BBC Home

Explore the BBC


21st October 2019
Accessibility help
Text only

BBC Homepage

Channel Islands
Guernsey
Jersey


Contact Us


Like this page?
Send it to a friend!

 

or register to join or start a new discussion.


Discussion:

Church homophobia not about sex or the bible

Messages  1 - 20 of 144

 
First | < Previous 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next > | Last
 

Message 1 - posted by Shaw, Dec 14, 2005

Few people, including the clergy involved in this issue, for or against, seem to realise that the church's opposition to homosexuality and opposition to same-sex relationships are actually nothing to do with homosexual sex or what they interpret in the bible. It is part of their wider beliefs about sex and sexuality and their attitudes towards women.

The real reason is that homosexuality undermines the church's insistence that sexual relations are only permissible within holy wedlock,sanctified by the church, between a man and a woman, and only for the procreation of children, not for pleasure.

Same sex relationships based on equality and respect between two men or two women subverts their notion of female inferiority -and male superiority in a partnership and that any sexual partnership has to be between a dominant male and submissive female partner for procreation. Through history, the church has tried to keep family life and the ability to have children has to be only within the control of the church. It is a powerful control mechanism and it informs many of our current attitudes and policies e.g. stigma, prostitution, sex education, and women's pay, pensions and child support, that are based on notions of 'ownership of women and children by the father or husband.

I hope you will help people to understand how religious attitudes affect our lives, so that we can move on and help humanity progress away from superstition prejudice and cruelty

Google 'Illicit Sex and The God Machine'
Complain about a message      

Message 2 - posted by Alexander Rednaxela, Dec 14, 2005

Did you write 'Illicit Sex and The God Machine' ?

Its extremely enlightening and very well put.

Its so true that the church use "sex sin" to control, unfortunately it has worked on people and still does to this day. I can relate to certain parts in so many ways from my upbringing.



Complain about a message      

Message 3 - posted by U2279876, Dec 19, 2005

religion is an all round joke,only for the weak minded to beleive in,because they lack the brains to question all the many gaping holes in it's fantasy story.
Complain about a message      

Message 4 - posted by none/MAS!, Dec 19, 2005

Oh,that's done it.
Complain about a message      

Message 5 - posted by bepo, Dec 19, 2005

religion is an all round joke,only for the weak minded to beleive in,because they lack the brains to question all the many gaping holes in it's fantasy story.

Quoted from this message



. . Yeh, but my understanding of the reason Gay and Lesbian couples want a Church approved service is so they can retain their shared assets, otherwise the Government will help themselves to each individual assets as and when its appropriate for them to do so !

Is that nearer the truth . . what do you think ?

<erm>
Complain about a message      

Message 6 - posted by LORRENMAX, Dec 19, 2005

Your right about the fantasy story, mate. If, you really like fantasy stories, you might read the one called the "Good Friday Admendment." Right now( just like the people in the days the Bible was written)people see the Admendment as the Gospel but will it been see in the same way at a future date. It is merely one's perception and understanding. P.S. Some people understand at a deeper level. Do you think it might be possible the stories are a parable " a usually short fictitious story that illustrates a moral attitude or a religious principle"?
Complain about a message      

Message 7 - posted by THR, Dec 19, 2005

I find this hard to explain but I'm not really very comfortable with the idea of same sex marriages. It's nothing to do with me being religious because I'm not particularly. And it's nothing to do with me being homophobic, because I'm not. I think it's more about not being able to see any point in it. I suppose you could say what's the point in heterosexual marriages as well - to which I'd probably say, to provide a secure relationship for the upbringing of children.

Then you could say "why do you think marriage conveys security?" or "isn't marriage more about making a public proclamation of one's love for another?"

And I would have to say "not necessarily" and "maybe" respectively.

At the end of the day, I obviously haven't got a clue why I don't like the idea of same sex marriages - I wished I had not bothered to reply to this post in the first place.
Complain about a message      

Message 8, Dec 19, 2005

This posting has been hidden during moderation because it broke the House Rules in some way.
      

Message 9 - posted by serenak, Dec 20, 2005

"At the end of the day, I obviously haven't got a clue why I don't like the idea of same sex marriages - I wished I had not bothered to reply to this post in the first place."

At the end of the day, it really will not make much difference about same sex, marriages.

If, you do what you think is right, don't worry about those who have a distorted view of marriage and their perceived rights.

When you are given a choice to vote on same sex marriages issue, vote "no!" If they have a right to vote yes, you have a right to vote "no." If more votes are against the right to same sex marraige, you will see them going back into the closet from whence they came.

You will not get rid of them. Their distorted view of the human body and it's functions shows they can't be right in their views.

When people don't or will not bother to standup for an issue, you will find yourself living in a world which displeases you.

You can bet all those folks for same sex marriage are out in force supporting their cause.

Quoted from this message


If 2 women or 2 men down the road from you loved each other and decided to get married, how would that affect YOU or your lifestyle? Why are you protesting about something that, to all intents and purposes has nothing to do with you?
Even if a straight couple living down the road from you were a bit 'kinky' and liked bondage games etc, that is up to them. You are free to have your own opinion on the issue, but what goes on between 2 consenting adults, (regardless of their sex and sexuality) is up to them. Love is love. Why should gay men and women be forced not to show that love on paper as other people can? Live and let live!
Complain about a message      

Message 10 - posted by Al Fresco II, Dec 20, 2005

THRazor wrote:

I find this hard to explain but I'm not really very comfortable with the idea of same sex marriages. It's nothing to do with me being religious because I'm not particularly. And it's nothing to do with me being homophobic, because I'm not. I think it's more about not being able to see any point in it. I suppose you could say what's the point in heterosexual marriages as well - to which I'd probably say, to provide a secure relationship for the upbringing of children.

Then you could say "why do you think marriage conveys security?" or "isn't marriage more about making a public proclamation of one's love for another?"

And I would have to say "not necessarily" and "maybe" respectively.

At the end of the day, I obviously haven't got a clue why I don't like the idea of same sex marriages - I wished I had not bothered to reply to this post in the first place.

-------------------------------------------------------------

If we accept that marriage is an institution within law, and forget the religious aspect of it, then it becomes clear that every law abiding citizen, paying their taxes, doing the same jobs as everyone else, some pen pushing - others saving lives in the A&E or OR, has every right to have their relationship made legally binding.

The reason Civil Unions have become law for gay people is important, as for the first time it makes partners next of kin. Prior to this legislation being passed, gay couples who had lived for anything like 20 - 40 years together as a couple, were never accepted as next of kin when their partner died. Families of the deceased could come along and totally exclude the living partner, and the partner would have no claims or rights to the estate of their partner.

This could not carry on any longer, it was a blight on the equality that every politician mouths for electoral support but easily forgets when they're in power. At least this government has supported gay people in this, whereas the previous government had Victorian attitudes to homosexuality, and the new look Conservatives Party don't seem to have moved that much further on from the 19th century.
Complain about a message      

Message 11 - posted by Al Fresco II, Dec 20, 2005

LORRENMAX wrote

"At the end of the day, I obviously haven't got a clue why I don't like the idea of same sex marriages - I wished I had not bothered to reply to this post in the first place."

At the end of the day, it really will not make much difference about same sex, marriages.

If, you do what you think is right, don't worry about those who have a distorted view of marriage and their perceived rights.

When you are given a choice to vote on same sex marriages issue, vote "no!" If they have a right to vote yes, you have a right to vote "no." If more votes are against the right to same sex marraige, you will see them going back into the closet from whence they came.

You will not get rid of them. Their distorted view of the human body and it's functions shows they can't be right in their views.

When people don't or will not bother to standup for an issue, you will find yourself living in a world which displeases you.

You can bet all those folks for same sex marriage are out in force supporting their cause.

I don't think people should have a right to vote on another's sexual orientation, and whether they can have their relationship recognised in law or not. And we will not go back into any flippin' closet, we're here to stay, we helped build civilisation etc., go and invest in some personal knowledge before you start spouting feeble crapness.

I object to your statement that gay people have a distorted view of the human body, many of us work in the NHS saving lives alongside our heterosexual colleagues, we know all about the human body, and it's certainly not distorted.

Finally, your idea that you will be never rid of us is analogous with a sinister dictorial stance, and we all know where and what resulted with having those beliefs and attitudes.
Complain about a message      

Message 12 - posted by Al Fresco II, Dec 20, 2005

Re-Posted following edit

LORRENMAX wrote

"At the end of the day, I obviously haven't got a clue why I don't like the idea of same sex marriages - I wished I had not bothered to reply to this post in the first place."

At the end of the day, it really will not make much difference about same sex, marriages.

If, you do what you think is right, don't worry about those who have a distorted view of marriage and their perceived rights.

When you are given a choice to vote on same sex marriages issue, vote "no!" If they have a right to vote yes, you have a right to vote "no." If more votes are against the right to same sex marraige, you will see them going back into the closet from whence they came.

You will not get rid of them. Their distorted view of the human body and it's functions shows they can't be right in their views.

When people don't or will not bother to standup for an issue, you will find yourself living in a world which displeases you.

You can bet all those folks for same sex marriage are out in force supporting their cause.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't think people should have a right to vote on another's sexual orientation, and whether they can have their relationship recognised in law or not. And we will not go back into any flippin' closet, we're here to stay, we helped build civilisation etc., go and invest in some personal knowledge before you start spouting feeble crapness.

I object to your statement that gay people have a distorted view of the human body, many of us work in the NHS saving lives alongside our heterosexual colleagues, we know all about the human body, and it's certainly not distorted.

Finally, your idea that you will be never rid of us is analogous with a sinister dictorial stance, and we all know where and what resulted with having those beliefs and attitudes.
Complain about a message      

Message 13 - posted by Yodell, Dec 20, 2005

Not recognising gays will not make them 'go away' as Lorrenmax thinks. Gays are what they are through no fault of their own and I don't wish that to sound likes it looks in print as it's not a disease and I expect they like their lives as it is thank you very much. Gays have every right to be a part of a society in which they exist and in fact form than anybody else. Are anti's saying that a loving relationship between same sex couples is less than a fraught one between different sex couples. There will no doubt be straight couples who practice things in the privacy of their own homes that gays are vilified for.
Complain about a message      

Message 14 - posted by Fulup le Breton, Dec 20, 2005

You see Yodell you can write a sensible post if you really really concentrate, but anyway HEAR HEAR i totally agree with you!

To discriminate against somebody on the grounds of their sexuality is just pathetic, who cares that much to stop them having a civil marriage, why does it offend you right wing nut jobs so much?

Not recognising gays will not make them 'go away' as Lorrenmax thinks. Gays are what they are through no fault of their own and I don't wish that to sound likes it looks in print as it's not a disease and I expect they like their lives as it is thank you very much. Gays have every right to be a part of a society in which they exist and in fact form than anybody else. Are anti's saying that a loving relationship between same sex couples is less than a fraught one between different sex couples. There will no doubt be straight couples who practice things in the privacy of their own homes that gays are vilified for.

Quoted from this message

Complain about a message      

Message 15 - posted by LORRENMAX, Dec 20, 2005

"To discriminate against somebody on the grounds of their sexuality is just pathetic, who cares that much to stop them having a civil marriage, why does it offend you right wing nut jobs so much?"

Why is pathic (having a capacity to move one to either compassionate or contemptuous pity) for someone to discriminate (to distinguish by discerning or exposing differences on grounds of sexuality?

Why must the hetrosexual community accept the views of the homesexual community? If one doesn't like the views, one needs to standup and defend their rights. Isn't that what the homosexual community does when it insults anyone who believes different by stating "why does it offend you right wing nut jobs so much?"

People do discriminate and gays discrimate in their views, also. They even go so far as to discriminate by transfering their sexual obsessions by using the common response "Gays are what they are through no fault of their own."

If, you test someone's chromosomes and the results reflect a male, you are a male and if you are tested and it relects a female, you are a female.

Now, some people do have defective genes and they will have the attributes of male and female but the defect is not common.

Humans are born either male, female, or as previous mentioned part male and part female; therefore, sexuality distinguishes a person as either male,female, or a combination of both sex. If you are born into this world as male and you choose the life style of a female, you choose the life style because of the conditioning in your life. The same goes for females. Males and females, not the one's with defective chromosomes, choose the gay life style because of the conditions in their lives.

You can choose what ever life style you want but that doesn't negate the distorted life style of homosexality. The human body has specific functions for each part such as the hands, eyes, and the alimentary canal.

The "alimentary canal" is a "tubular passage that extends from mouth to anus and functions in digestion and absorption of food and elimination of residual waste."

To use the "alimentary canal" in one's sexuality is distorted. It's purpose, as previously mentioned, is not sexual.

You can believe as you choose but don't justify to non-homosexuals and yourselves, the life style is normal, when it is not.
Complain about a message      

Message 16 - posted by Al Fresco II, Dec 20, 2005

You are having a laugh; you're making this up as you go along

You know nothing of sexual identity.

Sexuality and sex are two distinct and separate areas.

To be born male or female doesn't infer that you are either hetero or gay, that is absolute nonsense.

>>>sexuality distinguishes a person as either male, female, or a combination of both sex<<<

Sexuality is no such thing, that's absolute poppy-cock, no wonder you are as deluded as you posts seem to make you out as.

>>>Why must the heterosexual community accept the views of the homosexual community?<<<

Who exactly are the heterosexual community?

Who are the homosexual community?

Are they separate isolated groups, or are they living and working side by side?

Do only gay people have sexual obsessions, isn't this phenomenon to be found in heterosexuals too?

Are heterosexuals straight through no fault of their own?

Homosexuality isn't a distortion, it's as natural as any sexual orientation. It's attitudes such as yours which are distorted.

Your views are based on little knowledge of how the real world exists around you. Perhaps if you acquired some education on the subject before mouthing off stupid nonsense about things you know nothing about, then maybe you would have a more reasonable and less prejudicial outlook on life.
Complain about a message      

Message 17 - posted by Shaw, Dec 20, 2005

glrplease

I know what you mean

And it may be absurd and ridiculous. But for the many people whose lives are made a misery by religion, it is no joke.

It is no laughing matter to suffer the pangs of guilt, stigma and prejudice promoted by religion; the fear of violence from religious misogynists and political fanatics of all sects; or HIV/AIDS because of anti-condom pressures on UN health and population control programmes.

Google 'A Challenge to Religion on Health' for some examples
Complain about a message      

Message 18 - posted by Fulup le Breton, Dec 20, 2005

Why is it pathetic (having a capacity to move one to either compassionate or contemptuous pity) for someone to discriminate (to distinguish by discerning or exposing differences on grounds of sexuality?

Quoted from this message



Because if that is where your discrimination ended their would be no problem however you wish to curtail the human rights of a group of people.

Why must the heterosexual community accept the views of the homosexual community?

Quoted from this message



They want to defend their rights you want to take them away.

People do discriminate and gays discriminate in their views, also. They even go so far as to discriminate by transferring their sexual obsessions by using the common response "Gays are what they are through no fault of their own."

Quoted from this message



I think youíre shooting for concepts above your ability, take another run up at that one.

If, you test someone's chromosomes and the results reflect a male, you are a male and if you are tested and it reflects a female, you are a female.


When have human rights got anything to do with genetics, oh yes thatís right "right wing nut job".


You can choose what ever life style you want but that doesn't negate the distorted life style of homosexuality. The human body has specific functions for each part such as the hands, eyes, and the alimentary canal.


Well if your party had its way we would not be able to choose what ever life style we wanted would we?

It is only a distorted life style if you subjectively wish to see it as such, what interests me is the hate, insecurity or fear that led to your choice.

The "alimentary canal" is a "tubular passage that extends from mouth to anus and functions in digestion and absorption of food and elimination of residual waste." To use the "alimentary canal" in one's sexuality is distorted. It's purpose, as previously mentioned, is not sexual.


Sexuality exits in the human mind and the whole human body has been used for sexual pleasure since the beginning.

You can believe as you choose but don't justify to non-homosexuals and yourselves, the life style is normal, when it is not.


I am not homosexual but I would defend their fundamental human rights against all.

Quoted from this message

Complain about a message      

Message 19 - posted by LORRENMAX, Dec 20, 2005

"To be born male or female doesn't infer that you are either hetero or gay, that is absolute nonsense."

You are right and that is what I stated.

Take the time and read the post.

Your persona is nothing more than sum total of your life's conditioning.

I. You stated "Sexuality and sex are two distinct and separate areas."
1. What is sexuality? It is "the condition of having sex or sexual activity." Webster's dictionary.
2. What is sex? It is "the sum of the structural, functional, and behavioral characteristics of living things that are involved in reproduction by two interacting parents and that distinguish males and females.) Webster's dictionary.

II. "Who exactly are the heterosexual community?"
1. Hetrosexual is "of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward the opposite sex b : of, relating to, or involving sexual intercourse between individuals of opposite sex." Therefore, anyone having the sexual desire for the opposite sex is part of the community who abide by this type of relations.
1a. Therefore, your sexuality is based on the conditioning of with whom you have sex.

If you choose to have sex with the person of your own gender, you are not classified as hetrosexual but homosexual. It is defined as "of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex." People who follow this practice are part of the homosexual community.

Now, if a person wants to practice the life of homosexuality, it is or her own personal busy.

If, these same people want to believe it is normal to have sex in both ends of the their alimentry canal (the tubular passage that extends from mouth to anus and functions in digestion and absorption of food and elimination of residual waste) go right ahead; but, don't say is it normal.

Why? Because those parts of the body were not created for sex but to take in food and eliminate it after it has been processed.
Complain about a message      

Message 20 - posted by LORRENMAX, Dec 20, 2005

To THrazor,

I stated "You can bet all those folks for same sex marriage are out in force supporting their cause." in a previous post. See how they standup for their perceived rights.

Why are they out in force? Because they believe their obsessions are normal. Is it normal? No, but believing it is allows them to cope.

Why shouldn't they believe they are normal? If, they were to believe otherwise, they couldn't see themselves as normal?

But, then what is normal? Like I stated to you " At the end of the day, it really will not make much difference about same sex, marriages."

If, you believe something is wrong, standup and fight for what you believe in. They do but their logic is no good. "tell everybody it is normal to have sex in the same canal that disposes of food." Yep, real good logic.
Complain about a message      
First | < Previous 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next > | Last

This discussion is tagged with:
- London

getting involved How to reply to messagespopup icon
complain  Alert us about a messagepopup icon
online safety Are you being safe online?popup icon

Messages  1 - 20 of 144

 


About the BBC | Help | Terms of Use | Privacy & Cookies Policy