Getting tired of the same old debates

Manwë was known for many things, but wisdom and power are two that lead the rest of his attributes. Join the Councils and discuss the more weighty matters of Tolkien Fandom.

Postby plunge » Tue Oct 03, 2000 9:24 am

Kel, as I said before, I don't think I am painting you with a broad brush. I have a long experience with your views on this issue, and you certainly aren't a cavalier about it as you are in this post. You support those sorts of laws, of imposing YOUR will on others. You DO believe that gay people, by virtue of being gay, have broken down a wall, that once down, leads them into all sorts of other devience. You made that very clear in the McKellan threads. You are prepared to determine treatment of all gay people based on the actions of liberal gay advocacy groups. <BR><BR>So I picked the wrong political labels for you. So sorry. It's a little confusing, because your logic borrows from collumn A and collumn B, and gets a little messy in between.
User avatar
plunge
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 1747
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2000 4:23 pm
Top

Postby The_Grey_Pilgrim » Tue Oct 03, 2000 10:28 am

Nienna,<BR><BR>Christianity DOES teach that we should love the sinners and reach out to them. However, when sinners say that they are not sinning and live a life of unrepentant sin they then say by their actions that they do not want to follow God, but would rather follow their own self. That goes for homosexuality, adultery, bearing false witness, murder, blasphemy, covetousness, and dishonoring parents.<BR><BR>What you put forth is a common misconception that Christianity should never draw lines or set standards but rather it should be inclusionary at all costs. That is just not biblical and not Christian in the least.
User avatar
The_Grey_Pilgrim
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 4620
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2000 11:03 am
Top

Postby plunge » Tue Oct 03, 2000 10:44 am

What do what many Christian sects think have to do with a civil right? Christians are welcome to believe whatever they need to. It's when they try to effect their beliefs into law that you'll get complaints from me.
User avatar
plunge
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 1747
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2000 4:23 pm
Top

Postby Nienna » Tue Oct 03, 2000 10:49 am

But that's okay - I understand that, TGP - I can see an organized religion teaching that homosexual practice is a sin and expecting it's members to live accordingly. I don't expect the Catholic Church to approve of gay "marriage". I don't even expect it, or any other church, for that matter, to turn a blind eye to those non-members who practice homosexuality. But condemning and persecuting individuals because of their sins isn't really in keeping with Christian faith, either, is it? Aren't we supposed to practice compassion above all other things? Shouldn't we always be loving and open to others even if we believe them to be sinners? <BR><BR>It's the petty name-calling and put-downs that get to me. Who here is so perfect that they get to make someone else feel less than human because of their shortcomings? We're not supposed to be doing the judging, remember? It's a hard thing (and God only knows I'm guilty of it myself), but I just don't believe anyone who hasn't had to deal with that particular struggle gets to make a judgement call.<BR><BR>Anyway - as you can see, these issues always leave me with more questions than answers...<img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif"border=0> And I rarely get it right myself.
User avatar
Nienna
Mariner

 
Posts: 5845
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2000 5:20 pm
Top

Postby peregin2k » Tue Oct 03, 2000 10:57 am

TGP,<BR>What if their being gay is in fact a part of a chemical imbalance in their brain (scientists are still figuring it out) are they still committing sin? What about the murders who were really insane that's why they kill? Are they sinners as well? We can't say that. Only God can judge who is a saint or a sinner. IMHO, everybody's a sinner.<BR><BR>Here in Canada, gays have established their own Christian church cause it seems to them, that no religious organization wants to take them in. Hey, if I remember my bible studies right, Jesus took in the sinners, tax collectors, prostitutes and such in his ministry. <BR><BR>Sorry, if this has become a religious debate. To those people who are narrow minded and think I'm a "gender bendering wacko" again for defending gays, the way I defended women, well, I just have an open mind about this things.
User avatar
peregin2k
Mariner

 
Posts: 7147
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 2:53 pm
Top

Postby Monk » Tue Oct 03, 2000 11:00 am

Thank you Nienna, you stated my position with much more grace and eloquence than I will ever be able to.<BR><BR> Keep Smiling<BR> The Monk
User avatar
Monk
Shield Bearer
 
Posts: 406
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2000 7:05 am
Top

Postby The_Grey_Pilgrim » Tue Oct 03, 2000 12:23 pm

P2k,<BR><BR>You answered your own question with the words <b>IMHO, everybody's a sinner</b><BR><BR>True that Jesus took in the sinners, He met people where they were. However, He did not leave them where they were. He told them all to sin no more. I doubt very much that Christ would not say the same thing to the unrepentant homosexual.<BR><BR>The gays starting their own church is just a fulfillment of Scripture. 2 Timothy 4:2-4, "Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage-with great patience and careful instruction. (3) For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. (4)They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths."
User avatar
The_Grey_Pilgrim
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 4620
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2000 11:03 am
Top

Postby Shelrond » Tue Oct 03, 2000 12:32 pm

TGP,<BR><BR>I just wanted to say thank you. While I do not agree with<BR>you on this issue, I respect you very much for stating your views<BR>and backing them up with the facts and citations you have without<BR>insulting people with different views.<BR>To quote the old saying, "I may not agree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it."<BR><BR>With respect.
User avatar
Shelrond
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 2523
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 1:00 am
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Top

Postby peregin2k » Tue Oct 03, 2000 12:52 pm

TGP,<BR>Isn't it a fact that there are a lot of Christian religions because of the same words you've stated? Because of the fact, it didn't suit their desires. I can cite some examples but I don't want to cause I might offend others. <BR><BR><BR>
User avatar
peregin2k
Mariner

 
Posts: 7147
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 2:53 pm
Top

Postby plunge » Tue Oct 03, 2000 12:52 pm

It must be nice having a creed with a built in explanation for why everyone who disagrees with you is wrong. Timothy is about where the entire NT goes horribly wrong- now it's all about infighting between sects, defining who's "pure" and has the most direct line to what God wants. Establishing heirachies of social control and power. Pretty different from the more gnostic dinner party spiritual liberation of early Christianity. By the time it gets to the period of Revelations, this self-righteousness has finally exposes itself for the violence and hate it really is. I still say mostly everything after Paul was illegitmate, unworthy of the religion, and certianly of the Gospels.
User avatar
plunge
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 1747
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2000 4:23 pm
Top

Postby The_Grey_Pilgrim » Tue Oct 03, 2000 2:06 pm

That's the plunge that I have come to know, always playing up that angle of the early Christians were planning to keep others down.<BR><BR>Just as an aside, plunge, it is REVELATION not RevelationS. It was ONE revelation to John from Jesus, not a bunch of RevelationS.<BR><BR>And yes it is nice indeed to have a creed to live by that sets the compass for my life in the right direction. But you make an erroneous assumption that I am always right about everything (though I thank you for the compliment), but there are many things that I am wrong about. And there are many places in Scripture where I have questions about myself. However, in the arenas that have been discussed on this board the Bible is quite clear about the topics such as homosexuality.<BR><BR>But since I am against homosexuality you may jump to the false belief that I HATE homosexuals. That would be wrong, and an uneducated assertion. Too many people who see homosexuality as being wrong are wrongly branded as being homophobic. First off, I do not have a FEAR of homosexuals. Furthermore, a phobia is an irrational fear, and most people who have a fear of the gay community have well founded fears, not all, but most.<BR><BR>P2K,<BR><BR>With all due respect your last post needs to be supported or it leaves me, at least, in the dark as to what you are trying to get at.<BR><BR>Shelly,<BR><BR>Thanks for the kind words. You are a prince amongst gentlemen.
User avatar
The_Grey_Pilgrim
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 4620
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2000 11:03 am
Top

Postby plunge » Tue Oct 03, 2000 2:41 pm

I didn't say you were always right about everything, but you have a credo that you hold believe to be innerrant, which not only amounts to the same thing, but allows you to disguise the pomposity and arrogance of such a claim in false humility. <BR><BR>I personally think Revelations (commonly reffered to that not to imply there are multiple revelations, but just as a standard way to shorten the name of the book) IS a document of hate, and in that characteristic of later books of the NT. It's all about war, revenge on political enemies trough fantasies of their destruction and damnation, and the coming of Christ as a warrior-king and political figure- the exact same thing that people foolishly mistook the messiah to be. It didn't have to be this way. But that's the direction the early church decided to take, and of course all these documents are written by people who support that direction, while the documents of others were discarded. What do YOU think the Revelation to John is all about? <BR><BR>I'm sure you don't hate homosexuals, but I hope you don't mind that from the perspective of the people you're trying to bestow your holy wisdom on, it amounts to about the same thing. You may call it hating the sin, loving the sinner, but for them, the "sin" is part of who they are. Hating the sin in this case is inevitably little different from hating the sinner.
User avatar
plunge
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 1747
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2000 4:23 pm
Top

Postby The_Grey_Pilgrim » Tue Oct 03, 2000 2:58 pm

plunge,<BR><BR>So now believing in Christ and being firm in that belief makes me pompous? You see, it is talk like that that is going to have you end up with coal in your stocking this Christmas <img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif"border=0>.<BR><BR>Seriously, that is quite a remark, but if you feel that way, that Christians mask their genuineness in such a way then I do feel really sorry for you. Oops! I am being pompous again, sorry, you know how we Christians are.<BR><BR>You asked, so here goes. The purpose of Revelation is to encourage the faithful to resist staunchly the demands of emperor worship. John informs his readers that the final showdown between God and Satan is imminent. Satan will increase his persecution of believers (Hummmmm! Fascinating), but that they must stand fast, even to death (as is happening all around the world know as it did back then). They are sealed against any spiritual harm and will soon be vindicated when Christ returns, when the wicked are forever destroyed, and when God's people enter an eternity of glory and blessedness.<BR><BR>Now, you will probably have a problem with that, but that is what I believe Revelation to be about. It also gives a pretty vivid description of what heaven will be like. <BR><BR>This comes not from John, but from Christ Himself and John basically serves as someone taking dictation.<BR><BR>Hey, plunge, let me ask you this. Are there any Christians that you find not to be as odious or pompous as me and my like? Or do you find Christianity and everything touched by it to be tainted? I am curious because you have always come out so forcefully anti-Christian in all of the posts that mention Christianity.<BR><BR>Is your problem with Christ Himself, or is it with the fact that imperfect Christians follows a perfect God? I am really and truly curious about this. Obviously you do not have to answer if you wish not to, but I would like to know where all of this anti-Christian sentiment comes from. Please tell me that you don't have a strange birthmark on your scalp in the shape of three 6's.
User avatar
The_Grey_Pilgrim
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 4620
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2000 11:03 am
Top

Postby Nienna » Tue Oct 03, 2000 3:07 pm

TGP, just out of curiosity, what exactly would a well-founded fear of the homosexual community be? <BR><BR>I'm not talking about sweeping generalizations about AIDS, or the usual nonsense about gays recruiting our children (oh please), or gays being pedophiles (there are statistically more heterosexual pedophiles than gay pedophiles) - I want a legitimate fear that an intelligent, well-educated person would have about the gay community.
User avatar
Nienna
Mariner

 
Posts: 5845
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2000 5:20 pm
Top

Postby runes » Tue Oct 03, 2000 3:13 pm

being gay is a sin?<BR>thats fu*king bullsh*t.<BR>how stupid is that.<BR>god, it shows how incredibly stupid and ignorant the world is, and how incredibly dumb and pregidous religion is.<BR>smarten up people.<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>when i refer to someone as 'gay' or 'fag' or whatever such as in a conversation, i use it only because it has beocme part of the language. id be like 'gimme that pencil fag' or something.they be like 'shut up b*tch'<BR>that is not however a crack at their sexual prefernce.<BR>i would NEVER ever refer to a gay as a fag. except of cpurse if we were good friends, and we were joking around.<BR>just as i would never call a black person a n------<BR>etc. etc.
User avatar
runes
Mariner
 
Posts: 5509
Joined: Wed Apr 12, 2000 12:00 am
Top

Postby The_Grey_Pilgrim » Tue Oct 03, 2000 3:26 pm

The concerns would be of the forceful pushing of the gay agenda on the public. The school districts where I am have catered to the curricula that the gay community has send to thousands of school districts throughout the country. The fact that the gay community has painted themselves in the likes of people who need their civil rights upheld like the African-American community that gay community likens themselves to a lot of the time.<BR><BR>Most of my friends who are black find that argument insulting at best and reprehensible at worst.<BR><BR>The main threat that the gay community sees to themselves is Christianity and they have attacked conservative Christians with a vengance. They have been screaming about intolerance for so long but have not stop to hear the intolerance coming from their own lips.<BR><BR>I don't think many people who are against homosexuality are afraid of AIDS. But even that is a trump card the gay community likes to play. Heart Disease and Cancer kill more people than AIDS does. I am not saying that we should not find a cure for AIDS (though for the most part if people Gay or Straight we not as promiscuous as they are this disease would not have spread so far). What I am saying is that the gay community has painted AIDS as the biggest killer of all time. It is not.<BR><BR>You may disagree with me on all of this but these are some of the concerns that some of us "homophobes" have.
User avatar
The_Grey_Pilgrim
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 4620
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2000 11:03 am
Top

Postby peregin2k » Tue Oct 03, 2000 3:28 pm

TGP,<BR>Pardon my french, but as a Lutheran you should have known what I'm talking about. Didn't Martin Luther create the protestant movement because of his desire to change something with these words "Are we not as capable as a faithless Pope of deciding what is conformed to our faith and what is not?" It's the same with the homosexual Christian Church, they think that "established religious beliefs" didn't conform with what they believe in. I hope I didn't offend you!<BR><BR>I'm not saying I agree with their move of making another religious sect, it's just that if only we embraced these people and didn't coerce them with our beliefs sooner or later they'll come to realize what they are doing is wrong in the eyes of God. I know a lot of gays who became straight, because we've accepted them in our bible classes, without telling them you're a sinner you should repent blah, blah, blah. It's up to that person to change his ways, with divine interversion, of course.<BR><BR>Geez, this thread became a religious one, again.
User avatar
peregin2k
Mariner

 
Posts: 7147
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 2:53 pm
Top

Postby Nienna » Tue Oct 03, 2000 3:44 pm

I never called you a homophobe.....<BR><BR>I agree that gay activist groups should not be pushing their particular political agenda through the public school system - but I don't think any special interest group should be doing that, so it's less a gay issue than a policy issue for me. I even have a huge problem with corporate sponsorship of school programs - something my husband and I don't agree on at all. I would also have a huge problem with any organized religious group pressuring a public school system to incorporate its agenda. <BR><BR>The most vociferous faction of the gay community has created the impression that AIDS is a larger problem than it is, and has managed to get proportionately more funding for AIDS research than other, more wide-spread diseases - the squeaky wheel gets the oil, as they say. To me that is also less a gay issue than a reflection of the increasing influence the entertainment community has on the political community - something else I have a problem with. The promiscuity issue affects both the gay and straight communities. And, while they may represent a small percentage of the AIDS-infected population, there are non-intravenous drug using, non-homosexual, non-promiscuous people who have AIDS. <BR><BR>As far as the gay community perceiving itself as attacked by the Christian community....well? Is the Christian community entirely innocent here? There is guilt on both sides.<BR><BR>Both Christians and homosexuals know the evils of persecution. You would think we could just behave with a little more compassion towards each other. Teach by example, and be kind.
User avatar
Nienna
Mariner

 
Posts: 5845
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2000 5:20 pm
Top

Postby plunge » Tue Oct 03, 2000 3:46 pm

You don't _just_ have a firm belief in Christ. You also have a firm belief that you've figured out certain things about theology and morality. A firm belief in lots of other things. You think your interpretation of the Bible is correct, and you think the Bible is a relgiously infaliable document that never contradicts or mistakes itself, and doesn't stoop to bald political manuevering in the form of religious lectures. I just happen to disagree. <BR><BR>I guess, I don't hate the sinner, just the sin. <img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif"border=0> (I'd still like to hear your response on that paternalisticaly confused problem) <BR><BR>I find gnostic Chrisitianity to be truest to the spirit of the Gospels. The kind that existed before poltiical authority became such an overiding concern, and people in the later letters starting making stuff up to suit their own ends. <BR><BR>Do you deny that the Revelation to John (who incidentally to anyone watching at home, isn' the apostle John) is just one of many many apocalyptic Revelations, all with different purposes and ideas and stories of the end times? Why does this one hold so much specific weight?<BR><BR>When people get pushed around, they push back. It's bad, but it's to be expected. African American's opinions on Civil Rights don't hold much more water for me than anyone elses- there's a "I got mine, who cares about you" mentality going on there, not to mention that many many popular black civil rights leaders are outright homophobes, who think homosexuality makes the black man weak before whitey. Blah blah blah.
User avatar
plunge
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 1747
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2000 4:23 pm
Top

Postby Barrabas » Tue Oct 03, 2000 4:04 pm

Hey guys and gals, haven't been here for awhile and I just can't resist some hot topics.<BR><BR>I definitely feel that homosexuals are unfairly persecuted in many areas of society. Having said that, I inherently feel that homosexuality is wrong, unnatural. It just doesn't fit with me very well. While I am OK with my feelings about homosexuality, others transmit these unorthodox feelings into homophobia, persecution and hate, and that is simply not fair.<BR><BR>Why would God create homosexuality and then make it a sin? I know that there is a nature-nurture issue here but I truly believe that homosexuality has some genetic predisposition. Certain religious groups have branded anything which is not "normal" or "natural" as a sin. That was their way with dealing wih these contraversial issues. I think God is more understanding than most of his churches are. Being gay is not evil. It's like saying being black is evil.<BR><BR>As for gays and marriage, why not? Why should it bother me if two guys or gals get hitched? How does it affect my life? The government has no business in the bedroom. Two people sharing their life, paying their taxes, and exchanging vows is normal, whether homo or heterosexual. If the churches won't allow it, than a justice of the peace should.<BR><BR>The homosexuality issue is just another aspect of social evolution. Back in the days, it was women acquiring power, then racial tolerance and now homosexuality. We'll get over it. Guys and gals, have an open mind.<BR><BR>Now please excuse me, I must go make love to my wife.
User avatar
Barrabas
Shield Bearer

 
Posts: 281
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 12:24 pm
Top

Postby The_Grey_Pilgrim » Tue Oct 03, 2000 5:14 pm

Nienna,<BR><BR>I never meant that you called me a homophobe, sorry if it seemed that way. I was stating that others would hurl that epithet at me in a needless fashion.<BR><BR>P2K,<BR><BR>Now I see where you are coming from, however, I would disagree with your point about Martin Luther starting his own church. That was never his intention. His intention was to Reform the Catholic Church that was in pretty bad need of some serious reformation. His main sticking point was the sale of indulgences to guarantee a spot in heaven ( a get of purgatory free card, if you will). Indulgences are in no way, shape, manner, or form Christian or Biblical. They fly in the face of Christ atoning for the sins of world and they cheapen His grace to all.<BR><BR>So there is a pretty clear difference between that and what you have said.<BR><BR><BR>plunge,<BR><BR>Gnosticism was by and large condemned as heresy for the duality it proposed concerning Christ in that they claimed that Christ was not a physical being.<BR><BR>The love the sinner hate the sin is simplified in Christs Vicarious atonement, and John 3:16 (Oops! More pompous creeds to live by), "For God so LOVED the world that He gave His one and only Son that whosever should believe in Him should not die but have eternal life." God loved the sinner (humanity) by sacrificing His Son to atone for the Sins of the world.<BR><BR>Christians, should be mirror images of Christ and do likewise. We should live a life of sacrifice for those around us. If I saw someone in dire need I would never turn my back on them no matter what they needed, or what kind of philosophy they touted. This does not mean that in saving them that I would be condoning what they believed in or what philosophy they touted.<BR><BR>Believe it or not I find Bill Clinton moral repugnant and devoid of ethics. Yet, if I happened to be around him in need I would help him. This does not mean that I would condoning his cigar poking, um I mean smoking, ways. <BR><BR>Also, just because I do not care for what he stands for does not make me want him dead. I would never punch him in the nose because he is against pretty much everything I stand for.<BR><BR>I would not do the same thing to the homosexual, and I have lived a life that proves that by the friends that I have. Don't make the assumption that because I am against homosexuality that I do not have gay friends.
User avatar
The_Grey_Pilgrim
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 4620
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2000 11:03 am
Top

Postby peregin2k » Tue Oct 03, 2000 6:14 pm

TGP,<BR>I think it's still the same thing, since the issue is, I've seen things that don't agree with my point of view then I have to reform it. So Gays established their own Christian group cause there are certain things that they don't see eye to eye with the "established religions". That's the whole point of my example, see I going to offend somebody.<BR><BR>The main threat of the whole gay community is Christianity, it aint so. It's all "established religion" (you could be put to death if you are openly gay in some cultures) and people who can't accept the fact that gays are people, too. <BR><BR>I'm glad to see that the Canadians on this thread are very open minded with this issue. <BR>
User avatar
peregin2k
Mariner

 
Posts: 7147
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 2:53 pm
Top

Postby plunge » Tue Oct 03, 2000 6:34 pm

That doesn't answer the question. For gay people, who they love is not equatable with the President boinking an intern. It's a part of their identity, who they are. You cannot hate the sin without hating the sinner. <BR><BR>The pomposity comes not from quoting rather vague Biblical ideas about how nice you are, but assuming you know for sure what the sin is, and what _political_ steps should get taken to deal with it. <BR><BR>You obviously need to study gnosticism a little more, because it's far too diverse to far under that slander. You also need to distinguish between Dark Ages/MiddleAges gnosticism and that oru early Christianity. Hersey is just another way of saying "a threat to our exclusive control."
User avatar
plunge
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 1747
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2000 4:23 pm
Top

Postby The_Grey_Pilgrim » Tue Oct 03, 2000 7:16 pm

plunge,<BR><BR>You are a broken record. When I get to you, you accuse me of being pompous. When I refute you, you claim I am ignorant and not as enlightened as you. And when I hit the mark, you bring up other points that do not bear on what we talk about.<BR><BR>The only reason that the biblical passages may seem obscure to you is that you probably have opened a Bible in a long time to really read it as opposed to dissect it and tear it apart.<BR><BR>Here's another "obscure" biblical passage for you, 1 Corinthians 1:22-23, "Jews demand miraculous signs and greeks look for wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to the Jews and foolishness to the Getntiles." Verse 25, "For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength."<BR><BR>Sorry for being pompous, but according to you it is in my nature afterall I am a Christian.
User avatar
The_Grey_Pilgrim
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 4620
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2000 11:03 am
Top

Postby legolas the elf » Tue Oct 03, 2000 9:38 pm

You've all turned this topic into a chaotic circus. Let things be...no need to be afraid!
User avatar
legolas the elf
Mariner

 
Posts: 8768
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 5:12 pm
Location: In the forest
Top

Postby finarfin » Tue Oct 03, 2000 9:40 pm

If you listen to enough Phish, does that make you Gay?
User avatar
finarfin
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 4624
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2000 9:57 am
Top

Postby Kelannar » Tue Oct 03, 2000 10:58 pm

"You cannot hate the sin without hating the sinner."<BR><BR>This is the most inane statement I've ever heard of from plunge yet. The idea that the sin is so connected to the person that denouncing one but loving the other is impossible is, I think, incredibly short-sighted. It is also sad, because ultimately any sin can be closely associated with the sinner. Can't there be something about a person that makes them predisposed to adultery? Or gluttony? Or avarice? Or pride? (We already know that left-handers score higher on most scientific social nonconformity tests, and that they commit more crimes. Should we hate them also because the sin is so associated to the sinners?)<BR><BR>I won't comment on the broken record nature of plunge's debate, as I've become fairly used to it.<BR><BR>Nienna, if people wanted to get legal benefits for sharing property, why don't they just form a corporation? Or a joint partnership? There are numerous ways to get so-called marriage benefits without being married. But marriage is, and will always be, a social recognition of a couple. There is no way around that. And most people in this country simply refuse to socially promote homosexuality, either because they think it is a deviant act or because they don't want to dilute the meaning of marriage.
User avatar
Kelannar
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 2549
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2000 9:30 pm
Top

Postby Nienna » Wed Oct 04, 2000 5:23 am

I think what plunge may have meant that, while loving the sinner and hating the sin is a nice concept, it is almost nearly impossible to accomplish. I said this in the last debate we had over this issue - it's one thing to love a murderer and hate his crime and quite another to love someone who is gay and then hate what is a very essential part of his being. <BR><BR>Kelannar - I guess I just don't understand what it is that people are so afraid of. What is the evil here? Two men or two women want to be socially recognised as a couple and all of a sudden my marriage is worth less? Sorry - not buying it. There are plenty of lousy heterosexual marriages that don't do a whole hell of a lot to promote the sanctity of marriage as a sacrament.
User avatar
Nienna
Mariner

 
Posts: 5845
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2000 5:20 pm
Top

Postby Beleg » Wed Oct 04, 2000 7:56 am

Nienna, I usually don't disagree with you openly, but I've read too many latitudinarian comments from you here in this thread to desist any more.<BR><BR>You can't honor the rule to love the sinner and hate the sin because it's so hard to do? That's your reason? How shallow. And how self-inflating into the bargain. The whole point of making the distinction is to remind ourselves, day in and day out, that we are to Love God and Love our Neighbor. We do the first because He is so worth loving. We do the second because our neighbors do not often show worth of being loved BUT ARE WORTH IT ANYWAY. So the ideal remains the goal and even if we fail to achieve the ideal every day, the very striving is edifying and makes us better people.<BR><BR>Now, to your second paragraph. You have now said several times that you consider the major argument against homosexual 'marriage' to be that heterosexuals somehow must think that such a contract cheapens the heterosexual institution. Well, it would, if the heterosexual institution could be any farther degraded than it was by feminists and the free-for-all divorce situation. The fact that simple disagreement coupled with no-fault unilateral termination has made the civil marriage contract a null. It is no longer a contract (in which both parties must consent for a termination to be effected). So the degradation was already there. This has got to be in the range of purposes Louisiana had in mind when it enacted 'convenant marriage'. Which WOULD be a contract because mutual consent for termination IS required in that case.<BR><BR>Gays want to get married. That has a certain cache, doesn't it? And gays would like to partake of that, even if by theft. There's also civil benefits to being married, like tax rates. But choosing the corporation, limited partnership or S/C corp route wouldn't have the moral approval that getting married would have. So gays want to get married. It's essentially a terrorist attack on the moral foundations of the country. A full-frontal assault on the very notion that there can be a shared morality that underpins the Rule of Law. And I'll tell you, you undermine the Rule of Law and you get anarchy. Some here seem to fantasize that they'd love anarchy. I suggest they buy guns (while they still can) because if there's no Rule of Law, then it's the war of all against all and you'll need your gang to help defend you.
User avatar
Beleg
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 3905
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 1999 8:28 am
Top

Postby helpingfriendlybook » Wed Oct 04, 2000 7:59 am

Alright, I've been avoiding this discussion for a while now. But, I'm in the mood to be kinda serious today. IMO gays should have just as much respect and the same rights as everyone else. Not giving it to them just makes us cowardly and hypocritical. There. I've said it.
User avatar
helpingfriendlybook
Mariner


 
Posts: 9768
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2000 12:00 am
Top

PreviousNext

Return to Philosophy: Councils of Manwë

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests