MOBILE USERS: m.isthmus.com
Connect with Isthmus:         Newsletters 
Thursday, March 5, 2015 |  Madison, WI: 12.0° F  Fair
Collapse Photo Bar

Tolerance message from United Church of Christ censored

If it's news, but not politics, then it goes here.

Do think messages of tolerance and inclusion should be censored?

Yes, we need censorship for freedom.
2
8%
Yes, censorship is the price of civility.
0
No votes
Yes, only religious views of bigotry and prejudice should be allowed
7
28%
No. We love our freedom.
16
64%
 
Total votes : 25

Postby kurt_w » Fri Dec 03, 2004 4:28 pm

I'm no fan of Andrew Sullivan, and this is probably the first, last, and only time I will quote him in the Forum:

The simple truth is that there isn't a single civil right I would deny to an evangelical Christian. I've defended their freedom of religion, of association, of disassociation, and believe they should be treated with respect. I wouldn't dream of drumming them out of the military, firing them for their faith, tearing up their relationships, or taking their children away from them. The favor, alas, is not returned.
kurt_w
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 5617
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 3:11 pm

Postby Chuck_Schick » Fri Dec 03, 2004 4:48 pm

bubbaquimby wrote:Problem is that both sides have been totally stereotyped. People only think of Christians being viewed as fundamentalist Christians and trying to force fed them Christianity.

Well first off, I don't think that's true. I come from a Catholic background (not hardcore, but still) and most of the folks I was raised around were of some Christian denomination or another. But funny thing: You really couldn't tell what sect they belonged to unless they talked about it, which they rarely did, because faith is a very personal thing, as it should be. As the man says:

"And when ye pray, ye shall not be as the hypocrites: for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have received their reward.

But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thine inner chamber, and having shut thy door, pray to thy Father who is in secret, and thy Father who seeth in secret shall recompense thee."

ââ?‰?Â
Chuck_Schick
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 10385
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2001 4:41 pm
Location: back atcha

Postby bubbaquimby » Fri Dec 03, 2004 5:08 pm

[quote="Chuck_Schick] The Declaration of Independence invokes the terms "Nature's God" and "Creator" but this is not a document of law at this point, but rather a historical manifesto of sorts. As such, the text is not parsed by the courts, nor is it necessary to revise or amend it.

The Constitution, on the other hand contains not one reference to God, the Almighty, Creator, Faith (not in the religious sense, at least), or any other loaded religious term you can come up with. If you don't believe me, pull it up for yourself and use your browser's "find" function to try to prove me wrong:

http://www.house.gov/Constitution/Constitution.html

Article I of the Bill of Rights states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ...." and that's about it. Now there seem to be a number of revisionist historians out there who will tell you the Founding Fathers were all about putting God before Country, but to me that amendment boils down to "do what you want but please keep it to yourselves, we've got real work to do here." And that pretty much sums it up for me.[/quote]

I never said that God or Creator was in it. I just meant that their values were based on it, or at least many of them. Ben Franklin's call for pray during it is a good example. Now don't missunderstand, I don't think that they wanted a Christian nation and some were deists and some were from Calvin backgrounds. So from the get go this country had people dissagreeing on values of what America really should be. I get sick of both sides using the founding fathers as the rally for what America should be. If it was still as the Founding Fathers started then only white men who owned land would be able to vote. The country is constantly changing on what values we should have. It is built on Christians values and secular values and they tend to dissagree often and probably always will.
bubbaquimby
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2003 3:31 pm

Postby Ducatista » Fri Dec 03, 2004 5:21 pm

bubbaquimby wrote:I am a traditional person who believes that in my religion marriage is a holy and very important part of church and shouldn't be taken lightly. It should be between a man and a women who for the most part are looking to raise a family following the teachings of Christ and commandments of God. If the wedding is in my church I feel that both the bride and groom should believe in these things and if not then they can marry in another church, with the justice of the peace or whatever. But I believe that kids should have both a mom and a dad, they need both. I was missed out on a lot by not having a dad around for many of my youth and I can only imagine what it is like without one all the time.

Thanks for having a go, I appreciate it. But it doesn't answer my question. Why don't you think a same-sex marriage can fulfill all the criteria you have for a worthy marriage? (Other than the man/woman thing, which defines your objection, doesn't explain it.) Why should same sex/opposite sex matter, if the couple is looking to raise a family and follow the teachings of Christ and commandments of God? What isn't holy about their marriage? THAT'S the part no one's been able to answer for me.

Even if we assume that the primary purpose of marriage is raisin' babies, isn't the value in a two-parent family the stability, and the warmth, and the example of caring and teamwork and partnership that two loving parents will provide? Why does it have to be two parents of the opposite sex?

An aside on the two-parent imperitive: my dad died when I was five, and my mom mever remarried. ("Ah ha," you might be saying, "and look how you turned out!") Mom made a stable, happy home full of love and laughter and loyalty and curiousity and music and joy ââ?‰?Â
Ducatista
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 4392
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2004 12:31 pm
Location: 53703

Postby bubbaquimby » Fri Dec 03, 2004 5:54 pm

Ducatista wrote:
bubbaquimby wrote:I am a traditional person who believes that in my religion marriage is a holy and very important part of church and shouldn't be taken lightly. It should be between a man and a women who for the most part are looking to raise a family following the teachings of Christ and commandments of God. If the wedding is in my church I feel that both the bride and groom should believe in these things and if not then they can marry in another church, with the justice of the peace or whatever. But I believe that kids should have both a mom and a dad, they need both. I was missed out on a lot by not having a dad around for many of my youth and I can only imagine what it is like without one all the time.

Thanks for having a go, I appreciate it. But it doesn't answer my question. Why don't you think a same-sex marriage can fulfill all the criteria you have for a worthy marriage? (Other than the man/woman thing, which defines your objection, doesn't explain it.) Why should same sex/opposite sex matter, if the couple is looking to raise a family and follow the teachings of Christ and commandments of God? What isn't holy about their marriage? THAT'S the part no one's been able to answer for me.

Even if we assume that the primary purpose of marriage is raisin' babies, isn't the value in a two-parent family the stability, and the warmth, and the example of caring and teamwork and partnership that two loving parents will provide? Why does it have to be two parents of the opposite sex?

An aside on the two-parent imperitive: my dad died when I was five, and my mom mever remarried. ("Ah ha," you might be saying, "and look how you turned out!") Mom made a stable, happy home full of love and laughter and loyalty and curiousity and music and joy ââ?‰?Â
bubbaquimby
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2003 3:31 pm

Postby skrattypants » Fri Dec 03, 2004 6:17 pm

ââ?¬Å?I AM NOT AGAINST GAY MARRIAGE. Is that clear enough for you. I don't want it in my church.ââ?¬?

ââ?¬Å?i am not against ___________________________ââ?¬? (fill in the blank with prejudicial exclusion of choice).
ââ?¬Å?i donââ?¬â?¢t want it in my ________________________________ââ?¬? (fill in organization or orifice of choice here).

yes, you are. you may not know it yet, but you are. it doesnââ?¬â?¢t feel good to admit, but it will come easier with creeping senility and crushed expectations. saying itââ?¬â?¢s all right for others but not good enough for you is more than slightly elitist and disdainful. and please donââ?¬â?¢t haul out that most nauseating of christian homilies: ââ?¬Å?hate the sin, but love the sinnerââ?¬?.

your god is all around you, in rainbows and puppies and every blade of grass and every flaming homo. love every man and every woman. and every man and every man. and every woman and every woman. life is just too short for anything else.

ââ?¬Å?But I believe that kids should have both a mom and a dad, they need both.ââ?¬?

kids of gay marriages oftentimes have both. they just both happen to be male or female. raising a healthy child has less to do with presenting gender and more to do with offering a stable, loving environment. clich�©, but true.

i don�t mean to come down on you, but i�m having a difficult time not seeing the hypocrisy in what you�re saying.
skrattypants
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1252
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2003 6:08 pm
Location: so close and yet so far

Postby snoqueen » Fri Dec 03, 2004 8:22 pm

bubbaquimby wrote:My belief is that the holy part is that God made it so a man and woman are part of the making of the child and I think that it should be that way for raising a child. Biblically God has more of the father role and Jesus has more of the mother role for us (in Catholicism Mother Mary has that role, too). But this is my opinion and in no way shape or form is it the voice of all Christians even those in my own church. In the grand scheme I would rather have a loving and caring gay couple then an neglectful and dysfunctional straight couple.


I don't have any problem with what he wrote here. It's where he is at this point in time, and in some of it he's trying to be fair enough to accept a range of other opinions as valid.

My problem is not everybody is Christian (that would include me) and not everybody follows this person's belief system in whole or in part. So how can the government pick and choose among belief systems (which would include secularism and non-belief) and be consistent with the separation of church and state upon which the country was founded? And even if a majority of Americans are Christian and the prevailing culture is Christian (I doubt the latter), does the government not have the responsibility of protecting the rights of minorities to follow their own beliefs?
snoqueen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 12085
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 11:42 pm

Postby blunt » Sat Dec 04, 2004 1:21 pm

Male and female boink and make babies.
Animals do it, we, do it, birds and bees gotta do it.
Yes it's an amazing and wonderul thing (or a horrible curse) but we really don't need to over dramatize it or imbue the act with a supernatural glow (unless you're like me and imbue the whole world 24-7 with a supernatural glow.)
I don't hear anyone arguing about how the basics in life work.
But human improvisation can be enhancing instead of blasphemy.
And love and family and friendship and sex and sensuality and playfulness and intelligence, etc aren't necessarily part of procreation---or traditional hetero families.

FYI: I just read a brand new book, The Way Forward, "Christian voices on homosexuality", which also includes the St. Andrew's Day Statement (drafted by 7 theologians addressing homos).
Shocker.
It may be the only intelligent Christian book on homosexuality I've ever read.
blunt
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 8246
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 6:19 pm
Location: Right behind you.

Postby Ducatista » Sat Dec 04, 2004 2:49 pm

bubbaquimby wrote:But I also think which is second, is that children need a female and a male in their lives, you just miss out on understanding of men and women and how they should act in life...

That's a simplistic, easily refuted rationalization. All the children of single-parent or single-sex families who turned out OK knock that argument to the ground, and then all the children of two-parent, two-sex families who didn't turn out OK ââ?‰?Â
Ducatista
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 4392
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2004 12:31 pm
Location: 53703

Postby bubbaquimby » Sat Dec 04, 2004 3:15 pm

Ducatista wrote:
bubbaquimby wrote:But I also think which is second, is that children need a female and a male in their lives, you just miss out on understanding of men and women and how they should act in life...

That's a simplistic, easily refuted rationalization. All the children of single-parent or single-sex families who turned out OK knock that argument to the ground, and then all the children of two-parent, two-sex families who didn't turn out OK ââ?‰?Â
bubbaquimby
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2003 3:31 pm

Postby bubbaquimby » Sat Dec 04, 2004 3:22 pm

skrattypants wrote:ââ?¬Å?I AM NOT AGAINST GAY MARRIAGE. Is that clear enough for you. I don't want it in my church.ââ?¬?

ââ?¬Å?i am not against ___________________________ââ?¬? (fill in the blank with prejudicial exclusion of choice).
ââ?¬Å?i donââ?¬â?¢t want it in my ________________________________ââ?¬? (fill in organization or orifice of choice here).

yes, you are. you may not know it yet, but you are. it doesnââ?¬â?¢t feel good to admit, but it will come easier with creeping senility and crushed expectations. saying itââ?¬â?¢s all right for others but not good enough for you is more than slightly elitist and disdainful. and please donââ?¬â?¢t haul out that most nauseating of christian homilies: ââ?¬Å?hate the sin, but love the sinnerââ?¬?.

your god is all around you, in rainbows and puppies and every blade of grass and every flaming homo. love every man and every woman. and every man and every man. and every woman and every woman. life is just too short for anything else.

ââ?¬Å?But I believe that kids should have both a mom and a dad, they need both.ââ?¬?

kids of gay marriages oftentimes have both. they just both happen to be male or female. raising a healthy child has less to do with presenting gender and more to do with offering a stable, loving environment. clich�©, but true.

i don�t mean to come down on you, but i�m having a difficult time not seeing the hypocrisy in what you�re saying.


I really don't care what you think I believe, you think I am homophobe I think you are a faith-a-phobe. People, don't want the majority decided what the minority does and how they should think. I agree but why should the minortiy decided how I live and act in one of the greatest gifts of the country, my right to have freedom of religion. It is always funny that when I run into people who are really anti-christianity they all tend to have been from strict Christian households. So is it religion and Christianity they hate or is it something deeper, I am not a pyschology major but it I always found that interesting.
bubbaquimby
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2003 3:31 pm

Postby Ed Breakfast » Sat Dec 04, 2004 3:35 pm

bubbaquimby wrote:Well for one thing I am not Catholic


Then why were you married by a Priest?
Ed Breakfast
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 819
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 4:20 pm
Location: Madison, WI

Postby bubbaquimby » Sat Dec 04, 2004 3:42 pm

Ed Breakfast wrote:
bubbaquimby wrote:Well for one thing I am not Catholic


Then why were you married by a Priest?


Oops, I did write Priest, I meant pastor. That was my old Episcopalian roots showing up.
bubbaquimby
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2003 3:31 pm

Postby Ducatista » Sat Dec 04, 2004 3:47 pm

bubbaquimby wrote:Well for one thing I am not Catholic, so Catholics can do whatever they want.

Sorry! I'm of the fish fry persuasion myself, so I hear "priest" and think Catholic. Please substitute "whatever" for "Catholic." And thanks for the free rein, it'll come in handy this weekend.

bubbaquimby wrote:You asked me for a reason and I knew you won't agree but there it was. I am not even trying to change people's opinion on the subject but you want to change mine, now who is the more irrational and intolerant view.

I asked for a reason, hoped for a good one. Well, more like wished for a good one. Instead, same old same old. There is no new thing under the sun, like that wiseass Solomon said.

bubbaquimby wrote:I think not following Jesus's teachings and the word of the bible is spirtually lazy.

Millions of of gay Christians agree with you. No good reason why you should keep them out of your club, but then, you don't require your reason to be good.
Ducatista
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 4392
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2004 12:31 pm
Location: 53703

Postby bubbaquimby » Sat Dec 04, 2004 4:28 pm

Ducatista wrote:
bubbaquimby wrote:Well for one thing I am not Catholic, so Catholics can do whatever they want.

Sorry! I'm of the fish fry persuasion myself, so I hear "priest" and think Catholic. Please substitute "whatever" for "Catholic." And thanks for the free rein, it'll come in handy this weekend.

bubbaquimby wrote:You asked me for a reason and I knew you won't agree but there it was. I am not even trying to change people's opinion on the subject but you want to change mine, now who is the more irrational and intolerant view.

I asked for a reason, hoped for a good one. Well, more like wished for a good one. Instead, same old same old. There is no new thing under the sun, like that wiseass Solomon said.


No answer I could give would be good enough, your position is there is no good reason. I feel mine is a good reason. And the same old same old answer would be "Because God is against homosexuality", which I agree with but that wasn't the answer I gave you.

My dad is Catholic and would probably call you a "cafetria Catholic" because you pick and choice what parts of the bible and of Jesus's teachings to belive in. But then again, I think he has picked and choosed what he believes is right, too. No one is perfect and everyone sins, the difference is that we know we haved sin and asked forgiveness. If you accept gay marriage then you are saying it isn't a sin and that they shouldn't ask for forgiveness. (wow, that really was the same old same old answer, but sometimes old answers are still the best answer!)

Ducatista wrote:
bubbaquimby wrote:I think not following Jesus's teachings and the word of the bible is spirtually lazy.

Millions of of gay Christians agree with you. No good reason why you should keep them out of your club, but then, you don't require your reason to be good.

I would contest that there is millions of gay Christians since there is only about 2-3 million gays and I highly doubt they are mostly Christian. And also there are those that don't think they should be 1. married, and 2. married in a church.
bubbaquimby
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2003 3:31 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Headlines

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

moviesmusiceats
Select a Movie
Select a Theater


  ISTHMUS FLICKR
Created with flickr badge.

Promotions Contact us Privacy Policy Jobs Newsletters RSS
Collapse Photo Bar