KCMO Should have...

Good2Great · Post by **Good2Great** » Wed Sep 03, 2003 3:56 pm

This has been a very civilized gay debate. Very tidy, fidgity and goosey, but civilized.

KC, I have to admit asd I was reading your last comment to Tat2, I had a quick vision that were about to come out of the closet.

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Wed Sep 03, 2003 3:58 pm

g2g...boy that would piss of the wife....sorry to disappoint? you. Am as straight as a balding suburban man.

KCDevin · Post by **KCDevin** » Wed Sep 03, 2003 5:17 pm

I emailed The Cathedral of the immaculate conception, they mailed me (mailed) back and told me to phone the father at the archives or something... I asked how tall the cathedral was.

tat2kc · Post by **tat2kc** » Wed Sep 03, 2003 5:55 pm

STL Dan,
I assume, since you've read Timothy, that you also read and follow the section that says: Women should adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with braided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array" (I Timothy 2:9)

Am I correct in assuming that your wife does not braid her hair, wear any type of jewelry, including a wedding ring? I assume she covers her hair and does not speak in church?

You might want to check out the sections where God says that those with leprosy should "rent their clothes and cry out 'unlcean'". I think this was the justificaton for the leper colonies. Do we need to restart these?

You are not to wear clothing containing two different fabrics, as this is an abomination also.

Also, don't eat meat with blood still in it. ( i think this means eating a steak "rare"). Don't clip your hair at the temples, dont trim the edge of your beard. Don't get a tattoo. Stand in the presence of the elderly.
The penalty for adultry is death.

If we are gonna use the bible to condem homosexual acts, then there are lots and lots of other folks who are in big trouble too!

I mean really. Lets get a grip. The same book in the bible that says gay folks are an abomination also says that eating shrimp is an abomination! And don't forget pork! big no no.

You may also want to check out Ruth and Namoi's relationship, as well as David and Jonathan. Very much in love.

Electric_Cactus · Post by **Electric_Cactus** » Wed Sep 03, 2003 6:49 pm

I'm pleased to be a part of this group, where there are most certainly intelligent and well informed individuals. We are not only passionate about the city of Kansas City, but other issues as well. It's nice to know that there are so many active Kansas City brains out there.

QueSi2Opie · Post by **QueSi2Opie** » Wed Sep 03, 2003 8:59 pm

StL_Dan wrote:A good friend of mine brings up that guy all of the time.

The major difference between Koresh and Christ or any genuine Christian is the fruit of their lives.

Koresh abused innocent people's minds and took advantage of them for his own personal glory.

This type of behavior is a dead giveaway that one is not living for God......only for himself.

Christians, Davidians...same $hit! Any creative person with a pad, pen and ink can say that God himself told him to write these words and that he is a prophet from God. Religion is a mixture of fairy tales with some important rules that we need to live by in any decent civilization.

We cannot judge the 65% of human beings on planet Earth that are NOT Christian, or say that God himself told his deciples that he'll roast them like marshmellows if they don't have faith in Christ or ask for his forgiveness (assuming they are Christians). Most scriptures in religious texts are written by so-called prophets who spoke with a God-like deity or deities. Who is to say that the Holy Bible is the truth and that the Koran, Book of Mormons, Talmud, and so on are false?

If the people of Northern Africa, the Middle East and other parts of Asia would have discovered the Americas first, they would have profited from her wealth in gold and sugar cane, heavily financed the holy mosque, spread the word of Allah, and we'd all be preaching Islam right now...talkin' about how the Christians have whores for women, filthy music and movies, murder each other for greed and live in sloth and gluttony.

KCDevin · Post by **KCDevin** » Wed Sep 03, 2003 9:07 pm

And don't forget pork! big no no.

That is because it created diseases in that age, today we don't have to worry about it. That is why it was said to be "impure"...

SonicBoi · Post by **SonicBoi** » Wed Sep 03, 2003 10:24 pm

KC wrote:g2g...boy that would piss of the wife....sorry to disappoint? you. Am as straight as a balding suburban man.

I happen to know a few gay balding suburban men

tat2kc · Post by **tat2kc** » Thu Sep 04, 2003 7:11 am

KCDevin, so now that we know better in the 20th century, the prohibition against pork is no longer relevant? I re-read that passage, it did not mention disease or such.

If that prohibiton is no longer valid, then there are obviously parts of the bible that should be interpreted in the light of our modern society. Why not give us, as gays and lesbians, the same benefit?

StL_Dan · Post by **StL_Dan** » Thu Sep 04, 2003 8:11 am

tat2kc wrote:STL Dan,
I assume, since you've read Timothy, that you also read and follow the section that says: Women should adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with braided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array" (I Timothy 2:9)

Am I correct in assuming that your wife does not braid her hair, wear any type of jewelry, including a wedding ring? I assume she covers her hair and does not speak in church?

You might want to check out the sections where God says that those with leprosy should "rent their clothes and cry out 'unlcean'". I think this was the justificaton for the leper colonies. Do we need to restart these?

You are not to wear clothing containing two different fabrics, as this is an abomination also.

Also, don't eat meat with blood still in it. ( i think this means eating a steak "rare"). Don't clip your hair at the temples, dont trim the edge of your beard. Don't get a tattoo. Stand in the presence of the elderly.
The penalty for adultry is death.

If we are gonna use the bible to condem homosexual acts, then there are lots and lots of other folks who are in big trouble too!

I mean really. Lets get a grip. The same book in the bible that says gay folks are an abomination also says that eating shrimp is an abomination! And don't forget pork! big no no.

You may also want to check out Ruth and Namoi's relationship, as well as David and Jonathan. Very much in love.

Common sense should prevail. Paul was writing to Timothy for the benefit of him teaching new Christians how to focus on Jesus instead of their carnal nature which is in direct contradicition to living for Christ.

Modest dress and appearance was definitely an important issue with women then and now.....just take a look at how girls dress these days thanks to the Britney Spears of the world setting the tone. I'm sure women were just as beautiful and alluring during Timothy's lifetime as well. The remarks in Timothy clearly speak to how a woman should avoid bringing excessive, INAPPROPRIATE attention to herself. I think that is easily understood to the earnest reader of the passage.

Sexuality and choice of fabrics are also two different things.

In the beginning, God created man and woman.....not man and man. Procreation and the resulting family unit are staples of God's plan for this world. This is a timeless, moral issue.

What color or blend of fabric that is worn that you point out in the verses of the Bible are related specifically to the culture of the time in which Timothy lived. However, the conveyed meaning is appropriate to Christians even today.

Think about what people wear. It's not so important WHAT they are wearing so much as what they are wearing conveys. I would suggest most people dress a certain way for a reason. I don't pretend to know everyone's reason for dressing a certain way, but not recognizing the obvious reasons why main stream women wear what they wear is being a little naive.

I think we are all acquainted with "sexual expression", "sexual freedom" and "personal expression" that seem to be the feminine agenda these days.

I like a nicely dressed woman as well as the next guy, but not at the sacrifice of good judgement and taste.

StL_Dan · Post by **StL_Dan** » Thu Sep 04, 2003 8:20 am

tat2kc wrote:You might want to check out the sections where God says that those with leprosy should "rent their clothes and cry out 'unlcean'". I think this was the justificaton for the leper colonies. Do we need to restart these?

I think you might be combining OT stuff with NT stuff in regards to the wide variety of topics in your original post, but, nevertheless, leprosy was a dreaded, communicable disease found in every corner of the world at that time. Not until 1940 has there been any relief for those with leprosy through medication.

I can understand why everyone in those days, including Christians, would see the obvious need to quarantine individuals with this highly communicable disease for which no cure other than a miracle was available. Obviously, the words of the Bible concerning leprosy are there for the protection of society.

tat2kc · Post by **tat2kc** » Thu Sep 04, 2003 9:24 am

so what you are saying is that some of the things in the bible that we no longer follow are no longer viable prohibitions. I agree. Wearing a cloth of two different threads is not an issue today. Paul did not say dress modestly. He specifically mentioned do not wear pearls and do not wear gold. He also demanded that women be silent in church and not teach. If some of the specific prohibitions against behavior are no longer appropriate to modern society, then the "prohibition" against homosexual sex deserves at least the same consideration.

What about 1 Timothy 6:1: "Let all who are under the yoke of slavery regard their masters as worthy of all honor, so that the name of God and the teaching may not be defamed.

This was one of the passages used in the 1800's to justify slavery. One cannot take individual passages out of the bible and use it to justify a particular point of view. You must read the passages in context and view them in the light of the society at the times of the writing. The bible has some very specific prohibitions against divorce and remarriage. And yet the divorce rate in the US is close to 50%. Apparently the Christian citizens of America, worried that we are ruining the institution of marriage, are not as strict about following those passages that affect them.

StL_Dan · Post by **StL_Dan** » Thu Sep 04, 2003 10:57 am

tat2kc wrote:so what you are saying is that some of the things in the bible that we no longer follow are no longer viable prohibitions. I agree. Wearing a cloth of two different threads is not an issue today. Paul did not say dress modestly. He specifically mentioned do not wear pearls and do not wear gold. He also demanded that women be silent in church and not teach. If some of the specific prohibitions against behavior are no longer appropriate to modern society, then the "prohibition" against homosexual sex deserves at least the same consideration.

What about 1 Timothy 6:1: "Let all who are under the yoke of slavery regard their masters as worthy of all honor, so that the name of God and the teaching may not be defamed.

This was one of the passages used in the 1800's to justify slavery. One cannot take individual passages out of the bible and use it to justify a particular point of view. You must read the passages in context and view them in the light of the society at the times of the writing. The bible has some very specific prohibitions against divorce and remarriage. And yet the divorce rate in the US is close to 50%. Apparently the Christian citizens of America, worried that we are ruining the institution of marriage, are not as strict about following those passages that affect them.

Excellent comments, tat. Well thought out.

I agree with the notion that "context" is important, as well as, some things are no longer "viable prohibitions".

However, the notion that "Christian America" does not take divorce seriously or consider it a damaging family and societal phenomena is, IMO, incorrect. There isn't one Bible believing church out there that doesn't teach marriage an institution of God that is only separable as a result of adultery.

Homosexuality is a perversion of God's intended plan for man and woman to jointly be the cornerstone of the family unit. The Bible is clear about this. I don't think homosexuality is a cultural "trend" that can be paralleled with how a woman adorns herself with jewelry or multi colored garments. It's a much deeper issue.

StL_Dan · Post by **StL_Dan** » Thu Sep 04, 2003 11:05 am

tat2kc wrote:What about 1 Timothy 6:1: "Let all who are under the yoke of slavery regard their masters as worthy of all honor, so that the name of God and the teaching may not be defamed.

Slavery being institutionalized in the U.S. back in the day was wrong for many reasons...first and foremost for the lack of recognizing African Americans as being human beings.

God said all men are created in his image....not just "white" ones. (I'm fairly confident I'm preaching to the choir with that statement.)

I believe what Paul was saying to slave owners and slaves here was in the same vein as what Jesus said to Jews under Roman control that questioned their financial obligation to Caeser....

Remember, Jesus saying, "give to Caeser what is Caeser's and give to God what is God's."?

The implication here is not a full blown blessing of the government in Rome or it's hinterlands. Rather, it was a direct command to be respectful and subserviant to those in earthly power over you, yet, at the same time being subserviant to the higher spiritual power of God.

tat2kc · Post by **tat2kc** » Thu Sep 04, 2003 2:58 pm

I did not choose to be gay. Spent many a night as a teen crynig myself to sleep, or contenmplating suicide. Then spent many many many hours talking to my priest, and to my spiritual advisor, a carmelite nun, talking about my feeling, fears and hopes. FINALLY accepted who I was, and that God loved me. Had two choices: stay in the closet and get married, or be honest and spare a potential wife and children a lot of agony. Came out, met and fell in love with a wonderful man. We are in a committed, loving relationship. Homosexuality is not a choice, at any level. Even the Catholic church, screwy as it can be at times, recognizes that being gay or lesbian is not a choice, but a state of being. (after that they kinda fall apart, but its a start!).

Calling homosexuality a "perversion" strays dangerously close to line that separates respectful disagreement from hateful thoughts and actions. Those were the same words that those wonderful folks used in Wyoming as they beat Mathew Sheppard and left him for dead tied to a fence. Its the same language on Fred Phelps posters as he pickets the funerals of young people who died of AIDS. Its the same language a man used this last weekend as he stabbed a man in the back on bourbon street while I was there, because he wanted to "kill a perv" who was attending a gay festival this last weekend.

KCDevin · Post by **KCDevin** » Thu Sep 04, 2003 3:24 pm

it did not mention disease or such.

how do you know? We have no knowledge of some of the meanings in the bible, how do you know a day is 24 hours and not 100 years?
How do you know a lot of stuff? You do not...
Why would they eat pork and meat? It names (not directly) the animals which carry major diseases. Having my dad being a pastor, we talk about issues alot, and there are so many misteries in the bible, we agree that that is the reason why they didnt eat certain kinds of meat.
Also, that passage/book is directed to the hebrews, it kept them healthy and alive longer, that is one reason why people lived so long IMO.

something i dont understand, if you wished not to accept your being gay, why wouldn't you just change your ways? It could be hard but it would save your life and prevent further conflicts.

StL_Dan · Post by **StL_Dan** » Thu Sep 04, 2003 3:35 pm

tat2kc wrote:I did not choose to be gay. Spent many a night as a teen crynig myself to sleep, or contenmplating suicide. Then spent many many many hours talking to my priest, and to my spiritual advisor, a carmelite nun, talking about my feeling, fears and hopes. FINALLY accepted who I was, and that God loved me. Had two choices: stay in the closet and get married, or be honest and spare a potential wife and children a lot of agony. Came out, met and fell in love with a wonderful man. We are in a committed, loving relationship. Homosexuality is not a choice, at any level. Even the Catholic church, screwy as it can be at times, recognizes that being gay or lesbian is not a choice, but a state of being. (after that they kinda fall apart, but its a start!).

Calling homosexuality a "perversion" strays dangerously close to line that separates respectful disagreement from hateful thoughts and actions. Those were the same words that those wonderful folks used in Wyoming as they beat Mathew Sheppard and left him for dead tied to a fence. Its the same language on Fred Phelps posters as he pickets the funerals of young people who died of AIDS. Its the same language a man used this last weekend as he stabbed a man in the back on bourbon street while I was there, because he wanted to "kill a perv" who was attending a gay festival this last weekend.

First and foremost.....I'm not rippin' you, tat......just talking issues. I hope you know that. I'm glad you chose life. You are obviously a bright individual that knows how to use his intellect to discuss topics logically.

I commend you on being honest with yourself and those around you as you matured. And I agree with you that God does love YOU.

Thanks for sharing some important stuff about your experience. I respect that.

FYI.....Phelps, the WY folks and those that manifest hate under the guise of Christianity or acting on "God's will" are NOT living a life guided by the love of Jesus Christ. That is not judgement....that is recognizing sinful and abominable actions when a Christian like me sees them.

Here's to more prosperous discussion on any number of topics in the future.

Dan

tat2kc · Post by **tat2kc** » Thu Sep 04, 2003 5:24 pm

Devin,
do you really think that it is as simple as deciding "well, I changed my mind, I won't be gay anymore."? No one, with any amount of training or education, thinks that being gay is a choice. The accepted scientific fact is that a homosexual orientation cannot be changed. Could I have lied to everyone and dated women and gotten married, and had kids? Sure I could have, but if marriage is as important an institution as we believe it is, it would be a horrible situation for me to lie to a potential spouse about my orientation. I could not, in good conscience, enter into the sacrament of marriage under dishonest circumstances. There are enough of those freaks around. Just check out the real pervs who are picking up hustlers, or hanging around parks. They are mostly "straight" married men who don't have the balls to be honest with themselves or their family and friends. If you or a friend have AOL, cruise by the kansas city m4m chat rooms. The majority of the men in there looking for a hook up are married men.

Devin, at what point in your life did you decide to be a straight man? (you're 15, so close enough!). Also, how would changing my ways save my life? PLEASE tell me you are not one of those who still assume that HIV is a gay thing. The fastest growing segment of newly diagnosed HIV positve people are teenagers, NOT gay men. The only time my life has ever been in jeopardy from being gay is the few times I have been the victim of a hate crime, including being shot in the chest. I'm in a lot more danger from straight people than anything else. I'll never lie about who I am, for any reason. If we old gay men (40ish!) continue to put ourselves on the line, then maybe the younger pups won't have to be so scared to live honestly.

STL Dan, Of course I know you aren't ripping me! You've been honest and respectful of my opinions and values, even as they differ from yours. Its much appreciated! It helps me to remember that all you straight men are not freaks, despite your fashion sense!!

SonicBoi · Post by **SonicBoi** » Thu Sep 04, 2003 5:40 pm

KCDevin wrote:something i dont understand, if you wished not to accept your being gay, why wouldn't you just change your ways? It could be hard but it would save your life and prevent further conflicts.

It is easier to change your skin color or eye color.

KCDevin · Post by **KCDevin** » Thu Sep 04, 2003 8:57 pm

i wasn't trying to insult you, i was just curious. I decided i would be straight when i heard those verses in the bible.
Why would i think HIV is a gay thing? I had a friend that has AIDs (he moved several years ago) I'm not sure if he was ever married though...