Church refuses to hold funeral for gay man

[Larkinn]

bullshit....homophobia by definition means afraid.....no one is afraid of them...what are they going to do install track lighting...the word is a marketing creation.....hate sure....but not for the reason you claim....

Not at all, it more accurately means an irrational dislike. And I'm curious as to how I can be wrong in the reasons I've given for why people hate homosexuals....considering I haven't give any.

i live in sf.....if they wanted to be left alone they would not demand acceptance tollerance and hold a parade....

They do demand tolerance. At least enough so you don't spit on them/bash them/etc, etc. And the parades are a result of the intolerance. Stop treating them like shit and infringing on their rights, I'm sure its a small price to pay for them to stop their parades.

discard the biological norm to justify behavior.....

Incoherent. Try full sentences please.

 

[manu1959]

Not at all, it more accurately means an irrational dislike. And I'm curious as to how I can be wrong in the reasons I've given for why people hate homosexuals....considering I haven't give any.

They do demand tolerance. At least enough so you don't spit on them/bash them/etc, etc. And the parades are a result of the intolerance. Stop treating them like shit and infringing on their rights, I'm sure its a small price to pay for them to stop their parades.

Incoherent. Try full sentences please.

double bullshit....the term homophobia was conied with intent.....

tell me how people that have demanded things have done ?

the parades are a way to force their agenda.......

they are not getting what they want or think they deserve and force their agenda.....they get the response the deserve....

if you can respond you get it...don't play dumb....

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Peh...we've gone over this. I don't think that condoning and mentioning something are the same thing.

Then why is it when the Boy Scouts mention they will be signing up new members next Tuesday after school that is considered to be condoning and promoting religious activities?

 

[Alpha1]

No they wouldn't be condoning it. They would have been merely holding a funeral for Navy Veteran and a Gay man. I'm sure there are many sinners who have crossed that church's doorstep - that does not imply they are condoning those sins.

This has nothing to do with condoning it. It has to do with being a decent human being.

"Some of those photos had very strong homosexual images of kissing and hugging," he said.

And then, he said, the family asked to have its own people officiate the service. "We had no control over the format of the memorial," Mr. Simons said.

These two FACTS from the article point out the crux of the issue...

To have photos with "strong homosexual content" in the Church, would not be condoned in most Christan Churchs...it implies condoning the lifestyle while they publicly and vehemently preach against the lifestyle...

And to allow the family to control the content of the service would just as intolerable to those that have responsibility for how their beliefs are presented to the public....who knows what could have transpired in this service ...
the risk wasn't worth it and they acted accordingly....

 

[manu1959]

"Some of those photos had very strong homosexual images of kissing and hugging," he said.

And then, he said, the family asked to have its own people officiate the service. "We had no control over the format of the memorial," Mr. Simons said.

These two FACTS from the article point out the crux of the issue...

To have photos with "strong homosexual content" in the Church, would not be condoned in most Christan Churchs...it implies condoning the lifestyle while they publicly and vehemently preach against the lifestyle...

And to allow the family to control the content of the service would just as intolerable to those that have responsibility for how their beliefs are presented to the public....who knows what could have transpired in this service ...
the risk wasn't worth it and they acted accordingly....

god damn your facts

 

[CockySOB]

No, actually thats not what they said. Rather they canceled the funeral without meeting with the family nor appealing for any sort of compromise, or really talking to them at all.

So a member of the church offered/suggested the use of the church for the memorial service, but no one ever talked to the church administration to clear the event ahead of time? (Got that from the article you posted from the decedent's partner.) I know the Presbyterian Church I grew up in would have had to pass a funeral/memorial service request through the Elders of the church before the church property could be authorized. Staff would have to be arranged for the use of the property during the event, and clean-up afterwards. BTW, the process wasn't as formal as it may sound, but the communications were required.

I would think it very likely that this whole incident was mis-communication and assumption. I'd guess (based on the article you posted) that the decedent's family failed to make any actual arrangements with church officials, and the church officials were running in circles trying to figure out who "authorized" such an event without going through proper channels. I've seen similar situations before as few families who experience an unexpected death can maintain the focus necessary to focus on the details - it's just that emotional for them.

 

[Larkinn]

double bullshit....the term homophobia was conied with intent.....

Yes, to describe a particular feeling.

tell me how people that have demanded things have done ?

What?

the parades are a way to force their agenda.......

Yes again, an agenda of tolerance and equality. I know these things terrify you so.

they are not getting what they want or think they deserve and force their agenda.....they get the response the deserve....

The response seems to be an increasing marginilization of homophobes and acceptance of gays. I think they certainly deserve that.

if you can respond you get it...don't play dumb....

What?

 

[Larkinn]

Then why is it when the Boy Scouts mention they will be signing up new members next Tuesday after school that is considered to be condoning and promoting religious activities?

Err what? Since when is this the case?

 

[Larkinn]

"Some of those photos had very strong homosexual images of kissing and hugging," he said.

And then, he said, the family asked to have its own people officiate the service. "We had no control over the format of the memorial," Mr. Simons said.

These two FACTS from the article point out the crux of the issue...

These two things are not FACTS, rather they are in dispute. Or the first one is anyway. So you have one fact, and one non-fact.


To have photos with "strong homosexual content" in the Church, would not be condoned in most Christan Churchs...it implies condoning the lifestyle while they publicly and vehemently preach against the lifestyle...

And to allow the family to control the content of the service would just as intolerable to those that have responsibility for how their beliefs are presented to the public....who knows what could have transpired in this service ...
the risk wasn't worth it and they acted accordingly....

Lmao...they could have communicated this risk instead of agreeing to it and then speaking out against it later. And the person performing the service would have been an ordained minister.

 

[Larkinn]

So a member of the church offered/suggested the use of the church for the memorial service, but no one ever talked to the church administration to clear the event ahead of time? (Got that from the article you posted from the decedent's partner.) I know the Presbyterian Church I grew up in would have had to pass a funeral/memorial service request through the Elders of the church before the church property could be authorized. Staff would have to be arranged for the use of the property during the event, and clean-up afterwards. BTW, the process wasn't as formal as it may sound, but the communications were required.

From the article it seemed unclear whether these happened or not. It depends on how much the deceased's brother, Lee, communicated with church officials.

I would think it very likely that this whole incident was mis-communication and assumption. I'd guess (based on the article you posted) that the decedent's family failed to make any actual arrangements with church officials, and the church officials were running in circles trying to figure out who "authorized" such an event without going through proper channels. I've seen similar situations before as few families who experience an unexpected death can maintain the focus necessary to focus on the details - it's just that emotional for them.

I don't think this is the case, and the reason for that is because if this WAS the case, it would seem brutally unneccessary to lie to the family about the reasons for canceling.

 

[Larkinn]

So a member of the church offered/suggested the use of the church for the memorial service, but no one ever talked to the church administration to clear the event ahead of time? (Got that from the article you posted from the decedent's partner.) I know the Presbyterian Church I grew up in would have had to pass a funeral/memorial service request through the Elders of the church before the church property could be authorized. Staff would have to be arranged for the use of the property during the event, and clean-up afterwards. BTW, the process wasn't as formal as it may sound, but the communications were required.

I would think it very likely that this whole incident was mis-communication and assumption. I'd guess (based on the article you posted) that the decedent's family failed to make any actual arrangements with church officials, and the church officials were running in circles trying to figure out who "authorized" such an event without going through proper channels. I've seen similar situations before as few families who experience an unexpected death can maintain the focus necessary to focus on the details - it's just that emotional for them.

Also...from the original article:

Both the family and church officials agree that the church volunteered to host a memorial service, feed 100 guests and create a multimedia presentation of photos from Mr. Sinclair's life.

But the photos that the family selected alerted church officials that there might be a problem with the service, Mr. Simons said.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Err what? Since when is this the case?

1998: The American Civil Liberties Union sued the City of Chicago over both the religious and sexual orientation issues in the Scouting units that the city entities sponsored. The city ended its affiliation with the BSA. The Parent/Teacher Association has adopted a national policy of not permitting its chapters to sponsor Scouting units.

1999-APR - Illinois: The ACLU initiated a suit against the Chicago public schools and the Scott Air Force Base in southern Illinois. The ACLU position is that "Schools, military bases and other publicly funded groups have no business sponsoring Boy Scout troops so long as Scouts are required to take a religious oath...public funding of Boy Scouts of America troops violates the constitutional requirement of separation of church and state."

http://www.religioustolerance.org/bsa_1.htm

 

[Larkinn]

1998: The American Civil Liberties Union sued the City of Chicago over both the religious and sexual orientation issues in the Scouting units that the city entities sponsored. The city ended its affiliation with the BSA. The Parent/Teacher Association has adopted a national policy of not permitting its chapters to sponsor Scouting units.

1999-APR - Illinois: The ACLU initiated a suit against the Chicago public schools and the Scott Air Force Base in southern Illinois. The ACLU position is that "Schools, military bases and other publicly funded groups have no business sponsoring Boy Scout troops so long as Scouts are required to take a religious oath...public funding of Boy Scouts of America troops violates the constitutional requirement of separation of church and state."

http://www.religioustolerance.org/bsa_1.htm

You do get the difference between mentioning a meeting and funding something, right?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The church in question funded the event according to some sources. Even though they did not host it.

 

[manu1959]

Yes, to describe a particular feeling.

What?
Yes again, an agenda of tolerance and equality. I know these things terrify you so.
he response seems to be an increasing marginilization of homophobes and acceptance of gays. I think they certainly deserve that.
What?

so if christians hold a parade...demand tollerance and acceptance....and coin the term christophobia ..... you will be cool with that.....

 

[Edward]

This is NOT a free speech issue. Why are you having such trouble understanding this?

You act as if by condemning the Church for their actions we are infringing on their freedom of speech.

Don't you understand that WE DON'T have freedom of speech and can not condemn the actions of this Church. Only Manu and those who agree with him have freedom of speech. The rest of us are wrong to exercise our right to speak out against something and to condemn those who behave in such an un-Christlike manner. Of course, I agree with you that this isn't a free speech issue. No one is infringing on their freedom of speech when we exercise our freedom of speech and condemn them for their conduct. Ironically, these sinners will hold funerals for their fellow sinners who attend their Church and who sin before, during and after they attend their church service while saying "we SINNERS will have funeral for our fellow SINNERS in faith and will deny SINNERS not of our faith or belief a funeral. All those who commit sins X, Y and Z will get a funeral while those who do not sin the same sin we do and instead commit the sins A, B and C will be denied a funeral."

 

[Larkinn]

so if christians hold a parade...demand tollerance and acceptance....and coin the term christophobia ..... you will be cool with that.....

Sure. It'll be stupid considering they are one of the most powerful groups in this country, but sure go for it.

 

[maineman]

To what purpose? The point is, this church has the right to decide who it will and will not accept as members based on its criteria, and the same for performing services for others.

People have a right to believe what they want ... not just what Larkinn and DeadCanDance dictate. The first people to whine freedom of speech are the same two who wish to deny it first.

to the purpose of expanding your understanding. I do not disagree with you on this issue. I fully support a church not performing funeral services on non-church members for any reason they choose. THe book is still a good read, nonetheless.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Sure. It'll be stupid considering they are one of the most powerful groups in this country, but sure go for it.

And I assume you will have no problem when the Fire Department and Police Department send vehicles to participate in the parade?

 

[manu1959]

Sure. It'll be stupid considering they are one of the most powerful groups in this country, but sure go for it.

nah the christians are jewish puppets......where have you been....