Ah, the GUILT card. “It isn’t impossible with GOD, so it must be your fault. You’re just not trying hard enough”
To which again, many of us would point out that God made us this way.
There is same-sex behavior in animals. Are they sinning? Did God make them that way or did the devil corrupt them? Is there anything inherently wrong with them due to their activity?
I’m a vocal supporter of LBGTQ equality, and I’m a fairly committed atheist. But Czarcasm, your posts in this thread are practically indistinguishable from right-wingers complaining about how Muslims never denounce terrorism.
Not really. I know that some are trying to do something, but there a large number of others who(in my opinion) may not be doing as much as they could, or as much as we might have thought they were. For example, the list provided in the second post seems to have a few holes in it-some of the numbers were too high, and some of the “Affirming” of those church organizations turned out not to be as strong as they were made out to be.
nm, wrong thread.
I’m fairly athy as well and I agree with RNATB and was in fact considering using the same analogy. It is neither fair nor fruitful to blame people who agree with your stance for the people who do not.
I’m not blaming them for the stance taken by their counterparts-I’m inquiring as to whether or not their own stance is as strong as they seem to be claiming it is and, if it is, whether that stance is being pushed forward in an effective way.
As a queer and an atheist, I’ll co-sign that.
If you feel that either enough is being done, or that they have no obligation to do more, then that it is your right to have that opinion. If, on the other hand, you think that I am blaming “good” Christians for the opinions and actions of the “bad” Christians, then I think you are mistaken. What I think I am doing is questioning the opinions and actions of the “good” Christians by examining what they have actually said and/or done.
Narrow clarification: none of the churches in the Clear Affirming list have had their positions successfully critiqued in this thread IMHO. (The RCC was not on that list.)
I dunno, most Muslims are pretty strongly against terrorism; the same really can’t be said for the denominations or the churches of most practicing Christians in the US. This isn’t surprising, as support for gay marriage is climbing, but still only 62% in the general public, up from 39% in 2008. Changing Attitudes on Same-Sex Marriage | Pew Research Center
My problem is that Czarcasm pivots from, “Believe whatever the hell you want-It’s when you act on those beliefs to the detriment of others, or when your beliefs lend silent support to those who would act to the detriment of others that concerns me,” to an expectation that a church perform a gay marriage. The latter is a fairly tall order given Biblical text in my view, though one that many churches are happy to fulfill.
While the former, roughly speaking, is a critique of fundamentalist Christianity, but not mainline Christianity.
I’m not seeing the distinction you think you’re making.
Link to basically the same thread in the Pit, 2015: When will white, christian moderates speak up?
Good times.
Oh, and let’s not ignore my precious words: https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18240961&postcount=215
Look at me! Look at me! 
That thread completely slipped my mind, sorry. I think this still is valid, however:
Ah, but if a large church starts specifically attacking another church’s doctrines that brings back echoes of religious persecution. Each church is having (or not) its own internal debates, but only the tiny ones feel safe in attacking another one’s doctrines directly outside of a theological congress or similar environment.
The Vatican and the Catholic bishops, although continuing to hold what the Church has held forever, that the sexual powers are to be exercised only in marriage between one man and one woman, and always in a manner that is open to the conception of new life, have always taught authoritatively that persons using the sexual powers in other ways, are to be accorded the dignity and compassion due to all children of God. This dignity and compassion does not include, however, to overlook or to remain silent in the face of personal sin, quite the converse: the dignity of any and all children of God demands that they be exhorted and supported to bring their actions in line with God’s will for all mankind. As Catholics we recall that “For male and female He created them, and He said to them, 'go forth and multiply.” And the Catholic Church believes and teaches that this is what our sexual selves are as created by God; this is what sexuality is for: to unite husband and wife and to bring forth new life.
And the Church encourages all its members to bring their way of life in line with the will of God, as promulgated by Church teaching: unmarried male-female couples living together, married persons using contraception, divorced and civilly remarried couples living together. Perhaps many persons who are exposed to Catholic teaching only through the news media, wouldn’t be familiar with the many ways in which children of God do, sadly, stray from the will of God, and the efforts the Church makes to call men and women to living out their sexuality within Christian marriage, and always open to new life, or if not that, then to live in chaste celibacy.
Please know I’m not here to argue, to criticize, or to condemn anyone personally. Or to discuss myself or defend myself personally, or to defend any person or institution. (I have only limited time in which to participate in these very interesting discussions.) I’m just to propose what the Catholic Church has always believed and taught. Which is quite different, perhaps, from what some of the posters here may have encountered.
I will say only this about myself: I, too, am a sinner, and have offended Him most grievously many times. I, too, have fallen short. I have no standing to criticize others; instead, my time is spent thinking upon how I depend upon the mercies of God to keep me on the right path. Without Him, I would surely go off a cliff and be dashed upon the rocks below. Any righteousness I may have is from Him; I fear to think what I might otherwise say or do or become, if not for Him. For He is all-good; He is all-holy; and in Him we all live and move and have our Being. And He alone is our ultimate Happiness. Off to work soon; I hope everyone here has a blessed day!
Here is the main part of the text: “We grant you [Kings of Spain and Portugal] by these present documents, with our Apostolic Authority, full and free permission to invade, search out, capture, and subjugate the Saracens and pagans and any other unbelievers and enemies of Christ wherever they may be, as well as their kingdoms, duchies, counties, principalities, and other property […] and to reduce their persons into perpetual servitude.”
The Catholic Church distinguishes between papal directives that do not arise from the Pope’s teaching office, and those which are not considered a part of the deposit of Faith, addressed to the entire Church vs. pronouncements that do so arise, and are so considered.
The Deposit of Faith is what Catholics are obliged to believe and follow.
I can’t defend or explain the papal permission to subjugate “the Saracens,” except to note that I do recall from my history that the Turkish Empire (Saracens) frequently raided, captured, and enslaved Christians throughout the Middle East, North Africa, the Balkans, and into the islands and coastal areas of Greece and Italy. The theory among the Turkish Empire, I believe was, that “infidels” in general (e.g. non-Muslims) had no rights at all, and were all considered to have the status of mere booty, to be made essentially cattle for the Empire.
The problem became so great, that a religious order was established whose main work was to raise funds and to ransom Christian captives of the Saracens. (The Mercedarians.)
It would seem that King Afonso wanted to make a vindictive response to the Saracen raids upon Christian communities. And the Pope approved his doing so.
This would be a one-off decision on the part of the Pope, and not applicable to the Church as a whole. Thus it is certainly defensible to view this bull as not in accord with the Gospel message of Christ.
That said, I wasn’t there; I don’t know the whole story.
Filled with rules.
If cursing disqualified you from being Christian, then no one would be able to claim that the majority of the country is Christian. And since when is church attendance a necessary element of Christianity? Isn’t it enough that I believe in Jesus and his power to save us from the eternal consequences our own sins?
But to answer your question I have gone to many different churches over time from Full Gospel churches to Presbyterian churches.
I’m an imperfect Christian with lots of struggles and doubts.
I am filled with sin, all the big ones, lust, pride, envy, anger, gluttony, greed, sloth, and cursing.
I don’t mean to say that ALL or even a large portion of Christians are callous selfish womanizers but they are there in abundance.
Because some Christians are trying to spread hate and not enough other Christians are standing up to them.
Given the trends, it sure looks like they’re being stood up to. OP claims the haters “have the megaphone”, but I don’t see it. Yes, the OP could be doing more. Why he’s not, I don’t know. The OP mentioned “waiting for the old guard to die out”, but we don’t even need to do that. Yes, geezers are less likely to support gay marriage, but every generation group is trending upward. Yes, it’s still an important issue. There are lots of important issues. And quite frankly I’m not seeing this one trump the environment, mass incarceration, policing, poverty, health care, immigration, refugees, militarism, etc., etc. Maybe 10 years ago. But now we’re winning.
Are the upward trends partially due to the churches or despite them? I’ve read, somewhere, that actually knowing out gay people improves ones tolerance.
I suspect it also helps that the dreadful fallout from SSM predicted by so many hasn’t quite happened.