Gay Couples are to be Allowed to Marry in Churches.

[جوري]

I'm pretty sure the consensus in the West now is that the root of homophobia betrays latent homosexuality within the homophobe.

I am pretty sure the thesaurus you're using is failing is to enable you make a coherent statement!

all the best

 

[Ramadhan]

No, but only because the law currently defines marriage as a union of a man and a woman; there is therefore no such thing as a 'homosexual marriage' to forbid. The closest that currently exists is what's called a 'civil partrnership', which shares much of the same formalities in civil law. Unlike marriage, though (obviously), civil partnership ceremonies currently may not be held in places of worship. Such unions may well receive a subequent blessing in a church if the clerics are agreeable, but legally they can hold blessings for whatever they like.

Exactly. So, the gays presently can have their unions with full perks from the government and can also still have blessings from agreeable church.
Why the need to create extra legislation that open the door for litigations against non-agreeable church?

 

[جوري]

terrible pop-psychology forced-fed by political correctness that amounts to nothing

I'd have to say you're giving it more than its worth here.. it is just another ill-equipped kid parroting everyone's popular views in incoherent terms..

 

[yas2010]

[QUOTE What there is a consensus on, though, is that sexuality is not so much the convenient black and white picture painted by the homophobes as shades of grey, or a sliding scale. We are all both heterosexual and homosexual to some degree; we just fall on different points of the line, strongly heterosexual ----- bisexual ----- strongly homosexual.[/QUOTE]

Consensus? with whom?

 

[GuestFellow]

LOL.. that will raise a few a few hackles around here! I don't think that's any sort of scientific consensus, though, although there is probably more of an element of truth in it.

What there is a consensus on, though, is that sexuality is not so much the convenient black and white picture painted by the homophobes as shades of grey, or a sliding scale. We are all both heterosexual and homosexual to some degree; we just fall on different points of the line, strongly heterosexual ----- bisexual ----- strongly homosexual.

Can I call you egg? :

Anyway, I have heard of a theory that everyone is bisexual but some are more heterosexual while others are more homosexual and some are in between.

I'm not sure how this will take into account asexuality. It is the opposite of bisexuality...

 

[glo]

Re: British gay Muslims seek Islamic weddings

But more importantly:

Do you believe homosexual act is sinful?

and we go from there

I had a feeling that was the question you meant, naidamar. I guess I was feeling a little facetious.

Look, it is getting late here and I should be heading for bed.
I will try to answer your question, hoping that you can just accept it as my own view, without the need to pass judgment or criticize it ...

There could be two ways in which I can understand your question, and depending on how you mean it, my answer will be different:

If you mean by it whether I think that God considers homosexual acts to be sinful, then I have to truthfully tell you that I don't know.
Like I said before, there was a time when I did consider homosexual acts to be sinful, but I have done a lot of reading and studying since then, as well as listening to the stories and arguments of gay people.
I know the Bible verses referring to homosexuality quite well (well, there aren't that many, given the size of the Bible), and I understand the different arguments people make with regards to how to read and interpret those verses. (I am not going into those here at any length. I am sure you could google it, if you really wanted to know.)

So my honest and truthful answer is that I don't know. I leave it to God to judge, since he knows us better and sees into our hearts.
And I leave it to gay people themselves to seek God's guidance in prayer in their situation.


If, however, you mean by your question whether I personally find homosexual people disgusting or abhorrent, then - according to homosexual people I know and assuming we are talking about consenting adults in committed relationships - my answer is no.
I cannot relate to or understand the concept of being attracted to the same sex, but that doesn't bother me.
As to the actual sexual activity, I am not in the habit of pondering or wondering what goes on between consenting adults in the privacy of their own bedrooms.

As I said before, the gay people I know live in loving, faithful and long-standing relationships. I cannot find it in my heart to call them anything other than my friends.


I don't know if that answers your question, naidamar, but this is my personal opinion as best as I can express it in the middle of the night. I hope you can respect it as such - even in the event you should not agree with me.

Now I am off to join my husband. Good night!

 

[sabr*]

Re: British gay Muslims seek Islamic weddings

As-Salāmu `Alaykum (السلام عليكم):

What is the obsession with the homosexuality threads? More like obsession.

 

[Mike3449]

Re: British gay Muslims seek Islamic weddings

As-Salāmu `Alaykum (السلام عليكم):

What is the obsession with the homosexuality threads? More like obsession.

Well, Christian Churches are probably following that... whoever is without sin should cast the first stone. They don't understand that the Jesus that Muhammad created would kill them and the Homosexual. Unless they changed their ways.

It's a confusing World...

 

[جوري]

Re: British gay Muslims seek Islamic weddings

whoever is without sin should cast the first stone

and who created that quote? certainly wasn't uttered by the Jesus the pagan council created-- nice to create gods of men and nice 'pious' forgeries along the way.. enables you to write with that sanctimonious bravado I suppose, so it has merit if the audience is as equally under-educated..

For example, the story in which Mary Magdalene is about to be stoned by the crowd until Jesus intervenes and says, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."
It's an interesting story. Later tradition identified her as Mary Magdalene, but actually the story doesn't. This is a mistake people make because in all the Jesus movies, she's Mary Magdalene. But she's an unnamed woman who gets caught in the act of adultery. So yeah, "Let the one who is without sin be the first to cast a stone at her." This entire story, a beautiful story that in some ways you could argue is the favorite story of people who read the Gospels, wasn't in the Gospels. It's only found in the Gospel of John, and it's not found in the earliest and best manuscripts of John. So scholars for hundreds of years have known that it wasn't part of John, it was a story that was added later by scribes because it's found only in our later manuscripts.

-bart-ehrman

nice non-religion..
nice man/god
nice lecherous acts..

 

[Ramadhan]

Re: British gay Muslims seek Islamic weddings

If you mean by it whether I think that God considers homosexual acts to be sinful, then I have to truthfully tell you that I don't know.

OK. I just find it interesting that your views can be against the views and laws God laid for you in bible.

Like I said before, there was a time when I did consider homosexual acts to be sinful, but I have done a lot of reading and studying since then, as well as listening to the stories and arguments of gay people.

This is an aspect of christianity that I find interesting: you can change your views about sins based on your conversations with the sinners.
I would expect you gain more understanding about God's commands and scriptures from the learned (in this case, your christian scholars) instead from the lay people or even those whose actions considered sinful by your scripture.
I am intrigued to know if you would also listen to the stories and arguments of adulterers? and then changed your views on adultery based on those conversation?

If, however, you mean by your question whether I personally find homosexual people disgusting or abhorrent, then - according to homosexual people I know and assuming we are talking about consenting adults in committed relationships - my answer is no.

First off, no one accused you of finding homosexuals disgusting and abhorrent.
In fact, we all know you are very fond of them. So, relax.

As to the actual sexual activity, I am not in the habit of pondering or wondering what goes on between consenting adults in the privacy of their own bedrooms.

I agree with the principle.
However, do you find it reasonable that a group of people who openly advertise their sexuality, parading whom they choose to be in bed with, and forcing governments and church to be acceptance of who they choose tho have sex with and then NOT have the actual sex?

Wouldnt that be like an adulterer who proudly display their preference for adulteries, forcing everyone to be acceptance of their adulteries, and then NOT having adultery affairs?

As I said before, the gay people I know live in loving, faithful and long-standing relationships. I cannot find it in my heart to call them anything other than my friends

No one has ever said that gay people are incapable of living in loving, faithful and long-standing relationships. No one has also said that all homosexuals are horrible people.
As a matter of fact, the homosexuals that I know are among the most kind, nicest people around, but that is not what we are talking about, is it?

I also happen to know a few elites in Indonesia who have been stealing money from government/public (ie. big corruptors), and they are among the most generous people around, giving money to the poor, etc.
Based on your criteria, shouldn't theft (and corruption) be made ceased as sinful acts?

 

[glo]

Naidamar, I know you weren't accusing me of anything. I didn't feel like I was being accused.
I was simply sharing with you - as honestly as possible - what my thoughts and feelings are on the matter.

I never claim to know the truth, I only ever claim to have opinions.
As I walk with God and seek his guidance, he will hopefully bring me closer and closer to His truth.

I want to thank you for reading what I wrote and for treating my thoughts and comment with respect.
Please forgive me if I don't reply to any of your questions. You have given me food for thought and much to ponder about, but there isn't much else I can say at this moment on the matter.
Ask me in a year's time again!


May I ask you a question instead?
You make references to gay people openly advertising their sexuality and forcing the wider world to accept them.
Do you think that is the main issue?
If homosexuals stayed quietly in the background and, unnoticed by society, lived their own lifestyle, would that be (more) acceptable?

I guess I am asking because the homosexual people I know don't jump up and down, making demands or displaying their sexuality to the wider community. They just want to live their lives in peace and safety and without discrimination.
Do you think those people are acceptable in our communities?

(When I ask those questions, I am not accusing you of anything either. I am interested in your personal opinion, no more and no less. There is no right or wrong response. Thank you, naidamar. eace

 

[Pygoscelis]

Re: British gay Muslims seek Islamic weddings

The term faq and dyke have been reapproriated by the gays themselves and cease to be derogatory terms, and worn proudly by the homosexuals.

I dont see how mustafamc's can be hateful.

They have tried to take the terms and disarm them by adopting them. Black people have done the same thing with the N word. They will call each other that, just as gays will use those words for each other. That doesn't make it not rude or hateful for others to call them these things, especially in the context mustafamc used the words.

 

[Pygoscelis]

Salaam
Having orginally began this thread.

One of my main concerns is that Would the UK govt under the guise of Equality Bill/s 'force' mosques to follow suit, so allow homosexuals to marry in mosques....

It may reassure you to hear that I, as one of the sole pro-homosexual marriage people here, would very much oppose such a thing. Keeping the separation of church and state strong actually protects the churches/mosques as much as it does the state. No government should be able to force your mosque to approve of anything. I'd march right alongside you against that.

 

[Pygoscelis]

Exactly. So, the gays presently can have their unions with full perks from the government and can also still have blessings from agreeable church.
Why the need to create extra legislation that open the door for litigations against non-agreeable church?

Civil Union actually does not always carry all the same civil rights. It varies from state to state and nation to nation.

I am aware of no laws anywhere though that would open the door for people to sue non-agreeable churches. That would be a complete disregard for the separation of church and state. Something the secularists and pro-homosexual rights people would deplore and would not want to open that door.

 

[Ramadhan]

As I walk with God and seek his guidance, he will hopefully bring me closer and closer to His truth.

I don't know how you walk with God, but just a thought: wouldnt you think that obeying and upholding God's laws and commandments bring you closer and closer to Him?
And to do things that anger Him would bring you away from Him?

a normal person would definitely think that a sinful act that brought God's wrath that destroyed the whole city (ie. Sodom) and that God has explicitly said it's a sin is enough reason to avoid that sin.

You make references to gay people openly advertising their sexuality and forcing the wider world to accept them.

Have you ever heard of a thief who openly advertise their theft and forcing the wider world to accept their lifestyle as a thief?
I like this quote from one of your ministers:
The Bible is not homophobic anymore than it is incest-phobic, adultery-phobic or necrophilia-phobic.

Do you think that is the main issue?

no. The main issue is treating a serious sin as a non-sin.

If homosexuals stayed quietly in the background and, unnoticed by society, lived their own lifestyle, would that be (more) acceptable?

If that's the case, then that's the sin that they have to deal between themselves and God. and who knows if God forgives them.

I guess God (in your bible) telling you that homosexual act is extremely sinful mean nothing you.

I guess I am asking because the homosexual people I know don't jump up and down, making demands or displaying their sexuality to the wider community.

Then you must know extremely little people. How about the gays who paraded on the streets displaying and advertising who they want to have sex with on the streets in many western countries every year as part of their "pride" parade. The gays also demand that children books should also display gay parents and to include gays in children sex education. How about gays who demand to get married in church. How about gays who demand to have equal rights as married couple?
If you don't think all those things as making demand and displaying their sinful act, then maybe you need to check your dictionary.

 

[Ramadhan]

Civil Union actually does not always carry all the same civil rights. It varies from state to state and nation to nation.

we are talking UK here, as the OP suggested.

I am aware of no laws anywhere though that would open the door for people to sue non-agreeable churches. That would be a complete disregard for the separation of church and state. Something the secularists and pro-homosexual rights people would deplore and would not want to open that door.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23924057-fury-over-same-sex-marriages-in-church.do
The Church of England today came under pressure to allow "gay weddings" after the law was changed to lift a ban on civil partnerships in places of worship.
Today's proposal leaves faith groups to decide if they want to host such ceremonies and also allows religious music and hymns at them for the first time.
Shadow constitutional reform minister and former clergyman Chris Bryant said: "I urge churches not to turn away civil partnerships. I'd have thought they would want to celebrate commitment and love. Sadly, some churches do not see it that way."
Christian groups protested that lifting the ban could rapidly lead to churches being forced into acceptance or become the target for protests. "When it comes to equality legislation, permission often turns rapidly into coercion," they said.

 

[Pygoscelis]

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23924057-fury-over-same-sex-marriages-in-church.do
The Church of England today came under pressure to allow "gay weddings" after the law was changed to lift a ban on civil partnerships in places of worship.
Today's proposal leaves faith groups to decide if they want to host such ceremonies and also allows religious music and hymns at them for the first time.
Shadow constitutional reform minister and former clergyman Chris Bryant said: "I urge churches not to turn away civil partnerships. I'd have thought they would want to celebrate commitment and love. Sadly, some churches do not see it that way."
Christian groups protested that lifting the ban could rapidly lead to churches being forced into acceptance or become the target for protests. "When it comes to equality legislation, permission often turns rapidly into coercion," they said.

Social pressure is one thing. Legal pressure is quite another. I applaud those who call people on their bigotry. I do it for those bigoted against black people, women, muslims (believe it or not), and also those bigotted against homosexuality. Saying it is your religion that tells you to be bigoted is no excuse in my book.

 

[Zafran]

It seems to be comedy night on the forums, folks!



It is estimated some 3,000 lost their lives in Pompeii and Herculanium, including those killed in the associated tsunami.

250,000+ were killed across SE Asia in 2004/5 (tsunami)
50,000+ were killed in Pakistan, India and Afghanistan in 2005. (quake)
26,000+ were killed in Iran in 2003 (quake)
50,000+ were killed in Iran in 1990 (quake)
500,000+ were killed in (what is now) Bangladesh in 1970 (cyclone, floods)
110,000+ were killed in Turkmenistan in 1948 (quake)
32,000+ were killed in Turkey in 1939 (quake)
30,000+ were killed in (what is now) Pakistan in 1935

etc, etc, etc.

Were those people all homosexuals and pedophiles, too? :hiding:








Are you for real?! All that casual sex, feminism and homosexuality has resulted in;

Or is that just the most spectacular failed conspiracy in history? :hiding:

I think this answers the question

Narrated AbuMusa:

"The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: This people of mine is one to which mercy is shown. It will have no punishment in the next world, but its punishment in this world will be trials, earthquakes and being killed."
(Sunan Abu-Dawud)

 

[Zafran]

Social pressure is one thing. Legal pressure is quite another. I applaud those who call people on their bigotry. I do it for those bigoted against black people, women, muslims (believe it or not), and also those bigotted against homosexuality. Saying it is your religion that tells you to be bigoted is no excuse in my book.

The way I see Homosexuality is the same way I see pre marriage relationship/sex, - they both are wrong in Islam - I dont think Muslims should hate these people and de humanize them (if they still believe in God and the prophet pbuh they are still muslims) but if somebody wants to follow Islam they need to know that the path is a hard one and struggle with the nafs (ego/self) is part of the deen.

 

[Ramadhan]

Social pressure is one thing. Legal pressure is quite another.

The gays have been continuously putting legal pressure on government.

I applaud those who call people on their bigotry. I do it for those bigoted against black people, women, muslims (believe it or not), and also those bigotted against homosexuality. Saying it is your religion that tells you to be bigoted is no excuse in my book.

When the homosexuals themselves take lightly of God and the scripture and then forced to be allowed to get married in places of worship, that's what I call bigotry.
And I think you will be glad to know that "your book" means nothing to all religious folks