"God Hates Gays"

I never suggested that the WBC represented a prevailing belief. I was merely asking what my fellow Temple-goers thought of them and theirbeliefs, namely their interpretations of the bible.

Perhaps you could explain the problem that your church has with gay clergy? And under what circumstances would you "generally" tolerate homosexuality in your church? Under what circumstances would it be a problem?

"That being said, religion is a dumb thing to argue about. If you feel strongly on the issue, attend a church that approves of homosexuality."

I disagree. Religion represents ancient and incredibly influential traditions. It's inspired and divided people for thousands of years and one of the greatest and most fundamental cornerstones of human culture, society, and the human experience. Do you think thousands of years of philosophers wasted their time discussing and analyzing different faiths?

And I DO attend a church that approves of homosexuality. TOTJO enables me to practice my faith and share it with people from around the world. But personally, being content with the maxims of a faith and not questioning or disagreeing with them is tantamount to blind faith, and as religions live or die by their practitioners, I think it's important for them to adapt to the times.

Angelus wrote: I never suggested that the WBC represented a prevailing belief. I was merely asking what my fellow Temple-goers thought of them and theirbeliefs, namely their interpretations of the bible.

Perhaps you could explain the problem that your church has with gay clergy? And under what circumstances would you "generally" tolerate homosexuality in your church? Under what circumstances would it be a problem?

"That being said, religion is a dumb thing to argue about. If you feel strongly on the issue, attend a church that approves of homosexuality."

I disagree. Religion represents ancient and incredibly influential traditions. It's inspired and divided people for thousands of years and one of the greatest and most fundamental cornerstones of human culture, society, and the human experience. Do you think thousands of years of philosophers wasted their time discussing and analyzing different faiths?

And I DO attend a church that approves of homosexuality. TOTJO enables me to practice my faith and share it with people from around the world. But personally, being content with the maxims of a faith and not questioning or disagreeing with them is tantamount to blind faith, and as religions live or die by their practitioners, I think it's important for them to adapt to the times.

Hope you didn't feel like I was attacking you.

In regards to the question about the UMC: the UMC views the idea of gay clergy as unbiblical, this conviction being based upon the above quoted verse and others. When I said that the UMC's position is generally tolerant, I meant that this is the attitude of the church professes is one of tolerance (this is the trend I have seen in most UMC churches I have visited), but then again, it's a diverse church, and there are churches that are markedly more liberal or conservative than what is considered the norm within the UMC, so a few individual congregations may be less friendly. The website says this:

"The United Methodist Church does not condone the practice of homosexuality and considers this practice incompatible with Christian teaching. We affirm that God’s grace is available to all. We will seek to live together in Christian community, welcoming, forgiving, and loving one another, as Christ has loved and accepted us. We implore families and churches not to reject or condemn lesbian and gay members and friends. We commit ourselves to be in ministry for and with all persons." The rest of the stance is here http://www.umc.org/site/apps/nlnet/content.aspx?c=lwL4KnN1LtH&b=5066287&content_id={1F6BAEA8-E9EE-4867-B892-2F6871C78CB6}¬oc=1

I've never heard homosexuality mentioned in a UMC sermon. As I said, it's not really an issue for us, until our more liberal members bring up the gay clergy argument.

Hope that clears things up

Let me also make this clear. We are not foaming-at-the-mouth Evangelicals or fundamentalists, and as such, as educated and civilized Mainline Protestants, we have no interest in legislating our religious codes into law.. We do not push for school prayer, nor do we oppose abortion, nor do we oppose gay marriage. Our position on homosexuality never mentions what happens outside of the church. And, as I said, it's hardly ever discussed *within* the church, just when somebody pushes the issue.

In other words, we, as a group, don't take part in the gay marriage debate in the secular sense.

There are some interesting and quite in depth opinions in the above 11 pages. However for me there is a fundamental problem with allowing religion to dominate what is acceptable or not in any society today. Whether it be the Bible or the Koran there is no definitive proof, particularly in relevance to the salient matters, that what has been written in the last two thousand years holds any factual credeance at all, other than subjective interpretaion reinforced with domination by centuries of religious freaks!!( popes, immans and so on!!!)

Let's face it, the the Catholic church along with the Muslim religion is full of hypocracy and frankly archaic practices that very obviously serve to frustrate the peaceful and indeed logical progression of the human race.

I find it diabolical that in this day an age, with all our factual science and drive for diversity and free spirit, that we still have so many sheep who staunchly follow these false profits living daily with the diluded hope that they are making a 'blind bit of difference'.

I can only hope that one day when evelution allows and common sense prevails, such archaic practices and institutions such as popes and immans etc. etc. will cease to exist, and notwithstanding a healthy degree of dicipline, which is needed within any society, we can all live without unproven religious interference.

Religion may once have had a place in the world, as a vehicle by which the masses were controlled and directed. Those days are surey on their way out. I'm not suggesting that we stop having faith, that is personal and subjective to the individual but please spare me the bullshit brainwashing routine...... it's time to move on and allow us to live the way we were wired to!!!

Arkda Asterma wrote: Whether it be the Bible or the Koran there is no definitive proof, particularly in relevance to the salient matters, that what has been written in the last two thousand years holds any factual credeance at all, other than subjective interpretaion reinforced with domination by centuries of religious freaks!!( popes, immans and so on!!!)

It's strange that you seem so opposed to people presenting opinions as facts when so much of your post is made up of...opinions presented as facts...

I notice that most of your post is copied and pasted from a different post of yours too...

It's not necessary to post the same thing in multiple places to get your point across...you don't like religion, that's perfectly fine, but copying and posting anti-religion posts comes across as very determined and kinda preachy, y'know?

And don't forget...TOTJO is a Church.

I guess that I'm happy being a...what was it...a sheep living with the possibly deluded hope that I'm making a blind bit of difference

Not all of us read everything that's posted in every part of the forum, V-Tog, and while I understand that you have more obligations to do so than I do, try to understand that other people don't have the time to do the same. Whether Arkda posts something once or one hundred times, it is his opinion and he is free to express it. And frankly, the topics he posted in are pretty similar, so I don't see anything wrong with not wanting to rephrase the same sentiment.

Also, simply because he didn't saturate his post with first person statements doesn't mean he was stating his opinions as facts. One of the first things I was taught in school when writing research papers was that first person statements tend to weaken arguments.

I think strong opinions make for the most interesting discussions...likewise, calling someone out for something like copying and pasting lines from their other posts can be really discouraging. When I was first a member here, I had a particular proclivity for scaring people off. A few new members disappeared very quickly because I made it clear that I didn't like what they were saying or how they were saying it. I'm not suggesting that you're doing the same, I just think we have a responsibility to consider the impact out posts have on how comfortable other people feel about posting.

Thank you Angelus for your words and I appreciate your sentiments.

I will say that V-Tog clearly has strong opinions of an opposing nature to mine but in fairness my intention was to push a few buttons and get a flavour of the thoughts and sentiments of the Temple and indeed it's members.

Sometimes one has to boarder on the line between treading on the eggshells and really kicking them about. And sometimes the truth is a bitter pill to swallow!!

Arkda Asterma wrote: There are some interesting and quite in depth opinions in the above 11 pages. However for me there is a fundamental problem with allowing religion to dominate what is acceptable or not in any society today. Whether it be the Bible or the Koran there is no definitive proof, particularly in relevance to the salient matters, that what has been written in the last two thousand years holds any factual credeance at all, other than subjective interpretaion reinforced with domination by centuries of religious freaks!!( popes, immans and so on!!!)

Let's face it, the the Catholic church along with the Muslim religion is full of hypocracy and frankly archaic practices that very obviously serve to frustrate the peaceful and indeed logical progression of the human race.

I find it diabolical that in this day an age, with all our factual science and drive for diversity and free spirit, that we still have so many sheep who staunchly follow these false profits living daily with the diluded hope that they are making a 'blind bit of difference'.

I can only hope that one day when evelution allows and common sense prevails, such archaic practices and institutions such as popes and immans etc. etc. will cease to exist, and notwithstanding a healthy degree of dicipline, which is needed within any society, we can all live without unproven religious interference.

Religion may once have had a place in the world, as a vehicle by which the masses were controlled and directed. Those days are surey on their way out. I'm not suggesting that we stop having faith, that is personal and subjective to the individual but please spare me the bullshit brainwashing routine...... it's time to move on and allow us to live the way we were wired to!!!

a blind bit of difference?

why I couldn't agree with you more

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kp9TgyjlnS0

Angelus wrote: Not all of us read everything that's posted in every part of the forum, V-Tog, and while I understand that you have more obligations to do so than I do, try to understand that other people don't have the time to do the same. Whether Arkda posts something once or one hundred times, it is his opinion and he is free to express it. And frankly, the topics he posted in are pretty similar, so I don't see anything wrong with not wanting to rephrase the same sentiment.

Also, simply because he didn't saturate his post with first person statements doesn't mean he was stating his opinions as facts. One of the first things I was taught in school when writing research papers was that first person statements tend to weaken arguments.

I think strong opinions make for the most interesting discussions...likewise, calling someone out for something like copying and pasting lines from their other posts can be really discouraging. When I was first a member here, I had a particular proclivity for scaring people off. A few new members disappeared very quickly because I made it clear that I didn't like what they were saying or how they were saying it. I'm not suggesting that you're doing the same, I just think we have a responsibility to consider the impact out posts have on how comfortable other people feel about posting.

Hello...

I respectfully disagree with...err...everything you said there.

Emphasis on respectfully

Arkda Asterma wrote: I will say that V-Tog clearly has strong opinions of an opposing nature to mine but in fairness my intention was to push a few buttons and get a flavour of the thoughts and sentiments of the Temple and indeed it's members.

You don't know what my opinions are. I've been involved in organised religion my whole life but there are many aspects of it that I think are outdated, and sometimes unaccapetable. My post was not based purely on my own views of religion, but that you are determinedly posting anti-religious propaganda at a Church. As you think that religion is such a load of nonsense, I assume that you will be renouncing your oath and membership?

V-Tog wrote:

Angelus wrote: Not all of us read everything that's posted in every part of the forum, V-Tog, and while I understand that you have more obligations to do so than I do, try to understand that other people don't have the time to do the same. Whether Arkda posts something once or one hundred times, it is his opinion and he is free to express it. And frankly, the topics he posted in are pretty similar, so I don't see anything wrong with not wanting to rephrase the same sentiment.

Also, simply because he didn't saturate his post with first person statements doesn't mean he was stating his opinions as facts. One of the first things I was taught in school when writing research papers was that first person statements tend to weaken arguments.

I think strong opinions make for the most interesting discussions...likewise, calling someone out for something like copying and pasting lines from their other posts can be really discouraging. When I was first a member here, I had a particular proclivity for scaring people off. A few new members disappeared very quickly because I made it clear that I didn't like what they were saying or how they were saying it. I'm not suggesting that you're doing the same, I just think we have a responsibility to consider the impact out posts have on how comfortable other people feel about posting.

Hello...

I respectfully disagree with...err...everything you said there.

Emphasis on respectfully

Arkda Asterma wrote: I will say that V-Tog clearly has strong opinions of an opposing nature to mine but in fairness my intention was to push a few buttons and get a flavour of the thoughts and sentiments of the Temple and indeed it's members.

You don't know what my opinions are. I've been involved in organised religion my whole life but there are many aspects of it that I think are outdated, and sometimes unaccapetable. My post was not based purely on my own views of religion, but that you are determinedly posting anti-religious propaganda at a Church. As you think that religion is such a load of nonsense, I assume that you will be renouncing your oath and membership?

my thoughts exactly