Sand Dancer
Crazy Cat Lady
Oh, they should be thankful for being allowed to be part of society.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Texas pastor openly calls on 'Christian nationalists' to 'impose their values on society'
- Thread starter We Never Know
- Start date
TLK Valentine
Read the books that others would burn.
That is exactly the opposite of how it works in the real world.
Here, let me explain:
You have an idea. What you don't have is the money to make that idea happen.
So you form a corporation, and you sell shares of stock in that corporation for the money you need to get started.
The people who buy the shares are now shareholders -- each one of them owns a small piece of your business. And you had better believe that all of them are expecting to make a profit from your idea.
So, it might be fine with you... but you're no longer the only person who gets a say... and unless you own at least 50.1% of the shares of stock, you can get outvoted.
TLK Valentine
Read the books that others would burn.
So why was being gay against the rules?
Homosexuality is not a case of what you want to do. It's a case of who you are, just like being a woman is a case of who you are, or being black is a case of who you are, or being Native American is a case of who you are. Society does not treat blacks, women, or gays as equals. It's not because those groups are not choosing to fit in to society, by not being blacks, females, or gays.
They want Native Americans to give up being Native too, and act like Christians instead. This is exactly the argument you are making for gays giving up being gays.
Society is the one in the wrong for not accepting people in who they are naturally, trying to make them give up their "otherness", their Blackness, their Native'ness, their gayness, and so forth. In other words, the true sinner is society, not the gays, or the blacks, or the females. In other words, the log is in your eye, not theirs.
I would try to conform to the standards of Christian love and acceptance instead, as expressed in the biblical texts, rather than conforming to the standards of White conservative Protestant traditionalist norms that calls being non-inclusive of others as what Christianity is. Christian love is suppose to be a radical love, going against the "righteousness of men", or social expectations of others to their harm, as is the case here.
Christian love is supposed to break down these walls of us and them, not build them higher like this. "They're welcome to be part of us, if they give up being who they are and become one of us instead". "We'll welcome Native Americans into society, if they become like European Christians like us. We'll even put them in schools to take away their old, sinful ways. Then they'll be pure and good and righteous like us. One of us."
This is exactly what you are saying about how gays are welcome in society, if they quit being gays. That's not what Christian love is. That is the systems of the world. That is the "ways of the world". That's not what Jesus taught. Jesus taught something radical. Loving other and accepting them as others to ourselves.
That's a much harder commandment to follow, than trying to "convert them" to look like us. "If you love those who love you, what reward will you get"? If you only love those who are exactly like you, is that really love?
Last edited:
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
I do believe fully in Jesus' message of help they neighbor, but that is not what determines wealth. The #1 factor is resources per capita, and then we go on from there.
TLK Valentine
Read the books that others would burn.
How does being good to others put money in my pocket?
Heyo
Veteran Member
It doesn't. It lowers the chance of others taking money out of your pocket by force.
Look at the church history, how it got lot of money.
I disagree with homosexuality being what the person is. But, in my opinion it is also irrelevant. If person wants to think so, I have no reason to try to change his mind. I think society or government should not intervene people's personal life at all. People should be free to live their life freely as they want. This means also, if someone doesn't want to be with people he doesn't like, he doesn't have to. And if we all have some common systems, like for example justice system, it should be the same for all. Meaning, if someone murders someone, he gets the same punishment as anyone else would get in the same situation. Now the problem is because the system tries to control too much. It should be set to have power only in very limited clear issues, like for judging only crimes like murder and theft.
Even though I think homosexual act is not reasonable nor good, I think people should be free to make their own mistakes. If government and society would not have too much power, this kind of things would not be any issue. Those who want to live that way could do it, and the others could live freely their own life without being part of any of the other life. And if there is a real serious crime against others, like murder or theft, it should be judged the same way in all cases, without any question about nativity, color or sexuality.
If native American wants to live by their own way, I think they should have own group where they can live by that way. Similarly, as if Christians want to live by their own way, they should have own group. I don't think it is reasonable to try to mix up different ways of life, because it can't be done without limiting some of the culture the groups want to have.
The homosexual act has been against rules because Bible tells it is wrong. Bible has a long list of sexual acts that are not accepted.
‘The man who commits adultery with another man’s wife, even he who commits adultery with his neighbor’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death. The man who lies with his father’s wife has uncovered his father’s nakedness: both of them shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. “‘If a man lies with his daughter-in-law, both of them shall surely be put to death: they have committed a perversion; their blood shall be upon them. If a man lies with a male, as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. “‘If a man takes a wife and her mother, it is wickedness: they shall be burned with fire, both he and they; that there may be no wickedness among you. “‘If a man lies with an animal, he shall surely be put to death; and you shall kill the animal. “‘If a woman approaches any animal, and lies down with it, you shall kill the woman, and the animal: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. “‘If a man takes his sister, his father’s daughter, or his mother’s daughter, and sees her nakedness, and she sees his nakedness; it is a shameful thing; and they shall be cut off in the sight of the children of their people: he has uncovered his sister’s nakedness; he shall bear his iniquity.
Lev. 20:10-17
And you may ask, why are those wrong. And I believe the reason why the homosexual act is not accepted is that it is not reasonable nor healthy.
Yes, often that is how it can go. But the investors could also expect just to get their money back, maybe with some profit and then the company could be founders company. Often it is not so. Founder doesn't necessary want to own it completely. But, even if the owner wants profit, it is the customers that make it possible. If they pay for the product or service, they think the owner deserves to have his share. If they would not think so, they would not buy it. And I think it is fair. Investing for people to have a job and services can be a good thing. And if the economy is really free, bad companies die of.
But what do you think, isn't a corporation the best form of communism, by corporation people can truly own commonly the means of production, unlike in the systems that are usually called communistic?
Sand Dancer
Crazy Cat Lady
In some pretty dishonest and insidious ways.
Sand Dancer
Crazy Cat Lady
The Bible has very narrow views of how to be right. Unspotted cattle, fish with scales only, being a man, being unlike pagans, etc. We don't live like that anymore. We know things are not black and white.
TLK Valentine
Read the books that others would burn.
In theory, yes, but does it really?
And it's a moot point if I have no money in my pocket to begin with.
TLK Valentine
Read the books that others would burn.
The Bible is the rules --and they aren't rules I recognize as binding.
The most unhealthy part is the death penalty the Bible requires, which again, I consider non-binding.
And what's "reasonable" about sexual attraction?
TLK Valentine
Read the books that others would burn.
Not by being good.
TLK Valentine
Read the books that others would burn.
I just said that -- but there's no "maybe" involved. Every investor expects to make a profit.
Quite often. Companies that don't make profits go bankrupt.
Except now you're doing it backwards. You need investors long before you can even think about customers. You've already sold off bits of your company in order to afford to produce a product for those customers to buy.
But you are right -- in a "free" economy, bad companies die... and the thousands, perhaps millions, of people who work and invested in it lose everything and end up on the street....
...broke, homeless, hungry, and covetously eyeing you.
Not really -- because the people who own the means of production don't actually produce anything. An employee-owned company, where the actual workers own the majority of the stock, or a cooperative, where the consumers themselves own and operate the business, would be closer to the ideal...certainly a lot closer than anything previously tried.
Reasonable sexual attraction is that which produces best offspring. The whole point of sexual attraction is that man and woman reproduce. Normally the attraction points to person who would be a good partner for that. But in some cases, it can be misdirected to something that is not reasonable.
One way to look this is to ask yourself a question, why are you attracted to something. Then, after you have answered to that, you can think, is it really reasonable. I believe there is always some reason for the attraction. And then the second phase is to think, is the reason good. And after that, even if the reason is good, is it good to do what you desire, because of the attraction.
Did you some time like it? Probably never. It is not a problem for me. I think Bible is a good recommendation and guide, but I have no reason to force people to live by it.
Sand Dancer
Crazy Cat Lady
I used to. Since it doesn't reflect current knowledge, I can't take some of it seriously. There is some good stuff in it though.