St. Francis Church: Against Same Sex Marriage [Pic

Submitted by: i_love_anime 4 years ago

Their community thinks otherwise.
There are 74 comments:
Male 20
And where is the message of hate from the church? Look again (I`ll wait). There isn`t one. OH NOW I GET IT - if people don`t agree with you then they MUST be haters - right? incubus is right - you are a bunch of drama queens. Get back in closet!
0
Reply
Female 2,549
Please my gay lesbo friends make me understand:
Why waste your time to be part of an instition that is doing everything in it`s power to make your life a misery - by signing up for a tradition ( marriage) it endorse.
It`s going weak anyway heteros not so keen on marriage now!
You are giving them power.

Why not instead put all the focus on changing laws about civil unions of consensual adults? Adoption laws?
Completely ignore the church?
I fully support the marriage equality but feel that it `s just delaying the inevitable.
Whatcha think?
0
Reply
Male 1,810
Many people do not consider a union of two people of the same sex to be a "marriage". If that is your opinion, you now are a hate-filled pro-religious idiot.

Beep boop it must be true...I read it on the internet !!
0
Reply
Male 10,845

Charles Xavier is not amused.
0
Reply
Female 1,478
RandomNoun, is that like the non-gluten craze, where a very, very small percentage of people are allergic to gluten, so health-conscience people flip out and say `omg if it`s bad for someone, it`s totally/could be totally bad for me too!!`? Bleh ;)
0
Reply
Male 977
Drama queens.
0
Reply
Male 711
`Its not hate to have opposing views, if I said said I dislike eating fish it does not mean I hate fish nor does it mean I am afraid of them in reference to a word ending in phobia`

True, because `fisheatingphobia` would be a passionate insistence that nobody else eat fish either.
0
Reply
Male 195
Departing words: It`s wrong to hate. It`s even wrong to hate people who hate you. I don`t hate anyone. I`m not taking anyone`s rights away, or even fighting for that. I`ve never beaten anyone to death, or pushed them to suicide. The only people I punish are my children, and only when they disobey. This shall be my last post and visit to IAB. The anti-Christian sentiment that continues daily hurts my feelings. Goodbye.
0
Reply
Male 514
Its not hate to have opposing views, if I said said I dislike eating fish it does not mean I hate fish nor does it mean I am afraid of them in reference to a word ending in phobia
0
Reply
Male 626
[quote]...so why does the pro-gay anti-Christian get free reign? Isn`t Christianity a lifestyle choice too?[/quote]

Because gays don`t take away Christians rights, beat them to death, push them to the point of suicide, or otherwise punish them for being against something they believe in.
0
Reply
Male 184
Deanoboz asks "...so why does the pro-gay anti-Christian get free reign? Isn`t Christianity a lifestyle choice too?" and calls it a meaningful question. Let us dissect this question a bit and then determine how meaningful it is. First off, you assume that pro-gay = anti-christian.By design, right off the bat anyone who disagrees with you is now anti-christian. Is there anyone here stopping you from making whatever point you want? Also, you so meaningfully ask "Isn`t Christianity a lifestyle choice too?" and insultingly assume that homosexuality is a choice. How dare you criticize anyone for responding to your painfully obvious attempt at eliciting an emotionally charged response! Meaningful?
0
Reply
Male 2,345
WIN.
0
Reply
Male 914
"Why should I, a Canadian Christian, be the object of hatespeak?"

Why not?

You have the right to hate whoever you want, but you don`t have the right to trample their freedoms.
0
Reply
Female 1,478
I should spread love.. so.. become a prostitute? I`ll get right on that. I`ve been looking for some direction in my life. Thanks, equally preachy anti-preachy sign!
0
Reply
Male 4,294
"I don`t even hate any homosexuals singly (except for Colton on Survivor..."

I don`t know why this made me laugh so hard.
0
Reply
Male 4,294
What I think is so funny about the anti-gay bigots that are pushing laws against homosexuality is that this opposition is what moved gay marriage along as far as it is and as quickly as it happened. So I guess thank you haters. You have done really well for the gay community.
0
Reply
Male 195
Markust123- As a Christian man I can tell you that I don`t hate homosexuals as a group either. I don`t even hate any homosexuals singly (except for Colton on Survivor... but it`s mostly because he`s so mean and catty). Why should I, a Canadian Christian, be the object of hatespeak? Same-sex marriages are legal here.
0
Reply
Male 4,294
"Why is it okay to hate this group (Christians,) and wrong to hate that group (Homosexuals)?"

Speaking as a gay man I don`t hate Christians as a whole for bigotry like this. I know there are many Christian churches that teach love and acceptance of all. That is what makes churches like this one so hateful. One church sees love and acceptance the other creates an enemy out of a whole section of society, all for the purpose of having something to gather their followers (troops) against. Because there is a war on religion. They`re the victims I tells ya. What a joke.
0
Reply
Male 195
jinxjinx34 said: "How far down the page of your Google search of homophobia did you have to go to find a definition that used antipathy instead of hatred? If you want a website that celebrates ignorance hang out at GODHATESFAGS.COM. You will be more comfortable there."

I went to dictionary.com. "Unreasoning fear of or antipathy toward homosexuals and homosexuality." Check it out.
I attempted to ask a meaningful question, and you responded with hatred. You just lost.
0
Reply
Male 36,462
@Angilion: Oh I agree! It`s really hard to figure out "law" from "rule". I`ve read that Jews are much more familiar with this notion than most Christians.
It`s recent news to me! I`d often wondered why one thing in the OT is taboo but others are now "OK". This R vs L goes a ways to explain it.
But it`s far from perfect.

I`d agree that the whole of the OT should be taken as a metaphore, not ruel OR law, but that`s `cause I`m a Deist! lolz!

I`m a lot more agreeable today than the past several days, my intestines feel better! Phew!
0
Reply
Male 12,365
5Cats:

I`ve read that line of argument a few times and it looks to me suspiciously like an excuse for ignoring some but only some of the rules in the OT - an ad hoc backforming.

Who decides which Jewish orders are rules (that Christians should ignore) and which are laws (that they should obey)? How do they tell the difference?

For example:

Christians who use that line of argument and who cite the OT as condemning homosexual sex between men are (a) interpreting the Leviticus verses that way and (b) treating the condemnation as a law, still binding on Christians. The same Christians treat the ban on eating animals that live in water and do not have both fins and scales (e.g. crabs, oysters, etc) as being a rule, not binding on Christians. Why? The OT describes them both as being wrong in the same way - to`ebah.
0
Reply
Male 36,462
In general, regarding the Old Testament: Some things in it are "rules" like not sitting on the same chair as a woman who`s menstrating (it`s in there!)
Other things are Laws, like thou shall not bear false witness.
The idea is that Jesus`s sacrifice replaces those "rules" but you still have to follow the Laws.
Jews would know a lot more about OT rules vs laws than I do.

I just think it`s stupid for Christians to pick & choose from the OT, stick to the Gospels folks!
0
Reply
Male 184
Angilion, My baseline argument and the thing that ultimately drives my opposition to the bible and religion in general is in fact the bastardization of the the very rule book which governs the faith. Words can so easily be twisted, misinterpreted, and mangled into what you want to believe and what you want others to believe. And then the whole thing is backed up by the very definition of the word "faith" and the forced opposition to reason.
0
Reply
Male 1,444
"Two Men are friends, but Two Women are hot!"
0
Reply
Male 12,365
Off to the old testament for a bit...

I`m not sure if you were saying that the OT harshly condemns homosexual men and demands that they be stone to death or if you were saying that churches tend to interpret that as the meaning of that verse in Leviticus (I don`t remember the numbers without looking them up).

I argue that the intended meaning of the verse isn`t entirely clear and it appears to be condemning male homosexual sex only (not homosexual men in general, although obviously there`s a huge amount of overlap) *and only in some contexts*. It doesn`t appear to condemn male homosexual sex in general. I`m not so certain on that part because my knowledge of ancient Hebrew is nil and my knowledge of early bronze age Jewish culture is scarcely more than nil. I`m going purely on what I`ve read from other people who have more knowledge of those things.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Angilion, I think we are in an agreement here. lol.[/quote]

I agree that we`re in an agreement. Do you agree with that? :)
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Angilion- you spent so much time Googling that bit of info you missed my reply.[/quote]

A silly assumption. I was checking chapter and verse numbers, which I don`t keep a certain memory of in my head at all times, and I didn`t use Google.
0
Reply
Male 184
Angilion, I think we are in an agreement here. lol.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]"They`re putting the message on public display, which makes it political and therefore fair game."

Respectfully @Angilion, so are homosexualists...[/quote]

I agree. Fair game, both sides. Any views deliberately put into the public, political arena are fair game.
0
Reply
Male 184
Yes, much like your points about the ancient versions of the bible.
0
Reply
Male 184
Angilion- you spent so much time Googling that bit of info you missed my reply. I mis-typed New Testament. I meant Old Testament.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Angilion, I was confused to your objection to my point about prescribed punishments until I realized I typed New Testament instead of Old Testament.[/quote]

Ah...so the post I was writing (about what`s actually condemned in the new testament and the lack of prescribed punishments for it) while you wrote the above is obsolete already :)
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Angilion, I am not talking about verse that has been dissected and interpreted to agree with your or my sensibilities. I am talking about how it is used in churches around the world. In that sense, the original versions are irrelevant because they are not the versions being used by the followers of the religion.[/quote]

Fair point.

My counter, unsurprisingly, is that the churches *should* be looking to the original versions first and foremost. They believe that some parts of those original versions were written by people who were actually there, who knew Jesus personally and heard his teachings first hand, so they should regard the original versions as being of paramount importance.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
This is what`s actually condemned in the new testament:

People who would not normally have homosexual sex either having homosexual sex as part of ceremonies in temples of another religion or suddenly having homosexual lust imposed on them by the Abrahamic god as a punishment for apostasy (the meaning isn`t clear - this is Paul we`re talking about, after all). The punishment being the unexpected and unwanted change, not homosexuality per se. (Romans 1:26-27).

Malakoi and arsenokoitai (1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy 1:9-10). Nobody knows what arsenokoitai means. Malakoi has multiple meanings depending on context. Arguably the best modern English translation would be `soft`, in all its contexts. Elsewhere in the Christian bible, `malakoi` is used to mean soft, fine (describing clothing), lazy, cowardly, easily manipulated, etc.

None of them prescribe any punishment in this world. One says that malakoi and arsenokoitai won`t go to heaven. That`s it.
0
Reply
Male 1,293
What is it with socialists that they don`t understand political opinions contrary to their own? What is it with their bigoted assumption that any opinion different to the favoured socialist idea is hate?
0
Reply
Male 184
Angilion, I was confused to your objection to my point about prescribed punishments until I realized I typed New Testament instead of Old Testament.
0
Reply
Male 37,888

TruTenrMan ""Expel the wicked person from among you."

Yes, from within their church. That does not mean they can expect the entire world to live by their rules. That`s what radical muslims are doing and we hate them, right.
0
Reply
Male 184
Angilion, I am not talking about verse that has been dissected and interpreted to agree with your or my sensibilities. I am talking about how it is used in churches around the world. In that sense, the original versions are irrelevant because they are not the versions being used by the followers of the religion. I too have read a myriad of religious texts including the Old and new testaments and there are a lot of chapters that are left up to individual interpretation.
0
Reply
Male 184
@Angilion- I can absolutely agree with your point. "hate" is a word used loosely and is a personal experience. My point was simply that it was not put up on a sign to promote peace or tolerance, only to further divide.
0
Reply
Male 36,462
[quote]Well Deano, seeing as I don`t fall under *any* of your above rubrics, (no problems with gods, holy stuff, xians ect)[/quote]
@QueenZira: HAHAHAHAHAHAAAA! U So Funny!

Again: @FP: Homosexual ACTS does not make the animal a full-out "homosexual" ok? That is humans projecting their belief systems on wild creatures.

[quote]They`re putting the message on public display, which makes it political and therefore fair game.[/quote]
Respectfully @Angilion, so are homosexualists...
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Angilion, I cannot verify your points about the condemnation of homosexuals in early texts, but unfortunately, they are irrelevant because nobody is using these copies lol.[/quote]

They`re not irrelevant to anyone who cares what the Christian bible is supposed to say, because they`re obviously much closer (allegedly identical) to the first written copies of it.

[quote]The New Testament is particularly harsh in its prescribed dealings with homosexual men and demands that they be stoned to death.[/quote]

No it isn`t and no it doesn`t.


If you think I`m wrong, tell me what chapter and verse you`re referring to. I`ve read several versions of the whole thing, both testaments, and I`m quite familiar with the handful of verses used (misused, in my opinion) to condemn homosexuality. I am absolutely certain that your statement is wrong.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]it is not hateful only if you agree with the sentiment.[/quote]

No. I disagree with the sentiment and I don`t think that particular message is hateful.

Perhaps the difference is that I consider hate to be something quite extreme, not merely disagreement or disapproval. The word `hate` is used far outside it`s actual meaning as a political weapon to silence people with and I disagree with that. Or should I say that I hate it?
0
Reply
Male 184
Angilion, I cannot verify your points about the condemnation of homosexuals in early texts, but unfortunately, they are irrelevant because nobody is using these copies lol. The New Testament is particularly harsh in its prescribed dealings with homosexual men and demands that they be stoned to death. It is funny how the church overlooks most of the 7 "deadliest" sins on a daily basis.
0
Reply
Male 184
Satkela, it is not hateful only if you agree with the sentiment. Also, I doubt that there are hordes of homosexuals beating down the door to join this church so what is the point other than to cause a reaction?
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]How is this a hateful message in any way? According to the Bible Homosexuality is wrong and since that is a church I`m not surprised that they have a message like this on their marquee. No one is being viciously attacked, no hate crime is being commited so wtf? If you don`t like what it says ignore it.[/quote]

They`re putting the message on public display, which makes it political and therefore fair game. I agree that there`s no hate in the church`s message, though.

I disagree with your statement that the Christian bible says that homosexuality is wrong. Some modern copies of interpretations of translations do, but they`re not well grounded in the earliest known texts or the appropriate historical contexts.

[quote]Christians are being ignored anyway...[/quote]

Hahahaha.

You were joking, right?

If you weren`t, try applying your own argument - Christianity should be ignored outside of churches.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Notice they didn`t say anything about two women.[/quote]

Maybe they`ve read their own bibles. There`s only one verse in the Christian bible that *might* be interpreted as condemning homosexuality between women, if you stretch a point or two and ignore the context. The handful of verses that *might* condemn homosexuality (but don`t really seem to do so, in my opinion) are either male-specific or of unknown meaning but possibly male-specific based on what might be the etymology, maybe.

Sure, many modern language interpretations condemn all homosexuality. That`s because the people who wrote them (or the people who paid for them to be written) wanted their bibles to say that. It`s not what was actually there.
0
Reply
Male 1,237
The world is full of ignorance. Get depressed get angry get nonchalant go and live somewhere
0
Reply
Male 184
TruTenrMan looks a little gluttenous. I cant be near a fat person because fat people are sinners. I wonder how many adulterers TruTenrMan has excommunicated from his church. Not the same thing?
0
Reply
Female 584
How is this a hateful message in any way? According to the Bible Homosexuality is wrong and since that is a church I`m not surprised that they have a message like this on their marquee. No one is being viciously attacked, no hate crime is being commited so wtf? If you don`t like what it says ignore it. Christians are being ignored anyway...
0
Reply
Male 1,558
Religions DO NOT spread love-EVER
0
Reply
Male 184
@DeanoBoz- I agree with you that there is a lot of content poking fun at religion and probably a majority of site frequenters that are Atheist or Agnostic, ect. What is your point? You list a couple "soft" definitions of homophobia and antipathy to try to make a point then you go on to compare choosing to be christian to being born homosexual. Who are you to assume that it is a choice? Oh, and by the way, I dont have antipathy towards god. I would need to believe god exists in order to have antipathy towards god. I do not have antipathy towards people of religion. I do however HATE ignorant [email protected] How far down the page of your Google search of homophobia did you have to go to find a definition that used antipathy instead of hatred? If you want a website that celebrates ignorance hang out at GODHATESFAGS.COM. You will be more comfortable there.
0
Reply
Male 2,552
Of course Christianity is a lifestyle choice.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
@DeanoBoz: I don`t think anyone should say things that are hateful to Christians for simply being Christians. But if their views are harmful toward others, they ought to be opposed. What would you think if a slave owner in the 1850s complained that abolitionists were discriminating against them (btw, they could have easily claimed biblical justification too)?

Oh, and using TruTenrMan`s definition of the debate, Christianity is a lifestyle choice.
0
Reply
Male 195
@diylobotomy- The point I`m making is not about homosexuality, it`s about one group hating another. The question at hand is "Why is it okay to hate this group (Christians,) and wrong to hate that group (Homosexuals)?"
0
Reply
Female 2,228
Tenr- when are you coming for me then? After all, I`m one of those dastardly evil Pagans your holy book mentions killing all the time, yes?
0
Reply
Male 2,552
Gerry1of1: "Expel the wicked person from among you." Isn`t that what Christians are trying to do? And getting bashed for it?
0
Reply
Female 2,228
FoolsPrussia let`s hope we haven`t run into one of these xians huh?




(I`m beginning to luv this meme).
0
Reply
Male 2,552
I`m not arguing that homosexual animals exist. I`m arguing that for species propagation, homosexuality is pointless.

From a faith-based point of view, I disagree with it from a moral stand-point.
0
Reply
Male 37,888

Here we go again. 1 Corinthians 5:12.

`nuff said.
0
Reply
Male 1,832
@DeanoBoz straight Christian couples can marry.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
TruTenrMan: Except homosexual acts have been well-documented among many animal species.

List of animals displaying homosexual traits
0
Reply
Female 2,228
Tenr you have a simplistic and impoverished view of what is "Natural". Some adaptive things species do have nothing whatsoever to do with reproduction per se. Having another available set of parents to care for kids not specifically their own may have been a huge evolutionary advantage. Then again, having a natural check on population overgrowth would have been enormously adaptive as well.

Fail.
0
Reply
Female 2,228
Well Deano, seeing as I don`t fall under *any* of your above rubrics, (no problems with gods, holy stuff, xians ect) we must needs look elsewhere no?

Some xians affirm their gay brothers and sisters, ie. heterosexist xians don`t own the whole religion, some xians don`t hide behind religion and blame god for their prejudices, some xians don`t want to run the secular government and generally cause harm to others. Yeah, that`s about the size of it.
0
Reply
Male 2,552
FoolsPrussia: I know that is the excuse being used. I also know that a man/man couple and a female/female couple is scientifically unnatural. Being that the purpose of a species is to propagate, gay couples do nothing to further that; therefore, as a human species, homosexuality is not natural, and by process of elimination is a psychological choice made by individuals.
0
Reply
Male 195
There is a lot of talk about homophobia in regards to the church. Homophobia is defined as antipathy toward homosexuals. Antipathy is defined as an instinctive opposition in feeling. Homophobia is characterized (especially in IAB posts) as hateful and wrong. However, there is no such characterization of hagiophobia (antipathy toward holy things), theophobia (antipathy toward God), or Christianophobia (antipathy toward Christians). In fact, these three oppositions are celebrated daily here. I don`t feel that any group should hate another with impunity, so why does the pro-gay anti-Christian get free reign? Isn`t Christianity a lifestyle choice too?
0
Reply
Male 3,445
TruTenrMan: Satanism is a choice. Homosexuality is not.

Was it not hateful for interracial couples to be ostracized in the 1950s?
0
Reply
Male 1,586
Notice they didn`t say anything about two women.
0
Reply
Male 1,083
I agree, two men are friends (well they can be), two husbands are married.
0
Reply
Female 2,228



Trutenr- probably because you refer to someone`s sexual orientation as a "lifestyle choice."
0
Reply
Male 6,737
Word.
0
Reply
Male 2,552
*"I find it FUNNY how just because..."
0
Reply
Male 2,552
I find it how just because someone disagrees with a lifestyle choice, it`s instantly labelled as "hate". As a Christian, I don`t agree with Satanism, but I don`t "hate" Satanists; I feel sorry for them.
0
Reply
Male 2,143
`Nuff Said!
0
Reply
Female 206
Link: St. Francis Church: Against Same Sex Marriage [Pic [Rate Link] - Their community thinks otherwise.
0
Reply