PDA

View Full Version : What did you Assume?



Barry Morris
09-28-2014, 05:06 PM
http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/read-what-christian-pastor-promises-do-if-his-children-are-gay270914

dancingqueen
09-28-2014, 05:55 PM
Surprise! there are good people out there who happen to be Christian...
Get down of that Crucifix.... someone needs the wood
- Felicia

Westender 3
09-28-2014, 06:04 PM
http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/read-what-christian-pastor-promises-do-if-his-children-are-gay270914


Your friend Mr. Bluesky should read that and let it sink in.

Anapeg
09-28-2014, 06:21 PM
Catholics ought to see the validity of this in another 500 to 1000 years or so.

Barry Morris
09-28-2014, 11:39 PM
Your friend Mr. Bluesky should read that and let it sink in.

That would not be necessary.

You assume.

BFLPE
09-30-2014, 04:46 PM
What did you Assume?No assumptions. Never really thought about it actually. After reading that I must say I'm surprised though. I thought the average Christian was much more accepting than what the pastor suggests. The author seems like a good enough person but he sure paints a disturbing picture of how Christians feel about gay people.

I'm surprised you posted this as it really doesn't show Christians in a good light at all.

Barry Morris
09-30-2014, 06:02 PM
No assumptions. Never really thought about it actually. After reading that I must say I'm surprised though. I thought the average Christian was much more accepting than what the pastor suggests. The author seems like a good enough person but he sure paints a disturbing picture of how Christians feel about gay people.

I'm surprised you posted this as it really doesn't show Christians in a good light at all.

Your surprise is no surprise to me.

The man is saying how he would still love his children, regardless of what they did. And that is only right.

BFLPE
09-30-2014, 06:55 PM
Is it my surprise at how badly the article reflects on Christians or my surprise that you would be the one to post an article that shows Christians in a bad light that is no surprise to you?

Either way it pretty disturbing that in the 21st century the following is still common place...


'telling of the pain, and bullying, and shunning they're received from churches, pastors, and church members. ‘They have shared with me their stories of exclusion, isolation, of unanswered prayers, of destructive therapies, of suicide attempts, and of being actively and passively driven from faith, by people of faith.

IMHO
09-30-2014, 10:05 PM
The pastor illustrates a nice change from those religious nuts who think it is ok to behead someone in the name of religion.

Barry Morris
09-30-2014, 11:00 PM
Is it my surprise at how badly the article reflects on Christians or my surprise that you would be the one to post an article that shows Christians in a bad light that is no surprise to you?

Either way it pretty disturbing that in the 21st century the following is still common place...

How common place??

dancingqueen
09-30-2014, 11:55 PM
How common place??

Common enough that the author feels the need to address it...
I am not surprised that you only see what you want to see out of this.

BFLPE
10-01-2014, 08:54 AM
How common place??Did we read the same article? I don't know exactly how common but the author makes it clear that his position, which I applaud him for taking, is certainly not the norm.

Barry Morris
10-01-2014, 09:01 AM
Common enough that the author feels the need to address it...
I am not surprised that you only see what you want to see out of this.

I'm not surprised at your view of it either.

Barry Morris
10-01-2014, 09:02 AM
Did we read the same article? I don't know exactly how common but the author makes it clear that his position, which I applaud him for taking, is certainly not the norm.

How would you know??

BFLPE
10-01-2014, 09:12 AM
How would you know??Again, did we read the same article?

What do the following quotes from the article suggest to you?


They have shared with me their stories of exclusion, isolation, of unanswered prayers, of destructive therapies, of suicide attempts, and of being actively and passively driven from faith, by people of faith.
Maybe itís because, as a Christian, I interact with so many people who find homosexuality to be the most repulsive thing imaginable, and who make that abundantly clear at every conceivable opportunity.

dancingqueen
10-01-2014, 05:40 PM
I'm not surprised at your view of it either.

My view of what?

The Left Sock
10-01-2014, 07:52 PM
What did I assume?

Well, I assumed that there are indeed good people who live their lives under the flag of Christianity.

However, I also assume that they will get swallowed up in the maelstrom of ignorance, confusion, fear, and hostility polluting the Christian faith in North America, long before their efforts to introduce compassion get a chance to take hold and grow roots.

Barry Morris
10-01-2014, 09:52 PM
What did I assume?

Well, I assumed that there are indeed good people who live their lives under the flag of Christianity.

However, I also assume that they will get swallowed up in the maelstrom of ignorance, confusion, fear, and hostility polluting the Christian faith in North America, long before their efforts to introduce compassion get a chance to take hold and grow roots.

naturally, all your information regarding that assumed state of affairs comes from those biased on the other side.

Never seen what you describe myself.

Since I don't believe the media to EVER paint a picture of ANYTHING that doesn't help their agenda, I can only go by my own experience.

The Left Sock
10-01-2014, 10:29 PM
Come on, you can get all kinds of evidence from Youtube or any other internet source, to show so-called Christian leaders ranting and raving all kinds of negative rhetoric that don't sound anything like this pastor.

You can't seriously be that blind to the deep divisions among people of your faith, can you?

Barry Morris
10-02-2014, 08:39 AM
Come on, you can get all kinds of evidence from Youtube or any other internet source, to show so-called Christian leaders ranting and raving all kinds of negative rhetoric that don't sound anything like this pastor.

You can't seriously be that blind to the deep divisions among people of your faith, can you?

And who gets the most attention in the media??? A very, very few churches are vocal and attention grabbing!!!

You can't seriously be blind to the imbalance of your sources??? :) :) :)

The Left Sock
10-02-2014, 10:03 AM
I also know about the local positions in the churches around town. And so do you. And they cannot claim to be as magnanimous as the pastor in the OP.

Or are you going to try to deny that as well?

Barry Morris
10-02-2014, 11:14 PM
I also know about the local positions in the churches around town. And so do you. And they cannot claim to be as magnanimous as the pastor in the OP.

Or are you going to try to deny that as well?

You know their positions?? Sure you do.

Tell you what, let me know which church you want a "position" from, and I'll give you the pastor's name.

The churches I know well, have no "position", it's just not something that has come up.

The Left Sock
10-02-2014, 11:53 PM
There you go with the condescension again.

I don't know anything. I'm just a heathen with a misguided view of everything Christian. Right?

Wait, I do know one thing. I know for a fact I'm never going to sign up for a convoluted belief system that can't even adequately explain itself, and can't even develop a consensus on what it believes.

I do know that much.

Barry Morris
10-03-2014, 09:20 AM
There you go with the condescension again.

I don't know anything. I'm just a heathen with a misguided view of everything Christian. Right?

Wait, I do know one thing. I know for a fact I'm never going to sign up for a convoluted belief system that can't even adequately explain itself, and can't even develop a consensus on what it believes.

I do know that much.

Condescension is your perception only.

Actually, Christianity is the simplest belief system there is. Trust God. Start there.

The bible we have, teaching us about what is important, is a book authored by an infinite being, which therefore has infinite depth. Therefore no two finite, human people will EVER agree 100 percent on what it says.

The Left Sock
10-03-2014, 10:11 AM
"Condescension is your perception only."

So now I don't even know what condescension is! You just can't stop yourself, can you!

"authored by an infinite being, which therefore has infinite depth" That's rich. You don't actually buy that, do you?

Barry Morris
10-03-2014, 10:43 AM
"Condescension is your perception only."

So now I don't even know what condescension is! You just can't stop yourself, can you!

"authored by an infinite being, which therefore has infinite depth" That's rich. You don't actually buy that, do you?

Lots of folks here read condescension into remarks that are not in the least condescending. I'm sorry you think so.

Buy into the infinity of God?? Of course. The alternative is to have more faith than I will ever have.

The Left Sock
10-03-2014, 10:51 AM
You patronizing, superior attitude is blazing across the pages. Only a fool would mistake it for anything other than condescension.

But, keep trying to kid yourself that I'm the one deluded. If that's what gets you through the day.

The ironic thing is, you have no justification for your condescension. Must be some sort of defence-mechanism overcompensation, I should think.

Barry Morris
10-03-2014, 01:47 PM
You patronizing, superior attitude is blazing across the pages. Only a fool would mistake it for anything other than condescension.

But, keep trying to kid yourself that I'm the one deluded. If that's what gets you through the day.

The ironic thing is, you have no justification for your condescension. Must be some sort of defence-mechanism overcompensation, I should think.

The word says all have sinned. I believe that to be true.

I can do nothing about your opinions of Christians.

Bluesky
10-04-2014, 12:06 PM
You patronizing, superior attitude is blazing across the pages. Only a fool would mistake it for anything other than condescension

Barry, Sock is right. I have tried in gentler ways in private messaging and elsewhere to point this out to you. Yet you do not listen.

When you yourself say,
Lots of folks here read condescension into remarks that are not in the least condescending. , it ought to say something about those remarks. Maybe they are condescending. Christians ARE prone to this attitude. And when people tell you again and again, I think it's time to get out of your self denial, and think deeply about how you word things.

It is very possible to be that way without realizing it.

Barry Morris
10-04-2014, 12:32 PM
It's possible, I'll keep it in mind.

But let me tell you a story. I left the church I had attended for 43 years, for various reasons. When the two of the elders contacted me, asking for meetings, I told them to bring along church leaders who had had more than 20 minutes conversation with me in the last 20 odd years. End of story.

Isn't condescension judging what people you don't know all that well are thinking?? I believe that, and all I'm doing is responding to text.

Have a great weekend!!

The Left Sock
10-04-2014, 12:38 PM
http://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/condescension

Barry Morris
10-04-2014, 12:39 PM
http://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/condescension

Bluesky
10-04-2014, 01:05 PM
It's possible, I'll keep it in mind.

But let me tell you a story. I left the church I had attended for 43 years, for various reasons. When the two of the elders contacted me, asking for meetings, I told them to bring along church leaders who had had more than 20 minutes conversation with me in the last 20 odd years. End of story.



All I see is an amazing lack of humility. Instead of being eager to learn how an elder can correct you, your first instinct is to point out their failings as a pre-emptive move.

dancingqueen
10-04-2014, 01:22 PM
I told them to bring along church leaders who had had more than 20 minutes conversation with me in the last 20 odd years. End of story.

Haven't you ever wondered why so many people have not had more than 20 minutes conversation with you over the last 20 odd years?
if 50 million people don't like the taste of say sushi flavored Coke, CocaCola does not blame the people for not liking it, they reconsider the idea of sushi flavored Coke....
Just some food for thought, take it as you will.

Barry Morris
10-04-2014, 05:43 PM
All I see is an amazing lack of humility. Instead of being eager to learn how an elder can correct you, your first instinct is to point out their failings as a pre-emptive move.

Really? You did know I was on that board for 10 years??

Barry Morris
10-05-2014, 09:33 AM
Haven't you ever wondered why so many people have not had more than 20 minutes conversation with you over the last 20 odd years?
if 50 million people don't like the taste of say sushi flavored Coke, CocaCola does not blame the people for not liking it, they reconsider the idea of sushi flavored Coke....
Just some food for thought, take it as you will.

The point is, it doesn't really matter whether or not they like me well enough to talk to me, the point is, don't be so hypocritical as to think you have anything to say to me now.

Barry Morris
10-05-2014, 09:36 AM
I'll say it again!

34 posts in 6 years, and 15 infractions!! You're on a roll!!!

Barry Morris
10-05-2014, 01:26 PM
https://thecynicalphysicaltherapist.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/wpid-wp-1408906076706.jpeg

Yup, that's exactly what I thought!!! :) :) :)

The Voice
10-05-2014, 04:38 PM
As if?? Barry was likely Captain of the Football Team.

Don't worry, he would try to intimidate you in person as well.

:) :) ;)

Chachinga
10-05-2014, 11:06 PM
Barry was likely Captain of the Football Team.


More like holy water boy :) :) :)

Barry Morris
10-06-2014, 12:41 AM
More like holy water boy :)

Chuckles!!! :) :) :)

Anapeg
10-07-2014, 09:40 AM
As if?? Barry was likely Captain of the Football Team.

Don't worry, he would try to intimidate you in person as well.

:) :) ;)

At 6' 3" he does not have to intimidate. Anyone ticks me off and I am soliciting Barry as back up.

Barry Morris
10-07-2014, 02:31 PM
At 6' 3" he does not have to intimidate. Anyone ticks me off and I am soliciting Barry as back up.

Never been 6' 3", never will!!!

Anapeg
10-07-2014, 03:17 PM
Never been 6' 3", never will!!!

Really? I was, the operative word, "was", 5' 11" and you are well above me when we stand together. Or have I shrunk even more than I thought. Careful here, either way I am not looking good, or, tall, whatever.

Barry Morris
10-07-2014, 06:15 PM
Really? I was, the operative word, "was", 5' 11" and you are well above me when we stand together. Or have I shrunk even more than I thought. Careful here, either way I am not looking good, or, tall, whatever.

Pretty sure I'm getting shorter too!!! But at least I'm not getting wider to compensate!!!

Anapeg
10-07-2014, 07:35 PM
Pretty sure I'm getting shorter too!!! But at least I'm not getting wider to compensate!!!

Gravity be a horrid task master. I now vaguely resemble a beach ball with eyes and a handle bar mustache.

The Left Sock
10-07-2014, 08:45 PM
You should be heading straight to Hollywood, with a look like that!

Anapeg
10-07-2014, 09:24 PM
You should be heading straight to Hollywood, with a look like that!

I could be the next Batman villain!

BFLPE
10-07-2014, 10:01 PM
Getting back on topic, does anyone think the pastor is out of touch or do the following quotes represent a common attitude among Christians?


They have shared with me their stories of exclusion, isolation, of unanswered prayers, of destructive therapies, of suicide attempts, and of being actively and passively driven from faith, by people of faith.
Maybe itís because, as a Christian, I interact with so many people who find homosexuality to be the most repulsive thing imaginable, and who make that abundantly clear at every conceivable opportunity.

The Left Sock
10-07-2014, 10:16 PM
I think this pastor is a rare gem in the woodpile, and I wish him the best of luck in promoting this loving interpretation of Christianity.

However, the political winds blow a different way across most of North America. Many churches are digging in and entrenching themselves to prepare for a world in which they are being pressured to recognize gay marriages.

I see far more ugliness coming from radicals in this arena, than I do messages of compassion from humanistic preachers. But it's refreshing to see, nonetheless!

Barry Morris
10-07-2014, 11:16 PM
I think this pastor is a rare gem in the woodpile, and I wish him the best of luck in promoting this loving interpretation of Christianity.

However, the political winds blow a different way across most of North America. Many churches are digging in and entrenching themselves to prepare for a world in which they are being pressured to recognize gay marriages.

I see far more ugliness coming from radicals in this arena, than I do messages of compassion from humanistic preachers. But it's refreshing to see, nonetheless!

I can't speak about compassion. Homosexuality is just not much of an issue in the churches I know.

You will find church pastors giving up their right to perform marriages before doing gay marriages. This is already happening. Couples will marry at city hall, and then have a church celebration.

AND churches will be preparing to give up their tax status, too. Because, fundamentally, the church is NOT about a building or organization, it's about the people, an organism.

Anapeg
10-08-2014, 12:01 AM
Homosexuality vs various Church' is what it is all about. It is the reason for the post, the Preachers address as well as what we have been debating. That there has been discussions over the subject and the fact Church' are strong enough in their position as to even consider giving up their tax status speaks volumes.

Barry Morris
10-08-2014, 12:28 AM
Homosexuality vs various Church' is what it is all about. It is the reason for the post, the Preachers address as well as what we have been debating. That there has been discussions over the subject and the fact Church' are strong enough in their position as to even consider giving up their tax status speaks volumes.

The Body of Christ will simply NOT be dictated to be government. Some churches will cave in, as some already have. But they threw out the bible, their foundation, years ago!!

BFLPE
10-08-2014, 12:44 AM
Nonetheless, how can you say it's not a big deal while saying Churches are willing to give up their tax exempt status over it? That's contradictory IMO.

Barry Morris
10-08-2014, 12:48 AM
You misquote me than add an insult. Sorry, you're playing a dumb game.

Let me say it again, as a response to Sock:

I can't speak about compassion. Homosexuality is just not much of an issue in the churches I know.

Clear??

The Left Sock
10-08-2014, 08:20 AM
If homosexuality is not an issue in the churches you know, it probably just means that the members of those churches hold the same positions on homosexuality, so there is nothing to discuss.

A lack of discord doesn't add up to compassion. Contemplate Adolf and his crew, for an example of that.

So yeah, I'm clear.

BFLPE
10-08-2014, 08:29 AM
So Churches are willing to give up rights to perform marriages and are willing to give up tax exempt status. With that in mind and the quotes from the pastor it's clear the anti gay attitude of Christians is still entrenched firmly in the stone age. I thought things had changed.

Barry Morris
10-08-2014, 08:48 AM
So Churches are willing to give up rights to perform marriages and are willing to give up tax exempt status. With that in mind and the quotes from the pastor it's clear the anti gay attitude of Christians is still entrenched firmly in the stone age. I thought things had changed.

No, things have not changed. Sex outside marriage is still sin. Heterosexuals who engage in it are disciplined. Homosexual sex is sin because it is outside marriage AND between members of the same gender. Marriage is between a man and a woman. Anything else makes no sense.

IF the government tried to force some other form a "marriage" or other sinful behaviour on the church, you would find the same resistance, and willingness to get out from under government control, ie tax status.

And you will find the same acceptance and love given to any sinner who comes to church. I realize that there are some churches who are not as accepting, but I believe them to be the exception.

BFLPE
10-08-2014, 11:06 AM
Interesting.

So do you still think that being gay is a choice people make?

Bluesky
10-08-2014, 11:07 AM
Contemplate Adolf and his crew, for an example of that.

So yeah, I'm clear.

Uh oh. Did someone mention Adolf? You lose.

"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1"[2][3]ó​ that is, if an online discussion (regardless of topic or scope) goes on long enough, sooner or later someone will compare someone or something to Hitler or Nazism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

The Left Sock
10-08-2014, 11:42 AM
Consensus doesn't equate compassion, and the Nazis are a perfect example of that.

I lose nothing.

How many Christians are squirming inside, at their church's stance against homosexuals? Probably an equal proportion to the German citizens who squirmed at what Hitler was up to.

Now the interesting part is just how many Germans squirmed at Hitler's policies. Some say many, some say barely anyone at all.

So, take your pick what I mean, when I say Christians are probably in a similar boat.

Barry Morris
10-08-2014, 12:09 PM
Interesting.

So do you still think that being gay is a choice people make?

Yes.

I could choose to engage in homosexual sex. But I don't.

Barry Morris
10-08-2014, 12:10 PM
Consensus doesn't equate compassion, and the Nazis are a perfect example of that.

I lose nothing.

How many Christians are squirming inside, at their church's stance against homosexuals? Probably an equal proportion to the German citizens who squirmed at what Hitler was up to.

Now the interesting part is just how many Germans squirmed at Hitler's policies. Some say many, some say barely anyone at all.

So, take your pick what I mean, when I say Christians are probably in a similar boat.

Only those to whom holiness and the integrity of Scripture mean nothing.

The Voice
10-08-2014, 05:41 PM
No, things have not changed. Sex outside marriage is still sin. Heterosexuals who engage in it are disciplined.

Disciplined by WHO??

What ever happened to forgiveness??

Barry Morris
10-08-2014, 05:47 PM
Disciplined by WHO??

What ever happened to forgiveness??

There are biblical ways to handle discipline. They are quite clear.

Forgiveness is immediate upon confession and repentance. Repentance means change.

The Voice
10-08-2014, 05:56 PM
There are biblical ways to handle discipline. They are quite clear.

It's not clear to me?

What are they?

The Left Sock
10-08-2014, 08:12 PM
Yes.

I could choose to engage in homosexual sex. But I don't.

That's really interesting. I couldn't. It's not in my nature, and I find it repulsive. My biology wouldn't function in order to 'consummate' the act.

But if yours can, then all the power to you!

Anapeg
10-08-2014, 08:22 PM
It's not clear to me?

What are they?

You failed to read post #69 did you? Quite straight forward and clear.

Anapeg
10-08-2014, 08:23 PM
That's really interesting. I couldn't. It's not in my nature, and I find it repulsive. My biology wouldn't function in order to 'consummate' the act.

But if yours can, then all the power to you!

Interesting choice of words, "repulsive". Yet you argue for their rights.

The Left Sock
10-08-2014, 08:27 PM
For me to contemplate sex with another man is repulsive to me. That's just the simple truth.

But it is obvious to me that it is not repulsive to others, and for them, it is their basis for loving relationships.

So, while I don't share their nature, I respect their right to seek love in their own way, and to live as equals.

Anapeg
10-08-2014, 08:40 PM
For me to contemplate sex with another man is repulsive to me. That's just the simple truth.

But it is obvious to me that it is not repulsive to others, and for them, it is their basis for loving relationships.

So, while I don't share their nature, I respect their right to seek love in their own way, and to live as equals.

But you find their relationship repulsive, got cha. Things we find repulsive are things we do not associate with, we with malice of forethought avoid. Things we find repulsive are beneath us, regardless the face we put on it. You cannot have your cake and eat it too, sorry.

The Left Sock
10-08-2014, 08:43 PM
But you find their relationship repulsive, got cha. Things we find repulsive are things we do not associate with, we with malice of forethought avoid. Things we find repulsive are beneath us, regardless the face we put on it. You cannot have your cake and eat it too, sorry.

No, you're not understanding what I said. Barry said he could engage in homosexual behavior, if he chose. I said I could not.

What is being discussed here is sexual activity. This is what I find personally repulsive, because I'm not gay. It has nothing to do with 'relationships', but everything to do with the consummation of such a relationship.

Hope that clarifies things for you.

Bluesky
10-08-2014, 08:54 PM
Consensus doesn't equate compassion, and the Nazis are a perfect example of that.

I lose nothing.

How many Christians are squirming inside, at their church's stance against homosexuals? Probably an equal proportion to the German citizens who squirmed at what Hitler was up to.

Now the interesting part is just how many Germans squirmed at Hitler's policies. Some say many, some say barely anyone at all.

So, take your pick what I mean, when I say Christians are probably in a similar boat.

You have been doing the Hitler comparison thing ever since I have interacted with you on Soonet. Please stop already. It's too easy. And a lazy, non-critical way to think. It only makes you look bad.

Hitler gassed people he didn't like. Jesus taught us to love those who disagree with us for his sake.

The Left Sock
10-08-2014, 08:56 PM
I'm perfectly okay with the idea that you think I look bad.

But thanks for the input, anyway!

Anapeg
10-08-2014, 09:13 PM
No, you're not understanding what I said. Barry said he could engage in homosexual behavior, if he chose. I said I could not.

What is being discussed here is sexual activity. This is what I find personally repulsive, because I'm not gay. It has nothing to do with 'relationships', but everything to do with the consummation of such a relationship.

Hope that clarifies things for you.


Clear as mud, the back peddling clouds the waters. You made a Freudian slip and are now trying to cast it in a better light. You, by your own admission find gay relationships repulsive. Re read and then, counter my post. Your typing is the trap here not myself.

Anapeg
10-08-2014, 09:14 PM
First Hitler then repulsive. You might wish to stand down now.

The Left Sock
10-08-2014, 09:20 PM
Let me simplify it for you, since you seem to be having problems with basic comprehension:

Gay sex - personally repulsive to me.

Gay relationships - perfectly acceptable for others.

Do you get it now?

I don't transfer my personal reaction to gay sex into an impulse to prevent others from finding meaningful relationships. Just because I don't get the attraction, doesn't mean I oppose those who do.

Anapeg
10-08-2014, 09:23 PM
Let me simplify it for you, since you seem to be having problems with basic comprehension:

Gay sex - personally repulsive to me.

Gay relationships - perfectly acceptable for others.

Do you get it now?

I don't transfer my personal reaction to gay sex into an impulse to prevent others from finding meaningful relationships. Just because I don't get the attraction, doesn't mean I oppose those who do.

re∑pul∑sive
rəˈpəlsiv/
adjective
1.
arousing intense distaste or disgust.
"a repulsive smell"
synonyms: revolting, disgusting, abhorrent, repellent, repugnant, offensive, objectionable, vile, foul, nasty, loathsome, sickening, nauseating, hateful, detestable, execrable, abominable, monstrous, noxious, horrendous, awful, terrible, dreadful, frightful, obnoxious, unsavory, unpleasant, disagreeable, distasteful; More
antonyms: attractive
archaic
lacking friendliness or sympathy.
2.
of or relating to repulsion between physical objects.
Translate repulsive to
Use over time for: repulsive

Translations, word origin, and more definitions

dancingqueen
10-08-2014, 10:30 PM
re∑pul∑sive
rəˈpəlsiv/
adjective
1.
arousing intense distaste or disgust.
"a repulsive smell"
synonyms: revolting, disgusting, abhorrent, repellent, repugnant, offensive, objectionable, vile, foul, nasty, loathsome, sickening, nauseating, hateful, detestable, execrable, abominable, monstrous, noxious, horrendous, awful, terrible, dreadful, frightful, obnoxious, unsavory, unpleasant, disagreeable, distasteful; More
antonyms: attractive
archaic
lacking friendliness or sympathy.
2.
of or relating to repulsion between physical objects.
Translate repulsive to
Use over time for: repulsive

Translations, word origin, and more definitions

Care to explain how that definition fits your earlier claim?

But you find their relationship repulsive, got cha. Things we find repulsive are things we do not associate with, we with malice of forethought avoid. Things we find repulsive are beneath us, regardless the face we put on it. You cannot have your cake and eat it too, sorry.

dancingqueen
10-08-2014, 10:34 PM
Marriage is between a man and a woman. Anything else makes no sense.

Why not?
For me marriage with another man would make sense as opposed to the opposite. It would be quite egotistical of you to presume everyone has the same goals in life as you do.

Anapeg
10-08-2014, 10:41 PM
Care to explain how that definition fits your earlier claim?

That was the royal "we". You know me well enough that having me defend myself to you is at the very least insulting.

dancingqueen
10-08-2014, 11:23 PM
That was the royal "we". You know me well enough that having me defend myself to you is at the very least insulting.

But your claim in no way relates to the definition posted. If you are going to make such claims, expect to be held accountable for them.

Anapeg
10-09-2014, 12:47 AM
But your claim in no way relates to the definition posted. If you are going to make such claims, expect to be held accountable for them.

I must be slowing down, you have eluded me completely. Someone, Sock I believe made reference to gay sex being repulsive and I was bantering with them.

The Voice
10-09-2014, 03:56 AM
You failed to read post #69 did you? Quite straight forward and clear.

I read post #69 and I don't have any problem with reading comprehension.

Are you saying that "confession and repentance" are biblical punishment??

Barry always maintains that everything in the Bible is quite clear yet even biblical scholars can't agree on that.

The Left Sock
10-09-2014, 07:38 AM
Repulse - (noun) the act of pushing someone or something unwanted away or of refusing them or it.

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/repulse

We can play the dictionary game all day. Doesn't change a thing.

Barry Morris
10-09-2014, 09:27 AM
Why not?
For me marriage with another man would make sense as opposed to the opposite. It would be quite egotistical of you to presume everyone has the same goals in life as you do.

It can be a relationship or a union. By definition it can't be a marriage. A marriage combines what God created to come together, a man and a woman, both for procreation, and for a combining of all the characteristics of humankind into the "one flesh" the bible speaks of.

Two men or two women CANNOT do that.

Barry Morris
10-09-2014, 09:27 AM
Let me simplify it for you, since you seem to be having problems with basic comprehension:

Gay sex - personally repulsive to me.

Gay relationships - perfectly acceptable for others.

Do you get it now?

I don't transfer my personal reaction to gay sex into an impulse to prevent others from finding meaningful relationships. Just because I don't get the attraction, doesn't mean I oppose those who do.

I'm glad you didn't use the word marriage, so that I can agree with you.

Barry Morris
10-09-2014, 09:40 AM
I read post #69 and I don't have any problem with reading comprehension.

Are you saying that "confession and repentance" are biblical punishment??

Barry always maintains that everything in the Bible is quite clear yet even biblical scholars can't agree on that.

You asked a secondary question about discipline. This guy has a good page on it, including the verses I was looking for:

http://www.allnationsmin.org/Download/documents/Children%20&%20Discipline.pdf

'And if your brother sins, go and reprove him in private; if he listens to you, you
have won your brother.But if he does not listen to you, take one or
two more at by the mouth of two or three witnesses every fact may be
confirmed.And if he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he
refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a
tax-gatherer.”
Matthew 18:15

By the way snooky, you'll spend the rest of your days looking for the spot where I said "everything in the Bible is quite clear". Quite a few misquoters here, it seems!!! :) :) :)

Anapeg
10-09-2014, 10:20 AM
Repulse - (noun) the act of pushing someone or something unwanted away or of refusing them or it.

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/repulse

We can play the dictionary game all day. Doesn't change a thing.

No, it does not. You have proven, through your choice of words your lack of understanding and compassion toward non heterosexuals. Go, play with Barry, I am done.

The Left Sock
10-09-2014, 10:45 AM
You're simply out to lunch. I would tell you a personal tale to prove the point, but I'm starting to think the effort would be wasted upon you.

dancingqueen
10-09-2014, 04:30 PM
It can be a relationship or a union. By definition it can't be a marriage. A marriage combines what God created to come together, a man and a woman, both for procreation, and for a combining of all the characteristics of humankind into the "one flesh" the bible speaks of.

Two men or two women CANNOT do that.

Sorry, you are wrong:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/marriage?s=t
Words have meanings, and that is why we have dictionaries.


Regardless, I am quite aware of the tricky little word game you are playing...
Gay people should not have sex because they are not married, but uh-oh... they can't get married because of the made up or out-dated definition
thus trying to absolve yourself of any thought of discriminatory thought so you can still think you are a good person.

dancingqueen
10-09-2014, 04:32 PM
I must be slowing down, you have eluded me completely. Someone, Sock I believe made reference to gay sex being repulsive and I was bantering with them.

He said the act of him having gay sex is repulsive, he may not have directly said it, but it was implied very strongly, even I picked up on that... I find milk repulsive, but i can understand why others might enjoy it.

Barry Morris
10-09-2014, 04:59 PM
Sorry, you are wrong:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/marriage?s=t
Words have meanings, and that is why we have dictionaries.


Regardless, I am quite aware of the tricky little word game you are playing...
Gay people should not have sex because they are not married, but uh-oh... they can't get married because of the made up or out-dated definition
thus trying to absolve yourself of any thought of discriminatory thought so you can still think you are a good person.

Words have meanings, and dictionaries can change them. The bible definition has not changed. One man, one woman, to be one flesh. Same gender simply can't be that.

And gays want to use the term marriage so they can think of themselves a good persons.

Sorry. I wouldn't do anything to block relationships, or unions, or whatever anybody wants to do, it's your life. But same-sex marriage isn't, and never will be.

dancingqueen
10-09-2014, 05:05 PM
Words have meanings, and dictionaries can change them. The bible definition has not changed. One man, one woman, to be one flesh. Same gender simply can't be that.

And gays want to use the term marriage so they can think of themselves a good persons.

Sorry. I wouldn't do anything to block relationships, or unions, or whatever anybody wants to do, it's your life. But same-sex marriage isn't, and never will be.

in our society, what do we use to determine what words mean?

Barry Morris
10-09-2014, 05:17 PM
in our society, what do we use to determine what words mean?

You use a dictionary, as do I. When discussing a biblical matter, whose guidance Christians accept, the bible overrides the (changeable) dictionary, especially when political correctness kicks in.

dancingqueen
10-09-2014, 05:22 PM
You use a dictionary, as do I.

So in our society, we use a dictionary to determine what words mean. I posted a link showing what the dictionary defines "marriage" as. Nothing else matters, a book that cannot be validated as true or not cannot be used to define a word we use in our society.

Barry Morris
10-09-2014, 05:37 PM
So in our society, we use a dictionary to determine what words mean. I posted a link showing what the dictionary defines "marriage" as. Nothing else matters, a book that cannot be validated as true or not cannot be used to define a word we use in our society.

Tell me, how is the dictionary validated?? General acceptance, no??

I'm sure you understand how much that means to me.

dancingqueen
10-09-2014, 05:45 PM
I don't know for sure how the dictionary is validated. I trust a system is in place made by smarter people than myself. Makes no difference though, unless you can explain how it does make a difference.

Barry Morris
10-09-2014, 05:51 PM
I don't know for sure how the dictionary is validated. I trust a system is in place made by smarter people than myself. Makes no difference though, unless you can explain how it does make a difference.

But I did explain how it is "validated". General acceptance. Throw political correctness into the mix, and there you have a dictionary definition that is "democratic"!!!

Mind you, if the dictionary was truly authenticated, there would only be one, wouldn't there?? But the Oxford and Webster's are published all the time, along with many others I'm sure.

As to it's making a difference, you said it, "..a book that cannot be validated as true or not cannot be used to define a word we use in our society."

dancingqueen
10-09-2014, 05:53 PM
But I did explain how it is "validated". General acceptance. Throw political correctness into the mix, and there you have a dictionary definition that is "democratic"!!!

Mind you, if the dictionary was truly authenticated, there would only be one, wouldn't there?? But the Oxford and Webster's are published all the time, along with many others I'm sure.

right, and I don't really care how it is validated, as it has no impact of the validity of it. Now if you feel there is some conspiracy around it that proves in-authenticity , then by all means substantiate that claim with something other than your opinion.

Barry Morris
10-09-2014, 05:57 PM
right, and I don't really care how it is validated, as it has no impact of the validity of it. Now if you feel there is some conspiracy around it that proves in-authenticity , then by all means substantiate that claim with something other than your opinion.

Well, since the dictionary definition is out the window, would you consider logic?? Or even, as I have never seen an answer to, evolution??

Gotta run, be back late!!

dancingqueen
10-09-2014, 06:02 PM
Well, since the dictionary definition is out the window, would you consider logic?? Or even, as I have never seen an answer to, evolution??

Please explain how two people of the same gender marrying is illogical, again, not everyone has the same goals in life as you do. consider that.
Me being in a same sex relationship is pleasurable, me being in an opposite sex relationship has never been pleasurable. thus, me marrying a man is more pleasurable... Me marrying a woman would be illogical.

Bluesky
10-10-2014, 07:31 AM
If pleasure is your primary metric, then I suppose you are right.

dancingqueen
10-10-2014, 08:16 AM
If pleasure is your primary metric, then I suppose you are right.

For some people it is, I don't see anything wrong with that.

Barry Morris
10-10-2014, 09:19 AM
For some people it is, I don't see anything wrong with that.

Indeed, pleasure IS the primary reason sometimes. But does it last??

To have what will likely be short term relationship, with all the problems of dissolving a marriage attached, is illogical.

Male/female families can last for centuries. Same gender unions do not. Illogical.

The Left Sock
10-10-2014, 11:48 AM
Something has to last for centuries to be valid? I don't buy that. Most marriages that take place today won't last a generation, let alone a century.

And further, there are many examples of gay couples who have been together for many years. Of course, these do not show up on legal documents, because the law didn't recognize their relationship, but they are out there.

I would much rather see gay people find long term relationships, than suffer the consequences of bouncing from one partner to another. Recognizing their relationships as legal and equal to our own, is the compassionate way to make that a reality.

dancingqueen
10-10-2014, 12:07 PM
Indeed, pleasure IS the primary reason sometimes. But does it last??

To have what will likely be short term relationship, with all the problems of dissolving a marriage attached, is illogical.

Male/female families can last for centuries. Same gender unions do not. Illogical.

And this is where you duck and dodge my request for evidence.
So, regardless...
for a gay person entering an opposite sex relationship is not pleasurable, so instead of pleasure, they would have misery. That, is illogical. I would be interested in you showing me the logic behind such a union.

Barry Morris
10-10-2014, 01:25 PM
And this is where you duck and dodge my request for evidence.
So, regardless...
for a gay person entering an opposite sex relationship is not pleasurable, so instead of pleasure, they would have misery. That, is illogical. I would be interested in you showing me the logic behind such a union.

Union?? No problem, do as you wish.

But just don't think it's a marriage. It isn't.

You have the freedom to engage in all the pleasure you wish, as far as I'm concerned. To saddle oneself with the legal definition of marriage for mere pleasure is....illogical.

Barry Morris
10-10-2014, 01:29 PM
Something has to last for centuries to be valid? I don't buy that. Most marriages that take place today won't last a generation, let alone a century.

And further, there are many examples of gay couples who have been together for many years. Of course, these do not show up on legal documents, because the law didn't recognize their relationship, but they are out there.

I would much rather see gay people find long term relationships, than suffer the consequences of bouncing from one partner to another. Recognizing their relationships as legal and equal to our own, is the compassionate way to make that a reality.

I don't believe in the reality you hope for. Reality is (why ever don't you see this??), and you said it yourself, most marriages won't last, and in fact, don't even take place!! "We love each other, that's enough". Using the term "marriage" as applied to same gender unions is bogus. Legally using the term won't help them stay together.

dancingqueen
10-10-2014, 01:39 PM
Union?? No problem, do as you wish.

But just don't think it's a marriage. It isn't.

You have the freedom to engage in all the pleasure you wish, as far as I'm concerned. To saddle oneself with the legal definition of marriage for mere pleasure is....illogical.

"marriage" and "union" are pretty much the same thing, You so love to muddy waters to justify your own prejudices.

Barry Morris
10-10-2014, 01:43 PM
"marriage" and "union" are pretty much the same thing, You so love to muddy waters to justify your own prejudices.

If they were the same thing, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Gays want to call it marriage. Christians don't believe same gender relationships can be.

Simple.

Prejudices?? You need to believe that, don't you?? I could tell you all day that you have the freedom to live as you wish, to engage in any kind of relationship you wish, get all the government benefits you want, because that's what I believe.... but I remain a bigot because I don't want to call it a marriage.

There is the reality.

The Left Sock
10-10-2014, 01:49 PM
We should just change the term we use for 'marriage', and call it something else. I don't mean just gay people, but society in general. We could call it being legally bonded, legal partners, or even 'betrothed'. We could leave the word 'marriage' to the religious folks, and they can keep on calling it that, until they fizzle out of existence.

But I'm pretty sure if society changed the official term to something else, the religious right would still find things to fight about. To me, they are more interested in controlling the lives of others, than protecting the use of a word. Well, there's one way to find out - just change the name 'marriage' to something else, and see what happens!

Barry Morris
10-10-2014, 06:01 PM
We should just change the term we use for 'marriage', and call it something else. I don't mean just gay people, but society in general. We could call it being legally bonded, legal partners, or even 'betrothed'. We could leave the word 'marriage' to the religious folks, and they can keep on calling it that, until they fizzle out of existence.

But I'm pretty sure if society changed the official term to something else, the religious right would still find things to fight about. To me, they are more interested in controlling the lives of others, than protecting the use of a word. Well, there's one way to find out - just change the name 'marriage' to something else, and see what happens!

Interesting idea. But I'm pretty sure most of society, religious or not, would prefer the status quo.

Re your other continuous rant:

Anyone who lets a church control his life is just plain stupid. Anyone who lets God control his life is just plain smart.

Hans
10-13-2014, 01:33 PM
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2014/10/13/vatican-proposes-stunning-shift-on-gays-lesbians/?hpt=hp_t1

I think the Bishop of Rome is going to have an interesting time coming up in the next year or so.

Barry Morris
10-13-2014, 02:50 PM
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2014/10/13/vatican-proposes-stunning-shift-on-gays-lesbians/?hpt=hp_t1

I think the Bishop of Rome is going to have an interesting time coming up in the next year or so.

It's easy when you claim final authority over the bible.

Hans
10-14-2014, 01:27 PM
And it has started. Let's see who has the most pull.

"Under furious assault from conservative Catholics, the Vatican backtracked Tuesday on its surprisingly positive assessment of gays and same-sex relationships."

http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/14/world/vatican-backtrack-gays/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Barry Morris
10-14-2014, 04:01 PM
"Cardinal Raymond Burke, an American and head of the Vatican's supreme court, said the report "lacks a solid foundation in the sacred Scriptures."

Yup, that's what I thought too.

Barry Morris
10-14-2014, 11:52 PM
"One buzz term circulating the synod has been "the law of graduality" -- the idea in Catholic tradition that people move toward holiness gradually. This concept offers a pastoral approach to same-sex relationships that can allow individual priests and parishes to welcome gay congregants without overstepping doctrine, Religion News Service's David Gibson writes."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/13/vatican-relatio-gay_n_5976794.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000050&ir=Gay+Voices

Toward?? I don't think so.

Hans
10-18-2014, 05:17 PM
Catholic bishops ended a tense, two-week summit in Rome on Saturday without deciding how to minister to gays and lesbians or whether divorced and remarried Catholics should receive Holy Communion.
An interim report issued on Monday, and greated with great fanfare from liberal Catholics, was heavily revised by Saturday.
Sections were removed that had praised the "gifts" gays and lesbians offer the church, as well as the "precious support" same-sex partners give to one other.
Even the revised sections, though, failed to garner a two-thirds consensus from the nearly 200 bishops meeting here, revealing deep divisions in the highest levels of the Catholic Church.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/18/world/vatican-final-report/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Looks like it was shot down. Let's see what the Pontifex Maximus does next.