“Miss Beverly Hills”: Homosexuality Is A Sin Because Leviticus Says So

video

by Frances Martel | 11:23 am, February 27th, 2010

» 3 comments

This is officially a trend: following in the footsteps of Carrie Prejean, “Miss Beverly Hills” Lauren Ashley—apparently a real title, though the city of Beverly Hills has distanced itself from her—has come out in defense of all that is moral and just in the world and against the looming menace of gay marriage.

Ashley had previously stated that she believed the Bible was clear that homosexuality is a sin, interpreting the statements in the Old Testament as “If man lies with mankind as he would lie with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death and their blood shall be upon them.” She later spoke to her local NBC affiliate to clarify her statements, and isn’t stepping back. Asked whether she could remember the passage in the Bible that condemns homosexuality, she says yes, only to mutter to herself a bit and answer hastily, ”it’s in Leviticus,” and restates that her belief that it is a sin stems from being Christianity. The funny thing about this isn’t even that she can’t remember a statement she claims to know by heart several seconds before, it’s that Leviticus is in the Old Testament, which the New Testament more or less completely disavows (that’s what the whole “let he without sin cast the first stone” part is about, though she may have skimmed that), but maybe we’re expecting too much from her. Watch her response below:

You know who would have prevented Ashley from making a fool of herself and having the pageant disassociate itself from her? A sassy gay friend.

Beverly Hill, Carrie Prejean, Gay Marriage, gay rights, Lauren Ashley, Leviticus, misinterpretations of Christianity, Miss Beverly Hills

homie

Kind of a low-rent looking ‘beauty queen’.
homie

Perhaps she should have written that Leviticus verse on her hand. LOL
http://www.facebook.com/people/Joshua-Taj-Bozeman/661000669 Joshua Taj Bozeman

it’s that Leviticus is in the Old Testament, which the New Testament more or less completely disavows (that’s what the whole “let he without sin cast the first stone” part is about, though she may have skimmed that), but maybe we’re expecting too much from her. Watch her response below

Nonsense. Where on earth did you get that the New Testament disavows the Old Testament?!

It does no such thing. NO Biblical scholar would ever agree with that statement, as it’s absurd on every level.

Christ (hint, he was the guy that dominated the NT) clearly spoke on marriage and proclaimed the OT view of marriage (another hint: it says marriage is a union of one man and one woman). The NT also clearly proclaims that ANY sex outside of marriage is sinful. Now, we can safely assume that if marriage is to be a union of one man and one woman, and sex is to be limited to marriage, we can take a step further and proclaim that sex between men or sex between women is ALWAYS a sin.

A lot of Leviticus is a legal code for the ancient Israelites, and SOME of the demands there no longer apply (just as some laws in this country were once on the books and no longer apply). But, basic moral code never passed away, and it was never disavowed by anyone in the NT.

It’s funny how snarky bloggers can be. Follow the Bible? Well, by golly that makes you a fool. So, let’s demand tolerance for any sort of sex you find okay, but no tolerance for merely following the most popular text of all time? Makes sense!