LGBTQ+ Rights and Religion

That's true, and it's not confined to this particular issue. It's the discourse version of Gresham's Law—"bad rhetoric drives out good." However, we've pretty much agreed as a nation to endure the former's BS in the cause of ensuring the latter's liberties, should they need them in a pinch. And when both sides in an argument are so self-consciously engaged in dragging the Overton Window towards their own direction and away from their enemies', even worthy voices (including religious voices) can eventually find themselves very badly in need of them.

edited 8th Jan '14 8:56:57 AM by Jhimmibhob

"She was the kind of dame they write similes about." —Pterodactyl Jones

For the record, the bible is very clear on what you're supposed to do if someone else is being hurt by another—you're supposed to stand up for them. You might argue that homosexuals don't get the same protection, but frankly speaking, anyone who's so much as made themselves a cold cut sandwich on Saturday is a sinner, and it's not really our job to judge in the first place. Standing idly while someone else takes pleasure in the suffering of others is wrong, or at least according to that God fellow.

But then, compassion and forgiveness and love are difficult. Expecting anyone in this day and age to stand by such ideals might be asking too much.

edited 8th Jan '14 9:58:22 AM by Rem

Fire, air, water, earth...legend has it that when these four elements are gathered, they will form the fifth element...boron.

A: You should not be jerks.

B: 100% agreement on that point. No one should be a jerk.

A: So I'm going to go do this thing that B disagrees with.

B: I disagree with that.

A: Jerk.

edited 8th Jan '14 10:04:03 AM by Soban

Everyone who ever harassed me with religion as their motivator said they did it out of love and didn't want me to burn in hell.

Gabrael was right in saying how different people can use the same bible to justify their actions. And with tens of thousands of versions of the bible out there that only makes it easier.

We can argue until the cows come home if they are moral or amoral, following Christianity or not, but until these specific people stop feeling justified or the moderate majority stops just letting it happen, then nothing will change.

"Oh wait. She doesn't have a... Forget what I said, don't catch the preggo. Just wear her hat." - Question Marc

I personally don't mind if you consider homosexual dalliances sinful. Hell, I don't even mind if you consider being of a different race to be sinful. However, harming others due to your beliefs is unacceptable, and if the justification is hypocritical, all the worse.

In short, if someone is doing something wrong but only hurting themselves, you're free to think whatever you want.

Fire, air, water, earth...legend has it that when these four elements are gathered, they will form the fifth element...boron.

Rem, I agree. However, there seems to be a view that "Hurtful." Includes telling you that I think it's wrong. That is what I'd like to address. There are a zillion things that people do to hurt homosexuals. I agree that they are wrong. My problem is that it seems to me that there is a feeling that if I even speak my mind on the issue, then I am doing something to hurt you.

edited 8th Jan '14 11:01:40 AM by Soban

Uh... "sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me" has been proven wrong. <_< That's the whole point to verbal, psychological abuse.

edited 8th Jan '14 11:04:39 AM by Euodiachloris

"I believe that your actions are sufficiently heinous that the creator of the universe, who is pretty much the nicest guy you'll ever meet, feels that once you die it will be necessary to throw you in a furnace where your soul will be destroyed and/or you will burn forever."

This is basically what you are saying.

It's one thing to say "homosexuality is against my religion" if some guy hits on you (if you're a guy). It's better to say "I'm straight", but whatever. It is another thing entirely to go up to someone who's gay and tell them that their lifestyle is wrong. If someone went up to you, Soban, and said that Christianity is definitely wrong from their point of view, would that make you really care about what they say?

Like, for example, if a Gnostic comes up to you and says that you should become Gnostic, because to them, the Christian god is a lunatic, would that really make you want to abandon Christianity? Any time you say "you're living your life wrong" you are antagonizing them, even if it is legitimately for their own good.

edited 8th Jan '14 11:15:17 AM by Zendervai

Not Three Laws compliant.

It depends how and when you say something. On a funeral I don't't go around procclaiming my atheism and that I don't belief the deceased is in Heaven now and that they were deluding themselves for believing that. And I certainly don't insult them as morons. Only when asked directly do I state my beliefs.

And in other situations, when people ask you to be left alone, you stop. You don't go on and harass them further.

x5 Let me put it this way: There is a chance that telling someone you consider them to be a sinner due to their sexual preferences will hurt their feelings. Perhaps this is because they're overly sensitive, or because they've heard it so often, or because you're unintentionally coming off as a lot more aggressive than you believe—regardless, it can possibly hurt someone else.

But sometimes, we have to hurt others in order to do the right thing. I understand that. So what do you think happens when you tell someone they're a sinner?

If they're not a Christian, they probably don't care, and even if they do try to fight their sexualities, they're probably sinning in a hundred other small ways as well, so you've wasted their time. If they are a Christian...actually, I don't know how that works. Does God forgive you if you're trying hard? Most of you are unrepentant sinners by your own measurement anyways, but I assume you believe God cuts you some slack or something.

Anyway, the point is that you need to think before speaking your mind. If you believe that by doing so you'll save the listener's soul and send them to Heaven, great. If not, it probably isn't worth it.

Fire, air, water, earth...legend has it that when these four elements are gathered, they will form the fifth element...boron.

There is another problem:

Very rarely is there ever a situation where anyone needs to express what is or isn't against their religion. The average person doesn't need to go around announcing they believe homosexuality is a sin, abomination, whatever. The fact that so many people feel the need to comment on what should be a private issue is telling of the hostility and "us vs. them" drama more aggressive individuals keep pushing.

I don't agree with a lot of faiths or ideologies. But I don't feel the need to bring it up, make public statements, or bring it up in someone's face should they be part of the group I disagree with.

There just isn't any call for it.

"Oh wait. She doesn't have a... Forget what I said, don't catch the preggo. Just wear her hat." - Question Marc

Glasgow Catholic adoption society wins its appeal against its charitable status having been stripped because they refuse to place kids with same-sex couples.

Placed in this thread because of the obvious religious basis for this. That is a seriously backward, disappointing decision :(

My name is Addy. Please call me that instead of my username.

It's rather telling that the agency refers to the threat as being "forced to close" rather than, you know, forced to change and stop discriminating. They'd rather close than stop being bigoted, to the point they don't even consider it.

"And as long as a sack of shit is not a good thing to be, chivalry will never die."

Question, would you rather close your adoption business or place children with families that you believe to be abusive?

If someone thinks LGBT families are abusive then they are a bigot with no place in the raising of children whatsoever.

Schild und Schwert der Partei

According to the bible, homosexual married couples are living in blatant unrepentant sin. It's not exact, but close enough for the analogy. Answer the question, would you place children in families you thought would not treat them right and leave them damaged?

edited 3rd Feb '14 3:42:12 AM by Soban

Embezzlers and interest-charging bank owners are living in totally unrepentant sin. Yet, they can adopt...

Presumably then you would be ok with someone refusing to let religious couples adopt because they feel indoctrinating a child to be harmful?

@Euodiachloris, embezzlers tend to be in jail or felons and to my knowledge people don't usually place in those environments either. There are details to charging interest that are not appropriate to this thread.

You also failed to answer the question. Would you put a kid in an environment that you believe to be harmful in the long term to the kid?

Indoctrination is a loaded word. Suffice to say that if they felt that religion was so harmful, and they only placed with atheist families, I've got to give them that right.

edited 3rd Feb '14 4:15:11 AM by Soban

Creative tax avoidance is "embezzling" — yet plenty of people aren't behind bars for it, mate. And, some see it as a virtue, not a sin. I stand by what I said.

Embezzlement is the act of dishonestly withholding assets for the purpose of conversion (theft) of such assets by one or more individuals to whom such assets have been entrusted, to be held and/or used for other purposes.

I'm not sure what you mean with the tax law. However, legally navigating the tax code to the benefit of the client is their job.

Your also trying to dodge the question.

edited 3rd Feb '14 4:24:24 AM by Soban

No, I'm not. Embezzlement is rather frowned on in the Bible, not so? "Render unto Caesar..." etc, etc. Not to mention whole parts of Leviticus going on about what makes a justified use of interest and what doesn't... and how you're supposed to pay your tithes and taxes. <_< Shifting things about to look as if you've got less than you do or juggling your finances to take advantage of arcane loopholes to circumvent the spirit of all that? Well, what else do you call siphoning money away from a collective pocket by whatever means for your own personal gain than "embezzlement"? It's what the word means. :|

How is this somehow less heinous than being gay when it comes to stuff like adoption? I'd think teaching kids that it's OK to try not pay tax and to be a selfish git in general is bad for society, let alone the kids. <_<

edited 3rd Feb '14 5:01:10 AM by Euodiachloris

"Embezzlement is rather frowned on in the Bible, not so? "Render unto Ceaser..." etc, etc. Not to mention whole parts of Leviticus going on about what makes a justified use of interest and what doesn't... and how you're supposed to pay your tithes and taxes"

Ok.

"Shifting things about to look as if you've got less than you do or juggling your finances to take advantage of arcane loopholes to circumvent the spirit of all that?"

If it's done in a legal and approved manner, no. I'm going to go back to what I already said, embezzlers tend to be in jail or felons and to my knowledge people don't usually place in those environments either. I personally don't see anything wrong with using the established rules to maximize my outcome as long as I don't break the law in doing so. It'a all a part of rendering to Ceaser what is Ceaser's.

"you call siphoning money away from a collective pocket by whatever means for your own personal gain than "embezzlement"?"

If you mean, illegal by whatever sure. However, if someone is following the rules as best they can doing the shifting, no, I don't.

However, we have gotten somewhat off topic.

"How is this somehow less heinous than being gay when it comes to stuff like adoption?"

It's not.

My position is that homosexual actions is sin. Putting a kid with unrepentant sinners is a bad idea. It's much the same reason you don't put kids with gangsters and people who can't support them. I'm sure that gangsters and people who can't support another kid can be great parents too. However, we agree that putting a kid with gangsters is going to result in the kid picking up very detrimental habits and parents that can't support a kid is not a great idea as well.

I've answered your question, now answer mine. Should I have to put a kid into an environment that I believe to be harmful to the kid in the long term?

edited 3rd Feb '14 5:16:45 AM by Soban

That depends on what basis you have for believing the environment harmful. I may believe that being raised with strictly conservative Christian parents is harmful for a child in the long term, but I wouldn't be able to refuse them adoption.