Does the Bible either indirectly or explicitly condemn or allow homosexuality?
Back up your answers with biblical quotes.
Old or New Testament.

Not going to go out of my way to find it since it would be a pain on my phone, but the bible literally says homosexuality isn't allowed
There's not a lot of room for discussion or debate on that front

Which edition are we talking about here? King James? All that bullshit by Paul?

"Do not commit adultery"
That includes lesbians, gays, bisexual and transexual. Read the Bible more often please...

Quote from Ares

"Do not commit adultery"
That includes lesbians, gays, bisexual and transexual. Read the Bible more often please...

please quote the specific passage where adultery is defined this way.

I'll save you some time: there isn't any definition of adultery in the bible, especially once that specifically mentions transsexuals, which didn't exist over 2,000 years ago. maybe you should take your own advice and read the bible, it doesn't sound like you've done so.

I say screw the bible and gays are all right by me... I don't see why people need to make a big deal out of it... People are going to like who they like and why should others stop them from being who they are... The bible is just a bunch of bed time stories that shouldn't be taken to heart, we should teach people how to be nice in general and not get hung up on what the bible says is right and wrong

Quote from I Pwn3d Jo0

I say screw the bible and gays are all right by me... I don't see why people need to make a big deal out of it... People are going to like who they like and why should others stop them from being who they are... The bible is just a bunch of bed time stories that shouldn't be taken to heart, we should teach people how to be nice in general and not get hung up on what the bible says is right and wrong

When you think like this, the issue will never go away. Because people are allowed and should not be judged whether they want to believe a fairy tale or to have a relationship with the same sex. And we already are being taught how to be nice and I believe that even the worst of us manage to be nice if its beneficial in a certain situation. What we need is to be raised so that we genuinely want to do the right thing and that can only be achieved by educating parents how to raise their children, because all the morals/superegos/values are formed at a very young age.

Quote from I Pwn3d Jo0

we should teach people how to be nice in general

dismissing someone's religious beliefs as "bed time stories" is the exact opposite of the respectful open-mindedness you're preaching here.

Quote from Exilement

dismissing someone's religious beliefs as "bed time stories" is the exact opposite of the respectful open-mindedness you're preaching here.

Sorry to say though but if you read through the bible not alot of those stories fit physics or biology (in the case of virgin Mary)... Granted some of them can be better described if try to word things back in those times... People taking to themselves can be described as a mental disorder, splitting the sea can be used to describe a boat (how do you describe something you never seen before), a talking burning bush that to me can either be drug effect or mental disorder, the lions den story just sounds like a fluke...I mean I say they are bed time stories do to the fact as well that stories get exaggerated over time, it's like a game of telephone until someone writes it down... So the truth of it might be in there somewhere but it's not what you would think by the end of it... That is why I call them bed time stories... Sorry if it offended anyone but try to think from the other side

I have read and studied the bible and I understand that much of it is allegorical and not intended to be taken literally. That doesn't mean that the religion as a whole can be falsified by acknowledging that fact.

My point was that if someone is religious, if someone defines part of their identity according to the religion they believe in, then calling it "bedtime stories" is deliberately insulting regardless of how you meant it. If you're really incapable of realizing that then you shouldn't be criticizing anyone for failing to see why homosexuality should be socially acceptable as well. Both attitudes stem from the same inability to empathize with people who have fundamentally different worldviews from your own. That's literally the only way to describe your "side" of the argument you're trying to make.

If you want to insult religion, be classy about it.

“Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet. Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich.”
― Napoleon

It's funny to me that Christians read whatever weekly version of the bible we're on and hold it as indisputable truth. Not realizing how far we have really come along from the teachings of Jesus. Jesus wanted you to love thy neighbor. But it's been turned into satanic hell fire and the wrath of the arch angels. During the time of Christ many Roman men committed pederasty, which today is looked at as completely abhorrent but was socially acceptable at the time.

I don't think the bible condemns homosexuality, I think people who read the bible and interpret it as they like condemn homosexuality.
And fuck those people.
Blaming a book they read is a convenient cop out.

Quote from Exilement

dismissing someone's religious beliefs as "bed time stories" is the exact opposite of the respectful open-mindedness you're preaching here.

No it isn't. That which is presented without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Calling these beliefs 'bed time stories' is a direct stab at the lack of evidence supporting those beliefs. Referring to them in such a way is perfectly accurate, until evidence pointing to the contrary is presented.

You're taking the politically correct stance that religious views should be exempt from criticism. Whether or not someone is offended by my dismissal of their unfounded, and often deranged beliefs is irrelevant.

Quote from Exilement

I have read and studied the bible and I understand that much of it is allegorical and not intended to be taken literally. That doesn't mean that the religion as a whole can be falsified by acknowledging that fact.

My point was that if someone is religious, if someone defines part of their identity according to the religion they believe in, then calling it "bedtime stories" is deliberately insulting regardless of how you meant it. If you're really incapable of realizing that then you shouldn't be criticizing anyone for failing to see why homosexuality should be socially acceptable as well. Both attitudes stem from the same inability to empathize with people who have fundamentally different worldviews from your own. That's literally the only way to describe your "side" of the argument you're trying to make.

Most Americans refer to the Norse Gods as simple myths/fictional stories/legends. What makes The Bible any different?

Nothing. The Bible is a compilation of fairytales and myths. However you slice it, they're bedtime stories.

I can see how it can offend some people but honestly I don't care. That's like me saying Santa Claus is a fairytale character and you getting upset about it.

In short, the bible has little to no truth in it and most of the book contradicts itself anyway.

Oh and I like how no one answered the debate question... so,
Leviticus 18:22
"Do not practice homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman. It is a detestable sin." (NLT)

Well I'll be. There actually is a passage for homos.

Quote from Xeno

Most Americans refer to the Norse Gods as simple myths/fictional stories/legends. What makes The Bible any different?

Nothing. The Bible is a compilation of fairytales and myths. However you slice it, they're bedtime stories.

I can see how it can offend some people but honestly I don't care. That's like me saying Santa Claus is a fairytale character and you getting upset about it.

In short, the bible has little to no truth in it and most of the book contradicts itself anyway.

Quote from Cronos

No it isn't. That which is presented without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Calling these beliefs 'bed time stories' is a direct stab at the lack of evidence supporting those beliefs. Referring to them in such a way is perfectly accurate, until evidence pointing to the contrary is presented.

You're taking the politically correct stance that religious views should be exempt from criticism. Whether or not someone is offended by my dismissal of their unfounded, and often deranged beliefs is irrelevant.

I don't think that he insists religion be exempt from criticism, I'm sure he has plenty of criticism for it himself. Calling the bible "bedtime stories" isn't criticism, that's making light of and insulting it. You're handily missing the point of what he was saying and he was right about it. But I'm sure he'll have a sizable post tearing both of you a new asshole soon enough, I wont waste my time.

Quote from Xeno

Oh and I like how no one answered the debate question... so,
Leviticus 18:22
"Do not practice homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman. It is a detestable sin." (NLT)

It's interesting to me that you use the NLT or New Living Translation version from 1996 for this quote which directly says to not practice homosexuality. This is misleading as the original hebrew texts are clearly referring to man on man sex but by adding in that snippet it directly condemns lesbian intercourse as well and specifies that ANY form of homosexual intercourse is wrong. If you really wanted to pick a more biased version of that passage I would've gone with the version from the Living Bible from 1971 that reads thus.

"Homosexuality is absolutely forbidden, for it is an enormous sin"

But neither of these versions are even close to correct. If you would like to read the following article which basically smashes your whole fragile argument.
Scroll to the bottom of the article if you're too lazy to educate yourself.
If you can't believe the cultural reason, please refer to my previous statement about roman men widely committing pederasty and it being culturally acceptable.

And as if that isn't enough I'd love to counter your quote with a quote of my own.
Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for whoever loves others has fulfilled the law. The commandments, “You shall not commit adultery,” “You shall not murder,” “You shall not steal,” “You shall not covet,” and whatever other command there may be, are summed up in this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” Love does no harm to a neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law — Romans 13:8-10

This passage states that loving others is above even the commandments.