Homosexuality & Religion

[Quiddity]

Care to respond to #266. Or is that just SO obvious it needs no response?

In short.....not everyone who believes bahaves that way and it's not always going to produce good results. I'm more interested in what works, not in why people failed it. This is will off topic though.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I wouldn't do that to a homosexuals either. I find your comparison ridiculous. What blacks went through with gay rights......you should be ashamed.

I think a comparison with how Catholics have been treated in the past is especially valid. I see a strong parallel between the treatment of Catholics a century ago and the treatment of homosexual people today.

You know why the Knights of Columbus was first established, right?

Catholics were being barred from normal social institutions: trade unions. This meant that they didn't have access to the insurance that unions provided to their members. When a Catholic workman died on the job (which was a pretty common occurrence in the days before workplace health and safety laws), his family would get nothing. The wife and children would be left without a means of support. They were denied the usual protections given to families, and suffered horribly because of it.

Because of this need, the Knights of Columbus was set up... initially to provide insurance to these people who were being discriminated against, so that when a Catholic worker died, his family didn't lose their home and his kids wouldn't wind up in an orphanage or with some other family member.


I see this as the exact moral equivalent of the question of same-sex marriage, but with one difference: insurance is something that a fraternal organization can provide. The rights of marriage aren't obtained as easily.

 

[Storm]

There is a moral approval dimension to this that is there IMO. It's not just about the legalities. There is a "throw it in your face" about it.

You know, 99% of the time, people complaining about how we "throw it in their face" are talking about behavior that wouldn't even get straights noticed. Holding hands with your partner, maybe a demure kiss on the cheek. Or, you know... wanting equal treatment under the law. Shocking!

Sure, there's a tiny remnainder of people who do flaunt their sexuality. Has it ever occured to you that maybe they do that to make the point that we're not just going away?

Cliche as it may be, I have to quote Etheridge: "We have come too far/ And we've got the scars/ And we are never going back into the shadows again!"

 

[linwood]

I'll take the cop-out route on this. It will probably come with the usual bigot, intolerant, backwards rhetoric it always comes with, but whatever. I simply can't put the time and patience it deserves. I shouldn't have posted in the first place. Besides, this topic rarely makes any progress either way. Just too charged of a topic. It ends up being pats in the back by people who already support it.

Mea culpa for posting in the first place. Some other day.

I've been watching you post in these homo rights threads for years.

You always back out and off when your hypocritical dogma has been evidenced for what it is.

I'd like to think most people would consider for at least a moment why they are consistently unable to defend their beliefs and alter their beliefs accordingly.

I thank you Victor for constantly, heroically, and consistently, re-affirming my own particular beliefs about people with your thinking processes.

You keep me going!

 

[Quiddity]

I think a comparison with how Catholics have been treated in the past is especially valid. I see a strong parallel between the treatment of Catholics a century ago and the treatment of homosexual people today.

You know why the Knights of Columbus was first established, right?

Catholics were being barred from normal social institutions: trade unions. This meant that they didn't have access to the insurance that unions provided to their members. When a Catholic workman died on the job (which was a pretty common occurrence in the days before workplace health and safety laws), his family would get nothing. The wife and children would be left without a means of support. They were denied the usual protections given to families, and suffered horribly because of it.

Because of this need, the Knights of Columbus was set up... initially to provide insurance to these people who were being discriminated against, so that when a Catholic worker died, his family didn't lose their home and his kids wouldn't wind up in an orphanage or with some other family member.


I see this as the exact moral equivalent of the question of same-sex marriage, but with one difference: insurance is something that a fraternal organization can provide. The rights of marriage aren't obtained as easily.

That would be a better comparison.

 

[Quiddity]

You know, 99% of the time, people complaining about how we "throw it in their face" are talking about behavior that wouldn't even get straights noticed. Holding hands with your partner, maybe a demure kiss on the cheek. Or, you know... wanting equal treatment under the law. Shocking!

Sure, there's a tiny remnainder of people who do flaunt their sexuality. Has it ever occured to you that maybe they do that to make the point that we're not just going away?

Cliche as it may be, I have to quote Etheridge: "We have come too far/ And we've got the scars/ And we are never going back into the shadows again!"

Never crossed my mind.

 

[Quiddity]

I've been watching you post in these homo rights threads for years.

You always back out and off when your hypocritical dogma has been evidenced for what it is.

I'd like to think most people would consider for at least a moment why they are consistently unable to defend their beliefs and alter their beliefs accordingly.

I thank you Victor for constantly, heroically, and consistently, re-affirming my own particular beliefs about people with your thinking processes.

You keep me going!

Good thing you are here to set me straight. If you actually stay in the forum long enough, you would have noticed that I've been pretty selective about whom I discuss certain issues with. Precisely because of the reactions I get in these types of threads. But I'm glad I could fill a void of doubt in your life. I guess I do serve a purpose.

 

[Meow Mix]

Good thing you are here to set me straight. If you actually stay in the forum long enough, you would have noticed that I've been pretty selective about whom I discuss certain issues with. Precisely because of the reactions I get in these types of threads. But I'm glad I could fill a void of doubt in your life. I guess I do serve a purpose.

If it's reactions you're worried about... have you followed any of the other threads I post in? I don't respond vitriolically even if I vehemently disagree with who I'm posting to.

Perhaps you'd give me some insight on your perspective and answers to my relevant questions in private messages?

 

[Quiddity]

If it's reactions you're worried about... have you followed any of the other threads I post in? I don't respond vitriolically even if I vehemently disagree with who I'm posting to.

Perhaps you'd give me some insight on your perspective and answers to my relevant questions in private messages?

Have I ever not given you a well thought out answer (even if you disagree)? Seriously? You, 9ths_Penguin, and others I make it a point to respond to you guys because you guys are fairly charitable and thoughtful in your posts.

I'm willing to chat about it in a thread but I'm done with this one at the moment. It drained me...

 

[Pegg]

Well I don't see any problem with that.

The problem isn't that someone potentially doesn't like gays or finds it icky or abominable, etc...

The problem is when someone steps up to actually "go about trying to make life hard for homosexuals." Like when the Mormons worked so hard for Proposition 8, or all the attempts to ban homosexual marriages, or attempts by parents and family to try to "rehabilitate" young gays (that's life destroying nonsense!!!).

I could care less if someone disliked homosexuality, even if they said so to my face, so long as we could still be friends and they wouldn't try to politically undermine my rights or anything. There's a difference between agreement and tolerance.

yep i totally agree on that note, christians should lead the way in tolerance...we dont have to agree with the things that go on, but we dont have the right to try and stop others from taking part in them.

christians were never meant to get involved in politics....Jesus never did and he didnt want his followers to either. The way we see it is that as christians, we are pacifists up until the point where we have to make a stance on some point.

 

[Pegg]

There is a moral approval dimension to this that is there IMO. It's not just about the legalities. There is a "throw it in your face" about it.

why do homosexuals feel the need for moral approval by christians?

We dont ask athiests for their approval about our belief in God, we dont ask for approval of evolutionists because we disagree that we spontaneously generated on this planet

so why do you seek justifcation from us for your sexual preferences?

 

[darkendless]

why do homosexuals feel the need for moral approval by christians?

We dont ask athiests for their approval about our belief in God, we dont ask for approval of evolutionists because we disagree that we spontaneously generated on this planet

so why do you seek justifcation from us for your sexual preferences?

Because Christians are the most arrogant/ignorant when it comes to discussing homosexuality. They feel if the most aorrgant and ignorant can accept them, anyone can.

 

[Pegg]

" The problem comes when homosexuals want to get involved with religion...then it kind of forces the issue."

If working towards equality and fair treatment for all, working to stem the growth of intolerance, working to spread acceptance and understanding of normal human differences, is somehow counteractive to your religion. Well then, your religion is not even worth a warm pile of monkey poo and is not worth preserving. True religion advances humanity; it does not drag it down.

If i want to become a member of a country club, i have to abide by their rules and regulations.

If I want to deposit my money in a bank, I have to accept their fee structure.

If I want to become a doctor, I have to pass the same exams as everyone else.

Im sorry that the standards found in the bible are not to your liking, but we are all bound by the same standards and laws and no one is forcing anyone to abide by them. Everyone has the choice and if its not your cup of tea then you dont have to drink it. The door swings both ways...in and out.

 

[Pegg]

Because Christians are the most arrogant/ignorant when it comes to discussing homosexuality. They feel if the most aorrgant and ignorant can accept them, anyone can.

that doesnt answer my question.

If we are the most arrogant and ignorant, then why do you feel the need to get our approval?

Usually i just ignore arrogant and ignorant people.

 

[Pegg]

I don't believe for a second that you're so incredibly stupid as to think that's even comparable.

no, i dont think its comparable to this subject, but the principle is nonetheless.

 

[Smoke]

If i want to become a member of a country club, i have to abide by their rules and regulations.

I agree. Most Christian churches are clubs that no decent person would want to belong to if they really thought about it, anyway, and it's beneath the dignity of any self-respecting gay person to beg for admittance. Try to shoehorn your way into an organization that doesn't want you and isn't worth joining in the first place is unseemly in two ways.

 

[dawny0826]

that doesnt answer my question.

If we are the most arrogant and ignorant, then why do you feel the need to get our approval?

Usually i just ignore arrogant and ignorant people.

I don't think it's an issue of seeking approval, Pegg. There are Christian people who feel it's justified to go out of their way to out, exploit and demean the glbtq community.

Why wouldn't you take the defense if your life choices are under scrutiny? You've stated that you believe Christians should stay away from politics. When they do involve themselves - negative consequences ensue for the glbtq communities.

 

[Storm]

why do homosexuals feel the need for moral approval by christians?

We dont ask athiests for their approval about our belief in God, we dont ask for approval of evolutionists because we disagree that we spontaneously generated on this planet

so why do you seek justifcation from us for your sexual preferences?

We don't. We Don't Care About Approval

Now, equality? That's another matter.

 

[Pegg]

If they're just telling you that they don't want to have vegemite themselves, no.

If they're telling you that they think nobody should like vegemite, maybe.

If they're telling you that, in their community, they shun anyone who likes vegemite, probably.

If they tell you that, because of their distate for vegemite, they're trying to make it illegal for everyone, hell yes.

Of course I agree that if they try to stop me eating vegemite, then Im going to dig in my heels because thats my right...but not all christians are out to put an end to homosexual activity...i've certainly never held up a placard or been politically active about it, so i dont really appreciate being tarred and feathered for something i've never done nor would do.

If i'm talking to a homosexual, im not thinking in the back of my mind that this person is a 'homosexual' just as I dont talk to a fornicator and think this person is a 'fornicator', I personally dont care what people want to do in their bedrooms, its their choice and God allows them the freedom to do it so my view is 'who am I to tell them they cant'. They can.

But if they ask me what God thinks of that, then i will tell them the truth as its found in the bible and im not going to sugar coat it and pretend that he approves of it. Just as I wouldnt do that to a hetrosexual who has sex with a different person every night of the week or a married person who is having an affair or a person who takes drugs or a person who steals or a person who is a drunkard....

we are all in the same boat when it comes to what God approves of and what he doesn't... homosexuals are not special in that sense.

 

[Pegg]

"I'd venture to guess that not one in a hundred reading this would suggest that homosexuals should be treated poorly, over against, say, adulterers or those who have committed a robbery. That's not advocated among many serious Christians; though there is a significant amount of Christians who do adopt such abominable and unChristian attitude."


SO let's get this right. Believing this stuff does NOT necessarily make one a better person. Being a "Cristian" is no different from being a non-Christian except by name.

So what good is believing this mythology? What useful difference does it make if folks who believe or not any better than anyone else?

christianity is only beneficial if people 'apply' it and 'practice' it.