PaliRichard Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 I seem to remember you ending an earlier post with the quote "we're queer and we're here" Would it be considered homophobic behaviour if an hetrosexual person referred to an homosexual person by this term ? One of my best friends is gay and I call her queer all the time (she calls me gayboy in return and I'm straight - not sure how that works ) It's all about context, I recently reported someone at work for calling me a Scottish t**t, my queer friend calls me that all the time, the difference is that she means it in a loving way, the guy I reported was being nasty - it's all in the context. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted February 8, 2013 Author Share Posted February 8, 2013 any reservation they may have on gay marriage is likely to label them with a an accusation of being homophobic What other description would you use? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 If they film it, perhaps you could be best boy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aliceBB Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 Men & men, women & women ANYONE should be able to as they please with their own lives.. IMO How about adult siblings? Should they be able to marry each other? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janie48 Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 Source please. Secondly, it's perfectly possible for a gay man to be a bigot, yes. There are certain groups in the lgbt community that are very intolerant. You always ask for a source when i state anything,it would appear you can't believe anything i say without me having to prove i was telling the truth. Anyway here's one. Yes i wouldn't be surprised if they had some bigots in the group you mention you get them in all areas of society,its not nice,but its a fact of life. In reply to your bit in bold I will put this in bold also, just to make sure it sinks in. Nobody and no legislation is forcing or going to force any church to marry gay people. If there was a hint of a move to force churches to marry same-sex couples, I would fight for the side of the churches, as would every person who values liberty I know, so it isn't going to happen. With this in mind would you care to think again about the question I posed, and the main point of my post, which you skipped past. Don't you think it's odd though that although there is this clear majority for change in society, the Church - which we are repeatedly told provides the moral backbone to that society - is prevented from making its own mind up whether it wishes to implement or reject the proposal? We allow other religions to make that call, but not yours. How is this not a clear case of hypocrisy, and fundamentally in direct contrast to the rights that you demand for the Church and it's members? To put it another way, in your own post #441 you specifically said that the state should stay out of Church affairs, and I have agreed with that, and yet the state has involved itself in your Church's affairs by banning gay marriage. Don't you think it's odd that you need protecting from yourselves, in case you change your minds? You didn't have to repeat what you stated before i knew what you meant,you keep referring to the church as "yours" i am not the vicar! if you want a clearer understanding of how the church runs its affairs you need to speak to someone with that authority. I know i often speak in defence of the church,but thats because i respect the church as an institution and recognise a lot of the valuable and good work it does.Do you think because i only attend church occasionally and am not fully up to date with developments i shouldn't show some support and express an opinion. I know enough about the church to know it is making an effort to evolve and adapt to modern society in some ways and that it has to take into consideration the opinions of its various members,many of whom hold conservative views.I may not share all those views myself,but that doesn't mean i don't respect them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janie48 Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 What other description would you use? I can't speak for them all but i believe that most of them only wish to protect the traditional institution of marriage. What description would you use? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aliceBB Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 The most enduring Judao-Christian taboos are against adult men having sex with (i) other adult males (ii) children/minors (iii) their own siblings (iv) animals (i) is now decriminalised. Nobody would (I hope) argue that (ii) ever should be legal. What about (iii) and (iv)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaliRichard Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 The most enduring Judao-Christian taboos are against adult men having sex with (i) other adult males (ii) children/minors (iii) their own siblings (iv) animals (i) is now decriminalised. Nobody would (I hope) argue that (ii) ever should be legal. What about (iii) and (iv)? Any scriptural sources for two, three and four? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 I can't speak for them all but i believe that most of them only wish to protect the traditional institution of marriage. What description would you use? When you say the traditional institution of marriage, do you mean the type where women are very much subservient to the man, and they vow to obey him? Or are you talking about the modern version where a marriage is a union of equals? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aliceBB Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 Any scriptural sources for two, three and four? Incest : Leviticus 20:11-17 Bestiality : http://www.openbible.info/topics/bestiality Paedophilia...interestingly, no, sorry! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.