No need to generalize.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
"I'm a Christian who believes the Bible, and I don't believe in homosexual marriage."
- Thread starter Solid SOAP
- Start date
- Status
If homosexuality somehow never existed, you'd probably be getting this sort of grief from Christians and Catholics more often, though you might have some racial minorities ahead of you on the hit list.
I would say the implication is that religion is intrinsically judgmental, since most of them lay out moral codes to apply to one's life or that of others, which definitely aligns with the concept of "judgement" and being "judgemental".
But I think this is beside the point. The image in the OP is just, unless I miss my guess, religious types looking to get the last word in an argument while trying their best to not look petty... a strategem which makes them all the more pathetic in my eyes.
Tell a Christian, to their face, that they are going to hell but you still love them and will pray for their salvation. Make sure you have a fake smile on your face. I wonder how they'd react to that?
Pai Pai Master
Banned
It's really easy, guys. Don't torture yourselves.
This, Facebook is a social tool which one can curate to their liking. I don't see the point in keeping people whose viewpoints clash so much with your own on your friends list. Hell, if the person feels they should still be entitled to be on your friends list and you want to oblige them for some reason you can just hide their feed updates.
shadowsdarknes
Member
Yeah.. I mean.. someone who is a known adulterer is someone who broke the ten commandments. That's part of God's top 10 no-nos. And yet we don't restrict those people to the right to marry based upon belief.
Orbis Tabula
Member
I saw this on Facebook from an acquaintence. It was the most anti-gay thing I saw posted in regards to Friday's ruling, and it's not even that bad, in the scale of things. Basically, all of my friends are too reasonable to be entertaining.
Huh? It's actually quite easy to love and respect someone but not agree with their life choices. You probably do this every day in some capacity with your family and friends.
I'm completely with you as I find so many parts of the Bible to be ludicrous, but, as it turns out the "camel through an eye of a needle" text is probably a mistranslation. It should be "rope through an eye of a needle."
http://www.biblicalhebrew.com/nt/camelneedle.htm
A lot of people seem to think they aren't bigots simply because they're not screaming and ranting like we see many bigots do (think of all the racist incident videos you see online, there is a stereotypical depiction of a bigot).
They mistake tone and content. But someone who calmly and articulately tells you your lifestyle is a sin and they just respectfully disagree with you and your degeneracy and don't deserve the same rights as straight people is just as much of a bigot as the idiot who screams homophobic slurs in a persons face.
They mistake tone and content. But someone who calmly and articulately tells you your lifestyle is a sin and they just respectfully disagree with you and your degeneracy and don't deserve the same rights as straight people is just as much of a bigot as the idiot who screams homophobic slurs in a persons face.
The image macro seems pretty innocuous to me. I am not an expert in Christian theology, but it would appear that their religious definition of marriage excludes gay marriage. The Supreme Court case changed the legality of gay marriage, they obviously cannot force that upon a religion. To be consistent I assume they would need to exclude non-Christian marriage ceremonies as well?
Being gay isn't a choice, though.
megatronium
Member
This is my current opinion.
This is the other problem with discussion regarding religion; because religion is not inherently rational, hypocrisy and inconsistency are not inherently problematic. It's totally fine to be inconsistent and erratic when you are not bound by logic and reason.
hendersonhank
Member
I don't get the problem. "Judge not lest ye be judged", "let he who is without sin cast the first stone", etc etc. Doesn't mean Christians don't have things they (are supposed to) think are wrong.
excelsiorlef
Member
If only there was a designated tax free building or 6 in their city where they could go and meet other people who are also not alone.
ElfArmy177
Member
What the fuck is this shit? I've seen it floating around Facebook a bunch recently and I don't get it. How can you love and accept your friends if you completely disagree with their lifestyle? How is this not still bigotry? I don't get it.
Eh, I love my best friend but I don't agree with several things they have done. I understand what they are saying and I don't think its a good or bad quote....
Maninthemirror
Banned
"I cant believe they are judging the actions of people and in turn judging them so let me judge their reaction and in turn judge them"
its a never ending cycle.
its a never ending cycle.
metalslimer
Member
Honestly atheists getting married should have been a much bigger blow to the institution because at least there are many religious lgbt people.
hendersonhank
Member
Seeking out homosexual relationships is, though.
you can still criticise your family members you know?
Don't you see how it's a direct contradiction of itself? You are judging someone's actions yet are claiming you aren't judging them
Adultery is a sin, but it's not an impediment to the constitution of matrimony.
drtomoe123
Member
I guess it depends on how you use social media. Personally, I try to avoid turning my feed into an echo chamber.
krypt0nian
Banned
Just a lot of pan rattling. They will have to realize that it simply doesn't matter what they think anymore.
It's over. We won. Go on with your day.
It's over. We won. Go on with your day.
CapitalismSucks DonkeyBalls
Banned
It's difficult when 90% of them follow this hivemind. They aren't the open-minded types.
Interfectum
Member
Oh my god.
quickwhips
Member
If they weren't judging they would have no need to make or post stupid pictures on face book.
shadowsdarknes
Member
If someone has cheated on their previous spouse and is now remarrying, I'd say that's a direct conflict of interest.
The last lines of this are particularly bullshit: "We have a right to speak what we believe, just as you have a right to speak what you believe."
Yeah, but this isn't about the right to speak, which you've so handily noted that we both already have.
This is about the right to get married, which you already have, and are opposed to me having.
Also lol at "Yes, we are still friends". No, we are fucking not after you post this kinda shit.
Yeah, but this isn't about the right to speak, which you've so handily noted that we both already have.
This is about the right to get married, which you already have, and are opposed to me having.
Also lol at "Yes, we are still friends". No, we are fucking not after you post this kinda shit.
You're genitals have been naturally selected by darwin himself to propagate through sexual reproduction. Stop ending the lineage that millions have laid. You're disparaging 4 BILLION YEARS OF SEXUAL EFFORT!!!
/s
kept waiting for The Onion logo to pop up
So, the expectation is that gay people should not seek out relationships? I hope you're arguing semantics here, and don't actually feel that way.
All Jesus is saying is that it is impossible for someone who loves material, non-spiritual things to be saved by his own power - he will always be too weak to turn from his love of that to love God - but that with God's help it is possible. Jesus is using a humorous exaggeration to drive the point home. This might be the most taken out of context and literally taken scripture of all time. Definitely in the top 10.
Great question
Alligatorjandro
Banned
You can still be a Christian and support gay people. It's not like how they live their life has an effect on you.
And other people use religion to justify murder and everything else. Have been doing so for years. Until they decide to stop
This is more of a problem with Christian leaders. They need to address head on that Christians do not get a pass at using their religion to justify homophobia. The world has changed, and religion needs to change with it.
This is more of a problem with Christian leaders. They need to address head on that Christians do not get a pass at using their religion to justify homophobia. The world has changed, and religion needs to change with it.
Catholic can't remarry in the first place.
TapeDispenser1000
Member
Pretty easy to keep ones believes to oneself, and not try to project them onto others.
Maninthemirror
Banned
I am not a christian but the argument a christian will make is Bible defines what constitutes a marriage, not that both have to be christian to be married
These people believe that somehow gay marriage being legal disenfranchises them.
Yes its difficult, but as a family member you have more influence than others. you can at least explain how their behaviour harms others. Then again while i don't have the most open minded family, They are at least reasonable and won't disown me for expressing my opinions. so i get it if your family aren't like that.
Pai Pai Master
Banned
Sure, I'm not going to unfriend or unfollow every person I may disagree with but it would drive me crazy if I had people posting crap like the OP's image.
Eh, not completely true. There is a (very narrow) set of exceptions, most of which revolve around the validity of the previous marriage.
EatinOlives
Member
Sorry, I don't think you can "love" someone while simultaneously not supporting their right to be equal in the government's definition of marriage.
There is an important distinction that I feel those who would post the image in the OP are not making. The SCOTUS ruled on the definition of marriage from a government's standpoint, it made no statement on how each church should view the ruling. Every church from every religion can still not recognize that union if they wish.
You would think that someone who claims to "still love you" and "not judge you" would be able to make the distinction between the government's definition of marriage and that of their own personal belief system.
And let's be honest, this image is vague as fuck. What don't they support? Do they not support equality in the eyes of the government? Do they support society not recognizing their union in any way whatsoever, even from a governmental point of view? If so, they're actively wanting LGBTs from leading an equal life in society. That's far beyond a simplistic "my scripture of choice doesn't support your lifestyle". That's actively treating them as a lesser being. That's not "love", nor is it "non judgmental" behavior. That's very judgmental.
I would support a Christian's point of view if he/she would recognize that this ruling has nothing to do with religion, and that a government-recognized marriage does not in any way infringe on their religion or its points of view. If they don't want to make that distinction I don't see how the image is anything but hypocritical trash.
There is an important distinction that I feel those who would post the image in the OP are not making. The SCOTUS ruled on the definition of marriage from a government's standpoint, it made no statement on how each church should view the ruling. Every church from every religion can still not recognize that union if they wish.
You would think that someone who claims to "still love you" and "not judge you" would be able to make the distinction between the government's definition of marriage and that of their own personal belief system.
And let's be honest, this image is vague as fuck. What don't they support? Do they not support equality in the eyes of the government? Do they support society not recognizing their union in any way whatsoever, even from a governmental point of view? If so, they're actively wanting LGBTs from leading an equal life in society. That's far beyond a simplistic "my scripture of choice doesn't support your lifestyle". That's actively treating them as a lesser being. That's not "love", nor is it "non judgmental" behavior. That's very judgmental.
I would support a Christian's point of view if he/she would recognize that this ruling has nothing to do with religion, and that a government-recognized marriage does not in any way infringe on their religion or its points of view. If they don't want to make that distinction I don't see how the image is anything but hypocritical trash.
Even that is on the fringes of what we would normally refer to as a choice. "Just choose to repress your sexual feelings and never act on them ever" is a pretty difficult thing to choose to do for most human beings.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked