Gays and Church

[The Cheat]

I am sure that many of you have heard about the new bishop in the Episcopal church who is openly gay.

 

I was wondering what is your view on this?

 

I myself am a member of an Episcopal Church and one family has already left the church because of the incident. My father is a member of the vestry and nearly went crazy about it when he heard about it while we were on vacation down in Myrtle Beach, SC.

 

I do not believe that he should be allowed to be a Bishop because with those beliefs he goes against what the Bible has taught from the beginning with Adam and Eve.

 

I have nothing against gays but I do not think they should be Bishops or that a gay marriage should be blessed by a church.

 

This is only my personal opinion, I would like to hear some of yours.

[Acrylic]

Originally posted by The Cheat

I am sure that many of you have heard about the new bishop in the Episcopal church who is openly gay.

 

I was wondering what is your view on this?

 

I myself am a member of an Episcopal Church and one family has already left the church because of the incident. My father is a member of the vestry and nearly went crazy about it when he heard about it while we were on vacation down in Myrtle Beach, SC.

 

I do not believe that he should be allowed to be a Bishop because with those beliefs he goes against what the Bible has taught from the beginning with Adam and Eve.

 

I have nothing against gays but I do not think they should be Bishops or that a gay marriage should be blessed by a church.

 

This is only my personal opinion, I would like to hear some of yours.

 

I personally do not like this. I am not of that religion...but still....its horrible. If I belonged to that religion, I'd leave, because I do not support homosexuality. So, yeah. Thats my view.

[The Cheat]

yeah it has been hard for our church because we are in the process of creating a new church and this does not help the confidence of the parishiners at our church so we are hoping that this will not hurt the building process

[Kain]

More power to him. Its not like he's raping the children like some other branch of Christianity. The Bible can't tell you what to feel, it just makes harsh suggestions, which isn't fair because Christians will get snippy if you don't adhere to there philosophy, but in turn they get mad and hate you (which is against Christ's 'Love Everyone' philosophy). I'm sure it wouldn't be above some overzealous, headstrong, maniacle, power-fiend of a Christian (gag*Bush*gag) to try and make it illegal for gay intercourse to even occur.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

I myself am a member of an Episcopal Church and one family has already left the church because of the incident. My father is a member of the vestry and nearly went crazy about it when he heard about it while we were on vacation down in Myrtle Beach, SC.

May I ask why?

 

I do not believe that he should be allowed to be a Bishop because with those beliefs he goes against what the Bible has taught from the beginning with Adam and Eve.

Rationally put.

But gays are humans like everyone else and thus have the same rights. Two people who can do the same job as good should have the same chance of being hired.

 

Can a murderer be married in church? I think so. Haven't murderers in death rows in the USA the right to pray with a priest? Then why cannot a gay couple be welcomed by the churh? Countries that allow gay marriage and adoption floods the media with reports that are almost all good, while certain people seems to practically have an attitude of "you can start WWIII and a Jew Holocaust all over again and still go to Heaven as long as you're a Heterosexual christian."

 

I have nothing against gays but I do not think they should be Bishops or that a gay marriage should be blessed by a church.

I actually believe you when you say that you're not against gays. But again, they have the same rights as you have, and should be allowed the same privileges and rights as straight people enjoy.

 

This is only my personal opinion, I would like to hear some of yours.

Well, that's mine. Summed up: Freedom of religion and freedom from persecution. If a church can say that they don't want to hire gays, then what prevents a gas station or McDonald's from doing so if the manager declares the particular station or McDonald's religious?

 

I personally do not like this. I am not of that religion...but still....it's horrible. If I belonged to that religion, I'd leave, because I do not support homosexuality. So, yeah. Thats my view.

How can you not support homosexuality? That's, with all due respect, like me saying that I don't support Blacks or handicapped people. Homosexuals just are that way, so you can't choose not to support them in a politically allowable manner.

 

Think: What exactly is it about them that you do not like? That they kiss? Far as I know, heterosexual girls can kiss heterosexual girls as much as they want.

 

Does it offend you that gays kiss? Well, think about all the other minority groups that offend: Africans wearing afros, Latins speaking Spanish, and so on. Think about the poor KKKs who can't walk down a street without seeing a black person who insists on being so black. But should afros be banned? No, and you know why. Because it's the KKKs who should adapt to suit the diverse society, and not the other way around. Likewise, homophobes should adapt to the upcoming society where gays leaving the closet are becoming a part of life.

 

Personally, I don't think it's so horrible, to say the least. Maybe it's sad for some religous people who put religion higher than their attitude for gays, or worse, allow the bible to dictate them an attitude towards gays. I'm overjoyed by this (sp.?) because it's a big step for gay rights, but I do sort of pity the members of the church, although they are as wrong as they can be.

 

I have to say it's ridiculous that Bush doesn't simply step up and open for full gay rights on the same line as heterosexual rights. They'll eventually be given those rights anyway, no matter how much the governments discriminates them, classmates bully them, and homophobes beat them up. It's pointless to fight a no- win battle, which goes with some philosophic thoughts about how the future generations will consider you.

 

Sincerely,

Dagobahn Eagle,

Ex-homosexual

 

Couple of PS points: I'm being really calm for someone turning down attackers of homosexual rights, but I'm just trying to keep this thread flame-free.

 

SO: NO FLAMING, thank you. Neither from us or the anti-gays.

 

Oh, and your spelling is good, T. Cheat. At least that's a bright point:).

[Acrylic]

Originally posted by Dagobahn Eagle

How can you not support homosexuality? That's, with all due respect, like me saying that I don't support Blacks or handicapped people. Homosexuals just are that way, so you can't choose not to support them in a politically allowable manner.

 

Gay people were made like that, yes..but:

 

Homosexuality is not normal. And you DO have to agree with me on this. If it was, the majority of people would be guy-guy girl-girl. Not guy-girl. So, I DO NOT support it at all. No one will change my opinion. So thats all I have to say At The Moment.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

Homosexuality is not normal. If it was, the majority of people would be guy-guy girl-girl. Not guy-girl. So thats all I have to say At The Moment.

I do not support left-handed-ness. "If people were meant to be left-handed, the majority would be left-handed". Same goes with tall people and blonde people. They're so damn unnatural, thus they are wrong.

 

If you mean "normal" as in "majority", no, then it's not normal. If you mean it as "unnatural", however, your arrow is pretty far off the bullseye.

 

And you DO have to agree with me on this.

No, for the reason I just stated above. Fetishism, homosexuality, bisexuality, and lefthandedness are all normal.

 

You may just as well say that being left-handed is wrong because "left-handed people tend to be creative instead of not changing stuff, thus they are against the conservative way of thinking. Thus I do not support everyone who's left-handed."

 

So, I DO NOT support it at all. No one will change my opinion.

Does that opinion cover everything that's "not normal". Do you "choose not to support" people in wheelchairs, people with some sort of syndrome, bedwetters, and people with a below- or above-average IQ as well?

 

And I'm really curious to know what you mean with "not supporting" homosexuality. If you mean you fight for them losing rights, well, as I said you're losing the battle if you do.

 

Gays are, as I said, part of life. You may harass them, but that won't make them change. You'll find that there are a dozen other differences that've been proscecuted before, such as left-handed-ness, that today are 100% accepted. There is no "racism" towards left-handed people at all, while for a houndred years ago it was considered a sign of retardation. Homophobia will vanish the same way.

 

Eagle.

 

- Edit -

PS: Some nitpicking.

I do not believe that he should be allowed to be a Bishop because with those beliefs he goes against what the Bible has taught from the beginning with Adam and Eve.

Homosexuality is not a belief, it's a preference, like love for a white girl or a Latin girl is a preference.

[SkinWalker]

Originally posted by Acrylic

Gay people were made like that, yes..but:

 

Homosexuality is not normal.

 

Define "normal." Does this definition include "found in nature?" Because homosexuality is definitly found in nature. Bonabo monkies, dolphins, and several other species engage in regular and predictable behaviors of homo- and bi- sexual behaviors.

 

Originally posted by Acrylic

And you DO have to agree with me on this. If it was, the majority of people would be guy-guy girl-girl. Not guy-girl.

 

By that standard, D-Eagle's reference to "Afro's" would be considered "not normal" and therefore unacceptable to society. Otherwise we would see a majority of people wearing them.

 

There is also a theory which states that people are neutral in their sexuality at birth and it gets defined for them through early childhood development. Freud was a large proponent of this, as was/is others.

 

Originally posted by Acrylic

So, I DO NOT support it at all. No one will change my opinion. So thats all I have to say At The Moment.

 

I don't support afros and I'm against them returning as a fashion, but I refuse to let that feeling cloud my judgement about the person within the afro. I hope you can say the same about the person within the homosexual. Besides, what possible harm can he/she offer you that creates a greater risk of phyisical danger than a heterosexual?

 

As to a priest being a homosexual... well, I was under the assumption that they were supposed to be celibate. That would imply asexuality (the prefix a- meaning without). So where is the problem?

[Dagobahn Eagle]

There is also a theory which states that people are neutral in their sexuality at birth and it gets defined for them through early childhood development. Freud was a large proponent of this, as was/is others.

Funny, that's my theory too. Interesting that others share it.

[FunClown]

I do not support left-handed-ness. "If people were meant to be left-handed, the majority would be left-handed". Same goes with tall people and blonde people. They're so damn unnatural, thus they are wrong.

 

I'm left handed. If the bible said I couldn't be Christian because I'm left handed I would just leave.

 

****

 

Someone mentioned something about McDonalds. I agree, Hollywood is just plain evil. They wouldn't let a woman try out to be one of the bad boys. That just makes me sick. Why can't they have a man Bond girl for crying out loud. They can't help it if they were born like that. Shouldn't it be about equality rather than discriminating against someone playing a part [they may not be suitable for].

 

Can you pick the slight sarcasm

[ShockV1.89]

As to a priest being a homosexual... well, I was under the assumption that they were supposed to be celebate. That would imply asexuality (the prefix a- meaning without). So where is the problem?

Good point, I never thought of that.

 

If it was, the majority of people would be guy-guy girl-girl.

 

So in your perfect world, everyone would be just like everyone else? Damn, man, I hope you're never in charge. I'd probably shoot myself out of boredom.

 

Hey, guess what. It's not "normal" to chat on "Lucasforums"! Stop it right now! You're not being normal! You have to stop, it's not right!

 

Well, gosh, that didnt make any sense, did it? There are appx 55,000 people enrolled in LucasForums. I guarantee there are more homosexuals out there right now. I guess we are less normal than they are!

 

And you DO have to agree with me on this

No.

 

No one will change my opinion.

So basically you've closed your mind to any points of view other than your own, and you're not even going to consider any other opinions? *sigh*

[CloseTheBlastDo]

I have yet to hear ONE person state any half-decent reason why homo-sexuality is actually wrong. (Without mindlessly quoting from the bible of course)

 

As pointed out by other posters, just because something is a minority, doesn't mean it's WRONG! (And I'm astonished this even needs to be pointed out!!)

 

Homosexuality does not harm anyone (if you believe it does, I'd really like to hear how...), and it does not infringe on other people's rights.

 

If it's the fact that gay couples don't naturally produce children, then I guess hetrosexual couples who decide not to have children are WRONG too.

(...the fact is that a relatively small proportion of the population not producing children is not a bad thing. Humans are over-populating this planet - a few less of us is no bad thing...)

 

If you literally can't stomach the physical act itself:

 

a. Grow up

 

b. It's none of your damn business what consenting adults get up to

 

c. Hetro-sexual people are capable of FAR more 'disgusting' and 'perverse' acts - by ANYBODY'S standards!

 

Couple all of the above with the fact that modern evidence clearly shows that homo-sexuality is as natural as hetro-sexuality, and I'd say the case is pretty much wrapped up.

 

 

So - I think it's time for the bigots on this forum to put their brain cells together (I'm guessing you'll have a grand total of about 12 between you) and give all of us a REAL reason why homosexuality is WRONG.

...OK, we'll start easy. Just come up with ONE!

[CloseTheBlastDo]

Oh - and just to quickly mention the bishop who is openly gay - good on him. And I hope it splits the church in two.

 

Then there will be one more religious institution in the world which is forward thinking and not holding on to old, bigoted beliefs - which can only be a good thing...

 

And also, just remembered about the neurtal sex theory mentioned earlier.

We were talking about it in another thread (can't remember exactly where - and I'm too lazy to go find it! )

 

But basically, an experiment was conducted where a boy was raised as a girl, and for a while it SEEMED to be a success, and therefore seemed to provide back-up to the neutral sex theory.

 

However, it turned out that the 'girl' always resented doing the things 'she' was bought up to do, and eventually went back to living as a boy. Which kind of goes against the neutral sex theory.

 

I for one DON'T believe in the neutral sex theory. I think your sexual preference AND sexual identity are both determined at birth...

[Acrylic]

Originally posted by ShockV1.89

So in your perfect world, everyone would be just like everyone else? Damn, man, I hope you're never in charge. I'd probably shoot myself out of boredom.

Oh so you find dudes making out and screwing with eachother a form of entertainment?

 

So basically you've closed your mind to any points of view other than your own, and you're not even going to consider any other opinions? *sigh*

Not about homosexuality. I've closed my mind on that...and I'm sticking to it.

[ShockV1.89]

What if I do? What's it to you? Do you have any right to tell me I cant enjoy that? Where do you get off telling me what to do and what not to do? I'm not gay, but I'm not going to tell other people that they cant be, nor will I make fun of it like you are.

 

Ohh, man, you really want me to flame off on you, dont you? Not gonna do it, but damn, the ignorance and closed mindedness is infuriating.

 

Not to mention that you simply ignored the points that myself and others made. You simply responded with an child like, middle school-ish remark about "dudes screwing each other." It boiled down to: "Huh huh, you like seeing gay dudes shaggin? Gay! Haha!"

 

**** end rant ****

 

I have no problem with the gay bishop. I didnt have a problem before SKinwalker said what he did, and now I have even less of a problem. If priests and bishops (etc) are celibate... then why is there sexual preference an issue? It's not like they're going to be doing anything anyway.

[Acrylic]

Originally posted by ShockV1.89

What if I do? What's it to you? Do you have any right to tell me I cant enjoy that? Where do you get off telling me what to do and what not to do? I'm not gay, but I'm not going to tell other people that they cant be, nor will I make fun of it like you are.

 

Ohh, man, you really want me to flame off on you, dont you? Not gonna do it, but damn, the ignorance and closed mindedness is infuriating.

 

Not to mention that you simply ignored the points that myself and others made. You simply responded with an child like, middle school-ish remark about "dudes screwing each other." It boiled down to: "Huh huh, you like seeing gay dudes shaggin? Gay! Haha!"

 

DID I tell you what to do?

 

I said "Oh so you find dudes making out and screwing with eachother a form of entertainment? "

Its pretty much asking you a question. Not TELLING you to do something.

 

And no, I didnt ignore anybody, but you are not gonna ****ing change my mind about what I think and do not think!

[Alegis]

I don't support gays, but I do support Lesbians...j/k

 

Well I'm not really a church guy, I hate it actually (but thats something for another discussion eh?) but I think the church has something to do with the bible and adam and eve stuff, so I guess this shouldn't be allowed

[ShockV1.89]

Originally posted by Acrylic

 

I said "Oh so you find dudes making out and screwing with eachother a form of entertainment? "

Its pretty much asking you a question. Not TELLING you to do something.

 

It's the biggest loaded question I've seen in this thread yet. Dont try to back out of it.

 

And no, I didnt ignore anybody, but you are not gonna ****ing change my mind about what I think and do not think!

 

This is the senate. A serious discussion forum. It's not the "Post what you think and dont back it up" forum. If you post something and someone disagrees and explains why, it is up to you to back up your points and your position. If you dont, then you're just spamming, as far as I'm concerned.

 

If you're not going to participate in discussion and debate, then leave.

[KBell]

i understand what AC means, but the way he worded it was totally wrong. DOnt express mature opinions untill your actually mature AC.

[Eldritch]

I still have to think the strongest point was Skin's statement about priests having to be celibate. It shouldn't matter what their sexual preference is - so long as they're not indulging those impulses, it's a non-issue.

 

But I have to ask these questions, since Acrylic seems to imply some of this: Do you actually think that homosexual people are more likely to engage in criminal sexual behavior (child molestation, rape, etc) than another demographic group? Are they less trustworthy than another demographic group? Is what they do behind bedroom doors any less normal than what happens in the bedroom of a heterosexual couple? Do they flaunt their sexuality and engage in a higher percentage of public displays of affection?

 

The answer to all these questions is No. You don't see gay people running around kissing in public anymore than you see heterosexual people doing it.

Originally Posted by Acrylic

"Oh so you find dudes making out and screwing with eachother a form of entertainment?"

Sex is a personal act - no one will be forced to watch gay sex as a form of entertainment unless they choose to do so. It won't be forced upon anyone.

 

So what are you really afraid of? That they'll come onto you? That you might catch "gay" as you would a common cold? I know you said you've made up your mind, but please try to fight ignorance with knowledge and come to an informed decision before doing so.

[Kjølen]

I fully support what people are. I support homosexuality, maybe not the ACT of homosexuality. I say, the priest can be gay if he is, as long as he doesnt do anything.

 

The problem with a lot of homophobics is that they think every single gay out there will make a move on them. Gays are like normal people, just because they could be interested in you, doesnt men they will.

In my opinion, homophobics think gays like them, but they're WAAAAAAY out of their league. Oh just kidding about that last one. Heh.

[The Cheat]

well i dont believe it is wrong to be gay, i just dont think that gays should be bishops because it is viewed as a sin in the bible and i have been brought up to pray for the sinner but not support the sin which is why i believe it is ok for a murderer to pray with a priest while on death row.

 

i dont think that they should be bishops or have their marriage blessed in a church because it would be like the church is supporting that sin from the bible.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

What if I do? What's it to you? Do you have any right to tell me I cant enjoy that? Where do you get off telling me what to do and what not to do? I'm not gay, but I'm not going to tell other people that they cant be, nor will I make fun of it like you are.

 

Oh so you find dudes making out and screwing with eachother a form of entertainment?

He never said that, so don't try to ridicule him.

 

What he's asking you is whether or not you dislike everything that's different from you. Asians, Africans, Latins, lefthanded people (which I am:)), people, people with scars that won't heal, people with cancer, people in wheelchairs, and so on and so on and so on.

 

If not, if the only thing that's different than your own being that you hate are the gays.. well, then it's not that they are a minority, it's something else. So what is it?

 

It's pretty much asking you a question. Not TELLING you to do something.

Oh so now? As far as I can tell, you're telling homosexuals to stop being homosexuals?

 

And no, I didnt ignore anybody...

Then answer my question.

 

...but you are not going to change my mind about what I think and do not think!

A fundamental skill of any debater is the ability to admit that you are wrong.

 

You might just find that one day you'll change your mind on your own accord.

 

Back to church and gays.

I agree that if a person chooses to violate the conditions for a church, or any workplace, the workplace has the right not to hire him, just like a corporation doesn't have to hire a person who comes to an interview dressed like a hippie. Why? Because all the hippie has to do is stop being a hippie or stop acting out his beliefs in order to be hired.

 

A homosexual, however, cannot change his attitude, thus, you cannot choose not to hire him.

 

Legally, the bishop is issue is this: A person is close to being denied a promotion in his workplace because of his sexual preference. That's all there is to it. Thus: Illegal discrimination.

[Eldritch]

The bible doesn't count it as a sin. If you're referring to that passage in Leviticus, please see my fully detailed post in the "Why is it OK to bash Christianity?" thread.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

Someone mentioned something about McDonalds. I agree, Hollywood is just plain evil. They wouldn't let a woman try out to be one of the bad boys. That just makes me sick. Why can't they have a man Bond girl for crying out loud. They can't help it if they were born like that. Shouldn't it be about equality rather than discriminating against someone playing a part.

How funny.

If a woman could not play roles in a movie at al, then it would be wrong, but male roles are the same as female roles, so that's an invalid argument.

 

Oh, and there have been countless women acting men and vice versa.