Jetrell Fo said:
RicOlie_2 said:
OK, everyone go find a corner and sit there until you cool down. And everyone take your own corners (without fighting over them).
I call shotgun on the short bus corner.... :)
Yay, a short bus joke.
:/
RicOlie_2 said:
I believe Jetrell Fo was making a joke...
I'm glad at least someone got it.
:)
It makes me angry when people gang up on men like this because they (the homosexual men, that is) have decided against a homosexual relationship. Many of the same people who shout out the gospel of tolerance from the rooftops can't seem to be able to tolerate people who make the choice not to embrace an actively homosexual lifestyle, as if every person's life ought to revolve around sex and sensual pleasure.
^This is why I'm a huge supporter of self-determination. There should be nothing wrong with a homosexual openly and honestly rejecting a homosexual lifestyle IF that is what they truly want to do.
I'm rather curious what Bingo thinks of that article. I'd be willing to read that post. (I don't mean this as a wisecrack or as any other kind of insulting manner, I am just curious what Bingo thinks of this)
RicOlie_2 said:
It makes me angry when people gang up on men like this because they (the homosexual men, that is) have decided against a homosexual relationship. Many of the same people who shout out the gospel of tolerance from the rooftops can't seem to be able to tolerate people who make the choice not to embrace an actively homosexual lifestyle, as if every person's life ought to revolve around sex and sensual pleasure.
It makes me angry when people like yourself group all homosexual men together in a sentence like that as if they are a political party or a religious sect. The man in the article is a homosexual man but so are a lot of the equal rights activists. And he writes such palpable bollocks as
The notion of same-sex marriage is implausible, yet political correctness has made stating the obvious a risky business. Genderless marriage is not marriage at all. It is something else entirely....
...Two men or two women together is, in truth, nothing like a man and a woman creating a life and a family together. Same-sex relationships are certainly very legitimate, rewarding pursuits, leading to happiness for many, but they are wholly different in experience and nature.
Why?
Why is the social and civil joining of two loving human beings in anyway different because the both have matching genitals?
I felt as he did when Gay Marriage was being posited by the Conservatives (of all people particularly when you see the tea party disclaimer at the bottom the linked article) in this country and then I heard the arguments against it.
The same bigoted superstitious clap-trap.
Either marriage is about procreation or it's about love and commitment.
If it's about procreation the infertile, the old, the voluntarily childless should all be banned from marriage as they can't produce babies. Let them be demoted to a civil partnership, it's good enough for gays.
If it's about love any combination of humans should be able to openly declare that union and have it hold equal status with heterosexual marriage.
If this chap doesn't want to get married again (but this time to a man) he shouldn't but denying other people what they legitimately desire based on his own views is a disgrace.
He was more than happy to get married to his 'soul mate' before exploring his 'predilections' so why not let other gay men marry their soul mates? He was overjoyed at adopting children well...why not let two men or two women get married and adopt a child and share that joy? I'm glad he still has a friendly relationship with his children and their mother because sometimes it just doesn't work out that way due to homophobia.
With two dads in the house, this little moment of warmth and tenderness would never have occurred. My varsity-track-and-football-playing son and I can give each other a bear hug or a pat on the back, but the kiss thing is never going to happen. To be fully formed, children need to be free to generously receive from and express affection to parents of both genders. Genderless marriages deny this fullness.
More bollocks.
These moments happen in relationships of lots of different kinds. They adopted for fuck sake. The child isn't kissing his biological mother. he is kissing a person who he loves how is that different from kissing another same sex parent? It's just circular rhetoric.
At first, I felt liberated. I dated some great guys, and was in a couple of long-term relationships. Over several years, intellectual honesty led me to some unexpected conclusions: (1) Creating a family with another man is not completely equal to creating a family with a woman, and (2) denying children parents of both genders at home is an objective evil. Kids need and yearn for both.
The children are already adopted so they would have experienced the same degree of difference as they would as they would if both parents were the same gender. Hopefully barely none, beyond any other slightly novel difference between one set of parents and another.
One black, one brown, one works in a hospital, one is disabled, one is a Jew, one is a Hindu. Both men, Both women, One a man, one a woman.
Sexuality is fluid for many, and much more complex than many want to acknowledge. Gay and straight activists alike pretend this isn’t true in order to fortify their positions.
More bollocks. Most commentators of human sexuality will acknowledge there is a spectrum which at different points some people move up and down. From homosexual, bi-sexual to heterosexual. Some people...not all people.
Some people are born heterosexual and no matter how many boxes of chocs you buy them or how hard you pray or wish for them to change they will remain heterosexual all their lives. It's not just a phase for some people.
However I have two friends who met as Lesbian and Gay man and are now married two each other and have two lovely children. It just happened. It's every gay child's mother's dream but can happen. This guy thinks because it happened for him it should happen for everyone.
Marriage is not an elastic term. It is immutable. It offers the very best for children and society. We should not adulterate nor mutilate its definition, thereby denying its riches to current and future generations.
Yes it is. Marriage literally means to join. It came to mean a contract between a man and a woman ratified by the state in Northern Europe and now in some countries it means a contract between two people ratified by the state. In some cultures it can be a man with many wives. In a few it can be a wife with many husbands and in a few less it can be a group of people who join as a community of husbands and wives.
He seems to mean Holy Matrimony which is defined from faith to faith and church to church.
RIC2 It's weird that you should link to this item and bill it as the intolerant mass of gay men pressing on this poor soul when he seems to be the one pushing his hang ups and insecurities onto everybody else.
When you linked to that video of a woman quoting Leviticus it kicked off a bit of storm (me) on these boards. You claimed what she believed you believed. Leviticus as I've no doubt bored everyone senseless saying advocates violence as a cure for the social ill of being different and you couldn't understand why she was getting a negative response?
Maybe you should just think a bit more before you link to this sort of material.
If someone said he was a Muslim and was being persecuted by Jews for his beliefs, your instinctive reaction would probably be one of solidarity but if he then went on to explain his beliefs were that all Jews should be Muslims because it made him feel better about himself maybe your attitude would change.
This chap says he is happier now. He got married adopted some children, his wife divorced him, he had sex with guys he missed his kids and got back together with his wife. Well good for him. He screwed up on marriage but pulled himself together. I'm still stuck on the why he is allowed to screw up but other people aren't allowed to succeed first time and what that has to do with hedonism?
Love Ric. It's a pleasure sometimes but it's also a pain in the ass (no pun intended) but that's the responsibility that comes with commitment. Some gay people are probably getting married for the lulz but on the whole they are committing to an individual they love. They are opting not to just shake genitals and then wish each other a good afternoon.
I am committed to my partner and it's difficult. And we haven't had sensual pleasure for ages. He is a drunk and he can be hard work when drunk but I don't dump people just because the are inconvenient or an obstacle to my sex drive. This is the reality of most people I know in a long term relationship. Gay straight, old, young, rich, poor. People sticking with each other through good times and bad. Through the easy times and the challenging times. If that partner happens to be the same gender it a style of homosexual life.
How many times has a politician or evangelist tried to make the lives of committed people of difference difficult and then been found with drugs up their ass and a dick in their nose? Those wives stick by them out of love Ric2.
So if we all have the same possibilities from casual flings to sticking by someone collapsed sobbing in a pool of their own wine sick why not marriage?
Give me one good logical reason why not?
The show My Two Dads taught me everything I needed to know.
I understand your position, Bingo, but I think you misunderstand mine, at least in part. I don't agree with the entirety of the article, but I do agree with his support of civil unions on a lesser level than marriage. I understand that you find that offensive, but I find a lot of what you say offensive as well.
When I linked to that video of the girl quoting Leviticus, I did indeed agree with just about everything she said (I don't now). I also did expect that she would get a lot of hate for that, but what I was surprised at was the degree of hate. It was way, way, way overboard. It seems obvious to me now that she didn't have all the facts, not that she was a bigot or a hater.
Also keep in mind that I am only fifteen years old, so my opinions, or at least the specifics of them, are likely to change as I mature. I often can't make up my mind on things like this because I am constantly learning new information, and gaining a better understanding of what my Church actually teaches. When I signed up here, I had a completely different view on the subject than I do now. Since then, I have learned a lot more, including the fact that many of the things I had grown up believing were false. I currently have a fairly conservative view of the whole thing, but I no longer condemn anyone for being openly gay and marrying someone of the same sex, because I realize how it affects people when my religion is forced on them. I have no concrete opinion on whether same sex parents should be allowed to adopt or not. It seems to affect the way those kids behave, both in positive and negative ways. The negative ways could very well be caused by self-righteous people bullying them, but it's difficult to say for sure.
Hopefully we can learn to understand each other better, even if we don't agree. I have nothing against two guys or two girls who love each other pursuing a romantic relationship, but I don't support it and probably never will.
Warbler said:
I'm rather curious what Bingo thinks of that article. I'd be willing to read that post. (I don't mean this as a wisecrack or as any other kind of insulting manner, I am just curious what Bingo thinks of this)
In short, he doesn't like it, and it's probably better if you don't read his post.
For whatever reason, we've had our share of well-spoken 15-year-olds here, and Ric 2 is one of them. I often disagree with his positions, but he's got a great head on his shoulders.
RicOlie_2 said:
Warbler said:
I'm rather curious what Bingo thinks of that article. I'd be willing to read that post. (I don't mean this as a wisecrack or as any other kind of insulting manner, I am just curious what Bingo thinks of this)
In short, he doesn't like it, and it's probably better if you don't read his post.
I read what he said before you posted this. I have no comment.
TV's Frink said:
For whatever reason, we've had our share of well-spoken 15-year-olds here, and Ric 2 is one of them. I often disagree with his positions, but he's got a great head on his shoulders.
I agree.
Thanks guys. :)
Don't thank me, thank the booze and drugs. ;-)
Don't thank me, thank the booze and drugs. ;-)
JEDIT: And here we go again.
Don't thank me, thank the booze and drugs. ;-)
JEDIT: The forum is drunk.
Now I've got a craving for alcohol ...
RicOlie_2 said:
I understand your position, Bingo, but I think you misunderstand mine, at least in part. I don't agree with the entirety of the article, but I do agree with his support of civil unions on a lesser level than marriage. I understand that you find that offensive, but I find a lot of what you say offensive as well.
When I linked to that video of the girl quoting Leviticus, I did indeed agree with just about everything she said (I don't now). I also did expect that she would get a lot of hate for that, but what I was surprised at was the degree of hate. It was way, way, way overboard. It seems obvious to me now that she didn't have all the facts, not that she was a bigot or a hater.
Also keep in mind that I am only fifteen years old, so my opinions, or at least the specifics of them, are likely to change as I mature. I often can't make up my mind on things like this because I am constantly learning new information, and gaining a better understanding of what my Church actually teaches. When I signed up here, I had a completely different view on the subject than I do now. Since then, I have learned a lot more, including the fact that many of the things I had grown up believing were false. I currently have a fairly conservative view of the whole thing, but I no longer condemn anyone for being openly gay and marrying someone of the same sex, because I realize how it affects people when my religion is forced on them. I have no concrete opinion on whether same sex parents should be allowed to adopt or not. It seems to affect the way those kids behave, both in positive and negative ways. The negative ways could very well be caused by self-righteous people bullying them, but it's difficult to say for sure.
Hopefully we can learn to understand each other better, even if we don't agree. I have nothing against two guys or two girls who love each other pursuing a romantic relationship, but I don't support it and probably never will.
I hope you appreciate my treating you like any other adult and ignoring your age in terms of debating. Perhaps with age you will encounter more people which may alter the way you see things but at the moment you see things in a particular way and it is this you I'm talking to not a possible future you or the five year old you.
If you want a Biblical perspective beyond the Old Testament look to Jesus.
He walks into the homes 'respectable' people wouldn't go near and talks to the people staying there in the same way as 'respectable' people. He shows compassion and mercy and encourages others to do this also. He forgives transgressors. Now he sees the same 'sins' that Moses saw (and in this regard I would have some room for debate with the son of Man) but he ignores the prescribed punishment.
He reserves his wrath for people who claim to serve God but serve themselves. People who quote the law while subverting the spirit of it, who make money out of misusing the church and use it to put themselves above common people. Clerical hypocrites.
The sort of person who would cover up a scandal on one hand while lobbying against another group with church goers donations or laundered mafia money, or money raised by having an enormous property portfolio in cities full of homeless people. You know the sort, every organisation has someone like that, including every Church.
Repeating something you heard or read is not a viable form of judgement you need take your experiences from one aspect of life and transmute them into other situations.
It was indignation and a passion for justice that brought down apartheid, won universal suffrage and ended slavery (in those places where slavery ended) and this is what a large number of homosexual people feel. Indignation, a passion for justice and equality. You must feel that impulse yourself when you see injustice it's a very natural response. Give a treat to one child and not another and you will hear quite loudly how natural that impulse is.
When you hear people saying they want equality and your scripture seems to say something different and you can't put it down to mistranslation or a lost historical context consider the value of that text. Does it serve the spirit of Christianity to constantly raise passages which ask the reader to do things you would never countenance as modern day person of faith?
If your Levitican laws steer your church away from the good news remove them. For it is better for you that a part of the Bible be lost than the whole of it be tarnished.
Oddly enough, the only appropriate response to a well thought and argued post like that ^ is hallelujah!
VIZ TOP TIPS! - PARENTS. Impress your children by showing them a floppy disk and telling them it’s a 3D model of a save icon.
Bingowings said:
RicOlie_2 said:
[stuff]
I hope you appreciate my treating you like any other adult and ignoring your age in terms of debating. Perhaps with age you will encounter more people which may alter the way you see things but at the moment you see things in a particular way and it is this you I'm talking to not a possible future you or the five year old you.
I do indeed appreciate it. Please note, however, that I do indeed think about what I post, so your example of the video I posted before isn't an example of thoughtlessness. It was merely a different opinion I had, which has since changed more than once. I would appreciate if you kindly refrained from bringing it up because it is no longer relevant to my view, but it was indeed representative (for the most part) of my view at the time.
It was indignation and a passion for justice that brought down apartheid, won universal suffrage and ended slavery (in those places where slavery ended) and this is what a large number of homosexual people feel. Indignation, a passion for justice and equality. You must feel that impulse yourself when you see injustice it's a very natural response. Give a treat to one child and not another and you will hear quite loudly how natural that impulse is.
When you hear people saying they want equality and your scripture seems to say something different and you can't put it down to mistranslation or a lost historical context consider the value of that text. Does it serve the spirit of Christianity to constantly raise passages which ask the reader to do things you would never countenance as modern day person of faith?
If your Levitican laws steer your church away from the good news remove them. For it is better for you that a part of the Bible be lost than the whole of it be tarnished.
I don't think the Levitical laws tarnish the Bible at all, since they are an important part of our salvation history. Though the specific proscriptions are not all valid anymore, the morals presented in them is still considered entirely valid by the Church and myself.
Yes but the problem is people quote Leviticus often from a wonky translation and use it as an excuse for violence because it's supposed to be the word of God.
When some kids claim Slenderman made them do something horrid it's hard to see how they wouldn't have done something horrid in the name of anything because he is clearly not standing right behind you while you are reading this.
However when someone is raised to believe God is right behind you and before you as well as over to one side and wants (or at least wanted) a violent punishment for the crime of being a bit different it's hard not to see some problem with the text as a whole.
The text has all the bits we love, turning the other cheek, being kind to strangers etc and it has the stoning people to death and burning people alive bits.
One tarnishes the other (just as my proscribed/prescribed typo tarnished my earlier post).
Why do you think people like myself bring it up all the time?
We are tired of hearing it in the context of denying our freedoms and we are tired of being beaten up, set on fire, hung from cranes and bleached.
If it's a piece of history put it on a library shelf under, religious history.
If it's a piece of current scripture go out get a stone and join in with the nutters on the streets of Russia or Uganda or London.
Saying you are peaceful and holding onto to a piece of hate literature just doesn't wash.
This whole discussion is making me want to own a Bible annotated by liberal/non-inerrantist Christians.
This sounded odd... Pope Francis: '2%' of Catholic clergy are paedophiles'
...in the 90s sitcom Father Ted, there was a joke that was quite similar...
"If theres 100m priests in the world, and 10% of them are paedophiles, thats still only 10m." - Ted Crilly
...and to paraphrase a little, The Pope said much the same...
"If there's 417,553 thousand clergy in the world, and 2% of them are paedophiles, thats still only 8351 thousand." - The Pope
...great comic satire is saying the un-sayable 2 decades before it's acceptable. If 2% is the official Vatican number, then the real percentage is probably higher but still credit to Pope Francis for standing up and admitting this.
VIZ TOP TIPS! - PARENTS. Impress your children by showing them a floppy disk and telling them it’s a 3D model of a save icon.
Franny seems to be warning the clergy to stay on script because he has the power to have them imprisoned or tear down the whole operation.
If the real number is higher for the clergy in general, it must be much higher still among the Jesuits in particular.
Also, these utterly depraved satanists love to make a major distinction between pedophelia and pederasty.
DuracellEnergizer said:
This whole discussion is making me want to own a Bible annotated by liberal/non-inerrantist Christians.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_Bible
A Bible. A Founding Father. A Fanedit.