Well, faith is faith. I accually think this is a good step. No reason why someone who is best suited for the role shouldn't get it because of what gender he likes.
If I believed I'd pray for em.
Yeah, mom. We wouldn't want to be mixing those gay people with the straight ones! 
Well, anyway, my comment got a laugh from everyone else in the room. 
[ 08-05-2003: Message edited by: Savannah / Emily ]
I'm glad. Go Episcopalians.
Finally people are starting to wake up and realize 'Hey! It doesn't really matter!".
Should've said something, but I've said it enough
By the way my words were faded
Rather waste some time with you...
quote:
Savannah / Emily's account was hax0red to write:
Finally people are starting to wake up and realize 'Hey! It doesn't really matter!".
h0t h0t girl-2-girl action
Catholic priest admits he's attracted to women!
OMG!
quote:
Absolut Blindy had this to say about Cuba:
THIS JUST IN!Catholic priest admits he's attracted to women!
OMG!
*glares* Can't even get your stereotypes right.
Should've said something, but I've said it enough
By the way my words were faded
Rather waste some time with you...
quote:
Savannah / Emily obviously shouldn't have said:
I'm confused by Blindy's comment, too?
He's just being an asshat.
quote:
Maradon! said this about your mom:
So if a priest prefers men it's a huge controversy, but if a priest prefers boys he gets shuffled into the Vatican Witness Protection Program.
Wrong division of Christianity, and again nice stereoptyping!
quote:
x--TalonusO-('-'Q) :
Wrong division of Christianity, and again nice stereoptyping!
I made no reference to any division of any faith at all.
quote:
Check out the big brain on Maradon!!
I made no reference to any division of any faith at all.
Isn't the Vatican something that's exclusive to Catholicism?
quote:
Check out the big brain on Azizza!
I do agree that this is a step in the right direction. Now if only some of the other churches would get thier collective heads out of thiewr asses.
Couldn't agree more with this statement.
I still can't understand why so many "christians" feel the need to absolutely HATE gays, when the basis of the religion is love for all, even if you disagree with them.
quote:
Maradon! impressed everyone with:
I made no reference to any division of any faith at all.
Vatican is exclusive to Catholics. The Episcopalians are related to the Church of England, which broke away from the Catholic religion and the Vatican. The two denominations are quite different.
quote:
x--TalonusO-('-'Q) :
Vatican is exclusive to Catholics. The Episcopalians are related to the Church of England, which broke away from the Catholic religion and the Vatican. The two denominations are quite different.
I wasn't using the vatican term to refer to the Episcopalian priests for crying out loud, it was a part of my facetious referral to the shuffling of priests between churches to obscure thier child molesting habits as a sort of religion sponsored witness protection program.
And before you even ask, yeah, Episcopalian clergy have been accused of molesting little kids, too.
quote:
Maradon! spewed forth this undeniable truth:
So if a priest prefers men it's a huge controversy, but if a priest prefers boys he gets shuffled into the Vatican Witness Protection Program.
The other way to interpret this that also works is that the Pope has made it quite clear what the Catholic church thinks of homosexuality.
This does open up a very imortant philosophical dilema for the Christian faith, at least for this demonination.
This decision opens up a whole can of worms for the faith. It brings it down to moral relativism. The belief that society, individual, or the culture we live in defines what is right or wrong. Something the Christian faith is quite at odds with.
The basic tenet of all denominations is the Scriptures. The belief the Scriptures are the word of God. They spell out what is right or wrong according to the will of God. And Scripture is quite clear on it's view of homosexuality. The view about the passages of the roles of men and women as equals can be debated according interpretation, homosexuality on the other hand is quite cut and dry in both the Old and New Testament.
Again, I'm not going to give my personal views if it is right or wrong. Just pointing out the dilema. That the Sciptures are the basic precepts of being a Christian. The very foundation of the faith.
This sets a precedence for allowing the picking and choosing of what passages, the supposed will of God, can and should be followed. If one chooses this path, it pretty much refutes the theory of Scripture being the Word of God if the churches can change them at will. [ 08-06-2003: Message edited by: Old_Hickory ]
I know gay people, I have one or two gay friends, but I don't like homosexuality! Holy crap, I'm a bigot. Man.
Way to make sweeping generalizations about a religion. I mean, not every single Christian thinks that a gay person is instantly a loser. I can learn to grow and respect other gay people.
And, yeah, Mr. Hickory is right, it does basically spit in the face of Christianity. I mean, Homosexuality is a sin, and always will be a sin in the Bible, and to put someone in such a high regarded position to someone who openly admits and practices such a sin is not right by any standards.
Of course, I know that it is perfectly possible for a gay person to be right with God. How that affects them, I have no clue.
Man, what is it with all the Christian bashing today?
quote:
Old_Hickory had this to say about Captain Planet:
First, I'm going to state I am not posting my personal views on religion or homosexuality. This post is about the specific philosophical dilema this places Christianity, and should be read in that context.
This does open up a very imortant philosophical dilema for the Christian faith, at least for this demonination.This decision opens up a whole can of worms for the faith. It brings it down to moral relativism. The belief that society, individual, or the culture we live in defines what is right or wrong. Something the Christian faith is quite at odds with.
The basic tenet of all denominations is the Scriptures. The belief the Scriptures are the word of God. They spell out what is right or wrong according to the will of God. And Scripture is quite clear on it's view of homosexuality. The view about the passages of the roles of men and women as equals can be debated according interpretation, homosexuality on the pother hand is quite cut and dry in both the Old and New Testament.
Again, I'm not going to give my personal views if it is right or wrong. Just pointing out the dilema. That the Sciptures are the basic precepts of being a Christian. The very foundation of the faith.
This sets a precedence for allowing the picking and choosing of what passages, the supposed will of God, can and should be followed. If one chooses this path, it pretty much refutes the theory of Scripture being the Word of God if the chruches can change them at will.
On the contrary. Having taken several seminars on interpretations of the passages used to condemn homosexuality, I've seen a lot of alternative interpretations. For one, the attempted forced sodomy of the angels in (Soddom, iirc). If you read it closely, Gen. 19:1-29, its not the act of homosexuality being condemned, but rather the act of rape. Homosexual or not, the act was not consensual.
Also, the often quoted Lev. 18:22, "You (masculine) shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination." The second (Lev. 20:13) adds the penalty: If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have comitted an abomination; they shall be put to death; their blood is upon them."
The reason it was considered wrong was because at that time, the scientific standing was that male semen contained the whole of nascent life. With no knowledge of eggs and ovulation, it was assumed that the woman provided only the incubating space. Hence, the spilling of semen for non-procreative purpose, including male masturbation, was considered equivalent to abortion and murder. Subsequently, female homosexuality and masturbation were not condemned.
Also, stereotypical homophobia of the biblical age also referred to effeminism (aka acting like a "woman" as opposed to a "man"). It was condemned because people saw homosexuals as "weak".
Also, if someone wants to live according to the Old Testament, condemning homosexuality, they also must condemn sexual intercourse during the week after the menstrual cycle (Lev. 18:19; 15:19-24). But also condoned in the old testament are polygamy and concubinage. Sorry folks, can't have your cake and eat it too. People who pick and choose are hypocritical.
There's plenty more in the old testament that gets neglected, such as prohibition of divorce, and celibacy while at the same time demanding celibacy (Timothy 4:1-3).
So yeah, the scripture isn't as cut and dry as most people think.
I'm not sure if the Episcopal church follows the same doctrine that demands abstinence from the clergy, but because of the similar strucuture I will. The catholic church has no objection to the nature of being homeosexual, simply demanding abstinence in the case of being a homosexual. (As a pleasent note, so is pre-marital sex, masturbation, and a multitude of other things..).
So forgive me if i'm ignorant in this case, but would the vow of abstinence or the voluntary abstinence simply disavow all problems in case?
Anyways, i'm not exactly sure on the subject, but if my platform for assumption is correct, the case isn't that important.
On the note of child molesting priests - give up sex at 18 and listen to everybody in town tell you all of their steamy sex stories and you'll be all fucked up to, blessed of god or not.
