Don't think it will do much good for most homophobic parents but it will give their children a warm feeling that they tried to reconcile with their parents regardless of the results.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks for this. While I don’t agree with the implied conclusion that you should reward this type of cruelty from a parent, I still approve of the letter. When dealing with christians, this seems like a possibly effective approach.
Maybe a few parents are homophobic because of their religion, but I’d say they are a small minority. I think most just use scripture as a crutch. It isn’t like they’d be a-okay with a gay daughter, if only those few lines in the bible weren’t there. And it isn’t like they insist everything else in the bible be followed to get invited to Christmas.
If you can take away the crutch, then they have to really think and do some soul searching. Then eventually realize there really isn’t a good reason to act this way towards your child (or anyone) over the gender of the person they love.
When you have a book that tells you what is right and wrong, you don’t need to ever actually understand the meaning of either. It can be easy to never develop the ability to reason, empathize, compromise, or basically, get the f~@~ over your damn self for an evening.
To be clear, I’m not saying all religious people are like children who don’t comprehend why hitting their playmates is wrong beyond the fact that they may get in trouble if caught. I’m saying religious people have the prerogative to be that way. For those who are morally stunted, turn the book back around on them and maybe that dormant part of their brain will kick into gear.
-
Also, I want a rainbow tree now.
So, this is cool is they're homophobic because of their christianity but what if they're homophobic because a unicorn told them to be homophobic?
Who can help me then?
Well, I’d say we don’t really need to worry about that too much. The odds are overwhelmingly against it ever coming up.
But, a mental health professional would be my best guess.
This seems like a good idea, but what if they don't listen (which is a fairly likely scenario)? What do you do then?
|
So, this is cool is they're homophobic because of their christianity but what if they're homophobic because a unicorn told them to be homophobic?
Who can help me then?
Well, I’d say we don’t really need to worry about that too much. The odds are overwhelmingly against it ever coming up.
But, a mental health professional would be my best guess.
Well, I wasn't really intending to get on down to irony town but you seem to have taken it there.
I was trying to make the point you made in a humorous way: that homophobia is not normally a product of religion, religion is just a defence that homophobic people use.
But, y'know, if you want to throw the Flying Spaghetti Monster party and start accusing people who believe in supernatural beings of being crazy, well... stop hating on religion, man/woman!
Not being a Reverend, I advocate making your mother live with the consequences of her choices. Stop enabling bad behavior. Stop giving in to bullying and dirty tactics.
Don’t go to Christmas dinner. Tell anyone who asks why.
This seems like a good idea, but what if they don't listen (which is a fairly likely scenario)? What do you do then?
You build connections with your community to get support and try to be patient, I'd guess. When I lived in SF, the "we (i.e., the queer community) are family" meme really spoke to a lot of people estranged from their parents.
Fortunately, when my sister came out as trans my parents were supportive.
This seems like a good idea, but what if they don't listen (which is a fairly likely scenario)? What do you do then?You build connections with your community to get support and try to be patient, I'd guess. When I lived in SF, the "we (i.e., the queer community) are family" meme really spoke to a lot of people estranged from their parents.
Fortunately, when my sister came out as trans my parents were supportive.
I'm not saying it's a stupid idea, I'm saying that it's likely that it won't work in many cases. Will it work in a lot? Possibly. However, I'm willing to bet there will still be a lot of people who read this letter and remain anti-homosexual.
Sorry GeraintElberion. I was having a comedically-challenged moment.
Though if someone says god, Jesus, aviating pasta dishes, ect actually told them anything, my advice would is the same.
I can't get my head around parents who would be horrible to their kids over being Gay.
It's your kid ffs.
I can't get my head around parents who would be horrible to their kids over being Gay.
It's your kid ffs.
Oh, hating your kids for being gay is mild compared to the s&#+ I've seen. My grandmother physically abused my uncle for being disabled (and he's disabled because she tried to starve herself into a miscarriage) and knowingly put my mother into a situation where she got molested, then blamed her for it and got on her case for not letting it go and loving her. I'd rant about my father, too, but his b$&!$$!@ was aimed at other people's kids, not my sister and I, so it isn't really applicable here.
The point is that parents can be extremely horrible to their children, and that parents being a+*!*+%s because their kids are gay doesn't surprise me one bit. It's tragic and unfortunate, but parent's aren't loving just because it's their kid.
|
Because some people are stupid, or ignorant, or cruel, or just generally not fit to be parents.I can't get my head around parents who would be horrible to their kids over being Gay.
It's your kid ffs.
It really is a bit more complicated than that.
My mom, for example, is blind and deaf. This makes it really hard for her to get any kind of social support (friends and the like). You simply have no idea how isolating that is unless you've lived it.
Unfortunately, the people who stepped in to provide that social support to her were a cult - real Landover Baptist kinds of people.
Which, of course, put me in a very awkward position as a gay kid.
Its not that she was a bad person, but she certainly was taken advantage of.
Man, that's a pretty messed up situation, sorry to hear it.
Obviously my answer was a somewhat flippant generalisation, but I stand by it for most cases. Presumably in your case your mother is none of the things I listed, but the people who took advantage of her probably fit at least a few of those characterizations, with a similar net result for you.
I can't get my head around parents who would be horrible to their kids over being Gay.
It's your kid ffs.
I can't either. But dysfunctional people raise dysfunctional people.
But I see treatment similar to it every day with my wife's ex and their kids; while none of them are gay, there's one of the girls who's a clear favorite, not to mention that the boy is treated vastly different than the girls.
And I saw it with my dad's Catholic father, over my dad choosing to marry my Protestant mother.
And with my uncle's mother, when he tried to do the right thing instead of what she wanted him to do.
Unconditional love should be, well, unconditional, you know? But life doesn't always work that way.
The thing is that the Bible DOESN'T say that homosexuality is wrong - at least no more wrong than Hamburger Helper - and there are plenty of churches which are open to gays (even gay people in leadership). So, when people say that they don't like it because the Bible tells them it's wrong, that's a lie. In fact, they don't like it just because they are bigots.
I’ll admit I haven’t read much of the Bible. Even if it does say that I still agree, that is not why they are so horrid to gays. It is just a lame excuse.
It is easy enough to disagree with someone’s “lifestyle” as they call it, without being cruel. If every spouse or partner that parents didn’t exactly approve of was banned from family holiday gatherings, the tradition would never have been established.
Orthodox Statement on Homosexuality
The position of the Orthodox Church toward homosexuality has been expressed by synodical canons and Patristic pronouncements beginning with the very first centuries of Orthodox ecclesiastical life.
Thus, the Orthodox Church condemns unreservedly all expressions of personal sexual experience which prove contrary to the definite and unalterable function ascribed to sex by God's ordinance and expressed in man's experience as a law of nature.
Thus the function of the sexual organs of a man and a woman and their bio-chemical generating forces in glands and glandular secretions are ordained by nature to serve one particular purpose, the procreation of the human kind.
However, the human sexual apparatus appears to have been designed not only as the medium by which the necessary physical contact for the purpose of sex is affected, but as the generator as well and the center of a highly complex system of feelings which all together are known by the name eros, love between husband and wife.
Therefore, any and all uses of the human sex organs for purposes other than those ordained by creation, runs contrary to the nature of things as decreed by God and produces the following wrongs:
a. They violate God's ordinance regarding both the procreation of man and his emotional life generated by his instinctive attraction to the opposite sex not only for procreating but for advancing the personalities of a man and a woman to a state of completion within the association of the Sacrament of Marriage. For all this, homosexuality is an insult to God, and since it attempts to alter the laws regulating creation it is a blasphemy.
b. Homosexuality interferes with the normal development of societal patterns and as such it proves detrimental to all. These endangered patterns include personal values regarding sex which people normally take to be a vital part of their existence and a valuable asset to their living a normal life, esteemed by others.
c. The homosexual degrades his own sex and thus denies to himself the self-respect that is generated from the feeling that one is in line with God's creation.
Homosexuality appears to be of two kinds: physico-genetic and habitual. Physico-genetic homosexuality is of physical origin due to secretory abnormalities that may produce organic changes. This type of homosexuality is rather rare and is treated as any other medical disorder.
Habitual homosexuality may have more than one cause. All, however, point out to a moral failure at some stage of the individual's development, or to the animate environment from which the homosexual originated.
Thus, although homosexuality followed as a way of life by the sufferer, may be subject to psychopathological investigation and treatment, the origin of it, in all but the few physico-genetic cases mentioned above, brings with it a moral failure. It is because of the realization of this that homosexuality has been described from ancient times as a moral stigma.
Thus, the Orthodox Church cannot subscribe to the demand that homosexuals be recognized by society and its agencies as legal spouses and as deserving the same respect as men and women enjoy in the state of wedlock.
Society and its values, religious and societal, have legitimate claims over the behavior of its members, especially in so vital a function as the sexual one on which not only the survival but its quality as well depend. No one has the right to do whatever he wishes with his body and still claim recognition and respect on the part of society.
The Orthodox Church believes that homosexuality should be treated by society as an immoral and dangerous perversion and by religion as a sinful failure. In both cases, correction is called for. Homosexuals should be accorded the confidential medical and psychiatric facilities by which they can be helped to restore themselves to a self-respecting sexual identity that belongs to them by God's ordinance.
In full confidentiality, the Orthodox Church cares and provides pastorally for homosexuals in the belief that no sinner who has failed himself and God should be allowed to deteriorate morally and spiritually.
Psychiatric restoration, without religious direction and reconciliation with God, is bound to prove short lived.
A healthy society and various religions do not recognize perversions. Rather, they work to restore the homosexual to the status of a self-esteemed individual and thus to a valued instrument of their own survival and wellbeing under God.
The fact that people still believe that, just makes me facepalm -.-
The fact that people still believe that, just makes me facepalm -.-
Fortunately for this nation your in the minority.
What I don't get is why an organization blathering tripe like that can be seen by anyone as any kind of authority on moral matters.
The first thing you do when you demonize a group is to define their differences from the ideal you want to see as "won't" rather than "can't", as stated above, a moral failure. They do acknowledge the existence of "can't" gays, but only as a medical disorder that needs to be treated. Way to go.
Then, and this made me read it several times to make sure I really saw what I think I saw, was that it is the right of society and religion to determine what people may do with their own bodies. This in itself is so utterly offensive that words fail me when I try to describe it. But not only that. They consider it a matter that society's continued existence depends on it. Sure, in theory, it does... But considering the number of years this last century that humanity actually got a negative population balance, it is frankly at best a stupid argument, at worst the result of a fanatic delusion. And finally... It appears that it is the right of society and religion to demand QUALITY of people's reproduction. Where to begin? I feel the soggy stench of the racial biologists of the 30's here. This argument says that immoral sex leads to bad children, if I read it right. Or are they worried about human hybrids with livestock? Or are they saying the church should have the right to kill off children that are not good enough?
It just goes to show... Some opinions are so utterly moronic and toxic to all that is great in humanity that only a very large, very corrupt organisation can be allowed to speak them.
Fortunately for this nation your in the minority.
I'm really hoping that you aren't suggesting that Homophobia is perfectly ok because a religion says so. That Orthodox Statement just smacks of Westernised Taliban.
If you aren't then please accept my apologies on questioning your stance.
Aretas, if you support what the orthodox church says, I am the one you want to bicker with. If not, and I am sorry for not managing to really divine this from what you have written here, I apologize for assuming so.
I don't know what is so difficult to understand. Its not Homophobia. Homosexuality is a perversion of the natural order, its that simple. If your going to do it keep it behind closed doors and don't flaunt it infront of 1st graders. Have a civil union but don't attempt to destroy the sacrement of marriage by calling it marriage. Or is the destruction of marriage what the radical left/gay/lesbian/bisexual/tranny community aspire to do?
Shifty: Westernized Taliban? Seriously! I don't believe homosexuals are in fear in the US of getting arrested by the special police like they are in Islamic countries/regimes like Iran.
Sissyl: Your comments are the only ones that are toxic & moronic. I simply laid out a statement, no hate whatsoever and you jump all over it like a pack of monkeys fighting over a banana! Lets stop it before Big Brother monitor shuts this down.
So, a statement can't be hateful? Well, that is certainly an original standpoint. :-)
And hey, what they want is to get in on the institution of marriage, because they believe it is a good thing to share love in a dedicated relationship. They certainly would be defeating themselves if they destroyed marriage then, wouldn't they? Are religious peopleso uncertain of themselves or their god that their vows and relationships to their god would be destroyed if gays got to marry too? Pitiful.
Shifty: Westernized Taliban? Seriously! I don't believe homosexuals are in fear in the US of getting arrested by the special police like they are in Islamic countries/regimes like Iran.
When the Church (Abrahamic faiths) had more power over State politics Gays were being arrested, and its not as if it was that long ago either.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy_laws_in_the_United_States
So yeah, I'm going to stick to Westerised Taliban, as its the same Abrahamic roots in Orthodoxy and Islam, and the similarities between the two are striking.
Frankly I think Jesus was a man of love and acceptance, and I don't think he'd be breaking out the Haterade on people just because they loved a same sex person. The World needs more love and those dudes aren't hurting anyone.
I accept the standpoint that religious institutions should be able to say they won't marry gay couples, hey their club - their rules, however I think gays have a right to marry as a civil civic function for sure, and should be afforded the same rights as any other person.
|
I accept the standpoint that religious institutions should be able to say they won't marry gay couples, hey their club - their rules, however I think gays have a right to marry as a civil civic function for sure, and should be afforded the same rights as any other person.
And hell, there are some religious institutions that would be happy to perform gay marriages.
After all, the Orthodox Church doesn't have a monopoly on the ancient institution of marriage either. And some of the cultures and religions that kept it were a good bit friendlier towards other sexualities.
I should not be complaining about this from an ideological standpoint really. This intolerance to gays are driving them en masse away from organised religion, and that hasto be a good thing for the world. However, as much as I want to see atheism grow as a political force, I don't want people to suffer, so I guess I will keep speaking out against what the churches to do their own members.
And hell, there are some religious institutions that would be happy to perform gay marriages.
No doubt.
I'm just saying for the ones that don't I don't feel in a position to tell them how to run their club. I feel all people should have a right to form a 'married' union however, and that the State should provide that facility for all its citizens.
Sissly: That statement does not advocate hate or violence. =)
They want to get in on the institution but its not Marriage because it goes back to the basics, MAN & WOMAN. Like I said, do whatever you want in the privacy of your home and leave everyone else out of it.
Mikaze: OMG you compared Human beings with our advanced social behavior to animals and plants! LOL. Seriously think about what you post. YES! Consenting adults.....you should read what I wrote after "its that simple"
Seriously guys, have I gone completely off the deep end on this issue? Can you tell me where I'm wrong about this?
|
|
Mikaze: OMG you compared Human beings with our advanced social behavior to animals and plants! LOL. Seriously think about what you post. YES! Consenting adults.....you should read what I wrote after "its that simple"
:\ Pointing out that so-called "perversions against nature" turn up in nature. Can't really call it a perversion when it's showing up there already.
Except your "pretty" little statement doesn't stop there. Society and religion has the right to control what you do EVEN in the privacy of your home. And to put demands on the QUALITY of people's children. If the orthodox church doesn't stay out of people's sexuality, what claim do they have that others should?
You are wrong in this because you think it is even remotely okay that a church should use state powers to control what other churches and non-members do, and because you tolerate control-freak rabid filth just because it comes as a statement by a church.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And hell, there are some religious institutions that would be happy to perform gay marriages.No doubt.
I'm just saying for the ones that don't I don't feel in a position to tell them how to run their club. I feel all people should have a right to form a 'married' union however, and that the State should provide that facility for all its citizens.
Oh yeah, agreed there. I don't think any religious institutions that don't want to provide such cervices should be forced to do so. It's just frustrating when those that do are kept from doing it because of those that don't.
"Okay, so they don't have to get hitched in your house. So let us let 'em get hitched in ours, dammit."
:\ Pointing out that so-called "perversions against nature" turn up in nature. Can't really call it a perversion when it's showing up there already.Mikaze: OMG you compared Human beings with our advanced social behavior to animals and plants! LOL. Seriously think about what you post. YES! Consenting adults.....you should read what I wrote after "its that simple"
The sexual phobic agenda of the church has always been defended in a normative fashion. The things the church want people to do are natural, and other things are not. Their problem is that evidence is mounting that several of the things they condemn as perversions of nature, i.e. Things that only sinful humans are doing, are in fact rather common among animals. In fact, every non-fetishistic "perversion" (that requires tools) not only exists, but is pretty common. Thus, their current strategy is to bury, hide, and destroy evidence. For example, the charming And Tango makes three book for children, a real story about two gay penguins in a zoo, is one of the main targets of their fear and hatred. When I heard of this, I bought five immediately, of course. The church mentality loves censorship. The Index Romanum, the list of banned books that the Roman catholic church updated up until the 20th century, was a who's who of western thought.
But then, they feel anxious when they learn that someone might be doing something fun, so I guess it's understandable.
Homosexuality is a perversion of the natural order, its that simple.
Not really. It happens in nature a lot. If you're trying to argue that we have some different natural order than the rest of the natural order of the animal kingdom then i think you're arguing for a contradiction.
People don't choose who they're attracted to. I can't remember any of my friends ever saying "Huh.. you know what, instead of playing kickball i'm going to want to go hang out with girls now"
Its part of nature. In nature you have variation. The differences are part of the system and are in fact necessary for the system to function at all. "This is different therefore wrong" simply does not apply to nature.
The world would be plenty better if the religious fanatics actually read the books they consider to be literally true. It is sad that they don't.
|
I find it funny that Jesus preached love and tolerance and when the people heading the church he "founded" decided to use it as a political platform and wanted to use it to look down on and separate themselves from the Roman oppressors and decided to add in stuff like the whole "gays don't go to heaven" stuff, everyone just went with it. Oh, OK....yea we don't like gays no more because Romans like men and women. Now somehow this is how Jesus taught us? Or the new revisions of the bible that are "divinely inspired" rewrites that are infallible?
Sometimes you need to take a look at the history of your religion and decide what parts are motivated by politics and bigotry and remove them especially when your messiah was supposed to be the pinnacle of love and compassion. That's who my Jesus is. If yours teaches exclusion and hatred then you have it wrong.
Have a civil union but don't attempt to destroy the sacrement of marriage by calling it marriage. Or is the destruction of marriage what the radical left/gay/lesbian/bisexual/tranny community aspire to do?
I'm sorry, it's hard to take this seriously. If marriage is truly a sacred institution then why aren't you defending it against Hollywood and the wonderful short term marriages that are making a mockery of it?
OMG you compared Human beings with our advanced social behavior to animals and plants!
Define "advanced". How is our social behavior better than other primates?
Aretas, would you please provide the passage where Jesus states gays need to be fixed? He was pretty specific that divorce was wrong. Of course you do not see the same animosity directed toward divorcees. I believe he also stated to give away all of your belongings and follow him. Again, that passage is ignored in favor of propping up people's own agenda.
I will start taking you seriously when you start taking Jesus seriously.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
First off, I applaud all of you for being civil and having an interesting debate on this subject. Makes me proud to be a member of the Paizo/Pathfinder community. Kudos to all! =)
Secondly, this make me think of the following quote that I though I'd share with you: Lynn Lavner: "The Bible contains six admonishments to homosexuals and 362 admonishments to heterosexuals. That doesn't mean that God doesn't love heterosexuals. It's just that they need more supervision."
And also another quick quote: Desmond Tutu:
"We struggled against apartheid because we were being blamed and made to suffer for something we could do nothing about. It is the same with homosexuality. The orientation is a given, not a matter of choice. It would be crazy for someone to choose to be gay, given the homophobia that is present."