Help!

[Saru]

So, we just got back from an amusement park today, with my sisters/brothers and a friend. (not my friend) somehow it was brought up the guy was gay, which he is, he wasn't here when the conversation was brought up, but my family hushed it down as he came by. Once we got home, I brought it up with my mom, why did she think gays were evil?

This is what she said literally word for word. *Note we're Presbyterian/Non Denominational*

"Sam (me), I'm sorry you do not know this. I sincerely am, so I will have to set it straight for you. (lol)

Gays, or should I say homosexuals, are men and women and men-women who at an early age make a declaration of war on God. They choose to lead their disgustingly filthy empty lives, and try to fill their horrid souls with sex with little innocent boys, crack, heroin and other dangerous things. Their thing called "pride" is simply an affront to God, much like their bizarre pagan worship ceremonies. I am sorry you've been deceived by Satan to believe that gays will go to heaven, but I guess thats what you get for being public schooled."


So... I don't know what to do. Any help on how to deal with this? She also wants me to re-read genesis, and matthew, and leviticus. *sigh* her reasoning is when she was little she was a fag hag, and she saw her gay friends converting. Ok.... She also literally straight up told me anyone who didn't believe her world view was wrong, because her world view was the bible's world view. Then told me to get out of her room and away from her, because I called her "honey" (my gay side slipped out :( )

Does anyone know some good arguments that well, homosexuality isn't a choice? I mean we all know that, but she said she wants proof. And of course this site wouldn't work because,well lets face it, it's run by a homosexual "agenda." GASP! (God, I hate the word "agenda")

[Zerbie]

Hey Sam,

Hang in there and take care of yourself. Make sure you are emotionally well and strong first, and from there, approach the relationship with your mom in the way that is healthiest.

Do you live with your parents? Do you live on your own? The answer to these questions will have a big impact on how you relate with your parents. If you depend on your mom for shelter or support, you may want to NOT challenge her now. Are you ready to come out to her? If not, then you may want to let this matter wait until you are, even if that's another year or two or more.

I'm sorry to say that probably any source you present that homosexuality is NOT a choice, will not do the job, because it sounds like her mind is really made up for now. If so, then anything arguing another viewpoint is something she will find flaws with, whether it's the author, whether it's the studies, whether it's how someone translates the Bible, etc.

I'd be more interested to know why she used to be 'a fag hag' and has since transitioned to this current belief system. There must be a story there. If you knew why her current way of thinking is so important to her, you might then know how to gently address whatever the real issue is. It depends on so many factors. Is she married to your dad? Is he still fervently anti-gay? If he is, then your mom may be deeply invested in supporting your dad's viewpoint as well, which would make it two against one, leaving you in a very uncomfortable place.

A lot to think about. I suggest whatever you do say to challenge your mom and present other evidence- IF you do! - go slowly, and think in terms of months and years rather than hope for an immediate change in her attitude. Her mind is hers, and she may choose not to change it.

It's also okay for you not to take this issue on with her. Take care of Sam, that comes first.

[BrianB]

You can't prove something is not. That is a logical impossibility. You can only prove what is. The only thing you can do is give her evidence that people are born with their orientation. She will most likely reject that too since it doesn't fit what she "knows" to be true. Probably the most productive thing you can do for you mom is to pray for her. It's hard to stay hurt or mad at someone when you're praying for them. Zerbie gave some great advice too. I wouldn't be too quick to come out to my parents if I'm still depending on them for food and shelter. A lot of teens end up on the street that way. This link should give you arguments to counter what your mom is telling you about the bible. http://www.soulforce.org/article/1365

[Saru]

Yea, I got a text from my dad today (he's in Chicago doing a storie on global warming, cuz he's a reporter.) "I heard you called your mother horrible names. How dare you try and pull that while I'm away on a trip. And I can't believe you actually think homosexuality is ok? That is nothing short of bizarre, and you have the audacity to try and brainwash your brothers and sisters into thinking that? If your attitude isn't changed when I get home the next thing that will change is your place of residence" Ok wow. Once again my mom lied to my dad about what was said. But still, I remembered that one quote:

God grant me the serenity to
Accept the things I cannot change;
Courage to change the things I can;
And the Wisdom to know the difference.

And I realized my parents will never see the light *in a sense* so there's no reason getting kicked out trying to show them. I showed my mom a link from a gay-Christian site, and she said the homosexual agenda poisoned their minds. So I apologized to my mom and dad (though of course it wasn't sincere) and I'll just let this lie under the covers for a bit.

[Zerbie]

Oh, Sam, I'm sorry you hear such painful words from your parents!!


I am glad that you are taking care of yourself and making sure you still have your roof over your head. You did right, taking care of yourself. Keep hangin' in there.
Best wishes.
Z

[Daniel]

Hi Sam,

The words you relate from your parents are pretty hared to bear. And I am so sorry that you have to live through this time with them as they are right now.

What I am going to write now may sound very strange, perhaps even odd.

There is no winning here. There is no convincing. There is no proving that gay people are children of God.

Have you read the Zen Art of War? If not, this may be the time to do so. It's a very interesting book. It teaches one to use the strength of the opposition against them. How? To yield. To be soft.

That's what you did when you said you were sorry. Good going. This may not be the time to draw a line in the sand.

Wishing you all good things.

Daniel

[bnmoore]

Your profile says that you are 19 and have a job as restaurant manager. Is there no way that you can remove yourself from that environment? You can't actually sue your parents or any other Christians for malpractice. Acting from enlightened self-interest is not selfish.

I bailed from my toxic familial environment and was a teen runaway at 16 in 1971. I don't know that I would still be alive if I hadn't. I've already voiced my opinions about the causes of substance abuse, depression, and suicide among gay people.

Although there may be problems with some of the wording this article at livestrong is pretty good:

http://www.livestrong.com/article/13933-homosexuality/

Also the talking points at glaad.org are probably a good read for any LGBTQ person.

[Zerbie]

Your profile says that you are 19 and have a job as restaurant manager. Is there no way that you can remove yourself from that environment?.

Good question. When I heard Sam lived with parents, I thought maybe he was in school full time and they are giving him housing and helping pay the way through school.

Again, it all depends. Sam. Do you work full time? Do you earn enough at this restaurant to live on your own? perhaps with a friend or a couple of friends where you could rent a house together, or a large apartment, and split the rent? If all of that is possible, and you aren't relying on your parents to fund college, it's an option to think seriously about. You'll want a plan that makes sense with your goals for the future, so this may or may not be a good idea.

[Saru]

Good question. When I heard Sam lived with parents, I thought maybe he was in school full time and they are giving him housing and helping pay the way through school.

Again, it all depends. Sam. Do you work full time? Do you earn enough at this restaurant to live on your own? perhaps with a friend or a couple of friends where you could rent a house together, or a large apartment, and split the rent? If all of that is possible, and you aren't relying on your parents to fund college, it's an option to think seriously about. You'll want a plan that makes sense with your goals for the future, so this may or may not be a good idea.

Nope. The restaurant was going downhill, and I had my suspicions that the owner was stealing money. So I left for another job where at the moment I do make less, but in about a year I may be making at least %40 more per paycheck, for less work. However, I have been scouting, and cannot find any realistic apartment options. I live in a very rich town, so even the most slummest of apartments, filled with drugs etc are about $500 a month out of my reach. And all my friends either live with their parents while their parents pay for their college, or live in dorms their parents pay for. SO I really have no potential roomies, and I live in a very homophobic and conservative town, and I'm not exactly the most butch gay man out there. So getting an apartment with a random person may be a bit odd. Thanks for all the help though guys <3 Around September hopefully I'll have gotten enough $$$ to pay for this semester of college, gotten a raise at my job, and have hopefully found some suitable roommates to room with. Because this house is such a dysfunctional house. (My dad works for 700 Club/Focus on the family or w/e its called, and my Mom owns a business, but on the side runs a massive Tea Party operation, and she just got back from a meeting that mocked someone who support gay marriage.) *sigh*

[Zerbie]

Then it sounds like you're doing all you can. You seem to have a good sense of your options for future, that's great. Til things change and you can be on your own someplace (could a new town be an option someday?), just keep hanging in there. Give life some time, take opportunities as they come, and in a while (a few months, year or two) you can get yourself to a much better place.

[tymejumper]

Sam, I am so sorry that you had to hear this and put up with this. Parents can be cruel at times and it sounds like fear is speaking.

I would just lay low, not talk about it anymore and move out when you can. Is there any type of Trevor Project, or PFLAG around the area? They may be able to help you, you can find them online.

hang in there (((HUGS)))

[Saru]

Sam, I am so sorry that you had to hear this and put up with this. Parents can be cruel at times and it sounds like fear is speaking.

I would just lay low, not talk about it anymore and move out when you can. Is there any type of Trevor Project, or PFLAG around the area? They may be able to help you, you can find them online.

hang in there (((HUGS)))

Nope. I mean my friends (even the Christian ones) are obviously ok with it, but I can tell they don't really like here about it. One does, but she has a crush on me... So go figure.

In my school this poor guy got a (I believe the term is breast implants..?) because he wanted to become a girl, and the first day he showed up to school with breasts he was beaten almost to death. And still showed up as soon as he could get out of the hospital and came to school everyday with his head held high as people spit at him etc. props to him

[Daniel]

Nope. I mean my friends (even the Christian ones) are obviously ok with it, but I can tell they don't really like here about it. One does, but she has a crush on me... So go figure.



So your Christian friends are 'Ok' but don't like hear about it? With friends like that....

I am thinking that REAL friends are not just Ok, but actually will talk about things with you and listen to what you have to say- that is- you don't have to be editing yourself all the time.

[Saru]

So your Christian friends are 'Ok' but don't like hear about it? With friends like that....

I am thinking that REAL friends are not just Ok, but actually will talk about things with you and listen to what you have to say- that is- you don't have to be editing yourself all the time.


Well its more of, I can talk, but they get this wierd "oh god not this again" look in their eyes. And I don't even bring it up that often >.>

[Daniel]

Well its more of, I can talk, but they get this wierd "oh god not this again" look in their eyes. And I don't even bring it up that often >.>

I understand what you are saying: I've been out to my parents and siblings for over 20 years now, and it's only in the last 3 or so that I can use the word gay and the air in the room doesn't freeze for a second. They still don't know quite what to do or how to act, but there has been a change. Yeah- it took a long time.

When I first came out I gave my mother an ultimatum after she disinvited my boyfriend to Thanksgiving dinner. I said that if he wasn't coming then neither was I. She didn't like it, but got the message. This set the tone for everything that came afterward. In retrospect, I set some healthy boundaries.

That 'weird' look? Your family and friends may simply to clueless as to how to respond. After all, they may be suffering from a deficit of information. And that is the hard part: a lot of time can be spent educating those who are uncomfortable with being educated. And ignorance is not bliss, especially for the gay person who has to endure those who are immovable in their opposition and hardheartedness.

I look back and smile now, but I still remember all the times I used the word 'gay' in casual conversation with my family. They got that weird deer in the headlights look.

Sometimes I think we can help others to not be afraid by not being afraid ourselves. And that takes some doing. And some daring.

Hang in here!

[bnmoore]

(My dad works for 700 Club/Focus on the family or w/e its called, and my Mom owns a business, but on the side runs a massive Tea Party operation, and she just got back from a meeting that mocked someone who support gay marriage.) *sigh*

I suggested this without a link in my last reply but in order to avoid using the terminology used in 'Anti' arguments it's really helpful:

http://www.glaad.org/talkingabout

Using the same words reinforces them.

SoulForce isn't working alone either:

http://www.glaad.org/faith

[offog]

I too hope you can get away from your parents soon. It's hard to go on having to hide who you are. If you decide to come out to your parents once you're in a position to get your own place, wait until you're actually moved out all the way.

A couple of months ago I read a post at another web site from the aunt of a young fellow who'd been kicked out of a Christian high school for being gay. (I think someone on Soulforce posted a link to that item.) His conservative Christian parents slagged him and he ran to his aunt's place. The aunt's been a tower of strength through everything.

When the aunt drove to the kid's place to pick up his belongings, she found that his parents had given almost all his stuff away and were mourning him as if he was dead.

The way your parents seem to be, they might just change the locks on you and not let you get your stuff if they find out your "secret" prematurely.

[stav]

Gays, or should I say homosexuals, are men and women and men-women who at an early age make a declaration of war on God. They choose to lead their disgustingly filthy empty lives, and try to fill their horrid souls with sex with little innocent boys, crack, heroin and other dangerous things. Their thing called "pride" is simply an affront to God, much like their bizarre pagan worship ceremonies. I am sorry you've been deceived by Satan to believe that gays will go to heaven, but I guess thats what you get for being public schooled."

how do you think she would respond to educational materials?????

e.g: from a documentary "because the bible told me so". It has Reverent Tu Tu and several other really good ministers and pastors talking on the subject. It taught me about 'biblical literalism', which is what your mum's doing - citing key texts from Leviticus out of context, for example.

http://www.abc.net.au/compass/s2807909.htm

Tell her that if she combines linen and wool, that's an abomination because it says so in Leviticus, and that eating rabbit is an abomination, as is sewing two seed types in one hole in the ground. Levitical prohibitions were part of the then 'holiness code'--rituals and practice relevant to the then times. They were not 'innately' immoral wrongs.

Two search terms for you to help you: biblical hermeneutics and exegesis. I have some really really good scholarly/theological articles, in published journals, on the homosexuality question contrasted against those two terms. They are pdfs. I can steer you to them if you would like copies. Basically, it's getting pretty hard to sustain your mum's view.

[stav]

Does anyone know some good arguments that well, homosexuality isn't a choice? I mean we all know that, but she said she wants proof. And of course this site wouldn't work because,well lets face it, it's run by a homosexual "agenda." GASP! (God, I hate the word "agenda")

Amongst the best source of evidence I have been able to garner, is the monozygotic (identical) and dizygotic (fraternal) twins studies. They go something like this:

The rate of homosexual concordence in dizygotic twins is at the *same* rate as the background population. That is, two non-identical twins have the same chance of each being gay as the overall rate of homosexuality--somewhere between 5 to 15 %.

The rate of homosexual concordence in monozygotic twins is substantially higher--over 70%. That is, *most* identical twins are of the same sexual orientation.

That's one piece of evidence. Another is the studies that look at birth order.

Scientists have discovered that for *boys*, the more children a woman has, the greater chance the *boy* has of being gay, the more children a woman has. There is some tendency for some kind of intra-uterine event, where the woman's endocrinological and immunological systems impose biological events on the non-born to encourage the emergence of homosexuality.

Then there's this. Every mammalian species on the planet has homosexuality as part of its evolutionary pattern. It's normal. In some duck species, for example, a male duck can have a life-long female duck partner, and a live-in male duck (a gay duck). It's a three-way relationship. It's normal.

In dolphins, the homosexual male dolphin facilitates social *cohesion* amongst the herd. The homosexual dolphin enjoys prestiged social status. It's normal.

We do have the 'nature nurture' debate in humans that is fiercely explored. However, even the environmentalists (nurture) tend to argue that there is an environmental event or events, perhaps socio-emotional, perhaps intra-uterine, that leads to a *permanent* emergence of a *normal* homosexual state.

We have numerous hypotheses from numerous disciplines that have postulated what is occurring. No-one truly knows.

Is there any particular area you would like more information on? I am really happy to help.

cheers
stav

[Saru]

Thanks :) I'll check out the sites. However, I had already brought up that shrimp was an abomination, and she told me "grow up and stop looking for empty solutions." And on the animal thing she said "and don't tell me it's ok because a few demented animals do it."

[Daniel]

Thanks :) I'll check out the sites. However, I had already brought up that shrimp was an abomination, and she told me "grow up and stop looking for empty solutions." And on the animal thing she said "and don't tell me it's ok because a few demented animals do it."

To water but you can't make it drink.

When a person knows that we are looking for them for approval, they can get lots of mileage out of refusing it. It's a pretty twisted game, but there you have it. The trick is to not look for approval in the first place.

The whole idea of non-violence is having compassion for and loving those who act in very unloving ways. Not easy. And it's not magic. However, it does provide a means whereby two parties can treat each other as persons rather than objects.

It's the difference between approving of homosexuality and loving someone who is gay.

[Rick336]

Look at the situation scientifically. Your mother's brain has absorbed extremely flawed information from the church and society over her lifetime about homosexuality and she formed her beliefs long ago from this flawed information.

After a lifetime of these thoughts following certain neuron paths and strengthening synapse connections in her brain, it is extremely difficult for new thoughts, no matter how reasonable, to change those well established paths and connections formed from bad information.

I believe everyone needs to take responsibility for their own behavior, but in a sense, your mother's irrational beliefs are not really her fault. She is only communicating to you what her neuron connections tell her is reality.

Think about this. Almost every Christian brain on this planet has been programmed to believe that three wise men visited the baby Jesus in Bethlehem. And if you walked up to any one of them and challenge this number, almost all would vigorously defend it.

But in reality, nowhere in the Bible does it mention the number of wise men who visited baby Jesus. It could have been two or five or ten. Most people automatically assume it was three because the Bible says the wise men brought gold, frankincense and myrrh. But does the number of gifts automatically establish the number of men? What if two wise men brought gold, three brought frankincense and four brought myrrh. That's nine wise men who brought gifts. And what if some showed up without gifts?

Could it be that the number of wise men actually comes from the Christmas carol "We Three Kings" which is purely based on an assumption?

Our brains act like computers that are hard-wired to produce certain thoughts that may or may not be based on fact. Using evidence to rewire it requires a lot of patience, and understanding. It's not an easy task.

Your mother is no different.


http://www.uci.edu/uci/features/2009/05/images/singleeventmemory_p090527_01a.jpg

A neuron synapse electrical impulse connection in the brain that
incorrectly hard wires information from the carol "We Three Kings"
as provable evidence of the number of wise men.


Rick

[stav]

Thanks :) I'll check out the sites. However, I had already brought up that shrimp was an abomination, and she told me "grow up and stop looking for empty solutions." And on the animal thing she said "and don't tell me it's ok because a few demented animals do it."

oouch - when I imagine what it must have been like to have heard that, I want to grate my skin off with a cheese grater. It hurts. I can remember my mum throwing her fists in the air and screaming angrily (with a vein popping out the side of her neck) at god, asking Him why she was being punished. Took her 10 years to get her head around it.

But - whoever this person is who is being so mean, there's a big hole in her knowledge. In Leviticus, the translation is unclear from the Hebrew in the Septuagint version to the English. We think it may mean 'same sex contact in a woman's marital bed' implying adultery of the male-male kind, by a husband doing it with a guy at home. Have a look at the reasons for that (second quote below) and also some other stuff from another important Biblical excerpt.

http://www.soulforce.org/forums/showpost.php?p=15130&postcount=20

1Cor 6:9 has two words that, when translated into English, have been understood to be directed against homosexuality. The Greek the words, malakoi(s) and arsenokoitay, are problematic for different reasons, however.

malakos - is an adjective.
malakois appears in Matt 11:8 and Luke 7:25 and is the neuter/plural form of malakos. malakoi appears in 1Cor 6:9 and is the masculine/plural form of malakos. This is the full extent of the appearance of the malakos adjective in the New Testament.

It appears in ancient Greek texts and is understood to mean, variously, freshly plowed (when talking about land), luxurious (when talking about clothing) and is also used to mean temple idol slaves or servants (Homer and others).

The Latin Vulgate Bible, from the 5th century translated malakois (Matt 11:8 and Luke 7:25) into mollibus, which means "luxurious" or "effeminate". It translated malakoi (1Cor 6:9) into idolis servientes, which means idol slaves or servants.

The King James version (1611), which relied heavily on the Vulgate, translated malakois to "soft" in Matt and Luke, as it was referring to clothing. But in 1Cor, evidently not being happy with "idol servants" they translated malakoi into "effeminate". It seems to many scholars that the Latin translators were closer in time and culture than the English translators, so they would have a better idea of meaning. None-the-less, the KJV translation has, of course, stuck ever since.

As far as arsenokoitay is concerned it appears twice in scripture and not at all in classic Greek literature. It is a compound word, not uncommon in Greek. 1 Cor 6:9 uses arsenokoitay and 1Tim 1:10 uses arsenokoitais. The words combined to make the first word are arsen (adjective neuter/singular), o (masculine definite article) and koitay (noun feminine/singular). The second word is the same, except that koitais is feminine/plural.

Now, the first thing is that the Greek language is gender specific. These words have feminine endings which means they refers to something female. The word parts are varied, however. arsen means “male”. o is the male definite article (the). koitey, the root of koitay and koitais, means “bed” or "place where koitus (coitus) occurs" - can we presume "female's bed", since it is feminine?

What was being communicated here? No-one is really sure. The KJV opted for “the abusers of themselves with mankind”. The NIV went with “homosexual offenders”. The NRSV went with “sodomites”.

The notion of "men in a bed together" is not literal at all, but shows the same bias as KJV, by assuming a lot of things that the Greek, or Latin, doesn't say.

But the Vulgate, translated 1000 years earlier, and closer to the original culture, than the KJV translated to adulteri, which means “adulterer” but in the female tense. You could argue that this doubles up on the earlier use of adulterer appearing in the same verse, but that one is male tense.

So which meaning do you want to use? It seems you have quite the range of choices, and biblical scholars can’t agree – can we?

I think, Sam, you show maturity in questioning the use of this passage.

On Leviticus.

http://www.soulforce.org/forums/showpost.php?p=26962&postcount=13

Leviticus (transliterated from Hebrew)
18:22 v’et-zacar lo tishcab mish’c’bey ishar to’ebah he
20:13 v’iysh ashere yishcab et-zacar mish’c’bey ishar to’ebah asu sh’neyhem mot yumatu d'mehem bam

Of significance to me, especially if one is going to rely on the actual Hebrew wording is mish’c’bey ishar. The word mish’c’bey is a common plural construct form of the noun mishcav meaning ‘couches’ or ‘beds’. A construct noun denotes something that belongs to the next absolute noun (free-standing, more or less) and is usually translated using the preposition ‘of’. The word ishah (not ishshah) is a common feminine singular absolute noun meaning ‘a woman’, and would be the noun to which mish’c’vey refers. The two words together, then translate as ‘beds of a woman’ or 'a woman' beds'.

The Greek Septuagint and Latin Vulgate agree and both used the same phrasing, appropriate to the respective grammars of course, to translate these words.

The Greek translated this as coiteyn gunaykos. The word gunaykos is a genitive feminine singular common noun. The genitive case denotes ‘belonging to’ or ‘of’ in the much the same way as the Hebrew construct noun. The word coiteyn (bring to mind coitus) means variously bed, place of marital relationship, place of insemination – in short, place where marital coitus occurs. Therefore, the two words together, coiteyn gunaykos, mean simply ‘a bed of a woman’.

The Latin Vulgate translated this phrase as coitu femineo. Far from the Latin being definitive, interpreting the meaning of coitu and femineo is critical. Coitu can be either a supine verbal form, similar to an infinitive, or a noun. The presence of femineo, an adjective which generally qualifies a noun, is of immense importance. The use of an adjective requires the presence of a noun. The most likely understanding would be that the noun that femineo modifies is coitu, which would lead to the translation ‘a woman’s meeting place’ or, logically, ‘a woman’s bed’.

The other option, treating coitu as a supine verb, would give the meaning we later find in English translations, but would also be grammatically incorrect. The adjective femineo is left without a noun to modify. The rough translation of the two words together into, "to have sexual intercourse like a woman" is very flawed, and inconsistent with the Hebrew and Greek, which were unequivocal.

The entirety of an accurate translation of 18:22, therefore, is:
You will not lie down with a male on a woman’s beds; it is an abomination.
And 20:13 is:
A man who lies down with a male on a woman’s beds – they have committed (done) an abomination. Both of them shall be put (executed) to death; their blood is upon themselves.

What, then, is an abomination? Since in both Hebrew and Greek, "woman" and "wife" are synonymous, the proscription is about a man lying with a man on a wife's bed - bed being held in Leviticus 15 to be virtually sacrosanct. There is a pattern that "spoiling the bed" is one of the ways adultery is described. These are proscriptions, but the action being prohibited is not the male-male sex, but rather the male-male sex occuring on the bed of a wife - it is about the common theme of adultery of a man already in relationship with a woman.

[stav]

but, as the posters said upstream - if she still has her head in the sand about it after trying, best to take very good care of yourself and protect yourself from her. Some people don't get it and are lost in their own fears and prejudices. She may start to figure it out by your withdrawal from her life.

You might find solace by building into new worlds, trusting your own moral compass, heal the hurt, remember your worth, surround yourself with loving, kind people who value you and your intrinsic worth.

If there is any other materials you need, let us know.

cheers and kind regards
stav

[Saru]

Thank :) And yea, I realized by this email she sent me, how ignorant she is of the matter. And I pray for her, but only time will tell.

http://townhall.com/columnists/MattBarber/2010/05/21/why_kagans_sexuality_matters?page=1

She said "proof Homosexuality is an abomination"

Ok all that article does is yell out crap against gays, with no factual backing. I mean really? And in the end all it says is if she's gay, she'll more likely vote for more gay legislature.

[stav]

From the article

Every major world religion, thousands of years of history and uncompromising human biology have established that homosexual conduct is among other volitional behaviors filed under "sexual immorality." Indeed, the majority of folks around the world – billions, actually – count this a timeless truth.

Does the Bible really say those things? I used to think so, and I used to think it was a black and white closed shop issue.

Honestly - if people were not caused to suffer from the contents of that article, I would find it rather funny. The writing style is embarrassingly poor. It makes generalisations and it does not scrutinise its own assumptions. It is at serious crossed purposes with the evidence-based world of science and best practice. The article makes errors of attribution about what science has and has not discovered. It is also internally inconsistent, with its own arguments.

Strangely ironic, that the abuse the article propagates againts minority groups is actually what Jesus spoke out against. The Spirit of Grace and of Love are patently not manifest in the work. It commits the Sin that led to Jesus overturning the table during the Roman occupation of Jerusalem and the surrounding regions.

kind regards
stav

[bnmoore]

If we keep up with the news we can't fail to notice the behaviors of the governor and attorney general of VA. From what you've said it seems that your parents are aligned with that mentality. Virginia doesn't seem to be for lovers at the moment. (SoulForce in Lynchburg aside.)

[stav]

hey there bnmoore,

i'm from australia - and so don't know what's going on in your state - but seems that there's been some kind of retrograde, backward step?

cheers
stav

[bnmoore]

Individual states have slogans. Virginia's is "Virginia is for Lovers". Georgia's is "The Peach State". If you keep up with gay news in the U.S. Virginia's governor and attorney general have been removing what protections for LGBTQ people were already in place in the state government and in universities.

As for Georgia's evil, Bob Barr authored DOMA. He calls himself Libertarian now and claims to support equal rights. I'm just tempted to quote my favorite line from "As Good as it Gets" and say "Go sell crazy some place else, we're all stocked up here". Pepe Le Pew can dye his stripe black but he's still a skunk.

[stav]

Individual states have slogans. Virginia's is "Virginia is for Lovers". Georgia's is "The Peach State". If you keep up with gay news in the U.S. Virginia's governor and attorney general have been removing what protections for LGBTQ people were already in place in the state government and in universities.

thanx bnmoore :)

sounds like retrograde conservatism. The pendulum. But in the overall cycle, where there will be a correction towards liberation and healing in time. Big picture.

we have a lot of regional and local news here in Oz. Some of your US States' news makes the international TV. But, mostly, it's the economic stuff that hits the screen.

As for Georgia's evil, Bob Barr authored DOMA. He calls himself Libertarian now and claims to support equal rights. I'm just tempted to quote my favorite line from "As Good as it Gets" and say "Go sell crazy some place else, we're all stocked up here". Pepe Le Pew can dye his stripe black but he's still a skunk.

he ha ha ha :)

You can't dress cat poo up in cellophane paper. The *bleep* still stinks after all.

nice to meet you - :)

cheers
stav

@all and @saru. I am going to post at that newspaper's site, where they invite people to join the debate. I'm not afraid of them....

cheers
stav

[BrianB]

As for Georgia's evil, Bob Barr authored DOMA. He calls himself Libertarian now and claims to support equal rights. I'm just tempted to quote my favorite line from "As Good as it Gets" and say "Go sell crazy some place else, we're all stocked up here". Pepe Le Pew can dye his stripe black but he's still a skunk.
Carpetbagger is the first word that came to mind when I read that he calls himself a Libertarian now. You can paint a pole with red and white stripes. That doesn't make it a candy cane. OTOH he has been around Neal Boortz quite often. Has it changed his voting habits. That would be the proof of his libertarianism.:inspector:

[Saru]

Yea my mom just went to support the ban on gay marriage, and the enforcement of anti-gay sex laws. (Technically in va it's illegal for gays to have sex) And yea, she's a pretty influential person in the community, and is trying to get a congressman into congress.

[stav]

http://townhall.com/columnists/MattBarber/2010/05/21/why_kagans_sexuality_matters?page=1

Is your mum a tv celeb?

In Australia, Rudd has interpreted the marriage legislation conservatively, where he could have been more liberal. Marriage remains the purview of a man and a woman at this time.

However - one can register a same-sex relationship in a civilly binding way. One now has equal rights - the civil legislation is/has been amended in a number of sectors. E.g. Social Security, Superannuation, Depedency Laws, and I could go on.

Importantly, we are strengthening our anti-discrimination laws. It's an exciting time here in Oz.

But - please come join me on that right-wing Town Hall website (see URL). I joined the debate at post 110.

I'm really enjoying it.

The conservative sector are quite slow to self-reflect and to scrutinise their own assumptions.

It's a psychological phenomenon. Their prejudice is really a function of unitegrated or disowned parts of themselves. You can caste it as a failure of self-acceptance, or as succumbing to a value system founded on fear.

Cheers
stav

[Rick336]

Hi, sorry but I agree with your mother, for that reason God create the Man and Woman to be loved and have children.

But he's a jealous god and he created a fiery torture chamber to punish them with eternal agony and suffering if they dare pray to another god.

Because god so loves the world. :love:




Rick

[bnmoore]

Hi, sorry but I agree with your mother, for that reason God create the Man and Woman to be loved and have children.

We already have children and love for women. As well as love of God, Spirit, Universal Intelligence, Infinite Mind, or any other name for that in which we live and move and have our being.