The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Let's watch our judgmental language > Comments

Let's watch our judgmental language : Comments

By Richard Prendergast, published 13/7/2006

Official statements calling gays and lesbians ‘disordered’ and ‘violent’ don't make them feel welcome and respected by the church.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. ...
  10. 40
  11. 41
  12. 42
  13. All
No one forces anyone to go to this church or any other church. Could you imagine if one of the churches tried to tell the organisers of the mardi gras how to run their affairs. If people don't believe the bible is God's Word why do they have to convince those who do believe otherwise. I suggest people practicing sodomy or other practices (such as adultery, fornication etc) start their own religion instead of trying to change the clear teachings of the bible. Either the bible is the word of God and condemns the practices of homosexuality, fornication, lying, adultery etc or it is not God's Word and so we allow every minority group to determine what is right or wrong within the church.

It might not occur to some that God has the right to determine right from wrong. It is laughable that the clay tries to tell the Potter how it should be shaped.

If you want to join the labour party then sign on the dotted line. If you want to join the RSL sign on the dotted line, if you want to go to a private school sign on the line and pay your fees, if you want to be considered to be one of God's children then repent and receive the wonderful grace of the Lord Jesus Christ. ONly then will baptism mean anything
Posted by runner, Thursday, 13 July 2006 6:19:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It was not a film mate, if you read the news, you would find the facts. Your denial of the facts are disgusting.

Don't accuse me of making things up unless you do your homework. These are the events that lead to the riots and pogrom of the La Madame Nightclub and the Green Party headquarters in Warsaw.

If you don't like the facts, good! Suck on this mate!

http://www.thegully.com/essays/gaymundo/060403_poland_bar.html

The "terrible Twins": President Lech Kaczynski and his twin brother Jaroslav, who controls the Polish Parliament and the boss of the conservative Catholic party which now controls a big chunk of Parliament, are all virulent, card-carrying queer-haters. And for the first time in Polish history, the "gay question" was a centerpiece of an electoral campaign. The ultra-homophobic, anti-Semitic, and Catholic fundamentalist, the League recently became part of the hard-right national government led by the Kaczynski twins.

On March 8, queers participating in a women's march in Warsaw were met with "Ban the Fags" signs carried by counter-demonstrators from the National Revival of Poland, a party that denies the Holocaust.
WARSAW, APRIL 4, 2006. Warsaw's legendary queer and countercultural club, Le Madame, was stormed by the police on Friday, March 31, 2006 at 6 a.m., and shut down after a five-day siege. Many of the 50 people who were guarding the club at the time were brutally beaten or dragged out.

http://www.gaycitynews.com/gcn_512/apolishstonewall.html
http://www.bgogemini.org/eng/index.php?m=single&id=67
http://www.green-rainbow.org/pipermail/lavender/2006-March/000084.html
http://www.faithinamerica.info

And in Russian riots: the Orthodox Church connection:
http://www.jewishmosaic.org/page/load_page/46

"the mayor of Moscow banned the march, European leaders condemned the ban, and every stripe of right-wing nationalist, ultra-nationalist, and nostalgic Communist came out against the march, using language reminiscent of pre-war fascism."

http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2006/05/63f18d02-3626-4787-b3f4-d9439765c477.html
http://www.gayrussia.ru/en/project/detail.php?ID=6231

Look at the mess these violent sentiments have caused. Hence the Catholic dominated Eastern Europian regimes responded to these violent words from the Vatican.

Your denial is despictable. Since when were right conservative Christians on the same side as the Communists? Jesus is not on your side.
Posted by saintfletcher, Thursday, 13 July 2006 6:30:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
How anyone can take a bunch of demonic clowns like the catholic church seriously is beyond me. Whether they be straight or gay or whatever. The question I have is why the various gays in the anglican church are prepared to demolish the entire structure (good on them)simply to assert their predeliction for anal sex. Seems very selfish but whatever erodes the foundations of these anachronistic institutions is fine by me. So c'mon girls, even plain chicks have the right to a bit of fun so don't let those men in dresses stop you. Instead of wasting your time in church have some play-time with your toys.
Posted by citizen, Thursday, 13 July 2006 7:00:45 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
MaNiK JoSiAh, the Vatican’s statement about homosexual parenting causing “violence” to children is neither tactful nor sound. There is no reputable published evidence of harm to children from such an arrangement, and most studies fail to identify any significant psychological differences between children raised by two same sex parents compared with two opposite sex parents. A good start if you’re interested in this is http://www.apa.org/pi/parent.html.

Mikijo, homosexual orientation may well be inborn (there’s not a lot of credible evidence one way or the other) but you’re possibly conflating homosexual orientation with homosexual behavior and homosexual identity, which don’t necessarily have a one on one on one relationship, something the Church and others seems to be tying themselves up in knots about. If your heterosexual orientation, behavior and identity line up, great. If you feel “revulsion” about people who don’t fit that configuration, there may be a problem. I don’t think homosexuals are trying to force themselves on the Catholic Church, although some seem to react to the Church’s more extreme pronouncements, and others are clearly angry at abusive treatment they’ve received. Richard Prendergast seems to be making a sincere effort to reconcile his Christian beliefs with the real world.

Ledingham, could I suggest your growing lack of confidence in pinning down the mind of God concords with some of the most profound thinkers in Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism and most other religious traditions. You’re probably on the right track.
Posted by Snout, Thursday, 13 July 2006 7:03:25 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Religion has a massive hangup about sex!
It takes a normal human aspect of life and demonises it. What is it afraid of...the admonishments from its various core works of fiction?
Fact - people are formed with neither total 100%male or 100%female sexuality. They are a mixture, and this drives their lifestyle.
Guilt and sexual repression leads to hatred and violence.
Religious gullibles need to grow up and get a life.
Posted by Ponder, Thursday, 13 July 2006 7:06:25 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It took the third paragraph to come to:
"They were just like every other family in their cares and concerns. The only difference was that they were a lesbian couple."
Does that mean they were not like every other family in their cares and concerns?
Does it mean they were not a family?
Does it mean they were a couple but not a family?
Does it mean they were a family but not a family?
Does it mean they were not just a family but were just like a family?
Does it mean they were not a couple?
Does it mean they were a couple but not a family?
Does it mean they were being judged by being a couple while being a family?
Does it mean the judgment discredited that they were a family but they were just like a couple with cares and concerns.
Does it mean they were not a family but were just like a family but then were not a family but a couple but did not have the cares and concerns of a family but with the cares and concerns of a family, just like a couple with cares and concerns.
What is the concern when they are just like every other family?
Posted by GlenWriter, Thursday, 13 July 2006 9:37:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. ...
  10. 40
  11. 41
  12. 42
  13. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy