[Closed] The church and homosexuality

I've been particularly shocked by some of the things I've heard about gay marriage

Do they think kids can catch 'gay' then?

Having not bothered about clicking link to watch video clip.

I will say this, how can the church be against gay marriage when the church officials overlook their lackys who deem it ok to inappropriately commit acts with young boys.

Now the only reason in my logical mind opposing the gay sector is the sexual bit of their relationship. But that,s my opinion of course.

The church seriously needs to have a hard look at what actually a gay relationship/marriage is and the grounds upon their judgement is impaired.

Does it bug me that I see two gay men chatting when sipping a brew of espresso at the cafe, NO!

Does it bug me that I see two gay men kissing when " " " " " ". A LiTTLE YES.

It does however bug me, the thought of two men having ting ting together, YES!

But once again, that is purely my opinion and of course should not be construed as anything else.

For what it's worth, stw folk, you can sleep easy at night with your same sex partners ;d

Only just watched the vid.
Nice one. 🙂

Can any of the Xtians on here explain why God doesn't like gayers? I mean is he really that bothered?

emsz, no, He probably isn't, however the last time I replied on one of these gay/christian threads I offered to send you and anyone else who was interested an essay I wrote about what the Bible says about homosexuality and marriage. I guess though that no one really wants to hear a liberal Christian view about homosexuality for some reason.

Not all Christians are anti-gay or even anti gay marriage, and as a Christian minister I completely agree with much of the criticism of Christianity on this thread. I heartily recommend 'A new kind of Christianity' by Brian McLaren for those who want to see what a more liberal and relevant Christian faith might look like. And the offer of reading my little essay is still open!

Middle lane hogging homophobic christian motorists on a sunday.

It's ok, they're just moving in a mysterious way.

Can any of the Xtians on here explain why God doesn't like gayers? I mean is he really that bothered?

Ooh, ooh, miss, I know, I know!

It's the same argument as the anti-contraception one; the religious know that the best way of making new believers is procreation, contraception and gay relationships preclude this.

It's the same argument as the anti-contraception one; the religious know that the best way of making new believers is procreation, contraception and gay relationships preclude this.

Just as a quick clarification, that view (anti-contraception) is purely a Catholic one, not a Christian one as a whole.

And the offer of reading my little essay is still open!

If it isn't full on thesis length, then please could I have a look? My e-mail is in my profile.

Could do with some ammunition for when I see my parents. They are a bit full-on X-tians and still think Homosexuality is a disease that can be cured! 🙄

speed12 - Member

Just as a quick clarification, that view (anti-contraception) is purely a Catholic one, not a Christian one as a whole.

Sorry, but that's just not true.

Just a quick [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_views_on_contraception ]Wiki [/url]search shows that before 1900, almost all branches of Christianity were against birth control.

Wasn't me that wrote that Rusty S, it was speed12.

almost all branches of Christianity were against birth control.

but that's because

Peyote - Member

Wasn't me that wrote that Rusty S, it was speed12.

Sorry mate, no idea what happened there!

They are a bit full-on X-tians and still think Homosexuality is a disease that can be cured!

Cancer and heart disease are diseases, being gay isnt, its not something you catch,inherit or can get rid of with anti biotics or drugs,its a life style,a way of life.

Just a quick Wiki search shows that before 1900, almost all branches of Christianity were against birth control

A quick [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_Offences_Act_1967 ]wiki [/url]search shows that before 1967 male homosexual acts were illegal in the uk

Thankfully, things have moved a long way since then. I'd love to know what my children really think about it now as it probably takes a generation to get really get rid of old ideas learned as we were growing up

A quick wiki search shows that before 1967 male homosexual acts were illegal in the uk

Thankfully, things have moved a long way since then.

Not if the Church had had their way.
Secular society has moved on - the churches have not.
The acceptance of reason undermines their authority.

If you convince me that there is no underlying purpose to our existence, then there's very little rationale for me doing anything 'nice' or 'charitable'

I struggle with long sentences, but wow.

The rationale is that it's nice to be nice to other people. Do you really think that's invalid without a higher being instructing you?

Do you think atheists are incapable of generosity and compassion?

Even more worrying, if God was not telling you to be nice to other people would you stop?

I do things for people because on a fundamental level it makes me happy. Not because I'm told to.

Not if the Church had had their way.
Secular society has moved on - the churches have not.
The acceptance of reason undermines their authority

You're correct, the church hasn't moved on and they recognise that there are a whole bunch of conflicts within the church caused by it. Part of the problem though (I believe) is that the church also sees itself as trying to be a place of stability in times of change which means they will always be behind current thought. Another aspect is that the way that states behave is changing (see the changes between 60, 70s and now) and they are also trying to see where they sit in the new order. This particular question is just one part of all of that

But you're right - it looks like they are behind and out of touch even though many people inside the church are right up to speed (and may are not as miketually found 🙁 )

I think you will find the problem is they have a book of rules and morals written by ill educated [ by our level of knowledge now] folk thousands of years ago using their moral code and understanding of the world and universe.

they cannot possibly move with the times and stay true to the book.
Of course it is outdated its very old.

Can i have the essay e-mail in profile

Leffeboy, thanks for the reply.

The problem the Churches face with homosexuality is a difficult one.
Western liberal society has pretty much come to terms with the fact that prejudice on the grounds of sexuality is wrong.
The states that have agreed to legalise against this prejudice have shown that allowing gay people to live openly has not resulted in the breakdown of society as people had feared and must have increased the sum total of human happiness 😀

Ok so maybe I am reading some of it.

"I have no rational basis or evidence for my views. However, I demand that for the purposes of this discussion you ignore that and confine yourself to polite disagreement.

So what if he doesn't have any rational evidence? What are you, the thought police? How is it any of your business?

You have a moral obligation (humanist or religious) not to piss people off. Slagging off their beliefs will do that.

I think you will find the problem is they have a book of rules and morals written by ill educated [ by our level of knowledge now] folk thousands of years ago using their moral code and understanding of the world and universe.

Yep. And there are two ways to approach it now (as we know from all of these discussions). One way is to say that as soon as a single bit is no longer applied then it all collapses (no more tasty little owls to eat)

The other way says that the book wasn't physically written by God but messages were passed to individuals and you have to work out what was meant, how it was interpreted at the time and how to apply it now.

If you think (as many do) that the last statement means that the church is making it up as they go along then yes, it all looks like nonsense. If you take the view that the church is trying to move ahead as best they can, keeping stability but also learning as mankind learns then you take a different viewpoint.

If you take the view that the church is trying to move ahead as best they can, keeping stability but also learning as mankind learns then you take a different viewpoint.

The problem is that from the outside this looks very much like a bunch of charlatans desperately trying to hold onto an audience which has realised how the trick is done.

I think most people understand the Bible as being the work of man - how much of that is based on God's word depends on your position of course.

And given that it's written by men, their interpretation (and even errancy) is open to your own interpretation. Or that of the church authorities, depending on your denomination 🙂

The problem is that from the outside this looks very much like a bunch of charlatans desperately trying to hold onto an audience which has realised how the trick is done

Not to me. I think you'd have to be cynical and quite poorly historically informed to think that!

So what if he doesn't have any rational evidence? What are you, the thought police? How is it any of your business?

Kaesae would love to explain physics to you and the cosmic forces at work in the universe ...of you go and respect his views that have no rational evidence. 😕

Its obvious something with proof and evidence trumps an act of faith.

You have a moral obligation (humanist or religious) not to piss people off. Slagging off their beliefs will do that.

Kaesae would love to explain physics to you and the cosmic forces at work in the universe ...of you go and respect his views that have no rational evidence

I respect his right to hold them. Makes no difference to me if he's wrong or not. I'm not one of the tomato-throwers on those threads!

Will telling someone gay they cannot get married do this?

It certainly will.

molgrips - Member

I think most people understand the Bible as being the work of man

Really?

What makes you think this?
Evangelism and biblical literalism is one of the fastest growing branches of Christianity.

Islam, in it's current, ' between reformations' state is also widely based on literalism.

Talking to Christians, and the fact that the church has evolved so much over the years.

Evangelism and biblical literalism is one of the fastest growing branches of Christianity.

What makes you think that?

The problem is that from the outside this looks very much like a bunch of charlatans desperately trying to hold onto an audience which has realised how the trick is done.

It can from the inside as well. Part of it depends who you are listening to and part of it depends what part of the picture you see. When Rowan Williams became archbishop I had huge hopes that the church would embrace homosexuality given that he had written 'The Body's Grace' not long before. However that never happened, partly because it wasn't for him as an individual to decide - he had to bring the whole church with him 🙁

is open to your own interpretation. Or that of the church authorities, depending on your denomination

and that's the other thing. It can be easy to imagine the view of the church as being the view of all christians but it really isn't. Individuals can move faster than the church can and in the same way as individual ideas on what is acceptable in sexual relationships will move faster that the state (1967) individual christians write and influence opinion faster than the church authorities respond.

I respect his right to hold them.

It certainly will.

Your choice but which physics do you believe in? rational or irrational

Just to throw another mentos in our coke bottle, I'll be interested in the report from this:

[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-19870036 ]Big Bang and religion mixed in Cern debate[/url]
Nothing available yet though

Your choice but which physics do you believe in?

Since when was this about me?

so pick which you choose to support the rights of gay people to be treated as equals or the right of some people to discriminate based on a book/religion

Are you asking me what I believe?

ah the molly show
as you were.

Evangelism and biblical literalism is one of the fastest growing branches of Christianity.

What makes you think that?

Oh, every single article I've read on the growth of Christianity over the last ten or fifteen years?

oh ffs. It's about equality plain and simple. why a couple of guys that love each other can't be treated by the government or society like a "normal" heterosexual couple? what's the problem? If It's some kind of christian ethos? get stuffed! that stuff is too old to matter and care about anyway.. let'em marry what da hell the whole world will explode!!

Ok so maybe I am reading some of it.

"I have no rational basis or evidence for my views. However, I demand that for the purposes of this discussion you ignore that and confine yourself to polite disagreement."

So what if he doesn't have any rational evidence? What are you, the thought police? How is it any of your business?

You have a moral obligation (humanist or religious) not to piss people off. Slagging off their beliefs will do that.

I agree that the holding of any particular belief isn't anyone elses buisness, however I note that you are conveninently ignoring the second sentence which demands not respect for a belief but that it not be criticised. Sorry but no that's not how life works. People are free to hold whatever racist, mysoginistic, homophobic beliefs they want; I for one will criticise them for it. No belief system should be considered beyond criticism. Not yours and certainly not mine.

Whilst I agree that deliberately setting out to offend isn't a particularly nice thing to do, no-one has the the right to not be offended.

Are all of us arguing about Christianity on here Bible scholars with years of study at theological college (which would thus mean we know what we're talking about), or are we doing what blokes always do which is just relating our opinion without really understanding anything about the subject matter?

Could you let us know which subjects we are allowed to discuss without years of study?

Are all of us arguing about Christianity on here Bible scholars with years of study at theological college (which would thus mean we know what we're talking about), or are we doing what blokes always do which is just relating our opinion without really understanding anything about the subject matter?

You're question implies there are only two categories: academically educated and ignorant! I'm not academically educated (in Theology anyway), but was brought up in a CoE, Anglican household so I think I do understand something about the subject matter, while recognising the limitiations of my experience and knowledge.

I hope that clarifies my own position, if not every other contributor to this thread!

My eldest son keeps talking about getting married / civil partnership, etc. I am entirely against this, though not because of my religion - it's because he expects me to pay for it all, and I know he'll be planning the full Baz Lurmanesque thing, probably wanting a big hollowed out elephant covered in sequins singing 'born this way' or something. And his boyfriend still insists on hogging the remote control - bastards, the pair of 'em.

Are all of us arguing about Christianity on here Bible scholars with years of study at theological college (which would thus mean we know what we're talking about), or are we doing what blokes always do which is just relating our opinion without really understanding anything about the subject matter?

I went to a church youth group from 14 to 18. I attended church most Sundays for about a decade. My wife is a school chaplain and a christian. So, I know a bit.

I know a doctor of theology, who is now pretty high up in training new clergy, who is incredibly liberal. I know other vicar who will pray for a car parking space. And another who believes homosexuality is a sin and set up an anti-gay marriage petition. I know another who is a divorced woman; some in the church would think she shouldn't have been allowed to remarry.

The people who are least likely to agree on what the bible says or means are theologians.

Ironically, the christian with a theology Phd I know is pro gay marriage, while the christian with a physics Phd is against.

All these people who pray, ever ask for a refund ?

Could you let us know which subjects we are allowed to discuss without years of study?

Yes, fair enough.

What I was sarcastically trying to imply was that we all arrive at very strong opinions of things that we don't actually know much about, other than bits and pieces we've picked up 2nd or 3rd hand over the years.

We wouldn't choose a house or car on such flimsy knowledge but most people seem happy to write off religion as man-made nonsense without ever making a proper effort to find out what it's really all about for themselves, first hand.

Anyhow, this is a bit of a digression from the original thread subject.

If someone these days came out with half the crap written in the bible they'd be sectioned or put on Jeremy Kyle.

"Yeah I got pregnant right, but I ain't never had no sex or owt. I'm a proper virgin me."

"I was at the seaside and some dude made the sea part and then just walked straight through it, mental as ****. Then another bloke started to walk on the water."

"The bloke down the street is worried about global warming so has built a massive **** off boat and is going to get 2 of every animal in the world plus all the food and stick them in his boat for a month and a half and look after them with all there individual needs and then release them all back in there correct locations. What a bloke."

Etc....

And yet people still live there lives unquestioningly following this book and what they were told to think when they were kids.

- bastards, the pair of 'em.

god hates those as well, apparently.

ah the molly show

Wot?

I note that you are conveninently ignoring the second sentence which demands not respect for a belief but that it not be criticised. Sorry but no that's not how life works

I disagree.

I could believe in the flying spaghetti monster. I do not have to justify it to you, and you are not entitled to charge in slagging me off cos it makes you feel big and clever, when it upsets me.

If a constructive discussion comes about then fine, it may be discussed, and criticised, as long as it's not acrimonious.

I don't believe it's ok to just start slagging something off that is held dear to other people. It's a sensitive and deeply personal subject, whether you like it or not, and I think that deserves respect.

Obviously, that does not give the religious free reign to start attacking the rest of us. If they do that then they are asking for an argument. However, people on STW are not, so you have to be careful to criticise the actions of those who are attacking gays, without criticising those nice and understanding religious folk who are reading your posts.

We wouldn't choose a house or car on such flimsy knowledge but most people seem happy to write off religion as man-made nonsense without ever making a proper effort to find out what it's really all about for themselves, first hand.

Which religion should we start with? And what flavour? For how many years should we make an effort to experience it, first hand?

I'm going to start with a decade of early-American puritanism, followed by three years following the strict religious rules of the Amazon crocodile people. Thankfully, there's [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_religions_and_spiritual_traditions ]a list[/url], though presumably only one of these is right?

Or I could, you know, be rational.