The Gay Thread

[anitram]

Jeevey, of course I see that teaching as horribly bad. But does that mean everything a religion teaches is bad? As in, half of the good points don't matter because of the bad half?

I don't want to speak for Jeevey but that doesn't logically follow. I do think there is importance in people recognizing that religious teachings in and of themselves can be bad, destructive, maybe even evil.

There are things in the Bible which I think are incredibly disturbing, take the sacrifice of Isaac, for example. To me, it is plain old wrong and I would encourage people to consider the reaction today to a man who would be willing to kill his child because he hears the voice of God telling him to do so. Would you defend him or would he be branded deeply mentally ill? That isn't to say that you, as a Christian, believe in a BAD religion.

 

[Pearl]

I don't want to speak for Jeevey but that doesn't logically follow. I do think there is importance in people recognizing that religious teachings in and of themselves can be bad, destructive, maybe even evil.

There are things in the Bible which I think are incredibly disturbing, take the sacrifice of Isaac, for example. To me, it is plain old wrong and I would encourage people to consider the reaction today to a man who would be willing to kill his child because he hears the voice of God telling him to do so. Would you defend him or would he be branded deeply mentally ill? That isn't to say that you, as a Christian, believe in a BAD religion.

I think the sacrifice of Isaac is disturbing too. I do wonder if there's any truth to that story or what the hell God is thinking if that really happened. If anyone did that today, yes I would say he was mentally ill and he'll have to do a hell of a lot to prove that was God who did order that. And it would totally boggle my mind that the God that I've benefitted from will order that. Seriously, I would lose my sanity.

 

[iron yuppie]

What do we mean by "bad" here? It seems like it started off as "exclusionary," e.g. some religious people actively discriminating against gay people. To that I would say that such discriminatory behavior can and does exist in both religious and non-religious people. That's not an inherent problem with religion.

In my mind at least, the real social problems with religion arise from literal interpretations of scripture. Those will always result in ugly behavior because the context in which they were written differs so wildly from modern society. Anitram, you gave the example of Abraham and Isaac. For me that story is pretty clearly an allegory for the importance of a patriarchal society, i.e. each man obeys the older man in the story. So yes, if someone now not only takes that story as literal but also thinks it is applicable to modern culture, then that person will likely have some extreme problems with socialization.

 

[Pearl]

What do we mean by "bad" here? It seems like it started off as "exclusionary," e.g. some religious people actively discriminating against gay people. To that I would say that such discriminatory behavior can and does exist in both religious and non-religious people. That's not an inherent problem with religion.

I've known homophobes who could care less about God or religion.

In my mind at least, the real social problems with religion arise from literal interpretations of scripture. Those will always result in ugly behavior because the context in which they were written differs so wildly from modern society. Anitram, you gave the example of Abraham and Isaac. For me that story is pretty clearly an allegory for the importance of a patriarchal society, i.e. each man obeys the older man in the story. So yes, if someone now not only takes that story as literal but also thinks it is applicable to modern culture, then that person will likely have some extreme problems with socialization.

That's why I wonder if the story is actually true. I think the Book of Genesis is a collection of folk tales from early Mesopotamian tribes. The Great Flood has some historical truth to it. There is evidence of a major flood in that area millennia ago that caused major destruction. Now about Noah and the Ark, that could be just a legend. Many cultures all over the world have legends that have some truth mixed with the supernatural. Legends are basically like the game, telephone

 

[iron yuppie]

That's why I wonder if the story is actually true. I think the Book of Genesis is a collection of folk tales from early Mesopotamian tribes.

I'd say that is pretty well accepted in scholarly circles. Different people added/edited/redacted biblical texts over several centuries. Sometimes the evidence for this is pretty clear, as in the two creation stories coming nearly back-to-back in the early stages of Genesis.

 

[BoMac]

I really don't think jeevey said that *everything* a religion teaches is bad, just that some elements of it *can* be bad, particularly if some tenets of it are distorted to suit a specific purpose.

 

[jeevey]

Maybe I'm just thinking anytime someone points out the problem with religion (and I agree that the Bible has it's problems) that means they're saying anyone who follows such teachings is a fool and out of touch with reality. Jeevey probably isn't, and I did probably miss her whole point.

That's exactly what I'm not saying. What I'm trying to say here is about individual dogmas--articles of belief. And that it's important to recognize that they can be both A. explicitly religious and B. really and truly evil. I'm speaking out to the exact discomfort that Pearl is expressing here, the reluctance to criticize religious teaching AS religious, for fear that religion or faith as a universal body is under attack. I think that's a problematic attitude that lets real harmful beliefs go unexamined, or get a free pass because they are religious.

To be clear, I don't think religion as a body is bad. It can produce many good things, and it's really precious for many people. In many ways I envy people of faith. I miss having that confidence that the universe gives a fuck, (which I know is not exclusive to people of a named faith, but which I only had when I was.) But I also don't think that religion and faith are inherently good. I think that like anything they need to be examined, weighed and thought about, and that you need to carefully pick and choose what dogmas are a force for good, and which are harmful.

 

[jeevey]

What do we mean by "bad" here? It seems like it started off as "exclusionary," e.g. some religious people actively discriminating against gay people. To that I would say that such discriminatory behavior can and does exist in both religious and non-religious people. That's not an inherent problem with religion.

By bad I mean evil, and for that I like Sam Harris's shorthand description, which I'm paraphrasing here but is roughly 'anything that actively creates human misery.' And no, evil does not come exclusively from religion, but it can come from there. And it's important that we not give protection to evil beliefs because they come from a holy source. I think it's important that we identify evil religious beliefs specifically by their religious nature, because it's often exactly that that gives them such power.

 

[Pearl]

That's exactly what I'm not saying. What I'm trying to say here is about individual dogmas--articles of belief. And that it's important to recognize that they can be both A. explicitly religious and B. really and truly evil. I'm speaking out to the exact discomfort that Pearl is expressing here, the reluctance to criticize religious teaching AS religious, for fear that religion or faith as a universal body is under attack. I think that's a problematic attitude that lets real harmful beliefs go unexamined, or get a free pass because they are religious.

To be clear, I don't think religion as a body is bad. It can produce good things, and it's really important for some people. In many ways I envy people of faith. I miss having that confidence that the universe gives a fuck, (which I know is not exclusive to people of a named faith, but which I only had when I was.) But I also don't think that religion and faith are inherently good. I think that like anything they need to be examined, weighed and thought about, and that you need to carefully pick and choose what dogmas are a force for good, and which are harmful.

I'm not really that reluctant to criticize or examine religious teachings. I take it my assessment of the Book of Genesis above reflects that. I think religion at best can be a structure that allows personal and spiritual growth, with enough room to question, doubt and explore. When questioning, doubt and exploration is stifled, and personal and spiritual growth is stunted, then I say religion, or any kind of single Christian denomination for that matter, is a problem, and even dangerous.

As for faith, I think blind faith (if that is what you mean) is only good if you've been practicing faith for a long time, as in many many years. Someone starting out on their spiritual journey, especially at a young age, shouldn't try blind faith because of their immature minds, emotions and spirit. Faith is a journey, I believe, and I don't think just finding God once means your journey is over. It's only the beginning to being a stronger, better, wiser person. That is, if you don't pay close attention and misinterpret teachings, that nagging feeling in your heart, etc. Then you can lose your way, and may become dangerous.

 

[deep]

That's why I wonder if the story is actually true. I think the Book of Genesis is a collection of folk tales from early Mesopotamian tribes. The Great Flood has some historical truth to it. There is evidence of a major flood in that area millennia ago that caused major destruction. Now about Noah and the Ark, that could be just a legend. Many cultures all over the world have legends that have some truth mixed with the supernatural. Legends are basically like the game, telephone

I know you are a fan of Karen Armstrong, I am a somewhat fan also. I remember listening to an hour long program with her on public radio about Abraham. She had written a book on him. Her point was that this story and person is at the very heart of the 3 great religions, without him and this story they do not exist. It gave me a lot to think about. If anything like this happened I think Abraham failed the test. He was supposed to tell G-d that he loved him but he would not kill an innocent child and G-d could do what he wanted with him but please do not question his love for not commuting murder.

So what are we left with? Three great religions that believe slaughtering innocents is ok, if you can tell yourself it is what G-d wants. And again we have seen all three religions do just that.

 

[jeevey]

Thoughtful post, deep. One of my most shaking moments in Bible school was when the professor asked, "Does God do things because they right or are they right because God does them?" I think it's so difficult when our sacred book tells us that God did something or commands something that our moral sense tells us is wrong. It's very difficult to resolve.

 

[Pearl]

I know you are a fan of Karen Armstrong, I am a somewhat fan also. I remember listening to an hour long program with her on public radio about Abraham. She had written a book on him. Her point was that this story and person is at the very heart of the 3 great religions, without him and this story they do not exist. It gave me a lot to think about. If anything like this happened I think Abraham failed the test. He was supposed to tell G-d that he loved him but he would not kill an innocent child and G-d could do what he wanted with him but please do not question his love for not commuting murder.

So what are we left with? Three great religions that believe slaughtering innocents is ok, if you can tell yourself it is what G-d wants. And again we have seen all three religions do just that.

It is true Abraham is at the heart of the three monotheistic religions. Maybe he did exist and maybe there is some truth to the story of Isaac. It is disturbing that God will test Abraham like that. It is more disturbing that Abraham was more than willing to do it. Maybe the point is, don't be that trusting of God. Or rather, like I said earlier, be careful of blind faith. Maybe even God wouldn't want us to have blind faith either. After all, He did stop Abraham and did not allow him to follow through. But still, its a pretty damning test.

Speaking of Karen Armstrong, she once said that when religion is personal and left to the individual, then it is fine. It's when institutions get involved and take away personal faith that religion becomes destructive. I agree with her.

 

[anitram]

I know you are a fan of Karen Armstrong, I am a somewhat fan also. I remember listening to an hour long program with her on public radio about Abraham. She had written a book on him. Her point was that this story and person is at the very heart of the 3 great religions, without him and this story they do not exist. It gave me a lot to think about. If anything like this happened I think Abraham failed the test. He was supposed to tell G-d that he loved him but he would not kill an innocent child and G-d could do what he wanted with him but please do not question his love for not commuting murder.

So what are we left with? Three great religions that believe slaughtering innocents is ok, if you can tell yourself it is what G-d wants. And again we have seen all three religions do just that.

Really great and thoughtful post.

 

[Galeongirl]

Wow, I never thought there would be a religious discussion in a thread on homosexuality.


For what it's worth, thanks to my Christian upbringing I know my biblical stuff. But I never saw that book as something literal, to me it was just another storybook. And I still honestly do not understand why the difference was made that declared this specific book holy. And why people convince themselves they are forced to live by the rules declared in this book(but coincidentally pick the ones they don't mind living by, ie homosexuality is disgusting and wrong, but shellfish and divorce are pretty ok). It's just mindboggling as a whole. But ah well, religion doesn't want me anyway so I don't even need to bother understanding it. I'll be sent to hell anyway, for simply being myself.


Just saw this on 9gag. They do have a point. If all humans are created by god, why are people so against gays? Cause they would also have been made by god...

 

[PhilsFan]

I know you are a fan of Karen Armstrong, I am a somewhat fan also. I remember listening to an hour long program with her on public radio about Abraham. She had written a book on him. Her point was that this story and person is at the very heart of the 3 great religions, without him and this story they do not exist. It gave me a lot to think about. If anything like this happened I think Abraham failed the test. He was supposed to tell G-d that he loved him but he would not kill an innocent child and G-d could do what he wanted with him but please do not question his love for not commuting murder.

So what are we left with? Three great religions that believe slaughtering innocents is ok, if you can tell yourself it is what G-d wants. And again we have seen all three religions do just that.

This is the best thing you have ever posted in this forum.

 

[MrPryck2U]

Except it appears he doesn't wish to spell the word "God". Really? G-d?

 

[LemonMelon]

It's a sign of respect in Judaism.

I don't know deep to be Jewish though.

 

[Pearl]

nm

 

[MrPryck2U]

Oh you shouldn't have deleted that Pearl. You're right. We humans do suck. We treat each other like shit. It's a wonder we're able to continue.

 

[Pearl]

Oh you shouldn't have deleted that Pearl. You're right. We humans do suck. We treat each other like shit. It's a wonder we're able to continue.

I just figured it came across like I was going off topic, or ignoring the tone in this thread.

But here is what I meant to say:

This is how I think God sees us. Aside from how we treat gays, we are all awful to each other. Sometimes I wonder why God hasn't thrown the towel on us and gone off to create another planet where its intelligent beings would actually be intelligent.

 

[deep]

World Vision Hiring Homosexuals Ignites Controversy In Christian Community

 

[Galeongirl]

 

[jeevey]

That worldvision thing is disturbing--people are withdrawing their financial support to children as retaliation. Allow kids to go hungry in the name of Christ?

 

[deep]

That is a wedding dress

this is what happens when traditional marriage is under attack!!

We were all psyched when Jessica Biel and Justin Timberlake finally tied the knot -- how could you not be happy for those two crazy kids? But not everyone was keen on Biel's wedding dress, a frothy pink confection by Giambattista Valli. Why pink, everyone wondered? What is it about the colored wedding dress trend?

Biel finally opens up about the dress -- and plenty of other wedding day tidbits -- to Elle magazine, who put her on the January 2013 cover. She tells the mag: "These are non-traditional times."

 

[Galeongirl]

Not sure what that has to do with this thread, but yeah. I truly couldn't care less about some random celeb's wedding dress. To each their own. If that's what they want to wear, then that's what they'll wear.

 

[Pearl]

I don't see the point in wearing white on a wedding day. Very few women are virgins on their wedding day. Besides, that traditional only began when Queen Victoria got married in the early 19th century. Before that, brides simply wore a nice dress, regardless of color. As for me, I might opt for an ivory or peach color.

 

[Galeongirl]

I want interference crackblue.

 

[Pearl]

I want to the see the pics when the day comes!

 

[Galeongirl]

Oh I'll post them. Am not joking, though maybe a little less painful on the eyes blue, but I'm definitely going for blue.

 

[deep]

Ohio will have to recognize gay marriages, judge says


these should hit the Supremes again.

Is it possible that there are 5 small-minded Justices that could fashion a ruling allowing states to discriminate?