For anyone who doubts homophobia in this country...

If anyone was offended by my diatribe - especially any gay posters and religious posters (specifically Mormons) - I do not have any hatred for Mormonism or gay people. I also don’t usually use the word “faggot.”

The fact is that the Mormon in Snark makes him hate the gay person there, and the gay person resents the Mormon in there. So, I went overboard with the hyperbole to make a point.

Mind you, I don’t take back a single sentiment or word of it. I stand by it 100%. I just hope that those who are not like him (thankfully most all of the world) do not take it out of context…


Yer pal,
Satan

*TIME ELAPSED SINCE I QUIT SMOKING:
Six months, one week, four days, 4 hours, 51 minutes and 53 seconds.
7768 cigarettes not smoked, saving $971.01.
Extra time with Drain Bead: 3 weeks, 5 days, 23 hours, 20 minutes.

I slept with a REPUBLICAN moderator!*

I think that was wrong, Satan. Snark has a difficult task: reconciling his devout faith in the prophets of his religion with his sexual desires. One or the other will have to give, but I see no hypocritical difference between a man who believes in LDS and feels no desire towards men and one who believes and does feel desire. I do not condone his statement that he will vote against same-sex marriages, and I profoundly wish he could believe his God does not hate him for who he would love. I cannot say I agree with his beliefs in even the slightest way. But…your post was such a deliberate and forceful attack at the most sensitive point of his person that I shudder to see it. What good can truly be expected to come of your post? Since when has hateful scorn and mockery led a conflicted soul to a secure and loving haven?

1st of all, Doma does not discriminate against gays. It discriminates against persons of the same-sex getting married. The 2 are not the same. If a Gay man & a lesbain women got married- it would be perfectly legal (and it has happened). If I had a long term roomate male buddy, we still could not get married- even tho we are not Gay. Same reason why polygamy laws are Constitutional; no-one can have legal multiple spouses- Mormon or no. If the Law said “Mormons can’t have multiple wives”- it would be struck down in a instant. (I am not saying that the modern LDS Church is in favor of Polygamy, note).

Next, what I was trying to say, oh Nacho-for-brains is that you attack ALL “Bible” religions, whether or not they have anything against gay marriages. In the Celtic Church, a sincere Gay couple can be married by one of our Priests. You may hate ALL religion if you like- but don’t hate a Church for the wrong reasons. To do so is to be ignorant, and bigoted.

**

And people have been very patient in dealing with his conflicting posts because of this very fact.

His response is to come here and say he’s better than everyone else, even those who have spent much time trying to help him.

Sorry, Gaudie, but I could not sit idly by while this person tries to make himself feel more normal at the ewxpense of those who were trying to help him.

**

If it is causing him to feel the way Snark obviously does (even if he doesn’t want to face it), then I see a problem.

Is it none of my business? Purhaps. But I have been good about not commenting about him at all and being as nice as possible when I did comment. And this is a public board. And he is acting in a most pathetic manner…

**

I certainly agree on both points.

Well, maybe, just maybe, my words will get Snark to wake the fuck up and admit some things to himself. Things that he is still in denial about, things which will lead him to a life of nothing but misery if he keeps going down that path.

A ton of people have been quite nice to him to help him achieve this, as I have said and as you know. But frankly, I ran out of patience, did not appreciate him turning on people who genuinely gave a fuck, and - call this a copout of you wish, but I stand by it - maybe, just maybe, these forceful words will get him to look in a mirror for the first time ever.


Yer pal,
Satan

*TIME ELAPSED SINCE I QUIT SMOKING:
Six months, one week, four days, 8 hours, 7 minutes and 37 seconds.
7773 cigarettes not smoked, saving $971.69.
Extra time with Drain Bead: 3 weeks, 5 days, 23 hours, 45 minutes.

I slept with a REPUBLICAN moderator!*

Wow, I really lost it last night. I apologize to those whom I offended with my rash and unwarranted words. I had to vent, and the internet seemed a convenient place to do it. I didn’t mean the things I said. Please forgive this wretched man’s rantings.

I don’t think I should post here anymore. Again, very sorry if I hurt anyone’s feelings or offended anyone. I’ll try to be more tolerant and less snooty in the future.

Goboy, Lefthanders like myself have very sinister motives…

I think the pro-gay marriage people need to exhibit a tad more patience here. Old conservative attitudes take a long time to change, especially among the religious community. And before you spit your bile and venom at anybody who opposes same sex unions, don’t overlook the fact that these marriages will be held in the THEIR churches for crying out loud. Wake the fuck up and show at least a little understanding! Frankly, this is asking them to dishonor what they believe, in their own sacred establishments! Like I said, attitudes are slowly changing and I think the walls are slowly being broken down, brick by brick, but to rant about it like little toddlers that they should all just immediately bend to your will shows a lack of understanding and compassion, as well as a touch of stupidity. Just my opinion, thank you.

SSM’s dont have to take place in a church.

There are states that have issues with even civil unions.

This has to do with the Legal aspect of the ceromony, not just the ceromony itself. hell, I’m a minister in the ULC and can do marriages, but they just wouldnt be leaglly recognised.

Hey George, could you point us to a single post on this thread where anyone suggested that churches should be required to endorse marriages that conflict with their doctrine…

…still waiting, you know why? There aren’t any.

The desire is that the state should recognise SSM, and the state isn’t supposed to take into account how churches feel about that.

Welcome to the SDMB.

I haven’t been posting the last day and a half or so. The pace at my workplace has picked up considerably, and my girlfriend is just returning home after a week on the road. If it weren’t for all that, I probably would have taken part in this debate too.

Anyway, I just wanted to put in one quick comment: Personally I wouldn’t have said what Satan said. Nonetheless, I think Satan’s post was a legitimate one. I think Snark needed to hear it from someone.

Gays who fight their own homosexuality can become the worst enemies of all other gays. Gays who are anti-gay take their internal battle and externalize it, doing their best to oppress and persecute gays everywhere in the name of rejecting something they dislike in themselves. It’s a legitimate tactic to call them on this and forcefully remind them that it’s themselves they are fighting, not the rest of the world. I wouldn’t take this course of action myself, because I dislike heaping my own scorn on top of the torment these people must already be suffering. But I do recognize that Satan’s approach is deemed legitimate by many, and it’s probably the best way to counter these gays who are anti-gay.

As I see it, this question harks back to the old debates about “outing” homophobic-but-secretly-gay legislators and community figures who sponsor anti-gay legislation by day and cruise gay bars by night. The gay community has debated this for a long time. To out a homosexual homophobe amounted to punishing him with his own homosexuality–it was an ethical quandry for many gays. But eventually a consensus arose that it had to be done, if only to call these people on their hypocrisy and keep them from causing real harm to the gay community everywhere.

Anyway, I just wanted to put in my two cents in support of what Satan said. I personally would have had a hard time saying it. But I think maybe it needed to be said by someone.

This is where Separation of Church and State is of a benefit to churches. When civil same sex marriage becomes legal, churchs will NOT be forced to perform ceremonies. I have heard some right wing organizations (like Concerned Women of America) claim this, but they don’t have past stastics to back this up.

Think about it, we have laws that discourage discrimination based on gender, race and religious belief, are there not? Is there legislation out there that forces churches to accept women as pastors? No. Are White suprematist churhces required to accept non-white members? No. Can a church refuse to do a wedding for a couple with other religious beliefs? Yes.

This is the largest problems with the government getting mixed up in marriages. I hear radio talk show hosts refer to civil marriages as “sacred institutions”. No, that is not correct. A religious marriage is a sacred institution A civil marriage is akin to a legal contract in the eyes of the law.

A couple can get a civil marraige that is not recognized by a church and a church can have a marriage ceremony (such as between a man and a man) that is not recognized by the state. That fact alone should demonstrate that they are two distinctly separate things.

Snark, when you compare my sexual orientation to drunk driving, you deserve to be insulted. Trust me, I went easy on you. Drain Bead and Satan said exactly what needed to be said. Your attempts to condescend to the rest of us lustful mortals from on high infuriate me. It would be a lot easier to respect you if you acted like a mensch, and not a whiner. I will leave my views of the legitimacy of the CoJCoLDS for another day, so I will only ask you a question:which is more important, the imperative demands of your soul to love and be loved in a way that feels right and good to you, or the commands of a pack of old men? This whole situation reminds me of William Blake’s “The Garden of Love”:

And that comes from a guy who used to have nightly chats with the prophets Isaiah and Ezekiel!

DITWD, I’m still trying to parse the logic there, and I just don’t get it. You can marry a floozy in a Vegas chapel, it’s legal in all fifty states. You get automatic inheritance, property rights, joint tax filing, next-of-kin hospital privileges. If I lived with my partner for 20 years, owned a house and a business together, we would legally just be friends, and if he died intestate, it could all be taken by his family, leaving me nothing. And you don’t call that discrimination? <shakes head, mutters,“tsk, tsk.”>
TwistofFate, I’m gay AND left-handed, so you know I’m going to Hell. (oh, and “sinister”, heehee)

Yes, I was explaining what defenders of DOMA argue. The reason I got into Supreme Court cases was to show that the SC has pretty much entirely excluded SSM from protection by distinguishing it from heterosexual marriages. The idea of analogizing SSM to heterosexual marriage to SSM has been a non-starter for the SC. The tenor of the decisions indicate that they feel that states could have a legitimate reason to ban SSM, despite the fact that you and I and many others disagree with that point.

I have re-directed your flame to the Supreme Court, so you did not flame in vain.

sigh Again?

This whole thread hurts.

I will comment in more detail at some point - I have been keeping up, but haven’t been able to post.

Esprix

I agree that Snark was being a snooty twit. However, so Snark thinks Poly is wrong about what God wants…of course he thinks that those who do not think his religion’s beliefs are correct are wrong! I don’t flame Poly if he thinks Mormon doctrine is wrong, and it’s not just that I prefer Poly’s God; I recognize that every person who believes in a God that has manifested His opinions about social issues thinks they have a good idea what God wants, and therefore those who disagree with them are wrong. This goes for Poly, who believes God condones SSM, as it does for Snark, who thinks He condemns them. At least if Snark thinks that homosexual behavior is wrong and so does not do it himself (presumably) despite his desires, it seems more honest than a solidly hetero person smugly telling gays they should abstain. I think believing that homosexual acts are inherently sinful is silly and extremely harmful if people believe it and attempt to legislate it, but if Snark wishes to believe God will condemn him for being gay and everyone who says otherwise is misled, well, that’s his right, and I’d not condemn him any more for saying so than I would condemn a person who says God endorses homosexual behavior and that Snark is misled.

It is making him miserable. However, calling him a faggot repeatedly and telling him he is going to hell and that he prefers a cock up the ass to heaven does not seem like the optimal way to get through to him. I do not think he loves himself enough right now that graphically pointing out what he perceives as terrible sins will help him to realize that a merciful God would not punish him for such things; he’ll only see himself as more unworthy for his desires and thus less likely to rebel even a little against his church.

In denial about what? That he likes men, and sex with men is forbidden by his religion? I think he knows that; at least he isn’t currently claiming he’s not gay. :wink: I’ve certainly seen about 500 “yo, you’re GAY!” posts directed towards him at this MB. I think all your post will do is drive him further into his self-loathing. I dislike seeing what appears to be deliberate cruelty excused because someone thinks it’s for someone else’s own good or “they deserve it”. If I saw you IRL tell an unhappy young man that he was a faggot and going to hell and a sick, sick person who is horribly fucked up, I would feel a strong desire to punch you in the nose, regardless of whether you believe it will help him or whether you think he was being arrogant. ::shrug:: Perhaps I am misled and Snark is actually genuinely arrogant and slapping him in the face with his “sins” will help him. But I have my doubts, and I tend to err on the side of compassion.

Gaudere et al,
He say that he IS going to change and become straight.
Can I hear a Gore sigh?

Umm, who says they will EVER change? To reiterate my last post, to say that a certain outcome is “inevitable” is to give away the fact that you are in the grip of an ideology. Conservative “acceptance” of gays is ANYTHING but certain. I think it’s just as likely (not “preferable,” mind you) that all the old sodomy laws could come back into vogue.

I realize I’m quoting you a tad out of context George, and I apologize. But I just wanted to reemphasize the above point.

On a totally unrelated note, I like your nick and think you picked a helluva place for your first post. Wouldn’t it be a scream if you were the REAL George Clooney?

Jumping in a little late here. I would be more than happy if my rights as a partner in a gay relationship were given equal precedence under the law from a medical standpoint. You know that if my significant other becomes violently ill and doesn’t want to be put on a respirator or any of those types of machines that his legal family can over ride it eventhough I probably know him better and have more than likely spent more of his adult time with him discussing these types of things just in case. Also, if the doctor so chooses, I can get booted out of his room because I am not a blood relation and then be kept in the dark about his status. Even if I was his legal fiance they could not do that to me. It’s a committed, loving relationship you dips, it shouldn’t matter who it is with as long as it is between consenting adults. If any ignorant churches don’t like it that is fine and dandy, keep your bedroom politics within your own bedroom and out of mine.

Now carry on.

HUGS!
Ed Asner

Lord have mercy upon us!

Snark, I am going to assume you are going to be drawn back to this thread. Don’t you dare leave! You’ve posted your views and gotten shot down for them, and your personal problems, which maybe should never have been admitted in the first place, have taken center spotlight here. Now, be a man and deal with them.

First, Satan used a bit of tough love on you. Read his post again, and listen to what he’s saying to you.

You are bisexual. You find Vanilla attractive, and men too. And you’ve repressed even the idea of fantasizing about sex with men. You’re messing with your own psyche.

There’s an old rule that says, when you’re in such a bind that you need to choose between sins, choose the lesser sin. I’m sorry to say it, but you’re in that bind.

Your other psychological problems have not been brought up in recent months, and I regret pointing them out, but you know very well, or ought to, that trying to juggle your sexuality and your faith is going to put a lot of burden on the integrity of your psyche. And you don’t need that.

You have every right to believe as you choose and to vote as you choose. However, I trust that you, conflicted as you are, can still see the logic that no one’s religious beliefs should be used as a touchstone for the conduct of others not of their belief system. Sqrl may not morally force nature worship on you by lobbying his legislators to require that you worship the spirits of the created world, and you may not morally force the promulgations of your prophets on him.

And, quite frankly, men who claim to have had revelations of the wrath of God falling on a people who do not enforce some particular standard of morality on all are not prophets of the God of Love in whom I believe. There are three options here:
[li]I have deluded myself into thinking that God loves everyone and does not desire anyone to perish, and is not out to judge people for being true to their inner natures, doing the best they can with who they are; or[/li][li]Your prophets are honest men who mistakenly think that God is prepared to condemn America for treating its gay minority as though they were equal citizens and equally loved in his eyes; or[/li][li]Your prophets are pious frauds using their ill-gotten religious power to manipulate others in favor of their prejudices.[/li][li]Needless to say, for the atheists and others, all of the above may be true.[/li]
I am going to ask you, Snark, to do something that I feel pressed upon me. Set the works Joseph Smith and his successors gave the world to one side. Sit down with your reading Bible and read the Gospel of John straight through. Then sit back, clear your mind as much as possible, and quietly ask the God you love and are trying to follow to guide you and grant you wisdom to deal with all of this, and the gift of His love.

When you’re done with this, I’m convinced you will go pick up the phone or sign on the computer, contact Vanilla, and have a long talk with her.

Listen to her. With the horrible experiences she went through, she (though at times flighty and with issues of her own to deal with) is singularly well-equipped to deal with a man who loves her and who feels desire for men as well.

For her, that’s a distinct improvement.

And she loves you.

Get your act together. Admit to yourself that God made you as you are. And take a good hard look at who you are, and how you got there.

Then fix what needs fixing, and is within your power. Admit what you can’t fix, and give it over to God. Then forget about it. It’s His problem from then on. And love yourself, with no guilt and no sniveling unworthiness. Most of the rest of us do. Including Satan – as I think you’ll come to see.

You will notice I am not condemning your faith in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. But you have come to a point where you need to look very carefully at what you believe and how it is affecting you. You are acting as though you need to quit this board again. You’ve turned away the woman God gave you, who is quite obviously, even to someone who scarcely knows either of you and has never met you, the perfect woman to help you live out your life as who you are…and for whom you are the perfect man to deal with her own problems.

Get a grip on your own issues. Get your act together.

Then let us who care know how you’re doing.

(And, by the way, you may want to apologize to the men and women of this board who your analogy insulted – not just say, “I was a little snooty, and I’ll try to do better.” Look 'em in the eye, and say, “I was following the leaders of my faith, and I’m sorry that I built an analogy that insulted you.” But by then, you’ll realize that.)

You’re a strong young man, Snark – a lot of people dealing with what you’ve had to cope with would have disintegrated and taken up residence in the catatonic ward of a psychiatric hospital. And that means you have the guts to face what’s messing up your life and deal with it.

Take care of yourself. God loves you. And so do we.