Many among us flat out doubt a valid Christian God's sexual ethic can be made that has room for rejecting homosexuality.
Come to think of it, Christian or non-Christian, a good litmus test for a sexual ethic is whether it has issues with LGBT.
-
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!
Why do homosexuals and transgenders force religious people to accept them?
- Thread starter Servant_of_the_One1
- Start date
Many among us flat out doubt a valid Christian God's sexual ethic can be made that has room for rejecting homosexuality.
Come to think of it, Christian or non-Christian, a good litmus test for a sexual ethic is whether it has issues with LGBT.
methylatedghosts
Can't brain. Has dumb.
Sometimes people present themselves in a childish and infantile manner, so sometimes one must speak with them at their level because they don't know how to have a proper adult conversation.
I'd never say that all arguments are worthy of respect. They are worthy of note, however, inasmuch such arguments tell you about such a persons level of thinking (or lack of thinking). Respect is earned, never granted
On a smaller scope, yes. But I never came out to anyone in the church. However, I did witness how others who came out were treated. I wanted no part of that.
I was 4 when I began to notice how I was attracted to women and men alike. I remember saying how I was in love with Harrison Ford, and then later on saying how I was in love and wanted to marry a woman I saw on TV.
That electricity never stopped, though I knew painfully well what was acceptable to say out loud and what wasn't.
Look, I expect to be treated with as much respect and humanity as everyone else. Regardless of my orientation and regardless of my choices in life or your choices in life or anyone else's. Doesn't matter. I'm a human being.
methylatedghosts
Can't brain. Has dumb.
Understanding does not mean accepting. But without understanding another view point, you can never hope to reach across at a personal level to change it
I guess it does at that. Sorry.
I don't know whether a similar phenomenom happened in the USA, but I am reminded of the early 1970s in Brazil, before the institution of divorce was fully established in law.
We were at just the right moment in our history for formely married women to exist in such numbers as to have to be acknowledged, yet people literally lacked the ability to deal respectfully and constructively with them. People simply avoided contact with them as if they had the plague. It was a very cruel state of things, particularly for their children.
A sobbering detail is that often that rejection was nearly deprived of malice, driven almost entirely by genuine embarassment, disconfort and ignorance of proper protocols. I gather that quite a few married people did not really know whether they should fear keeping social contact with those oddly available yet "tainted" people, who did not fit very confortably in any of the blanket labels that oriented their relationships.
Was it even proper or respectful to invite a woman who was left behind by her husband to socialize with oneself and one's husband? What would people think? Would the woman mistake it for an invitation for intimacy or something? Would the neighbors and friends think it was?
I figure that for many people those were genuine questions, causing very real disconfort. Not least because the answers were not nearly as standardized as they would like them to be.
We are better off leaving aside those pretenses of homogeneous sexual profiles and needs, on that I have no doubt. But necessary and urgent as that change of mentality is, it is not painless. There are only so many opportunities to tell one's family gracefully that we truly wish they would not insult our spouses and friends, or that we would rather not have to lie to them out of necessity.
Sometimes I wonder how difficult living in society would be if people survived into their 200s or 300s. I have personally met an elderly woman that is racist somewhat despite her own best intentions. It is incredibly unconfortable, because I want to tell her to shut up and grow up, yet she is probably unable to.
We cannot change people, they can only change themselves. So attempting to "reach across" to them is pointless, unless they are willing to accept someone different then they are, and most are not.
Understanding and acceptance, goes hand in hand to these people. They think that if the understand them, and they really are normal people, then they may start to like them... The what happens to their thinly veiled bigotry?
Couldn't have that be wrong now could we? This is the same bigotry as we saw with racism, sexism, and any other progressive social movement that has ever occurred.
-Peacemaker-
.45 Cal
I understand that but I'm curious what it means in your mind to be "accepted". Does that include viewing all your sexual attractions as decent and good? In your mind is it possible for someone to look upon your lifestyle as broken and still love you? Also, how in your mind can the church love those who identify as "homosexual" short of condoning the lifestyle
No need to apologize to me. I keep people around that respect me, and understand me as I truly am. Which means I have a small social circle, but it is an extremely tight group.
I can definitely see the similarities in what you write. And I too have run into older people that are racist, and it is uncomfortable, but you are right, that at that stage in life, they are unable to change. At least internally, they can externally change their behaviors, but the thoughts will probably always be there.
Society, will get where it needs to be soon enough, but it is going to be an arduous process, and not pleasant for a lot of people. Social progress is not without problems.
1) I expect my sexual attractions to be viewed with as much respect as anyone else's sexual attractions.
2) I don't have a bisexual "lifestyle." My orientation is bisexual. My life is my life that I live. And I expect to be treated and respected as such.
3) I have plenty of Christian friends and pastors who open their doors to queers and make no room to shame them or lecture them. So yes, Christianity has a lot of potential to love and accept AND offer marriage services to same sex partners.
You seemed to have missed my questions earlier so I will re-post it here. But I will answer this question first. I understand I am not the intended person for the question, but I feel an answer is warranted.
People don't have to like what I do or who I love. But they also have no right to tell me what I can and can't do, who I can and can't marry, or what church I can or can't attend. All of those things are between me, my family, and the Gods themselves. No one else has the ability to pass judgement on me.
I don't expect any person of an Abrahamic faith, to agree with the fact that I am bisexual. Or think I am not some depraved individual, BUT, this does not give them the right to influence my life, because they disagree with it.
If you don't like gay sex, don't have it. If you don't like gay marriage, don't get gay married. It's pretty darn simple, really.
Who are we to pass judgement on another, so long as they are not hurting people?
(You are both used to my knack for meddling in by now. But I ask for your understanding anyway.)
My gut feeling is that accepting people means basically not feeling ok with labeling them as second-rate citizens or subhumans. On a more ambitious level, it means taking the stance that many see as being typically Christian, of keeping an open heart and accepting the people as equally deserving of personal space and opportunity to seek their happiness.
Even if that means being seen with unease, ridicule or suspicion by one's own family or church members. Which is a very real consideration, unfortunately for us all. I am not implying that it is easy or that there is not a lot of confusion and disconfort involved. But it is quite worth the effort.
IMO, yes. Sexual ethics should be based on how respectful to feelings and physical safety of people one's actions are. Which is to say, pretty much everything in the LGBTIQ spectrum is fair game, at least in and of itself.
Lying, misleading, taking advantage of powerlessness or of mental or emotional immaturity are ethically wrong. Having unusual or minoritarian sexual interests or attributes are not.
In my view, yes. But it is an inherently unstable and painful state of things, not likely to last long. Eventually one or the other will have to go; either full acceptance arises or the disconfort takes over and finds justifications to sustain itself.
They should condone the lifestyle.
Because someone has to stand up & speak for a narrow interpretation of my omniscient, omnipotent & omnipresent God! Without me, how would He ever be heard or felt!?
-Peacemaker-
.45 Cal
Sin always hurts. And there's a big difference between passing judgment on a person (deeming them evil and/or yourself morally superior) and judging their behavior which is something that we should all be doing vigilantly. There's a horrible lie being spread that "to judge" is to make a moral judgment about behavior. Nothing could be further from the truth, especially biblically. A stern rebuke can be the greatest act of love and kindness when it's warranted.
gsa
Well-Known Member
Treating them as children does a disservice to children, who are ignorant, and also to them, because they are at best wilfully ignorant. They are adults, and should be treated as adults. Morally culpable adults who are capable of knowing right from wrong, who are wilfully choosing wrong. We are not their betters in any kind of metaphysical sense; just in a moral one.
They also know how to have a proper adult conversation. You have probably identified their condescending tone and attitude with some persistent infancy, but their condescension is inherent to who they have chosen to become. They believe that they are superior, and they either do not respect the ability of truth and reason to show them the errors of their false beliefs or they are unwilling to be persuaded by the same. It makes little difference; the point is that when you come across someone who is so anchored to falsehood you cannot persuade them. You can only focus on mitigation of their harm, which is why it is important to shame and stigmatize their beliefs until they have no consequence.
Look, anti-Semites in Europe could be loving, intellectual and otherwise capable human beings. But their beliefs were venomous falsehoods. Modern homophobes are no different.
-Peacemaker-
.45 Cal
I rather like your meddling though I view many of your opinions as severely misguided. You speak respectfully even when people say things that anger you. You are a blessing to this forum
Last edited:
Trust me, having to deal with social rejection just for being somewhere in the LGBTQI classifications hurts a lot more.
Incidentally, I'm pretty certain that many LGBTQI people are not hurting when they have the proper acceptance and opportunity to live as they want to. Could that perhaps be evidence that they are not sinning?
This is a direct question to you. Of course I have my answer and it is "no", but what do you say?
(Edited to add: of course, I mean that they are not sinning. Sorry for the poor wording)
I actually agree. Many or most of us should judge often and honestly, and be ready to learn from those judgements. When they are accurate and even more so when they are not.
I am glad to say that you have been a pleasant surprise in this regard as of late. You have been willing to listen, often when I and perhaps others have failed to make our pieces palatable or even just respectful.
That has not gone unnoticed, nor unappreciated. I thank you for that.
Last edited:
I will thank you for your honesty again.
Of course you see my opinions as severely misguided, and I take no offense on your saying so outright, for that shows considerably more respect than nearly all of the conceivable alternatives.
Now I have to decide whether to thank you for your generosity or to needle you for lying so transparently. I will get back to you when I reach a decision, ok?
I wonder if the admins agree. I'm sure quite a few people do not. But I will tell you that my efforts at being honest are a blessing to myself, even if there is always a price to be paid.
Last edited:
Sin hurts the sinner, and in that regard it is no ones business but his, and his God's(s).
The horrible lie is that biblical truth automatically makes one morally superior to any other form of "the Truth". What about the Truth of Ásatrúar? Of Hinduism? Of Buddhism?
Hate the sin, not the sinner (Mohandas Ghandi). Judge not lest ye be judged (Matt 7:1). Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone(paraphrased John 8:7)... Any of these ring a bell?
If you stand by your view that a stern rebuke is the greatest act of kindness, remember that everyone on here that disagrees with you and thinks you are a fool and misguided are really just trying to fix a broken person (you).
gsa
Well-Known Member
Your beliefs are toxic venom that will ultimately destroy humanity if they are not contained. They are vile, ignoble lies that ruin any chance of true happiness or flourishing.
This stern rebuke is the greatest act of love and kindness that I can offer you, given that it is warranted.
I am sure you feel better knowing that.
-Peacemaker-
.45 Cal
I believe the fruit of all sexual sin is dysfunction, including the sins of heterosexuals (fornication, adultery etc). I've heard that homosexuals have many of the same self destructive tendencies in countries in which acceptance is far greater like the Netherlands. Again, based on what I've read it's not an issue of acceptance but of brokenness.