Hypocracies of the Religious Right

[Inviolable]

Inviolable,


I may be Lutheran but my wife and two of my sons are Roman Catholic, one son is Presbyterian and my daughter is Pentacostal. In addition I spent four years in formal study of religion having attended religious college. I would consider myself fairly well exposed to different religious thinking.

Oh yeah, I absolutely agree with you. You're very well versed.
I wish I knew half as much as you do Frogger, don't get me wrong.

I don't mean any disrespect, none at all.

I think it's just kind of odd. If a Christian is a Christian then why all the titles?
I'll visit a Lutheran church or a Catholic church or a Pentacostal church and I might even make a return visit if the sermon is good.
But really, if the Catholic church is open to allowing for Christian churches world wide to be a part of them, then why even bother with the word "Catholic"? Why not just be the "Christian" church and stick with one rule.
Jesus is our Lord and Saviour.

Again, I'm not trying to slam the Catholic church or slam any other church, for that matter. I just don't see a need for titles when you're trying to bring the body of Christ together.

[Inviolable]

no...LOL....due to the nature of my satirical content....i do a lot of hiding... :thumbsup: :thumbsup:


if your serious about serious religion discussion....and this , like gerryh, is for me a serious section....we can talk here....

Oh no, I wasn't trying to drag you away from these forums.
I just wanted to show you a movement thats recently been started on MySpace that is kind of an online church.
It caters to every kind of Christian from around the world.
Like a really really big global church.

[grainfedprairieboy]

Anyways, I'm open to this discussion...we have some socons (social conservatives) on here who want to go at it? :laugh:

One of the most remarkable things about homosexuals and the gay lifestyle is the way their personal sexuality is central to ever aspect of every issue.

[Doc Dred]

It's wierd ...but i think i'm a calvinist of sorts...the Holy Spirit must act first before belief and understanding can happen...

this myspace things sounds cool ...maybe i shall give it a go...

i find religous talk a lot more relaxing than political....

i can deal with differing ideas and belief systems ...i see them all as growth and potential....

politics on the other hand....lol...

any way i'm off to the land of Ikea...boards in boxes that turn them selves into functioning entities in my home....

sort of like birth and the right to exist ......lol....

yer al right invaluable ;)

[sweet_cheeks]

lol...I have the most fun debating when I take the left wing side, and I'm left wing on this.

Okay, when the issue of homosexuality is addressed by the Religious Right, the common answer is:

We don't believe they choose the attraction/inclination, and the sin is not the attraction or thoughts, but is the act itself. Through the will of God you can be 'healed' (and turned straight), or if not you need to live a life of celibacy.

Now, as a Gay Christian (yes those exist too), here is where I get uber-annoyed by evangelicals, the christian right, etc.

God created/designed us all in his image, with a plan. If same sex attraction isn't a choice, then we know God designed us that way.

Isn't it more against God, to preach that we should deny and try to change the way he made us???

Isn't the religious right saying God made a mistake in us, and we need to work on fixing the mistake.

It's ridiculous. Also the amount of cherry picking from the Old Testament by right wing Christians makes my head spin.

The common one is that Leviticus verse that says it's an abomination. Did you know that the same chapter says that eating shrimp is an abomination? I guess we should round up and protest all the shrimp eaters in world, eh? Sanction those damn Japanese shrimp eh?

Anyways, I'm open to this discussion...we have some socons (social conservatives) on here who want to go at it? :laugh:

Ya know, I think the bible is used too much to condemn people. For centuries it's been used as the scape goat and I really can't wait until people start thinking for themselves instead of hiding behind words written thousands of years ago. How many deaths, how much discrimination, torture, slavery, ect... can be blamed on how the bible or certain verses were perceived? Could you imagine if we HAD to follow every thing in the bible?? Kind of funny how some things in the bible have long since dropped at the wayside as we become more intelligent but others are still enforced socially and governmentally like being gay and gays not being able to marry. I've heard someone say that it breaks the tradition of marriage! What?? If you want marriage to remain a tradition... then you need to go back hundreds and thousands of years...... and legalize wife beating too! *rolling eyes*

Okay... I'm done ranting myself. Just a hot topic for me and I'm not even gay.

[mikezila]

I can see that. I guess that would be frustrating to a gay Christian.

I think maybe the best way to understand why they do that is to look past the simple use of the verse. Into something a little deeper.
Like for instance, what would make a Christian want to quote the verse in the first place when they're looking past the other things.

I think maybe some sins stand out more so then others.
I don't mean to say, a sin isn't a sin. But some Christians like myself eat shellfish, but I feel I can because we now fall under Grace and the rules have changed some what.

I don't know entirely about shellfish but pork was a sin to eat because it was unclean. It still is, pork has lots of parasites. It's just gross.
I think the biggest problem homosexuals are facing is the fact that homosexuality is viewed upon by many as abnormal.
Which could be why Christians feel it stands out.

there's the problem! sins and abominations aren't the same thing. sins hurt other ppl, abominations hurt yourself.

[dazed&confused]

This subject seems closed a couple of moths ago I going to put my thoughts in anyway
The Bible is two separate books Old Testament was written by Jews,intended for Jews and its meanig can only be interrupted by Jews. The new testament was written by both Jew & Gentile about Christ in 325 the Council of Nicea codified which gospels & epistles wre to be included so in my view yhe only churches who can interrupt it is The Roman Catholic, Eastern Othodox & to a lesser extent The Coptic church.

[Freethinker]

How many deaths, how much discrimination, torture, slavery, ect... can be blamed on how the bible or certain verses were perceived?

The better way of phrasing that would be --""How many deaths, how much discrimination, torture, slavery, ect can be directly attributed to how the Bible or certain verses are perceived?""

And the answer is -- "Countless hundreds of thousands of deaths, and an incalculable amount of discrimination, torture, slavery, homophobia, etc."

I agree with the thread starter; for religious folk in America to --on the one hand-- claim that their Bible is perfect, they certainly seem to pick and choose between which of their 'perfect' god's rules they will follow and not follow.

They are (like the book that they follow) very inconsistent.