Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Wiggle room for changing church teachings on homosexuality


semlogo

Recommended Posts

Couple of questions....

Will (or should) the government impose sanctions on churches that do not institute or allow gay marriage?

After this glorious victory, whose is the next quest for equality?

Bernard

Absolutely not. It is just as much a civil right to have churches teach what ever doctrine it wants. The last thing I would want is the government telling religion what to do.

I don't know who the next group that would need to fight for equality. Sadly it has been the history of this country and for that matter the human race to always need a group to push down and discriminate against. You would think that in this day and age we would put discrimination behind us and learn to treat all people with equality and respect. Our country should be big enough to treat all of its citizens equally under the law. But hey, I can't complain much. Look how long it took for women to get the same right to vote granted to men automatically for just being born a man.

Link to comment

The government does pressure religious organizations and limit their freedom as to what they can teach and practice. It's illegal in many countries to perform female genital mutilation, child marriages, and to engage in polygamy.

The church was pressured to stop polygamy by the US government. Solicitor General of the United States, Rex Lee, a Mormon, recused himself from a case against Bob Jones University.

In that case, the U.S. government was threatening to revoke Bob Jones University's tax-exempt status because of its racist policy of prohibiting interracial dating.

When asked why he took himself off the case, Mr. Lee explained that previously when representing the Mormon church in a similar case, he had argued that the church should retain its tax-exempt status despite its racist policies (preventing Blacks from full participation) and felt conflicted from arguing an opposing view in the Bob Jones case. (see, The Tenth Justice, [by] Lincoln Caplan, Knopf, 1987, p. 51, note 2 . . . p. 293).

So there you have Rex Lee, US Solicitor General stating that the LDS church had already had their tax-exempt status threatened due to racist religious policies and he was utilized to defend then church.

There is no true freedom of religion anywhere. You would think, however, that a church inspired of God would beat the secular world in a race to equality.

Link to comment
...treat all people with equality and respect...

Treating people equally only makes sense, if people are behaving identically. Treating people with respect also includes not pretending that their differences are the same. It's funny that in my racism in America class, the professor, an African American, insisted that neither he nor other black people want to be treated as if they're white. They're black, acknowledge it and respect and appreciate the differences. At no point, did the teacher, nor any other minority in the class, demand that they be called, "white."

It's insecurity and a lack of self-respect that leads homosexuals to try to get the gov't to pretend their behavior is the same. It's not the same and never will be. To treat people like adults, we ought to acknowledge that there is a difference and not sugar coat the fact that homosexual unions, if normalized, would be harmful to society. I think gay people are insecure, because they know that their behavior isn't as good for society, on some level, and know it never will be. Everyone knows that natural reproduction is more likely to result in the presence of two biological parents. That's what's best for society. To normalize homosexuality is to normalize absenteeism among biological parents, particularly among biological fathers.

Link to comment
You would think, however, that a church inspired of God would beat the secular world in a race to equality.

Why would you think this?

Any statement of the sort you just made is an example of chronocentrism. Chronocentrism is an appeal to the superiority of one time frame over another. It's simply unjustified and unjustifiable.

Furthermore, "equality" is not the same thing as "identity". 1-[sin2θ+cos2θ] equals lim 1/n as n→∞, but 1-[sin2θ+cos2θ] is not the same thing as lim 1/n as n→∞. They are both equal to zero, but they are not interchangeable—mathematicians do not treat them in the same way: doing so would result in errors.

Lehi

Link to comment

When asked why he took himself off the case, Mr. Lee explained that previously when representing the Mormon church in a similar case, he had argued that the church should retain its tax-exempt status despite its racist policies (preventing Blacks from full participation) and felt conflicted from arguing an opposing view in the Bob Jones case. (see, The Tenth Justice, [by] Lincoln Caplan, Knopf, 1987, p. 51, note 2 . . . p. 293).

So there you have Rex Lee, US Solicitor General stating that the LDS church had already had their tax-exempt status threatened due to racist religious policies and he was utilized to defend then church.

CFR (call for references in case you are unfamiliar with the term). I'd like to see the direct quotes of what Rex Lee stated.

Link to comment

Question: If civil unions will give gays all of the civil rights that they seek, then why do they need the word "marriage"?

Could it possibly be about revenge? For being marginalized and hated and beaten by fundamentalist Christians throughout this country's history? Doesn't changing the meaning of this word, in effect, give the homosexual population vengeance... against the religious cohort that has opposed them... on the most fundamental level?

Link to comment
There is no true freedom of religion anywhere. You would think, however, that a church inspired of God would beat the secular world in a race to equality...
Did they beat us, or are they just pulling the wool over their own and society's eyes? Does gov't policy prove racism has ended? Go talk to black people about that and see if there isn't still racism. However, from my experience and from polls done among Mormons, Mormons feel warmly to all groups of people and care about all of them. From my experience, as long as a person is a faithful Mormon, other Mormons do not care in the slightest what color they are. The rest of the world tends to use minorities as a means to gain status, to prove how "tolerant" they are or supposedly "not racist."

I think Mormons, for the most part, treat minorities with more respect than other groups. They're not a political platform for us. They're brothers and sisters. For example, you yourself call it a race, which was a little like LBJ's attitude, that they would win something:

"I'll have those n****rs voting Democratic for the next 200 years." -- Lyndon B. Johnson to two governors on Air Force One according Ronald Kessler's Book, "Inside The White House"
So says the "hero" and "champion" of left-wing Civil Rights.

It's not a race to prove who is superior. In reality, how we feel about others is between us and God. If you think it's a race for social and political advantage, I think God will be angry. Perhaps the left is saying, "We'll have those f****ts voting for us for the next 200 years," even today.

Link to comment

The government does pressure religious organizations and limit their freedom as to what they can teach and practice. It's illegal in many countries to perform female genital mutilation, child marriages, and to engage in polygamy.

The church was pressured to stop polygamy by the US government. Solicitor General of the United States, Rex Lee, a Mormon, recused himself from a case against Bob Jones University.

In that case, the U.S. government was threatening to revoke Bob Jones University's tax-exempt status because of its racist policy of prohibiting interracial dating.

When asked why he took himself off the case, Mr. Lee explained that previously when representing the Mormon church in a similar case, he had argued that the church should retain its tax-exempt status despite its racist policies (preventing Blacks from full participation) and felt conflicted from arguing an opposing view in the Bob Jones case. (see, The Tenth Justice, [by] Lincoln Caplan, Knopf, 1987, p. 51, note 2 . . . p. 293).

So there you have Rex Lee, US Solicitor General stating that the LDS church had already had their tax-exempt status threatened due to racist religious policies and he was utilized to defend then church.

There is no true freedom of religion anywhere. You would think, however, that a church inspired of God would beat the secular world in a race to equality.

I personally think that the US government had no legal reason or right to do what they did against the LDS church in regards to polygamy. It is clear that the government has made wrong decisions concerning civil rights and the rights of religion in the past. I believe this is one of those cases. You will get no argument from me abut that. I also feel that if that case was argued today, it would be overruled.

I don't know about the details on the Bob Jones case. But two things I would like to suggest. First, a university is not a church. It can be argued that it is a business open to the public only operated by a church. When that is the case, businesses open to the public have a different criteria about what they can and can not do to keep their government subsidized tax status. I am sure you can understand the difference between the two. And the second point is that standard is very carefully guarded when it comes to things like religious institutions since both in the BYU case and Bob Jones University case, they were able to keep their tax exempt status.

Link to comment

Treating people equally only makes sense, if people are behaving identically. Treating people with respect also includes not pretending that their differences are the same. It's funny that in my racism in America class, the professor, an African American, insisted that neither he nor other black people want to be treated as if they're white. They're black, acknowledge it and respect and appreciate the differences. At no point, did the teacher, nor any other minority in the class, demand that they be called, "white."

It's insecurity and a lack of self-respect that leads homosexuals to try to get the gov't to pretend their behavior is the same. It's not the same and never will be. To treat people like adults, we ought to acknowledge that there is a difference and not sugar coat the fact that homosexual unions, if normalized, would be harmful to society. I think gay people are insecure, because they know that their behavior isn't as good for society, on some level, and know it never will be. Everyone knows that natural reproduction is more likely to result in the presence of two biological parents. That's what's best for society. To normalize homosexuality is to normalize absenteeism among biological parents, particularly among biological fathers.

I think everyone on this board is quite aware that you do not believe in equal rights for all Americans. Fortunately most Americans disagree with you.

As far as your insecurity comment, this seems to be a stance that I have heard from other Mormons and others that also don' want to give equal reginition under the laws of this country to gays. It is not however in the least bit factual. I think it is an excuse to justify their position on equality. It might surprise you to know that most gay people in this country especially those that have delt with the prejudices of society long enough to want to get married are quite comfortable in being gay. The reasons for wanting equal rights under the laws of this country are numerous. They have certainly been explained to you before. You somehow ignore those reasons. And it has nothing to do with "getting back" at those that have opposed them in the past.

However, I do have to say, that there is still an incredible amount of bigotry and hatred in this country for gay people. Not a week goes by where a case is reported about some gay person bashed in the head and killed or almost killed simply because they were gay and were in the wrong place at the wrong time. I think when the institution of any government treats a group of citizens as second class citizens, in the minds of SOME people it gives them permition to treat that group outside the law. There has certainly been a significant drop in this type of physical bashing and murder that has occured against black people since the civil rights laws for them were passed.

At one time I felt that civil unions for gays would be just fine. But I have changed my mind and feel seperate but equal does not address some of theise other ills of society that this status would cause. I would however be fully supportive if the US government got out of the "marriage" business and only recognized civil unions for all of its citizens and kept marriage to the churches. That said, there are penty of churches that want to marry gays, so they would still be able to marry as a religious sacrament if they wanted to.

Here is a link you might be interestyed in.

Church Wants Gay Marriage

And now the question arrises, Does the goernment have a right to stop a church from practicing its beliefs on gay marriage??

Link to comment

I think everyone on this board is quite aware that you do not believe in equal rights for all Americans.

Misrepresenting someone's position is hardly indicative of a sincere desire to dialogue or persuade.

From what I've seen the issue is not about believing that all Americans should have equal rights, but rather what that actually means.

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...