S/o: Family Research Council (FRC).

[TranquilMind]

And now, in present day America, PEOPLE who align themselves with the term Christian have a disagreement about what scripture says on the topic of homosexuality.

 

The bulk of the people who applied scripture to me and my life circumstances did so from a sincere and deeply held belief that they were correctly interpreting scripture and being kind to me by confronting me with my sin.

 

You say they were wrong.

 

The bulk of people who apply scripture to homosexuals and thier life choices do so from a sincere and deeply held belief that they are correctly interpreting scripture and being kind by confronting homosexuals with thier sin.

 

I say they are wrong.

 

There are many who claim the name of Christ who say sexual orintation is part of how we are hard wired, created, and is not sinful when it falls outside the heterosexual default.

 

Why is your rebuke of scripture's "misuse" in my case more valid than my rebuke of scripture's "misuse" by conservative Christians?

I really cannot respond to anything about your situation without any facts at all (and I'm not asking you) from any biblical perspective at all.   I don't know you, what happened, or what the people in church did.    I'm sorry that people hurt you though. 

 

I never "confront anyone with their sin", though I am happy to examine these things on a forum.  God didn't give me the job of being everyone's Holy Spirit.      If someone asks my perspective on a matter in real life, I will answer as to my perspective and that will be influenced by scripture. 

 

I do not see multiple ways to interpret the abject proscriptions against homosexual behavior in Leviticus and Romans 1.    One may legitimately argue that it's what he wants to do, or that what the Bible says about it is irrelevant, or any other honest position, but one cannot contend legitimately that there are no proscriptions.

 

 

 

.  People can believe whatever they want, but they can't support whatever they want biblically. 

[ktgrok]

No, Joanne, I am not. I refuse to put homosexual acts in the same category as being black. There is no sin in being of any ethnic background. And yes, I stand by my belief that homosexual acts are sins just like all the other things listed. I do not agree with your understanding of being gay at all. There are a lot of other things that you believe according to psychology that I don't agree with either.

 

 

You also think it is a sin for people to co-habitate. Should that be outlawed? What about remarriage after divorce? What about fat people buying cake? We don't have laws against gossip, but that's a sin. Or lying...I can lie and tell you I like your hat, and no one will arrest me. If the sin isn't hurting anyone else, we don't have laws against it. 

[Tanaqui]

I do not see multiple ways to interpret the abject proscriptions against homosexual behavior in Leviticus and Romans 1.

 

Leviticus? Unless you're a kosher-keeping Jew, I don't want to hear about Leviticus, which gives the same weight to shrimp scampi and polycotton blends as it does to Adam and Steve.

 

As for Romans, perhaps this link will enlighten you as to other interpretations of that book. A more dramatically written piece on the subject can be found here. And here is a third view. As always, there are multiple ways to examine any passage.

 

[Mergath]

People have to be married before they can get divorced. A man leaves his mother and father and cleaves to his wife in marriage. There is never a reference to anything but men and women being united in any kind of marital bond in the Bible.

 

 

The bible never mentions computers, either. Or airplanes. Or cars. If everything Jesus never spoke of is forbidden, that's a long list of things Christians aren't supposed to be doing.

[SemiSweet]

My brother is an editor for TV and film out in LA. When this man came to him with his story, Andy could not help but be moved. He helped him put together this video. If this doesn't explain the need for equality, I don't know what would.

.

I rarely watch videos, but I did this one. Tears. That is heartbreaking. How people cannot see the humanity behind the supposed "sin" is beyond me. :(

[Cindy in FL.]

Please continue to make all the completely illogical leaps that you would like!

 

The bible never mentions computers, either. Or airplanes. Or cars. If everything Jesus never spoke of is forbidden, that's a long list of things Christians aren't supposed to be doing.

[Cindy in FL.]

No, but we also don't go out of our way to protect them legally or celebrate them. I never see anyone having a pride parade for liars, gossips, fornicators, etc. Sometimes I do wish the authorities would step in and not allow me to buy the cake, though.

 

The bottom line I suppose is this. There are Christians that believe that God created the world for Himself and with certain rules in place for the way we should live. These rules were never meant to be arbitrary or to harm us, but we rebelled against them. The further we get out from creation, the further we get from the way things were meant to be. This is sad, it breaks our hearts. I say that sincerely.

 

I believe that morality cannot be legislated and that no human being has the ability to change another person's heart. I believe that can only be accomplished by the Holy Spirit. Not to say that we cannot influence one another, because we can.

 

The real rub is that some people think it is ok to rob others of their beliefs. If I say that I believe homosexuality is wrong then that is hateful. It isn't. It is my sincere, heartfelt belief based on what I consider to be a significant study of the Bible. I am not just pulling it out of the air. I don't get to tell you that you are hateful because you believe something else. You can speak against my Christianity and I am not going to put that label on you. That seems patently unfair. Don't deny me my right to my beliefs while demanding your right to yours.

 

All that being said, I think that gay marriage will be legal everywhere in fairly short order and life will go on. I will not come unglued or sit in a corner lamenting the state that the world is in. I won't vote for it, but I also will not actively work against it. I will have to accept that as the law of the land, but please don't ask me to agree with it.

 

Now any law that tries to force me to personally go against what God tells me to do, that I will have to rebel against and I would have to accept the consequences of that.

 

 

You also think it is a sin for people to co-habitate. Should that be outlawed? What about remarriage after divorce? What about fat people buying cake? We don't have laws against gossip, but that's a sin. Or lying...I can lie and tell you I like your hat, and no one will arrest me. If the sin isn't hurting anyone else, we don't have laws against it.

[Cindy in FL.]

I am a conservative Christian and I certainly don't think this. No woman or girl is responsible for someone else violating her. That is absurd and ridiculous. I am sorry this happened to you and that people laid the blame at your feet.

 

I've never heard about the mysterious way women's bodies have of not getting pregnant from rape. That's crazy talk.

 

Here's an example. I felt immense amounts of guilt and shame when I was being sexually abused (raped) by my mother's "partner" as a young teen. I now believe that it was definitely not my fault. The fact that I felt guilt and shame at the time had an awful lot to do with the culture around me.

 

Then again, there are those on the American Christian right who also believe rape is a woman's/girl's fault and that her body even has mysterious ways of ensuring she doesn't get pregnant if she is raped.

[Cindy in FL.]

Politicians. That's a whole nother thread right there! They can say the darnedest things. :)

 

I agree that guilt/shame can be inappropriately laid on us by society, but it can also be done appropriately. I also believe that it comes from within. I believe that God put the truth within everyone (it wouldn't be just otherwise, and God is just). I believe His laws apply to all mankind regardless of what religion we choose, our ethnicity, or the environment we are raised in. I don't think that all guilt and shame are bad.

 

It was said in the context of pro-life campaigns, by some American politician. Though there was a lot of talk about it when it happened (last year?) I don't remember the guy's name now. I can try to find it if you're really interested. As a European, I don't know the US political scene all that well, but it was certainly shocking.

 

Anyway, I made that comment mainly to show that it is very possible indeed to feel guilt and shame even if you don't do anything wrong, simply because society has attached a stigma to something. Feeling guilt and shame does not mean you are doing something wrong by definition.

 

I personally believe the same can apply to being gay. Someone who was raised in an environment where being gay is condemned as sinful may certainly feel guilt and shame for being the way they are. Others, raised in a more accepting environment, are much less likely to feel that shame. It's less about G-d writing on people's hearts than society writing on people's hearts, then. Unless you believe that G-d does not write on every person's heart in the same way.

 

(Or is being gay/accepting one's sexual orientation and having relationships only wrong for people whose religion tells them it is wrong? That would somehow make more sense to me, actually. Jews believe most of G-d's commandments apply to them, but not to people who aren't Jewish. They don't expect non-Jews to keep kosher, for instance, because those rules do not apply to others.)

[FaithManor]

As a baker's spouse I am in the privileged position to inform you that cheesecake from a box mix is not real cheesecake. If you do not have the calling for true scratch baking, you should accept you're limitations and journey to the sacred ground of the Cheesecake Factory to receive the sacramental cheesecake, or else buy frozen and patiently contemplate the wonders of Cheesecake while it thaws.

 

As a lifelong member of the cheesecake sisterhood, I must say that there simply are not enough "likes" allowed on this board to adequately convey my gratitude for this post!

 

:hurray: :hurray: :hurray: :hurray: :hurray:

[Cindy in FL.]

I think you are guilty of cheesecake idolatry. Dangerous ground.

 

As a lifelong member of the cheesecake sisterhood, I must say that there simply are not enough "likes" allowed on this board to adequately convey my gratitude for this post!

 

:hurray: :hurray: :hurray: :hurray: :hurray:

[Muttichen]

I understand, and I do agree to a certain extent. Murder is almost universally seen as inappropriate, for example, though it may be defined differently depending on where or who you are. I believe this is a good thing. I also believe seeing murder as inappropriate comes natural to most people, that it is inherent. 

 

As a Christian, you'd of course believe that G-d's laws apply to everyone, and you'll also base your ideas about what G-d's laws are on the Bible (OT + NT). Not everyone agrees, though. I am sure you accept that and respect the rights of others to disagree? 

 

But what if society was suddenly trying to define murder as appropriate?  Shouldn't we stand up and fight against that? Not very long ago most people saw homosexuality as inherently inappropriate.  

[Amira]

But what if society was suddenly trying to define murder as appropriate?  Shouldn't we stand up and fight against that? Not very long ago most people saw homosexuality as inherently inappropriate.  

 

Leaving aside the fact that murder and gay marriage are not at all comparable, of course you can stand up and fight against laws you don't like.  I do that.  But that doesn't mean that you'd win or that you can expect that there will be no consequences for breaking laws you don't agree with. Or that people won't be fighting on the other side.

[Firefly]

 

The real rub is that some people think it is ok to rob others of their beliefs. If I say that I believe homosexuality is wrong then that is hateful. It isn't. It is my sincere, heartfelt belief based on what I consider to be a significant study of the Bible. I am not just pulling it out of the air. I don't get to tell you that you are hateful because you believe something else. You can speak against my Christianity and I am not going to put that label on you. That seems patently unfair. Don't deny me my right to my beliefs while demanding your right to yours.

 

 

 

But Cindy, nobody is trying to rob you of your beliefs.  People may disagree, but respect your right to believe what you want.  The problem occurs when people try to deny rights to others based on their religious beliefs... beliefs that not everyone within the religion can agree on anyway.  

[Tanaqui]

But what if society was suddenly trying to define murder as appropriate?

 

As the Eric Garner case shows, many people already consider some murders "appropriate".

 

There is, of course, a huge difference between homosexuality and murder. Gays generally, like straights, confine themselves to consensual activities with willing partners. Murderers, you know, don't.

 

If I say that I believe homosexuality is wrong then that is hateful. It isn't. It is my sincere, heartfelt belief based on what I consider to be a significant study of the Bible. I am not just pulling it out of the air.

 

And if Bob Jones gets up and talks about how race-mixing is against God's order, that all races ought to stay within the "bounds of their habitation", that's not really hateful, that's just his sincere, heartfelt belief based on what he considers to be a significant study of the Bible. He's not just pulling it out of the air. And when Stormfront members talk online about the Curse of Ham, welp, that's just THEIR sincere and heartfelt beliefs.

 

If you're going to say that their conclusions aren't scripturally sound, don't bother. That's utterly irrelevant to how sincere or heartfelt they are, and clearly those people DO think they've made a careful reading of the Bible.

 

And of course, it's not just Christians. Prejudice against the Dalits? Sincere and heartfelt belief, not pulled out of thin air! Misogyny among... well, anybody? Sincere and heartfelt!

 

Just because you can find justification for your beliefs does not mean that they aren't hateful or hurtful.

[umsami]

A 12 year old boy named Ronin Shimizu killed himself in California last week.  He was being bullied for being the only male member of a cheerleading squad.  He was called "gay."  His parents had recently removed him from school to be homeschooled.  It came too late.  

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2862375/Boy-12-kills-bullied-cheerleader.html

 

I am looking forward to the day when being "gay" is not an insult.  When being "fat" is not an insult.  When being different is something to be celebrated, rather than attacked.

[Χά�ων]

A 12 year old boy named Ronin Shimizu killed himself in California last week.  He was being bullied for being the only male member of a cheerleading squad.  He was called "gay."  His parents had recently removed him from school to be homeschooled.  It came too late.  

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2862375/Boy-12-kills-bullied-cheerleader.html

 

I am looking forward to the day when being "gay" is not an insult.  When being "fat" is not an insult.  When being different is something to be celebrated, rather than attacked.

Yes, this. 

[Cindy in FL.]

"Hate speech is speech that offends, threatens, or insults groups, based on race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, disability, or other traits"

 

So if you are offended because I say homosexuality is wrong, then apparently I am guilty of hate speech. Apparently my right to my religious beliefs is taken away along with my right to free speech. I am offended when people say negative things about my faith, but I am not going to label that hate speech or attempt to deny them their right to say or think it.

 

Please don't pretend this doesn't happen.

 

But Cindy, nobody is trying to rob you of your beliefs. People may disagree, but respect your right to believe what you want. The problem occurs when people try to deny rights to others based on their religious beliefs... beliefs that not everyone within the religion can agree on anyway.

[Firefly]

"Hate speech is speech that offends, threatens, or insults groups, based on race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, disability, or other traits"

 

So if you are offended because I say homosexuality is wrong, then apparently I am guilty of hate speech. Apparently my right to my religious beliefs is taken away along with my right to free speech. I am offended when people say negative things about my faith, but I am not going to label that hate speech or attempt to deny them their right to say or think it.

 

Please don't pretend this doesn't happen.

 

 

I don't understand your response, Cindy, or how you think I'm pretending something didn't happen.   :confused1:   I didn't mention anything about hate speech, and am not offended by what you say.  I disagree with it.  

 

But since you brought it up, as far as hate speech goes,  people have the right to say whatever they want-- I'm not in favor of silencing anyone.  But people who say hateful things should be prepared to be called out on it.  It doesn't mean people are trying to take away the right to free speech when they disagree.  I'm talking about actions, not words.  

[Btervet]

"Hate speech is speech that offends, threatens, or insults groups, based on race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, disability, or other traits"

 

So if you are offended because I say homosexuality is wrong, then apparently I am guilty of hate speech. Apparently my right to my religious beliefs is taken away along with my right to free speech. I am offended when people say negative things about my faith, but I am not going to label that hate speech or attempt to deny them their right to say or think it.

 

Please don't pretend this doesn't happen.

 

 

Pointing out that your speech is hateful isn't the same as taking away your right to free speech. You have every right to hateful speech, it just isn't kind, and most people don't enjoy listening to it.

 

There are things I could say about certain religions that would most definitely be hateful. I choose not to say them because I do not think it is kind to be hateful to others. Of course I have every right to say whatever I want, but there are consequences for that. There are consequences for hate speech, if you (general you) choose to engage in it, regardless of how sincere your belief is. That doesn't mean your rights are being taken away, that means there are consequences for your choices.

 

------

 

I find it baffling that a thread about a hate group, a group which would be thrilled if all gays were dead, and many religions silenced, has so many people popping up to defend sets of this groups beliefs. If you don't support them, why would you turn a thread which started by educating people about said group, into a debate on homosexuality and free speech? Isn't it possible to believe same-sex marriage is wrong, yet still let people speak out against unquestionable hate groups like the FRC without drowning out their voices with unrelated debate?

[Cindy in FL.]

I hate trying to communicate on the Internet sometimes. I didn't mean you yourself, I meant people in general. Some people want there to be legal ramifications for someone saying something they don't agree with. I don't think that is right. If I say something that someone doesn't like they are free to disagree and tell me so.

 

I don't understand your response, Cindy, or how you think I'm pretending something didn't happen. :confused1: I didn't mention anything about hate speech, and am not offended by what you say. I disagree with it.

 

But since you brought it up, as far as hate speech goes, people have the right to say whatever they want-- I'm not in favor of silencing anyone. But people who say hateful things should be prepared to be called out on it. It doesn't mean people are trying to take away the right to free speech when they disagree. I'm talking about actions, not words.

[Cindy in FL.]

Threads morph all the time and often have little resemblance to the op by the time they run their course.

 

I do not think there is anything hateful about saying that homosexuality (meaning the practice of it) is wrong. If I were to say I think homosexuals are disgusting, etc. then you can call that hateful. Because it would be. I don't understand why people can't see the difference between disagreement and hate.

 

Pointing out that your speech is hateful isn't the same as taking away your right to free speech. You have every right to hateful speech, it just isn't kind, and most people don't enjoy listening to it.

 

There are things I could say about certain religions that would most definitely be hateful. I choose not to say them because I do not think it is kind to be hateful to others. Of course I have every right to say whatever I want, but there are consequences for that. There are consequences for hate speech, if you (general you) choose to engage in it, regardless of how sincere your belief is. That doesn't mean your rights are being taken away, that means there are consequences for your choices.

 

------

 

I find it baffling that a thread about a hate group, a group which would be thrilled if all gays were dead, and many religions silenced, has so many people popping up to defend sets of this groups beliefs. If you don't support them, why would you turn a thread which started by educating people about said group, into a debate on homosexuality and free speech? Isn't it possible to believe same-sex marriage is wrong, yet still let people speak out against unquestionable hate groups like the FRC without drowning out their voices with unrelated debate?

[FaithManor]

I don't understand your response, Cindy, or how you think I'm pretending something didn't happen.   :confused1:   I didn't mention anything about hate speech, and am not offended by what you say.  I disagree with it.  

 

But since you brought it up, as far as hate speech goes,  people have the right to say whatever they want-- I'm not in favor of silencing anyone.  But people who say hateful things should be prepared to be called out on it.  It doesn't mean people are trying to take away the right to free speech when they disagree.  I'm talking about actions, not words.  

 

I agree. I think many people believe that disagreement is somehow taking away a right to express a belief, and that being called out for being offensive is somehow "being silenced." The constitution guarantees the right to say what you think, but it does not guarantee the right to be free of consequences in the culture for saying it.

 

Also, the free speech the constitution guarantees is the right to criticize the government. It is not the right to necessarily be verbally nasty to others. For the most part, they've stayed out of that kind of thing, until free speech incites something that causes concern for public safety in which the right to say it does not extend to the right to make others unsafe.

 

So just because others disagree, it doesn't mean a person is being silenced. It means that person is experiencing discomfort for holding a viewpoint that is found offensive. In that regard, Americans need to put their big girl panties on and learn to live with the discomfort as many an abolitionist, suffragist, etc. did in times past. It goes both ways. Both sides need to understand that because someone's position makes you uncomfortable, that doesn't mean you are being silenced or your rights are being infringed. It just means someone said something that you don't like. That's life.

 

Sneetches. Be nice, play nice.

 

In the absence of that, well armored underthings is mighty handy! :)

[Tanaqui]

I don't understand why people can't see the difference between disagreement and hate.

 

I see you have many more than two children. That's wrong. Very wrong. Gravely wrong, and you know, you might be punished for it later. I don't hate you, I just think you did something very, very bad.

 

I see also that you are a Christian. Christians do bad things all the time. Have you heard about the joys of atheism? Let me sit down and lovingly tell you all about them. Because I care, and not because I hate you.

 

Also, America. Does bad things. Aren't you ashamed of being an American? Oh, I don't hate you, I disagree with you and your country and everything it stands for.

 

Gee, I can spin these out all day. Some disagreements don't need to be stated, because just stating them is mean.

[Pam in CT]

"Hate speech is speech that offends, threatens, or insults groups, based on race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, disability, or other traits"

 

So if you are offended because I say homosexuality is wrong, then apparently I am guilty of hate speech. Apparently my right to my religious beliefs is taken away along with my right to free speech. I am offended when people say negative things about my faith, but I am not going to label that hate speech or attempt to deny them their right to say or think it.

 

Please don't pretend this doesn't happen.

 

 

The FRC, about whom this thread began, and the KKK, mentioned upthread, engage openly and intentionally, in hate speech.  They also work to shape and define public policy.  

 

I am vigorously opposed to what they say.  I support their right to say it.  

 

If they were to come to my town, I might well counter-protest.  I certainly would work to ensure that they not succeed in enacting legislation that I found hateful.  That is NOT denying them the right to have, or hold, or speak their beliefs.

 

 

 

Cindy, FWIW, I have no reason at all to lump you with the likes of the those organizations, which I do personally consider hateful.  I see you as a good person trying in good faith to grapple with difficult issues of how people with differing private beliefs should navigate public space arenas.  

 

I certainly would never deny your right to hold different beliefs from mine, or to speak them here or elsewhere. 

 

 

*Actions*, particularly actions in *public domains*, are where accommodation to people different from ourselves gets tricky.  

[Firefly]

I hate trying to communicate on the Internet sometimes. I didn't mean you yourself, I meant people in general. Some people want there to be legal ramifications for someone saying something they don't agree with. I don't think that is right. If I say something that someone doesn't like they are free to disagree and tell me so.

 

 

 

Ah okay-- thanks for clarifying; we are in agreement on this point. :)

[Cindy in FL.]

Plenty of people disagree about family size. I don't care if anyone disagrees with the size of my family, even if they say it to my face. Doesn't translate as hate. Don't want any kids? Don't have them. Is 1 the right number? 2? 4? As many as you can pop out? I don't care how people agree/disagree on that. In and of itself it isn't hate. Tell someone they are ignorant, selfish, etc. because of those choices then you're getting into hateful territory.

 

Christians do bad things. Sometimes in disturbing numbers. I can handle you bring that up. I won't consider you hateful. Want to tell me about the joys of atheism? Go ahead! If it is something you passionately believe in and think it would be to my benefit to hear about it, then how kind of you to share. Want to tell me you think Christians checked their brains at the door and are incapable of intelligent thought and shouldn't be allowed to educate their children? You might be getting a little bit mean.

 

Want to tell me that America/Americans aren't as wonderful as we think we are. That we aren't the saviors of the world and our ways are not always best? Go ahead. Want to have demonstrations calling for the destruction of America and the killing of Americans, then I think you're a bit overcome with hate.

 

Spin away, Tanaqui, spin away.

 

Disagreement does not equal hate. Telling someone you disagree with them isn't hate. Hate is hate.

 

I see you have many more than two children. That's wrong. Very wrong. Gravely wrong, and you know, you might be punished for it later. I don't hate you, I just think you did something very, very bad.

 

I see also that you are a Christian. Christians do bad things all the time. Have you heard about the joys of atheism? Let me sit down and lovingly tell you all about them. Because I care, and not because I hate you.

 

Also, America. Does bad things. Aren't you ashamed of being an American? Oh, I don't hate you, I disagree with you and your country and everything it stands for.

 

Gee, I can spin these out all day. Some disagreements don't need to be stated, because just stating them is mean.

[Tanaqui]

Well, Cindy, I can only say that you are wrong. You may think you're not hateful, but you are at the very least impolite.

[Cindy in FL.]

So, if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all. Or confine yourself to the weather. Who gets to define nice? If we aren't careful we'll get to the point where no one is allowed to say anything. Maybe we should just segregate ourselves into groups of people that completely agree with one another so we don't ever say anything that someone will disagree with. That's the ticket!

[*Lulu*]

I really cannot respond to anything about your situation without any facts at all (and I'm not asking you) from any biblical perspective at all. I don't know you, what happened, or what the people in church did. I'm sorry that people hurt you though.

I've already shared that I was repeatedly raped. If you need more information than that to determine if the shaming that was done to me was scriptural......I just don't have words. I really hope I am misreading that.

 

I never "confront anyone with their sin", though I am happy to examine these things on a forum. God didn't give me the job of being everyone's Holy Spirit. If someone asks my perspective on a matter in real life, I will answer as to my perspective and that will be influenced by scripture.

Then why the desire to make the law of the land take that job?

 

If the only objections you have to same sex unions are based on your religious beliefs doesn't it follow that it is wrong to force others to follow your religious convictions?

 

How is that any different from any other religion trying to make one of their mandates/beliefs the law?

 

Conservative Christians would raise holy hell if that shoe were on the other foot.

 

I do not see multiple ways to interpret the abject proscriptions against homosexual behavior in Leviticus and Romans 1. One may legitimately argue that it's what he wants to do, or that what the Bible says about it is irrelevant, or any other honest position, but one cannot contend legitimately that there are no proscriptions.

 

 

 

. People can believe whatever they want, but they can't support whatever they want biblically.

Except they do. All the time. History is full of examples.

 

Certain sects of the American Evangelical movement have practically made it into an art form.

[Tanaqui]

Cindy, I'm sure your parents raised you with a modicum of common sense. Some things are not appropriate for mixed company. As an atheist, I rarely go up to Christians (or anybody) and go "Wow, your religion sure is stupid!"even if variations on that theme are sometimes said among other atheists. As a New Yorker, I don't head over to Chicago for a week and then spend the whole time moaning to the locals about how awful their pizza is and how much better NYC is as a city, you know, overall. As an adult, I don't walk up to teens and tell them their fashions are ugly and ridiculous. And so on. I'm sure you can think of many things to say that are polite and useful.

[LucyStoner]

"Hate speech is speech that offends, threatens, or insults groups, based on race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, disability, or other traits"

 

So if you are offended because I say homosexuality is wrong, then apparently I am guilty of hate speech. Apparently my right to my religious beliefs is taken away along with my right to free speech. I am offended when people say negative things about my faith, but I am not going to label that hate speech or attempt to deny them their right to say or think it.

 

Please don't pretend this doesn't happen.

 

 

Please don't pretend that many self-proclaimed Christians don't engage in vicious hate speech. Your speech hasn't been vicious or in general overall hateful, unfortunately though, many others IRL are. I have stated repeatedly that I respect your beliefs for you but that your beliefs can't be the basis for the law in a civil society. That you would prefer that my brother not be married to his husband isn't loving. As I've stated before, go ahead and believe they are sinners. But respect their right, as loving committed Christian husbands and fathers, to live their lives separately from your flavor of Christianity with equal civil rights to you and your husband.

 

A TWELVE YEAR OLD boy was bullied about perhaps being gay to the extent that he killed himself. You didn't bully him and you wouldn't raise your kids to. I get that. Please understand that it is most probably kids from nominally or devoutly religious homes who did bully him. Because when you sit down with those types of bullies their excuse generally boils down to something like God made Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve or it says it's wrong in the bible.

[Cindy in FL.]

Yes, they did. So I don't do any of the things you listed or anything like it. Where you would get such an idea is really beyond me. However, in the context of a conversation or in a relationship I will say things to participate in the conversation. I never bring up controversial subjects (religion, politics, etc.).

 

If someone were to ask me what I think about a subject, then I feel free to truthfully respond. Why wouldn't I?

 

Cindy, I'm sure your parents raised you with a modicum of common sense. Some things are not appropriate for mixed company. As an atheist, I rarely go up to Christians (or anybody) and go "Wow, your religion sure is stupid!"even if variations on that theme are sometimes said among other atheists. As a New Yorker, I don't head over to Chicago for a week and then spend the whole time moaning to the locals about how awful their pizza is and how much better NYC is as a city, you know, overall. As an adult, I don't walk up to teens and tell them their fashions are ugly and ridiculous. And so on. I'm sure you can think of many things to say that are polite and useful.

[Tanaqui]

Then you're being disingenous in claiming that you're worried about being accused of hate speech.

[Cindy in FL.]

I won't pretend that doesn't happen. Just look at Westboro Baptist and their ilk. There's no defending people like that.

 

I know some Christians want American to be a theocracy, which they are wrong about. It is not a Christian nation. However, I still personally believe that people do better when adhering to God's law. That's their own personal decision to make and not for me to make or legislate for them. I do reserve the right to vote my conscience, though. Everyone gets to vote and then we all live under the laws enacted by those in office. Democracy. I'm good with that.

 

Everyone has the right to live their lives with or without religion.

 

Please don't pretend that many self-proclaimed Christians don't engage in vicious hate speech. Your speech hasn't been vicious or in general overall hateful, unfortunately though, many others IRL are. I have stated repeatedly that I respect your beliefs for you but that your beliefs can't be the basis for the law in a civil society. That you would prefer that my brother not be married to his husband isn't loving. As I've stated before, go ahead and believe they are sinners. But respect their right, as loving committed Christian husbands and fathers, to live their lives separately from your flavor of Christianity with equal civil rights to you and your husband.

 

A TWELVE YEAR OLD boy was bullied about perhaps being gay to the extent that he killed himself. You didn't bully him and you wouldn't raise your kids to. I get that. Please understand that it is most probably kids from nominally or devoutly religious homes who did bully him. Because when you sit down with those types of bullies their excuse generally boils down to something like God made Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve or it says it's wrong in the bible.

[Cindy in FL.]

No, I am not. Look up the definition.

 

Then you're being disingenous in claiming that you're worried about being accused of hate speech.

[KungFuPanda]

 

 

 

 

 

In practicality, groups like FRC have little power anyway.

 

  

 

Am I the only one who learned about this group from this board? Are they better known in more conservative states?

 

I was so angry at being told that I am not really married that I had to go make gingerbread houses with the kids. Thank you Crimson Wife!

Catholics are a diverse group. Also, it's a religion where official doctrine is changed long LONG after the parishioners have changed their practice. Try not to put too much stock in those clinging to very specific doctrinal interpretations because the real lives and hearts of most moderate Catholics are years ahead of any doctrinal changes.

 

  

No, it's not equivalent at all.  The basic premise that deviant sexual behavior is equivalent to race is completely untrue.

What's deviant? There are no specific acts practiced by homosexuals that do not take place in heterosexual, church-sanctioned marriages. NONE. The only way to sort out which couples are 'deviant' and which aren't is to put a camera in every bedroom and review your performance. I'm not saying every couple practices ever sex act that exists, just that you can't really declare anyone's marriage invalid because they did something on an arbitrary list of banned activities.

 

Also, has anyone ever actually explained how homosexuality makes someone more prone to pedophilia? I'm missing a piece of the argument that connects attraction to an adult to the likelihood that that person will also be attracted to children.

[Tanaqui]

No, I am not. Look up the definition.

 

 

Yeah, you are. If you don't say these things in mixed company unless asked, you're being both disingenous and kinda ridiculous.

 

[LucyStoner]

I won't pretend that doesn't happen. Just look at Westboro Baptist and their ilk. There's no defending people like that.

 

I know some Christians want American to be a theocracy, which they are wrong about. It is not a Christian nation. However, I still personally believe that people do better when adhering to God's law. That's their own personal decision to make and not for me to make or legislate for them. I do reserve the right to vote my conscience, though. Everyone gets to vote and then we all live under the laws enacted by those in office. Democracy. I'm good with that.

 

Everyone has the right to live their lives with or without religion.

 

 

I don't think it is my right to vote on the civil rights of others. I am disgusted when I am asked to do so. Everyone gets a vote and leaving it all to the voters would have resulted in at least 15 more years of Jim Crow and blatant voter suppression laws in some parts of the south and redline housing rules would have continued probably even to this very day in parts of the entire country. If people voting your way in my state carried the day, my brother would still be unprotected by marriage.

 

I don't see in any of your posts any answer to why it's ok for gays to have fewer civil rights than you.

 

ETA- hate speech doesn't have to be as visible as Westboro to be hateful and wrong.

[Cindy in FL.]

Firstly, I want to thank you for the civil discourse we are enjoying in this thread. I understand your point. I define marriage in a very particular way, and think civil union is more appropriate. It isn't a marriage in my view. I do think we have to be careful with the civil rights of others. Either everyone has them, or no one should.

 

While we do disagree about what is and isn't a sin, we are probably not as far apart on all the issues as it may appear.

 

I agree about hate speech not always being as overt as Westboro, but I still don't think that saying I believe homosexuality (fornication, lying, cheating, coveting, gossiping, etc) to be a sin is an example of hate speech.

 

 

I don't think it is my right to vote on the civil rights of others. I am disgusted when I am asked to do so. Everyone gets a vote and leaving it all to the voters would have resulted in at least 15 more years of Jim Crow and blatant voter suppression laws in some parts of the south. If people voting your way in my state carried the day, my brother would still be unprotected by marriage.

 

I don't see in any of your posts any answer to why it's ok for gays to have fewer civil rights than you.

 

ETA- hate speech doesn't have to be as visible as Westboro to be hateful and wrong.

[texasmama]

Firstly, I want to thank you for the civil discourse we are enjoying in this thread. I understand your point. I define marriage in a very particular way, and think civil union is more appropriate. It isn't a marriage in my view. I do think we have to be careful with the civil rights of others. Either everyone has them, or no one should.

 

While we do disagree about what is and isn't a sin, we are probably not as far apart on all the issues as it may appear.

 

I agree about hate speech not always being as overt as Westboro, but I still don't think that saying I believe homosexuality (fornication, lying, cheating, coveting, gossiping, etc) to be a sin is an example of hate speech.

 

 

I think the bolded is particularly true, and I think that if we were all in the same room, it would make for an easier conversation.

 

I also think you have been very civil in your views, and I do not hear any "hate" in the things you have said.

[LucyStoner]

Separate but equal is inherently unequal.

 

Many federal benefits are extended to married couples but not those in domestic partnerships. Social security survivors benefits for instance. Had my BIL died before they were legally married, my brother would have received fewer benefits. Benefits that his partner had been paying into the same as any straight worker, yet my BIL didn't have the option to pay less SS taxes because his family wouldn't receive equal benefits.

 

ETA- if there were able to be married back when they first had their commitment ceremony, my brother would next year be entitled to not only SS survivors benefits until his kids were 16 but a SS payment once he reached retirement age. So he is still less equal under the law. Sure, there's a lot more at stake here than dollars and cents. And most likely this remains hypothetical since my BIL will hopefully live to see a nice old age. But these things matter. And there are many surviving partners who were and are affected by this gap in the law.

[LucyStoner]

I think the bolded is particularly true, and I think that if we were all in the same room, it would make for an easier conversation.

I agree with you but I haven't found this conversation to be especially difficult. And if we were in the same room, we'd probably be too busy eating pie to talk too much. Also, cake for you cake types.

[Mergath]

Please continue to make all the completely illogical leaps that you would like!

 

 

If I'm making illogical leaps, so are you.  The bible only mentions hetero marriage, therefore only hetero marriage is allowed.  Things that are not discussed are forbidden.  That's your logic, not mine.

[zoobie]

 

 

Am I the only one who learned about this group from this board? Are they better known in more conservative states?

 

 

Catholics are a diverse group. Also, it's a religion where official doctrine is changed long LONG after the parishioners have changed their practice. Try not to put too much stock in those clinging to very specific doctrinal interpretations because the real lives and hearts of most moderate Catholics are years ahead of any doctrinal changes.

 

 

What's deviant? There are no specific acts practiced by homosexuals that do not take place in heterosexual, church-sanctioned marriages. NONE. The only way to sort out which couples are 'deviant' and which aren't is to put a camera in every bedroom and review your performance. I'm not saying every couple practices ever sex act that exists, just that you can't really declare anyone's marriage invalid because they did something on an arbitrary list of banned activities.

 

Also, has anyone ever actually explained how homosexuality makes someone more prone to pedophilia? I'm missing a piece of the argument that connects attraction to an adult to the likelihood that that person will also be attracted to children.

They're based in D.C. And their parent organization, Focus on the Family (James Dobson) is better known. I was getting Focus on the Family homophobic crap emails back in the early 2000s. One of my aunts hasn't talked to me since I told her that I would donate money to gay rights organizations for every email forward she sent. (After I asked her repeatedly and politely to stop sending them to us.)

[Cindy in FL.]

Please bear with me as I try to figure all this out and express it the way I want to.

 

Marriage has a very particular meaning to me. One I am not willing to change. It may seem petty to some, but it really matters. For the record, I also think rainbows are the reminder to us of God's promise never to flood the earth again.

 

Why not civil unions with the same federal benefits as marriage? For that matter, anyone in a domestic partnership should be able to designate those to their partner, too.

 

I don't think that would be separate but unequal. Different words, but not unequal.

 

 

 

Separate by equal is inherently unequal.

 

Many federal benefits are extended to married couples but not those in domestic partnerships. Social security survivors benefits for instance. Had my BIL died before they were legally married, my brother would have received fewer benefits. Benefits that his partner had been paying into the same as any straight worker, yet my BIL didn't have the option to pay less SS taxes because his family wouldn't receive equal benefits.

[Cindy in FL.]

Relations between people of the same sex are never mentioned in a positive light and are mentioned negatively.

 

If I'm making illogical leaps, so are you. The bible only mentions hetero marriage, therefore only hetero marriage is allowed. Things that are not discussed are forbidden. That's your logic, not mine.

[Joker]

Please bear with me as I try to figure all this out and express it the way I want to.

 

Marriage has a very particular meaning to me. One I am not willing to change. It may seem petty to some, but it really matters. For the record, I also think rainbows are the reminder to us of God's promise never to flood the earth again.

 

Why not civil unions with the same federal benefits as marriage? For that matter, anyone in a domestic partnership should be able to designate those to their partner, too.

 

I don't think that would be separate but unequal. Different words, but not unequal.

 

 

 

 

Then what about those same sex couples who do marry in a church, are religious, and consider it a marriage?

[Χά�ων]

If I'm making illogical leaps, so are you. The bible only mentions hetero marriage, therefore only hetero marriage is allowed. Things that are not discussed are forbidden. That's your logic, not mine.

It also talks about a man grasping the genitals of another man to seal a deal. And about selling ones daughter.

[Cindy in FL.]

For me, they are not married in the Biblical sense of the word, though I can't deny they've been united.

 

Then what about those same sex couples who do marry in a church, are religious, and consider it a marriage?