Same bullshit, different decade: What members of the gay rights movement could learn from history

[NYcarbineer]

What the heck do YOU know about marriage?

And what the heck do YOU know about Christianity? Your attempt at McCarthyism is...too entirely predictable.

Show the passage in the Bible that forbids doing business with a gay person.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I was raised a Lutheran and experienced it most of my life....so I ask again, what do YOU know about marriage?

Oh, a Lutheran.

But what does my knowledge of marriage have to do with this discussion? What bearing does this have on your argument? What argument are you trying to make here?

"Since he knows nothing about marriage, he isn't qualified to talk about it." Geez. Come up with something more original.

 

[bodecea]

But didn't the anti segregationists also use the bible?

Yeah, and they were wrong. See my above answer to Carbine (points up)^^

And in about 20 years....guess who will be looked at in the same light.

 

[bodecea]

I was raised a Lutheran and experienced it most of my life....so I ask again, what do YOU know about marriage?

Oh, a Lutheran.

But what does my knowledge of marriage have to do with this discussion? What bearing does this have on your argument? What argument are you trying to make here?

"Since he knows nothing about marriage, he isn't qualified to talk about it." Geez. Come up with something more original.

I didn't say you weren't qualified....but that is a far far way from speaking as some kind of expert. How long have you been married? And what were your reasons for marriage?

 

[The Rabbi]

But didn't the anti segregationists also use the bible?

Yeah, and they were wrong. See my above answer to Carbine (points up)^^

And in about 20 years....guess who will be looked at in the same light.

Homos.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Since there is not even a remote reference to race in the passage who's reading what?

See? You are being overly literal.

"Hey he's black!" Is a judgment based on appearance. Instead of judging his character, you judge his skin color, or appearance. Oh wait, I think MLK said something similar. I bet he had the same passage in mind.

"I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."

-MLK

 

[TemplarKormac]

How long have you been married? And what were your reasons for marriage?

And how does this have anything to do with gay marriage? Hmm?

I'm not married. I've seen the destructive effects one that goes bad has on a family. I've witnessed two divorces that quite literally tore my family apart. I know enough about marriage to stay out of it, which makes it quite ironic to me, that people like you would be fighting for gays to get into it.

You don't get married to achieve status among your peers. Marriage involves true, genuine love and die hard commitment. I know, because I've seen what happens when a married heterosexual couple stays true to those things, they stay married until one or both of them dies.

 

[TemplarKormac]

And to address Carbine again, the Bible speaks against racism with this one simple verse

"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus."

Galatians 3:28

That verse represents the complete destruction of the premise that Judeo-Christian thinking is based all or in part on racism.

 

[TemplarKormac]

But didn't the anti segregationists also use the bible?

Yeah, and they were wrong. See my above answer to Carbine (points up)^^

And in about 20 years....guess who will be looked at in the same light.

What light? You're the one cursing it despite the darkness.

 

[Seawytch]

But didn't the anti segregationists also use the bible?

Yeah, and they were wrong. See my above answer to Carbine (points up)^^

Slow down and read what I typed. You were berating bfgrn for using the bible, but both the segregationists and ANTI segregationists used the same bible. We've "driven the segregationists out of the public square" though. Good or bad?

 

[Seawytch]

Somehow you think that by asking me these questions, you'll get me to slip up and endorse the thinking segregationists employed when using the Bible to justify it. Well, guess again.

You ARE endorsing it...you're just replacing race with sexual orientation.

 

[Seawytch]

The Bible also commands you shall have no other gods before you that doesn't give your business the right to deny service to a Hindu.

You know, you're purposefully being dishonest. Do you see any religious person denying anyone of a different religion service in a business? No. But nobody seems interested in forcing a Muslim to serve a Jew either, do they? In fact, people are more content on them denying the Jew service once they see him wearing his kippah into the store. But hey, Christians are the only ones required to uproot their beliefs for the sake of a "free and stable society" as bellboy put it.

Federal law already requires the Muslim to serve the Jew...since 1964.

 

[NYcarbineer]

And to address Carbine again, the Bible speaks against racism with this one simple verse

"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus."

Galatians 3:28

That verse represents the complete destruction of the premise that Judeo-Christian thinking is based all or in part on racism.

Bob Jones of Bob Jones University made a similar argument, but within it he made the Biblical case for separate but equal.

Argue with him:

Is Segregation Scriptural by Bob Jones Sr 1960 A Time To Laugh

 

[NYcarbineer]

The Bible also commands you shall have no other gods before you that doesn't give your business the right to deny service to a Hindu.

You know, you're purposefully being dishonest. Do you see any religious person denying anyone of a different religion service in a business? No. But nobody seems interested in forcing a Muslim to serve a Jew either, do they? In fact, people are more content on them denying the Jew service once they see him wearing his kippah into the store. But hey, Christians are the only ones required to uproot their beliefs for the sake of a "free and stable society" as bellboy put it.

Christians are the only ones? I don't see Sharia Law anywhere in the US.

And what about that response had anything to do with Sharia Law?

You're claiming Christians are the only ones to have to 'uproot' their beliefs.

Can Muslims establish Sharia Law in their communities, if in fact they are Muslims of that sort of religious belief?

 

[NYcarbineer]

And if the courts rule in favor of homosexuals, you'll soon hear demands that churches marry gays. You know what? That's an intrusion on my faith, and thusly on my beliefs. You will be asking us to sacrifice our beliefs for a "more stable society."

Wrong TK...you already are hearing demands that churches marry gays...but you're not hearing it from the government nor will you ever. The demands are coming from the families and loved ones of their gay brothers and sisters.

You will never heard demands that people violate their religious beliefs to accomodate gays.
Oh wait, we have.
The Solicitor General himself admitted in court that religious institutions will find themselves in trouble if gay marriage is legal.

He was not talking about churches. Churches will never be forced by the government to perform rituals or ceremonies against the tenants of their faith. The SG was referring to religious schools like Bob Jones University that had their tax exempt status taken from them because of their policies regarding interracial marriage.

(Which, once again, proves that it is the same bullshit, different decade)

Actually he was referring to schools like Notre Dame University, that will be forced to put gay couples in married student housing and the like.
Yeah, same bullshit different decade. Gays will shut down any person or any institution that disagrees with them. Free speech and free association will be a thing of the past. They are worse than ISIS.

Notre Dame is shut down now?

lol, who knew?

 

[NYcarbineer]

But didn't the anti segregationists also use the bible?

Yeah, and they were wrong. See my above answer to Carbine (points up)^^

So people with sincere religious beliefs that happen to be contrary to our secular laws can simply be ruled 'wrong' and brought in line WITH our laws?

Isn't that what some of us have been trying to explain to you for weeks?

 

[RKMBrown]

I often see them comparing the gay struggle for equality to that of the African American struggle for racial equality, "same bullshit, different decade" they contend. Well, true, but not in the way they think. The comparison is flawed, for two reasons.

Yeah, I know what's coming too, the standard volley of how "gays should be allowed to marry" or "why do you hate gays?" or the run of the mill cherrypicked Bible verse or two. I've seen it all pretty much. The whole playbook. So for those of you intent on repeating that tired rhetoric, can it.

The short version:

Reason 1: Martin Luther King sought understanding through tolerance and understanding during the Civil Rights movement. In fact, he didn't speak in terms of tolerance, but of love, a Christian based love. He employed a doctrine passivity, not subversion. Even in the face of having the lives his and his fellow African Americans torn apart by racist sentiments and policies, they chose not to do the same to their oppressors. This attitude allowed for no further division of an already helplessly, racially divided America.

Reason 2: Homosexual and Liberal gay rights activists want to force you to be understanding and tolerant of their cause for equality, without ever being understanding or tolerant themselves. Amounting to nothing more than a vengeful, subversive doctrine of unyielding, unwavering tolerance at whatever cost; to be especially employed towards Christian private business owners. This allows for further division between them and those the LGBT rights movement is trying to reach.

The rest of it:

For King, nothing would ever advance the cause of equality by repaying intolerance with intolerance, hatred with hatred, or violence with violence. "Hate cannot drive out hate, only love can do that," he said. That however is in stark contrast to how the gay rights movement has decided to react to the assumed hatred and bigotry on the behalf of religious private business owners.

The Kingsian philosophy of tolerance, passivity and nonviolence consisted of six main principles:

1) First he said, one can resist evil without resorting to violence.

2) Second, nonviolence seeks to win the ‘‘friendship and understanding’’ of the opponent, not to humiliate him (King, Stride, p.84).

3) Furthermore, third, evil itself, not the people committing evil acts, should be opposed.

4) Fourth, he continued, is that those committed to nonviolence must be willing to suffer without retaliation as suffering itself can be redemptive.

5) Fifthly, nonviolent resistance avoids ‘‘external physical violence’’ and ‘‘internal violence of spirit’’ as well: ‘‘The nonviolent resister not only refuses to shoot his opponent but he also refuses to hate him" (King, Stride, p.85). The resister should be motivated by love in the sense of the Greek word agape, which means ‘‘understanding,’’ or ‘‘redeeming good will for all men’’ (King, Stride, p.86).

6) Lastly, he states the sixth principle, which was that the nonviolent resister should have a ‘‘deep faith in the future,’’ stemming from the conviction that ‘‘the universe is on the side of justice’’ (King, Stride, p.88).

King held the philosophy akin to the old folk hymn, "keep your eyes on the prize." To be frank, that prize wasn't putting some unwitting business owner out on the street for being racist or intolerant. Yeah, business owners were racist and intolerant back then, but not even they (the blacks, and most of them I'd think) thought it was okay to ruin someone, besides, what were they going to do? Sue every Tom, Dick, and Harry who discriminated against them? Not really. Such a movement spurred Congress to end the discussion on racial inequality once and for all, you know the rest.

If only gay rights activists and liberal pro gay rights activists took the approach specifically covered in the third, fourth and fifth principle, I would guarantee that there would be a more broad understanding and sympathy towards gay rights and equality, moreso than exists at this point in time.

Uhmmm King was the exception not the rule.. Your problem is you are a homophobe. Let it go.

 

[NYcarbineer]

And to address Carbine again, the Bible speaks against racism with this one simple verse

"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus."

Galatians 3:28

That verse represents the complete destruction of the premise that Judeo-Christian thinking is based all or in part on racism.

"...there is neither male nor female..."

...hmmmm...that's pretty much the complete destruction of any premise that Judeo-Christians thinking opposes same sex marriage.

 

[RKMBrown]

This will be sure to set some liberals aflame:

Irony... you starting a hate and fear thread and posting this pic.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Irony... you starting a hate and fear thread and posting this pic.

Irony, you focus on the man who made the quote and not the quote itself.

Yes, indeed. Lets judge everyone on their appearances.