Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

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

thod

Religion Or Politics?

Recommended Posts

Foster parent ban: 'extreme distress' of 'anti-gay' Christians' over ruling http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/8353512/Foster-parent-ban-extreme-distress-of-anti-gay-Christians-over-ruling.html

After the recent case of a Christian couple not being allowed to ban homosexual in their hotel, it looks to me that there is an campaign of attack on Christians. In this case, we have a couple that have already fostered 20 children, thus their competence cannot be questioned. In a meritocracy, they have merit. Yet they oppose homosexuality because they are Christian. The judge argues that homosexuality is superior to their Christianity. Yet many people who are not Christian also oppose homosexuality. Thus this fight is not about Christianity, it is about conservative values in general. The legal system is being used to suppress a political position. They are saying they will frame laws and use the law them to attack those who disagree with them. Note that these cases do not go to juries, thus the decision of this judge is one man's opinion, a place man at that.

It seems to me that the homosexuals and their allies on the left have infiltrated the institutions of state and are using those positions to promote their agenda. They say it is "the will of the people", yet they never ask the people. I contend that most people would have said "let this couple continue, they are good at what they do". We see the same in the CoE with their female and homosexual priests. Where did it all come from? why are other denominations not doing this? Perhaps it is because it is a "state" religion and thus sympathetic officers are placed in key positions. Why are the true Christians not leaving in droves? well many have (like Tony Blair) but not all.

I argue that the left has declared war on Christianity. At the same time it is ultra cautious about attacking Islam which in many ways is even more conservative than Christianity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
. At the same time it is ultra cautious about attacking Islam which in many ways is even more conservative than Christianity.

Maybe muslims don't foster or run B&B?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
“They said, 'No, you would have to tell the child it is all right to be homosexual because there are too many children that are confused with their sexuality.’ We thought, yes, but at eight?”

During the case, the Equality and Human Rights Commission, an official watchdog, suggested that the couple could attend a “re-education” programme

I don't even..what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe muslims don't foster or run B&B?

Perhaps more likely, those that do such things just don't go around making a big issue of this kind of stupid, irrelevant issue. Muslims who want self-serving publicity-seeking martyrdom have different channels for their egos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are the true Christians not leaving in droves? well many have (like Tony Blair) but not all.

Ah yes, a true Christian, in the best tradition of the Crusades, the Inquisition, and the Holocaust. A man whose legacy will be more religious hatred and fear in Britain than we've seen in 400 years.

Also the man who elevated homosexuality to a sacrosanct status.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree. I don't think that anyone has "declared war" on Christianity.

Caught a bit about this on the news last night and it seems that the court has simply applied the law. They aren't saying that Christians can't foster - just that this particular couple can't because they push certain views.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree. I don't think that anyone has "declared war" on Christianity.

Caught a bit about this on the news last night and it seems that the court has simply applied the law. They aren't saying that Christians can't foster - just that this particular couple can't because they push certain views.

I saw them on the box,quite clearly nuts.If you can discriminate against gays then you should be able to discriminate against any/all religions and any race you choose to. And what effect would it have if one of the kids they chose to foster was gay? We have enough screwed up people around already without adding to the stock. Shirtlifting, in my experience is a harmless occupation practised by usually quite charming people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These people would not offer a great life to any adoptee who turned outto be gay!

You can't choose with your own children can you? :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"... banned from becoming foster parents because of their faith-based opposition to homosexuality."

What (if any) difference do you think there is between opposition to homosexuality and faith-based opposition to homosexuality?

If opposition to homosexuality is wrong, does the opposition to homosexuality being 'faith-based' make it okay, or do you think that opposition to homosexuality is inherently okay whatever its basis?

After the recent case of a Christian couple not being allowed to ban homosexual in their hotel, it looks to me that there is an campaign of attack on Christians.

You think that two cases of defending homosexual rights from attack by Christians is an attack on Christians?

In this case, we have a couple that have already fostered 20 children, thus their competence cannot be questioned. In a meritocracy, they have merit.

They may have some merit, but I don't think that your assertion that their competence cannot be questioned means that it cannot, or should not, be questioned. New information has now come to light and/or society's view of their opinions seems to have shifted since the '90s. Society's typical, average viewpoint drifts over the decades (and, indeed, centuries), hence our not being keen on slavery and casual racism any longer.

Yet they oppose homosexuality because they are Christian. The judge argues that homosexuality is superior to their Christianity. Yet many people who are not Christian also oppose homosexuality. Thus this fight is not about Christianity, it is about conservative values in general. The legal system is being used to suppress a political position. They are saying they will frame laws and use the law them to attack those who disagree with them. Note that these cases do not go to juries, thus the decision of this judge is one man's opinion, a place man at that.

You seem a bit confused here. You say both that this is a homosexuality vs. Christians issue... then go on to say that it's not a fight about Christianity, but about 'conservative' values in general.

I think I tend to agree with the latter -- that the religion is a red herring. If any candidate foster parents openly professed to being anti-gay, I don't think it matters what their justification is for that.

The couple in question (judging from the photo in the news item) are black. If I said I was anti-black for religious reasons, it wouldn't be racism vs. religion. It would just be racism.

It seems to me that the homosexuals and their allies on the left have infiltrated the institutions of state and are using those positions to promote their agenda. They say it is "the will of the people", yet they never ask the people. I contend that most people would have said "let this couple continue, they are good at what they do". We see the same in the CoE with their female and homosexual priests. Where did it all come from? why are other denominations not doing this? Perhaps it is because it is a "state" religion and thus sympathetic officers are placed in key positions. Why are the true Christians not leaving in droves? well many have (like Tony Blair) but not all.

"Those damned infiltrating gays! I tell you something else -- blacks have infiltrated our corridors of power as well! And Pakistanis, Orientals... the lot! They're using their positions to make it difficult for any decent person to be racist any more! What's the world coming to? We ought to kick 'em all out and get proper British people in their place..."

If there's a difference between what you're saying and what I just said, I would be grateful if you would point it out.

I argue that the left has declared war on Christianity. At the same time it is ultra cautious about attacking Islam which in many ways is even more conservative than Christianity.

We might be on the verge of vaguely agreeing on something here...

If you're saying that we ought to be as hard on Muslims (and, indeed, any other religion) as you believe we may be heading towards with Christians, then I would go along with that. Having solely religious reasons for a view or a belief shouldn't be enough to grant such a view more credence or respectability. If anything, it should grant it less credence and respectability.

In modern society, religious views are probably the only completely unfounded beliefs that we allow people to get away with without openly laughing at them. And if you're not sure whether this is right, try saying that you genuinely believe Elvis is still alive or that you have been abducted by aliens at a job interview or on a first date, and see how seriously the people you're with take you after that.

If you do try this on a first date, by the way, and end up with an offer of a second date, don't take it... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The permissable basis of being allowed to oppose something should be whether that thing is a choice or not.You cannot choose your skin colour,gender,nationality or sexuality so those it should not be allowed to be discriminated against.Religion however is chosen,and furthermore cannot be empirically proven so all religions and superstitions should enjoy equal status. Christianity,Islam,Judaism,Voodoo oh and that lot who think that Prince Phillip is God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The law is there to protect minorities from the majority. Whether you agree or not that is exactly what it is doing.

Personally, I dont see why it is better to be fostered by someone with a medieval belief in sky faries rather than a real fairy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The law is there to protect minorities from the majority. Whether you agree or not that is exactly what it is doing.

Personally, I dont see why it is better to be fostered by someone with a medieval belief in sky faries rather than a real fairy.

fairies :lol::lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder of being openly pro homosexulaity means you have a better chance of adopting

You don't have to be openly pro gay - just saying you're not bothered what they do with their dangly bits when they're grown up will do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

....

After the recent case of a Christian couple not being allowed to ban homosexual in their hotel, it looks to me that there is an campaign of attack on Christians. In this case, we have a couple that have already fostered 20 children, thus their competence cannot be questioned. In a meritocracy, they have merit. Yet they oppose homosexuality because they are Christian.

Many Christians don't care about people's sexuality one way or the other (as it were). This couple oppose homosexuality because they are fundementalist bigots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The law is there to protect minorities from the majority. Whether you agree or not that is exactly what it is doing.

If you mean the law in general, then it's not necessarily to protect minorities from the majority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Religion isn't really the issue here. There are many Christians, at least in the west, who have no problem with homosexuality and there are many openly homosexual clergy and lay (no pun intended) people in the church. As the OP points out - this is more to do with groups in society using the law as a means to further a progressive/social engineering agenda, forcing their will via case law; when in previous generations common law (ie, law from the people upwards) was more respected. It's mainly the result of the spread of government-by-lawyers and institutions like the EU which are based on the Napoleonic, top-down system of lawmaking.

In reality, it's not much different to the old religious method of forcing people to conform to the views of those in power because it is the 'will of God' etc, just couched in secular terms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Religion isn't really the issue here. There are many Christians, at least in the west, who have no problem with homosexuality and there are many openly homosexual clergy and lay (no pun intended) people in the church. As the OP points out - this is more to do with groups in society using the law as a means to further a progressive/social engineering agenda, forcing their will via case law; when in previous generations common law (ie, law from the people upwards) was more respected. It's mainly the result of the spread of government-by-lawyers and institutions like the EU which are based on the Napoleonic, top-down system of lawmaking.

In reality, it's not much different to the old religious method of forcing people to conform to the views of those in power because it is the 'will of God' etc, just couched in secular terms.

I am quite sure that there are many religious people who are pleasant,well balanced examples of humanity.However this fire and brimstone Christianity is appalling.This couple were clearly out to lunch.Sexuality cannot be changed or we would not be seeing this rash of convictions for paedophilia in the ranks of the clergy.There were another two convictions on the news only last night.Both these men had used religion as a way of getting themselves in a position to abuse teenage boys.

Now if those who preach religion as a way of life can't resist the temptation when their whole ethos is predicated on exactly that resistance that doesn't offer much hope for anyone else.To be told that being gay is simply wrong when that is the way they have been born would have a devastating effect on that person's development.I don't understand this preoccupation with what other people wish to do.It's really none of their business,stick to the god bothering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am quite sure that there are many religious people who are pleasant,well balanced examples of humanity.

There aren't.

thinking that an invisible man watches you all the time means you are a ******ing loon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There aren't.

thinking that an invisible man watches you all the time means you are a ******ing loon.

Who said he was invisible or a man?

Your problem is you cant see him / her / it as you are clearly not worthy :lol::lol::lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sexuality cannot be changed

At heart, I must be a rapist. Yep, I sometimes see a woman and think "I would really like to bang that". If it is OK for the homosexual to fulfil his nature, then it is OK for me to fulfil mine. Sometimes I fill with rage and wish to do violence to another man, that too is my nature. Yet in each case I desist. Christians that oppose homosexuality do not ask that homosexuals change their nature, only that they desist from acting on it. If this makes the homosexual lonely, that is God's will and has purpose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At heart, I must be a rapist. Yep, I sometimes see a woman and think "I would really like to bang that". If it is OK for the homosexual to fulfil his nature, then it is OK for me to fulfil mine. Sometimes I fill with rage and wish to do violence to another man, that too is my nature. Yet in each case I desist. Christians that oppose homosexuality do not ask that homosexuals change their nature, only that they desist from acting on it. If this makes the homosexual lonely, that is God's will and has purpose.

:unsure:

You keep on ignoring those voices in your head my friend and all will be well :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 284 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.