|
Post by toosmall on May 12, 2005 21:36:49 GMT -5
You should feel lucky to have people like that around you. When people found out I was bi the harassment didnt stop for over a year.
|
|
|
Post by flatandgreen on May 12, 2005 21:50:02 GMT -5
I am RIDICULOUSLY lucky and know that. A lot of my friends have had a much more difficult time of it. Wherever I've gone and whoever I've told, it's been a very positive experience and I can't say why.
I can't believe how obsessed people can be over sex, especially when it's sex they're not having! I have no idea why it affects them anyway, because they're so psycho and cruel that I'd never hit on them. They're "safe," so what's the problem?
|
|
|
Post by lilsx1 on May 13, 2005 17:20:45 GMT -5
It's because people are ignorant or because they have been raised with religion aka man's opinionated, misinformed and again, ignorant and twisted views on the subject. It doesn't matter if gays talk to kids about it, they are just telling kids what it is and I doubt that kids are going to grow up and turn gay just because gays talked to them about it. Kids are influenced by drugs, sex, drinking and peer pressure of all sorts every day at school - making an educated decision or realizing that they are not alone (if gay) is probably better than being ashamed or being taunted about it. WHO CARES!!!! Yeah you all have opinions but that's all that it is - YOUR opinion. God is the one who knows all hearts and understands us... so let them be, let them make their own decisions, it's between them and God and God hasn't asked you to help Him out has He? Some people have nothing better to do than to judge others. They suck and aren't worth your thoughts or time and energy. I surround myself with friends that love me for me. I am "straight" but admire women as they are sexually more attractive and appealing and I have been/want to be with women again. So if those tendencies are in me, an every day straight person and I am not all the way bi, just have those feelings now and again - who is to say it's not normal. Like my mom said, "There will always be people who love you and people who don't." and I like the quote, "It is better to be hated for who you are than loved for who you are not."
|
|
|
Post by lilsx1 on May 13, 2005 17:43:42 GMT -5
I just wanted to add that we were created in God's image and I have a daughter that I know if she grew up and turned out to be a lesbian serial killer who did drugs and stole every chance she got - I would STILL LOVE HER WITH ALL MY HEART. If love for a child is that strong in our limited capacity as humans, imagine the love that God must have for ALL of us... stop judging. You are not God!
|
|
WWJD
New Member
Posts: 8
|
Post by WWJD on May 13, 2005 23:48:45 GMT -5
34Jesus replied, "I tell you the truth, everyone who sins is a slave to sin. 35Now a slave has no permanent place in the family, but a son belongs to it forever. 36So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed. John 8:34-36 5This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you: God is light; in him there is no darkness at all. 6If we claim to have fellowship with him yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live by the truth. 7But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all sin. 8If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. 9If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. 1 John 1:4-9 13 He who conceals his sins does not prosper, but whoever confesses and renounces them finds mercy. Proverbs 28:13 6Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. John 14:6
Christians are not to judge but to help guide and to help those who are with out Christ to see their sins and to be saved and christians need help to stay sinnless, but we all sin and those who walk with Christ repents to become right with God. We try not to live in sin, but God knows we are weak in the mind and spirit for we were made from earth not heaven, but thats why he sent His Son. On the day of judgment we will be judged for every careless word we spoke and every sin unrepented. Christians are suppose to spread the word through out all nations to help save all his children. God gave every one the freedom of choice and if someone chooses not to be saved after we have told them the word of God and try to help them as much as we are lead and they still refuse, then we are to wash are hands of there blood and let them be. No one is perfect and no one is better then the other.
Well I just had to put my input in.
WWJD
|
|
|
Post by PepeLePewtheDivine on May 15, 2005 14:56:21 GMT -5
those who are "without christ" are not "sinners". If we are to go by that standard then I guess the Jews and Buddhists should assume the same position of such arrogance and we are to live in a world with even more predjudice and judgmentalness. Nothing positive comes from ptting up walls and closing our minds.
|
|
|
Post by flatandgreen on May 15, 2005 19:53:36 GMT -5
I'm not up for renouncing the love I've known just yet. God, help me.
|
|
WWJD
New Member
Posts: 8
|
Post by WWJD on May 15, 2005 21:15:17 GMT -5
You did not understand what I was saying. We are all sinners, but people who do not know the word of God and that are not in Christ do not beleave that they are sinning. They live their life as if some of the things they do is not a sin. Some beleave it is the way of life and thats just how they are. Anything that Jesus will not do is a sin. He came to earth to show us how to live by example. We are to try to be like Christ. I did not say people that are with out Christ are the only sinners. We are all sinners, but through Christ we are saved. If we truely sorry for the sin we have done, if we ask for forgiveness we will be forgiven. We are to give the word to those who do not know it. Christians need each other to help stay on that narrow path when we backslide. When we fall we need each other to help each other up. To truely beleave in Christ Is to truely love him, to follow him, to know we are sinners and that we need him. with out His forgiveness we are not saved. If you do not understand what I am saying and to disagree with me is understandable coming from someone that does not beleave in him and that does not follow him. You can know the word and have read the bible a thousand times but if you do not love Him and want to follow him and do his will, you truely do not understand the word or what I am saying that is all. you can argue with what I say and turn things around to make it sound like you know what you are talking about, but you do not, if you do not know Christ and you can know him by exccepting him as your Lord and saver, that He is God's Son that came to earth to die on the cross for your sins and was raised from the died to set at the right hand of God and by spending time with him in prayer. I say this just incase you say " you do not know Him personally" but you can know Him personally, by all the things I have said. I am not here to push my faith on you but when I saw someone speaking untruely about God or down grading him well I have to say something in His behalf and yes, we are to judge. We are to judge the right growed to be in or to judge the right place to spend time in. If the people we hang with will cause temptation, we need not to be spending to much time with them or a place that will have temptation we need not to be there. We have enough problems as there is. We need not to cause more temptation for our selves by judging the right friends to hang with or the right places to be at. I know one might say well Jesus dinned with tax collecters, that is true, but He was preaching the word and telling them how to be saved and telling them about the kingtom of heaven. He was not taking part in anykind of impure behavior. We are not to put are selves in to temptation.
WWJD
|
|
|
Post by fawnmarie on May 15, 2005 23:58:33 GMT -5
Jesus seems like he was a nice guy. I wish more christians acted like him. But I'm a Buddhist. It works for me. Siddhartha went out to the world to see what caused all the misery and how to stop it (this was about 500 years before the birth of Jesus, BTW). When he because enlightened, he saw that there was suffering in the world, and that suffering came from attachment and craving, and then taught people to have compassion for each other without jealousy, without condtions, without tally boards. Moral behavior is encouraged in Buddhists, because when one behaves ethically, one's mind is clear to be at peace. When one is at peace and in control of one's cravings, then compassion can be cultivated. When compassion is cultivated, and it is realized that all beings suffer, that all beings desire to live and be free, then it is almost impossible to be hurtful or to "sin". One is encouraged to be "mindful" - to pay attention to what you are doing or saying, how it effects others, whether it hurts others. Buddhists do not have a big beard in the sky telling them how to act. In Buddhism, you are asked to become enlightened and truly know right from wrong, not just 'behave yourself'. You are expected to be able to make your own moral decisions, because right from wrong is so obvious. To hurt yourself and others unnecessarily is wrong. There is no concept of "sin" per se in Buddhism, because the punishment you get is that which you have brought on yourself through the workings of karma. If you do bad things, bad things will happen to you. You'll feel bad. It's very simple. You are taught to develop love and compassion for all beings, and by having that feeling in you - that huge compassion, it is very hard to not want to only do good. Not because of fear of hell, fear of punishment, or fear of a god, but because your entire soul sings when you do the right thing. Unnecessarily hurting other beings (emotionally or physically) is considered wrong in Buddhism. Stealing and sexual misconduct (i.e. adultery, rape, sex with children) is considered wrong. Homosexuality goes against the godly mandate to "go forth and multiply" but you see, reproduction isn't real high on the Buddhist list of things to do, so it isn't really an issue. Very religious Buddhists refrain from sex altogether, and even the lay people refrain from it during certain times of the year. But any sexual activity that isn't a lie or a hurtful action isn't considered sinful or wrong. It is left up to the individual Buddhist to decide whether any sexual encounter is either a lie, a theft or hurtful. Married people sometimes have sex when they're mad at each other and they sometimes do it to hurt each other and they even lie to each other about it, or say hurtful things about it. That's considered a wrong action with wrong intention and intentionally causing suffering. "Freedom is the real source of human happiness and creativity. Irrespective of whether you are a believer or nonbeliever, whether Buddhist, Christian, or Jew, the important thing is to be a good human being." His Holiness the Dalai Lama Should ANYONE possibly be interested, a good article on the Buddhist viewpoint of homosexuality can be found here: www.buddhanet.net/homosexu.htmMy Buddhist 2 cents. Fawn
|
|
|
Post by gigi on May 16, 2005 1:52:50 GMT -5
OK, I generally refrain from commentary on religion because I consider it divisive. The BASIC themes of right and wrong are great. When organization gets in the way with an "us over them" interpretation this agnostic turns off. I prefer a POSITIVE belief in the inherent good within people unless THEY demonstrate otherwise. There are also some things that are not subject to ANYONE's review. If one believes God is the ultimate judge than how does that individual have the temerity to judge on his behalf! It boggles the mind.
|
|
|
Post by Wahaika on May 16, 2005 10:40:54 GMT -5
On judging others (an accusation that is being thrown around a lot in this thread): You mean like calling someone a homophobe? Here is a good article on that. "Stop the name-calling. Stop redefining social phobias to fit your ideological and political agendas. To tolerate homosexuality, one does not have to agree with it, support it or think it is natural. The next time someone says homosexuality is wrong, disgusting or that they'd just rather not see it, respect their opinion and tolerate them. The people who have been called "homophobes" in the past have a right to think this and to say it. It does not make them homophobic because this radical definition is wrong and intolerant." Here is the entire article. It's good. www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2003/02/02-25-03tdc/02-25-03dops-column-02.aspMeanwhile, I will answer a question that was put to me by PepeLePewtheDivine back at Reply #43. >>Homosexuality is not about lifestyle - its about sexual orientation. "There is no right to be gay" is an absurd statement, as if the way a persons's sexuality is about politics.
>>As outraged as I am by such blatent homophobia I am even more disturbed at the cold heartedness of your statments. I think the need is greater than ever for us to take the focus off of conflict and be about resolutions.My answer: "There is no right to be gay" is a simple statement of reality. You seem to be confusing "freedom to choose" with "right to choose." The two are not the same. Rights come from God. "we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among them are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." - Thomas Jefferson, Declaration of Independence "You have rights antecedent to all earthly governments; rights that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws; rights derived from the Great Legislator of the Universe." -John Adams, Second President of the United States Whether gays are "born that way" or not is somewhat irrelevant. Heterosexuals are "born that way" but are not automatically justified in immoral behavior either. For example, if two consenting adults of the opposite sex decide to have sex, and they just happen to be married to different people each, then we have a problem - adultery. Immoral, condemed behavior. I will assume that we agree on this point (that adultery is wrong) unless I hear otherwise. The basic concept is that while everyone has the freedom to disobey God, there is no right to disobey God. To disobey God is to invoke His judgement and pay the consequenses (unless one repents). When one is exercising a right, there is no fear of condemnation from Him - because one is exercising a right. Rights are God given. "Thou shalt not commit adultery." One has the freedom to commit adultery but not the right. "Thou shalt not steal" One has the freedom to go steal something from someone, but not the right. "Thou shalt not kill" One has the freedom to go kill someone but not the right. They don't even have the right to kill themselves. It's not about sex as I have seen claimed. It's about the attempt to justify immorality and make it appear as normal and accepted when the reality is that it is clearly not. Sex is the current example but drug abuse, spouse abuse, murder, etc. would all apply if any of those were the subject of the thread. How about consequenses? The unfortunate reality is that we all pay the consequenses of this social ill. Read about some of it here: "This risk can clearly be documented in the homosexual population. Homosexuals account for less than 3 percent of the population. Yet in 2003 men having sex with men accounted for more than 63 percent of newly reported HIV cases in males. Gay and bisexual men account for 10 percent of all new hepatitis A infections and 15-20 percent of all new hepatitis B infections in the United States." "In recognizing risky sexual behavior, the CDC (Centers for Disease Control) recently recommended that men who have sex with men (MSM) should be vaccinated for hepatitis A and B and tested at least yearly for HIV, syphilis, gonorrhea and Chlamydia." Entire article: www.washingtontimes.com/functions/print.php?StoryID=20050507-111846-5356rIf I had more time this morning I would write how the public education system and "tolerance" is being used to gain more than tolerance - acceptance. If I get time, I'll go find the vote taken at the NEA on this that happened about a year ago. I agree with Gigi that the discussion is devisive. I hope we can all be friends in spite of our differences. Wahaika (Resident homophobe under the widest possible most inclusive interpretation of the term - I do not accept homosexuality as normal or natural and do not want it taught to my children that it is.)
|
|
|
Post by gigi on May 16, 2005 10:59:14 GMT -5
I consider organized religion divisive not the discussion. Wahaika, people have the right to their opinions and I much prefer that they voice them honestly instead of being PC. What disturbs me is having ANY belief shoved down my throat. I prefer to listen to what an individual has to say and then make a determination for myself. There is a basic good to which we as a global community should adhere. I believe there is plenty of room within that for tolerance and acceptance.
|
|
|
Post by flatandgreen on May 16, 2005 12:23:38 GMT -5
Homosexuality = drug abuse? Maybe. After all, the endorphin rushes from sex are kind of like drugs.
But spousal abuse or murder? Ridiculous.
As far as gay men and the bugs they pick up, it's difficult to say what causes it. It's definitely related to riskier sexual acts and habits. The risk of dangerous sexual practices is easily minimized with monogamy. Perhaps monogamy is an easier goal to achieve when there's a culture that accepts monogamy for homosexuals as normal and naturaul. The shame (righteous or not) that surrounds their sexual acts can lead to very risky, furtive sexual practices.
It's easy to look at the numbers and say, "Gay men are disease-ridden blights upon our clean and shining society." However, thinking inside the numbers box hinders understanding causality. It may not be a function of gayness as much as a society of shame and parts of gay culture that have idealized promiscuity as a way of throwing of the heterosexual shcakles that have not been kind to them.
As for the religion, I've heard what you have to say -- and a lot of others. I find this thread exhausting. People opposed to gays being married, in the military, Boyscouts, or what have you, believe they are shielding their society from our insidious evil. We define justice, our mission (it's not conversion) in our society, and justice differently. Don't think that both sides aren't conflicted on this issue. I am as much as my religious family members that love me a lot are about me, but we SIMPLY DISAGREE. I'm not going to stop fighting your goals for society just as you're not going to stop opposing mine. It's that simple. I'm sorry that I am an affront to your morals. I sincerely wish this wasn't an issue.
I resent the government imposing laws based upon morals about my sex and love life though. I do not consider homosexuality a sin anywhere near spousal abuse or murder and find it ridiculous that I can drink alocohol by the liter yet not marry.
|
|
LadyR
Junior Member
Posts: 80
|
Post by LadyR on May 16, 2005 13:36:54 GMT -5
I have been reading this thread with great interest. First, let me say that I have a small number of friends, or at least, people that I like and am friendly with and even family members who are gay. I believe in "live and let live", however, there are some things that do bother me. I do not understand why a group of people, brought together by sexual preference, could become a huge voting block. Why should politics be influenced in this manner? Also, while being gay may seem a normal lifestlye to some, it is not to me, and I do not want anyone telling my children that it is.
That said, it is my observation, that my gay friends and family have something in common, that being that they all have had a rather troubled childhood and have been profoundly affected in a bad way by either a really bad mother or father. This parent was either cruel, negligent or overbearing. My nephew's mother was an alcoholic who behaved badly and was loud and drunk and violent. I'm curious as to whether this is true for anyone else and I wonder if this might be part of the reason for a person's preference for a partner of the same sex. I wonder if what someone may view as the way they were born, is really a very early on reaction to a bad parent. If I were a guy with a mother like the one I just described, I would probably find myself preferring to be with guys too. Anyone have any feelings on this?
|
|
|
Post by fawnmarie on May 16, 2005 14:32:48 GMT -5
First of all, Wahaika, the entire basis of your argument is that sexually moral and immoral behavior is dictated by your god.
1) There is no proof of the existance of your god, so we can not base our laws on that dogma.
2) There is not a vast majority of citizens in this country that believe in your God. Defining law to suit your dogma would not be a democratic answer.
Yeah, I know, I know - you yourself are convinced that this deity exists and that's all well and good for you. But there are just as many rightful citizens of the US that believe in another god or no god whatsoever. And whether you want to think this is a democracy or a representative republic, the point is the laws are supposed to represent the will of the majority of people, and as a complete bloc, the conservative christian may just be outnumbered.
So - try to deal with it. Tell your kids that you don't think it's okay. But I tell you, if you breed hate in your children, it can come back to hurt them. Would you rather have your children taught some compassion and tolerance, or bail them out of jail for a hate crime when they're picked up at 4AM for kicking seven kinds of hell into some "homo".
As for HIV - well, straight or gay, guys are dogs and generally more promiscous than women, PERIOD. It's proven in studies and surveys - don't take my word for it. Recent survey found that some 63% of men had had affairs on their wives - and these are straight men. I'm sure the numbers are no better for gay men, and that is most likely the reason for the high number of infections between gay men. HIV started in the gay male community, and men in general being the horn dogs they are, it got pretty far and wide. Because there was enough warning, the hetero men were able to protect themselves sooner. Also the fact that it is easier for a man to spread HIV than a woman, simply because the act for them is literally an injection of bodily fluids. No matter what your gender, the chance of getting HIV from taking in ejaculate is much higher than exposure to vaginal fluids, which may or may not find a vulnerable point in the skin.
That aside - I think we can disagree and be friends, and it's okay not to think ANYTHING is okay - it's a free country. On the other hand, we do have civil liberties and they must be upheld for the good of the whole.
As for the son and the alcoholic mother - it is likely that changes in normal hormones due to drinking during pregnancy might have made a difference.
Some reptiles actual genders are determined by the temperature the eggs are in before hatching. It is theorized that changes in maternal hormones during pregnancy may have an effect upon the "genderization" of the human brain during pregnancy. This could be do to xenoestrogens in the environments, odd flukes in the mother's hormones, or exposure to drugs or alcohol. Alcohol is known to have "feminizing" affects on male alcoholics. It could be a factor if the mother was drinking during a particular development phase.
Fawn
|
|