Parts of the Bible Ruled Hate Literature in Canada

[Wayward Clam]

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/articl...TICLE_ID=31080

Essentially, some of the more aggressively anti homosexual passages.

I don't know how to react to this one!!!

[Platypus]

Well, 1984 has been rather slow arriving...

[ilovetheusers]

Going out with a girlie in a small town I grew up in I now get to see her daughters friends parents use the bible to justify all sorts of stupidity and hatred, taking every passage literally whenever it is something they agree with. Got 2 of them that are not alowed to see Harry Potter films/books because he's a wizard and he's the devil and another one who hates "teh gays" cuz is sez tu in da baaahbuil... It's so frightening that people could take a book written by a roman about a man he never met that has been translated several times so literally.

Conversely, this is just another instance of censorship. So glad I don't live anywhere that can censor a religious text or religion, no matter how different it is. Even if I don't like someones religion I defend their right to believe what they will. This is silly.

[MacGyver]

The whole Christian religion is under attack because it's centered around the relationship between a husband and wife. Marriages are modeled after the relationship between Christ (the husband) and the church (the bride). Today's society doesn't believe in families any more, common law relationships are becoming more and more common, and the Liberal government in this country has enacted policies that support single parent families and two income earners, instead of supporting married couples with children. It's almost as if married people are being punished!

The reason the bible speaks out against homosexuality is because its contrary to everything Christ was about. Read Genesis Chapter 19. God didn't obliterate the wicked cities of Sodom and Gamorah because he was bored. These same people criticizing the bible for saying that homosexuality is wrong, don't like this passage because it tells them they will be destroyed for their wicked ways, and that's something they CAN'T disagree with unlike the other passages they're speaking out against.

Whatever happened to freedom of the press? Next thing you know anti-drunk-driving campaigns will be outlawed because it makes drinkers and alcoholics feel bad? Get real. Send a letter to your MP and the PM. You don't even need a stamp.

[10of40]

Incidentally, the tendency to take the Bible literally (basically the base for the fundamentalist branches of Christianity) started in the Scientific Revolution.

As for the homo-bit...

I believe there are more passages than that specifically stating that homosexuality is a SIN.

So, if one professes to be a Christian & homosexual, he is living in sin.

Dante (I believe) stuck them in Circle II of Hell.

Sorry to have offended anyone, but sin is sin is sin - there isn't any way around it.

[silencio]

It's a brave new world.

[Stalemate]

The situation can be resumed in simple terms, IMHO:

Whichever group/philosophy/way of thinking is most popular has the most "rights" while personal and communal responsabilities are disregarded.

The illusionary right to free speech is being slowly quelled by laws protecting special groups. People should be protected along with their individual rights and freedoms - not their opinions.

Why should the government get involved in protecting one special group over another? Doesn't that strike you as being very similar to the interpretation (not the original intent, though) of "seperation of church and state"? Aren't both situations indicative of government approval of one way of thinking over another?

I'm a Bible believing Christian and would never consider bringing harm to a fellow man unless the well-being of my family or my personal liberty was at stake. My way of thinking and living has the same value as my neighbours.

To the liberal-minded in the government and elsewhere, I'm getting the feeling that my own beliefs are not only unpopular, they're being increasingly discriminated against.

[Kermit D. Frog]

I agree Adept....when was the last time you heard of someone getting sued because they "made fun of" a christian.

[Wayward Clam]

Originally posted by MacGyver
The reason the bible speaks out against homosexuality is because its contrary to everything Christ was about.

You frighten me, MacGyver.

[Wayward Clam]

And MacGyver's friends as well.

I do completely agree with you that it is not PC to make fun of gays, lesbians, blacks, women, disabled people, etc.

And it IS part of pop culture to make fun of Christians and the Bible.

This is a double standard that should not exist. Either allow satire of everybody (where I stand) or apply EQUAL censorship "limits" on what you write about everybody, regardless of who they are.

But the trouble is that the Bible isn't just anti-gay, it's aggressively so. It is not the golden rule, it is not tolerant, and It's not a live and let live scenario. It's a live my way or else my followers will persecute you in life and I will damn you to Hell in the afterlife scenario.

And God or no God, that's dirty pool.

So you should either allow the Bible's opponents the same freedom of speech... or censor those parts of the Bible. Nothing else is fair.

[Pinnacle]

Originally posted by 10of40
. . . So, if one professes to be a Christian & homosexual, he is living in sin. . .

To continue on with that thought, everyone is living in sin (not just homosexuals). This is what I find so amusing about Christians that criticize homosexuals. Yes, the homosexuals are living in sin, but so is everyone else. "Let ye without sin cast the first stone" (not an exact quote, but close enough).

[Jediab]

Originally posted by Pinnacle
"Let ye without sin cast the first stone" (not an exact quote, but close enough).

You are right, Jesus did say that. He said that about a woman that was about to be put to death by stoning for adultry.

Bon Jovi wrote a song awhile back (yeah I am old) called Living in Sin. It is a story about a young man around 21-25 or so who is intimatly involved with an underaged girl.

That is different than if the 2 met at a party and they hit it off. One thing lead to another, and the mistake was made. And it never happened again.

Now by Christain beliefs they sined in both cases. The diference is, in example 1, they knowingly continue to defy the Word, and do what they want, when they want, without regards for the Law of God, not to mention the Law of the local police. They are willfully choosing to Live in Sin.

Example 2 shows that they made a mistake and sinned. But they willingly chose not to continue that way of life together.

The woman that Jesus saved made a mistake, a mistake that equaled a sin. Jesus was referring to making mistakes and forgiveness, not an ongoing lifestyle of sleeping with married husbands

Now the overzealous people who say that gays/lesbians are bad people should just settle down and relax. They are individuals who have chosen what they do. There is a difference between not liking them and not liking what they do. You dont have to like what they do, but in the same process, you should not hate them.

Jesus expanded the commandment Thou Shall not Kill, to Thou shall not hate. If you don't hate, then you won't kill out of hate.

As for the zealots that believe that Harry Potter is evil, if you are to condem Mr. Potter for using magic and being a wizard, then you will have to condem Mr Walt Disiney and his evilness. Snow White, Cinderella, Bambi, Sword and the Stone, Lady & the Tramp, Sleeping Beauty etc. Also you can't forget The Wizard of Oz. To leave these out, you will be a hypocrite of the highest order, and your argument will go gown in flames.

For the record I am a Christain.

[ilovetheusers]

Interesting topic, hope it stays civil so we can continue the conversation.


I’m not going to debate over whether or not the commandment is from a deity to dislike/hate/subjugate another person or to shun them or what have you. I feel strongly somewhat like clam does and feel the argument can only lead to frayed tempers. No point in it as it’s doubtful anyone would convince the other party of anything.

I can agree that in the last few years Christians have become actively discriminated against in the press but as the majority or people in the US (and I suspect Canada though I don’t know) are Christian in one form or another I doubt any real consequences will come of all this. Though I myself do not believe in any religion I am troubled by others that feel that freedom of religion can be construed as freedom from religion. It is not. It is the freedom to practice religion free from government interference. It was designed to allow persons of one religion to live free of others of a different religion who might have control of government and seek to impose their will upon them.

I hear this spoken about in the media quite often but am shocked that the people who quite often purport that they are discriminated against often rail at any criticism at all. Just listening to callers on the radio defending Catholicism against anyone who wanted to have a full on investigation of the priests and the massive cover-up that lead to thousands being molested under the watchful eye of the church elders. Now of course the Catholics are not all Christians and vise versa, I’m just using that as an example of how even something as extreme as that is vehemently defended against the slightest criticism. I never understood the trepidation involved in questioning anything that another has faith in if they really feel it’s the true way. I’m off track and I’m going to end now.





Before I do end I will debate the statement that science was in any way shape or form responsible for twisting the words coming from the bible or causing people to take anything literally. I have yet to see a scientist who uses religion as a means to an empirical ending of an experiment but see quite a good deal of the religious who bastardize science to attempt to prove their faith. I should point out that science is in no way a belief but a system of gathering data and interpreting it and any theory welcomes open debate attempting to disprove it. Sorry, it just bugs me when the religious try to take a shot at a simple theorem that you need to give some shred of proof and to back up a hypothesis. Again, not trying to attack anyone, it just bugs the heck out of me.

[ilovetheusers]

Originally posted by Jediab
As for the zealots that believe that Harry Potter is evil, if you are to condem Mr. Potter for using magic and being a wizard, then you will have to condem Mr Walt Disiney and his evilness. Snow White, Cinderella, Bambi, Sword and the Stone, Lady & the Tramp, Sleeping Beauty etc. Also you can't forget The Wizard of Oz. To leave these out, you will be a hypocrite of the highest order, and your argument will go gown in flames.

Very well said. However the people who are like this I know of really don't care to hear argument against their belief. I’d make the statement that most folks believe in a way of life, in the way they want to believe it.

[MacGyver]

Originally posted by Wayward Clam
You frighten me, MacGyver.

Why?