Website Changes underway

Please forgive issues and glitches while we attempt to make the experience better.

Why does it matter if Tim Farron thinks being gay is a sin?

More
20 Apr 2017 15:11 #281340 by Brick
Regarding this article on the Telegraph Website: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/19/absolute-disgrace-tim-farron-fire-refusing-answer-asked-gay/

Warning: Spoiler!



I was curious to know what people here thought, particularly those among us that are members of the LGBT Community?

Now he has eventually, given in to peer pressure and said that he does NOT think that being gay is a sin. But even if he'd thought it was, why should that matter?

We don't live in a Orwellian society, we don't have Thought Police that control what we think. We're entitled to have our own opinions, even if other people disagree with them. He is perfectly OK to think that being gay is a sin.

We also have free speech in this country, so not only is he allowed to think that being gay is a sin, he is also allowed to say that.

But he hasn't said that. He simply refused to comment on a theological topic, that he did not deem himself qualified enough to comment on. And because of that, he's branded an 'absolute disgrace', a 'bigot', and a 'homophobe'. And that gets me onto my main point.

What has he done that's bigoted? What has he done that's homophobic?

He hasn't attacked anyone, either verbally or physically. He hasn't harassed or caused distress to anyone. He hasn't infringed upon anyone rights.

For me, this line is key - “As a liberal, I’m passionate about equality, and equal marriage, about equal rights for LGBT people, for fighting not just for LGBT rights in this country, but overseas.”

So even if he did think it was a sin, he's taken an Evelyn Beatrice Hall stance of 'I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it' attitude.

I guess my real question is why were celebrities, politicians, the media, and members of the public so appalled by what he said?

Apprentice to Maitre Chevalier Jedi Alexandre Orion

Moderator | Welcome Team | IP Team

IP Journal | IP Journal 2 | AP Journal | Open Journal

'The only contest any of us should be engaged in is with ourselves, to be better than yesterday'

- Knight Senan
The following user(s) said Thank You: Rex

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • User
  • User
More
20 Apr 2017 15:20 #281342 by
I'm a big believer in the seperation of church and state. Sin (being a faith thing) should really not be brought up in state on any level. As long as he does his job and does not allow his views to be clouded by prejudice he is fine in my books. Once he allows whatever views he has on the LGBTQ+ community to influence him, then we will have an issue.

In the end, his views shouldn't matter, as long as he does his job and doesn't allow faith to get in the way of his duty.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • ren
  • Offline
  • Member
  • Member
  • Council Member
  • Council Member
  • Not anywhere near the back of the bus
More
20 Apr 2017 15:24 #281343 by ren
Because that's what they do? Welcome to the feminist society, where cackling like a fishwife is the norm instead of something to feel sorry for.

Anyway. Some people believe it's a sin because it's their religion. Some people believe it's not a sin, and some people (Like the gay church of gayness?) believe it's god's first commandment.

So even if he did think it was a sin, he's taken an Evelyn Beatrice Hall stance of 'I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it' attitude.

Who would have thought there are people in the english-speaking world who not only call themselves liberals, but practice actual liberalism as well!

Convictions are more dangerous foes of truth than lies.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Brick,

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • User
  • User
More
20 Apr 2017 15:25 #281345 by
Very strong of you to allow someone to have an opinion even though you dont agree with it.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • User
  • User
More
20 Apr 2017 15:30 #281346 by
The only influence religion should have on government is through the guidance of our morals.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • User
  • User
More
20 Apr 2017 15:32 #281347 by

JLSpinner wrote: The only influence religion should have on government is through the guidance of our morals.


Nope ..common sense and reason will do ....not that i dont like the Ten Commandments but i think the neighbours cow should make up her own mind by now :P

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
20 Apr 2017 15:40 #281349 by Brick

Calan wrote: Very strong of you to allow someone to have an opinion even though you dont agree with it.


Does that require strength? or just indifference?

Apprentice to Maitre Chevalier Jedi Alexandre Orion

Moderator | Welcome Team | IP Team

IP Journal | IP Journal 2 | AP Journal | Open Journal

'The only contest any of us should be engaged in is with ourselves, to be better than yesterday'

- Knight Senan
The following user(s) said Thank You:

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • User
  • User
More
20 Apr 2017 15:50 #281351 by
I think it will matter to some people what this guy thinks and that's fine it doesn't matter to me if he thinks its a sin or not. Being also a member of the LGBT community and being raised by super religious parents I had to work through what i thought and be guided by the force to answer that for myself ever since that experience it has never really mattered to me how others feel about it.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • User
  • User
More
20 Apr 2017 16:01 #281354 by
Thank you. I see that It takes maturity to accept anthers opinions if they differ from your own. It takes balance to see that the Force creates diversity, and it takes fearlessness to remain peaceful and accepting in such a diverse and sometimes violent environment. All this together is strength.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
20 Apr 2017 16:39 #281356 by MadHatter
I don't care what he thinks, what he says or how he feels. He could say he thinks it's a sin and finds me abominable. So long as he continues to let me live my life without government interference then I am all good. Frankly, I think too many people let emotions influence how they react to particular opinions. Opinions will not go away because we attack them. In fact, all you do is drive it underground and deepen the dislike. That only leads to festering which is far more dangerous than open debate.

Knight of the Order
Training Master: Jestor
Apprentices: Lama Su, Leah
Just a pop culture Jedi doing what I can
The following user(s) said Thank You: Brick, Rex, , ZealotX

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • User
  • User
More
20 Apr 2017 17:05 #281361 by
Frankly I think how he held himself is really idealistic.

He cares to champion the idea of equality, despite not agreeing with the stance of the people he is representing.

And about the free speech bit; I think he realized that what he had to say about LGBT might be considered insulting and out of respect for his fellow human being he was absolutely right to hold his comment. What is appalling is to be forced to make a statement one way or the other. Part of freedom of speech is knowing when to employ it.

If I don't like a certain quality about someone I'm not just going to blurt out that I think there a terrible person, especially not in a public forum.

It's all tricky when it comes to politics though.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • User
  • User
More
20 Apr 2017 18:24 #281373 by
Some of us don't believe sin exists so his opinions become his own and that's ok as long as he doesn't Infringe on the rights of others.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
20 Apr 2017 18:34 #281374 by Rex
Just curious, are there any people who disagree with the "As long as what he thinks doesn't impact his secular policy, he can think whatever he wants religiously" line? Also, how many people agree with his stance of personally thinking that being gay is wrong in a religious sense, but that the government shouldn't discriminate against them since the government (in the UK and US) is secular?

Knights Secretary's Secretary
Apprentices: Vandrar
TM: Carlos Martinez
"A serious and good philosophical work could be written consisting entirely of jokes" - Wittgenstein
The following user(s) said Thank You:

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
20 Apr 2017 18:45 #281375 by JamesSand

I guess my real question is why were celebrities, politicians, the media, and members of the public so appalled by what he said?


Two fairly likely possibilities.

A) They weren't, but it's important to be seen to be on the right side of any argument, even one that doesn't exist - so anyone who is anyone and is likely to have their dollar value affected by popular opinion jumps on, and it quickly turns ridiculous.

B) They're all pushing the gay agenda, tryna keep the SP (Straight People) down.
The following user(s) said Thank You:

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • User
  • User
More
20 Apr 2017 18:52 #281376 by

Rex wrote: Just curious, are there any people who disagree with the "As long as what he thinks doesn't impact his secular policy, he can think whatever he wants religiously" line? Also, how many people agree with his stance of personally thinking that being gay is wrong in a religious sense, but that the government shouldn't discriminate against them since the government (in the UK and US) is secular?


As long as one abides by the law and pays their taxes, the government should keep their noses out of their citizen's business. Whatever they identify as or whomever they want to be with is really not of national concern, so personally they (the government) should be viewing the LGBTQ+ community as they are, citizens with the same rights as everyone else.

His stance that it is wrong is a touchy area. Some faiths condemn the act of homosexuality, even to the point of a death sentance. I am going to assume the man on the stand here is a Christian, and for the purpose of my point I will keep it at that. Yes, the Bible condemns homosexuality. But Jesus, you know, the Big Guy's son, saviour of all mankind, said "Let he who has no sin cast the first stone" and "Treat others the way you want to be treated".

So is it a sin? According to his faith, yes. Congrats. But no one is perfect. "All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God", "the penalty of Sin is Death". We are not in a postion to judge those for what they do, sin or otherwise. As long as it doesn't hurt anyone, go ahead.

I personally admire the fact that he refuses to stoop to the level of the radical SJW movement and create another us vs them arguement. His job does not require him to know what you identify as. Whatever he sees it as, sin or otherwise, is not really of his concern and he knows that. Or I hope at least. :P

And thats another 2 cents in the piggy bank for ya.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
20 Apr 2017 19:17 #281382 by JamesSand

So is it a sin? According to his faith, yes. Congrats. But no one is perfect. "All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God", "the penalty of Sin is Death". We are not in a postion to judge those for what they do, sin or otherwise. As long as it doesn't hurt anyone, go ahead.


I'm heaping assumption on assumption here, but let's say your premise of his religion is correct (and any wording in the original discussion included the word "sin") - The issue should really be of interest to other people of the same faith who don't think it's a sin, not "The Gays" (or any other spud) at large.

If you don't follow V8 Supercars, having an opinion on Mark Skaife is fairly pointless.

By my standards, anyone who eats white bread is an abomination and spitting in god's eye. Now, I'm sure I'll take my licks from the TipTop crowd for this, but that's what I believe.

Still, I'm perfectly willing to let these degenerates make and consume sandwiches, it really has no bearing on how I conduct myself (If I found a White-Bread eater starving in the desert (it's always a desert isn't it) I'd probably give them a wholegrain loaf and let them convert or die, so I might be a bit more hardline than society usually finds tolerable)


Where was I going with this?

Oh right, as far as I can tell the bloke did the right thing, but the Big Bad Media could give two shits about that, anyone is a target to those vampires and demonising people sells papers. It's a *very* slow news week when you've got to run a story about puppies or something. People like villains, and pollies (and the odd actor or athlete) are prime candidates for sacrifice.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Rex,

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • User
  • User
More
21 Apr 2017 01:15 - 21 Apr 2017 02:20 #281439 by
homosexuality is only a 'sin' if the Doctrine of a religion is geared towards domination through conquest and/or conversion, either culturally or militarily. In that System, having the most babies (typically male) is both beneficial and necessary, as it can then lord over smaller, nicer and more civil doctrines, ultimately to assimilate or decimate them. According to the mind-think of the Doctrine, anyone Not having babies, is then committing a HERESY, and needs to be executed for treason. This is one part of why i think homophobia is a thing. ( the other part of homophobia, is that hetero men hate/fear that gay men will treat them the same as they usually treat women.; ie, Not Nicely, in most cases.)

to the best of my knowledge, none of the other religions except for middle-eastern originated monotheisms, place a priority negative on homosexuality and a priority positive on mass reproduction.

Now, im not denouncing heterosexuality, if you're straight, then you're straight, if not, then you're just not. Simple as dogs and cats, imo.

and, conversely, overpopulation and the need for depopulation is only a factor when a populace is confined within a specific space, and not allowed to expand as needed.
Last edit: 21 Apr 2017 02:20 by .

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
21 Apr 2017 06:04 #281447 by Rex

Rebekka wrote: homosexuality is only a 'sin' if the Doctrine of a religion is geared towards domination through conquest and/or conversion, either culturally or militarily. In that System, having the most babies (typically male) is both beneficial and necessary, as it can then lord over smaller, nicer and more civil doctrines, ultimately to assimilate or decimate them. According to the mind-think of the Doctrine, anyone Not having babies, is then committing a HERESY, and needs to be executed for treason. This is one part of why i think homophobia is a thing. ( the other part of homophobia, is that hetero men hate/fear that gay men will treat them the same as they usually treat women.; ie, Not Nicely, in most cases.)

to the best of my knowledge, none of the other religions except for middle-eastern originated monotheisms, place a priority negative on homosexuality and a priority positive on mass reproduction.

Now, im not denouncing heterosexuality, if you're straight, then you're straight, if not, then you're just not. Simple as dogs and cats, imo.

and, conversely, overpopulation and the need for depopulation is only a factor when a populace is confined within a specific space, and not allowed to expand as needed.


Rebekka, do you think that Tim Farron wants more Jewish/Christian/Muslim/Zoroastrian babies to racially conquer Britain? Or that he politically is pro-gay as a way to assuage his conscience of all the weighty misogyny?
Religious texts are a product of their times, and so many religion texts just don't bring up the subject since it was a non-issue for the original audience (mind you that the only religious texts I can think of that are explicitly pro-homosexuality are all modern pagan ones).

Anyways, on the flip side, celebrities and media personalities can think that Tim Farron is an absolute pig for all I (and he) care, but they shouldn't let it affect their creative output by the same standard we expect of Farron. Even if they decide to vocalize their disgust, it shouldn't make a difference for our MP protagonist since they most likely aren't his constituents anyways. If you don't like his statement that to "understand Christianity is to understand that we are all sinners" in regards to his personal/religious views on LGBT marriage, you likely will enjoy his voting record on the subject. He puts his money where his mouth is, which I appreciate even though I'm not a fan of many of his policies.

Knights Secretary's Secretary
Apprentices: Vandrar
TM: Carlos Martinez
"A serious and good philosophical work could be written consisting entirely of jokes" - Wittgenstein
The following user(s) said Thank You: Brick

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • User
  • User
More
21 Apr 2017 09:36 #281451 by
You can't say anything today without having a label slapped upon you, which, in my opinion, is what the liberals like to do. I'm gay and I don't mind in the slightest if anybody doesn't agree with it, they're entitled to their opinions and their beliefs. As long as what is being said or done is not directly harming people I don't see the issue.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
21 Apr 2017 12:16 - 21 Apr 2017 12:21 #281460 by Cyan Sarden
The main problem I see here is that of influence and the potential for abuse. As a leader (be it political or otherwise) you have a certain responsibility: for every person in power, there are many more who depend directly or indirectly on that person. Those who are dependent aren't always at liberty to express their thoughts and are thus prone to follow at great personal cost - as anything else can damage their own position (in relation to the one in power).

So let's say Farron has a personal secretary who is a member of the LGBT community or is friends with someone who is. While Farron's statements might be condemned by the general public, his secretary won't be able to do so without risking the job, putting great emotional stress on that person.

In that respect, anything Farron says, however legal it may be, should be considered carefully by him. And when he said what he said, he hurt a lot of people. It was a bigoted statement that probably didn't do much damage to the community as a whole, but I bet he did a lot of damage to those who are in his direct or indirect sphere of influence. As such I have to say that I can't let stuff like that stand. He may not have personally attacked anyone, but he's more than likely done so indirectly.

Do not look for happiness outside yourself. The awakened seek happiness inside.
Last edit: 21 Apr 2017 12:21 by Cyan Sarden.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Brick

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Moderators: MorkanoWrenPhoenixThe CoyoteRiniTaviKhwang