COVID-19 RESOURCES
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

religion and D/s

JMohegan said:
If secretly gay-friendly churchgoers really did exist en masse here in the U.S., then equal treatment in marriage, adoption, the boy scouts, and every other damn thing would have become a reality a long time ago.

Why? Because, even though you may tolerate bigoted messaging while enjoying all that fellowship and free babysitting on Sundays (telling yourself that your tolerance for said bigotry really doesn't hurt anything)... still, we don't vote in this country on Sundays.

So let's dispense with that ridiculous notion.

Republicans may begin to support gay marriage in full force, Huckabee said, “And if they do, they’re going to lose a large part of their base because evangelicals will take a walk.”

http://www.salon.com/2013/03/27/huckabee_evangelicals_may_walk_over_gay_marriage/
Click to expand...
Thank you.
 
JMohegan said:
If secretly gay-friendly churchgoers really did exist en masse here in the U.S., then equal treatment in marriage, adoption, the boy scouts, and every other damn thing would have become a reality a long time ago.

Why? Because, even though you may tolerate bigoted messaging while enjoying all that fellowship and free babysitting on Sundays (telling yourself that your tolerance for said bigotry really doesn't hurt anything)... still, we don't vote in this country on Sundays.

So let's dispense with that ridiculous notion.

Republicans may begin to support gay marriage in full force, Huckabee said, “And if they do, they’re going to lose a large part of their base because evangelicals will take a walk.”

http://www.salon.com/2013/03/27/huckabee_evangelicals_may_walk_over_gay_marriage/
Click to expand...


May I ask a question about the US here - please don't bite my head off because I genuinely don't know about this and would like to know the answer. And if it shouldn't be on this thread, then apologies again.

Gay marriage is not currently legal in the US but is being proposed, same as here in the UK? There is no doubt that it will go through here - is there more opposition where you are? Do you not have legislation that prevents discrimination against gay couples who want to adopt, or that protects against discrimination in the workplace?

Equality on the grounds of sexual orientation, ethnicity etc is fully supported and backed by the law over here, as it should be. It sounds like you're still battling?
 
LallyH said:
May I ask a question about the US here - please don't bite my head off because I genuinely don't know about this and would like to know the answer. And if it shouldn't be on this thread, then apologies again.

Gay marriage is not currently legal in the US but is being proposed, same as here in the UK? There is no doubt that it will go through here - is there more opposition where you are? Do you not have legislation that prevents discrimination against gay couples who want to adopt, or that protects against discrimination in the workplace?

Equality on the grounds of sexual orientation, ethnicity etc is fully supported and backed by the law over here, as it should be. It sounds like you're still battling?
Click to expand...
You can gain a clue about how vociferously GLBT civil rights are being opposed in the USA by the tone of these posts...

We have lots of legislation that encourages discrimination against gays in the workplace and in our private lives, and all of it, Lally-my-love, every stitch of it is fueled by believers in God.
:(
 
I've thoght about this a lot. I grew up in a very strict, fundamentalist environment. There were so many things I couldn't do, such as going to movies and dancing. I went to seminary and became a minister. By the time I was in my early 30's I saw the hypocrisy in the church and left. A few years later I went to law school and joined a more liberal, mainline denomination where I'm still very active. I didn't really get into any BDSM until about 5 years ago (though looking back I had some desires for it even when I was young). I prefer to take on the dominant role. As I think about it, it's probably because I had to be submissive to the church and it's fundamentalist teachings for so long. I was controlled for so many years, it's freeing to be in control occasionally.

Karen Armstrong wrote a book a number of years ago about her experiences in the convent. She felt such guilt over what the sisters labeled her shortcomings that she would flog herself. One night, while beating her back she experienced an orgasm (though she didn't know what it was). I can't remember the title of the book...it was the prequel to one called "The Spiral Staircase." If anyone is interested in religion and the lifestyle, you might want to read it.
 
Stella_Omega said:
You can gain a clue about how vociferously GLBT civil rights are being opposed in the USA by the tone of these posts...

We have lots of legislation that encourages discrimination against gays in the workplace and in our private lives, and all of it, Lally-my-love, every stitch of it is fueled by believers in God.
:(
Click to expand...

Given the (supposed) close ties between the UK and US, I didn't realise there was such a huge cultural difference in this regard. Equality for all is such a basic precept of our society which is taken as read (being enshrined in our human rights legislation), that it had been puzzling for me to try to figure out some of the posts in this thread :(

Discrimination still exists of course - we're still not a perfect society by any means, but if caught, the perpetrators of any type of discrimination are held very much accountable for their actions.

None of the religions have any political power over here, and the percentage of religious followers is so small that none of the political parties can be swayed by any religious thinking. Again, your situation is obviously much different if your legislation can be dictated in this way.
 
*sigh* :(

We are told to be proud of our seperation of church and state-- but all that really means is that churches don't pay taxes.
 
Last edited:
LallyH said:
Given the (supposed) close ties between the UK and US, I didn't realise there was such a huge cultural difference in this regard. Equality for all is such a basic precept of our society which is taken as read (being enshrined in our human rights legislation), that it had been puzzling for me to try to figure out some of the posts in this thread

Discrimination still exists of course - we're still not a perfect society by any means, but if caught, the perpetrators of any type of discrimination are held very much accountable for their actions.

None of the religions have any political power over here, and the percentage of religious followers is so small that none of the political parties can be swayed by any religious thinking. Again, your situation is obviously much different if your legislation can be dictated in this way.
Click to expand...

No political power? Church of England bishops get seats in the House of Lords, do they not? A couple dozen Lords Spiritual, or something like that?

How the heck is that "no political power"?

On a related note...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...rowing-Lords-rebellion-over-gay-marriage.html
 
JMohegan said:
No political power? Church of England bishops get seats in the House of Lords, do they not? A couple dozen Lords Spiritual, or something like that?

How the heck is that "no political power"?

On a related note...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...rowing-Lords-rebellion-over-gay-marriage.html
Click to expand...

There are 650 seats in the House of Lords of which the bishops occupy 26. Hardly a vote swaying majority for the lords spiritual.

And if I wanted a balanced opinion on any political question, the telegraph wouldn't be my first choice.

My point was directed at the post that said that US politicians were swayed by the opinion of the church going electorate. That s simply not the case in the UK.
 
LallyH said:
There are 650 seats in the House of Lords of which the bishops occupy 26. Hardly a vote swaying majority for the lords spiritual.

And if I wanted a balanced opinion on any political question, the telegraph wouldn't be my first choice.

My point was directed at the post that said that US politicians were swayed by the opinion of the church going electorate. That s simply not the case in the UK.
Click to expand...
My apologies. I misunderstood your assertion about "no political power."

That was a news, not an opinion, piece. But of course, news organizations can & do reflect bias. What is your "first choice" for UK news reporting?

US politicians are not a monolithic bunch. There are districts in which the electorate is heavily church-going evangelical, and those politicians reflect the church-influenced, socially conservative, perspectives of their voters. But there are other districts in which the electorate is far more progressive.
 
JMohegan said:
My apologies. I misunderstood your assertion about "no political power."

That was a news, not an opinion, piece. But of course, news organizations can & do reflect bias. What is your "first choice" for UK news reporting?

US politicians are not a monolithic bunch. There are districts in which the electorate is heavily church-going evangelical, and those politicians reflect the church-influenced, socially conservative, perspectives of their voters. But there are other districts in which the electorate is far more progressive.
Click to expand...


There was muttering from the church regarding the legislation to stop gay couples from being discriminated against by adoption agencies. The church wanted the right to opt out, but didn't get it. I am confident their opposition to gay marriage will be as ineffectual.

The Telegraph is aimed at middle class right wing conservatives. My paper of choice would be The Guardian which is as left wing as media is likely to get - I've read it since my college days and my allegiance is cemented now my nephew is one of their journalists. The Independent is also good - it's intention is to have no allegiance to any particular political leaning, but it's still a newspaper, so.....
 
Bramblethorn said:
Here, it also means they get a special exemption on anti-discrimination employment laws :-/
Click to expand...

yes, that too-- and doctors, hospitals, even pharmacists, are allowed to refuse women their contraceptive needs if the providor's church says it's immoral.
 
Stella_Omega said:
yes, that too-- and doctors, hospitals, even pharmacists, are allowed to refuse women their contraceptive needs if the providor's church says it's immoral.
Click to expand...

Nope, not here, not allowed to happen. Every chemist / drug store / pharmacy sells and supplies contraception. Even ones in heavily religious biased communities.

Gay and lesbian couples have had legal de-facto rights for a lot of years now. It's not the same as marriage, but they are the identical rights as every straight person in a de-facto relationship.

The marriage law is on it's way through now. There was some resistance over the whole religious connotations behind the word marriage, but the majority have successfully argued that marriage takes place outside the church via civil service all the time. The churches are free to continue being bigoted as much as they want, no-one is going to force them to start marrying gay couples. But that shouldn't and won't exclude gay people from the right to marry.

As an added note, the military here is extremely gay friendly. Gay couples have had the same entitlements as straight ones for a long time. They don't make a big deal about it, but there are a couple of transgender people, one of whom has decided to undergo the change after enlisting. He used to be Sarah, now he's Scott. It's his bachelor party this weekend and I don't get to go cos the dumbass booked it on short notice for the same weekend as the dance comp I've had tickets to for ages. And I really like paintballing too!!
 
Maybe I am in the minority, but I have known just as many Athiests/Agnostics who think non-hetero sex/relationships/identities are wrong because its just "gross" and/or wrong when measured against their sensibilities as I have God believers who are completley cool with people just being who they are.

It just seems to me that religious freedom can only be secured with tolerance and compassion for differences and not a demand for a concensus about what is universally "right" or "wrong". Nature itself a lesson in the power of diversity when it comes to survival and sustainability, isn't it?
 
Last edited:
As in every state, residents of Kentucky already enjoy religious liberty under the First Amendment, but conservatives in the state legislature decided to craft a proposal that would empower Kentuckians with "sincerely held" religious beliefs to disregard state laws and regulations. In effect, if a law conflicted with the tenets of your faith as you interpret them, your conscience would trump your obligation to follow the law.

This wouldn't mean folks could just run red lights and tell the police their "sincerely held" beliefs trump traffic lights -- the legislation has a few safeguards, though critics argue they're overly vague -- but as my friend Rob Boston at Americans United for Separation of Church and State recently explained, the Kentucky proposal could carry widespread consequences.

"What are some of the things that could happen if this bill becomes law? A pharmacist could refuse to provide Plan B drugs to a rape victim. The owner of an apartment building could refuse to rent to an unmarried couple. A woman who gets pregnant out of wedlock could be summarily fired from her job. The measure would also largely nullify protections for gays and lesbians that a handful of Kentucky communities have passed.

In short, the bill could end up elevating the religious beliefs of some people over the civil rights of all."

The bill nevertheless passed the legislature, largely with Republican support, but also with the backing of some conservative Democrats. Kentucky Gov. Steve Beshear (D) then vetoed the measure, citing "serious unintentional consequences that could threaten public safety, health care and individuals' civil rights," and the need to avoid "costly litigation" the state would likely lose.

In response, the legislature overrode the veto this week, and it will become state law in 90 days. Religious right activists who lobbied aggressively for the measure have vowed to "move along with the rest of the country," taking their proposal to other states.
Click to expand...

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/03/30/17529345-this-week-in-god?lite
 
Stag of Oberon said:
when the first reaction to experiences is "well that musta been all in your head"?

whats the difference then.

why would I even attempt such a monumental task of detailing my most treasured qualia and then cast such pearls before a group of people that would have neither appreciation for the sacred nor even respect for a fellow poster?
Click to expand...
Yeah, if the stakes are that high for you, then it's probably better to clutch those pearls to yourself.

edited to take my rose back :p
 
Last edited:
Stag of Oberon said:
That reads to me as the politest STFU ever.

Keep your poison rose.

This is precisely why these threads devolve so rapidly though, and why there can be no home for celebration of experience with the divine here. If someone does have some kind of experience which they consider to be divine or even merely supernatural, that experience to them is not an opinion. Recollections of it are and should be precious, but if anyone dares post such here their experience is assumed to be an arguable point; they are ganged up on, the poster's intelligence is frequently insulted, and their 'treasured pearls' are picked apart by jackals.

"but this is the internet" is hardly an excuse for such an insular board. When the same handful of screen names come up again and again, it's those people who decide what the atmosphere here will be like. Calling yourselves a minority here (as several of you often do) does not make it so, nor does it give you any moral high ground in mobbing up for a cyber lynching.
Click to expand...

I've never claimed to have any kind of authority on why the world works how it does, whether there is a Divine or not, and I have no really strong investement in other people's experiences of that Divine, whether it looks like God on the sistine chapel or God as drawn by the creators of South Park. Weird shit happens, science doesn't explain all, and you can think and feel whatever makes you happy and skippy. This has nothing to do with belief lack thereof, or anything like that, which is slippery and personal and interesting, and fundamentally none of anyone's business.

I'm talking culture. Jesus Christ, Christianity withstood ROME it can certainly hold up to criticism from outsiders, no?

You don't get to tell me that the poo of literally millions of people over thousands of years is really morphing into a sundae, slowly but surely and gosh let's get along, and what is my fucking problem and I should really have to pet everyone on the head for trying. Nobody should have to do that.

You can ignore me, you can disagree with me, you can call me an asshole, but I will not be harangued by TONE ARGUMENTS. If I'm that angry queer Jew girl, put me on ignore.

I'm not going to lie about eating cow just because some people consider it God. I'm not going to belittle them for it either, but I'm not going to bow down to it.
 
Last edited:
Wow, you are really misreading me. That was meant to be an expression of sympathy and understanding with a little humor-- there are a lot of things I don't post on the internet myself because the stakes are too high for me.

But I'm realising that you really DID mean "swine" when you said "people."
And that you cannot at this time read anything I say with any sort of good will. Put me on iggy please. Don't let me be responsible for your butthurt.
 
Stag of Oberon said:
christianity can go fuck itself. More imporantly, as you imply, it can take care of itself. I'm not talking about christianity. I'm talking about the very personal testaments of one person at a time, whatever their faith may be.



aren't you?



I didn't ask you to. Simple respectfulness does not require bowing.
Click to expand...


No. Really not. Show me where I Dawkinsed at anyone. Ever. You have a personal relationship with Jesus, great. He's cool. I'm a fan, in general.

I'm saying one is responsible for the douchebaggery happening around them. You tend to believe that all douchebaggery is created equal - I don't. I believe that unprovoked and *systemically supported* douchebaggery is different from retaliatory, nay, DEFENSIVE acts and stances.

I'm a fan, like I said, not a follower, of turn the other cheek philosophies and forgiveness as the highest of human qualities. Kind of have a Legal/Justice fetish ingrained as part of my beliefs. To me, the fucking Crusades STILL MATTER NOW. Because Mel Gibson. Because then someone votes in the same things you're ranting about. It's all connected, and you're not fighting if you're apologizing for it and urging patience.
 
Last edited:
Curious_in_Cali said:
Maybe I am in the minority, but I have known just as many Athiests/Agnostics who think non-hetero sex/relationships/identities are wrong because its just "gross" and/or wrong when measured against their sensibilities as I have God believers who are completley cool with people just being who they are.

It just seems to me that religious freedom can only be secured with tolerance and compassion for differences and not a demand for a concensus about what is universally "right" or "wrong". Nature itself a lesson in the power of diversity when it comes to survival and sustainability, isn't it?

All that heaviness aside, for me personally, I confess that I think sexualizing religious rituals, rules, and overall concepts of omnipotent power can definitely be hawt.
Click to expand...

Anecdotal evidence aside, the polling on this issue is crystal clear, and it's not even close.

When asked the question, "Should homosexuality be accepted or discouraged by society?" a few weeks ago, the responses broke down as follows:

Accepted/Discouraged:

Total Population, 57/36

All Protestants, 46/46
White Evangelical Protestants, 30/61
White Mainline Protestant, 68/28
All Catholic, 61/32
White Catholic, 56/37
Unaffiliated, 83/13

http://www.pewresearch.org/2011/05/13/most-say-homosexuality-should-be-accepted-by-society/

As a member of the Unaffiliated, I'll condemn the 13% of my group who are clearly ignorant or bigoted or both.

What I will NOT do is sit by and listen to nonsense about how churchgoers are getting a bad rap because the problem is just with the leaders of churches instead of the churchgoers themselves, as was alleged earlier on the thread.

The numbers for Unaffiliated are bad. The numbers for White Evangelical Protestants are fucking disgusting.
 
Stag of Oberon said:
I can see this needs clarification, as there are so many minorities among us.

So if it weren't obvious before, the "minority" i'm talking about here is religious bullies of any persuasion. "But we're minorities," is an argument i remember hearing from religious bullies all the time, especially here. Five wolves in a room with a sheep are not a minority, no matter how many sheep are just outside, or for that matter, standing aside in the same damn room.
Click to expand...

Says you. I think you really have no idea who the wolves are. Hurt feelings suck, but they are not the same as - do I need to make a list?

I also beg to differ on what constitutes being bullied. Being vehemently disagreed with by more than one person isn't exactly the same thing.

But this narrative that I'm a "wolf" tearing the tender throat of belief is unadulterated horse shit. If you want to know what I think about belief, read Saul Bellow talking about the internal conflict of being Jew reading the gospels seriously for the first time. I had to read them numerous times in the course of being what we consider edumacted because we're a Christian culture, but who cares.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
BDSM and Autism: Part 2
Replies
2
Views
334
LustyScribe
LustyScribe
T
M/S story - Reclaiming the Throne
Replies
2
Views
322
tachikoma
T
Altissimus
Shame and humiliation in sex
3 4 5
Replies
115
Views
3K
GrushaVashnadze
GrushaVashnadze
A
What I Wrote and Why- Courtney Crowe
Replies
1
Views
175
Djmac1031
Djmac1031
AwkwardlySet
Some questions and some rant
2
Replies
32
Views
760
M_K_Babalon
M_K_Babalon
Back
Top