Hurt/offended by the Church/Christians?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5YYViktsfA"]YouTube - exterminate

 

Fantastic reply. I do understand that it is a bit much for people to exist today with yesterday's establishment of God in everything, but it is part of this country's history. Much of the driving force of establishing a new country was for religious freedom. All of the "In God we trust" type stuff was the country as a collective whole expressing itself in freedom. But yes, that was yesterday and times have changed. The country no longer reflects the same culture. Removing of the pledge of allegiance, or even the 10 commandments from the pentagon, etc, are all understandable.

But we've also moved so far that we are seeing a reverse oppression. I had a friend who taught at high school with me (I was a math teacher, she was a history teacher) who was reprimanded by the school for bringing a pastor in to talk about Christianity to her class. Seems too in your face with that much information. But she also brought in someone who represented Islam on another day. And brought in a buddhist as well. Everything was ok except for the pastor.

For some reason it is okay to teach theories of life like evolution but not creation (if taught as a theory and not even as a biblically based idea).

And Shale, is your idea of kissing Raul in front of a church just in retaliation to the way the country has God mottos? Is that the church's fault or the governments fault for not changing as the people it oversees did? Why do today's Christians get blamed for yesterday's believers actions when it was a different culture and circumstance?

 

p.s. What is DADT?

 

I have, in SF, and it was the single most horrifying event I have ever attended

and yes, the last gay pride parade thing I went to there were used condoms EVERYWHERE

and I haven't lived here my entire life, I'm not sheltered. I was born and raised in what most people would call the south (the one on the east) so I'm no stranger to dickheads fucking with me for being gay. The difference between me and other gay kids growing up is they curled up into a little ball afraid to be themselves until they turned 18 and then they flamed out while I was just living my life. They were fucked with and had no friends, I was the only gay kid in my schools that had any straight friends.

 

don't ask don't tell

I personally like it but that's a whole different argument

 

then San Fran is the exception then. i've gone to 10 different city's pride events, none of which happened.

and at least they're balloons filled cum and not heroin.


and why do you like dadt?

 

it happened in sf and in albany, ny

and I like dadt because if there's a draft it seems like an easy loophole to get out of going to war, if I'm wrong it's because I didn't care enough to research the fine print of that policy

 

I was being flip, but in the context used I suppose it would be for balance.

And the reason today's Christians get blamed for yesterday's believers actions is because so many of them, at least the vocal ones in our face are pushing yesterdays beliefs so fervently.

Fred Phelps being the most extreme nutcase but there are many Christians who do not tell that ass to STFU. Same way Muslims get crap because of their fucked up fanantics. But we would love to see more Muslims telling the Jihadists to STFU, crawl back into their caves and let the civilized world alone.

In our country every effort to curtail gay rights is led by some whigged out Christian fanatic. They may not be acting in a Christian capacity but be assured they most likely are Christian of some denomination and are acting on those principles. Here in Florida our courts have just this year ruled that gay ppl can adopt children - we were the only state that did not allow that. It was a law spurred by Anita Bryant in the '70s acting on some anti-gay prejudice dredged up from her Christian faith.

 

Great discussion. I'm working with Tim on this week's hot topic. I read a poll that asks what people think of when they think of people of faith. 91% replied "antihomosexual." It's clear that people of faith are better known for what we oppose. While telling Fred Phelps to STFU is a great start, we are hoping to stir us up to take more personal responsibility for our own response to the gay community. Tim hit it on the head--it's important for the people we are addressing to see how the words and acts done in the name of faith have hurt, marginalized and shut out people in the LGBT community. I am hoping that we all begin to examine our own reactions to the gay people in our families, workplaces and communities and where necessary to respond less from a place of fear and to respond in ways that are more consistent with Christ's call to love people.

 

welcome dshinoduh

 

Genesis 3:22 always stuck with me:

Genesis is very metaphorical, what does the tree of life refer to? Knowledge? The forbidden Fruit? Knowledge of conception? They eat the fruit then become aware they are naked

Man gains knowledge of conception only then knows the difference between good and evil and lives for ever and ever through the knowledge of conception

That was the original argument between God and Satan (assuming Satan was the Serpent) should man and woman live as innocents, or should they know each other.

Then what of those that dont have knowledge / lust of conception?



Besides that the Christian / Pagan thing has been going on for millenia, arent LGBT just modern day pagans?

Lastly, deconstructed down to its base. Family is the cornerstone of our society. Which is better Family by Blood or Family by Like? Either way Family is the Foundation, Religion or Sexual Identity is the First Floor thats built on top of that Foundation

 

you like it so that if theres a draft you can easily prove you're gay? haha um ok. as much as i don't agree with the military and don't want to join, i still think dadt kinda sucks. for the people that are gay and want to be in the military, they are simply refused acknowledgement of any kind indefinitely. thats not fair. plus if a draft were to happen, everyones gonna be gay all the sudden too, just like in the 60's, so you would still have a great chance of being thrown in anyway. unless maybe whenever you see a recruiter, hop on a dick and hope for the best.

 

idk, I just don't see the point in fighting for a country that oppresses you so I don't see the point in fighting for the right to fight either

simple as that

 

true, good point

 

Shale, haha, I get it... your "flip"-ness. If you were to kiss in front of a church for balance, if it was a church that was not involved in any of the offenses to the LGBT (assuming it wasn't westboro) could a member of that church go out and scream profanities at a gay couple to bring balance to things in their mind? =o) Hypothetical rhetorical question.

I believe that many many churches, pastors, christians, etc. would love to give a piece of their mind to Phelps. I would think the majority do. By your reasoning, we are not allowed to speak about prayer or God in schools because people like Phelps are vocal and exist? Or if I can specify, people like Phelps exist, and due to their controversial stance get invited onto countless interviews and get plenty of air time and published press. The fact that people are quoting him and printing his words (even if it is to argue his stance) are only perpetuating and spreading the message that he wants printed across the nation. Everything he says may be rebutted, but his stance is well known because its printed over and over again. No press is bad press.

But what about a local pastor's wife who during the prop 8 protests, walked through the pro-gay marriage side (I think in Berkeley) not to agree with it, but to apologize for the way the anti-gay marriage people (mainly Christian) were acting? She is one of the more vocal believers I know. Or the countless churches with podcasts, and transcribed messages, blogs, etc. who speak fervently against people like Phelps? Zero media coverage, zero interviews, zero published quotes.

Please don't take this as me saying the church is doing everything that we're supposed to. We fall short often (who doesn't)... but we're also not all Phelps. He gives a message of judgment from a self proclaimed high authoritative position, but our model from Jesus and biblically is for the leaders to be humble and admit that they fall short of what God has called them to. So much of what Phelps does is against biblical principle.

Because of all believer's shortcomings, I can't put the full blame on media (even though their main goal is not impartial presentation of beliefs, but it is ratings through violence and controversy). It just sucks that Phelps is the face of Christianity for much of the unchurched world right now. Especially when (from what my gay friends tell me) all they want is for Christians to leave them alone and let them live their life... and when most believers do what they're asked, we (in some, or many people's minds) think that we're not speaking out enough against people like Phelps.

If I can make a very stretched analogy - the homophobic assumption is that all gay men want to hook up with and will hit on all straight guys, "sneak peaks" in the locker room, etc. We know this isn't the case. But my college roommate was obsessively pursued by a gay student who crossed many boundaries. No other gay friends of ours spoke out against that person. No one told him to "STFU" or anything close to that. Regardless, I should hope (and it is very much the case today) that his view on gay men doesn't fall into the stereotypical homophobic view because of it.

You said "And the reason today's Christians get blamed for yesterday's believers actions is because so many of them, at least the vocal ones in our face are pushing yesterdays beliefs so fervently."

It wouldn't be fair for him to blame all future encounters with gay men as a whole based on his previous or even future experiences with individuals right?

Shale, this is all for the sake of discussion... I know tone is not conveyed at all in a typed forum, but I am just responding to your points in what seems logical (haha, at least to me! which isn't always universal!) I REALLY appreciate the time you're taking to respond and discuss. For example, we know how much we don't like what we see from Westboro, but to see it come up in a forum like this (a few times) makes us realize that our fears that this was bad publicity for the church as a whole into a tangible reality. So a huge thank you for your openness and honesty! I expect nothing less in your response. =o)

Belated happy thanksgiving... and current happy black friday. haha.

 

2 Good responses and 2 long winded response from me. I apologize in advance to Shale and Vanilla Gorilla.


Good questions VG

From what I've come to learn through studies - The tree of life was different than the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Before Adam and Eve ate the fruit, they were pure (and naked) and innocent of all faults. When the sinned by eating the fruit against God's command, they became aware of their ability to make choices to do the right thing or the wrong thing. With that awareness comes the understanding of pride, humility and even shame (which they felt when they realized that they were naked- or metaphorically - exposed before God - as God could see their spiritual faults and their perceived physical faults).

The tree of life was one that had fruit that gave eternal life. What I believe is that God kicked Adam and Eve out of the garden as part of a punishment and partly due to his love for them. If they had eaten the fruit of life while stuck in sin, they would live eternally in their impure state (or they'd be stuck in a state of perpetual sin). Biblically we believe that God knew that man would fall and had a plan of redemption from the beginning. That he would redeem our eternal souls after our physical bodies pass away instead of allowing man to have eternal life in now imperfect sinful bodies.

I like your idea about family as the cornerstone of society, but I think we can break that down even further. I think relationships are the cornerstone of society. (As many students I know have broken families - family was not their cornerstone, but their friendships and relational support were) This may be true for LGBT who may not have found acceptance from their families when they came out of the closet. Bible believers understand that our cornerstone is Jesus and our relationship with Him and God (which should dictate our call to live like Jesus and love everyone in the world). Family could be seen as a cornerstone because of its strong relationships. I don't think we can say that religion or sexuality are built on the cornerstone of family/relationships if our religion or sexuality defines the type of family/relationships that we have. Those things go down to the core of who we are and affect the way we see everything in the world (Christians and philosophers would use the term worldview). I think thats why so many Christians don't know how to respond to LGBT (vs. say a different "sinner" - alcoholic, thief, etc) because all other sins don't change the core value of what is perceived as the "standard" of relationships, but being LGBT does challenge that perceived cornerstone.

Our purpose is to get away from believers fearing that idea, but loving people instead.

Thanks for the reply!

 

And finally a quick reply from me! haha. OhSoDeadful - I'm asian american and WWII had somewhat of a similar idea to what you wrote. Here's a quote from a WWII website-

"Every Japanese American who was imprisoned was eventually forced to prove their loyalty by answering two questions -- (1) whether or not they would be willing to be drafted to fight in the war or volunteer as a nurse and (2) whether they would swear to obey all the laws of the U.S. and not interfere with the war effort.

Even though they had just had their rights as American citizens revoked, forcibly imprisoned just because of their ethnic ancestry, and still in a state of collective shock, the overwhelming majority of Japanese Americans answered yes to both questions."

That was a gentle way of saying that the Japanese Americans had to disown Japan to fight for America.

For many minorities, they had to fight for the country they were fighting against (civil rights movements during war times) but it was being in this country that allowed them to be who they were, believe what they believed, and say what they wanted to say. Maybe America didn't see minorities as citizens then, but just being in America was an opportunity for so many (My grandfather in SF Chinatown who served in WWII as well)

 

Oh definitely they would have a right to do that - I do believe in free speech and you counter what stupid ppl say with your own words of wisdom.

And to that end I sometimes appreciate the adolescent sense of protest. Guess I never grew up.

Yes, I understand the business of news and I often take them to task for their selling a point rather than being objective. That too is ignored for the most part. However, despite your anecdotal point about the pastor's wife, it is hard to dispute that those involved in anti-gay measures are usually conservatives and of those conservatives most if not all are Christians in our country.

Here is an article that showed up on my ISP news feed just today.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40373973/ns/us_news-life/

Some Excerpts:

Ohio gay-rights vote mirrors national debate

The public remains deeply divided on same-sex marriage, even as younger adults come out in support of gay rights

By DAVID CRARY</SPAN>
The Associated Press
11/25/2010 5:35:25 PM ET 2010-11-25T22:35:25

Surveys repeatedly find that young adults, far more so than their elders, support the rights of gays to marry and serve openly in the military. A Gallup poll earlier this year showed, for the first time, a majority of Americans saying same-sex relations were morally acceptable. Increasing numbers of Americans personally know gays and lesbians, and positive portrayals of them abound on TV and in films.

"The more gay-friendly an environment you create, the more people come out as gay," Klarman said. "When people know other people are gay — family, co-workers — they find it harder and harder to dislike them and deny them equal rights."
Social conservatives see those trends as clearly as liberals do, though they may hope for a different outcome.

"There is a sense of inevitability of moral standards diminishing that is frustrating for many," said the Rev. Scott Estep, pastor of a popular Bowling Green church, Dayspring Assembly of God. The church of 700-plus members, ... is attended by leading opponents of the two ordinances, though the pastor himself made no formal endorsement of either side.

Just an anecdotal point that is too often repeated by churchgoing Christians in small towns all over our country. And this is what they oppose?

What's to Defend in Marriage?




http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showpost.php?p=6293209&postcount=5

We do sneak peeks in the locker room! But that is a guy thing not a gay thing.

Sometimes you gotta fight your own fight. It was up to him to tell the guy to STFU if it was a problem that crossed his boundaries. In this case it was a personal problem, not an organized religion or congregation acting en-masse to curtail his rights. "No man lives without jostling and being jostled; in all ways he has to elbow himself through the world, giving and receiving offence." Thomas Carlyle – 1838

 

Clicked on your link and saw your original post for the photos "Still waiting for someone in authority to do the right thing, but meantime here is the embarrassment for those moralizing heterosexuals who can't stay together for even one decade." <- Made me literally LOL. Well said. The divorce rate in this country is ridiculous. Marriage and many aspects of relationships are taken way too lightly and romanticized when going into them and the bitter truth hits hard when reality sets in. For the gay couples that have been able to get married, I imagine will have long happy marriages since their now "civil union" was just a step that they have been waiting for as they worked intentionally on their relationships awaiting the opportunity for this commitment. Unfortunately, the heterofreedom to marry at will has backfired for a lot of people (more than a few that I know personally - which is hard being a pre-30 year old who saw friends rush into things after my wife and I dated for 7 years and have been married for more than 5).

Thanks for the link to the article as well. Breezed through it once, but in my delirium did not read it as thoroughly as I'd like to (staying up black Friday shopping and then deciding not to sleep because my newborn normally wakes up to eat, and instead of sleeping, I've now waited 3 extra hours for her to wake up). I'll definitely read it again tomorrow... err... later today.

The line ""The more gay-friendly an environment you create, the more people come out as gay," Klarman said. "When people know other people are gay — family, co-workers — they find it harder and harder to dislike them and deny them equal rights."
Social conservatives see those trends as clearly as liberals do, though they may hope for a different outcome." is something that I argue with quite a bit with other believers.

Creating a more gay friendly environment will have more people come out... its true that if fear and judgment are removed that those that were afraid will be able to live freely. What I don't think many Christians understand is that legal gay marriage won't MAKE more people gay, it just creates an environment that might be more friendly for people still in the closet. People that were gay before gay marriage is legalized (and I honestly think it is only a matter of time before it is as equal rights cannot and should not be denied in this country) will still be gay after, and those that are hetero won't all of a sudden become gay just because it is a more friendly environment.

Who knows, maybe a more gay friendly environment will actually help the church/gay relationship. The extreme folks will still be extreme, but maybe the church in general will be more open to being friendly and loving.

Sure, I definitely concede the fact that most of those involved in anti-gay marriages are conservatives with Christian backgrounds. Maybe it is because I am Christian that I have a different understanding of the church spectrum than those that are not in the church and I'm sure the fact that I am from the SF Bay Area brings disconnect to the small conservative towns, but I do see things quite differently than those that represent the churches in your article. Your response to my roommates analogy was that it was an individual thing and not an organization or congregation acting en-masse to curtail rights, but that is agreeing with my point that like individuals, not every church acts in the same way. I still feel like you're blaming Christianity and the church as a whole instead of the individual pastors and churches that are leading their movements. My roommates fight was with the person that crossed boundaries and not all of the LGBT world - Shouldn't the gay-rights movement be against the church's that crossed boundaries and not the whole faith?

Full disclosure, I do appreciate this - ""There is a sense of inevitability of moral standards diminishing that is frustrating for many," said the Rev. Scott Estep, pastor of a popular Bowling Green church, Dayspring Assembly of God.
The church of 700-plus members, on the Dixie Highway north of town where roadside businesses give way to open farmland, is attended by leading opponents of the two ordinances, though the pastor himself made no formal endorsement of either side.
"I'm concerned about the kind of environment my children will grow up in," said Estep, who considers homosexual behavior one sin among many. He suggested, not despairingly, that his son and daughter "will be faced with a lot more decisions and diversity than I did."

It is no secret that the church may not agree with homosexuality as a lifestyle (which in the U.S. should not impede civil rights) but there is a diminishing moral standard in the world culture. I am not implying at all that this is caused by the gay rights movement, but I have a similar fear that my daughter is going to have to fight a lot of battles that I didn't have to deal with just as I had to fight battles that my parents could have never imagined (I had friends dealing drugs in elementary school, was exposed to internet porn in middle school- when you still had to pay per minute for the internet, and add in the issues from the whole MTV generation). Rev. Estep quote may have been used in this article and I'm sure was from an interview on gay-rights, but I don't think it should be read into in regards to civil rights especially since it stated that the pastor made no formal endorsement of either side. I believe that while he has the freedom of speech and religion, his statement and unmentioned endorsement gave a good example of what Christians can do to not water down their beliefs without impeding rights.

p.s. You're other 2 images made me laugh as well. I enjoy the internet age and camera phones to capture EVERYTHING. I do believe that Jesus saves from hell, but I absolutely cringed at the sight of the second sign. There is nothing biblical about those statements especially when the sports event oft quoted John 3:16 says that God loved the world.

 

Here we go.

Look at uranium.
Uranium is made of atoms with unstable nuclei. Every so often, these nuclei project alpha particles made of neutrons and protons.
The observation of this decay gives us a rough Idea of how long this Uranium has been around. The is referred to as 'half-life'.

Geologists can look at natural uranium deposits and formulate rough estimates of the earth's age. They can also look at things like crystal formation and fossils and radio carbon dating.

Evolution. Transitional forms. The effects of inbreeding. Recessive and dominate genes. Gene transcription. RNA.

If you want proof of evolution, all you have to do is LOOK. Go and have a child. It will look like a mix of you and your partner. That is essentially evolution.
You can SEE RNA -messenger molecules transcribe your DNA to your cells.

Creationism is a myth which eludes fact yet demands to be presented in a credible manner.

I recommend you go live in texas, where Thommas Jefferson has been replaced by John Calvin in the text books.

I don't know whether to be amused or saddened or angry, or just ambivalent to the madness of human beings, which stems from their unwillingness to simply learn from the world.