We all enjoy sharing our individual philosophies; but, at what point does it turn into pushing them? Where do we draw the line in our mind as to what is personal opinion and what should be viewed as universal truth?
I'm asking because it seems to me, when we seek to marginalize the value of another belief we drag the value of our own in the wake. I see the inherent value in debating an individual on their stated beliefs, but trivializing an entire group by our perception of what we think they think seems to be a less than desirable stance. Tried and convicted in the court of malicious gossip in order to showcase our perceived value of our own philosophy seems a little insecure, to me.
I find that I become inspired my having my ideas challenged to the full extent of my opponent's ability. It gets the best out of me. It doesn't do that for everyone but that's how I learn. Putting my ideas through a test of fire. It makes people do research and form educated opinions, regardless of the chaos we see on the surface.
I do not get offended by anyone or what they say. I think everyone entering a debate, and that is what these forums are when it comes to topics like religion and politics, needs to grow a very thick skin. Didn't our parents always tell us not to discuss those subjects in public? This is why. In the real world these discussions lead to violence. Here they lead to insults for those who are easily insulted.
I don't think these forums are for everyone. That is to say I don't think some people can handle them and perhaps shouldn't be here. But then again I have seen people who are at first appalled, who once they learn the ropes do very well.
I doubt that unless a religious vs atheism forum is structured and highly moderated, it ever be a place of mild discussion.
Well, as I said. Debating the individual makes sense. Broad assumptions don't. We have no idea what anyone thinks until they tell us. Derogatory prejudgment only shows our limitations and personal bias. Assuming someone is close minded is, in itself, close minded.
Much in agreement with Starty.
It's all a learning process, when too many people major in minor things, how much do we learn?. A branch of kindness dose help the balance.
Aw, I know you mean me, of course in truth, getting to know you and talking with you made my forum time quite educational and a LOT of fun.
Not that you really meant me, but I did want to chime in.
Well your kindness is delightful and some of your small talk can be interesting. It's more of the one;s that are one-sided limited thinkers.
Though I understand what you are trying to say, I came out of many years in an evangelical Christian environment, and though many make more of the 10,000 denominations argument than it has merit, evangelicals do broadly believe the same things. I can testify that they are very uniform in their opinions as not to be runs the risk of not being 'a true Christian' with the result of going to hell. So I do believe that their opinions are largely that of the group, and fair game to be challenged. Similarly the atheists here also share a herd mentality with regards to their anti-religion stance.
If anyone here makes unqualified statements they are going to be taken to task and run the risk of mockery if they blindly hold onto positions when their error is exposed.
I do think any statement made by anyone is far game for challenge. However, I haven't polled enough evangelicals of varying denominations to feel comfortable acting as if all who bear that name are of one mind. Heck, even if i disagree with the reasoning behind the conclusions of one doesn't imply that someone who states the same conclusions used the same line of reasoning. I wouldn't deign to think i knew what someone thinks without giving them the benefit to state what they think. Unless, I'm venting. At which point that reflects poorly on me, not anyone else.
My only point was the value of any belief system lies in the good it does. If your belief system requires you to belittle the beliefs of others, in order to feel good about yourself and your beliefs...where's the observable good in it? I do realize you are a special case. You were an evangelical. But, (correct me if I'm wrong) you were a Pentecostal. A very minor sect about as far out there philosophically as the JW. At least around here.
But, using the exact same behavior patterns one claims to be railing against gets confusing to watch. The lines get blurred to the point where they all look the same.
A few times I've said, don’t understand Christian. It’s my only claim, over all, no better, no worst.. It was penny who pointed out, its people I'm trying to understand better. Since most people are religious and must love them and respect everyone in order to love this world, first, they are family, ok… lover’s second, deep truth to be told.
May not ever understand the religious, when studying their behavior and observe their respect toward other groups and the millions of species on earth. Many of the religious think people who commit abortions are the greatest murderers on earth, That;s all we need!, more human’s for the rat race and no gays, so on and so on….
I will agree that I don't understand a lot of the things religious people say they believe. And, sometimes, their reasoning comes off as veiled hate. It's simply that if we respond to what we consider to be disrespect with disrespect, I don't see where we are any different than that which we rail against.
I actually started this thread because of a bombardment of threads by someone who kept asking what made Christians so pushy about their beliefs. If you start shoving back, aren't you also guilty of attempting to push your beliefs? Right, or wrong, everyone is entitled to believe whatever they want. If we attempt to belittle and degrade we are attempting to change beliefs through intimidation.
The point where those beliefs are invoked as the primary reason for imposing behavior on others.
Good answer - there's a lot of truth in that.
That encompasses a great deal more than most would admit to. Since, anyone who forcefully enters a debate can be accused of such. Unfortunately, within the topic of religion and philosophy, it is difficult for most to accept their thoughts on the matter fall into the category of belief.
it feels like the suspension of disbelief with many final answers answered being-:You got to have faith:, often blind faith at that. If I were to talk to my imaginary friend, they take me away to the funny farm, (maybe not an artist).. If a Christian deal with their imaginary friends, they can cause wars, imprison and get their taxes cut.
It's not just Christians, it's the whole idea of US against Them thing, that is such a waste of energy.
I think there is a unique problem in the space where religious belief intersects with civic engagement. The very nature of religious belief means that certain religious views are not open to argument for the person holding that view. When those views are used as the basis for public policy that affect everyone, including those of different faiths, and of those of none, then there is a problem.
Those with religious belief need to translate their ideas and concerns into universal values that are meaningful to wider society, not just those who share the same beliefs. Someone can't simply invoke "god's will" as the justification for a proposal that would affect all of society. Instead we have to work within the common reality; Persuade, reason, and compromise.
In my opinion, if someone cannot present the benefits of their ideas at societal level, without resorting to invoking god's will, then they have failed in civic engagement. Insisting on those idea regardless is, I believe, the point where religious belief becomes an imposition on anyone who does not share that belief.
It becomes pushy when people can’t discuss a topic without name calling and trying to talk down to each other. When people can’t have a different opinion without them being called a bigots or when tolerance means that I must cosign everything some other group does and stand for, or I’m anti-American.
It seems to me that pushy ideas are those that others will call bigoted ideas. If one is claiming that we shouldn't allow same sex marriage or inter-racial marriage the he/she will be told that their ideas are bigoted and pushy.
I never brought up anything about same sex marriages, but since we’ll on the subject I would like to make clear my stand on the subject. First I would like to say that people should stop equating same sex marriages with inter-racial marriages. One is natural the other is not! One can produce children [which seems to be the reason for sex] the other cannot, what purpose does fulfill accept the lust between two men for each other?
Now having said that, if the US law states that it’s constitutional for same sex marriages to take place, then so be it. If the law says they have a right to full benefits of marriage, then do your thing! The law is the law [man’s law] but there’s a law higher than man’s law and that’s God’s law. I will obey the law of the government, but when it demand that I break God’s law to be accepted by this world.
I see no pushiness in what I just wrote!
Now because of what I wrote if it offend you to the point of calling me names, than you would be the one who are during the pushing!
This is really very interesting and I want to be as clear as possible if I may. Are you saying you can express, share and promote your opinion (which is based on your religion) that strips the rights of a group of people of the same rights you have based on that religious opinion. In essence attempting to deny a group of people an equal opportunity in your country. You don't think that's pushy but if someone were to come along and say that that's a bigoted opinion that opinion would be pushy.
Did I get that right?
Know you didn’t get that right, what I attempted to state is that if the laws of these United States says it your right to marry two people of the same sex than go on and marry with the full benefits of marriage, if that is indeed what the law of the land states. If it’s your opinion that this is ok to have same sex marriages, than that’s just your opinion, and I have a right to my opinion which is that it serves no useful purpose.
Nowhere in this did I deny anyone any rights which belong to them according to the law of the land. I never deny anyone theirs rights if it’s the law of the land. But what I don’t like is that my rights are being denied, when I’m being force to accept something that I believe to be wrong. I’ll live and let live, but I expect the same from you. You will never make me believe that it’s ok for two men with the same seed to have sex, that’s my opinion, and I have that right just as you do.
Now I have threw right to not have my children exposed to something to that I don’t think would not be in their best interest. Just as I have a right to protect my children from getting involved in gangs and drugs, this is my rights. When you try to force your lifestyle on me you violate my rights.
What are you being forced to accept? That someone else can do something your god says is wrong?
You DO realize, do you not, that you are not the final arbiter here? That your opinion doesn't mean diddly to anyone else and that you have no right to impose your opinion on them?
You aren't being "forced" to do anything but leave people alone to act as they wish, hurting no one. In particular, you are not being forced to live any lifestyle you don't want to (except that you may not exert arbitrary control over others).
If God didn’t say it is wrong, I still don’t believe it would not be right for me and my family. A man and a woman have the necessary equipment to pull this sex act off; two men just are built for this type of activity. I know I’m the final arbiter, but neither are you, did you know that? You are already getting pushy, I never forced my opinion on anyone, but you seem to think you have a right to your opinion and I don’t have that same right.
I never even brought up the conversation of same sex marriages that were something that you have a problem with. I’ll Leave those people alone who leave me alone, we wouldn’t be having this conversation if you had not come here trying to force your opinion on me! Show me in my post where I tried control others, all I did was the same as you, and that is state my opinion on the matter that you brought up! If anything it’s you who come here to try to force your opinion on me!
You are ignoring or missing the whole point; you DO NOT have the (moral) right to control others any more than necessary than for the safety of society.
Same sex marriage offers zero harm to society; it does not need controlled. Yet a great many people WILL control it, ban it and the people practicing it. And perhaps I misread, but I got the definite impression that you would be one of those voting to control and ban it. Was I wrong? Would you vote to permit it in your state?
Finally, yes I will always try to force an opinion on you - the opinion that everyone has the right to live as they please without interference. That it must be tempered with the comment that they can cause no harm doesn't materially change it, and I will absolutely try to force that on you and everyone else I can. Matthew 7:12 may be the most important verse in your scriptural book, but also the most forgotten.
PLEASE, try to understand I'm not trying to force my opinion on anyone, I'm simply doingh what you are doing, and that's stating my opinion. If its wrong for me to do thss, than its worng for you and we all should just stop posting!
Was it intentional, that you did not answer the question of how you would vote? To control or not control someone else for no other reason than you don't like what they do?
Given the opportunity, would you vote to permit gay marriage in either your state or the entire country?
First of all, I never tried to control others, I keep asking where am I trying to control others and no one is answering my questions, but they expect all their questions answered on demand!
Given the opportunity I would never allow same sex marriages in my country, but if that country is a country controlled by the vote of the people and the people voted this law into effect, than I would have to step down from that job because the people have spoken.
Again, if the law of that land that is supposed to be controlled by the vote of the people then let them marriage, but it still doesn’t change my opinion. And I still have a right to that opinion!
When you talk about your right to not have your children exposed to legal activity. This is an attempt to control your environment and others.
I can see this is going downhill fast; to protect my children from getting involved drugs is attempt to control others. You have a responsible to your children to try to control the environment in which they will be conditioned by. Would you live in a mansion in the Hollywood hills and let you babies live in a gang infested hood in the ghetto?
You really didn’t even make an effort to really answer my question, I hope that’s not your best!
"First of all, I never tried to control others"
"Given the opportunity I would never allow same sex marriages in my country"
So you haven't had the opportunity to control others, but if given that opportunity (the vote comes up) you will absolutely make an effort to do so.
Did you read the verse referenced? Matthew 7:12? You might do so before claiming you have a right to act as you have said you would.
And if you don't like reading the bible, you might try Voltaire (actually his bibliographer), where he was reported as saying "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." Voltaire did not agree with your stance that another's actions need be acceptable to him before he would defend it.
Freedom is a precious thing; when we voluntarily chip away, little by little, simply because we don't like what somebody is doing it will bite us in the end. Sooner or later we're going to be the "chippee" instead of the "chipper".
“Therefore, whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.” [Matthew 7:12]
I don’t know what you got from that verse of scripture, but it’s simply tells me to treat others the way I want them to treat me. Now since you when to the Book of Christ in an attempt to boost your argument, let’s go to that same book and see what the author of that book has to say homosexual activity:
1 Corinthians 6:9-10 - "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."
I don’t think you want to go to the Word of God looking for justification for homosexual ativity!
There's noway that verse is putting its stamp of approval on the homosexual lifestyle!
Using a book that condones slavery, describes how badly to beat slaves, demands genocide, tells us to kill women who are not virgins on their wedding day and and demands that men who rape women marry the woman for life, to justify intolerance of homosexuals.
You interpret the verse the same as I do.
But I neither asked nor indicated that the bible condoned homosexuality; only that you disapproved of it and would force that belief onto others if you could. Which you agreed with.
Do you then wish others to force their ideology and religious beliefs onto you? Or do you wish them to keep their religion at home and not force you to follow it's tenets whether at gunpoint or by passing laws to force you into behaving as they think you should?
Of the two possibilities, the second agrees with what the bible says is the right thing to do; the first directly violates Matthew 7:12, according to both you and I. But that is exactly what you are doing with a vote to curtail the freedom of others; you find it "ungodly" and will therefore prevent others from acting that way if you can for no other reason than you think your god doesn't like it. Very plainly forcing your religion onto others.
You keep talking about me forcing my beliefs on others, I posted what I believe. Should I let you just say what you want about your lifestyle and not say some about my lifestyle? It is you band your gang who is trying to force something, to force me to believe your way. This is not about religion, this is about my opinion vs. your opinion on the homosexual, I’ll not play this game with of when nothing else works, let’s just trash the bible. You seem to be hung-up on religion!
But I don't care what your lifestyle is. Gays don't care what your lifestyle is. Nobody cares what your lifestyle is. Not even what your opinion of same sex marriage is.
So why do you care what theirs is? Why refuse them anything they want, as long as it causes no harm? And why refuse them whether you approve of their lifestyle or not? What gives you the ethical right to force your opinions of what your god wants of YOU, onto THEM?
It's not about the bible; I mentioned that because it guessed you would put high value on what instructions it gives of right and wrong - instructions on how to treat others. It's about you forcing your belief system onto others because your opinion is that you shouldn't do it. Not because you think they shouldn't do it (you don't have the right to say that) and certainly not because your personal view of your god says so.
And I don't trash the bible; you do. It is not I saying to ignore the instructions there; it is you. I do my best to follow that specific instruction, and the meaning behind it; you do your level best to violate it, according to your own statement.
I did not introduce the bible into this discussion, one of you did?
It doesn't matter who introduced it, it matter if you used it.
No, we are discussing the bible here; this is about why people can’t have a civil discussion, when the discussing breaks down, the first thing non-believer wants to do is trash the bible. Lets continue discussing what t5he forum is about, it’s not about the bible, it’s about people controlling their temples when in a discussion like this one.
Same sex marriage may not serve a purpose for you, but that doesn't mean it isn't serving a purpose for those who want to get married.
Of course, you appear to equate marriage with sex and reproduction, which is your fatal error in reasoning.
Sure, you have a right to that bigoted opinion, but what does it have to do with you, anyways? Nothing.
No one is forcing gay marriage on you, it has nothing to do with you or your children. YOU are the one trying to force your opinions on others, not the other way round.
Do you see the problem why people can’t have a difference of opinion and discuss it in the proper manner? It’s because it always results in name calling!
Again, show me in my post where I’m trying to force my opinion on others!
Please explain to me what you mean by your statement of equating marriage with sex and reproduction, because you’ve completely lost me on that one.
Perhaps because not all marriages involve sex, and it's to the point now that the majority of marriages do not involve reproduction.
Yet, your comment that "I have a right to my opinion which is that it [gay marriage] serves no useful purpose. " pretty strongly indicates that you think a marriage must show both sex AND reproduction or it serves no useful purpose. A rather obvious fallacy.
I have been married now for 38 years - 34 of them with no sign of reproduction. It has been immensely fulfilling and useful from economic, social, emotional and intellectual standpoints.
That reproduction, or even sex, defines a marriage is an obvious fallacy.
Wow, how soon believers forget what they say. Right here:
Just to give you an idea of how bigoted your opinion sounds lets imagine we were talking about inter-racial marriage, as not long ago it was also not lawful. Would you be making claims that your rights are being infringed upon by an inter-racial couple moving into your area and exposing your children to that?
Because untimely it's the same thing. Discrimination.
It’s your opinion that I sound bigoted and you have a right to your opinion. Being a black man that grew up the deep sought during 1950’s and 60, I’m well aware of the problem with this inter-racial thing I know first-hand the pain of discrimination. I would never try to cause that pain to anyone, but that has nothing to do with homosexual activity.
The homosexual is free to sex it up with whomever they which they have this freedom. No one is stopping the homosexual having sex, but it was against the law of the land to marry inter-racially, do you see the difference.
One have aq free-will choice, the other don’t.
Now I'm really confused. You claim you would never cause the pain of discrimination to anyone and I certainly respect and appreciate that. There was a time when inter-racial marriages were against the law and there was a time when same sex marriage was against the law. They are now both legal, right, so why are you discriminating against homosexuals by claiming you don't what your family exposed to them. It seems like the very same thing some would have said about inter-racial marriage.
didnt I say that if the law of the land says they have a right to marry, than let the marry? If the inter-racial couple wants to marry and the law of the land says its ok for thgem to marry, trhan let them marry. I see no discriminating in any of this.
You can’t take that right form me no matter how many name you call me, I never called you a devil for not believing what I believe, so what gives you the right to call me a bigot for not believing what you believe.
Yes, but the law of the land says it's currently legal for homosexuals to marry, but you claim that the exposure to it would infringe on your rights. It's confusing.
The Laws in some states are now legalizing pot, do you now tell your children to just go out and smoke all the weed they wants to just because it’s the law, I hope not! Exposing my children to drugs just because it’s now legal is just foolish. I obey the law, but I don’t have to agree with every law that’s passed by the sorry congress of these United States of America! Again, I never infringed on anyone’s rights and neither are you going to infringe on my rights!
But a few posts back you said that gay marriage infringes on your rights to shelter your family from homosexuals?
I never said that gay marriages infringes on my rights, I said that you trying convince me that this activity is nomal and if I dont accept as such, i'm as bigot, that's what i said. I donnot hate homosexuals, I wold never do any physical harm to a homosexual because weither they know it are not, they are children of God, He decides what to do about the situation, its noy my call, but they will not force their lifestyle on me.
Sorry about the missed spelled words, I'm trying to do too many things at one time.
I know how sometimes the little head gets disconnected or confused with the big head, often when you try to make sense out of religion and sex combined.
Pot is the next gay marriage
Education and treatment works far better than war and imprisonment of millions of people.
Should infertile people be banned from having sex too? They can't produce children.
How about pregnant women? They can't produce children, so should they be allowed to have sex?
Everyone could be allowed to have sex after of age 18. Maybe age16 for straights or maybe age 12 like in the Bible stories, kidding about the bible stories and Pope, I was not there, behind secrete doors to know.
I do know about 80 predominate religious countries have illegal same sex -sex laws and death penalty in 10 of them.
That is a lot more than an opinion, it's against the law of love and the law of nature and the law within the animals species.
Roy, I hope you never have twins and one of them is gay, because 50% chance the other child will be gay too.
I don't care who have sex with whom, again, I say its not for me and my family, if you can't respect that, than it is you trying to force your opinion on me. Just because the majority agree on something doesn't make it right!
I have to agree with you that just because the majority thinks something is right, that it is right.
That is a fallacy referred to as an appeal to popularity.
Here's how it really works. When something is right and it is understood by people, they will accept it as right. The majority know evolution is right, those who don't clearly have no clue and are a minority.
You was supposed to be explaining to me what you meant by stating that sex have nothing to do with reproduction; I’m still waiting on that.
Are you stating that evolution is a fact? There was a time when most of the world thought the world was flat, but that didn’t stop it from being round. Because the majority agree on something dosn’t make it right!
It certainly doesn't! That the majority thinks a harmless action should be prohibited does NOT make that prohibition right.
Just as you say, opinions matter naught; what matters is the results. Gay marriage has no result except happiness of two people, so all the opinions that god hates it matters nothing.
"That is a lot more than an opinion, it's against the law of love and the law of nature and the law within the animals species."
Against your concept of a "law of love"?? Outside your own mind there is absolutely no such law.
Against the "law of nature" and another madeup "law within the animals species"???? Do you have any idea at all just how many species regularly practice homosexuality?? Or multiple "spouses"?? Your "laws" are nothing but your own imagination!!
Everything I've ever achieved in life was all once imagined.
Maybe a misunderstanding, I'm for same sex, although not gay myself, nothing is wrong with that.
Everyone or groups task, is to love, why should there be a law against same sex love? Love is when two people or thing are stronger together than apart. It's been proven thousand of species have same sex -sex and mate for life. Plus all animal love.
Not being a homosexual myself, I just can’t see how a man can have sexual desire for another, when I see two men kiss each other in the mouth, I almost lose my dinner. Now if it’s having that kind of effect on me, what am I supposed to do, put my stamp of approval on it? Then I would be untrue to myself to please another, nothing good could come from that.
Would you join a world where everyone was just like you.
I would not.
10% of people prefer sex same sex, maybe some of them would throw up to watch you kiss a woman.
No, I wouldn’t want to live in a world where everyone was like me, I’m unique and so are you, but one thing is sure, you are trying to get everyone in this world to be like you. Show you what I mean:
Since we’ve started discussion on the problems of discussing in forums without being pushy, not once have I tried to convert you to Christ, you got to give me that.
After I made my first comment in this forum [which had nothing to do with homosexuality] I have been hit with comments by people trying to convert me to their ways or at lease me see it as normal, trying to evangelize into their cult, I never tried to convert anyone of them to Christ.
I tried to keep my religion out of it! To me it is the gay community who are trying to force their cult on others, trying to create a world where everyone is just like them!
You think gay people want to turn the world... gay? That sounds a little paranoid to me. I have never heard anything of the sort from any gay person.
you think the gay community is a cult? A cult of what?
Please inform me, because I AM gay, and happily, legally married to my wife. I don't force my gayness on anyone. I don't make out in public in front of homophobic people. I don't force straight people to hold hands or watch what goes on in our bedroom. I'm not trying to convert people to gayness.
What exactly is the gay "lifestyle"? Do you have a straight lifestyle? What does that entail? If you don't like gay marriage, don't go get one. No one is forcing anything on you at all.
Yes, you should put your stamp of approval on people loving who they chose to love. I do expect that of everyone in a compassionate society. If you don't want to watch them kiss (I am no fan of public displays of affection myself) avert your eyes.
I think religion is errant nonsense and delusion at a personal level. But I certain put my stamp of approval on people pursuing any religion they want. It is just the same as that. I don't expect people to conduct themselves according to the workings of my brain or stomach. They are living their own lives by their own standards and harming no one.
That is your right to put your stamp of approval on it; you have a right to stand up for what you believe. I just happen to believe it not normal for one like me to want to have sex with me, I find that disturbing. I don’t want to be around men who are turned on by me; don’t I have a right to keep things away from me that disturbs me to such an extent? When I'm called a bigot for looking out for my peace I find that I am being violated. Rights go both ways.
I don’t understand everybody wants to talk about religion.
I don't want to be around donuts. They are conspiring to make me fat.
I'm tired of being hit on by men. I think all heterosexual males should be forced to be gay.
lol....I unfortunately don't have any men hitting on me, why don't you send some my way?
Bah, I live in WV... (DEEEEEEEP WV), I have all my teeth. That's all you need down here. Unfortunately most of the men hitting on me also live here and most don't have all their teeth.
But if you're a fan of camo and chewing tobbacco and pick-up trucks with rebel flags in the windows, come on down. I'll hook you right up
No, you do NOT have the right to keep all people you don't like away from you. You have to right to keep away from them, though, should you choose to pay the price of that instead of making them pay it.
About the only exception is the legal right, enforceable by law, of a restraining order. It's not given just for an opinion of lifestyle, though, and generally only to prevent violence.
I’m not sure your last post was meant for me because comment seem to be falling in places other than where they are supposed to be, maybe it time for me to get a new computer.
If it was meant for me, here’s my reply:
I never said anything about keeping all people away from me, but if I find something to my disliking I have the right to keep it away from my house. I never said they have no right to be anywhere they want to be, this is America the land of the free, go where they will, do what they, but not at my house where I’m the law to a certain extent. If you are responding my post, than you are reading things into your post I never even implied.
You got me wrong; I never said they don’t have the same legal rights under the law of the land if that’s the law of the land. You’ll try to force things here that don’t belong!
Yes, I took "keep things away" to include people. Apologies.
But whatever does gay marriage have to do with your home? Is this just a red herring to divert attention or do you really think you will be forced to supply bed an breakfast to a gay couple?
Law - now it's you reading something that isn't there. Except, of course, that you will do what you can to make laws banning such a marriage. Without having a valid reason for doing so.
A simple solution for you, don't have sex with men. That was easy, wasn't it?
Those men might lose their dinner when they see you kiss a woman. So what?
I'm alright with that, because nothing they could mach what the evil looks I've gotten in certain places just being black, so if they lose their because its not for something I did , but because of what I look like.
my problem with them is not how they look, but what they do.
Now that I like. Good attitude.
Except for the part about a problem. Why do you have a problem with their lifestyle? How does it affect you? (when answering, remember that they are not responsible for controlling your imagination )
I thought I explained that already, but since you missed it I’ll explain it again. I’m not comfortable being in the company of men who are attractive to other men, I love women , I was a whore, that was my lifestyle, but I didn’t try to convince others that it was right or normal and called them bigots because they disagreed with my lifestyle.
Am I imagining that I’m repulsed by men having the hot’s for other men? Am I imagining that I don’t want it in my house, what do you mean controlling my imagination?
Of course you can choose not to be gay... It's not really a choice, btw, but anyway.
You can have whatever you like or not have whatever you don't like in your home.
But... that is technically bigotry. I'm sorry you don't like the word, but it's apt.
My dad, for example, wouldn't let blacks in our house when I was younger. Black people repulsed him. It certainly repulsed him that I was having a relationship with a black guy. So then he wouldn't let ME in the house.
Was that his right? Yep. Was he a bigot? Yep.
But he judge the person by what he looked like, there's nothing wrond with being black. look around you, blacks are some of the most gifted people on this earth, to judge a proson by what they look like a not for somerthing they've done is biggotry.
That why people need to stop trying equate the two, they are not the same!
If i don't want you in my house because you are crach-head, that's not being a bigot, its using my common sense!
callinng people bigot just because they don't agree with your lifestyle is in itself bigotry!
Actually, you don't disagree with my lifestyle. No one who's ever told me I was disgusting or going to rot in hell forever has ever disagreed with my lifestyle.
They have disagreed with who I am. Something that I can't change, something that I was born with.
I will absolutely equate the two. I have seen the same baseless prejudice against my son not because he was "acting black" but because he was black. Just like you don't want someone in your home because they might "act gay" others didn't want him in their home because he might "steal something" or "get high".
It's the same thought process, the same stereotyping behavior... you just don't like it when it's done to you and don't mind when it's done to others.
Is it ok for you not to have a drug addict in your house, is it prejudice to want to protect your children from that lifestyle or are we to let him in and says lets live and let live. No, your prejudice will show the moment he enters your house, if not you wouldn’t be a very good parent. What gives you the right to say who anyone should let in their home?
Stop trying to force your way on others, stop being a hypocrite, if the others are bigots then so are you when you do the very same things you accurse others of?
Honey, I could care less who you bring into your house or why. My days of changing the world one person at a time are long over.
My point was the statements were bigoted and they are, by definition. I don't care, personally, just stating a fact. It's your right to hold any belief you like for any reason at all. Since you have no power to affect me in any way, shape, or form... carry on.
And yes, I am a bigot against bigots. I can live with that.
And I let drug addicts in my house all the time. They aren't using anymore, and haven't for years... however they are still drug addicts. I wouldn't let anyone planning on having sex on my coffee table in my house, however, what they do in their own bedroom doesn't concern me and certainly wouldn't bar them entrance into my home. But that's not even what we're talking about, you won't let people into your home, regardless of what they are actually doing, because of the gender they are attracted to...
Edit: Exactly what is my way and how am I trying to force it? Or are you going to dodge that like you have dodged every other point? (blatantly dodging btw, so much so that I've actually laughed aloud quite a few times)
And now, you compare gay people to drug addicts. How is that fair? How is that not being dishonest about your opinions?
Roy, you've been given some real food for thought tonight. I really hope you will spend some time thinking about it.
For Melissa is right - you are exhibiting the behavior of a bigot. Someone that dislikes someone else merely because they are different. We all have some of that - it is a natural reaction of humanity - but it needs removed from our society at every opportunity. It is imperative that we are all tolerant of other behaviors, other appearances, other lifestyles. This land is to small to remain forever hating, forever fearing, forever at each others throats just because we're different.
We all have it somewhere, sometime. The only difference is what we do with it - do we spread hatred and fear or do we offer love and tolerance to people that are not as we are. Think about it.
It’s amazing how you love to throw the B word around, I never told you that I don’t like or hate homosexuals, I don’t like their lifestyle. You are not just different, but you are going against the natural order of things. So you admit you are a bigot, right? You are wrong that we must to tolerate others behavior; I will not tolerate a serial killer in my community if I can do something about it.
I hope you can get off that merry-go-round of me trying to deny the homosexual their rights as American.
The homosexual‘s definition of tolerance:
You must agree with everything I stand for and except it as normal are you are a bigot!
The true definition of the word:
The acceptance of the differing views of other people, e.g. in religious or political matters, and fairness toward the people who hold these different views.
I think I’ve been fair, I keep repeating, give them, the right what every other American enjoys, I simply say it not for me. I believe I’ve been fair, but I’m not going to be fair to you and unfair to myself.
That's not the definition of bigot at all...
This is: big·ot noun \ˈbi-gət\
: a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc. : a bigoted person; especially : a person who hates or refuses to accept the members of a particular group (such as a racial or religious group)
Which, again, is apt.
I would say that some of your statements are also stereotypical, except that tends to mean that they beliefs are commonly held... which would be inaccurate. Is there a word for a completely inaccurate and illogical belief that in no way reflects reality?
Apparently we are using two different dictionaries; in that case I think it means we can find a dictionary to say whatever we want. How it that for apt?
Tell me what statement are stereotypical, and what false believe that I have and your proof that they are false so I can follower what it is we’ll discussing, if there is a word for a completely inaccurate and illogical belief that in now reflect reality, you for sure should know it, because you’ve just described everything you just wrote! How’s that for apt
Well, first of all you should probably learn the difference between bi-sexual and transsexual... neither of which, btw, are confused about their gender.
Then, you might want to wrap your mind around the fact that homosexuality/bisexuality isn't defined by who you are having sex with.
Here's a clue: I am happily married yet still bi-sexual. There are plenty of gay men married to women. There are plenty of lesbians married to men.
In addition, you should probably learn what a cult is. You should learn the definition of a "normal" man. And apparently, you should learn the definition of bigotry... since you seem to think it implies acceptance. No dictionary in this world defined it as "The acceptance of the differing views of other people, e.g. in religious or political matters, and fairness toward the people who hold these different views."
There is no difference; they are just a bunch of confused people that don’t know what5 are who they are. So what being a homosexual or whatever you call yourself is not enough, now it sound like you are telling me that you cheat on your husband with women, I’m sure you would that’s normal too, right?
A system of religious or spiritual beliefs, especially an informal and transient belief system regarded by others as misguided, unorthodox, extremist, or false, and directed by a charismatic, authoritarian leader.
First of all you hang out in religious forums pitting what you do against religion; I had a time in this discussion trying to keep this discussion off religion. Many think you beliefs are misguided; you are the leader that the definition is talking about, that is your religion, homosexuality or you would not be in religious forums in battle with religion.
Conforming to the usual standard, type, or custom.
The norm has always been sex between a man and a woman which in many cases result in a new creature is born. It always been the norm until recently, that’s why most would not come out in the open, be3cause it’s not normal.
You say no dictionary in the world describe in the bigot the way I did, but you are wrong again.
Get yourself an Encarta Dictionary and look up the word bigot, it’s in there, and that book is in this world.
Anymore words you need me to look up for you, I still have a few minutes before I have to do other things because you are just throwing stuff out there and see what sticks.
"The norm has always been sex between a man and a woman which in many cases result in a new creature is born. It always been the norm until recently, that’s why most would not come out in the open, be3cause it’s not normal."
That is totally false. Do a little bit of research on human culture. Homosexuality has been dealt with in a vast variety of ways, some for, and some against.
Human society didn't begin in the 50's. Sorry to burst your bubble.
I know exactly who I am. I am attracted to both males and females. I am very certainly a women and very much enjoy being so. I wouldn't be a man if you offered me a billion dollars. No, I don't cheat on my husband. Thanks again for the personal attacks.
Homosexuality is a religious belief? I don't pit homosexuality against Christianity at all. Some Christians do. They are speaking for themselves not Christianity in general.
Normal males have male reproductive organs and chromosomes. Gay men have those too.
I will lay you 1000 dollars that no dictionary in this world defines bigotry as "The acceptance of the differing views of other people, e.g. in religious or political matters, and fairness toward the people who hold these different views." Which is a direct quote from you. Since, you know, that is the opposite definition of the world.
It would appear you know very little about the history of mankind, where homosexual activities have been going on for thousands of years, hardly recently.
And the excuses and lies begin, with the claim of being "unnatural" or "against the natural order of things". Sorry, but I've heard those lies before; they are common in an misguided effort to justify tbigotry. Homosexuality is common in the "natural" world - look it up for any of the great apes, dolphins and a host of other species.
Then you go on to those committing violence, while I have consistently pointed out that tolerance does NOT include those that do so. Presumably a red herring to draw attention away from the real topic.
And finally followed by the lie that gays demand that you accept their lifestyle. They do not, you have been repeatedly been told that and know it to be true. They only ask that they be given the rights you have, not that you accept or practice a lifestyle you do not wish.
But I give. You have made it exceedingly plain that bigotry is the name of the game; that you will not tolerate differences and will make it illegal to be different whenever possible. You will live with hate and fear all your life and you will do it by choice. I pity you.
We not talking about apes, we are talking about men and women, apes do apes stuff and people do people stuff, so let’s stick to the people stuff, ok?
“And finally followed by the lie that gays demand that you accept their lifestyle.”
Go back and read you and the gang’s post and then try to tell me that you have not been trying to do that very same thing all day.
Not once have I tried to convince you of Christ, but and the gang have been trying to force the homosexual life on me all day. Go back and read the posts.
You pity is wasted on me, you need to save that pity for yourself, because I know who I’m and what sex I’m, but appearance you don’t. I pity anyone who don’t know if they are a man or a woman, so pity yourself not me, you need the pity!
The law is the law [man’s law] but there’s a law higher than man’s law and that’s God’s law. I will obey the law of the government, but when it demand that I break God’s law to be accepted by this world.
I see no pushiness in what I just wrote!
Roy, you are perfectly entitled to hold the view you hold, and to express it. That does not constitute you trying to force your views on anyone, and I think you have been characterized unfairly in that regard.
Likewise, those who categorize your opinion as bigotry are perfectly entitled to hold that view, and express it. That does not constitute anyone forcing you to accept a "homosexual lifestyle", and I think you have characterized those who disagree with you unfairly in that regard.
These views constitute a difference of opinion. No more. A pluralistic society will, by definition, be made up of different values, opinions and beliefs. I think the issue is how we respond to and engage with each other over those differences.
For example, if you responded by campaigning for a federal law making homosexuality illegal, then that would constitute forcing your views on others because such a law would affect everyone in society. Likewise if those who disagree with you campaigned for a law making religious worship illegal, that would constitute them forcing their views on you. I don't think anyone on this thread has suggested banning religion, and to your credit you have explicitly said you would not seek to force your views on others through legislation etc.
Believe it or not, I think this thread is an example of the right approach: people with opposing views engaging each other in discussion. Those discussions can be quite passionate, messy, frustrating and generally difficult, mostly because human beings tend to be passionate, messy, frustrating and generally difficult. Despite that, I think communication is the key.
I also think we need to get away from the idea that expressing a view or trying to change someone's mind is wrong. You are perfectly entitled to try to persuade me that you are right, and I'm perfectly entitled to try to change your mind. As long as your views, and your attempts to persuade me, do not impinge on my rights and vice versa, then I think we are good.
In the spirit of that, I think your view on homosexuality is totally, and fundamentally wrong.
OK, we'll stick to what people do. Which is, in some cases, have gay sex. It is therefore, by your own reasoning, a natural thing - why would you claim otherwise? What do you hope to accomplish with such a claim?
Which posts tries to force homosexuality on you, please? Be specific, and show where anyone is forcing, or even encouraging, you into the homosexual act? Or which one is forcing you into a same sex marriage? Or any of the other facets of their lifestyle?
Oh, I understand you are male - I'd better not pity you for that for I am the same. I pity you for the inability to accept people for what they are, for being unable to tolerate differences in others, for the need to foster hatred and fear of anyone different than you. It is a sad life, and one I have spent my own life consciously avoiding.
You've been fair? You just compared gay people to serial killers, how is that fair?
Your imagination is the only thing that could be affecting you. You may not know any gay people (either sex) or you may, but you can't tell. So what's all the stress about? Obviously only your own imagination.
No one will force gays into your home at gunpoint. No one will require you to take the podium and declare to the world that being homosexual is a natural thing, even though it is. No one will require you to visit a gay bar or a party with gay people present.
Just give them the same opportunities you have; to marry the person they love and have certain legal responsibilities and duties as a result.
I understood conversation to be about homosexual, not wither or not I can recognize be sight, I know homosexuals and have had conversations with them, if I’m approached by one I give him the same respect I would give a NORMAL man. I do not try to shame them or anything like that I just refuse to be dragged into that cult.
You keep harping on the same thing, I keep telling you that if the law of the land says it’s their right to marry, then let them marry, the people has spoken, what more can I say? I never once said that they should not have the same rights as every other American, if that’s the law of America, I just don’t know what you are trying to get out of me.
If you are American, and the law says it’s your right to marry, than get marry, share your home together, but I don’t have to attend your wedding and cheer you on. I believe there some American law that gives me that right.
So what point are you trying to prove by going in this circle other than to convince me that it’s a normal lifestyle, and something is wrong with me because you can’t convince me of your way of thinking, I’m not going to be evangelize by you, you are simply trying to force me into your way of thinking and if you can’t then I’m a bigot. I don’t have a right to force my way of thinking, and you are wasting your if you think you will ever evangelize me!
"I never once said that they should not have the same rights as every other American"
Of course you did say they should not have the same rights. When you said you would prevent them from marrying the person they love; a right that you have.
And perhaps I AM trying to evangelize; I am a very firm believer in both the Golden Rule and the concept of tolerance of others. You have plainly denied that either one can be found in you, while at the same time demanding that others exhibit both towards you. You don't want the gay "lifestyle" forced on you, and you demand tolerance of your intolerance. You complain that no one will ever change you, that you will remain bigoted your entire life, and that is your choice but do not ask me to condone intolerance, hatred and fear. You will not get it from me.
You give then the same respect you would give a "normal" man? Are you saying that Gay people are abnormal?
Roy, are you hit on by every female that crosses your path? I imagine not. Why on earth would you assume that any gay man would automatically hit on you? Or are you disturbed by the fact that they're attracted to people that you don't agree with?
Who said that every homosexual man hits on me, i know i didn't! don't try to puy words in my mouth with the week game you are trying to play!
the gays must have thought what they were doing was not normal or rhey would not have hid their lifestyle for so long, now you go and look up the word nrlrmal.
I told you where I found that definition and I quoted it verbatim, I added nothing to it or have taken away from it. So if you have a problem with that definition you need to take it up with them. So what do you think of the other words you needed me to look up for you, did I get normal right or does your dictionary say the opposite?
Actually, the definition of normal male is exactly the one I quoted to you. Having male chromosomes and male genitalia.
I really do think you need to take a look at what you "quoted" as the definition of bigot. It's not even funny any more, it's just sad.
Anyway, the conversation has degenerated to the point that you are just throwing out insults and personal attacks. When you want to have a rational conversation let me know. Otherwise, talk to yourself... or anyone else who feels the need to be personally insulted by you. I'm not sure why they would feel that need, but to each his own.
Have a good night.
"I really do think you need to take a look at what you "quoted" as the definition of bigot. It's not even funny any more, it's just sad."
What kind of way is that to end this discusion, you claim to qoute something I said and when I ask you to show me where I said you tell mew i don't need to look at it, now that's sad. again, you are just throwing stuff out there and see what sticks, now that's sad!
I misquote you, you did say I need to read my words, but i can't find it, so direct me to it>
conforming to the usual standard, type, or custom.
That’s the only definition I gave and said it came from a dictionary, the only one.
What you are referring to was my explanation of the understanding I got from their definition, I never said that it came from any dictionary, you claim its in no dictionary in the world, I never said it was, that trick of yours has fail again!
You know Roy, I get that you don't understand who and why two men can be attracted to each other, because I also don't see the attraction as well, I don't really want to see two men kissing either, but for some reason I'm not opposed to seeing two women kissing. The thing to remember is that who they are attracted to is not a decision they can make. I personally couldn't decide to be gay and have a loving relationship with a man, so it's only fair to assume they can't make the decision to love a women in the same way they would a man, or a women a women.
Before I went to art school I was a tad homophobic as well, but one I spent 3 years in close quarter with homosexuals for 3 hours a day I realized they are no different then us. I later worked at a office that was about 50% openly homosexual. And I can tell you they were with the exception of one, kind and caring people. From time to time someone or someone's friend would ask me out because they mistook kindness for affection and I would simple tell them that they were nice but I'm not gay and they would leave me alone.
And, there problem with you is not how you look, but what you do. It's the same thing, they don't really care that you are into women and they are not, so why should you care if they are into each other, it is really none of your business.
I'm bisexual whether I have sex with women or not. It's not a choice. I was born this way. I never sat down and decided to be attracted to men.
It's not bigotry against what someone DOES. It's bigotry against who someone IS.
I would venture to guess that most of the homophobes don't have gay people having sex on their yard. They don't like the person because they ARE gay, not because they have gay sex.
If you belive that mess you are saying, i can see why you are so confuse about who and what you are and what sex you are. you sounbd like a very confused bperson!
Ah, personal attacks. Nice.
I'm absolutely not confused about who I am. Nice try though. Sorry but it will take more than that to insult me... or at least effectively.
I would think it would be more confusing to be part of a minority that was horribly stereotyped because of something they couldn't change, and hate it, yet be perfectly willing to do it to another group. That's confusion I COULDN'T live with.
First of all you and the gang made it my business, you brought this conversation up, you told me how you felt about the homosexual lifestyle and I told you how I felt the topic you brought up.
I didn’t care one way or the other about the homosexual, but it seems to be something that was pressing on you mind, the only reason its my business is because you made it my business.
You keep calling gayness a cult. How so? Do you know what the word means?
The topic was only brought up as an example of bigotry, and no one at that point had mentioned anything about a "homosexual lifestyle", whatever that is, whereupon you leaped on the opportunity to say this:
"The law is the law [man’s law] but there’s a law higher than man’s law and that’s God’s law. I will obey the law of the government, but when it demand that I break God’s law to be accepted by this world.
I see no pushiness in what I just wrote! "
No, we did not make it your business, it was only brought up as an example of bigotry and you took advantage of that opportunity to voice your bigoted opinion.
Most definitely a misunderstanding - I apologize.
by il Scettico3 years ago
A common religion debate is that religious people try to shove their beliefs down every ones' throats, which is unwanted, closed-minded, and hypocritical. Yet the most common closed-minded belief shoving type of...
by A Thousand Words5 years ago
Hey, everyone. I'm certainly curious to know what it is that you believe and why. No hidden agendas or ulterior motives. Plain and simple curiosity and a conversation starter.
by yoshi977 years ago
After reading through the religion forum, I see a lot of different views, but I also see some that are very much the same. What I am curious about is this ... are we all mostly different, or are we preaching the same...
by Richard VanIngram7 years ago
The short answer is, "Yes."Should he or she, though?My answer , after my own search, long, difficult, very individualistic is again, "Yes." Can I understand why some or many rational individuals...
by thirdmillenium19 months ago
It is quite understandable for the rationals to pity the believers for their purported ignorance and obstinate adherence to their religious beliefs. They think they know the truth which may well be the case. What I do...
by Ron Montgomery7 years ago
Possible? Interesting? Shortest thread ever?I was raised in a conservative Christian family, but no longer refer to myself as a Christian. I am agnostic, meaning I live in a world full of...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.