If, that had been the case for everyone then racial prejudice would never have changed. In those times as now. Not everyone thinks the same or believes in the same things.. But today you have a choice and can speak out. It has never been justified to believe black people a lower form of human being. Just as the attitude has not justification. Neither is it a good comparison to compare the colour of skin to homosexuality or religious bigotry. Skin colour has no choice whatsoever.
And sexual orientation has no choice whatsoever. To say that sexual behaviour does is to suggest that black people could opt for skin bleaching. As you say, times change, and unjustifiable positions get called out and become publicly unacceptable. The homophobic stance is in the midst of that process now.
No religion can be held responsible for the existence of such beliefs.
It certainly can, if:
a) some of the senior figures within that religion publicly espouse that opinion as a tenet of the religion
b) the underlying tenets or sacred texts of the religion espouse that opinion
c) both of the above
No it can't because the bigots of this world are atheists, pagans and religious.[/quote]
She asserted, whilst the Catholic church's consultation on the family tries to decide if gay people are acceptable...
All evil comes from man himself.
That we can both agree on, even though I'm confused at your justification - I thought you were of the opinion that all things come from God?
Only the Muslim religion today allows for homosexuals to be stoned to death in the streets...
Only theocratic nations allow for the persecution of homosexuals. How far are Uganda and Nigeria from this?
Think on.. if this country becomes a Muslim state then you won't be able to defend such beliefs or speak out without fear of death.
Yay, Christian extremism is better moderated by secularism than Islamic extremism... your conclusion from this is that Christianity is better?
No! that kind of thinking can put things everyone considers wrong at risk of becoming legal.
Like homosexuality? It's not wrong because I say so, it's wrong because it has no valid justification.
The fact is the right and wrong of it cannot be defined because there is no way to do that. It is prejudice of men and how they feel which cause the evil to take place.
No, it's really easy, you just have to decide what maxim you consider to be important. Does it hurt anyone? Then there's no evil there. Does it bring joy to people, then it's good.
No! it was about the sexual reproduction system not any relationship or that relationships are about children. It is a fact the sexual reproduction system only works with one of each sex together.
And what's that got to do with whether or not different sexualities are socially acceptable? That they serve a natural purpose - or, at least, don't unduly hinder natural purposes - is demonstrable by the fact that across the animal kingdom there are any number of animals in which homosexual behaviour can be observed, and it still hasn't been evolved out.
Though it may not be right in nature doesn't mean people should be mean to those who want to live together in a relationship.
Well-spotted.
It wasn't spotted it was a fact.
Like 'There's no justification for treating gay people differently from straight people'?
No you cannot. Because the colour of skin has NO choice involved.
And people who are gay have no choice in being gay.
And misogyny is about the sex of a person not their sexuality. We have Muslims who make women and girls to be worthless. Are you going to call them out on it?
Yes, each and every time I have the opportunity. I'm also going to call out Christians, conservatives and Hindus who believe that women should be quiet and stick to child-rearing or secretarial work, who objectify women in the media and believe that it's fair to ask female politicians who's going to look after their children whilst their working.
No more than you can say being gay is the only right way.
Nobody is saying that 'gay is the only right way', they're saying that it's wrong to say that straight is the only right way.
In reality we have both. We know both exist but they are not right for everyone.
No, they aren't, but we have to accept that what's right for those people is perfectly fine until and unless it has a negative impact on someone else.
How is hurting another for their beliefs any different than that of the beliefs the person held you are hurting them for?
Because their belief is a choice, apparently. Because their choice to express that belief is hurtful, and because their choice to try to legislate that belief is more hurtful.
You cannot change by force. You need to understand and find a peaceful settlement for all. Live and let live.
You mean like calling out bigotry as bigotry on discussion forums when I see it?
Equally... as human beings but not given special treatment which sets them apart from their community. Which is what is happening and causing more problems not helping their cause.
How is opening up social conventions and legal status to gay people giving them 'special treatment'?
Paganism and Christianity is not about equal treatment in society.
I'm not sure, I'd probably suggest that the majority of paganism are probably perfectly happy with the idea, certainly there aren't vocal elements of the pagan community raising money and political parties intent on imposing their way on everyone. Can you say that about Christianity?
Homosexuality is not about religion or magic.
No, it isn't, but too often religion is about other people's sexuality.
O.
