Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In general we're in agreement. However, I disagree that being gay is never a choice. I am gay and I have always believe it was something learned in my case. I object to the idea that it's 100% genetic.
I am not gay. You are so you would know better than me, but how can you tell where that line between genetics and choice might lie? It would seem to me that if I had gay inclinations, at some point I would feel that acting on those inclinations was a choice. Not all that different from when I reached puberty and started to make the choice of acting on my inclinations with regard to my attraction toward women.
Could it all be genetics and that we are all somewhat confused about what is a choice about that and what actually is not?
Intuitively it seems like there'd be some sort of bell curve and most people wouldn't be near enough one end of the scale for them to have no significant same-sex attraction. I am not familiar with research on the topic, but I have noticed anecdotally that e.g. my stepdaughter (now in her late 20s) takes sexual orientation and gender fluidity as a matter of course and has friends at various places on both the Kinsey Scale (which is what we're talking about here) as well as on the (to my mind more questionable) "I feel more (fe)male today so I think that's how I'll dress and act" spectrum.
There's something to be said for knowing your role and society's expectations and to know where you stand with others (AKA:"making up your mind") ... I am not sure how society would even work in practice if everyone were "gender fluid". That said ... it's not my problem or my place to tell people how to think or feel in that regard. I will be moldering in the grave before it's a practical problem, likely.
Are we going to have these issues and problems when we're moldering in the grave? I'm hoping no, though personally, none of this about fluidity is a problem for me. That people feel and do as they decide appropriate is all fine and dandy with me as long as they don't affect others in any negative way. Also with regard to the challenges they may face as a result, I am sympathetic, but we've all got to deal with whatever challenges our life path may include. Forced upon us or by choice, again no matter.
The problem with characterizations such as O'Darby's about LGBTQ people is that they don't come from actually knowing any such people, but from seeing the worst of the Pride events, parades, etc., which draw out all the whackos and people who want to put themselves on display.
In fact, he is doing exactly what he's claiming other people are doing by characterizing Christians as a bunch of judgmental Bible-thumpers. The loudest ones are, the ones with TV shows and news coverage are, but probably most Christians are busy living their own lives and not worrying too much about everyone else.
Most gay people I know are kind of low-key and geeky. You're not going to see them dressed up in wild outfits and performing sex acts on the street. Some are engineers, lawyers, other businesspeople. I do know a guy who is a dog groomer, if you need a stereotype, but he's married and I know them only because they go to my friend's church.
The guys who got married in the church I last attended were a law-school professor and an actor who had some minor roles in his youth and now works as a dispatcher for the county senior bus service. Wild and crazy guys, not.
A gay woman I know has risen quite high in the public sector engineering world. In fact, I can say that about two other women engineers I know. Very geeky, all of 'em. They get excited about things like bridges, not Pride parades.
The problem with characterizations such as O'Darby's about LGBTQ people is that they don't come from actually knowing any such people, but from seeing the worst of the Pride events, parades, etc., which draw out all the whackos and people who want to put themselves on display.
In fact, he is doing exactly what he's claiming other people are doing by characterizing Christians as a bunch of judgmental Bible-thumpers. The loudest ones are, the ones with TV shows and news coverage are, but probably most Christians are busy living their own lives and not worrying too much about everyone else.
Most gay people I know are kind of low-key and geeky. You're not going to see them dressed up in wild outfits and performing sex acts on the street. Some are engineers, lawyers, other businesspeople. I do know a guy who is a dog groomer, if you need a stereotype, but he's married and I know them only because they go to my friend's church.
The guys who got married in the church I last attended were a law-school professor and an actor who had some minor roles in his youth and now works as a dispatcher for the county senior bus service. Wild and crazy guys, not.
A gay woman I know has risen quite high in the public sector engineering world. In fact, I can say that about two other women engineers I know. Very geeky, all of 'em. They get excited about things like bridges, not Pride parades.
Some of us do have plenty of firsthand experience with "LGBTQ" people and know many of them personally.
Suffice it to say, there's a lot you simply don't know.
The problem with characterizations such as O'Darby's about LGBTQ people is that they don't come from actually knowing any such people, but from seeing the worst of the Pride events, parades, etc., which draw out all the whackos and people who want to put themselves on display.
In fact, he is doing exactly what he's claiming other people are doing by characterizing Christians as a bunch of judgmental Bible-thumpers. The loudest ones are, the ones with TV shows and news coverage are, but probably most Christians are busy living their own lives and not worrying too much about everyone else.
Most gay people I know are kind of low-key and geeky. You're not going to see them dressed up in wild outfits and performing sex acts on the street. Some are engineers, lawyers, other businesspeople. I do know a guy who is a dog groomer, if you need a stereotype, but he's married and I know them only because they go to my friend's church.
The guys who got married in the church I last attended were a law-school professor and an actor who had some minor roles in his youth and now works as a dispatcher for the county senior bus service. Wild and crazy guys, not.
A gay woman I know has risen quite high in the public sector engineering world. In fact, I can say that about two other women engineers I know. Very geeky, all of 'em. They get excited about things like bridges, not Pride parades.
True. If O’Darby ran into me in person, I think they’d be thrown for a loop if they knew it was me.
I dress stereotypically feminine, I only wear maxi skirts and dresses when I wear dresses/skirts. I’m quiet and shy, traits conservatives love to see in women. I don’t drink, I don’t do drugs, I don’t party, I don’t go to bars/clubs, I am not promiscuous, I don’t talk about “dirty†things and I don’t show any sign of being bi in public.
I am not the picture of depravity, I blend in all too well in my hyper-Evangelical area. Even has people joke I belong in a conservative Christian university because I dress like it.
BTW, TRUE depravity to me is sexual assault and stuff like that. There is no depravity in being LGBT. We just want to live our lives. I didn’t choose my sexual orientation! Don’t tread on me. (Intentionally used because the people I see flying that flag the most seem to love taking away my rights).
Google tells me "just a bunch of semnatics" is "a common retort people use when arguing their point. What they mean is that their argument or opinion is more valid than the other person's." As I said in another post, this is my fundamental objection to your posts. You do seem to assume your opinion is inherently more valid than that of anyone who disagrees with you, as though your opinion should be the self-evident default opinion of any reasonable person.
What I choose to believe is indeed a matter of judgment on my part, a judgment and conviction that the Bible and Christianity are where ultimate Truth is to be found. Both the OT and NT characterize sexual immorality, incluiding homosexuality, as sinful. I'm not making any independent judgment about homosexuality. I simply accept that it and some of my own proclivities are sinful because this is part and parcel of my belief that the Bible is God's Word. Unlike some Christians for whom the Bible is just a Chinese menu of teachings they may or may not choose to accept, an orthodox Christian is not free to say "I believe the OT and NT are simply wrong on this issue - I don't think homosexuality is sinful at all." The Chinese menu approach eventually eviscerates Christianity of any claim to Truth.
I understand your viewpoint, but it seems to me your thinking is muddled or at least premised on the notion that your opinion is self-evidently more valid than mine. Let's examine some of your statements:
"You don't need to judge anyone or play God but you certainly do by recognizing the Bible as the truth of these matters." Well, yes, we orthodox Christians do "recognize the Bible as the truth of these matters." You obviously don't. Fair enough, but why is our position inherently less valid than yours? As stated, it isn't a matter of us judging or playing God but simply of accepting the teachings of a religion we regard as ultimate Truth. By suggesting we shouldn't recognize the Bible as the truth, what are you saying except that you regard our religion as false and think we should follow your lead?
"If you don't want to celebrate something just don't, but why get in the way of those who do want to celebrate that something? Or think negatively about it. Just let others be is all. Stop this kind of anti-gay propaganda shrouded by the likes of the Bible. No matter what you believe or what book you choose for guidance. It is just wrong to treat other people the way you suggest for the reasons you do." I have never had any discussion, let alone a confrontation, about homosexuality with any homosexual. Never. Not a word. What is the "anti-gay propaganda" you think I should "stop"? Should I stop believing the biblical teachings because you disagree with them? Show me in any post where I have suggested "treating other people" in an objectionable way. When you say "it is just wrong" you reveal the fundamental flaw in your thinking. To accept the biblical teaching on homosexuality is "just wrong" because ... why? Because you disagree with it, and your opinion is self-evidently more valid?
"You explain you don't believe anything that can be at the expense of what the Bible 'clearly' teaches. Sure seems to me that anyone who wants to consider 'Jesus' overarching message' should not believe anything that can be at the expense of that message." To the woman taken in adultery, Jesus said "Go and sin no more," not "Adultery really isn't a sin in my book." The clear biblical position is that homosexuality is a sin. We can be 100% confident this was and is Jesus' position if He is who orthodox Christians believe Him to be. Jesus' overarching message was mercy and compassion toward sinners, not eradicating all notions of sin. There is no inconsistency in believing the biblical teaching that homosexuality is sinful while treating homosexuals with the same compassion Jesus showed toward all sinners. Orthodox Christians do not have the freedom to "not believe" what the Bible clearly teaches; that's the Chinese menu approach that ultimately renders Christianity unrecognizable.
"Clearly your quote promotes the same sort of thinking. Let's not be so open minded that we become 'tolerant of sin.' How about we use this term 'sin' only in terms of how it applies to you directly, personally. You want to claim you are not a sinner in any of these respects. Great. Good for you and whomever you think is judging you in these ways. Leave others alone. Free of such judgement and negative labeling." My actual invented quote was "Don't become so tolerant of sin you lose all sight of biblical morality." It captures the essential point. According to biblical morality, homosexuality is sinful. If we decide for ourselves what is and isn't sinful (in many theologies here, of course, nothing is sinful) we eventually lose any concept of morality - it's all just personal opinion. Perhaps you think it all is, or should be, personal opinion, but that's not Christianity. The entire Gospel message is predicated on the individual's recognition of sin, the individual's confession and repentance of sin, and God's forgiveness of sin through Christ. If sin is whitewashed out of existence, the Gospel message makes no sense.
Because you aren't a Christian, it doesn't bother me in the slightest that you hold and promote the views you do. I don't insist my views are inherently more valid than yours or should be the default views of anyone else. I merely say my views are in accordance with the biblical teachings on homosexuality and the longstanding position of orthodox Christianity. I can hold those views with great conviction without confronting, harassing or persecuting homosexuals (as your post pretty much implies I must do). Why should I refrain from articulating the orthodox Christian position on an internet discussion forum when you and others feel free to attack that position and promote pro-LBGBTQ views? Isn't this an example of what the critics of wokeism often point out: a curiously one-sided notion of tolerance that doesn't extend to those who hold views differing from the woke paradigm?
I greatly appreciate this effort to respond, because all too many and all too often people will loose their hair over these kinds of differences of opinion and/or ways of thinking so that a further exchange like this becomes impossible. Thanks, and in return, here's my best effort to respond in kind. As honestly, fairly and sincerely as I am able with the limited time I have available right now before I sign off from this forum for the day...
You had to Google about semantics? I could have perhaps chosen a different way to simply say I disagree, and I can't honestly say I disagree without thinking I disagree with good reason. I don't know about "more valid," because that's a rather subjective matter, but of course anyone who reads are respective points of view will decide who's is more valid than the other. I'll leave it at that while continuing to point out the validity of my point of view as best as I am able. For you and others to judge as I am sure you will.
I wish you could be less defensive or judgmental about what I think of my opinion far as you are concerned and instead focus on the merits of my reasons. I'm not looking for votes or approval here. Just a fair, reasonable and adult evaluation of what makes for our differences of opinion. I could do the same thing to you, about what drives the angle of your responses to my comments, but instead I think it best to focus on the reasons for our difference of opinion about all this. Possible? We shall see.
What you choose to believe is indeed a matter of judgement on your part. Okay. We have a connect there. A starting point. Perhaps the end point too, because obviously, as explained before, depending on what book or set of guidelines anyone chooses to use for purposes of directing their life will tend to overshadow alternative facts, reason and logic that doesn't not fit that direction or directive. That's a difficult divide to bridge, as history has shown over the course of many a divide. Whether political (the American Civil War for example) or religion. People act according to the book, ideology or leaders they choose to follow. Those who fought for the south to preserve slavery during the American Civil War did the exact same thing, but is that choice of what to believe or who to follow necessarily as valid as the next all considered?
What all ELSE needs to be considered?
The anti-gay propaganda I think you should stop is what you make clear to everyone who reads your comments in this forum. I'm glad if the sharing of that "message" is limited to this forum, but of course it's easy to assume that opinions and beliefs expressed in this forum carry forward elsewhere outside this forum. At the more macro level, anyone who supports a religion that promotes ill treatment of gays, for example, is a part of the problem in my opinion. So there's that too.
Earlier you objected about having to celebrate the differences of others (among other things). Seems maybe you have dropped your stance about all that, because again, no one need celebrate anything they don't want to. No need to prevent others from celebrating their differences either. Okay. Perhaps that's also a point of connection made by way of this exchange. I hope so.
Otherwise, no. You should not stop believing anything because I or anyone else believes you should. You should stop believing in whatever beliefs are not well justified is all. About this we can all judge as intelligent human beings. Of course, just like those who fought on the side of the Confederates during the Civil War, not everyone will agree about what is right or wrong. We are all called upon, however, to judge right from wrong based on criteria that in my opinion should transcend any one book, or religion or leader. Otherwise, we make no progress toward a better way for all concerned. We all express our opinion about which is the better way and why we think so. That's all I'm doing here. Again for you and anyone else to judge as you will.
I say it is just wrong to judge people the way you do because of their differences, and I'd like to think my rationale has been made clear about this. Ultimately, because I strongly believe it is right to "live and let live." That's not something I believe because it comes from some book or a religion or any leader of any sort. I strongly believe in respecting the differences we humans all manifest in one way or another. Again as long as no harm is being done in the process. You somehow call this a "fundamental flaw in my reasoning." I surely don't understand how you come to such a conclusion. This is not personal either. Not about you or me.
That the "clear biblical position is that homosexuality is a sin" does not excuse those who adopt this belief or make this choice to believe such a thing. It simply contradicts what other people consider the proper way to address people who don't believe what you do, or who are gay regardless what your holy book says about them. Your holy book makes them out to be less than you. "Sinners." Again, backward thinking is not a good reason to believe or do anything. Treating people badly or as lesser, let alone as "sinners" because your book say so is not a good justification to treat people badly. People doing you nor anyone else any harm. That's just wrong according to most criteria I can think reasonable when deciding what to believe and do with respect to our fellow man.
Describing someone as a sinner or as someone in need of "saving" is not to treat these people with compassion. Either treat them as equals and worthy of the same rights, experiences and opportunities as you enjoy, or you are simply being hypocritical. You can't claim to have compassion toward black people to use another example, and at the same time argue they are somehow inferior or wrong-doers or sinners. You, no one, can have it both ways that way.
What you describe as the way we "eventually lose any concept of morality" is also a matter of opinion. Yes of course. Again for all of us to judge as we will, and your basic go to justification for all your opinion being the Bible is certainly problematical for anyone who will judge along these lines from a broader more objective standpoint. I consider myself very moral in all the ways I think the word is supposed to mean. Your version of morality and your reasons for thinking so is rationale I can't accept as valid for a variety of reasons. The opposite of moral in some ways! Besides the fact that I don't judge all such issues according to what the Bible says. Thank goodness (also in my opinion) so many people stopped using the Bible for guidance along other lines as well! But I'll leave those other lines be for now.
Perhaps I think it is all personal opinion? Seems you tend to think so, and again yes of course it's all a matter of opinion what we choose to believe or follow for guidance along these lines. What isn't actually? We aren't born with a Bible in our brain. Or any of the notions contained in the Bible. It's ALL opinion, and unfortunately it's generally the opinion passed down from others that we either choose to adopt or not. All of it. That is Christianity and the history of Christianity demonstrates this fact well. Opinions about Christianity have changed in many fundamental ways since the Bible first began to come together.
I don't "insist my views are inherently more valid than yours or should be the default views of anyone else." Please. With all due respect. What a cop out. No one goes to the trouble of explaining their points of view and reason(s) for having them like I do when I could instead simply claim you are wrong because I know better. I deserve more credit than that I think.
You might also like to describe opinions expressed in this forum different than yours as "attacks," but this too seems the same sort of ploy on your part to undermine that actual arguments with these sorts of unfair defenses. This is not an attack. This is my explanation as to why I think you are promoting wrong-thinking and wrong-doing. Not that affects me of course, but that affects others who are gay for example.
Well, actually, it affects me too, because I want to live in a better world more free of these sorts of intolerances and forms of bigotry that make the world a worse place rather than a better one.
For whatever any of this is worth. Perhaps worth nothing to you, but perhaps for others considering these different opinions and reasons for them. For them to judge as they will. I expect nothing really more or less here.
The problem with characterizations such as O'Darby's about LGBTQ people is that they don't come from actually knowing any such people, but from seeing the worst of the Pride events, parades, etc., which draw out all the whackos and people who want to put themselves on display.
What is my "characterization" to which you refer? I have known, as friends and co-workers, several openly homosexual people. I socialized with some of them. None of them were "whackos" who would ever have thought of "putting themselves on display." On what possible basis do you make a judgment as to who I have known or not known?
I have no characterization at all of homosexuals, any more than I do of fornicators, adulterers or child molesters. I make no point except that homosexuality is a sin according to the Bible and orthodox Christian theology. I did not say that same-sex attraction constitutes sexual depravity. If pressed, I suppose I would say it's similar to Jesus' warning that he who looks at a woman with lust is already an adulterer - which I regularly do but confess as sin and try to do better the next time with the help of the Holy Spirit.
I said that the LGBGTQ movement is one manifestation of the sexual depravity that characterizes our times, as I firmly believe it is. How is your characterization of "whackos and people who want to put themselves on display" any different?
One advantage I seem to have is that I have no emotional involvement in these issues. I have a rational understanding of my own position and, I believe, a rational understanding of the contrary positions. I understand that people disagree with my position and why. None of it bothers me a bit. The ad hominems roll off my back.
Having a sexual drive is not a sin; however it can be directed in ways that are disordered, unhealthy, and sinful.
Feeling hungry is not a sin; but if one's hunger were directed in disordered ways that are not healthy or good, then we would have no problem saying that there's something wrong with them.
I don't know about "sinful," and I don't know who needs an explanation like this, because who doesn't know just about anything in excess or unhealthy can prove to be a significant negative?
I had a friend who used to say "anything can kill you if you get under a big enough pile of it."
So beyond the obvious, just what do you consider "disordered, unhealthy, and sinful?"
We don't have trouble saying something is wrong with someone suffering from bulimia, for example, but is bulimia "sinful?" Most if not all such problems I know about along these lines are problems for obvious health reasons, but none that I know of that are "sinful."
Or perhaps you are thinking about something like adultery? I don't consider that "sinful" either and I leave whatever problem it may be to those involved. Their business not mine.
I am neither prudish nor a fundamentalist, not by a longshot.
You are obviously free to hold and promote whatever beliefs you wish. This forum is a safe haven for you because the terms of service prohibit the pushback you would experience if you were to expose your beliefs to a wider audience, Christian or secular.
There is no Jesus without the Bible. All we know about Jesus is contained in the NT. Jesus Himself emphasized the definitional importance of the Scriptures. There is no Christianity without the Bible. In orthodox Christianity all teaching, all claimed revelation and mysticism, is evaluated by its conformity to the Bible.
Without the Bible, Jesus is just an amorphous idea in someone's head. Hey, that's you! What possible response could you have to someone who is convinced he or she mystically encountered a unique Mohammad or Buddha, one entirely at odds with the historical figures and with your Jesus?
Your beliefs have no foundation at all, except ... you.
You measure the Bible and the Jesus of the Bible by ... you.
The Bible is challenging. Understanding it as a coherent whole is challenging. I believe it's meant to be challenging. But it does provide the entire framework for what Jews and Christians believe and what Jesus believed and taught. It is the foundational document. I accept it as God's message to humanity regardless of whether I personally like or approve of everything in it.
Unlike you, I don't measure God by ... me. I don't measure the Bible by ... me. My religion is not ... me.
Always a bit of a kick when I so often read comments about how others are free to have their own opinions. Perhaps not semantics, but who doesn't know this and what does it really mean? Free to have your own opinion but obviously not an opinion I share or respect is what it really means...
While I agree Mystics beliefs don't have much foundation other than his own beliefs, I don't see the foundation for your beliefs any better. Important to note given your want to suggest you somehow don't come off as one who thinks his opinion is above others too.
That's okay of course. I don't think anyone holds strong opinion without thinking their reasons are well justified if not better justified than opinions that are incongruent, but I think you don't give Mystic as much credit as you should either. Mystic is as well aware about all the Bible teaches too. That awareness, consideration and evaluation is more than just mere personal opinion. Is it not?
Being gay is more than just sex. I knew I was gay since I was in kindergarten. I knew then I felt a non-sexual attraction to men. When the TV show Maverick came out in 1957, I had my first heartthrob in Jack Kelly. (I'm old now!). It was no different than the episode on Andy Griffith where little Opie had a crush on his teacher, Helen - except it was a same sex crush. It was not acquired.
Interesting. Thanks...
I can't imagine how someone so young becoming aware of such a thing must think about so much else going on around them in terms of how other people are different and act accordingly. In all the "good, bad and ugly" ways people can. Especially children!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
