Homosexuality v. Christianity -- A FEW QUESTIONS:

Tell YOU what, I haven't read them, so I am in no position to say anything. Not to mention, I am Jewish. I'll leave it up to you, Frank and Timber, but I won't promise to stop riffing on all of your comments. I am learning a lot here, and following with interest, as is my right.

I'll do one, The Encyclopedia Britannica:

At no point does the Encyclopedia Britannica present any information that can be said to substantiate your claim that the early Church was a friend, facilitator, nurturer, or any other kind of positive force for science.

You certainly have not offered anything from the Encyclopedia Britannica to that effect -- and the one citation from that book had absolutely nothing whatever to do with the Church's position re: science.

I have called that to your attention several times.

Well, well...



I thought so. And I'm sure you haven't read Timber's sources either. But for some strange "reason", you embraced Timber's and rejected mine. There is a name for this strange "reason": faith. :wink:



So? Does that mean that you're to ignore the Middle Ages as a matter of faith/ethnicity? The medieval world is part of our common JUDEO-CHRISTIAN, GRECO-ROMAN heritage (even though nowadays people want to get rid of the Judeo-Christian half of it).



No problem. I now know the type of "evidence" they rest upon.



Thank you. I take it as a compliment.



No question about it. That's your God-given unalienable right. :wink:

Take care.

Cute emoticon.

But the right he has is obtained from law -- and unfortunately, it is anything but unalienable.

There's SUCH an interesting stylistic juxtaposition in Maliagar's posts -- I'm talking about the content versus the "my dears" and "take cares." Lah Dee Dah! Is this the Real Maliagar?

Actually maliagar, I don't really expect anyone to take my posts on religion or politics seriously, as I don't particularily care about either, hence the lack of research/knowledge on my part. However, I love a good debate, and I love learning, whether or not I agree with the opinion being defended. As for the medieval world, I am quite fond of their secular literature and music. Carmina Burana comes to mind, not the Orff version, which is a great setting for the text, but the original, which points out the excesses of the Church at the time. Tsk tsk...old habits die hard it seems (that wasn't even a nun joke). Anyway, two points: I do not consider myself Jewish by faith, simply by birth. Also, Greco-Roman is not in my heritage, as far as I know. Too much wrestling, and touching hot sweaty guys is a bit icky, isn't it, and a tad gay. Any time you need cooking tips though, I'm your expert. :wink:

Maliagar, the perhaps reason you can't see the forrest is that those woody, leafy things all around you are blocking the view. Indeed each of the authors I cited are possesed of significant academic and/or scientific credentials, and the specific works listed refute some or all of your assertions, whether you have read them, or even heard of them or not. I imagine if you were to do a websearch on the authors you easily could verify their credentials as authorities in the subject, and on the works themselves, to obtain links to criticisms of them, if you prefer not to obtain and read the originals yourself. That should prove sufficient for the satisfaction of any rational inquisitor. While there may be valid objection on the basis of access ... buying or obtaining them from a library, I did offer a list of free websites presented by fully accredited, highly respected institutions of higher learning, both secular and religionist, which provide comprehensive treatments of the medieval period. I've plowed through them all, among others, over many years, in context of other quests for information, and most immediately in course of remedial catchup for our debate. I have found no support for your assertions. To play your own game, "The truth has been revealed to you, embrace it".

That notwithstanding, in matters juris civilis, the issue of proof is determined by the preponderance of evidence. You hold to a minority, contrarian, partisan, even parochial viewpoint. That you fail to accord credence to, or even to recognize, the voluminous evidence presented against your case is of no consequence beyond that it amply illustrates your insusceptability to reason, logic, and learning. You may well be, even likely are, devoutly committed to your faith, but your baseless arguments do that faith neither honor nor other service. Rather, they expose it, and yourself, to ridicule and dismissal.

I fully expect you will reject that assessment, as you have rejected or ignored all that has gone before in this incredibly long, repetitious, forensically, academically, rhetorically valid series of rebuttals to and refutations of the fantastic propositions you wandered in here with. The exercize has been entertaining, to be sure, and has brought back to my attention several authors who had slipped from my memory ... thank you kindly for that.

As you yourself have indicated, there is no swaying those who are blinded by prejudice. To that, I will add no profit may be expected from an endeavor to educate those consumed by superstition. I am forced to conclude you share much with fundamentalist fanatics, Christian or otherwise ... the eccliastic fringe, the evangelically impaired.
A closing note inr eference to the authors, works, and websites I, and others, have presented to you:

Lege atque lacrima, maliagarus. Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione. Cogito sumere potum alterum. Die dulci fruere.

So I suppose you wouldn't have a problem if the law, one day, took that right away, right? What the law gives, the law can take away. No ground to protest. The law is the highest--or I should say, the only--authority... Interesting implications for our debate on homosexuality and the law.

TIMBER!!

"Die dulci fruere."

!!!!!!!

My guess is that if you examine carefully your culture, tastes, and the values you hold dear, you're gonna find out that you're much more Judeo-Christian and Greco-Roman than you realize. But hey, that's just a guess.



Good to know. :wink:

Take care.

Tartarin, If I coulda found a smilie wearing a toga, I'd have put it after the "Have a nice day" transliteration

You may be right maliagar, regarding my family tree, but seeing as we don't have records going back that far, I will go with what I know, not with what I speculate, and either way, if I did know, I would accept said history with interest, and no bias. You take care too.

I believe I see a pattern emerging here ... a disconect between what is written and what is comprehended by some readers.

Walter, I fully understand the difference between "cleaning house" and "gay marriages." It's the concept of inconsistency within the church that needs "cleaning." They can't point at "gay marriage" being a crime against the church while their own practice pedophelia, rape, and sodomy by priests of their own parisheners - all shoveled under the rug. It's a thing called ethics towards all humans. c.i.

I would have to agree with c.i. regarding the cover-ups, or simply moving priests to other parishes after "indiscretions"....it is just an attempt to cover up their shame at a religious law that cannot be codified, i.e. what the heart wants, the heart wants, and better to get it in an open, accepting environment, rather than an oppressive one. Also, we must accept that ethics are also inexact at best:

The field of ethics, also called moral philosophy, involves systematizing, defending, and recommending concepts of right and wrong behavior. Philosophers today usually divide ethical theories into three general subject areas: metaethics, normative ethics, and applied ethics. Metaethics investigates where our ethical principles come from, and what they mean. Are they merely social inventions? Do they involve more than expressions of our individual emotions? Metaethical answers to these questions focus on the issues of universal truths, the will of God, the role of reason in ethical judgments, and the meaning of ethical terms themselves. Normative ethics takes on a more practical task, which is to arrive at moral standards that regulate right and wrong conduct. This may involve articulating the good habits that we should acquire, the duties that we should follow, or the consequences of our behavior on others. Finally, applied ethics involves examining specific controversial issues, such as abortion, infanticide, animal rights, environmental concerns, homosexuality, capital punishment, or nuclear war. By using the conceptual tools of metaethics and normative ethics, discussions in applied ethics try to resolve these controversial issues. The lines of distinction between metaethics, normative ethics, and applied ethics are often blurry. For example, the issue of abortion is an applied ethical topic since it involves a specific type of controversial behavior. But it also depends on more general normative principles, such as the right of self-rule and the right to life, which are litmus tests for determining the morality of that procedure. The issue also rests on metaethical issues such as, "where do rights come from?" and "what kind of beings have rights?"

There's also a huge difference between homosexuality outside of the church and inside of the church. Homosexual acts ouside of the church by two consenting adults injurs no one. Homosexual acts by priests against children is a legal crime in this country as well as in western ethical terms. Rape against children by priests harms those children for life. Where's the balance? I have not seen it. c.i.

Here here, I have not seen it either.

BTW. Maliagar, what about that Encyclopedia Britannica thing?

well yeah but you see (if you only would open your biased mind and heart) the church created the scientific renascence and is only interested in furthering mans understanding of the cosmos of which he is a part (lord and master over) ergo these side issues of minor sexual exploits by a handful of misunderstood devotees of self-actualization enlightenment are victimized by scurrilous misanthropes and secular humanists (we know who you are C.I.) so its up to us to keep our eyes and lips shut whilst the church saves our souls. thank you for your attention to this matter.(gays will be burned on the west lawn on saturday-hot dogs and soda's for the children-burgers and beers for the adults.) Easter will be a little late this next year as the cathedral we were using as a calendar was set to Julian time.

Well, in the interest of fairness, ci, they all don't try to "shovel it under the rug." Some individual churches go out of their way to insure the problem is brought to the attention of their congregations in as forceful a way as possible.

Take a look at this as an example:

http://www.attrition.org/gallery/other/religion/tn/stained_glass.gif.html