<p>Judge not, lest ye be judged</p>
<p>CGM, I think pafather was just giving you the Christian perspective since this thread was pertaining to Christians. I don’t think he meant to be arrogant.</p>
<p>For all the talk Jesus gets, I never have found that sermon where he actually rails against homosexuality.</p>
<hr>
<p>I think that it is necessary to point out that the King James Bible has been was initially heavily edited…to simply point to the Bible as the ultimate source for Christianity is to say that 2000 years of constant translations were all correct, with no editing and mistranslations at all…which at least on the editing note, we know that to be false.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Right. Then the next thing he says is always “Go and sin no more.”</p>
<p>But it is arrogant to assume one knows what God says…and that God thnks gays are sinners…</p>
<p>go forth and sin no more…some people see wearing short skirts as sin, some people see women working as sin…some people see kissing as sin…and I don’t think GOd had an issue with kissing</p>
<p>and a kid was kicked out of a school for being Gay…yep…it is real</p>
<p>I would never presume to know what God says, I can read what people say they think God said to Jesus and to other biblical characters…very different than "knowing for sure what God says</p>
<p>This thread was originally a discussion about Christians claiming that it is unfair to force them to have only two choices: (1) accept homosexuality as morally wonderful; or (2) lose the right to form a recognized campus group.</p>
<p>No Christian I have ever met has demanded that all people agree with his concept of morality. On the other hand, college administrators want to disallow Christian groups from ever discussing certain topics, such as that they believe that homosexual behavior is a sin. </p>
<p>The belief that all innate tendencies and behaviors are necessarily good is not a philosophy or religion to which I subscribe. Although I think this belief is relatively easily refuted (for example, I think it is obvious that you do not have to teach a little kid how to be selfish), as a Christian I have no problem with students having the right to discuss such a philosophy with other students. I believe that ALL students, including Christians, should have the right to BELIEVE and DISCUSS whatever they want regarding philosophy and morality (obviously there are rules that limit BEHAVIOR).</p>
<p>If a group of students wanted to present and advertise for a seminar entitled Why Christianity is Silly I would have no problem, and I would not consider it harassment. If a vegetarian group wanted to sponsor and advertise for a seminar entitled Why meat eaters are the scourge of the earth I would have no problem, and I would not consider it harassment. If a Christian group wanted to sponsor a seminar entitled Why your nature is wrong and what you can do to get back on the right track, many college administrators would label this as HATE SPEECH and not allow it. </p>
<p>I believe that actual HARASSMENT of other students (excessive name calling, physically threatening, yelling at, preventing from studying or being left alone, etc.) should never be allowed for ANY REASON. But discussing ones philosophical or religious views regarding behaviors that are right or wrong should be fair game in any public university (at appropriate times, such as outside of the classroom) </p>
<p>Why should those of us who do not believe that all natural tendencies and behaviors are necessarily good be forced to agree with this?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You are actually twisting a little bit. They were not “forced to accept homosexuality”; banning speech that puts down others because of their sexual orientation doesn’t equate “acceepting homosexuality”. It’s like banning speech that puts down any ethnic group; it doesn’t really force you accept them and you can be as racist as you like; you are just not allowed to make a speech about it. I hope that’s clear.</p>
<p>debating whether homosexuality is moral is akin to debating whether being a certain race is moral or whether being a certain religion is moral.</p>
<p>should those discussions be tolerated as well? should I be able at a public university to say that all Jews or hispanics are immoral if I believed that?</p>
<p>And as for your Christian view…the Bible actually says MANY MANY things that are against what’s happening in the US.</p>
<p>The Bibile says “love of money is the root of all evil”. Why aren’t you guys marching a protest through Las Vegas Strips?</p>
<p>The Bible also says something like there’s only One God and you shall worship no one else. Why don’t you make a fuss about that either? You are now forced to accept other religions too. What a tragedy for you!</p>
<p>But by the way, since when your Christian view should become the basis of secular laws?</p>
<p>I am sad to see that few are really listening to what pafather is saying. Rather they are just addressing Christian stereotypes and twisting words. If you want Christians to understand your viewpoint (which, believe it or not, many of them want to do), shouldn’t you afford them the same civility you ask of them?</p>
<p>Pafather has been very reasoned and calm. Why must others respond with insults and overgeneralizations that have very little to do with what he is actually saying?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>People like you need to put yourself in someone’s shoes and see from the other side. Imagine what kind of life you have when you are in your 20s and you are told to “reisist temptation” by all your might and can’t date and remain single for the rest of your life! Just suppose heterosexuality is a sin, and imagine you, as a man, can’t date any women for the rest of your life and feel guilty about it every time you think about women. LOL! I don’t think many people can handle that kind of suppression and I wouldn’t be surprised if most get really depressed.</p>
<p>No one is saying that you must accept the Bible’s teaching on homosexual practice. Regardless of what you believe, or what you base your belief upon, you should be able to express it appropriately on a public campus without fear of retribution.</p>
<p>Sam Lee,</p>
<p>The Christian belief is that, while all men by nature have an orientation toward sin, when one puts his trust in Christ, he is transformed and enabled, through God’s power, to do God’s will. Evangelical Christians believe that God has provided us his Word (the Bible) for us to learn more about God. The fact that I do not have homosexual tendencies is not the primary difference between me and homosexuals. Just as everyone else, I am by nature a sinner. I have very specific sinful tendencies toward which I would gravitate when I am not in a good relationship with God.</p>
<p>The primary difference between me and homosexuals, in terms of Christianity, is that I recognize that my very nature is sinful, and that I humble myself to ask God to help me overcome my weaknesses. The Bible promises that if I rely on God then for any temptation, God will provide a way out. Furthermore, Christians recognize that using “all your might” is inadequate; we can do NOTHING good without God.</p>
<p>I hope this doesn’t get people too riled up, but re: “Imagine what kind of life you have when you are in your 20s and you are told to “reisist temptation” by all your might.” Regardless of your opinion on homosexuality, how is it different for people to say “I think people shouldnt have sex with members of the same gender” as opposed to saying “I think people shouldn’t have pre-marital, non-baby-producing sex” ? Many many people don’t agree with the latter statement, but if a Christian group tried to promote the idea on campus, no one would argue their right to do so. Solely as a matter of free speech, I think the former has to be allowed as well.</p>
<p>no one has yet to answer my question:</p>
<p>debating whether homosexuality is moral is akin to debating whether being a certain race is moral or whether being a certain religion is moral.</p>
<p>should those discussions be tolerated as well? should I be able at a public university to say that all Jews or hispanics are immoral if I believed that?</p>
<p>the last post just brought up the issue of free speech, but the Supreme Court has already recognized that free speech is limited in schools so just to invoke free speech would be to neglect judicial precedent.</p>
<p>In which case did the Supreme Court rule that free speech can be limited on a public college campus?</p>
<p>pafather,</p>
<p>The underlying difference is that based on your Christian view, homosexuality is a sin or sinful behavior. But since when a secular law should be tailored to your view? Based on your Christian view, all other religions are really heresies, idols, and should not be accepted either. But it is currently against US policy to discriminate based on one’s religion. That doesn’t mean you are “required to consider them” as morally (in the Christian sense) acceptable. Otherwise, you may want to speak up for your right against other religions also.</p>
<p>logoprincipals,</p>
<p>The argument for gays/lesbians is that homosexual is not a “practice”, it’s an inborn trait, which is in agreement with views of any major acadamies. It follows that they should have the same protection against discrimination as people of different races and religions…etc. But many people still think it’s a “practice”, that’s why the debate often ends up in nowhere because people already have different “starting points”.</p>
<p>The problem is that pafather speaks in generalities that does not have much bearing on what has actually transpired in the article. Writing that the Pride Alliance is a “sex club” orgy is not advancing a theological argument. It is neither factual nor part of a civil discourse that a university has a right to support. Had the Pride Alliance president called all religious organization members future child molesters, I would not support him and I doubt the administrators would either. The difference is that my example is fictious while the other has actually occurred, with apparently vocal support. Maliciously slandering others has no justification, whether we are talking about people of faith or homosexuals. And I will not make “special cases” for slander against people I might not personally care for, in the manner that some anti-gay people have done.</p>
<p>You can talk about morality without sounding like Fred Phelps.</p>