Hayteria
24-12-2007, 02:31
First I want to clarify that I'm not anti-gay-rights more so anti-religion. Ok, with that out of the way, what's with homosexuals (assuming they aren't "repenting" for being homosexual) saying that they can be "Christian"? I frankly wonder why they would want to be, but that sounds like contradictory bullshit to me. Now granted I can't reasonably claim to know for sure, and I suppose it could depend on what you say "Christian" means. But I think most definitions that narrow it down reasonably well would easily explain why Christianity would be such a motive for people being so strongly opposed to things like gay marriage, gay adoption, etc... (outside of the obvious question of "why else would they?" that is...)
If you think Christianity refers to simply what is based on the bible, then you have the momentum of Leviticus 20:13 and Romans 1:26-27 against you (not to mention how 1 timothy 1:9-10 juxtaposes homosexuality with the murder of one's own parents) and you should know this given how frequently religious people throw these verses at gay rights advocates. The bible condemns homosexuality, so those who believe such religious ideas as that the bible is the "word of god" (or even that the bible condemning something means that it must be immoral) will be led by religious ideas to regard homosexuality as evil, and, as such, fearing homosexuals; wouldn't it therefore make sense that homophobia would come from that?
If you think Christianity is defined more so by the people who follow it, then there's still problems with that. One good comparison between Christianity and homophobia is that both seem rather "of the majority" (or "popular" if you will) and as such it would seem that the same who are pro-religion would probably generally tend to be anti-gay. But if you are to say that you don't mean Christians as a general whole but those who lead it, the pope isn't exactly a gay rights advocate either, to put it mildly. And if you say to be Christian means to not lie or murder, then that's just Christian-centric when you think about it; you're randomly associating certain ethical principles that go across many different cultures and even outside religion with Christianity as if they're somehow exclusive to it. My mom is a Christian (or at least claims to be) and I'd say that I, as someone who is anti-religion, (not sure yet whether I qualify as agnostic or atheist) probably value honesty more than her. She's encouraged me to lie before; for example when she bought something for a cousin of mine she told me to tell that cousin that I (as opposed to my mom) bought it for that cousin. Granted, I gave in, but before then I was inclined not to. Does this make me "more Christian" than my mom? Odd, since my parents want to take me to church tomorrow (Christmas eve) when I think I'm lucky I got through "sunday school" (I don't think it deserves the "school" title) without getting brainwashed given all the scare-tactics they use. Even as I'm typing this from my bedroom I'm trying to ignore the Christmas caroling coming from my parents and their friends in the living room.
So let's rule the "don't murder and lie" part out and leave a choice between Christian scripture, common Christian people, and Christian leaders. In this case, these different perspectives point in the same direction; leading to the idea that Christianity is therefore in conflict with homosexuality. As such, if you are a homosexual, the logical conclusion is that you can't be Christian. But this does not make you bad people; not at all. It means you're up against religion if you wish to stand up for yourself. You aren't the only group, and you're not disadvantaged by religion to the same extent as me...
I have type 1 diabetes. (Disclaimer: I do not in any way claim to speak for diabetics; I've heard of diabetics who are against ESCR ironically) Basically, my body doesn't manage blood glucose levels and as such I have to manage them manually, and if my blood glucose goes low enough I might pass out and die, and if my blood glucose goes too high too often, I could go blind. And it's harder to manage it than it might sound. Embryonic stem cell research has potential to cure my condition, (among many other medical conditions as well, I think...) but religious beliefs are suppressing that research by claiming that it is immoral because it destroys "human life" to get the cells. The embryos used are only a few days old so there's little to no reason to believe these embryos have consciousness to lose, as such forcing death upon someone (what I see as the problem with murder) doesn't apply to ESCR. But according to religious morality it doesn't matter whether it's sentient life that's being destroyed or not, it's human life therefore it's just as important as the patients that research on it would be protecting. Some people might think that it would be sentient because it has a "soul" but that's also a religious belief as well, not to mention a nonsensical one. So let's rule out the whole "souls" part and say it doesn't do harm and is therefore only considered immoral because of conformity to what religion considered right and wrong. Same thing with homosexuality when you think about it; one has to wonder what harm homosexuality does, but people say it's immoral just because the bible says so. (AARRGGHHH the people in the living room have gotten to the "little lord Jesus asleep on the hay" bullshit :headbang:) So really, gay rights requires AT LEAST secularism, which religion often tends to create opposition to, and the same reasonings that apply against ESCR apply against homosexuality.
However, are people who merely can't marry the ones they love as bad off as those who have the constant risk of either dying or going blind? If not, then homosexuals who say they can be "Christian" need to stop bullshitting themselves and face that they are indeed up against the choke chain of religion, the same thing that's choking those of us with medical conditions curable through ESCR to a probably further extent.
So please, keep this in mind anyone else here who's going to be going to church tomorrow evening, whether because you want to or because you're being dragged off to it.
If you think Christianity refers to simply what is based on the bible, then you have the momentum of Leviticus 20:13 and Romans 1:26-27 against you (not to mention how 1 timothy 1:9-10 juxtaposes homosexuality with the murder of one's own parents) and you should know this given how frequently religious people throw these verses at gay rights advocates. The bible condemns homosexuality, so those who believe such religious ideas as that the bible is the "word of god" (or even that the bible condemning something means that it must be immoral) will be led by religious ideas to regard homosexuality as evil, and, as such, fearing homosexuals; wouldn't it therefore make sense that homophobia would come from that?
If you think Christianity is defined more so by the people who follow it, then there's still problems with that. One good comparison between Christianity and homophobia is that both seem rather "of the majority" (or "popular" if you will) and as such it would seem that the same who are pro-religion would probably generally tend to be anti-gay. But if you are to say that you don't mean Christians as a general whole but those who lead it, the pope isn't exactly a gay rights advocate either, to put it mildly. And if you say to be Christian means to not lie or murder, then that's just Christian-centric when you think about it; you're randomly associating certain ethical principles that go across many different cultures and even outside religion with Christianity as if they're somehow exclusive to it. My mom is a Christian (or at least claims to be) and I'd say that I, as someone who is anti-religion, (not sure yet whether I qualify as agnostic or atheist) probably value honesty more than her. She's encouraged me to lie before; for example when she bought something for a cousin of mine she told me to tell that cousin that I (as opposed to my mom) bought it for that cousin. Granted, I gave in, but before then I was inclined not to. Does this make me "more Christian" than my mom? Odd, since my parents want to take me to church tomorrow (Christmas eve) when I think I'm lucky I got through "sunday school" (I don't think it deserves the "school" title) without getting brainwashed given all the scare-tactics they use. Even as I'm typing this from my bedroom I'm trying to ignore the Christmas caroling coming from my parents and their friends in the living room.
So let's rule the "don't murder and lie" part out and leave a choice between Christian scripture, common Christian people, and Christian leaders. In this case, these different perspectives point in the same direction; leading to the idea that Christianity is therefore in conflict with homosexuality. As such, if you are a homosexual, the logical conclusion is that you can't be Christian. But this does not make you bad people; not at all. It means you're up against religion if you wish to stand up for yourself. You aren't the only group, and you're not disadvantaged by religion to the same extent as me...
I have type 1 diabetes. (Disclaimer: I do not in any way claim to speak for diabetics; I've heard of diabetics who are against ESCR ironically) Basically, my body doesn't manage blood glucose levels and as such I have to manage them manually, and if my blood glucose goes low enough I might pass out and die, and if my blood glucose goes too high too often, I could go blind. And it's harder to manage it than it might sound. Embryonic stem cell research has potential to cure my condition, (among many other medical conditions as well, I think...) but religious beliefs are suppressing that research by claiming that it is immoral because it destroys "human life" to get the cells. The embryos used are only a few days old so there's little to no reason to believe these embryos have consciousness to lose, as such forcing death upon someone (what I see as the problem with murder) doesn't apply to ESCR. But according to religious morality it doesn't matter whether it's sentient life that's being destroyed or not, it's human life therefore it's just as important as the patients that research on it would be protecting. Some people might think that it would be sentient because it has a "soul" but that's also a religious belief as well, not to mention a nonsensical one. So let's rule out the whole "souls" part and say it doesn't do harm and is therefore only considered immoral because of conformity to what religion considered right and wrong. Same thing with homosexuality when you think about it; one has to wonder what harm homosexuality does, but people say it's immoral just because the bible says so. (AARRGGHHH the people in the living room have gotten to the "little lord Jesus asleep on the hay" bullshit :headbang:) So really, gay rights requires AT LEAST secularism, which religion often tends to create opposition to, and the same reasonings that apply against ESCR apply against homosexuality.
However, are people who merely can't marry the ones they love as bad off as those who have the constant risk of either dying or going blind? If not, then homosexuals who say they can be "Christian" need to stop bullshitting themselves and face that they are indeed up against the choke chain of religion, the same thing that's choking those of us with medical conditions curable through ESCR to a probably further extent.
So please, keep this in mind anyone else here who's going to be going to church tomorrow evening, whether because you want to or because you're being dragged off to it.