GLBT and Civil Rights

[Victor]

[color=blue]I know there is probably much written and said on this but wanted to get your thoughts on comments made by 2 GLBT members. [/color]
[url="http://www.glbt.com/"]http://www.glbt.com/[/url]

[b]First one:[/b]
...the opposition to granting the freedoms of personal sexuality and it's expression is OVERWHELMINGLY Christian. If it is not you personally or your church, why is it continuing without some major Christian opposition? What have you or your church done to curb the extreme theology that ignores the love following Jesus gives? And theology at odds with Constitutional principle.

[b]Second one:[/b]
That's exactly where it's coming from. They are trying to force their religious ideals on everyone regardless of others beliefs by hijacking our state laws and writing their religious beliefs into them. It's disrespectful, it's unconstitutional, it's a smack in the face to religious freedom and it won't be tolerated much longer.

[color=blue]What would you say to them?[/color]

[Era Might]

[quote]the opposition to granting the freedoms of personal sexuality and it's expression is OVERWHELMINGLY Christian. [/quote]

What does this mean? If flashing people in public places is my "expression" of sexuality, does that make it legal?

[quote]They are trying to force their religious ideals on everyone regardless of others beliefs by hijacking our state laws and writing their religious beliefs into them. It's disrespectful, it's unconstitutional, it's a smack in the face to religious freedom and it won't be tolerated much longer. [/quote]

Putting aside the question of whether this issue is one of "religious ideal" or natural law, [i]everyone[/i] tries to force their opinion on everyone else. This is the basis of law, that we set objective standards, and punish those who don't live up to those standards we have set.

These people think any "expression" of "personal sexuality" should be accepted in law, and they want Christians to conform to their desires. They are forcing their opinion on Christians.

They are free to do so, but we will advance our own opinions, and do all we can to shape society according to the dictates of reason and conscience.

[Victor]

[quote name='Era Might' date='Feb 13 2006, 04:04 PM']What does this mean? If flashing people in public places is my "expression" of sexuality, does that make it legal?[/quote]

[color=blue]If flashing someone infringes on someone else's freedom then they would most likely say "yes".[/color]

[quote name='Era Might' date='Feb 13 2006, 04:04 PM']Putting aside the question of whether this issue is one of "religious ideal" or natural law, [i]everyone[/i] tries to force their opinion on everyone else. This is the basis of law, that we set objective standards, and punish those who don't live up to those standards we have set.

These people think any "expression" of "personal sexuality" should be accepted in law, and they want Christians to conform to their desires. They are forcing their opinion on Christians.

They are free to do so, but we will advance our own opinions, and do all we can to shape society according to the dictates of reason and conscience.[/quote]

[color=blue]I fully agree but in thier opinion, we live in an amoral government system. What that means is that the American government is not designed toward morality but rather to give everybody the freedom they seek as long as it doesn't hurt anybody else. That is it in a nutshell. [/color]

Edited February 14, 2006 by Victor

[Era Might]

[quote name='Victor' date='Feb 13 2006, 07:40 PM'][color=blue]If flashing someone infringes on someone else's freedom then they would most likely say "yes".[/color]
[right][snapback]886372[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Public homosexuality infringes on everyone else's freedom, particularly that of children, not to be exposed to deviant, abnormal, unnatural behavior. What they choose to do in their bedroom will be judged by God. But so long as homosexuality is forced on American society, Christians (and all people of reasoned thought) will stand against it. This is not about a persecution of private sin, but the protection of the common good, which homosexual "marriage" and other measures serve to erode.

[quote name='Victor' date='Feb 13 2006, 07:40 PM'][color=blue]I fully agree but in thier opinion, we live in an amoral government system. What that means is that the American government is not designed toward morality but rather to give everybody the freedom they seek as long as it doesn't hurt anybody else. That is it in a nutshell.[/color]
[right][snapback]886372[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I disagree strongly, on two grounds.

First, with respect to the American tradition. George Washington spoke eloquently on the role of Judeo-Christian principles in American society:

[quote]Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

--Farewell Address of 1796[/quote]

And second, I would disagree on the grounds that the concept of "hurt" and "infringement" of another's freedom is subjective. Their understanding is probably limited to bodily harm. Our understanding extends to the entire human person, socially, psychologically, morally. Is their opinion any better than ours? Would they seek to impose their understanding on us?

As I said, they are free to do so, but so are we.

Edited February 14, 2006 by Era Might

[avemaria40]

Didn't John Adams say that our govn't was made for a religious and moral people?

[Socrates]

[quote name='Era Might' date='Feb 13 2006, 05:52 PM']Public homosexuality infringes on everyone else's freedom, particularly that of children, not to be exposed to deviant, abnormal, unnatural behavior. What they choose to do in their bedroom will be judged by God. But so long as homosexuality is forced on American society, Christians (and all people of reasoned thought) will stand against it. This is not about a persecution of private sin, but the protection of the common good, which homosexual "marriage" and other measures serve to erode.
I disagree strongly, on two grounds.

First, with respect to the American tradition. George Washington spoke eloquently on the role of Judeo-Christian principles in American society:
And second, I would disagree on the grounds that the concept of "hurt" and "infringement" of another's freedom is subjective. Their understanding is probably limited to bodily harm. Our understanding extends to the entire human person, socially, psychologically, morally. Is their opinion any better than ours? Would they seek to impose their understanding on us?

As I said, they are free to do so, but so are we.
[right][snapback]886382[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Very well put.

And as I've argued elsewhere, there is nothing in the Constitution which protects "gay rights." For years, there were anti-sodomy laws on the books in many states, yet no one declared these "unconstitutional."
In fact, the 10th Amendment states: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
So claiming the Constitution demands that states must recognize "gay marriages" and the like is absurd.

[shortnun]

I would recommend reading Richard Peddicord, O.P.'s book "Gay & Lesbian Rights: A Question: Sexual Ethics or Social Justice." It dedicates itself to exploring both sides of the issue from a Catholic morality and Catholic social justice perspective (and thus not a US Constitutional approach).

[Socrates]

[quote name='shortnun' date='Feb 13 2006, 08:26 PM']I would recommend reading Richard Peddicord, O.P.'s book "Gay & Lesbian Rights: A Question: Sexual Ethics or Social Justice." It dedicates itself to exploring both sides of the issue from a Catholic morality and Catholic social justice perspective (and thus not a US Constitutional approach).
[right][snapback]886543[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
It should be quite clear and obvious where Catholic morality stands on this issue!

[shortnun]

Socrates, the author's point in this book is to examine one issue (GLBT civil rights) from two different vantage points: Catholic morality and Catholic social justice.

That's all I'm saying.

[Victor]

Era Might, I am by no means disagreeing with you. I am part of another large forum in which I am almost standing alone on this topic. Do understand they disagree with what is "natural", what is constitutional, what is moral, etc. So, anything we throw at them will be challenged. Which is ok. We agree to disagree. I was looking more to American Law against them. It's the only thing they seem to listen to. Something really solid.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Victor' date='Feb 14 2006, 01:26 PM']Era Might, I am by no means disagreeing with you. I am part of another large forum in which I am almost standing alone on this topic. Do understand they disagree with what is "natural", what is constitutional, what is moral, etc. So, anything we throw at them will be challenged. Which is ok. We agree to disagree. I was looking more to American Law against them. It's the only thing they seem to listen to. Something really solid.
[right][snapback]887262[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
The "GLBT" movement is based entirely on lies and perversions, so it is unlikely these people will listen to truth until they convert.

The U.S. Constitution, being framed over 200 years ago, obviously says nothing directly concerning "gay marriage." Such a perverted concept did not even exist at that time and all marriages were between a man and a woman.
And the 10th Amendment makes it clear that laws regarding marriage belong to the states and the people, not the federal government.

[url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=34329"]Here is a debate on this very topic[/url] I had on here last summer with a "GLBT."
Don't know how helpful you'll find it, but you can see how I argued this in detail.