How fair is it?

[Alex Bragi]

In world troubled by drugs, hatred, poverty, racism, religious intolerance, sexism, violence... etc, it seem quite incredulous that so many religious institutions put such an emphasis on what people do in their own beds. I'm talking about homosexuality. But wait a secular second, alternatively, is it really anyone else's business what beliefs these same church groups choose to adhere, within the walls of their own institutions?

Last September a predominantly gay New Orleans church was kicked out of a Catholic HIV/AIDS residential facility after the Catholic Archdiocese learned members support same-sex marriage. The Metropolitan Community Church of Greater New Orleans was told August 4 it had 90 days to vacate its temporary space at the Project Lazarus complex, an AIDS hospice that is overseen by the Catholic Church. MCC and the Catholic Church entered into a one-year lease agreement in May for the MCC, a church founded specifically for gay people, to worship at the Catholic facility. But according to an Archdiocese spokesperson, after the contract was signed and more inquiries were made into the MCC, the Catholic Church learned of its stance in support of same-sex marriage and decided to terminate the contract.

Well, let me tell you, when I first I read this I was angry, very angry, but then I had a long think about. I'd actually forgotten it, until now thanks to a comment by Warbaby1943, I've begun thinking about it all over again-- and thinking it might be an interesting topic for discussion here.

Like all arguements there are two sides. On one hand it would seem hypocritical not to welcome and embrace any, and everyone, who wishes to worship and/or be associated with the church. Should a body that extols the virtures of 'love thy neighbor' really be so prejudice towards a minority group (or any group) like this one? Do they have that right? After all just like the colour of our skin we have little choice in our sexuality.

On the other hand, many Christians have very specific ideas about homosexuality. They simply and strongly believe it's a moral sin. So, isn't this a little like not throwing pork sausages on the bbq at the synagogue on a Saturday afternoon? Maybe Muslims banning a booze up at their mosque, or Jehovah's Witnesses refusing the blood bank van access to their kingdom hall? Wouldn't it be rather hypocritical for a group to express their disapproval of a particular behavior but then condone the same behaviour in others?

When you choose to become a part of a particular community, within the wider community, you're expected to abide by certain rules. It's a kind of unspoken agreement, an understanding that you will support and encourage the ideas of the group, that you will do your best to live by their standards.

Ok, we're not talking about the freaking KKK here. So, are they just some bunch of old fuddy duddies who haven't moved into the new millennium yet? Now, will they in time move on, or do they need to be pushed? Should they just be left behind to stew in their own dogma? Or, do they deserve to be admired and praised for their continuing allegience to their faith and beliefs?

How fair is it really criticize these staunch believers? I can't walk into a mosque without permission because I'm an infidel. I can't enter certain parts of a synagogue because I am a woman. Damn it, I'm not entirely welcome to march in the annual rainbow parade because I'm not gay! That's life.

I leave you to ponder. :)

[Tojo]

Easy Alex.....:32:


Tojo

[_ID_]

Pondering is fun.

Your two questions revolve around two simple phrases in scripture, thus both the answer to your very thought provoking question.

First, just as you said. Love thy neighbor as thy self.

When following this particular line of thinking you tend to fall in line with nearly all the other suggested 'commandments' or words spoken by the authors of scripture.

Second, Judge not lest ye be judged.

So if you say you love your neighbor, but don't agree with their lifestyle. Follow this scripture. Thus you relieve yourself of the burden of saying how someone else does something is wrong and imoral.

If you follow those two teachings, you should do very well to not consider the imorallity or faullicy of others. Concentrate on your own salvation, and worry about if your living your life how you should. Contemplating the eternal salvation and damnation of others falls into the second step I mentioned.

V/R
ID

[Timberwolf]

"After all just like the colour of our skin we have little choice in our sexuality."

The problem is somewhere around 90%+ of those who consider homosexuality a sin don't believe this. They believe you can change if you just click your heels together and say "There's no place like home" enough. Hence complete nonsense like that "orientation therapy" or whatever they call it.

"On the other hand, many Christians have very specific ideas about homosexuality. They simply and strongly believe it's a moral sin. So, isn't this a little like not throwing pork sausages on the bbq at the synagogue on a Saturday afternoon? Maybe Muslims banning a booze up at their mosque, or Jehovah's Witnesses refusing the blood bank van access to their kingdom hall? Wouldn't it be rather hypocritical for a group to express their disapproval of a particular behavior but then condone the same behaviour in others? "

Except I don't approve of these stupid and ridiculous taboos enforced by other religions either.

"Now, will they in time move on, or do they need to be pushed? "

They've had give or take 2000 years to "move on". It's time to stop hoping they wake up "someday" to the little fact that they do not have the right, or the knowledge, to dictate to all people what is "right" and "wrong".

"How fair is it really criticize these staunch believers? "

Any *genuine* believer shouldn't cower from a challenge. If your belief in something is so strong, not only should they not be hiding from genuine debate, they should be openly encouraging it to push their "truth" if that's what they arrogantly choose to label their opinions as.

Instead, we get hit over the head over and over with the same, ass-backwards, easily dismissed with even the slightest research, dogma and taboo. Because they have no case. At all.

"Or, do they deserve to be admired and praised for their continuing allegience to their faith and beliefs?"

If one admires pulling the wool over one's eyes and stubronly refusing to change when presented with facts as a good thing, then I suppose so.

[karnautrahl]

I used to wonder about a God that was omniscient, omnipresent and perfect. Can He/She create a flawed universe? One where there are beings who are able to go against His/Her will?
Is there such a thing as God's ultimate truth and only one way to live? I don't believe that could be possible. Even if there was-no way, on any Earth would He/She condone any violence or coercion to spread this "way".

[Warbaby1943]

If I accept the fact tat homosexuality is not a chosen path but one that the person has no choice but to follow, do I then have to condone homosexual marriages?

I can live with anyone next door to me and it doesn't bother me but I also have traditional values. Over the years I have come to accept many things I would have, at one time, thought not possible. I'll back the gays in anything but homosexual marriages. I don't think I'd ever be able to accept that.

I've disagreed with the Catholic church on issues before and in the matter of homosexuality, I believe they are very hypocritical but as you say, Alex, they have that right to say it. I have the right to disagree and if I were gay I'd be fighting just as hard as many are for all rights and privileges others enjoy including marriage. Just because I don't agree with it from this side of the fence doesn't make me right. I'll never be able to walk a mile in their shoes but I can sympathize with them.

[Asia]

Alex,
I love that you posed such a question on which to ponder - I'm tired and all I can think of saying is that we, as a society of all denominations, prefer to celebrate hate than we do love. Doesn't take much thinking to figure that one out. And it angers me too - not just because I am bi-sexual (I get hassle from lesbians as much I do hetrosexuals - often given the interesting tag of 'lipstick lesbian'). I can laugh in the face of adversity but when the Religious elders preach that knowledge waits (and I'm still waiting) and moral judges watch people in pairs feared and limited in sex (they dare to push fake morals, insult and stare) well, that just does nothing more than make me blessed for having experience both sides and knowing love will never be an immoral thing. The prevention of AIDS and HIV (somehow linked with homosexuality by the RC church), now, that is the most immoral and insulting thing ...
~Sorry for rambling, I'm very tired~
Asia
xxx

[mkemse]

If I am not mistaken, i read somewhere that ALL Men are created equal, it does not say "All Men are created equal unless they are Gay, Black White Hisapanic" If couples or an individual are over 21 years of age their life style is THEIR chosen life style I have never heard anywhere of say a Gay individual being arrested for assult or rape, Never read an article anywhere where the gay life style has brought dow nthe comminuty values in any American City, or gays were the sole reason for a rise in crime
If everyone could learn to co exist together the world as a whole would be better off.
What consenting adults choose to do in the privacy of their own home is THEIR busnies, and notthat of the governement ect.
The Unite Staes seems more concerned about whether women should have th eright to control their reproductive systems, whether gay marriages should be legal, immagration right,s (we ALL start out as imigrants) what the government needs to focus on are issues like the drug problem we have in the USA, fightting terrorism, the homeless in this country and leave issues such as gay marriages and abortions rights among other hot button issues to those it effects, let's ahev the goernemtn concentrate on the of issues effecting the nation, drug addiction, fightinig durgs, and leave the other issues to families and individuals
We have amid term election in Novemember, a perfect time for all American to say enough is enough, we as citizen who elect our officals demand the folowing and elect those who the majorit want to see changes made let WAshington and the world know in Novemmbertheissues that Ameircan citizens are coincerendd about maybe then the Goverment will not only serve the people, butthose in Washington will actualy get paid tyo do the work and support the issues of those who elected them to office. Wouldn't that be amazing, if we actualy elected officials who listen to their constiuates. Stranger things have happen
Let;'s leave abortion rigfht, to families and their doctors, Gay rights to individual states, their are to many far more important issues facing this countryright now for congress to tie itself up with these other issues

congressneeds to focus on and deal with terrorism, homelessness, mental health issues. imigration AND NOT on whether a women should or should not have the to decide if she wants an abortion or is 2 people ofthe same sex should be allowed to marry, if we solve the issues of war, drugs, imigration rights and terrorism, i believe the other issues will overtime resolve themselves
Please use November to elect those who support OUR views as a majority, or forthose who choose not to vote, tha is yourright, but if you choose not to vote do not complain about those elected, you had your chance to speak up and choose not to
As long as a Gay couple does not intrude in my life i could care lesss if they marry, i never support or not support gay marriage, or abortion rights, i do support the goerment focusing on issues that effect the entiore country and our safety

[Uzukasai]

I have never had a problem with homosexuality, if its what makes them happy then go with it, I just never saw why we have to make laws over it and why people have to argue against it, challenge it, and try to convert people away from it so much? I think Thomas Jefferson put it best when he said, "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg", so I just never saw the point, if its a sin, well fine then they are happy living in sin, it doesn't mean you will.

However, argueing this from a religious stand-point, and yes I have tryed to study the bible and anything else religious I can get my hands on, I have a firm believe that Christianity is indeed anti-homosexual. I may have taking these out of context as I can't remember where every qoute is located in every book, (I still don't know how some Christian's can do that), *whips out the bible*

"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.: Leviticus 20:13, 23

The above to me seems pretty clear with its message.

"For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:"

"And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. " Romans 1:26 ,27

Vile Affections in the above verse is homosexuality ans as far as I know makes the only reference to lesbians in the bible. Paul in Roman's also explains that the "Natural Use" of woman is to basically be sex objects to men which is just, ugh. There are a few more passages that I can remember that have anti-homosexual messages but im too lazy to look each one up.

Anyway there you go, personally I have nothing against homosexuals, feel free to continue with what your doing, but I am a firm believer that to be Christian is to be anti-homosexual. *shrugs*

[little_rose]

I think that most of what's been said above is in context all true and depending on your personal belief, okay. But what really gets my goat is when ppl suggest that to be homosexual, in any shape or form (speaking as a bi woman) is below standard.
Alex, you mention that:

'When you choose to become a part of a particular community, within the wider community, you're expected to abide by certain rules. It's a kind of unspoken agreement, an understanding that you will support and encourage the ideas of the group, that you will do your best to live by their standards.'

Well, Christianity is not simply something which has arrived at our doorstep as a full-blown message on how to live- it is something which has evolved according to events and history. The way we live now is part of that history, and to suggest that living as a homosexual, or being part of a loving gay relationship is below standard and immoral, detracts from the struggle of thousands of men and women who have fought to be recognised by the Church and by wider society as people who HAVE standards, and who are part of our society and who wish to make a contribution- either within the church or outside of it! I know many Catholics (myself included) and christians who are gay and who struggle to make sense of this God who is forgiving --but won't forgive this fundamental wish to be with someone who makes you happy.
I think that it's fantastic that in certain parts of the US communities are taking it upon themselves to operate outside of the credo of the Pope who - let's face it- isn't the most loving person in the world, and are creating churches which actually comply with the (majority) of Jesus' messages-- to be forgiving and understanding of other people and to not be abusive. (okay- so i don't know the bible off the top of my head either, but i do know the gist of what is said).
Moreover, the church cannot ignore that what goes on outside of it's doors, also happens inside. I mean, you just have to look at the news reports of priests in England and Ireland, and no doubt much further afield who have been charged with abusing vulnerable members of their own church (usually boys) to see that the 'homosexual problem' is embedded within the make-up of how the church is run and is not going to go away in a hurry.

I think it's great to have a discussion about this, but it's important to remember that just because you are christian or catholic does not necessarily mean you are straight- it's not a given, but rather something which has been laid down in the bible and scripture because of events unfolding at the time- if you think about it in a historical manner, maybe having sex with a woman rather than a man when Jesus, and all his apostles were around WOULD be rather stupid because it meant that your line, or small family holding wouldn't bear sons and therefore any labour power would have to be found outside the lineage- expensive!

Anyway, i've said my bit. Good discussion point alex.

xx

[Putnamcocpl]

Excellent posts, everyone.

The one thing that i find personally Ironic, is, a institution, such as the catholic church... would make any comment on Homosexuality, given the number of Homosexual Pedophiles they have allowed for CENTURIES to be "men of the cloth"

Denounce, Renouce, or just Plain Bounce the current crop... It doesnt change the facts. It had be well documented, that the "straight" preists knew what was happening, but didnt turn the others in.

I believe it was a very important figure in any christian religon, that made the statement that ALL of em are supposed to live by..:pray:

Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone....

Somebody, tell them to drop the rocks, and clean up thier own mess first.

Oh Bi the WAY... Bi Women dont count... GOOD Entertainment is where you find it:icon_twis

[Warbaby1943]

Excellent posts, everyone.

The one thing that i find personally Ironic, is, a institution, such as the catholic church... would make any comment on Homosexuality, given the number of Homosexual Pedophiles they have allowed for CENTURIES to be "men of the cloth"

Denounce, Renouce, or just Plain Bounce the current crop... It doesnt change the facts. It had be well documented, that the "straight" preists knew what was happening, but didnt turn the others in.

I believe it was a very important figure in any christian religon, that made the statement that ALL of em are supposed to live by..

Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone....

Somebody, tell them to drop the rocks, and clean up thier own mess first.
You're so correct and at times I hate to admit I'm Catholic. It is the old "Do as I say, not as I do" theory at its worst.

[scabrat]

Alex,
I - I'm tired and all I can think of saying is that we, as a society of all denominations, prefer to celebrate hate than we do love.
Asia
xxx

Couldn't agree more. Two guys show love for one another, and its 'and abonination' If an army goes in and masacres an entire community in the name of spreading the word of God, it becomes devout and righteous.

:dunno:

Interestingly that also sems to be reflected in societies censorship policies 'spit!'

They appear more concerned about nudity and sexual imagery, than violence, dishonesty and ill treatment of others.

:dunno: :dunno:

[Lady Dena]

Last September a predominantly gay New Orleans church was kicked out of a Catholic HIV/AIDS residential facility after the Catholic Archdiocese learned members support same-sex marriage. The Metropolitan Community Church of Greater New Orleans was told August 4 it had 90 days to vacate its temporary space at the Project Lazarus complex, an AIDS hospice that is overseen by the Catholic Church. MCC and the Catholic Church entered into a one-year lease agreement in May for the MCC, a church founded specifically for gay people, to worship at the Catholic facility. But according to an Archdiocese spokesperson, after the contract was signed and more inquiries were made into the MCC, the Catholic Church learned of its stance in support of same-sex marriage and decided to terminate the contract.
No . . . no. . . no. It's one thing for the Catholic Church to exclude homosexuals from their houses of worship if they want, but it's quite another for it to discriminate when running an AIDS Hospice. When a church is engaging in the normal business of a church, it has the right to discriminate on religous grounds. But when a church is engaging in an essentially secular enterprise, it should have to follow the same rules as any of its secular counterparts. If the Chruch of Not Liking Black People wants to exclude black people from their services, fine. If that same Church wants to operate a hospital, then it shouldn't be able to exclude black people any more than any other hospital.

The problem is that in most states (contrary to popular belief) it is perfectly legal to discriminate against people based on their sexual orientation. I would explain why I think that's wrong, but on this board I think I'd preaching to the choir (excuse the pun).

[OttifantSir]

This discussion (off the forums) have been a long one, and a heated one.

To the point of gay/homosexual marriage, I'd like to ask: What is marriage?
To me, it's a limitation. The way marriage vows are usually exchanged, it says that "to this person I pledge my undying love, my labour, my life, my thoughts on all of life, my seed to bear/produce children, in all eternity"
This seems to me like a limitation on humankind. There are the people who are content with living with one person the rest of their life. And there are those who would be content to have a spouse, but not content to let that spouse be all of their feelings and affection. That loves on one more than one level. Then, you have those that feel a marriage is wrong altogether.

I believe that religious communities have the right to set limitations on their faith. Why not? They are comprised of people with similar mind-sets, beliefs on how the world is made, and so on. They have the right to disagree with people, as do we all. But the story of someone being evicted from an AIDS-hospice for being consentual towards gay-marriages is wrong. The catholic church has the right, IMO, to deny the services of the church (testimonial, weddings, baptism, communion, etc) to those which it disagrees with. But when you treat a disease, as said before, you do not have those rights. I have the right to choose whether or not I want to listen to Jehova's Witnesses showing up at my door, cause that's intellectual, religous. But I do not believe myself to have the right to deny helping one of them if they knock on my door asking for help with a wound.

My true beliefs on religion is that almost all of the world has it backwards, but that's another topic altogether.

As for the "predatory" priests we have all heard about within the catholic church: They do contradict the idea that homosexuality is wrong. The church allows them to continue their work. To me, that is saying: We condone that our priests, who should be celibate, have sex with members of the same sex.

I have read the Knights Templar-trilogy of Jan Guillou, and in this, there is a lot of facts with regards to the Catholic Church. One thing that comes to mind from these books, is the talks of Earl Birger, the founder of Stockholm, and the one bringing peace to Sweden, with Cardinal Wilhelm of Sabina. (This is a proven fact, with Papal commands to back it up) Wilhelm says he wants the Swedish Priests to live in celibacy. Not because it is stated so in the Bible, or it being a commandment or direction from either God or Jesus, but because the Church would soon be piss-poor if priests had heirs. They have to have some heritage from their father, right? And marrying off a girl meant giving some "gift" to the family of the man who was "forced" to look after this woman the rest of her life.

I am off-topic here. My point is, that every religion is a corporation looking out for itself. They crave money, fortune, comforts just as much as anybody else. But they accomplish this without a product to sell. What do they have to sell? Sure, crosses, rosaries, forgiveness of sins and a sure-fire way to keep people giving all their life by saying that all you think is a sin, so you'll never be free of sin. (This is mainly the way of the Catholic Church, I know. But that's the faith/religion I am most knowing of.)
If any other public corporation did these things without claiming to be a religion, they would soon be shut down by laws, or people recognising it for what they were: A scam, a hustle.

I believe people are free to choose what they wish to believe in. They want to believe in Creatonism? Fine by me. They want to believe in Evolution? Great, doesn't bother me the least. As long as they respect that other people might not share their beliefs for some reason, I am fine with it.

What do I believe? It's a mix. I believe some divine being (Dragons in my case) created the Universe, Earth, mankind. But not as finished products. We didn't simply spring forth as humans. We evolved from the first idea of this divine being.

Religious communities working to ban the teachings of evolution from the schools, are, to me, narrow-minded stupid fucks. Or people trying to take religion off the curriculum. As long as the teachers don't try to promote one religion, or try to ban the idea of science, I believe the children have the right to learn whatever we can teach them. And that includes such diametrical opposites as Creationism and Evolution.

I don't remember where I heard it, but I believe it was Benjamin Franklin saying it: If we each had an apple and then exchanged it, we would all have one apple. If we each had an idea and exchanged it, we would both have two ideas.

That's something I really like. That shows that you have to be open to new influences.

Well, time to end this. I could probably have discussed this from both sides of the fence for several hours, but I think this will do for now.