What gets me is the hurt that well meaning people can inflict in their efforts to...assist!

http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/27905.htm

I do so feel for what this chap has gone through and I applaud him for speaking up and being real and true to himself.

Christ, I may have attended a well known Anglican boys school where the attitude towards homosexuality as quite liberal. I remember the School Chaplain got in front of school one day as said "some of you may be deciding whether or not you are homosexual....and that is OK" or words to that effect. There was no fire and brimstone. This was the mid70s. I was not aware of any sex going on at this all-boys school.

This poor kid in the article seems to be involved in a very fundamentalist church. He should leave it and find a more accepting one?
"Im my Father's house there are many mansions"

i agree badamj2000 i dont go to a religious school but i do know some out gay guys who do and they arent consistently harassed or told their abominations or anything like that from students or teachers, some schools are just too extreme

Yes, our society has moved on a lot in the last few decades and the sky hasn't fallen.

Quote:

Originally Posted by badamj2000

Yes, our society has moved on a lot in the last few decades and the sky hasn't fallen.

It has and it has'nt. The Angican church is even worse in Sydney than the 70's (and it was'nt good then). The Catholics now have George Pell...absolutely awful.

I have said it before and will say it again - if you are a religious homosexual then you are no different to a Jew who supports the Nazi Party.

Extreme comparison, but it emphasises my point. A homosexual should be evolved enough to know religion is for the common masses as a means of control.

Quote:

Originally Posted by shazzboy

I have said it before and will say it again - if you are a religious homosexual then you are no different to a Jew who supports the Nazi Party.

Extreme comparison, but it emphasises my point. A homosexual should be evolved enough to know religion is for the common masses as a means of control.

I really didn't want to get into this arguement but after words like that I really had to.

Being religious doesnt' automatically mean you go to church. Following an organised religion is completly differnt to following your own beliefs.

Personally I believe it is hypocritical to follow an organised religion that actively persecutes your own kind, but if they provide a hegemonic influence then all isn't lost I guess.

Also if you think religion as an insitition is the only "means of control of the masses" then your sadly mistaken, EVERY institution is a means of control, however we been free people are allowed to choose what controls us.

If you are homosexual and believe in a magical sky fairy whether through organised religion or not does not matter - you are still an enemy. Atheism is the future and anyone against it is my enemy.

WUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU Christianity FTW!!!!

my current necklace is a cross from Diva, and last time someone asked if i was religious, i said: no, homosexualists arent allowed to be religious.
got some funny looks for that one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by shazzboy

I have said it before and will say it again - if you are a religious homosexual then you are no different to a Jew who supports the Nazi Party.

Quote:

Originally Posted by shazzboy

Atheism is the future and anyone against it is my enemy.

Maybe so shazzboy, but we should be able to live harmoniously with people who are different from ourselves, even if we don't believe in the same thing or even morally object to their beliefs. Religion, including Christianity, has shown itself to be extremely flexible, and changes according to what people want to believe, or to catch up with current thinking. The bible was used to justify slavery for example.

Considering a mob of Christians queer-bashing or hate-mongering, of course we can see them as the enemy. But what makes them enemies is their ideas/beliefs, as you said. The struggle is therefore a psychological one, to overcome such beliefs: to maximise the tendency for hate-religion-believers to either stop believing, or to choose alternative non-hateful beliefs, and also to decrease their adoption by new members (a lot of those churches have a very high membership turnover). If we label and treat people as "the enemy", they'll hold these beliefs more aggressively -- hate increases hate -- they'll want to believe the homophobic version of their religion to justify acting on their hate, which will itself more deeply & firmly reinforce it.

The real question is how to make them want to let go of their hateful interpretation of their religion, and either go atheist, or embrace a peaceful / less hateful version of their religion.

Interviewing queer Christians is really important. Since surely religion will be with us for a long time yet, and will continue mutating & adapting until it's gone (if it ever will be), the queer-friendly interpretations of religions should ideally be at least as readily available, accessible and appealing as the hateful ones.

Whatever people choose to do in their free time is up to them so long as it doesn't affect others. Attempting to brainwash children with religion is just wrong. If people get to adulthood (i.e. 18) and are still of the opinion that religion is worthwhile, then let them into the church/mosque/synagogue... that should be legal, but we just need to keep an eye on them to make sure that they don't get too fanatical.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyclone55

Whatever people choose to do in their free time is up to them so long as it doesn't affect others. Attempting to brainwash children with religion is just wrong. If people get to adulthood (i.e. 18) and are still of the opinion that religion is worthwhile, then let them into the church/mosque/synagogue... that should be legal, but we just need to keep an eye on them to make sure that they don't get too fanatical.

I agree with the common sense & principles in this. It's an ideal. Practical realities complicate things however. I doubt it's possible to hold religious beliefs without these affecting others. Religion influences who a person votes for, for some this being the most influential factor. Belief in immortality & that this life is something inferior to eternal bliss, less precious, and even disposable can lead to the "kill 'em all & let God sort 'em out" attitude held by religious supporters of the death penalty, wars, terrorism, etc.

How to enforce laws against parents brainwashing children or to have a "No under-18s" sign on the door of every religious building? With ID checks & police raids? Then there'd be the problem of how to define a religious building, etc...

People will keep believing, belief will keep influencing others as long as we have democracy, parents will keep teaching their children as they believe is best. To be practical & realistic, I think the best we can hope for (at least in the world as it is at present), is in harm minimisation.

Um... No, schools are still like that. To a lesser extent, sure. It's still fairly torturous.

Hello,
As far as I am concerned being an Atheist is the only solution.

I had a relationship with someone who was a Catholic. He all seemed to be all mucked up by it all.

Cheers