Post Reply
Page 6 of 27  •  Prev 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 ... 27 Next
Switch to Forum Live View North Carolina Pastor: Put Gays And Lesbians In Electrified Pen To Kill Them Off
2 years ago  ::  May 23, 2012 - 11:10AM #51
Cesmom
Posts: 4,665

May 23, 2012 -- 10:25AM, mytmouse57 wrote:


May 22, 2012 -- 10:25PM, Do_unto_others wrote:


May 22, 2012 -- 4:10PM, mytmouse57 wrote:

Continual anal sex might indeed cause some people to need diapers -- straight or gay.  Having sizable things shoved up the old tailpipe on a regular basis isn't what the system was really designed for. And yes, I realize many gays have no anal sex, or at least far less of it than some straights do. The point is, it's not really a smart practice, for anybody.



No mouse, that is NOT "the point". The point is the assinine, stoopid, hateful, HARMFUL things said from mainstream "Christian" pulpits.


May 22, 2012 -- 4:10PM, mytmouse57 wrote:

Anybody with even a passing knowledge of it should have been able to instantly peg that woman as suffering from some form of mental illness. I figured that out after about three seconds into her talking -- before I read any of the related text. 



Once again, the actual point is 1.) that she said it, 2.) that, despite your brilliant observation, most people took her seriously, and what she said as 'true'.


May 22, 2012 -- 4:10PM, mytmouse57 wrote:

But in general the public is woefully ignorant about the subject. 





The subject of homosexuality - yes. Mental illness is NOT the point.




First of all, the public is well versed in slickly marketed information about homosexuality. Legitimizing and mainstreaming homosexuality been one of the best, most effective marketing campaigns of the last 30 years or so.


Is that for good, ill -- or both? Opinons vary, and time will tell.


When the rantings of a mentally ill woman are exploited to try driving a certain narrative, you damn sure betcha mental illness is the point. Again, as the parent of mentally ill child, I find such explotation for political reasons to be revolting and highly offensive. 


Lastly, the views expressed by this pastor are hardly "mainstream." This is yet another broad swipe at the big, easy target of "Christianity." You are attempting, yet again, to cast anybody who might disagree with you even the slightest as a raving lunatic homophobe. 


Most Christians, clergy or congregation, would not agree with what that man was preaching. 





I agree that most Christians would not agree with what that man was preaching.  But I also think that a loud enough minority can create a lot of problems.


Perhaps no one has hear of Charles Worley, but Pat Robertson, Tony Perkins, Newt Gingrich, etc are getting plenty of air time to spew the exact same type of homophobic rants.  Lets at least recognize that it is significant and has an affect on public opinion.

Our need to learn should always outweigh our need to be right

It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.

More people would learn from their mistakes if they weren't so busy denying them.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 23, 2012 - 11:22AM #52
TemplarS
Posts: 6,721

May 23, 2012 -- 10:25AM, mytmouse57 wrote:


Lastly, the views expressed by this pastor are hardly "mainstream." This is yet another broad swipe at the big, easy target of "Christianity." You are attempting, yet again, to cast anybody who might disagree with you even the slightest as a raving lunatic homophobe. 


Most Christians, clergy or congregation, would not agree with what that man was preaching. 






The problem here is that neither what you are saying nor what D_U_O is saying is completely accurate. You are both at the extremes of what is actually being said.


You are right; the position taken by this pastor is far beyond what the vast majority of Christians would agree with.  Few support locking gays up, re-criminalizing gay relations, and so on.  Few advocate violence against gays.


On the other hand.  It is a fact that many mainstream Christians oppose things such as same-sex marriage and other measures of equality for gays.  There is a whole spectrum of things that are opposed.  Yes, they do not do so with the language of hatred and violence; but they do so nonetheless, and this poses a real problem for those who happen to be gay.


 


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 23, 2012 - 12:21PM #53
Erey
Posts: 18,594

May 23, 2012 -- 11:22AM, TemplarS wrote:


May 23, 2012 -- 10:25AM, mytmouse57 wrote:


Lastly, the views expressed by this pastor are hardly "mainstream." This is yet another broad swipe at the big, easy target of "Christianity." You are attempting, yet again, to cast anybody who might disagree with you even the slightest as a raving lunatic homophobe. 


Most Christians, clergy or congregation, would not agree with what that man was preaching. 






The problem here is that neither what you are saying nor what D_U_O is saying is completely accurate. You are both at the extremes of what is actually being said.


You are right; the position taken by this pastor is far beyond what the vast majority of Christians would agree with.  Few support locking gays up, re-criminalizing gay relations, and so on.  Few advocate violence against gays.


On the other hand.  It is a fact that many mainstream Christians oppose things such as same-sex marriage and other measures of equality for gays.  There is a whole spectrum of things that are opposed.  Yes, they do not do so with the language of hatred and violence; but they do so nonetheless, and this poses a real problem for those who happen to be gay.


 


 




Templar,


I think it is important to try and see from the other point of view.  It is not always possible to do that sucessfully but it is a good practise.  In regards to Gay Marriage for the vast majority of Americans, especially those over the age of say 40 it came out of thin air less than 10 years ago.  I would say that is probably true more or less of many fo the gay people I have known for a few decades.  I remember hearing of it the first time and thinking, "why"?  At that time there really were not the number of gay couples parenting.  There has been a sort of explosion of that in recent years.  Yes it has always happened but normally it was people had children in a heterosexula relationship and latter one of the parents came out as gay. 


So it is not like I was born enlightened or anything.  A large percentage of the gay people i have known for a long time were never interested in parenting.  It wasn't really something they viewed as part of the gay lifestyle (when there used to be a gay lifestyle as we know the sort of isn't anymore). 


Of course for sometime now I see the importance of marriage rights for gays but it was far from obvious not that long ago. I think what we have are a bunch of people who are enjoying playing outraged civil rights activists and telling everyone "else" how horrible they are and how they themselves are much better people. 



More than religious affiliation the marriage rights movement is divided on age.


Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 23, 2012 - 12:58PM #54
TemplarS
Posts: 6,721

Erey, you are right about people sometimes needing time to accept change, and you are certainly right about the generational split.  I see that in my children and their friends (indeed, they made a big contribution to my own evolving views on the subject).  In 20 years this will be a non-issue.


But how does that help gay people now? Would any of us say to a black man in 1957, "don't worry about it, in 20 years you'll be able to go to the front of the bus for sure"?


I think the attitudes and actions of the likes of Worley are irrelevant.  They are extreme and fringe and few people condone them.


But it is the actions and the attitudes of the vastly larger population who oppose gay equality, even if though they may do it with no vitriol and no hatred, that are really of significance in terms of what will happen in the political process.


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 23, 2012 - 1:47PM #55
mytmouse57
Posts: 9,782

May 23, 2012 -- 11:22AM, TemplarS wrote:


May 23, 2012 -- 10:25AM, mytmouse57 wrote:


Lastly, the views expressed by this pastor are hardly "mainstream." This is yet another broad swipe at the big, easy target of "Christianity." You are attempting, yet again, to cast anybody who might disagree with you even the slightest as a raving lunatic homophobe. 


Most Christians, clergy or congregation, would not agree with what that man was preaching. 






The problem here is that neither what you are saying nor what D_U_O is saying is completely accurate. You are both at the extremes of what is actually being said.


You are right; the position taken by this pastor is far beyond what the vast majority of Christians would agree with.  Few support locking gays up, re-criminalizing gay relations, and so on.  Few advocate violence against gays.


On the other hand.  It is a fact that many mainstream Christians oppose things such as same-sex marriage and other measures of equality for gays.  There is a whole spectrum of things that are opposed.  Yes, they do not do so with the language of hatred and violence; but they do so nonetheless, and this poses a real problem for those who happen to be gay.


 


 




And, IMO, folks need to get over the notion that opposistion to same-sex marriage is intrinsically terrible, or couched in actual "bigortry."


The entire "equality" angle is like yelling the sky is purple, and then geting upset at those who disagree and note that, no, the sky is still blue.


There's no objective equality involved, that's only subjective -- and driven by arguments couched almost entirely in appeals to emotion.


And furthermore, while other changes to marriage -- such as allowing inter-racial couple to marry -- represented changes only in instance. The proposition of same-sex marriage represents a fundamental chage of general principle. Gays might not feel as if they are asking for the moon. But in a way, they are. 


As a moral and philosophical matter, gay marriage "equality" is just part of that slick marketing package I referenced earlier -- a wider, and largely succesful -- effort to mainstrean and legitimize homosexuality, and present a happy, sanitized, "friendly" imgage of it. Right down to the use of the much warmer and fuzzier-sounding term "gay."


The point being, people do have good reason to oppose gay marriage -- at least as it has been marketed -- and comparing said opposistion to racism and bigotry is an unfair stretch.


Are there still plenty of people out there who still really do hate gays -- and because of religious dogma? Sadly, yes. And that muddies the water, and fuels the "bigot" caraciture so often leveled against Christians or others who oppose gay marriage as a matter of moral principle.


But that angle is way overplayed.


This issue -- gay rights/gay marriage -- is not a simple case of bigotry verses justice, as it was with women's rights or civil rights for Blacks. 


Legally, as a matter of choice under rule of secular law, there is no good argument against gay marriage. It's a done deal, IMO. It's only a matter of time. 


But, a better understanding of why some people object to it is also in order. 


Giving too much attention to raving lunatics, such as this pastor, does nothing to help the situation.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 23, 2012 - 1:49PM #56
mainecaptain
Posts: 21,783

May 23, 2012 -- 11:10AM, Cesmom wrote:



I agree that most Christians would not agree with what that man was preaching.  But I also think that a loud enough minority can create a lot of problems.


Perhaps no one has hear of Charles Worley, but Pat Robertson, Tony Perkins, Newt Gingrich, etc are getting plenty of air time to spew the exact same type of homophobic rants.  Lets at least recognize that it is significant and has an affect on public opinion.




"Pat Robertson, Tony Perkins, Newt Gingrich, etc " Have a really big affect. People already inclined to  hate and violence, hear these people and think they are being given permission to be that way.That ends their (generic) hesitation in being hateful and violent.


After all when someone running for president says hating a particular group is okay, then surely it is okay in the mind of a bigot . If you can irrationally hate without being called out, then violence is not far behind.


Bury your (generic your) head in the sand and pretend it is not happen does not make it go away. It makes it worse.

A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious. On the other hand, they do less easily move against him, believing that he has the gods on his side. Aristotle
Never discourage anyone...who continually makes progress, no matter how slow. Plato..
"A life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives" Jackie Robinson
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 23, 2012 - 2:20PM #57
TemplarS
Posts: 6,721

May 23, 2012 -- 1:47PM, mytmouse57 wrote:


The point being, people do have good reason to oppose gay marriage -- at least as it has been marketed -- and comparing said opposistion to racism and bigotry is an unfair stretch.


Are there still plenty of people out there who still really do hate gays -- and because of religious dogma? Sadly, yes. And that muddies the water, and fuels the "bigot" caraciture so often leveled against Christians or others who oppose gay marriage as a matter of moral principle.


But that angle is way overplayed.




 


May 23, 2012 -- 1:49PM, mainecaptain wrote:


After all when someone running for president says hating a particular group is okay, then surely it is okay in the mind of a bigot . If you can irrationally hate without being called out, then violence is not far behind.






I don't think everybody (or even most people) who oppose same-sex marriage hate gays.


And I don't think everybody who opposed civl rights laws in the 60s hated black people.  Many of them probably liked their black maids a whole lot and loved to listen to Nat King Cole and so on.


I also don't think that is the point, now or then.  The point is equality under the law.  Emotions are not relevant.  No law is going to stop someone from hating a black man or a lesbian. But you can force the person to treat them the same as anyone else in legal matters.


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 23, 2012 - 2:29PM #58
Erey
Posts: 18,594

May 23, 2012 -- 12:58PM, TemplarS wrote:


Erey, you are right about people sometimes needing time to accept change, and you are certainly right about the generational split.  I see that in my children and their friends (indeed, they made a big contribution to my own evolving views on the subject).  In 20 years this will be a non-issue.


But how does that help gay people now? Would any of us say to a black man in 1957, "don't worry about it, in 20 years you'll be able to go to the front of the bus for sure"?


I think the attitudes and actions of the likes of Worley are irrelevant.  They are extreme and fringe and few people condone them.


But it is the actions and the attitudes of the vastly larger population who oppose gay equality, even if though they may do it with no vitriol and no hatred, that are really of significance in terms of what will happen in the political process.


 




OK, so you and I came from roughly the same place.  When you first heard of homosexuals having legal marriages you did not immediately seize upon the justice of it and probably fell rather short of supporting it.  How might you have responded if back during those times people started treated you like you were a problem, like you were evil and bigoted?  Chances are that would not have done much towards you embracing the movement.  It would have made you defensive and really dislike people that identified with that cause. 



And you are absolutely right and my main point is that preacher is highly irrelevant.  Don't waste your righteous indignation on people like that preacher.  Even more importantly, don't malign good and supportive people in your ego driven drive to be outraged. 



What for gays now?  Well they shoud still work for equality in marriage, of course.  I don't think it serves the cause very well nor is it very wise or fair to run around painting large groups of people with the label of bigot.  Especially equating them with a nut job they have never heard of before (thank you MSM).


I think work still needs to be done in further explaining or educating the reasons why it is important to the quality of life to be able to marry.  More importantly why it is highly important to any children that are involved in a family headed by gays or lesbians.  I think that piece of educational opportunity has been drowed out by the self-masterbatory shouts of "evil biggot". 

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 23, 2012 - 2:38PM #59
mytmouse57
Posts: 9,782

May 23, 2012 -- 2:20PM, TemplarS wrote:


May 23, 2012 -- 1:47PM, mytmouse57 wrote:


The point being, people do have good reason to oppose gay marriage -- at least as it has been marketed -- and comparing said opposistion to racism and bigotry is an unfair stretch.


Are there still plenty of people out there who still really do hate gays -- and because of religious dogma? Sadly, yes. And that muddies the water, and fuels the "bigot" caraciture so often leveled against Christians or others who oppose gay marriage as a matter of moral principle.


But that angle is way overplayed.




 


May 23, 2012 -- 1:49PM, mainecaptain wrote:


After all when someone running for president says hating a particular group is okay, then surely it is okay in the mind of a bigot . If you can irrationally hate without being called out, then violence is not far behind.






I don't think everybody (or even most people) who oppose same-sex marriage hate gays.


And I don't think everybody who opposed civl rights laws in the 60s hated black people.  Many of them probably liked their black maids a whole lot and loved to listen to Nat King Cole and so on.


I also don't think that is the point, now or then.  The point is equality under the law.  Emotions are not relevant.  No law is going to stop someone from hating a black man or a lesbian. But you can force the person to treat them the same as anyone else in legal matters.


 




Comparisons to racial bigotry/equality and references to the civil rights movement for Blacks are unfair and underhanded. The subtext being, anybody who might question the sanitized, politically correct narrative regarding homosexuality shares the thought process of a racist.


Homosexuality isn't anything like ethnicity, (or left-handedness, or having red hair, for that matter.) Trying to make it so is all part and parcel of the slick marketing -- the maintreaming and legitimizing of homosexuality -- I've been referencing, which you aparenlty have bought into.  


Be that as it may, I agree with the last part of your statement, equity in legal matters -- for everybody -- is a perfectly workable and reasonable solution.


This isn't about "equality," IMO. It's about tolerance, and maintaining civility. 

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 23, 2012 - 2:48PM #60
mytmouse57
Posts: 9,782

May 23, 2012 -- 11:10AM, Cesmom wrote:


May 23, 2012 -- 10:25AM, mytmouse57 wrote:


May 22, 2012 -- 10:25PM, Do_unto_others wrote:


May 22, 2012 -- 4:10PM, mytmouse57 wrote:

Continual anal sex might indeed cause some people to need diapers -- straight or gay.  Having sizable things shoved up the old tailpipe on a regular basis isn't what the system was really designed for. And yes, I realize many gays have no anal sex, or at least far less of it than some straights do. The point is, it's not really a smart practice, for anybody.



No mouse, that is NOT "the point". The point is the assinine, stoopid, hateful, HARMFUL things said from mainstream "Christian" pulpits.


May 22, 2012 -- 4:10PM, mytmouse57 wrote:

Anybody with even a passing knowledge of it should have been able to instantly peg that woman as suffering from some form of mental illness. I figured that out after about three seconds into her talking -- before I read any of the related text. 



Once again, the actual point is 1.) that she said it, 2.) that, despite your brilliant observation, most people took her seriously, and what she said as 'true'.


May 22, 2012 -- 4:10PM, mytmouse57 wrote:

But in general the public is woefully ignorant about the subject. 





The subject of homosexuality - yes. Mental illness is NOT the point.




First of all, the public is well versed in slickly marketed information about homosexuality. Legitimizing and mainstreaming homosexuality been one of the best, most effective marketing campaigns of the last 30 years or so.


Is that for good, ill -- or both? Opinons vary, and time will tell.


When the rantings of a mentally ill woman are exploited to try driving a certain narrative, you damn sure betcha mental illness is the point. Again, as the parent of mentally ill child, I find such explotation for political reasons to be revolting and highly offensive. 


Lastly, the views expressed by this pastor are hardly "mainstream." This is yet another broad swipe at the big, easy target of "Christianity." You are attempting, yet again, to cast anybody who might disagree with you even the slightest as a raving lunatic homophobe. 


Most Christians, clergy or congregation, would not agree with what that man was preaching. 





I agree that most Christians would not agree with what that man was preaching.  But I also think that a loud enough minority can create a lot of problems.


Perhaps no one has hear of Charles Worley, but Pat Robertson, Tony Perkins, Newt Gingrich, etc are getting plenty of air time to spew the exact same type of homophobic rants.  Lets at least recognize that it is significant and has an affect on public opinion.




So, it then becomes a matter of the responsibilities that come with the right of free speech/expression? 


Somebody in a posistion of authority has an ethical/moral responsiblity to watch what they say... is that the concept you're getting at?


If so, I agree. 

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 6 of 27  •  Prev 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 ... 27 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook