It is a fact that religion has been used, is used, and will be used to support several kinds of personal agendas.
This happens specificly when we have religion involved in politics and governments. This great North American nation has reached an amazing level of enlightment when it absolutely separates religion from government. A thing we don't have in Latin American countries probably one of the reasons why our countries are "third world countries" or more politically correct (as americans like to be) "countries in development way" (it sounds nice, yet the reality is SSDN.)
However, that was not the point of this thread.
In the same way as religion is used to serve personal agendas, non religion it's also used to serve personal agendas.
The biggest debate we are having these days in this forum is about homosexuality. We have a polaryzed discussion which does not get anywhere. This can be translated to the general North American forum in which the population is polaryzed, and there is not quite an agreement.
However, regardless the fact that as a christian I'm not in favor of homosexuality as a sexual praxis, I can't support the use of religion in order to enact or not to enact a law regarding their rights.
I WANT TO BE CLEAR ABOUT SOMETHING I'M AGAINST HOMOSEXUALITY AS (i)MODUS VIVENDI(i) BECAUSE I FEEL IS (i)CONTRA NATURAM(i), BUT AT THE SAME TIME I LOVE INDIVIDUAL HOMOSEXUALS AS MY BROTHERS AND SISTERS IN CHRIST.
So the wrongdoing is when we try to make laws based upon christianity or nonchristianity. The laws has to be enacted in the benefit of the (i)multitude(i) as a whole, and not to benefit an specific class. Because it is so it would be a discriminatory law.
Case in point are the affirmative actions which tend to benefit the minorities (african americans) in detriment of the majority (caucasians) just because the government is trying to compensate today african americans for what yesterday african amercians sufferd by the nonsensical stupidity of a section of the caucasian population (i said a section, not all).
As far as I undertand it's very stupid to blame today caucasian people for the mistakes of caucasian people in the past. It's not fair.
So if a law needs to be enacted in benefit of gay people such law needs to be also fair for the rest of population which is not gay.
IT IS NOT A MATTER OF RELIGION. IT IS A MATTER OF FAIRNESS AND EQUALITY AMONG THE SOCIETY AS A WHOLE.


TLW.

I pray for equality!!! ...people are people regardless of race, sex preference and religion....We are the world....and I love them all as my brothers and sisters

AGREED!!!

I applaud everything you have said.

As a heterosexual man that does not like gay men due to too many passes made over the year I feel I have the right to say this in all fairness.

Re-examination of the texts on my part has convinved me that rather than homosexuality it was homosexaul RAPE that is a sin.

I appreciate you as someone against stating that you honor freedom enough to believe religion should be left out of it. I simply think the church has been teaching wrongly and practicing duplicity for many centuries as it had more homosexual men in it's ranks than any other surviving institution I ever heard of.

Sir, may i disagree with you in this point with all due respect.
I see your point in the fact that there have been, there are, and with a lot of pain there are going to be homosexual men in the Church. That is not a justification that the Church has been practicing duplicity.
It just simply states that the Church is made by men just like you and me. And as you and me have our flaws and defects in whatever level we have them (just you and me personally know our own flaws) the men of the Church also have their flaws in different levels. Sometimes these flaws reach aberrant level such as homosexual rape.
None of this denies the Church's teachings. It is just a proof of the human nature.
Then again Sir, this is my personal point of view with all due respect to your personal point of view.

TLW

TLW,

The biggest debate we are having these days in this forum is about homosexuality. We have a polaryzed discussion which does not get anywhere. This can be translated to the general North American forum in which the population is polaryzed, and there is not quite an agreement.
However, regardless the fact that as a christian I'm not in favor of homosexuality as a sexual praxis, I can't support the use of religion in order to enact or not to enact a law regarding their rights.


Me either, and I dont!
(I may,,, no I dont think I ever have)


I WANT TO BE CLEAR ABOUT SOMETHING I'M AGAINST HOMOSEXUALITY AS (i)MODUS VIVENDI(i) BECAUSE I FEEL IS (i)CONTRA NATURAM(i), BUT AT THE SAME TIME I LOVE INDIVIDUAL HOMOSEXUALS AS MY BROTHERS AND SISTERS IN CHRIST.
So the wrongdoing is when we try to make laws based upon christianity or nonchristianity.

Why is always about the Christian religion?
Cant someone be against changing the law for moral, or other reasons that have nothing to do with Christianity?



The laws has to be enacted in the benefit of the (i)multitude(i) as a whole, and not to benefit an specific class. Because it is so it would be a discriminatory law.

Going back one answer!

Couldn't another "Reason," even morality be considered as a benefit of all?
I think it can, and I think it can be argued with facts
Therefore (IMO,) it dissolves the discriminatory law argument!

right on right on Miguel....Love the sinner hate the sin....I think that all people should have the same right no matter what.

Great post my friend...

where does morality come from?
does it come from man itself?
but from where does man get his notion of morality?
isn't it natural law the source of morality?
if it's so. who does provide man with a sense of natural law?
or are we omnipotent and omniscient by ourselves to draw conclusions over natural law and morality through our sole reasoning?

Just pondering here.

Agreed, I failed to specifiy what I meant when I refered to the church, by which I meant a body of men or the ruling class within a spiritual organization. It is technically not the church that was guilty of the duplicity but members within it's ranks.

This is simply something I have thought about quite a bit, and seen many hints of being refered to long before the largescale scandle involving members of the clergy. It is something that I had personally thought was well known for a very long time without being spoken frequently of in public.

I would like to clarify that I believe it is unfortunate that a few wrong incidents was again used to justify seperatism against a social class that is simply a part of the greater congregation of the church.

I believe the only fault of the church as an organized system in encouraging this reality was putting men who are subject to desires just as any human in situations where they were forbidden to have sex or pro-create. Many of these men per my personal belief over the centuries were put in situations that encouraged failing in one direction rather than the other simply by being in situations where there only human contact in many cases was restricted to other men.

I look at it in a whole different light......Let me explain. It is no secret that I dislike the sin but love the sinner....But I also believe that I would take any situation and ask myself WWJD. Now we all know the stories of Jesus healing of the lepers, and asking the people to cast the first stone at Mary Magdalene who was a whore.

I am no ones judge, whether your a lesbian, gay or anything else. I do believe that laws need to be changed not because of their sexual preference but because they are human beings with equal rights as all other human beings. To deny anyone anything based on their sexual preference is just wrong.

I also believe that when the Catholic Priest were not allowed to be married....that yes this was the start of a huge big problem. If God intended for all people to have a mate, why should this be any different. And yes I do believe that it caused alot of problems later on down the line. But then again you have to see that when these priests stepped over the line and did what they did....they knew it was a sin, they knew with everything they were that what they were doing was wrong. And just like with most human beings they justified it anyway that made them feel it wasn't wrong. Christ always loves the children the most, and if anyone hurts a child in any way shape or form, you can bet that they will be held accountable for it.

This includes all GLT or anyone else. I am not the judge of anyone, but they can bet that eventually they will be held accoutable for their actions. And a lot of people think they can within themselves reason it away. It is what it is, and no matter how you justify it.....it is a sin.....so do it and live with the consequences. And this is not me personally saying this to anyone.....It is the Laws of God.....