posted
Yeah well. I don’t cut my hair, but I do braid it, so I’m in trouble with 1 Timothy and 1 Peter. We can sit together in the “women with disobedient coiffures” circle of hell.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: Skipping all the way from the first post, this lurker wonders why you (and others) feel the need keep on posting these thinly veiled "I need to justify why I think your religion sucks, especially if it is Christianity" threads. Can you explain what fuels your fury?
Kranky, I know you're not going to respond to anything I say, but, frankly, I think you should learn to read. You show me where I have expressed anything like 'fury' at Christianity or any other religion in this thread? I have been nothing but respectful towards Christianity and the posters in this thread. Perhaps, to you, questioning a religion and why members of that religion thinks a certain way equates to thinking that 'your religion sucks', but I don't see it that way, and I think most of the people in this thread don't either. The thread has been very amiable, by and large, and I think most people have enjoyed participating in it.
However, I am more than open to the idea that I could be interpreting things incorrectly. So, any Christians or other religious people ( I mean, not including me. ) who feel like I've expressed either the attitude that a) Christianity sucks or b) fury in general outside of this post, please say so now with what I said in quotations so I can understand what you're referring to.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
dkw, Forget the hair thing, you actually have the devil inside you enough to teach men, instead of listening in silence and subjection. That's right out according to 1 Timothy 2:11-12.
edit: I'm only talking about those passages historical interpretation, not what they actually could mean.
posted
Yeah, but I'm gonna try to get convicted on the hair thing first, so I can sit next to mac.
Besides, God called me to the ministry, so there I've got an excuse. The hair is personal preference. Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
What gets me highly irritated is that, because I feel that homosexual activity is a sin, I automatically hate gays.
This has been said before, hasn't it? Yeah, like a million times, but there is no way we can be sincere about it, is there? Let's forget about the whole "everyone commits sins" and "Love one another" concepts in Christianity. We believe it is a sin, therefore we hate homosexuals.
Also, let us disregard any idea that committing homosexual acts has some kind of choice involved. And of course, it is extremely SCARY when someone mentions that people with homosexual tendancies can disregard those tendancies and lead an active, happy, fulfilling heterosexual sex life. These people must be Nazis, because this means that since they believe this, they must hate anyone and everyone who is homosexual.
Listen: I also have beliefs that say that drinking alcohol, tea, and coffe are wrong. Do I hate anyone who doesn't follow this? No.
What I do understand, and what actually corrolates directly with the original article we were talking about: OSC's Hypocrits of Homosexuality, is that in MY religion any sex out of marriage is wrong, and there cannot be homosexual marriages. The reason why we can't, for deeply doctoral reasons that go beyond little snippets in the bible, recognize homosexual marriage has been mentioned on here. What is hypocritical is that people want to say they are Mormon and at the same time not believe important doctrinal issues. They blame the church for not changing, not themselves for refusing to accept what has always been true in the history of the church.
But if you aren't LDS, and you are homosexual, and you want to get married, then I respect that. Make your vows, and be happy. You actually can do this without government sanction, you know? You can even do it without most of society's sanction. You can be happy.
posted
I didn't mean to name call. I wasn't talking about anyone in this thread, just general bitterness. I'm frankly surprised at how very civil everyone on this forum is about the whole thing. (usually)
Posts: 4816 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
(abashed) Sorry. Maybe it would have been less offensive if I'd said 'hate on', but that wouldn't have conveyed the point I meant to make. I apologize if I've offended anyone, but there aren't any other words I could think of for it.
Posts: 4816 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Amka, I like to consider myself a very open, tolerant person, but I have to admit that I still have a visceral reaction that homosexuality is...distasteful, I guess is a good way to put it. Now, I've actively worked against this reaction, but it's still with me. For myself, it is difficult to accept it when people say that they, for example, don't want gays to be allowed to be married, for the sole reason that their religion says that it's a sin.
This is leaving aside the fact that there is a very loud and visible contingent of Christians who clearly hate homosexuals, but place this completely at God's door. In fact, throughout Christianity's history, there is this thread of being able to do horrible things to the out-group because "God says it's ok". As I've said before, the passages in Paul referring to homosexuality being wrong were retranslated in the 13th century so that they unequivocally talked about homosexuality. At the same time, other passages were retranslated or emphasized (like the Timothy reference I mantioned above) that legitimized the persecution of various other outgroups, such as women, Jews, and pretty much anyone who didn't agree with the Church's hierarchy.
I feel that this gives me legitimate reason to to worry about the motives of people who claim to want to prevent homosexuality, only because their religion says that it's a sin. I feel pretty much the same way as I would if someone told me that they needed to stop women from teaching, because their religion said that it's a sin.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
So you are saying you have a legitimate reason to worry about motives. Okay. Worrying is okay. Accusing, though, isn't. Asserting that someone is lying about their true reasons, because you believe people in the past lied about theirs, is also not okay.
I'm with Amka. Seriously, religion is the reason I don't agree with it. I'm fairly liberal about other things that do NOT run counter to what I morally believe. This does. Asserting that that isn't the real reason - that secretly, I hate a whole bunch of people - is not right.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: And of course, it is extremely SCARY when someone mentions that people with homosexual tendancies can disregard those tendancies and lead an active, happy, fulfilling heterosexual sex life.
Actually, this does scare me, but only because I’ve known people who tried it. What it did to their own emotional and mental health was bad, but what it did to their spouses’ was worse. I respect homosexuals who choose to be celibate because they believe that same-gender sex is wrong. And I suppose if the person’s prospective spouse knows about the situation and is still willing to marry him or her, that is a matter of personal choice. But if a homosexual person enters into a heterosexual marriage without giving the fiancé the opportunity to make an informed decision to risk it, that’s a recipe for disaster. Based on what I’ve seen, I’d even call it borderline abuse, and that’s a charge I don’t make lightly.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Didn't the Nazi's put homosexuals in concentration camps along with jews, gypsies, and anyone who opposed the sanctioned POV? IMO, to try to legislate against homosexuality is just one step away from the same type of open persecution of homosexual people. Also, does it stop there?
Posts: 168 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Toretha, back to what you said on the earlier page, in my post I already pointed out that absence of a prohibition of something doesn't necessarily mean it's okay.
If you think I base my belief that marriage is supposed to be only between men and women solely on the portion of a scripture that I quoted, then you must not know me or Christians very well.
Thing is, I've read the Bible. A lot. And studied it for years.
I don't have a degree in theology, but I don't think I need one to interpret what God is saying about marriage in His word. It's an insitution established with the first two humans to inhabit this earth, and they were, coincidentally, male and female.
dkw rationalizes her stand by saying that she doesn't think God is talking about committed homosexual relationships when he condemns homosexual behavior. She's entitled to her opinion. Personally, I'd rather not assume very much when it comes to the word of God. I'd rather not say "Well, since it isn't all that clear, maybe this behavior is okay when it's between two committed people."
Adultery can happen between two people who love each other and are committed to each other, and just happen to be married to someone else. Does that make adultery okay in this case?
One of my favorite phrases my husband has is "God is not a teddy bear." He says that in response to people who view Jesus as their best buddy, he'll help you when you're down, he'll be there for you when you feel bad, and he's all about just forgiving you and loving you.
And every bit of that is true. Yet, there is another side to God - he is a God that expects obedience. Moses never entered the promised land because he was disobedient, and he's only one example. God knows we will fall short, that we are not sinless and cannot always walk in his will - but he expects us to try. And when we are willfully disobedient there are consequences.
Sorry, that's a bit of sermon, but the point I'm trying to make is that you can't pick and choose through the Bible, taking only those things from it you are comfortable with and make you feel warm and fuzzy. Doesn't work that way. Jesus told the man that wanted to be his disciple to follow him, and the man said just let me bury my father, and I'll come. But Jesus said Let the dead bury the dead - follow me.
I'm not trying to come down hard on dkw or anybody else with beliefs different from mine - if she sincerely believes that there is nothing spiritually wrong with homosexual marriage then great. And I don't expect every Christian will agree with me, a lot of them will not. Neither one of us can claim to have all the answers - we can only take what interpretation we feel is right and go with it. Could I be wrong? Yup. I'm not God. I can't claim any divine knowledge. All I can do is what I've done - read the book, pray, seek guidance, and go forward and live by my beliefs.
One more thing, and I know this is getting long. In regards to women in the church and women in the ministry and women as teachers.
I'm a traditionalist, I admit. I feel more comfortable with my pastor being a man, but that's just a matter of tradition and comfort zone, not because I think women shouldn't be allowed to occupy positions in the ministry. The spiritual gift of pastoring, and teaching can be bestowed to both male and female, and I firmly believe God calls women to the ministry, just as he does men. There are too many phenomenal women ministers for it to be any other way.
Feminists always come down heavy on Paul, and I don't really understand it. Paul mentions about 40 people personally in his letters that are involved in the church, and 16 of them are women. He doesn't bring them up because they're old girlfriends - they're collaborators. Phoebe is described as a deacon, using the same word Paul used to describe himself when he said he was a deacon of the New Covenant in 2 Corinthians. He refers to Junia as a "well-respected apostle before me." And supposedly he hates women?
What about Galatians 3:28? He says we are all equal in Christ Jesus, Jew and Gentile, master and servant, male and female.
If we are equal in Christ, then why can't a woman serve in the ministry?
Brings up the question can a homosexual serve in the ministry. Absolutely. Why not? However, a homosexual serving in the ministry should be, like any other Christian, someone struggling againist their sin and trying to live their life as a redeemed saint. If you do not deny the sin you're practicing and seek forgiveness for it, then you are not fit for service. So, a person with homosexual tendencies can be a minister, but he/she must be struggling against that sin, and renouncing it. Yes, that means celibacy.
Again, my thoughts, my beliefs.
And my swansong. I love you all, but I've made a commitment that I will not allow myself to be caught up for hours on an internet forum, when there are children to raise, and many other things I need to be doing. Not that being here isn't worthwhile, on the contrary I firmly believe my time at hatrack made me a better person. It's just....time to move on. I've got things to do...and I can't be doing them if I'm here.
posted
dkw - It really is false to go into marriage being homosexual and not telling your spouse about it. A few years ago I read an article in our church magazine teaching against that practice.
But there are degrees. It is very likely that you've met people who've felt homosexual urges but did not entertain them. They were also attracted to people of the opposite sex. So they grew up to get married, and are very happy in their marriage. In an earlier time, they may not even have recognized those feelings for what they were as preteens and teens, and so did not attach much significance.
Once you've labled yourself something, it IS very difficult to go back. Or maybe you are comfortable saying you are 'bisexual'. Anne Heche is probably a perfect example of that. The problem with this, is that to be bisexual suggests enough promiscuity to be trying it out with a few partners. And that is immoral, in my book.
Let me put forth a disclaimer: I fully recognize that there are many homosexuals who really couldn't feel a glimmer of attraction for the opposite sex, no matter how hard they tried. All I'm trying to say is that few people are fully one way or the other, and so I believe there is some choice involved.
posted
Belle, I admire you and I respect your beliefs. I also don’t want this to sound like I’m nit-picking. But I object to your use of the word rationalizing. I wrote out the fourteen-year long story of how I came to change my mind about homosexual marriage so that people would see that I was not picking and choosing in order to support what I already believed or what I wanted to believe. This change is deeply rooted in and flows from my commitment to God, to the church, and to the scriptures. I have made promises of obedience to all three, and I take them seriously. I take the position I do on homosexual marriage because of those commitments, not in spite of them.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Weird post alert. This is kind of a stream of consciousness in a way.
News flash!
This thread caused my husband and me to have a long discussion about homosexual marriages last night. We have come to this conclusion. We believe that homosexuality is a sin, but it isn't different from any other sin in that, it isn't the sin that sends you to hell, nor is it NOT sinning that gets you into Heaven. It doesn't matter. We've decided that we don't care. Not in a "who cares?" way, but in a "we don't mind" way. So this is my stance. Go ahead. I figure that Jesus didn't lead a crusade against sinners while he was here, did he? And the only people he condemned were the ones that were pointing out other people's sins to them, and the ones that displayed a lack of faith. I'm just going to worry about those two things and let God worry about everyone else. So if two gay people decide to get married, that's fine. I really do care about people. Nothing I say can change someone's mind. That's God's job, if He so chooses. I'm just going to try to keep loving everyone. That's all I can do. Posts: 6367 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Amka, being bi-sexual doesn’t necessarily mean “trying it out” with multiple partners any more than being homosexual or heterosexual does. I’m heterosexual. I’m also celibate. The fact that I’m not having sex with a man doesn’t make me any less heterosexual. If I were attracted to women, I’d be homosexual. And celibate. If I were attracted to both men and women I’d be bisexual. And still celibate.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: Unhoo, enough with the slippery slopes. Come on.
Those who choose to ignore all the consequences of their actions, then not only do they condemn themselves to those consequences, but in this instance have the potential of also condemning others who do not subscribe to the same ideas.
I have opted to point out just one extreme consequence of this debate.
Posts: 168 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: This thread caused my husband and me to have a long discussion about homosexual marriages last night. We have come to this conclusion. We believe that homosexuality is a sin, but it isn't different from any other sin in that, it isn't the sin that sends you to hell, nor is it NOT sinning that gets you into Heaven. It doesn't matter. We've decided that we don't care. Not in a "who cares?" way, but in a "we don't mind" way. So this is my stance. Go ahead. I figure that Jesus didn't lead a crusade against sinners while he was here, did he? And the only people he condemned were the ones that were pointing out other people's sins to them, and the ones that displayed a lack of faith. I'm just going to worry about those two things and let God worry about everyone else. So if two gay people decide to get married, that's fine. I really do care about people. Nothing I say can change someone's mind. That's God's job, if He so chooses. I'm just going to try to keep loving everyone. That's all I can do.
But I guess I speak of how the word, bisexual, had to have gotten invented in the first place.
Edit: And the very fact that the word is there proves my contention that there are degrees of homosexual tendancies and having such a tendancy does not mean you can't find much love and joy in a heterosexual marriage.
posted
PSI - thank you for your post, but I disagree with you almost completely.
quote:And the only people he condemned were the ones that were pointing out other people's sins to them, and the ones that displayed a lack of faith.
That simply isn't true. He stopped the people from stoning the woman, but then he told her to go and sin no more. He said those who lusted after someone has already committed adultery in his heart.
What is the point of labeling something a sin, but then saying sinning doesn't matter? He died for our sins, but doesn't actually care if you do them or not? That pretty much obviates the entire atonement.
It is tempting to work this out in your head as to not offend anyone. *shrug*
---
I truly believe that we are given commandments so that we can be happy. These aren't to torture us, these are to make us happy. If we follow them, then we will be happy. He cares deeply, deeply for our happiness - and shows the way to live to achieve that. If we think he doesn't care if we are doing something that will hurt us, that is equal to saying he doesn't care about us.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm positive that Jesus cares about ending sin, I know that. I also know that he spent the majority of his time teaching. That's what I intend to do. I plan to teach about Christ and what he did for us. If someone is interested and becomes a Christian because of it, then they'll have the Holy Spirit to help them out. I've just decided it's not my job to worry about everyone else's sin, it's God's.
added: It's my job to introduce them to God in the first place.
posted
Amka, certainly. I think most of us are somewhere along a spectrum. If we’re far enough to one end or the other we refer to ourselves as hetero- or homo- sexual. But in at least one of the cases I referred to earlier, the woman spent years trying to convince herself she was bi-sexual so that she wouldn’t hurt her husband. She wasn’t. She was way, way over on the homosexual end of the sexual orientation spectrum. And what those years did to his mental health, sexual self-image, etc., was not a good thing.
posted
Also, I've looked for passages involving someone else's sin besides your own, and the only ones that I can find that actually tell you to talk to them about it are the ones regarding a brother that sins against you. I may be wrong about this, does anyone know of any others?
Posts: 6367 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here is the thing. What if a girl was raised by athiests? These parents encouraged a moral lifestyle, with the understanding that those kinds of actions generally result in a happier life.
BTW, where is David Bowles? I haven't seen him in a while...
Anyway, so as this girl enters puberty, she realizes that she is gay. Not hmmm, that girl looks pretty, maybe I'm a lesbian? More like, when she imagines kissing boys it gags her, but she really wants to kiss that girl in class that sits a couple of rows ahead of her. And she can imagine other things too.
She begins to get quiet about it. She is embarrassed. But she keeps on getting crushes on other girls. One girl maybe senses it, and being heterosexual herself, gets kind of ickied out and makes a comment to our girl. She goes home and cries about it.
Her parents, being good parents, talk to her about it. She tells them her experiences and feelings. Since they don't have any religious reasons why homosexuality is wrong, they explain to her about being gay and lesbian. They are very loving to her about it, and tell her that she can still find true love and get married like they did. It will just be harder now. So they find the local gay and lesbian youth groups.
What a relief for her.
Her parents teach her that chastity before marriage is still important. It strengthens the marriage, and she should think about her future in that way.
In college, she finds another woman who believes in monogamy. They become really close, and finally decide to get married. No legal marriage, but her fiance occassionally attends the Unitarian church, so they have a ceremony and exhange vows using a goddess drum at dawn.
They stay married all their life, until they die.
How do you think God feels about that? These people were good people who didn't believe in our religion, but acted in the best way they knew how.
My point with this, for those of us who are religious, is that we can't just condemn people on the grounds that they are gay.
These are one of the reasons we are implored to judge righteously or not at all. Judging righteously, the way I've been taught, simply means that we sometimes find ourselves needing to make a decision on how to react to other people's actions, such as in the legal system or letting our children play with certain other kids (like if there is a drugged out parent at the child's home, you can let the child come to your house, but not let your child go to their house).
But since we cannot know what is in someone's heart, we cannot make any claims as to any worthiness they may have to enter or not enter heaven. Only God has that authority.
I can't condem these women for making right choices based on their understanding.
posted
Hmm. How about your story with the following changes. She was raised in an extremely devout United Church of Christ family. Went to church every Sunday. Made a personal commitment to Christian discipleship and was confirmed at age 13. The woman she fell in love with was also an active UCC member, and they were married, by the pastor, in her home church, and now are raising their family in the church. She teaches fifth grade Sunday School. Her spouse is chair of the trustees.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:So you are saying you have a legitimate reason to worry about motives. Okay. Worrying is okay. Accusing, though, isn't. Asserting that someone is lying about their true reasons, because you believe people in the past lied about theirs, is also not okay.
Why not? If it's my sincere belief that someone is against homosexual marriage because they have major personal problems with homosexuals, why can't I say that, even if they've claimed that it's a religious thing? What if I have proof?
I think the crux of the issue for me is one of respect. I have ample evidence that the majority of people do things for reasons other than they say that they do them for. If I don't think that you're mature enough to know why you do something, why can't I say that? What do I have to do to make it ok, say that it's part of my religion?
----
I'm pretty sure that I've never actually said those things to an individual, but it's not because I don't believe them. Rather, I don't think that it would do any good. I reserve the right to respect who I respect and not respect those who I don't. There are plenty of people who I disagree with, even on this issue, who I still respect. There are many others I agree with that I don't respect.
The way I see it, I have to respect your right to have an opinion, but I have no obligations towards your opinion at all.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's so weird. So if I say I have gay friends that I treat with love and respect, and I never say anything derogatory to them about their sexual preference, but then I say that I believe the Bible when it says homosexuality is a sin, then that means I'm a bigoted homophobe?
At most it means that I'm bad at telling my friends how I really feel about their behavior. I'm not a jerk, I'm a wuss.
You're reading between lines that aren't even there.
And what proof? What proof do you have that I'm lying when I say I don't hate gay people?
posted
I have a heck of a comeback to that, but it's possible that it is not in the best interests of Hatrack for me to post it. What do y'all say?
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
You're right Kat. But a more accurate analogy would have been making coffee illegal. Personally, I dislike coffee and I read a study once that said people who actually like the taste of coffee are mentally unbalanced (most people hate the taste of coffee when they first try it, but become accustomed to it.) Tea is more natural to drink. It isn't offensive to the taste buds, it isn't a drink one must become "accustomed" to or be crazy to like in the first place. However, I don't think Starbuck's should be illegal.
Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh I thought you were talking about me. I was surprised since I don't usually post creatively enough to infuriated people. If I'm lucky I pique them. Posts: 6367 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
pot is already not permitted by society, some think it is just fine and is outraged by it being unnacceptable, and there is currently a fight to legitimize it. It's a very close analogy.
Also, it wasn't on Amka's list, but it would have been if the list was exhaustive. Pepsi wouldn't.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Pot is illegal. What kind of crack are you smoking over there? They want to decriminalize pot. Homosexual marriage isn't illegal. It just isn't allowed. There is a difference.
Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
One month ago, your statement would not have been accurate.
I didn't say legalize, I said legitimize. Neither is considered universally sanctioned, and both movements are fighting for universal sanctioning.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
One month ago it would have been illegal to have homosexual sex in some states. Homosexual marriage has never been illegal.
Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
) who feel like I've expressed either the attitude that a) Christianity sucks or b) fury in general outside of this post, please say so now with what I said in quotations so I can understand what you're referring to.
![[Group Hug]](graemlins/grouphug.gif)
(((hatrack)))
![[Cry]](graemlins/cry.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
