Christian Activists in Britain Protest New Gay Rights Law

[Penguin]

Didn't Jesus say though "that you should take people for what they are" If somebody is gay what difference should it make? So what? Wasn't that the main reason Jesus died on the cross? To show that god is for EVERYBODY no matter who they are, how much they sin and what sexuality they are. Jesus wouldn't have cared about their sexuality then so why should we care now. My thoughts

[17th Angel]

Because we are not as perfect as your poster child christ?

[BlaznFattyz]

Originally Posted by Penguin

Didn't Jesus say though "that you should take people for what they are"

of course, love everyone no matter what, but don't confuse that with loving someone enough to steer them in the right direction when you see them going to a dead end.

[kenod]

Discrimination based on sexual preference cannot be compared to discrimination based on gender, race, age or disability. Of course, the gay rights movement wants to achieve the same status, and is just about there, but there is one very obvious difference: gender, race, age and disability are not based on behaviour.

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Originally Posted by kenod

Discrimination based on sexual preference cannot be compared to discrimination based on gender, race, age or disability. Of course, the gay rights movement wants to achieve the same status, and is just about there, but there is one very obvious difference: gender, race, age and disability are not based on behaviour.

They're not?
Gender discrimination: "She's too emotional, and she'd call in sick once a month. We can't hire her."
Race discrimination: "I didn't rent the apartment to him because he'd be playing that loud 'music' all the time."
Age discrimination: "Let's not hire him. He'd be too slow."
Disability discrimination: "Don't bother taking her order. I'm sure she can't talk clearly anyway."
All these forms of discrimination are based on assumptions about the behaviour of an individual based on their membership in a particular group, and come down to the fact that the person doing the discriminating is uncomfortable with that group.
Let's assume for the sake of argument that I have the attitude, "All Christians are pushy, loud-mouthed jerks." (I don't think anything of the sort, not even remotely, but let's pretend for a minute that I do.) This assumption is based on a few brief encounters with particularly uncharitable people who said to me that they were Christians. Or perhaps I've never even met any Christians to my knowledge, and it's based purely on what I've seen in the media.
Let's also say that I am a HR manager in a firm, and someone comes to me for a job interview. In the middle of the interview I notice a cross around the person's neck. I immediately think, "Oh no, she's a Christian. Well, I don't care what her qualifications are, I'm not hiring her! She'd spend the whole day proselytising, and no one would be able to get any work done. That's when she shows up at all - she'd be gone half the time to prayer meetings, or to go bomb abortion clinics."
What a horrible thing to say! And how can I write this woman off like that based on such a tiny piece of information (a cross around her neck)! I clearly know nothing about Christianity, and even less about this woman and her relation to Christianity! How dare I deny her a job on the basis of my erroneous assumptions about her, which have nothing to do with her qualifications!
There's no law that says I have to be comfortable with Christianity. There's no law that says I have to learn all about it and get over my dislike. But I do not have the right, legally and morally, to deny someone housing, employment, service, or anything else for which they are otherwise qualified based on their (perceived) membership in a group with which I am uncomfortable, or of which I do not approve.

[kenod]

Originally Posted by Scarlet Pimpernel

They're not?
Gender discrimination: "She's too emotional, and she'd call in sick once a month. We can't hire her."
Race discrimination: "I didn't rent the apartment to him because he'd be playing that loud 'music' all the time."
Age discrimination: "Let's not hire him. He'd be too slow."
Disability discrimination: "Don't bother taking her order. I'm sure she can't talk clearly anyway."
All these forms of discrimination are based on assumptions about the behaviour of an individual based on their membership in a particular group, and come down to the fact that the person doing the discriminating is uncomfortable with that group.

Ok, I get it now ... it is just a stereotypical assumption that homosexuals want to have same sex relationships

Homosexuals are defined by behaviour (real or desired) in a way that other minority groups are not. A blind person is not blind because he wants to have a guide dog!

Behaviour is either moral or immoral. Therefore it is my responsibilty to decide what I believe is right and wrong, and act accordingly.

[Zagreus]

I believe that presuming ourselves Godly enough to judge even one other human being, even in our error (understandable, as we are not yet perfect) ... is a far worse sin, than anything that might be immoral about homosexuality. As Christ would put it, and juantoo3 is REALLY good at quoting this one too, we're "picking motes" if we judge others.

Now, you can argue that two wrongs make it okay, or YOU STOP PICKING MOTES FIRST, neh.

But once again, I'd rather leave it up to God - than ASSUME I know EXACTLY what God wants. Christ taught us to Love Unconditionally. When we MASTER that ... THEN let's presume to do God's handiwork here on earth when it comes to sorting out the moral from the immoral.

~Zag

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Zagreus

I believe that presuming ourselves Godly enough to judge even one other human being, even in our error (understandable, as we are not yet perfect) ... is a far worse sin, than anything that might be immoral about homosexuality. As Christ would put it, and juantoo3 is REALLY good at quoting this one too, we're "picking motes" if we judge others.

Now, you can argue that two wrongs make it okay, or YOU STOP PICKING MOTES FIRST, neh.

But once again, I'd rather leave it up to God - than ASSUME I know EXACTLY what God wants. Christ taught us to Love Unconditionally. When we MASTER that ... THEN let's presume to do God's handiwork here on earth when it comes to sorting out the moral from the immoral.

~Zag

Loving unconditionally and allowing a continuation of an error is two different things. You say "what is the error?" And I say homosexual acts are the error. And the Bible says do not condone such behavior.

Note I didn't state homosexuals are the error. Frankly, the act itself is self defeating. But the disruption to society is what God is concerned about. But that isn't even the problem. The confusion brought on to the children is. I will point out again that Sparta had to declare a law, that every man had to lay with a woman in order to continue the state by way of children, else they would have become defunct. (they did anyway).

Judging isn't a Godly thing. It is a man thing. We have to have judges on mortal affairs. Your example is frankly, mute. It certainly is not a "sin", since the Noahidic laws of man demand that we have judges over man's affairs, and that they be just and impartial (nevermind the christian/judeac/Islamic scriptures).

Anarchy sucks.

v/r

Joshua

[kenod]

As an individual, I have a responsibility to make decisions concerning my own behaviour.
As a parent, and as a citizen who votes, I am obliged to make decisions about what I believe is right and wrong, moral and immoral.

Everyone makes decisions that affect others - to pretend otherwise is just self righteous nonsense.
Some people use their conscience as a guide. I try to use my understanding of Scripture.

Anyone who takes the position that everything should be tolerated, has not stopped to consider the consequences.
There are social and spiritual consequences for whatever we embrace as a society.

If you want to smoke, why not, it's your life.
As long as I don't have to pay for your medical treatment, ok.
As long as you don't set an example that my children might imitate, ok.
As long as I don't have to have breathe your smoke, ok.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by kenod

As an individual, I have a responsibility to make decisions concerning my own behaviour.
As a parent, and as a citizen who votes, I am obliged to make decisions about what I believe is right and wrong, moral and immoral.

Everyone makes decisions that affect others - to pretend otherwise is just self righteous nonsense.
Some people use their conscience as a guide. I try to use my understanding of Scripture.

Anyone who takes the position that everything should be tolerated, has not stopped to consider the consequences.
There are social and spiritual consequences for whatever we embrace as a society.

If you want to smoke, why not, it's your life.
As long as I don't have to pay for your medical treatment, ok.
As long as you don't set an example that my children might imitate, ok.
As long as I don't have to have breathe your smoke, ok.

hmmmm, what kind of car to you drive? If none, then you are "perfectly" within your right to demand everything else.

[Zagreus]

Ok, so sodomy, you know - that's all unbiblical and all. Besides which, that stuff is illegal. You do that, you're goin to hell. That's all I gotta say. I'm not judgin', just tippin my hat to God and the Bible there. No judgin, just pointing out that all those dudes in the pornos, and guys wanting to try a new ... umm, thing, with the wife ... gonna be soooooorry.

oh brother

~Zag

[kenod]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

hmmmm, what kind of car to you drive? If none, then you are "perfectly" within your right to demand everything else.

I drive the most economical car I possibly can while participating as a contributing member of society.

If your point was that whatever we do, we affect others, then I'm right with you.

[kiwimac]

Homosexuality is not disordered, it occurs in all species, if were only a human traith then it would be arguable but it is not.

I find it fascinating the number of Christians who continually put homosexual people down, who demean them, argue that its "just about the sex." HOW THE HECK WOULD YOU KNOW? I have found most Christians quite unwilling to call a homosexual person their brother or sister in Christ, what a fine attitude that is!

I despise prejudice.

kiwimac

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Zagreus

Ok, so sodomy, you know - that's all unbiblical and all. Besides which, that stuff is illegal. You do that, you're goin to hell. That's all I gotta say. I'm not judgin', just tippin my hat to God and the Bible there. No judgin, just pointing out that all those dudes in the pornos, and guys wanting to try a new ... umm, thing, with the wife ... gonna be soooooorry.

oh brother

~Zag

Nix nix river stix. What is done between husband and wife is PRIVATE, and sanctified by the marriage. Of course there must be willingness between partners, or else it is the equivilent of rape.

To link marriage bed with porn is ludicrious! Assinine! Cheap. Since marriage is a God blessed thing and sex in marriage is a God blessed and sanctioned thing, what say you that God does not witness what He has created? And if a couple of randy partners want to try something different with each other, what say you that God is opposed?

Who is passing judgement on whom? God? or man?

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by kiwimac

Homosexuality is not disordered, it occurs in all species, if were only a human traith then it would be arguable but it is not.

I find it fascinating the number of Christians who continually put homosexual people down, who demean them, argue that its "just about the sex." HOW THE HECK WOULD YOU KNOW? I have found most Christians quite unwilling to call a homosexual person their brother or sister in Christ, what a fine attitude that is!

I despise prejudice.

kiwimac

Prejudice works both ways...

For example, I hate gays with an attitude against heterosexuals. But they hate me as well, and I'm heterosexual.

My brother inlaw warned me about gays. (he was one). He said, "they're dangerous". Then he died.

So, I suppose it could be said I'm not "pre judging" anything or anyone. Post judging might be more apt, I suppose.

p.s. humans are not animals...