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   »   » Oblivion   » Gay Marriage, and blurred boundaries (Page 3)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6  ...  9  10  11 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Gay Marriage, and blurred boundaries
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716

 - Posted      Profile for ChastMastr   Author's homepage   Email ChastMastr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
A suggestion no one ever seems to bring up:

Being deeply, emotionally, and intimately -- including physically -- involved with someone of the same sex -- is not the same as having sexual intercourse with them.

It is my understanding, and always has been since I became a Christian, that what is actually forbidden between two people of the same sex is not the affection, hugging, kissing, or deep commitments -- it is simply and (in this case) solely sexual intercourse, outside of male-female marriage.

Why not accept the commitment, love and such, even physical expressions of same (many of which are quite traditional, such as kissing and so forth, and go very far back in history, around the world, including in the Bible period), and just make it clear that what is forbidden to us as Christians is the sex.

This is an option which no one ever seems to bring up; it is either "forego all same-sex relationships" or "have sex." I would think this would be an acceptable way to deal with the emotional, even sensual/tactile hunger for same-sex hugs, touch, affection, relationships, etc., without the sin. Yes, temptations would come, and some would stumble at times, but at least it is a way that ... well, works for me anyway, but I'm odd.

--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity


Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365

 - Posted      Profile for Freddy   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Dear Happy Coot,

I think I see the error of my ways.

In responding to Greta in what I thought was a logical and innocuous way I realize that I was seemingly crusading against homosexuality on a thread where this was not the topic. This was not the topic of this thread, and I was speaking off topic.

I am not crusading against homosexuality – I was only meaning to discuss Greta’s interesting points. Her further explanations make me see how badly I misinterpreted her remarks. She was simply looking for parallels, not calling anyone a racist.

As some others did, I thought that she started out to say she wasn’t playing the race card - and then proceeded to play the race card. But now I see that she was simply drawing a parallel where the legal issues were similar.

In the area of free choice, your comments are well-founded. I was meaning to question the assertion that sexual orientation is not a matter of choice. I am not claiming to actually know anything about this. I just think that “choice” is a complex concept, and that it is not a black-and-white issue. There must be many factors that exert an influence on sexual behavior - heredity, environment, etc. I said that I accept people’s claims that they do not consciously choose their orientation, because I think that many factors are involved, and that there are many ways of choosing – conscious and unconscious. I don’t recall ever choosing my own orientation, but I am sure that I have assented to it in various ways that were within the realm of my free choices, both consciously and unconsciously.

Your comments about my associating homosexuality with “problematic sexual behaviors” are also well founded. I was wrong in doing that. I was simply thinking in terms of sexual behaviors and grabbed at convenient ones that came to mind. Big mistake.

But these comments are out of the realm of this thread, as they are not about gay marriage per se. I was only reacting to what I popped into my head as I read along.

In any case, I appreciate the attention and the comments. I would be interested in any further observations, and apologize if I have offended.

--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg


Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Bishop Joe
Shipmate
# 527

 - Posted      Profile for Bishop Joe   Email Bishop Joe       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
An interesting book that deals with a lot of the issues discussed heretofore is A PLACE AT THE TABLE by an American film and book critic named Bruce Bawer. Bawer is gay and, while not closeted, so not-in-your-face about it that he wrote freelance for an arch-conservative publication ten years before "creative differences" broke them up (he wanted to deal with the homosexual elements in a play; they forbade it).

Bawer is a high-church Episcopalian in New York City and he discusses his faith journey and how he gets along in church. He has a long-term partner. His thesis angers many gay people: that American gays are fighting their fight for acceptance with a self-defeating "Woodstock" confrontational mentality. When we have Pride Day, do the TV clips show people in suits, or khakis, or polo shirts? Well, they could, but if there's one little old drag queen or lesbian on a Harley or some drunk guy with his left butt cheek showing through his Levi's, that's what gets broadcast. He wants gay men and lesbians to be extra careful in putting forth a mainstream, patriotic image. (More militant gays have called him a "house Negro.")

A PLACE AT THE TABLE was published in 1994, but it articulates many issues that are germane today, including acceptance in church, and the desirability of some sort of civil-partnership accord with the government.

I'm rather new to BB's and don't know if this type of mention is kosher, but I assure you that I am not Bawer's press agent!! The book is still in print, at least in the USA.


Posts: 150 | From: Chicago, IL USA | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
CorgiGreta
Shipmate
# 443

 - Posted      Profile for CorgiGreta         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The Rt. Rev. Joe

You state: "I'm rather new to BB's and don't know if this type of mention is kosher..."

We have discussed the dietary laws at length on this board, and we are unanimous in our belief that breaking kosher may or may not be a sin.

Greta


Posts: 3677 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Reepicheep
BANNED
# 60

 - Posted      Profile for Reepicheep         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Hiya Bishop Joe - thanks for that. Will see if I can obtain it this side of the pond.

ChastMastr - I'm with you on the sex/no sex thing - but you again have the problems of boundaries blurring. Is it wrong if you have the intention of creating the same sort of intimacy as with the heterosexual act - e.g. oral sex? mutual masturbation?

Freddy - I take your point about race, and the way mixed race marriages were banned at one time.

But, again, what is the bottom line about a marriage - you enter it with your own free will, a lifelong mutual commitment, with the intention of bringing about children. On the radio they suggested there might come a time when for the purposes of superior genetics 1 in 5 children would be born from a test tube. Part of the controversy was that it would allow lesbians to have babies, with no reference to a man.

Love doesn't get a mention in the BCP - you could have a lifelong commitment to someone, without necessarily loving them at the time.


Posts: 2199 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
RuthW

liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13

 - Posted      Profile for RuthW     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Bishop Joe:
I'm rather new to BB's and don't know if this type of mention is kosher, but I assure you that I am not Bawer's press agent!! The book is still in print, at least in the USA.
[/QB]

Recommending a book is totally kosher (unless of course the book has previously been used in idol worship).


Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Reepicheep
BANNED
# 60

 - Posted      Profile for Reepicheep         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Recommending a book is totally kosher (unless of course the book has previously been used in idol worship).

Which rules out the bible......


Posts: 2199 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
babybear
Bear faced and cheeky with it
# 34

 - Posted      Profile for babybear   Email babybear   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Recommending a book is totally kosher (unless of course the book has previously been used in idol worship).


My understanding was that it was okay to use a book that *had* been used in idol worship, as long as it didn't cause other brothers and sisters to sin.

bb


Posts: 13287 | From: Cottage of the 3 Bears (and The Gremlin) | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
CorgiGreta
Shipmate
# 443

 - Posted      Profile for CorgiGreta         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
All this talk about kosher is making me hungry. Btw, is the seven-layer cake they serve in kosher Delis really kosher? It's definitely sinful.

Greta


Posts: 3677 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Sean
Shipmate
# 51

 - Posted      Profile for Sean   Author's homepage   Email Sean   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Angel:

But, again, what is the bottom line about a marriage - you enter it with your own free will, a lifelong mutual commitment, with the intention of bringing about children.

Is an intention to have children an necessary part of marrage - I can think of plenty of people who have got married with no intention to have children at all.

--------------------
"So far as the theories of mathematics are about reality, they are not certain; so far as they are certain, they are not about reality" - Einstein


Posts: 1085 | From: A very long way away | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Reepicheep
BANNED
# 60

 - Posted      Profile for Reepicheep         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It was in the BCP service. It follows the Catholic idea that the only reason for having sex was to have kids, and the only reason for getting married was having sex.....

[slight hyperbole]

but if you look at my OP, you'll see the 3-fold reason for marriage. The other two can be managed without getting married, and not be sinful.

Love
Angel


Posts: 2199 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Sean
Shipmate
# 51

 - Posted      Profile for Sean   Author's homepage   Email Sean   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I did see your original 3, I just didn't get around to commenting then.

Surely there is more to marriage than avoiding sin. Few here would subscribe to the view that sex is solely for the purpose of procreation anyway, any I can't think of any NT references that would in anyway imply it is (Gospel or St Paul). The BCP or any other liturgy is hardly authoritive in that sense - it just reflects the thinking of the people and age that produced it.

Your post kind of implies that if, for example, Bronwyn's op had gone less well so that there was no possibility of her having children then there would be no point in us getting married, and that strikes me as absurd and mildly offensive. The support we can give each other in our lives and our following of Christ is just as legimate a reason as the children we will have and their upbringing.

--------------------
"So far as the theories of mathematics are about reality, they are not certain; so far as they are certain, they are not about reality" - Einstein


Posts: 1085 | From: A very long way away | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Sean
Shipmate
# 51

 - Posted      Profile for Sean   Author's homepage   Email Sean   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Sorry - that was badly done. I didn't mean to imply that you were being offencive Angel, just that the idea was mildly so.

--------------------
"So far as the theories of mathematics are about reality, they are not certain; so far as they are certain, they are not about reality" - Einstein

Posts: 1085 | From: A very long way away | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
babybear
Bear faced and cheeky with it
# 34

 - Posted      Profile for babybear   Email babybear   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Being married is often a rather wonderful state of being. (Sorry if that sounded "smug-married".)

I didn't marry the Gremlin because I wanted to have "legitimate" sex, but because I fell in love with him, and wanted to spend my life with him. I wanted to have children, but because of an arthritis like problem I didn't know if I would be able to carry a baby. (Thankfully things have worked out really well.)

Even if I had not been able to have children I would still have wanted to marry the Gremlin. We may well have adopted children. But the reason why marriage is a good place to having children is because the loving, nurturing, caring environment already exists.

bb


Posts: 13287 | From: Cottage of the 3 Bears (and The Gremlin) | Registered: May 2001  |  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:
Originally posted by babybear:
But the reason why marriage is a good place to having children is because the loving, nurturing, caring environment already exists.

bb



well that rather depends on the marriage, i'm afraid.

--------------------
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
Bishop Joe
Shipmate
# 527

 - Posted      Profile for Bishop Joe   Email Bishop Joe       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Here in the States there are no small number of priests and ministers who are happy to bless the union of a man/woman couple living together and over age 65, so that their Social Security benefits not be severely reduced in the wake of a conventional marriage. No one considers it truly a case of "living in sin" or horrifying; it's just a necessary adjustment to an arbitrary federal regulation. The church's simple blessing has no legal standing, as would a wedding. (I don't know if the UK follows the Continental model, but in the USA any validly licensed and ordained priest or minister in good standing can perform marriage and that's good enough--one needn't notify the civil authorities or go through any other kind of process.) But some of those same clerics would rather be slathered with honey and tied up on a red-ant colony than perform a commitment ceremony or blessing for a same-sex couple. If the central argument on this thread ultimately reduces to reproduction, who is more likely to do so: a man and a woman over age 65, or a same-sex couple aged late 20s - early 40s who have the stamina, money and patience to deal with adoption or the many new technological methods of reproduction spoken of above? Not all gay men and lesbians fit that profile but c'mon . . .

In seminary we tried to imagine a scenario breaking as many Levitican imprecations as harmlessly as possible. We thought of a Jewish woman attending an art show as a fund-raiser for AIDS at her Reform temple. Funds raised will benefit Africans, not her co-religionists. The woman drove herself to the event because her husband is home watching the Friday-night "Sex and the City" on cable TV. (Him I might worry about.) She wouldn't miss this showing because she just ADORES modern art. The woman is hatless and wears a purple sweater made of a blend of silk and linen. At the buffet reception for the fund-raiser, she eats a deep-fried shrimp from a stick. Nobody else knows it, but she's having her period. By the way, she has CD's in the bank, but of course the usury restriction came along much later. Now, are these alleged deviances enough to send the lady straight to Hell? Or had she better be judged by other means?


Posts: 150 | From: Chicago, IL USA | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
gbuchanan
Shipmate
# 415

 - Posted      Profile for gbuchanan   Email gbuchanan   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
An interesting tid-bit I've just remembered I didn't post before. Quite a few folks I've known who have been living together then have got married when they decided to have children; this actually seems to make marriage closer to the sort of biological function you've just described.

Has anyone else come across this?


Posts: 683 | From: London, UK | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Nicolemr
Shipmate
# 28

 - Posted      Profile for Nicolemr   Author's homepage   Email Nicolemr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
bishop joe, i thought of three more levitican prohabitions you could break in there... her husband, who has had a testicle removed due to cancer, has a crewcut. she has a tattoo.

--------------------
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
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716

 - Posted      Profile for ChastMastr   Author's homepage   Email ChastMastr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Angel:
ChastMastr - I'm with you on the sex/no sex thing - but you again have the problems of boundaries blurring. Is it wrong if you have the intention of creating the same sort of intimacy as with the heterosexual act - e.g. oral sex? mutual masturbation?


Actually, I'd consider both of those, or anything to deliberately bring someone to orgasm, a sex act in the sense I mean here. I'm speaking more in terms of emotional intimacy, cuddling, snuggling, etc.

--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity

Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716

 - Posted      Profile for ChastMastr   Author's homepage   Email ChastMastr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Bishop Joe:
But some of those same clerics would rather be slathered with honey and tied up on a red-ant colony

Goodness, those clerics are kinky, aren't they?



--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity


Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Nicolemr
Shipmate
# 28

 - Posted      Profile for Nicolemr   Author's homepage   Email Nicolemr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
chastmaster, i must be misunderstanding you, i really MUST.

you can't honestly be advocating that homeosexuals carry on with there lives, live together, have physical intimacies... but never have orgasims?????

that is so cruel that words fail me.

--------------------
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
rewboss
Shipmate
# 566

 - Posted      Profile for rewboss   Author's homepage   Email rewboss   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I once accidentally brought my girlfriend to an orgasm. By "accidentally" I mean we hadn't even started to undress, we were just kissing and cuddling... and then it sort of happened, I know not how (but, since at the moment I'm girlfriendless, if anyone wants to volunteer to help me find out...).

Did I sin when that happened? Or did she? Or did we both?

--------------------
The latest from the world of rewboss


Posts: 1334 | From: Lower Franconia, Germany | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gill
Shipmate
# 102

 - Posted      Profile for Gill   Email Gill   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
HAHAhahahaahahahahahahahahaahaaaa.....

Please can I write the filmscript?

A Methodist Preacher who brings women to orgasm as he brushes past them in the street?

It'd be a cross between 'What Women Want' and 'Sister Act' - unexplained powers mysteriously filling a church with worshippers.

Brilliant!


--------------------
Still hanging in there...


Posts: 1828 | From: not drowning but waving... | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
rewboss
Shipmate
# 566

 - Posted      Profile for rewboss   Author's homepage   Email rewboss   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
See? It's a gift of the Spirit to be used liberally and to the Glory of God.

--------------------
The latest from the world of rewboss

Posts: 1334 | From: Lower Franconia, Germany | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716

 - Posted      Profile for ChastMastr   Author's homepage   Email ChastMastr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by nicolemrw:
chastmaster, i must be misunderstanding you, i really MUST.

you can't honestly be advocating that homeosexuals carry on with there lives, live together, have physical intimacies... but never have orgasims?????

that is so cruel that words fail me.



Well, I don't think I'm cruel... what do you recommend? That we live in isolation instead? I would think telling us that since we can't have sex, we have to be isolated from all the other kinds of non-forbidden intimacy would be much crueler, if cruelty is the issue. Certainly I can't be the only one for whom non-sexual intimacy works?

--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity

Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gill
Shipmate
# 102

 - Posted      Profile for Gill   Email Gill   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Would you mind defining 'works', please? Do you mean, it allows you to get on and function in life, or do you mean you are content.. or both? Or something else altogether?

--------------------
Still hanging in there...

Posts: 1828 | From: not drowning but waving... | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716

 - Posted      Profile for ChastMastr   Author's homepage   Email ChastMastr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gill:
Would you mind defining 'works', please? Do you mean, it allows you to get on and function in life, or do you mean you are content.. or both? Or something else altogether?

"Why, all of them at once together!" as Bilbo Baggins replied to Gandalf. I find it helps me to function in life, makes me more or less content, and is even of profound value in our (to me) cold and isolating society. (I'd go much further and say that it has helped change my life for the better in pretty amazing ways, but this gets into different (albeit related) waters, specifically hierarchical paternal/filial relationships, and to go on and explain all of those details may well confuse people and the issue specifically at hand.)

--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity

Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
dolphy

Lady of Perpetual Responsiblity
# 862

 - Posted      Profile for dolphy   Email dolphy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I don't know why this is all so hard...
What?
'Marriage'... 'it's suposed to be different than this'....
'Well you've been working'
'Yes, and you've been working and we're planning and saving and killing ourselves... for what?'
Ok, I've just had a major bust up with my partner.. very probably for good this time.. but these words, from a cheesy American soap speak true... why are we all so against gay people and stuff like that.? People are people no matter their colour, sex, or whatever.
Love is love .. end of story....
That's all.

--------------------
Looking forward to my rock moving closer again.

Posts: 15134 | From: my camper van | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
pagan flower
Apprentice
# 867

 - Posted      Profile for pagan flower     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
If I had a partner I would want to be *able* to marry her (or rather, handfast!).

THe joining of souls is a sacred matter in whatever path you follow - and i truly believe that if two people love each other they should be able to celebrate their love and have it recognised.

Hang in there Dolphin...

--------------------
walk in light,

Pagan flower


Posts: 17 | From: North West, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
dolphy

Lady of Perpetual Responsiblity
# 862

 - Posted      Profile for dolphy   Email dolphy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Thanks pagan...
Walking in darkness but watching from the Cathedral!!!
Surely if two people love each other, that's all that counts.. but what happens if two people desperately love each other and life gets in the way... ? Do we walk from the hurt and pain or do we continue to 'watch with an intent basic?'
Anyone help here?
Walking through a storm,
Dolphins still making me cry.

--------------------
Looking forward to my rock moving closer again.

Posts: 15134 | From: my camper van | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gurdur
Shipmate
# 857

 - Posted      Profile for Gurdur   Author's homepage   Email Gurdur   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
um, Crying Dolphin, certainly I suffered the situation where "two people desperately love each other and life gets in the way".
Ten years later it still affects me. There are no answers I know of, excepting that life moves on and the pain gradually lessens over time.

As for the issue of gays, my own personal standpoint is that gays in stable loving relationships can only be better than the alternatives (just as for straights); and legal recognition of that (inheritance issues etc.) can often be of some help.
On the other hand, since I'm not gay, and not an expert on relationships of whatever kind, possibly I shouldn't be shoving my nose in on that issue.


Posts: 380 | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Bishop Joe
Shipmate
# 527

 - Posted      Profile for Bishop Joe   Email Bishop Joe       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Gurdur, in my opinion you're exactly the sort of person who should be thrusting himself into the debate because it takes empathetic straight people to forward gay/lesbian acceptance. As a minority, gays cannot do it by themselves.

Posts: 150 | From: Chicago, IL USA | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Astro
Shipmate
# 84

 - Posted      Profile for Astro   Email Astro   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
A while back I heard a gay vegetarian chef say on the radio that he could not understand wht vegetarians wnted to eat imitation meat in pies and sausages, whyt anyone would want to drink de-caffinated coffee, and why any gay person should want to do something so hetrosexual as get married to their partner. So I guess it takes all sorts.

--------------------
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
Bishop Joe
Shipmate
# 527

 - Posted      Profile for Bishop Joe   Email Bishop Joe       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Does an Englishman abroad speak for all the English? Does a member of the Labour Party speak for all of labour? Is it imperative upon you to like "The Vicar of Dibley" just because most people like it?


Posts: 150 | From: Chicago, IL USA | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gill
Shipmate
# 102

 - Posted      Profile for Gill   Email Gill   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The ones who worry me most are homophobic gays - I know a few in the church! They've taken Jesus' message of Self Hate in board... Seriously, they have swallowed the official Church teaching without daring to think through how it might work out (or not)in their own lives. So you end up either with Christian gays in denial (but in church) or a load of disenfranchised people wondering what God is playing at...

There are plenty of both, I think.

--------------------
Still hanging in there...


Posts: 1828 | From: not drowning but waving... | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Newman's Own
Shipmate
# 420

 - Posted      Profile for Newman's Own     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I disagree with gay marriages as a point of sacramental theology. (And, yes, I know that many participants will disagree with marriage's being a sacrament at all.) If gay partners have rights under civil law (related to inheritances and the like), that would not bother me in the least. But the matter of the sacrament of matrimony is male and female.

One cannot use tea for baptism, the Africa spa line for the unction or confirmation, or a roasted chicken for the Eucharist. (I had a bizarre dream that a dear friend who is a priest involved in Affirming Catholicism was doing that last.)

No offense to Twinings, the Body Shop, poultry farmers, or the gay community is intended.

--------------------
Cheers,
Elizabeth
“History as Revelation is seldom very revealing, and histories of holiness are full of holes.” - Dermot Quinn


Posts: 6740 | From: Library or pub | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716

 - Posted      Profile for ChastMastr   Author's homepage   Email ChastMastr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
As a member of the gay community myself (albeit a celibate one, see above) I wholly agree!

And no offence taken!

(I hope they don't take away my toaster for this!)

David

--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity


Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
splodge
Shipmate
# 156

 - Posted      Profile for splodge   Email splodge   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Marriage is for males and females exclusively and vive la difference. My argument: Because there are essential and significant differences between homosexual and heterosexual relations in the nature of things, in the cosmic scheme if you like, as well as the more prosaic kind.
I don't believe it belittles homosexuals to believe that in the relating of men to women there are dimensions of relationship that are not mirrored in and cannot be experienced in male-male or female-female relationships (and no doubt vica versa). It is not a matter of quality or depth just function and purpose. Without arguing it recreates the ying-yang dynamic of the universe so some such mystical view, intuitively we feel that heterosexual relations have a special purpose and importance in the divine plan
It is significant surely, that only heterosexuality can bring together the two bio-sexual halves of humanity with their particular physical and psychological differences?. Only heterosexuality by definition can relate both sexes at the same time, "microcosmically" and ideally, uniting humanity . And then of course only hetero sexual relations can (though need not) result naturally in the reproduction of humanity: without heterosexuality there would be no human beings.
Sorry to state the obvious, but we need a debate that cuts through the existential fog where our own experience of life is the measure of all things. However the truth of a thing is not how we feel about it, it is what is. Or "The Facts":
No matter how much legal equality there should be, or how equal the experience of love, happiness and joy between same or different sex lovers; reality consists of the existence of two diffeent biolgical sexes, and this means there is a very basic factual, non comparability, functional non-equality, between heterosexuality and homosexuality. In my view this explains and justifies heterosexual relationships being celebrated by quite different and exclusively straight institutions, statuses and sacraments. - as long as this does not denigrate homosexual relationships legally, politically, financially - which civil rights should be recognised by alternative institutions.

--------------------
Splodge

Posts: 145 | From: Newport | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gill
Shipmate
# 102

 - Posted      Profile for Gill   Email Gill   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Well THAT was a conversation stopper, Splodge!

Well-put. Though you're going to get the 'but we can make babies however' brigade now.

BTW for those who are committed to the idea of Evolution (I have an open mind here I hope) does our capacity for genetic engineering count as part of the evolutionary process? Should be a new thread but I can't be ar - er bothered.

--------------------
Still hanging in there...


Posts: 1828 | From: not drowning but waving... | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716

 - Posted      Profile for ChastMastr   Author's homepage   Email ChastMastr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'd agree with Splodge here also.

David
Hiding his toaster under the bed in case someone wants it

--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity


Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
doug
Apprentice
# 474

 - Posted      Profile for doug   Email doug   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
a friend remaked today :

gods greatest joke in creation is that he
created 76 sexes and only told us about two

d.


Posts: 28 | From: Oxford | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Bishop Joe
Shipmate
# 527

 - Posted      Profile for Bishop Joe   Email Bishop Joe       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It was one of Kurt Vonnegut's Novels--Slaughterhouse Five, I think--in which the aliens found out there were seven sexes on earth, and that heterosexual procreation could not take place unless a homosexual act had taken place shortly before nearby.
Posts: 150 | From: Chicago, IL USA | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
In this day and age, marriage is primarily a matter of civil law. Most religions are perfectly happy to recognize most unions solemnized by other faiths or even solely by civil authorities. As such I am extremely uncomfortable with the notion of theology dictating official state policy. I thought we were beyond all that.

As far as the "legalize-it-but-don't-call-it-marriage" position goes, its creation of a secondary status is vaguely reminiscent of the unfortunate "separate-but-equal" policy followed by my country for the first half of the twentieth century. Unless there is some legitimate State interest in maintaining a distinction, the State should not discriminate against its own citizens.

--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto


Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gill H

Shipmate
# 68

 - Posted      Profile for Gill H     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Newman's Own -

If tea cannot be used for baptism, then I guess I will have to break it to Sven that his baptism was invalid. Alas!

(Anyone who wonders what the heck that's about - check the 'adventures of Sven' thread in Heaven. I had the privelege of baptising Sven in a mug of tea last year.)



--------------------
*sigh* We can’t all be Alan Cresswell.

- Lyda Rose


Posts: 9313 | From: London | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Nicolemr
Shipmate
# 28

 - Posted      Profile for Nicolemr   Author's homepage   Email Nicolemr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
splodge, i have a gay friend, whos been living with his partner now for ten years, and believe me, he feels VERY belittled that they can't marry.

--------------------
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
splodge
Shipmate
# 156

 - Posted      Profile for splodge   Email splodge   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Thanks nicolemrw

Does your Gay friend want exactly the kind of
ceremony as heterosexuals have? Is it important it is called marriage?

I dunno but is it better to have some alternative ceremony for gay people which maj of pop would accept as legitimate or
call in marriage and then a lot of people (most?) not accepting such a ceremony as being a valid marriage.
Would you say its about the social legitimacy that marriage has?

I guess you noticed that my acceptance of gay relationships as being 100 percent equivalent to straight relationship "philosophically and theologically" speaking (legal rights I think should for adults be equal) is somewhat less than a 100 per cent. I am willing to argue the point...

--------------------
Splodge


Posts: 145 | From: Newport | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
splodge - The argument of "social acceptance" was one of the most prominent during the anti-miscegenation debate in the U.S. about forty years ago. If "social acceptance" is not considered a valid argument against interracial marriages, why should it be considered any more valid when applied to today's most popular bigotry?

--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto

Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716

 - Posted      Profile for ChastMastr   Author's homepage   Email ChastMastr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'd say the question is "What is a marriage, ultimately, in the eyes of God?" Not "will modern people accept it?" I mean, for goodness' sake, look at the bread and wine we eat at church: whether one views it as sacrament or only symbol, we're participating in ritual cannibalism, for goodness' sake! Many people outside the Church, if they pay attention to the words being used, would see this is absolutely bizarre. Do we really want to base our beliefs on how people are going to react? If same-sex marriage is right and consecratable, then do it, even if we are persecuted for it; if wrong, don't. Popular acceptance should not be a deciding issue; was it, and should it have been, when we were being used as human torches for Nero's dinner-parties?

--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity

Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Nicolemr
Shipmate
# 28

 - Posted      Profile for Nicolemr   Author's homepage   Email Nicolemr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
splodge, as both my friend and his partner tend towards atheist/agnostic, a religious ceremony is not exactly it. but a ceremony, yes. with legal standing, and social acceptance. and if legally its the same thing as a marriage, then, as croesos points out, the "seperate-but-equal" doctrine applies. seperate-but-equal is inharently UNEQUAL. does my friend want a "marriage"? i've never asked him. we're just getting reaquainted after having been out of touch for many years, and thats more personal than i'd want to ask him until we have a chance to get together in person, kick back and have a few drinnks together. but i will say, marriage is the word he used.

--------------------
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
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716

 - Posted      Profile for ChastMastr   Author's homepage   Email ChastMastr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
But then we have the question of the Christian sense of marriage, and which kinds we believe are real marriages (in our sense), and he secular kind. I think civil agreements and the like would solve this, as well as open the door to other, non-sexual/non-romantic family linkages which could be very helpful in our fragmenting society.

--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity

Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6  ...  9  10  11 
 
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