Monarchy Forum
Register Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 3 of 14      Prev   1   2   3   4   5   6   Next   »
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 6,734
Reply with quote  #31 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wessexman
To say the Church ignores social justice because it is against homosexual acts is simply to beg the question.
I wouldn't say that I was begging the question. And I didn't actually say what you say above anyway. The Church campaigns for one group of citizens to have fewer rights than other citizens on the basis of their sexuality. That is not so much ignoring social justice as attacking it. I happen to think that the Church's position on the issue has little foundation in Scripture, in ethics or in reason. However, I would not regard it as attacking social justice if it simply maintained its stance as regards its own membership, who can go or stay as they please. I so regard the Church because it strives to restrict the rights of all gay people, whether they are Cathoiic or not, Christian or not.
House_of_Luxembourg

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 154
Reply with quote  #32 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AugieDoggie
That video was terrifying. Could stand less than 20 seconds before I had to turn it off.

[eek] I got 4 seconds in.

__________________
"With God's help it will never be that a Bohemian king would run from a fight!"
- John the Blind
(according to an account in the Cronica ecclesiae pragensis Benesii Krabice de Weitmile)

ECH WUNN
Wessexman

Registered:
Posts: 1,039
Reply with quote  #33 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wessexman
To say the Church ignores social justice because it is against homosexual acts is simply to beg the question.
I wouldn't say that I was begging the question. And I didn't actually say what you say above anyway. The Church campaigns for one group of citizens to have fewer rights than other citizens on the basis of their sexuality. That is not so much ignoring social justice as attacking it. I happen to think that the Church's position on the issue has little foundation in Scripture, in ethics or in reason. However, I would not regard it as attacking social justice if it simply maintained its stance as regards its own membership, who can go or stay as they please. I so regard the Church because it strives to restrict the rights of all gay people, whether they are Cathoiic or not, Christian or not.


Again, this is just question begging. It depends upon gay people indeed having these rights - presumably to get married to those of the same sex - which is precisely what is in contention. If you believe that so called gay marriage is a contradiction in terms, like married bachelors, why would you think it was a part of social justice to allow homosexuals to call their relationships marriages?

The Scripture and Christian and Jewish tradition obviously condemn homosexual acts. There is really no question of this. The Roman Church also supports it teachings on sexual morality with natural law teaching, which you do not address.

What is more, despite some tendentious modern revisionism and marginal cases blown up with a worry disproportion, almost all traditional cultures and religious traditions have considered homosexual acts between males (female homosexuality is rarely mentioned, one way or the other) as at least inferior and distasteful, if not immoral. It is a universal.
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 6,734
Reply with quote  #34 
I'm not going to answer you in full detail tonight, but I will note that you are question-begging. You assert that Scripture condemns homosexual acts. Where? I assure you that I know every place, not hard since there are so few of them. and there are ambiguities and doubts in all of them. The Christian and Jewish traditions condemning homosexuality I can't argue about, but what if they were immoral and wrong to do so? Plenty of Christians and Jews today think that they were, as do I. And as I think you are. Leaving aside gay marriage, the Roman Catholic Church even opposes civil partnerships. With the M word left out, do you still deny that this stance is an attack on social justice?

If you want to continue this, we will see in the morning. I respect your evident intellect and knowledge but find your stance offensive and uncharitable, and am not sure I really want to debate with you further. The tone of your reply, should there be one, will help me decide.
Wessexman

Registered:
Posts: 1,039
Reply with quote  #35 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
I'm not going to answer you in full detail tonight, but I will note that you are question-begging. You assert that Scripture condemns homosexual acts. Where? I assure you that I know every place, not hard since there are so few of them. and there are ambiguities and doubts in all of them. The Christian and Jewish traditions condemning homosexuality I can't argue about, but what if they were immoral and wrong to do so? Plenty of Christians and Jews today think that they were, as do I. And as I think you are. Leaving aside gay marriage, the Roman Catholic Church even opposes civil partnerships. With the M word left out, do you still deny that this stance is an attack on social justice?

Well, I simply did not think it was up for much debate: that the Scripture condemns homosexual acts. I'm aware, of course, there are those who try to claim otherwise - that these passages have been misinterpreted and the like, but in most cases they are not persuasive. They are about as persuasive as those who take the Second Philippic or Nero's ceremonies as evidence for the Roman acceptance of gay marriage.

Let us stick to the most important ones for Christians - St. Paul's condemnations, such as Romans 1:24-27; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10; and 1 Timothy 1:10. There is not really much serious debate that the Apostle was referring to homosexual acts and meant the condemnation generally.

I think, that instead of asking questions in which basic assumptions are left unstated, it would be better if you actually state your case. It is not apparent that someone who thinks that homosexual acts and relationships are immoral and unnatural should think it a huge attack on social justice to deny civilly sanctioned endorsement and benefits - which imitate marriage - to these relationships.


Quote:

If you want to continue this, we will see in the morning. I respect your evident intellect and knowledge but find your stance offensive and uncharitable, and am not sure I really want to debate with you further. The tone of your reply, should there be one, will help me decide.


Well, I respect you as a human being and wish all the best for you. We are all sinners. However, it does appear that you consider charity to be acceptance of homosexual acts, or at least silence on them.  I agree fully with the current Pope that we must show compassion and charity, but this conversation is itself a warning of the temptations to turn these into excuses for and acceptance of sin.

Take it or leave it. You will not find me making harsh or derogatory comments, but I will be frank about my views on the subject, if we are discussing it (and I did not start the discussion). This is not the first time that you have given the impression that you find anything but abject submission and agreement with you on this subject to be deeply offensive.

Jonathan

Registered:
Posts: 185
Reply with quote  #36 
Put your debates in the same-sex marriage topic.
DavidV

Registered:
Posts: 4,502
Reply with quote  #37 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan
Put your debates in the same-sex marriage topic.


Jonathan, I'm sorry, but you have no authority to instruct forum users where or where they may not post? It's Theodore's forum and as moderator he alone can decide where posts belong. Frankly, you've either been very annoying or offer no value with some of your threads and posts.
Jonathan

Registered:
Posts: 185
Reply with quote  #38 
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidV


Jonathan, I'm sorry, but you have no authority to instruct forum users where or where they may not post? It's Theodore's forum and as moderator he alone can decide where posts belong. Frankly, you've either been very annoying or offer no value with some of your threads and posts.

I never said I did, I just wanted the homosexual debate in the homosexual topic, I did not know that some members were debating about it. Also most of the topics I post is in the off topic discussion, therefore, my threads are justified. If I been "annoying" it was just cause I wanted to hear your response. People with different views will debate, so if I've been annoying I'd least been more participating here.
royalcello

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 6,790
Reply with quote  #39 

While I personally dislike debates pertaining to homosexuality (I actually banned them here for a time, but was persuaded to lift the ban), they are hardly off-topic for this thread. DavidV is correct; Jonathan is not entitled to tell people where to put their comments.

My observation after years of networking with monarchists both online and in person is that for whatever reasons, monarchism/royalty is something that seems to significantly attract both gay people (by which I suppose I basically mean gay men; I'm not aware of any lesbian monarchists though I suppose they might exist somewhere...Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson?) AND traditionalist adherents of religions (usually liturgical Christianity) that do not accept homosexuality, possibly in disproportionate numbers (relative to the general population) in both cases. This is obviously a recipe for conflict. It is my determination to strive for a "big tent" approach to monarchism in which both homosexual people and people whose religious convictions do not allow them to accept homosexuality are welcome, as well as monarchists who do not meet either description, no matter how difficult that seems. I hope that remains acceptable to everyone.

 

Jonathan

Registered:
Posts: 185
Reply with quote  #40 
Quote:
Originally Posted by royalcello

While I personally dislike debates pertaining to homosexuality (I actually banned them here for a time, but was persuaded to lift the ban), they are hardly off-topic for this thread. DavidV is correct; Jonathan is not entitled to tell people where to put their comments.

My observation after years of networking with monarchists both online and in person is that for whatever reasons, monarchism/royalty is something that seems to significantly attract both gay people (by which I suppose I basically mean gay men; I'm not aware of any lesbian monarchists though I suppose they might exist somewhere...Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson?) AND traditionalist adherents of religions (usually liturgical Christianity) that do not accept homosexuality, possibly in disproportionate numbers (relative to the general population) in both cases. This is obviously a recipe for conflict. It is my determination to strive for a "big tent" approach to monarchism in which both homosexual people and people whose religious convictions do not allow them to accept homosexuality are welcome, as well as monarchists who do not meet either description, no matter how difficult that seems. I hope that remains acceptable to everyone.

 


I see, you do not want to alienate some monarchists because they're gay. I understand that, monarchists are thin these days, for every monarchist, there are an hundred communists, and a thousand liberals, we need to be focus on more unity. I just figure you disagree with the same sex marriage and the homosexual culture, being this a very traditional Christian Monarchist website. I also expect it to an authoritarian one, that's why I had high hopes for it and express my authoritarian views.
royalcello

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 6,790
Reply with quote  #41 

I have never identified this as a "Christian" website. I was not a Christian when I started it, though I am now. I have always been very clear that I support the non-Christian monarchies of non-Christian countries, as well as the de facto secular constitutional monarchies of modern Europe. You are correct that my top priority is monarchist unity and trying not to alienate any monarchists or potential monarchists. (I do get very frustrated with people who claim to be monarchists but refuse to support any monarchy that actually exists today, and don't mind saying so, but that's a separate issue.)

I am not going to criticize HM Queen Maxima of the Netherlands for openly supporting gay rights, and I am not going to criticize HI&RH Archduke Imre of Austria & Hungary and his wife for openly upholding traditional Catholic teaching.

My position on the same-sex marriage issue is complicated and would not completely satisfy either side. Basically, while my personal concept of what "marriage" means is the traditional one, and I do not believe Marriage is a "right" (if it were, the State would be obligated to find spouses for people who would like to be married but have not been able to do so on their own), in light of the way marriage has already been fundamentally altered by profound changes in heterosexual behavior (principally contraception and "no-fault" divorce, combined with virtually universal de facto acceptance of what used to be called "fornication"), which it's quite clear the vast majority of straight people (including most "conservatives") are not going to give up, I don't think it makes sense to oppose civil SSM in isolation. I'm not sure what the solution is. I don't believe in anti-discrimination laws in principle, as has been discussed on this forum previously, so cannot endorse the "Gay Rights" movement. A baker who does not wish to make a cake for a same-sex wedding should not be penalized. If a gay baker wanted to set up a business that would make cakes only for same-sex weddings, that should be allowed as well.

I've been more forthright here than I am on Facebook, where I absolutely refuse to discuss these issues. I hope that's not a mistake.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "the homosexual culture."

Jonathan

Registered:
Posts: 185
Reply with quote  #42 
Quote:
Originally Posted by royalcello
I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "the homosexual culture."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_culture
Wessexman

Registered:
Posts: 1,039
Reply with quote  #43 
For the record, I'm against fornication, easy divorce, and birth control. The morality of homosexuality is of little interest to me, but I refuse to back down on the principle (plus, I don't much like the implication that simply to stand by these principles is offensive and uncharitable).
DavidV

Registered:
Posts: 4,502
Reply with quote  #44 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan

I see, you do not want to alienate some monarchists because they're gay. I understand that, monarchists are thin these days, for every monarchist, there are an hundred communists, and a thousand liberals, we need to be focus on more unity. I just figure you disagree with the same sex marriage and the homosexual culture, being this a very traditional Christian Monarchist website. I also expect it to an authoritarian one, that's why I had high hopes for it and express my authoritarian views.


Jonathan, your problem is that while you will unquestionably find agreement with us on certain social, moral and cultural topics, we also tend to recognise that monarchism is not a monolithic ideological strand, never has been and never will be. You have often acted quite petulantly, as in asking people to post in a certain topic and even trying to prod a reply out of them, and then insist that monarchists embrace "fascism" or certain aspects of it, even though fascism has had catastrophic consequences for all the monarchies that flirted or fell under the rule of some sort of it.

You think authoritarianism is the solution to everything, and even though authoritarianism has its good points, it's not an infinitely desirable state of affairs either.

I'm sorry, I guess certain fellow monarchists and supposed monarchists, not just on here, have exasperated me a little too much of late.
royalcello

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 6,790
Reply with quote  #45 
Well at least two of my gay monarchist friends don't like that "LGBTQI" stuff at all.
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.