|
6 people marked this as a favorite.
|
The following words are from the Reverend Otis Moss, Senior Pastor of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, Illinois concerning President Obama’s recent public endorsement of Gay Marriage.
My Brother:
Tell your brethren who are part of your ministerial coalition to “live their faith and not legislate their faith” for the Constitution is designed to protect the rights of all. We must learn to be more than a one-issue community and seek the beloved community where we may not all agree, but we all recognize the fingerprint of the Divine upon all of humanity.
There is no doubt people who are same-gender-loving occupy prominent places in the body of Christ. For the clergy to hide from true dialogue with quick dismissive claims devised from poor biblical scholarship is as sinful as unthoughtful acceptance of a theological position. When we make biblical claims without sound interpretation we run the risk of adopting a doctrinal position of deep conviction but devoid of love. Deep faith may resonate in our position, but it is the ethic of love that forces us to prayerfully reexamine our position.
The question I believe we should pose to our congregations is, “Should all Americans have the same civil rights?” This is a radically different question than the one you raised with the ministers, “Does the church have the right to perform or not perform certain religious rites.”
There is difference between rights and rites. We should never misconstrue rights designed to protect diverse individuals in a pluralistic society versus religious rites designed by faith communities to communicate a theological or doctrinal perspective. These two questions are answered in two fundamentally different arenas. One is answered in the arena of civic debate where the Constitution is the document of authority. The other is answered in the realm of ecclesiastical councils where theology, conscience and biblical mandates are the guiding ethos. I do not believe ecclesiastical councils are equipped to shape civic legislation nor are civic representatives equipped to shape religious rituals and doctrine.
The institution of marriage is not under attack as a result of the President’s words. Marriage was under attack years ago by men who viewed women as property and children as trophies of sexual prowess. Marriage is under attack by low wages, high incarceration, unfair tax policy, unemployment, and lack of education. Marriage is under attack by clergy who proclaim monogamy yet think nothing of stepping outside the bonds of marriage to have multiple affairs with “preaching groupies.” Same-gender couples did not cause the high divorce rate, but our adolescent views of relationships and our inability as a community to come to grips with the ethic of love and commitment did. We still confuse sex with love and romance with commitment.
My father, who is a veteran of the civil rights movement and retired pastor, eloquently stated the critical nature of this election when speaking to ministers this past week who claim they will pull support from the President as a result of his position. He stated, “Our Ancestors prayed for 389 years to place a person of color in the White House. They led over 200 slave revolts, fought in 11 wars, one being a civil war where over 600,000 people died. Our mothers fought and were killed for women’s suffrage, our grandparents were lynched for the civil rights bill of 1964 and the voting rights act of 1965…my father never had the opportunity to vote and I believe it is my sacred duty to pull the lever for every member of my family who was denied the right to vote. I will not allow narrow-minded ministers or regressive politicians the satisfaction of keeping me from my sacred right to vote to shape the future for my grandchildren.”
“The institution of marriage is not under attack as a result of the President’s words.”
Gay and lesbian citizens did not cause the economic crash, foreclosures, and attack upon health care. Poor under funded schools were not created because people desire equal protection under the law. We have much work to do as a community, and to claim the President of the United States must hold your theological position is absurd. He is President of the United States of America not the President of the Baptist convention or Bishop of the Sanctified or Holiness Church. He is called to protect the rights of Jew and Gentile, male and female, young and old, Gay and straight, black and white, Atheist and Agnostic. It should be noted the President offered no legislation, or executive order, or present an argument before the Supreme Court. He simply stated his personal conviction.
If we dare steal away from the noise of this debate, we will realize as a church we are called to “Do justice, live mercy and walk humbly with God.” Gay people have never been the enemy; and when we use rhetoric to suggest they are the source of our problems we lie on God and cause tears to flow from the eyes of Christ.
I am not asking you to change your position, but I am stating we must stay in dialogue and not allow our own personal emotional prejudices or doctrines to prevent us from seeing the possibilities of a beloved community.
November is fast approaching, and the spirits of Ella Baker, Septima Clarke, Fannie Lou Hammer, Rosa Parks, A. Phillip Randolph, James Orange, Medgar Evers and Martin Luther, King Jr. stand in the balcony of heaven raising the question, “Will you do justice, live mercy and walk humbly with our God?”
Emmitt Till and the four little girls who were assassinated in Alabama during worship did not die for a Sunday sermonic sound bite to show disdain for one group of God’s people. They were killed by an evil act enacted by men who believed in doctrine over love. We serve in ministry this day because of a man who believed in love over doctrine and died on a hill called Calvary in a dusty Palestinian community 2,000 years ago. Do not let the rhetoric of this debate keep you from the polls, my friend.
Asking you to imagine a beloved community, your brother and friend,
Otis Moss, III
, Senior Pastor
Trinity UCC
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
He appears to be saying something positive about gay, but he's a christian minister.
>>Does not computer>>
>>Critical error>>>
**Head explodes**
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Quote: Deep faith may resonate in our position, but it is the ethic of love that forces us to prayerfully reexamine our position. Talk like this could bring me back to Christianity.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
CourtFool wrote: Quote: Deep faith may resonate in our position, but it is the ethic of love that forces us to prayerfully reexamine our position. Talk like this could bring me back to Christianity.
I was never really christian on the inside, so it won't bring me back. However, assuming this becomes the norm, it will go a long way to changing my very negative views on the religion as a whole.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
The United Church of Christ is a very liberal denomination and as such these comments come as no surprise. It is simply a political agenda dressed up in bad theology.
+
Ooh, will the threads about Christianity and homosexuality never end?!?
I hope not!
Anyway, this cat is the successor to that Jeremiah Wright guy who was so strongly associated with Obama in 2008.
I really don't know what else he could have been expected to say:
[Translation]
"Even if you hate gay marriage, vote Obama this November!"
|
3 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Chrystrom wrote: It is simply a political agenda dressed up in bad theology. Right, because it is impossible the reverend actually believes what he is saying.
Thanks for re-affirming my jaded cynicism about humanity. For a moment there, I was having a dream.
|
3 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
"Tell your brethren who are part of your ministerial coalition to “live their faith and not legislate their faith” for the Constitution is designed to protect the rights of all."
Yep.
See, this just proves that Christianity isn't anti-gay, unlike what all the Christ-hating atheists here keep claiming.
Or, maybe this lukewarm acceptance by one pastor in one liberal sect fits in with what most of us have been saying all along: Christianity in general is anti-gay, but there are exceptions.
Those exceptions should be encouraged, but even this one seems mostly aimed at people in his own congregation who are upset about gay rights.
thejeff wrote: See, this just proves that Christianity isn't anti-gay, unlike what all the Christ-hating atheists here keep claiming.
Or, maybe this lukewarm acceptance by one pastor in one liberal sect fits in with what most of us have been saying all along: Christianity in general is anti-gay, but there are exceptions.
Those exceptions should be encouraged, but even this one seems mostly aimed at people in his own congregation who are upset about gay rights.
Um, Athiests aren't saying that christians are anti-gay. Christians are doing that all by themselves. They're really quite loud about it.
thejeff wrote: See, this just proves that Christianity isn't anti-gay, unlike what all the Christ-hating atheists here keep claiming.
See Chrystrom's post. You can keep me in the Christ-hating column for now.
CourtFool wrote: Chrystrom wrote: It is simply a political agenda dressed up in bad theology. Right, because it is impossible the reverend actually believes what he is saying.
Thanks for re-affirming my jaded cynicism about humanity. For a moment there, I was having a dream.
Well, I can't judge it as theology, but Obama's position on gay marriage has not been met with 100% glowing accolades by the black churches.
I'm sure (well, I'm willing to believe) that Moss is sincere, but this is straight-up rallying the Democratic faithful.
When you disagree it is base pandering. When you agree it is sticking to principles. Got it.
Tiny Coffee Golem wrote: thejeff wrote: See, this just proves that Christianity isn't anti-gay, unlike what all the Christ-hating atheists here keep claiming.
Or, maybe this lukewarm acceptance by one pastor in one liberal sect fits in with what most of us have been saying all along: Christianity in general is anti-gay, but there are exceptions.
Those exceptions should be encouraged, but even this one seems mostly aimed at people in his own congregation who are upset about gay rights.
Um, Athiests aren't saying that christians are anti-gay. Christians are doing that all by themselves. They're really quite loud about it. Sorry, that first bit was snark, directed at certain claims made in other religion/homosexuality threads here.
As I've said many times, there are churches and Christians that support gay rights, but the overwhelming majority of the opposition to gay rights in the US comes from Christianity (more generally, worldwide from religion.)
One statement, from one religious leader doesn't change my opinion, because it fits right in. If it becomes a trend, then I'll celebrate.
@Courtfool
???
I hope you're not talking to me.
From another thread:
Comrade Anklebiter said:
"I think it was CJ that first introduced the word "pander" into this conversation and it's been bothering me, so I looked it up:
1) To offer illicit sex to a third party; to pimp
2) To tempt with, to appeal or to cater to improper motivations, to assist in the gratification of.
Now, the double meaning is kind of amusing, and I get that Obama is motivated by politics. And I agree that wanting to get married is an improper motivation. I'm just surprised a practicing Catholic agrees with me."
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
CourtFool wrote: thejeff wrote: See, this just proves that Christianity isn't anti-gay, unlike what all the Christ-hating atheists here keep claiming.
See Chrystrom's post. You can keep me in the Christ-hating column for now. Alert: The following is an opinion and does not represent the feelings of management or this station.
I don't hate Christianity, or any religion for that matter. I just feel a bit sorry for anyone that avidly denies reality through magical thinking via religion or otherwise. I see them as unactualized. As such I take anything said I take anything said by religious (not just christians) or otherwise delusional people at face value.
That being said I know and love many people who are very strong of faith. Such as my parents, siblings, and other family just for starters. I don't have ill will against such people until they avidly try to deny me my civil rights, bring viloence against me, or otherwise try to make me "less than."
/end opinion
I am just deeply disappointed in this country this morning. There was a brief flash of beautiful light and then someone had to go and cover it up.
Tiny Coffee Golem wrote: As such I take anything said I take anything said by religious (not just christians) or otherwise delusional people at face value. In this regard, I do not discriminate based on religion. I am equally skeptical about anything said by anyone.
At least I think I am.
I try to be?
CourtFool wrote: Tiny Coffee Golem wrote: As such I take anything said I take anything said by religious (not just christians) or otherwise delusional people at face value. In this regard, I do not discriminate based on religion. I am equally skeptical about anything said by anyone.
At least I think I am.
I try to be? lol. Ditto. To be more clear. I'm skeptical of everyone. The religious can be otherwise perfectly reasonable.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Nothing wrong with a little cynicism.
I agree with most of Rev. Moss's letter if not his choice of candidate.
For all the people who are asking where's the condemnation by moderate Christians of homophobic extremism, well, there you go. I'd be shocked if this made national news like the homophobic pastor rants did.
|
4 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Kryzbyn wrote: Nothing wrong with a little cynicism. If you're not cynical about American politics, you're not paying attention.
Jean-Paul Sartre, Intrnet Troll wrote: Kryzbyn wrote: Nothing wrong with a little cynicism. If you're not cynical about American politics, you're not paying attention. You just gave me today's facebook status.
There are plenty of Christians who go beyond Reverend Otis Moss not only supporting the rights of every citizen but embracing differences. This is not a fringe group.
The Protestant Church activly has supported gay rights especially since a fair number of its leaders are gay and married. So I think it is a little disingenuous to say there are "some" churches and christians who support this. The entire Protestant Church as a whole supports this important movement. Like many people I don't like to be painted with a broad brush and I think it is lazy to do so.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
The Mad Badger wrote: There are plenty of Christians who go beyond Reverend Otis Moss not only supporting the rights of every citizen but embracing differences. This is not a fringe group.
The Protestant Church activly has supported gay rights especially since a fair number of its leaders are gay and married. So I think it is a little disingenuous to say there are "some" churches and christians who support this. The entire Protestant Church as a whole supports this important movement. Like many people I don't like to be painted with a broad brush and I think it is lazy to do so.
I'm not sure what you mean by "Protestant Church".
In general use, Protestant Churches would be any churches that split off from the Catholics during the Reformation and their spiritual descendents, ie most of the non-Catholic Christians in the Western world. This would include all of the rabidly anti-gay fundamentalist and evangelical churches in the US, as well as the more liberal ones like the UCC.
Charlie Bell wrote: For all the people who are asking where's the condemnation by moderate Christians of homophobic extremism, well, there you go. I'd be shocked if this made national news like the homophobic pastor rants did. I wish it would.
The Mad Badger wrote: There are plenty of Christians who go beyond Reverend Otis Moss not only supporting the rights of every citizen but embracing differences. This is not a fringe group.
The Protestant Church activly has supported gay rights especially since a fair number of its leaders are gay and married. So I think it is a little disingenuous to say there are "some" churches and christians who support this. The entire Protestant Church as a whole supports this important movement. Like many people I don't like to be painted with a broad brush and I think it is lazy to do so.
You're probably right. However the anti-gay christians are significantly louder. Perhaps you and the pro-gay group could get louder to try to correct the situation. Until then most people are going to associate christianity and anti-gay. Statistics support the last statement. I can dig them up if absolutely necessary.
thejeff wrote: The Mad Badger wrote: There are plenty of Christians who go beyond Reverend Otis Moss not only supporting the rights of every citizen but embracing differences. This is not a fringe group.
The Protestant Church activly has supported gay rights especially since a fair number of its leaders are gay and married. So I think it is a little disingenuous to say there are "some" churches and christians who support this. The entire Protestant Church as a whole supports this important movement. Like many people I don't like to be painted with a broad brush and I think it is lazy to do so.
I'm not sure what you mean by "Protestant Church".
In general use, Protestant Churches would be any churches that split off from the Catholics during the Reformation and their spiritual descendents, ie most of the non-Catholic Christians in the Western world. This would include all of the rabidly anti-gay fundamentalist and evangelical churches in the US, as well as the more liberal ones like the UCC.
I should have been clearer on this. Thank you for pointing out my mistake it helps me strengthen my own argument I am at times too quick and perhaps this issue is too close that I over look things.
I should have stated the Episcopal Church which in their Convention in 1976 stated In 1976, the Convention declared that homosexuals are "children of God" and "entitled to full civil rights
The Archives of the Episcopal Church, Acts of Convention: Resolution #1976-A069 and #1976-A071. Retrieved 2008-10-31.
Mind you this was 1976 where I seriously doubt any other groups were speaking up for full civil rights. They have gone on from there you can read further on Wikiapedia I took from there because it was the most expedient.
The Mad Badger wrote: There are plenty of Christians who go beyond Reverend Otis Moss not only supporting the rights of every citizen but embracing differences. This is not a fringe group.
The Protestant Church activly has supported gay rights especially since a fair number of its leaders are gay and married. So I think it is a little disingenuous to say there are "some" churches and christians who support this. The entire Protestant Church as a whole supports this important movement. Like many people I don't like to be painted with a broad brush and I think it is lazy to do so.
Wait? What? You do realize how wrong you are, don't you? There is a small sect inside the Protestant Church that wants to change it, but most find the thought of homsexuality and same-sex marriage to be an abomination in the eyes of God.
Sanakht Inaros wrote: The Mad Badger wrote: There are plenty of Christians who go beyond Reverend Otis Moss not only supporting the rights of every citizen but embracing differences. This is not a fringe group.
The Protestant Church activly has supported gay rights especially since a fair number of its leaders are gay and married. So I think it is a little disingenuous to say there are "some" churches and christians who support this. The entire Protestant Church as a whole supports this important movement. Like many people I don't like to be painted with a broad brush and I think it is lazy to do so.
Wait? What? You do realize how wrong you are, don't you? There is a small sect inside the Protestant Church that wants to change it, but most find the thought of homsexuality and same-sex marriage to be an abomination in the eyes of God. I am sorry I don't know you so I am not sure if you are being sarcastic here or not.
I don't want to assume anything. It seems like you are being factitious but I am not sure.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Jean-Paul Sartre, Intrnet Troll wrote: Kryzbyn wrote: Nothing wrong with a little cynicism. If you're not cynical about American politics, you're not paying attention. I think that sentence works just as well even if you don't throw in the "American" qualifier.
Kthulhu wrote: Jean-Paul Sartre, Intrnet Troll wrote: Kryzbyn wrote: Nothing wrong with a little cynicism. If you're not cynical about American politics, you're not paying attention. I think that sentence works just as well even if you don't throw in the "American" qualifier. It works pretty well if you leave out the whole qualifier:
If you're not cynical, you're not paying attention.
But maybe I'm just cynical.
|
3 people marked this as a favorite.
|
The position coming from a UCC minister comes to no surprise since next to the UU, they're perhaps the most liberal sectarian group within Christianity. As some are aware, when I had gastric bypass surgery over four years ago, I had a UUC minister volunteer to stay with me at my home the first week out of the hospital as I had (indirectly related) complications from the surgery - and he also happened to be gay, whereas I happen to be straight and an atheist. We got along just fine; we just happen to be secure in who we were and can acknowledge and respect the diversity between ourselves.
Now only if the majority of the nation would allow themselves to embrace that mindset ...
The Mad Badger wrote: Sanakht Inaros wrote: The Mad Badger wrote: There are plenty of Christians who go beyond Reverend Otis Moss not only supporting the rights of every citizen but embracing differences. This is not a fringe group.
The Protestant Church activly has supported gay rights especially since a fair number of its leaders are gay and married. So I think it is a little disingenuous to say there are "some" churches and christians who support this. The entire Protestant Church as a whole supports this important movement. Like many people I don't like to be painted with a broad brush and I think it is lazy to do so.
Wait? What? You do realize how wrong you are, don't you? There is a small sect inside the Protestant Church that wants to change it, but most find the thought of homsexuality and same-sex marriage to be an abomination in the eyes of God. I am sorry I don't know you so I am not sure if you are being sarcastic here or not.
I don't want to assume anything. It seems like you are being factitious but I am not sure. Somewhat sarcastic. Nor am I being factitious. You got upset about being painted with a wide brush, but the facts stand against you. The majority of christians--both protestant and catholic--are against the idea of same-sex marriage and homosexuality. So for you to say that the entire Protestant Church supports same-sex marriage was laughable. You've clarified your position while I was posting that, but still, that may be the "official" position of the Epispocal Church, there are those that still preach that homosexuality is wrong.
The Mad Badger wrote: I should have been clearer on this. Thank you for pointing out my mistake it helps me strengthen my own argument I am at times too quick and perhaps this issue is too close that I over look things.
I should have stated the Episcopal Church which in their Convention in 1976 stated In 1976, the Convention declared that homosexuals are "children of God" and "entitled to full civil rights
The Archives of the Episcopal Church, Acts of Convention: Resolution #1976-A069 and #1976-A071. Retrieved 2008-10-31.
Mind you this was 1976 where I seriously doubt any other groups were speaking up for full civil rights. They have gone on from there you can read further on Wikiapedia I took from there because it was the most expedient.
Ok, now I know where you're coming from.
The Episcopal Church is certainly not "fringe", it is also not necessarily representative. With roughly 2 million members, mostly in the US, it's big but nothing like dominant. I think it's fair to include it in "some" churches.
Further, despite the talk of full civil rights in 1976, gay rights remain controversial even within the Church. There was much controversy recently over gay bishops, up to talk of a schism. I'm not sure what if anything came of that. And even now there is resistance to gay marriage within the church in states where it is legal, some bishops allowing it and some not.
None of that is to disparage the Church. That they're fighting internally over the issue is far better than many others. It just seems a little disingenuous to claim supporting full civil rights since 1976 without acknowledging the ongoing conflicts.
Jean-Paul Sartre, Intrnet Troll wrote: @Courtfool
???
I hope you're not talking to me.
From another thread:
Comrade Anklebiter said:
"I think it was CJ that first introduced the word "pander" into this conversation and it's been bothering me, so I looked it up:
1) To offer illicit sex to a third party; to pimp
2) To tempt with, to appeal or to cater to improper motivations, to assist in the gratification of.
Now, the double meaning is kind of amusing, and I get that Obama is motivated by politics. And I agree that wanting to get married is an improper motivation. I'm just surprised a practicing Catholic agrees with me."
Hey don't bring me into this conversation.
Am I the only one that read this and thought is he saying marriage is under attack by orcs.
Sanakht Inaros wrote: The Mad Badger wrote: Sanakht Inaros wrote: The Mad Badger wrote: There are plenty of Christians who go beyond Reverend Otis Moss not only supporting the rights of every citizen but embracing differences. This is not a fringe group.
The Protestant Church activly has supported gay rights especially since a fair number of its leaders are gay and married. So I think it is a little disingenuous to say there are "some" churches and christians who support this. The entire Protestant Church as a whole supports this important movement. Like many people I don't like to be painted with a broad brush and I think it is lazy to do so.
Wait? What? You do realize how wrong you are, don't you? There is a small sect inside the Protestant Church that wants to change it, but most find the thought of homsexuality and same-sex marriage to be an abomination in the eyes of God. I am sorry I don't know you so I am not sure if you are being sarcastic here or not.
I don't want to assume anything. It seems like you are being factitious but I am not sure. Somewhat sarcastic. Nor am I being factitious. You got upset about being painted with a wide brush, but the facts stand against you. The majority of christians--both protestant and catholic--are against the idea of same-sex marriage and homosexuality. So for you to say that the entire Protestant Church supports same-sex marriage was laughable. You've clarified your position while I was posting that, but still, that may be the "official" position of the Epispocal Church, there are those that still preach that homosexuality is wrong. I am sure there are a small group who may but they hold no power within the this group. And do not speak for the Espispocal Church as a whole just like there are going to be contrians everywhere.
The facts do not stand against me. The facts are that the Epispocal Church stands with and supports same sex marriage that is a fact.
You may not like that because it goes against your own thoughts but it is there and there are more of us than perhaps you would care to admit who do support equal rights for all groups and we have a religious back ground. It is not a fringe group either.
Just remember when you point at others there are three fingers pointing back at yourself. We should all be working together to live together not pointing at one another and saying how horrible we all are.
My apologies, CJ, but I didn't want, even for a second, to be associated as: a) anti-gay marriage (just anti-marriage, thank you!); or b) accusing him of "pandering".
The Mad Badger wrote: The facts do not stand against me. The facts are that the Epispocal Church stands with and supports same sex marriage that is a fact.
I'm not really up to date on the stand of the Epispocal Church, but the actual FACT of the matter is that you didn't claim that the Epispocal Church was pro-gay rights, you claimed that the Protestant Church was pro-gay rights. The Epispocal Church is (as far as I am aware) a single denomination of Christianity. The term "Protestant" is pretty much shorthand for any denomination of Christianity other than Roman Catholic or Orthodox...it's a far FAR more general term than "Epispocal".
The Mad Badger wrote: I am sure there are a small group who may but they hold no power within the this group. And do not speak for the Espispocal Church as a whole just like there are going to be contrians everywhere.
The facts do not stand against me. The facts are that the Epispocal Church stands with and supports same sex marriage that is a fact.
You may not like that because...
The facts do stand against you. Just because the EC's "official" position is that homosexuals deserve the same rights as heterosexuals, doesn't mean that they speak for the entire Protestant Church as you initially claimed.
Edit: ninja'd...
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
doctor_wu wrote: Am I the only one that read this and thought is he saying marriage is under attack by orcs. I wish. Having to save weddings from marauding orcs sounds a whole lot better than having to constantly acknowledge that people hate other people based on insignificant differences*.
*My personal opinion is that differing sexual orientations do not make people criminally deviant or martian.
I already clarified and admitted to my mistake perhaps you may want to do the same?
You make it seem that their "official" position is not how the church feels. Perhaps you should look into it before you make a judgement, for truly are you any better than the people you are railing against if you don't broaden your own mind and accept that not all people are bad just because they are Christian?
doctor_wu wrote: Am I the only one that read this and thought is he saying marriage is under attack by orcs. "Roll initiative!"
*Marriage rolls a 1*
littlehewy wrote: doctor_wu wrote: Am I the only one that read this and thought is he saying marriage is under attack by orcs. "Roll initiative!"
*Marriage rolls a 1* Bah! This system is broken. Everyone knows that Save vs. Divorce or die gimps the PCs.
Jean-Paul Sartre, Intrnet Troll wrote: My apologies, CJ, but I didn't want, even for a second, to be associated as: a) anti-gay marriage (just anti-marriage, thank you!); or b) accusing him of "pandering". So what does that make me? And answer in another thread, this one is icky ;)
The Mad Badger wrote: I already clarified and admitted to my mistake perhaps you may want to do the same?
You make it seem that their "official" position is not how the church feels. Perhaps you should look into it before you make a judgement, for truly are you any better than the people you are railing against if you don't broaden your own mind and accept that not all people are bad just because they are Christian?
This is the exact position I was satirizing in my first post in this thread. me wrote: See, this just proves that Christianity isn't anti-gay, unlike what all the Christ-hating atheists here keep claiming. When someone says "most Christians" or "Christianity in general" those can be true statements and still not refer to your particular sect or be a claim that "all people are bad just because they are Christian?"
The Mad Badger wrote: I already clarified and admitted to my mistake perhaps you may want to do the same?
You make it seem that their "official" position is not how the church feels. Perhaps you should look into it before you make a judgement, for truly are you any better than the people you are railing against if you don't broaden your own mind and accept that not all people are bad just because they are Christian?
What I was pointing out was that even if it's the Position of the EC, there are those that don't accept it. It lead to a rift in the EC when it came time to appoint an openly gay bishop in 2003. That in turn, says that there are those who find the official position untenable.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
