<p>He meant there sn’t any premise for attacking gays without the “they’re morally wrong” argument.</p>
<p>We all have things that we believe to be morally wrong and shouldn’t be censured for or censored from expressing those opinions.</p>
<p>logosprincipal, you might want to examine what I actually said rather than what you believe I said.</p>
<p>rheasilvia,</p>
<p>I wasn’t addressing you in my last post, though I was responding to thoughts that have been been previously expressed by others.</p>
<p>Again, I am not talking of individuals, who can contribute or not according to their talents. And, I think you will admit that “creative” contributions to society are not the exclusive realm of homosexuals. Are you saying one must be homosexual to tap into one’s creative energies? I can admire and even share the sentiments in the wonderful writings of those authors mentioned above, but I do not do so while championing the homosexual cause — whose practitioners’ libido is of the weakest sort. This you may find difficult to comprehend, that I am not homophobic (as in “I hate him, he is homosexual.”), rather I hate the aberrent sexual activity of homosexuals. </p>
<p>Rugburn - it is very convenient for you to dismiss morality as a premise and I can see why you need to.</p>
<p>Twisting everyones words, aren’t you leanid?</p>
<p>Of the lowest sort? Well, how bought all them hetrosexual males and their magazines, strip clubs, hookers, affairs, etc</p>
<p>Guess no straight people are weak…I am more impressed with a gay couple in a solid monogomaous relationship than i am with serial divorcees (many of which are nice Christians)</p>
<p>And if you want to discuss “aberrent” sexual activities, ummm, straight people do some of the SAME STUFF</p>
<p>And expressing an OPINION is VERY different from not letting people have protections from those that harrass, call names, discriminate</p>
<p>I mean, these nice Christians who want to discriminate, is that what Jesus would have wanted?</p>
<p>no, leonid. You’re the one who has to explain yourself here. You’ve talked about “being strong enough to resist temptation,” and the like. So what morality is it that demands that homosexuals “be strong enough to resist temptation”? Why is homosexuality a “perversion”?</p>
<p>Leanid asked:What clear benefit do homosexuals (as a GROUP) offer to civilization?</p>
<p>Hmmmm- generalizations I admit but-in every case whereby gays have moved into a town/city- the town is usually gentrified and enhanced in terms of gays having brought the arts to a community. Excellent restaurants, meticulous service and enormous involvement in government and community services. Gays are organized,intelligent and resourceful. Excellent and reliable business owners. I believe also (and could be wrong) that the crime rates in gay communities are very low. I thouroughly enjoy being around conservative gays, it is the activist gays that bother me. As far as contributions that gays have made to civilization I am only aware of the arts, but I am sure the activist gays will make me aware of the numerous contributions that gays have made throughout the centuries whether I like it or not or whether they have any proof that the hero or heroine was actually gay.</p>
<p>What bothers me most about religious groups and activist gays is that the far extremes of both entities believe that the other should not exist. The media highlights only the far extremes thus giving us middle grounders the belief that the world is coming to an end because a bunch of holy rollers dislike gays and a bunch of gays are demanding that religion die and instead we should embrace a more secular world. Bleccccccch! All of this stuff makes me ill- Th pendulum always swings too far to the left or right in society throughout the centuries. This time the extreme left views reign supreme and we are all goose stepping to the “PC Police”- I am extremely positive that someday we will find out that the truth lies somehwere in between. Just as we have witnessed that religious officials are not seated next to God we will also discover that with gay marriage and gay rights we will also see the negatives: child abuse,high divorce rates,partner abuse- etc…</p>
<p>cgm - Am I “twisting everyone’s words”? I did not say that aberrent behavior is the SOLE province of homosexuals. Heterosexuals are guilty of it too, and that weakness is also abhorrent in them.</p>
<p>I cannot speak for Jesus though I think he would deplore discrimination of homosexuals as people. Would he support their sexual activity? </p>
<p>rheasilvia - perhaps the morality that homosexuality is antithetical to the natural procreative process and thereby the continuation of civilization. “Why is homosexuality a perversion?” ?! Are you serious?
Do you really think that man was naturally meant to fornicate with other men?!</p>
<p>songman - good points. Can they not make those same contributions WITHOUT the tragic cloak of homosexuality?</p>
<p>I finally found a copy of the[HOMOAGENDA](<a href=“http://www.bettybowers.com/homoagenda.html”>http://www.bettybowers.com/homoagenda.html</a> )</p>
<p>
First of all, drop “right” from quotes. It’s a fundamental, Constitutionally-guaranteed liberty. If you don’t like that, move to some country where you would be imprisoned for your beliefs. Clear?</p>
<p>Here goes nothing: the government may regulate the content speech if there is a compelling gov’t interest and the regulation is narrowly tailored to meet it. The regulation, most often, must be content-neutral to pass constitutional muster. Public HIGH school restrictions on “speech” have a much higher gov’t interest than those of a college - mostly because of the desire to keep peace in high school, an interest that is radically reduced in the collegiate atmosphere, the hallmark of which is the free exchange of ideas.</p>
<p>Sidewalks are the “quintessential public forum” and therefore have very little regulation. PRIVATE college campuses can do whatever they darn well please - which really ticks y’all off when it’s something you don’t like. However, they may not prohibit speech on property that isn’t theirs - simply put, they have no jurisdiction over it.</p>
<p>Political speech, by the way, is the most strongly protected type of speech: it is really what the First Amendment is aimed at. You’re going ot have a much tougher time convincing a judge to allow the ban of political speech than you are of any other type of speech. </p>
<p>The big fight, as always, will be PUBLIC UNIVERSITIES. Public land, non-discrimination of speech with respect to content -> no regulations unless an incitement to violence or has the immediate effect of producing danger. Hard to imagine that Scripture would do that.</p>
<p>Now, for private universities: assuming, arguendo, that the First Amendment does not extend to them, the universities often have their own non-discrimination policies. Christians would also fall under those policies. Presumably, the non-discrimination policy would trump any internal rule-making proceedings - and we hope that it would. Otherwise, the non-D could be overridden by, for example, a ban on expressions of the Jewish faith. (These things always work both ways!) </p>
<p>Con law lesson over.</p>
<p>Now onto the big part: why are you fools complaining? I’m a huge gay rights activist, but morons like you are the ones who really undermine any advances. First of all, there is the minor point that it’s completely patronizing to women, gays, and minorities to imply that we are gentle little creatures that need sheltering from the world. Second of all, sometime, somewhere, some person is going to impose a quid pro quo. They’ll just ban all speech, all parades, all shows of support on the issue. I’ve had people complain that there’s no reason for me to march in gay pride parades (not because I’m straight, but because they don’t like gay parades). My response? Have your own parade! Don’t like our posters? Put up your own. Don’t like our club? Get your own. </p>
<p>The free exchange of ideas is necessary for a free, liberated society. The First Amendment protects unpopular speech. It is our job to ensure that those protections are afforded to all. I despise what the Christians are saying - I’m too libertarian to get worked up about gays and too sensible to think that anyone would be gay for fun - but what I hate even more is that people don’t want Christians or conservatives to speak their minds. </p>
<p>Final thought: the Catholic view of homosexuality is that “being gay” is fine - there is no sin in being attracted to people of the same sex. The sin is entirely carnal; it is only by acting on that attraction, outside of marriage, that one sins.</p>
<p>Christianity teaches that, while not everyone has an orientation toward homosexuality, EVERYONE has an orientation toward sin. Nonetheless, that is not an excuse to keep on sinning. We are all called to perfect holiness. Christianity also teaches that no one is capable of behaving perfectly (only Jesus Christ was able to live without sin).</p>
<p>Assume that (as part of the human genome project) scientists observe that a particular genetic makeup correlates very closely with some behavior, such as being prideful, or materialistic, or greedy, or adulterous, or whatever. Assume also that a particular person has DNA that is more closely aligned with that specific genetic makeup than anyone else in the entire world (and hence has the strongest orientation toward that behavior). According to Christianity, such a person is not in any way exempted from the requirement of being perfectly holy. The only way one can EARN his way into heaven is through PERFECT obedience, which no one other than Jesus has ever been able to attain. The Bible clearly indicates that ALL OF US have an orientation toward sin, and that no one on his own would choose God. Only through the Holy Spirit acting in us do we call on God.</p>
<p>How is this relevant to the issue of homosexuality? From a Christian perspective, it doesnt matter what ORIENTATION I have in terms of temperament, sexual orientation, personality, etc. The requirement is the same for everyone – to conform ones thoughts and behavior to those of Jesus Christ. You can argue all you want about whether or not Jesus specifically addressed homosexuality. But no reasonable reading of the Bible can possibly be warped into implying that Jesus was stating that WHATEVER bent someone naturally has is OK to act on. </p>
<p>Liberals demand that everyone accept homosexuality as being morally OK. Sorry, but my reading of the Bible does not make it OK. You can certainly find some people who will claim that the Bible does not condemn homosexuality, and I have no problem with such people being allowed to publicly express such a view. However, liberals do not want me to have the right to state that according to my religion homosexuality is NOT morally OK. Why not allow discussion of this and other topics on college campuses?</p>
<p>Many liberals, including some college administrators, classify anything short of total acceptance of homosexuality as a morally wonderful behavior as a form of harassment. This is ridiculous. Over the years, I have had a number of friends and co-workers who have been involved in adultery. When interacting with these people, I have not screamed in their faces, publicly bothered them, made bizarre phone calls, or bothered them in any fashion. I have simply treated them as anyone else. However, if any of them had asked my opinion of adultery, I would simply have explained to them that my religion condemns it. In the same way, if a group on campus does not consider adultery as a morally acceptable behavior, does that mean that such a group HARASSES adulterers, and hence should not be allowed on campus? In my opinion, not according to any meaningful definition of harassment.</p>
<p>Since when is it US policy that I am required to consider all forms of behavior as morally acceptable?</p>
<p>I guess I was unaware that the US Constitution guarantees me freedom of religion only as long as my religion does not condemn any forms of behavior.</p>
<p>Homosexuality is not innately more abhorrent than other sins. But the insistence by homosexuals on the moral acceptance of their behavior is what separates this behavior from many others. Few people insist that all of us accept pride, greed, arrogance, selfishness, etc. as morally acceptable behavior. Humility, along with the recognition that our personal desires and behavior fall short of God’s standards, is the cornerstone of Christianity. We may definitely disagree as to exactly what God’s standards are, but insistence that God’s standards are WRONG, or that God does not have the right to have any moral standards that are contrary to my own personal bent, is the antithesis of Christianity.</p>
<p>Excellent post, pafather!</p>
<p>to call homosexuality a sin is to attack the very nature of a person…that is like when slavery was justified because the blacks were called descendants of Cain and therefore, being black was innately sinful. a homosexual cannot change his/her sexual orientation anymore than a black person cannot change his/her skin color and therefore, should not be condemned because of the way that your god made him/her.</p>
<p>what about it is a sin…please…not married, marriage is man’s law, not Gods…</p>
<p>Ariesathena: you misinterpreted my use of quotation marks on “right” in my original post:</p>
<p>“First of all, drop “right” from quotes. It’s a fundamental, Constitutionally-guaranteed liberty. If you don’t like that, move to some country where you would be imprisoned for your beliefs. Clear?”</p>
<p>Our right to freedom of expression (not just speech) is indeed guaranteed by the Constitution–but the Supreme Court has abridged that right many times. The original poster put up an article about a particular case on a college campus (Georgia Tech) that happens to be a public university.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court ruled in 1969 that freedom of expression in schools is not unlimited:</p>
<p>"conduct that “materially disrupts classwork or involves substantial disorder or invasion of the rights of others is, of course, not immunized by the constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech.” " (from <a href=“http://law.enotes.com/everyday-law-encyclopedia/89945#TINKERVDESMOINESINDEPENDENTCOMMUNITYSCHOOLDISTRICT[/url]”>http://law.enotes.com/everyday-law-encyclopedia/89945#TINKERVDESMOINESINDEPENDENTCOMMUNITYSCHOOLDISTRICT</a> )</p>
<p>It was for that reason that I put “right” in quotation marks. I’m sorry I confused you. </p>
<p>As for moving to a country that could imprison me for my beliefs, I unfortunately already live in a country that imprisons people without a trial. I donate to the ACLU to try to prevent further erosions of my rights. But thank you for your vehemence!</p>
<p>“to call homosexuality a sin is to attack the very nature of a person”</p>
<p>Correct. Christianity considers EACH of us to have a sinful nature. However, it also includes a provision whereby anyone who HUMBLES himself and recognizes Jesus as Lord will be saved, and becomes a new creature.</p>
<p>Demanding that no one hold or discuss on campus any beliefs that someone’s “nature” or bent might possibly be immoral would preclude a discussion of Christianity. On what basis can a college disallow a group that refuses to believe that ALL “natures” are equally moral?</p>
<p>And not to sound stupid, but hpw do YOU know Gods law? Personal contact? What if someone elses contact with God says, live as you are…And don’t say the Bible, that was written by man…interpretted by man, altered by man…</p>
<p>So unless you are the second Comoing of Christ, you have no real clue to what God really wants, just what man has put on paper</p>
<p>So be absolutely honest with yourself, is it your own fear and hate, or did God have a conversation with you</p>
<p>Man makes laws to deal with human failings…sin is all in the eye of the beholder…your GOd is not my God, nor a Muslims God, nor a Native Americans God…</p>
<p>Sometimes the arrogance of “believers” is so disappointing…</p>
<p>Yes, arrogrance, to think that their God is the only one and their interpretation is the only one that is “right” all I do know is that hate comes from fear, discrimination comes from fear, and judging someone for how God made them is fear</p>
<p>Cast the first stone, I dare you</p>
<p>For all the talk Jesus gets, I never have found that sermon where he actually rails against homosexuality.</p>