Using the Bible as an excuse for bigotry

[Outrider]

That's not more important in a discussion about whether RCs feel shame.

I think it is, because it shows that even when they do feel ashamed it's a fabrication.

O.

[Nearly Sane]

I think it is, because it shows that even when they do feel ashamed it's a fabrication.

O.

Baseless assertion

[ippy]

Since this thread was withdrawn and I was thinking about these two with their extremely unkind unthinking regressive views on homosexuality, I now remember a few years back, about 45-50 years ago a chap I new had much the same an exactly similar ignorant regressive view of gay people.

ippy.

I particularly remember having a difference with him, I maintain the as there always is and always has been a percentage of gay people in any population I maintained this fact makes it perfectly normal to be a gay person, they're not abnormal as he would have had it, it wasn't a very pleasant exchange.

Anyway he had two young children at the time, two boys and then, guess what 'yes' one of them turned out to be gay which shows that sometimes justice does and can happen.

I've always found things like anti-gay or anti-black attitudes toward our fellow humans by anybody whoever they might happen to be well very shallow, it's a pity it doesn't stop there.

   

[SteveH]

Since this thread was withdrawn and I was thinking about these two with their extremely unkind unthinking regressive views on homosexuality, I now remember a few years back, about 45-50 years ago a chap I new had much the same an exactly similar ignorant regressive view of gay people.

ippy.

I particularly remember having a difference with him, I maintain the as there always is and always has been a percentage of gay people in any population I maintained this fact makes it perfectly normal to be a gay person, they're not abnormal as he would have had it, it wasn't a very pleasant exchange.

Anyway he had two young children at the time, two boys and then, guess what 'yes' one of them turned out to be gay which shows that sometimes justice does and can happen.

I've always found things like anti-gay or anti-black attitudes toward our fellow humans by anybody whoever they might happen to be well very shallow, it's a pity it doesn't stop there.

 

I agree that homosexuaity is not sinful, and could be considered normal, but the fact that they exist doesn't prove it> Blind people and wheelchair-users also exist, but it isn't normal or desirable to be blind or have to use a wheelchair. (Obviously, it isn't sinful, either.)

[Roses]

I agree that homosexuaity is not sinful, and could be considered normal, but the fact that they exist doesn't prove it> Blind people and wheelchair-users also exist, but it isn't normal or desirable to be blind or have to use a wheelchair. (Obviously, it isn't sinful, either.)

So you are saying it is abnormal to be gay?

[SteveH]

So you are saying it is abnormal to be gay?

*Sigh* No. Try reading what I posted.

[Gordon]

I agree that homosexuaity is not sinful, and could be considered normal, but the fact that they exist doesn't prove it> Blind people and wheelchair-users also exist, but it isn't normal or desirable to be blind or have to use a wheelchair. (Obviously, it isn't sinful, either.)

I'm not entirely sure what you mean here: are you suggesting that being gay is somehow akin to having some kind of deficit?

[Nearly Sane]

So you are saying it is abnormal to be gay?

None of what Steve wrote lends itself to that interpretation

[Roses]

*Sigh* No. Try reading what I posted.

I did and you gave the impression that whilst you don't believe it is sinful to be gay, it is abnormal.

[Nearly Sane]

I'm not entirely sure what you mean here: are you suggesting that being gay is somehow akin to having some kind of deficit?

No, he's just making the point that because something exists and can be seen as normal doesn't necessarily mean it's good.

I am interested in why he thinks that trentvoyager's relationship is in some sense not as valid as a straight one as regards marriage though

[Roses]

None of what Steve wrote lends itself to that interpretation

He suggested being gay is akin to having a disability.

[Nearly Sane]

I did and you gave the impression that whilst you don't believe it is sinful to be gay, it is abnormal.

What part of 'I agree that homosexuality is not sinful, and could be considered normal' are you missing?

[Aruntraveller]

I am interested in why he thinks that trentvoyager's relationship is in some sense not as valid as a straight one as regards marriage though

Indeed.

The only reply I got to that query was "Don't be silly". A very considered, measured and in-depth response I thought.

[Nearly Sane]

He suggested being gay is akin to having a disability.

No, he didn't. He didn't say it was like a disability, he pointed out that just because something exists it does not necessarily make it a good thing. He's not saying homosexuality is a bad thing, rather he's taking issue with ippy's post that implies that because something has existed that it's ok.

[Aruntraveller]

What part of 'I agree that homosexuality is not sinful, and could be considered normal' are you missing?

There does sound to be a qualifying element to the "could be" part of the statement, perhaps?

[Nearly Sane]

I agree that homosexuaity is not sinful, and could be considered normal, but the fact that they exist doesn't prove it> Blind people and wheelchair-users also exist, but it isn't normal or desirable to be blind or have to use a wheelchair. (Obviously, it isn't sinful, either.)

Could you explain though why you don't see trentvoyager's relationship as deserving of the same status as mine?

[Nearly Sane]

There does sound to be a qualifying element to the "could be" part of the statement, perhaps?

Not in the context of his reply to ippy

[Roses]

What part of 'I agree that homosexuality is not sinful, and could be considered normal' are you missing?

Have you read his post? He goes on to state, Blind people and wheelchair-users also exist, but it isn't normal or desirable to be blind or have to use a wheelchair. (Obviously, it isn't sinful, either.) That certainly gives the impression it isn't desirable to be gay.

[Gordon]

No, he's just making the point that because something exists and can be seen as normal doesn't necessarily mean it's good.

I am interested in why he thinks that trentvoyager's relationship is in some sense not as valid as a straight one as regards marriage though

I see: perhaps I misunderstood.

Even so, if the point JC is advancing is that some relationships could be viewed as being less good, less desirable or less valid than others does require some kind of justification.

[Nearly Sane]

Have you read his post? He goes on to state, Blind people and wheelchair-users also exist, but it isn't normal or desirable to be blind or have to use a wheelchair. (Obviously, it isn't sinful, either.) That certainly gives the impression it isn't desirable to be gay.

Which he needs to do to give examples of things that exist that are normal, sinful and not desirable. He's taking issue with ippy's argument that because something exists and is normal, that does not in itself make it desirable. He's not saying homosexuality is not desirable.

[Nearly Sane]

I see: perhaps I misunderstood.

Even so, if the point JC is advancing is that some relationships could be viewed as being less good, less desirable or less valid than others does require some kind of justification.

He isn't in that post making any comment on homosexuality other than it is not sinful and can be seen as normal. Ippy's post implies that mere existence of something makes it ok, Steve simply in that post points out that is not the case.

[Roses]

Which he needs to do to give examples of things that exist that are normal, sinful and not desirable. He's taking issue with ippy's argument that because something exists and is normal, that does not in itself make it desirable. He's not saying homosexuality is not desirable.

If you say so, but his post doesn't make that clear.

[Gordon]

He isn't in that post making any comment on homosexuality other than it is not sinful and can be seen as normal. Ippy's post implies that mere existence of something makes it ok, Steve simply in that post points out that is not the case.

I've now read back, including ippy's post which is key to what Steve said, and which I neglected to read properly earlier, and realise that I have indeed misunderstood: my apologies, Steve.

[Nearly Sane]

If you say so, but his post doesn't make that clear.

It's perfectly clear in the context of him replying to ippy's post. You are filling in stuff that his post doesn't say.

[Outrider]

I agree that homosexuaity is not sinful, and could be considered normal, but the fact that they exist doesn't prove it>

The emphasis there is mine - that implies that you think it isn't normal to be gay.  That might not be what you intended to suggest, so feel free to clarify, but that phrasing makes that implication.

Blind people and wheelchair-users also exist, but it isn't normal or desirable to be blind or have to use a wheelchair. (Obviously, it isn't sinful, either.)

Where did 'desirable' suddenly creep into the conversation - the discussion was about 'normal'.  If you mean 'normal' in the sense of 'typically occuring' then being gay is entirely normal; not only does it appear throughout human history, it appears in other places in the animal kingdom too, it appears to be an entirely typical part of the spread of animal behaviour.

If, on the other hand, you mean 'normal' in the sense of 'conforming to social or cultural norms' well than that's rather dependent upon which cultural norms you choose to cleave to.

O.