British Lions rugby legend Gareth Thomas comes out

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
the iron horse said:
I am a believer in that rebel from Nazareth.

I believe he was God.

I also believe in the scriptures, he often quoted.

Homosexuality is a sin. It's not right. It's not a gay life at all.


One of my best friends was homosexual, he killed himself at he age of 47.
Click to expand...

I hope your Jesus forgives your intolerance when you leave this world.
 
Finding iron horse's beliefs on homosexuality as offensive as some of you (and I) do does not give you free license to attack him personally. Let's keep things civil in here.
 
BVS said:
Jesus never mentioned homosexuality...

And it's homophobia like this that leads people to hate themselves.

You should be ashamed.
Click to expand...

It's not even mentioned that much in the bible as a whole really. there are many sins which are mentioned and condemned far more in the bible but which are accepted quite readily and easily by society than homosexuality.
 
An Cat Gav said:
It's not even mentioned that much in the bible as a whole really. there are many sins which are mentioned and condemned far more in the bible but which are accepted quite readily and easily by society than homosexuality.
Click to expand...

And if one does some real research they'll find it really isn't mentioned at all as being a sin...

but it's their own hate in their own hearts that these bigots have to deal with...
 
financeguy said:
British Lions rugby legend Gareth Thomas: 'It's ended my marriage and nearly driven me to suicide. Now it's time to tell the world the truth - I'm gay | Mail Online

Not that surprising, as it has been well known in rugby circles for years. It's interesting that rugby is way less homophobic than soccer. There are several very well known soccer players that are heavily rumoured to be gay, but haven't come out for fear of the fans' and other players' reactions.
Click to expand...

You think they haven't come out for fear of the reaction from other players and fans?

I think it's much more likely that they haven't come out for fear of the reaction from the gay community. Men who kick balls for a living can't be that popular.
 
An Cat Gav said:
It's not even mentioned that much in the bible as a whole really.
Click to expand...

BVS said:
And if one does some real research they'll find it really isn't mentioned at all as being a sin...
Click to expand...

This sort of inane argument hurts the gay community more than it helps. It isn't mentioned much in the bible therefore it's not important? Communion is only mentioned twice.

It's not mentioned as a sin? For the love of god (pun?), whoever told you that has either never read the bible or has very (VERY) poor reading comprehension.

An Cat Gav said:
there are many sins which are mentioned and condemned far more in the bible but which are accepted quite readily and easily by society than homosexuality.
Click to expand...


This, however, is a very astute point. I think every "christian" should wrestle with the question of why homosexuality has been put on a pedestal as a major sin when their churches are full of greedy, gossiping gluttons who rarely move away from their sin.
 
I'm not sure BVS was that far off the mark... Melon has laid it out here in quite a bit of detail at various times over the years. The bible has a little bit to say about it, but it's a little unclear what 'it' is, since we are working off translations from a word that isn't as clearcut as it might seem, was apparently not that widely used at the time, and might likely not be referring to our modern understanding of homosexuality.
 
Kieran McConville said:
I'm not sure BVS was that far off the mark... Melon has laid it out here in quite a bit of detail at various times over the years. The bible has a little bit to say about it, but it's a little unclear what 'it' is, since we are working off translations from a word that isn't as clearcut as it might seem, was apparently not that widely used at the time, and might likely not be referring to our modern understanding of homosexuality.
Click to expand...

Well I'm sure that melon has spent a great deal more time than I have studying the subject. I grew up as a non-believer in one of the most conservative areas in the US (eat it scumbo), so started reading the bible to understand the people around me. I'd like to think I read it as literature not a holy book. That doesn't mean I'm objective, but I don't have a great deal of emotion wrapped up in it. Here's what I've concluded:

1. As a historical document, the bible is reliable. The source material for the bible is remarkable in it's number and consistency. For better or for worse, the bible that we have is the bible that was written. The modern translations (not paraphrases) do a good job of translating and make note of it when there is some question over a word or phrase.

2. That being said, the commentary that I've read arguing that the bible doesn't condemn the practice of homosexuality has been akin to the commentary I've read that tries to justify the American lifestyle with scripture. It's simply bad exegesis. Now don't get me wrong, I completely understand why it exists and sympathize with the motives, but texts have meanings and authors have purposes. As readers, our goal should always be to understand those and not read our own agendas into a work.

3. The bigger question for me (and no one has been able to answer this satisfactorily yet) is why do churches put such an emphasis on homosexuality (when the bible does not) and are unwilling to put an emphasis on sins dealing with money and resources (when the bible does). I think the more appropriate argument from homosexuals to the church is "fine, we're sinners, but no more so than you. If you have a place in this church then so do we." To me the argument is not about homosexuality sin/not sin, but rather an argument of belonging. Do homosexuals have a place in churches and church community. Looking at the churches I've seen, I see no reason in scripture to keep them out.
 
Let me extrapolate on that last point a bit farther (sorry, I know most of you don't care). If I were an american preacher, I think I'd preach the story of Jesus and the rich young ruler every Sunday. It seems to be the most applicable, but I think most christians in my town have torn it out of their bible. I don't remember where it's at, but you can look it up. In the story, a rich young ruler comes before and asks Jesus what he must do to inherit the kingdom of god. Now the author has already told us that this rich young ruler has kept the law (he's a very religious person), but Jesus tells him that if he wants to inherit the kingdom he needs to go and sell all of his possessions and come and follow Jesus. The moral of the story seems to be that Jesus is calling this rich young ruler to give up his identity (all that we know about him is that he is a rich young ruler - that is who he is) and to follow Jesus.

Doesn't that sound a lot like what american christians tell homosexuals? You need to give up your identity (I'm gay) and follow Jesus. I've no problem with that if they are also telling they tell the people who find their identity in their ability to succeed in business that they need to turn from that and follow Jesus or the person that finds their identity in their relationships to turn from that and follow Jesus. If that call is consistent across the board, fine. If not, then what right do churches have to try to keep one sin out and not another?
 
I think a lot of this stuff is as much an expression of certain communities of interest as anything else. Extremely conservative Christianity in the USA, from a distance, seems driven by a culture-war mindset as much as anything else. I wager that homosexuality=bad is among very few things they can agree on in those megachurches.

Not that anecdote proves much, but I spent the first twenty years of my life attending Catholic mass weekly and the priest had a lot to say about materialism, family, charity, love, forgiveness. Although officially the line was maintained that homosexuality is wrong (which needless to say, I disagree with), it was just not that big a deal. Barely mentioned, I would say. I remember one fairly wise old priest we had for years who took the view that on certain issues the official church became paralysed and you either dug into your mutual ditches, or you just sidestepped it and got on with things.
 
Kieran McConville said:
Not that anecdote proves much, but I spent the first twenty years of my life attending Catholic mass weekly and the priest had a lot to say about materialism, family, charity, love, forgiveness. Although officially the line was maintained that homosexuality is wrong (which needless to say, I disagree with), it was just not that big a deal. Barely mentioned, I would say. I remember one fairly wise old priest we had for years who took the view that on certain issues the official church became paralysed and you either dug into your mutual ditches, or you just sidestepped it and got on with things.
Click to expand...

That does seem very wise.
 
Dalton said:
It's not mentioned as a sin? For the love of god (pun?), whoever told you that has either never read the bible or has very (VERY) poor reading comprehension.
Click to expand...

There are many that have studied the original texts that have come to the conclusion that there is no text that ever says homosexuality is a sin.

I guess those theologians who've spent their whole careers studying the original texts were all morons...:|
 
Kieran McConville said:
I think a lot of this stuff is as much an expression of certain communities of interest as anything else. Extremely conservative Christianity in the USA, from a distance, seems driven by a culture-war mindset as much as anything else. I wager that homosexuality=bad is among very few things they can agree on in those megachurches.

Not that anecdote proves much, but I spent the first twenty years of my life attending Catholic mass weekly and the priest had a lot to say about materialism, family, charity, love, forgiveness. Although officially the line was maintained that homosexuality is wrong (which needless to say, I disagree with), it was just not that big a deal. Barely mentioned, I would say. I remember one fairly wise old priest we had for years who took the view that on certain issues the official church became paralysed and you either dug into your mutual ditches, or you just sidestepped it and got on with things.
Click to expand...


Given that the Vatican has officially pronounced homosexuality an 'ideology of evil', I don't think I buy the notion which you seem to be postulating (correct me if I'm wrong) that Christianist homophobia is largely a US evangelist Christian issue and not a particularly noteworthy feature of the Church of Rome.

And for the record I was not personally oppressed by the Catholic Church in any way shape or form (except intellectually).

Sinead O'Connor was right all along, it has taken Irish society in particular a long slow process to accept that.
 
financeguy said:
Given that the Vatican has officially pronounced homosexuality an 'ideology of evil', I don't think I buy the notion which you seem to be postulating (correct me if I'm wrong) that Christianist homophobia is largely a US evangelist Christian issue and not a particularly noteworthy feature of the Church of Rome.
Click to expand...

Actually my experience in Catholic churches was similar as Kieran's. I don't really remember them railing against homosexuality; abortion, on the other hand was a favourite topic alongside poverty, charitable relief, etc.

Though it should be noted that I haven't actually been attending church (aside from some Christmas masses and funeral masses) over a decade so it's possible that things have changed.
 
anitram said:
Actually my experience in Catholic churches was similar as Kieran's. I don't really remember them railing against homosexuality; abortion, on the other hand was a favourite topic alongside poverty, charitable relief, etc.
Click to expand...
same here. after attending saturday mass nearly every saturday for almost two years a while back, i don't recall ever having a sermon about how homosexuality is wrong or anything. however, this church puts many, many crosses on their lawn every year, one for each abortion performed in the city.

while i wouldn't be surprised to find out there are catholic churches out there devoting whole sermons to the "sin" that is homosexuality, it's not the case here, anyway.
 
anitram said:
Actually my experience in Catholic churches was similar as Kieran's. I don't really remember them railing against homosexuality;
Click to expand...

Right. But the priests might water it down as so many of them are closet gays. It doesn't change the essential wrongness of the Vatican's position.

Bascally this is not an organisation worthy of my support in any way, even tacit. As a committed doctrinaire atheist, the funerals and weddings thing is tricky for me. I would hope I will never attend mass or confession again (and indeed haven't done for years) but if I stopped going to funerals or weddings it could be deemed offensive by the type of people who put a lot of store in these rituals.
 
I think the point I was making was simply that, whatever the Vatican might like to think, worldwide Christiandom is not an analogue of its medieval predecessor. We do not march in lockstep. And at the local level you'd be surprised how little bearing the controversial stuff has on what gets done.

The priests might 'water it down' because it just isn't the main game.
 
The other point I would like to think I was making is that so much of this stuff strikes me as culture and place specific. Just as the more notorious sexual preoccupations of the Catholic elite have as much to do with their long and unwieldy stew of tradition and scripture, so the societies of Ireland, Australia and middle America are not the same as each other. Honestly, the US fundy stuff that sometimes crops up on this forum is utterly alien to my understanding of the faith.
 
I run the risk of speaking only for myself, mate.

If you expect me to answer for the Vatican, you will be left waiting, I am afraid.
 
No, my point is more that:

(1) The Catholic Church has an official position that is homophobic by any reasonable standard
(2) Being an organisation with some influence in the world, The Catholic Church's official position on homosexuality can (and most likely does) lead to actual homophobia in practice.
(3) By remaining within the Church of Rome ordinary Catholics are at least enabling said theology, even if they do not personally agree with it.
 
financeguy said:
No, my point is more that:

(1) The Catholic Church has an official position that is homophobic by any reasonable standard
(2) Being an organisation with some influence in the world, The Catholic Church's official position on homosexuality can (and most likely does) lead to actual homophobia in practice.
(3) By remaining within the Church of Rome ordinary Catholics are at least enabling said theology, even if they do not personally agree with it.
Click to expand...

Think of a church as being a little like a political party. It becomes easier then. Of course political movements can and do splinter. If and when the pressures become great enough. The Anglican church appears to be in the process of tearing itself apart over just this issue. At this stage, for whatever reason, the Catholic church appears more stable. I'm not entirely sure why, but you should be assured that it is not because all Catholics comfortably regard homosexuality as evil.

Mostly, I find your argument, not wrong exactly, it has a certain relentless logic to it, just not much nuance. People aren't simply automatons. And my political party analogy is intended to touch on this. Pick any broad based political party that you're familiar with. Within its ranks you will find major figures who can barely stand to be in the same room with each other. And yet (until and unless they don't), they stay.
 
Kieran McConville said:
Think of a church as being a little like a political party. It becomes easier then.
Click to expand...

One with, in this case, 'una doce, una voce' as its guiding principle, perhaps. It seems to me that there is no toleration of serious dissent, as shown by the current Pope's record as "Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith".

Kieran McConville said:
At this stage, for whatever reason, the Catholic church appears more stable.
Click to expand...

Is it because it is based on a profoundly undemocratic patriarchichal hierarchical authoritarian system?
 
I should perhaps come clean and say that I am unofficially lapsed in so far as it is the faith, not the organisation, that I support. That might explain my failure to loudly condemn at the appropriate moments.

And so it is in political movements. You have your elite, your powerbrokers, your foot soldiers, and then you have all the rest who respect the vision and avoid the rest. It's a little like... if I was a citizen of the US, I would vote reliably Democratic, but on no account would I seek office in that party.

Look, the Catholic church is trapped by its own tradition. Two thousand years, beginning in Rome, later dominating medieval Europe, later mugged by modernity and the Enlightenment. Where its less defensible elements clash with the teachings of Jesus - and you had better believe I put the gay issue in this category - then frankly, I know which side I come down on. That was what I meant earlier when I alluded to our local priest who I knew for some years. I honestly have no idea what he thought about homosexuality or the ordination of women, because he talked about the type of stuff that often gets associated with the left in Australia... social justice type stuff. In fact, time was when the Catholics in Australia were being bashed from the right, often as not. It wasn't a matter of going along with hatred of homosexuals because, well, nice things were advocated for the poor... it was a matter that the primary, the only message was to love your neighbour as yourself, and that the last shall be first, and all the rest.

No, I am not pleased about the vocal ultra conservative elements that we seem to hear from all the time these days. This is, however, the same church that sat through Vatican II in the 1960s. They're pretty atrophied but all institutions are forced to change at some point.
 
financeguy said:
No, my point is more that:

(1) The Catholic Church has an official position that is homophobic by any reasonable standard
(2) Being an organisation with some influence in the world, The Catholic Church's official position on homosexuality can (and most likely does) lead to actual homophobia in practice.
(3) By remaining within the Church of Rome ordinary Catholics are at least enabling said theology, even if they do not personally agree with it.
Click to expand...

Wow. I just can't get behind this at all.

I believe that Republicans are dead wrong in their ideology and practice of running a government. I actively work to keep them from getting what they want, but that disagreement with beliefs and lifestyles doesn't meant that I'm bigoted towards republicans.

In the same manner, I have plenty of friends that would identify themselves as Christians that would never "bless" a same-sex marriage in the confines of their faith, that would never say that homosexuals don't have the right to follow their hearts in this area and "marry" the person that they choose.

It is far too easy to label those we disagree with rather then understand the nuances of their position. I believe our media is partly to blame for this in that they rarely give voice to well reasoned people on either side of this debate, but rather put the most flamboyantly gay person on the screen right next to the most obnoxiously bigoted "christian". There is a lot of intellectual ground in between those two poles.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
The little stranger Chapter 5
Replies
0
Views
677
annj
A
lharper
Innocent Experience - Chapter 6
Replies
3
Views
1K
lharper
lharper
Phantom Dreamer
  • Locked
Justin Trudeau Neoliberal
Replies
0
Views
766
Phantom Dreamer
Phantom Dreamer
youvedonewhat
Diaries Part 6.
Replies
2
Views
1K
lharper
lharper
youvedonewhat
Diaries Part 5.
Replies
8
Views
1K
eriekittym
eriekittym

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom