Print

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

[Max White]

She is flaunting her sexuality at a funeral

Whoa, that is a bold statement. Why do you say this? It isn't like she was making out with another girl over an open grave... What makes you say she was 'flaunting her sexuality'?

[Truean]

There are, unfortunately for me, a lot of people out there like Durin. Just so I don't characterize him:
I'm gonna say it's pretty safe to say he doesn't like gay marriage or anything that has to do with the gay rights movement. I think him saying the familiar "one man; one woman" (paraphrase) sorta leads to that.
He, I think pretty clearly, believes the bible is quite express in what it says and not really open to a lot of interpretation.

His view, is not uncommon at all, much to my dismay. I've seen it a lot before.

And then there are people like you, who seem to think that someone disagreeing with you is tantamount to being an immoral and judgmental ogre.

I don't agree with you. That is all. Why is that so hard for you to stomach?

Could you at least say where you do stand, if you think homosexuality is "a kink" and don't see it as a civil rights issue?

Tried my best to not to offend him and it seems I've failed....

I was assuming he doesn't like gay marraige, gay rights, etc. Also that he thinks the bible is not open to interpretation. I also said his view wasn't uncommon. <--- I didn't think that would be the post to upset him. [sigh]

[Durin]

I don't understand what you are asking G-flex. There is no scientific model for will. The APA's do NOT say it is not a choice, they say, "most people do not report having choice about their sexual orientation." Most people are straight, and have strong social reasons to avoid homosexuality.

A kink, by definition, is going to be a sexual behavior that most people do not engage in. Calling heterosexuality a kink is just silly.

There is perhaps a mildly negative connotation to the word "kink", and if that is your issue, I apologize, but there is no scientific basis for the ongoing claim that "orientation" is something people cannot control. I know folks like you love to make this personal by asking, "can you control your sexuality?" But that too is dishonest and frankly nasty. The simple fact is that social pressures have been shown to cause people to change their sexual orientations, sometimes permanently. Antiquity gives us many examples where pederasty, for example, was normalized at least in some localized circumstances, and apparently not just in Greece, although that is the most famous example I know of.

So ultimately what it all seems to boil down to is a few people attempting to paint people who fairly clearly are making choices about sex that most people have a lot of difficulty coming to terms with as victims of Christians. I do not claim support for gays is anti-Christian, but the examples I see over and over that people toss up are these malformed assaults ON CHRISTIANS like the one you have presented here.

I say you are using this to attack Christianity because you are using it to attack Christianity. Would you even deny that you have a certain antipathy towards Christianity? I do not think it is a well kept secret that many do.

[Max White]

Hey Durin, read like, two posts above yours. It is pretty short, with a lizard avatar, and was asking you a question. Would you address that question? For the lizard, please?

[Frumple]

I say you are using this to attack Christianity because you are using it to attack Christianity. Would you even deny that you have a certain antipathy towards Christianity? I do not think it is a well kept secret that many do.

Just... yeah, this is annoying. Christianity isn't a blanket term anymore, friend, and it's one of the reasons that "Christianity" (note the scare quotes) does catch a lot of flak. A person can have quite a bit of antipathy towards the folks that are abusing the religion they claim to follow in order to exercise (unfounded, harmful) prejudice without having some blanket malaise towards that religion and all its practitioners.

I don't think anyone here is actually "attacking" Christianity qua Christianity -- pointing out certain inconsistencies involved with the religion is far from an attack -- but they is some understandable hostility towards the people who are using the title Christian as an excuse to pander hate. There's no assault on Christians here, really. There's assaults on heretics insulting the name and teachings of Christ and calling it Christianity. There'd be a lot less of that sort of assault if the rest of Christianity would start joining in (a little more visibly, anyway) on piling onto these people dragging Jesus's legacy through the mud.

Though I may be taking that last sentence or two a bit far. I'll admit I get a little riled up about that.

[Truean]

I don't understand what you are asking G-flex. There is no scientific model for will. The APA's do NOT say it is not a choice, they say, "most people do not report having choice about their sexual orientation." Most people are straight, and have strong social reasons to avoid homosexuality.

A kink, by definition, is going to be a sexual behavior that most people do not engage in. Calling heterosexuality a kink is just silly.

There is perhaps a mildly negative connotation to the word "kink", and if that is your issue, I apologize, but there is no scientific basis for the ongoing claim that "orientation" is something people cannot control. I know folks like you love to make this personal by asking, "can you control your sexuality?" But that too is dishonest and frankly nasty. The simple fact is that social pressures have been shown to cause people to change their sexual orientations, sometimes permanently. Antiquity gives us many examples where pederasty, for example, was normalized at least in some localized circumstances, and apparently not just in Greece, although that is the most famous example I know of.

So ultimately what it all seems to boil down to is a few people attempting to paint people who fairly clearly are making choices about sex that most people have a lot of difficulty coming to terms with as victims of Christians. I do not claim support for gays is anti-Christian, but the examples I see over and over that people toss up are these malformed assaults ON CHRISTIANS like the one you have presented here.

I say you are using this to attack Christianity because you are using it to attack Christianity. Would you even deny that you have a certain antipathy towards Christianity? I do not think it is a well kept secret that many do.

Na. O I readily admit,I am a sad, person, who has been crapped on by society repeated and is rather bitter about it,  but antipathy towards Christianity? Not as such, no. My thing is being sad at/upset at/ and blowing off steam about how GLBT people are treated, by lots of people/organizations. It's a pretty consistent topic with me and has been for years. This one just so happened to be about Christians. I've complained about laws, police, governments, companies, pretty much everybody and yeah that includes them this time.

This isn't a massive destructive/smear plot; this is some people saying what happened is wrong and could've been handled differently. See I grew up as one, hence my familiarity with the bible and how I was actually saying that book banned homosexuality based on old testament and G-Flex was saying it didn't/that if it did, then it was based on New Testament. Ironically, you basically argued for what I was saying about the bible banning homosexuality from the get go.

As for agreeing with people who say homosexuality is wrong, honest question, how do you expect me to do that, really? What just basically say I'm an abomination? Some of them say I should be killed, imprisoned, have all kinds of laws passed against me, be considered mentally ill, the list really goes on. How do you want me to respect the right of someone to disagree with me about that. Namely, a lot of people think I should have all those things happen to me and I ... don't. I don't like the idea of prison, or a mental ward, laws passed against me or hell, or whatever. How do you honestly expect me to go for all that?

[G-Flex]

The simple fact is that social pressures have been shown to cause people to change their sexual orientations, sometimes permanently. Antiquity gives us many examples where pederasty, for example, was normalized at least in some localized circumstances, and apparently not just in Greece, although that is the most famous example I know of.

"Social pressures" and situations can cause a lot of things in people that are not under their direct control. Like most of the things we learn when we're children. Given sexual behaviors or orientations being more common in certain circumstances or cultures doesn't make it a "choice"; it might be an argument that it's not strictly genetic/innate, but that's about it.

So ultimately what it all seems to boil down to is a few people attempting to paint people who fairly clearly are making choices about sex that most people have a lot of difficulty coming to terms with as victims of Christians.

I'm not going to say they're victims of Christians in general, but they're certainly victims in many cases.

And no, gay people are not "clearly making choices about sex". Virtually any gay person will tell you it was not their choice to be gay, or to remain gay. Hell, I know I didn't choose my sexual orientation, and couldn't even if I tried.

There are many, many cases of gay people trying not to be gay, even to the point of getting married and having children. It doesn't work that way. I'm sorry.

I say you are using this to attack Christianity because you are using it to attack Christianity. Would you even deny that you have a certain antipathy towards Christianity? I do not think it is a well kept secret that many do.

I'm not attacking Christianity. I'm attacking bigots who think that being a homosexual is something that people can simply choose not to be, or is wrong, or thinks that homosexual relationships do not deserve the same legal or social standing as heterosexual ones. What religious background they come from doesn't matter to me. I know people who are Christians and who are fine with homosexuality, and are otherwise nice and tolerant people, and while I might disagree with them on religious matters, I'm not about to attack them about it any more than I personally attack anybody else I disagree with.

[Max White]

That is a good point, if gay people chose to be gay, why can't I? It isn't for religious reasons, as I'm an atheist, and I don't think I am homophobic, I even wrote a letter to my member of parliament to voice my support for gay marriage (And the guy had time to write back, you would think he had a damn job to do) yet I don't feel sexually attracted to other men... I don't have a choice, I am straight, as much as I am a white male aged 20 to 35, it isn't something I can help.

Why is it a choice if it is not one that anybody can make?

[Durin]

I say you are using this to attack Christianity because you are using it to attack Christianity. Would you even deny that you have a certain antipathy towards Christianity? I do not think it is a well kept secret that many do.

Just... yeah, this is annoying. Christianity isn't a blanket term anymore, friend, and it's one of the reasons that "Christianity" (note the scare quotes) does catch a lot of flak. A person can have quite a bit of antipathy towards the folks that are abusing the religion they claim to follow in order to exercise (unfounded, harmful) prejudice without having some blanket malaise towards that religion and all its practitioners.

I don't think anyone here is actually "attacking" Christianity qua Christianity -- pointing out certain inconsistencies involved with the religion is far from an attack -- but they is some understandable hostility towards the people who are using the title Christian as an excuse to pander hate. There's no assault on Christians here, really. There's assaults on heretics insulting the name and teachings of Christ and calling it Christianity. There'd be a lot less of that sort of assault if the rest of Christianity would start joining in (a little more visibly, anyway) on piling onto these people dragging Jesus's legacy through the mud.

Though I may be taking that last sentence or two a bit far. I'll admit I get a little riled up about that.

You seem pretty confident as to which people are which despite claiming Christianity is not a blanket term anymore. I'll toss one more verse your way as a manner of describing to you why I do not have a lot of faith in your interpretation of the matter.

1 Tim 6:3-5

3 If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words , even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;

4 He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words , whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings,

5 Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.
KJV


And

2 Tim 3:2-7

2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,

3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,

4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;

5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,

7 Ever learning , and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.
KJV

Christianity is not a complex concept. We are all imperfect. Imperfection leads to destruction. We cannot do anything for ourselves in this matter, but Christ can. The question is, do you believe in imperfection? If so, WHAT is imperfection? What is sin?

You claim a lot of confusion exists, but it does not in fact exist anywhere except in the minds of those who wish to be confused. It is not a mystery why homosexuality is not wholesome. Questions and suspicions about it abound in almost all cultures. "Two Spirits" in native American culture were simultaneously revered and yet feared for their unusual state of being one gender but acting like the other. I know of one story where the "Two Spirit" native American was at first respected as a good leader, but then later killed because things went bad and they suspected them of bringing bad spirits on the people.

It should be obvious here what the real underlying issue is -- human beings are wired to have heterosexual attraction AND to be at least mildly repulsed by homosexuality. THAT is the issue. THAT is what you and others of your mindset seem to want to avoid addressing at all costs.

[G-Flex]

It is not a mystery why homosexuality is not wholesome.

Well, at least now you're actually coming out and admitting that you think homosexuality is wrong.

It should be obvious here what the real underlying issue is -- human beings are wired to have heterosexual attraction AND to be at least mildly repulsed by homosexuality. THAT is the issue. THAT is what you and others of your mindset seem to want to avoid addressing at all costs.

You're going to have to actually back this up with something other than "look, other cultures felt weird about homosexuality too".

Christianity is not a complex concept. We are all imperfect. Imperfection leads to destruction. We cannot do anything for ourselves in this matter, but Christ can. The question is, do you believe in imperfection? If so, WHAT is imperfection? What is sin?

Christianity as actually practiced is extremely complex, with a variety of sects, doctrines, dogmas, rules, and theological beliefs and backgrounds.

[Durin]

And the inevitable accusation of bigotry.

There are a lot of things that people do that most people would never, and indeed claim they could never do. "I could never kill someone!"

Why does anyone do anything that most people could never bring themselves to do? If anyone ever does anything most people find deeply offensive, is it automatically something they could not help? Even a child knows to try the excuse, "But I HAD to!" Petulance.

The arguments is utterly empty of any rational basis, and attaching the term "bigot" to anyone who refuses to be moved by it is mean spirited and belligerent.

I am done here for tonight. Your hateful refusal to maintain a civil and rational tone is predictable and tiresome.

[Max White]

It should be obvious here what the real underlying issue is -- human beings are wired to have heterosexual attraction AND to be at least mildly repulsed by homosexuality. THAT is the issue. THAT is what you and others of your mindset seem to want to avoid addressing at all costs.

Wait, you think that is a thing? Ok, I'll address that!


As easily as you like to assert something with no evidence what so ever, I can easily dismiss it on the same grounds, so no, you are wrong. I see no evidence that there is a hard wired preference to be heterosexual, and be repulsed by homosexuality. If you want to assert this, bring something to the table, some research that supports this, and I will be happy to play that game.

Trust me, there are few topics I will seek to 'avoid at all costs'.

Also, REPLY TO MY POSTS!!! You seem to be seeking to avoid my arguments at all costs. Makes you look weak.

She is flaunting her sexuality at a funeral

Whoa, that is a bold statement. Why do you say this? It isn't like she was making out with another girl over an open grave... What makes you say she was 'flaunting her sexuality'?

Still waiting for a reply...

[Durin]

It is not a mystery why homosexuality is not wholesome.

Well, at least now you're actually coming out and admitting that you think homosexuality is wrong.

It should be obvious here what the real underlying issue is -- human beings are wired to have heterosexual attraction AND to be at least mildly repulsed by homosexuality. THAT is the issue. THAT is what you and others of your mindset seem to want to avoid addressing at all costs.

You're going to have to actually back this up with something other than "look, other cultures felt weird about homosexuality too".

Christianity is not a complex concept. We are all imperfect. Imperfection leads to destruction. We cannot do anything for ourselves in this matter, but Christ can. The question is, do you believe in imperfection? If so, WHAT is imperfection? What is sin?

Christianity as actually practiced is extremely complex, with a variety of sects, doctrines, dogmas, rules, and theological beliefs and backgrounds.

Whereas you have no responsibility at all to back up your claim, in spite of thousands of years of recorded history all around the globe that discount your assertions, that it is otherwise?

[G-Flex]

I didn't call you a bigot, although quite frankly, you're acting like one. You're just disguising it with the mistaken notion that one's sexual orientation is a conscious decision.


Also: I'll back up what I said by stating that the modern, rational, scientific consensus on homosexuality is that homosexual relationships can be fulfilling and healthy in a manner essentially equivalent to heterosexual relationships. That is all that is necessary. There is scientific basis that homosexuality is not unhealthy, and no scientific basis that it is.

[Durin]

It should be obvious here what the real underlying issue is -- human beings are wired to have heterosexual attraction AND to be at least mildly repulsed by homosexuality. THAT is the issue. THAT is what you and others of your mindset seem to want to avoid addressing at all costs.

Wait, you think that is a thing? Ok, I'll address that!


As easily as you like to assert something with no evidence what so ever, I can easily dismiss it on the same grounds, so no, you are wrong. I see no evidence that there is a hard wired preference to be heterosexual, and be repulsed by homosexuality. If you want to assert this, bring something to the table, some research that supports this, and I will be happy to play that game.

Trust me, there are few topics I will seek to 'avoid at all costs'.

Also, REPLY TO MY POSTS!!! You seem to be seeking to avoid my arguments at all costs. Makes you look weak.

She is flaunting her sexuality at a funeral

Whoa, that is a bold statement. Why do you say this? It isn't like she was making out with another girl over an open grave... What makes you say she was 'flaunting her sexuality'?

Still waiting for a reply...

Are you serious?

She is flaunting her sexuality at a funeral by making an issue out of being refused a sacrament she is not allowed due to the tenets of the faith. How did the Priest know she was gay? Psychic?

I'm not avoiding your question. I simply cannot understand what on Earth you are thinking? It is not some sort of mystery that the Catholic church does not condone homosexuality. Period. End of story.