You could also draw a correlation to increasing acceptance of black folks, and particularly interracial marriage.
Why pick gay people and marriage?
Tom
-
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!
Another Business Bites The Dust Because Of Its Christian Anti-Gay Bias
- Thread starter Skwim
- Start date
Why pick gay people and marriage?
Tom
Skwim
Veteran Member
But you just said, "The churches were quite active in fighting slavery, and the bible itself became the prominent tool." So, how was the Bible used as a prominent tool in fighting slavery?
.
Wait...baking the cake is participation in the wedding?
My wife bakes wedding cakes, but doesn't agree. In fact, she gave me the stink eye when I asked her, since it seems a strange contrivance.
Still...where does this line of thinking logically stop? Christian suit makers? Waiters at reception centres? Where?
I would name you "Honorary Queer", but I already did.
I honestly believe that the "straight but not narrow" type people have more to do with advancing equality than all the Pride Parades ever.
Tom
When the leadership, who attribute their respective offices to the will of God, refuse to acknowledge the problem, when they protect the perp and the treasury and abandon the victim, you're entitled to doubt. And especially Woytyła then Ratzinger did that, and Borgoglio, trying to fix it, has met entrenched opposition all the way. And that's just the RCC.
What is the test for 'degeneracy'? Were the opponents of slavery degenerate? The advocates of divorce?
That's the issue for you, isn't it ─ homosexuals being allowed to accept their homosexuality, and society acknowledging that it's an aspect of natural sexuality. Whereas I see no issue there at all, just light where there was darkness.
Isn't it a very old Australian joke that Australians will bet on anything, even two flies crawling up the window?
Not that I like governments and organizations profiting from gambling that includes the social destruction of compulsive gamblers. I'd happily see that stopped. But you're speaking of individual attitudes, not commercial and legislative ones.
On two occasions I lived with a woman then I married the third one. No ill came of any of it. One of the other two married and the other never married but has lived for several decades with her partner. (In her jurisdiction, those in de facto relationships have property rights on separation. That should be universal.)
The idea of non-divorce is absurd ─ the locking of people into situations they really truly don't want.
Child porn is morally objectionable on several grounds ─ it's deeply damaging to the child's psychological development, it's exploitation, and it's slavery.
I find it objectionable. Nor do I understand what the parents are trying to achieve. It seems to me to the fruits of their ignorance.
I see those qualities as strongly as ever in the society I live in. The exceptions have always been there. And you and I differ on the rights of women, hence on abortion.
The thing I find generically objectionable is the enormous growth of the gap between rich and poor, of social and economic inequality. I believe in a level playing field, equal opportunity, and the elimination of poverty. Even a quick glance at the world will show you that these questions have had plenty of lip service and no action.
In fact, according to the USA Gallup poll, approval of pornography increased 5% from 2017 to 2018. That's what, another fifteen million people now okay with pornography?[/quote] My objection to pornography is the exploitation of its participants. If other things are equal, then all societies have had a sex industry ─ you can read up on the rules of bonking your slaves in the Tanakh, part of the Law that Jesus said would not be changes for one of many glimpses of this fact.
So what should people born with homosexual inclination actually do with their lives? Suffer because you disapprove, or form meaningful relationships, as most do?
At this point it becomes necessary to single out the pedophiles. Pedophilia is also a sexual orientation, and I assume is as consuming and important to those who have it, as other sexual orientations are. The huge problem with it is that it produces victims, and leaves them with permanent damage, so it can't be tolerated.
Nice post, mate.
And to confirm, yeah, the joke is that Aussies will bet on two flies climbing up a wall. Although it's not too much of a joke, in truth.
Sports betting is more visible now, and some states used to ban slot machines and now allow them (like where I live), so perhaps that's what was meant.
But our version of Veterans Day includes special exemptions to allow a betting game to be played by veterans without a license, etc (they'd play regardless, it's just interesting that it's specifically legislated) and there has been a public holiday in Melbourne for a horse race since 1865.
I think some things are more obvious now...for example homosexuality...and for some that relates to an easy link to 'moral degredation' since that plays into a narrative for them.
Drinking is down, racial and sexual discrimination is down (if more newsworthy), murder rates are often better, domestic violence and child abuse are more commonly dealt with.
But sure, we are sliding into end times because people don't okay hard enough. Just like Sweden did. Errr...or Norway. Australia? New Zealand?
*shrugs*
shmogie
Well-Known Member
no,
Nice try, of course you left out ´custom decorated´, usually requested in a homosexual theme, two grooms, sammy loves benny, etc. I note by your spelling that you are probably from the UK, or a bad American speller. If the former, then your country apparently doesn´t believe in unalienable rights, like free speech, freedom of religion, etc. Conformity seems to be the great goal.
In the US we have the Bill of rights that protects citizens. Freedom of religion is one of those.
The cake issue has pretty much been settled in the favor of a Christian baker whom the homosexual activists decided to single out, and sue.
A case has been taken by the Supreme Court from two calligraphists who do wedding announcements, and their Christian faith prohibits them from participating in homosexual weddings.
The issue will soon be settled once and for all.
It ends when homosexuals stop asking Christians to do what they cannot do. It isn´t about providing them generic goods or services, it is usually about providing goods or services at or related to rites, services, or rituals that Christians cannot be a part of in any fashion.
PruePhillip
Well-Known Member
Here's one example. The leading light of the British anti-slavery was "William Wilberforce ...a leader of the movement to stop the slave trade...He was independent of party. In 1785, he became an evangelical Christian, which resulted in major changes to his lifestyle and a lifelong concern for social reform and progress...take on the cause of abolition, and he soon became one of the leading English abolitionists. He headed the parliamentary campaign against the British slave trade for twenty years until the passage of the Slave Trade Act of 1807." Wikipedia.
Republicans in the USA cited the bible continuously in their campaign against the Democrat's policy on slavery. It's principles of universalism, compassion and doing unto others what would be done to you were significant motivations for anti-slavery.
Pro-slavery advocates also quoted the bible, in as much as slavery existed during biblical times (including the Jews themselves.) It's important to understand that the "bible" didn't condone slavery - it accepted there was the practice of slavery, just as it accepted there was a practice of warfare, monarchy, empires and the like. The bible didn't see its mission as saving the world as much as changing the individual. And of course, the bible states that he who leads into slavery will be led into slavery.
Skwim
Veteran Member
Okay, but not an example of the Bible used as a prominent tool in fighting slavery,
Sorry, but your mere assertion that "Republicans in the USA cited the bible continuously in their campaign against the Democrat's policy on slavery. . . ." doesn't constitute any kind of confirmation for the Bible being used as a prominent tool in fighting slavery,
Oh, you mean like it's important to understand that the "bible" (lower case and in in quotation marks for some reason) didn't condone burnt offerings - it accepted there was the practice of burnt offerings, just as it accepted there was a practice of warfare, monarchy, empires and the like.
To tell you the truth, the Bible, being an inanimate object principally made of "paper," wouldn't have seen (understood?) anything.
Hmmm. Couldn't find that verse at all. But, if you're thinking of Revelation 13:10 where in the King James version it says,
"He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints"
.
Last edited:
PruePhillip
Well-Known Member
The principle here is the same for all injustice: what you have done to others will be done to you.
I have long thought this actually said slavery, so thanks for that.
As an aside. The Christian Gospel is not the Old Testament. The latter provided the symbols and symbolic language by which we understand the Gospel (ie the lamb slain from the foundation of the world, our great high priest, God's people, the inner sanctuary, redeemed by His blood, the bondman and the free man, the Promised Land, exile in Babylon, freed from Egypt and so on, so on.)
And in the New Testament there is no place for the slave.
Forget what such and such a religion has done, that doesn't alter what the bible says.
PruePhillip
Well-Known Member
For many, it was the ONLY tool. Christians are also informed by a general
theme of the bible - that of universalism: we are all God's creation, none is
better than another, we are all brethren.
PruePhillip
Well-Known Member
That's disingenuous. The "Bible" is the sum of its authors and its cultural impact.
It seems to have understood a lot, a given by the historic record of the Jews and
Israel to this day, as seen in prophecy going back to the Bronze Age - by way of
example.
Skwim
Veteran Member
But the Bible doesn't treat slavery as an injustice. If it did I seriously doubt god would have set out rules on how to go about it.
Please, not with the trite apologetic that the slavery mentioned was somehow "symbolic"; a metaphor.
Excuse me, but if you read the New Testament you'd find plenty of places for slavery.
Colossians 3:22
22 Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to curry their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord.
Colossians 4:1
1Masters, provide your slaves with what is right and fair, because you know that you also have a Master in heaven.
1 Timothy 6:1
1All who are under the yoke of slavery should consider their masters worthy of full respect, so that God’s name and our teaching may not be slandered.
1 Peter 2:18
18Slaves, in reverent fear of God submit yourselves to your masters, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh.
Titus 2:9-10
9 Teach slaves to be subject to their masters in everything, to try to please them, not to talk back to them,
10 and not to steal from them, but to show that they can be fully trusted, so that in every way they will make the teaching about God our Savior attractive.
Ephesians 6:5-9
5 Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ.
6 Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart.
7 Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not people,
8 because you know that the Lord will reward each one for whatever good they do, whether they are slave or free.
9 And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him.
22 Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to curry their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord.
Colossians 4:1
1Masters, provide your slaves with what is right and fair, because you know that you also have a Master in heaven.
1 Timothy 6:1
1All who are under the yoke of slavery should consider their masters worthy of full respect, so that God’s name and our teaching may not be slandered.
1 Peter 2:18
18Slaves, in reverent fear of God submit yourselves to your masters, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh.
Titus 2:9-10
9 Teach slaves to be subject to their masters in everything, to try to please them, not to talk back to them,
10 and not to steal from them, but to show that they can be fully trusted, so that in every way they will make the teaching about God our Savior attractive.
Ephesians 6:5-9
5 Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ.
6 Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart.
7 Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not people,
8 because you know that the Lord will reward each one for whatever good they do, whether they are slave or free.
9 And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him.
Sorry, but again, your mere assertion just doesn't cut it.
Yes, but it still doesn't say a thing about the Bible being used as a prominent tool in fighting slavery.
.
Last edited:
PruePhillip
Well-Known Member
Too much to take in (I am working at the moment)
I would say ALL people who fought against the practice of slavery from the
17th Century till the end of the Civil War employed the bible. Even when
someone did not directly quote the bible they would employ some biblical
concept, ie Lincoln stating that anyone who supported slavery should have
it tried on them is a reference to the Golden Rule in the bible.
The bible wasn't A prominent tool, it could have been THE prominent tool.
PruePhillip
Well-Known Member
Certainly. Not denying that.
Christian writers did not speak of earthly conquest or enslavement.
They saw many things they considered quite evil. Some of them,
like slavery, were established long before even the bronze age.
Biblical doctrine sought to ameliorate the condition of the slave by
appealing to the one who owned one. Remember, Christianity is
not about making a better world but a better person - it felt that the
world was irredeemably evil and would get worse.
So... no biblical Christian was going to wave placards, seize the
levers of government, activate for social change, stop wars, reduce
poverty, ban prostitution etc etc etc. That is the lot of modernity and
its interpretation of Christianity.
I did, indeed. I was unaware putting figurines on a cake broke some sort of religious commandment. So you're arguing now that making a cake for a gay marriage should be mandatory, but doing so if there are two same sex figurines on top should not be?
Or are you trying to move goalposts?
Wedding flowers then...thoughts?
Or from any country in the Commonwealth, or basically any other country where English is taught under English language rules.
I'm Australian.
Oh please, what a lot of rot.
I assume you're talking about Amendment One, and it doesn't, actually. It speaks to Congress not establishing laws prohibiting the free exercise of religion. Which is always open to interpretation (unless you think culling should be permissable, of course).
Still, I would agree this has been breached at times.
Minersville School District v. Gobitis - Wikipedia
Wait, so you're fine with the rulings now you agree with them?
Which baker are you referring to, there haave been more than one.
I think that was Matthew 7:3-5, right?
Personally, I'd hate having someone make my wedding cake who didn't want to.
But I'd also hate living in a world where someone walks into a shop and is rejected out of hand because of their political beliefs, religious beliefs, colour or sexuality.
And on balance, the second seems worse to me.
As always, how a 'Christian' is identified is probably the key to how accurate this is right?
shmogie
Well-Known Member
Of course, religious conviction on a very clear and narrow issue, guaranteed by the Constitution, has nothing to do with race, politics, or anything else
Critics always try and expand the concept to area's not even in question.
If the New Testament stated that socialists or left handed people wearing plaid were to be refused service, a case under the First amendment could be made, but, of course, it cannot.
You state that if someone doesn't want to bake a cake for you, you would go elsewhere, so would I, especially if I had plenty of other options.,
However, the homosexual activists search out Christian business owners , then set up situations where they know the business owner cannot do what they want, then sue.
It is a campaign of hate, and vengeance.
shmogie
Well-Known Member
Further, the New Testament, the book of policies and principles that Christians follow, contains no support for slavery.