 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Russian anti-gay bill passes, protesters detained
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
I'm wondering, now, what happens to scientific debate. Is any study pointing towards homosexuality being innate now 'propoganda'?
I have visions of Galileo in my head, and the few select verses and particular interpretations of those verses that the church used to assert that the earth was the centre of the universe. Was Galileo engaging in heliocentric propaganda when he looked in his telescope?
[ 18. June 2013, 13:50: Message edited by: orfeo ]
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
I have visions of Galileo in my head, and the few select verses and particular interpretations of those verses that the church used to assert that the earth was the centre of the universe. Was Galileo engaging in heliocentric propaganda when he looked in his telescope?
No, just when he published his results. Interestingly, while displacing the Earth from the center of the Universe was heretical, it was considered a kind of second order heresy. The really big heresy of heliocentrism was teaching that the Earth moved!
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Indifferently
Shipmate
# 17517
|
Posted
Sex outside marriage is not allowed. We are not talking about banning it. However brainwashing children into believing that any sort of sex outside marriage is OK is precisely what revolutionaries do to assault Christianity. It is no coincidence that Communist Hungary was the first country to introduce child sex "education" in 1918.
Posts: 288 | From: United Kingdom | Registered: Jan 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
I suspect that the use of the term "propaganda" is a nod to the Russian Constitution. Article 29 states* in section 1:
quote:
Everyone shall be guaranteed the freedom of ideas and speech.
But section 2 clarifies that by saying:
quote:
The propaganda or agitation instigating social, racial, national or religious hatred and strife shall not be allowed. The propaganda of social, racial, national, religious or linguistic supremacy shall be banned.
So Russia recognizes the right to free speech, but not the right to spread "propaganda". I suspect the use of the term (or whatever term is used in the original Russian for the English translation "propaganda") is meant to indicate a class of speech outside constitutional protections.
--------------------
*I'm obviously using an English translation of a document originally in Russian.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Indifferently:
However brainwashing children into believing that any sort of sex outside marriage is OK is precisely what revolutionaries do to assault Christianity.
How about brainwashing children into believing it's up to each of them to come to their own decision regarding whether sex outside marriage is OK? How would you feel about that; would it constitute an assault on Christianity, in your view?
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Indifferently:
Sex outside marriage is not allowed. We are not talking about banning it. However brainwashing children into believing that any sort of sex outside marriage is OK is precisely what revolutionaries do to assault Christianity. It is no coincidence that Communist Hungary was the first country to introduce child sex "education" in 1918.
That's a rather amazing amount of influence to attribute to a shaky, post-war political unit that didn't control all its supposed territory and only lasted 133 days. Do tell me how they managed to have such worldwide influence when they couldn't even keep out the monarchists (or the Romanian army, for that matter)?
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
So Russia recognizes the right to free speech, but not the right to spread "propaganda".
Which in practice means that any speech they want to limit, they merely brand "propaganda," and voilà! it's illegal. Which means they do not recognize the right to free speech at all, and saying they do in their constitution is so much gas.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Indifferently
Shipmate
# 17517
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
quote:
Originally posted by Indifferently:
Sex outside marriage is not allowed. We are not talking about banning it. However brainwashing children into believing that any sort of sex outside marriage is OK is precisely what revolutionaries do to assault Christianity. It is no coincidence that Communist Hungary was the first country to introduce child sex "education" in 1918.
That's a rather amazing amount of influence to attribute to a shaky, post-war political unit that didn't control all its supposed territory and only lasted 133 days. Do tell me how they managed to have such worldwide influence when they couldn't even keep out the monarchists (or the Romanian army, for that matter)?
I'm not attributing influence to that government as such - I merely point out that the specialization of children through "sex education" is desirable from a Marxist point of view, as it creates a "counter-hegemony" to undermine the (Christian) prevailing orthodoxy.
The counter-hegemony of sexual freedom is all the more powerful because it tempts our fallen nature into acts which, though contrary to God's law, we derive physical pleasure from.
To South Coast Kevin: your suggestion that the State should be morally neutral in the matter is problematic on two fronts:
First such a thing could not exist anyway.
Secondly this is based on an Enlightenmennt liberal idea that, given free choice and good foreknowledge, man will choose what is best for him. This is contrary to the Christian view - that man is fallen, lustful and myopic, and thus responsible measures ought to be taken to guide him away from things which will do him harm. That is why, every day, we beg, "Lead us not into temptation."
Posts: 288 | From: United Kingdom | Registered: Jan 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Indifferently:
To South Coast Kevin: your suggestion that the State should be morally neutral in the matter is problematic on two fronts:
First such a thing could not exist anyway.
It's not quite that I want the State to be morally neutral, just that I want the state to permit people to make their own minds up. So I'm in favour of using the tax system to favour behavioural patterns that benefit society (e.g. imposing taxes on pollutants and on harmful products like cigarettes). If there were credible evidence that equal marriage would harm society then I guess I'd want the tax system to favour woman-man marriage. But AFAIK there is no such evidence, thus I want the state to be neutral on the matter.
quote:
Originally posted by Indifferently:
Secondly this is based on an Enlightenmennt liberal idea that, given free choice and good foreknowledge, man will choose what is best for him. This is contrary to the Christian view - that man is fallen, lustful and myopic, and thus responsible measures ought to be taken to guide him away from things which will do him harm. That is why, every day, we beg, "Lead us not into temptation."
No, I don't think people will routinely choose what's best for them, given free choice and good foreknowledge. I think people should have the right to make their own decisions according to their own moral framework, albeit that a balance should be struck between this right and (a) the same right for other people, and (b) the general good of society.
I think it's fundamentally ungodly for the state to control how people live, until and unless there's a demonstrable impact on other people.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Indifferently:
I'm not attributing influence to that government as such - I merely point out that the specialization of children through "sex education" is desirable from a Marxist point of view, as it creates a "counter-hegemony" to undermine the (Christian) prevailing orthodoxy.
Given that the example you chose was a failed state that didn't make it past the half-year mark, you're not making a particular convincing case. Exactly how many resources did the Hungarian Soviet put into children's sex ed compared to, for example, fighting their civil war? I have no idea, but if I had to hazard a guess I'd probably say one line in an education plan never actually implemented. Any details you could provide would be helpful.
Quite frankly, if the Christian sexual ethic is so flimsy it collapses in the face of such a (hypothetically) weak onslaught, it was doomed anyway.
quote:
Originally posted by Indifferently:
The counter-hegemony of sexual freedom is all the more powerful because it tempts our fallen nature into acts which, though contrary to God's law, we derive physical pleasure from.
So close, and yet you don't draw the obvious conclusion. You don't need sex education to sell people the idea that sex is fun and enjoyable. Sex sells itself! I can't imagine the stunted view of both human sexuality and history that would reach the conclusion that no one thought sex was fun until the development of Marxism.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Indifferently:
Sex outside marriage is not allowed. We are not talking about banning it. However brainwashing children into believing that any sort of sex outside marriage is OK is precisely what revolutionaries do to assault Christianity. It is no coincidence that Communist Hungary was the first country to introduce child sex "education" in 1918.
Actually in the Bible, sex happens before marriage, because sex is what made people married. There was no ceremony as such, it was people publicly moving in together and promising to be together for life. Marriage happened that way in most of Europe too, for centuries. It was only property laws that made marriage a more formalised ceremony. In any case, there is no Bible verse that forbids pre-marital sex (just interpretations of particular verses), and sex does not come under Caesar's remit. It is not for governments to legislate against sex between consenting adults.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Indifferently:
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
quote:
Originally posted by Indifferently:
Sex outside marriage is not allowed. We are not talking about banning it. However brainwashing children into believing that any sort of sex outside marriage is OK is precisely what revolutionaries do to assault Christianity. It is no coincidence that Communist Hungary was the first country to introduce child sex "education" in 1918.
That's a rather amazing amount of influence to attribute to a shaky, post-war political unit that didn't control all its supposed territory and only lasted 133 days. Do tell me how they managed to have such worldwide influence when they couldn't even keep out the monarchists (or the Romanian army, for that matter)?
I'm not attributing influence to that government as such - I merely point out that the specialization of children through "sex education" is desirable from a Marxist point of view, as it creates a "counter-hegemony" to undermine the (Christian) prevailing orthodoxy.
The counter-hegemony of sexual freedom is all the more powerful because it tempts our fallen nature into acts which, though contrary to God's law, we derive physical pleasure from.
To South Coast Kevin: your suggestion that the State should be morally neutral in the matter is problematic on two fronts:
First such a thing could not exist anyway.
Secondly this is based on an Enlightenmennt liberal idea that, given free choice and good foreknowledge, man will choose what is best for him. This is contrary to the Christian view - that man is fallen, lustful and myopic, and thus responsible measures ought to be taken to guide him away from things which will do him harm. That is why, every day, we beg, "Lead us not into temptation."
Marxists are not fond of Enlightenment liberalism, just saying. Your grasp of history seems to be lacking!
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Indifferently
Shipmate
# 17517
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
quote:
Originally posted by Indifferently:
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
quote:
Originally posted by Indifferently:
Sex outside marriage is not allowed. We are not talking about banning it. However brainwashing children into believing that any sort of sex outside marriage is OK is precisely what revolutionaries do to assault Christianity. It is no coincidence that Communist Hungary was the first country to introduce child sex "education" in 1918.
That's a rather amazing amount of influence to attribute to a shaky, post-war political unit that didn't control all its supposed territory and only lasted 133 days. Do tell me how they managed to have such worldwide influence when they couldn't even keep out the monarchists (or the Romanian army, for that matter)?
I'm not attributing influence to that government as such - I merely point out that the specialization of children through "sex education" is desirable from a Marxist point of view, as it creates a "counter-hegemony" to undermine the (Christian) prevailing orthodoxy.
The counter-hegemony of sexual freedom is all the more powerful because it tempts our fallen nature into acts which, though contrary to God's law, we derive physical pleasure from.
To South Coast Kevin: your suggestion that the State should be morally neutral in the matter is problematic on two fronts:
First such a thing could not exist anyway.
Secondly this is based on an Enlightenmennt liberal idea that, given free choice and good foreknowledge, man will choose what is best for him. This is contrary to the Christian view - that man is fallen, lustful and myopic, and thus responsible measures ought to be taken to guide him away from things which will do him harm. That is why, every day, we beg, "Lead us not into temptation."
Marxists are not fond of Enlightenment liberalism, just saying. Your grasp of history seems to be lacking!
I never said they were. By co-opting certain forms of language they have AlexAndrian as "liberal" to the extent that New Labour is described as "socially" liberal when in fact it was quite the opposite.
Posts: 288 | From: United Kingdom | Registered: Jan 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Indifferently:
Sex outside marriage is not allowed. We are not talking about banning it. However brainwashing children into believing that any sort of sex outside marriage is OK is precisely what revolutionaries do to assault Christianity. It is no coincidence that Communist Hungary was the first country to introduce child sex "education" in 1918.
In many countries it's perfectly possible for gays to have sex within marriage. Heck, I'm in inner Boston, there could be gay married couples having a lunchtime quickie RIGHT NOW. woot!
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Heck, I'm in inner Boston, there could be gay married couples having a lunchtime quickie RIGHT NOW. woot!
Jaysoos, man, children might be reading this. You're brainwashing them with this propaganda. And you don't even have a pussy to riot.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
Nonsense, I'm celebrating the joys of married love. Between two hot dudes.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Nonsense, I'm celebrating the joys of married love. Between two hot dudes.
I see what you've done there. This is looksism.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Louise
Shipmate
# 30
|
Posted
Williams leads tributes to Samaritans founder
A bit about Chad Varah, the founder of the Samaritans
quote:
Dr Varah launched the Samaritans in 1953 "to befriend the suicidal and despairing" after conducting the funeral of a 13-year-old girl who had killed herself. Uneducated about sex, she had mistaken her first period for a symptom of a sexually transmitted disease which she feared would afford her a painful, shameful death.
Her case also prompted him to become one of the earliest proponents of sex education, particularly to poorly educated young people, for which conservative 1950s society vilified him as a "dirty old man".
(The article elides the dates a bit - the death of the girl came quite a bit earlier, but moved him to become active in this field)
So, Chad Varah's Christian approach which saved many lives or Indifferently's strange contention that sex education is bad because it is really 'Marxist? You decide.
--------------------
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
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Nonsense, I'm celebrating the joys of married love. Between two hot dudes.
I see what you've done there. This is looksism.
Oh fine. The joys of married love between two rather dowdy middle-aged men, one of whom is stuck in a low level management job he detests and the other who is struggling with sciatica.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Indifferently
Shipmate
# 17517
|
Posted
I know not whether there is an epidemic of illiteracy ("dyslexia" perhaps) running wild on this board but people seem to be determined to counter points I simply have not made. I am not suggesting we try to ban sexual behaviour which is contrary to the the clear historic, scriptural and patristic teachings of the Universal Church, I am merely suggesting that active promotion of such behaviour is both wrong and unnecessary.
Posts: 288 | From: United Kingdom | Registered: Jan 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Indifferently
Shipmate
# 17517
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Indifferently:
Sex outside marriage is not allowed. We are not talking about banning it. However brainwashing children into believing that any sort of sex outside marriage is OK is precisely what revolutionaries do to assault Christianity. It is no coincidence that Communist Hungary was the first country to introduce child sex "education" in 1918. the
In many countries it's perfectly possible for gays to have sex within marriage. Heck, I'm in inner Boston, there could be gay married couples having a lunchtime quickie RIGHT NOW. woot!
Please show me where in the Book of Common Prayer exists any provision for marriage other than between one man and one woman.
Posts: 288 | From: United Kingdom | Registered: Jan 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
An Australian senator has been saying again that same sex marriage could lead to polygamy. Given that the latter is a thoroughly Scriptural practice, the mind boggles as to how that particular strain of religious argument actually works. Because not only do we not promote polygamy, we actively discourage it.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Indifferently
Shipmate
# 17517
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
An Australian senator has been saying again that same sex marriage could lead to polygamy. Given that the latter is a thoroughly Scriptural practice, the mind boggles as to how that particular strain of religious argument actually works. Because not only do we not promote polygamy, we actively discourage it.
That is why we have something called "The Church". It's not just scripture - the teaching of the Fathers and Councils are clear that polygamy is not allowed, and the Lord, raising up marriage into a higher order under the New Covenant, made the union betwixt man and wife an icon of that between Christ and His Church.
But I suppose you're too busy parroting flat pack lefty received opinion to engage in the most basic theology and ecclesiology. So I apologize.
Posts: 288 | From: United Kingdom | Registered: Jan 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Indifferently:
But I suppose you're too busy parroting flat pack lefty received opinion to engage in the most basic theology and ecclesiology. So I apologize.
Other views of ecclesiology are out there, Indifferently. Obviously you think your view is right, but you can't just ignore the fact that many people think of 'the Church' in a very different way than you, and would even hesitate to use the phrase.
It might be worth thrashing this out on another thread, but I'm far more comfortable with 'the church in' a particular city or area, as this seems to be more faithful to the New Testament witness.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
Indifferently
That is you have something called "The Church". It's not just scripture
But I suppose you're too busy parroting flat pack righty received opinion to engage in the most basic theology and ecclesiology.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Indifferently:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Indifferently:
Sex outside marriage is not allowed. We are not talking about banning it. However brainwashing children into believing that any sort of sex outside marriage is OK is precisely what revolutionaries do to assault Christianity. It is no coincidence that Communist Hungary was the first country to introduce child sex "education" in 1918. the
In many countries it's perfectly possible for gays to have sex within marriage. Heck, I'm in inner Boston, there could be gay married couples having a lunchtime quickie RIGHT NOW. woot!
Please show me where in the Book of Common Prayer exists any provision for marriage other than between one man and one woman.
Please show me the place where Jesus declared the Book of Common Prayer to be the repository of eternal truth.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Indifferently:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
An Australian senator has been saying again that same sex marriage could lead to polygamy. Given that the latter is a thoroughly Scriptural practice, the mind boggles as to how that particular strain of religious argument actually works. Because not only do we not promote polygamy, we actively discourage it.
That is why we have something called "The Church". It's not just scripture - the teaching of the Fathers and Councils are clear that polygamy is not allowed, and the Lord, raising up marriage into a higher order under the New Covenant, made the union betwixt man and wife an icon of that between Christ and His Church.
But I suppose you're too busy parroting flat pack lefty received opinion to engage in the most basic theology and ecclesiology. So I apologize.
I can assure you, as a person who wrestled with these issues personally for close on 2 decades, that my opinions are not received at all. They are entirely my own and I fought excruciatingly hard internal battles to arrive at them.
It's quite galling to have it suggested that just because my opinion is now more popular in some circles than yours are, that this somehow means I'm just a parrot. I know who I am, thanks. I am a rare blend of influences and personality the like of which it's unlikely you encounter very often. I am Christian, gay, intensely musical, more intelligent than 99% of the population, extremely analytical, honest, ethical, passionate, romantic... And frequently told by people who meet me how damn unusual I am. So kindly pack up your stereotype and take it elsewhere.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Indifferently:
I am not suggesting we try to ban sexual behaviour which is contrary to the the clear historic, scriptural and patristic teachings of the Universal Church, . . .
No it's not. Banning certain sexual behaviors has very clear historical and scriptural precedents. It's popularity is second only to banning heretics, blasphemers, infidels, and assorted other dissidents. That's what makes the Russian law so handy. Now you can do both at the same time!
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
quote:
Originally posted by Indifferently:
That is why we have something called "The Church". It's not just scripture - the teaching of the Fathers and Councils are clear that polygamy is not allowed, and the Lord, raising up marriage into a higher order under the New Covenant, made the union betwixt man and wife an icon of that between Christ and His Church.
But I suppose you're too busy parroting flat pack lefty received opinion to engage in the most basic theology and ecclesiology. So I apologize.
Other views of ecclesiology are out there, Indifferently. Obviously you think your view is right, but you can't just ignore the fact that many people think of 'the Church' in a very different way than you, and would even hesitate to use the phrase.
Not to mention the question as to why those outside "the Church" should be forced to follow its teachings by the laws of the state.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ToujoursDan
Ship's prole
# 10578
|
Posted
In the Episcopal Church in the U.S. same sex blessings have been authorized by the Standing Committee on Liturgy and Music (SCLM) since 2009 and are included in the Book of Occasional Services, which is a supplement to the Book of Common Prayer. There is probably a good possibility that it will be included in a future revision of the BCP.
Of course, in places like New York State where I live, Episcopal clergy also act as agents of the State, so as they are pronouncing a blessing on a same sex couple they may (and often) choose to marry them in the eyes of the law.
My Bishop issued this instruction regarding marriage and same sex couples soon after gay marriage was legalized in the State of New York.
Diocese of Long Island: A Theological Perspective and Practical Guideline on Marriage in the Diocese of Long Island as New York State Law Allows Same-Gender Marriage
[ 18. June 2013, 22:56: Message edited by: ToujoursDan ]
--------------------
"Many people say I embarrass them with my humility" - Archbishop Peter Akinola
Facebook link: http://www.facebook.com/toujoursdan
Posts: 3734 | From: NYC | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
Not to mention the question as to why those outside "the Church" should be forced to follow its teachings by the laws of the state.
This strikes me as 89% of the issue right here.
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Nonsense, I'm celebrating the joys of married love. Between two hot dudes.
I see what you've done there. This is looksism.
Oh fine. The joys of married love between two rather dowdy middle-aged men, one of whom is stuck in a low level management job he detests and the other who is struggling with sciatica.
Oh, now I see what you mean!
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
Not to mention the question as to why those outside "the Church" should be forced to follow its teachings by the laws of the state.
This strikes me as 89% of the issue right here.
The other 11% being that Jesus wasn't quite the bastard some of his followers are?
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
I am a rare blend of influences and personality the like of which it's unlikely you encounter very often.
Damn, but I miss the Offense thread. ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
Not to mention the question as to why those outside "the Church" should be forced to follow its teachings by the laws of the state.
This strikes me as 89% of the issue right here.
The other 11% being that Jesus wasn't quite the bastard some of his followers are?
Oooh, I left that out. I will have to recalculate.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Please show me the place where Jesus declared the Book of Common Prayer to be the repository of eternal truth.
Probably the same place he said, "Well, if the King James Bible was good enough for *me* to use, you don't need nuthin' else."
NOTE: I don't have a problem with the KJV. But there are folks who say, "well, if it was good enough for Jesus..."
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Indifferently:
I know not whether there is an epidemic of illiteracy ("dyslexia" perhaps) running wild on this board but people seem to be determined to counter points I simply have not made. I am not suggesting we try to ban sexual behaviour which is contrary to the the clear historic, scriptural and patristic teachings of the Universal Church, I am merely suggesting that active promotion of such behaviour is both wrong and unnecessary.
Anyone else think it mildly amusing that Indifferently will promote the 'Universal Church' when it suits him, but otherwise make snide comments about the errors of Rome?
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Palimpsest
Shipmate
# 16772
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Indifferently:
I know not whether there is an epidemic of illiteracy ("dyslexia" perhaps) running wild on this board but people seem to be determined to counter points I simply have not made. I am not suggesting we try to ban sexual behaviour which is contrary to the the clear historic, scriptural and patristic teachings of the Universal Church, I am merely suggesting that active promotion of such behaviour is both wrong and unnecessary.
So you don't have to promote it. Other people who feel it's right and necessary get to promote it. You don't get to tell them they can't. You'll have to depend on your charm and your arguments to convince those who are not of your church and not attempts to ban their promotion.
That doesn't seem to be going very well for you though.
Posts: 2990 | From: Seattle WA. US | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Actually in the Bible, sex happens before marriage, because sex is what made people married. There was no ceremony as such, it was people publicly moving in together and promising to be together for life. [..]
This court case in India was too timely to pass up.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Indifferently:
Sex outside marriage is not allowed. We are not talking about banning it.
I may have an unusual peer group (no science here!), but I'm afraid that if sex outside marriage is not allowed, that pretty much constitutes a ban for all but four of my closest friends
To be fair, two of these are hitching up come Saturday.
--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!
Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
quote:
Originally posted by Indifferently:
I know not whether there is an epidemic of illiteracy ("dyslexia" perhaps) running wild on this board but people seem to be determined to counter points I simply have not made. I am not suggesting we try to ban sexual behaviour which is contrary to the the clear historic, scriptural and patristic teachings of the Universal Church, I am merely suggesting that active promotion of such behaviour is both wrong and unnecessary.
So you don't have to promote it. Other people who feel it's right and necessary get to promote it. You don't get to tell them they can't. You'll have to depend on your charm and your arguments to convince those who are not of your church and not attempts to ban their promotion.
That doesn't seem to be going very well for you though.
I don't get this about "promoting homosexuality". In Britain from 1988, Section 28 of the Local Government Act stated that a local authority "shall not intentionally promote homosexuality or publish material with the intention of promoting homosexuality" or "promote the teaching in any maintained school of the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship".
No prosecutions were ever made (I'm not sure if one ever could, given such half-baked drafting) but the second clause intentionally made things difficult for teachers asked for advice by gay pupils or students, even if the relationship were entirely legal.
Then again, Britain is a democracy and the legislation was repealed in 2000 (by the government led by that well-known Marxist, Tony Blair).
[ 19. June 2013, 22:14: Message edited by: Sioni Sais ]
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Indifferently:
. . . I am merely suggesting that active promotion of such behaviour is both wrong and unnecessary.
Active promotion of sexuality is largely unnecessary, period. Most people eventually learn how to offer and accept sexual expression, as witnessed by a world population swollen to more than seven billion of our species.
What I'm curious about is this: what constitutes the "promotion" of sexual behavior you disapprove of?
Say that we acknowledge that the behavior exists. Is that promotion?
Say we describe the behavior. Is that promotion?
Say we acknowledge that 8-10% of the population engages in these practices. Is that promotion?
I could go on, but you see what I'm asking.
I'm curious because, in my experience, most of us have at least some imagination: that is, we can summon up mental pictures/sensations of, say, working on a factory assembly line (even if we've never done this). Most of us can at least partially grasp what it might be like to row a boat (even if we've never done this). Similarly, most of us can muster up some dim idea of a sexual encounter (even before we've experienced the Real Thing).
Your mileage may vary, but in my experience, people tend to imagine sexual behaviors that appeal to them. When people imagine sexual behaviors that don't appeal, they generally react negatively, in ways ranging from mild disinterest to outright revulsion.
This fact makes the notion of "promoting" sexual behavior somewhat problematic, in that it's pretty hard to encourage people to engage in behavior that leaves them cold or that they find repugnant.
IOW, how can homosexual behavior be "promoted," except to those who might actually find it appealing (which suggests they may either be homosexual or bisexual already)?
And what, exactly, constitutes "promotion?"
--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!
Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Indifferently
Shipmate
# 17517
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Indifferently:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
An Australian senator has been saying again that same sex marriage could lead to polygamy. Given that the latter is a thoroughly Scriptural practice, the mind boggles as to how that particular strain of religious argument actually works. Because not only do we not promote polygamy, we actively discourage it.
That is why we have something called "The Church". It's not just scripture - the teaching of the Fathers and Councils are clear that polygamy is not allowed, and the Lord, raising up marriage into a higher order under the New Covenant, made the union betwixt man and wife an icon of that between Christ and His Church.
But I suppose you're too busy parroting flat pack lefty received opinion to engage in the most basic theology and ecclesiology. So I apologize.
I can assure you, as a person who wrestled with these issues personally for close on 2 decades, that my opinions are not received at all. They are entirely my own and I fought excruciatingly hard internal battles to arrive at them.
It's quite galling to have it suggested that just because my opinion is now more popular in some circles than yours are, that this somehow means I'm just a parrot. I know who I am, thanks. I am a rare blend of influences and personality the like of which it's unlikely you encounter very often. I am Christian, gay, intensely musical, more intelligent than 99% of the population, extremely analytical, honest, ethical, passionate, romantic... And frequently told by people who meet me how damn unusual I am. So kindly pack up your stereotype and take it elsewhere.
Good job you didn't list "modest" among your attributes.
Posts: 288 | From: United Kingdom | Registered: Jan 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Palimpsest
Shipmate
# 16772
|
Posted
I have posted an opinion of Indifferently on the Hell Thread about that just started.
The discussion on "Promotion" led me to the thought that if the Church promoted Homosexuality from the pulpit the way it does Peace, Love and Charity, gay sex would be in as much trouble as the other topics. ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Posts: 2990 | From: Seattle WA. US | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
ToujoursDan
Ship's prole
# 10578
|
Posted
I dunno. I'm approaching 50, have had heterosexuality actively "promoted" to me throughout my life, in: church, school, work, the media and every which way imaginable. And despite all the junior high and high school proms, homecomings, parties, summer camps and church functions to which I was pressured to bring an opposite sex date; and all the music, TV shows, commercials and movies where I have heard/watched opposite sex romance, love, sex and family celebrated; and all the work parties where I have listened to straight parents gush over their kids and looked at their pics, it hasn't made me want to run out and get a girlfriend, much less actually fantasize over women parts.
Fears over the "promotion" of a sexual orientation seem pretty overblown. I often wonder if those who kindle this fear worry that they'll catch "the ghey" if the circumstances were right. They also seem to think that if they make being gay difficult people will cease to be gay (despite the fact that there are gay communities in some of the most homophobic parts of the world.) It strikes me as fantasy thinking.
--------------------
"Many people say I embarrass them with my humility" - Archbishop Peter Akinola
Facebook link: http://www.facebook.com/toujoursdan
Posts: 3734 | From: NYC | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dennis the Menace
Shipmate
# 11833
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ToujoursDan:
I dunno. I'm approaching 50, have had heterosexuality actively "promoted" to me throughout my life, in: church, school, work, the media and every which way imaginable. And despite all the junior high and high school proms, homecomings, parties, summer camps and church functions to which I was pressured to bring an opposite sex date; and all the music, TV shows, commercials and movies where I have heard/watched opposite sex romance, love, sex and family celebrated; and all the work parties where I have listened to straight parents gush over their kids and looked at their pics, it hasn't made me want to run out and get a girlfriend, much less actually fantasize over women parts.
Fears over the "promotion" of a sexual orientation seem pretty overblown. I often wonder if those who kindle this fear worry that they'll catch "the ghey" if the circumstances were right. They also seem to think that if they make being gay difficult people will cease to be gay (despite the fact that there are gay communities in some of the most homophobic parts of the world.) It strikes me as fantasy thinking.
Well said
--------------------
"Till we cast our crowns before Him; Lost in wonder, love, and praise."
Posts: 853 | From: Newcastle NSW Australia | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ToujoursDan:
Fears over the "promotion" of a sexual orientation seem pretty overblown. I often wonder if those who kindle this fear worry that they'll catch "the ghey" if the circumstances were right.
As best as I can tell, some such people think that if you don't tell a young man that "gay" exists, it won't occur to him to find that other young man attractive.
The rest just think you're disgusting and don't want to hear about you - they want you firmly in the closet, communicating solely by the secret gay handshake.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
Modesty does not consist of lying about oneself.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
A hundred years or so ago, writing with your left hand was actively discouraged in most schools. Children were encouraged (sometimes with a big stick) to conform to the right-handed norm.
Nowadays children are encouraged to decide for themselves which hand to write with and left-handers are allowed to flaunt their left-handedness in public. Some have even written books about famous left-handed people and claim that left-handed people are superior to right-handed ones.
Despite this shocking promotion of left-handedness, most of the population is still right-handed. Including my daughter, right-handed child of two left-handers.
(this isn't really a tangent: think about it)
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
TonyK
Host Emeritus
# 35
|
Posted
Host Mode <ACTIVATE>
Indifferently -I refer to your post of 23rd June in response to Orfeo.
quote:
Originally posted by Indifferently:
Good job you didn't list "modest" among your attributes.
I need to remind you of Commandment 3
'Attack the issue, not the person
Name-calling and personal insults are only allowed in Hell. Attacks outside of Hell are grounds for suspension or banning.'
Please note that this is a hostly and probably final warning - not a suggestion or a recommendation.
And to all who may be so minded - remember commandment 4:
'If you must get personal, take it to Hell
If you get into a personality conflict with other shipmates, you have two simple choices: end the argument or take it to Hell.'
There is already a suitable thread for this purpose here!
Host Mode <DEACTIVATE>
Yours aye ... TonyK
Host, Dead Horses
Posts: 2717 | From: Gloucestershire | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pages in this thread: 1 2 3 4
|
Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement
© Ship of Fools 2016
UBB.classicTM
6.5.0
|
|
|
|
|
| |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
