Is this real???

[Marsipanne]

I've met more than enough academically successful, clever but utterly delusional people. I think that being brainy doesn't make you intelligent, if that makes any sense.

 

[CharleyH]

I've met more than enough academically successful, clever but utterly delusional people. I think that being brainy doesn't make you intelligent, if that makes any sense.

You always make sense, and you know it!

 

[OldnotDead]

Sadly, DK, a lot of this kind of BS exists because none of the major religions want to really address the issue and deal with it.

The bible, both Old and New Testament, has numerous references condemning same sex activity. At the same time Christianity has a fundamental message that we are all God's Children and blessed in his sight. How do you resolve that conflict? 99% of the time the leaders would prefer to NOT deal with it. It's too hot an issue.

Roman Catholic Church seminaries have become hotbeds (excuse the pun) of homosexual activity. The Church officially maintains that homosexuality is wrong but doesn't want to address the problem as the gay community has become a source for 'celibate' priests. So how can they get to some of the real fundamental problems of Priestly abuse, because then they will have to admit that they have other problems they don't really want to talk about. [Lest anyone think that I am saying that Gay Priests are the source of the problem, I am NOT!!! So stop thinking that right now!]

The problem is that they cannot talk openly about ALL the issues and symptoms of a system that no longer works.

St. Paul's extremely harsh admonitions are often cited by those that wish to condemn all homosexuals to the 'fiery pit'. But if you really studied Paul's writings AND the times in which he wrote AND the audience to whom he was writing, the words are actually not nearly as harsh as some would have you believe. Paul was writing to the churches he was trying to support in a largely Gentile (also referred to as 'Greek') community. Some of these were in Greece (okay, I hear all the little sniggering out there) and some in and around Rome.

The Gentiles did not have the Hebrew Biblical tradition and there was much discussion among early church leaders (mostly the Apostles) as to whether you had to be Jewish first and then become a Christian. Paul argued successfully that it was not necessary. And that put him in the position of trying to educate the newly converted as to what was right and not right.

The second big issue was one of philosophy of the times and the message of salvation. Unlike the Hebraic tradition of salvation through good works, the message of Christianity as related in the Crucifixion is that repentance of the sinner and forgiveness of God (Grace) is absolute and unrestricted. Grace can be extended to the most undeserving of the faithful no matter how great the sin. The problem with preaching such a message is then how do you explain to the masses that they still need to be good?

It remains to this day a fundamental issue of theologians. Paul's writings are some of our earliest examples of a minister wrestling with these issues with his flock. If you read him completely and try to get the larger message, Paul is constantly trying to point out that one person being better than another does not make them holier or more worthy in the sight of God. He does admonish his flock to not be tempted by sin and to try and be good. But he also points out that the message of Grace is one that precludes a kind of score keeping, holier than thou approach.

Sadly, The Church over the centuries tuned into Good Works and by its own actions somewhat negated Paul's message of not keeping score. But that's another issue.

The point is that Paul's condemnation of homosexuality that reinforced the Old Testament proscription does provide theological support to the argument that this activity is sinful. But, in my opinion, the same writings and message say that the ultimate judgement is in the hands of God, not men.

But in order for the Church to deal with the issue in a more intelligent and humane manner, they first have to get over this fundamental concept that has been part of church doctrine forever. One of the things I like to point out is that if you do listen to these bible thumping homophobes they all quote the same passages over and over.

If you want to really mess one up, get familiar with the bible and it won't take long for you to have two or three passages for everyone they quote. In fact, and this is the importance of context. Out of all the passages, they have very little ammunition. If it IS a message of God, then HE didn't want to spend too much time on it.

As I see it, the real issue that Paul had to deal with was promiscuity. He was trying to support a Christian community that was developing and give it a sense of moral right and wrong that was appropriate to a religious community. The Church cannot condone sexual promiscuity, but if it were more enlightened, it could as some minor sects have, re-interpret the language and meaning and come up with a more responsible and inclusive position regarding same sex relationships.

Will it happen? Probably not. But who knows. One of those gay priests may just become Pope some day. THEN what will they do?!

Now, as for the site. I would suggest reporting the site to the FBI as promoting hate speech. I'm sure someone already has, but it doesn't hurt to put them on record. Since it is sponsored by a church, it gets a lot of protection under free speech and as far as I can tell the only actions it seems to advocate are legislative and peaceful protest. So there probably is no crime. And my guess is that the loon in charge will just use any FBI query as another example of the Feds being in the pocket of the 'unwashed'. Loony tunes.

On a final note, I respectfully ask that you remove some inciting words that could get you reported. You have posted some inciting words that are not allowed and I would hope that you would quickly remove them and ask the people that have quoted your suggestion to remove those as well. Voting someone out of office that you believe supports crazy folks like this is perfectly acceptable. Your suggestion is not.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Sadly, DK, a lot of this kind of BS exists because none of the major religions want to really address the issue and deal with it.

The bible, both Old and New Testament, has numerous references condemning same sex activity. At the same time Christianity has a fundamental message that we are all God's Children and blessed in his sight. How do you resolve that conflict? 99% of the time the leaders would prefer to NOT deal with it. It's too hot an issue.

Roman Catholic Church seminaries have become hotbeds (excuse the pun) of homosexual activity. The Church officially maintains that homosexuality is wrong but doesn't want to address the problem as the gay community has become a source for 'celibate' priests. So how can they get to some of the real fundamental problems of Priestly abuse, because then they will have to admit that they have other problems they don't really want to talk about. [Lest anyone think that I am saying that Gay Priests are the source of the problem, I am NOT!!! So stop thinking that right now!]

The problem is that they cannot talk openly about ALL the issues and symptoms of a system that no longer works.

St. Paul's extremely harsh admonitions are often cited by those that wish to condemn all homosexuals to the 'fiery pit'. But if you really studied Paul's writings AND the times in which he wrote AND the audience to whom he was writing, the words are actually not nearly as harsh as some would have you believe. Paul was writing to the churches he was trying to support in a largely Gentile (also referred to as 'Greek') community. Some of these were in Greece (okay, I hear all the little sniggering out there) and some in and around Rome.

The Gentiles did not have the Hebrew Biblical tradition and there was much discussion among early church leaders (mostly the Apostles) as to whether you had to be Jewish first and then become a Christian. Paul argued successfully that it was not necessary. And that put him in the position of trying to educate the newly converted as to what was right and not right.

The second big issue was one of philosophy of the times and the message of salvation. Unlike the Hebraic tradition of salvation through good works, the message of Christianity as related in the Crucifixion is that repentance of the sinner and forgiveness of God (Grace) is absolute and unrestricted. Grace can be extended to the most undeserving of the faithful no matter how great the sin. The problem with preaching such a message is then how do you explain to the masses that they still need to be good?

It remains to this day a fundamental issue of theologians. Paul's writings are some of our earliest examples of a minister wrestling with these issues with his flock. If you read him completely and try to get the larger message, Paul is constantly trying to point out that one person being better than another does not make them holier or more worthy in the sight of God. He does admonish his flock to not be tempted by sin and to try and be good. But he also points out that the message of Grace is one that precludes a kind of score keeping, holier than thou approach.

Sadly, The Church over the centuries tuned into Good Works and by its own actions somewhat negated Paul's message of not keeping score. But that's another issue.

The point is that Paul's condemnation of homosexuality that reinforced the Old Testament proscription does provide theological support to the argument that this activity is sinful. But, in my opinion, the same writings and message say that the ultimate judgement is in the hands of God, not men.

But in order for the Church to deal with the issue in a more intelligent and humane manner, they first have to get over this fundamental concept that has been part of church doctrine forever. One of the things I like to point out is that if you do listen to these bible thumping homophobes they all quote the same passages over and over.

If you want to really mess one up, get familiar with the bible and it won't take long for you to have two or three passages for everyone they quote. In fact, and this is the importance of context. Out of all the passages, they have very little ammunition. If it IS a message of God, then HE didn't want to spend too much time on it.

As I see it, the real issue that Paul had to deal with was promiscuity. He was trying to support a Christian community that was developing and give it a sense of moral right and wrong that was appropriate to a religious community. The Church cannot condone sexual promiscuity, but if it were more enlightened, it could as some minor sects have, re-interpret the language and meaning and come up with a more responsible and inclusive position regarding same sex relationships.

Will it happen? Probably not. But who knows. One of those gay priests may just become Pope some day. THEN what will they do?!

Now, as for the site. I would suggest reporting the site to the FBI as promoting hate speech. I'm sure someone already has, but it doesn't hurt to put them on record. Since it is sponsored by a church, it gets a lot of protection under free speech and as far as I can tell the only actions it seems to advocate are legislative and peaceful protest. So there probably is no crime. And my guess is that the loon in charge will just use any FBI query as another example of the Feds being in the pocket of the 'unwashed'. Loony tunes.

On a final note, I respectfully ask that you remove some inciting words that could get you reported. You have posted some inciting words that are not allowed and I would hope that you would quickly remove them and ask the people that have quoted your suggestion to remove those as well. Voting someone out of office that you believe supports crazy folks like this is perfectly acceptable. Your suggestion is not.

You have approached the theological aspects with admirable throughness

Here is a little historical perspective. If you read Deuteronomy & Leviticus, the major parts of what is called the law of Moses, you will quickly find that ANY activity that leads to orgasm and dosen't provide at least a decent chance of a new little christian being born is proscribed.

While much historical debate has centered on it, and there is by no means a concensus, many historians feel that this is not so much a theological precept as simple self preservation. Christians are a persecuted sect in the early days. Breding more little christians and the evangelical role in Christian theology could be viewed as a means to try and become less a minority.

Judge not, least thy be judged.
Vengence is mine, sayeth the lord.
I am the way, the truth and the light, no one cometh to the father except by me.

There is no end of passages you can quote to counter the hate, but in the end, those who use the bible to support their hate will continue to do so, ignoring both context and perspective and ultimately they will ignore the very religion they are using, if you can over balance their few tired sayings with others.

These aren't christians who hate, these are haters who cloak themselves in christianity.

-Colly

 

[yui]

When monkeys fly out of my ass!

Say, Ms. Abs, um, just to clarify, if monkeys are flying out that wouldn't be sodomy, right?


And how about the sticks that the designers of that stupid, lame, ridiculous website have up their asses? Is that sodomy?

A militia sounds good, but please tell me I don't have to move to Idaho. I was thinking The Maui Militia has a ring to it…

Best to you,

Yui ^_^

 

[OldnotDead]

You have approached the theological aspects with admirable throughness

Here is a little historical perspective. If you read Deuteronomy & Leviticus, the major parts of what is called the law of Moses, you will quickly find that ANY activity that leads to orgasm and dosen't provide at least a decent chance of a new little christian being born is proscribed.

. . . .

These aren't christians who hate, these are haters who cloak themselves in christianity.

-Colly

Thanks for the compliment.

Old Testament references, just to nitpick, would be more concerned about reproducing little Hebrews. But, The Church does use these references as support for its position on birth control and official policy of not supporting Oral Sex to the point of orgasm. [an aside: you have not lived until you have gone to a Catholic premarital counseling session and had to listen to a middle aged couple explain how they follow the churches teachings and do have oral sex but only to orgasm if they are having intercourse.]

The last comment sums it all up, much better than all the words.

OUTSTANDING!

 

[ABSTRUSE]

Say, Ms. Abs, um, just to clarify, if monkeys are flying out that wouldn't be sodomy, right?


And how about the sticks that the designers of that stupid, lame, ridiculous website have up their asses? Is that sodomy?

A militia sounds good, but please tell me I don't have to move to Idaho. I was thinking The Maui Militia has a ring to it…

Best to you,

Yui ^_^

I'm going to have to be more careful of my ass these days.

I do love Colly and Old's posts, very enlightening.

 

[Just-Legal]

That site is one of the most disgusting things I've ever seen.

I agree.

*eyes Marsi's AV*

I wanna say Naru! but its not... her name has totally escaped me...