God vs. Gay

[jbrowder24]

You're welcome, as you told me what I think.

No, I haven't. My only comments that might be construed as such are referring to you putting words in my mouth, and perhaps there has been a misunderstanding... but I am not quoting your words about religion and saying "you mean this." I'm sorry I haven't articulated my comments to your taste, but you are misconstruing everything I say, such as:

I did read that you said some people. But that is my point your are OK with some people's religious beliefs beliefs but not others.

My problem is not with people's religion, and this is what you are not understanding. My beef is not with any religion, my beef is with individuals who abuse religion or are hypocrites. Not all Lutherans are the same as other Lutherans, for example. And some people belief what they do because of teaching, for example some of the extreme Muslims are due to a lack of education, and these certain youth are being taught a twisted form of their religion without being able to read what the texts actually say. And I don't judge, as another example, Baptists for their faith - some of my relatives are Baptists and wonderful people - but I do judge the Westboro Baptist Church for their actions.

How do you feel about those who pick and choose the other way around?

My point is in how one treats sin. If somebody believed homosexuality was a sin but accepted homosexuals in a forgiving way but chanted that anyone that had pre-maritial sex would go to hell, I'd feel the same. Perhaps a better example would be how the Bible had been used to justify slavery. The point was not about being gay, but about people using the Bible to justify their actions, yet ignoring it as is convenient to them.

How does religion dictate law in America? Should people be banned from voting as their religion dictates?

No, people should not be banned from voting due to their religion. There are plenty of topics of delate that relate to this though, such as should a ten commandments statue be put on the lawn of a courthouse, should prayer be allowed in a public school, etc. I am not sure how things are in the UK for this area. For the most part, I'm not bothered by these things, but understand why some are. I am bothered, however, by the people who refuse to recognize a difference between civil marriage and religious marriage, so yes in this case the comment I made did have to do with being gay. All the legislators and courts that have passed same-sex marriage in the U.S. recognize the distinction and protect the rights of churches, which I strongly agree the rights of churches should be protected. But many people don't, and thus those speaking out against gay marriage are indeed trying to legislate their morality onto a nation. Yet, it's not illegal for athiests to get married, so the 'marriage is sacred' argument simply has no ground.

I think objecting to people's thoughts and beliefs is at best a pointless exercise. If people believe that I am going to hell for being gay, because someone told them that a two millenia old book written in a language they don't understand says so, then that belief doesn't harm me. I have no grounds to object.

It only does you no harm if they don't act on it; for example if schools aren't allowed to help a gay/confused student as posted in the growing prejudice thread, couldn't that be doing harm to us? Even worse are the extremes, here's an example:
Should I Kill Gay People? Supported By The Bible

If some one fails to treat me civilly, or votes against my right to marry, etc. then that action harms me and I have every right to object to it. I don't care whether such actions were part of practicing their religion. If someone incites someone to do the same, I object to it but don't care if they are practicing their religion.

If you were to try to convince someone they were wrong to vote against your right to marry, etc, but they kept coming back with the defense of the Bible - what would you say to them? Because when it comes down to it, there is no defending yourself against someone's religious beliefs. However, if you are respectful of their faith and religion and try to talk with them about how you feel people are born gay and you don't feel God would have someone born gay, or if you try and talk with them about the historical context of the texts and what they really meant, maybe, just maybe, you can get them to open up their mind a little more while still allowing them to keep their faith and religion. It's all about being respectful. Your responses to be make it sound like you think I'm out there protesting religions, but I'm not... and again perhaps it's just misunderstanding each other, and again I only speak to what you've said about what I said.

I do not think there should be any specific protection of freedom of religion beyond general liberty, freedom of association, freedom of speech, freedom of association, etc. that we all enjoy, religious or not. I do not see why irrational beliefs should have special protections.

There are certain things that won't be allowed even if it's "religious" in this day and age, such as say a human sacrifice... the religious argument wouldn't hold up in court. But otherwise in terms of worship, things are pretty open here officially - though unofficially, there's a lot of conflict when it comes to non-Christians (such as the whole building a mosque near ground Zero ordeal).

Anyway, I will be travelling home for Easter weekend and uncertain in my ability to repsond, but I ask you please stop inferring things into what I'm saying. It's one thing to disagree or question, but another entirely to take a few sentences of text where you can't hear my tone etc and assume you know what I mean - we each respond based on our own experiences. I imagine if we were able to converse in person, things would go much smoother being able to hear tone, stop and ask questions, etc.

[fredv3b]

I am not going to continue this because we are obviously completely failing to understand each other. However I do have one final point.

My beef is not with any religion, my beef is with individuals who abuse religion or are hypocrites.

Who gets to decide which is the correct form and understanding of a religion, and therefore what counts as an abuse of that religion?

Have a good trip.

[Wintereis]

. On my side of the pond we have the best churches but they are all empty 24/7. The reason is that outbreaks of religion have normally been accompanied by outbreaks of war, oppression, murder and various other sorts of religious festivals: pogroms, inquisitions, final solutions etc. There's not a lot of sympathy for the churches in Europe.


In 2008 1000 people were polled both in the UK and the USA and asked "Do you believe there is a God?". Less than 40% in the UK said yes, compared with 80% in the USA. In the past in the UK if you were asked about your religious affiliation and said “None”, they used to write down “C of E” (church of England). 66% of the population have no actual connection to any religion or church, despite what they tend to write down on official forms. The decline of the church in Europe has continued at a phenomenal rate in the last 50 years. Thank god for that!

Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear.
Thomas Jefferson



I think there is often a great misconception, a failure of imagination so to speak, by other western nations when it comes to their perceptions of American Religion.

First, The United Sates has not had the same experiences as other western nations in regard to religion. There have not been pograms, inquisitions, crusades, and burnings in the town square over religion in the United States due to the seperation of church and state which exists here. That is not to say that individuals have not perpetrated violence in the name of religion here, just that we have not seen institutional and/or large scale violence relating to religion since the founding of the nation. Quite possibly, this simple fact has allowed for a higher level of religious affiliation in the United States.

Secondly, just because 80% of Americans believe in a god does not mean that they hold with a particular religion. The dominant religion, as it is in Spain, Italy, Germany, France, Britain and numerous other western nations is Christian.

Thirdly, while lacking the centuries of religious architecture in the United States and Canada, (Native Americans tended to worship in a more natural environment) with designers like Louis Comfort Tiffany and Frank lloyd Wright lending their hands to Chapels, Churches, and Synagogues, we are not exactly impoverished when it comes to that particular artistic sphere either. That is another failure of imagination I am afraid. And one, as a designer, you should be aware of.

As for my personal beliefs. I do believe in the divine, but not as it is often formally established through religion. I suppose my understanding is a sort of conglomeration of philosophical, scientific, and theological understandings that are reconciled through personal experience.







Believing that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their Legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church and State (Letter to the Danbury Baptists, 1802). ~Thomas Jefferson

[ninja]

i heard a funny thing on the radio the other day, the topic was the gay kiss issue that happened last week in london, anyway this guy came on and was gay bashing big time, however in the traditional way he'd not properly read the bible but that didnt stop him quoting "a man laying with a another man is an abomination" so the radio host asked him how he felt about lobsters, the man said he had nothing against lobsters, and then the radio host came in with his point, that in the same book of the bible shellfish are also abominations. when i heard it laughed so hard i almost fell over