Need help arguing against a gay marriage ban

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by markolas

Don't say "religion" when what you really mean is "Christianity."

Well, no. I mean pretty much all religion. I get that there are a few rouge ones out there that tolerate homosexuality, but they are in the vast minority.

[markolas]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Well, no. I mean pretty much all religion. I get that there are a few rouge ones out there that tolerate homosexuality, but they are in the vast minority.

I'm starting to understand how DrummerDeanna felt.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by markolas

I'm starting to understand how DrummerDeanna felt.

Well, it is not a personal thing to you or anyone. I am just citing to facts. And, please do not misunderstand me like I think Deanna and others did. I think religion is a great thing that does great things. I just think the powers to be in almost all organized religion use that true and real great thing as a tool to gain power and then misuse it. Certainly, the Catholic Church has done that with the ped. tragedy. I mean they knew these people were hurting kids and just shuffled them off to another Parish when caught. Then, when called out for that, they equated peds. with gay people because they knew a very significant number of people think all gay people are peds., which no data supports and they knew that. Does that mean all of the Catholic Church is a 100% bad organization? Of course not. I personally think the Church is a wonderful but very flawed and archaic organization as the facts indicate almost all organized religions are. So, what I do is take the good and leave the bad and also try to change the bad in whatever small way I can. But and again, this is not a personal attack on anyone's private religious beliefs unless those beliefs are along the lines of the Church did nothing wrong in the ped. scandals, which I then only point out is factually incorrect. I also think religion is a highly emotional topic for people because their lives are so emotionally involved in organized religion in one way or another and they see that belief crushed by stunts like this. I mean it is a little hard not to call Jerry Fallwell and his ilk prikcs because they are so full of hate and that pulpit hatred hurts people.

I hope that made sense and again, I am just noting facts.

[DavidMn]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Well, it is not a personal thing to you or anyone. I am just citing to facts. And, please do not misunderstand me like I think Deanna and others did. I think religion is a great thing that does great things. I just think the powers to be in almost all organized religion use that true and real great thing as a tool to gain power and then misuse it. Certainly, the Catholic Church has done that with the ped. tragedy. I mean they knew these people were hurting kids and just shuffled them off to another Parish when caught. Then, when called out for that, they equated peds. with gay people because they knew a very significant number of people think all gay people are peds., which no data supports and they knew that. Does that mean all of the Catholic Church is a 100% bad organization? Of course not. I personally think the Church is a wonderful but very flawed and archaic organization as the facts indicate almost all organized religions are. So, what I do is take the good and leave the bad and also try to change the bad in whatever small way I can. But and again, this is not a personal attack on anyone's private religious beliefs unless those beliefs are along the lines of the Church did nothing wrong in the ped. scandals, which I then only point out is factually incorrect. I also think religion is a highly emotional topic for people because their lives are so emotionally involved in organized religion in one way or another and they see that belief crushed by stunts like this. I mean it is a little hard not to call Jerry Fallwell and his ilk prikcs because they are so full of hate and that pulpit hatred hurts people.

I hope that made sense and again, I am just noting facts.

I get it. I've never been offended by what you've said.

[markolas]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Well, it is not a personal thing to you or anyone. I am just citing to facts. And, please do not misunderstand me like I think Deanna and others did. I think religion is a great thing that does great things. I just think the powers to be in almost all organized religion use that true and real great thing as a tool to gain power and then misuse it. Certainly, the Catholic Church has done that with the ped. tragedy. I mean they knew these people were hurting kids and just shuffled them off to another Parish when caught. Then, when called out for that, they equated peds. with gay people because they knew a very significant number of people think all gay people are peds., which no data supports and they knew that. Does that mean all of the Catholic Church is a 100% bad organization? Of course not. I personally think the Church is a wonderful but very flawed and archaic organization as the facts indicate almost all organized religions are. So, what I do is take the good and leave the bad and also try to change the bad in whatever small way I can. But and again, this is not a personal attack on anyone's private religious beliefs unless those beliefs are along the lines of the Church did nothing wrong in the ped. scandals, which I then only point out is factually incorrect. I also think religion is a highly emotional topic for people because their lives are so emotionally involved in organized religion in one way or another and they see that belief crushed by stunts like this. I mean it is a little hard not to call Jerry Fallwell and his ilk prikcs because they are so full of hate and that pulpit hatred hurts people.

I hope that made sense and again, I am just noting facts.

Well, I just kind of object to the idea that religion in general is this horrible thing, and the religions that aren't are these aberrations. But I guess since I'm a practitioner of one of those "rogue" religions you mentioned, I would have that opinion.

[amber]

Originally Posted by markolas

Well, I just kind of object to the idea that religion in general is this horrible thing, and the religions that aren't are these aberrations. But I guess since I'm a practitioner of one of those "rogue" religions you mentioned, I would have that opinion.

Aren't there few enough of the awesome religions to technically classify them as aberrations? I can only think of...2-3 awesome ones.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by amber

Aren't there few enough of the awesome religions to technically classify them as aberrations? I can only think of...2-3 awesome ones.

That cite I posted above goes into that. It should also be noted that even within the Christian Faiths, some sects "allow" it, a la the Episcopal Church.

[amber]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

That cite I posted above goes into that. It should also be noted that even within the Christian Faiths, some sects "allow" it, a la the Episcopal Church.

Yes, I was thinking of mentioning the sects - but according to my math, the ratio of "cool" ones (and the criteria isn't solely whether they accept homosexuals or not) to not cool ones would still be such that the cool ones could be defined as "aberrent". And perhaps I could give extra "bad" points to some of the middle eastern religious practices/beliefs?

I'll go read your link. That was a good description of the distinctions b/t Christian ity and Buddhism, BTW.

[markolas]

Originally Posted by amber

Aren't there few enough of the awesome religions to technically classify them as aberrations? I can only think of...2-3 awesome ones.

How are you defining "awesome"? And aren't there only 5 or 6 world religions to begin with?

[amber]

Originally Posted by markolas

How are you defining "awesome"? And aren't there only 5 or 6 world religions to begin with?

I don't have the exact numbers (especially counting sects) but I would still classify 1 out of 6 as abberant, statistically.

abberant

1. Deviating from the proper or expected course.
2. Deviating from what is normal; untrue to type.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by markolas

Well, I just kind of object to the idea that religion in general is this horrible thing, and the religions that aren't are these aberrations. But I guess since I'm a practitioner of one of those "rogue" religions you mentioned, I would have that opinion.

Again, organized religion, not religion itself, is the bad thing that hurts people.

Regarding your religion, to wit:

There are many schools, sects and subsects of Buddhism. As with Christianity, no consensus exists within Buddhism about gay and lesbian relationships. Buddhism is most concerned with whether an action is helpful and based on good intentions. This differs from Christianity which often evaluates an action, based on whether it is good or evil; positive or sinful according to a system of morality.

Apparently, the Buddha did not leave any teachings on homosexual orientation or homosexual behavior. He strongly encouraged his followers to "be a lamp onto yourself" -- to examine and test the truth of religious teachings before accepting them.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_budd.htm

[markolas]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Again, organized religion, not religion itself, is the bad thing that hurts people.

I don't think all organized religion is bad and hurts people.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by markolas

I don't think all organized religion is bad and hurts people.

The facts do not support you. All the ones I know of , save some sects and perhaps the Buds., of have and continue to do so. But and again, these same organizations do a tremendous amout of good as well. Does that outweigh the bad - who can say.

[Sugar]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Apparently, the Buddha did not leave any teachings on homosexual orientation or homosexual behavior. He strongly encouraged his followers to "be a lamp onto yourself" -- to examine and test the truth of religious teachings before accepting them.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_budd.htm

Are you certain on this one? If so, it's a fab point and one that dovetails nicely with your earlier point about the whole "not establishing one religion" thing in the Constitution.

But I'm sure you knew that...

[markolas]

Originally Posted by Sugar

Are you certain on this one? If so, it's a fab point and one that dovetails nicely with your earlier point about the whole "not establishing one religion" thing in the Constitution.

But I'm sure you knew that...

He's right. The Buddha didn't mention homosexuality.