Continue from Speaker's Corner
-
From: http://www.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=136051
Topic : Benedict condemns gay marriages
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by dreameryb:
Agree. Sometimes its just hard to reason with Christians on certian issues becuase they would put forward an argument on the sole ground that "because the Bible says so". This is circular logic becuase they treat the bible as axiomatic without proving thus in advance. Using religious convictions to cement one's argument simply does not tally. If it does, people would quote the bible in examination essays. They dont do that, do they? I do respect whatever religion people choose to believe in but it is dangerous to impose their own religious thinking on others.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
29 July 2005 · 12:34 AMOriginally posted by laoda99:If Christians do not use the bible to reason with u, then what should they use as a basis for discussion? Another book belong to other faiths? Or encyclopedia?
Even in discourse communities, pple have some form of aids/documents to help them in discussion, not just say anything u believe from ur heart, like what heng@ did. -
duplicate
-
well, it's hard to tell people to "BELIEVE!!" when they don't..
and that's what christians seem to do a lot of.. trying to cram their beliefs down other people's throats... while rejecting outright other people's beliefs...
it's a kind of hypocrisy to me.. -
1. Why do u see christians cram their beliefs down other people's throats?Originally posted by the Bear:well, it's hard to tell people to "BELIEVE!!" when they don't..
and that's what christians seem to do a lot of.. trying to cram their beliefs down other people's throats... while rejecting outright other people's beliefs...
it's a kind of hypocrisy to me..
2. So when other people's beliefs is rejected outright, it is injustice. But when Christian beliefs are put down, Christians deserved it? Is this not hypocrisy? -
is it not hypocrisy if, ultimately, secular humanism is shoved down people's throat?
-
live and let live
if someone doesn't like what i say, i should not keep badgering that person..
likewise, if i don't like what they say, they should stop badgering me... -
in all fairness .. has the Pope imposed his religious thinking on others? or is he just making his conviction known?
-
Originally posted by Icemoon:in all fairness .. has the Pope imposed his religious thinking on others? or is he just making his conviction known?
this is a good one.....
All leaders will have their personal conviction, all the more a religious leaders. Would it please the world if a religious leader to appear wishy washy about issues that are controversial to start with. While political leaders can attempt to spin their political stance to cater to the different lobby groups, religious leaders need to have a strong "biblical" stance.
At the end of the day, so what???
The non-Christians will continue to do whatever they want,
The pro-leader Christians will continue to feel that this leader is the anointed one,
The anti-leader Christians will do their own thing on the said issue.
Hey, personally, I am a self-declared homophobic but because I am a small fry in the big ocean, I don't need to declare my convictions. -
lets just say it is unfair to call homosexuals anarchists. But then, what do u expect from someone who was a Nazi soldier?
-
but then there is no basis for your faith either because the bible is not hard evidence either.Originally posted by laoda99:Is it really unimpinging on another's right? Think again....probably ur perspective isn't....but pple e.g. the heterosexual community may have views different from urs.....
There is really no basis for ur faith since u believe whatever ur heart tells u. I insist on 'hard' evidence if u want to backup ur views, not just what ur heart tells u.
and yes, homosexuals are unimpinging on others. They're just people who want to live life and fall in love. Of course most of the heterosexual in singapore may have a different view. Why? singaporean heterosexuals tend to be very bigoted, just because something is different or in the minority, they assume it has to be wrong. They're heterosexist in the same way that the whites used to have this white superiority view of themselves. Most of my heterosexual friends in UK feel there is certainly nothing wrong with homosexuality. If u're homosexual, u are homosexual. If u're heterosexual, u're heterosexual. There is no "better to be either" any more than it is better to be white or black. -
If a person come and say "I don't like Indians" and u r an indian, how do u feel ? Worse still if u r a leader for a particular group of people who can influence and alter their view and stand, and u openly discrimate against another group of people, is tat practise encourage or discourage ? Lets give a hypothetical example of some "pope" from some religion openly declared tat being "left handed" is wrong and these people should change and try to use the right hand. And then a lot of people suddenly view these lefthanded as some form of abomination. If u r a lefthanded how will u feel ?
If he dare to make such comments he should be prepared for the backlash.
-
There is certainly something "not quite right" about homosexuality from the nature point of view.Originally posted by HENG@:Most of my heterosexual friends in UK feel there is certainly nothing wrong with homosexuality. If u're homosexual, u are homosexual. If u're heterosexual, u're heterosexual. There is no "better to be either" any more than it is better to be white or black.
I don't see how they can procreate naturally? -
Originally posted by HENG@:
Then to each his own. Believe in what u deem as hard evidence then.
[b]
but then there is no basis for your faith either because the bible is not hard evidence either.
[b] -
What I feel: The pope make this statement in view of falling morality in the church. Think this is a necessary 'evil'. For pple of other faiths e.g Islam, they have their codes of laws which is understood what is forbidden and what is not. No mullah will need to make a statement abt that.Originally posted by stupidissmart:If a person come and say "I don't like Indians" and u r an indian, how do u feel ? Worse still if u r a leader for a particular group of people who can influence and alter their view and stand, and u openly discrimate against another group of people, is tat practise encourage or discourage ? Lets give a hypothetical example of some "pope" from some religion openly declared tat being "left handed" is wrong and these people should change and try to use the right hand. And then a lot of people suddenly view these lefthanded as some form of abomination. If u r a lefthanded how will u feel ?
If he dare to make such comments he should be prepared for the backlash. -
You are mixing personal preference with discrimination.Originally posted by stupidissmart:If a person come and say "I don't like Indians" and u r an indian, how do u feel ? Worse still if u r a leader for a particular group of people who can influence and alter their view and stand, and u openly discrimate against another group of people, is tat practise encourage or discourage ?
I mean, are we all obliged to like every single human on earth? -
laoda .. go read up on Platinga's apologetics and what it means to have a "properly basic belief "Originally posted by laoda99:Then to each his own. Believe in what u deem as hard evidence then.
-
What is Islam's stand on the issue?Originally posted by laoda99:For pple of other faiths e.g Islam, they have their codes of laws which is understood what is forbidden and what is not.
If they follow the OT closely, then they should also hate the sin but not the sinner. -
Think u should talk to muslims abt this.Originally posted by Icemoon:What is Islam's stand on the issue?
If they follow the OT closely, then they should also hate the sin but not the sinner.
One of my muslim fren had strong objections to the issue of homosexuality. I will end here. -
really? then u have to explain to me why it is so rampant in so many species in the wild. My point is that there are enough heterosexuals to ensure the species's survival thru procreation, so whats "not quite right" about the existance of homosexuality alongside heterosexuality?Originally posted by Icemoon:There is certainly something "not quite right" about homosexuality from the nature point of view.
I don't see how they can procreate naturally? -
well I guess not. But still we shouldn't spread discrimination right? I mean, when SIS says of someone who "doesn't like indians/chinese/whites/blacks" he means those who feel that indians/chinese/whites/blacks are inferior in any way. it applies the same to sexuality, and I must say that there are some of your religion who are less than cordial about their discrimination, and then when confronted about it, claim that I just because I do not agree with said discrimination, I am the actual bigot. It is very disconcerting, especially when said persons are supposedly God's followers.Originally posted by Icemoon:You are mixing personal preference with discrimination.
I mean, are we all obliged to like every single human on earth? -
And if u want to quote from the bible, I can too.
"Give thought to the work of God. Who will make straight what he has made bent?"
Ecclesiastes 7:13 -
Originally posted by laoda99:If Christians do not use the bible to reason with u, then what should they use as a basis for discussion? Another book belong to other faiths? Or encyclopedia?
Even in discourse communities, pple have some form of aids/documents to help them in discussion, not just say anything u believe from ur heart, like what heng@ did.
is circular logic not employed in this case:
"What is truth to u?"
"Truth is what god tells me in my heart."
"How do u know whether it is true?"
"Because god tells me what is true in my heart."
As for quoting the bible, I have done that in my research paper (I am studying in the field of education). I have friends who are atheists who have done that in their social sciences papers. So why not?
When Christians quote the bible, we are not imposing our ideas on others, rather, to show what form the basis of our faith. If u are offended, probably u are not open-minded enough. Just a question: U are not offended when a buddhist show u some quotes from his scriptures right?
Laoda: What dreamery b said in the highlighted is especially true. That was what i was trying to say most of the time.Originally posted by dreameryb:When Christians are reasoning with a non-Christian, the basis of their reasoning should be well validated scientific facts and accepted logic. Logical reasoning and scientific facts are embraced by everyone, regardless of their religious backgrounds and thus shoud form the basis of discussion for people from different religious backgrounds. Condemning homosexuality simply because "the bible does not approve homosexuality" betokens ignorance of the abundance of research done in psychology and nuroscinece in the past few dacades, which have concluded that homosexuality is not pathological but rather a natural human sexuality.
Quoting a short maxim from the bible in a research paper may be accepted but it can hardly be used as substantiation of you argument. I am sure you would agree with that. After all, formal education encourages logical reasoning based on widely accepted scientific facts, doesnt it?
I am not offended when Christians quote something from the bible. But I feel uneasy if the person is using the quote as the sole evidence for his argument and refuses to take an alternative explanation which most other people subscrbe to.
Instead of delivering the love. I think it backfired.
Take some time to think thru.
MC -
You are mixing personal preference with discrimination.
Okie, then change the word to "Being Indian is a sin and u should try to make them being non-indian (which is an impossible task)". U r not obliged to like every human but in the event tat he had done nothing wrong, or can do nothing to stop tis, u should treat them all as equal, with the same respect and stop insisting them to follow wat u do.
I mean, are we all obliged to like every single human on earth? -
Exactly.Originally posted by Icemoon:There is certainly something "not quite right" about homosexuality from the nature point of view.
I don't see how they can procreate naturally?
The reason why the Churches (Catholic and most Protestant) do not allow gay marriage is because gay relationship is against nature. Not just because the bible says so.
You may think that "How about test tube babies? Isn't that unnatural too?"
My answer is : at least test tube babies serves a purpose in the society. It helps barren couple have children.
But homosexual relationship? How is a man&man relationship going to benefit the world? They can't even procreate, like what Icemoon said.
Just ask yourself, if your father married a guy twenty to thirty years ago, will there be you at all?
If you decide to go into a gay marriage today, then you will never have children of your own. Then married for what? There is no purpose for the marriage in the first place. Ppl get married to have a family together, not just be with the partner every day. If getting married is just to be with each other, then there is no need to be married in the first place. There is no reason to. And there should not be any issues against the Church not allowing gay marriages. -
There is certainly something "not quite right" about homosexuality from the nature point of view.
As said before, perfectly normal parents can give birth to homo. According to some experts, all men have a spectrum of preference to the same or opposite sex. For homo they have a higher preference to same sex, much like there r some people who r taller or shorter.
I don't see how they can procreate naturally?
About procreation, is it their burden to procreate ? They choose not to, much like people who r single. If u felt tat procreation is a duty of the people then the church should condemn people from beng single, such as being a priest. Who knows if these priest can get married and have children, he may come out with nobel prize winning children or politican tat solved a conflict or musician tat make brand new music