Should Gays Forgive Abrahamics?

[gsa]

Your post could be taken as implying it.

I do not see how. Not being representative or illustrative is not the same as being irrelevant. For example, most Catholics are not representative of the church on a wide variety of matters, and yet I would not say that they "don't matter" in any absolute sense.

 

[gsa]

I voted Other, but I'm hardly invested in the question.
Still, the way I look at this stuff is always around 'What are you trying to achieve?'

So in South Africa, what was the end of apartheid supposed to achieve? Replacement of White power with Black power? I mean, that would be understandable, in a lot of ways. But a far nobler and more worthy goal is equality.

The OP also assumes (in a way) that the two groups are distinct. Should an LGBT Christian be forgiven?

Meh. I voted other. By all means, call out people who are not fair, call out the bigots, etc. But when someone embraces diversity, it might be more effective to continue focusing on the remaining bigots, and the new converts can add their voices to the ground swell. Something like that, anyway.

The post deliberately refers to Abrahamic religions as opposed to individual believers, and operates with the assumption that Abrahamic religions have unifying characteristics. This also encompasses slightly more than half the current human global population, so we can expect substantial variation on points of belief. But I am assuming that the religion has some content independent of the variation found among believers. Or to put it another way, as Jeffrey Tayler argues quite well in this article, that these text-based scriptural religions have something to say within the foundational texts themselves:

The problem with religion lies not with, as Aslan would have it, interpretation – postmodern or otherwise – but with, for starters, the founding texts themselves. The canonical writings of Islam, Christianity and Judaism all contain a plethora of macabre fables and explicit injunctions for vile, sadistic behavior that no civilized person would or should accept, but which far too many do take as literal truth. (And not just in the Middle East. Even in the United States, a Gallup poll conducted this summer established that three out of four Americans consider the Bible the actual word of God.) The only way for those hoping to justify faith while shielding their scripture from censure is to do what Aslan does: shift the focus from the “holy” texts to the people reading them.

But if we cannot speak of these religions, if the very idea of religion has no coherence or use, then I suppose that your criticism makes sense.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I think it is an error to assume that opposing Abrahamic religion is the same as wallowing in anti-religious bigotry.

I make no such assumption.

 

[gsa]

I make no such assumption.

OK. So what is the relevance of the initial comment to the OP?

 

[Unification]

I do not think that there is a longstanding allegorical and non-literal interpretation of Leviticus 20:13 that conveys a meaning of "love and treat your neighbor as yourself." I am open to being shown otherwise.

God's sanctuary: the brain.
House of God: brain
Tabernacle of God: brain

These texts are ancient. Thousands of years old. Words and language have evolved.

This whole chapter and most of all of the laws are about an impure and unclean woman(mind)

This chapter of Leviticus is pretty much saying: do not judge, expose another's faults, make them feel guilty, that is taking part in the woman(mind) (lying with the mind) That will lead to spiritual death (separation from God/conscious/being aware)

Every man(soul) has a woman/helpmate(mind). It's either pure/clean or impure/unclean.

The mind, like anything else in nature and the universe has opposites.

The husband: conscious/higher mind.

The wife:subconscious/lower mind.

The wife/woman (mind) needs covered and veiled by the husband(conscious/spirit)

The scriptures are meant for the internalized, not for the physical. It's easy to see the problems, divide, and inequality by taking the scriptures literally. It's also easy to see the problems in the world by viewing things physically and materially. Root of all evil.

Man in the context of Leviticus (soul)

Woman: mind

Sons and daughters are seeds that the mind gives birth to. Not literal kids.

Child: seed of knowledge

Kin: redemption

Childless: without knowledge, wisdom, understanding.

Nakedness: exposing ones faults, placing judgement on another.

Lie/lieth/lie down: be a liar, be in vain, deceive, make bed with(take part with) rest with(take part with)

Uncle: beloved

Uncover: reveal/judge

Fountain of her blood: reasons for guilt/faults.

Their blood shall be upon them: they shall be held accountable, guilt shall be upon them, they shall be judged.

Father: Western Hemisphere of brain.

Mother: Eastern Hemisphere of brain.

Sister: protector that bonds, other half.

Fathers's sister: Eastern Hemisphere of brain. (twin)

Mothers sister: Western Hemisphere of brain. (twin)

Adulterer: whoring after lies. Cheating on truth with lies.

Daughter-in-law: bride.

Husband: conscious
Bride: subconscious

Marriage: divine Union, the two minds becoming one/whole.

Bride(subconscious mind)of Christ(conscious mind/spirit)

Death: separation of mind, back to being unconscious/unaware. Fractured mind.

God is no respector of persons. Every human has a brain and a mind. Entire Old Testament is about the brain and mind.

 

[Levite]

Yes. These individuals claim that there is no conflict, or at least assume that the traditions can be modified to eliminate any existing conflict.

But that does not fully address the question: Even if it can be ameliorated, the conflict, if only as a matter of tradition and history, exists. We will never live in a world where Leviticus 20:13 was not widely interpreted as calling for the execution of male homosexuals. That is simply a fact. And that has had a number of consequences for people over history. It also reflects what most believers assumed was a divine command.

I am sure that you are more than a little skeptical about the ability to interpret the Christian scriptures in a way that is pro-Jewish. Consider your own accurate description of Christianity:

Christianity, as a whole, has not shown a love of Judaism in any significant way over the course of its existence. It has, on the contrary, been rife with anti-Semitism, from the Christian scriptures onward.

I can in fact reasonably say the same about Abrahamic religions generally, with respect to gays. Indeed, it is a consistency across the three major traditions and their cousins or would-be successors (including the Bahai and various heretical sects).

This point, from later in that same thread, is also appropriate:

Individuals Jews may come to know and love individual Christians, but individual Christians are not the same as Christianity as a historical whole.

To which I can say, rather pointedly: Abrahamic religions, considered as a whole, have not shown a love of gays or homosexuality in any significant way over the course of their existence. They have, on the contrary, been rife with homophobia, from the Hebrew scriptures onwards. Individual Abrahamics may come to know and love individual gay people, but individual Abrahamics are not the same as the Abrahamic religions as a historical whole.

Does this privilege the reactionary elements within these traditions, and render liberal reformists inauthentic?

I am, indeed, skeptical about the ability of major Christian institutions at present to interpret the Christian scriptures in a way that is pro-Jewish; and their inability or reluctance or refusal to do so is similarly a problem for many Christians not linked to major Christian institutions.

However, I am not at all skeptical about the ability of individual Christians, and even some Christian churches, to interpret their scriptures in a way that is both not anti-Semitic and not supercessionist. I am not skeptical about this because I am fortunate to be friends and colleagues with Christian ministers and priests who do just this, and who vigorously teach and promulgate for such interpretation within their various church structures and traditions. And they do this in thoughtful, complex ways, which show great scholarship of their own theologies and histories, and of Jewish theologies and history as well. They are not isolated: they represent significant and growing movements of scholars, clergy, and laypeople who believe that interpreting Christian scriptures in ways that are anti-Semitic or supercessionist are both counterproductive to what they believe God wishes of them and theologically offensive to their conception of God itself. A day may yet come-- perhaps even in my lifetime-- when the major Christian institutions, and a majority of Christians, will espouse such progressive interpretation and shift in theology and attitude.

I am a firm believer that the interpretation of Biblical text to construe a divine blanket condemnation of all homosexuality is erroneous. I believe this because there are a long history of interpretive principles in my tradition that teach me that God is merciful and compassionate, and never deliberately cruel, and that the laws in the Torah must be interpreted to reflect that understanding of their Source. I also am not alone in this regard: many, many other rabbis feel this way, as well as scholars and laypeople. All the non-Orthodox movements of Judaism are inclusive of LGBT people and interpret Torah accordingly, because they (like I) cannot believe that the God we worship as merciful and compassionate would ever condemn anyone for simply being the way He created them to be. And even the left wing of Modern Orthodoxy is trying to struggle with this issue in compassionate and thoughtful ways.

I am also a firm believer in the centrality in value of teshuvah (repentance). When people have made mistakes, and they do teshuvah for those mistakes, they ought to be forgiven.

Thus, though I do indeed have strong feelings about the historical treatment of Jews by Christians, and strong feelings about the ways Christian scripture has been read and interpreted to support that treatment, I find no reason to blame the Christian friends and colleagues I have (and all other such Christians) who have clearly done teshuvah, and recognized those historical Christian interpretations and attitudes as wrong and unjust. It would make no sense for me to hold them accountable for the transgressions of others, since they cannot help what is wrongfully done in the name of their religion.

Likewise, I see no reason for LGBT people to hold at fault those Jews who have done teshuvah, and recognized the erroneous interpretations and attitudes of our predecessors as wrong, and no longer espouse either interpretations or attitudes. We cannot change what happened in the past. We can only do our best to change what is happening now, and what will happen in the future.

And, indeed, I am pleased to count many LGBT Jews among my friends, and many LGBT rabbis and scholars among my colleagues. These are LGBT Jews who are passionate about their Judaism, deeply engaged in study and observance, who joyfully and skillfully teach Torah to others and themselves do many mitzvot (commandments). While most of them certainly work actively to further the progress that has been made, and to give it better foundation and richer elaboration in scholarship and society, none of them appear to be interested in blaming all Jews or all Judaism or all Torah for the wrongs and woes of the past. And certainly none of them-- as far as I know-- blame God, or believe that He ever truly condemned them or all others like them.

 

[oldbadger]

............................. I am very concerned about the global impact of these particular religions ......................................

......which is why I can't take you seriously.
...... your concern is myopic!
I totally support equality of opportunity, access, service, freedom and choice for gay people, as well as I do for religions and creeds.......... but when folks insist on whining on about about how bad religion is, rather than humanity in general, I do tend to think of words like 'mania'.

Your OP reminds me a teenager who reckons he had a bad and unfair upbringing, demanding apology from his grandparents because their ideas about raising his own parents created the situation which he later grew up within. And then he'll be blaming his own parents for all time anyway.............
'It's not my fault.....it was my upbringing! Whaaaaaaaa....!'

No! You can't have your friggin' apology!
And, anyway, if the hundreds of Creeds out there all got together, made agreement, and then sent you a signed, sealed and served letter of unconditional apology for the bad things that had happened to Gays.....
....... what would you do?
....... what would you do?

 

[gsa]

I am, indeed, skeptical about the ability of major Christian institutions at present to interpret the Christian scriptures in a way that is pro-Jewish; and their inability or reluctance or refusal to do so is similarly a problem for many Christians not linked to major Christian institutions.

However, I am not at all skeptical about the ability of individual Christians, and even some Christian churches, to interpret their scriptures in a way that is both not anti-Semitic and not supercessionist. I am not skeptical about this because I am fortunate to be friends and colleagues with Christian ministers and priests who do just this, and who vigorously teach and promulgate for such interpretation within their various church structures and traditions. And they do this in thoughtful, complex ways, which show great scholarship of their own theologies and histories, and of Jewish theologies and history as well. They are not isolated: they represent significant and growing movements of scholars, clergy, and laypeople who believe that interpreting Christian scriptures in ways that are anti-Semitic or supercessionist are both counterproductive to what they believe God wishes of them and theologically offensive to their conception of God itself. A day may yet come-- perhaps even in my lifetime-- when the major Christian institutions, and a majority of Christians, will espouse such progressive interpretation and shift in theology and attitude.

I am a firm believer that the interpretation of Biblical text to construe a divine blanket condemnation of all homosexuality is erroneous. I believe this because there are a long history of interpretive principles in my tradition that teach me that God is merciful and compassionate, and never deliberately cruel, and that the laws in the Torah must be interpreted to reflect that understanding of their Source. I also am not alone in this regard: many, many other rabbis feel this way, as well as scholars and laypeople. All the non-Orthodox movements of Judaism are inclusive of LGBT people and interpret Torah accordingly, because they (like I) cannot believe that the God we worship as merciful and compassionate would ever condemn anyone for simply being the way He created them to be. And even the left wing of Modern Orthodoxy is trying to struggle with this issue in compassionate and thoughtful ways.

I am also a firm believer in the centrality in value of teshuvah (repentance). When people have made mistakes, and they do teshuvah for those mistakes, they ought to be forgiven.

Thus, though I do indeed have strong feelings about the historical treatment of Jews by Christians, and strong feelings about the ways Christian scripture has been read and interpreted to support that treatment, I find no reason to blame the Christian friends and colleagues I have (and all other such Christians) who have clearly done teshuvah, and recognized those historical Christian interpretations and attitudes as wrong and unjust. It would make no sense for me to hold them accountable for the transgressions of others, since they cannot help what is wrongfully done in the name of their religion.

Likewise, I see no reason for LGBT people to hold at fault those Jews who have done teshuvah, and recognized the erroneous interpretations and attitudes of our predecessors as wrong, and no longer espouse either interpretations or attitudes. We cannot change what happened in the past. We can only do our best to change what is happening now, and what will happen in the future.

And, indeed, I am pleased to count many LGBT Jews among my friends, and many LGBT rabbis and scholars among my colleagues. These are LGBT Jews who are passionate about their Judaism, deeply engaged in study and observance, who joyfully and skillfully teach Torah to others and themselves do many mitzvot (commandments). While most of them certainly work actively to further the progress that has been made, and to give it better foundation and richer elaboration in scholarship and society, none of them appear to be interested in blaming all Jews or all Judaism or all Torah for the wrongs and woes of the past. And certainly none of them-- as far as I know-- blame God, or believe that He ever truly condemned them or all others like them.

As I have tried to indicate elsewhere in this thread, the point here is not to chastise individual believers. Jews are one of the most pro-gay social groups in existence, perhaps second only to atheists (the last survey I looked at for the US suggested they beat the religiously unaffiliated in their support, but then many Jews are also atheists which makes that kind of comparison difficult). But while I do not think anyone should oppose the reform of Abrahamic tradition, there is an open question about how to treat Abrahamic religion generally. In other words, how should gay people, moving forward, treat Abrahamic religion? Something that can be reconciled with human rights for gay people? Or something that will always exist in tension with gays, that should be regarded as a past enemy and a likely enemy in the future, once the weather changes?

For a moment, let us forget about Judaism in the definition of Abrahamic (as well as Bahai) and focus on the two largest traditions, Christianity and Islam. Globally, only a small minority of Christian believers concentrated in the West (including Latin America) and a tiny and largely inconsequential percentage of Islamic believers have anything close to a liberal position. Measured by institutions, Christianity is overwhelmingly negative, given the size of the Catholic and Orthodox Churches and the dominance of traditionalists in most Protestant denominations. Approximately 78 countries criminalize homosexuality; a majority are Islamic and a substantial remainder are either Christian or at least post-colonial societies that adopted the largely British statutes criminalizing homosexuality. The most cursory examination of these laws demonstrates their religious origins. The only countries that execute gay men and lesbians as state policy are Islamic; the only other countries to consider the adoption of capital punishment for homosexuality are Christian, and often responding to the demands of Christian fundamentalists/evangelicals. The only "secular" nation to adopt extreme anti-gay laws is Russia, and this resembles, more than anything else, the kind of fascist obsession with Jews that was simply a secularized version of Catholic and Protestant anti-Semitism; in this case, the new cosmopolitan enemy of Russian Orthodox nationalism is homosexuality (and liberalism of course, the perpetual boogeyman; note that one of the Orthodox hacks refers to Satan as the "first revolutionary," which is at least an honest assessment of the compatibility of this religion with egalitarianism and democracy).

I do not believe it is a coincidence that these are also the most patriarchal religions, and that the rise of gay rights is accompanied by the growth of sexual equality. Men overwhelmingly control the formulation of religious doctrine and practice. This is not without some irony in extreme cases, particularly in the gender segregated Islamic societies where homosexuality enjoys a level of necessary de facto tolerance to avoid the greater taboo of fornication and adultery. And these are of course the dominant forces within these traditions; wherever gays have secured greater rights, it is largely in opposition to the dominant Abrahamic religious leadership. Where they have lost gains, it is usually a result of opposition from reactionary elements within these religions.

And here is the heart of the matter: You cannot change the text. You can change the interpretation, you can contextualize, you can revisit, you can even suspend or abrogate in some extreme cases. But you cannot change it. And you cannot eliminate the historical record. And given the tendency towards religious fundamentalist revival in all of these traditions, that suggests that the text itself, for as long as it commands respect as the word of a divine being and is revered as a source of moral authority, is a fairly potent threat. If people can be persuaded to believe it, it can be resurrected. Swiftly and violently.

Now of course I know that Abrahamic religion is not the source of all evil. But on this topic, with this group, it has done the most harm. It is not the only source of homophobia, but it is the most powerful one.

 

[mahasn ebn sawresho]

I am, indeed, skeptical about the ability of major Christian institutions at present to interpret the Christian scriptures in a way that is pro-Jewish; and their inability or reluctance or refusal to do so is similarly a problem for many Christians not linked to major Christian institutions.

However, I am not at all skeptical about the ability of individual Christians, and even some Christian churches, to interpret their scriptures in a way that is both not anti-Semitic and not supercessionist. I am not skeptical about this because I am fortunate to be friends and colleagues with Christian ministers and priests who do just this, and who vigorously teach and promulgate for such interpretation within their various church structures and traditions. And they do this in thoughtful, complex ways, which show great scholarship of their own theologies and histories, and of Jewish theologies and history as well. They are not isolated: they represent significant and growing movements of scholars, clergy, and laypeople who believe that interpreting Christian scriptures in ways that are anti-Semitic or supercessionist are both counterproductive to what they believe God wishes of them and theologically offensive to their conception of God itself. A day may yet come-- perhaps even in my lifetime-- when the major Christian institutions, and a majority of Christians, will espouse such progressive interpretation and shift in theology and attitude.

I am a firm believer that the interpretation of Biblical text to construe a divine blanket condemnation of all homosexuality is erroneous. I believe this because there are a long history of interpretive principles in my tradition that teach me that God is merciful and compassionate, and never deliberately cruel, and that the laws in the Torah must be interpreted to reflect that understanding of their Source. I also am not alone in this regard: many, many other rabbis feel this way, as well as scholars and laypeople. All the non-Orthodox movements of Judaism are inclusive of LGBT people and interpret Torah accordingly, because they (like I) cannot believe that the God we worship as merciful and compassionate would ever condemn anyone for simply being the way He created them to be. And even the left wing of Modern Orthodoxy is trying to struggle with this issue in compassionate and thoughtful ways.

I am also a firm believer in the centrality in value of teshuvah (repentance). When people have made mistakes, and they do teshuvah for those mistakes, they ought to be forgiven.

Thus, though I do indeed have strong feelings about the historical treatment of Jews by Christians, and strong feelings about the ways Christian scripture has been read and interpreted to support that treatment, I find no reason to blame the Christian friends and colleagues I have (and all other such Christians) who have clearly done teshuvah, and recognized those historical Christian interpretations and attitudes as wrong and unjust. It would make no sense for me to hold them accountable for the transgressions of others, since they cannot help what is wrongfully done in the name of their religion.

Likewise, I see no reason for LGBT people to hold at fault those Jews who have done teshuvah, and recognized the erroneous interpretations and attitudes of our predecessors as wrong, and no longer espouse either interpretations or attitudes. We cannot change what happened in the past. We can only do our best to change what is happening now, and what will happen in the future.

And, indeed, I am pleased to count many LGBT Jews among my friends, and many LGBT rabbis and scholars among my colleagues. These are LGBT Jews who are passionate about their Judaism, deeply engaged in study and observance, who joyfully and skillfully teach Torah to others and themselves do many mitzvot (commandments). While most of them certainly work actively to further the progress that has been made, and to give it better foundation and richer elaboration in scholarship and society, none of them appear to be interested in blaming all Jews or all Judaism or all Torah for the wrongs and woes of the past. And certainly none of them-- as far as I know-- blame God, or believe that He ever truly condemned them or all others like them.

Any attempt to separate Christianity from Judaism a failed attempt
Because Christianity associated with the Jewish radical link
O2- rejected homosexuality in the Bible
P encourage homosexual practices mean the collapse of Judaism and Christianity also

Natural law rejects homosexuality among men
Because there is a function for each member of the body members
For instance
Hand raise the sickle and raise Venice
When the gun used to kill the Divine be contrary to natural law and also
The same measurement on the genitals
That's why I say
Natural Law will meet with Judaism and Christianity in rejecting homosexual sexual practices
It wants to be

 

[gsa]

......which is why I can't take you seriously.
...... your concern is myopic!
I totally support equality of opportunity, access, service, freedom and choice for gay people, as well as I do for religions and creeds.......... but when folks insist on whining on about about how bad religion is, rather than humanity in general, I do tend to think of words like 'mania'.

Your OP reminds me a teenager who reckons he had a bad and unfair upbringing, demanding apology from his grandparents because their ideas about raising his own parents created the situation which he later grew up within. And then he'll be blaming his own parents for all time anyway.............
'It's not my fault.....it was my upbringing! Whaaaaaaaa....!'

No! You can't have your friggin' apology!
And, anyway, if the hundreds of Creeds out there all got together, made agreement, and then sent you a signed, sealed and served letter of unconditional apology for the bad things that had happened to Gays.....
....... what would you do?
....... what would you do?

You really misunderstand. This isn't about seeking an apology. It is about forgiveness. An apology from the Catholic Church would be welcome, to be sure, but I neither expect it nor would it really change my view of the RCC. Presumably, forgiving the Abrahamic religions for their misdeeds, indeed for being the source of much of the problem here, is primarily about the greater good. Socially, personally, psychologically, politically.

What I am suggesting is that it is better, at least arguably better, not to forgive the Abrahamic religions. First, because there is no reason to forgive them, given that they are on the whole unrepentant and there is no real advantage to their victims to do so. Second, because their homophobia, and the misogyny that is reinforced through that homophobia, is a powerful demonstration of the harm that they represent. As one of the most consistent and hated targets of Abrahamic religion, gays should not be in the business of forgiving (or joining) these religions, but at the forefront of movements aimed at dismantling their hold over human minds and institutions.

One would think a deist might be inclined not to take a pro-revealed religion line on this one, but I guess times have changed...

 

[Typist]

Personally, I vote no. Gay people should not forgive Abrahamic religionists and should in fact use Abrahamic anti-gay policies, rhetoric and doctrine to illustrate why Abrahamic religion is dangerous.

Your thread is a great example of the very thing you are arguing against.

 

[gsa]

Your thread is a great example of the very thing you are arguing against.

How so?

 

[Typist]

Instead of judging people as individuals, you've created a huge class of unknown people who are all lumped together in to one category so they can be rejected, blamed, hated etc.

 

[oldbadger]

You really misunderstand. This isn't about seeking an apology. It is about forgiveness.

Look........ If Gays want to forgive bodies, institutions, cultures and groups who have and/or do show prejudice against them, then they'll have to get in line and queue up. And if queue position is dictated by victim-group-size then gays are going to need to bring a good book or game to pass the time, 'cos, damn..... the queue is going to be Big! The first group in the queue is going to be the *WOW* (Women of the World). And if the WOW did decide to pass out forgiveness for each prejudice tort and crime committed, then it's going to take an awful lot of trees to produce the paper, even if they don't make copies.

What I am suggesting is that it is better, at least arguably better, not to forgive the Abrahamic religions.

Sure...... with a queue that big you'd better off finding a decent cafe and ordering an English Breakfast No2 (double sausages and bacon) and reading all that week's papers.

One would think a deist might be inclined not to take a pro-revealed religion line on this one, but I guess times have changed...

There's differing kinds........ of Deists. This one sees some of the unfairness in the world, realises that Big G can't do much to help, and just does what little he can within arms' length. And this one knows that perpetually inconsolably incorrigibly angry people are hard to help or please......... and no matter how much is given they'll just take more, and more, and more........ like some spiritual black-hole.

But I know gays who love, and laugh, and live. They'd forgive the whole World for it's sins, for sure!

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Look........ If Gays want to forgive bodies, institutions, cultures and groups who have and/or do show prejudice against them, then they'll have to get in line and queue up.

I think there are some UKippers that need to join the queue.

 

[leibowde84]

He already knows my views on his immature opinions about religion. We have talked in the chat room at length about this topic.

Why are his views "immature"? What do you mean by that specifically?

 

[gsa]

Instead of judging people as individuals, you've created a huge class of unknown people who are all lumped together in to one category so they can be rejected, blamed, hated etc.

The religions are being lumped together. Actually, they are not so much being lumped together as they are being subject to a religious taxonomy widely agreed upon. No one is suggesting that the believers should be rejected, blamed and hated as an undifferentiated mass.

Look........ If Gays want to forgive bodies, institutions, cultures and groups who have and/or do show prejudice against them, then they'll have to get in line and queue up. And if queue position is dictated by victim-group-size then gays are going to need to bring a good book or game to pass the time, 'cos, damn..... the queue is going to be Big! The first group in the queue is going to be the *WOW* (Women of the World). And if the WOW did decide to pass out forgiveness for each prejudice tort and crime committed, then it's going to take an awful lot of trees to produce the paper, even if they don't make copies.


Sure...... with a queue that big you'd better off finding a decent cafe and ordering an English Breakfast No2 (double sausages and bacon) and reading all that week's papers.


There's differing kinds........ of Deists. This one sees some of the unfairness in the world, realises that Big G can't do much to help, and just does what little he can within arms' length. And this one knows that perpetually inconsolably incorrigibly angry people are hard to help or please......... and no matter how much is given they'll just take more, and more, and more........ like some spiritual black-hole.

But I know gays who love, and laugh, and live. They'd forgive the whole World for it's sins, for sure!

Oh I would not suggest that women be excluded from criticizing a religious tradition that defines them largely as a property interest of males. The violent homophobia is inextricably linked with the misogyny. Even today one of these traditions enslaves half of its adherents in a number of countries.

Perpetually inconsolably incorrigibly angry people are by definition impossible to help or please. Thankfully, that is not what is under discussion here.

 

[oldbadger]

I think there are some UKippers that need to join the queue.

I wrote to Nige............ He must have listened 'cos he's still pullin'!

 

[oldbadger]

Oh I would not suggest that women be excluded from criticizing a religious tradition that defines them largely as a property interest of males.

Well you did! Your OP excluded them!

The violent homophobia is inextricably linked with the misogyny.

Violent homophobia.... now!
It's building............

Perpetually inconsolably incorrigibly angry people are by definition impossible to help or please. Thankfully, that is not what is under discussion here.

I think that it might be............

 

[Typist]

The religions are being lumped together.

Within any one of the Abrahamic religions there are people who are homophobic and people who are supportive of gays. Lumping is dumb at best.

Young U.S. Catholics overwhelmingly accepting of homosexuality | Pew Research Center