I know you think I’m a fucking idiot, but I really don’t care what you think, also I know you can make your point a lot more effectivally then resorting to name calling. But anyway there is a difference, Calling a act evil is one thing, calling a person evil is quite another.
I’m afraid you’re claiming too much there - not all Christians, and not all Christian churches, agree with your summary of “Christian teaching.”
I believe you when you say you do not intend to be hateful. But the idea that you’re expressing is, by it’s nature, intrinsically hateful. When you tell me, or Otto, that we’re sinning because of who we love, can you understand how insulting that is? Can you imagine how you would feel if someone told you that your relationship with your wife/husband was a sin? You seem to have taken exception to Otto’s response, but as long as you continue to parrot this hateful idea, you’re going to have to resign yourself to that sort of response. “Turn the other cheek” is a good idea in theory, but in practice, most people have trouble not returning insult for insult.
True.
Sadly, most Christian churches do, however.
I’m not sure if that’s a question or a statement, but I do know it’s a copout. “I don’t hate women, I just don’t want one to take my job.” “I don’t hate Mexicans, I just get irritated when I see one working.” “I don’t hate gay people, I just don’t want them to have the same rights we have.” Well, how you do or don’t define “hate” is irrelevant to the fact that that’s a double-standard, and a bigoted one at that.
Der Trihs isn’t denying anyone their rights; he doesn’t have the power to. It’s amazing that for someone who dislikes him so much, you want to imagine that he’s so powerful. Well, he’s not. He can’t deny the Pope’s rights of free speech, free association and freedom to believe whatever. He can just come in here and rant about things he doesn’t like, which you can do too. But if you come in and rant that people shouldn’t drive 60 mph on a freeway with a speed limit of 65, you’re not wishing to deny someone their rights, you’re just wishing they would choose not to exercise it. If you can’t see the difference, you ought to leave the kitchen now.
What’s the difference? Neither has any intrinsic moral evil, and anyone who assigns evil to either one is a bigot.
You can redefine “hate”, “not” and “is” however you want, but when it comes down to it you’re a bigot and an asshole for saying that within a certain population, only those who deny their need for love and affection are worth your acceptance.
must…not…channel…dave…berry.
perhaps but not relivant to the point, Der Trishs was hateful and bigoted to the pope and his Bronze Age minions, which my quick sum up Christain view on homosexuality would be pretty good.
No, if I am misguided it is not hateful, and for that matter if I am correct and it is ordained by God it is not hateful - just 2 examples.
1st Yes I can understand that - with that said:
I can understand if you don’t understand the meaning behind it. We are all sinners, some things we love and long to do as people are sins, we all are unworthy to God - all, you, me and even Cecil - we all commit sins and will commit them in the future. It is our state of being, a function of the place where we exist - and have no chance to overcome on our own. If you call this insulting so be it, but you know it was never hateful.
Um they do, there is no right that a straight person has that a gay person is denyed.
But lets push this further, is someone hateful to siblings if they are against sibling marriage?
There are pleanty of double standards in life, that does not mean hate.
Agreed (for 3rd time) - I take that back totally and completly, he just is a hateful bigot.
Really I have no beef with him, I just see that he is exactly what he is accusing the Pope of being, he is his own worst enemy.
What’s the difference between a person and a act? What are you kidding me. It is your opinion that the act is not an intrinsic moral evil - you have free will you can accept this or reject it.
Um you are the one redefining here. And I am a sinner just like you, I am not worthy of entering the kingdom of God on my own, I am no better or worse then you, I have not denyed anyone my acceptance - have you done so to me because I dare to speak my mind?
Is drug abuse an evil?
Are drug abusers evil?
Can we say that drug abuse is a moral wrong, but still love and care about a person with a history of drug abuse?
But by those same points, Der Trihs could not be hateful - if he is misguided, or (translating into atheist) speaking the truth, then he isn’t being bigoted. Why should you be given leeway where he is not?
I suspect if people “knew it was never hateful”, they wouldn’t be arguing with you on it (unless they have a vendetta against you for some reason, which I haven’t noticed).
But I do have a question based on your position; you don’t believe gay people are inherently sinful, as it’s only homosexual (and only male, from your suggestions) sex that’s sinful. So, a gay person having homosexual sex would be in exactly the same state of sin that a straight person would be if they had sex with a person of their gender. Thus, gay people who abstain from sex are (assuming an otherwise perfect life) totally sinless. Is that correct as per your views?
Those who would have denied blacks the right to own property, or women the right to vote, were misguided–and quite hateful.
Whether or not the hate you spew is hate is a completely seperate matter from whether some important and possibly nonexistent being agrees with you. God could ordain you to kill all Jews, and in your twisted world it might be right but it’d still be hateful.
Sure it is. You can say that guitar playing is a sin and baseball playing isn’t, and then say that you’re not being hateful, but you are. Some people are guitar players and other people are baseball players, and trying to force one to become the other–through secular legislature!–because of some creature in the sky you’re imagining who’s babbling double-standard nonsense about guitars, is flat out wrong and is hatred, period. You can’t get around that by redefining “hate” so that the institutions you like are exempt and the ones you don’t like aren’t. Well, you can avoid responsibility in your mind, but the rest of us know what you are regardless.
How about marriage, hospital visitation, the power to make medical decisions, the list goes on…
Sibling marriage is a cultural and legal taboo based on scientific evidence that a child born to a mother and father closely related by blood runs an abnormally high risk of inheriting recessive-allele genetic defects. Gay marriage poses no such danger; in fact, it doesn’t pose any danger to anyone.
Do the fallacies never end?
OK, I’m willing to give you the benefit of the doubt here and figure that it’s possible that I misinterpreted you here:
First off, I can see that I may have figured you agreed wholly with the linked ideas, where you may not. Do you?
Secondly, let me explain my interpretation of this quote–you seem to be saying that the behavior of a woman loving a woman (for example) is wrong but that such a woman can be saved from her sin if she denies herself the love and affection she experiences as a basic human need. Is that what you’re saying? If so, I find that a double standard–you don’t expect heterosexuals to permanently deny their inner need for love and affection. I sincerely hope that neither you nor I ever know what it’s like to be forced forever to deny our own drives towards the love of another person–but please recognize that that’s what you’re asking of homosexuals. Well, that’s what the Pope’s asking, anyway. Seems like you agree, but I may be misinterpreting you.
FTR, I have not denied you my acceptance, either. You seem to me to hold no ill will. I feel you’re misguided, but I bet you feel that I’m misguided too; I accept that you and I have differing viewpoints, likely based on different life experiences, and I don’t think you’re a bad person or someone not worth talking to or accepting.
That simply makes God hateful as well.
And that’s hateful towards all of humanity.
To marry the person they want, fool.
Yeah, becuse hating something evil makes me a bigot.
If someone proclaims that they love me while whacking me with a stick (against my will), you’ll forgive me if that doesn’t get them very far with me. Same applies if the whacking is intellectual, legal, and political… in addition to inspiring others to the physical form as well.
True, but I’ve made this point with you a number of times in the past, as have any number of other people. There’s really not a whole lot of gain in trying to make the point with you because of your insistence on being a hateful bigot who makes himself feel better by wrapping his hateful bigotry in the trappings of religion, so there really isn’t much left other than calling you a fucking idiot.
You fucking idiot.
I do it for the practice.
Acting evil towards a certain group isn’t being hateful towards that group?
It is reaction that is hateful. The Pope may think (misguided or not) your way is harmful and wants to help you overcome it if you are willing - this is a show of love and compassion, Der Trihs may think (misguided or not) the Pope’s way is harmful and he wants the Pope to rot - Der Trihs is hateful.
Even if I accept this, the issue is who is the hateful one, the Pope or Der Trishs, I don’t know either’s stand on this issue.
Um, you are the one trying to redefine hate to exempt DT when he makes comments like the Pope and his … minions should rot, while trying to include people who are willing to help someone and really care about people - even if this help may be misguided you your opinion.
That list doesn’t exist, the rules are the same for straight and gays. Any consenting adult can marry any other consenting adult of the opposite gender. Once married they will have those rights. No one can be denied marriage due to sexual orientation AFAIK. Yes I know it is unfair if the love of your life is of the same gender.
Not all siblings can produce a child, 2 such combo’s are brother-brother and sister-sister ones, and they we have the issue that a hetro sibling couple, due to medical reasons, self inflicted or not, could not bear a child. These couples also pose no such danger. BUt you sidestep the question - is it hateful to be against sibling marriage?
Is it hateful to be against 12 yr olds marrying?
Do your redefinitions of hate never end?
No this is not what I’m saying, her acts can not get her into the Kingdom of God. If she never sinned from that point forward she by herself can not get in. Sins will bar us, and since we all sin none of us are worthy. God has provided a way to be cleansed of our sins, all our sins, so we may enter the Kingdom, to get that there is nothing we can or must physically do so to speak, it is the belief in Christ (and baptism by the Holy Sprit - but don’t want to go into this aspect now) that allows you to enter - that’s it - totally and completely. It allows us lowly earthlings crawling around in the filth of this planet to be acceptable to enter the Intergalactic Kingdom of God. Without this belief we have no more claim to this Kingdom then a mouse has living in your house, and will have a much harder time getting in the Jerry mouse can get into your home.
Exactly ;). I do have no ill will to anyone on this board, and enjoy your differing points of views (misguided as they are 
). I also get a occasional good laugh on some of the insults Otto hurls at me, he does have a great way with words. My views on homosexuality and homosexual marriage is not easially understood in a sound bite, and if I try it sounds terriable, it is only after people actually understand the thought process behind it do they see that their first impression is wrong - though they may still consider my views misguided.
Note most of those quotes above were from Fetus.
But back to the question from Revenant Threshold
False - people are inherently sinful - gays are people, therefore gays are inherently sinful
Homesexual sex, pre-martiatal sex, extra marital sex are just some of the sins that Christ must pay for us.
One person is in the same state of sin as every other - that being unworthy of entering the Kingdom of God. If a person could lead a perfect (sinless) life, gay or not, it is a divide by zero error - a black hole. I personally fill it with that person has reached nervana and could enter - but in real terms it ain’t happening.
You’re not comparing the same thing. To do so you’d need to find out whether Der Trihs would be happy to help people overcome their faith, or alternatively what the Pope’s views are on gay people who aren’t willing to give up sex. I can’t speak for Der Trihs, but i’m pretty certain the Pope’s view is that those people, who are accepting sin instead of attempting to resist it, are going to hell and are bad people. So i’d say it’s pretty equivalent - the Pope (and various other religious anti-gay people) shouldn’t be given more leeway on this matter than Der Trihs; if anything, he should be given less, since he actually has a very strong ability to change things.
Apologies, I didn’t see this post.
Let me redefine my question. Assume we have two people, a gay person and a straight one. They are both people, and so inherently sinful. Let’s assume through some twist of fate they’ve both sinned exactly the same amount. Both, however, have abstained from homosexual sex. Thus they are both exactly the same, sin-wise. Is this correct? Does it change at all if both have had gay sex at some point (i.e. are they both still the same sin-wise)?
Der Trihs Have you ever heard of the Bible story about the son who wanted to get his inheritance before his father died? If so was that a hateful father?
No it means we get free will - Yeah!!! It means we can mess up and still enter the Kingdom of God - Double Yeah!!!.
yes I know you would come back to this - and yes you are correct if the person you want is not a consenting adult of the opposite gender.
You have not proven, that the Pope and his minions are evil - at best misguided but caring. I did not see anywhere where the Pope wished that gays rot. If I did I would consider that hateful. The only place I saw that was in your post, and I’m not about to redefine hate to excuse you.
If it helps, yes I forgive you. And for the record I am not for, nor was I ever for, whacking homosexualls with a stick for their homosexuality, and taking a big leap here I suspect the Pope would be against it too.
I love you too
What evil act are you refering to?