Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Andir]

Sure, and I find a problem with that line of thought.

Battery is dieing and I'm going to enjoy the rest of my Christmas break... Enjoy!

[Fenrir]

So a gay couple violating the symbol of a community's religion is showing hatred and oppression?  They are symbolically burning that symbology of marriage.  Gay couples could live together without getting married and live the rest of their lives in peace with the community, but they choose to force upon the community their view of that symbol.

Do you not see how placing extra value on community tradition is a bad thing?

Homosexuals being married do not destroy any heterosexual marriages. It’s a bad analogy. No one is saying that building another church from a different religion would be an attack on community — we are talking about burning the one that is already there.

Now, if homosexuals went around setting married couples on fire, that would be an attack...

[Truean]

Gay marriage is not a literal burning, even if you somehow assume it is some sort of assault on ... whatever, which it isn't. Gay marriage is exercising a right and the right to chose to enjoy said right. Burning a building down is taking away someone else's property and their right to chose to enjoy said property, by directly infringing upon them in a measurable way.

Especially historically, black people made up about 10% or 12% of the US population, maybe 15%. My my, what a coincidence that the church burned down was one of those attended entirely by black people.... How interesting that the absolutely overwhelming majority of churches burned in 20th century America belonged to black congregations....  No racist intent there, none at all.... Nope. Nothin' to see here folks, keep it moving.... And, pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

Barring telepaths, which don't exist, the only way we can see intent is to infer it from actions. It isn't just an appeal to numbers. There's some logic there. Otherwise, "intent" becomes meaningless and completely unknowable/unmeasurable. People intend the ordinary consequences of their actions. What do you think people will conclude if you burn down a black congregation's church in the US? Yeah.... People know what will be thought of someone who does this in the US....

[penguinofhonor]

When the intent of something is to commit a crime against a community because of their race/religion/etc, it's a hate crime. Gay couples kissing are not committing a crime with the intent to harm anyone.

Oh, he seems to have ignored my post saying that already.

[Frumple]

Gay couples could live together without getting married and live the rest of their lives in peace with the community, but they choose to force upon the community their view of that symbol.

Point of order, most homosexuals I've heard of mostly don't care (E: At least in a 'we need to go activist on people' sense.) whether religion allows them to marry or not -- that's a point of theology and nothing the secular government has any business messing with so long as it's not harmful, and thus isn't a point of major social issue.

What they want is equal legal standing re: partnership. Most homosexuals I've heard speak rationally on the topic (and some even speaking without quite so measured a response) would be perfectly bloody fine with domestic partnership if it gave the same legal rights as a given a 'married' heterosexual couple. In most of the US, and indeed, most of the world in general, that right is denied. Domestic partnerships rarely entail the same breadth and depth of legal rights as what's legally called marriage.

So yes, they could, in a sense, 'live the rest of their lives in peace with the community'... as a second class citizen, whose rights are being curtailed for no sensible reason. The community is forcing their (misguided, usually due to the religiously laden term 'marriage'*) view of a symbol on a minority, and doing so in a harmful way. So the picture being painted in the quote is quite inaccurate.

As the general aside, 90% of peoples excuse (religion) to be fucktards stubborn about homosexual marriage could be solved by completely g'damn decoupling marriage from law. Let marriage be religious and completely irrelevant in any fiscal/legal sense and have domestic partnerships be the only legally recognized entity. Would solve so many problems or at the very least strip one more shield from the g'damn bigot's arsenal.

Well, it's late, and I'm rambling a bit and I think forgetting a point/poorly organizing everything, but whatever. I think the point gets across, mostly.

*Usually due to a literal interpretation of... whatever that line is. The funny one, where if you're being ass enough to interpret literally, you can only decry male homosexual couples, not female. Yes, the man lying with man one. Bible's too bloody chauvinistic to be meaning man as general human, there. Protip: That is blatant hypocrisy.

[Truean]

Leviticus 18:22, "Thou shalt not lie with a man as thou lies with a woman for that is detestable." Depending on the translation.

That one?

I'd agree with you on the legal/financial equal status thing, though frankly I'd personally add people not looking at me funny or staring. I don't want people thinking of me as a freak. There's an ... eh...alright song by Tatu, "All the things she said," about a lesbian couple trying to deal with people giving them shit for being gay,

"Mother, looking at me, tell me, what do you see. Yes, I've, lost, my mind...." <--- How lovely it feels to read someone's mind when they're looking at you like you're nuts for being gay.

I've gone out on some dates with men. Sometimes, I can feel people looking at us in unsettling and horrible ways. They don't look at us; we aren't people to them. We're a sin. Nobody smiles; nobody says hello....

[Frumple]

Yeah, that'un.

That'd be bloody ideal, yeah, but I'd settle for equal rights in the interim. Mostly, I can't see legalizing people not considering other people freaks, just letting that consideration influence their actions. Equal legal rights first, then everything else. Ideally the latter would come before or during the former, but I'm not hopeful of that, quite yet

Actual equality (of consideration) will take a lot damn longer. Considering you get dark looks just for stupid shit like having long hair or an odd skin color in the "wrong area"... heresy knows no bounds, s'way I see it.

M'not Christian (and it's not strictly a christian issue, of course, just prevalent in the area I'm in), but I have a fairly powerful respect for most of the great holy figures of human history. F'Jesus, th'do-onto-others thing (The only meaningful non-metaphysical teaching of Christianity,honestly. Everything else is either derivable or contradictory, with the golden rule taking really g'damn obvious precedence.) is pretty solid. As days go by and I get older, seeing these people trample all over a good fellow's (or at least good character's) teachings becomes more and more enraging Pissing in the face of a genuine saint, type act, it is. Indignation isn't just a spell in Tales of Phantasia.

I dunno, I guess I'm mostly hoping it'll peter out a little bit once the current older generations die out, because most of the time it feels like th'frakkers dying is the only solution. The internet, I think, has helped the younger ones (30 down, or so), at least somewhat. I can hope, anyway... if nothing else, it seems to have been shifting the hate on more meaningful (in the sense of actually having impact in an innate sense, not pushed upon the person from the outside) things.

Or maybe the mid-twenties age group is just unfortunate, hemmed in by bigots on both sides, ignorant on the younger, unwilling the change on the older. Hella' more likely my general social reclusiveness has blinded me to the actual state of things. Which is probably good, 'cause otherwise I would've had t'kill someone by now.

Yes, I'm rambling. Late, tired, etc.

[Vector]

Leviticus 18:22, "Thou shalt not lie with a man as thou lies with a woman for that is detestable." Depending on the translation.

Haha, my step-grandmother left that lying around in the room my parents and I were supposed to be staying in one time =/

[Willfor]

If it has come to the point where a majority or nearly a majority of Americans support the legalization of Gay Marriage, and this often touted figure of 80% of America is Christian is true, then at least 30% of America is composed of Americans who are Christian and yet support the legalization of Gay Marriage.

Can we hear a little bit more about these people? I've seen books by them, I've seen them bandied about on Christian blogs back when I actually read those, but I oh so very rarely hear about them in this topic. 30% in America is not a small amount of people. It's too late at night for me to be doing math here, but I'm pretty sure it's a bigger number than 1 million. I'm pretty damn sure.

[Vector]

Just so you know, I'm not trying to tout my step-grandma as a prototypical Christian.  She's a nutbag.

[Willfor]

I wasn't trying to go after anyone with my post, I was just trying to insert a little positivity or unnegativity. Possibly failing miserably since I really shouldn't be posting when I'm this tired.

[Truean]

Leviticus 18:22, "Thou shalt not lie with a man as thou lies with a woman for that is detestable." Depending on the translation.

Haha, my step-grandmother left that lying around in the room my parents and I were supposed to be staying in one time =/

Hehe, that's just a weird circumstance(s) to do something like that in. [soft hugs]. Your mom and dad are a boy and a girl who are married, I imagine.... Did your step grandmother mean it in some way I'm not seeing?

Rob had a particularly interesting way of dealing with people who were mean about us. Its hard to describe and varied, tailored to the bigot. He usually turned whatever they did on its head, quietly as a rule, but occasionally he'd be quite noticeable about it.

He took me on a dinner date once for our anniversary. We held hands and sat right next to one another. We didn't kiss in public or anything but it was far too obvious.... Some guy came up to us and said, "Do you mind, my family is here...." The implications were quite obvious.
Rob's reply was, "So is mine...." He stared him down; the implications were quite obvious.... Frankly I was at once flattered to be called his family and terrified at the situation. This was one of the more open ones.

Other times, he'd quietly point out some hypocrisy of theirs while smiling and then we'd leave.

Those would be, of course, only during those rare times when we both, a.) left his place, and b.) let it show. I still occasionally miss him, am glad we happened, and glad he wound up with a great Canadian Transwoman if not me.

[penguinofhonor]

He took me on a dinner date once for our anniversary. We held hands and sat right next to one another. We didn't kiss in public or anything but it was far too obvious.... Some guy came up to us and said, "Do you mind, my family is here...." The implications were quite obvious.
Rob's reply was, "So is mine...." He stared him down; the implications were quite obvious.... Frankly I was at once flattered to be called his family and terrified at the situation. This was one of the more open ones.

/most adorable thing I've read all day

[Euld]

Can we hear a little bit more about these people? I've seen books by them, I've seen them bandied about on Christian blogs back when I actually read those, but I oh so very rarely hear about them in this topic. 30% in America is not a small amount of people. It's too late at night for me to be doing math here, but I'm pretty sure it's a bigger number than 1 million. I'm pretty damn sure.

Here's an article that seems to lay out their point of view pretty well.  I gotta say, reading this gave me chills because of my background.  I used to be a Christian.  I became a Christian to stamp out my homosexual desires and become straight.  After a number of years of believing, then a few years of doubting, and a sexual encounter, I dropped the religion.  It wasn't helping, and I was tired of trying to please God, who seemed more than happy to let me stew in my troubles.  Anyway, reading this point of view from the other side is almost scary.  I honestly believed this stuff?  And tried convincing other people that it was true? o_o

[Frumple]

Here's an article that seems to lay out their point of view pretty well.

That's not the 30% Will was talking about. That's the other ones.

Honestly, I've only personally met two christians, both ordained priests (though of different denominations) that were, I guess you could say, 'chill' about the homosexuality thing. One was that WWII vet I mentioned a few pages back; he was a massively radical Christian who denies the literal truth of biblical text -- for him, the scripture is a combination of existential truths and moral parables (to greatly simplify things, of course), which is littered with things that are obviously contradictory to the teachings of Jesus (Those parts, are to be ignored or outright vilified). His response to Christian persecution of homosexuality was pretty simple: "That's not Christian." Full stop, he saw it as against the teachings of Jesus*, regardless as to what the bible said.

The other was a co-worker with my parent, teaching adult education (Drop-outs, helping with adult illiteracy, GED prep, etc.). Is a full time nurse practitioner now, iirc. Less radical, but it'd be roughly the same message. Jesus' message is a message of love, not hate, not persecution. If you're exercising the latter two, you are sinning. There's no biblical text you can hide behind strong enough to protect you from that. If there is going to be judgment, then God will judge**, but until then that man or woman is your brother or sister and as much a child of God as you are. You cannot, in good faith, act toward them differently than you act toward anyone else.

There was some passing interaction with Christians that wanted the legal equality thing to go down, as well. Being fair to all things (Some days, anyway), I'm in a really shit-poor area for finding the good ones.

*S'one of those things that a lot of Christians seem to fail to realize, that the teachings of Jesus, who they claim to want to emulate, is not a 1:1 match to biblical text. Also, divine inspiration of text is irrelevant when it's written/translated/copied by fallible human hands, read with fallible human eyes (or hands, for the blind), listened to and orally transmitted by fallible human ears and mouths, and interpreted by fallible human hands.

** Protip: An omnibenevolent god, unless you're using the strongly supported (in a number-of-people doing it sense) medieval conception of benevolence (It has absolutely jack and shit to do with morality, especially human morality, and everything to do with omnipresence. By the old scholastic conception of benevolence, a good sized boulder has as much goodness of god in them as a man), cannot punish for acts that do no harm. Homosexual relationships do no (more) harm (than heterosexual ons)? Check. Omnibenevolent god cannot punish that. Full stop. Logic says.