• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

7 players stand out of gay pride game

Aštra’el

Aštara, Blade of Aštoreth
All the pride rainbow symbolizes is acceptance of LGBTQ people. The act of refusing to wear it symbolizes refusal to accept LGBTQ people.

Unless the "cultural and religious reasons" are something like "I'm personally fine with LGBTQ people, but my hometown church is so anti-gay that my kid would be bullied if I wear this shirt," we're talking about bigotry.

The “pride rainbow” is also a celebration of homosexuality and popular “lgbt” culture. Not everyone wants to celebrate that. Why take offense?

Also… what exactly do you mean by “accept”? Why would it be anyone else’s concern who I “accept”?
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
Let me ask you the question you asked me above: Do you think that secularists should be stopped from expressing their beliefs when those beliefs give offense to some Christians? Probably not.

No.

The whole church is responsible except the part objecting to the homophobia as loudly as that contingent you blame. Think about your own posting here. Do you share any blame in promoting Christian homophobia? I haven't seen your objection calling it immoral and improper yet. What I've seen is you attempting to smooth things to mitigate the damage as you when you say to not blame the whole church. It would have been nice had you castigated that behavior instead, but why would you?

The thing is that I don't see it as homophobic and bigotry. I think you have your definitions of those things wrong and you are accusing innocent people, along with the rest of the mob that do the same thing because it is fashionable to do that.

And what makes you and I so different in this regard? Your religious upbringing. Your loyalty is to the church, so it's not just an extreme element of the church that is responsible. It's only an extreme element of the church that is not, the handful of Christians objecting to the marginalization and demonization of homosexual people. We heard the same objection with the Catholic priests and the American police - it's just a few bad apples, when its an entire community of people either remaining silent or actively defending the behavior.

It was just some bad apples in each case, but of course it had turned into an institutional problem, a problem in the system as well as the bad apples.
I heard the same thing with people accusing innocent Muslims because they weren't standing up and condemning terrorists in Islam.
In your view all cops are murderers, all priests are paedophiles, all Muslims are just as bad as the terrorists I suppose until they go public and condemn those who have done such things.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
All the pride rainbow symbolizes is acceptance of LGBTQ people. The act of refusing to wear it symbolizes refusal to accept LGBTQ people.

Unless the "cultural and religious reasons" are something like "I'm personally fine with LGBTQ people, but my hometown church is so anti-gay that my kid would be bullied if I wear this shirt," we're talking about bigotry.

It's easy to make up our own scenarios so we can condemn people we know nothing about.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
They probably were not properly punished. They should not only lose their pay for those games, there should have been a fine too. But I don't think that those details are available. The players still appear to have no valid excuse for their anti-gay activities.

I don't think enough details are available for us to make proper judgements on the players.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
It's easy to make up our own scenarios so we can condemn people we know nothing about.
We can when they fail to say anything about all the stuff going on in that their religion does not support. Like drunkenness? Where is their outrage over people having too much to drink during the games? Where are their condemnations over people gambling? What they do supports such sinful behavior, and it's downright hypocritical of them to speak out over this one subject.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
It's easy to make up our own scenarios so we can condemn people we know nothing about.
Is it as easy as you criticizing me without giving anything of substance?

What do you think could reasonably justify those players' behaviour? A straight answer this time, please.
 

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
The thing is that I don't see it as homophobic and bigotry. I think you have your definitions of those things wrong

Yes, I know. You've told me that, and I didn't expect that you have or will change your mind there. What makes it homophobia for you when it is? Angry facial expressions and loud voices? Use of insults and profanity like Westboro Baptist Church? You seemed to agree that they were homophobic with their "God hates f*gs" signs. What if the signs had said "God disapproves of homosexuality"? Is it now not homophobic in your opinion? If so, why? To many people, it's the same message delivered in different packages. Throwing in a "God loves you, I love you" doesn't change the message, just the tone and sincerity of it.

you are accusing innocent people, along with the rest of the mob that do the same thing because it is fashionable to do that.

What innocent people am I accusing of what? And why do you think my behavior is chosen because its fashionable?

Also, you used the word mob. Why do you suppose that there are so many people saying the same thing I am? Why has there been blowback from these Aussie athlete's message? Why are so many posters in this thread telling you what I'm telling you? Surely it can't be for no reason or because it's fashionable. Even if you can't understand those sentiments, it behooves you to be aware of them. If you deliver the message that the homosexual community displeases a good god, you are damaging people, not helping them, and they will resent both you and the religion that taught you that.

Maybe that's OK with you. Maybe you're willing to pay that price to speak your message. As you've noted, that's legal and you won't be physically stopped. But I do believe that you are contributing to a net negative effect for Christianity. Or maybe you think that your position makes the church and its religion seem righteous in the eyes of the public.

Perhaps you've seen the quote from particle physicist Steven Weinberg, "Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. For good people to do evil things, it takes religion." I think he's talking about people like you. You seem like a good person to me. I believe that without your religion, you'd be like any humanist and embrace diversity, support love in any form, and try to create a society that gives us all opportunity and freedom. But Christianity has taught you to judge homosexuality negatively, and with no malice at all in your heart, you deliver that destructive message. It's your church I judge more than you or any individual believer.

Weinberg says, and I agree, that what the church is doing is an insult to human dignity, and that it promotes good people to do harm.

In your view all cops are murderers, all priests are paedophiles, all Muslims are just as bad as the terrorists I suppose until they go public and condemn those who have done such things.

No. But all cops who are aware of misconduct by other police and turn a blind eye are in part responsible for the bad actors and those who help cover up their crimes. Likewise with the other two groups. I do expect people aware of crimes and misconduct to come forward in the sense that I and others hold them culpable in part if they don't.

And the same thinking applies to the body of the church. You want the people who aren't actively causing the problem to be held blameless. Fine. I don't blame you or most of them, either. You aren't the reason you hold homophobic beliefs or why you consider them wholesome and constructive. Your church is. Your religion is.

What outsiders see is a vocal contingent demeaning homosexuals and the rest sitting there quietly. There isn't even one Christian voice in a thousand denouncing the church's message. Whereas the adherent sees his church as a force for good, this is what others see from the outside. It's not your problem, and you didn't cause it. The church caused it, and it is its problem - a public relations problem. Christian homophobia is seen by many as mean-spirited bullying insincerely dressed in the language of loving the sinner.

You reminded me of lyrics from Sympathy For The Devil: "Just as every cop is a criminal, and all the sinners saints."
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
The thing is that I don't see it as homophobic and bigotry. I think you have your definitions of those things wrong and you are accusing innocent people, along with the rest of the mob that do the same thing because it is fashionable to do that.
There are plenty of non-homophobic Christians.

They just don't recoil at the idea of wearing a shirt with a rainbow on it.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
We can when they fail to say anything about all the stuff going on in that their religion does not support. Like drunkenness? Where is their outrage over people having too much to drink during the games? Where are their condemnations over people gambling? What they do supports such sinful behavior, and it's downright hypocritical of them to speak out over this one subject.

They didn't speak out, they just refused to wear the jersey.
The club accepted the blame for their handling of the issue.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
They didn't speak out, they just refused to wear the jersey.
The club accepted the blame for their handling of the issue.
Yeah, they don't speak out on the rest of the crap. They did nothing until this particular issue. They are in a den of sin, and it's fine and dandy until now over this very issue.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
There are plenty of non-homophobic Christians.

They just don't recoil at the idea of wearing a shirt with a rainbow on it.

What could reasonably justify you calling people homophobic because they did not want to wear the rainbow jersey, especially when the club took the blame for their handling of the issue.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
Yes, I know. You've told me that, and I didn't expect that you have or will change your mind there. What makes it homophobia for you when it is? Angry facial expressions and loud voices? Use of insults and profanity like Westboro Baptist Church? You seemed to agree that they were homophobic with their "God hates f*gs" signs. What if the signs had said "God disapproves of homosexuality"? Is it now not homophobic in your opinion? If so, why? To many people, it's the same message delivered in different packages. Throwing in a "God loves you, I love you" doesn't change the message, just the tone and sincerity of it.

It sounds like you are saying that the people who said "God hates f*gs" are more sincere than those Christians who do not say that. Is so, that tells me something about your view of Christians.
But you are right when you say "To many people....". There are many people on both sides of probably many arguments in the US who don't seem to be able to hear what their opponents are actually saying.

What innocent people am I accusing of what? And why do you think my behavior is chosen because its fashionable?
Also, you used the word mob. Why do you suppose that there are so many people saying the same thing I am? Why has there been blowback from these Aussie athlete's message? Why are so many posters in this thread telling you what I'm telling you? Surely it can't be for no reason or because it's fashionable. Even if you can't understand those sentiments, it behooves you to be aware of them. If you deliver the message that the homosexual community displeases a good god, you are damaging people, not helping them, and they will resent both you and the religion that taught you that.

Maybe that's OK with you. Maybe you're willing to pay that price to speak your message. As you've noted, that's legal and you won't be physically stopped. But I do believe that you are contributing to a net negative effect for Christianity. Or maybe you think that your position makes the church and its religion seem righteous in the eyes of the public.

Perhaps you've seen the quote from particle physicist Steven Weinberg, "Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. For good people to do evil things, it takes religion." I think he's talking about people like you. You seem like a good person to me. I believe that without your religion, you'd be like any humanist and embrace diversity, support love in any form, and try to create a society that gives us all opportunity and freedom. But Christianity has taught you to judge homosexuality negatively, and with no malice at all in your heart, you deliver that destructive message. It's your church I judge more than you or any individual believer.

Weinberg says, and I agree, that what the church is doing is an insult to human dignity, and that it promotes good people to do harm.

The Biblical teaching is that God does not want His people to engage in homosexual acts. The Church should not change the Biblical teaching imo. It is understandable that some people do not hear the message as it is in the Bible and that some Christians are bigots and give the wrong message.
If people are guilty of homophobia for not wearing a jersey in your sight then so be it but it does appear to be a mob mentality and not in keeping with the facts of the case as we know them.

No. But all cops who are aware of misconduct by other police and turn a blind eye are in part responsible for the bad actors and those who help cover up their crimes. Likewise with the other two groups. I do expect people aware of crimes and misconduct to come forward in the sense that I and others hold them culpable in part if they don't.

And the same thinking applies to the body of the church. You want the people who aren't actively causing the problem to be held blameless. Fine. I don't blame you or most of them, either. You aren't the reason you hold homophobic beliefs or why you consider them wholesome and constructive. Your church is. Your religion is.

What outsiders see is a vocal contingent demeaning homosexuals and the rest sitting there quietly. There isn't even one Christian voice in a thousand denouncing the church's message. Whereas the adherent sees his church as a force for good, this is what others see from the outside. It's not your problem, and you didn't cause it. The church caused it, and it is its problem - a public relations problem. Christian homophobia is seen by many as mean-spirited bullying insincerely dressed in the language of loving the sinner.[

You reminded me of lyrics from Sympathy For The Devil: "Just as every cop is a criminal, and all the sinners saints."

It sounds like you think the Biblical belief that homosexual acts are not acceptable in God's people, is a homophobic belief, and as such should be silenced.
The reality is imo that a very small minority of Christians are bigots and homophobic and the message of the church on homosexuality is just misunderstood in this age.
Probably all views have changed recently in the one direction and it has reached the point where just to teach the actual Biblical teaching is seen as homophobic.
What church members and even whole churches have to decide now is if they are going to go the way of the world and reject the Biblical teaching on homosexuality or not.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
What could reasonably justify you calling people homophobic because they did not want to wear the rainbow jersey,
I've explained this a few times now.

... but don't think I haven't noticed that you keep avoiding explaining why you think the players' actions were somehow not homophobic.

especially when the club took the blame for their handling of the issue.
I disagree with the team's handling of the issue.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
Yes I can understand that it looks bad.
Indeed.

They wore logos that represent gambling and loaning money with interest without objection, but they drew the line at wearing a symbol that represents the idea that we shoukd treat LGBTQ people with respect.

Not only are they homophobes, they're hypocrites.
 

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
It sounds like you are saying that the people who said "God hates f*gs" are more sincere than those Christians who do not say that.

I'm saying that the more overtly bigoted and hateful message is the same one as the "hate the sin, love the sinner" : "You're not good enough, you are defective, you offend a good god, and if you continue, you are fit for eternal torture - but God loves you, and so do I." You don't need to agree or disagree that that is what that message means, because it doesn't matter to the church's future what its adherents say is the actual message and how it is to be understood. What matters is the opinions of the culture at large. Can you not see that this is an offensive message to many and a bad look for the church?

Remember, I make a distinction between hot bigotry and cold bigotry, with only the former being accompanied by overt hatred. Just because one feels no hatred does not mean that he is not the vector for the hatred of others. Both groups are equally sincere. I consider you sincere and hate-free, but you are also a vector for Christian homophobia.

It sounds like you think the Biblical belief that homosexual acts are not acceptable in God's people, is a homophobic belief, and as such should be silenced.

Yes, it's a homophobic belief. I wish it were silenced, which is why I am an antitheist. I would like to help discredit organized, politicized Christianity to diminish its cultural hegemony. I see it as a net societal harm. I realize that you and most believers (and probably most unbelievers) see the church as a positive social force, but many others see it like I do.

the message of the church on homosexuality is just misunderstood in this age.

That's not possible. You're talking about a huge number of people delivering that message and a huge number listening to it.

What church members and even whole churches have to decide now is if they are going to go the way of the world and reject the Biblical teaching on homosexuality or not.

It's a problem for the church. I don't see it solving it. I expect it to continue shooting itself in the foot, as it has with the abortion issue. It has to for as long as it can. What are they going to do to rein in the homophobia problem, or the misogyny problem? Nothing. What can they do but be more silent, and I'm pretty sure that Christian culture, which teaches spreading the gospel wherever and whenever possible, won't permit that.

The individual adherent must choose what he wishes to express to others in the face of a culture that would reject him for that behavior like he rejects gays. He will be seen as morally deficient and likely chastised for expressing such religious views. And why not? Every other religious demographic faces the same judgment, and since all of the others are too weak to affect law or policy, they keep their religious opinions to themselves. Think of the Muslims. I practiced medicine in a rural area with about a dozen Muslim docs and a few dozen Christian ones. We only heard from the Christians, because they felt empowered expressing themselves. I had to keep silent as an atheist. The Muslims were silent as well.

But now that atheists are taking a more prominent position in society and are increasingly less marginalized and demonized by the church, they have become emboldened and vocal themselves - what many like to call militant atheism - and its the increasingly put church on the defensive, as in this thread. In another few decades, the Christians in America may have the same status as the other religions, and be pressured into keeping their religion private and confined to the lives of believers and those who want to hear them, just like the Sikhs and Druids, as it should be in a diverse, tolerant, secular society.

I look forward to a day when nobody has any better idea of how Jesus feels about gays than how Brigid, a Celtic goddess, feels. What would Brigid do? I don't know. Who?
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
I guess I don't like being forced to conform. When everyone was wearing " let's go on strike" T shirts, I wore Micky mouse.
And I don't think an atheist should be forced to wear a Jesus T shirt either. This is just basic human rights.
Were you playing for a professional sports team that you signed a contract with?
If not, what's the relevance? What does what you wear in your spare time have anything to do with this?
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Yes I can understand that it looks bad.
It looks bad because it's hypocrisy. That whole minding the beam in your own eye before tending to the splinter in your neighbors eye.
I look forward to a day when nobody has any better idea of how Jesus feels about gays than how Brigid, a Celtic goddess, feels. What would Brigid do? I don't know. Who?
Brig would probably write a poem about how bad it is to tolerate the Den of Sin, as those Christians would say, but get worked up over the sin their priest told them to especially single out and hate, with the end goal of portraying the inferiority of the Christians through their loose morality and beliefs, despite being wrote down, when compared the oral traditions of the Celts.
And with Jesus we can say it is very likely he didn't discriminate against gays and welcomed them just as much as anyone else when he healed the "special friend" of the Roman Centaur (who himself, regardless of who his lover may have been, was Jesus and the Jews oppressor, so it reveals a great deal of how un-Christlike swarms of Christians are).
 
Top