So, the tables are turning . . .

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 9/14/06 at 3:19pm

In this yahoo article, Religious Conservatives are saying that "debate over homosexuality has prompted attacks on religious freedom." Ok, so religious conservatives can attack a whole group of people, but now that they are being questioned, they are saying that it is wrong to attack them?

You can read the rest of the article
Here!

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 9/14/06 at 3:22pm

The board member, Robert J. Smith, said he was expressing his personal beliefs as a Roman Catholic.

Exactly. As some "wise" poster said here, you have to clarify when you make a statement like this whether or not you're speaking personally or in a professional capacity. And if you work somewhere with a non-discrimination act, prepare to be fired.

[FranklinShepard-Inc.]

Posted: 9/14/06 at 3:31pm

Then that's the solution: When scientology can refer to religious freedom, why not a new religion that promotes same sex marriage? It would have to be treated the same as some, say, methodists, wouldn't it?
So anyone promoting same sex marriage could refer to his religious beliefs.

[DG]

Posted: 9/14/06 at 3:32pm

"sensing declining alarm over same-sex marriage"

I think what they're sensing is a decline in the viability of one of their hot-button control factors.

[SorryGrateful]

Posted: 9/14/06 at 3:49pm

But don't you understand that religions are more valid than homosexuality? Their thinking is that you're not actually people whereas they are.

[javero]

Posted: 9/14/06 at 3:53pm

I've often raised the question before gay coworkers of mine of why don't those in same-sex relationships and their staunchest supporters start their own Christian sect akin to the Lutherans, Methodists, Baptists, Episcopalian, Pentecostals, etc. I'm no theologian but recall the salient events of western civilization that led to the chasm between the Vatican & the rest of Christendom. The main one of course was the Papal Decree that established: (1) the primacy of the Bishop of Rome, (2) the infallibility of the Bishop of Rome, and (3)one more that escapes my memory, all of which came at the expense of the other Bishoprics throughout Christendom, especially the one in Constantinople (Istanbul) that headed Byzantium. The twain shall never meet again by all appearances.

Later, after the Western Christian laity fell out with the Vatican hegemony, Martin Luther and company stood in defiance on doctrinal and other grounds resulting in a plethora of offshoots. I realize that this is an oversimplification of events that have shaped the course of modern human affairs (and redesigned maps in the process) but if one group can part ways with the establishment why can't another that meets the muster of the same-sex community? I mean the Catholics & Protestants cannot even reach a consensus in 2006 on which books of the Holy Bible should be canonized, a throw back to the Council of Nicaea debacle. I bowed out of the debate years ago and have no regrets but I digress.

Updated On: 9/14/06 at 03:53 PM