User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 64

  1. #11
    Senior Member Ming's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    2w3
    Socionics
    ENFP
    Posts
    491

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    I'm only going to post one reply to all the "the bible/God/Church" says so, no it doesnt, homosexual acts are considered anathema, there isnt any directions about what to do about it OK?

    Dont use everything you find wrong in the world to bash Christianity, it gets tedious and to be honest it happens often enough and regular Christians who dont care too much about homosexuals or fellow travellers will start to go on the defensive, try and get a fair hearing about something like this then.
    Sorry. I didn't mean any offence..

    It's good that there is people like that; because sometimes I leap a bit too much.

    There are a lot of Christians who are not like that; I know a lot of people (at least online) who accept homosexuality. Which I believe is a wonderful thing! I myself admit that I'm not into Christianity (I'm more Buddhism if I had to choose a religion) but I'm not intentionally trying to bash the bible/Christianity. At least I didn't have that idea in mind when I wrote that post.

    It's just that there are still inequality in gay rights. And really, there's no real adequate reason to have them still. I still just don't get why churches don't allow gay people to marry. Or adopt? Why are they still not letting us? Why are the world leaders still voting against these rights that we deserve to have? I mean REALLY, deep down, what are their intentions?

    It just seems so.. complicated.

  2. #12
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,648

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ming View Post
    Sorry. I didn't mean any offence..

    It's good that there is people like that; because sometimes I leap a bit too much.

    There are a lot of Christians who are not like that; I know a lot of people (at least online) who accept homosexuality. Which I believe is a wonderful thing! I myself admit that I'm not into Christianity (I'm more Buddhism if I had to choose a religion) but I'm not intentionally trying to bash the bible/Christianity. At least I didn't have that idea in mind when I wrote that post.

    It's just that there are still inequality in gay rights. And really, there's no real adequate reason to have them still. I still just don't get why churches don't allow gay people to marry. Or adopt? Why are they still not letting us? Why are the world leaders still voting against these rights that we deserve to have? I mean REALLY, deep down, what are their intentions?

    It just seems so.. complicated.
    I dont endorse or promote homosexuality and I dont support adoption rights in every instance for same sex couples.

    There was a case in the UK not too long ago were a male couple had been abusing and taking pictures of the male children placed in their care, social workers had suspiscions but were too afraid of being accused of bigotry to act more swiftly, most recently a chief in a gay welfare agency in scotlad funded with tax money was found to be part of a peadophile ring. These things give me reservations.

    Anyway, adoption isnt the same thing as what is being discussed here, neither is same sex "marriage", I get a little bewildered at how one issue becomes a general grievance, especially when its homosexuality involved.

    I dont believe the government should be able to deprive people of their property, that's in breech of an individuals legal rights, now that is how it could have and should have been dealt with. Instead its presented as another instance of straights vs. queers, with a couple of people throwing in their own prejudices about the bible and God. Hmmm, grumble.

  3. #13
    Senior Member cafe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Socionics
    INFj None
    Posts
    9,827

    Default

    In the US there is a fair amount of anti-gay rights activism by religious groups, so I don't think it's a huge surprise that Ming would make that leap.

    What happened to that couple would almost certainly not have happened if they were hetero and legally married.
    “There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.”
    ~ John Rogers

  4. #14
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    There was a case in the UK not too long ago were a male couple had been abusing and taking pictures of the male children placed in their care, social workers had suspiscions but were too afraid of being accused of bigotry to act more swiftly, most recently a chief in a gay welfare agency in scotlad funded with tax money was found to be part of a peadophile ring. These things give me reservations.
    For me, I'd feel as if I were being prejudiced if I did not apply the same standards to hets... since hets do the same stuff. I feel like gays (and other "social undesirables") are singled out because of the ways they might differ from the predominate social faction in charge.

    Anyway, adoption isnt the same thing as what is being discussed here, neither is same sex "marriage", I get a little bewildered at how one issue becomes a general grievance, especially when its homosexuality involved.
    Because it's a huge deal -- parenthood and marriage -- and the system is encouraging inequity. So yes, when something becomes a general grievance, I typically don't dismiss it, I ask myself, "Why is this becoming such a big deal?"

    I dont believe the government should be able to deprive people of their property, that's in breech of an individuals legal rights, now that is how it could have and should have been dealt with. Instead its presented as another instance of straights vs. queers, with a couple of people throwing in their own prejudices about the bible and God. Hmmm, grumble.
    Wait, I thought you started this thread, so I was trying to defer. Doh. No, you came in to defend Christians in your initial post.

    All right.

    My own experience and analysis is similar to Randomnity. Setting personal feelings aside, a lot of this stuff is still explicitly driven by institutionalized disapproval of homosexuality, which was both enforced and driven by social/religious forces. It's the sort of disapproval where one might not openly antagonize gay people, but inside when something like this happens, one is more prone to think, "Well, it's okay; they shouldn't have been in a relationship anyway. So their feelings don't matter" -- IOW, dismissive and insensitive to a commitment that has lasted far longer than many het marriages.

    That stinks.

    And a lot of notable population of religious-minded people either openly or tacitly (by not challenging it) end up endorsing that thinking... similar to how people are offended by how the Catholic church has been brushing over certain indiscretions when it's convenient. Religion sometimes leads to hubris, which leads sometimes to treat others insensitively.

    Yes, it's all one big mash.

    We've had this discussion before. I have no idea what things are like where you are, but you don't seem to be perceiving the religious conservative undercurrent that predominates a place like the United States. It's been there since the country's inception, even where the Founding Fathers were at best Deists and some non-believers ... it still permeated their thinking.

    And in cases like this it leads to some terrible injustices.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  5. #15
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,648

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cafe View Post
    In the US there is a fair amount of anti-gay rights activism by religious groups, so I don't think it's a huge surprise that Ming would make that leap.

    What happened to that couple would almost certainly not have happened if they were hetero and legally married.
    Alright, I still think that it is a property rights, instead of a gay rights issue, I also think its important that its framed that way.

    You think its fair to attack all religious because of the actions of people like westbro baptists?

  6. #16
    lab rat extraordinaire CrystalViolet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    XNFP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    2,170

    Default

    This isn't just about gay rights, it's about eldery people's rights as well. Gay, straight, christian, muslim, black, white, that situation just ain't right.
    Currently submerged under an avalanche of books and paper work. I may come back up for air from time to time.
    Real life awaits and she is a demanding mistress.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  7. #17
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,648

    Default

    Jenn, I woudnt describe homosexuals as social undesirables and I dont believe that they are marginalised as a consequence of being threats to the status quo or anything like that.

    I think its a complex issue and there are understandable reasons why I think aged and respected institutions shouldnt be over turned or undermined because a minority, which is still a minority and doesnt promise to become anything other than a minority decides so. Everyone should enjoy the same rights and the authorities should be impartial, the problem as I see it is that the majority of gay rights agitation focuses upon creating a partiality on the part of government, that it will intervene to create approval, redress especial grievances.

    That's not a good thing and I dont believe that its effects will be restricted to sexual orientation wars, marriage and parenthood are massive issues, changing them with a stroke of a legislators pen is patently impossible, simple as, attempting too, I believe, is a recipe for disaster too. There wont ever be satisfaction on this issue for either those who believe that in promoting homosexuality they are standing up for the underdog or for those who decline to do so believe they are defending the way of life they grew up with and want for their own children.

    In this instance it was a case of poperty rights and should have been addressed as such.

  8. #18
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,648

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FireyPheonix View Post
    This isn't just about gay rights, it's about eldery people's rights as well. Gay, straight, christian, muslim, black, white, that situation just ain't right.
    To be honest I've begun to go sour on the whole idea of rights altogether and think that is more and more the case of being nonsense on stilts like the objectors to the French Revolution suggested.

    Its away beyond condemning institutions as based upon violations of the natural order and become about feelings of entitlement/desert, closely paralleled by the consumerism in the economy, or victimhood.

    Like from someone who's an avowed socialist that sort of sentiment is bound to be surprising and it surprises me myself too. I dont believe I've been duped by conservative populism either.

  9. #19
    Senior Member matmos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    NICE
    Posts
    1,721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    We've had this discussion before. I have no idea what things are like where you are...
    ...And neither does he.

    The fool didn't even know the age of consent in his own country was 16, not 17.

    You'd think that a "youth worker" who reads (translation: skims) as much as Larky would be familiar with such matters.

    He's happy to give an example of one male couple (without supplying any references at all) and some gibberish about pedo-rings in "scotlad" (wherever that is), but is happy to ignore the wholesale pedastry and endemic pedophilia in the Roman Catholic church. Indeed, he will jump to its defence at every opportunity.

    He also hangs about gay threads a little bit too much.

    I just wonder.

  10. #20
    Senior Member cafe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Socionics
    INFj None
    Posts
    9,827

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    Alright, I still think that it is a property rights, instead of a gay rights issue, I also think its important that its framed that way.

    You think its fair to attack all religious because of the actions of people like westbro baptists?
    I will just tell you the way my husband looks at it. In the nineties some private companies and municipalities, etc started granting gay partners benefits like medical insurance. Religious Right groups found out about it and pitched a huge fit.

    They boycotted companies and attacked people politically -- that kind of thing. Basically, they did everything they could to screw people in gay partnerships and domestic partnerships in general over. Their rationale was that they weren't married and so did not deserve benefits.

    In doing this, they pushed gays into a corner. If they wanted to be treated like equal citizens with rights that straight couples were eligible for they had to have legal recognition for their relationships. And that is what they've been fighting for ever since.

    Marriage is the blanket property rights, insurance rights, tax rights/liability, medical power of attorney, etc etc etc institution in the US. Most states don't even recognize common law/de facto straight marriages.

    The only reason the couple in the article has any hope at all of legal recourse is that they were smart enough to have their paper work done. But because the relationship itself does not have any kind of state recognition, the local government believed they could get by with what they did.

    If the couple had not taken proper care of their legal stuff, they would have been right. Still, one partner still died alone because there is no legal recognition for this kind of relationship.

    So largely, this fight for gay marriage is in reaction to bad stuff that has already happened or is happening and a lot of that bad stuff is at the hands of religious groups or people claiming religious rationale for their behavior.
    “There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.”
    ~ John Rogers

Similar Threads

  1. Are all 6w5's Introverts and are all 6w7's Extraverts?
    By Mondo in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-24-2010, 08:44 AM
  2. Separation of Church and State
    By G-Virus in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 12-03-2008, 03:22 AM
  3. Need some insight to determine type once and for all.
    By Dwigie in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 09-30-2008, 06:35 PM
  4. Abortion, gay rights, and other social issues.
    By Angry Ayrab in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 08-06-2008, 11:54 PM
  5. [MBTItm] Possible explination of INFJ's and Ni at their worst.
    By Athenian200 in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 01-13-2008, 01:23 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO