Religion — Page 59

TV’s Frink said:

RicOlie_2 said:

Becoming a priest, nun, or monk is a choice. Celibacy is not imposed on anyone, but those who choose it seem to get by just fine. Black people, on the other hand, do not choose to be black.

Obviously I was exaggerating for effect. But you’re exactly right, being celibate is a choice. So God creates heterosexuals and homosexuals, and he tells heterosexuals they have a choice about having sex or not having sex, and either choice is ok as long as they’re married (or not priests). He tells homosexuals they have no choice.

Sounds reasonable.

Ah, that’s what you’re getting at. A person’s vocation (whether it be marriage, the priesthood, lay celibacy, or the religious life) is pretty much predetermined by God. It is the decision of the individual to follow it or not. In the case of gays and lesbians, their vocation is celibacy. That being said, there is an obvious difference, since someone called to the priesthood can still marry (a sin if they deliberately reject their vocation) can remain married without any further sin, but the same is not true according to Catholic teaching if a gay man marries another gay man and remains married.

The idea that our lives shouldn’t be difficult and sometimes painful is not one that I subscribe to, however, and I’m afraid that while I have sympathy for people who suffer this way, I don’t think remaining celibate is the end of the world. If someone imposed celibacy on me, it would be a bummer, but I could live with it just fine. I have many fulfilling relationships that do not involve sex and never will, and I would be willing to keep it that way if that is what God wants. If I didn’t want what God wants, I wouldn’t be Catholic…

The Full Definition of bigot as provided by Merriam Webster

a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance

The definition doesn’t support your accusations so in essence the foundation for your sensitivity is without substance which makes your claims even more inane.

RicOlie_2 said:

TV’s Frink said:

RicOlie_2 said:

Becoming a priest, nun, or monk is a choice. Celibacy is not imposed on anyone, but those who choose it seem to get by just fine. Black people, on the other hand, do not choose to be black.

Obviously I was exaggerating for effect. But you’re exactly right, being celibate is a choice. So God creates heterosexuals and homosexuals, and he tells heterosexuals they have a choice about having sex or not having sex, and either choice is ok as long as they’re married (or not priests). He tells homosexuals they have no choice.

Sounds reasonable.

Ah, that’s what you’re getting at. A person’s vocation (whether it be marriage, the priesthood, lay celibacy, or the religious life) is pretty much predetermined by God. It is the decision of the individual to follow it or not. In the case of gays and lesbians, their vocation is celibacy. That being said, there is an obvious difference, since someone called to the priesthood can still marry (a sin if they deliberately reject their vocation) can remain married without any further sin, but the same is not true according to Catholic teaching if a gay man marries another gay man and remains married.

The idea that our lives shouldn’t be difficult and sometimes painful is not one that I subscribe to, however, and I’m afraid that while I have sympathy for people who suffer this way, I don’t think remaining celibate is the end of the world. If someone imposed celibacy on me, it would be a bummer, but I could live with it just fine. I have many fulfilling relationships that do not involve sex and never will, and I would be willing to keep it that way if that is what God wants. If I didn’t want what God wants, I wouldn’t be Catholic…

Hang on. Tell me if I’m misunderstanding you, but you’re saying that God chooses certain people to be homosexual and it’s their duty to be celibate?

If I’ve understood you correctly, I think this is a perfect example of how religion brainwashes people (who are otherwise intelligent, like yourself) into justifying hate. I know, I know, you don’t hate the sinner, you hate the sin, but this is absolute lunacy.

In addition, I’ve always found the idea that any one religion knows what God wants to be extremely arrogant (let alone completely unlikely).

This God guy sounds like a real asshole.

moviefreakedmind said:

RicOlie_2 said:

Ah, that’s what you’re getting at. A person’s vocation (whether it be marriage, the priesthood, lay celibacy, or the religious life) is pretty much predetermined by God. It is the decision of the individual to follow it or not.
In the case of gays and lesbians, their vocation is celibacy.

Their vocation is not having sex with people of the same gender.

Easy to say when the people who claim to know God’s will decide that your particular orientation fits their plans.

The idea that our lives shouldn’t be difficult and sometimes painful is not one that I subscribe to, however, and I’m afraid that while I have sympathy for people who suffer this way, I don’t think remaining celibate is the end of the world.

That’s pure hatred.

Forcing celibacy on people for no good reason is hateful, yes.

I’m not exactly sure what you are trying to say, but when you are homosexual, requesting celibacy and requesting not having sex with the same gender are exactly the same thing.

“Requesting” is also a disingenuous way of putting it when it’s considered a sin to not comply. It’s not a request, it’s a demand.

moviefreakedmind said:

Yeah it’s a sin, but if you don’t believe that then what does it matter?

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2014/topic-pages/victims_final

18.7 percent were targeted because of bias against sexual orientation.

Giving people reason to hate is not a good idea. See Trump, Donald.

moviefreakedmind said:

It isn’t a reason to hate.

I’m sure that’s comforting to the victims and/or their families.

What many religions teach regarding homosexuality is hate, regardless of how they want to excuse it or dress it up. And even if it isn’t, a certain segment of our citizens take it as hate and use it to fuel their anger. Trump does the exact same thing with race. It’s like buying a crazy person a gun and then saying it’s not your fault if they use it.

And I never said you’re here to comfort anyone, or empathize, or even understand. That’s quite clear.

My point is that many religions promote a lot of hate, either directly or indirectly. I’m not claiming that Christianity is guilty of this while Islam is not.

Ric isn’t spewing hate, I never said that. But his religion promotes it in some ways.

And I know you weren’t talking about hate crimes, but my contention is that religion’s attitude towards homosexuality often helps contribute to those hate crimes.

I don’t care what you do personally, you just often have a “who cares?” attitude that bothers me because I think we should all care about basic decency. Obviously we disagree on what basic decency is (not a shot at you, most everyone disagrees about this on some level). It’s just that you’re “who cares” attitude seems to show up almost any time we’re talking about a disadvantaged group other than your own.

moviefreakedmind said:
Until a group of insane Christians occupy territory the size of small countries and start flying planes into buildings, let’s stop with the ISIS comparisons.

Yes, because the Crusades…never happened

This is the mindset that irritates me. You can’t take historical documents and evaluate them based on today’s moral standards and then wonder why they aren’t as pretty as John Lennon’s Imagine.

I’m pretty sure the merit of a deity’s moral code should be immune to the passing of time. Pretty much if his morals were right then they should be right now because he’s God.

EDIT:

Also I’m sure it was Al-Qaeda that brought down the WTC

moviefreakedmind said:
Yeah, but that was about 1000 years ago. Also, the Crusades were a response to the aggression from the Islamic Empires of the east. If you want to point out atrocities committed in the name of Christ, talk about the Inquisition.

I could have sworn there were multiple Crusades.

Probably, but from the perspective of an unbeliever why are you evaluating him as though he is real?

Whether or not I so deities as fictitious means nothing because people who are believers use their God as a basis for their real life moral foundation.

TV’s Frink said:

RicOlie_2 said:

TV’s Frink said:

RicOlie_2 said:

Becoming a priest, nun, or monk is a choice. Celibacy is not imposed on anyone, but those who choose it seem to get by just fine. Black people, on the other hand, do not choose to be black.

Obviously I was exaggerating for effect. But you’re exactly right, being celibate is a choice. So God creates heterosexuals and homosexuals, and he tells heterosexuals they have a choice about having sex or not having sex, and either choice is ok as long as they’re married (or not priests). He tells homosexuals they have no choice.

Sounds reasonable.

Ah, that’s what you’re getting at. A person’s vocation (whether it be marriage, the priesthood, lay celibacy, or the religious life) is pretty much predetermined by God. It is the decision of the individual to follow it or not. In the case of gays and lesbians, their vocation is celibacy. That being said, there is an obvious difference, since someone called to the priesthood can still marry (a sin if they deliberately reject their vocation) can remain married without any further sin, but the same is not true according to Catholic teaching if a gay man marries another gay man and remains married.

The idea that our lives shouldn’t be difficult and sometimes painful is not one that I subscribe to, however, and I’m afraid that while I have sympathy for people who suffer this way, I don’t think remaining celibate is the end of the world. If someone imposed celibacy on me, it would be a bummer, but I could live with it just fine. I have many fulfilling relationships that do not involve sex and never will, and I would be willing to keep it that way if that is what God wants. If I didn’t want what God wants, I wouldn’t be Catholic…

Hang on. Tell me if I’m misunderstanding you, but you’re saying that God chooses certain people to be homosexual and it’s their duty to be celibate?

If I’ve understood you correctly, I think this is a perfect example of how religion brainwashes people (who are otherwise intelligent, like yourself) into justifying hate. I know, I know, you don’t hate the sinner, you hate the sin, but this is absolute lunacy.

In addition, I’ve always found the idea that any one religion knows what God wants to be extremely arrogant (let alone completely unlikely).

It’s the duty of everyone that God calls to be celibate, whether or not they’re gay. No one’s forcing it on them, though (and I have no belief that gays don’t go to heaven if they don’t choose celibacy)… There are a lot of sacrifices that my religion demands. To quote Jesus, "Then Jesus said to His disciples, “If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross and follow Me.” I don’t view it as being an unfair demand, just a different one.

That being said, I understand perfectly why you see it as being unfair. I wouldn’t expect you to understand why sacrificing such important things for a deity makes any sense, because from an atheistic/agnostic perspective, it’s stupid. But to say that gays have an unfair restriction placed on them is also only half true.

But I’m sure you know my personal views. I don’t think any of this stuff should be imposed on anyone.

Lord Haseo said:

moviefreakedmind said:
Until a group of insane Christians occupy territory the size of small countries and start flying planes into buildings, let’s stop with the ISIS comparisons.

Yes, because the Crusades…never happened

One of the main causes of the Crusades was the danger pilgrims to the Holy Land faced due in large part to its overlords at the time. Also, the Moors and whatnot were making incursions into Europe and threatening Europe as a whole. The Crusades themselves were entirely justified. A lot of the stuff that happened during them was far from it, but it’s not like mass rape and pillaging was sanctioned by the Church. Of note as well is that a sizeable percentage of the crusaders were the criminals and low-life of society, if I remember correctly from what I’ve read.