 'path of India'. Also, although they may have originated in historical Bharatavarsha, Dharmic religions are not confined to India - they are spread out all over the Subcontinent and beyond, eg Zen Buddhism in Japan, Korea, Vietnam and China. Tibetan Buddhism is practised in what is politically a part of China. Sri Lanka (Bhuddism) is not part of India. Sikhism's founder was from Punjab in Pakistan. Gaudiya Vaishnavism originated in Bengal (now Bangladesh). They are not Indian religions, they are Dharmic religions! Perhaps the only truly 'Indian religion' is Hinduism - they have the same etymological root. Wokepedian (talk) 01:24, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Untitled section

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

All major world religions traditionally condemn LGBTQ+. There are always progressive and reformist sects and denominations, but traditionally, religious texts have negative references to things that allude to LGBTQ+. That's why there's so much debate over these texts. You'll never find any unambiguously positive or affirming texts regarding what's known today as LGBTQ+ in any major religion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:98A:400:8910:992D:A09C:979B:6574 (talk) 07:11, 24 March 2022 (UTC)