Look at your genitalia. Look at the genitalia of the opposite sex. Tab A was designed for Slot B. Look at the orifice on your backside. It was not designed for the purpose. It was designed for exit, and has no lubrication system.
Are you saying you're attracted to females because your body outline "down there" matches hers?
Are you saying you're attracted to females because your body outline "down there" matches hers?
That's not what love--or sex--is all about.
Except that he's never touched or been attracted to a woman's vagina, as he claims. He's not attracted to females. He's shown no evidence of having such an attraction. Who knows, maybe on his wedding night, he might find himself repulsed by a woman's anatomy, or confused by it.
Honestly speaking he's just as likely to be attracted to penises as he is to vaginas. But his family and church have already told him who he should be attracted to (as he's trying to tell us, without having any personal experience on the subject), and he's never tested their theory.
There have actually been fundamentalist Christians who married and tried to have sex literally for years by putting the husband's penis into the wife's navel, they were so ignorant about anatomy.
And there have been homosexual fundamentalist Christians who tried to fight their sexuality, with the help of huge organizations backing them up, and failed. You can't tell me Bussee et. al. were raised in a homosexual-friendly environment that indoctrinated them into becoming homosexuals.
* John Paulk, then leader of Focus on the Family's Love Won Out conference and chairman of the board for Exodus International North America, was photographed in September of 2000 exiting a Washington, D.C. gay bar.[65] This led to Paulk stepping down from the two organizations.[66]
* Michael Johnston, an HIV-positive man who is featured in the film It's Not Gay, promoted by the American Family Association, had frequently been interviewed on U.S. television and radio regarding his claimed change in sexuality, and even featured in a national television advertising campaign in 1998 stating that Jesus Christ empowered him to leave his homosexual past. In 2002, he was exposed as having recently resumed having sex with men, and he admitted to having had unprotected sex with multiple male partners without disclosing his HIV-positive status, despite knowing he that he was HIV-positive, for over a period of two years.[67]
* Exodus International's co-founder Michael Bussee and his partner, a fellow ex-gay counselor, Gary Cooper quit the group and in 1979, held a life commitment ceremony together. Bussee went on to become an outspoken critic of Exodus and the ex-gay movement.[68] He flatly rejects therapies designed to change or "cure" gay people, but recently acknowledged potential for therapy that "does not promise change, but instead offers patients help in managing their desires and modifying their behavior to match their religious values -- even if that means a life of celibacy".[69]
* Colin Cook, founder of Homosexuals Anonymous, was in 1986 discovered to be engaging in sexual acts with his patients. He claimed that the nude massages of other men should desensitize them against homosexual desires. In 1987, he was expelled from Homosexuals Anonymous for sexual activity, and in 1995 a similar scandal happened with his newly founded group FaithQuest Colorado. Cook had engaged in phone sex, practiced long and grinding hugs, and asked patients to bring gay pornography to sessions so that he could help desensitize them against it.[70]
* Christopher Austin was an ex-gay counselor who was sentenced to 10 years in prison in 2007 for sexually assaulting a male client. Austin was affiliated with and gave presentations at NARTH and Evergreen International, which describes him as "a therapist specializing in homosexual and sexual addiction recovery [and] the creator of RENEW, a multi-dimensional treatment approach for men struggling with homosexuality".[71][72]
* Terrance Lewis was a minister and former counsellor at Providence Bible College in Winnipeg, Canada who was found guilty in February 2008 for sexually assaulting a young man who sought counselling to make him straight. The alleged victim, now 29, told court he started meeting Lewis for counselling sessions in early 2000 after his parents caught him viewing gay pornography on the family computer. The man said Lewis started a program of “touch therapy,” which included the two kissing and fondling each other and engaging in sexual roleplaying. [73][74]
Are you saying you're attracted to females because your body outline "down there" matches hers?
That's not what love--or sex--is all about.
No, I was asked to give a non-biblical reason for us being born heterosexual or asexual.
It's about 2 becoming one. Men have certain personality traits that are different -- and complimentary -- to women. A woman completes a man, because she has traits that he doesn't have. When "the two become one flesh", it's a sexual act, but it's also an emotional/personal joining. Two men or two women just don't complete each other in the way God intended.
Are you saying you're attracted to females because your body outline "down there" matches hers?
That's not what love--or sex--is all about.
That's the thing. To these bigots, sex has nothing to do with love. Nor do they want it to. It's simply a means for procreation. And they are forbidden by many churches, even in marriage, to enjoy it.
Except that he's never touched or been attracted to a woman's vagina, as he claims. He's not attracted to females. He's shown no evidence of having such an attraction.
The first part is true; I've never touched a woman in that way. The rest of your assumptions are false.
No, I was asked to give a non-biblical reason for us being born heterosexual or asexual.
It's about 2 becoming one. Men have certain personality traits that are different -- and complimentary -- to women. A woman completes a man, because she has traits that he doesn't have. When "the two become one flesh", it's a sexual act, but it's also an emotional/personal joining. Two men or two women just don't complete each other in the way God intended.
So are you saying Hillary Clinton would be "completed" by marrying Elton John?
Like I said... a bigot.
I guess Ellen DeGeneres and Portia DeRossi are a match made in heaven.
Quote:
She said, "I could say the same thing I've said in every relationship: 'I'm happy.' But there's happiness and there's love, and then there's completion. It doesn't take away from any of the relationships that I've had, 'cause I've had amazing relationships. ... But I feel like I found my perfect fit."
That's the thing. To these bigots, sex has nothing to do with love. Nor do they want it to. It's simply a means for procreation. And they are forbidden by many churches, even in marriage, to enjoy it.
Man, you're on a roll today with the mis-information.
Studies were done asking people how satisfied they were with their sex lives. You would think the people with the highest ratings would be the adventurous ones....single college students, swingers, homosexuals... But the people who were most satisfied with their sex lives were.....(drum roll please).....heterosexual Protestant Christian married couples.
Yes I am. But Jesus canceled that debt. And he will pay for yours, too, if you let him.
No. You didn't read the Bible carefully. If the New Testament is true, then he paid for mine. Whether I "let him" or not. According to what is written, as opposed to what is spread by the false prophets of most "Christian" churches, he paid for all our sins. Not just those who "love" him. Love for Jesus is not the "get out of Hell free" card. Jesus' sacrifice was (if you believe in it). It really sounds like you're not a very good Christian. You're willingly being used by the false prophets to spread their lies.
Unfortunately, logic won't have the best of your ilk. Just like Robot Santa, your head may explode, but a new one exactly the same will grow back in it's place, if not fatter, and more determined to be "right" than the one that came before.
No, I was asked to give a non-biblical reason for us being born heterosexual or asexual.
It's about 2 becoming one. Men have certain personality traits that are different -- and complimentary -- to women. A woman completes a man, because she has traits that he doesn't have. When "the two become one flesh", it's a sexual act, but it's also an emotional/personal joining. Two men or two women just don't complete each other in the way God intended.
OK, that is indeed a non-biblical reason, but it's based completely on theory.
You have obviously never loved or had sex with someone (and apparently you've already said that).
Love and sex are visceral--you feel them. You can theorize about what's "right" all day long--but until you feel the attraction of love and sex, you'll never understand it. And you'll never understand how two men (or women) can be attracted to each other. Theory has nothing to do with it.
I don't understand why I'm attracted to men (especially men with beards), but lemme tell ya, it's real. I don't care if it's "not supposed to happen".
(FYI, I tried the marriage thing for 10 years, and it didn't work for me.)
No. You didn't read the Bible carefully. If the New Testament is true, then he paid for mine. Whether I "let him" or not. According to what is written, as opposed to what is spread by the false prophets of most "Christian" churches, he paid for all our sins. Not just those who "love" him.
By that logic, everyone would go to heaven. But that's not the case, since Jesus said that many would be in hell. He obviously didn't pay for their sins.
There are 2 options. There are those who say to God, "Thy will be done", and there are those to whom God will say, "Alright, have it your way." The latter is hell. The gates of hell are locked from the inside.
By that logic, everyone would go to heaven. But that's not the case, since Jesus said that many would be in hell. He obviously didn't pay for their sins.
There are 2 options. There are those who say to God, "Thy will be done", and there are those to whom God will say, "Alright, have it your way." The latter is hell. The gates of hell are locked from the inside.
And by accepting my sexuality I am saying to God "Thy will be done". Homosexuals who deny their sexuality are the ones denying what God gave them.
And as pointed out before, eating shrimp is proclaimed in Leviticus as being cause for death. So I think we can rule out the "laws" of Leviticus as being pertinent to this day and age. So please tell me again, where in the Bible does it say anywhere that "God's will" is for exclusively heterosexual behavior? Or is it not actually the Bible that says so at all? Is it just the conjecture of false prophets? Yes. It is. And you can't prove otherwise.
By following those false prophets and spreading their lies, you are committing a far greater sin than anything written in the obsolete pages of Leviticus.
I love you guys, my day started crappy, but this just made me laugh all day.
And Lesbians still get to go to heaven since no one disproved my realization!
^_^
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton
And by accepting my sexuality (heterosexual for your information) I am saying to God "Thy will be done". Homosexuals who deny their sexuality are the ones denying what God gave them.
I said the exact same thing earlier.
I mean I am who I am, it's not like I want to be discriminated against.
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality
By that logic, everyone would go to heaven. But that's not the case, since Jesus said that many would be in hell. He obviously didn't pay for their sins.
There are 2 options. There are those who say to God, "Thy will be done", and there are those to whom God will say, "Alright, have it your way." The latter is hell. The gates of hell are locked from the inside.
Oh god, I can't resist...
If Hell's gates are locked from the inside that should make it easy enough to unlock and leave.
Maybe it is, but you are too busy enjoying the side benefits of the sinfulness so much that you don't notice you're currently on fire.
What are the side benefits of spreading the false prophets' lies? What, they get to go to Church barbecues? Is that why they're on fire? Accidentally splashed their sinning selves with lighter fluid?
If you want to winge about Christians pushing their beliefs on you, have a look at this thread. I see 99% here are atheists trying to convinve the 1% christian population here they are wrong, and just throwing insults.
You don't agree with Christians' views? Thats fine. Don't. Just dont insult people because of their views, and I won't insult you for yours.
If you want to winge about Christians pushing their beliefs on you, have a look at this thread. I see 99% here are atheists trying to convinve the 1% christian population here they are wrong, and just throwing insults.
Where, in all my arguments above, did you get the impression that I'm an Atheist? I am, but you had nothing in this thread upon which to base that assumption, except that I don't blindly follow hateful church doctrine. I'm not against Christian views, to love thy neighbor as thyself, to live life with charity, compassion and forgiveness. But I am against the views that are nowhere to be found in any plausible part of the Bible and never taught by Christ, and that are being spread by the false prophets of various churches.
Ask yourself. When their views diverge (be it with the acceptance of homosexuality, or the consumption of crustaceans), do you choose to believe in Jesus, or do you choose to believe in the Church? If your answer is the latter, then you are the non-Christian, not I.
I think you foolishly confuse Christianity with the blind following of Church dogma.
Are you a Christian, or are you a blind follower of a false prophet?
Quote:
You don't agree with Christians' views? Thats fine. Don't. Just dont insult people because of their views, and I won't insult you for yours.
I think if you look at this thread, you'll notice that no one came out defending homosexuality or "throwing insults" until some bigoted non-Christian assholes came out condemning it. Those assholes were not invited to share their views, and cannot be allowed to spread their ignorance and false prophecy without rebuttal.
Where, in all my arguments above, did you get the impression that I'm an Atheist? I'm not against Christian views, to love thy neighbor as thyself, to live life with charity, compassion and forgiveness. But I am against the views that are nowhere to be found in the Bible, and that are being spread by the false prophets of various churches.
Ask yourself. When their views diverge (be it with the acceptance of homosexuality, or the consumption of crustaceans), do you choose to believe in Jesus, or do you choose to believe in the Church? If your answer is the latter, then you are the non-Christian, not I.
I think you foolishly confuse Christianity with the blind following of Church dogma.
I don't confuse it, and I agree with you that we shouldn't follow what the church says, but what Jesus says.
I read the bible for what is the most plausible thing they are trying to say, with reference to their culture, and their accepted meanings behind the text.
I'd say that the Apostle Paul denotes quite well what the difference is between them within the bible, and that has to do with how the law was an application for the Jewish people at that time, and how some of the rules are for the benefit of the culture, some of them for sanitary reasons (such as menstrual issues, and keeping clean) others around dietary issues at the time (the best foods in that culture) and some of them for spiritual well-being. All these tied up in Levitical law.
Some no longer apply because their groups no longer apply (eg, sanitary issues can be laxed now, etc) and some do apply because they cross the cultural divide. I think paul makes that view about sexual practice, and speaks of how those laws relate to your body and mind, and aren't as subjective.
Comments
Look at your genitalia. Look at the genitalia of the opposite sex. Tab A was designed for Slot B. Look at the orifice on your backside. It was not designed for the purpose. It was designed for exit, and has no lubrication system.
Are you saying you're attracted to females because your body outline "down there" matches hers?
That's not what love--or sex--is all about.
Are you saying you're attracted to females because your body outline "down there" matches hers?
That's not what love--or sex--is all about.
Except that he's never touched or been attracted to a woman's vagina, as he claims. He's not attracted to females. He's shown no evidence of having such an attraction. Who knows, maybe on his wedding night, he might find himself repulsed by a woman's anatomy, or confused by it.
Honestly speaking he's just as likely to be attracted to penises as he is to vaginas. But his family and church have already told him who he should be attracted to (as he's trying to tell us, without having any personal experience on the subject), and he's never tested their theory.
There have actually been fundamentalist Christians who married and tried to have sex literally for years by putting the husband's penis into the wife's navel, they were so ignorant about anatomy.
And there have been homosexual fundamentalist Christians who tried to fight their sexuality, with the help of huge organizations backing them up, and failed. You can't tell me Bussee et. al. were raised in a homosexual-friendly environment that indoctrinated them into becoming homosexuals.
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex-gay :
* John Paulk, then leader of Focus on the Family's Love Won Out conference and chairman of the board for Exodus International North America, was photographed in September of 2000 exiting a Washington, D.C. gay bar.[65] This led to Paulk stepping down from the two organizations.[66]
* Michael Johnston, an HIV-positive man who is featured in the film It's Not Gay, promoted by the American Family Association, had frequently been interviewed on U.S. television and radio regarding his claimed change in sexuality, and even featured in a national television advertising campaign in 1998 stating that Jesus Christ empowered him to leave his homosexual past. In 2002, he was exposed as having recently resumed having sex with men, and he admitted to having had unprotected sex with multiple male partners without disclosing his HIV-positive status, despite knowing he that he was HIV-positive, for over a period of two years.[67]
* Exodus International's co-founder Michael Bussee and his partner, a fellow ex-gay counselor, Gary Cooper quit the group and in 1979, held a life commitment ceremony together. Bussee went on to become an outspoken critic of Exodus and the ex-gay movement.[68] He flatly rejects therapies designed to change or "cure" gay people, but recently acknowledged potential for therapy that "does not promise change, but instead offers patients help in managing their desires and modifying their behavior to match their religious values -- even if that means a life of celibacy".[69]
* Colin Cook, founder of Homosexuals Anonymous, was in 1986 discovered to be engaging in sexual acts with his patients. He claimed that the nude massages of other men should desensitize them against homosexual desires. In 1987, he was expelled from Homosexuals Anonymous for sexual activity, and in 1995 a similar scandal happened with his newly founded group FaithQuest Colorado. Cook had engaged in phone sex, practiced long and grinding hugs, and asked patients to bring gay pornography to sessions so that he could help desensitize them against it.[70]
* Christopher Austin was an ex-gay counselor who was sentenced to 10 years in prison in 2007 for sexually assaulting a male client. Austin was affiliated with and gave presentations at NARTH and Evergreen International, which describes him as "a therapist specializing in homosexual and sexual addiction recovery [and] the creator of RENEW, a multi-dimensional treatment approach for men struggling with homosexuality".[71][72]
* Terrance Lewis was a minister and former counsellor at Providence Bible College in Winnipeg, Canada who was found guilty in February 2008 for sexually assaulting a young man who sought counselling to make him straight. The alleged victim, now 29, told court he started meeting Lewis for counselling sessions in early 2000 after his parents caught him viewing gay pornography on the family computer. The man said Lewis started a program of “touch therapy,” which included the two kissing and fondling each other and engaging in sexual roleplaying. [73][74]
Are you saying you're attracted to females because your body outline "down there" matches hers?
That's not what love--or sex--is all about.
No, I was asked to give a non-biblical reason for us being born heterosexual or asexual.
It's about 2 becoming one. Men have certain personality traits that are different -- and complimentary -- to women. A woman completes a man, because she has traits that he doesn't have. When "the two become one flesh", it's a sexual act, but it's also an emotional/personal joining. Two men or two women just don't complete each other in the way God intended.
Are you saying you're attracted to females because your body outline "down there" matches hers?
That's not what love--or sex--is all about.
That's the thing. To these bigots, sex has nothing to do with love. Nor do they want it to. It's simply a means for procreation. And they are forbidden by many churches, even in marriage, to enjoy it.
Except that he's never touched or been attracted to a woman's vagina, as he claims. He's not attracted to females. He's shown no evidence of having such an attraction.
The first part is true; I've never touched a woman in that way. The rest of your assumptions are false.
No, I was asked to give a non-biblical reason for us being born heterosexual or asexual.
It's about 2 becoming one. Men have certain personality traits that are different -- and complimentary -- to women. A woman completes a man, because she has traits that he doesn't have. When "the two become one flesh", it's a sexual act, but it's also an emotional/personal joining. Two men or two women just don't complete each other in the way God intended.
So are you saying Hillary Clinton would be "completed" by marrying Elton John?
Like I said... a bigot.
I guess Ellen DeGeneres and Portia DeRossi are a match made in heaven.
She said, "I could say the same thing I've said in every relationship: 'I'm happy.' But there's happiness and there's love, and then there's completion. It doesn't take away from any of the relationships that I've had, 'cause I've had amazing relationships. ... But I feel like I found my perfect fit."
Ellen agrees with you!
The first part is true; I've never touched a woman in that way. The rest of your assumptions are false.
SINNER!
That's the thing. To these bigots, sex has nothing to do with love. Nor do they want it to. It's simply a means for procreation. And they are forbidden by many churches, even in marriage, to enjoy it.
Man, you're on a roll today with the mis-information.
Studies were done asking people how satisfied they were with their sex lives. You would think the people with the highest ratings would be the adventurous ones....single college students, swingers, homosexuals... But the people who were most satisfied with their sex lives were.....(drum roll please).....heterosexual Protestant Christian married couples.
SINNER!
Yes I am. But Jesus canceled that debt. And he will pay for yours, too, if you let him.
I'm waiting.
Yes I am. But Jesus canceled that debt. And he will pay for yours, too, if you let him.
No. You didn't read the Bible carefully. If the New Testament is true, then he paid for mine. Whether I "let him" or not. According to what is written, as opposed to what is spread by the false prophets of most "Christian" churches, he paid for all our sins. Not just those who "love" him. Love for Jesus is not the "get out of Hell free" card. Jesus' sacrifice was (if you believe in it). It really sounds like you're not a very good Christian. You're willingly being used by the false prophets to spread their lies.
Unfortunately, logic won't have the best of your ilk. Just like Robot Santa, your head may explode, but a new one exactly the same will grow back in it's place, if not fatter, and more determined to be "right" than the one that came before.
No, I was asked to give a non-biblical reason for us being born heterosexual or asexual.
It's about 2 becoming one. Men have certain personality traits that are different -- and complimentary -- to women. A woman completes a man, because she has traits that he doesn't have. When "the two become one flesh", it's a sexual act, but it's also an emotional/personal joining. Two men or two women just don't complete each other in the way God intended.
OK, that is indeed a non-biblical reason, but it's based completely on theory.
You have obviously never loved or had sex with someone (and apparently you've already said that).
Love and sex are visceral--you feel them. You can theorize about what's "right" all day long--but until you feel the attraction of love and sex, you'll never understand it. And you'll never understand how two men (or women) can be attracted to each other. Theory has nothing to do with it.
I don't understand why I'm attracted to men (especially men with beards), but lemme tell ya, it's real. I don't care if it's "not supposed to happen".
(FYI, I tried the marriage thing for 10 years, and it didn't work for me.)
No. You didn't read the Bible carefully. If the New Testament is true, then he paid for mine. Whether I "let him" or not. According to what is written, as opposed to what is spread by the false prophets of most "Christian" churches, he paid for all our sins. Not just those who "love" him.
By that logic, everyone would go to heaven. But that's not the case, since Jesus said that many would be in hell. He obviously didn't pay for their sins.
There are 2 options. There are those who say to God, "Thy will be done", and there are those to whom God will say, "Alright, have it your way." The latter is hell. The gates of hell are locked from the inside.
By that logic, everyone would go to heaven. But that's not the case, since Jesus said that many would be in hell. He obviously didn't pay for their sins.
There are 2 options. There are those who say to God, "Thy will be done", and there are those to whom God will say, "Alright, have it your way." The latter is hell. The gates of hell are locked from the inside.
And by accepting my sexuality I am saying to God "Thy will be done". Homosexuals who deny their sexuality are the ones denying what God gave them.
And as pointed out before, eating shrimp is proclaimed in Leviticus as being cause for death. So I think we can rule out the "laws" of Leviticus as being pertinent to this day and age. So please tell me again, where in the Bible does it say anywhere that "God's will" is for exclusively heterosexual behavior? Or is it not actually the Bible that says so at all? Is it just the conjecture of false prophets? Yes. It is. And you can't prove otherwise.
By following those false prophets and spreading their lies, you are committing a far greater sin than anything written in the obsolete pages of Leviticus.
And Lesbians still get to go to heaven since no one disproved my realization!
^_^
And by accepting my sexuality (heterosexual for your information) I am saying to God "Thy will be done". Homosexuals who deny their sexuality are the ones denying what God gave them.
I said the exact same thing earlier.
I mean I am who I am, it's not like I want to be discriminated against.
By that logic, everyone would go to heaven. But that's not the case, since Jesus said that many would be in hell. He obviously didn't pay for their sins.
There are 2 options. There are those who say to God, "Thy will be done", and there are those to whom God will say, "Alright, have it your way." The latter is hell. The gates of hell are locked from the inside.
Oh god, I can't resist...
If Hell's gates are locked from the inside that should make it easy enough to unlock and leave.
Maybe it is, but you are too busy enjoying the side benefits of the sinfulness so much that you don't notice you're currently on fire.
What are the side benefits of spreading the false prophets' lies? What, they get to go to Church barbecues? Is that why they're on fire? Accidentally splashed their sinning selves with lighter fluid?
If you want to winge about Christians pushing their beliefs on you, have a look at this thread. I see 99% here are atheists trying to convinve the 1% christian population here they are wrong, and just throwing insults.
You don't agree with Christians' views? Thats fine. Don't. Just dont insult people because of their views, and I won't insult you for yours.
I have my own beliefs, you have yours
If you want to winge about Christians pushing their beliefs on you, have a look at this thread. I see 99% here are atheists trying to convinve the 1% christian population here they are wrong, and just throwing insults.
Where, in all my arguments above, did you get the impression that I'm an Atheist? I am, but you had nothing in this thread upon which to base that assumption, except that I don't blindly follow hateful church doctrine. I'm not against Christian views, to love thy neighbor as thyself, to live life with charity, compassion and forgiveness. But I am against the views that are nowhere to be found in any plausible part of the Bible and never taught by Christ, and that are being spread by the false prophets of various churches.
Ask yourself. When their views diverge (be it with the acceptance of homosexuality, or the consumption of crustaceans), do you choose to believe in Jesus, or do you choose to believe in the Church? If your answer is the latter, then you are the non-Christian, not I.
I think you foolishly confuse Christianity with the blind following of Church dogma.
Are you a Christian, or are you a blind follower of a false prophet?
You don't agree with Christians' views? Thats fine. Don't. Just dont insult people because of their views, and I won't insult you for yours.
I think if you look at this thread, you'll notice that no one came out defending homosexuality or "throwing insults" until some bigoted non-Christian assholes came out condemning it. Those assholes were not invited to share their views, and cannot be allowed to spread their ignorance and false prophecy without rebuttal.
Where, in all my arguments above, did you get the impression that I'm an Atheist? I'm not against Christian views, to love thy neighbor as thyself, to live life with charity, compassion and forgiveness. But I am against the views that are nowhere to be found in the Bible, and that are being spread by the false prophets of various churches.
Ask yourself. When their views diverge (be it with the acceptance of homosexuality, or the consumption of crustaceans), do you choose to believe in Jesus, or do you choose to believe in the Church? If your answer is the latter, then you are the non-Christian, not I.
I think you foolishly confuse Christianity with the blind following of Church dogma.
I don't confuse it, and I agree with you that we shouldn't follow what the church says, but what Jesus says.
I read the bible for what is the most plausible thing they are trying to say, with reference to their culture, and their accepted meanings behind the text.
I'd say that the Apostle Paul denotes quite well what the difference is between them within the bible, and that has to do with how the law was an application for the Jewish people at that time, and how some of the rules are for the benefit of the culture, some of them for sanitary reasons (such as menstrual issues, and keeping clean) others around dietary issues at the time (the best foods in that culture) and some of them for spiritual well-being. All these tied up in Levitical law.
Some no longer apply because their groups no longer apply (eg, sanitary issues can be laxed now, etc) and some do apply because they cross the cultural divide. I think paul makes that view about sexual practice, and speaks of how those laws relate to your body and mind, and aren't as subjective.