The Science of Gaydar aka Gay is not a choice.

Arella Mae wrote:

Oh I see, you think YOU should be able to deny my constitutional rights because you don't agree with me and that's ok?

Isn't that rather hypocritical?

No, Arella Mae. GW was just trying to turn the tables, to show you how it would feel if someone used that sort of language against you because of your beliefs and actions. (That's what she meant by "Get it?")

I think they're being a bit unfair and piling on, though. I've read through this thread, and I've never heard you say you think it's right to legally discriminate against homosexuals or deny them civil rights. Have you?

0 Replies

Eva wrote:

Arella Mae wrote:
Oh I see, you think YOU should be able to deny my constitutional rights because you don't agree with me and that's ok?

Isn't that rather hypocritical?

No, Arella Mae. GW was just trying to turn the tables, to show you how it would feel if someone used that sort of language against you because of your beliefs and actions. (That's what she meant by "Get it?")

I think they're being a bit unfair and piling on, though. I've read through this thread, and I've never heard you say you think it's right to legally discriminate against homosexuals or deny them civil rights. Have you?

I can't wait to see the answer to this one.

0 Replies

Green Witch wrote:

I don't think we can compare normal religious people to fundamentalists, it's a different mentality. Fundamentalists suffer from locked brains.

Hey, I dislike fundies as much as you do, GW. God knows I put up with enough of them regularly that I have a standing prescription for migraines. But they have a right to their beliefs just as much as we have a right to ours. I wouldn't deny them their civil rights.

[size=7]Uh, wait a minute. Maybe I would. It might solve a lot of things. [/size]

0 Replies

I NEVER said a word in this thread about denying anyone their civil rights! My point was only that you can disagree with something or someone and not hate it or them.

Greenwitch I am sorry about my hypocritical remark. I honestly did not catch the intent until JPB posted her post. I have not had enough coffee yet! Laughing

0 Replies

Green Witch wrote:

Arella Mae wrote:
Oh I see, you think YOU should be able to deny my constitutional rights because you don't agree with me and that's ok?

Isn't that rather hypocritical?

I basically inserted "the Bible" and "Bible Thumper" into the places you (or American fundamentalists) would have written "gay".

I don't care if people believe in the Bible or not, but I don't want them smashing their beliefs into the laws of the country at the expense of innocent people.

0 Replies

Eva wrote:

Green Witch wrote:
I don't think we can compare normal religious people to fundamentalists, it's a different mentality. Fundamentalists suffer from locked brains.

Hey, I dislike fundies as much as you do, GW. God knows I put up with enough of them regularly that I have a standing prescription for migraines. But they have a right to their beliefs just as much as we have a right to ours. I wouldn't deny them their civil rights.
[size=7]Uh, wait a minute. Maybe I would. It might solve a lot of things. [/size]

I agree, when one citizen is denied their rights the whole society is in peril.

0 Replies

OK, but I'm not willing to take on every citizen's problems with civil rights. At least, not today. I have a 5 o'clock deadline. :wink:

Gotta run. You guys be nice to Arella Mae, you hear? She's not the target. Blame the people who are actively persecuting gays. They're causing far more damage, and they need to be stopped. Better yet, use your vote. Let's stop electing people who don't represent our values.

0 Replies

Arella Mae wrote:

I NEVER said a word in this thread about denying anyone their civil rights! My point was only that you can disagree with something or someone and not hate it or them.

Greenwitch I am sorry about my hypocritical remark. I honestly did not catch the intent until JPB posted her post. I have not had enough coffee yet!

Arella, the whole point here is that this country is denying the rights of gays because some Americans believe the gay life style is a choice - a wrong choice. I'm trying to show that it's not a choice and thus they should have the same rights that you and I have.

I understand what you are saying about hate.
Non-sarcastic Example:I think it's wrong for couples to have many children because the Bible says "be fruitful". I don't hate these people, I don't want them to be denied their rights. If they chose not to use birth control* of course they will get pregnant - it's nature's (God's) plan, it's how we are made. I don't want them to be penalized by the government for what nature (God?) does to them. I see it as the same way with gays.

(*I'm sure no person accepting the Bible literally would ever use birth control)

If you believe that gays are entitled to get married,with full legal benefits, and adopt children like straight couples, then we have no argument. I can understand that you don't like what they are, and I understand that you don't feel hatred, but I could not accept denying people their rights because they were born different.

(Sorry if this is a little jumbled, I'm multi-tasking)

0 Replies

Greenwitch I completely understand your point. However, no, we don't agree and we never will. I'm ok with that. Obviously, you and others aren't. I'm ok with that too.

To me, voting for something that stems from something I believe to be wrong is putting my stamp of approval on it and I just cannot do that. I honestly have no problem with anyone that would vote for this or against this. It's everyone's right to vote their conscience. I'm not gonna get ticked off because someone disagrees with me on something or votes for something I'd vote against.

I do understand how others would consider me voting against someone's rights as denying them their civil rights and to be totally honest with you, I would more than likely abstain from voting on this particular issue, but yes, if I did vote, I'd vote no.

0 Replies

Inconceivable.

0 Replies

Hi Lash. I hope you are well.

Inconceivable? Perhaps to you but we have differing beliefs. I don't expect anyone to agree with me. That's not what discussion is for. I have gone through this topic countless times with many on this forum. It seems none of us have changed our views.

I'm ok with that. I believe what I believe and I believe it fully. I am not going to sway on what I believe God says and I am not going to apologize for it either.

0 Replies

Hey, Arella Mae, how the hell are you? Still thumpin' that bible?

0 Replies

Hey Gus. Yeah, still thumping that Bible! How are you? You're looking good in those overalls!

0 Replies

Arella Mae, I do understand where you're coming from. There are many passages in the Old Testament against homosexuality. It is very plain. Of course, there are also passages against many other things that churches now consider perfectly acceptable. Some of this may be attributed to advances in theology, but a lot of it has changed because cultures have changed in their thinking. What is not so plain is Jesus' attitude toward homosexuality. So, on this point, I prefer to adhere to the standard of grace rather than law.

A lot of research is being done on this topic, and it seems to be pointing toward a biological source for homosexuality/heterosexuality. I cannot ignore that.

At the end of the research, if it turns out that people are, in fact, born (created) one way or the other, would that cause you to reexamine your beliefs?

Would you then accept homosexuality as God-given, or would you consider it a mistake that God made?

I ask these things because this, I believe, is the root of our disagreement. My gay Christian friends believe their sexuality is as much God-given as is my heterosexuality. Further, they believe God wants them to have faithful, committed relationships rather than a series of affairs. These are deeply spiritual people who have struggled with their sexuality in a Christian context for years before coming to this understanding. Who am I to disagree? I have not spent 1/20th the time studying the Bible on this issue that they have, and they can speak far more knowledgably on this subject. As a result, I do not believe the subject is nearly as "cut and dried" as many conservative churches would have me believe.

0 Replies

Perhaps if everyone would understand that I believe God to be the ultimate authority on everything they might understand me a bit better.

Nowhere in the Bible does Jesus condone homosexuality or any other sin for that matter. Whether one is born gay or it's a choice, etc., isn't the point Eva. The point is God says the engaging in homosexual sex is wrong. If you are going to follow Jesus then you do have to deny yourself and your fleshly desires (sinful nature).

So no, there is no study on earth that can make believe homosexuality is a God-given thing. God does not go against His word. I have no animosity or hard feelings or any ill will towards anyone that is homosexual. That is between them and God or between them and whomever they chose it to be. The furthest I will go with it is to tell them what the Bible says about it and that I do not condone it and that's that. Because I disagree with people on this issue doesn't mean I hate them or feel negativly toward them in any manner.

0 Replies

Arella Mae wrote:

Perhaps if everyone would understand that I believe God to be the ultimate authority on everything they might understand me a bit better.

Eaten any shellfish lately?

(Yes, I know, we've been over this many times. I'm not re-entering the fray, just seeking to remind you of some of the issues we've already discussed.)

0 Replies

I am just bowing out of this conversation. It is going the same place it has gone before and I do not want to get into an argument with anyone and I certainly do not want to anger anyone.

0 Replies

Green Witch wrote:

I don't think we can compare normal religious people to fundamentalists, it's a different mentality. Fundamentalists suffer from locked brains.

It's always interesting to see someone try a new key. Frustrating and fruitless in the end, but interesting nonetheless.

I'm currently taking a class on Paul. It's taught by a (normal religious) Christian who walks a middle line between being a religious scholar and his own beliefs as a Christian. Current scholarship on Paul (the author of much of the New Testament and a strong influence on the rest) is that Paul himself was homosexual and the Church's stand on homosexuality is a direct result of Paul's self-hatred. As a Pharisee, Paul would have abhorred his own sexual orientation and would have extolled the virtues of sexual abstinence over personal submission into sin. The rest of the planet has been dealing with Paul's self-hatred ever since. Paul didn't do anything lightly. When he was persecuting early Jewish-Christians he persecuted them with vigor. When he was 'saved' and began converting gentiles he did so with equal vigor and came up with a whole new set of rules so they could join the club. He was extremely successful and persuasive. With the exception of a single letter from James all of the New Testament was written by Paul or subsequent to Paul's mission (including the gospels). All other scripture was excluded as heretical because it didn't completely fit the proper storyline. Not that it matters to a fundamentalist that they have been hoodwinked into following the religion of Paul instead of the religion of Jesus (their savior), but Paul's habit of looking for salvation through holy abstinence from life rather than Jesus' message of blessed participation in life has defined the difference between fundamentalist and normal religious Christians for centuries.

0 Replies

There is not one thing in the Bible to indicate Paul was a homosexual. The "thorn in Paul's flesh" is not specifically stated in the Bible as being a physical ailment or even a spiritual one.

Quote:

"And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure. For this thing I besought the Lord thrice, that it might depart from me. And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christ's sake: for when I am weak, then am I strong." (2 Cor. 12:7-10)

If what you are saying were true then Paul's teachings would be contradicting the teachings of Jesus. That dog don't hunt.

I am glad to see the convo took a different turn though.

0 Replies

Arella Mae wrote:

If what you are saying were true then Paul's teachings would be contradicting the teachings of Jesus.

Ding, Ding, Ding, Ding, Ding!

Give the lady a cigar!!

0 Replies

The Science of Gaydar aka Gay is not a choice.

Quick Links

My Account

able2know