The Gay Megathread (see mod note on post #2212)

Benny_Cake · 23-01-2013 06:58PM

totus tuus wrote: »

I don't have one! I thought it might be of interest to others!

I'm amazed that someone would have no opinion at all on such an extreme piece of legislation. It would seem to be in complete violation of the European Convention on Human Rights which Russia has signed up to.

wonderfulname · 23-01-2013 07:11PM

philologos wrote: »

It's funny that in his first term he didn't agree with same-sex marriage and now he does. Seems a bit like flip flopping for the electorate.

He clarified his position during his first term, he was never against same sex marriage, he simply never took an official position, hardly flip flopping, regardless it's more interesting as a reflection of public sentiment than an individual opinion.

JimiTime · 23-01-2013 07:21PM

philologos wrote: »

It's funny that in his first term he didn't agree with same-sex marriage and now he does. Seems a bit like flip flopping for the electorate.

It will be interesting to see how the US pans out.

Originally Pastor Louie Giglio was invited to pray at the inaugural ceremony, but he was disinvited when they realised that he had preached an evangelical sermon in the mid-1990s entitled, “In Search of a Standard—Christian Response to Homosexuality.”

They said, that in the name of diversity and inclusion they had disinvited him. The US seem to want to continue to at least pay lip service to God, yet want to move away from him. Its like many governments of the modern age. It will be interesting to see how this clash pans out.

JimiTime · 23-01-2013 07:28PM

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Or maybe it is that people can not change their mind once they become politicians / elected?

It is a shame that we come to forums like this where atheists and theists accuse each other of being close minded, not being open to evidence or having their opinions changed and more. "Stubborn" this. "Strident" that. "Biased" the other.

Then when someone actually DOES change their mind on an issue they are derided as flip flopping, or political pandering and more.

It seems one can not win with these people. Something tells me had it been the other way around and he had moved from a pro- to anti- gay marriage stance that philologos would not be calling it "flip flopping" but things like "seeing the light" or "a welcome change of policy".

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Here is a mad thought.

Perhaps he examined the arguments for and against and decided that the pro case was indeed the more compelling.

Or are you suggesting that people can't change their minds once they have considered all the aspects of an issue?

That the ability to say 'I now believe in this cause' is a sign of weakness?

Links234 wrote: »

Flip flopping? Really? This is the man that ended don't ask don't tell, wrote into law the hate crimes prevention act, appointed the first transgender presidential appointee, I think his statement about equality is perfectly representative of his view and his actions as US president.

TBH, if the shoe was on the other foot, I'm sure he'd be at the forked end of your tongue, and accusations of flip flopping would be rife. I certainly can't imagine you guys saying, 'Maybe he weighed things up and changed his mind etc'.
At the end of the day, he's a politician, so it should really be of no surprise that he plays the game.

totus tuus · 23-01-2013 07:54PM

Benny_Cake wrote: »

I'm amazed that someone would have no opinion at all on such an extreme piece of legislation. It would seem to be in complete violation of the European Convention on Human Rights which Russia has signed up to.

I was keeping my opinions to myself. Sodomy is one of the sins crying out to heaven for vengeance, so in principal I agree with Russia, and if they do likewise with abortion, even better! However, I would hate to see anyone made the victim of prejudice and oppression!

tommy2bad · 23-01-2013 08:09PM

totus tuus wrote: »

I was keeping my opinions to myself.
Please do if this is the type of rubbish it consists of!
Sodomy is one of the sins crying out to heaven for vengeance, so in principal I agree with Russia, and if they do likewise with abortion, even better! Now let the flak begin........

Incomming!!!
FFS stop with the sodomy thing it's old a longtime now. You should know that the sin of Sodom that cry to heaven for vengeance is not homosexuality but inhospitality to strangers. I'm not going to bother prooftexting it for you, do your own googling.

philologos · 23-01-2013 08:31PM

wonderfulname wrote: »

He clarified his position during his first term, he was never against same sex marriage, he simply never took an official position, hardly flip flopping, regardless it's more interesting as a reflection of public sentiment than an individual opinion.

This is how he defined marriage in 2008 when interviewed by Rick Warren:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=criiu2h3ZAk

Bannasidhe · 23-01-2013 08:59PM

philologos wrote: »

This is how he defined marriage in 2008 when interviewed by Rick Warren:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=criiu2h3ZAk

So what?

This is 2013.

Have you never made a statement about something only to change your point of view some years later?

philologos · 23-01-2013 09:03PM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

So what?

This is 2013.

Have you never made a statement about something only to change your point of view some years later?

Right before an election seems dodgy.

I think he agreed with it all along, even in 2008. The only difference was that in 2008 he knew that most Americans disagreed with same-sex marriage. There's evidence to suggest he may have agreed with it in 1996.

I prefer someone who has the courage to stand up for their convictions irrespective of public opinion. It doesn't inspire much trust if people are willing to lie to you in order to get your support.

Bannasidhe · 23-01-2013 09:05PM

philologos wrote: »

Right before an election seems dodgy.

I think he agreed with it all along, even in 2008. The only difference was that in 2008 he knew that most Americans disagreed with same-sex marriage.

So by that logic the majority of Americans now agree with same-sex marriage.

Good news all round then.

philologos · 23-01-2013 09:06PM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

So by that logic the majority of Americans now agree with same-sex marriage.

Good news all round then.

At present 53%.

My point concerns Obama.

Bannasidhe · 23-01-2013 09:12PM

philologos wrote: »

At present 53%.

My point concerns Obama.

But its a nothing point.

Find me a politico of any persuasion who hasn't at some point contradicted themselves - now that would be worth commenting on.

wonderfulname · 23-01-2013 09:35PM

philologos wrote: »

This is how he defined marriage in 2008 when interviewed by Rick Warren:

Here's a full history of his opinions; http://2012.presidential-candidates.org/Obama/Same-Sex.php

Up until last year I would have seen him as trying to please everyone, the gist of what he was putting out was his religous beliefs were X, but if you believed Y you should be allowed recognise it, everyone should be equal in the eyes of the law, but that's state law, not fedral, so don't ask him to do anything!

If you're to dismiss any of his actions as politically motivated I'd go with those! But anyway, as I said his opinions are largely irrelevant, that the American public voted in a candidate voicing clear support for marriage equality is the telling part.

JimiTime · 23-01-2013 09:39PM

philologos wrote: »

Right before an election seems dodgy.

I think he agreed with it all along, even in 2008. The only difference was that in 2008 he knew that most Americans disagreed with same-sex marriage. There's evidence to suggest he may have agreed with it in 1996.

I prefer someone who has the courage to stand up for their convictions irrespective of public opinion. It doesn't inspire much trust if people are willing to lie to you in order to get your support.

Is it surprising though? Politics is a game. A quest for power. In order to be in a position where you are running for an office like the Presidency of the US, I'd say integrity will have been sacrificed many years earlier. There is no doubt in my mind that this is not a flip flop. He simply deceived the public, which is what politicians do in the quest for election victory.

NuMarvel · 23-01-2013 10:20PM

totus tuus wrote: »

I was keeping my opinions to myself. Sodomy is one of the sins crying out to heaven for vengeance, so in principal I agree with Russia, and if they do likewise with abortion, even better! However, I would hate to see anyone made the victim of prejudice and oppression!

Then you must be against the legislation you claim to support in principle. Because reading the article you linked to clearly shows it will do nothing but continue to make gay men and women the victims of prejudice and oppression, not to mention violence.

And it's claims that sodomy calls out for vengeance that makes it easier for people like the dozen masked men to attack patrons of a gay-friendly club and destroy private property. I'm sure those men felt especially empowered when a Orthodox priest turned around the next day and he regretted that he couldn't participate in the attack, and calls gay people "scum".

philologos · 23-01-2013 10:27PM

JimiTime wrote: »

Is it surprising though? Politics is a game. A quest for power. In order to be in a position where you are running for an office like the Presidency of the US, I'd say integrity will have been sacrificed many years earlier. There is no doubt in my mind that this is not a flip flop. He simply deceived the public, which is what politicians do in the quest for election victory.

Oh yeah entirely. I mean I'm equally skeptical of the current Tory government in terms of it's policies in Britain. Politics is a populist game that often involves little honesty or courage if any. People don't stand by their policies or their words and too often aim to wriggle out of them.

SoulandForm · 23-01-2013 11:01PM

Its not that extreme at all.

Homosexuality was illegal full stop both in the Republic of Ireland and in Northern Ireland until very,very recently and I believe the legalization in both cases was forced on the Irish people by the EU government.All this Russian legislation is doing is banning the promotion of homosexuality and the lifestyle that invariably almost goes with it- the vanity, promiscuity, drug taking, increased rates of suicide, etc.In the west kids are being brainwashed into thinking that homosexuality is just as much healthy and natural as hetrosexuality- and when the negative consequences of leading a homosexual lifestyle are pointed out people invariably blame hetrosexual oppression but the reality is the more liberated the homosexual lifestyle becomes the more people trapped in it are killing themselves. Would banning the promotion of heroin taking also be in complete violation of the European Convention on Human Rights?

Benny_Cake wrote: »

I'm amazed that someone would have no opinion at all on such an extreme piece of legislation. It would seem to be in complete violation of the European Convention on Human Rights which Russia has signed up to.

Bannasidhe · 23-01-2013 11:21PM

SoulandForm wrote: »

Its not that extreme at all.

Homosexuality was illegal full stop both in the Republic of Ireland and in Northern Ireland until very,very recently and I believe the legalization in both cases was forced on the Irish people by the EU government.All this Russian legislation is doing is banning the promotion of homosexuality and the lifestyle that invariably almost goes with it- the vanity, promiscuity, drug taking, increased rates of suicide, etc.In the west kids are being brainwashed into thinking that homosexuality is just as much healthy and natural as hetrosexuality- and when the negative consequences of leading a homosexual lifestyle are pointed out people invariably blame hetrosexual oppression but the reality is the more liberated the homosexual lifestyle becomes the more people trapped in it are killing themselves. Would banning the promotion of heroin taking also be in complete violation of the European Convention on Human Rights?

Honestly - do you really believe this nonsense?

Would you also use these terms 'the vanity, promiscuity, drug taking, increased rates of suicide, etc.' to describe, for example, every teenager?

Would you have promoting being a teenager illegal? Or acting like a teenager?

I am a homosexual, I am not vainer then anyone else - probably less as I find the fact that I do not wear make-up or need to shave means I rarely have look in a mirror beyond a quick check of the hair.
I am in a long-term stable monogamous relationship.
Does coffee count as a drug? I rarely even drink alcohol.
I obviously haven't committed suicide...

I am a middle aged woman, well-educated, pay my mortgage, do my job, walk my dogs, spend time baking with my grandkids, chat on the phone to my mother and am partial to a good murder mystery on the Tele.

My homosexual 'lifestyle' would be the envy of my heterosexual friends and relations if it wasn't for the fact that it is exactly the same as theirs.

NuMarvel · 24-01-2013 12:06AM

SoulandForm wrote: »

Its not that extreme at all.

Homosexuality was illegal full stop both in the Republic of Ireland and in Northern Ireland until very,very recently and I believe the legalization in both cases was forced on the Irish people by the EU government.All this Russian legislation is doing is banning the promotion of homosexuality and the lifestyle that invariably almost goes with it- the vanity, promiscuity, drug taking, increased rates of suicide, etc.In the west kids are being brainwashed into thinking that homosexuality is just as much healthy and natural as hetrosexuality- and when the negative consequences of leading a homosexual lifestyle are pointed out people invariably blame hetrosexual oppression but the reality is the more liberated the homosexual lifestyle becomes the more people trapped in it are killing themselves. Would banning the promotion of heroin taking also be in complete violation of the European Convention on Human Rights?

This homosexual lifestyle sounds nothing like the one I've been living! Hell, I didn't even realise there was a homosexual lifestyle. I thought I was an individual living my own life, but clearly, as a liberalised homosexual certain things are expected of me.

I'm very very sorry, and going forth, I shall engage in the sex and the drugs on a most frequent basis!

Soulandfarm, you have obviously done a lot of research into this. I might need to call on your superior expertise to make sure I'm doing it all right.

philologos · 24-01-2013 12:10AM

JimiTime wrote: »

It will be interesting to see how the US pans out.

Originally Pastor Louie Giglio was invited to pray at the inaugural ceremony, but he was disinvited when they realised that he had preached an evangelical sermon in the mid-1990s entitled, “In Search of a Standard—Christian Response to Homosexuality.”

They said, that in the name of diversity and inclusion they had disinvited him. The US seem to want to continue to at least pay lip service to God, yet want to move away from him. Its like many governments of the modern age. It will be interesting to see how this clash pans out.

I heard about this on The Gospel Coalition. It's truly bizarre that a teaching that was essentially orthodox Christianity from the beginning to the present is regarded as "extreme" and "bigoted".

Cossax · 24-01-2013 01:18AM

philologos wrote: »

I heard about this on The Gospel Coalition. It's truly bizarre that a teaching that was essentially orthodox Christianity from the beginning to the present is regarded as "extreme" and "bigoted".

Simply a sign that society is becoming more tolerant - the fact that something has been believed/not questioned for a long time hardly makes it unbigoted or acceptable to all for the rest of human history.

JimiTime · 24-01-2013 02:53AM

philologos wrote: »

I heard about this on The Gospel Coalition. It's truly bizarre that a teaching that was essentially orthodox Christianity from the beginning to the present is regarded as "extreme" and "bigoted".

I think we'll start to see ACTUAL bigotry and intolerance (IMO, its already begun), but of course, in an Orwellian twist, it'll be sold as tolerance and inclusion. Watch this space.

nozzferrahhtoo · 24-01-2013 08:55AM

JimiTime wrote: »

TBH, if the shoe was on the other foot, I'm sure he'd be at the forked end of your tongue, and accusations of flip flopping would be rife.

You can be sure all you want. That does not make it true. I can only speak for myself however... but I can tell you that "flip flopping" is not an issue for me. I simply do not _care_ what a persons opinion was in the past or how many times (if at all) they changed it.

The only thing that is important to me is A) What a person's opinion is at the current time and

What his arguments, evidence, data and reasoning is to substantiate that position.

So despite your confidence in what my actions would be I can tell you it is false and whether someone goes from anti gay to pro gay, or the other way around, my question for them is the same: "Really? Why do you think that then?".

As I said I really think it is a sad state of affairs that the discourse between theists and atheists is rife with accusations of bias and close mindedness. Yet when someone actually does change their mind on an issue they are accused of weakness, flip flopping or pandering. "Damned if you do and Damned if you don't" has never sounded so true.

aloyisious · 24-01-2013 08:59AM

One of the things that amazes me about people professing to be Christian is when they come on and say things involving vengeance or storm the gates of heaven. I mean, come on: how do they think think the God they profess belief in would react if some-one came storming to his gates, or ranted to him about vengeance to heaven? I know that if I was the Allmighty, I suspect that I'd probably be scratching my head and thinking "WTF" in godly terms. Don't they know how stupid they actually sound?

philologos · 24-01-2013 09:32AM

Cossax wrote: »

Simply a sign that society is becoming more tolerant - the fact that something has been believed/not questioned for a long time hardly makes it unbigoted or acceptable to all for the rest of human history.

I tolerate disagreement with me on a broad range of issues including this one. I don't applaud what I believe is wrong though. Tolerance just means agreeing to disagree. It doesn't mean applauding what one knows is wrong.

I don't believe society is becoming more tolerant rather it is becoming less so in respect to those who hold to traditional marriage as being distinct from civil unions.

IMO - I'm more concerned that secular godless influences don't corrupt Biblical teaching in churches and ultimately keeps people from salvation by denying Jesus as Lord.

What's interesting is that every single person who claims to be Christian who supports subverting Scriptural authority on this issue has denied penal substitution. The latest example is Steve Chalke of Oasis Waterloo.

As a Christian I see it as my responsibility to contend for the Biblical gospel in our churches and strongly oppose any other secular gospel twisting Christianity. Its hugely important that we teach Biblical Christianity in our churches because anything else is a gospel of man rather than of God. It's simply not worth following, its an imitation of the real thing.

This is a really serious issue from a Biblical point of view.

lazygal · 24-01-2013 09:51AM

philologos wrote: »

I tolerate disagreement with me on a broad range of issues including this one. I don't applaud what I believe is wrong though. Tolerance just means agreeing to disagree. It doesn't mean applauding what one knows is wrong.

I don't believe society is becoming more tolerant rather it is becoming less so in respect to those who hold to traditional marriage as being distinct from civil unions.

IMO - I'm more concerned that secular godless influences don't corrupt Biblical teaching in churches and ultimately keeps people from salvation by denying Jesus as Lord.

What's interesting is that every single person who claims to be Christian who supports subverting Scriptural authority on this issue has denied penal substitution. The latest example is Steve Chalke of Oasis Waterloo.

As a Christian I see it as my responsibility to contend for the Biblical gospel in our churches and strongly oppose any other secular gospel twisting Christianity. Its hugely important that we teach Biblical Christianity in our churches because anything else is a gospel of man rather than of God. It's simply not worth following, its an imitation of the real thing.

This is a really serious issue from a Biblical point of view.

I think the lessening of tolerance towards bigotry and homophobia can only be a good thing. I think the more secular society denormalises discrimination on the basis of sexuality, the better. Of course if individual 'Christians' want to condemn others based on a 2,000 year old book there's not a lot society can do about that, apart from try to get them to see the error of their ways through tolerance and understanding. I see that as my job as a responsible citizen when I encounter people who promote bigotry of any kind, especially when its couched in a persecution complex. I need to show them that they are wrong and the only way they can really be part of civil society is to stop thinking that people who are gay should be discriminated against.

philologos · 24-01-2013 09:53AM

JimiTime wrote: »

I think we'll start to see ACTUAL bigotry and intolerance (IMO, its already begun), but of course, in an Orwellian twist, it'll be sold as tolerance and inclusion. Watch this space.

Buckle up. I know where I stand anyway. I have the assurance that irrespective of what earthly government might say or do that Jesus is Lord over all.

philologos · 24-01-2013 09:59AM

lazygal wrote: »

I think the lessening of tolerance towards bigotry and homophobia can only be a good thing. I think the more secular society denormalises discrimination on the basis of sexuality, the better. Of course if individual 'Christians' want to condemn others based on a 2,000 year old book there's not a lot society can do about that, apart from try to get them to see the error of their ways through tolerance and understanding. I see that as my job as a responsible citizen when I encounter people who promote bigotry of any kind, especially when its couched in a persecution complex. I need to show them that they are wrong and the only way they can really be part of civil society is to stop thinking that people who are gay should be discriminated against.

I have no interest in condemning anyone. God is the final judge.

What I do have an interest in is standing up for Biblical truth. That marriage in a Christian context is the union between a man and a woman. If people try to change that in my church they will be met with my opposition, and hopefully the opposition of many others.

The point of Christianity in a nutshell is that Jesus stood in our place on the cross and rose again three days later that if we repent and trust in Him we will be forgiven abs receive eternal life.

I long for all people to be saved and for none to be condemned, not even my worst enemy.

How wrong you are about me!

philologos · 24-01-2013 10:01AM

Benny_Cake wrote: »

I'm amazed that someone would have no opinion at all on such an extreme piece of legislation. It would seem to be in complete violation of the European Convention on Human Rights which Russia has signed up to.

Any reasonable people should strongly oppose that law. Although I strongly disagree on redefining marriage, I also strongly disagree with draconian laws like this.

lazygal · 24-01-2013 10:03AM

philologos wrote: »

I have no interest in condemning anyone. God is the final judge.

What I do have an interest in is standing up for Biblical truth. That marriage in a Christian context is the union between a man and a woman. If people try to change that in my church they will be met with my opposition, and hopefully the opposition of many others.

The point of Christianity in a nutshell is that Jesus stood in our place on the cross and rose again three days later that if we repent and trust in Him we will be forgiven abs receive eternal life.

I long for all people to be saved and for none to be condemned, not even my worst enemy.

How wrong you are about me!

I long for people to stop being so obsessed about how adults express their love and for whom. I long for a secular society where faith is a personal thing. I've been purposed in life to promote secularism and tolerance, nothing is more important than people repenting for the their bigotry and hatred and rejecting the out of date teachings of a 2,000 year old book. The point of secularism in a nutshell is that religion is a private matter but the civil, public sphere holds no truck with discrimination based on superstition.

I long for all people to realise they don't need to be worrying about what happens after death, better to live a good and tolerant life here and now.

How wrong you are about me!

The Gay Megathread (see mod note on post #2212)

Comments