Off-Topic: Elton John today

[skcin]

I must say, I'm actually pretty impressed that this thread is still open.

I don't have much to add to the discussion itself, except that you can believe something will happen (ie - all gays will go to hell) but that doesn't mean it WILL happen. it's NOT fact. it's belief. it's opinion. You can believe what you want, but others will probably disagree & that doesn't mean they are wrong.

I have noticed, Ed, that you've ended most of your posts with something like (this is NOT a direct quote) 'you have a right to your opinion, no matter how ignorant it is...' or something similar. Way to throw in YOUR judgement of others when bitching about them judging you. Haven't seen any of the "jesusy" people here say "you can do whatever you want, not matter how ignorant and disgusting and sick and horrific it is..." Implying someone is less intelligent than you are soley becuase you disagree with what they believe is kind of f*cked up.

Originally Posted by carrie721

-both are delicious dipped in peanut butter
-apples can fly for a little bit if you throw them real hard.

point, set, match.

Always the voice of reason.

[carrie721]

Originally Posted by trackaghost

It doesn't make sense to me either. Imagine someone who devotes their life to good, does great things, affects positive change in the world, shows people incredible kindness and through it all shows great humility, yet because they have "laid with men" and not repented for that one thing, they would be turned away from heaven? Crazy. If people are to be judged surely it should be on how they have treated others and not who they have loved? (Not that I think it's a sin anyway).

yeah, i don't understand why god would care. if there were a god, i would think he'd just want us to be good to each other.

Originally Posted by LiamMcConville

Why should any one grace you with a rational response when you've been posting nothing but irrational/extremist blabber?

Every post you've made in this thread has been equally judgmental & intolerant as the Christians you've accused throughout.

this is exactly why i've pretty much left the "gay community."

"i hate them because they hate us" is silly. i see the same kind of irrational groupthink in the gay community that they accuse the right wing/christians of exhibiting, except in the gay community it's laced with the acerbity of the so-called downtrodden. i left the church to get away from that sort of thing, not so i could running into the arms of another group that behaved the same way. it's not different or better if you're "right," it's the same old bullsh*t and it's plain ol' hypocrisy.

re my "so-called downtrodden" comment: of course i think gays get the short end of the stick in society. i'm not saying we should settle for that. but when you take on the mantle of victim and relish in it as so many have, that's when i have to step out of the ring.

Originally Posted by skcin

Always the voice of reason.

well, i'm pretty smart n junk.

[jaycee]

Originally Posted by carrie721

this is exactly why i've pretty much left the "gay community."

"i hate them because they hate us" is silly. i see the same kind of irrational groupthink in the gay community that they accuse the right wing/christians of exhibiting, except in the gay community it's laced with the acerbity of the so-called downtrodden. i left the church to get away from that sort of thing, not so i could running into the arms of another group that behaved the same way. it's not different or better if you're "right," it's the same old bullsh*t and it's plain ol' hypocrisy.

re my "so-called downtrodden" comment: of course i think gays get the short end of the stick in society. i'm not saying we should settle for that. but when you take on the mantle of victim and relish in it as so many have, that's when i have to step out of the ring.

Ooh, this is interesting! It's something I mull over (or related versions of it) quite a bit, and still haven't finalised an answer for myself! (See mum, I am unsure of myself occasionally! )
On the one hand I can empathise (I won't bother explaining why here) with the frustration oppressed communities have to endure, and I can appreciate why so many get vocal and passionate about it all. On the other hand, it can get to a point where you do indeed appear to be just as bad as the oppressors, which doesn't win much in the way of support. But then if noise isn't made to attract attention, no progress is made because the community is ignored.
At the moment I'd tentatively agree with what Lennon said (http://www.bestofyoutube.com/story.p...met-the-walrus) about violence begetting violence, with peace/love being the only way forward. That said, my rationalism can often come across as aggressive, probably because I like to either have someone tell me why I'm wrong or agree with me, while I often get (at least with some people) a kind of "agree to disagree"/"we'll each believe what we want to" response about things, which I simply can't stand - I hate any form of stagnation, to be honest! I really don't care whether I'm right or wrong about things at any given moment, so long as I'm striving to be right about everything. I mean, if you took all the things I argue passionately about, I'd consider them each to have about a 95%-99% chance of being right, but because I argue passionately about a lot of things, I'd say there's very little chance that I'm right about everything I argue passionately about!
By way of example, about... let's see, perhaps eight months ago, I ardently argued for scientific realism - I'd take on any anti-realist! Then I gathered more evidence and logic arguments, and I'm now an ardent scientific anti-realist! A rather opposite viewpoint, to be sure!
Basically, all I'm saying is that I don't like the notion of holding personal beliefs that are held in the face of rational argument or evidence. So while I often appear very stubborn, I'm ultimately pretty flexible underneath! My "core belief" set is pretty minimal (e.g. physicalism, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physicalism), with a lot of Occam's Razor employed! I try to get by with as few unprovable beliefs as I can!
What also usually doesn't help the appearance of my apparent stubbornness is that I don't like to argue about things I'm unsure of - I just listen to what people have to say, and slowly come to a well-defined, but in principle tentative, position.
Yet another rant from me! I hope the only people that read them can enjoy them, or at least find them informative!
PS. carrie721's absolutely right when she says that no-one should relish in being a victim - how can progress be made when you enjoy being victimised?!

EDIT: Wow! I didn't realise I had such a great capacity for irrelevance and stupidity! This must be one of my best efforts at that!
I'd delete this post out of embarrassment, except I think it's probably better to admit to my occasional stupidity rather than cover it up...

[LiamMcConville]

PS. carrie721's absolutely right when she says that no-one should relish in being a victim - how can progress be made when you enjoy being victimised?!

Relevent to discussion.

Originally Posted by jaycee

Ooh, this is interesting! It's something I mull over (or related versions of it) quite a bit, and still haven't finalised an answer for myself! (See mum, I am unsure of myself occasionally! )
On the one hand I can empathise (I won't bother explaining why here) with the frustration oppressed communities have to endure, and I can appreciate why so many get vocal and passionate about it all. On the other hand, it can get to a point where you do indeed appear to be just as bad as the oppressors, which doesn't win much in the way of support. But then if noise isn't made to attract attention, no progress is made because the community is ignored.
At the moment I'd tentatively agree with what Lennon said (http://www.bestofyoutube.com/story.p...met-the-walrus) about violence begetting violence, with peace/love being the only way forward. That said, my rationalism can often come across as aggressive, probably because I like to either have someone tell me why I'm wrong or agree with me, while I often get (at least with some people) a kind of "agree to disagree"/"we'll each believe what we want to" response about things, which I simply can't stand - I hate any form of stagnation, to be honest! I really don't care whether I'm right or wrong about things at any given moment, so long as I'm striving to be right about everything. I mean, if you took all the things I argue passionately about, I'd consider them each to have about a 95%-99% chance of being right, but because I argue passionately about a lot of things, I'd say there's very little chance that I'm right about everything I argue passionately about!
By way of example, about... let's see, perhaps eight months ago, I ardently argued for scientific realism - I'd take on any anti-realist! Then I gathered more evidence and logic arguments, and I'm now an ardent scientific anti-realist! A rather opposite viewpoint, to be sure!
Basically, all I'm saying is that I don't like the notion of holding personal beliefs that are held in the face of rational argument or evidence. So while I often appear very stubborn, I'm ultimately pretty flexible underneath! My "core belief" set is pretty minimal (e.g. physicalism, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physicalism), with a lot of Occam's Razor employed! I try to get by with as few unprovable beliefs as I can!
What also usually doesn't help the appearance of my apparent stubbornness is that I don't like to argue about things I'm unsure of - I just listen to what people have to say, and slowly come to a well-defined, but in principle tentative, position.
Yet another rant from me! I hope the only people that read them can enjoy them, or at least find them informative!

Irrelevent to discussion.

[Nikolaj]

how can progress be made when you enjoy being victimised?
(concluded someone!)

I bet it can't be! Can it? And enjoying being victimized? Nah, that'd be wacky. Wouldn't it?
(I was feeling an expert on 'wacky' for starting this thread to begin with, and actually unplugged my laptop for 3 days!) I felt embarrassed and dumb to have started this thread, but I'm glad to have had so many incredible comments to read that mostly elevated it all.
I've said it before and don't mean it to sound kiss a** -- but man, there are some real literary talents here on The Ledge, really.
Hello to gldstwmn, wherever she may be. She was the first Ledge writer to really captivate me and keep me coming back, to discover other excellent writers here regularly. The Ledge is really something, isn't it?*
*Okay, that sounds kiss a** for sure. Stop typing, now

[Zombie]

Originally Posted by carrie721

-both are delicious dipped in peanut butter
-apples can fly for a little bit if you throw them real hard.

point, set, match.

Aw shizz, you done got me there. That's it, everyone. The Internet is over! You ain't got to go home, but you got to get the hell out of here!

Originally Posted by Fiver

Hey Zombie, I've been thinking about this for the past few days as well. I've realized finally what HejiraNYC was trying to get across.

I snipped your reply for screen-saving's sake. I'm not upset with you or anything, and I think it takes a big person to own up to making a misstep or mistake, but we've all got to stop trying to compare sexual orientation to things like lying and adultery. As carrie pointed out, I can't say it's like comparing apples to 747s, as those are too similar after all, but they just don't belong in the same category regardless.

We would never compare engaging in hetereosexual activity to lying - something we shouldn't do because it has the potential to hurt other people or ourselves. As with heterosexual activity, as long as it is consensual, between partners that want to be there and are enjoying what's going on, homosexual activity doesn't hurt anyone like that.

Why should someone have to seek forgiveness for doing something that hasn't hurt anyone, that hasn't done anyone any wrong, including themselves? What's the point?

As for the "as long as I say I'm sorry, it's all better" portion of this, it may just be because I was dragged up quite Catholic, but I'm going to point to Canon 14 of the Council of Trent:

"If any one saith, that man is truly absolved from his sins and justified, because that he assuredly believed himself absolved and justified; or, that no one is truly justified but he who believes himself justified; and that, by this faith alone, absolution and justification are effected; let him be anathema."

I know that if you are Protestant, you are going most likely going to take issue with that - I know that most Protestants are all about the sola fide - but even being the godless heathen I myself am, I try to make sure I walk the walk, because I do not think it is enough to just talk the talk (not that I talk that particular sin/abomination/hell/whatever talk to begin with).

Originally Posted by trackaghost

It doesn't make sense to me either. Imagine someone who devotes their life to good, does great things, affects positive change in the world, shows people incredible kindness and through it all shows great humility, yet because they have "laid with men" and not repented for that one thing, they would be turned away from heaven? Crazy. If people are to be judged surely it should be on how they have treated others and not who they have loved? (Not that I think it's a sin anyway).

That's why I can't get behind religion - I mean, that, and the whole lack of belief in a deity thing, y'know. I don't need a book or other group of people to tell me what is and isn't the right thing to do. My own moral compass works just fine, and while I stumble from time to time, I genuinely try to be a good person. But that doesn't matter to a lot of people - they think I'm going to hell anyway.

Originally Posted by David

Normative Judaism highly prizes the person who does good deeds, but nonetheless considers homosexual acts a sin. The concept of sin, however, has a vastly different resonance in Judaism--sin requires repentance, true, but even unrepented sin doesn't lead to damnation. The idea of damnation, in fact, is alien to normative Judaism. Eternal punishment is a Christian tenet, not a Jewish one.

I bring this up also to raise a question: Earlier someone said that Christianity doesn't accept homosexuality because of the fear of hell, & yet Judaism, with no fear of hell, also doesn't approve of homosexuality--or, more accurately, homosexual acts.

Does anyone know how other major religions view this?

I know that Islam definitely thinks it damns you, and quite often thinks it means you should be put to death so you can get to the damning part faster, though there is a small minority of Muslim people that believe the Q'ran doesn't actually disallow for it.

For the Hindus, it depends on who you talk to. The Hindu Council in the UK says Hinduism does not codemn homosexuality, and, for example, there is a long tradition of the "third sex" in Indian culture, since the time of the Vedas. Many sects have intersexed deities, as well.

Buddhism is a different animal. Buddhism doesn't talk about acceptable sexual activity in its Pali scriptures, but Numbah 3 of the Five Precepts says you should refrain from sexual misconduct - that's not referring to any specific activity, though, so the views any particular Buddhist has on homosexuality will usually stem from cultural influence, hence the Dalai Lama's rather outspoken previous condemnations of it.

...I read a lot.

[Fiver]

I see what everyone is saying about comparing gays to liars and adulterers, but my intention wasn't to compare them, it was just to illustrate my point without singling out homosexuality as a sin.

So a better way to put it would've been; I commit *insert any sin here*, and I am a sinner. I actually don't know why I didn't do that in the first place. I just didn't wanna seem like I was setting myself apart from a person who happens to be gay, but it came across wrong.

Originally Posted by Zombie

I know that if you are Protestant, you are going most likely going to take issue with that - I know that most Protestants are all about the sola fide - but even being the godless heathen I myself am, I try to make sure I walk the walk, because I do not think it is enough to just talk the talk (not that I talk that particular sin/abomination/hell/whatever talk to begin with).

I see what you're saying, but I think I'm just bad at making my point, and I also don't exactly disagree with you. I was raised in an organized religion myself, and for me it tends to make me take for granted that people already understand my specific religion's doctrine on things. I realize that's crazy, seeing as how many different belief systems there are out there stemming from the Bible alone.

So to clear up what I was trying to say about sins, and asking forgiveness...

It's not like a free pass on sin. What I meant, but didn't really explain, was that you can ask for forgiveness for anything you've done (1John 1:9), but it's necessary to be truly repentant (true remorse for your actions and the intent to avoid sinning again) to receive that forgiveness. If you sin with the attitude, "Oh, well, I can just ask for forgiveness later." that's not real repentance. (Hebrew 10:26)

to me this:

As for the "as long as I say I'm sorry, it's all better" portion of this, it may just be because I was dragged up quite Catholic, but I'm going to point to Canon 14 of the Council of Trent:

"If any one saith, that man is truly absolved from his sins and justified, because that he assuredly believed himself absolved and justified; or, that no one is truly justified but he who believes himself justified; and that, by this faith alone, absolution and justification are effected; let him be anathema."

sounds like a take on 1 John 1:8-10

8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

To me, to 'confess your sins' means to acknowledge that you have sinned, to agree with God that you have done wrong, and not act as if you are justified in what you've done.

Also, I'll point out again, since some have taken offense at my previous post saying you have to accept Jesus as your Saviour to go to Heaven. This is my PERSONAL BELIEF. I hold faith in these things. It's not that I think you're an idiot if you don't, or that me simply stating these things means you should all immediately convert, so please don't get upset. Freedom, religious or otherwise, to express what you believe is a wonderful thing.

[Zombie]

Originally Posted by Fiver

I see what everyone is saying about comparing gays to liars and adulterers, but my intention wasn't to compare them, it was just to illustrate my point without singling out homosexuality as a sin.

So a better way to put it would've been; I commit *insert any sin here*, and I am a sinner. I actually don't know why I didn't do that in the first place. I just didn't wanna seem like I was setting myself apart from a person who happens to be gay, but it came across wrong.

Fair enough - and I still say it takes a big person to try to make amends and clear up previous statements instead of getting defensive and spazzing.

Originally Posted by Fiver

I see what you're saying, but I think I'm just bad at making my point, and I also don't exactly disagree with you. I was raised in an organized religion myself, and for me it tends to make me take for granted that people already understand my specific religion's doctrine on things. I realize that's crazy, seeing as how many different belief systems there are out there stemming from the Bible alone.

So to clear up what I was trying to say about sins, and asking forgiveness...

Snipping for brevity's sake again.

That makes much more sense. Also, you're not alone in doing that - many people, myself included, fall prey to just assuming other people "get" what we "get." I do it a lot.

Originally Posted by Fiver

sounds like a take on 1 John 1:8-10

I see why you made that connection, but Canon 14 actually refers to the justification by faith or works arguments raised by James 2:24 - "You see then that a man is justified by works, not by faith only." (KJV)

Originally Posted by Fiver

Also, I'll point out again, since some have taken offense at my previous post saying you have to accept Jesus as your Saviour to go to Heaven. This is my PERSONAL BELIEF. I hold faith in these things. It's not that I think you're an idiot if you don't, or that me simply stating these things means you should all immediately convert, so please don't get upset. Freedom, religious or otherwise, to express what you believe is a wonderful thing.

Don't worry - I don't give a flip if people think I'm going to heaven or not, because I don't believe in one.