|
Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums Over 3 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments. Over 100,000 members from around the world.
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!
|
|
75 members (bluebilly, accordeur, BillS728, aphexdisklavier, bobrunyan, anotherscott, AaronSF, apianostudent, 16 invisible),
2,119
guests, and
357
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 3,291
3000 Post Club Member
|
3000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 3,291 |
Originally posted by Jolly: Secondly, I'm waiting around for that Papal quote, myself.... The quote
Defender of the Landfill Piano
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,773
3000 Post Club Member
|
3000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,773 |
I've read more than one study that suggests that it is essential. I know I know you said you can't cite them now. But you realize you're going to have to right? It seems such a study would involve destroying several societies in a variety of ways and collecting data. Were these studies... or just opinions?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 14,305
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
|
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 14,305 |
Originally posted by Steve Miller: Originally posted by Jolly: [b]Secondly, I'm waiting around for that Papal quote, myself.... The quote [/b]I read it. It does not substantiate the question as asked. The Pope called no homosexual evil, he cited the institution of gay marriage as evil. I can certainly say I agree. One can most certainly love the sinner, as we have all sinned in some way, but can decry an institutionalization of sin as evil, which is exactly what it is.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,244
1000 Post Club Member
|
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,244 |
Originally posted by KlavierBauer: I've read more than one study that suggests that it is essential. I know I know you said you can't cite them now. But you realize you're going to have to right?
It seems such a study would involve destroying several societies in a variety of ways and collecting data.
Were these studies... or just opinions? Oh, my bad. I should not have used the word "study". That was indeed incorrect. They were theories. And as such, I need not cite them as they are simply ideas and it is irrelevant if I thought of them, or someone else did. But the point is, it cannot be known here that homosexuality does NOT contribute to survival of species, so it is foolish for anybody to claim that it doesnt, as if it is a fact. It is not a known fact. And said theories propose possible ways in which maybe it DOES contribute to survival of species.
I was born the year Glenn Gould stop playing concerts. Coincidence?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,773
3000 Post Club Member
|
3000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,773 |
I would agree with you in part Siddhartha. I mean, I obviously don't agree with your conclusion, but I agree these are all theories, and nothing definitive can be determined.
As far as a naturalistic view of homosexuality, you're right we can't say for sure one way or the other whether it does or does not affect the continuation of the species. We can view very plainly however, that by itself, homosexuality can not survive, and we can assume therefore that a purely homosexual society can not survive where a purely heterosexual society can. Keep in mind I'm not speaking personally right now, solely as an observer. My personal views are not so black and white.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,244
1000 Post Club Member
|
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,244 |
Originally posted by KlavierBauer: I would agree with you in part Siddhartha. I mean, I obviously don't agree with your conclusion, but I agree these are all theories, and nothing definitive can be determined.
As far as a naturalistic view of homosexuality, you're right we can't say for sure one way or the other whether it does or does not affect the continuation of the species. We can view very plainly however, that by itself, homosexuality can not survive, and we can assume therefore that a purely homosexual society can not survive where a purely heterosexual society can. Keep in mind I'm not speaking personally right now, solely as an observer. My personal views are not so black and white. The problems I have with this, are a) we dont KNOW that a purely heterosexual society CAN survive on its own, because we have never seen one. And the theories I mentioned purport that perhaps they cant. So again, no, this is not a known fact. and b) if a homosexual society cannot survive, what do you think that demonstrates? That it is wrong, or evil, or unnatural? I'm not putting words in your mouth, I'm asking you. But these conclusions do not at all derive from the premise.
I was born the year Glenn Gould stop playing concerts. Coincidence?
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 3,291
3000 Post Club Member
|
3000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 3,291 |
Originally posted by Jolly: It does not substantiate the question as asked. The Pope called no homosexual evil, he cited the institution of gay marriage as evil. So gays are not evil, but it's OK to treat them as though they are? Phooey.
Defender of the Landfill Piano
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,773
3000 Post Club Member
|
3000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,773 |
Sid: No, that's why I said I was speaking strictly as an observer. I'm not making a conclusion or moral judgement on homosexuality, just stating that all things being equal, a heterosexual society can procreate, and a homosexual society can not. Of course other things can wipe out either, but all things equal one can't survive on it's own. Steve: I love your sig
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 14,305
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
|
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 14,305 |
Originally posted by Steve Miller: Originally posted by Jolly: [b]It does not substantiate the question as asked. The Pope called no homosexual evil, he cited the institution of gay marriage as evil. So gays are not evil, but it's OK to treat them as though they are?
Phooey. [/b]Phooey all you want, but it is a distinction with a difference. Just as the Church does not close the door on a young woman who has aborted her child, neither does it close the door on the homosexual. Remember, hate the sin, not the sinner.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,244
1000 Post Club Member
|
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,244 |
Originally posted by KlavierBauer: Sid: No, that's why I said I was speaking strictly as an observer. I'm not making a conclusion or moral judgement on homosexuality, just stating that all things being equal, a heterosexual society can procreate, and a homosexual society can not. Of course other things can wipe out either, but all things equal one can't survive on it's own.
Steve: I love your sig Right, I think I understood you. The point of the theories I mentioned was exactly that perhaps a heterosexual society CANNOT survive on its own. Its not a proven fact that it can by any means. I understand you're not passing judgement with your remarks, I'm just pointing out that the remark is not necessarily a valid one. And for the bigger picture, again I know you're not judging, but what is the point of this comment? Agreed, a same-sex society cannot procreate. I dont understand what this is attempting to illustrate in a discussion of this sort.
I was born the year Glenn Gould stop playing concerts. Coincidence?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,773
3000 Post Club Member
|
3000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,773 |
I have no agenda with the above remarks. I guess I was just adding my input to the naturalistic discussion taking place. You had posed that perhaps a heterosexual society can not survive on it's own, and that possibly a homosexual population was vital to its survival. I was simply debating that point with you that in a natural sense, homosexuality can't survive. Again, I wasn't making a moral statement, or even a statement relative to our lives as they are. Purely speaking from a natural point of view.
As far as the original discussion goes... How did homosexuality come up in the first place? Why can't we have a discussion on sexuality around here without homosexuality becoming the focus? I feel discriminated against as a heterosexual.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,244
1000 Post Club Member
|
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,244 |
Originally posted by KlavierBauer: As far as the original discussion goes... How did homosexuality come up in the first place? Why can't we have a discussion on sexuality around here without homosexuality becoming the focus? I feel discriminated against as a heterosexual. LOL. Good point. I'd LOVE to talk sex for the rest of us. Lets talk about using condoms (they must be evil since you cant have babies using them). Or talk about sex outside of marraige (its cheapening the institution and should be banned), or the divorce rate and remarraige (again, the cheapening of the institution harms all of us). Actually, we did debate hetero sex recently as part of the sex ed in schools thread. It doesnt go much differently than this one here
I was born the year Glenn Gould stop playing concerts. Coincidence?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,773
3000 Post Club Member
|
3000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,773 |
uhhhh... this IS that thread...
That was my point
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,244
1000 Post Club Member
|
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,244 |
Originally posted by KlavierBauer: uhhhh... this IS that thread...
That was my point Doh!!! LOL, I didnt even realize that. HAHAHA. wow, around the world in a single thread. A great point it was, indeed.
I was born the year Glenn Gould stop playing concerts. Coincidence?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,948
2000 Post Club Member
|
2000 Post Club Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,948 |
More Christian views on homosexuality: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1029829,00.html?cnn=yes
So, Jolly, Ivory, what is the difference between your views and this guy? They seem very similar.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,730
1000 Post Club Member
|
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,730 |
Originally posted by Jeffrey: More Christian views on homosexuality: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1029829,00.html?cnn=yes
So, Jolly, Ivory, what is the difference between your views and this guy? They seem very similar. And you did an advanced degree somewhere?
Estonically yours,
Ivorythumper
"Man without mysticism is a monster"
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,773
3000 Post Club Member
|
3000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,773 |
Jeffrey, I only read the first sentence of the article.
I'm pretty sure I got the gist of it.
If you honestly can't see the difference between a Christian's separation between sin and sinner, and this guy's brand of hatred then you need to study Christianity a bit more. Well, perhaps not study the religion (you appear to have done enough studying for one life), but try to understand a bit more the underlying concepts of sin. Discard your logical ideas, and be open to the idea that there might exist a system where not all thinking is logically based. If all wiggles are waggles, and all waggles are flops, then all wiggles are flops. right? Well that doesn't always work in religion. I am not saying this sarcastically to you. I honestly feel that with all of your studying and book knowledge, you have missed the point of religion, faith, and so on. But really, how can you begin to know and appreciate the fundamentals of a system whose creator you don't believe exists? Clearly you and Jolly and Ivory have very different rules governing your lives. I have to believe though, that even you can see the difference between their thoughts on this subject, and the man in the article you linked to. Can you really not? If that is sincerely the case, then perhaps we are all approaching this the wrong way.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,948
2000 Post Club Member
|
2000 Post Club Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,948 |
KB - I really do think that "God Hates Fags" and the Pope's claims that homosexual marriage is the root of evil in the modern world are very similar. (Jolly seems to think that the Dark One himself is behind homosexual rights!)
Above ivory kept badgering me to distinguish my view that the only moral standard underlying sexual relations is voluntary informed consent from a brothel, so I would like to see ivory explain himself for a change. How is the pope saying homosexual marriage is the root of evil in the modern world any different from the Rev. from Topeka saying God hates fags?
As for the view that Christians separate the sin from the sinner: I don't buy it in the case of homosexuals. Orthodox Christians think that sex can occur without sin only within marriage. Ivory and Jolly above claimed that sexuality was an extra "special" and meaningful part of the human condition (this was the gist of their argument against my voluntary consent only rule, to the extent they even tried to argue against it). But then they deny gays the right to marry, forcing homosexuals to either (a) deny an extra special part of their human personality or (b) commit a sin they cannot ever sincerely repent (without self-loathing and hatred of their own sexuality). It is part (b) here that makes the analogy to other sins a false analogy. If I steal or lie or even commit adultery, I can sincerely repent afterwards. But no one who is actually homosexual can ever sincerely be a healthy personality and "give up" the "sin" of homosexuality. This is a sadistic and sociopathically cruel set of doctrines, which cause unnessesary misery and suffering to young (and not so young) gay people everywhere.
Don't give me some nonsense about how God is love and the difference between Ivory and the guy who says "God hates fags" is that God (in the Catholic view) is a god of love who wants the best for his creatures. A God who would create someone whose sexuality was homosexual, and then condemn them to never be able to express that special sexuality without sin is a sadistic and cruel God. This is the sociopathic vision of God that Ivory presents, and I'd like to see him try to explain his way out of this.
So, yes, the pope's and Ivory's and Jolly's and the Rev from Topeka's views are all vulgar, condescending, sadistic, hate-filled, and ignorant gay bashing.
As for whether they are different personally from the guy in the article: I don't know any of them personally. Jolly has exceptional and pungent literary ability combined with lots of personal wisdom (on some topics), and I'd be happy to meet him. You, KB, also strike me as a nice guy with a love of music that I'd like to meet. The guy from Topeka seems like a narrow fanatic who needs to get a life, so I have no interest in meeting him. In that sense, I think you are different as people.
But I really hope you, KB, rethink the homosexuality thing. What exactly is so harmful to you, if gays have sex with each other in the privacy of their own home?? Or if they marry and enjoy the same rights and responsibilities and social respectability that you and your new wife enjoy? Heaven forbid you have a child and s/he is born gay. It happened to the Cheney's - it could happen to anyone.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,730
1000 Post Club Member
|
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,730 |
Jeffrey:
You and I do not agree on first principles, hence we will not agree on any possible conclusions.
If I lived in a purely materialistic universe, I would certainly be inclined to agree with you about a lot of things regarding sexuality, homosexuality, etc. Yet your mechanical universe cannot speak to love (except as an evolutionary and chemical reality), or human dignity.
As it is, I believe in a hylomorphic union of body and spiritual soul in the human person, of God who is creator and lover, and in the Incarnation in Jesus who brings us into union with God and who shows us how to live our lives in the fullness of our humanity so as to be maximally happy in this world and in eternity.
I do believe in an order to creation which is largely deducible from observation. I see no contradictions between what has actually been observed and what is postulated by Catholicism.
Believe me, Jeffrey, I have been through a lot in my life and I have tested my faith and God's mercy in extreme manners. Yet the Hound of Heaven has continued to track me down, not allowing me to escape his love.
"I fled Him, down the nights and down the days; I fled Him, down the arches of the years; I fled Him, down the labyrinthine ways Of my own mind; and in the mist of tears I hid from Him, and under running laughter. Up vistaed hopes I sped; And shot, precipitated, Adown Titanic glooms of chasmed fears, From those strong Feet that followed, followed after. But with unhurrying chase, And unperturbèd pace, Deliberate speed, majestic instancy, They beat - and a Voice beat More instant than the Feet - "All things betray thee, who betrayest Me."
So, you do not understand. Perhaps you cannot. If you think it hateful, sadistic, sociopathically cruel, medieval, stupid, vulgar, condescending, sadistic, hate-filled, ignorant and gay bashing -- so be it.
You do not understand how one can hate the sin but love the sinner. I do because I know Christ's love for me and I know my own failings, shortcomings, sins, and abject unworthiness to be loved (and all the while understanding the immense dignity that I have in common with all of humanity).
None of us hold the moral high ground.
Perhaps as you grow into fatherhood, and lil' Jeff deeply disappoints you and perhaps even betrays your love for him (God forbid), you will understand what this all means.
Yours,
Steve
Estonically yours,
Ivorythumper
"Man without mysticism is a monster"
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,948
2000 Post Club Member
|
2000 Post Club Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,948 |
Steve - "Perhaps as you grow into fatherhood, and lil' Jeff deeply disappoints you and perhaps even betrays your love for him (God forbid), you will understand what this all means." It is sad (and not a little condescending) that you would confuse a father's love for his child, with a doctrine of social discrimination (opposing gay marriage and scapegoating gays as a cause of "evil" in the world). "You do not understand how one can hate the sin but love the sinner." Yes, I do, both practially and theoretically. You purposely confuse my alleged cognitive failings, with the confusion of your own doctrine. What I claimed (and what you did not repond to) is that this is a meaningless dodge in the case of homosexuality, as the pope sits around claiming gays and gay marriage are in the vanguard of evil in the world. "I believe in a hylomorphic union of body and spiritual soul in the human person, of God who is creator and lover, and in the Incarnation in Jesus who brings us into union with God and who shows us how to live our lives in the fullness of our humanity so as to be maximally happy in this world and in eternity." Fine and dandy. If this make you happy, go for it. But none of this justifies you or the pope denying the equal rights and respect to homosexuals and their sexual enjoyment, that you claim for yourself. It's that old moral notion of equality. You seem to accept that my arguments are morally and logically correct: "If I lived in a purely materialistic universe, I would certainly be inclined to agree with you about a lot of things regarding sexuality, homosexuality," except that you think your version of God preaches discrimination against homosexuals. I see no reason why a god, if there were one, would do this. The human species does not die out if some people choose to have homosexual sex acts. "Believe me, Jeffrey, I have been through a lot in my life and I have tested my faith and God's mercy in extreme manners." Fine. Just don't assume that others have not tested their worldviews or have difficult experiences in their lives, either. Your comment lends no special credence to bias against homosexuals, just because your faith has been tested.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Piano
by Gino2 - 04/17/24 02:34 PM
|
Piano
by Gino2 - 04/17/24 02:23 PM
|
|
Forums43
Topics223,408
Posts3,349,457
Members111,637
|
Most Online15,252 Mar 21st, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|