Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Hope on August 18, 2016, 08:39:48 PM
-
http://bit.ly/2bCPWeu
I had to laugh at this article.
-
I laughed too Hope. What a prat! So, natural disasters only hurt gays and not the people next door? It's amazing how some people think.
-
I laughed too Hope. What a prat! So, natural disasters only hurt gays and not the people next door? It's amazing how some people think.
Possibly more amusing than this guy's beliefs are the fact that there are some people who believe that, because 1 person claiming to be a Christian believes this - all Christians believe it!!
-
If anyone thinks that, they need to get out more!
-
Surely natural disasters are Gods way of punishing the insurance industry.
-
There's a thought, how to cripple PPI.
-
Hope
Do you not see the dichotomy here?
You poke fun at a man who claims God has the power and the will and does actually punish gays. Preposterous you imply, ridiculous even.
Yet you claim he (god) can and does cure illness !!!!!!
Why is one OK and the other daft?
Or is it not as I would claim that both viewpoints are ridiculous.
-
http://bit.ly/2bCPWeu
I had to laugh at this article.
Not very funny really, the guy obviously has a screw loose.
-
Hope
Do you not see the dichotomy here?
You poke fun at a man who claims God has the power and the will and does actually punish gays. Preposterous you imply, ridiculous even.
Yet you claim he (god) can and does cure illness !!!!!!
Why is one OK and the other daft?
Or is it not as I would claim that both viewpoints are ridiculous.
And the link between the two situations, john, is what? That seems to be the dichotomy, if there is one.
-
Not very funny really, the guy obviously has a screw loose.
I think what made me laugh is that both here and elsewhere, there seems to be a belief amongst some posters that this is an 'evangelical Christian' understanding.
-
I've never heard anyone say such things. I suppose it's possible they are harking back to Sodom and Gomorrah, a generally misunderstood story.
-
I think what made me laugh is that both here and elsewhere, there seems to be a belief amongst some posters that this is an 'evangelical Christian' understanding.
What isn't funny is that some extreme Christians think there is something bad about having a sexual relationship with a consenting adult of the same sex.
-
What isn't funny is that some extreme Christians think there is something bad about having a sexual relationship with a consenting adult of the same sex.
I think there are a few non Christians who think that.
-
I think there are a few non Christians who think that.
True, and they are very sick too!
-
I think there are a few non Christians who think that.
But they don't all have a book of rules to back them up, so they don't really have the proper authority to think that way!
-
But they don't all have a book of rules to back them up, so they don't really have the proper authority to think that way!
Since the world of secular homophobia has been papered over.....And understanding of religious homophobia has been weaponised by evangelical antitheism we as forum denizens are unlikely to properly understand secular homophobia.
-
Hope,
I think what made me laugh is that both here and elsewhere, there seems to be a belief amongst some posters that this is an 'evangelical Christian' understanding.
Does anyone fancy a game of "Hope logical fallacy top trumps"?
I'll go first - No True Scotsman!
10 - point to me I think - yippee!
It is an "evangelical Christian understanding" in that some people who are evangelical Christians tell us that it's an evangelical Christian understanding. The fact that you think they're as wrong about that as they think you to be for not sharing that belief – ie, that they're not "true" evangelical Christians – is another matter.
-
But they don't all have a book of rules to back them up, so they don't really have the proper authority to think that way!
What?
You mean, because Christians have a book that tells them to kill gays, that counts as "proper authority"?
-
What?
You mean, because Christians have a book that tells them to kill gays, that counts as "proper authority"?
It is - for some of them.
Not for normal humans though.
-
WELL SAID!!!!!!
-
What?
You mean, because Christians have a book that tells them to kill gays, that counts as "proper authority"?
And which book would that be, jeremy?
-
And which book would that be, jeremy?
A book of fairy tales. :D
-
There will always be nutters on the fringe of any religion or movement and I can't answer for them but it is emphatically not a Christian evangelical, or other mainstream Christian, teaching to kill gay people.
-
What about what the Bible teaches on how to deal with gays?
Sodom & Begorrah for example?!!?!?
Nick
-
What about what the Bible teaches on how to deal with gays?
Sodom & Begorrah for example?!!?!?
Nick
Any religion which teaches that homosexuality between consenting adults is wrong needs to be attacked and corrected.
Until the offending passages are removed from the Bible, Christianity must be subjected to strong opposition.
-
Any religion which teaches that homosexuality between consenting adults is wrong needs to be attacked and corrected.
Until the offending passages are removed from the Bible, Christianity must be subjected to strong opposition.
And any other religion, Len?
-
I would say yes!
But what if some feel that THAT religion is unchanging, cough ISLAM cough cough & CAN'T be changed in ANY way ....?!!?!?!?
-
I would say yes!
But what if some feel that THAT religion is unchanging, cough ISLAM cough cough & CAN'T be changed in ANY way ....?!!?!?!?
And is there another religion ....apart from the two you and Len have mentioned?
-
Of course,yes, but we know the Bible's been altered anyway......
-
Of course,yes,
.....and which one would that be?
-
Any religion which teaches that homosexuality between consenting adults is wrong needs to be attacked and corrected.
Why?
Until the offending passages are removed from the Bible, Christianity must be subjected to strong opposition.
Again, I'd ask 'why'? Remember that throughout history, pretty well every culture and humn society has frowned on homosexuality. Why should 21st Century Westrern society be any more correct than these other cultures and societies ?
If you think about it, over the last 2000 years, people have made comparable attacks on the Bible over a number of issues, such as the role of women in Christianity, over slavery, over injustice on a huge range of levels, attitudes to the Jews: when the Bible has been studied even reasonably carefully, it has been found that what the Bible says on all such issues is pretty well what its detractors say. I'd agree that, in several cases, over time some of the teachings of Christ and his followers (including Paul) became twisted to suit human power structures, but that accusation can be laid at the feet of pretty well every way of thinking without detracting from the core teachings. Interestingly, the real changes seem to have come with the adoption of Christianity by the Roman Empire - at a time when 'secular' political influence on the church was perhaps at its greatest.
-
Why?
Again, I'd ask 'why'? Remember that throughout history, pretty well every culture and humn society has frowned on homosexuality. Why should 21st Century Westrern society be any more correct than these other cultures and societies ?
If you think about it, over the last 2000 years, people have made comparable attacks on the Bible over a number of issues, such as the role of women in Christianity, over slavery, over injustice on a huge range of levels, attitudes to the Jews: when the Bible has been studied even reasonably carefully, it has been found that what the Bible says on all such issues is pretty well what its detractors say. I'd agree that, in several cases, over time some of the teachings of Christ and his followers (including Paul) became twisted to suit human power structures, but that accusation can be laid at the feet of pretty well every way of thinking without detracting from the core teachings. Interestingly, the real changes seem to have come with the adoption of Christianity by the Roman Empire - at a time when 'secular' political influence on the church was perhaps at its greatest.
Society has frowned on a lot of things in the past without good reason, like being left-handed for instance. Maybe now in the 21st century society is beginning to wise up where homosexuality is concerned, and realise that people of the same sex have just as much right to be in a consensual adult relationship, and all that entails, as heterosexuals.
-
ITs simple Floo - haters are gonna hate.
Religion is a convenient peg for some haters to hang their hats on. As we see here sometimes.
-
I would say yes!
But what if some feel that THAT religion is unchanging, cough ISLAM cough cough & CAN'T be changed in ANY way ....?!!?!?!?
What's all this "Cough, cough" business and excessive punctuation marks fgs? You certainly don't change, never mind evolve. Never mind your pitiful anti-Islamic obsession.
.........
Quote from: Leonard James on Today at 07:57:04 AM
Any religion which teaches that homosexuality between consenting adults is wrong needs to be attacked and corrected.
Hope: Why?
............
Everything must be challenged Hope. I don't believe the best way of challenging is to attack.
-
ITs simple Floo - haters are gonna hate.
Religion is a convenient peg for some haters to hang their hats on. As we see here sometimes.
Religion is a very convenient excuse for nasty bigots. Fortunately as I know for a fact, many Christians are not anti-gay, and are disgusted by those who are.
It must be sickening for you and Leonard James, our two openly gay posters, to see anti-gay Christians one minute extolling the virtues and 'love' of god, and the next condemning same sex relationships!
-
It must be sickening for you and Leonard James, our two openly gay posters, to see anti-gay Christians one minute extolling the virtues and 'love' of god, and the next condemning same sex relationships!
I can't speak for LJ - but for myself - it's been part of my life for so long that I pay no heed most of the time. That's not to say I don't notice it, but that if I reacted every time I did then it would affect my life more and to its detriment.
You have to pick & choose your times when to react. Hope starting a cod post about a weird preacher in the US is not one of them. He used it as, yet again, a way to raise one of his favourite topics (wait for the wail of disavowal) and to then raise a beast that doesn't exist:
I think what made me laugh is that both here and elsewhere, there seems to be a belief amongst some posters that this is an 'evangelical Christian' understanding.
I haven't seen anyone on here post such views.
So it's a false post from the off. Just Hope indulging his predilection for mildly irritating homophobia.
-
I've not seen anyone on here post such views either but the likes of the Westboro' Baptists are sometimes brought up as examples of evangelical Christians, which fires people up. I imagine that is what Hope means.
-
I imagine that is what Hope means.
Well if it is then he should be more careful with his wording. After all, he isn't bothered about using his schoolmarmish ways if others make a mistake with their use of English.
-
I've not seen anyone on here post such views either but the likes of the Westboro' Baptists are sometimes brought up as examples of evangelical Christians, which fires people up. I imagine that is what Hope means.
I can think of one poster on this forum who is probably the nearest we get to the Westboro' Baptist nasties.
-
I can think of one poster on this forum who is probably the nearest we get to the Westboro' Baptist nasties.
That's a truism that says nothing about any poster being anywhere close to the Westboro Baptists.
-
Society has frowned on a lot of things in the past without good reason, like being left-handed for instance. Maybe now in the 21st century society is beginning to wise up where homosexuality is concerned, and realise that people of the same sex have just as much right to be in a consensual adult relationship, and all that entails, as heterosexuals.
Floo, there is a difference between being "in a consensual adult relationship" - something that has been legal from the latter stages of the 20th century, and the treating of that consensual relationship as on a par with heterosexual marriage.
At the same time, 20th/21st Century Western society seems happy to harbour behaviours that even you have happily condemned - such as human trafficking; paedophilia and other forms of child abuse; international trade injustice; an ever-widening gap between the rich and the poor - both within developed and developing nations, and between developed and developing nations/blocs- ie trade injustice.
People may, probably will, argue that healthcare and education provision is improving - even when Government and other sources suggest that they are struggling. Hospitals in the West are getting busier and busier, and dwealing with ever more complex conditions; surely healthcare ought to be improving the people's health in the first place, not simply spending ever more time/money treating the conditions.
Why should the liberalisation of attitudes towards homosexual activity suddenly be seen to be bucking those trends?
-
Well if it is then he should be more careful with his wording.
I try to make the same point - such as that which Brownie has just highlighted - in as many different ways as possible over time, Trent. Otherwise, simply repeating points word for word, gets a tad tedious.
-
I try to make the same point - such as that which Brownie has just highlighted - in as many different ways as possible over time, Trent. Otherwise, simply repeating points word for word, gets a tad tedious.
I think you overestimate the effect your variation of wording has on its ability to ameliorate the tediousness of your points.
-
Floo, there is a difference between being "in a consensual adult relationship" - something that has been legal from the latter stages of the 20th century, and the treating of that consensual relationship as on a par with heterosexual marriage.
Why are some relationships between consenting adults not 'on a par' with others?
At the same time, 20th/21st Century Western society seems happy to harbour behaviours that even you have happily condemned - such as human trafficking; paedophilia and other forms of child abuse; international trade injustice; an ever-widening gap between the rich and the poor - both within developed and developing nations, and between developed and developing nations/blocs- ie trade injustice.
In what ways are these issues equivalent to relationships between consenting adults?
People may, probably will, argue that healthcare and education provision is improving - even when Government and other sources suggest that they are struggling. Hospitals in the West are getting busier and busier, and dwealing with ever more complex conditions; surely healthcare ought to be improving the people's health in the first place, not simply spending ever more time/money treating the conditions.
That some areas of public policy might involve delivery or planning weaknesses isn't surprising: but in what way is this relevant to relationships between consenting adults?
Why should the liberalisation of attitudes towards homosexual activity suddenly be seen to be bucking those trends?
Because it is about removing discrimination and treating all relationships between consenting adults equitably: why should that be a problem?
-
I think you overestimate the effect your variation of wording has on its ability to ameliorate the tediousness of your points.
Well, since that is a condition that pretty well everyone suffers from here, Trent, one has to wonder whether the rehashing of the same old topics is actually worthwhile.
-
Floo, there is a difference between being "in a consensual adult relationship" - something that has been legal from the latter stages of the 20th century, and the treating of that consensual relationship as on a par with heterosexual marriage.
At the same time, 20th/21st Century Western society seems happy to harbour behaviours that even you have happily condemned - such as human trafficking; paedophilia and other forms of child abuse; international trade injustice; an ever-widening gap between the rich and the poor - both within developed and developing nations, and between developed and developing nations/blocs- ie trade injustice.
People may, probably will, argue that healthcare and education provision is improving - even when Government and other sources suggest that they are struggling. Hospitals in the West are getting busier and busier, and dwealing with ever more complex conditions; surely healthcare ought to be improving the people's health in the first place, not simply spending ever more time/money treating the conditions.
Why should the liberalisation of attitudes towards homosexual activity suddenly be seen to be bucking those trends?
Of course a consenting adult homosexual relationship is on a par with a heterosexual one, you just don't want to see it that way!
-
Well, since that is a condition that pretty well everyone suffers from here, Trent, one has to wonder whether the rehashing of the same old topics is actually worthwhile.
And who instigated the rehashing of this topic? ::)
-
Of course a consenting adult homosexual relationship is on a par with a heterosexual one, you just don't want to see it that way!
Hmm.....I can see less potential strife in a relationship between two affable chaps or chapesses who are probably pipesmokers than between a man and a woman.
-
Hmm.....I can see less potential strife in a relationship between two affable chaps or chapesses who are probably pipesmokers than between a man and a woman.
Don't you believe it!
-
Hmm.....I can see less potential strife in a relationship between two affable chaps or chapesses who are probably pipesmokers than between a man and a woman.
Why would they be pipe smokers?
-
Why would they be pipe smokers?
I think Vlad is being funny - there used to be a stereotype that lesbians were pipe smokers. At least I think he was being funny. He perhaps ought to get on stage before it wears off.
Anyhow, stereotypes usually exist based on some identifiable trait - but trawling through my past I cannot remember one lesbian of my acquaintance who smoked a pipe. So don't know where that comes from - I only know that I recognise it as a stereotype.
-
I think Vlad is being funny - there used to be a stereotype that lesbians were pipe smokers. At least I think he was being funny. He perhaps ought to get on stage before it wears off.
Anyhow, stereotypes usually exist based on some identifiable trait - but trawling through my past I cannot remember one lesbian of my acquaintance who smoked a pipe. So don't know where that comes from - I only know that I recognise it as a stereotype.
But stereotypes are soooooo funny!
-
But stereotypes are soooooo funny!
Well sometimes yes, sometimes no. It's probably a discussion worthy of its own thread.
But as an example, Joan Rivers was a quintessentially female Jewish comedian. It was a stereotype - fast-talking, sassy, take no prisoners kind of humour. Did she in some way transcend the stereotype.
Why, for example did John Inman remain just a stereotype - but Kenneth Williams in some sense transcended the stereotype he appeared to be? I dunno. Rambling I suspect.
-
I didn't know about the pipe smoking, a pipe of peace maybe? Depends on what is in the pipe I suppose; some years ago lesbians were well known to smoke cigars and that became a stereotype.
-
Why, for example did John Inman remain just a stereotype - but Kenneth Williams in some sense transcended the stereotype he appeared to be? I dunno. Rambling I suspect.
The mention of KW and the use of 'rambling' in the same para is too good to miss, for reasons that are obvious in this link;
Rambling Syd Rumpo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGRa_ZoOX24&list=RD4HvCRM2xjjY&index=8)
-
I'd like to claim I put in there for wise person to spot - but it was entirely accidental. But thanks for the link Gordon - classic Williams ;D
-
I'd like to claim I put in there for wise person to spot - but it was entirely accidental. But thanks for the link Gordon - classic Williams ;D
I'd like you to claim that too :)
-
That's very funny. Indeed radio had many subtley funny programmes in those days, listeners often didn't 'get' the double entende. I loved Round the Horne' which I used to listen to with my parents and I certainly didn't 'get' a lot it (neither did parents).
when I saw the "Rambling comment" it made me think of SteveH who used the monikor 'Rambling Syd Rumpo' on another forum for a while. Come to think of it, he is also a pipe smoker....
-
Of course a consenting adult homosexual relationship is on a par with a heterosexual one, you just don't want to see it that way!
Evidence, please.
-
And who instigated the rehashing of this topic? ::)
Trent, if you look back though the thread I think you'll find it was Floo. The first page or so basically pokes fun at the guy who is central to the OP story; it is then Floo who turns the thread into a rehash of the old arguments.
-
Evidence, please.
ME I'm evidence.
Different granted - but equal, absolutely.
No amount of wishful thinking on your part will change that.
-
Trent, if you look back though the thread I think you'll find it was Floo. The first page or so basically pokes fun at the guy who is central to the OP story; it is then Floo who turns the thread into a rehash of the old arguments.
No, of course. You never thought for one moment than when you posted the OP it would give you a chance to reply to Floo or someone else and turn it in your favourite direction. So now we are at a point where you are free to yet again claim that gay peoples' relationships are somehow less than that of heterosexuals.
You could have left it - but you didn't. You still took the opportunity.
Why would I expect anything less? ::)
-
Evidence, please.
John and George
Peter and Thomas
John and James
Ellen and Diane
Margaret and Jane
Trent and partner
Leonard and partner
Your evidence that you want to say to two people on this board that your relationship is such that you should have things allowed to you that they shouldn't?
-
Trent, if you look back though the thread I think you'll find it was Floo. The first page or so basically pokes fun at the guy who is central to the OP story; it is then Floo who turns the thread into a rehash of the old arguments.
nope you raised the topic, you own it.
-
Evidence, please.
Hope you always ask for evidence from everyone else, when you NEVER provide any yourself.
Our Trent and LJ are evidence, imo.
-
Evidence, please.
Are you asking for evidence for the first or second part of the sentence?
-
Evidence, please.
How about current UK Marriage laws (excepting N.I.) which provide the same status to all legal marriages irrespective of the gender of those involved: so under these laws all are 'on a par'.
-
Why would they be pipe smokers?
Who could be more affable or cordial company than a pipesmoker?
-
Who could be more affable or cordial company than a pipesmoker?
Smokers of any sort are not permitted in our home, smoking is a KILLER!
-
Smokers of any sort are not permitted in our home, smoking is a KILLER!
I wasn't suggesting you have them indoors. They are quite happy sitting on the patio with you shouting through the French windows.
-
I wasn't suggesting you have them indoors. They are quite happy sitting on the patio with you shouting through the French windows.
Fortunately no one of our acquaintance is a smoker, as they would not be welcome on our property. Blimey talk about being off topic!
-
Fortunately no one of our acquaintance is a smoker, as they would not be welcome on our property.
What about if they were on the pavement on their mobiles?
-
What about if they were on the pavement on their mobiles?
Yes but can you smoke and use a mobile at the same time?
I love the smell of burning hair.
-
Yes but can you smoke and use a mobile at the same time?
You have a point. Instead of mobiles what about Red Indian smoke signals?
-
MAybe. Can Floo read
Red Indian Native American smoke signals?
-
MAybe. Can Floo read Red Indian Native American smoke signals?
On careful reflection on the technical aspects of using pipes as a medium for communication, all that would be needed would be a fast smoker and a working knowledge of morse code.
-
And which book would that be, jeremy?
Your Bible. What other book did you think we meant?
-
I didn't know about the pipe smoking, a pipe of peace maybe? Depends on what is in the pipe I suppose; some years ago lesbians were well known to smoke cigars and that became a stereotype.
Honestly, this is the first time I have ever heard of lesbian pipe and cigar smokers.
-
Smokers of any sort are not permitted in our home, smoking is a KILLER!
Do you mean they are not allowed in your house at all or just that they are not allowed to smoke in your house? If the former, how do you police the regulation?
-
Do you mean they are not allowed in your house at all or just that they are not allowed to smoke in your house? If the former, how do you police the regulation?
She diligently smells their breath before they enter the house.
Unfortunately she's fucked if they've just had a tic tac!
-
Floo might not think it is unfortunate, depends who it is.
-
She diligently smells their breath before they enter the house.
Unfortunately she's fucked if they've just had a tic tac!
Yes, but for some she gets the smell of cigarettes before it wears off.