Oh, and in regards to overpopulation; working towards an ethical way to solve overpopulation isn't that much of a tooth puller. The earth is not overpoplated. It's getting there, sure, and some places feel it now more than others, but we still have time to enact a solution that is a bit more laudable than the forced abortions they have in China, or the coerced(might as well be forced!) ones your acquaintance's(Been spellin that wrong this whole time!XD) plan would result in. Efficient use of farmland and extra-terrestrial colonization are just two ideas that come to mind. I understand that some things (like extra terrestrial colonization) are not likely to happen for a while, but working towards them is better than sitting on our butts thinking that doing nothing but killing is the only compassionate thing we can do for humanity. Besides, the murder-by-taxation plan will not stop over-population. It is not the minority of large families that causes it, but the majority of medium sized ones. Even if it did have an impact, it would only slow growth to a degree that would be far less perceptible than the anxiety and suffering caused by the financial burdens enacted on humans. When people are put in situations like that, they tend to lose it and many wouldn't hesitate to take their anger out on the society that they believe caused it. I know there must be a compassionate way to face overpopulation. Even if I can't provide detailed plans that would solve the problems, it is my belief that acting apathetic towards fellow humans will only cause further problems.
Depends what they can afford! it may be expensive! best to budget these things to be sure!
Let me explain or elaborate a bit.
In comparison to a perfect God (Jesus), humans have no dignity except that which comes from the Love of the Lord; that's my view of it anyway.
But yes humans have dignity. The dignity that comes from trying our best to be "like" the Lord.
The act(s) of homosexuality are contrary to that. Just plain wrong. There's no dignity in it, only shame. No matter how much people try to whitewash it and legalize it and get others to "sanction" it.
The same with adultery and murder and lying and all the other sins. We can obtain forgiveness for all of those, but never sanction from God.
And yes, Jesus would know! He may not have said in direct words that homosexuality is wrong, but the Bible (which is His word sent via the Holy Spirit to the heart and hands of the disciples) does indeed speak against it, in both the Old and New Testaments.
And I believe something else entirely, and also have a lesbian friend who has been with her partner longer than I have been with mine, and who is raising a daughter.
Nobody or no thing will convince me they are sinful, shameful or evil. Sorry.
Seen it before. Not buying it.
I don't understand. How do you know? Besides, as I said before, find me somewhere Jesus refers to this, and maybe then I'll take this as more than just the opinion of you and the denomination / church you happen to belong to...
...Jesus often accuses the pharisees of taking the Scriptures too literally, in any case: "Love your neighbor as yourself: this is the law and the prophets"
It stands for thetfin
Actually, I was just about to ask you what it means. I can't figure it out for the life of me XD
And what, precisely is this 'prevailing reading of the US constitution' regarding seperation of Church and State? Do you mean to say that the best interperetation is that Religion should have absolutely no influence on politics? I hope not, because that would be a major violation of rights to millions of religious voters. Or do you mean to say that powerful members of the church should have no direct control of the government and vice-versa? That sounds a bit more reasonable to me.
Hi, thetfin. Well, lol, then the meaning will remain a mystery. I thought it might mean something like "the end."
And yes, the latter is more correct as to what I mean concerning separation of Church and State. Of course it is more complicated than that, and involves institutions.
So that's what it means! hmmm... 'The end'... I like it! XD
Sort of makes sense now that I think about it.
The truth is that it's one part zany hairstyle, two parts cheesy horror film, and five parts pure, pointless absurdity... (woops, my nerdiness is showing!)
What I don't understand is how you feel that a specific Church or Churches in general are trying to gain direct control over Government institutions. Currently there are no Churches I am aware of that decide who can and can't be considered married for legal purposes. I'm not seeing the problem here.
A marriage does not happen solely because the associated government benefits are appealing, but a desire to attain those benefits is the only reason to desire the Government's acknowledgement of your union. Any other reasons for getting married simply aren't pertinent to the issue of whether or not certain partnerships should be Government-condoned marriages. That is why I only care about Government benefits in regards to this issue of Government legalization. There aren't any marriage police running around the country making sure that gay couples aren't living together and calling each other husband and husband or wife and wife. But the Government sure as hell will care once you're trying to attain benefits thay may or may not be due to you.
When we talk of "awarding someone their rights" it makes me wonder on whose or what authority were those rights were taken away in the first place.
The bible is indeed homophobic.
"If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives." (Leviticus 20:13 NAB)
You can find a lot of weird, inconsistent things in the Bible. And many things that are open to varying interpretations. And plenty of things that we have learned as civilization has evolved that are plain wrong.
Here's one rational, tolerant and intelligent Christian's view on the subject--
ironically, Leviticus and Romans were some of the few bible books that my brother enjoyed reading. we were severly restricted, of course. he vividly recalls getting excited when he read this verse:
26 That is why God gave them up to disgraceful sexual appetites, for both their females changed the natural use of themselves into one contrary to nature; 27 and likewise even the males left the natural use of the female and became violently inflamed in their lust toward one another, males with males, working what is obscene and receiving in themselves the full recompense, which was due for their error.
it just goes to show you that church, strict parents and bible training can't corral your mind or imagination. as for me, i never found anything exciting in the bible, but i didn't have a 16-year-old boy's repressed impulses.
What about a 16-year-old girl's repressed impulses?
i took those out in art and writing. plus i just never had a high libido. i don't know why. i'm just one of those people who never found sex all that interesting.
Should men and women have the same rights? Your question seems to be creating some good jokes and the subject matter is ridiculous.
Of course they should - should you have equal rights to gays? Think about that?
For those interested Richard Cohen has helped thousands of people come out of homosexuality at the International Healing Foundation.
If they want to come out of homosexuality, so be it/good for them. If not, that is their right. Jesus refused to judge an adulterer -- surely to God adultery is more widely-recognized as being (and more obviously) wrong than homo-sexuality -- either way, the point is that Jesus said, in regard to this adulterer "Let he is who without sin cast the first stone."
This is disgusting and debasing and the people involved in this are a disgrace. Being gay is not a disease, and a gay man becoming straight is not a 'recovery'. Just bloody leave them alone!
I guess HubPages didn't like this but you can read the Washington Times editorial here
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/200 … czar/?feat
If the Washington Times article is true Kevin Jennings should be fired. However, it's not clear that the Times story is correct. At least Fox News has retracted all or part of its report on Jennings.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/0 … 11734.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/terry-kre … 92303.html
MakeMoney should do a little fact checking before posting innacurate stories from questionable sources like the Washington Times or right wing pundits like Michelle Malkin.
Glad to see questions like this still get a response and some good ones too. My view is that we all have to stop making the gay thing an issue at all. Or the black thing or the Arab thing, or even the red neck thing.
We are all gods children, and we all have to sit up and act properly. Admittedly I may love a bit of discipline more than most but you know what I mean, don’t you sweetie.
One of the parts that was retracted was whether the kid was 15 or 16. The page you posted said he was 16. But this page has an audio of Jennings himself saying he was 15.
http://wthrockmorton.com/2009/06/02/kev … tion-post/
There seems to be a lot that want him gone, including 53 members of Congress.
I guess you'd have to weigh the evidence yourself.
I guess so, and your sources of evidence aren't very impressive. I notice that the link to an innacurate, biased article in the Washington Post is dead. Perhaps because it was innacurate??
No the Washington Times editorial is not dead. HubPages just removed the post about it, possibly because they didn't like the title. Or the content.
The post is not removed. However, a click on the Washington Times link brings a response "Closed to reply." I think that must come from Washington Times. (A right wing "Moonie"-owned paper.
Well I'm not getting "Closed to reply" at the Washington Times editorial. You have to login or register to post a comment. I have not registered, have you? There are 154 comments at this time.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/200 … /comments/
Why should we punish people for liking someone of their own sex? Just because the BIBLE says it's not right? Well, guess what, the Bible also said the earth was created by God in 7 days, and that Adam and Eve were the first human beings.
If people want to be gay, LET THEM BE GAY! Gay people deserve the same rights as us straight have!
I don't think it's a 'want' necessarily..
But, yes they deserve rights. Yes they should be given rights. Yes. Yes. and Yes. It's pretty simple. They are people just like anyone else.
Government should NOT have a say on their rights just because of their sexuality.
I hate how people think the bible is the ultimate truth. It's cool if you believe that personally, but not all of us think so...
I have no idea why sexuality is such a big deal. Everyone deserves the same rights. I swear, people in the future are going to look back on us and think the same way we do about slavery and/or segregation.
the truth is god Jesus the holy spirit human life birth right living holy human truth.
You believe that, fine. I am not going to believe there's an invisible man living on a huge cloud watching my every move, and if I break one of his 10 Golden rules, I'm going to a place filled with fire and hatrid. I don't believe he made the earth in 7 days, and I don't believe Jesus touched people and they healed from their illnesses, if Jesus touched people, Jesus was a pervert. I don't believe Adam and Eve were the first people on earth, because the story goes "Adam and Eve had four sons, three of which killed each other and one ran to all the other people", what other people? Were there any more people? Weren't they the FIRST AND ONLY people there, according to the bible?
If you want a good lie, you read the bible or have a refreshing talk with a priest.
I believe in the Big Bang theory and evolution. You believe yours, I belive mine.
Evangelical Christians Scott Lively, Caleb Lee Brundige and Don Schmierer Sow the Seeds of Hate in Uganda
Hate Begets Hate
Publishhed: January 4, 2010
Uganda’s government, which has a shameful record of discrimination against gay men and lesbians, is now considering legislation that would impose the death sentence for homosexual behavior. The United States and others need to make clear to the Ugandan government that such barbarism is intolerable and will make it an international pariah.
Corruption and repression — including violence against women and children and abuse of prisoners — are rife in Uganda. According to The Times’s Jeffrey Gettleman, officially sanctioned homophobia is particularly acute. Gay Ugandans are tormented with beatings, blackmail, death threats and what has been described as “correctional rape.”
The government’s venom is chilling: “Homosexuals can forget about human rights,” James Nsaba Buturo, who holds the cynically titled position of minister of ethics and integrity, said recently.
What makes this even worse is that three American evangelical Christians, whose teachings about “curing” gays and lesbians have been widely discredited in the United States, helped feed this hatred. Scott Lively, Caleb Lee Brundidge and Don Schmierer gave a series of talks in Uganda last March to thousands of police officers, teachers and politicians in which, according to participants and audio recordings, they claimed that gays and lesbians are a threat to Bible-based family values.
Now the three Americans are saying they had no intention of provoking the anger that, just one month later, led to the introduction of the Anti-Homosexuality Bill of 2009. You can’t preach hate and not accept responsibility for the way that hate is manifested.
We don’t have much hope that they will atone for their acts. But right now the American government, and others, should make clear to Uganda that if this legislation becomes law, it will lose millions of dollars in foreign aid and be shunned globally.
Who are these homophobes?
Scott Lively Wikibio
Don Schmierer's ministry
Caleb Lee Brundige--International Healing Foundation
Should gays/lesbians be afforded equal rights?
Yes, they should !
They're human beings as everybody else.
Something is very wrong with some people, if a difference is made in the open ,for what is done behind closed doors.
and I can't believe this thread is still going on !!!!!
The Rev. Rick Warren participated in the homophobic Uganda mission as well according to this article.
http://www.queerty.com/what-rick-warren … -20100104/
What Rick Warren, Scott Lively + Don Schmierer Did In Uganda Is Nothing New. Here's Why That's Horrifying
Who else feels bad for Scott Lively (pictured), Caleb Lee Brundidge, and Don Schmierer? We sure do! After all, these three American men traveled to Uganda with the noble purpose of spreading the anti-gay gospel, and all they got was a lousy reputation of instigating the country's Anti-Homosexuality Bill. Schmierer, a board member at Exodus International, which advocates conversion therapy says he's been "duped" by Uganda's faith-based power players, who, though no fault of these Americans, took their homophobic messages and turned them into a push to to legally execute gays. But don't bother with the New York Times archaically late news report about these three men who are now on the defensive, claiming their good intentions have been misappropriated in a foreign land.
Because Kapya Kaoma, an Anglican priest for Zambia, and author of the Political Research Associates' October report "Globalizing the Culture Wars: U.S. Conservatives, African Churches and Homophobia," has a much more concrete analysis about how these American hate leaders helped lead Uganda's own gay witch hunt. And how, really, Uganda's situation isn't all that unique.
If they had faced strong opposition, U.S. conservatives might not have been so successful in promoting their homophobic politics. Traditionally, evangelical African churches have been biblically and doctrinally orthodox but socially progressive on such issues as national liberation and poverty, making them natural partners of the politically liberal western churches. But their religious orthodoxy also provides the U.S. Right with an opportunity. Africans resonate with the denunciation of homosexuality as a postcolonial plot; their homophobia is as much an expression of resistance to the West as it is a statement about human sexuality. Similarly campaigns for "family values" in Africa rest on rich indigenous notions of the importance of family and procreation. In Africa, "family" expresses the idea that to be human is to be embedded in community, a concept called ubuntu. African traditional values also value procreation, making those hindering this virtue an enemy of life (see box 2).
Although Rick Warren's involvement in Africa is the most celebrated, and Lively's perhaps the most notorious, they are not the first U.S. conservative evangelicals to influence African policies. Pat Robertson's television show The 700 Club is watched across sub-Saharan Africa. Yet most Africans are not aware that Robertson supported the civil war in Angola and the oppressive White governments of Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) and South Africa. He was one of many U.S. conservative evangelicals, some of whom came to Africa as missionaries in the 1980s, who sided with those White minority governments in their effort to stop the spread of liberation theology. Allied with them was – and is – the Institute on Religion and Democracy (IRD), a U.S. neoconservative group that also supported the White regimes and challenged the National Council of Churches as a group of dangerous Marxists supporting subversion. The group formed in 1981 with the goal of weakening and splitting U.S. mainline denominations in order to block their powerful progressive social witness promoting social and economic justice.
[...] The torrential flow of conservative Christian resources to Africa helps wash away the memory of their alliances with White regimes. Through their extensive communication networks in Africa, social welfare projects, Bible schools, and educational materials, U.S. religious conservatives warn of the dangers of homosexuals and present themselves as the true representatives of U.S. evangelicalism, effectively marginalizing mainline U.S. churches that once had strong relationships on the continent. Right-wing groups have enticed African religious leaders to reject funding from mainline denominations – which require documentation of how the money is spent – and instead to accept funds from conservatives, further empowering the U.S. evangelical viewpoint while giving local bishops the opportunity to line their pockets.
To reach Africans, U.S. evangelicals now broadcast their Christian Broadcasting Network (CBN) and Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN) throughout sub-Saharan Africa. Although generally disinterested in helping poor Blacks in their own backyard, in Africa U.S. White conservatives driven to convert the continent dominate social services, run orphanages, schools and universities, and provide loans. These conservatives and evangelical charities like World Vision, Solar Light for Africa, and the IRD-founded Five Talents use their presence in Africa to address the question of homosexuality from a conservative albeit misleading position. In this way, almost all U.S. conservative Christians working in Africa are responsible for exporting homophobia to Africa.
Indeed, Africans do not distinguish between moderate evangelicals in World Vision and Hard Right figures like Scott Lively. For them, the term "evangelical" conveys the notion of Protestant Christianity as a whole, without the substantive distinctions made by U.S. religious groups. And U.S. conservative evangelicals support diverse Anglican, Presbyterian and Pentecostal church leadership in Africa with which they share no denominational tie. For instance, the Providence Christian Reformed Church in Holland, Michigan is not an Episcopal congregation yet it provides funding to the Anglican Church of Uganda. Some U.S. support goes directly to salaries, and has since 1998, as Reverend Aaron Mwesigyi of the Ugandan archibishop's office explained.
The evidence is damning. This is about the globalization of irrational fears and hatred, and to believe the phenomenon, and danger, is limited to Uganda is to sell U.S. conservatives short. These are brilliant, brilliant people. Continues Kaoma:
Despite historical evidence of homosexuality in Africa long before the Europeans arrived, most conservative African religious and political leaders now view homosexuality as a Western export, and a form of imperialism and neocolonialism. And of course, U.S. conservatives exploit and encourage this belief.
Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni, whose wife is a close ally of Rick Warren, warned, "It is a danger not only to the believers but to the whole of Africa. It is bad if our children become complacent and think that people who are not in order are alright… These foreigners should go and practice their nonsense elsewhere."
Because Africans are sensitive to neocolonialism, the conservative claim that homosexuality is part of a "Western agenda" gives African church leaders ammunition to demand greater influence and power in the affairs of the church. Denouncing homosexuality is Africa's way of claiming power over the western world. In this regard, when Africans claim that homosexuality is un-African, they are pointing to a politics of postcolonial identity.
This history gives the struggle greater depth and tenacity, and for that reason, African involvement in U.S. church issues will continue. Moreover, rejecting what is claimed to be an imposition from the West gives them power both within the African context and with American conservatives of all persuasions.
Ironically enough, although American conservatives repeatedly accuse progressives of being imperialist, it is their dealings with Africa that are extremely imperialistic. Their flow of funds creates a form of clientelism, with the expectation that the recipients toe an ideological line. They put words into the mouths of their African church allies, even writing or rewriting their anticolonial statements to reflect U.S. conservative concerns.
Go read the whole thing.
I don't see why not...
by Kharisma1980 5 years ago
What is your opinion on the issue of gay/lesbian relationships and gay marriage?
by Andrew Spacey 6 years ago
Same sex marriage - Equality or Not for gay people?Ireland recently voted 68% to 32% by referendum to allow same sex marriage, the first country in the world to do so. Is this true democracy at work? How do you view the decision - is it good for a whole country to be given the chance to vote on...
by WORD ADDICT 6 years ago
Don't you agree that gay and lesbian union should be called something else other than marriage?
by WayneAnsell 7 years ago
Should the government allow same sex marriage?
by Texasbeta 11 years ago
Yesterday, the celebrations began...NY has approved gay marriage. The latest polls tend to show the most Americans support the right...what about on here?
by Holle Abee 10 years ago
Is he for it, or against it? In 2008, he said he was against it. Now Axelrod says the POTUS is for it. I'm really curious. Have his views evolved?
Copyright © 2023 The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of The Arena Platform, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
Copyright © 2023 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective owners.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|