Jahfin Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 I am very sorry that happened to you. I agree that many many Christians do evil things, and I try not be like them. But everyone fails at some point. I hope I am not being hypocritical...if I am I will definitely try not to be. I don't always succeed at it but I try to do my very best to be accepting of others but when religions (as well as other organizations) want to single out and persecute others that aren't like them, I have a very hard time being accepting of that. People that are gay should be able to have the same rights as the rest of us and shouldn't have to live their lives in fear. As long as there are people out there trying to turn passages from the Bible into law, I'm afraid that is never going to happen. Or, as a friend of mine said recently: Sometimes I can't believe the level of hate and/or disgust that some people hold in their hearts for gay people. Does a man loving a man or a woman loving a woman really affect your straight lives THAT much? No. It. Fucking Doesn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAS Posted August 6, 2012 Author Share Posted August 6, 2012 ^ The fact of the matter is that most of the hate people have for gays is imaginary. Disagreement does not equate to hate. However, if you can paint those who disagree to be hateful monsters you don't need to support your position intellectually, you simply fall to the ground and cry victim. Anyone who does not support the homosexual lifestyle is called a bigot, hate-monger, homophobe, and all sorts of other names. Everyone who disagrees with gays is not a monster. In fact, we could just as easily drag out all the crimes committed by homosexual against straights and especially Christians and say that all gays are perverts, rapists and bigots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jahfin Posted August 6, 2012 Share Posted August 6, 2012 I've got a friend who found God sometime back in the 90's and proceeded to burn every single one of his albums, CD's and tapes in a bonfire because of his beliefs. He's come around since then as far as listening to rock n' roll but I've had more than one discussion with him where he's threatened fire and brimstone to rain down on myself, my family members, my friends and anyone else that may disagree with his stance on homosexuality. I know how he feels doesn't go for every Christian because I also know of some gay Christians but you can only imagine how the fire and brimstone type Christians may have colored my experiences in that regard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lake of Shadows Posted August 6, 2012 Share Posted August 6, 2012 [am i the only one who finds it pointless to read these posts if they're over 5 lines]? You can skip them though if it's too tough for your attention span... but you might miss something. Not everything worthwhile comes in a 'soundbyte' or 'picture caption' size. I know. It's like people who are not gay opining on whether it is a choice or not. good one The Bible says Jesus hung around with the dregs of society, cured the sick, raised the dead, turned water into wine to keep a party going, he had long hair and a beard, wore sandals.....he's a tie-dye shirt away from being a Deadhead. Also, he was Middle Eastern, which makes me wonder why Republicans love him so much. They hate Muslims, but their main dude looked like one. Not to mention, the same God they pray to, Jews and Muslims pray to as well. All very baffling. Well, he was Jewish... there is that Support Israel thing... but still... hilarious post. ~~~~~~~~~ excuse me, I need to go change my drawers... oh, mercy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MollyHendrix Posted August 6, 2012 Share Posted August 6, 2012 I don't always succeed at it but I try to do my very best to be accepting of others but when religions (as well as other organizations) want to single out and persecute others that aren't like them, I have a very hard time being accepting of that. People that are gay should be able to have the same rights as the rest of us and shouldn't have to live their lives in fear. As long as there are people out there trying to turn passages from the Bible into law, I'm afraid that is never going to happen. I haven't persecuted, or even hate, any gay by disagreeing with them. I could name you event after event of people groups, one being gay and lesbian, persecuting Christians and I don't live my life in fear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docron Posted August 6, 2012 Share Posted August 6, 2012 [homosexual people are gay] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MollyHendrix Posted August 6, 2012 Share Posted August 6, 2012 I've got a friend who found God sometime back in the 90's and proceeded to burn every single one of his albums, CD's and tapes in a bonfire because of his beliefs. He's come around since then as far as listening to rock n' roll but I've had more than one discussion with him where he's threatened fire and brimstone to rain down on myself, my family members, my friends and anyone else that may disagree with his stance on homosexuality. I know how he feels doesn't go for every Christian because I also know of some gay Christians but you can only imagine how the fire and brimstone type Christians may have colored my experiences in that regard. I completely understand. I wish those people would be quiet! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cryingbluerain Posted August 6, 2012 Share Posted August 6, 2012 Regarding the analogy of the black civil rights movement with the gay marriage issue, many black leaders have come out against this claiming it to be a false analogy. When Obama came out in support of gay marriage many African-American church leaders condemned him for it saying that it is not a civil rights issue. The civil rights activist Walter Fauntroy, who organized Martin Luther King Jr.'s march on Washington D.C., is also opposed to gay marriage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jahfin Posted August 6, 2012 Share Posted August 6, 2012 However you slice it, denying rights to gays that the rest of us enjoy is indeed an infringement upon their civil rights. When Amendment One passed in North Carolina in May, not only did it infringe upon their rights but it also infringed upon the rights of straight couples. I wonder just how many people that voted for it were even aware of those aspects of Amendment One. I'm guessing none or else they would have never voted to make discrimination legal in the state of North Carolina. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docron Posted August 6, 2012 Share Posted August 6, 2012 You can skip them though if it's too tough for your attention span... but you might miss something. Not everything worthwhile comes in a 'soundbyte' or 'picture caption' size. [it has nothing to do with attention span and everything to do with efficiency]. [people aren't here to learn (I think that is evident)... just a bunch of back and forth on stubborn people tryin to convince other stubborn people they are right]. [these subjects never arrive at anything so why not condense it down]... [or at least use bullet points so those who want to scan quickly are able to get the jist] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAS Posted August 6, 2012 Author Share Posted August 6, 2012 I think it's wrong to compare gay marriage to the civil rights movement because in the long run what homosexuals are after is a pointless title and a minor tax cut. The civil rights movement was about something of actual value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MollyHendrix Posted August 6, 2012 Share Posted August 6, 2012 I have never denied them the right of anything. If they want to get married go for it, it is not my job to condemn anyone for anything they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TypeO Posted August 6, 2012 Share Posted August 6, 2012 My cousins the Mormons would beg to differ with you. Also, this differs with you as well: http://mormon.org/faq/church-tithing Your cousins notwithstanding, beg to differ all you want. It doesn't differ at all. The only thing that differs is your comprehension of that link. Tithing is not FORCED. Tithing is a voluntary covenant. If I don't pay tithing, I simply lose out on blessings I might otherwise have gained. I'm not chastised or cast out or excommunicated. It's voluntary. And your silly IRS analogy doesn't wash because using the phrase "the IRS expects you to pay your taxes" assigns the state of expectation to a government agency. That's as silly as saying the IRS is happy when you pay your taxes. Paying taxes is a law, and if you refuse you will be fined and / or go to jail. Tithing is encouraged, but failure to do so doesn't result in punishment. As for expectations ("If you expect people to do something, that doesn't sound all that voluntary to me"), Mormons are expected to follow the commandments, don't steal, don't covet, etc. They are expected to be a good person, to deal fairly with their fellow man, etc. What you aren't capable of understand about tithing is that it isn't a financial obligation. Since you KNOW there isn't a God, you are unable to understand what tithing is about. Mormons pay tithing because it's worth it. They pay it because they want to. If you pay it with the attitude that you HAVE to, or begrudgingly, you might as well not pay, because there is no benefit. Tithing is a principle of faith and obedience. As an Atheist, I guess you don't believe in the soul, either? No way for you to, I imagine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jahfin Posted August 6, 2012 Share Posted August 6, 2012 From my own personal experience, I know that there's no sense in trying to convince someone else to think the way that I do (or vice versa) when it comes to the issue of accepting homosexuality (as well as other volatile issues) but by the same token, I see no harm in discussing them either just so long as the conversation remains civil (the most difficult part). What I have learned however, is that I can let the opposing side know that just because we don't agree, it doesn't mean that I don't respect their views and beliefs. As I have mentioned, a recent discussion of this nature between myself and a friend did what I believed to be irreparable harm to our nearly 30 year long friendship because we are both so staunchly entrenched in our beliefs. Despite that, we are still trying to work through it. It would be a shame to throw away our friendship after so long but after he insulted myself and my family in the manner that he did I found it next to impossible for us to get back on speaking terms with each other but somehow we have managed to do so. To me, a friendship that's lasted that long is far more important than any discussion we may ever have that revolves around religion or politics. I've seen people on FB say, "de-friend me now if you don't believe in ____" but I'm not one of those people, at least not yet. I don't really see the point in being surrounded only by people you agree with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jahfin Posted August 6, 2012 Share Posted August 6, 2012 I think it's wrong to compare gay marriage to the civil rights movement because in the long run what homosexuals are after is a pointless title and a minor tax cut. The civil rights movement was about something of actual value. Without comparing the homosexuals' struggle to that of African-Americans as far as civil rights, I still believe they should have the same rights as heterosexuals, including the right to marry. Who does that hurt? Not a soul. Plus, you all know you'd just love to see a gay couple go at it on Divorce Court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmie ray Posted August 6, 2012 Share Posted August 6, 2012 ^ I still adhere to the notion that a man normally supports a woman and his family, not another man - especially if he's able bodied. You know very well this gay marraige thing is more about leeching benefits, than true love. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jahfin Posted August 6, 2012 Share Posted August 6, 2012 ^ I still adhere to the notion that a man normally supports a woman and his family, not another man - especially if he's able bodied. You know very well this gay marraige thing is more about leeching benefits, than true love. The gay couples that I know simply want to be able to have the same rights as everyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MollyHendrix Posted August 6, 2012 Share Posted August 6, 2012 The gay couples that I know simply want to be able to have the same rights as everyone else. What rights are we denying them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electrophile Posted August 6, 2012 Share Posted August 6, 2012 Their right to party. Adam Yauch of the Beastie Boys fought and died for it, but alas, they don't have it yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAS Posted August 6, 2012 Author Share Posted August 6, 2012 I think the whole debate shows too much government dependance. Why does the government have the right to decide who gets married in the first place? I'd like to see people stand up in mass and tell the government off. Many religious groups have non-government affiliated marriages. If we all did that Uncle Sam just needs to stop giving a tax cut for married people (which I'd like to see happen anyways through a fair or flat tax system but that's a good topic for another thread) and stop recognizing relational titles and the debate is over. If homosexuals organize their own community or religious structure and get married therein that's an issue only for the community or origination which chooses to or not to recognize said union. Whether or not it's right or wrong can still be debated but this whole national debate over something that is nearly pointless anyways would end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmie ray Posted August 6, 2012 Share Posted August 6, 2012 If we all did that Uncle Sam just needs to stop giving a tax cut for married people (which I'd like to see happen anyways through a fair or flat tax system but that's a good topic for another thread) and stop recognizing relational titles and the debate is over. Well, I think you've proposed something, that I didn't think of - that might need to be a step taken if gay marraige is fully embraced. We've split the original topic so many ways, and seem to be currently divided statistically by about 81 ways to look at homosexuality, marraige, politics, religion as a whole. We have an almost exclusively gay community called Cherry Grove nearby, where fashion designers for the rich and famous cohabitate in multi-million dollar places, while I struggle as a boiler mechanic for the State to pay each monthly bill and support a sick wife. I realize these are two extremes - but you can see why it's personal with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docron Posted August 6, 2012 Share Posted August 6, 2012 Their right to party. Adam Yauch of the Beastie Boys fought and died for it, but alas, they don't have it yet. [they're too busy hip-hop body-rockin doin' the DOO] [i said it] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electrophile Posted August 6, 2012 Share Posted August 6, 2012 Well, I think you've proposed something, that I didn't think of - that might need to be a step taken if gay marraige is fully embraced. We've split the original topic so many ways, and seem to be currently divided statistically by about 81 ways to look at homosexuality, marraige, politics, religion as a whole. We have an almost exclusively gay community called Cherry Grove nearby, where fashion designers for the rich and famous cohabitate in multi-million dollar places, while I struggle as a boiler mechanic for the State to pay each monthly bill and support a sick wife. I realize these are two extremes - but you can see why it's personal with me. So they have money and you don't. Would it be less of a problem if they were athletes and musicians, as opposed to fashion designers? I struggle to pay my bills too, but the fact the lesbian couple down the street doesn't, has nothing to do with me. In fact, the fact they're lesbians means jack and squat. They have more money than me. There's lot of people, gay and straight, who can say that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redrum Posted August 6, 2012 Share Posted August 6, 2012 I'm gay You're gay Hillary is gay God is gay Jesus is gay Mohammed is gay We're all gay So let's all be gay, happy and healthy. :^) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jahfin Posted August 6, 2012 Share Posted August 6, 2012 As I've stated previously, when Amendment One was voted into law in North Carolina back in May, not only did it strip gay couples of their legal right to benefits but it also did the same thing to straight couples. It also made discrimination legal. How, exactly is that being fair to both parties? Also, I don't think it's been mentioned in this thread but what about the case of the late Sally Ride's female partner of 27 years, Tam O'Shaughnessy who is being denied benefits due her because of the Defense of Marriage Act? Shouldn't she be entitled to the same benefits that straight people are? Again, what harm is it causing other people if gay people are allowed the right to marry? They should have the same rights as everyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.