Total Posts:29|Showing Posts:1-29
Jump to topic:

I tolorance = to love?

Marauder
Posts: 3,271
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2011 11:40:30 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At the evangelism conference in Knoxville, one of the speakers talked about how America in this age has taken to valuing tolerance as a virtue, and that most of America is 'intolerant of our intolerance'. The problem is most people have equated tolerance with love. He said 'John Wesley would just flip out if he saw today that we do that'. If you really love me, I don't want you to just 'tolerate' me.

think of it this way, if it were my decision to smoke meth, you would just be tolerating me if you where all supportive of my freedom and rights to do so and act on that decision, even if you know meth would be incredibly bad for my health and where aware of many people you've known who's lives were ruined after they got hooked on that stuff. people who were driven to such madness that they held a gun on there father trying to get more and it forced a father to kill his own son in defense of his life.

but if you treat me with your love as opposed to your 'tolerance', wouldn't you avoid ever humoring my idea that smoking meth is okay, that its not that big a deal. wouldn't you not just go as far as avoid encouraging me to smoke meth, but also try with all your passion to encourage me to not smoke meth?

-----------------------------------------

I draw a line there so the second half of this post might be read with a different tone, switching back from speaking of tolerance in a negative to a more positive sense, for don't get me wrong, tolerance is not inherently bad.

Do we not always find that those whose post we respect the most are those who speak to us in respectful way to our views even though they do not share them?

----------------------------------

I draw that line so that this part of the OP sets the primary question I want to hear discussed from others on this thread. What is the relationship between tolerance and love? are there any correlations with where love is used tolerance is specifically called for, or are we just confusing tolerance with respectfulness? and is there any who would defend that lack of tolerance is an act of hate?
One act of Rebellion created all the darkness and evil in the world; One life of Total Obedience created a path back to eternity and God.

A Scout is Obedient.
Marauder
Posts: 3,271
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/11/2011 3:50:23 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
How is it not one person has something to say about this post? Is this forum not littered with threads all the time about how hateful and evil Christians must be all the time for not choosing to tolerate homosexuality as a choice or lifestyle? How if we really listened to Jesus and 'loved everybody' we would be tolerant of everybody for every thing, from various differing religious beliefs, to sexual preference, to rights to choose death of a yet to be born child over it's continued living existence.

How is it not one person speaks up to defend that tolerance in fact goes hand and hand with loving each other like we love ourselves? When specifically debating about the application in treatment of homosexuals there are thousands of post made for a case for tolerance and leaving each other alone if we 'really where christian and loved our neighbor as ourselves' yet when I put the question in generic terms 'Is tolerance equal to love?' not one person can defend that it is cause such a statement is so inherently ridiculous?

I'm a little disappointed.
One act of Rebellion created all the darkness and evil in the world; One life of Total Obedience created a path back to eternity and God.

A Scout is Obedient.
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/11/2011 4:25:10 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Tolerance

Live and Let Die

~~~
Intolerance

Live and Let Die, while spraying the dying with water hoses.

~~~
Acceptance

It's all good, yo
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
Marauder
Posts: 3,271
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/11/2011 4:47:10 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/11/2011 4:25:10 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
Tolerance

Live and Let Die

cause of course you do not care about the dieing.
~~~
Intolerance

Live and Let Die, while spraying the dying with water hoses.

if there dying because there on fire that kind of makes sense.
~~~
Acceptance

It's all good, yo

This sounds a lot more like denial or ignoring the problem.
One act of Rebellion created all the darkness and evil in the world; One life of Total Obedience created a path back to eternity and God.

A Scout is Obedient.
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/11/2011 5:06:19 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/11/2011 4:47:10 PM, Marauder wrote:
At 4/11/2011 4:25:10 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
Tolerance

Live and Let Die

cause of course you do not care about the dieing.

Tolerance implies that the other person is offending you in some way. If you care about them, give them some good advice. If they aren't willing to listen, let them go on with it. Being a squeaky wheel isn't going to benefit anyone. You're better off just letting them figure it out on their own. Instead, just fester and silently judge them. Or gossip about them depending on how big of a douche bag you are.

That is loving tolerance.

~~~
Intolerance

Live and Let Die, while spraying the dying with water hoses.

if there dying because there on fire that kind of makes sense.

Intolerance with "love" is when the other person offends you, and you let it effect how you treat them. The big difference between "tolerant love" and "intolerant love" is that with the later you nag their ears off and you do other things in an attempt to get them miserable enough to change. Basically, you think you know what is best for the person, so you take it on yourself to make sure they do what you know is best.

This is Intolerant "love".

~~~
Acceptance

It's all good, yo

This sounds a lot more like denial or ignoring the problem.

Could be yes.

But to realize that there is no problem would be "accepting love".
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
Marauder
Posts: 3,271
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2011 11:42:54 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/11/2011 5:06:19 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
At 4/11/2011 4:47:10 PM, Marauder wrote:
At 4/11/2011 4:25:10 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
Tolerance

Live and Let Die

cause of course you do not care about the dieing.

Tolerance implies that the other person is offending you in some way. If you care about them, give them some good advice. If they aren't willing to listen, let them go on with it. Being a squeaky wheel isn't going to benefit anyone. You're better off just letting them figure it out on their own. Instead, just fester and silently judge them. Or gossip about them depending on how big of a douche bag you are.

That is loving tolerance.

~~~
Intolerance

Live and Let Die, while spraying the dying with water hoses.

if there dying because there on fire that kind of makes sense.


Intolerance with "love" is when the other person offends you, and you let it effect how you treat them. The big difference between "tolerant love" and "intolerant love" is that with the later you nag their ears off and you do other things in an attempt to get them miserable enough to change.
Uh, no. believe it or not there are mature ways that are not 'nagging' to show you do not tolorate or condone something.
Basically, you think you know what is best for the person, so you take it on yourself to make sure they do what you know is best.

If you do not believe that what you know is true then there is no purpose to debate. and if you do think what you believe is truth and refuse to share the truth you believe you have that makes you a douche.

This is Intolerant "love".

Sometime's you just cant expect people to figure out stuff on there own, if things were not that way we would not send kids to schools to be 'educated'. In this world people are surrounded by misimformation and distortion of facts all the time. your post being an example of such distortion, it's often said good leaders have zero tolorance and infinite patientce (so intolorance is a positive quality) and you have changed the tone to treat the term like its synonomous with self-rightoues judgementalness. this distorts what it truely means to hold no tolorance for that which is wrong.


~~~
Acceptance

It's all good, yo

This sounds a lot more like denial or ignoring the problem.

Could be yes.

But to realize that there is no problem would be "accepting love".

if you change you view on if something is wrong or not then you've changed you view, so this is not relevant to how to be tolorant or to hold no tolorance. Now if your saying to make 'accaptance' a alternative to tolorance and intolorance, that's ridiculous. It really would be denial all the time or at the very least rejecting your every thought as retarded so that you could always assume that your wrong when differences occured with others that would have either called for your tolorance or intolorance.

or I suppose it could involve just creating a philosophy for yourself that everything is true which is fundamentally retarded.

Now mabye you could be so self-absorbed that your only concerned about what goes on in your head and completely ignore others your whole life and if you are so be it. but if your someone who is not and your someone who actually wishes to leave the world a little different after you leave it then you cannot just passively ignore the things that are up to either be 'tolorated' or 'not tolorated'.
One act of Rebellion created all the darkness and evil in the world; One life of Total Obedience created a path back to eternity and God.

A Scout is Obedient.
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2011 12:04:34 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/12/2011 11:42:54 AM, Marauder wrote:
At 4/11/2011 5:06:19 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
At 4/11/2011 4:47:10 PM, Marauder wrote:
At 4/11/2011 4:25:10 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
Tolerance

Live and Let Die

cause of course you do not care about the dieing.

Tolerance implies that the other person is offending you in some way. If you care about them, give them some good advice. If they aren't willing to listen, let them go on with it. Being a squeaky wheel isn't going to benefit anyone. You're better off just letting them figure it out on their own. Instead, just fester and silently judge them. Or gossip about them depending on how big of a douche bag you are.

That is loving tolerance.

~~~
Intolerance

Live and Let Die, while spraying the dying with water hoses.

if there dying because there on fire that kind of makes sense.


Intolerance with "love" is when the other person offends you, and you let it effect how you treat them. The big difference between "tolerant love" and "intolerant love" is that with the later you nag their ears off and you do other things in an attempt to get them miserable enough to change.
Uh, no. believe it or not there are mature ways that are not 'nagging' to show you do not tolorate or condone something.

This was an example. Intolerant "love" is still effecting the way you treat someone. There are other ways of making the other person's life hell.

Basically, you think you know what is best for the person, so you take it on yourself to make sure they do what you know is best.

If you do not believe that what you know is true then there is no purpose to debate. and if you do think what you believe is truth and refuse to share the truth you believe you have that makes you a douche.

Tolerant "love", as I stated is willing to give opinions and helpful advice, but you do not ram it down people's throats.

This is Intolerant "love".

Sometime's you just cant expect people to figure out stuff on there own, if things were not that way we would not send kids to schools to be 'educated'. In this world people are surrounded by misimformation and distortion of facts all the time. your post being an example of such distortion, it's often said good leaders have zero tolorance and infinite patientce (so intolorance is a positive quality) and you have changed the tone to treat the term like its synonomous with self-rightoues judgementalness. this distorts what it truely means to hold no tolorance for that which is wrong.



I never said either way was righter than the other, I'm describing characteristics of each. Some methods work better on some, and some work better on others. It is entirely contextual. Not just with people, but situation.
~~~
Acceptance

It's all good, yo

This sounds a lot more like denial or ignoring the problem.

Could be yes.

But to realize that there is no problem would be "accepting love".

if you change you view on if something is wrong or not then you've changed you view, so this is not relevant to how to be tolorant or to hold no tolorance. Now if your saying to make 'accaptance' a alternative to tolorance and intolorance, that's ridiculous. It really would be denial all the time or at the very least rejecting your every thought as retarded so that you could always assume that your wrong when differences occured with others that would have either called for your tolorance or intolorance.

or I suppose it could involve just creating a philosophy for yourself that everything is true which is fundamentally retarded.

Now mabye you could be so self-absorbed that your only concerned about what goes on in your head and completely ignore others your whole life and if you are so be it. but if your someone who is not and your someone who actually wishes to leave the world a little different after you leave it then you cannot just passively ignore the things that are up to either be 'tolorated' or 'not tolorated'.

I'm describing different ways of loving, and you are turning into something it is not.

The first part of the serenity prayer adequately describes my position.

"God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference."
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
Marauder
Posts: 3,271
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2011 12:34:55 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/12/2011 12:04:34 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:

I'm describing different ways of loving, and you are turning into something it is not.

The first part of the serenity prayer adequately describes my position.

"God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference."

I guess I agree with that, but I dont think intolorance should be characterized as 'ramming' something down other's throats. The terms tolorance and intolorance are so bland that they do not define what's 'tolorated' as something that can be changed or cant, or the method one wishes to change it by, but either that you try and are consistant with the fact of your trying (by not humoring the wrong), or you do not try and humor that which your tolorating.

we are so trained to hear 'intolorance' as a negative term that we add stuff it that's not there by default and because of these things we add we cannot fathom how intolorance could fit with love.

but it goes back to what that pastor said at the confrence, "if you love me, I dont want you to tolorate me"; For those that love me I would not ever want them to just tolorate me where I'm wrong, or give up on reaching out to me when I'm lost.

Because this non-tolorance I speak of would be love, it of course would be 'infinitely patient' non-tolorance or it wouldnt be of love but more of the kind of intolorance you described.
One act of Rebellion created all the darkness and evil in the world; One life of Total Obedience created a path back to eternity and God.

A Scout is Obedient.
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2011 12:53:04 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/12/2011 12:34:55 PM, Marauder wrote:
At 4/12/2011 12:04:34 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:

I'm describing different ways of loving, and you are turning into something it is not.

The first part of the serenity prayer adequately describes my position.

"God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference."

I guess I agree with that, but I dont think intolorance should be characterized as 'ramming' something down other's throats. The terms tolorance and intolorance are so bland that they do not define what's 'tolorated' as something that can be changed or cant, or the method one wishes to change it by, but either that you try and are consistant with the fact of your trying (by not humoring the wrong), or you do not try and humor that which your tolorating.

we are so trained to hear 'intolorance' as a negative term that we add stuff it that's not there by default and because of these things we add we cannot fathom how intolorance could fit with love.

but it goes back to what that pastor said at the confrence, "if you love me, I dont want you to tolorate me"; For those that love me I would not ever want them to just tolorate me where I'm wrong, or give up on reaching out to me when I'm lost.

Because this non-tolorance I speak of would be love, it of course would be 'infinitely patient' non-tolorance or it wouldnt be of love but more of the kind of intolorance you described.

It's all semantics.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
Zetsubou
Posts: 4,933
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2011 9:25:08 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Ha ha ha.

Old' Father Jim suggested that we Christians should support the efforts of the "oppressed and the discriminated" [em>id est LGBT Pride rallies] since it's a Christian thing to do: defend the meek.

I only go to church out of duty these days. I don't take the Eucharist and rarely 'Amen' to general prayers. It's just too much
'sup DDO -- july 2013
Zetsubou
Posts: 4,933
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2011 9:30:20 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
For intolerance just don't accept them/it.

This could range from refusing to acknowledge its existence to outright annihilationism.

As a Christian you don't persecute but revoke the very existence of whatever you refuse to tolerate.
'sup DDO -- july 2013
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/13/2011 2:52:22 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Tolerance doesn't mean you embrace something, nor does it mean putting up with, which is really silent intolerance.

Look to the Saint Frances prayer and you will understand it better, and the net result will be beneficial for you and the other person.

Acceptance is for you. If you don't accept something, then it is you who are in a state of discontent. It is in your best interest to find acceptance, or make peace with something that you find otherwise disturbing. Acceptance is about finding peace. Tolerance is more for the other person after you have found acceptance. Not crazy about the word tolerance.
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/13/2011 3:05:04 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
"What is the relationship between tolerance and love?"

You can love someone but not want to tolerate their bad behavior. The OP singled out homosexuality and clearly homosexual acts do not constitute as inherently bad. Saying you don't want to tolerate homosexuality is just as stupid as if I were to say I don't want to tolerate heterosexuality (though we both have the right to "not tolerate" or speak out against anyone we want). I actually think this perpetuated intolerance is going to turn more people away from Christianity which is awesome. Evangelicals are mocked all over pop culture. We just have to make sure they don't infiltrate politics ^_^
President of DDO
Marauder
Posts: 3,271
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/13/2011 11:55:50 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
My second post counts as part of the OP?

Looking back I admit the term ‘tolorance' does sound kind of stupid or at the very least pointless when talking about just ‘speaking out' against homosexuality. As a matter of where ‘non-tolorance' is important to maintain is more within my church on the issue in allowing for gay pastoralship. This was a proposed change to our book of disciplen last time there was a 4-year confrence that votes on changes like and if the morality of it not being bad was ‘clear' it would have passed or it will pass next year whith ease but it's going to meet resistance. It probably will pass though despite the resistance as the UMC historically copies what the Episcopal church does a year later.

In this debate going on within my church, the cases made on the pro gay side are not of the sort that argue why is a life fact not a life choice, why its not sin, but simply about tolorance and god saying to ‘love everybody'
So if the debate is going to drop arguing that it's not sin but just leave it at accapting it as sin and moves on to ‘loving the sinners, hating the sin' kind of thing, this is where I figured the tolorance of another not equating to loving of another comes up as relevant.

Cause if you are going to view something as sinfull, and not just any something but something like homosex which those who do this say it's not sinfull (Matt 6:23) then tolorance to the point of accapting them as pastors would not do them any good with getting out of this sin or those of there prospective perish who they lead because there being led by one in ‘very dark darkness' http://bible.cc... So doing this ‘tolorance' would not be an act of ‘love' as it shows no concern actuall given for others in this ‘tolorance'

Now I don't think any out there right now do respond to this issue in ‘love' as opposed to ‘tolorance'. If there was then there would not just be consevatives saying ‘DNA does not show this…' or ‘it's a sin, it say's so here…' There would be actuall research into understanding why those who are ‘confused' about there orientation (if it's not in DNA) are so, or how there drawn to a sin that ‘strait's' are not even though the bible say's ‘no temptation seizes you that is not common to all man' http://bible.cc...

Now because there is no such research out there I find I cant ever get passionate in defending homosex is wrong. I can get passionate enough to debate the few things that come up in debates that don't make sense to me that are just enough to make me identify with a side, like why DNA should make a difference or how this could spread in being passed on when those who have don't reproduce. I can get passionate about something being treated the way ‘infirmaties' are in john wesleys 40th sermon http://new.gbgm-umc.org... , thus I make this thread.

If it's a matter of saying it's a spiritual infirmatie, then know that there are no 'infirmaties' that one cannot be freed or healed from.

If it's not like that though, then it's not like that, and none of the above arguments apply. I do not defend that any of that makes sense as a response to 'it's not wrong' to start whith, only as a response to 'well it is wrong, but... that dosnt matter'
One act of Rebellion created all the darkness and evil in the world; One life of Total Obedience created a path back to eternity and God.

A Scout is Obedient.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/14/2011 12:12:16 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I cannot tolerate Christians that are not accepting.

"And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Even 'sinners' do that."

Gospel of Luke
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/14/2011 9:36:37 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/13/2011 11:55:50 PM, Marauder wrote:
So if the debate is going to drop arguing that it's not sin but just leave it at accapting it as sin and moves on to ‘loving the sinners, hating the sin' kind of thing, this is where I figured the tolorance of another not equating to loving of another comes up as relevant.

I see what you're saying, but I think what's happening is that people are realizing homosexuality is not harmful or immoral, so when they acknowledge it as a sin they're merely acknowledging that it's wrong according to the Bible. Of course the Bible is wrong about innumerable things so I don't see why this matters - but I digress. I think it's basically the response for those not intellectually capable or courageous enough to stand up and explain why homosexuality is not actually a sin, so this is sort of the froo froo response. When you think about it though, it makes sense insofar as EVERY pastor sins according to Christian doctrine, so why single someone out on the basis of their "sin" being who they are biologically attracted to? I think it's espousing that to even those who consider homosexuality a sin, it's not harmful to others in any way so they should just get over it and see the person for what they are beyond that one minor aspect of their life (sexuality).
President of DDO
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/14/2011 10:01:02 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Randomness: I'm actually going to a lecture tonight called "Does Jesus Love Homosexuals?" hosted by the Campus Crusaders for Christ. Haha I'm going to school them.
President of DDO
Zetsubou
Posts: 4,933
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2011 7:32:27 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/14/2011 10:01:02 AM, Danielle wrote:
Randomness: I'm actually going to a lecture tonight called "Does Jesus Love Homosexuals?" hosted by the Campus Crusaders for Christ. Haha I'm going to school them.
How did it go?

Christians are intriguing.
'sup DDO -- july 2013
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2011 7:40:21 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/18/2011 7:32:27 PM, Zetsubou wrote:
At 4/14/2011 10:01:02 AM, Danielle wrote:
Randomness: I'm actually going to a lecture tonight called "Does Jesus Love Homosexuals?" hosted by the Campus Crusaders for Christ. Haha I'm going to school them.
How did it go?

Christians are intriguing.

Thank you for asking :) I went to two. The first was an interfaith meeting where representatives from various religions (Pagans, Muslims, Unitarians, different sects of Christians, etc.) talked about how homosexuality is treated or viewed in their organized religion. The second had a Christian guy speaker who is gay, but believes that he's gay as a result of Original Sin. In other words he doesn't think it's his fault, but he thinks he should actively fight it. The Q&A was limited so I didn't get to school him the way I wanted to (the things he was saying made no sense). Vi did make him look silly though in using neuroscience to disprove what he was saying but I digress. I talked to him a little afterward and he was very nice and clearly a passionate, loving person who tried to be the best possible Christian he could. I think he's even going into ministry. He is so cute (good looking) and just seemed very smart and wonderful. The fact that he is so oppressed and is made to feel inferior or damaged really pains me. I don't want him to struggle so deeply just to never be happy or find peace with himself. I think he knows you can't "turn straight" so I'm assuming he plans to just live with this problem forever and never enjoy love or meaningful sex. That's truly unfortunate and I wish him the best of luck regardless.
President of DDO
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2011 7:43:28 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/18/2011 7:40:21 PM, Danielle wrote:
I think he's even going into ministry.

And this is why we have priests raping little boys ladies and gentlemen :P Nah I don't think he'd ever do that... but you never know. Who knows what sexual oppression can do to a person after X number of years. I highly doubt this will be an issue for him in particular, but it is a problem indeed. A lot of women who become nuns are also lesbians. People think they can hide behind the cloth.
President of DDO
Zetsubou
Posts: 4,933
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2011 7:53:48 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/18/2011 7:40:21 PM, Danielle wrote:
At 4/18/2011 7:32:27 PM, Zetsubou wrote:
At 4/14/2011 10:01:02 AM, Danielle wrote:
Randomness: I'm actually going to a lecture tonight called "Does Jesus Love Homosexuals?" hosted by the Campus Crusaders for Christ. Haha I'm going to school them.
How did it go?

Christians are intriguing.

Thank you for asking :) I went to two. The first was an interfaith meeting where representatives from various religions (Pagans, Muslims, Unitarians, different sects of Christians, etc.) talked about how homosexuality is treated or viewed in their organized religion. The second had a Christian guy speaker who is gay, but believes that he's gay as a result of Original Sin. In other words he doesn't think it's his fault, but he thinks he should actively fight it. The Q&A was limited so I didn't get to school him the way I wanted to (the things he was saying made no sense). Vi did make him look silly though in using neuroscience to disprove what he was saying but I digress. I talked to him a little afterward and he was very nice and clearly a passionate, loving person who tried to be the best possible Christian he could. I think he's even going into ministry. He is so cute (good looking) and just seemed very smart and wonderful. The fact that he is so oppressed and is made to feel inferior or damaged really pains me. I don't want him to struggle so deeply just to never be happy or find peace with himself. I think he knows you can't "turn straight" so I'm assuming he plans to just live with this problem forever and never enjoy love or meaningful sex. That's truly unfortunate and I wish him the best of luck regardless.
Was he Catholic(or Baptist) by any chance? Static sexual orientation is there taught position. Even if sexuality wasn't dynamic, wouldn't it be better for them to live in the delusion that it was? Some would ofcourse obviously know but the fatalistic: IT'S IMPOSSIBLE is very unchristian way of thinking.

I'm also somewhat surprised that he has no faith that the all able Lord wouldn't bestow a miracle upon him - with God all things are possible.
'sup DDO -- july 2013
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2011 7:58:21 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/18/2011 7:53:48 PM, Zetsubou wrote:
I'm also somewhat surprised that he has no faith that the all able Lord wouldn't bestow a miracle upon him - with God all things are possible.
I guess people today forget God. People with cancer have hope in God. Blind people have hope in God. A homosexual being more fortunate than these, in general, should also have hope in God. Just because he has homosexual feelings does not mean that God either hates him or will not give him guidance through hard times.
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2011 8:01:31 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/18/2011 7:53:48 PM, Zetsubou wrote:
Was he Catholic(or Baptist) by any chance?

I don't think he clarified but I don't think he was either of those.

Static sexual orientation is there taught position. Even if sexuality wasn't dynamic, wouldn't it be better for them to live in the delusion that it was? Some would of course obviously know but the fatalistic: IT'S IMPOSSIBLE is very unchristian way of thinking. I'm also somewhat surprised that he has no faith that the all able Lord wouldn't bestow a miracle upon him - with God all things are possible.

Well I'm sure he believes it's possible to change. He didn't say that it wasn't; he just implied that he knew it was not likely. Plus I dunno if he's actively trying to change so much as just trying to avoid sinning (gay sex).It would be unfair to any girl he tried to date if he wasn't really into it.
President of DDO
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2011 8:03:14 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/18/2011 8:01:31 PM, Danielle wrote:
Well I'm sure he believes it's possible to change. He didn't say that it wasn't; he just implied that he knew it was not likely. Plus I dunno if he's actively trying to change so much as just trying to avoid sinning (gay sex).It would be unfair to any girl he tried to date if he wasn't really into it.
I think I have heard of this phenomena that a lesbian marries a gay so that they both understand each other fully and help each other out, so that there are no surprises later on. Was that mentioned there?
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2011 8:09:27 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/18/2011 7:58:21 PM, Mirza wrote:
At 4/18/2011 7:53:48 PM, Zetsubou wrote:
I'm also somewhat surprised that he has no faith that the all able Lord wouldn't bestow a miracle upon him - with God all things are possible.
I guess people today forget God. People with cancer have hope in God. Blind people have hope in God. A homosexual being more fortunate than these, in general, should also have hope in God.

People with cancer don't want cancer. People who are blind don't want to be blind. There is nothing inherently wrong with being gay except for the intolerance we receive from ignorant and/or religious people... so why should they want to change? They haven't done anything wrong. The bible may say homosexuality is a sin but it says eating shrimp is a sin too... but I can't think of one person who doesn't eat shrimp. Or mix wool and cotton. Or use a bank (I'm pretty sure the bible is against charging interest as the Quran is). People ignore the bible all the time when it's convenient for them, or chalk SOME things up to metaphor or interpretation yet do not apply the same logic for things like this. It's easy to condemn other people I guess.

Just because he has homosexual feelings does not mean that God either hates him or will not give him guidance through hard times.

He definitely believes God loves him and gives him guidance.
President of DDO
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2011 8:12:36 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/18/2011 8:03:14 PM, Mirza wrote:
I think I have heard of this phenomena that a lesbian marries a gay so that they both understand each other fully and help each other out, so that there are no surprises later on. Was that mentioned there?

No but that's interesting. I know gay people who joke about it all the time though, so they don't have to come out to their families and upset them. They basically want to live a lie not to change but for convenience. In other words have a legal marriage with someone but date other people of the same sex. See, THIS is why legal marriage means nothing. A man and a woman married in that scenario don't have a real relationship, but a gay couple can have a meaningful and loving relationship far more similar to straight marriage. Marriage is "spiritual" -- I do want my tax breaks and legal benefits though :P I don't see why I wouldn't be entitled but a couple who is in a fake, loveless or BS marriage is. I know that's off topic though so let's not go on a tangent lol.
President of DDO
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2011 8:13:24 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/18/2011 8:09:27 PM, Danielle wrote:
People with cancer don't want cancer. People who are blind don't want to be blind. There is nothing inherently wrong with being gay except for the intolerance we receive from ignorant and/or religious people... so why should they want to change? They haven't done anything wrong. The bible may say homosexuality is a sin but it says eating shrimp is a sin too... but I can't think of one person who doesn't eat shrimp. Or mix wool and cotton. Or use a bank (I'm pretty sure the bible is against charging interest as the Quran is). People ignore the bible all the time when it's convenient for them, or chalk SOME things up to metaphor or interpretation yet do not apply the same logic for things like this. It's easy to condemn other people I guess.
Actually many gays do not want to be gays due to goals they have in life that they cannot achieve properly through gayness. That is irrelevant anyway - I am saying that people should have hope in God irregardless of their situation. Homosexuality can be a hardship for people, yes, but that does not mean that a person who dislikes it for whatever reason should make life worse for himself. Always look at the less fortunate.

He definitely believes God loves him and gives him guidance.
That is good.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2011 8:15:25 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/18/2011 8:12:36 PM, Danielle wrote:
No but that's interesting. I know gay people who joke about it all the time though, so they don't have to come out to their families and upset them. They basically want to live a lie not to change but for convenience. In other words have a legal marriage with someone but date other people of the same sex.
Yes but I do not mean it that way. Marriage for real so they help overcoming hardships through mutual understanding - not simply to fool parents or whatever.

See, THIS is why legal marriage means nothing. A man and a woman married in that scenario don't have a real relationship, but a gay couple can have a meaningful and loving relationship far more similar to straight marriage. Marriage is "spiritual" -- I do want my tax breaks and legal benefits though :P I don't see why I wouldn't be entitled but a couple who is in a fake, loveless or BS marriage is. I know that's off topic though so let's not go on a tangent lol.
Sure, I don't believe in legal marriage either.
Marauder
Posts: 3,271
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2011 12:42:06 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/18/2011 8:13:24 PM, Mirza wrote:

Actually many gays do not want to be gays due to goals they have in life that they cannot achieve properly through gayness.

I have never herd this before, but it sounds interesting. what goals are those you talk about, cause right now my only guess is to have biological children is the thing that cannot be 'achieved properly' through gayness.
But I wouldn't think that would be a big deal since adoption is always an option and what is the huge difference raising a kid seeded by someone else to raising one you can say 'he has your eyes dear, but my nose'? The experience of raising a child remains mostly the same in all the non-vain details that matter when raising an adopted kid over a child you went through the pain of labor yourself to deliver I would think?

of course I cant argue any of that from personal experience though. Some other scoutmasters who are dads though tell me that being a scoutmaster is so much like it though that they feel like there dads of the scouts that are not there sons. If that could be considered at least close to the same as raising your own kid, then raising an adopted child would have to be even more so the same as raising a biological child.
One act of Rebellion created all the darkness and evil in the world; One life of Total Obedience created a path back to eternity and God.

A Scout is Obedient.