Don't Let The Screen Door Hit You....

[Misty_Morning]

on your out.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,357205,00.html


I know the guy has his religious convictions but...c'mon.

Ya know...if young adults want to form a club to bridge the gap between gays and hets, I say....they are more mature than the individual that has been leading them.

Oh...and I love this:

I feel the formation of a Gay/Straight Alliance Club at Irmo High school implies that students joining the club will have chosen to or will choose to engage in sexual activity with members of the same sex, opposite sex, or members of both sexes

Got news for ya dude, at some point in time, they are gonna have sex...whether it be with someone of their same sex, opposite sex...or both.

 

[emap]

Yeah stupid reason, though he's religious, sometimes the stupid reasons are nicer to hear than what he might actually think.

Which honestly, I kinda think he better find a job in another school soon, most people have no idea how to put something nicely or skirt an issue.

 

[infinity706]

People are actually going to have sex?!?

Now, why didn't they have clubs like that when I was in highschool?

 

[emap]

Oh they did, it was called cheerleader and football player.

Well OK to be honest it was cheerleader and anyone, some of my fellow cheerleaders dated some weird guys. Not to mention what I was doing.

 

[DarkBee]

Oh they did, it was called cheerleader and football player.

Well OK to be honest it was cheerleader and anyone, some of my fellow cheerleaders dated some weird guys. Not to mention what I was doing.

Don't mention it...

But back to the topic: some people will use religion to condemn just about everything that doesn't fit in their picture of the 'ideal' life, and sadly to say homosexuality often comes as one of the first things mentioned.

 

[Vail_Indigo]

to be perfectly honest, this is why I hate voting for people who have religion.
It isn't that religion makes a person bad, it simply makes them unpredictable, in many ways.
For example, I like John Edwards. Something like 8 months ago, he said he would support civil unions, but his religion wouldn't let him support gay marriage.
Now, separation of church and state aside, the religious stance aqainst this is based on, at best, a smattering of scripture.
He doesn't, however, follow all the laws in Dueteronomy, which also come from god (supposedly).
Why not?
Why that bit and not the bits about stoning witches?
Why that bit and not, say, bits about having to marry your brother's widow?

No one follows their religion 100%. They make arbitrary decisions about what is law and what isn't. That, to me, is very dangerous.

 

[Tymeless]

to be perfectly honest, this is why I hate voting for people who have religion.
It isn't that religion makes a person bad, it simply makes them unpredictable, in many ways.
For example, I like John Edwards. Something like 8 months ago, he said he would support civil unions, but his religion wouldn't let him support gay marriage.
Now, separation of church and state aside, the religious stance aqainst this is based on, at best, a smattering of scripture.
He doesn't, however, follow all the laws in Dueteronomy, which also come from god (supposedly).
Why not?
Why that bit and not the bits about stoning witches?
Why that bit and not, say, bits about having to marry your brother's widow?

No one follows their religion 100%. They make arbitrary decisions about what is law and what isn't. That, to me, is very dangerous.

agreed!

 

[Misty_Morning]

I never intended this thread to be negative on a persons religious beliefs.

In the past I have been a VERY conservative Christian. In fact, I hid behind that and denied who I really was cuz everyone expected me to be a "certain" way.

Ya know, if ANY religion makes you happy....go with it.

But remember, this school in qustion is a PUBLIC school.

Just cuz this yahoo is Christian gives him NO right to try to push his beliefs onto the students.

If this was a private school, I'd have to say....whatever dude.


The fact is that the young adults were mature enough to reach out to one another to provide support.

However, this dickhead intended to squash that compassion just cuz his personal "beliefs" are against it.


Maybe he should do a little more Bible study.

In particular Pslams 8:2 "Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings hast thou ordained strength because of thine enemies, that thou mightest still the enemy and the avenger."






Can I get an Amen?

 

[Vail_Indigo]

I never intended this thread to be negative on a persons religious beliefs.

In the past I have been a VERY conservative Christian. In fact, I hid behind that and denied who I really was cuz everyone expected me to be a "certain" way.

Ya know, if ANY religion makes you happy....go with it.

But remember, this school in qustion is a PUBLIC school.

Just cuz this yahoo is Christian gives him NO right to try to push his beliefs onto the students.

If this was a private school, I'd have to say....whatever dude.


The fact is that the young adults were mature enough to reach out to one another to provide support.

However, this dickhead intended to squash that compassion just cuz his personal "beliefs" are against it.


Maybe he should do a little more Bible study.

In particular Pslams 8:2 "Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings hast thou ordained strength because of thine enemies, that thou mightest still the enemy and the avenger."






Can I get an Amen?

but you see my point, though. Out of a gazillion lines of text, he/his church has placed insanely high priority on a couple of phrases.

Anyhow, at least he had the decency to quit, as opposed to pharmacists and doctors who won't give out the morning after pill and/or other emergency contraception.
(which, to me, is like being a fireman and not saving jews, or a christian scientist doctor and refusing to do, well, anything)

 

[emap]

Hang on, we are rather putting words in his mouth. Not saying he doesn't hate homosexual sex because his priest tells him to. However, what he said was he cannot support this after school group because it goes against what the school is trying to teach their kids.

Abstinence first is a very good idea in this day and age, no telling who has an STD and who doesn't. Heck it's not even just an STD anymore, have to worry about this HPV stuff, some of it is an STD I suppose, certain strains cause genital warts, others can increase your chances of cervical cancer and a few other things, something like 120 strains of it.

Abstinence first doesn't work on all teenagers, probably not even most, those hormones are powerful. It is however a good stance to have from a school, and parents, they also need to provide condoms. Leaving out pill is fine, most people assume pill means condom without wearing one.

They really should do the old scare tactic, they used to do it with power lines and poles. Those videos were a bit unsettling but well so far as I know not a single person in my school has ever been electrocuted by a power line. They did it with drivers education to, I missed out on those, probably good though I've heard about them. If we were to show our teenagers the scare videos on STD's, I am pretty sure every single one of them would either go abstinent or buy condoms and wear two.

Course I'm making sense and can't do that when it comes to school.

 

[Vail_Indigo]

Hang on, we are rather putting words in his mouth. Not saying he doesn't hate homosexual sex because his priest tells him to. However, what he said was he cannot support this after school group because it goes against what the school is trying to teach their kids.

actually, he says: "Allowing the formation of this club on our campus conflicts with my professional beliefs and religious convictions."

So, its either his religious belief that homosexuality is a sin, or that sex before marriage is a sin.
Neither one of which have massive places in the bible.
Again, random.

 

[Vail_Indigo]

btw, I actually didn't want to make this an anti-religion thing.
But I did want to point out that there are reasons that religion has to be shunned when it comes to public policy.
You want your government representatives to have a solid, internally consistent, philosophy. You want them to be predictable and udnerstandable.
By its very nature, religion DOESN'T do that.
Well, at least, I don't know anyone who follows their sacred texts 100% (especially given the usual internal contradictions in the books).

 

[emap]

Let's not forget about the sunday sermons. At one point god was an angry god that would smite thee down into the very fires of hell for thinking a woman was cute. Then god is a happy god who loves and forgives all, and suddenly god hates homosexuality. Never been discussed before but suddenly god is very against two people of the same sex kissing or anything beyond.

Course god is still a happy god who forgives all, except homosexuality. Leaves one confused, is god forgiving of all or hates homosexuality and casts all those who engage in such acts to hell? If he does the second one, what else does he hate and cast you into hell for?

 

[Vail_Indigo]

Let's not forget about the sunday sermons. At one point god was an angry god that would smite thee down into the very fires of hell for thinking a woman was cute. Then god is a happy god who loves and forgives all, and suddenly god hates homosexuality. Never been discussed before but suddenly god is very against two people of the same sex kissing or anything beyond.

Course god is still a happy god who forgives all, except homosexuality. Leaves one confused, is god forgiving of all or hates homosexuality and casts all those who engage in such acts to hell? If he does the second one, what else does he hate and cast you into hell for?

well, theoretically, you can always seek forgiveness.

God hates the sin, not the sinner, and all that.

However, you raise the point about hell.
Forget everything else.
Hell either:
1. doesn't exist
2. makes no sense. There's only three reasons to punish people.
a. keep people from doing the offense again
b. keep people afraid of doing it in the first place
c. protect people from criminals by removing them
In the afterlife, none of these are relevant.
Now, don't get me wrong, if there's a god, he is infinitely complex and I could not possibly understand what he understands.
However, once god starts doing things which are completely incomprehensible and go against all logic, then everything you do is a crap-shoot. You can't honestly say you know what god wants BECAUSE his motives are occluded and he may very well be lying.

Funny...a writer I like kept a blog for a while. As it turns out, he was/is a hard-core christian and kind of an asshole about it. Anyhoo, we got to talking and something interesting came out of it.
At least for him, faith wasn't about whether or not there's a god, or whether or not christ was the son of god. These, in his view, were simply facts.
The faith was in the promises, that god really would follow through on everything he said.
I did not know that (and I'm not sure everyone views it that way).
An important distinction.

 

[emap]

Well I would believe that is a pretty common view on it, the followers of a religion believe that if they do this that way and that this way, they will go to a better place when they die.

What allowed Mahatma Gandhi to do what he did, he believed that he was being tested by god and to prove himself before god he had to peaceably protest. It is also why there are suicide bombers, they believe that because they are being blown up to further Allah they will go to heaven and enjoy their 21 virgins.

Not all religious people ignore part of the teachings either, Mother Theresa is a pretty good example. She not so much followed the motive as followed the writing of the bible and church. Why she did not treat all as well as a regular doctor would have, she did things the way she did because she believed that god said this and this and that was how she was supposed to treat lepers and so forth.

The big problem comes when priests start talking, everyone who listens believes in the god the priest represents and believes the priest is the voice of god so whatever he says comes straight from god.

 

[Vail_Indigo]

Well I would believe that is a pretty common view on it, the followers of a religion believe that if they do this that way and that this way, they will go to a better place when they die.

What allowed Mahatma Gandhi to do what he did, he believed that he was being tested by god and to prove himself before god he had to peaceably protest. It is also why there are suicide bombers, they believe that because they are being blown up to further Allah they will go to heaven and enjoy their 21 virgins.

Not all religious people ignore part of the teachings either, Mother Theresa is a pretty good example. She not so much followed the motive as followed the writing of the bible and church. Why she did not treat all as well as a regular doctor would have, she did things the way she did because she believed that god said this and this and that was how she was supposed to treat lepers and so forth.

The big problem comes when priests start talking, everyone who listens believes in the god the priest represents and believes the priest is the voice of god so whatever he says comes straight from god.

no, not even mother theresa followed it all. It is impossible to do so. This isn't a criticism, its simply a fact that the bible is not internally consistent. Jeez, there's no way she followed all the dueteronomy rules.
Now, you might argue that she followed the spirit better than anyone else, but you can't honestly say she followed every last rule.
Because, remember, the book DOES condemn homosexuality.
Did she?

 

[infinity706]

Hang on, we are rather putting words in his mouth. Not saying he doesn't hate homosexual sex because his priest tells him to. However, what he said was he cannot support this after school group because it goes against what the school is trying to teach their kids.

Abstinence first is a very good idea in this day and age, no telling who has an STD and who doesn't. Heck it's not even just an STD anymore, have to worry about this HPV stuff, some of it is an STD I suppose, certain strains cause genital warts, others can increase your chances of cervical cancer and a few other things, something like 120 strains of it.

Abstinence first doesn't work on all teenagers, probably not even most, those hormones are powerful. It is however a good stance to have from a school, and parents, they also need to provide condoms. Leaving out pill is fine, most people assume pill means condom without wearing one.

They really should do the old scare tactic, they used to do it with power lines and poles. Those videos were a bit unsettling but well so far as I know not a single person in my school has ever been electrocuted by a power line. They did it with drivers education to, I missed out on those, probably good though I've heard about them. If we were to show our teenagers the scare videos on STD's, I am pretty sure every single one of them would either go abstinent or buy condoms and wear two.

Course I'm making sense and can't do that when it comes to school.

Well, we did just get a HPV vaccine developed. Gonorrhea, syphilis, andchymidia can all be taken care of with a single dose of antibiotic. That mostly leaves us with herpes and HIV. There is an HIV vaccine, but it seems like giving it out isn't the idea right now because it wouldn't prevent a significant percent of cases of it anyway, being that there's more than one type. Plus, the disease takes something like 10 years to develop, so if you put it out and everyone just went around fucking everyone in sight, it wouldn't really make much of an impact anyway.

 

[Misty_Morning]

Well, we did just get a HPV vaccine developed. Gonorrhea, syphilis, andchymidia can all be taken care of with a single dose of antibiotic. That mostly leaves us with herpes and HIV. There is an HIV vaccine, but it seems like giving it out isn't the idea right now because it wouldn't prevent a significant percent of cases of it anyway, being that there's more than one type. Plus, the disease takes something like 10 years to develop, so if you put it out and everyone just went around fucking everyone in sight, it wouldn't really make much of an impact anyway.

that is just THE most stupid thing I have ever heard.

 

[emap]

Considering the fact that according to what I remember on this vaccine it only works on an old not seen anymore strand of HIV I really don't think handing out the vaccine would be a good idea.

Not that people would just go around fucking anyone and everyone. I never did that and I slept with alot of people I had just met. There were many hippies who were virgins until marriage. I mean imagine that, the very people who believe in free love being virgins until marriage.

Vail your right, she didn't follow everything in the bible. The bible doesn't condemn homosexuals either though. It says that women should not lay with women. It may say men should not lay with men though I don't remember that being in there.

Mother Theresa followed the scripture of her branch, so parts of the bible she followed and other parts she did not because the definition of the bible she followed said it's like this instead of that.

Both of which fall under the priest speaking being the problem. The bible is written by man, priests are man, god is not man.

 

[Vail_Indigo]

Considering the fact that according to what I remember on this vaccine it only works on an old not seen anymore strand of HIV I really don't think handing out the vaccine would be a good idea.

Not that people would just go around fucking anyone and everyone. I never did that and I slept with alot of people I had just met. There were many hippies who were virgins until marriage. I mean imagine that, the very people who believe in free love being virgins until marriage.

Vail your right, she didn't follow everything in the bible. The bible doesn't condemn homosexuals either though. It says that women should not lay with women. It may say men should not lay with men though I don't remember that being in there.

Mother Theresa followed the scripture of her branch, so parts of the bible she followed and other parts she did not because the definition of the bible she followed said it's like this instead of that.

Both of which fall under the priest speaking being the problem. The bible is written by man, priests are man, god is not man.

1. Mother Teresa - which is what I'm saying. No one follows the complete text. There's the randomness

2. The Bible most certainly does condemn homosexuality. You are being deluded by the forces of reconcilliation who choose to deny the truth and make excuses, and those who simply lie to themselves:
Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; it is an abomination.
- Leviticus 20:13

Because of this [idolatry], God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.
- Romans 1 1:26-27

Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor practicing homosexuals nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
- 1 Corinthians 6:9-10

 

[Vail_Indigo]

by the by, that completely proves my point. A few lines, a few bits out of an absolutely massive text that focuses primarily on our relationship to god and to each other, and yet those are the big deal.

 

[thetwolezz]

Abstinence first is a very good idea in this day and age, no telling who has an STD and who doesn't. Heck it's not even just an STD anymore, have to worry about this HPV stuff, some of it is an STD I suppose, certain strains cause genital warts, others can increase your chances of cervical cancer and a few other things, something like 120 strains of it.

Abstinence first doesn't work on all teenagers, probably not even most, those hormones are powerful. It is however a good stance to have from a school, and parents, they also need to provide condoms. Leaving out pill is fine, most people assume pill means condom without wearing one.

They really should do the old scare tactic, they used to do it with power lines and poles. Those videos were a bit unsettling but well so far as I know not a single person in my school has ever been electrocuted by a power line. They did it with drivers education to, I missed out on those, probably good though I've heard about them. If we were to show our teenagers the scare videos on STD's, I am pretty sure every single one of them would either go abstinent or buy condoms and wear two.

Course I'm making sense and can't do that when it comes to school.

Abstinence in schools have nothing to do with a Gay/Straight Alliance. The gay/straight alliance here realistically supplies condoms, provides informational sessions about STD's etc, and promotes abstinence. That's not to the "gay community". They do this for ALL students. All students need this information. Whether they are having sex now or will wait until they are married, it makes no difference.
The Alliance ALSO provides for teens to see one another as human beings, not just gay, straight, bisexual, trans, etc. They get to be in a group together, and learn about what is happening in their world that affects everyone. Kudos to the school for approving it.

 

[littleninja]

Vail your right, she didn't follow everything in the bible. The bible doesn't condemn homosexuals either though. It says that women should not lay with women. It may say men should not lay with men though I don't remember that being in there.

I could be wrong, but I haven't found an Old Testament passage that says anything about women laying with women..... it's all about men in there. In the New Testament, Paul brought the topic up and then added the thing about women. If you're like me, and think Paul was insane (and very likely himself gay), it becomes less an issue of picking and choosing scriptures, and more an issue of whether the scriptures can be given any relevancy to the topic at hand.

I vote no. But that's just me.

Now I'm gonna have to go crack open my bible to verify my statement. Been a long time, old friend....

 

[alaskabibear]

...Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor practicing homosexuals nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
- 1 Corinthians 6:9-10

I just quote the one scripture, and add this one to make a point below; "For the sinful nature desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the sinful nature. ... The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambitions, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God. (Galations 5: 17-21).

Now the point so often overlooked is the completeness of this list of those who fall short. Notice, if you will, that the slanderer, the one with selfish ambitions, the one who hates, the thief, the drunk, the one who has fits of rage and on and on - they fall outside of the goal just the same as the sexually immoral, the homosexual, the adulterer. In short, that's just about everyone. And that is just the point of Christianity; is it not?

The sad thing is though, even though we are all in the same boat together - we continue to insist that we are somehow better - that our own failures and falling short of God's perfection is somehow not "that bad" - certainly not as bad as some homosexual, I say to myself as I commit adultery on my wife and cheat people out of their hard earned money...

And IMO, those who think Paul insane just don't understand the depth of his message about the Love of God - it is all the same message as the other great enlightened ones - 'Love and do no harm', or, 'Do unto others as you would have them do unto you, for thus is summed up all of the Law...'

 

[emap]

Just cause I'm tired and weird I am going to put your socks in a twist.

Ever think that maybe paul was in drag? I'm not talking a guy trying to be female or trying to be unisex either. Think about the time, when Jesus was supposed to be wandering about preaching, men had beards. A right of passage was growing a beard, a man chose his profession after he started growing a beard, he could get married after growing a beard, he would be allowed to drink alchohol, not wine that was for kids, but the hard spirits.

Everything that it was to be a man revolved around having a nice full beard. If you had a small little beard you were just a child and got ignored. No beard would be even worse. Now, why exactly would a chosen of jesus have no beard? OK obviously possible Paul was alot younger than people think, however I don't think so. A boy with no beard would not leave home, would not be allowed to follow anyone around except mom or dad so either Paul was the child of one of the apostles, was adopted by one, or Paul was a woman.