Christianity, bullying, and gay straight alliances.

I'm ignoring the evidence? I thought I was the one pointing out evidence that the Catholic Church might not have your best interest at heart and you were the one claiming that it's all just speculation.

You are trying to tell me that a world wide, multi-million dollar organization, that owns their own bank, had ties with the mafia for allegedly money laundering, has tried to cover up other scandals, and has a long dark history of being involved in politics and war, doesn't have an interest in making money?

Do you think they made all the money by accident or that Jesus went out into the desert and turned one dollar into millions?

I am sorry but you are either very naive or being intentionally ignorant. I just don't know how you can look at such a rich and powerful organization and think that money doesn't influence them at all?


Let me flip it back on you: What do you think the main reason is that the Catholic Church won't allow gays to marry, and do you have any proof that there aren't any other factors involved.

 

It only seems fair that that gay people have exactly the same access to the years of misery, attritional bickering and descent into a messy divorce that us hetero married people have.*

*If my wife reads this I'm obviously joking

 

This is actually pretty spot on

It doesn't excuse their bigotted stance, but there is no need to look for complex answers when the churches own doctrine is explicit about things.

The fact they are wrong is just fine details!

 

My confusion on this issue can be expressed as follows, and I am interested in a christian response.
Fair enough, you have a venerable tradition that dictates your moral behaviour, and I wish you all the very best in that. If you don't want to engage in gay marriage, abortion, and a whole host of other behaviours, I think that is 100% solid gold your right.
My question is - what on earth gives you all the arrogance to then force your chosen path on others who have no engagement with it at all?

paul

 

No more or less than anyone else, which is the point of this thread really.

 

Creating more perishes and priests does not guarantee that people will join the Church. It's like saying that if I open a chain of restaurants, I'll have more customers. While this may appear to be true on the surface, it is a false logic because there has to first be a demand for for your restaurant. You can't just open up new churches and expect people to show up, especially when overall demand is on the decline. This why churches tend to flourish in countries/area's where there is a lot of poverty and lower education, some people need believe that the next life they have won't be awful.

Banks are in the business of making money. Somebody has to run the bank, and whether it is a government, a corporation, or a Church, doesn't change that fact.

And hospitals also need to generate revenue. They are not free. The sick/wounded people in the hospital are supposed to be the patients. If a doctor makes people sick, kills them or mistreats them, the doctor can be fired and sued. They're not going to get moved to another hospital. Moreover Doctors deal with real diseases and other medical conditions. They aren't on the street telling people that they need to see a doctor when they don't. Not to mention that the medical community are continually improving their understanding of diseases and medicine/treatments, while Priests are reciting parables from thousands of years ago.

You are right it "could" be a positive statement. I however fail to see how hiring someone from the mafia to do your finances could ever be seen a positive light. It's either a stupid thing to do, or a shady thing to do.

 

Slavery's got a long-held culture and tradition.

All a long-held culture and tradition means, is that people haven't critically examined it for a long time.

 

No Aiki Mac it doesn't because no one is trying to change that tradition - and here is the important bit - for those that choose to adhere to it. No one, at least here in oz, is talking about making people do anything. They are talking about allowing people to do something and enjoy rights that many of the rest of us take for granted. These are completely different things. Vaguely alluding to some possible future forcing of the church to marry gay people as a threat is a tribute to the desperation of the argument you are pursuing.

Oh, the link - more of the same dressed up differently.

paul

 

Fixed that for you.

 

Then the church is a business and it should pay it's taxes. Could mean they have more to worry about than just a few queer folk feeling them up.

 

KUDOS


Actually, more and more churches are closing for lack of funding due to lack of followers in the area.

They are not trying to create more, they are looking to cut back

 

The church is a business. However, the law looks upon it as a religion first.

 

Im sorry, how on earth does creating a new legal right force people to change? Particulalry if it only impacts a minority of people. At the end of the day what actual difference will this make to anyone other than the people getting married. It is ALREADY happening in a few parts of the world, and guess what, christianity is still getting on with it's business, and the sun still comes up. Gay people all over the world are ALREADY living the same lives as I do as a straight married person. Once again, the world still turns, and most of us go about our business as usual.

Fundamentally this is just yet another last ditch stand to defend yet another narrow minded anachronism who's time has come.

Oh, and the briefs... until I got bored, which admittedly wasn't long, but longer than you by your own admission.

paul

 

Gay marriages are like Chi/Qi/Ki, politics, and religion.

You have the left or the right and those whom like to defend their belief beyond the scope of logic

 

In`all honesty Aiki Mac, the problem here with the small mind is not mine, at least not in this case

The problem is that you adhere to a philosophical system that is incapable of changing, as it is based in the idea that all that is moral true has been pre-defined for you thousands of years ago. I have changed. I grew up in a place where homsexuality was a huge taboo, thought gay people were wrong and evil, and then by chance ended up working with a massive number of them and changed my mind. They are just the same as everyone else - not even the stuff they get up to in the bedroom is radically different to a whole bunch of straight people do. They just share particular similarities physically. That's it. That's what all of this wierd fuss is about. The fact that you are unable to see the utter absurdity of dis-allowing people to voluntarily undertake a public bonding ritual on this basis is just a teensy bit anachronistic.

But hey, all I have to do is wait. History is well and truly on my side on this one, all of this sort of stuff endsup going the way of the dinosaur in time.

paul