School Removes Cups With Gay Author Quote

[zimv20]

link (http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/n/a/2005/09/20/national/a095820D47.DTL)


(09-20) 09:58 PDT Waco, Texas (AP) --

A dining contractor has removed coffee cups with a gay author's quote from a Starbucks at Baylor University, saying it was inappropriate for the Baptist school.

Aramark, which oversees the coffee outlet, pulled the cups earlier this month from the campus store after consulting with Starbucks' district office and Baylor's dining service, school officials said Monday.

"I think they were trying to be sensitive," Baylor spokesman Larry Brumley said. "Obviously, Baylor is a Baptist-affiliated institution, and Baptists as a denomination have been pretty outspoken on the record about the denomination's views about the homosexual lifestyle."

The quote from novelist Armistead Maupin reads:

"My only regret about being gay is that I repressed it for so long. I surrendered my youth to the people I feared when I could have been out there loving someone. Don't make that mistake yourself. Life's too damn short."

Cade Hammond, president of the board of directors for the Gay and Lesbian Alliance of Central Texas, said he thinks the cups' removal as unnecessarily restrictive.

[Blue Velvet]

We wouldn't want pupils in a school to have open minds. Anybody could then put anything in them...

[TheMonarch]

Starbuck's cups have quotes on them? I drink too much coffee and haven't noticed them... :confused:

[Xtremehkr]

Open mindedness at Baylor is vigorously discouraged. This is a new level of overt discrimination though.

[zap2]

i guess since its private school its ok( ok = not aganist the law) it should illegal, its like racism, there should be a law against it. but it seems are goverment is a bunch of bullies(too put it nicely :D

it would be like my school(private) not allowing books by African American to be in our school, but that would never happen cuz my school is super liberal we picked dennis kuchinich as the person to run against bush!!

[mactastic]

Well, whatever. They're a private university, so they can do what they want in that regard. I wonder if they'd be so calm were the shoe on the other foot though...

[jelloshotsrule]

Well, whatever. They're a private university, so they can do what they want in that regard. I wonder if they'd be so calm were the shoe on the other foot though...

surely you don't need to "wonder" about it....

[iGary]

Well, whatever. They're a private university, so they can do what they want in that regard. I wonder if they'd be so calm were the shoe on the other foot though...

The shame is, they prolly get public funding to do this crap with. :rolleyes:

[jelloshotsrule]

which is exactly why (public funding) i don't want them supporting gays in school, on my mofo'ing dime! :rolleyes:

[wordmunger]

This all seems a bit silly to me, but let me just play devil's advocate for a moment.

It's not just that the guy is gay, but he's suggesting that others become gay.

I don't know -- even if Baylor was a public school, would they really want to be that in-your-face about it?

It's not like they're censoring textbooks, they're just coffee cups.

That said, it does seem a bit extreme. What, are Baylor students suddenly going to throw their beliefs out the window just because of something they read on a coffee cup?

[wrxguy]

Starbuck's cups have quotes on them? I drink too much coffee and haven't noticed them... :confused:
hahahahahha THAT IS WHAT I SAID!!! LOL but anyway...that is so close-minded and disturbing...private school or not, that is just disrepectful...Starbucks should have pulled there entire store from them for that ****...

[Guitarius]

A good friend of mine goes to Baylor. I'm gonna have to talk to her about it...

[katchow]

seems like an odd thing to put on a coffee cup to begin with. trivializes the sentiment if you ask me. Though the quote is very emotional i don't find it particularly profound.

[Blue Velvet]

It's not just that the guy is gay, but he's suggesting that others become gay.


No, he's not.

Somebody please tell me how it is possible to 'become' gay? Besides, even if he was saying that — which he isn't — what the hell would be wrong with that anyway?

Did anybody here wake up one day and decide to change their sexual orientation? Can anybody who is straight here remember a time when they made a conscious decision to be attracted to the opposite sex? I don't think so...

What he's saying is: 'Don't closet yourself. Don't fall in with peer pressure. Don't make yourself miserable to conform. Be true to who you are'


Edit: I know you said you were being devil's advocate, Wordmunger. But the playing of that card doesn't place the argument beyond debate. Besides, I'm often wary of that phrase unless I know for sure what the authors' intentions and beliefs truly are.

[iGary]

No, he's not.

Somebody please tell me how it is possible to 'become' gay? Besides, even if he was saying that — which he isn't — what the hell would be wrong with that anyway?

Did anybody here wake up one day and decide to change their sexual orientation? Can anybody who is straight here remember a time when they made a conscious decision to be attracted to the opposite sex? I don't think so...

What he's saying is: 'Don't closet yourself. Don't fall in with peer pressure. Don't make yourself miserable to conform. Be true to who you are'

LOL

"Become Gay, Be Fabulous, Get Discriminated Against, Have People Hate You!!™"

LOLWTF!!!

[Zaid]

No, he's not.

Somebody please tell me how it is possible to 'become' gay? Besides, even if he was saying that — which he isn't — what the hell would be wrong with that anyway?

Did anybody here wake up one day and decide to change their sexual orientation? Can anybody who is straight here remember a time when they made a conscious decision to be attracted to the opposite sex? I don't think so...

What he's saying is: 'Don't closet yourself. Don't fall in with peer pressure. Don't make yourself miserable to conform. Be true to who you are'


Edit: I know you said you were being devil's advocate, Wordmunger. But the playing of that card doesn't place the argument beyond debate. Besides, I'm often wary of that phrase unless I know for sure what the authors' intentions and beliefs truly are.

Well said.

As for how one becomes gay, I've always loved this quote
The next time someone asks you, "Hey, howdja get to be a homosexual anyway?" tell them, "Homosexuals are chosen first on talent, then interview... then the swimsuit and evening gown competition pretty much gets rid of the rest of them." ~Karen Williams

[wordmunger]

What he's saying is: 'Don't closet yourself. Don't fall in with peer pressure. Don't make yourself miserable to conform. Be true to who you are'


"Become Gay, Be Fabulous, Get Discriminated Against, Have People Hate You!!™"

The next time someone asks you, "Hey, howdja get to be a homosexual anyway?" tell them, "Homosexuals are chosen first on talent, then interview... then the swimsuit and evening gown competition pretty much gets rid of the rest of them." ~Karen Williams

These would all be better quotes than the one chosen. Maybe that's why I don't have a particular problem with the coffee cup censorship. I don't have any problem with not publishing bad quotes.

[katchow]

These would all be better quotes than the one chosen. Maybe that's why I don't have a particular problem with the coffee cup censorship. I don't have any problem with not publishing bad quotes.

i was thinking the same thing.

[Zaid]

These would all be better quotes than the one chosen. Maybe that's why I don't have a particular problem with the coffee cup censorship. I don't have any problem with not publishing bad quotes.

I'm sorry but i don't see how these quotes are better that the one chosen. As far as I can see they all extol the benefits of not being afraid to be proud of who you are.

The chosen quote doesn't say, "OK be gay" it says "if you're gay don't be afraid to be yourself"

[wordmunger]

I'm sorry but i don't see how these quotes are better that the one chosen. As far as I can see they all extol the benefits of not being afraid to be proud of who you are.

The chosen quote doesn't say, "OK be gay" it says "if you're gay don't be afraid to be yourself"

That's fine if you prefer the Maupin quote, but really, that's my point. People have different preferences. Just because one quote is not liked by some people doesn't mean they're discriminating against others who like it.

[Zaid]

That's fine if you prefer the Maupin quote, but really, that's my point. People have different preferences. Just because one quote is not liked by some people doesn't mean they're discriminating against others who like it.

Agreed, however, getting the quote removed because you don't like what it says is discrimination. Lets face it, any quote that advocated being out would have been removed. Of course as a private institution this is their right. And i would defend their right to do this on their own campus, as I would defend anyone's right not to have such quotes in their home if they so wish. But just because it is (and should be) allowed does not make it any less discriminatory. Call a spade a spade.

Now people who campaign to have such material removed from general public circulation because they are offended by it, that is a completly different story. For them is reserved the fifth level of hell.

[mactastic]

Somebody please tell me how it is possible to 'become' gay?
I heard you can catch it from a toilet seat. It's those gay germs -- Look out!

;)

[leekohler]

Agreed, however, getting the quote removed because you don't like what it says is discrimination. Lets face it, any quote that advocated being out would have been removed. Of course as a private institution this is their right. And i would defend their right to do this on their own campus, as I would defend anyone's right not to have such quotes in their home if they so wish. But just because it is (and should be) allowed does not make it any less discriminatory. Call a spade a spade.

Now people who campaign to have such material removed from general public circulation because they are offended by it, that is a completly different story. For them is reserved the fifth level of hell.

I agree completely.

[takao]

hm .. am i the only one who was surprised what a starbucks was doing on a university anyways ?

[fistful]

hm .. am i the only one who was surprised what a starbucks was doing on a university anyways ?

Well it makes sense in this case, for this school considering the students and faculty will swallow anything their given or told unless it's advocating homosexuality. ;)

[belvdr]

LOL

"Become Gay, Be Fabulous, Get Discriminated Against, Have People Hate You!!™"

LOLWTF!!!

As a Baptist, I just want to state two things:

1. I am against homosexuality.
2. I don't hate anybody.

So, while I may not agree with homosexuality, hating someone is not part of the equation. Of course, I cannot speak on behalf of other Baptists.

Now, upon entry to this private school, I would have to believe they discuss what the rules/regulations of the school are. So I think it is far from discrimination to do this in a private school setting. I'm sure they don't allow drinking as well, but that's not violating anyone's rights by prohibiting it. If someone doesn't like these rules/regulations, they always have the option to attend another school.

EDIT: And as for being forced to believe anything, that's simply not true at our church. We are taught to think about things, not just accept somebody's answer as truth. Interestingly enough, I do know of other Baptist churches that force people to think one way.

[katchow]

EDIT: And as for being forced to believe anything, that's simply not true at our church. We are taught to think about things, not just accept somebody's answer as truth. Interestingly enough, I do know of other Baptist churches that force people to think one way.

if i may ask, what line of critical thinking led you to be "against" homosexuality?

[Blue Velvet]

I am against homosexuality.


And are you also against same-sex partners in the animal world?

These type of relationships do occur amongst all sorts of species, you know. Often.

How can you be against natural behaviour?

[skunk]

As a Baptist, I just want to state two things:

1. I am against homosexuality.
Your own, or anybody's?

[belvdr]

I guess I'll answer all three at once. :)

1. My critical line of thinking comes from what I read from the Bible. The Bible refers to it as whoremungers, and strictly forbids it.
2. I've never seen homosexuality in the animal world.
3. I am against homosexuality, no matter who is involved. I believe it to be wrong from my reading of the Bible. I don't believe it to be natural behavior, just as I believe that violence is not natural behavior either.

To be honest, I'm glad I could state my opinion without a flame war coming out at me. I'll gladly answer any questions about what I believe, but I won't force it or claim to be all-knowing either. It's nice to have a peaceful debate for once; these things always seem to get out of hand so quickly.

EDIT: Here are the verses I refer to:

Ephesians 5:5
For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.

1 Timothy 1:10
For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;

Hebrews 13:4
Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.

Revelation 21:8
But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

[katchow]

I guess I'll answer all three at once. :)

1. My critical line of thinking comes from what I read from the Bible. The Bible refers to it as whoremungers, and strictly forbids it.


no flames, but you might want to look up the meaning of 'critical' thinking.

edit: oh, and while you're at it, take a gander at 'whoremonger'

[Blue Velvet]

I've never seen homosexuality in the animal world.

I've never seen The Great Wall of China, but I'm sure it exists.

Let me assure you that homosexual behaviour amongst many species occurs and is 100% natural -- how can you say otherwise?

I'm sorry that this may shatter a firmly-held but erroneous belief, but to argue otherwise is the same as putting your fingers in your ears and going 'la la la'.

http://www.bidstrup.com/sodomy.htm

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/031225377X/ref=ase_scottbidstrupshoA/104-8881768-8591132?v=glance&s=books

Here's a goodie:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html

[skunk]

I guess I'll answer all three at once. :)

1. My critical line of thinking comes from what I read from the Bible. The Bible refers to it as whoremungers, and strictly forbids it.The Bible also forbids the wearing of mixed cloth. Are you equally convinced by this?
2. I've never seen homosexuality in the animal world.You haven't lived.
3. I am against homosexuality, no matter who is involved. I believe it to be wrong from my reading of the Bible. I don't believe it to be natural behavior, just as I believe that violence is not natural behavior either.If you don't believe it to be natural behaviour, go and study homosexuality in Nature. Otherwise, don't bring it up.

To be honest, I'm glad I could state my opinion without a flame war coming out at me. I'll gladly answer any questions about what I believe, but I won't force it or claim to be all-knowing either. It's nice to have a peaceful debate for once; these things always seem to get out of hand so quickly.Don't count your chickens.

[katchow]

yikes, was that a triple wammy? :eek:

[wordmunger]

<looks at login name>

... sigh... I'm beginning to feel a bit oppressed...

[zimv20]

I'm beginning to feel a bit oppressed...
i've come to see the violence inherent in the system :-)

[belvdr]

The Bible also forbids the wearing of mixed cloth. Are you equally convinced by this?
You haven't lived.
If you don't believe it to be natural behaviour, go and study homosexuality in Nature. Otherwise, don't bring it up.

Don't count your chickens.

Send me the verse in the Bible that refers to mixed cloth. Some verses can be misunderstood if taken in small pieces, so I'd have to review the context first.

If the Bible were relevant to animals, He would have created animals with the ability to read. Thus, the entire Bible is not pertinent to animals.

In addition, you can say I haven't lived and that I shouldn't count my chickens, and you can flame me. Go right ahead, as it will not affect my faith in what the Bible teaches, and it will not change my mind that it is unnatural behavior. To be honest, comparing animal life to human life is somewhat stretching it. If you want to compare, then someone should try living in a tree with an eagle and see how close we really are to animal life.

Also, if you check postings above mine, I didn't bring up the animals, so you may want to refer that comment to someone else.

[belvdr]

<looks at login name>

... sigh... I'm beginning to feel a bit oppressed...

Oops.. :) No offense intended there..

[belvdr]

I've never seen The Great Wall of China, but I'm sure it exists.

Let me assure you that homosexual behaviour amongst many species occurs and is 100% natural -- how can you say otherwise?

I'm sorry that this may shatter a firmly-held but erroneous belief, but to argue otherwise is the same as putting your fingers in your ears and going 'la la la'.


You can compare the sight/belief thing all day long, but we'll never get anywhere with that.

I'll refer my response to my previous post about humans and animals, who the Bible applies to (in my opinion), etc.

I can always turn the question around as to why it is natural in humans, but that'll just get us in deeper with no resolution.

I guess we'll all have to trust what each of us have put our faith in.

[belvdr]

yikes, was that a triple wammy? :eek:

Wammy? :) I remember the wammy guy on one the old game shows... Fun to watch.

[zimv20]

If the Bible were relevant to animals, He would have created animals with the ability to read. Thus, the entire Bible is not pertinent to animals.

!!!!!

sorry, but even the arguments for a flat earth are more sensible than that.

[zimv20]

You can compare the sight/belief thing all day long, but we'll never get anywhere with that.

sure we can, 'cuz you're being inconsistent.

1. you deny the existence of animal homosexuality, because you've never seen it
2. but you believe in god and jesus, even though you've never seen them

[TheMonarch]

People, people, calm down... Just don't go to that school and drink your coffee :cool:

[belvdr]

sure we can, 'cuz you're being inconsistent.

1. you deny the existence of animal homosexuality, because you've never seen it
2. but you believe in god and jesus, even though you've never seen them


Whoa, hold on a second there. I'm not being inconsistent.

I never denied the existence of it; I just said I had never seen it. Let's not transform what I said to what you think I said.


1. My critical line of thinking comes from what I read from the Bible. The Bible refers to it as whoremungers, and strictly forbids it.
2. I've never seen homosexuality in the animal world.
3. I am against homosexuality, no matter who is involved. I believe it to be wrong from my reading of the Bible. I don't believe it to be natural behavior, just as I believe that violence is not natural behavior either.

[belvdr]

!!!!!

sorry, but even the arguments for a flat earth are more sensible than that.

I don't think so.

The Bible's purpose is to teach us God's Word and salvation. Only humans can be saved, and those who are saved should follow God's Word. Since animals cannot be saved, how can they possibly follow?

[belvdr]

People, people, calm down... Just don't go to that school and drink your coffee :cool:

The way this is going, we're all gonna have to drink decaf. :eek: :)

[zimv20]

a few of us animals do not wish to be 'saved'.

[jelloshotsrule]

where does the bible define "whoremunger" as "homosexual"? i figured it was someone (dude or lady) who rounded up a bunch of whores (again, dudes or ladies)... so, a dude could round up a bunch of female whores and be a whoremunger. to me

[belvdr]

a few of us animals do not wish to be 'saved'.

And that is your choice. Like I said before, I'm not pushing anything on anybody. I'm just commenting like others do; it just so happens I think a bit differently than others.

I don't really want any issues between you and I or me and others. This is a great community of Mac lovers (macosexual?) and I think we should move on.

Peace? :)

[Blue Velvet]

...and it will not change my mind that it is natural behavior.


That's right — the earth is flat. The sun orbits the earth. Women were created from a rib...

Stick your head in the sand... remain unconvinced by scientific evidence — retreat to a dusty old book of hand-me-down and heavily-edited apocryphal mutterings as fact.

Don't let anyone try to point out the fallacies in your thoughts because that might mean that your entire belief system is built on a castle of sand and that might mean that you may have to reappraise your view of life.

What a terrifying idea — that you might actually be wrong and that admitting so would somehow diminish your personhood.

Instead, maybe best to sit tight within your walls -- it's so comforting.

Personally, I can't understand why you and others like you bother to contribute to a thread like this, because to venture an opinion on this matter without expecting to at least debate it and be willing to listen to sound arguments to the contrary is tantamount to trolling on the subject IMHO.

I'll leave you now to ponder on the points addressed in this link. Please feel free to square the circle for us.
http://www.greenwych.ca/bible-a.htm

[belvdr]

where does the bible define "whoremunger" as "homosexual"? i figured it was someone (dude or lady) who rounded up a bunch of whores (again, dudes or ladies)... so, a dude could round up a bunch of female whores and be a whoremunger. to me

My take on it is you have to look when the Bible was translated. Off the top of my head, I cannot firmly recall the dates. I have some notes I wrote down on this, but they are at home.

You could definitely be right on this.

[Zaid]

You can compare the sight/belief thing all day long, but we'll never get anywhere with that.

I'll refer my response to my previous post about humans and animals, who the Bible applies to (in my opinion), etc.

I can always turn the question around as to why it is natural in humans, but that'll just get us in deeper with no resolution.

I guess we'll all have to trust what each of us have put our faith in.


Your beliefs are based on faith mate. Your argument is essentially "It is so because the Bible says it so" And this is based on the implicit faith that the Bible is what your god says. This all well and good and you certainly have the right to believe whatever you want (as long as you don't try and legislate your beliefs and force them onto others, i don't mind what you believe)

But lets not get carried away. A point that is accepted on faith is not a considered opinion.

[zimv20]

I'm not pushing anything on anybody.
here's the acid test, then: do you support gay marriage?

[Zaid]

here's the acid test, then: do you support gay marriage?


I think support is the wrong word there zim

I think the acid test is: If two people ( who do not share your beliefs) want to be married, do you think the state should stop them if they happen to be of the same sex?

[belvdr]

That's right — the earth is flat. The sun orbits the earth. Women were created from a rib...

Stick your head in the sand... remain unconvinced by scientific evidence — retreat to a dusty old book of hand-me-down and heavily-edited apocryphal mutterings as fact.

Don't let anyone try to point out the fallacies in your thoughts because that might mean that your entire belief system is built on a castle of sand and that might mean that you may have to reappraise your view of life.

What a terrifying idea — that you might actually be wrong and that admitting so would somehow diminish your personhood.

Instead, maybe best to sit tight within your walls -- it's so comforting.

Personally, I can't understand why you and others like you bother to contribute to a thread like this, because to venture an opinion on this matter without expecting to at least debate it and be willing to listen to sound arguments to the contrary is tantamount to trolling on the subject IMHO.

I'll leave you now to ponder on the points addressed in this link. Please feel free to square the circle for us.
http://www.greenwych.ca/bible-a.htm


Well, you do know the "scientific evidence" is theory too? It is all theory, that's why it's called faith. Nobody has actually debated my beliefs with any scientific fact, except for jelloshotsrule.

I am listening to what others say. Part of the definition of debate is to explain each person's side and everyone walks away with an opinion (or a changed opinion).

And if it's a dusty old book, then why is the older science not dusty and outdated?

Now, if you don't understand why I can post freely, then why not question why anyone, including you, can post freely? Is there a rule stating only scientific theories can be discussed? Again, I ask where are the "sound arguments" you point to?

You can say I'm trolling, and if you believe so, report me to moderators. I have not attacked, nor will I attack, anyone personally.

[jelloshotsrule]

My take on it is you have to look when the Bible was translated. Off the top of my head, I cannot firmly recall the dates. I have some notes I wrote down on this, but they are at home.

You could definitely be right on this.

wait. so... you don't KNOW that whoremunger means homosexual, but you assume it does based on when the bible was translated? i'm a christian (catholic- so maybe my bible knowledge is weak compared to most)... but i accept that there are 1. contradictions in it and 2. stories that aren't meant to be taken literally. 7 days doesnt have to equal 7 24 hour periods. etc.

and i don't see anything in your listed quotes that describes a homosexual rather than just lustful, adulterous people in general

[belvdr]

I think support is the wrong word there zim

I think the acid test is: If two people ( who do not share your beliefs) want to be married, do you think the state should stop them if they happen to be of the same sex?

I'll answer both (yours and zimv20's) questions, (again this is according to what I believe):

Do I support it? In what way? Do you mean would I vote for legislation, if brought up by someone else, against gay marriages? Yes. Because of what my faith teaches.

Do think they should be arrested, deported, or <pick another punsihment>? No.

Zaid, to answer your post earlier regarding faith and opinion, faith drives opinion. I really wasn't sure (didn't get much sleep last night) what you were referring to.

[belvdr]

wait. so... you don't KNOW that whoremunger means homosexual, but you assume it does based on when the bible was translated? i'm a christian (catholic- so maybe my bible knowledge is weak compared to most)... but i accept that there are 1. contradictions in it and 2. stories that aren't meant to be taken literally. 7 days doesnt have to equal 7 24 hour periods. etc.

and i don't see anything in your listed quotes that describes a homosexual rather than just lustful, adulterous people in general

Do I know for a fact what God meant? No. I admit that, and I'm basing this on the time it was written. Does anyone know exactly what God meant? Nope, but that's why I study it again and again.

[Zaid]

Well, you do know the "scientific evidence" is theory too? It is all theory, that's why it's called faith.


Now with this statement i completely disagree. Accepting a theory based on scientific evidence is not faith. There is a very fundamental difference

One is convinced by a scientific theory (normally because it explains real world observations well) The theory may well be wrong, and if it is and a better theory comes along you drop it like a hot potato. Scientific arguments are whittled to within in inch of their lives in the cross fire of argument.

One believes in a article of faith. You wouldn't just change your mind if new evidence came to light.

[jelloshotsrule]

belvdr- i think you've been very courteous with your posts, and while i disagree with you about 100%, i don't think anyone would report you (you've done nothing wrong other than disagreeing with people). in fact, i appreciate you taking the time to respond because i think if more people discussed things openly (while you may not be open minded, you ARE reading what people say). heck, it's the only way people will learn. my parents are very religious catholics and have always been pretty republican. last election my brothers and i engaged and challenged their political choices, and neither of them voted for bush, and we did it all very logically and respected the opinions presented...

so anyways, carry on.

[belvdr]

Now with this statement i completely disagree. Accepting a theory based on scientific evidence is not faith. There is a very fundamental difference

One is convinced by a scientific theory (normally because it explains real world observations well) The theory may well be wrong, and if it is and a better theory comes along you drop it like a hot potato. Scientific arguments are whittled to within in inch of their lives in the cross fire of argument.

One believes in a article of faith. You wouldn't just change your mind if new evidence came to light.

What I was referring to was, for example, the theory of evolution. The evidence is not hard, meaning, neither scientist nor theologist have rock solid proof that their side is right.

Now, scientific evidence such as 2 hydrogen atoms plus one oxygen atom equals water, that's fact, and is not faith. I agree totally with that.

[Zaid]

I'll answer both (yours and zimv20's) questions, (again this is according to what I believe):

Do I support it? In what way? Do you mean would I vote for legislation, if brought up by someone else, against gay marriages? Yes. Because of what my faith teaches.

Do think they should be arrested, deported, or <pick another punsihment>? No.

Zaid, to answer your post earlier regarding faith and opinion, faith drives opinion. I really wasn't sure (didn't get much sleep last night) what you were referring to.

So then you do believe in imposing your faith on people who don't share it. You would stop two people, who do not share your faith, from marrying because your faith teaches you that it is wrong.

Also faith may drive your opinion mate, but for some of us faith has bugger-all to do with it.

[jelloshotsrule]

Do I know for a fact what God meant? No. I admit that, and I'm basing this on the time it was written. Does anyone know exactly what God meant? Nope, but that's why I study it again and again.

i don't get it. what exactly led you to think that whoremungers refers solely to those acting out homosexual deeds, rather than just lustful, adulterous acts in general??

[belvdr]

belvdr- i think you've been very courteous with your posts, and while i disagree with you about 100%, i don't think anyone would report you (you've done nothing wrong other than disagreeing with people). in fact, i appreciate you taking the time to respond because i think if more people discussed things openly (while you may not be open minded, you ARE reading what people say). heck, it's the only way people will learn. my parents are very religious catholics and have always been pretty republican. last election my brothers and i engaged and challenged their political choices, and neither of them voted for bush, and we did it all very logically and respected the opinions presented...

so anyways, carry on.

Thanks for that. I think I am open-minded. I just haven't seen much in the way of any attempt to show I'm wrong. I think this type of debate can't be settled in just a few posts.

[belvdr]

i don't get it. what exactly led you to think that whoremungers refers solely to those acting out homosexual deeds, rather than just lustful, adulterous acts in general??

I'll have to look up the notes on what I was reading at the time. If you don't mind, I'll dig that back up and get back with you later on. IIRC, it was something about the translation/timeframe from Hebrew.

[Zaid]

What I was referring to was, for example, the theory of evolution. The evidence is not hard, meaning, neither scientist nor theologist have rock solid proof that their side is right.

Now, scientific evidence such as 2 hydrogen atoms plus one oxygen atom equals water, that's fact, and is not faith. I agree totally with that.

Well there is no such thing as Scientific fact. Everything is just the best theory that explains the data. The theory of evolution by natural selection is a theory, granted, but is the best (by best i mean the simplest theory, ie the one requiring the least number of assumptions) theory that we have to explain all the diversity in the world. Now I am convinced by the the theory of evolution, wheras you believe in the creation of the world by an omniscient omnipotent god. Belief and convinced. I'm not just playing semantic games here. There is a very real and very fundamental difference between these words.

[belvdr]

So then you do believe in imposing your faith on people who don't share it. You would stop two people, who do not share your faith, from marrying because your faith teaches you that it is wrong.

Also faith may drive your opinion mate, but for some of us faith has bugger-all to do with it.

Well, since we live in a Democracy in the US, each of us vote based on our opinion. If you consider that to be imposing my faith, then yes I am doing it.

Let's say gay marriage was legal. Would I walk up and stop it? No.

[Zaid]

belvdr- i think you've been very courteous with your posts, and while i disagree with you about 100%, i don't think anyone would report you (you've done nothing wrong other than disagreeing with people). in fact, i appreciate you taking the time to respond because i think if more people discussed things openly (while you may not be open minded, you ARE reading what people say). heck, it's the only way people will learn. my parents are very religious catholics and have always been pretty republican. last election my brothers and i engaged and challenged their political choices, and neither of them voted for bush, and we did it all very logically and respected the opinions presented...

so anyways, carry on.

I agree completely mate.

[belvdr]

Well there is no such thing as Scientific fact. Everything is just the best theory that explains the data. The theory of evolution by natural selection is a theory, granted, but is the best (by best i mean the simplest theory, ie the one requiring the least number of assumptions) theory that we have to explain all the diversity in the world. Now I am convinced by the the theory of evolution, wheras you believe in the creation of the world by an omniscient omnipotent god. Belief and convinced. I'm not just playing semantic games here. There is a very real and very fundamental difference between these words.

I see what you are saying. Very good explanation.

[leekohler]

That's right — the earth is flat. The sun orbits the earth. Women were created from a rib...

Stick your head in the sand... remain unconvinced by scientific evidence — retreat to a dusty old book of hand-me-down and heavily-edited apocryphal mutterings as fact.

Don't let anyone try to point out the fallacies in your thoughts because that might mean that your entire belief system is built on a castle of sand and that might mean that you may have to reappraise your view of life.

What a terrifying idea — that you might actually be wrong and that admitting so would somehow diminish your personhood.

Instead, maybe best to sit tight within your walls -- it's so comforting.

Personally, I can't understand why you and others like you bother to contribute to a thread like this, because to venture an opinion on this matter without expecting to at least debate it and be willing to listen to sound arguments to the contrary is tantamount to trolling on the subject IMHO.

I'll leave you now to ponder on the points addressed in this link. Please feel free to square the circle for us.
http://www.greenwych.ca/bible-a.htm

"God said it. I believe it, and that settles it." Ever see this bunper sticker? It explains everything you need to know regarding "Christians". The thinking is already done for them. There is no point in arguing Blue.

[jelloshotsrule]

"God said it. I believe it, and that settles it." Ever see this bunper sticker? It explains everything you need to know regarding "Christians". The thinking is already done for them. There is no point in arguing Blue.

don't lump all christians in the same boat there. as sheep following blindly. thanks

[Zaid]

Well, since we live in a Democracy in the US, each of us vote based on our opinion. If you consider that to be imposing my faith, then yes I am doing it.

Let's say gay marriage was legal. Would I walk up and stop it? No.


Fair enough. You certainly have a right to vote based on your opinion.

However the thing that stops a democracy from degrading into a dictatorship of the majority is the protection of the rights of minorities. The state should not be able to curb the rights of any citizen except where the exercising of that right impinges on the rights of others. (eg murder, theft etc)

Also all should be treated the same in the eyes of the law and the state.

[belvdr]

"God said it. I believe it, and that settles it." Ever see this bunper sticker? It explains everything you need to know regarding "Christians". The thinking is already done for them. There is no point in arguing Blue.

It seems you have a stereotype of Christians. I have listened and responded thoughtfully.

I agree there are some Christians with a locked down attitude of "I'm right; you're wrong." However, I have not done that, and have welcomed anyone's response.

It seems, more or less, that when a Christian steps up to discuss something, everyone gets all frustrated so fast. Why? You have a view and so do I. So what if we disagree?

Did you really think you would change someone's mind (over faith) in less than 70 posts? Why should you give up so easily?

[Blue Velvet]

Well, you do know the "scientific evidence" is theory too? It is all theory, that's why it's called faith. Nobody has actually debated my beliefs with any scientific fact, except for jelloshotsrule.

You first denied that homosexual behaviour is natural. I then gave you plenty of well-researched evidence to point out that it is indeed natural and occurs everywhere in nature across many species.

How can you be so arrogant as a Christian by looking at God's handiwork and then say 'It's not natural'? How can you judge other's behaviour and say it's not natural?

I've got news for you. If it occurs in nature, it's natural. Perhaps you should closely examine what natural really means... and yes, violence is natural too. Maybe not desirable but neither is illness...

You then shifted the goal posts and refused to admit that it somehow then wasn't applicable to humans, as if we are somehow exempt from the shared genetic heritage of the rest of the planet's species.

And also, do you not understand what the difference between a theory and a hypothesis is? One tested, the other mere conjecture and completely untested.

[jelloshotsrule]

Well, since we live in a Democracy in the US, each of us vote based on our opinion. If you consider that to be imposing my faith, then yes I am doing it.

Let's say gay marriage was legal. Would I walk up and stop it? No.

you believe it is wrong for people to engage in homosexual relationships. ok, fine. but how does their doing so affect you? for instance, i think that drinking is wrong (hurts the body and impairs judgment. some might go with the "the body is god's temple, so you are treating it badly and thus disrespecting god" argument. i wouldn't go that far...). however, i'm not going to impose my will on that on others. AND sometimes drinking does affect others (drunk driving, etc... but that is illegal). same with pot. i would never do it. i don't like when people do it. but it's their right.

and to go further, those things are choices. i choose to drink or not drink. i choose to smoke or not smoke. however, homosexuality is not (in my opinion, and most gay people themselves, i believe???) a choice... so, how do you tell someone that they way they are born... gay, straight, black, white, brown, yellow, tall, short, etc... how do you tell them that's wrong? why should a loving couple of people, both men, both women, one man, one woman, be any different? we are not talking about church weddings, we are talking about CIVIL marriages. big difference. if your church or mine doesn't want to allow them or say that god doesn't condone it, that's up to them. but for the gov't to tell them that, is discrimination plain and simple

[Zaid]

It seems you have a stereotype of Christians. I have listened and responded thoughtfully.

I agree there are some Christians with a locked down attitude of "I'm right; you're wrong." However, I have not done that, and have welcomed anyone's response.

It seems, more or less, that when a Christian steps up to discuss something, everyone gets all frustrated so fast. Why? You have a view and so do I. So what if we disagree?

Did you really think you would change someone's mind (over faith) in less than 70 posts? Why should you give up so easily?

You know what mate, I was raised a Muslim, and even though I am atheist I will agree that there are some incredibly profound and beautifully expressed ideas in religious texts. (I also think there are some completely bonkers ones but that is a different story)

There is this great verse in the Qur'aan which says:
And say unto them: You believe not that which i believe, nor do i believe that which you believe, so unto you be your beliefs and unto me mine.

You can always agree to disagree

[belvdr]

You first denied that homosexual behaviour is natural. I then gave you plenty of well-researched evidence to point out that it is indeed natural and occurs everywhere in nature across many species.

How can you be so arrogant as a Christian by looking at God's handiwork and then say 'It's not natural'? How can you judge other's behaviour and say it's not natural?

I've got news for you. If it occurs in nature, it's natural. Perhaps you should closely examine what natural really means... and yes, violence is natural too. Maybe not desirable but neither is illness...

You then shifted the goal posts and refused to admit that it somehow then wasn't applicable to humans, as if we are somehow exempt from the shared genetic heritage of the rest of the planet's species.

And also, do you not understand what the difference between a theory and a hypothesis is? One tested, the other mere conjecture and completely untested.

My statements stem from a difference in the term "natural" in relation to humans versus animals. If you believe the Bible, then you don't believe that we evolved from animals, hence my belief in the difference.

God's work is natural, and I believe that, just as I believe he mated man with woman for a reason.

And yes, I understand the difference in a hypothesis and a theory.

[leekohler]

don't lump all christians in the same boat there. as sheep following blindly. thanks

I didn't. Did you notice I put "Christians" in quotes?

[jelloshotsrule]

I didn't. Did you notice I put "Christians" in quotes?

fair enough. :)

[belvdr]

You know what mate, I was raised a Muslim, and even though I am atheist I will agree that there are some incredibly profound and beautifully expressed ideas in religious texts. (I also think there are some completely bonkers ones but that is a different story)

There is this great verse in the Qur'aan which says:
And say unto them: You believe not that which i believe, nor do i believe that which you believe, so unto you be your beliefs and unto me mine.

You can always agree to disagree

Yes you can agree to disagree, kinda like what we're doing. :) Agreed.. to disagree.. er.. :)

Peace..

[Zaid]

Well getting this all back to the question of quotes about and by queers:

Quotes on Homosexuality (http://www.quotegarden.com/homosexuality.html)

Enjoy :D

[Blue Velvet]

There is no point in arguing Blue.

Wrong.

Because fundamentalism, backwards superstition and religious cant must be resisted at all costs if humanity is to evolve.

Furthermore, opposition must be vocal and heard so that those who peddle such nonsense know that they don't have all the playing field to themselves as they push their beliefs into law.

If there's one thing that makes me really angry, is the handwringing and supine attitude adopted by certain people when faced with religiously-based intolerance. Just because it's a belief or faith, doesn't make it somehow OK or even right.

Many people around here might think I have it in for Christians -- not so. We haven't recently addressed the barbaric beliefs of certain strands of Islamic thought -- I'm even-handed in my disdain and contempt.

[leekohler]

It seems you have a stereotype of Christians. I have listened and responded thoughtfully.

I agree there are some Christians with a locked down attitude of "I'm right; you're wrong." However, I have not done that, and have welcomed anyone's response.

It seems, more or less, that when a Christian steps up to discuss something, everyone gets all frustrated so fast. Why? You have a view and so do I. So what if we disagree?

Did you really think you would change someone's mind (over faith) in less than 70 posts? Why should you give up so easily?

I didn't lump all christians together. Again, "christians" was in quotes in my post.

And you have hardly responded thoughtfully. It's people like you whose "thoughts" and words contributed to my and many others attempting suicide at a young ages.

[Zaid]

I didn't lump all christians together. Again, "christians" was in quotes in my post.

And you have hardly responded thoughtfully. It's people like you whose "thoughts" and words contributed to my and many others attempting suicide at a young ages.

You know what lee, under normal circumstances i don't participate in these 'discussions' (and i use that word loosely) because i've heard all the arguments before. We never convince them and they never convince us. Stalemate. it very difficult to argue something out of someone that wasn't argued into him. I've become lazy in that regard. My friends are all cool. I don't experience any discrimination. why should i bother

But you and blue are correct. it is our duty to bring the the counter-point to the table. It may not convince anyone, but if it makes one kid feel better knowing that he/she is not alone, then it is not time wasted

[leekohler]

You know what lee, under normal circumstances i don't participate in these 'discussions' (and i use that word loosely) because i've heard all the arguments before. We never convince them and they never convince us. Stalemate. it very difficult to argue something out of someone that wasn't argued into him. I've become lazy in that regard. My friends are all cool. I don't experience any discrimination. why should i bother

But you and blue are correct. it is our duty to bring the the counter-point to the table. It may not convince anyone, but if it makes one kid feel better knowing that he/she is not alone, then it is not time wasted

This is the funny part. You come out and the very people who claim to "love you unconditionally" are the very first people who turn on you.

[leekohler]

You know what lee, under normal circumstances i don't participate in these 'discussions' (and i use that word loosely) because i've heard all the arguments before. We never convince them and they never convince us. Stalemate. it very difficult to argue something out of someone that wasn't argued into him. I've become lazy in that regard. My friends are all cool. I don't experience any discrimination. why should i bother

But you and blue are correct. it is our duty to bring the the counter-point to the table. It may not convince anyone, but if it makes one kid feel better knowing that he/she is not alone, then it is not time wasted

And thanks, man.

[Zaid]

This is the funny part. You come out and the very people who claim to "love you unconditionally" are the very first people who turn on you.

I've been luckier than most. All my mates have been accepting to the point where it's not even an issue and we comfortable taking the piss out of each other for our differing sexualities. My cousins that i've told have all accepted me with open arms. But strangely my immediate family (well my dad) would shun me.

[skunk]

Send me the verse in the Bible that refers to mixed cloth.Since you ask, it's Deuteronomy 22:11
Thou shalt not wear a garment of divers sorts, as of woollen and linen together.
Oh, and in the next verse:
Thou shalt make thee fringes upon the four quarters of thy vesture, wherewith thou coverest thyself.
Have you checked your fringes? Well, have you?

[Zaid]

I'll answer both (yours and zimv20's) questions, (again this is according to what I believe):

Do I support it? In what way? Do you mean would I vote for legislation, if brought up by someone else, against gay marriages? Yes. Because of what my faith teaches.

Do think they should be arrested, deported, or <pick another punsihment>? No.

Zaid, to answer your post earlier regarding faith and opinion, faith drives opinion. I really wasn't sure (didn't get much sleep last night) what you were referring to.

I've just had a thought belvdr.

The bible is accepting of slavery. It certainly doesn't condemn or disapprove of it. So if you accept the bible as the word of god, and you vote based on the teachings of your faith, would you vote in favour of a law saying bankrupts should be sold into slavery? (as was the case at the time of the writing of the new testament)

Anyway i'm off to bed now, i'll pick up your response in the morning.

[pseudobrit]

10 I'm not pushing anything on anybody

20 Do you mean would I vote for legislation, if brought up by someone else, against gay marriages? Yes. Because of what my faith teaches.

RUN
_

20 SYNTAX ERROR

10 Well, you do know the "scientific evidence" is theory too? It is all theory, that's why it's called faith.

20 I understand the difference in a hypothesis and a theory.

RUN
_
20 SYNTAX ERROR

[Blue Velvet]

Have you checked your fringes? Well, have you?

Absolutely incontinent with laughter. Excuse me...

[pseudobrit]

I've just had a thought belvdr.

The bible is accepting of slavery. It certainly doesn't condemn or disapprove of it. So if you accept the bible as the word of god, and you vote based on the teachings of your faith, would you vote in favour of a law saying bankrupts should be sold into slavery?

But the Bible doesn't apply to animals, remember?

[Zaid]

But the Bible doesn't apply to animals, remember?
:D :D

Have you checked your fringes? Well, have you?
Genius mate, as always pure comic genius

[pseudobrit]

Oh, and belvdr, welcome to the Age of Reason and Enlightenment. Pull up a chair and read the rules (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationalism) before playing.

[leekohler]

Ladies and gentleman, belvdr has left the building? Coincidence?

[skunk]

Ladies and gentleman, belvdr has left the building? Coincidence?Not according to my people.

[belvdr]

Ladies and gentleman, belvdr has left the building? Coincidence?

It was a coincidence that I couldn't be onlilne while driving home. :rolleyes:

EDIT: Just so nobody thinks I left again, I will be offline again for awhile.. Thanks for your concern.

EDIT 2: Does the last person who posts win the debate? :)

[leekohler]

It was a coincidence that I couldn't be onlilne while driving home. :rolleyes:

EDIT: Just so nobody thinks I left again, I will be offline again for awhile.. Thanks for your concern.

EDIT 2: Does the last person who posts win the debate? :)

Nope, but I'd be interested to hear your responses to our posts.

[skunk]

Does the last person who posts win the debate? :)Define "win".

[pseudobrit]

EDIT 2: Does the last person who posts win the debate? :)

No, but the last person to drag his sorry ass into the 18th century loses.

[Xtremehkr]

If you believe the Bible, then you don't believe that we evolved from animals, hence my belief in the difference.

Well, the Evolution now has everything evolving from single cell organisms.

Humans are classified as mammals and are already considered to be apart of the animal world.

There are a lot of things that the Bible states is wrong, why are some taken so seriously and others ignored.

The Bible may say Homosexuality is wrong, but does it advocate discrimination against though who choose to do what they feel is right, whether or not they happen to believe in the bible.

Do you think that it is right to hold others to the standards that your faith system defines. Isn't that rather judgmental?

Are you ok with others telling you what to do based upon what their beliefs dictate?

[vniow]

2. I've never seen homosexuality in the animal world.


http://gaypenguinforamerica.com/

[belvdr]

Well, the Evolution now has everything evolving from single cell organisms.

Humans are classified as mammals and are already considered to be apart of the animal world.

There are a lot of things that the Bible states is wrong, why are some taken so seriously and others ignored.

The Bible may say Homosexuality is wrong, but does it advocate discrimination against though who choose to do what they feel is right, whether or not they happen to believe in the bible.

Do you think that it is right to hold others to the standards that your faith system defines. Isn't that rather judgmental?

Are you ok with others telling you what to do based upon what their beliefs dictate?

Wow, this thread took off like crazy.. but I guess that's expected.

I don't believe the Bible is wrong in any case. To me, it is correct, cover to cover.

And to answer both your questions at once, I'm not holding anyone to my standards. The only thing I can relate your question back to is regarding voting for gay marriages. I vote for what I believe is right. I don't expect anyone who doesn't believe the Bible to act like a Christian, and the Bible states that.

[Blue Velvet]

I don't believe the Bible is wrong in any case. To me, it is correct, cover to cover.

In Genesis 9:3: "Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat" for Noah. But Deuteronomy (14:7-21) later gives a list of animals, birds and fish that must not be eaten.

Which is true?

[Xtremehkr]

Wow, this thread took off like crazy.. but I guess that's expected.

I don't believe the Bible is wrong in any case. To me, it is correct, cover to cover.

And to answer both your questions at once, I'm not holding anyone to my standards. The only thing I can relate your question back to is regarding voting for gay marriages. I vote for what I believe is right. I don't expect anyone who doesn't believe the Bible to act like a Christian, and the Bible states that.


How you act is one matter. Legislating how others may act is another.

See, if you limited biblical standards to yourself, no one would mind. But when what is in the bible is used to determine what others are allowed or not allowed to do, it becomes a whole 'nother issue.

Again though, considering all of the things that the bible is against, what makes homosexuality so important to you at this point in time?

[eva01]

In Genesis 9:3: "Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat" for Noah. But Deuteronomy (14:7-21) later gives a list of animals, birds and fish that must not be eaten.

Which is true?

Technically everything that moves is meat, humans are meat too.

so eat them, and their tasty courage ^_~

I still stand by my little story of the bible written by two homeless drunk people on a bender

how awesome would that be if millions of people followed the word of two drunk hobos

[belvdr]

In Genesis 9:3: "Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat" for Noah. But Deuteronomy (14:7-21) later gives a list of animals, birds and fish that must not be eaten.

Which is true?

Both.. You can't take excerpts from two different time periods, and that apply to two separate people, and compare.

[belvdr]

How you act is one matter. Legislating how others may act is another.

See, if you limited biblical standards to yourself, no one would mind. But when what is in the bible is used to determine what others are allowed or not allowed to do, it becomes a whole 'nother issue.

Again though, considering all of the things that the bible is against, what makes homosexuality so important to you at this point in time?

Did I start the thread? Nope. But it is an open forum, and I can make comments just like everyone else.

It's always been important to me, but I've never felt compelled to rush out and start a thread about it.

Why are you so concerned with it at this time?

[eva01]

Both.. You can't take excerpts from two different time periods, and that apply to two separate people, and compare.

so that means you can eat anything that is meat (like humans for example) yet you can't at the same time :confused:

[belvdr]

It's obvious that no matter what anyone says or writes, we will all still be in the same scenario, even if we continued this years from now. Enjoy your discussion.

Peace out.

[Blue Velvet]

Both.. You can't take excerpts from two different time periods, and that apply to two separate people, and compare.

But you just said the Bible was correct from cover to cover. These two statements obviously contradict each other.

"Judge not, that ye be not judged' (Matt.7:l), yet others must be judged? (1Cor. 6:2-4).

[pseudobrit]

It's obvious that no matter what anyone says or writes, we will all still be in the same scenario, even if we continued this years from now. Enjoy your discussion.

Peace out.

I guess that was you "winning"

[Xtremehkr]

Did I start the thread? Nope. But it is an open forum, and I can make comments just like everyone else.

It's always been important to me, but I've never felt compelled to rush out and start a thread about it.

Why are you so concerned with it at this time?

Because at this point in time, it has been made an issue. Remember the pre-election promise to add a Constitutional Amendment to ban gay marriage? That is one example. Baylor acting in a discriminatory way is another example.

The actions taken by the religious right when it comes to discriminating against one part of society has made it an issue.

There are many problems in society that need addressing, but the party in power has chosen to focus upon this particular issue.

Personally, I can see a society where many different sexual orientations (to be topic specific) can exist harmoniously. If the tables are turned, and Christianity were being discriminated against, I would argue for the rights of those who wish to practice their religion, as long as it doesn't impinge upon others who live within the same society. Believe me, despite having said that, I don't have much to do with either points of view. Points of view is not the best example, in this context, it is more a battle between a point of view and what people naturally are. One group seeks recognition for who they are and the other refuses to recognize their right to exist.

What I do believe in though, is finding some sort of equality when it comes to finding a happy medium in which we can all exist.

[Blue Velvet]

Personally, I can see a society where many different sexual orientations (to be topic specific) can exist harmoniously. If the tables are turned, and Christianity were being discriminated against, I would argue for the rights of those who wish to practice their religion, as long as it doesn't impinge upon others who live within the same society. Believe me, despite having said that, I don't have much to do with either points of view. Points of view is not the best example, in this context, it is more a battle between a point of view and what people naturally are. One group seeks recognition for who they are and the other refuses to recognize their right to exist.


Perceptive. Well said...

[Xtremehkr]

Perceptive. Well said...

Thank you BV, reassurance is always appreciated.

[leekohler]

Well, I knew belvdr wouldn't respond to my earlier post regarding the effect religion has on gay kids well-being. Of course, maybe he didn't bother to read it.

[scem0]

I just finished reading the whole thread. I have a lot of respect for you belvdr for being open minded and trying to argue your side, but you are just so incredibly wrong that it hurts me inside.

It drives me nuts that we can't use logic against you in an argument. Nothing 'works' because everything you believe is based on 'faith'. Logic doesn't play a part.

If there was an 11th commandment - "Thou shalt hate anyone with red hair" - you will follow that commandment. Blindly. Because the Bible is 'right' from cover to cover, eh? I know that is a moot in this central argument, given that the Bible doesn't say that, but it just goes to show that arguments like 'we have no say in what hair color is' and 'there is no good reason to be against people with red hair' won't have an effect on you and that is completely ridiculous.

I want to get married some day, I am gay. But more importantly, I want to live in a society that doesn't put me in a box based on my sexual orientation.

This so ****ing frustrating :(. Luckily I was able to convince my mother that the Bible and Christianity can be more than a blind following of scripture and intangible forces, it can be a loose guide of how one can act based on logic. She was once a very conservative Christian. I was once in the closet, lonely, scared, and confused. Fancy that - conservative Christianity causing loneliness and confusion in a young gay boy. :rolleyes:

Many of the things in the Bible make sense, but descrimination against different sexual orientations just plain doesn't and there is no argument based on logic that one can use to say otherwise. It's as simple as 1+1=2. As hard as one may try, they cannot prove that 1+1=6, even if it says so in the Bible.

Please have a little less faith in empty words and more faith in yourself. You have a functioning brain in your head. Use it! Gay boys who are stuck in the closet lonely and confused will thank you.

_Emerson

[leekohler]

I just finished reading the whole thread. I have a lot of respect for you belvdr for being open minded and trying to argue your side, but you are just so incredibly wrong that it hurts me inside.

It drives me nuts that we can't use logic against you in an argument. Nothing 'works' because everything you believe is based on 'faith'. Logic doesn't play a part.

If there was an 11th commandment - "Thou shalt hate anyone with red hair" - you will follow that commandment. Blindly. Because the Bible is 'right' from cover to cover, eh? I know that is a moot in this central argument, given that the Bible doesn't say that, but it just goes to show that arguments like 'we have no say in what hair color is' and 'there is no good reason to be against people with red hair' won't have an effect on you and that is completely ridiculous.

I want to get married some day, I am gay. But more importantly, I want to live in a society that doesn't put me in a box based on my sexual orientation.

This so ****ing frustrating :(. Luckily I was able to convince my mother that the Bible and Christianity can be more than a blind following of scripture and intangible forces, it can be a loose guide of how one can act based on logic. She was once a very conservative Christian. I was once in the closet, lonely, scared, and confused. Fancy that - conservative Christianity causing loneliness and confusion in a young gay boy. :rolleyes:

Many of the things in the Bible make sense, but descrimination against different sexual orientations just plain doesn't and there is no argument based on logic that one can use to say otherwise. It's as simple as 1+1=2. As hard as one may try, they cannot prove that 1+1=6, even if it says so in the Bible.

Please have a little less faith in empty words and more faith in yourself. You have a functioning brain in your head. Use it! Gay boys who are stuck in the closet lonely and confused will thank you.

_Emerson

Em- you rock. But you already knew that, didn't you? :) I think you shuld PM him your post.

[Whyren]

I still stand by my little story of the bible written by two homeless drunk people on a bender

how awesome would that be if millions of people followed the word of two drunk hobos

Ha! Reminds me of a scene from Red Dwarf:

Newsreader:Archeologists near Mount Sinai have discovered what is believed to be a missing page from the Bible. The page is currently being carbon-dated in Bonne. If genuine, it belongs at the beginning of the Bible and is believed to read, "To my darling Candy. All characters portrayed within this book are fictitous and any resemblance to persons living or dead is purely coincidental." The page has been universally condemned by church leaders.

[TheMonarch]

I just finished reading the whole thread. I have a lot of respect for you belvdr for being open minded and trying to argue your side, but you are just so incredibly wrong that it hurts me inside.

It drives me nuts that we can't use logic against you in an argument. Nothing 'works' because everything you believe is based on 'faith'. Logic doesn't play a part.

If there was an 11th commandment - "Thou shalt hate anyone with red hair" - you will follow that commandment. Blindly. Because the Bible is 'right' from cover to cover, eh? I know that is a moot in this central argument, given that the Bible doesn't say that, but it just goes to show that arguments like 'we have no say in what hair color is' and 'there is no good reason to be against people with red hair' won't have an effect on you and that is completely ridiculous.

I want to get married some day, I am gay. But more importantly, I want to live in a society that doesn't put me in a box based on my sexual orientation.

This so ****ing frustrating :(. Luckily I was able to convince my mother that the Bible and Christianity can be more than a blind following of scripture and intangible forces, it can be a loose guide of how one can act based on logic. She was once a very conservative Christian. I was once in the closet, lonely, scared, and confused. Fancy that - conservative Christianity causing loneliness and confusion in a young gay boy. :rolleyes:

Many of the things in the Bible make sense, but descrimination against different sexual orientations just plain doesn't and there is no argument based on logic that one can use to say otherwise. It's as simple as 1+1=2. As hard as one may try, they cannot prove that 1+1=6, even if it says so in the Bible.

Please have a little less faith in empty words and more faith in yourself. You have a functioning brain in your head. Use it! Gay boys who are stuck in the closet lonely and confused will thank you.

_Emerson


scem0, out of all the people who posted here and disagree, and even though you, yourself disagree, your post was not a provocative jab to the other side that turns many threads into a spiraling posting war that never ends... I respect that.

[leekohler]

scem0, out of all the people who posted here and disagree, and even though you, yourself disagree, your post was not a provocative jab to the other side that turns many threads into a spiraling posting war that never ends... I respect that.

"Out of the mouths of babes..." :)

[TheMonarch]

"Out of the mouths of babes..." :)


I don't get it :o

[scem0]

Thanks, guys. :o

I suppose you could say that I have a lot of experience when it comes to understanding the Christian state of mind. Not necessarily from being a Christian, I only considered myself one for a short time, but by being around them. I have a lot of respect for Christianity, but nobody can argue that it is 100% right, nothing is. Nothing.

_Emerson

[leekohler]

I don't get it :o

Ha-ha! Well you've obviously never read the Bible. It's a verse referring to the wisdom that can come from the young.

[scem0]

shhh... I'm in denial about being young ;).

_Emerson

[leekohler]

shhh... I'm in denial about being young ;).

_Emerson

Oh stop it! Eveybody knows from your cute av. :)

[TheMonarch]

Ha-ha! Well you've obviously never read the Bible. It's a verse referring to the wisdom that can come from the young.

Ha ha. I get it now... but you said "babes" and I thought you were reffering to some kinky pornish stuff (you said "out of the mouths of babes", not babies)


:)

BTW, google image babes, you wont like what you'll see...

[leekohler]

BTW, google image babes, you wont like what you'll see...

No thanks! Sounds scary! :)

[TheMonarch]

No thanks! Sounds scary! :)


Aww, not too fond of kitties? ;)


(jk)

[leekohler]

Aww, not too fond of kitties? ;)


(jk)

Oh! Yes I am. I have a cat.

[gekko513]

Both.. You can't take excerpts from two different time periods, and that apply to two separate people, and compare.
There's your solution then. Since the bible wasn't written in our time period, the whole "homosexuality being wrong" might not apply anymore.

[zimv20]

here's a non-gay mug that baylor can use:

http://prodtn.cafepress.com/2/15085182_B_tn.jpg

[Zaid]

I've just had a thought belvdr.

The bible is accepting of slavery. It certainly doesn't condemn or disapprove of it. So if you accept the bible as the word of god, and you vote based on the teachings of your faith, would you vote in favour of a law saying bankrupts should be sold into slavery? (as was the case at the time of the writing of the new testament)

Anyway i'm off to bed now, i'll pick up your response in the morning.

Still waiting for an answer on this one

[belvdr]

Still waiting for an answer on this one

Zaid, I thought we agreed to disagree. :)

scem0, I apologize if what I said hurts. Life is like that sometimes, and I apologize for any hurt I've caused anyone. Not everyone agrees on every subject, and thus people do get hurt.

pseudoBrit, the "winning" statement I made was a joke. It wasn't intended as a serious comment. I was simply referring to the comment that I had left the building. :) I ran out of time to comment. Additionally, I can't keep up with 5-10 other posters.

To all, even though I believe in something totally different than you, please don't have hard feelings over it. It was a discussion, and that was it. I spoke my thoughts, and obviously some feel a bit more emotional over this topic. To those folks, I offer my apology (Blue_Velvet, scem0, iGary, others I have missed).

As with Zaid, I think we should agree to disagree. Let's put our swords down, and go on with life. Truce?

[pseudobrit]

As with Zaid, I think we should agree to disagree. Let's put our swords down, and go on with life. Truce?

If I believe in some social agenda, like say universal healthcare (or gay rights), I think I should be able to say why I believe in it and defend my viewpoint with logic and reason. If I'm left to fall back on unprovable things like blind "faith" I've lost this argument.

We're going to crush you with logic. There will be no agreeing to disagree.

I think you either need to:

1) out-debate us to convince us of the soundness of your beliefs. Failing that, you need to:

2) change yours beliefs so they are sound. Failing that, you need to:

3) admit that you've abdicated your judgement to your preacher, teacher or from whomever else it is you get your ideas and won't be bothered to think, reason and argue for yourself.

I've personally, on these very boards, gone through both stages one and two. I feel that slipping to stage three is the deepest failure of the human spirit and the most profound waste of the God-given mind and refuse to fall into that trap.

[belvdr]

pseudoBrit, you're just looking to fight someone. You won't crush me with your logic, and I don't really care what you think I should do. I do think for myself, and I study my Bible. If you don't like my beliefs, then so be it. I do not answer to you.

Good day.

[pseudobrit]

pseudoBrit, you're just looking to fight someone. You won't crush me with your logic

We already have. You've dodged nearly every single point that everyone's brought up.

[Zaid]

Zaid, I thought we agreed to disagree. :)

As with Zaid, I think we should agree to disagree. Let's put our swords down, and go on with life. Truce?


This is not a violent contest mate, no swords were ever drawn. Its an adult conversation. I'm asking questions like that not to catch you out or play a game of one-up-manship, but to understand how you think.

We've agreed to disagree mate, i'm not trying to change your mind, just understand it.

PS And i still await an answer

[pseudobrit]

If you don't like my beliefs, then so be it. I do not answer to you.

There's nothing wrong with your beliefs, it's that there's something wrong with your facts and your reasoning (or lack thereof).

You're entitled to your own opinion, not your own facts.

[Zaid]

There's nothing wrong with your beliefs, it's that there's something wrong with your facts and your reasoning (or lack thereof).

You're entitled to your own opinion, not your own facts.

Actually pseudo i don't reckon everyone is entitled to their opinion. Everyone is entitled to a considered thought-out opinion. If you can't defend your opinions you have no right to hold them

[iGary]

Why not just close the Starbucks?

I mean it is a well-known pro-life and pro-Gay Agenda™ company - why would you want to take their filthy dirty sin money?

[eva01]

Actually pseudo i don't reckon everyone is entitled to their opinion. Everyone is entitled to a considered thought-out opinion. If you can't defend your opinions you have no right to hold them

holy wrong statement batman, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. since when are you not?

[jelloshotsrule]

great post emerson

belvdr- i feel like my post from earlier concerning gay marriage and support or opposition of it was logical and worth responding to, i'd appreciate it if you took the time.

also, you say that it is a discussion, and not to get angry at you, etc... but you have to understand that because thousands of people think like you, and some more actively seek to impose those positions on others (beyond merely voting for an anti gay marriage law), this greatly impacts the day to day lives of gay people all over. emerson gave a vivid image of how it affects him, and this is just from your "discussion". imagine that being blown up on the real world effect that your viewpoint has on him and other gay people.

you really think that people choose to be gay?

i don't.

[takao]

looks like the thread headed exactly into what was to be expected of a forum with lots of US members.. sad but true

[jelloshotsrule]

looks like the thread headed exactly into what was to be expected of a forum with lots of US members.. sad but true

can you expand?

[Zaid]

you really think that people choose to be gay?

i don't.

[jello this is not directed at you, just using your quote as a starting point]

I think that this is something religious fundamentalists (and i use the word in its original sense) really have a problem with. They honestly believe that we choose to be gay. Why anyone would choose a life where they discriminated against, rejected by those closest to them, a life where you are mercilessly taunted at school, where the only special right conferred on us by society is the right to be beaten to a pulp and have the attacker walk because he was 'threatened' by us. And that is for those of us lucky enough to live in the western world.

Why on earth would anyone choose that, You don't choose to be gay anymore than you choose to be blond, or black, or green-eyed or any more than you choose to be straight. Being gay is not a disease, it is not a perversion and the fact that most americans seem to think it is says a hell of a lot more about them than it does about homosexuality

[leekohler]

Zaid, I thought we agreed to disagree. :)

scem0, I apologize if what I said hurts. Life is like that sometimes, and I apologize for any hurt I've caused anyone. Not everyone agrees on every subject, and thus people do get hurt.

pseudoBrit, the "winning" statement I made was a joke. It wasn't intended as a serious comment. I was simply referring to the comment that I had left the building. :) I ran out of time to comment. Additionally, I can't keep up with 5-10 other posters.

To all, even though I believe in something totally different than you, please don't have hard feelings over it. It was a discussion, and that was it. I spoke my thoughts, and obviously some feel a bit more emotional over this topic. To those folks, I offer my apology (Blue_Velvet, scem0, iGary, others I have missed).

We're emotional about it because you are talking about our lives and how you think it's OK to impose your beliefs on us. For example, you said you'd vote against gay marriage because your beliefs say it's wrong. None of us care about what you believe, but rather how your beliefs affect us. No one group's religious beliefs should be imposed on others. I don't know why you find that hard to accept.

[Chip NoVaMac]

I am coming in late to this thread. Tried to read most of the post, so if I repeat some points, forgive me.

First is the question of public funding for private schools. If Baylor is receiving state or federal funds, then they lose the right to have sway with vendors that they invite on campus. Too bad Starbucks just doesn't say goodbye to the Baylor Campus store.

We then come to the question of Christian faiths belief in the word of God in the Bible. We need to realize that these words were written by man. They have been translated by man. Man has shown that they can not be trusted to not inject their own beliefs in what ever they touch.

Then we have to look at the historical perspective of the Bible. For during the many hundreds of years that followed God's word being handed down to us, it made sense to have people follow the "party" line for procreation. War, famine, and disease wrecked havoc on populations. It made sense to make it "sinful" to engage in homosexual behavior; in order to get a stronger population growing.

We then have questions like, what did God and the Bible really mean about slavery. For there are passages that seem to condone slavery, as long as slaves are treated properly. But we now see slavery as wrong.

Some used the Bible as a defense against African-Americans getting equal rights. And to prevent mixed race marriages. What passages they read to come to these conclusions, I am not sure.

And about Gay marriage. We have blurred the line between church and state on this one. Because of the governments use of the word "marriage", it has IMO become one like the use of the word "kleenix" to mean tissue. Christians are rallying around their definition of the word; much like Kleenix marshals their forces to protect their brand. In the end our nation is built on the principle that al of us are created equal for the sake of apply our laws.

What if equal rights for African-Americans was left up to the popular vote? There is enough evidence to show us that homosexuality is not a "chosen" "lifestyle"; but a natural occurrence in nature. The difference between African-Americans and homosexuals, is that the former can not change their skin color. The later can not change their sexual orientation, but they can suppress it. They could end up like my uncle, dying alone and without knowing true love of another person.

Or they can like some friends deny the real feelings they have, and live a lie. My Catholic upbringing taught me that God found hypocrites to be distasteful in His eyes. For the core belief for Christians is in the Ten Commandments. And homosexual behavior is not in the most accepted interpretations; since the original tablets have not be found.

In the end religions will choose their own interpretations, to suit their own ends. For I look at the "do unto others" and the money changers in the Temple to state that God is against greed on the backs of others. I am glad that I was brought up with the belief of loving and caring God; not the vengeful God that some seem to believe in.