Irishman has politely asked me to stay and when I see someone new addressing me it only seems polite to respond once.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple CEO Tim Cook Publicly Comes Out as Gay in Letter Declaring Support for Equality
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
Irishman has politely asked me to stay and when I see someone new addressing me it only seems polite to respond once.
I guess I should have added that what I meant was that they don't "have to be respected". They can have their belief, but if someone comes up to me and starts rattling off their anti-gay blather, I'm not going to just say "Oh, what a respectable opinion! I don't agree with you, but thank you for sharing!" No, they will get an earful and will hopefully sulk away with their tail between their legs by the time I am done.
Apple CEO Tim Cook Publicly Comes Out as Gay in Letter Declaring Support for ...
Politeness? Really? From you?
This is the age of the train
I find it almost shameful that person could have some of that knowledge and then phrase a question in a way that carelessly or implicitly associates homosexuality (note the word 'heterosexual' in the first quote above) with causes of AIDS.
It may be theoretically possible that destruction of railway infrastructures, internationally, would help to reduce the spread of HIV. Would that be too extreme reaction to knowledge-based science? Yes. I can tolerate train travel. Well thought-through plans for additional, improved infrastructure may be positively welcomed.
I choose to no longer tolerate the words of someone who encourages definition of my sexuality as immoral whilst using the word 'AIDS' in that way. I don't have HIV but I know that it can be, to say the least, difficult for people to live with HIV or AIDS. These people deserve more respect, less prejudice, more care.
Whether a person is religious is rarely of importance to me, the more important thing is whether they're nice. If that person uses the AIDS epidemic as part of an attempt to educate other people about morality, then I expect that person to take care with their words, more so in a heated debate such as this.
There was politeness from brianvictor7 in response to my relatively hairy last post, so it's debatably not nice of me to add him to the list of people ignored by me. However I sense that there was evasion of an opportunity to properly apologise for carelessness with public discussion of AIDS, and that's no small thing, so it's done. One more name on the list.
I find it almost shameful that person could have some of that knowledge and then phrase a question in a way that carelessly or implicitly associates homosexuality (note the word 'heterosexual' in the first quote above) with causes of AIDS.
It may be theoretically possible that destruction of railway infrastructures, internationally, would help to reduce the spread of HIV. Would that be too extreme reaction to knowledge-based science? Yes. I can tolerate train travel. Well thought-through plans for additional, improved infrastructure may be positively welcomed.
I choose to no longer tolerate the words of someone who encourages definition of my sexuality as immoral whilst using the word 'AIDS' in that way. I don't have HIV but I know that it can be, to say the least, difficult for people to live with HIV or AIDS. These people deserve more respect, less prejudice, more care.
Whether a person is religious is rarely of importance to me, the more important thing is whether they're nice. If that person uses the AIDS epidemic as part of an attempt to educate other people about morality, then I expect that person to take care with their words, more so in a heated debate such as this.
There was politeness from brianvictor7 in response to my relatively hairy last post, so it's debatably not nice of me to add him to the list of people ignored by me. However I sense that there was evasion of an opportunity to properly apologise for carelessness with public discussion of AIDS, and that's no small thing, so it's done. One more name on the list.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Translators_of_the_Bible_into_English
I see some women on this list, but it is overwhelmingly male.
And while I don't think there is a conscious conspiracy, we all bring our own experiences and unconscious biases to translations. I've seen two translators see the same sentence and have one translate it as "yes, we will," and the other translate it as "no, we won't," just because that was what each was expecting. In that case we could call up the person who wrote the original and ask, "I'm sorry sir, but which did you mean?" Can't do that with the Bible.
i don't know how accurate that is.. i mean, sure, in many cases someone will be born with clear inclinations towards homosexuality or heterosexuality.. most instances though will involve some grey areas in which choices are made.
regardless.. i don't really get the "it's ok because they were born that way" stance.. why would it be 'worse' if someone chooses to be gay?
(in other words-- when i hear "it's not a choice", i hear "i accept it because they have no control over it.. if they had control over it then i might feel differently about it")
You are right, it is irrelevant.
The causes for homosexuality are in dispute. We do have a choice when it comes to our actions however.
I know from experience that sometimes the best scholarship ends up with the conclusion: not enough data to decide.
----------
You feel it's important, but you don't have any concrete suggestions for how to show respect for people who object to homosexuality in religious grounds?
Thank you for your comment. I believe we can both agree that homosexuals are people and deserve more respect, less prejudice, more care. I may say that I sharply disagree with a person's sexual practices. I see no point in denying them common courtesies, social services or employment at this stage of the game: such discriminatory practices served to at least attempt to keep immoral practices in check in the past. Now they are tactics used by vile and hypocritical potentates like Putin to find a convenient scapegoat to consolidate power. We live in a society which believes sexual desires give one license to do some very dangerous things. Witness the body count thanks to it. Pardon if this reply is a bit sketchy as I am writing on the fly.
You're right ... sometimes there are grey areas ... and those are perfectly okay too. Human psychology is quite complex. Whether someone is born attracted to the same sex, opposite sex, all sexes, or no sexes is really not the issue here. Everyone should be free to be how they want. My point was that people that call it the "homosexual lifestyle" are only describing it as a choice ... and disregarding any biological factors that may or may not come into play. That's what upsets me, not whether people are choosing to be gay or not. And when it comes down to it ... it is truly and utterly nobody's business who people are attracted to. To spend such an incredible amount of time and energy on telling people who they're allowed to be attractive to ... or love and want to spend their lives with ... is so incredibly asinine. Think of all the amazing things people could be doing if they weren't preoccupied with being giant douche bags. What a world that would be.
To the bolded parts ... you are saying they deserve more respect ... then go on to state that people with "sexual desires" that differ from yours somehow makes those people more inclined to commit dangerous acts. Am I right in assuming that? If so ... on what grounds do you base those thought patterns?
Last edited:
Now i understand your question.
Religious people should not be forced to participate. (Chapels, wedding cake bakers, wedding photographers)
----------
And it is your right to tell them your opinion.
I agree that from the pov of non-gay people accepting gay people, it shouldn't matter if they were born that way or if they chose to be that way. We should accept them regardless of if it's a conscious choice, or it's something that can't be helped.
I do think, however, that in terms of someone struggling with their sexual identity, it increases their pain. I imagine many wish they could chose to be "normal," but find they can't.
That has also been my experience. It is not a problem in the case of finding a coherent doctrine in the Bible about whether or not homosexual practice is wrong in God's eyes. I am waiting to discuss that with Irishman.
Erm, tricky issues! Whenever I hear of controversies like these, I find I'm of two minds. In the cases you list. I feel like a chapel and photographer should be able to refuse to participate in weddings they object to, because they are such an integral part of the ceremony, but the baker? Just bake the cake!
I know others wil draw the line at different places, and personally, if I was planning a wedding and I discovered hat my cake baker objected to my wedding, I'll just take my business elsewhere.
But controversies like these are only going to increase with more states allowing gay marriages. Intersting times!
----------
It's not? Sounded to me like it is. That article Irishman linked to suggested that scholars can't come to a conclusion on the word in the Bible that is being interpreted as referring to homosexuality and / or homosexual conduct.
When I first heard that homosexuals have a much higher risk of mental illness, that was my first thought. I doubt it is the only reason though. But I agree that gays should have the same rights as anyone else. But people have the right to reject the homosexual lifestyle. It's live and let live. Just respect one another!
Where does anyone force someone to "the homosexual lifestyle" ? It still makes little sense what you say.
As for actual studies there are as much showing such a corrolation as there are not showing such a coorolation. Let alone show any actually link between sexual orientation and the illness itself.
----------
As long as they follow the law no problem. Religion is basically nothing more then believing lord of the rings is real , I don't see any reason to give anyone preferential treatment for that.
I am waiting for someone to present that argument with specific excerpts here. That article is too lengthy to tackle in one bite (at least for the time I have).
I'm going to make this very blunt ... but regardless if God finds homosexuality wrong in his eyes, it is not your damn job to judge people for it ... that is God's job. Leave that up to him to decide what to do. Your job as a Christian is not to spew hatred and intolerance, it's to spread love and acceptance. You are as far from the pearly gates as any other sinner on this earth ... you are just as filthy in God's eyes as anyone else on this earth ... regardless of the severity of the "sin" ... and it is only through Christ's sacrifice that God can even look at you without being repulsed. You are an imperfect creature ... as are we all ... and you really need to start focusing more on yourself than the "sins" of other people. After all:
“Judge not, that you be not judged.
For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you.
Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?
Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye?
You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye."
You spend so much time telling people how much they sin ... when you sin every day just by existing ... and contradicting yourself by pointing the finger at other people.
If there is anything I can take away from the bible ... that merits any worth to me ... is how much it frequently stresses that we love each other and not judge each other. It puts love and kindness above even faith. It just sickens me when I see people outing others because they think other people's "sin" is worse than their own.
"Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God."
Brian ... are you pushing people away from your God ... or bringing them closer to your God by your actions? Think about that one.
I will be honest. I didn't read any of your post except the last sentence. My response: truth is often polarizing.
I will be honest ... this is why nothing you say in this thread has any merit because you are prideful, arrogant, and completely lack humility. You are the antithesis of the Christian way of life. I'm done responding to you because you really are hopeless ... and I hope others follow suit.
"I didn't read any of your post." Good job. This pretty much sums you up perfectly.
My response: Didn't Jesus dine with sinners? And I don't know about you, but I imagine he didn't spend the entire dinner lecturing them about the wrongness of their ways. If he had, the sinners would have kicked him out before the appetizer was served.
- Status