Why do Christians like to fixate so much on homosexuality?

Post Reply New Topic

LKL:

But I don't think that was the point of the thread.

We could ask the poster what he thought he meant. But in any case it SAID Christians fixate on homosexuality.

I responded to what it said, seeing no signals of irony or subtext.

The poster did not correct me if I misunderstood.

So you say I am disingenuous because I believed what I read?

How can anybody talk in a culture where no one says what he means?

Interesting point.
I would say in answer that every post I made on here constitute my belief. Would all that I post be up for others to ignore or agree or disagree? I would say yes.
Were someone to come along and post something that flew in the face of all I posted and give me cause to reassess this beliefs I would find it commendable.
Why? Because I am a seeker of knowledge I am here in as much to learn and to enlighten and on this particular forum I would imagine that anyone would be similarly inclined?
Again is the views that people post to be disagreed with, asked to give account for or explain, or simply ignored? Is this a diarised account without interaction or in this forum do we expect a discourse to further efforts to understand ourselves and others?
If you say "That is the end of that"
What you "seem" to say is that anything written is not up for input or for disagreement or different points of view.
Again is that what you are saying?

As time goes on and your own beliefs have been expressed, I am sure you will find WP members quite willing to accommodate you.

LKL:

Just out of curiosity, do you defend gays when Christians around you assume that you're a bigot like them (or, if everyone in your circle is as open-minded as you, do you write letters defending the honor of Christianity as a non-bigoted organization when you hear Pat Robertson, or any one of dozens of other loathsome Christian leaders, spreading hate on the airwaves or in print)? Or do you only speak up when non-Christians start to mention how fed up they are with Christians spreading hate? Because, frankly, that's the only time I generally see Christians speaking out on the topic with anything other than bigotry.

I am not now nor have I ever been any kind of activist. I do not interact with bigots. These days I do not watch TV. Having seen how futile my attempts to promulgate reason have been, I stopped trying.

I speak up when I see someone speaking clear false or accusing me of things I will not be accused of - IF I think I have half a chance of being heard.

As for bigotry - I was well into my 20s before I learned homosexuality existed. I have had students who said they were grateful I never attacked their homosexuality - actually, I never noticed it. In other cases, I paid no attention. If one is a good student I enjoy that. If one is easy to talk to I enjoy that. And the opposite.

I have a brother-in-law in what the state counts as a same-sex marriage and I am willing to assume the relationship meets the definition of marriage I have been using here. If he feels we treat them with distaste or bigotry he hides it well.


DO NOT JUDGE ALL CHRISTIANS AS THE SAME - whether good or bad. THAT is bigotry.

LKL:


I say, again, that I have been attempting to have a conversation/argument with you the entire time, and am responding to what you say to the best of my understanding of it.

If that be true, fine. Unfortunately your understanding has not been maximal

Whether that is due to my poor communication or your biassed hearing muddled by your experience, God knows.

In any case, I will gladly talk with you on anything BUT homosexuality. You are too fixated on the subject.

Idiolect is not strictly a neologism, going back at least sixty years. It is a term commonly used in Linguistics for the speech patterns of one person. Roughly, language = nation, dialect = one town or clan or other group within the nation, idiolect = individual.

But that is VERY unprofessionally stated, and precise definitions are complex and often fought over.

Some technical terms are so deeply imbedded you forget that to outsiders it is jargon.

I think that people are people and that morality is morality.
Good people I have seen amoung many different religious and racial persuasions.
I find it abysmal that some Christians are intolerant towards gay people because they are gay.
I find it abysmal that some Muslims find an excuse to use a Holy War as an excuse to destroy non-believers
I find it abysmal that some non-religious people will condemn all Muslims as no good because of the actions of a few.
But let's face it these qualifications I could run at a constant.
What it comes down to is bigotry, ignorance, intolerance and immorality is pervasive and at every structure and level of every society.
On a personal level we are down to keeping in check our own morality and trying to teach our children the very best of what we can offer.
I do not see any totality of deviancy in any one collective people.
There is good and bad in all societies and religious people.
In fact I would dare to suggest that MOST people are inherently good.

As do I. This does not mean that I must approve of the actions of people who are homosexual. It is possible to distinguish between sin and sinner. I find it quite strange that some humanists and atheists can mistake a social contract for a values system. These are not the same thing. The fact that the 'Golden Rule' can be reached through democratic process says nothing of the Christian requirement that respect still must be offered, even if it is never going to be reciprocated. There is a vast gap between a mutual agreement of respect and something that must be given regardless. This applies also, to Christians who dislike a particular subject.

Though it offends people, especially in this modern world, to be told what they are doing is wrong. It is still incumbent on the Christian to love the person in question. Though this standard is difficult to meet, and often is not, can you say the same is required of the humanist or the atheist?

In what setting?

I can tell you that because an Atheist doesn't have an obligation to a maker, it need not excuse them from any personal morality.
I can say that respecting a person's right to happiness and make choices that do not hurt others is a good morality to have.
It is about fairness.
I am not gay. I don't think that in our to respect gay people I have to try being gay. I don't think I have to treat them better or worse than anyone else. I am personally quite OK with hating a Muslim or a gay person or a Christian or an Asian or an Aboriginal or a Jewish person or a Woman. The key component is that the reason for doing so is that it had nothing to do with them being any of these things.
Hating all members of this group is not right and neither is hating them all except for an exception of a select couple of known members of this group.
I presume that anyone I see or meet will be a person and will not be the sum of their religion nor their sexuality nor their skin colour nor their race.
I do understand the want to judge a person by their difference and how easy and neat it is to just pigeonhole them all.

As to whether the same expectations are require by others to be non-bigoted? I would say yes. Does a Christian belief structure make it an easy mark for those rallying against homophobia? Yes.
It this bigoted? Yes.
Now we are getting to the crux. If someone attacks a belief as bigoted it means that they are attacking that belief and rally saying this belief is wrong. If the person to which the belief is held says "You know I know my faith says X but my personal take on it is Y" then the person in question may or may not be bigoted. It depends solely on what Y represents.

I personally think if a person is good in their hearts then who cares what turns their heads or what they do in their bedrooms. I don't care to know what anyone else does in their bedrooms or what their personal preferences are. Their personal morality? That is different.

Gnerally speaking: If/when two or more people agree to be accountable amongst themselves, let them be accountable there in whatever manner they wish and according to their own selected standard/s and only question them when one's own life, liberty or property has been compromised ... and then whenever someone else might want to join their particular circle, let him or her either conform to their ways or attempt to persuade them to change.

Am I missing something here? Not sure what this has to do with the topic at hand.
That said I will likely post exclusively in this forum because that is my interest. I will likely post in threads I like the sounds of the title and suspect it will open up interesting debate.
I see anyone there and any views as potentially worth answering. Is this an expectation here? Would I be wrong in doing this?

Not unless you are missing the aforementioned accommodation since extended.

You know it is not that I am saying that it is fair that Christians are seen as a "soft target" in such discussions but let's face it people do and will jump on such things fair or not. It is the same with Muslims and terrorists. I still maintain that most people are good and have decent morals. Most people are good regardless of personal faith.

When I talk of personal morality I am talking about morality that a person holds dear and i suspect most people have a morality that would be across the board pretty in line with your objective morality. Most people don't murder, steal, rape or have adulterous relationship. People generally treat each other well.

Sorry I am not understanding this at all.

Aforementioned being something before. Accommodation being something residing and since extended being...?

Sorry something, that I was, was previous residing here?

I don't mean to seem obtuse i really don't.

The confusion or whatever here might be my fault. Lots going on here on WP this morning ... and I hope you can forgive me for not presently having the energy required to sort all of that out at the moment. The willingness is definitely here, of course, but I am personally dealing with classic depression and low stamina ...

Off to get an orange ...

Sorry to hear that