Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

First openly gay bishop

LGBT Religion

  • Please log in to reply
261 replies to this topic

#21 Bad Wolf

Bad Wolf

    Luck is when opportunity meets preparation

  • Islander
  • 38,881 posts

Posted 06 August 2003 - 01:17 PM

Because it's very holier than thou, superior, and smugly sanctimonious sounding.

I think this is a conversation you and I don't need to have.

:)
Posted Image

#22 Drew

Drew

    Josef K.

  • Islander
  • 12,191 posts

Posted 06 August 2003 - 01:29 PM

Quote

I think this is a conversation you and I don't need to have.

I'm not afraid if you're not.
"Someone must have slandered Josef K., for one morning, without having done anything wrong, he was arrested."

#23 Julie

Julie
  • Islander
  • 777 posts

Posted 06 August 2003 - 01:46 PM

Una Salus Lillius, on Aug 6 2003, 02:17 PM, said:

Because it's very holier than thou, superior, and smugly sanctimonious sounding.
I'm sorry, I must have missed what was offensive.  Could someone fill me in?

#24 Talkie Toaster

Talkie Toaster

    There's no Shepard without Vakarian

  • Islander
  • 1,136 posts

Posted 06 August 2003 - 01:52 PM

Colonel Worf, on Aug 6 2003, 02:59 PM, said:

I remember the one about J Lo and her uh... blowjob or something. I don't remember what the phrasing was, but it FOXNews
Yeah, I remember that one.

"but residents of (something) said they'd rather give J-Lo a curb job than a blowjob... block job."
Blessed is the mind too small for doubt.

#25 Drew

Drew

    Josef K.

  • Islander
  • 12,191 posts

Posted 06 August 2003 - 01:54 PM

Julie, on Aug 6 2003, 01:46 PM, said:

I'm sorry, I must have missed what was offensive.  Could someone fill me in?
From what I can tell, suggesting that something is a sin for Christians is offensive to non-Christians. ::shrug::
"Someone must have slandered Josef K., for one morning, without having done anything wrong, he was arrested."

#26 Rhea

Rhea

  • Islander
  • 16,433 posts

Posted 06 August 2003 - 02:10 PM

Drew, on Aug 6 2003, 11:07 AM, said:

Una Salus Lillius, on Aug 6 2003, 12:56 PM, said:

It is that kind of statement that just.........makes my teeth grit.
Why would you let a difference of interpretation of scripture have any effect on you? We're not talking about interpreting the US Constitution here; we're talking about the tenets of a faith you don't wish to claim. Getting indignant about how Christians interpret their text makes as much sense for you as it would for me to get indignant about how Flat Earthers explain the orbit of the moon.
I'm an agnostic, not an atheist. I was raised a Christian. I don't subscribe to organized religion for many reasons, none of them your business.

The point is that Christians are NOT a homogenous group with identical beliefs. Au contraire. There is a huge difference between the various denominations.

If it were that straightforward, we'd all still be Catholics, there would BE no Protestant denominations, and therefore there would be no dissent in the Episcopalian church  (because it wouldn't exist) and they would never have ordained a gay bishop. :p Obviously there are as many flavors of interpretation as there are denominations and then some.

You speak for yourself, not all Christians. And THAT was my point.
The future is better than the past. Despite the crepehangers, romanticists, and anti-intellectuals, the world steadily grows better because the human mind, applying itself to environment, makes it better. With hands...with tools...with horse sense and science and engineering.
- Robert A. Heinlein

When I don’t understand, I have an unbearable itch to know why. - RAH


Everything is theoretically impossible, until it is done. One could write a history of science in reverse by assembling the solemn pronouncements of highest authority about what could not be done and could never happen.  - RAH

#27 Rhea

Rhea

  • Islander
  • 16,433 posts

Posted 06 August 2003 - 02:14 PM

Drew, on Aug 6 2003, 11:54 AM, said:

Julie, on Aug 6 2003, 01:46 PM, said:

I'm sorry, I must have missed what was offensive.  Could someone fill me in?
From what I can tell, suggesting that something is a sin for Christians is offensive to non-Christians. ::shrug::
No, it's a) making assumptions about what the people you're talking to believe and b) considering yourself qualified to speak for all Christians everywhere that's offensive.

I wouldn't have said a word if you had used the word "I believe" in the sentence about sex outside of marriage. You said "Christians believe," which presumes you're compentent to speak for all Christians on this subject, which you are not. Now do you understand the difference??
The future is better than the past. Despite the crepehangers, romanticists, and anti-intellectuals, the world steadily grows better because the human mind, applying itself to environment, makes it better. With hands...with tools...with horse sense and science and engineering.
- Robert A. Heinlein

When I don’t understand, I have an unbearable itch to know why. - RAH


Everything is theoretically impossible, until it is done. One could write a history of science in reverse by assembling the solemn pronouncements of highest authority about what could not be done and could never happen.  - RAH

#28 Drew

Drew

    Josef K.

  • Islander
  • 12,191 posts

Posted 06 August 2003 - 02:20 PM

Rhea, on Aug 6 2003, 02:10 PM, said:

I'm an agnostic, not an atheist. I was raised a Christian. I don't subscribe to organized religion for many reasons, none of them your business.
Except you keep telling us why you're not a Christian. :p

Quote

The point is that Christians are NOT a homogenous group with identical beliefs. Au contraire. There is a huge difference between the various denominations.

I acknowledge that. I wish you'd acknowledge that I acknowledge that. My point is that this is an internal matter that Christians will argue among themselves.
"Someone must have slandered Josef K., for one morning, without having done anything wrong, he was arrested."

#29 Julie

Julie
  • Islander
  • 777 posts

Posted 06 August 2003 - 02:28 PM

Rhea, on Aug 6 2003, 03:14 PM, said:

I wouldn't have said a word if you had used the word "I believe" in the sentence about sex outside of marriage. You said "Christians believe," which presumes you're compentent to speak for all Christians on this subject, which you are not. Now do you understand the difference??
So you're upset because he said, "If you're talking about sex outside of marriage, it is" instead of "If you're talking about sex outside of marriage, I believe it is"?

I'm not convinced that's making assumptions about what the people he's talking to believe, or considering himself qualified to speak for all Christians, but whatever.

#30 Bad Wolf

Bad Wolf

    Luck is when opportunity meets preparation

  • Islander
  • 38,881 posts

Posted 06 August 2003 - 02:31 PM

Quote

My point is that this is an internal matter that Christians will argue among themselves.

I disagree.   This decision sets a precedent that has potential implications on the issue of acceptance of homosexuality NOT just in the Episcopalian Church, not just in ANY church, but everywhere.

Your argument makes about as much sense as trying to argue that the the acceptance of gay marriages in one part of Canada is an internal matter than Canadians will argue among themselves.

Which is ridiculous.  My goodness, we've had arguments here at ExIsle about it.  Why?  Because it has implications far beyond just one part of Canada.

Lil
Posted Image

#31 Josh

Josh

    He stares...

  • Islander
  • 13,774 posts

Posted 06 August 2003 - 02:46 PM

Quote

I disagree.   This decision sets a precedent that has potential implications on the issue of acceptance of homosexuality NOT just in the Episcopalian Church, not just in ANY church, but everywhere.

Agreed. And I'm very much hoping they're positive implications. I think every human being deserves acceptance.
"THE UNICORNS ARE NOT TO BE TRIFLED WITH!" - John Burke.

#32 Bad Wolf

Bad Wolf

    Luck is when opportunity meets preparation

  • Islander
  • 38,881 posts

Posted 06 August 2003 - 02:52 PM

^

Damn straight.
Posted Image

#33 Drew

Drew

    Josef K.

  • Islander
  • 12,191 posts

Posted 06 August 2003 - 02:52 PM

Una Salus Lillius, on Aug 6 2003, 02:31 PM, said:

I disagree.   This decision sets a precedent that has potential implications on the issue of acceptance of homosexuality NOT just in the Episcopalian Church, not just in ANY church, but everywhere.
In the portion you quoted, I was talking about sex outside of marriage.

However, the hive-mind seems to think that having an actively homosexual Episcopalian bishop is unquestioningly a Good Thing™. This opinion seems formed from the commonly-held view that "we must be accepting of everybody!" However, there are issues that are internal to the church itself, mainly: a) the scriptures that forbid sex between members of the same gender, and b) the effect this will have on church unity. It's all very well and good for an outsider to say "Oh, those silly closed-minded Episcopalians!" but it's also very closed-minded to disregard the viewpoints of the people who really matter here: the Episcopalians themselves who have been struggling over this issue for years, and more broadly, to Christendom as a whole.
"Someone must have slandered Josef K., for one morning, without having done anything wrong, he was arrested."

#34 Rhea

Rhea

  • Islander
  • 16,433 posts

Posted 06 August 2003 - 02:55 PM

Drew, on Aug 6 2003, 12:20 PM, said:

Rhea, on Aug 6 2003, 02:10 PM, said:

I'm an agnostic, not an atheist. I was raised a Christian. I don't subscribe to organized religion for many reasons, none of them your business.
Except you keep telling us why you're not a Christian. :p

Quote

The point is that Christians are NOT a homogenous group with identical beliefs. Au contraire. There is a huge difference between the various denominations.

I acknowledge that. I wish you'd acknowledge that I acknowledge that. My point is that this is an internal matter that Christians will argue among themselves.
Nope. I keep telling you why I'm not a conventional Christian. I don't presume to speak for anybody else.

I believe very firmly in the things that Christ taught. Unfortunately, as far as I can tell, many Christians practice other things that Christ didn't preach because they are all part of that massive tome known as the Bible. And each group of Christians seem to pick and choose which things they practice.

In the end, I am probably with Huxley:

Quote

When I reached intellectual maturity, and began to ask myself whether I was an atheist, a theist, or a pantheist; a materialist or an idealist; a Christian or a freethinker, I found that the more I learned and reflected, the less ready was the answer; until at last I came to the conclusion that I had neither art nor part with any of these denominations, except the last. The one thing in which most of these good people were agreed was the one thing in which I differed from them. They were quite sure that they had attained a certain "gnosis" -- had more or less successfully solved the problem of existence; while I was quite sure I had not, and had a pretty strong conviction that the problem was insoluble...

Agnosticism, in fact, is not a creed, but a method, the essence of which lies in the rigorous application of a single principle. That principle is of great antiquity; it is as old as Socrates; as old as the writer who said, 'Try all things, hold fast by that which is good'; it is the foundation of the Reformation, which simply illustrated the axiom that every man should be able to give a reason for the faith that is in him, it is the great principle of Descartes; it is the fundamental axiom of modern science

The point is, Drew, that NO ONE can claim to speak for Christians as a group, because Christians as some supergroup do NOT ALL AGREE ON DOCTRINE. And you know that. Yet you still presume to speak for "Christians."

Edited by Rhea, 06 August 2003 - 02:56 PM.

The future is better than the past. Despite the crepehangers, romanticists, and anti-intellectuals, the world steadily grows better because the human mind, applying itself to environment, makes it better. With hands...with tools...with horse sense and science and engineering.
- Robert A. Heinlein

When I don’t understand, I have an unbearable itch to know why. - RAH


Everything is theoretically impossible, until it is done. One could write a history of science in reverse by assembling the solemn pronouncements of highest authority about what could not be done and could never happen.  - RAH

#35 Drew

Drew

    Josef K.

  • Islander
  • 12,191 posts

Posted 06 August 2003 - 02:55 PM

Josh, on Aug 6 2003, 02:46 PM, said:

I think every human being deserves acceptance.
Sure, but what do you mean by "acceptance"? This isn't the same thing as letting a black man into a white country club. This isn't the same thing as letting a woman play soccer in the men's league.
"Someone must have slandered Josef K., for one morning, without having done anything wrong, he was arrested."

#36 Drew

Drew

    Josef K.

  • Islander
  • 12,191 posts

Posted 06 August 2003 - 02:56 PM

Whatever.

Edited by Drew, 06 August 2003 - 02:57 PM.

"Someone must have slandered Josef K., for one morning, without having done anything wrong, he was arrested."

#37 Rhea

Rhea

  • Islander
  • 16,433 posts

Posted 06 August 2003 - 02:57 PM

Drew, on Aug 6 2003, 12:55 PM, said:

Josh, on Aug 6 2003, 02:46 PM, said:

I think every human being deserves acceptance.
Sure, but what do you mean by "acceptance"? This isn't the same thing as letting a black man into a white country club. This isn't the same thing as letting a woman play soccer in the men's league.
It's not? Could have fooled me.
The future is better than the past. Despite the crepehangers, romanticists, and anti-intellectuals, the world steadily grows better because the human mind, applying itself to environment, makes it better. With hands...with tools...with horse sense and science and engineering.
- Robert A. Heinlein

When I don’t understand, I have an unbearable itch to know why. - RAH


Everything is theoretically impossible, until it is done. One could write a history of science in reverse by assembling the solemn pronouncements of highest authority about what could not be done and could never happen.  - RAH

#38 Josh

Josh

    He stares...

  • Islander
  • 13,774 posts

Posted 06 August 2003 - 02:58 PM

^

Frankly, yes it is. What would happen if your scriptures said that being black was a sin? Would that be taken to heart as well?

All I can see from my personal viewpoint is the discrimination against an entire group of people who simply ARE who they are... and who will spend the majority of their lives fighting against societal pressure which declares them alien to that same society.

It's wrong.
"THE UNICORNS ARE NOT TO BE TRIFLED WITH!" - John Burke.

#39 Drew

Drew

    Josef K.

  • Islander
  • 12,191 posts

Posted 06 August 2003 - 03:02 PM

Rhea, on Aug 6 2003, 02:57 PM, said:

Drew, on Aug 6 2003, 12:55 PM, said:

Josh, on Aug 6 2003, 02:46 PM, said:

I think every human being deserves acceptance.
Sure, but what do you mean by "acceptance"? This isn't the same thing as letting a black man into a white country club. This isn't the same thing as letting a woman play soccer in the men's league.
It's not? Could have fooled me.
Possible responses:

1) Quite easily done, apparently. :p

2) No, it's not.

I'll go with #2.  :cool:
"Someone must have slandered Josef K., for one morning, without having done anything wrong, he was arrested."

#40 Bad Wolf

Bad Wolf

    Luck is when opportunity meets preparation

  • Islander
  • 38,881 posts

Posted 06 August 2003 - 03:06 PM

Drew, on Aug 6 2003, 12:52 PM, said:

However, the hive-mind seems to think
Okay let's start with just that line.

That one line is a SURE fire way to start a fight.  I am not a part of any "hive" mind and you damned well know it.  But oh, I guess I'm disagreeing with your views on religion which must automatically mean that I am part of some kind of collective with no will of my own.  Well Drew, that is b*llsh*t.

We both know that we are capable of discussing these things without it getting ugly.  But when you start out an argument by accusing people of being paft of a "hive mind", you make it clear that you are choosing not to have a civil discussion.

Quote

that having an actively homosexual Episcopalian bishop is unquestioningly a Good Thing™. This opinion seems formed from the commonly-held view that "we must be accepting of everybody!"

No one is trying to over simplify anything.  But having people like you say in effect "go away you non Christians, the Christians are talking" is about as condescending and patronizing and insulting a thing as I can think of.  You are coming off as if you think that only "Christians" (all of whom you are continuing to purport to speak for, which is insulting in and of itself) understand religious issues and I got a news flash for you.  It isn't so.  

Quote

However, there are issues that are internal to the church itself, mainly: a) the scriptures that forbid sex between members of the same gender, and b) the effect this will have on church unity.

Of course there are issues.  No one has said there aren't.  In fact, the fact that this is such a Big Deal™ to so many is evidence that they realize that there are issues.

One doesn't need to be a Christian According to Drew™ in order to get that either.

Quote

It's all very well and good for an outsider to say "Oh, those silly closed-minded Episcopalians!" but it's also very closed-minded to disregard the viewpoints of the people who really matter here: the Episcopalians themselves who have been struggling over this issue for years, and more broadly, to Christendom as a whole.

I haven't done that.  You must be referring to the "hive mind" again.
Posted Image



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: LGBT, Religion

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users