The Long, Slow Death of My Homophobia
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-05-2017, 10:42 AM
RE: The Long, Slow Death of My Homophobia
Feel free to un-misunderstand us, then.

"E se non passa la tristezza con altri occhi la guarderò."
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-05-2017, 10:47 AM
RE: The Long, Slow Death of My Homophobia
Has he said where he lives yet? It's sounding like some sort of Muslim theocracy, but since he said he was Catholic, this seems unlikely.

I have no doubt there are parts of the world that are still way behind in regards to equal rights, and it will take a big fight to get them to accept SSM. I'm sure this is all about fear, ultimately. Fear of those who are different. Fear of not being seen to condemn those who are different. Fear to admit when you are different.

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Robvalue's post
23-05-2017, 12:13 PM
RE: The Long, Slow Death of My Homophobia
Wait, wait, wait. No no no no no.

"Marriages" are not in the hands of the church, WEDDINGS are in the hands of the church. Marriage is still very much a secular, state function. The only connection is that priests are authorized under secular law to sign the marriage certificate in lieu of a judge. Period.

And while wedding ceremonies are certainly something churches frequently do, there are many, many, many weddings that fall outside the purview of the church. The entire Las Vegas wedding ceremony industry is testament to that. Other religions do it, atheists do it, and so on and so on. The church does not get to claim this one! See for instance:

[Image: 315D187600000578-3454391-Childhood_sweet...323477.jpg]

Quick! Tell me which of the people in the above picture are getting married, and what it has to do with the church. Is it the girl in the Darth Vader costume, upon whom the bride seems to be leaning?

Nope. Han is the groom. That's Davina and Paul Helslop. It gets even better... Davina posted a shot of herself in her "wedding night" outfit... ohh yeah...
[Image: 315D238700000578-3454391-Davina_and_Paul...431346.jpg]

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like RocketSurgeon76's post
23-05-2017, 12:34 PM
RE: The Long, Slow Death of My Homophobia
I'm not sure that's a traditional wedding happening there Smile

You're overstating things a bit I think. Churches perform marriages--a process by which two people are formally linked in a relationship--and they have various standards for deciding whether people can be married under the purview of their church. That's fine with me--marry whoever you want in your church and don't marry whoever your book says not to. Whatever.

At the same time, we have modern legal state-sponsored marriage, a relatively recent invention, which is a package of legal obligations and benefits defined by the state--a process by which two people are formally linked in a relationship--or as my uncle once told me, "allowing the state to control your life" Smile I didn't listen to him though (and have never regretted it!) Smile

So there's conflict between these two twists on the same meaning of the same word. Obviously for those of us who have the potential to discuss this issue--not exactly the whole world in case anyone was paying attention--the legal meaning which rests on the fundamental underpinning of our societies takes precedence over the provincial religious meaning. Shockingly some of the religious people are insisting on their God-given right to lord it over everyone else.

But yeah, it's sure not the property of any church, not for us, and not for me.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes tempogain's post
23-05-2017, 02:04 PM (This post was last modified: 23-05-2017 02:14 PM by JesseB.)
RE: The Long, Slow Death of My Homophobia
(21-05-2017 10:34 PM)sea_tiger Wrote:  In my area issue of homosexuality is known only through news and social media and sometimes in movies,documentaries etc.People don't face it in everyday life so it is an issue that doesn't concern them.I don't think that they will look at it favourably if faced in real life.
Quote:Despite this, as a conservative Republican, it was clear that gay marriage could represent a major turning point and revolution of the way society defines marriage.
In society marriage between man and woman is recognised and celebrated.The concept of marriage is inseparable from human ability to procreate, child nurturing etc.
As a conservative and traditionalist I don't think same-sex marriage would fit into social dynamics,social traditions etc. unless some changes occur.There's thousands of years of human history and traditions shaping our society.Same-sex marriage flies in the face of the foundation of social traditions.

What you think is tradition is a pretty new concept in the course of humans existence. Go back farther and you'll find people didn't agree with you (for instance polygamy was a thing in the culture that your idiotic traditions came from, would you like to advocate for that too?)

Homosexuality is a longer more natural tradition than what you're talking about. I think it was close to 10% (it varies from species to species) of all mammals present as homosexual. With some homosexual animals picking lifelong partners.

Marriage was and still is a legal concept that some priests decided to hijack for religion (as they do with most things). It was not always defined as 1 man and 1 woman, in fact if the genesis account were accurate then "god" would have been on the Jews for the thousands of years (according to the bible) afterward where polygamy was more common. You expect me to buy the story that god defined and commanded Adam and eve that marriage would be between 1 man and 1 woman, so he destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah BUT totally turned a blind eye to polygamy? In fact the bible NEVER condemns polygamy at all. Add to that an end to polygamy came far later from priests in the dark ages (which is where MOST of the bible and its "traditions" actually come from, like the bad word shit you have in your head that was actually a form of class warfare in the middle ages hijacked by the church).

Edit^ Fight back against class warfare, promote the use of the words fuck cunt twatwaffle shit damn ect!

Your views aren't founded in tradition, they are founded in extreme ignorance of reality and history.

And @ the OP cool on you. Homophobia is one of the weirdest stupidest obsessions the religious fucktards ever came up with.

DLJ Wrote:And, yes, the principle of freedom of expression works both ways... if someone starts shit, better shit is the best counter-argument.
Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes JesseB's post
23-05-2017, 02:10 PM
RE: The Long, Slow Death of My Homophobia
I'd like to add a correction to my above post. While homophobia is weird and stupid, there's also a very good reason why religions (more than one do this) obsess over it. It's pretty simple, one of the most powerful intense needs we have is the need to reproduce (especially if you're a guy these intense urges can drive you insane) Control what's in a persons pants and you control them completely.

That's all most of this shit is, the churches way of manipulating and enslaving the masses so they can continue to bilk them for money, and have an army ready to fight and die on command.

DLJ Wrote:And, yes, the principle of freedom of expression works both ways... if someone starts shit, better shit is the best counter-argument.
Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-05-2017, 02:11 PM
RE: The Long, Slow Death of My Homophobia
I'm for the traditions of Biblical marriage.
I wanna marry me some slaves to go with the bargain.

[Image: bible-marriage.jpg]

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Bucky Ball's post
23-05-2017, 02:17 PM
RE: The Long, Slow Death of My Homophobia
(23-05-2017 02:11 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  I'm for the traditions of Biblical marriage.
I wanna marry me some slaves to go with the bargain.

[Image: bible-marriage.jpg]

I'm actually far more ok with this than I am of the 1 man 1 woman bullshit used by the same religions today. (with some exceptions)

DLJ Wrote:And, yes, the principle of freedom of expression works both ways... if someone starts shit, better shit is the best counter-argument.
Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-05-2017, 02:27 PM
RE: The Long, Slow Death of My Homophobia
(21-05-2017 10:34 PM)sea_tiger Wrote:  In my area issue of homosexuality is known only through news and social media and sometimes in movies,documentaries etc.People don't face it in everyday life so it is an issue that doesn't concern them.I don't think that they will look at it favourably if faced in real life.
I grew up in the 1970s in a small central US midwestern town (population 750) with four churches (Bible, Baptist, Methodist, Presbyterian) that would fit your description here. Homosexuality, drugs, black people, hispanics, or really any sort of diversity were only dimly known to us through fuzzy black and white TV newscasts. They were strange things that those perverted urban Californians did, and about the most exotic and subversive thing to happen in our world was the occasional teen pregnancy, which was quickly swept under the societal carpet. I would imagine that this insular bubble has somewhat eroded in the 43 years since I moved away from there. But that is quite irrelevant, really; US society as a whole has reached a tipping point and the majority that used to oppose or was at least uncomfortable with homosexuality has now become the minority. Too bad, so sad.

My little hometown still had party lines and four-digit phone numbers when I moved there in 1968, and if that hadn't changed halfway through high school and the locals were inexplicably devoted to such hold-overs from the 1940s, and still had them, it would be just as irrelevant in the face of smartphones as homophobia is in the face of marriage equality.
(21-05-2017 10:34 PM)sea_tiger Wrote:  The concept of marriage is inseparable from human ability to procreate, child nurturing etc.
I wonder what history books you read? Marriage is a civil contract that establishes responsibility for child rearing and establishes how property inheritance works. At the pleasure of the state, which issue marriage licenses, clergy are allowed to solemnize marriages and sign marriage certificates, along with justices of the peace, military chaplains (including humanist chaplains) and many others. Don't believe me? Just let your church try to perform a marriage without the couple having obtained a license from, and met the requirements of, the state. And let them try to enjoy the tax advantages and inheritance defaults of marriage. And see how that goes, and let me know.
(21-05-2017 10:34 PM)sea_tiger Wrote:  As a conservative and traditionalist I don't think same-sex marriage would fit into social dynamics,social traditions etc. unless some changes occur.There's thousands of years of human history and traditions shaping our society.Same-sex marriage flies in the face of the foundation of social traditions.
No you do not have thousands of years of precedent in your favor. Again, I wonder what history books you read.

The end of human slavery, at one time, "flew in the face of social traditions" in places like the American South, and before that, the UK and elsewhere. So what.

The introduction of women's suffrage, "flew in the face of social traditions" in the early 20th century in the US. So what.

Women entering the workforce during WW2 and maintaining their toe-hold in it afterwards, "flew in the face of social traditions". So what.

Unchaperoned dating and skirts shorter than ankle length and going to the movies "flew in the face of social traditions" about three to four generations ago. So what?

What is the problem, exactly, with "flying in the face" of notions simply because they are entrenched or because some people fear change of any sort? The criteria isn't past popularity, but whether things are currently recognized as harmful / unfair / irrational.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like mordant's post
23-05-2017, 02:46 PM (This post was last modified: 23-05-2017 02:49 PM by JesseB.)
RE: The Long, Slow Death of My Homophobia
(23-05-2017 02:27 PM)mordant Wrote:  
(21-05-2017 10:34 PM)sea_tiger Wrote:  In my area issue of homosexuality is known only through news and social media and sometimes in movies,documentaries etc.People don't face it in everyday life so it is an issue that doesn't concern them.I don't think that they will look at it favourably if faced in real life.
I grew up in the 1970s in a small central US midwestern town (population 750) with four churches (Bible, Baptist, Methodist, Presbyterian) that would fit your description here. Homosexuality, drugs, black people, hispanics, or really any sort of diversity were only dimly known to us through fuzzy black and white TV newscasts. They were strange things that those perverted urban Californians did, and about the most exotic and subversive thing to happen in our world was the occasional teen pregnancy, which was quickly swept under the societal carpet. I would imagine that this insular bubble has somewhat eroded in the 43 years since I moved away from there. But that is quite irrelevant, really; US society as a whole has reached a tipping point and the majority that used to oppose or was at least uncomfortable with homosexuality has now become the minority. Too bad, so sad.

My little hometown still had party lines and four-digit phone numbers when I moved there in 1968, and if that hadn't changed halfway through high school and the locals were inexplicably devoted to such hold-overs from the 1940s, and still had them, it would be just as irrelevant in the face of smartphones as homophobia is in the face of marriage equality.
(21-05-2017 10:34 PM)sea_tiger Wrote:  The concept of marriage is inseparable from human ability to procreate, child nurturing etc.
I wonder what history books you read? Marriage is a civil contract that establishes responsibility for child rearing and establishes how property inheritance works. At the pleasure of the state, which issue marriage licenses, clergy are allowed to solemnize marriages and sign marriage certificates, along with justices of the peace, military chaplains (including humanist chaplains) and many others. Don't believe me? Just let your church try to perform a marriage without the couple having obtained a license from, and met the requirements of, the state. And let them try to enjoy the tax advantages and inheritance defaults of marriage. And see how that goes, and let me know.
(21-05-2017 10:34 PM)sea_tiger Wrote:  As a conservative and traditionalist I don't think same-sex marriage would fit into social dynamics,social traditions etc. unless some changes occur.There's thousands of years of human history and traditions shaping our society.Same-sex marriage flies in the face of the foundation of social traditions.
No you do not have thousands of years of precedent in your favor. Again, I wonder what history books you read.

The end of human slavery, at one time, "flew in the face of social traditions" in places like the American South, and before that, the UK and elsewhere. So what.

The introduction of women's suffrage, "flew in the face of social traditions" in the early 20th century in the US. So what.

Women entering the workforce during WW2 and maintaining their toe-hold in it afterwards, "flew in the face of social traditions". So what.

Unchaperoned dating and skirts shorter than ankle length and going to the movies "flew in the face of social traditions" about three to four generations ago. So what?

What is the problem, exactly, with "flying in the face" of notions simply because they are entrenched or because some people fear change of any sort? The criteria isn't past popularity, but whether things are currently recognized as harmful / unfair / irrational.

Well.... Women in the workforce is a small problem, not because I'm against equality or women working, but because employers and companies decided now that women are working they can raise prices so that it's almost impossible for a single income to support even 1 person let alone a family. Fucking A the ruling class is shitty.

Again for people who can't read very well, I'm not saying women shouldn't be equal or shouldn't work, I'm saying employers and people who sell goods are worthless cunts for continuing to raise prices on goods and keep wages the same for about the last 100 years. One of the factors that THEY took advantage of was the near doubling of the supply of workers to help make this shitty situation happen.

Rich people have a disease, they are like a fat person who can't regulate themselves literally eating themselves to death. Rich people if not given clear restrictions will continue to gather personal wealth until their disease even threatens their own lives. They have no self control and the only skill or talent they have is how to game the system to gather more resources for themselves, it requires no special intellect but they are benefited by a total lack of empathy (aka psychopathy). In order for an economy to work a certain balance MUST be maintained, however they aren't above destroying a country to gain personal profit then put the burden on the masses which is what the banks did to Greece for example. Sad part is people are generally pretty stupid and don't even know why Greece really failed.



Hopefully that makes sense.


DLJ Wrote:And, yes, the principle of freedom of expression works both ways... if someone starts shit, better shit is the best counter-argument.
Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes JesseB's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: