ok but can you imagine a worse, more terrifying fate than medusa’s one? just imagine. first of all you’re raped in your goddess’ temple. which, apart from the obvious trauma, means you can’t keep doing what you devoted your entire life to. your goddess gifts you with the ability to turn those you look at into stone and your hair into snakes so that you can defend yourself and be a threat rather than a victim to men. and then?????? a fucking MAN decides hes gonna hunt you down and slaughter you for…. sport like just because he can?????? and not only does he kill you but he keeps your head as a weapon???????? effectively using you and your body for his own purpose exactly like your rapist??????????????? like??? and this man is considered a hero while you’ll be remembered as a monstruous, dangerous entity???????????????????? medusa deserved better smh
wow the medusa avenging squad rly is there!!! make some noise ladies
Hello today I wanted to show how the Bible is not against LGBTQ+ individuals, we will be looking at the “clobber” passages within the old and new testaments:
The Story of Sodom & Gomorrah (Genesis 19)-
God sends two angels disguised as men into the City of Sodom where the men of Sodom threatened to rape them. The angels blind the men, and God destroys the city. For centuries, this story was interpreted as God’s judgment on same-sex relations, but the only form of same-sex behavior described is a threatened gang rape.
gang rape is obviously evil and is not in anyway talking about homosexuality, it was also a practice at the time used to humiliate a person. But the recap of Sodom & Gomorrah found in Ezekial 16:49 highlights the real point of the story:
“Now, this was the sin of your sister, Sodom. She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed, and unconcerned, they did not help the poor and needy.”
In other words, everyone using this story as evidence of the sin of homosexuality, might be missing the point entirely.
When God calls homosexuality an abomination (Leviticus 18:22) (Leviticus 20:13)-
This is by far the most used verse to condemn and use as an excuse to hurt people that are LGBTQ.
The translations of this verse found in most English
Bibles are not supported by the Hebrew text.
“Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. (KJV)”
Correct translation:
“And with a male, thou shalt not lie down in a woman’s bed; it is an abomination.”
This is the correct translation of Leviticus 18:22. It can be seen that, rather than forbidding male homosexuality, it simply forbids two males to lie down in a woman’s bed, for whatever reason. Culturally, a woman’s bed was her own. Other than the woman herself, only her husband was permitted in her bed, and there were even restrictions on when he was allowed in there. Any other use of her bed would have been considered defilement. Other verses in the Law will help clarify the acceptable use of the woman’s bed (Lev. 15).
Romans 10:4 says that Christ is the end of the law.
“Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.” — 1 Corinthians 6:9-10
“We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine.” — 1 Timothy 1:9-10
“Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.” — Romans 1:26-27
During the time in which the New Testament was written, the Roman conquerors of the region frequently and openly engaged in homosexual acts between themselves and boys. Such acts were also common between Roman men and their male slaves. These acts of non-consensual sex were considered normal and socially acceptable. They were, however, morally repulsive to Paul, as today they would be to everyone, gay and straight.
This is the societal context in which Paul wrote of homosexual acts, and it is this context that Christians must acknowledge when seeking to understand and interpret the three New Testament clobber passages. Yes, Paul condemned the same-sex sexual activity he saw around him—because it was coercive, without constraint, and between older men and boys. As a moral man, Paul was revolted by these acts, as, certainly, he would have been by the same acts had they been heterosexual in nature.
The Bible’s clobber passages were written about same-sex acts between heterosexual persons, and do not address the subject of homosexual acts between a committed gay couple, because the concept of a person being homosexual did not exist at the time the Bible was written.
We can be confident that Paul was not writing to, or about, gay people, because he simply could not have been, any more than he could have written about smartphones, iPads, or televisions. We do not know what Paul might write or say today about gay people. All we know is that in the New Testament he wrote about promiscuous, predatory, non-consensual same-sex acts between people whom he understood to be heterosexual.
Here are a few quotes from out Lord Jesus Christ:
Luke 6:31:
Do to others as you would have them do to you.
Mark 12:31: The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’There is no commandment greater than these.”
These are just a few, I hope that this might change some minds and give hope to LGBTQ+ people.
sure, give followers of isfet a platform, let them worship a/p/o/o/p in peace, you do you, me do me, gee, wonder why that sounds familiar somehow~
do we do this to pedophiles?
do we do this to rapists?
do we do this to murderers?
do we do this to white supremacists?
its really nice when you see a/p/o/o/p as an invisible noncorporeal snake like that
forgetting what the s/n/a/k/e and isfet stands for.
Are you….really comparing isfet sympathizers to rapist, pedophile, etc sympathizers?
First of all, no, I don’t agree with what they are doing at all. But to actually compare the followers of that entity as rapists, pedophiles, white supremacists…is not right.
Here is why:
Complete disrespect to those topics. I can certainly say as a victim of two of these things that I would not reach as far as to call those people such harsh terms. Nor their so-called sympathizers. Honestly, they are just ill-informed people and if they continue to choose to be ignorant, that is their own fault. But they are NOT rapists. They are NOT pedophiles. Unless you so happen to have receipts on these things, and you aren’t throwing around these terms so carelessly.
This topic has gone far enough. The kemetic community has already had their voices heard. We all agreed that a poop is bad and wrong and if you follow it then you aren’t a kemetic. There were a few funny memes about it. But pushing very real and very harmful terms around is pushing it too far.
fair--y backup 