(Though I don’t expect it to make much relative difference either way, it would probably also be a good idea to include lynchings of homosexuals, if only to preempt the obvious complaint.)
Here are some numbers. Note the incidence among children and women, for whom the predicate “disregarded religious prohibitions against homosexuality” evaluates to false in, I’d expect, nearly all cases.
Only vaguely relatedly: in my callower youth, I enjoyed asking biblically inspired homophobes what grounds they had for sanctioning lesbians, since the go-to verses (Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13… also Romans 1:27, though that’s less relevant for Jews) were so clearly targeting behavior among men. The sheer bewilderment in their responses was oddly enjoyable.
I count a lesbian couple with one child among my best friends.
I remain doubtful that there is a large incidence of female HIV positives who would not have been positive had they adhered to religious strictures against homosexuality. The HIV-homosexuality links is (according to this page) specific to the US, not to the rest of the world. There is a base rate fallacy at work.
Sure, but I’m guessing that Morendil was alluding to the lack of explicit prohibitions on female-female sexual acts in holy texts among the Abrahamic religions. This does not, of course, stop them from being considered a sin and the practitioners punished accordingly.
All three of them had a “sex == penetration with penis” mindset which made even acknowledging lesbians an “outside the box” problem.
The Christian bible, at least, does not have any explicit prohibition against female homosexual acts, just warnings against sexual immorality without female-female acts given as a specific example (Romans 1:26-27 would probably be the closest). I believe the same holds for Judaism and the Torah, with the Talmud and other rabbinical rulings against it (though nowhere near the same degree as male homosexuality—no death sentences). AIUI, The Quran is in a similar position to the Bible -- 4:15 can readily be read to condemn female homosexual acts, but the words are somewhat generic so it can also be read instead as condemning other female sexual immorality. Hadith is practically silent—it condemns “effeminate men” and “masculine women”, as well as those who wear clothing traditionally used for the other sex, but again no explicit prohibition. There is a large body of Islamic jurisprudence however, and although the mentions of female-female sex are still rare, it is clear that it is forbidden under Sharia as it has been interpreted most places.
(Though I don’t expect it to make much relative difference either way, it would probably also be a good idea to include lynchings of homosexuals, if only to preempt the obvious complaint.)
I would like to see those numbers.
(Though I don’t expect it to make much relative difference either way, it would probably also be a good idea to include lynchings of homosexuals, if only to preempt the obvious complaint.)
Here are some numbers. Note the incidence among children and women, for whom the predicate “disregarded religious prohibitions against homosexuality” evaluates to false in, I’d expect, nearly all cases.
Upvoted for data.
(You know there are female homosexuals, right?)
Only vaguely relatedly: in my callower youth, I enjoyed asking biblically inspired homophobes what grounds they had for sanctioning lesbians, since the go-to verses (Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13… also Romans 1:27, though that’s less relevant for Jews) were so clearly targeting behavior among men. The sheer bewilderment in their responses was oddly enjoyable.
I count a lesbian couple with one child among my best friends.
I remain doubtful that there is a large incidence of female HIV positives who would not have been positive had they adhered to religious strictures against homosexuality. The HIV-homosexuality links is (according to this page) specific to the US, not to the rest of the world. There is a base rate fallacy at work.
Sure, but I’m guessing that Morendil was alluding to the lack of explicit prohibitions on female-female sexual acts in holy texts among the Abrahamic religions. This does not, of course, stop them from being considered a sin and the practitioners punished accordingly.
All three of them had a “sex == penetration with penis” mindset which made even acknowledging lesbians an “outside the box” problem.
The Christian bible, at least, does not have any explicit prohibition against female homosexual acts, just warnings against sexual immorality without female-female acts given as a specific example (Romans 1:26-27 would probably be the closest). I believe the same holds for Judaism and the Torah, with the Talmud and other rabbinical rulings against it (though nowhere near the same degree as male homosexuality—no death sentences). AIUI, The Quran is in a similar position to the Bible -- 4:15 can readily be read to condemn female homosexual acts, but the words are somewhat generic so it can also be read instead as condemning other female sexual immorality. Hadith is practically silent—it condemns “effeminate men” and “masculine women”, as well as those who wear clothing traditionally used for the other sex, but again no explicit prohibition. There is a large body of Islamic jurisprudence however, and although the mentions of female-female sex are still rare, it is clear that it is forbidden under Sharia as it has been interpreted most places.
Sure, I doubt those are above the double digits.