Christian Social Influence Continues to Decrease

by fulltimestudent 21 Replies latest social current

  • fulltimestudent
    fulltimestudent

    A popular Sydney News reader died this week (of cancer, at age 73). The news reports from a number of sources were uniform in praising the man, both professionally and for his human qualities.

    And, the obituaries all mentioned his partner:

    Ian Ross and Gray at Ian’s farewell from Seven News in 2009.

    Ian Ross and partner Gray Bolte at Ross’ farewell from Seven News in 2009. Photo: Courtesy of Seven Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/television-newsreader-ian-ross-dead-at-73-20140430-37gj8.html#ixzz30VY1Njdo

    I was not aware that the man was gay, and I could not help but think of the long struggle that gay people have had against the hateful attitudes of mean-spirited Christians. A hatefullness that has been exercised for centuries and has often led to extremely brutal treatment.

    How good to see more enlightened general attitudes prevailing. Why should a decent man, as Ross seems to have been, be demonised by a religion that has often been far from decent?

  • LogCon
    LogCon

    Romans 1:26-28

    For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.

    What is so hard to understand about the above statement? Why would someone call themselves Christian and think that homosexuality is okee-dokee?

  • metatron
    metatron

    Why would any rational, compassionate personal accept what that text says?

    My whole attitude about gays changed after I actually met and worked with some of them. One of the best workers I know in the industry in which I work is gay. He pays a mortgage. He pays taxes. He is conscientious. He isn't obnoxious about it, it's his private business.

    I have no interest in gay sex. That said, what's the big deal? Why is it so important to condemn it? Why should anyone care?

    Years ago, I became aware of some lesbian couples who loyally took care of each in old age and chronic, dependent illness over years.

    I can't imagine a greater or more practical demonstration of goodness or true fidelity than that. Am I supposed to condemn them because they rub their wrinkly bodies together and don't make babies - which old straight couples don't do either?

    What is the point? Why is this so evil? What practical difference does it make?

    Murder and theft mean something and society needs to surpress that kind of stuff - but being gay doesn't harm or threaten me in the least.

    metatron

  • designs
    designs

    Variances in human sexuality go back to the earliest records made by humans, same with practices such as abortion. The Chinese recorded methods some 5000 years ago.

    Our Rip Van Winkle sojourn through western religions is slowly coming to an end.

  • fulltimestudent
    fulltimestudent

    Metatron:

    Why would any rational, compassionate personal accept what that text says?

    My whole attitude about gays changed after I actually met and worked with some of them. One of the best workers I know in the industry in which I work is gay. He pays a mortgage. He pays taxes. He is conscientious. He isn't obnoxious about it, it's his private business.

    I have no interest in gay sex. That said, what's the big deal? Why is it so important to condemn it? Why should anyone care?

    That's precisely the point, Metatron. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO BE GAY, to realise that a social injustice is occcurring and to be interested in righting a great social wrong.

    LogCon:

    men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.

    What is so hard to understand about the above statement? Why would someone call themselves Christian and think that homosexuality is okee-dokee?

    So that text (not part of the Bible canon when it was written) gives you the right to persecute another social group and to deprive them of their social rights, does it?

    Shame on you !!!!

  • millie210
    millie210

    Did the Bible condemn homosexual practices because it doesnt move the human race forward? No offspring are produced. This breaks the command to become fruitful and multiply.

    If that were the reason for the injunction against homosexual practices, then would they still be a sin in older people past the age of child rearing?

    Just something I have always wondered...

  • fulltimestudent
    fulltimestudent

    Millie210:

    Did the Bible condemn homosexual practices because it doesnt move the human race forward? No offspring are produced. This breaks the command to become fruitful and multiply.

    It may have been so, Millie. It certainly was in the view of some Confucianists. Takes a bit of puzzling out, though. If such an objection came from Yahweh, how many children do you think he wanted women to have?

    Here's a chart showing the birthrate for the world:

    http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.DYN.TFRT.IN

    I think, one way to see the ancient world, is that women were baby factories, producing kids for the armies of the time. Would you like to live in that sort of world?

    Would that be God's will for humanity?

    And, then think of the change in attitudes. When you consider that less than 100 years ago, in the west, most families were much larger. My father was one of of 12 kids, my uncle had 16. My mother's family only had four, because after the 4th kid, my grandmother locked her husband out of her bedroom, and refused to have sex with him anymore.

    Are people who only have a couple of kids, sinning against the divine purpose. The Catholic church thinks they are!!!

    In early Christianity, there was a cult of virginity. Christian women refused to have sex. Did they sin?

    .... If that were the reason for the injunction against homosexual practices,

    Interestingly, my studies have included an examination of two areas of the world where sex between men was common in the past. One was ancient Greece, and one was Tokugawa Japan. In that era in Japan, it is considered that male to male sex was normative. Yet most of those men were also married and had children. However, I do not think they were 'gay' in the sense that we use the word today. They just lived in a time/place where there were few inhibitions about male to male sex.

    And social pressure can affect men in other ways, as today -p lots of gay men get married (think family, social and religious pressure) and have kids.

    How do you think that information affects your idea?

  • Zoos
    Zoos

    The only point I can gather from the scripture quoted by LogCon is that heterosexuals should not give up their natural sexual use for the opposite sex by violating themselves in unnatural ways with members of the same sex. To do so would bring punishment by God.

    I see no injunction against gay people here. In fact, we have always understood that laws handed down to man apply equally to women. Would it not stand to reason this law handed to heteros applies equally to homos?

    FOR THE LORD GOD SAYS:
    "HETEROS - Keep your winkies in the women!"

    "HOMOS - Keep your winkies in each other!"

    ------------------------------------------------

    Given people's distaste for religion's behavior, religion has lost much of it's influence over public opinion. This trend can only snowball as the LogCon-types spit hate wads from the back row where they have been confined by decent human beings who demand a higher standard of conduct.

  • LogCon
    LogCon

    fulltimestudent said ," So that text (not part of the Bible canon when it was written) gives you the right to persecute another social group and to deprive them of their social rights, does it? Shame on you !!!!

    AFTERWHICH

    Zoos said `This trend can only snowball as the LogCon-types spit hate wads from the back row where they have been confined by decent human beings who demand a higher standard of conduct.

    Testy, testy and sensitive too, not to mention quick to jump to conclusions without any evidence to support your statementS.

    I MERELY QUOTED chapter and verse. I did not make a conclusion or judgement.

    THE SIN IS YOUR OWN !

  • LisaRose
    LisaRose

    The form of Christianity practiced today has changed from bible days, and will continue to change. The bible has been used to justify polygamy and slavery in the past, which most people today recognize as unjust. Most people today recognize that gay people exist in society, in fact have always existed.

    It's one thing to condemn homosexuality in your church, but not everyone today practices that form of Christianity. It's time to recognize the reality, that gay people exist, and will not change because your church condemns it. We have a young man posting here, he attempted suicide because of the condemnation among the Jehovah's Witnesses because he is gay. That is what happens when you use use the bible to justify hatred and intolerance.

    I am glad that this flavor of Christianity is less influential now. No matter your beliefs, you must recognize the rights of gay people to live as they see fit, they are not going back in the closet. My mother and father in law, who are in their eighties, attend a church with a lesbian pastor. If they can deal with it, everyone else should be able to as well.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit