Homophobia
Favorite quote of the day.. Thanks Jen
If homosexuality is a disease, let's all call in queer to work:
"Hello. Can't work today, still queer."
- Robin Tyler
---
It's no great secret that I've been intimate with women. Quite a few women. It's never something I actively sought. One thing just led to another between good friends. That's not to say I won't discreetly ogle a really nice bum, however. It wasn't a phase, I wasn't experimenting. It's just me.
Quite a few members of my family are homosexual or bisexual. This I didn't find out (for the most part) until recent years. Suddenly, quite a number of the things I was mystified by as a child made sense.
What brought this up you say? I'll tell you. I overheard some very ugly talk about homosexuals today. The kind that makes my blood boil! Then of course "gay marriage" came up.
Personally, I say go for it. You should have the same rights as every other committed couple out there. I hear the "sanctity of marriage" argument alot. It takes a level of calm and control that is not easily transmitted to text to restrain myself when I hear this old yarn.
How sacred is marriage to the average strait couple anyway? Have you SEEN the divorce stats? I mean really! How many people do we know that get married and live happily ever after, the first time? Or the second? Very, very few. So the "marriage is blessed by God and sacred" line just doesn't work for me.
Also, aren't we Americans (not too slight the other countries out there) supposed to uphold religious freedom? So, don't use "God's word" as an argument. We don't all believe in the same God.. In fact *gasp* some people don't believe in "God" at all.
If you really want to help "traditional marriage" here's a list of things I say need to be done:
Abolish no fault divorce
Require marriage counseling (minimum of a year)if divorce is considered
Require waiting periods and/or exorbitant fees for divorce
Require counseling BEFORE marriage
I could go on but you see where I'm going with this..
I can already see the "your going to force women to stay in abusive relationships" people trotting out the demonstration placards.. So, let me say this. Women that have men that beat them, humiliate, or emotionally carve them like a thanksgiving day turkey don't get away from those men because of divorce. They get away from those men, generally, under a few conditions.. they either get killed by them, outlive them, or they finally get the guts to sneak away with nothing but the kids, $36 dollars, and their battered pride while the hubby is passed out on the couch, or off banging his secretary.
With all of the above said and done.. I REALLY need a vacation from work. lol My poor beau says my tone has changed lately.. and I guess it has.. stress can be a killer. So, if any of you are out there slack jawed at my ranting.. I'm sorry.. I guess.
------------
My Beau's response .. which I felt needed to be brought to light. Some dont read the comments. So w/out further ado
I've just read what my wonder woman just wrote about homosexuality. I, in general have to agree with what she was saying.
I do have comments to make, however.
Recently, here in Canada, there has been discussion about not allowing refugee claimants to use a church as refuge in case they have difficulty receiving status in this country. I believe my paramour has read ''Murder in the Cathedral'', and would know how this tradition came to be. The Church does have a long standing position in these manners, and usually are prepared to accept those who seek asylum if it's needed.
Now, what does this have to do with homosexuality?
By writ, and tradition, the Christian church has denounced homosexuality as abberant behavior. Check out the book of Leviticus, folks. ''Put to death'' is what they say. Likewise, Judaism follows the same doctrine. Ditto, Islam.
Just like I agree the Church should have a right to offer asylum to folks like the woman recently in the news up here (an honourable tradition), I do have to agree with their doctrine of condemnation. That's their right, is what I mean. Sort of an American and Canadian trait. Guaranteed under the constitutions of the US and Canada. And I believe that the church and state should be separated, because it allows good to be done without gov't interferance. Now then.....
I also personally think that things such as homosexual marriages are just fine; lord knows(no pun intended) they have perhaps a better chance of success as a 'traditional marriage'. Speaking for myself, I see no harm at all in these types of relationships. Loving relationships are seemingly more rare these days, and the good book also says we should love one another, right?
However, the one thing I AM in disagreement with is the legislation of the church. Church doctrine is a manner of tradition,slow change, and the written word, just like state legislation. Now, you'll note that Churches(a term to cover all denominations, by the way)is very slow to make changes in how it governs itself. This will come as the leaders with in a church, whatever the type, tie reality with doctrine. But that change has to come from within, not be forced by whatever gov't is in power at the time. It's an archaic system, but several thousand years can't be too bad, right? You'll note, it's still here. And it DOES provide comfort. And, hey, Christianity and Judaism is the basis of State law in North America! Curious, isn't it?
Now, while Gov't forges ahead with the legalization of Gay marriage (which has my support), the Church is in the usual position of being on the other end of the argument. They DO make a good argument, if you bother to listen. But that's a moral position, just as mine is to support it. They have a right to their moral position, just like I do.
So, if they sound like fishwives in their denouncements of this policy of the gov't, they can. Just like we support the other side of the argument.
''The sign of intellectual honesty is the SOLICITATION of opposing points of view'' Let's not get so narrow minded that we forget that they have a right to be heard.
By Student of Life, at 7:50 PM
If homosexuality is a disease, let's all call in queer to work:
"Hello. Can't work today, still queer."
- Robin Tyler
---
It's no great secret that I've been intimate with women. Quite a few women. It's never something I actively sought. One thing just led to another between good friends. That's not to say I won't discreetly ogle a really nice bum, however. It wasn't a phase, I wasn't experimenting. It's just me.
Quite a few members of my family are homosexual or bisexual. This I didn't find out (for the most part) until recent years. Suddenly, quite a number of the things I was mystified by as a child made sense.
What brought this up you say? I'll tell you. I overheard some very ugly talk about homosexuals today. The kind that makes my blood boil! Then of course "gay marriage" came up.
Personally, I say go for it. You should have the same rights as every other committed couple out there. I hear the "sanctity of marriage" argument alot. It takes a level of calm and control that is not easily transmitted to text to restrain myself when I hear this old yarn.
How sacred is marriage to the average strait couple anyway? Have you SEEN the divorce stats? I mean really! How many people do we know that get married and live happily ever after, the first time? Or the second? Very, very few. So the "marriage is blessed by God and sacred" line just doesn't work for me.
Also, aren't we Americans (not too slight the other countries out there) supposed to uphold religious freedom? So, don't use "God's word" as an argument. We don't all believe in the same God.. In fact *gasp* some people don't believe in "God" at all.
If you really want to help "traditional marriage" here's a list of things I say need to be done:
Abolish no fault divorce
Require marriage counseling (minimum of a year)if divorce is considered
Require waiting periods and/or exorbitant fees for divorce
Require counseling BEFORE marriage
I could go on but you see where I'm going with this..
I can already see the "your going to force women to stay in abusive relationships" people trotting out the demonstration placards.. So, let me say this. Women that have men that beat them, humiliate, or emotionally carve them like a thanksgiving day turkey don't get away from those men because of divorce. They get away from those men, generally, under a few conditions.. they either get killed by them, outlive them, or they finally get the guts to sneak away with nothing but the kids, $36 dollars, and their battered pride while the hubby is passed out on the couch, or off banging his secretary.
With all of the above said and done.. I REALLY need a vacation from work. lol My poor beau says my tone has changed lately.. and I guess it has.. stress can be a killer. So, if any of you are out there slack jawed at my ranting.. I'm sorry.. I guess.
------------
My Beau's response .. which I felt needed to be brought to light. Some dont read the comments. So w/out further ado
I've just read what my wonder woman just wrote about homosexuality. I, in general have to agree with what she was saying.
I do have comments to make, however.
Recently, here in Canada, there has been discussion about not allowing refugee claimants to use a church as refuge in case they have difficulty receiving status in this country. I believe my paramour has read ''Murder in the Cathedral'', and would know how this tradition came to be. The Church does have a long standing position in these manners, and usually are prepared to accept those who seek asylum if it's needed.
Now, what does this have to do with homosexuality?
By writ, and tradition, the Christian church has denounced homosexuality as abberant behavior. Check out the book of Leviticus, folks. ''Put to death'' is what they say. Likewise, Judaism follows the same doctrine. Ditto, Islam.
Just like I agree the Church should have a right to offer asylum to folks like the woman recently in the news up here (an honourable tradition), I do have to agree with their doctrine of condemnation. That's their right, is what I mean. Sort of an American and Canadian trait. Guaranteed under the constitutions of the US and Canada. And I believe that the church and state should be separated, because it allows good to be done without gov't interferance. Now then.....
I also personally think that things such as homosexual marriages are just fine; lord knows(no pun intended) they have perhaps a better chance of success as a 'traditional marriage'. Speaking for myself, I see no harm at all in these types of relationships. Loving relationships are seemingly more rare these days, and the good book also says we should love one another, right?
However, the one thing I AM in disagreement with is the legislation of the church. Church doctrine is a manner of tradition,slow change, and the written word, just like state legislation. Now, you'll note that Churches(a term to cover all denominations, by the way)is very slow to make changes in how it governs itself. This will come as the leaders with in a church, whatever the type, tie reality with doctrine. But that change has to come from within, not be forced by whatever gov't is in power at the time. It's an archaic system, but several thousand years can't be too bad, right? You'll note, it's still here. And it DOES provide comfort. And, hey, Christianity and Judaism is the basis of State law in North America! Curious, isn't it?
Now, while Gov't forges ahead with the legalization of Gay marriage (which has my support), the Church is in the usual position of being on the other end of the argument. They DO make a good argument, if you bother to listen. But that's a moral position, just as mine is to support it. They have a right to their moral position, just like I do.
So, if they sound like fishwives in their denouncements of this policy of the gov't, they can. Just like we support the other side of the argument.
''The sign of intellectual honesty is the SOLICITATION of opposing points of view'' Let's not get so narrow minded that we forget that they have a right to be heard.
By Student of Life, at 7:50 PM
posted by Anonymous at
5:26 PM
1 Comments:
I've just read what my wonder woman just wrote about homosexuality. I, in general have to agree with what she was saying.
I do have comments to make, however.
Recently, here in Canada, there has been discussion about not allowing refugee claimants to use a church as refuge in case they have difficulty receiving status in this country. I believe my paramour has read ''Murder in the Cathedral'', and would know how this tradition came to be. The Church does have a long standing position in these manners, and usually are prepared to accept those who seek asylum if it's needed.
Now, what does this have to do with homosexuality?
By writ, and tradition, the Christian church has denounced homosexuality as abberant behavior. Check out the book of Leviticus, folks. ''Put to death'' is what they say. Likewise, Judaism follows the same doctrine. Ditto, Islam.
Just like I agree the Church should have a right to offer asylum to folks like the woman recently in the news up here (an honourable tradition), I do have to agree with their doctrine of condemnation. That's their right, is what I mean. Sort of an American and Canadian trait. Guaranteed under the constitutions of the US and Canada. And I believe that the church and state should be separated, because it allows good to be done without gov't interferance. Now then.....
I also personally think that things such as homosexual marriages are just fine; lord knows(no pun intended) they have perhaps a better chance of success as a 'traditional marriage'. Speaking for myself, I see no harm at all in these types of relationships. Loving relationships are seemingly more rare these days, and the good book also says we should love one another, right?
However, the one thing I AM in disagreement with is the legislation of the church. Church doctrine is a manner of tradition,slow change, and the written word, just like state legislation. Now, you'll note that Churches(a term to cover all denominations, by the way)is very slow to make changes in how it governs itself. This will come as the leaders with in a church, whatever the type, tie reality with doctrine. But that change has to come from within, not be forced by whatever gov't is in power at the time. It's an archaic system, but several thousand years can't be too bad, right? You'll note, it's still here. And it DOES provide comfort. And, hey, Christianity and Judaism is the basis of State law in North America! Curious, isn't it?
Now, while Gov't forges ahead with the legalization of Gay marriage (which has my support), the Church is in the usual position of being on the other end of the argument. They DO make a good argument, if you bother to listen. But that's a moral position, just as mine is to support it. They have a right to their moral position, just like I do.
So, if they sound like fishwives in their denouncements of this policy of the gov't, they can. Just like we support the other side of the argument.
''The sign of intellectual honesty is the SOLICITATION of opposing points of view'' Let's not get so narrow minded that we forget that they have a right to be heard.
By
Student of Life, at 7:50 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home