homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Ship's Locker   » Limbo   » Hell: The Christian Institute - The Tyneside Taliban? (Page 2)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Hell: The Christian Institute - The Tyneside Taliban?
Louise
Shipmate
# 30

 - Posted      Profile for Louise   Email Louise   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I have a better suggestion for a card for you

In the event of my death I would like everyone to know what a bigot and a moron I am.

There you are, print off, cut out and keep.

L

--------------------
Now you need never click a Daily Mail link again! Kittenblock replaces Mail links with calming pics of tea and kittens! http://www.teaandkittens.co.uk/ Click under 'other stuff' to find it.

Posts: 6918 | From: Scotland | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Canucklehead
Shipmate
# 1595

 - Posted      Profile for Canucklehead   Author's homepage   Email Canucklehead   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Don't be an ass Louise, I have no intention of carrying the thing around in my pocket in the event I should drop dead. As if some wallet card could over-ride my will anyway. I simply want one because I think it would be an interesting conversation piece.
Posts: 135 | From: Victoria, BC | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Louise
Shipmate
# 30

 - Posted      Profile for Louise   Email Louise   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Canucklehead,
You should have said that you only wanted it for 'research', I nearly had heart failure thinking that anyone here would want one of these things for real.

Naturally if you only want one to discuss it, that's different and I'm sorry for saying to you what I actually think of the originators of this stunt.

Nonetheless I wouldn't order anything from them, as they will count you as another 'supporter' for their cause.

L.

--------------------
Now you need never click a Daily Mail link again! Kittenblock replaces Mail links with calming pics of tea and kittens! http://www.teaandkittens.co.uk/ Click under 'other stuff' to find it.

Posts: 6918 | From: Scotland | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Sean D
Cheery barman
# 2271

 - Posted      Profile for Sean D   Author's homepage   Email Sean D   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Thank you for your niceness Louise [Smile] Is this really hell?!

Wood: [Not worthy!] Well said on the biblical stuff, and on ++Rowan.

And Canucklehead, claiming things are for research purposes has a pretty bad rep in the UK at the mo... (Sorry, not seriously suggesting there is a similarity, just couldn't resist.)

--------------------
postpostevangelical
http://www.stmellitus.org/

Posts: 2126 | From: North and South Kensington | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Merseymike
Shipmate
# 3022

 - Posted      Profile for Merseymike   Email Merseymike   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Talking of research....I am actually doing a PhD in this area ( and I am writing up, which is why I'm always on the computer!) and I need to read the CI bilge. I too refuse to buy it, but so far I have got photocopies sent to me which gives me some satisfaction, that I've avoided paying for it and can still analyse their 'research'

--------------------
Christianity is not a problem to be solved, but a mystery to be experienced

Posts: 3360 | From: Walked the plank | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Canucklehead
Shipmate
# 1595

 - Posted      Profile for Canucklehead   Author's homepage   Email Canucklehead   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The internet is a very good medium for transmitting words but at times is remarkably poor at transmitting actual meaning.

Louise is quite correct, my initial post was not nearly as clear as it should have been, partly because I was posting from work and was a bit rushed at the time, but also because I simply didn't make myself clear. I knew what I meant, why didn't you? Anyway, as I said, I have never heard of these people before but I am quite sure that their little donor card is quite useless for anything other than to make some sort of a statement. I didn't say I wanted it for "research", but I do think I could have a lot of fun with it nevertheless.

My apologies Louise for misleading you

Posts: 135 | From: Victoria, BC | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Assistant Village Idiot
Shipmate
# 3266

 - Posted      Profile for Assistant Village Idiot   Author's homepage   Email Assistant Village Idiot   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I don't know who the Christian Institute is. They certainly sound like toads.

But use of terms like "Taliban" strikes me as an even deeper bigotry. I'm not just trying to chide people for hyperbole and intemperate language here. It has become common for people to use phrases like "storm trooper" or "jihad" in the most inappropriate contexts. It is ultimately a denial a reality to equate people who get their knickers in a knot* about homosexuality with people who publicly execute their political opponents.

* a strangely appropriate metaphor, eh?

--------------------
formerly Logician

Posts: 885 | From: New Hampshire, US | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
multipara
Shipmate
# 2918

 - Posted      Profile for multipara   Author's homepage   Email multipara   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Then how about the "Tyneside Toads"?
Posts: 4985 | From: new south wales | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
John Donne

Renaissance Man
# 220

 - Posted      Profile for John Donne     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I can understand why people want evangelical christians to be the most vocal in opposing CI (where and if they do disagree with CI's stances). The way I see it, Christians are the family, and that includes CI. If a member of the family is being naughty you would expect those in the family closest to that member to tick them off or to try and get them to hold back a bit. The other problem is that if the more distant members of the family (anglocaffs, libs) give the naughty member (CI) a ticking off, that member is likely to just dismiss it as being what you would expect from a bunch that are degenerate and bereft of the gospel (which libs and anglocaffs are sometimes considered to be).
Posts: 13667 | From: Perth, W.A. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Wood
The Milkman of Human Kindness
# 7

 - Posted      Profile for Wood   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by logician:
But use of terms like "Taliban" strikes me as an even deeper bigotry. I'm not just trying to chide people for hyperbole and intemperate language here.

After the events of the last year and a bit, maybe it's time for a revision of Godwin's Law, eh?

Taliban just seems to be becoming an alternative way of saying "Nazi", really.

--------------------
Narcissism.

Posts: 7842 | From: Wood Towers | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Merseymike
Shipmate
# 3022

 - Posted      Profile for Merseymike   Email Merseymike   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I can't speak for all CI supporters, but certainly in their ideal CI world, the pre-1967 situation may well re-emerge, where 'practising homosexuality', as they would put it, would be illegal.
Execution, maybe not, but certainly not equal citizenship if we have the temerity to love another person. Prison, maybe.

Icarus Coot : right on.... [Smile] (are these allowed in Hell? a [Devil] and a [Projectile] for the Christian Institute , then.

--------------------
Christianity is not a problem to be solved, but a mystery to be experienced

Posts: 3360 | From: Walked the plank | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Wood
The Milkman of Human Kindness
# 7

 - Posted      Profile for Wood   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Icarus Coot:
I can understand why people want evangelical christians to be the most vocal in opposing CI (where and if they do disagree with CI's stances). The way I see it, Christians are the family, and that includes CI. If a member of the family is being naughty you would expect those in the family closest to that member to tick them off or to try and get them to hold back a bit. The other problem is that if the more distant members of the family (anglocaffs, libs) give the naughty member (CI) a ticking off, that member is likely to just dismiss it as being what you would expect from a bunch that are degenerate and bereft of the gospel (which libs and anglocaffs are sometimes considered to be).

I agree that we should be the most vocal in condemnation - but in my experience, it doesn't matter who criticises nuts like these. The moment anyone, no matter how "sound" they may have previously been thought to be, attacks one of their sacred cows, these people immediately lump their former comprades in with the enemy.

You just have to look at a bonkers outfit like the Metropolitan Tabernacle, for example, which a couple years ago disfellowshipped itself from the equally extreme Grace Baptists. Why? Had they gone liberal?

Well, apparently yes. The evidence was simply because their new hymn book included a few modern choruses (representative of an "intrinsically sinful" kind of music). Like all bigots, on either side of the metaphorical fence, you simply can't reason with them, no matter what you think your credentials are. I think some of my experiences here since my return show that.

--------------------
Narcissism.

Posts: 7842 | From: Wood Towers | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Merseymike
Shipmate
# 3022

 - Posted      Profile for Merseymike   Email Merseymike   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Its not so much about changing the minds of people like the CI, though, for there will probably always be people holding that view. There is plenty of evidence that they are losing the wider argumant.
I'm thinking more about the effect that a more affirming public position, by declared evangelicals who are not affiliated with either anything gay, liberal or catholic, on the broader evangelical constituency.
It reminds me a bit of a talk I gave at an evangelical CofE church a couple of years back. Good for them for inviting me, for a start - they were prepared to hear both sides - but after the meeting, at least three people came up to me and said 'well, I agree with you, but I wouldn't want to say so openly here'. Simply because, there wasn't the space, the permission, in their eyes, to express an alternative view than the 'party line'
I think its that sort of situation that could be assisted.

--------------------
Christianity is not a problem to be solved, but a mystery to be experienced

Posts: 3360 | From: Walked the plank | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Wood
The Milkman of Human Kindness
# 7

 - Posted      Profile for Wood   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
All right, "Mike". I do admit that you have a point there.

But I sincerely hope (and can see it in the wind) that there will be a paradigm shift in the next few years, leading to exactly the affirmation you want.

If not, then I sincerely believe it's the end - and definitely the end of Christianity for me. If there is a loving God, a decent God who cares about His church and about the sanctity of the Bible, which I believe is being abused and brutalised by the bigots, then He has to lead the church in the right direction.

I am not affiliated with anything gay, liberal or catholic. I am actually in a position to say stuff - and I do. But I swear, the way things are going, I'm seriously considering going off and becoming a Baha'i or something.

--------------------
Narcissism.

Posts: 7842 | From: Wood Towers | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Wood
The Milkman of Human Kindness
# 7

 - Posted      Profile for Wood   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
That last sentence contradicts the first.

Allow me to rephrase it: if things go wrong, then I'm going to go off and... read as written.

--------------------
Narcissism.

Posts: 7842 | From: Wood Towers | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Merseymike
Shipmate
# 3022

 - Posted      Profile for Merseymike   Email Merseymike   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Drop the inverted commas,please - because I have nothing to hide, least of all my name, I really am called Mike!

I hope you are right. Although my own thoughts are always that God will inspire and guide, but we have to do the doing, and not expect Him to place a heavenly hand on the situation, if you see what I mean. I feel there is something of a polarisation, and within the CofE anyway, the considerable differences of approach within the evangelical wing have been made apparent by the current debates - which even someone as admittetdly jaundiced and suspicious as me has found encouraging. I know formal distancing can be read as more division, but in some ways it may also bring some clarity.

I'm not, as yet, sure how far ths change in paradigm will go, but I do think as society itself recognises gay relationships, for example, the Church will look inexplicably daft if it doesn't find some sort of way to acknowledge committed and loving relationships.

Mind you, you don't have to abandon Christianity altogether simply because some of the Church refuses to get real.

--------------------
Christianity is not a problem to be solved, but a mystery to be experienced

Posts: 3360 | From: Walked the plank | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
The Black Labrador
Shipmate
# 3098

 - Posted      Profile for The Black Labrador   Email The Black Labrador   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Merseymike:
Its not so much about changing the minds of people like the CI, though, for there will probably always be people holding that view. There is plenty of evidence that they are losing the wider argumant.
I'm thinking more about the effect that a more affirming public position, by declared evangelicals who are not affiliated with either anything gay, liberal or catholic, on the broader evangelical constituency.
It reminds me a bit of a talk I gave at an evangelical CofE church a couple of years back. Good for them for inviting me, for a start - they were prepared to hear both sides - but after the meeting, at least three people came up to me and said 'well, I agree with you, but I wouldn't want to say so openly here'. Simply because, there wasn't the space, the permission, in their eyes, to express an alternative view than the 'party line'
I think its that sort of situation that could be assisted.

What exactly are you looking for?

Evangelicals who are not part of the CI/Reform do not feel bound by their statements, whether or not they agree with them. A press release from an evangelical leader saying "I think the CI/Reform are a bit over the top on this issue" doesn't strike me as a headline grabber.

And I suspect most evangelicals probably think this issue has had far too much publicity as it is, and don't wish to add to it. If you don't feel strongly about an issue you don't start campaigning on it - campaigning is always dominated by people who feel strongly - hence in this case you have the gay rights activists on one hand and the extreme evangelicals on the other. Most evangelicals have many other priorities.

If you're looking for acceptance of homosexual relationships within the evangelical community then it's up to the LGCM and similar organisations to make clear they hold mainstream Christian beliefs on the basics of the faith (and these groups strike me as containing a lot of liberals who might not) and then to set out a clear framework for acceptable homosexual relationships i.e. committed monogamous relationships. I don't currently see this happening, but the evangelicals aren't at fault for that.

Once gay relationships are recognised in civil law then there may be an opportunity for a proper dialogue on this issue. But there isn't much point in asking evangelicals (or anyone else) to change their whole approach to the Bible over this one issue.

On your earlier post, do you have any evidence that the CI, Reform, or any other evangelical group have actually proposed the recriminalisation of homosexual relationships?
Or are you just reading that into their general approach to this issue?

Posts: 629 | From: London | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Nightlamp
Shipmate
# 266

 - Posted      Profile for Nightlamp   Email Nightlamp   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The rapture can only be just around the cornor 'The Milkman of Human Kindness' and Merseymike have almost agreed on something.

--------------------
I don't know what you are talking about so it couldn't have been that important- Nightlamp

Posts: 8442 | From: Midlands | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Paul Careau
Shipmate
# 2904

 - Posted      Profile for Paul Careau         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Ian S

I see a danger in your view of the situation.

quote:
“it's up to the LGCM and similar organisations to…to set out a clear framework for acceptable homosexual relationships i.e. committed monogamous relationships.”
Really? Why should they do that?

Do they have an absolute guarantee that should they develop a concept of monogamous same-sex relationships they will then have full acceptance and affirmation of their sexuality from the greater majority of the Christian community?

Here in lies the rub. We (or rather I) am not so concerned with the specifics of the LGCM or other particular interest groups. My concern lies with the LGBT community in general and the direction that it takes. At present the message many of us have received from our society & from Christianity during our youth is ultimately a simple one – “it does not matter how you behave – the mere fact that you happen to be gay makes you irredeemably immoral”. Given that this is the current starting point for many of us in our adult lives it is little surprise that many simply take the attitude “bollocks to sexual morality – I can’t win whatever I do anyway so I may as well enjoy myself”

Society as a whole has to establish a scenario that shows young gay people – here is your path to a morally respectable, good, gay life that society believes is worth celebrating. That means gay marriage and it means positive education for gay youngsters with regard to their sexuality AND same sex relationships (NOT just the mechanics of sex). Without this the LGBT community will continue to simply throw its hands up & say “we can’t win whatever – so bollocks”.

quote:

“I don't currently see this happening, but the evangelicals aren't at fault for that. “

They ARE – they are responsible for ensuring that young gay people grow up believing that they are inherently immoral and that, for this reason, they see no value in the concept of sexual morality at all – only oppression.

quote:
“Once gay relationships are recognised in civil law then there may be an opportunity for a proper dialogue on this issue.”
How much time do you think we have? Are you not aware that there are some within the gay community who argue for a “new vision” of sexual relationships – they see themselves as pioneers and prophets of a new age - an age in which sex is viewed as a pure "recreational" activity. Their message has strong appeal within the gay community (and without for that matter). Whilst the “evangelists” wait for a proper dialogue, the prophets of the new age evangelise. [brick wall]

--------------------
Bye for now. Paul.

Posts: 92 | From: London | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Degs

Friend of dorothy
# 2824

 - Posted      Profile for Degs   Email Degs   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Theophilus:
quote:
Originally posted by He Who Must Not Be Named:
As I recall (sorry copy not to hand)'Issues In Human Sexuality' stated that committed same-sex relationships may be acceptable for the laity, but not for the clergy. So the 'official' view of the CofE is that homosexual activity is not always wrong.

Not really.
Issues in Human Sexuality 5.6 speaks about those who are conscientiously convinced "that they have more hope of growing in love for God and neighbour with the help of a loving and faithful homophile partnership, in intention lifelong", and goes on:

"While unable to commend the way of life just described as in itself as faithful a reflection of God's purposes in creation as the heterophile, we do not reject those who sincerely believe it is God's call to them. We stand alongside them in the fellowship of the Church, all alike dependent upon the undeserved grace of God. All who seek to live their lives in Christ owe one another friendship and understanding. It is therefore important that in every congregation such homophiles should find fellow-Christians who will sensitively and naturally provide this for them. Indeed, if this is not done, any professions on the part of the Church that is committed to openness and learning about the homophile situation can be no more than empty words."

--------------------
The preest when he hath sayd and red all: he gyueth the benedyccion upon all those that be there present and then he doth tourne hym from the people retournynge thyther from whens he came.

Posts: 2388 | From: a land that I heard of once in a lullaby | Registered: May 2002  |  IP: Logged
Stoo

Mighty Pirate
# 254

 - Posted      Profile for Stoo   Email Stoo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Paul Careau:
[Evangelicals] are responsible for ensuring that young gay people grow up believing that they are inherently immoral and that, for this reason, they see no value in the concept of sexual morality at all – only oppression.

I'm sorry?

Are you telling me that It is the fault of Evangelicals that young people are promiscuous?

God... and to think I actualy had you down for an intelligent poster.

--------------------
This space left blank

Posts: 5266 | From: the director of "Bikini Traffic School" | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Merseymike
Shipmate
# 3022

 - Posted      Profile for Merseymike   Email Merseymike   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The EA proposed it as a possible option in the last but one debate on the age of consent: certainly CI spokespersons, notably the late Baroness Young, have openly regretted the passing of the 1967 legislation in the Lords. The reason I used so many 'maybes' was because they tend to react to areas of proposed legislation, and no-one is proposing re-criminalisation. Hence at the moment, the focus will be on relationships, sexual offences and employment since these are on the Government agenda.

I think, though, the whole tone of the site speaks for itself in terms of what they actually think about gay people. If you can find anything affirming or positive at all, I would be surprised.

Ian : issues about relationships are uppermost in discussions amongst gay Christians. But its quite hard to work through a meaningful theology of gay relationships when we are still battling the 'celibacy or not Christian' line. If there was an acceptance that faithful gay relationships are a possibility, then I think there would be a real role for gay Christians such as myself who desperately think that the gay community needs to hear the Christian message.In the meantime, as Paul says - why should I be listened to ?
Interestingly enough. some thoughts on these issues are starting to emerge from gay evangelical quarters, people who have changed their position,(Roy Clements, Jeremy Marks) and are trying to work through the implications of Christian gay relationships. As I am in the sort of partnership Ian describes, I have a particular interest in this.

--------------------
Christianity is not a problem to be solved, but a mystery to be experienced

Posts: 3360 | From: Walked the plank | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Merseymike
Shipmate
# 3022

 - Posted      Profile for Merseymike   Email Merseymike   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
What I understood Paul as saying is that if young people hear nothing but negativity about the utter depravity of their sexual orientation, then they are hardly likely to be receptive to anything within the entire spectrum of Christian values - such as the benefits of stable relationships. Obviously evangelicals cannot be solely blamed, but I think this thread has shown that some groups who view themselves, as do the CI, to quote their FAQ's - as 'mainstream evangelical', they have contributed to the sort of view of sex which I think all Christians would have some concern about

--------------------
Christianity is not a problem to be solved, but a mystery to be experienced

Posts: 3360 | From: Walked the plank | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Astro
Shipmate
# 84

 - Posted      Profile for Astro   Email Astro   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
THe CI must be irresponsible if all they leave concerning what they want happening to their children to a "card".

They should make provision in their will - with prior agreement of all parties.

This is sound-bite christainity, and I think that most evangelicals (including conservative ones) would be opposed to that.

--------------------
if you look around the world today – whether you're an atheist or a believer – and think that the greatest problem facing us is other people's theologies, you are yourself part of the problem. - Andrew Brown (The Guardian)

Posts: 2723 | From: Chiltern Hills | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
LowFreqDude
Shipmate
# 3152

 - Posted      Profile for LowFreqDude         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I think that the CI are wrong with this exercise. From a PR perspective, this is tabloid level nonsense.

My main criticism is that once again same sex relationships have been singled out when notionally, to be consistent with their position, they should be asking for their orphans not to be adopted by (say) unmarried hetero couples, remarried divorcees...heck, non-Christians!

I get the feeling that the Church needs to get it drilled into their head that there is not a hierachcy of sins!

LFD

Posts: 625 | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Paul Careau
Shipmate
# 2904

 - Posted      Profile for Paul Careau         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Stoo

quote:
“Are you telling me that it is the fault of Evangelicals that young people are promiscuous?”
You genuinely don’t see do you. [Frown] That is frightening. I am not getting at you, its just the way it seems to be. People in the gay community seem to get this – in fact I was talking to a lesbian about this a few weeks ago – she empathised straight away. [Smile]

Think - how are heterosexuals brought up? During their teens they are told all about their sexuality and the relationships they might expect to have in their adult lives. They receive advice about adult relationships from their parents, they receive advice from their teachers, they receive advice from their religious communities, they are also presented with a wide variety of heterosexual images (although not always good) through the media. Therefore, by the time one reaches 21 your average heterosexual has received a considerable volume of information from the adult community with regard to sexuality and relationships as it relates to them. The pervading image being (still) one of monogamous, long-term relationships usually resulting in marriage at some stage. [Smile]

How is a young gay man or lesbian brought up? Typically, the big issue of your teen years revolves around – why don’t I find the opposite sex attractive when everyone else does - AND THEN - am I gay? Often you have a big turmoil over simply coming out – that’s without even having time to think about what KIND of gay relationship you might want etc. PLUS you are basically told next to nothing at all about your sexuality and the relationships you might expect to have in your adult life. If anything the message is simple – “you are crap”. Even at best, they often receive NO advice about adult relationships from their parents, they receive NO advice from their teachers, they receive NO advice from their religious communities, they are also presented with next to NO positive gay images through the media (at best they get spoon-fed stereo-types). Therefore, by the time one reaches 21 your average gay/lesbian has received approximately no advice or guidance whatsoever from the adult community with regard to sexuality and relationships as it relates to them. More likely than not the only things they have heard are all negative – being gay is immoral – gay people are “perverts” etc. [Frown]

So, at 21, you have learnt not to trust what heterosexual adults – be they parents, teachers or religious people say. In particular, if you come from a conservative Christian background, you may well have learnt not to trust Christian views on sex and sexuality. You know for a fact that their views on sexuality are crap – who is to say that they have not got it equally wrong on the subject of promiscuity. You are simply in the position that you are out on your own – your can’t trust the opinions of the wider community – all you have & all you can trust is the gay community.

If people criticise you for being promiscuous – SO WHAT? Have you really not noticed Stoo? In today’s society the message is that being promiscuous is OK – look at all the images of heterosexual promiscuity on TV. Is homosexuality viewed in modern society with the same degree of glamour? Basically, the impression most young gay men and women get left with is that, in terms of society’s perceptions of morality – being gay is WORSE than being promiscuous. In particular various Christian groups like the Christian Institute and the Evangelical Alliance and Reform send this message out loud and clear. What do they spend their time harping on about? Is it the evils of promiscuity or the evils of being gay? So, their message is – “if you are gay you are doomed – it doesn’t matter how else you behave”.

I shit you not – I have read the account of an Episcopal Priest who asked a gay man who was totally into the drugs scene and a promiscuous hedonistic lifestyle. He asked him why he did it – the man replied “I am damned anyway – so what does it matter – I may as well make the most of it in the here and now if I’m going to burn in hell forever whatever” – the man turned out to be a gay ex-evangelical Christian.

So, these particular Evangelicals ARE to blame. Of course they are not the only ones who have created the situation BUT they are largely responsible for making it worse.

Given a different, more positive upbringing most gay/lesbian people would probably be no more promiscuous than heterosexuals. But, to be honest, I think it is very hard for anyone to turn things around for themselves at the age of say 31 after having been through a young adult life like I have described. For Evangelicals to then turn around and criticise gay people for turning out promiscuous under those circumstances is then a bit rich I think. [Mad]

--------------------
Bye for now. Paul.

Posts: 92 | From: London | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Stoo

Mighty Pirate
# 254

 - Posted      Profile for Stoo   Email Stoo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Paul Careau:
...they often receive NO advice about adult relationships from their parents, they receive NO advice from their teachers, they receive NO advice from their religious communities, they are also presented with next to NO positive gay images through the media (at best they get spoon-fed stereo-types). Therefore, by the time one reaches 21 your average gay/lesbian has received approximately no advice or guidance whatsoever from the adult community with regard to sexuality and relationships as it relates to them. More likely than not the only things they have heard are all negative – being gay is immoral – gay people are “perverts” etc.

I don't disagree. Society has been like this since ancient times.

How, though, is this the fault of the evangelical church?

--------------------
This space left blank

Posts: 5266 | From: the director of "Bikini Traffic School" | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Stoo

Mighty Pirate
# 254

 - Posted      Profile for Stoo   Email Stoo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
In particular, if you come from a conservative Christian background, you may well have learnt not to trust Christian views on sex and sexuality. You know for a fact that their views on sexuality are crap – who is to say that they have not got it equally wrong on the subject of promiscuity.
Are we all justified in taking that line? I believe that the most vocal Christian view on homosexuality is crap. Must mean they've got the "God is love" bit wrong too.

quote:
In today’s society the message is that being promiscuous is OK – look at all the images of heterosexual promiscuity on TV. Is homosexuality viewed in modern society with the same degree of glamour?
Actually, and I'm not just being devil's advocate here, I think it is. Gay is cool. It's alternative. It's rebellious. Manchester's best place to go clubbing is its famous Canal Street. Hell, even dance music started in the gay clubs in America. Gay culture sets the trends and fashions.

--------------------
This space left blank

Posts: 5266 | From: the director of "Bikini Traffic School" | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Stoo

Mighty Pirate
# 254

 - Posted      Profile for Stoo   Email Stoo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Basically, the impression most young gay men and women get left with is that, in terms of society’s perceptions of morality – being gay is WORSE than being promiscuous.
I can't deny your experience, but that seems totally alien to me - none of my friends and very very few of my colleagues here in Manchester hold that view.

quote:
In particular various Christian groups like the Christian Institute and the Evangelical Alliance and Reform send this message out loud and clear. What do they spend their time harping on about? Is it the evils of promiscuity or the evils of being gay? So, their message is – “if you are gay you are doomed – it doesn’t matter how else you behave”.
Yes, I agree. I am surprised, however, that they have the impact that you claim they do, especially in a society such as ours in which less than 10% of the population are practising Christians.

--------------------
This space left blank

Posts: 5266 | From: the director of "Bikini Traffic School" | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Stoo

Mighty Pirate
# 254

 - Posted      Profile for Stoo   Email Stoo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Given a different, more positive upbringing most gay/lesbian people would probably be no more promiscuous than heterosexuals. But, to be honest, I think it is very hard for anyone to turn things around for themselves at the age of say 31 after having been through a young adult life like I have described.
The only practical impact I can see that 'Evangelicals' have had is Section 28. Even then, I would argue that that bill was pushed through, and kept, by a few vocal bigots. Section 28 does not proclude parents talking to their children about sexuality. It does not say that the media cannot produce positive images of homosexuality, and it does not say that no religious leader can dare to say that homosexuality just might not be evil.

(Finally, my apologies for this being on seperate posts - my computer can't cope with me posting large ammounts all at the same time)

--------------------
This space left blank

Posts: 5266 | From: the director of "Bikini Traffic School" | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Tubbs

Miss Congeniality
# 440

 - Posted      Profile for Tubbs   Author's homepage   Email Tubbs   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Stoo:
quote:
In particular various Christian groups like the Christian Institute and the Evangelical Alliance and Reform send this message out loud and clear. What do they spend their time harping on about? Is it the evils of promiscuity or the evils of being gay? So, their message is – “if you are gay you are doomed – it doesn’t matter how else you behave”.
Yes, I agree. I am surprised, however, that they have the impact that you claim they do, especially in a society such as ours in which less than 10% of the population are practising Christians.
And what about the other religions - Jews and Muslims for example - who also teach that homosexuality is "an abomination". They are equally hardline but I don't see them being targetted (or blamed) in the same way.

Tubbs

PS You're right, I am stirring [Razz]

--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am

Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Merseymike
Shipmate
# 3022

 - Posted      Profile for Merseymike   Email Merseymike   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I think its more the climate that they create : despite some of the surface gloss, Stoo, it is still not easy to grow up gay. Many young people go through considerable difficulties.Ask any youth worker and they will tell you!

I actually DO think that things are getting better and that the CI and Co . are on to a loser - but thats because people have challenged their assumptions.

--------------------
Christianity is not a problem to be solved, but a mystery to be experienced

Posts: 3360 | From: Walked the plank | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Stoo

Mighty Pirate
# 254

 - Posted      Profile for Stoo   Email Stoo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Merseymike:
I think its more the climate that they create : despite some of the surface gloss, Stoo, it is still not easy to grow up gay.

I totally agree, and the situation, I also agree, is not helped by the most vocal Evangelical viewpoint, but equally, it is not caused by it.

--------------------
This space left blank

Posts: 5266 | From: the director of "Bikini Traffic School" | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
John Donne

Renaissance Man
# 220

 - Posted      Profile for John Donne     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by The Milkman of Human Kindness:
quote:
Originally posted by Icarus Coot:
I can understand why people want evangelical christians to be the most vocal in opposing CI (where and if they do disagree with CI's stances). The way I see it, Christians are the family, and that includes CI. If a member of the family is being naughty you would expect those in the family closest to that member to tick them off or to try and get them to hold back a bit. The other problem is that if the more distant members of the family (anglocaffs, libs) give the naughty member (CI) a ticking off, that member is likely to just dismiss it as being what you would expect from a bunch that are degenerate and bereft of the gospel (which libs and anglocaffs are sometimes considered to be).

I agree that we should be the most vocal in condemnation - but in my experience, it doesn't matter who criticises nuts like these. The moment anyone, no matter how "sound" they may have previously been thought to be, attacks one of their sacred cows, these people immediately lump their former comprades in with the enemy.
Very good point. [Frown] I was being a bit rose-coloured glass-ish and utopian. But if there was one... one unimpeachable, irreproachable, eminent person who could make a statement that everyone would listen to as authoritative. Erm. Cough. Yes. We already had him. I wish he'd spelled it out a bit more so we don't have to have these arguments 2000 yrs later.
Posts: 13667 | From: Perth, W.A. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
whitelodge
Shipmate
# 3339

 - Posted      Profile for whitelodge   Author's homepage   Email whitelodge   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I suspect the broader evangelical Church is drifting into a sort of "don't ask - don't tell" position. Nobody (and this probable includes the un-gay-sympathetic members) wants to be the one to bring up a subject that could split their congregation in two.

My own (M.O.R. Methodist) church has a pair of middle-aged women - prominent and popular churchmembers - who are clearly living in something pretty analogous to a marriage. The nature of their relationship is simply not mentioned.

I don't think the not-mentioning is because the church is universally accepting of committed same-sex relationships - though, doubtless, many of us are. It's more just old-fashioned discretion combined with a fear of openly discussing an incendiary topic.

Just don't look at me like I've got to get this discussion going. Let somebody else do it.

Posts: 130 | From: London | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460

 - Posted      Profile for ken     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by whitelodge:
I suspect the broader evangelical Church is drifting into a sort of "don't ask - don't tell" position.

Agreed 100% In fact, has drifted would be more accurate. The last explicit discussion I remember actually going on that involved real people in a real church (as opposed to theoretical positions) was back in the 1970s, when some Christians I knew at college came out (which caused a little stir at the time) Nowadays, it is "don't ask".

--------------------
Ken

L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.

Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Merseymike
Shipmate
# 3022

 - Posted      Profile for Merseymike   Email Merseymike   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Theres some truth in that, whitelodge.
Actually, although everyone knows about us, and we are certainly treated as a couple, I don't actually talk about it all that much in church - I do think that actual contact with 'real people' makes a huge amount of difference to attitudes of others, actually. People aren't sometimes as daft as they're cabbage looking, and I think that a lot of people may just think ' why should I say anything', because they don't think it matters - the people in church are the people they know and like.

--------------------
Christianity is not a problem to be solved, but a mystery to be experienced

Posts: 3360 | From: Walked the plank | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Merseymike
Shipmate
# 3022

 - Posted      Profile for Merseymike   Email Merseymike   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Stu : I said earlier that I agree with that. However, they do help to promote a climate of negativity - its a drip feed effect - and within the Church, I think they are certainly the ringleaders.

--------------------
Christianity is not a problem to be solved, but a mystery to be experienced

Posts: 3360 | From: Walked the plank | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Degs

Friend of dorothy
# 2824

 - Posted      Profile for Degs   Email Degs   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Merseymike:
Stu : I said earlier that I agree with that. However, they do help to promote a climate of negativity - its a drip feed effect - and within the Church, I think they are certainly the ringleaders.

Am I not right in thinking that FinF joined forces with Reform in the gay-bashing?

That being the case there are also those at the AngCath end who must bear some responsibility.

Of course anti-gay propaganda from FinF is the ultimate in hypocrisy.

--------------------
The preest when he hath sayd and red all: he gyueth the benedyccion upon all those that be there present and then he doth tourne hym from the people retournynge thyther from whens he came.

Posts: 2388 | From: a land that I heard of once in a lullaby | Registered: May 2002  |  IP: Logged
Merseymike
Shipmate
# 3022

 - Posted      Profile for Merseymike   Email Merseymike   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Not really, Degs-as-was - new Directions makes the odd sniffy aside, and their official 'line' is conservative, but they have never really made any clear public statements, and their only comments about Rowan have related to women priests. Mind you, you're right about the hypocrisy, of course, and I think that is , in reality, why they don't discuss it in public. Its one thing to sit on your hands or toe the party line in public, its another thing to make public statements.

--------------------
Christianity is not a problem to be solved, but a mystery to be experienced

Posts: 3360 | From: Walked the plank | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Oscar the Grouch

Adopted Cascadian
# 1916

 - Posted      Profile for Oscar the Grouch     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Merseymike:
Actually, although everyone knows about us, and we are certainly treated as a couple, I don't actually talk about it all that much in church - I do think that actual contact with 'real people' makes a huge amount of difference to attitudes of others, actually.

I'd go along with that. In one of our congregations we have a single, middle aged woman who is very actively involved with the church. Although nothing is said outright in the church, I know she is a lesbian, and so do a number of others. But first and foremost she is a member of our church family - she belongs in the same way as everyone else.

As a result of knowing and loving her for who she is, I suspect that a number of prejudices about homosexuality have been severely weakened. Hell - once you've got a friend who is gay, it is nigh on impossible to rant on about the iniquity of those (impersonal) "queers"!

--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu

Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged
The Black Labrador
Shipmate
# 3098

 - Posted      Profile for The Black Labrador   Email The Black Labrador   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'd wondered if I would come to regret replying to this thread......

Note to Paul C:

It's amazing how influential evangelicals are. I had thought they were about 2% of the British population with absolutely negligible influence on public life. But it seems that they dominate the church to such a degree that they determine the way it's seen by non-Christians. I do hope someone has told Rowan Williams, David Hope and Richard Chartres this. And the only voices from within the church on this subject are from evangelicals? No doubt LGCM and non-evangelical groups are taking note. Evangelicals control sex education in schools apparently, even though the curriculum is set by a secular government which has more homosexuals than evangelicals among its ministers. And evangelicals are responsible for young people's self-image problems as well, even though most young people have probably never met any evangelicals and wouldn't pay attention to them if they did. Obviously they don't have any non-Christian role models. Then to cap it all, evangelical Christianity encourages promiscuity [Eek!] [Ultra confused] (though not among heterosexuals?).

And you're think you're a moderate! [Eek!] Well I suppose I must be a moderate evangelical (otherwise - let's face it - I wouldn't be prepared to debate this issue at all). But it appears that we're miles apart........ [Frown]

I know many people have been badly hurt by the church over this issue. I very much regret that. As Ken and Merseymike noted, attitudes are changing; there is less latent homophobia and more people are willing to consider the issues.

But we all consider the issues within the framework of our existing beliefs. For evangelicals that is biblical authority and a conservative approach to sexuality in general.
So I don't see much point in you asking for unconditional acceptance for all homosexual relationships - you won't get that any more than if you asked for unconditional acceptance for heterosexual relationships.

That's why I say it's up to the LGCM and similar organisations to set out a clear framework for acceptable homosexual relationships i.e. committed monogamous relationships. You are trying to change the established position of all the main Christian denominations. The burden of proof is on you. It's up to you to make your case. The way I'm suggesting you do this is to accept the core beliefs of the Christian faith, and then say when it comes to this particular issue it's time to look again at what the Bible actually says on this issue (as opposed to the way it's been interpreted in the past). This is how women's ordination, for example, got accepted by many (not all) evangelicals.

Posts: 629 | From: London | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Nicolemr
Shipmate
# 28

 - Posted      Profile for Nicolemr   Author's homepage   Email Nicolemr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
My own (M.O.R. Methodist) church has a pair of middle-aged women - prominent and popular churchmembers - who are clearly living in something pretty analogous to a marriage. The nature of their relationship is simply not mentioned.

this is actually nothing new. back in the early days of the 20th century, one of my grandfathers cousins lived in exactly this situation. the two women were business partners in a millinary shop as well as whatever else they were, and and were obviously emotionally a couple, even to the rather stereotypical fact that one of them was more "mannish", and the other (my distant cousin) more "womanly". they were regular, very active members of the church, and the woman's club and no one ever would have had the bad manners to say anything disparaging about it. (i get this info from my aunt, who is old enough to remember them from her childhood)

--------------------
On pilgrimage in the endless realms of Cyberia, currently traveling by ship. Now with live journal!

Posts: 11803 | From: New York City "The City Carries On" | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Paul Careau
Shipmate
# 2904

 - Posted      Profile for Paul Careau         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
“It's amazing how influential evangelicals are…”
They are often the most vocal and the most homophobic. They also form anti-gay lobby groups that seek out media attention and canvas MPs – the Christian Institute is a classic example. In this regard they present a strong negative image. As far as many people in the gay community are concerned not only Evangelicals BUT Christians in general = either Reform/Christian Institute OR a group of people who silently disapprove of/dislike them. The negative images are created by the vocal activities of a minority. However, the majority is largely silent therefore giving the impression of tacit approval for the views of this minority.

The Christian Institute presents itself to the media and to parliament as representing mainstream Christian opinion. Whilst some can see through such propaganda, many cannot. There is not that much high profile counter-propaganda of a pro-gay nature from the Christian community.

quote:
“I do hope someone has told Rowan Williams, David Hope and Richard Chartres this.”
A case in point. I have no idea who David Hope or Richard Chartes are – I know who Colin Hart is on the other hand.

quote:
“And you're think you're a moderate!”
You would never hear the more extreme views. But to give you an idea I know someone who said “Christians are like strange dogs – strange dogs bite – Christians hate gays – they are both best avoided”.

The onus is on Christianity to make the effort to reach out to people like that – because they sure as anything aren’t going to feel any desire to reach out to Christianity.

quote:
”attitudes are changing; there is less latent homophobia and more people are willing to consider the issues.”

Unfortunately, the change is slow. This may not seem like a problem to you – but for some people, they simply don’t have the luxury of time.

quote:
“That's why I say it's up to the LGCM and similar organisations to set out a clear framework for acceptable homosexual relationships i.e. committed monogamous relationships.”
I don’t know whether or not this might happen. I am not involved in these organisations. As regards the community in general I am not convinced. The community in general may be moving towards “long-term open relationships” if, indeed, it is changing at all. They won’t listen to Evangelicals because as far as they are concerned Evangelicals = Christian Institute et al. Evangelicals would have to reach out to them with a positive message and convince them that they have something positive to say.

quote:
“You are trying to change the established position of all the main Christian denominations. The burden of proof is on you. It's up to you to make your case.”
I have no answers, I simply point out the problems. I have no answers within the context of mainstream Christianity – only doubt.

quote:
“The way I'm suggesting you do this is to accept the core beliefs of the Christian faith, and then say when it comes to this particular issue it's time to look again at what the Bible actually says on this issue (as opposed to the way it's been interpreted in the past).”
You direct your comment at the wrong person. I lost all semblance of mainstream Christian faith years ago. I see no answers. I don’t believe so readily in the concept of a loving god any more and this issue is largely the reason why.

--------------------
Bye for now. Paul.

Posts: 92 | From: London | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Merseymike
Shipmate
# 3022

 - Posted      Profile for Merseymike   Email Merseymike   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Paul does have a point. The vast majority of gay people are obviously going to feel hostile to Christianity if it appears to be at best, tolerant, at worst, the Christian Institute.

And if that is the case, then is it any surprise that those of us who are gay and Christian find it so difficult to 'get through'.

I'm not sure that I agree about the change in relationships - I do think there are more stable couples, but given the legal and social climate, there are some barriers against this . But things are improving.
However, the Church does seem to be the one institution which really cannot seem to cope with these changes, and at times I do get furiously angry and just feel like chucking the whole thing( and you can usually tell when from the tone of my posts, as you have probably realised)

--------------------
Christianity is not a problem to be solved, but a mystery to be experienced

Posts: 3360 | From: Walked the plank | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Father Gregory

Orthodoxy
# 310

 - Posted      Profile for Father Gregory   Author's homepage   Email Father Gregory   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Dear Merseymike

There are two strategies with crap .... the first is not contentious but only sometimes effective. The second is highly contentious but perhaps more effective in the long run.

STRATEGY 1
Ignore crap.

STRATEGY 2
Make it clear that the existence of crap seriously disenfranchises the "crap-holder" from the designation of "Christian" or "Church." An example perhaps ...

"I can't be a Christian because you lot believe in total depravity."

Response ... correction .... certain Calvinists believe in total depravity .... in this they are not living and believing as Christians.

Waiting for the flak!

--------------------
Yours in Christ
Fr. Gregory
Find Your Way Around the Plot
TheOrthodoxPlot™

Posts: 15099 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
The Black Labrador
Shipmate
# 3098

 - Posted      Profile for The Black Labrador   Email The Black Labrador   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Originally posted by Paul Careau:
quote:
However, the majority is largely silent therefore giving the impression of tacit approval for the views of this minority.
I'm not sure Rowan Williams or the LGCM are silent?

quote:
A case in point. I have no idea who David Hope or Richard Chartes are – I know who Colin Hart is on the other hand.
David Hope is Archbishop of York. Richard Chartres is Bishop of London. Neither are evangelicals. As leaders of the established church I would suggest they are more representative than pressure groups like the CI.

quote:
They won’t listen to Evangelicals because as far as they are concerned Evangelicals = Christian Institute et al. Evangelicals would have to reach out to them with a positive message and convince them that they have something positive to say.
Agreed. But if saying something positive = endorsement without qualification of all relationships it won't happen.

quote:
You direct your comment at the wrong person.
Apologies. Wasn't aimed at you specifically.

[Trying. Very trying.]

[ 21. January 2003, 23:45: Message edited by: sarkycow ]

Posts: 629 | From: London | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Astro
Shipmate
# 84

 - Posted      Profile for Astro   Email Astro   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
As far as many people in the gay community are concerned not only Evangelicals BUT Christians in general = either Reform/Christian Institute OR a group of people who silently disapprove of/dislike them.
As much as I understand this, I find it rather sad that a group that has been unfairly charactertured should do the same to another group. May be Joe Public cannot see the difference between say the Pope and Rev Ian Paisley but I would have thought that the gay community could see the difference between say christian politains such as Baroness Young and Chris Smith.

--------------------
if you look around the world today – whether you're an atheist or a believer – and think that the greatest problem facing us is other people's theologies, you are yourself part of the problem. - Andrew Brown (The Guardian)

Posts: 2723 | From: Chiltern Hills | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Merseymike
Shipmate
# 3022

 - Posted      Profile for Merseymike   Email Merseymike   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I suppose the point we are making, though, is that open voices from the Church supporting gay issues are very much quieter than those who are hostile. In this situation, then all Christianity tends to be seen as hostile.

--------------------
Christianity is not a problem to be solved, but a mystery to be experienced

Posts: 3360 | From: Walked the plank | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Wood
The Milkman of Human Kindness
# 7

 - Posted      Profile for Wood   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Merseymike:
I suppose the point we are making, though, is that open voices from the Church supporting gay issues are very much quieter than those who are hostile. In this situation, then all Christianity tends to be seen as hostile.

There's a pro-gay Archbishop now, though. So it can't stay the same, can it?

--------------------
Narcissism.

Posts: 7842 | From: Wood Towers | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools