GOP lawmakers propose some rights for same-sex couples
- Thread starter Dreadsox
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
deep
Blue Crack Addict
cjboog said:I'm confused about Dreadsox's beaten for their beliefs comment. I said that "marriage equality" probably won't happen in the US because of Conservatives feeling the need to protect the "sacred tradition of marriage" and then he said something about beating people.
I think he meant because conservatives are against gay rights
should they be beaten?
I say
"kick em in the balls"
deep
Blue Crack Addict
Justin24 said:
Don't forget the Nazis put them in camps.
deep
Blue Crack Addict
It is a great way to meet interesting people.
Justin24 said:
I have a blanket disgust of all homophobic religions. This even includes liberal romantic fantasies with modern Buddhism, whose tenets were tainted with Western bigotry in the 19th century, and even the Dalai Lama cannot be called "gay friendly."
However, Dreadsox is correct. No other religion in America has the clout to change laws according to its whims and prejudices.
Melon
Dreadsox said:
They have. The United Church of Christ is officially in favor of it. But, you know, it's ad campaign of inclusion was controversial and dropped by the national networks before it even aired. However, these same networks have no problem constantly giving airtime to conservative Christian ideology when it comes to their news coverage.
Melon
I have been to mosques and talked witht the people there and said in the middle east, a homosexual person would face death.
Where does it say in all the religous Texts that Homosexual marriage should be allowed. I just want to know. I think it should be allowed, by civil union.
Where does it say in all the religous Texts that Homosexual marriage should be allowed. I just want to know. I think it should be allowed, by civil union.
melon said:
Another Church I once belonged to....
Do not forget, the Episcopal Church here in MA has been asked to be silent because of our stance on gay ministers, gay bishops, and gay marriage.
My minister has not performed a gay marriage in our church to my knowledge, but a church down the street has allowed her to.
Last edited:
yolland
Forum Moderator
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2004
- Messages
- 7,471
American Jews, of whatever sect, are generally strongly averse to the pursuit of religious aspirations through politics. With good historical reason too, as we've too often been on the receiving end of that, to disastrous results (as deep implied).Justin24 said:
You will find a few fringe Orthodox political groups that ally themselves with Focus on the Family et al. But in general even the Orthodox--their pervasive overall homophobia notwithstanding--see too few good reasons to trust these people, and too many not to.
Justin24 said:
Again, deflecting to Muslims....
Do you honsestly believe that there is enough political clout in America for them to have any effect at all on this issue?
As for religion........
There ARE and WERE Christian marriage ceremonies created thousands of years ago for this purpose.
Dreadsox said:
Show some proof on that. Well look what happened in France the Muslim community was tired of being persicuted by the French so they rioted, what make you think they can have a voice in this matter.
Justin24 said:
No matter what a religious text says, it shouldn't matter. That's the beauty of a secular society. If we're going to go on the "slippery slope" argument, if we're going to start basing laws on the Bible, then why not start basing laws on the Koran? This could realistically happen in the future, as Islam is one of the fastest growing religions in America. Plus, if I drive an hour or so north of here, I run into the largest population of Arabs outside of the Middle East. They could easily start passing Sharia laws in their local communities and apply it to the Christian minority if it so pleased.
At least most Muslim nations have the sense to exempt non-Muslims from their laws, whereas Christian countries generally don't give a fuck about religious diversity and blanketly apply its religious-based law on everyone.
Melon
Dreadsox said:
Studying the first millennium of the Christian church (as I know you've studied some) is quite fascinating in this respect. Sts. Sergius and Bacchus (saints in both the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches) were portrayed as lovers in their earliest stories.
The Orthodox church went so far as to create a same-sex union rite that was exclusive to men (likely because women were nothing but property in these days):
Homophobic interpretations of the Bible start becoming predominant around the time of St. Thomas Aquinas. But this must be taken into the context that they were against pleasure and pain of all kind. Having pleasure during sex even when married was a sin (and, of course, it begs the question as to how they expected men to have sex without pleasure, but these were the days before American "slash and burn" circumcision), and homosexual relations were seen as especially evil because it was seen as the most hedonistic form of sex, since it could not result in procreation.
However, medieval Europe was a funny place. Laws against same-sex relations were generally only enforced upon the middle classes, with the wealthy classes openly having same-sex relations (and studying the history of the papacy is VERY interesting in this respect).
Modern homophobia generally comes from Sigmund Freud, actually. Victorian mores, while repressive by modern standards, allowed for open affection for people of the same-sex, even if they likely never acted upon it sexually. Freud, of course, saw it all as perverted and found such affection to be a mental illness, and that's really where modern society gets its disgust for homosexuality. The Bible is just used (even if completely incorrectly) to justify those prejudices.
Melon
Justin24 said:
"Covenant" has been thrown around a lot lately by the Religious Right to create "covenant marriages" that are harder to obtain legal divorces.
It is also theorized that the meeting of the Centurion and his "slave" was really the story of a centurion and his lover. It would not have been unheard of in the Roman Empire. What is unheard of in the Roman Empire is a Roman citizen giving a rat's ass about a slave he wasn't having sex with. A later Roman emperor after Jesus' death ended up making a god out of his lover/slave when he died. The important point here is that Jesus did not condemn the centurion or expect his behavior to change, if his relationship with his slave was sexual, as would have been presumed during the Roman Empire.
Melon
Why was nothing written about what Jesus opinion on this? What about Sodom and Gamora. People sinning left and right both in hetro and homosexuality, that god smited them by sending down his angels and destroyed the city. Or is that more of a Roman Tale?
deep
Blue Crack Addict
that is one messed up story
what father would offer up his virgin daughters to be raped by a wild mob?
what father would offer up his virgin daughters to be raped by a wild mob?
Justin24 said:
Sodom and Gomorrah is not about sexuality in the slightest. It is about the violation of an ancient Jewish hospitality custom. The greatest insult then was to abuse/kill a person's houseguest.
The story of Sodom and Gomorrah is repeated in the book of Judges, but the city is now Gibeah and the crowd gang rapes and dismembers a female concubine. God then commands an army to destroy Gibeah. Does this mean that God disapproves of all sex with women?
If there is any sexual interpretation to Sodom and Gomorrah, it is that God detests rape. Of course, Mosaic Law prescribes that a rapist is to marry his victim after paying 50 silver shekels to her father, but that's a whole different barrel of monkeys.
Melon
Similar threads
- Sticky
