NATION

PASSWORD

Anglican church against gay marriage

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Capitalistfreedom
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 20
Founded: Jun 06, 2015
Ex-Nation

Anglican

Postby Capitalistfreedom » Tue Jan 19, 2016 12:46 pm

I'm kind of surprised that Anglicans are so intolerant, I thought they were one of the more moderate branches of Protestant denominations. I'm a non-practicing Anglican but I've been thinking about converting to Buddhism for quite a while, they seem so much more tolerant and modern on moral issues.

User avatar
The Alma Mater
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 25619
Founded: May 23, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby The Alma Mater » Tue Jan 19, 2016 12:47 pm

Constantinopolis wrote:
The Alma Mater wrote:
Of course, promising to be with someone for the rest of ones life without knowing if they are sexually compatible is also wrong.

There is no such thing as "sexual compatibility", in the sense of a fixed, unchangeable thing that can make or break a relationship.

People's sexual habits and preferences are determined by the experiences they had, and change over time. In the case of people who are virgins when they get married, they actually build their sexual preferences together.


Eehm, no. That, sadly, is not how it works.
Of course, sex should not be the *main* factor when one decides to marry - after all, in 50 years you probably are not going to get much anymore.

But arbitrarily claiming it is an attribute one should not weigh at all is just as silly as saying one should not take intelligence, hobbies, personality, looks or even religion into account. Arbitrary.
Getting an education was a bit like a communicable sexual disease.
It made you unsuitable for a lot of jobs and then you had the urge to pass it on.
- Terry Pratchett, Hogfather

User avatar
Constantinopolis
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7501
Founded: Antiquity
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Constantinopolis » Tue Jan 19, 2016 12:47 pm

Zoice wrote:There is no harm in them and your motto of self control to the point of chastity has no evidence behind it. It's just a religiously motivated preference - fine for you to have but pragmatically and legally it is worthless.

Of course it's just a religiously motivated preference. But I'm not the one trying to impose this preference on the rest of society. I don't think it should be enforced by the state, or that any laws should be based on it. You were the one who wanted to impose your preferences on churches.
The Holy Socialist Republic of Constantinopolis
"Only a life lived for others is a life worthwhile." -- Albert Einstein
Political Compass: Economic Left/Right: -10.00 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.64
________________Communist. Leninist. Orthodox Christian.________________
Communism is the logical conclusion of Christian morality. "Whoever loves his neighbor as himself owns no more than his neighbor does", in the words of St. Basil the Great. The anti-theism of past Leninists was a tragic mistake, and the Church should be an ally of the working class.
My posts on the 12 Great Feasts of the Orthodox Church: -I- -II- -III- -IV- -V- -VI- -VII- -VIII- [PASCHA] -IX- -X- -XI- -XII-

User avatar
Grand Calvert
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1332
Founded: Feb 12, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Grand Calvert » Tue Jan 19, 2016 12:48 pm

Washington Resistance Army wrote:
Grand Calvert wrote:Just because Christianity goes against natural impulses, that doesn't make it wrong. You might have an impulse to punch someone in the face, but that doesn't make it right. Natural does not mean right.


Spread the knowledge then, how is it wrong for me to have sex with a woman I'm not married to? Nobody gets hurt (I'm not down with that kinda kinky), there's health benefits, it's enjoyable, with proper sex-ed and contraception you can negate the risk of STD's and unwanted pregnancies.

Not really seeing much wrong with it. Hell, I really didn't when I was a Christian either.

Contraception does not always stop STDs. That is why chastity is better then just having "protected" sex with someone and just hoping for the best.
17 year-old Conservative Reformed Baptist
“So when the devil throws your sins in your face and declares that you deserve death and hell, tell him this: "I admit that I deserve death and hell, what of it? For I know One who suffered and made satisfaction on my behalf. His name is Jesus Christ, Son of God, and where He is there I shall be also!” -Martin Luther

Saved...

Sola Gratia (by grace alone)
Sola Fide (through faith alone)
Solus Christus (in Christ alone)
Sola Scriptura (according to scripture alone)
Soli Deo Gloria (for the glory of God alone)

User avatar
United Marxist Nations
Post Czar
 
Posts: 33804
Founded: Dec 02, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby United Marxist Nations » Tue Jan 19, 2016 12:50 pm

Capitalistfreedom wrote:I'm kind of surprised that Anglicans are so intolerant, I thought they were one of the more moderate branches of Protestant denominations. I'm a non-practicing Anglican but I've been thinking about converting to Buddhism for quite a while, they seem so much more tolerant and modern on moral issues.

How "modern" the beliefs of a religion are should never be the crux of the reason for one's faith in it.
The Kievan People wrote: United Marxist Nations: A prayer for every soul, a plan for every economy and a waifu for every man. Solid.

Eastern Orthodox Catechumen. Religious communitarian with Sorelian, Marxist, and Traditionalist influences. Sympathies toward Sunni Islam. All flags/avatars are chosen for aesthetic or humor purposes only
An open mind is like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded.
St. John Chrysostom wrote:A comprehended God is no God.

User avatar
Kannap
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 67527
Founded: May 07, 2012
Democratic Socialists

Postby Kannap » Tue Jan 19, 2016 12:51 pm

Grand Calvert wrote:
Washington Resistance Army wrote:
Spread the knowledge then, how is it wrong for me to have sex with a woman I'm not married to? Nobody gets hurt (I'm not down with that kinda kinky), there's health benefits, it's enjoyable, with proper sex-ed and contraception you can negate the risk of STD's and unwanted pregnancies.

Not really seeing much wrong with it. Hell, I really didn't when I was a Christian either.

Contraception does not always stop STDs. That is why chastity is better then just having "protected" sex with someone and just hoping for the best.


So just never have sex. We'll solve the STD problem as well as the overpopulation while continuing our lives and then leaving this planet behind us human-free.
Luna Amore wrote:Please remember to attend the ritualistic burning of Kannap for heresy
T H E M O U N T A I N S A R E C A L L I N G A N D I M U S T G O
G A Y S I N C E 1 9 9 7
.::The List of National Sports::.
27 years old, gay demisexual, they/them agnostic, South Carolinian. Pumpkin Spice everything.
TET's resident red panda
Red Panda Network
Jill Stein 2024

User avatar
The Flutterlands
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15157
Founded: Oct 02, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby The Flutterlands » Tue Jan 19, 2016 12:51 pm

United Marxist Nations wrote:
The Flutterlands wrote:How so? What makes Homosrxuality supposedly more evil than adultery and fornication?

No, I meant the latter of the first two. i.e. That adultery is worse than fornication or homosexual activity.

Ah. I see. Yes, I agree, since it's betraying the sacred trust made between one's spouse.
Call me Flutters - Minister of Justice of the Federation of the Shy One - Fluttershy is best pony
Who I side with - My Discord - OC Pony - Pitch Black
White, American, Male, Asexual, Deist, Autistic with Aspergers and ADHD, Civil Liberatarian and Democratic Socialist, Brony and Whovian. I have Neurofibromatosis Type 1. I'm also INTJ
Political Compass
Economic Left/Right: -4.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.77
Pros: Choice, Democracy, Liberatarianism, Populism, Secularism, Equal Rights, Contraceptives, Immigration, Environmentalism, Free Speech and Egalitarianism
Con: Communism, Fascism, SJW 'Feminism', Terrorism, Homophobia, Transphobia, Xenophobia, Death Penalty, Totalitarianism, Neoliberalism, and War.
Ravenclaw

User avatar
Zoice
Minister
 
Posts: 3041
Founded: Oct 30, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Zoice » Tue Jan 19, 2016 12:52 pm

Constantinopolis wrote:
Zoice wrote:There is no harm in them and your motto of self control to the point of chastity has no evidence behind it. It's just a religiously motivated preference - fine for you to have but pragmatically and legally it is worthless.

Of course it's just a religiously motivated preference. But I'm not the one trying to impose this preference on the rest of society. I don't think it should be enforced by the state, or that any laws should be based on it. You were the one who wanted to impose your preferences on churches.

No. I wanted to converse with and convert them to a more tolerant view. As long as they are not imposing on others, they can be left alone.
♂♀Copy and Paste this in your sig if you're ignorant about human sexuality and want to let everyone know. ♂♀
Or if you're an asshole that goes out of your way to bully minorities and call them words with the strict intent of upsetting a demographic that is already at a huge risk of suicide, or being murdered for who they are. :)

For: Abortions, Anomalocaris, Atheism, Anti-theism, Being a good person, Genetic Engineering, LGBT rights, Sammy Harris, the Sandman, Science, Secular humanism
Against: AGW Denialism, Anti-Semitism, Banning religion, Ends, Hillary Clinton, Islamophobia, Means, Mother Theresa, Organized religion, Pacifism, Prejudice, the Pope, Political Correctness, Racism, Regressive Lefties and Righties, Republican Candidates, Theism, Violence

User avatar
Washington Resistance Army
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54814
Founded: Aug 08, 2011
Father Knows Best State

Postby Washington Resistance Army » Tue Jan 19, 2016 12:52 pm

Grand Calvert wrote:
Washington Resistance Army wrote:
Spread the knowledge then, how is it wrong for me to have sex with a woman I'm not married to? Nobody gets hurt (I'm not down with that kinda kinky), there's health benefits, it's enjoyable, with proper sex-ed and contraception you can negate the risk of STD's and unwanted pregnancies.

Not really seeing much wrong with it. Hell, I really didn't when I was a Christian either.

Contraception does not always stop STDs. That is why chastity is better then just having "protected" sex with someone and just hoping for the best.


It does a pretty damn good job, it might just be me but I've been having sex for more than a few years and I'm still clean. Saying I shouldn't have sex because I MIGHT get an STD is stupid, if I didn't do things because of potential risks associated with them I would never leave my room.
Hellenic Polytheist, Socialist

User avatar
Suominona
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 23
Founded: Jan 18, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby Suominona » Tue Jan 19, 2016 12:53 pm

Grand Calvert wrote:
Zoice wrote:Right. The "selfish" desire to have sexual pleasure. When will they learn, how many must die from masturbation!?!?

Ultimately when you feel entitled to sexual pleasure then yes it is selfish.

Stop feeling entitled to sex, you selfish prick! Instead, I should feel entitled to stop you from having sex, for I am the selfless one!

Aelex wrote:
Suominona wrote:Which, again, is not what I'm advocating. Christians crave martyrdom so much they have to make up things I've said when really they should just read what I've posted. There ain't a lotta that and it's all in two pages of this thread.

Yeah you were whining about the poor gay child who could be oppressed about the evil Anglican church. Const' comparison is everything but wrong.
Yet you felt inclined to reply to me. Don't make me relevant if you don't want to make me relevant.

When you're saying bullshit, I feel the need to correct you. I guess my love of truth is just superior than my disdain. :)
I'm not going to browse the whole of NSG for you, sorry.

Thus your argument is crap. The burden of proof is on you my dear. Either show us proof and drop that lil' argument of your that gay marriage is even remotely theologically correct.
Why don't you bring up polygamy, pedophilia and bestiality as well to get it over with?

Regardless, you can stir up emotions all you like, but incest is hot. Don't knock it til ya try it. ;)

That's... Really gross. I'm about as open-minded about sex as anyone can be, probably more than most of you actually since libertinage is deeply rooted in my culture, but I find this simply and deeply disgusting.

Just 'child', but all right. It's not gays telling themselves 'gay is bad', you know. So yes, you made shit up instead of reading what I said after which you read what I said and stated the most obvious thing to me. Even then you fucked up, seeing as you stated something again what I didn't say.

So again, you felt the need to make me relevant and thus made me more relevant on your quest for da troof. Maybe drop the whining about me becoming relevant? Actually don't, because it's funny.

Did I say gay marriage was theologically correct or did I say that it wasn't theologically incorrect? I'll spare your time to search for that comment and reveal that I said neither. I said that proponents of queer theology on this forum have really sound arguments. I wonder if they're still here?

How would you know if you haven't tried it? That question was rhetorical, by the way. You don't know. You're just appealing to emotion. Thus, your argument is crap! See what I did there? I can do that too!

Grand Calvert wrote:
Suominona wrote:I like how you didn't contest chastity not being healthy. It's good we agree.

Yes, yes, I oughta control myself, except in the case of God, the state, morals and above all, you, because you're the first one to be offended for me doing my thing. In those cases, God should control me, state should control me, morals should control me, you should control me. Say self-control one more time, because it makes me giggle when someone like you says it. Go on, say it.

Oh sorry, chastity is healthy because you're less likely to get STDs which are so common nowadays because people have sex with whoever they want. And when did I ever say that I should control you? You're pretty much making strawman arguments.

Condoms. Next problem.

If you don't want to control what I do or what other people in general do, why are you advocating for control?

User avatar
Grand Calvert
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1332
Founded: Feb 12, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Grand Calvert » Tue Jan 19, 2016 12:54 pm

Kannap wrote:
Grand Calvert wrote:Contraception does not always stop STDs. That is why chastity is better then just having "protected" sex with someone and just hoping for the best.


So just never have sex. We'll solve the STD problem as well as the overpopulation while continuing our lives and then leaving this planet behind us human-free.

What do you mean by "leaving this planet behind us human-free"? I don't get what you're trying to say. And I never said to never have sex. Sex is fine, and even good, if it is within the confines of a Biblical marriage. If everyone stuck to that then we wouldn't be having problems with STDs. There's a reason that STDs became so common after the Sexual Revolution.
17 year-old Conservative Reformed Baptist
“So when the devil throws your sins in your face and declares that you deserve death and hell, tell him this: "I admit that I deserve death and hell, what of it? For I know One who suffered and made satisfaction on my behalf. His name is Jesus Christ, Son of God, and where He is there I shall be also!” -Martin Luther

Saved...

Sola Gratia (by grace alone)
Sola Fide (through faith alone)
Solus Christus (in Christ alone)
Sola Scriptura (according to scripture alone)
Soli Deo Gloria (for the glory of God alone)

User avatar
Unitaristic Regions
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5019
Founded: Apr 15, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Unitaristic Regions » Tue Jan 19, 2016 12:55 pm

Tafhan wrote:
Novorobo wrote:
Why can't "pro-gay Christians" accept that if the Bible is wrong on this one, it's moving the goalposts to defer to it on anything else?

...What?


It's a bit of a random argument, but what he's saying is that you can't just say: "Well, everything our book says, which we could verify, is wrong... but everything that we can't verify is surely right!"
Used to be a straight-edge orthodox communist, now I'm de facto a state-capitalist who dislikes migration and hopes automation will bring socialism under proper conditions.

User avatar
Constantinopolis
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7501
Founded: Antiquity
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Constantinopolis » Tue Jan 19, 2016 12:55 pm

The Alma Mater wrote:
Constantinopolis wrote:There is no such thing as "sexual compatibility", in the sense of a fixed, unchangeable thing that can make or break a relationship.

People's sexual habits and preferences are determined by the experiences they had, and change over time. In the case of people who are virgins when they get married, they actually build their sexual preferences together.

Eehm, no. That, sadly, is not how it works.
Of course, sex should not be the *main* factor when one decides to marry - after all, in 50 years you probably are not going to get much anymore.

But arbitrarily claiming it is an attribute one should not weigh at all is just as silly as saying one should not take intelligence, hobbies, personality, looks or even religion into account. Arbitrary.

Thank you for providing those examples. Because lots of people get married without having tried different hobbies to find out what they prefer, or without having tried many different religions to find out which one is best for them, etc.

Arguing for the benefits of trying different sexual partners before getting married is like arguing for the benefits of trying different sports, or different religions, or different political parties before getting married. It's ridiculous to say "I shouldn't get married yet, I haven't tried snowboarding - what if it turns out I love it and my spouse doesn't, so we are not compatible?"
The Holy Socialist Republic of Constantinopolis
"Only a life lived for others is a life worthwhile." -- Albert Einstein
Political Compass: Economic Left/Right: -10.00 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.64
________________Communist. Leninist. Orthodox Christian.________________
Communism is the logical conclusion of Christian morality. "Whoever loves his neighbor as himself owns no more than his neighbor does", in the words of St. Basil the Great. The anti-theism of past Leninists was a tragic mistake, and the Church should be an ally of the working class.
My posts on the 12 Great Feasts of the Orthodox Church: -I- -II- -III- -IV- -V- -VI- -VII- -VIII- [PASCHA] -IX- -X- -XI- -XII-

User avatar
United Marxist Nations
Post Czar
 
Posts: 33804
Founded: Dec 02, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby United Marxist Nations » Tue Jan 19, 2016 12:56 pm

The Flutterlands wrote:
United Marxist Nations wrote:No, I meant the latter of the first two. i.e. That adultery is worse than fornication or homosexual activity.

Ah. I see. Yes, I agree, since it's betraying the sacred trust made between one's spouse.

Yes. Whereas the other two only harm oneself, adultery harms those closest to oneself as well.

I'm about to have to go to class, so I may not respond for a long while.
The Kievan People wrote: United Marxist Nations: A prayer for every soul, a plan for every economy and a waifu for every man. Solid.

Eastern Orthodox Catechumen. Religious communitarian with Sorelian, Marxist, and Traditionalist influences. Sympathies toward Sunni Islam. All flags/avatars are chosen for aesthetic or humor purposes only
An open mind is like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded.
St. John Chrysostom wrote:A comprehended God is no God.

User avatar
Grand Calvert
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1332
Founded: Feb 12, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Grand Calvert » Tue Jan 19, 2016 12:56 pm

Suominona wrote:
Grand Calvert wrote:Ultimately when you feel entitled to sexual pleasure then yes it is selfish.

Stop feeling entitled to sex, you selfish prick! Instead, I should feel entitled to stop you from having sex, for I am the selfless one!

Aelex wrote:Yeah you were whining about the poor gay child who could be oppressed about the evil Anglican church. Const' comparison is everything but wrong.

When you're saying bullshit, I feel the need to correct you. I guess my love of truth is just superior than my disdain. :)

Thus your argument is crap. The burden of proof is on you my dear. Either show us proof and drop that lil' argument of your that gay marriage is even remotely theologically correct.

That's... Really gross. I'm about as open-minded about sex as anyone can be, probably more than most of you actually since libertinage is deeply rooted in my culture, but I find this simply and deeply disgusting.

Just 'child', but all right. It's not gays telling themselves 'gay is bad', you know. So yes, you made shit up instead of reading what I said after which you read what I said and stated the most obvious thing to me. Even then you fucked up, seeing as you stated something again what I didn't say.

So again, you felt the need to make me relevant and thus made me more relevant on your quest for da troof. Maybe drop the whining about me becoming relevant? Actually don't, because it's funny.

Did I say gay marriage was theologically correct or did I say that it wasn't theologically incorrect? I'll spare your time to search for that comment and reveal that I said neither. I said that proponents of queer theology on this forum have really sound arguments. I wonder if they're still here?

How would you know if you haven't tried it? That question was rhetorical, by the way. You don't know. You're just appealing to emotion. Thus, your argument is crap! See what I did there? I can do that too!

Grand Calvert wrote:Oh sorry, chastity is healthy because you're less likely to get STDs which are so common nowadays because people have sex with whoever they want. And when did I ever say that I should control you? You're pretty much making strawman arguments.

Condoms. Next problem.

If you don't want to control what I do or what other people in general do, why are you advocating for control?

Condoms do not always work. They can break. And I'm not "controlling" you. Convincing and controlling are not the same.
17 year-old Conservative Reformed Baptist
“So when the devil throws your sins in your face and declares that you deserve death and hell, tell him this: "I admit that I deserve death and hell, what of it? For I know One who suffered and made satisfaction on my behalf. His name is Jesus Christ, Son of God, and where He is there I shall be also!” -Martin Luther

Saved...

Sola Gratia (by grace alone)
Sola Fide (through faith alone)
Solus Christus (in Christ alone)
Sola Scriptura (according to scripture alone)
Soli Deo Gloria (for the glory of God alone)

User avatar
Suominona
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 23
Founded: Jan 18, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby Suominona » Tue Jan 19, 2016 12:58 pm

Grand Calvert wrote:
Suominona wrote:Stop feeling entitled to sex, you selfish prick! Instead, I should feel entitled to stop you from having sex, for I am the selfless one!


Just 'child', but all right. It's not gays telling themselves 'gay is bad', you know. So yes, you made shit up instead of reading what I said after which you read what I said and stated the most obvious thing to me. Even then you fucked up, seeing as you stated something again what I didn't say.

So again, you felt the need to make me relevant and thus made me more relevant on your quest for da troof. Maybe drop the whining about me becoming relevant? Actually don't, because it's funny.

Did I say gay marriage was theologically correct or did I say that it wasn't theologically incorrect? I'll spare your time to search for that comment and reveal that I said neither. I said that proponents of queer theology on this forum have really sound arguments. I wonder if they're still here?

How would you know if you haven't tried it? That question was rhetorical, by the way. You don't know. You're just appealing to emotion. Thus, your argument is crap! See what I did there? I can do that too!


Condoms. Next problem.

If you don't want to control what I do or what other people in general do, why are you advocating for control?

Condoms do not always work. They can break. And I'm not "controlling" you. Convincing and controlling are not the same.

Convincing is the control of the mind. I'm not saying you're holding me at gunpoint and telling me to put my yaoi down. You're doing it more subtly, describing it with that word you used.

User avatar
Suominona
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 23
Founded: Jan 18, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby Suominona » Tue Jan 19, 2016 1:00 pm

Capitalistfreedom wrote:I'm kind of surprised that Anglicans are so intolerant, I thought they were one of the more moderate branches of Protestant denominations. I'm a non-practicing Anglican but I've been thinking about converting to Buddhism for quite a while, they seem so much more tolerant and modern on moral issues.

Why not just reject religion and free your mind from those shackles once and for all?

User avatar
Grand Calvert
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1332
Founded: Feb 12, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Grand Calvert » Tue Jan 19, 2016 1:00 pm

Suominona wrote:
Grand Calvert wrote:Condoms do not always work. They can break. And I'm not "controlling" you. Convincing and controlling are not the same.

Convincing is the control of the mind. I'm not saying you're holding me at gunpoint and telling me to put my yaoi down. You're doing it more subtly, describing it with that word you used.

No it isn't. Controlling implies coercion, wheras I'm not coercing you at all. I can try to convince you all I want, but it's still up to you whether you're going to agree or not.
17 year-old Conservative Reformed Baptist
“So when the devil throws your sins in your face and declares that you deserve death and hell, tell him this: "I admit that I deserve death and hell, what of it? For I know One who suffered and made satisfaction on my behalf. His name is Jesus Christ, Son of God, and where He is there I shall be also!” -Martin Luther

Saved...

Sola Gratia (by grace alone)
Sola Fide (through faith alone)
Solus Christus (in Christ alone)
Sola Scriptura (according to scripture alone)
Soli Deo Gloria (for the glory of God alone)

User avatar
Washington Resistance Army
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54814
Founded: Aug 08, 2011
Father Knows Best State

Postby Washington Resistance Army » Tue Jan 19, 2016 1:00 pm

Grand Calvert wrote:Condoms do not always work. They can break. And I'm not "controlling" you. Convincing and controlling are not the same.


So what you're saying is that people shouldn't do it because of a potential risk? So people shouldn't drive cars because they might crash? I shouldn't go outside because I might get shot over previous affiliations?

You could extend that logic to literally everything we do on a daily basis and why we shouldn't do it. We've already established we can largely negate the risks of STD's and whatnot with proper sex-ed and contraception, do you have any other reasons why?
Hellenic Polytheist, Socialist

User avatar
Suominona
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 23
Founded: Jan 18, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby Suominona » Tue Jan 19, 2016 1:01 pm

Grand Calvert wrote:
Suominona wrote:Convincing is the control of the mind. I'm not saying you're holding me at gunpoint and telling me to put my yaoi down. You're doing it more subtly, describing it with that word you used.

No it isn't. Controlling implies coercion, wheras I'm not coercing you at all. I can try to convince you all I want, but it's still up to you whether you're going to agree or not.

This just in, manipulation isn't control.

User avatar
Burgundy-Auvergne
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 14
Founded: Nov 24, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Burgundy-Auvergne » Tue Jan 19, 2016 1:01 pm

Novorobo wrote:http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-35318392

So basically, against a tide of shifting public opinion, the Anglican church dug in their heels and reinforced their stance against gay marriage.

And you know what? I'm glad. Because the more the Anglican church fights the uphill battle against everybody else, the more people will leave. The more people leave the Anglican church, the more will either join the Catholic church or, better yet, abandon religion altogether, as either is an improvement on a wider variety of other issues.

Why can't "pro-gay Christians" accept that if the Bible is wrong on this one, it's moving the goalposts to defer to it on anything else?


I am not quite sure I understand you. Why do you want people to either join the Catholic Church or "better yet, abandon religion altogether"? They seem odd alternatives.

User avatar
Zoice
Minister
 
Posts: 3041
Founded: Oct 30, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Zoice » Tue Jan 19, 2016 1:02 pm

Grand Calvert wrote:
Suominona wrote:Convincing is the control of the mind. I'm not saying you're holding me at gunpoint and telling me to put my yaoi down. You're doing it more subtly, describing it with that word you used.

No it isn't. Controlling implies coercion, wheras I'm not coercing you at all. I can try to convince you all I want, but it's still up to you whether you're going to agree or not.

Most people that end up homophobic weren't convinced by it, they were indoctrinated with it in a hyper religious family. They didn't have a choice or informed consent.
♂♀Copy and Paste this in your sig if you're ignorant about human sexuality and want to let everyone know. ♂♀
Or if you're an asshole that goes out of your way to bully minorities and call them words with the strict intent of upsetting a demographic that is already at a huge risk of suicide, or being murdered for who they are. :)

For: Abortions, Anomalocaris, Atheism, Anti-theism, Being a good person, Genetic Engineering, LGBT rights, Sammy Harris, the Sandman, Science, Secular humanism
Against: AGW Denialism, Anti-Semitism, Banning religion, Ends, Hillary Clinton, Islamophobia, Means, Mother Theresa, Organized religion, Pacifism, Prejudice, the Pope, Political Correctness, Racism, Regressive Lefties and Righties, Republican Candidates, Theism, Violence

User avatar
Kannap
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 67527
Founded: May 07, 2012
Democratic Socialists

Postby Kannap » Tue Jan 19, 2016 1:02 pm

Grand Calvert wrote:
Kannap wrote:
So just never have sex. We'll solve the STD problem as well as the overpopulation while continuing our lives and then leaving this planet behind us human-free.

What do you mean by "leaving this planet behind us human-free"? I don't get what you're trying to say. And I never said to never have sex. Sex is fine, and even good, if it is within the confines of a Biblical marriage. If everyone stuck to that then we wouldn't be having problems with STDs. There's a reason that STDs became so common after the Sexual Revolution.


If you are implying that a married couple cannot have STDs then you are sorely mistaken.
Luna Amore wrote:Please remember to attend the ritualistic burning of Kannap for heresy
T H E M O U N T A I N S A R E C A L L I N G A N D I M U S T G O
G A Y S I N C E 1 9 9 7
.::The List of National Sports::.
27 years old, gay demisexual, they/them agnostic, South Carolinian. Pumpkin Spice everything.
TET's resident red panda
Red Panda Network
Jill Stein 2024

User avatar
Grand Calvert
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1332
Founded: Feb 12, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Grand Calvert » Tue Jan 19, 2016 1:03 pm

Washington Resistance Army wrote:
Grand Calvert wrote:Condoms do not always work. They can break. And I'm not "controlling" you. Convincing and controlling are not the same.


So what you're saying is that people shouldn't do it because of a potential risk? So people shouldn't drive cars because they might crash? I shouldn't go outside because I might get shot over previous affiliations?

You could extend that logic to literally everything we do on a daily basis and why we shouldn't do it. We've already established we can largely negate the risks of STD's and whatnot with proper sex-ed and contraception, do you have any other reasons why?

I've heard the car analogy a million times, and it doesn't make any sense. In many cases, you need to drive a car and go outside in order to continue on with life, but no one dies from not having sex.
17 year-old Conservative Reformed Baptist
“So when the devil throws your sins in your face and declares that you deserve death and hell, tell him this: "I admit that I deserve death and hell, what of it? For I know One who suffered and made satisfaction on my behalf. His name is Jesus Christ, Son of God, and where He is there I shall be also!” -Martin Luther

Saved...

Sola Gratia (by grace alone)
Sola Fide (through faith alone)
Solus Christus (in Christ alone)
Sola Scriptura (according to scripture alone)
Soli Deo Gloria (for the glory of God alone)

User avatar
Kannap
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 67527
Founded: May 07, 2012
Democratic Socialists

Postby Kannap » Tue Jan 19, 2016 1:03 pm

Suominona wrote:
Capitalistfreedom wrote:I'm kind of surprised that Anglicans are so intolerant, I thought they were one of the more moderate branches of Protestant denominations. I'm a non-practicing Anglican but I've been thinking about converting to Buddhism for quite a while, they seem so much more tolerant and modern on moral issues.

Why not just reject religion and free your mind from those shackles once and for all?


But that would require the false teaching that the Baptists try to feed me about free will. We can't have that.
Luna Amore wrote:Please remember to attend the ritualistic burning of Kannap for heresy
T H E M O U N T A I N S A R E C A L L I N G A N D I M U S T G O
G A Y S I N C E 1 9 9 7
.::The List of National Sports::.
27 years old, gay demisexual, they/them agnostic, South Carolinian. Pumpkin Spice everything.
TET's resident red panda
Red Panda Network
Jill Stein 2024

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ARIsyan-, Bienenhalde, Brusselsproutes, Cannot think of a name, Celritannia, Corporate Collective Salvation, Dremaur, Heldervin, Misdainana, Niolia, Pale Dawn, Saint Neots, The Black Forrest, The Huskar Social Union, The Jamesian Republic, Too Basedland, Tungstan, Vassenor

Advertisement

Remove ads