Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu Oct 16, 2014 2:22 pm UTC

Paul in Saudi wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:You apparently don't know the law; a brother MUST marry his brother's widow.


Well my parrot is named Onan. I suppose my Genesis is pretty strong. As I mentioned, I am unaware why some think marrying your brother's widow is wrong. Please expand on your thoughts, they fascinate me.


It's not explicitly wrong in any "this should never, ever happen" sense, but it is a little odd, and the "MUST" aspect is kind of creepy. Forced marriages are something that doesn't sit well in modern society.

Tyndmyr wrote:
KrytenKoro wrote:You can't make a gun that "shoots darkness",


Another dream shattered.


Actually, on second thought, I realize that particle accelerators can create a black hole. Therefore, a gun that shoots darkness can exist. This is somewhat tangental to the original discussion, I fear, but I suppose it could be related back by observing that "can't" as an utter absolute is a very broad statement indeed.

We certainly can quantify cold, etc, and it is at least theoretically possible to measure tolerance(though a more precise definition might be required). I suspect that we could come up with a reasonable criteria for measuring tolerance in a given faith if we wanted to do so, and measure how that metric changes over time, or compare different faiths against each other.

KrytenKoro
Posts: 1487
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 2:58 pm UTC

Re: Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Postby KrytenKoro » Thu Oct 16, 2014 4:44 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:It's not explicitly wrong in any "this should never, ever happen" sense, but it is a little odd, and the "MUST" aspect is kind of creepy. Forced marriages are something that doesn't sit well in modern society.

We're all aware it's a "you can't just let her starve" situation, right? It's to ensure the clan doesn't just discard her. In today's world, where widows are not prevented from/are physically capable of fending for themselves, the law is totally inapplicable.

----

Should we start a new thread for this?


Tyndmyr wrote:Therefore, a gun that shoots darkness can exist.

No and no.

First, black holes still give off radiation, to the point of eventually evaporating. You're not even really "getting rid of the light", much less giving off its opposite, so much as just storing it temporarily in a tiny, tiny container. So it wouldn't be "darkness". Secondly, the point is that darkness is not "anti-light". You wouldn't be shooting something that "eliminates" light, or something that is the opposite of light, you would be shooting something that, at best, sucks up light and leaves darkness in its wake. If you got rid of all the light in the universe, you couldn't differentiate a bottle full of darkness from "what was left" because they would be, pretty much by definition, the same thing.

Darkness, cold, silence, and tolerance are the null state. They're what's left behind when you remove the quantifiable disturbances. If darkness was not a privative, then you could connect a room that was 50% light to a room that was 50% dark to get a combined room that was...null. But you can't, and that situation makes no sense because darkness is a privative.

We certainly can quantify cold, etc

No, you can't. This is a fundamental misunderstanding of physics. You can't add a unit of cold to a unit of hot to create something...else. An object with negative temperature is actually hotter than one with positive.

The same goes with tolerance. There is no "unit of tolerance" to cancel out or render meaningless an act of intolerance. It's illogical to say "well, he murdered all those kids cause they were hispanic, but at the same time he frequently neglected to complain about the waiter speaking in spanish, so he comes out ok."

To be fair, a "unit" of intolerance would be, by nature, fairly hard to assign exact numbers to (which is more intolerant, murder or rape, etc.), but we can at least say that a tolerant society is one in which zero instances of intolerance occur.

For tolerance, for cold, dark, or silence to not be privatives, it would have to make sense to say "X + -X = 0". Silence would have to negate sound, not just stand in contrast to it. For tolerance, it would have to be accurate to claim that you could negate some act of intolerance, such as a murder, with some quantity of "purposefully tolerant acts".
From the elegant yelling of this compelling dispute comes the ghastly suspicion my opposition's a fruit.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10485
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Postby CorruptUser » Thu Oct 16, 2014 5:16 pm UTC

Paul in Saudi wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:You apparently don't know the law; a brother MUST marry his brother's widow.


Well my parrot is named Onan. I suppose my Genesis is pretty strong. As I mentioned, I am unaware why some think marrying your brother's widow is wrong. Please expand on your thoughts, they fascinate me.


Because it's a forced marriage? Technically the man can say no, in which case the woman spits on his shoe, but the woman can't say no.

KrytenKoro
Posts: 1487
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 2:58 pm UTC

Re: Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Postby KrytenKoro » Thu Oct 16, 2014 7:42 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:
Paul in Saudi wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:You apparently don't know the law; a brother MUST marry his brother's widow.


Well my parrot is named Onan. I suppose my Genesis is pretty strong. As I mentioned, I am unaware why some think marrying your brother's widow is wrong. Please expand on your thoughts, they fascinate me.


Because it's a forced marriage? Technically the man can say no, in which case the woman spits on his shoe, but the woman can't say no.

That does not sound right at all. The Halizah ceremony that nullifies the requirement was included in Deuteronomy. The only onus that's placed on the woman is that she not remarry at all until halizah has freed her from her connection to the clan, or yibbum has renewed her connection. Wikipedia, at least, claims that halizah is required if either party chooses to object, not just the man.
From the elegant yelling of this compelling dispute comes the ghastly suspicion my opposition's a fruit.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10485
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Postby CorruptUser » Thu Oct 16, 2014 8:01 pm UTC

Fine whatever, you're missing the point. The bible says a lot of things that we today would find abhorrent. The argument that "well, it made sense then" inherently implies that if something doesn't make sense now, we should be free to change it. So if gay marriage makes sense, the Church should endorse it.

KrytenKoro
Posts: 1487
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 2:58 pm UTC

Re: Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Postby KrytenKoro » Thu Oct 16, 2014 9:00 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Fine whatever, you're missing the point. The bible says a lot of things that we today would find abhorrent. The argument that "well, it made sense then" inherently implies that if something doesn't make sense now, we should be free to change it. So if gay marriage makes sense, the Church should endorse it.

I think Paul in Saudi was more responding that he didn't think it lacked sense now, either. Technically, the law is still practiced by the Jewish community today, they just overwhelmingly choose halizah and nobody's the worse for it.

As for gay marriage -- yeah, they should, but like mobius said it would be best if the pressure came from within. The Catholics were never the most rigid sec of Christianity anyway, they were just the longest lasting and most powerful.
From the elegant yelling of this compelling dispute comes the ghastly suspicion my opposition's a fruit.

User avatar
mobiusstripsearch
Posts: 97
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2014 8:21 am UTC

Re: Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Postby mobiusstripsearch » Fri Oct 17, 2014 3:40 am UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Fine whatever, you're missing the point. The bible says a lot of things that we today would find abhorrent. The argument that "well, it made sense then" inherently implies that if something doesn't make sense now, we should be free to change it. So if gay marriage makes sense, the Church should endorse it.


This is ok, because we today say many things the Bible would find abhorrent. And the Bible, unlike today's beliefs, will still be followed hundreds of years from now.

That is, if what makes sense is arbitrary, why follow today's standard over the Bible's?
"The inward skies of man will accompany him across any void upon which he ventures and will be with him to the end of time." -- Loren Eiseley

KrytenKoro
Posts: 1487
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 2:58 pm UTC

Re: Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Postby KrytenKoro » Fri Oct 17, 2014 4:20 am UTC

mobiusstripsearch wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:Fine whatever, you're missing the point. The bible says a lot of things that we today would find abhorrent. The argument that "well, it made sense then" inherently implies that if something doesn't make sense now, we should be free to change it. So if gay marriage makes sense, the Church should endorse it.


This is ok, because we today say many things the Bible would find abhorrent. And the Bible, unlike today's beliefs, will still be followed hundreds of years from now.

That is, if what makes sense is arbitrary, why follow today's standard over the Bible's?


It aint arbitrary. Modern Catholicism doesnt even claim that its arbitrary, to my understanding, just that its "incomplete".
From the elegant yelling of this compelling dispute comes the ghastly suspicion my opposition's a fruit.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10186
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Postby addams » Fri Oct 17, 2014 5:23 am UTC

Djehutynakht wrote:
TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:The Catholic Church does not say that gay people will burn in hell for being gay.


Technically... but you can't be actively gay (practice your gay-ness?) without committing a sin. (I forget though if it's one of those "nope, you're going to hell" sins or if it's one of those "you have to spend some time in purgatory to atone" sins).

The Pope has to take a moderate approach.

I think it is sweet and funny.
I don't think I understand it.

The sweetest, most wholesome people have told me quietly and frankly,
"I expect to spend some time in Purgatory."

It happened, again, recently.
I looked at that man and thought, "For What??"

Good Grief.
An impure thought will send those guys to Purgatory.
It is going to be crowded in Purgatory.

Who Know?
Maybe, this is It!

Some of us are working out Really bad sins and others are working out that impure thought.
As long as a person does not talk about the details of their sex life, in church...well...i don't know.

I heard Malicious Gossip is just as bad or worse than, "Letting the soft animal self Love who it Loves."

I do know The Catholics have some delightful traditions.
Fifty Hale Marys and a hand full of Glory Be's will cover most trouble People of Good Will get into.

It is delightfully sweet and effective.
Loads of religions have similar stuff.

The Hindus chant.
The Catholics chant.
The Buddhists chant.

Chanting is good for people.
I knew a guy that chanted the Periodic Table when he needed to calm down.
The Hale Marys are just as good and tons easier to learn.

If anyone needs a few minutes to calm down,
It's the guy that is having an affair with his daughter's Father-in-Law.

That could tear up a Family.
That shit makes the Catholics a little crazy.

They have a Thing for Family.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
Djehutynakht
Posts: 1546
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:37 am UTC

Re: Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Postby Djehutynakht » Fri Oct 17, 2014 11:32 am UTC

mobiusstripsearch wrote:That is, if what makes sense is arbitrary, why follow today's standard over the Bible's?


My personal argument would be that Jesus' overwhelming and overarching message of love overthrows any possible Old Testament objection.

Simply put:

If two individuals (even those of the same sex) were to stand before the entirety of all existence and declare both their love and absolute commitment to one another, and especially within all the tenants of Catholicism (ban on same-sex marriage aside) who would be the first figure to step forward to embrace this declaration?

My argument, within the confines of Catholicism, would be Jesus Christ. I can't really imagine a scenario where Jesus says "You love each other, and you're committed to each other in faith... but no. Sinful and wrong. Repent these ideas".

leady
Posts: 1592
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 12:28 pm UTC

Re: Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Postby leady » Fri Oct 17, 2014 11:51 am UTC

My reading of the bible leads to me find God and child to be remarkably judgy on rather trivial things so why this would be exempt... (and not just the OT)

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6782
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Postby sardia » Fri Oct 17, 2014 1:29 pm UTC

leady wrote:My reading of the bible leads to me find God and child to be remarkably judgy on rather trivial things so why this would be exempt... (and not just the OT)

The trick is to redefine and reinterprets God until it fits. Preferably done after getting the elders together in a council so everyone gets the story straight. Tldr man created God. Man can change God.

KrytenKoro
Posts: 1487
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 2:58 pm UTC

Re: Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Postby KrytenKoro » Fri Oct 17, 2014 1:44 pm UTC

leady wrote:My reading of the bible leads to me find God and child to be remarkably judgy on rather trivial things so why this would be exempt... (and not just the OT)

In fairness to Jesus, one of his main platforms was "no, seriously, God isn't as picky as you're portraying him, calm your shit."

That Christians almost immediately forgot this lesson and went back to "everybody sucks" is...kinda sad sometimes.

(Personally, although I'm Catholic and am pretty much required to respect Paul, I...really wish I didn't have to. His modifications to Christianity feel way more like marketing than a realistic part of Jesus's teachings, and it's really hard to shake the feeling that his origin story is a bit sketch. I don't...hate the dude, I find it difficult to really hate any person in specific, but...if God or an angel came down and said "no, all that was false prophecy", I would be pretty happy.)
From the elegant yelling of this compelling dispute comes the ghastly suspicion my opposition's a fruit.

User avatar
Mokele
Posts: 775
Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2009 8:18 pm UTC
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Postby Mokele » Fri Oct 17, 2014 1:46 pm UTC

mobiusstripsearch wrote:That is, if what makes sense is arbitrary, why follow today's standard over the Bible's?


Because one causes suffering for a purely arbitrary reason, the other does not.
"With malleus aforethought, mammals got an earful of their ancestor's jaw" - J. Burns, Biograffiti

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Postby Tyndmyr » Fri Oct 17, 2014 1:47 pm UTC

Mokele wrote:
mobiusstripsearch wrote:That is, if what makes sense is arbitrary, why follow today's standard over the Bible's?


Because one causes suffering for a purely arbitrary reason, the other does not.


And isn't your preference for a lack of suffering purely arbitrary?

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10186
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Postby addams » Fri Oct 17, 2014 6:11 pm UTC

sardia wrote: Tldr man created God. Man can change God.


I think that is a Fundamental Truth.
We made God.

It is not something most people want or need to know.
It is possible to be on opposite sides of what seems like a Foundation Stone and still be One in Faith.

I don't know how to explain it.
I know it happens to me.

Therefore, The Church has Great Responsibility.
Much as a Parent or a Monarch does.

Stability is important.
The People turn to the Chruch like a large sane family.

I'm not Catholic.
I have spent time hanging out with some.

I had not been in a church for services in English in Years and Years.
I was invited. I went. They changed a Few Words....I Noticed! And; Had Questions!

If it got my attention, made me uncomfortable and spawned questions,
What would it do to a Catholic??

They can't be changing things around, real fast.
I know for a Fact, even non-Catholics find comfort in the Stability of The Church.

I was a little surprised in myself.

When I think of Gay Catholics,
I think it is a Natural Fit.

Have you seen the way those guys dress on Sunday?
They Look Fabulous! They have a Parade!

The Church needs to be very careful.
It does not want to get Branded as The Gay Church.
It does not want to give up it's Formal Dresses for Men, either.

I sure don't want those two things to happen.
As long as they keep the buildings The Same, I'd be ok.

I Love those Buildings.
The services range from the Etherial to Educational.
The Music ranges from Flat Anglican Dirges to Old Uplifting Folk Songs.

In my experience, The Catholic Church is like the McDonalds of Christianity.

There are minor variations on the Theme.
You are not going to get many Big Surprises.

Well...After a person get's used to The Dead Guy.
I was so freaked out by The Dead Guy,
I did not go to church for a long time.

EDIT:
A More Innocent Time?
Or; A more responsible people?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCF7Dnov8vA
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
skeptical scientist
closed-minded spiritualist
Posts: 6142
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 6:09 am UTC
Location: San Francisco

Re: Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Postby skeptical scientist » Sat Oct 18, 2014 1:22 am UTC

operagost wrote:I have to say the title of this threat is flat out trollish. How about, "Catholic church possibly becoming more tolerant"?

I don't think that's fair. I did choose the title to convey a certain opinion about the organization (and said as much in my initial post), but I think my view that the Catholic church is fairly intolerant (as organizations go) is a fairly defensible one, not a trollish one.
I'm looking forward to the day when the SNES emulator on my computer works by emulating the elementary particles in an actual, physical box with Nintendo stamped on the side.

"With math, all things are possible." —Rebecca Watson

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10186
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Postby addams » Sat Oct 18, 2014 3:06 am UTC

Oh! Oh!
I just noticed your location!

Have you been inside the ...Cathedral there in S.F. ?
It does represent the Tradition well.

What a nice building.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathedral_ ... Assumption

Photos do not do the building justice.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathedral_ ... ior_photos

I'm no sure what to think, sometimes.
When I visit those places, I am entering both a Sacred Space and Someone Else's Home.

I try to behave myself.
I've not seen many Catholics act up, in Church.

ok. I have Never seen a Catholic old enough to be potty trained, act up in Church.
Have you?

They act like they want to be there.
They act like they know what they are doing.

I heard stories about Martin Luther acting up in Church.
Some say, "He was like Jesus throwing the money changers out of The Temple."
Others shake their heads and say, "No one else could have acted like that and Lived."

In 2000 years, we have One Guy break ranks and Look What Happens!
The entire Protestant Movement from The Shakers, Amish, Mennonites and Mormons to Tammy Fae Baker and the WestBorugh Baptists.

The Mormons and the Catholics win Buildings.
In all of Christendom, they have The Best!

Best, Oldest, Weirdest.
The Catholics Win.

Cut the Church a little Slack.
It does some stuff really well.

....Think about it....
Like with all PsychoTherapy or Self Improvement Work,
The individual does most of The Work.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
Paul in Saudi
Posts: 262
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 12:52 pm UTC
Location: Dammam, Saudi Arabia

Re: Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Postby Paul in Saudi » Sun Oct 19, 2014 2:40 am UTC

Well, we may have hoped too soon. The document upset the Africans and has been pulled.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10485
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Postby CorruptUser » Sun Oct 19, 2014 4:21 am UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:
Mokele wrote:
mobiusstripsearch wrote:That is, if what makes sense is arbitrary, why follow today's standard over the Bible's?


Because one causes suffering for a purely arbitrary reason, the other does not.


And isn't your preference for a lack of suffering purely arbitrary?


Not really. It follows from biology; things which are bad for individual survival cause suffering (the meat tubes that enjoyed being injured didn't breed), people don't want to suffer, so our ethics tend to revolve around minimizing suffering of those similar to us. Of course, I'm a moral nihilist; mankind's ethics are whatever we want them to be, so let's choose the ethical system that we want. The question becomes defining who had the 'right' to decide what those ethics are is another issue.

Tirian
Posts: 1891
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 6:03 pm UTC

Re: Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Postby Tirian » Sun Oct 19, 2014 2:36 pm UTC

Paul in Saudi wrote:Well, we may have hoped too soon. The document upset the Africans and has been pulled.


There was a public dialog, there hasn't been a public dialog before. I take hope from the fact that next year's public dialog will be more fruitful.

I think this is worth emphasizing. I've belonged to three Protestant denominations that have all become affirming and welcoming of LGBT in my lifetime. None of them made that transition in a week. As a progressive Christian, that has been difficult and painful, but at the same time it mirrors the fact that repentance and reformation are difficult and painful. I think Pope Francis was correct in noting that there would have been no glory in rubber-stamping a progressive document that would be ignored in the parishes. We will need to continue to have this conversation with courage and love until there is consensus that Christ intended a diverse church working in harmony to face the diverse spiritual challenges of its congregants.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10186
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Postby addams » Sun Oct 19, 2014 5:49 pm UTC

Tirian wrote:We will need to continue to have this conversation with courage and love until there is consensus that Christ intended a diverse church working in harmony to face the diverse spiritual challenges of its congregants.

Gee, Tirian;
That's beautiful.

Did you copy off someone else's paper?
Those seem to be familiar words.

Did you copy them?
Or; Is that such a fundamental truth. it is obvious to many?

With Courage and with Love.
The Courage part is easier than the Love part, on some days.

That seems Wrong, to me.
To me it seems, we should be making ourselves easy to Love.
So we can stand together in Courage.

It's hard to be Brave all by one's own self.

No Catholic stands alone.
They all get to stand with the Statue of a Woman.
Go Figure...
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10485
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Postby CorruptUser » Sun Oct 19, 2014 11:53 pm UTC

Tirian wrote: We will need to continue to have this conversation with courage and love until there is consensus that Christ intended a diverse church working in harmony to face the diverse spiritual challenges of its congregants.


Christ never intended to have a church. His teachings were originally a rebellion against organized religion, in so much as the priests had replaced the personal religion with cold roboticism. You were supposed to enjoy your religion, not suffer from it. So when the Church organizes suffering (sexual repression, anti-contraception, endorsing slavery, endorsing fascism, etc), it's DP-ing Jesus.

User avatar
mobiusstripsearch
Posts: 97
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2014 8:21 am UTC

Re: Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Postby mobiusstripsearch » Mon Oct 20, 2014 4:12 am UTC

Djehutynakht wrote:
mobiusstripsearch wrote:That is, if what makes sense is arbitrary, why follow today's standard over the Bible's?


My personal argument would be that Jesus' overwhelming and overarching message of love overthrows any possible Old Testament objection.

Simply put:

If two individuals (even those of the same sex) were to stand before the entirety of all existence and declare both their love and absolute commitment to one another, and especially within all the tenants of Catholicism (ban on same-sex marriage aside) who would be the first figure to step forward to embrace this declaration?

My argument, within the confines of Catholicism, would be Jesus Christ. I can't really imagine a scenario where Jesus says "You love each other, and you're committed to each other in faith... but no. Sinful and wrong. Repent these ideas".


Eh, I demur, point you back to my earlier snipped from Romans, suggest that this methodology is not Biblically rigorous, and emphasize that the Church has never preached exclusion of gays. (Gay Marriage is a different subject.)

sardia wrote:
leady wrote:My reading of the bible leads to me find God and child to be remarkably judgy on rather trivial things so why this would be exempt... (and not just the OT)

The trick is to redefine and reinterprets God until it fits. Preferably done after getting the elders together in a council so everyone gets the story straight. Tldr man created God. Man can change God.


Spoiler:
Image


"The rule is perfect: in all matters of opinion our adversaries are insane." -- Mark Twain

Mokele wrote:
mobiusstripsearch wrote:That is, if what makes sense is arbitrary, why follow today's standard over the Bible's?


Because one causes suffering for a purely arbitrary reason, the other does not.


Please explain. "Gay couples should be allowed to wed" seems pretty arbitrary to me, especially with 2000+ years of historical experience where gay couples did not wed.
"The inward skies of man will accompany him across any void upon which he ventures and will be with him to the end of time." -- Loren Eiseley

User avatar
LaserGuy
Posts: 4581
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:33 pm UTC

Re: Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Postby LaserGuy » Mon Oct 20, 2014 6:01 am UTC

mobiusstripsearch wrote:Please explain. "Gay couples should be allowed to wed" seems pretty arbitrary to me, especially with 2000+ years of historical experience where gay couples did not wed.


You realize that part of the reason for this, certainly in Western world, is because Christians were (and still are...) actively persecuting homosexuals, right? Like, that, for example, same-sex unions were perfectly legal in the Roman Empire and ancient Greece for hundreds of years. At least one Roman emperor had a homosexual wedding. It was only after the empire (or, more specifically, the emperor) became Christian did the practice become outlawed in 342 CE, and homosexual relations subsequently outlawed in 390 CE.

Derek
Posts: 2180
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:15 am UTC

Re: Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Postby Derek » Mon Oct 20, 2014 7:01 am UTC

LaserGuy wrote:You realize that part of the reason for this, certainly in Western world, is because Christians were (and still are...) actively persecuting homosexuals, right? Like, that, for example, same-sex unions were perfectly legal in the Roman Empire and ancient Greece for hundreds of years. At least one Roman emperor had a homosexual wedding. It was only after the empire (or, more specifically, the emperor) became Christian did the practice become outlawed in 342 CE, and homosexual relations subsequently outlawed in 390 CE.

That's not quite fair. Homosexuality, including long-term relationships, was ok in Rome and Greece (more so Greece), but gay marriage as we think of it (a union with all the same rights and privileges as an opposite-sex marriage) was not a thing. The purpose of marriage then was to have children and pass down the family name/fortune. Gay sex was a thing you did in your spare time. That Roman emperor was Nero, who was considered something of a nut, or at least eccentric. From Wikipedia:
The first historical mention of the performance of same-sex marriages occurred during the early Roman Empire according to controversial[44] historian John Boswell.[45] These were usually reported in a critical or satirical manner.
...
It should be noted, however, that conubium existed only between a civis Romanus and a civis Romana (that is, between a male Roman citizen and a female Roman citizen), so that a marriage between two Roman males (or with a slave) would have no legal standing in Roman law (apart, presumably, from the arbitrary will of the emperor in the two aforementioned cases).[53] Furthermore, according to Susan Treggiari, "matrimonium was then an institution involving a mother, mater. The idea implicit in the word is that a man took a woman in marriage, in matrimonium ducere, so that he might have children by her."[54] Still, the lack of legal validity notwithstanding, there is a consensus among modern historians that same-sex relationships existed in ancient Rome, but the frequency and nature of "same-sex unions" during that period are obscure.[55]

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10186
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Postby addams » Tue Oct 21, 2014 1:34 pm UTC

Thank you, Derek;
We often need someone to step in with The Truth.

Thank goodness no one has blamed the San Andreas Fault on the Church.

...Yet. Make that, 'Yet'.

I might be able to do it,
given a few moments to think.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
mobiusstripsearch
Posts: 97
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2014 8:21 am UTC

Re: Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Postby mobiusstripsearch » Sat Oct 25, 2014 1:28 am UTC

LaserGuy wrote:
mobiusstripsearch wrote:Please explain. "Gay couples should be allowed to wed" seems pretty arbitrary to me, especially with 2000+ years of historical experience where gay couples did not wed.


You realize that part of the reason for this, certainly in Western world, is because Christians were (and still are...) actively persecuting homosexuals, right? Like, that, for example, same-sex unions were perfectly legal in the Roman Empire and ancient Greece for hundreds of years. At least one Roman emperor had a homosexual wedding. It was only after the empire (or, more specifically, the emperor) became Christian did the practice become outlawed in 342 CE, and homosexual relations subsequently outlawed in 390 CE.


Can you give me an example of such persecution? You gave me an example of non-persecution instead.
"The inward skies of man will accompany him across any void upon which he ventures and will be with him to the end of time." -- Loren Eiseley

User avatar
Cleverbeans
Posts: 1378
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2008 1:16 pm UTC

Re: Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Postby Cleverbeans » Sat Oct 25, 2014 1:33 am UTC

mobiusstripsearch wrote:Can you give me an example of such persecution? You gave me an example of non-persecution instead.

http://www.well.com/~aquarius/rome.htm
"Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration." - Abraham Lincoln

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10186
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Postby addams » Sat Oct 25, 2014 2:11 am UTC

Sort of, On Topic.
The title of the Thread.
Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant.

The People are Intolerant.
People are So Judgmental.

I know next to nothing about how The Church works.
I would like to consider and have others consider not how the church oppresses people but....
How it does so much to attempt to get them to be a little bit Nicer.

The Church hits the Mark with a great many.
With the framework of the church and a definition of what a life of Honor, Dignity and Purpose is like....
Many people stumble from Mass to Mass and into and out of funny little Catholic Adventures like raising a family, starting a business and Pancake Breakfasts.

People talk to me.
Some people are so Judgmental the stand of The Church is almost intolerably Liberal.

The Church is barely hanging on.
No Abortions and No Gay Marriages.

OK! Those are Tough Stands.
The Chruch seem to be 100% against carrying out the Punishment for Sin, today.

There are many that would like to see us go back to weekly executions.
The Church looks darned liberal to Many, even in the US.

So many liberal issues The Church takes a Liberal stand on.
Pro-Brown People.
Pro-Poor People.

Pro-Education.
Pro-Probation.
Probation Is Purgatory.

Some of the Dogma is so sweet.
Some of the People are so mean.

I don't know anything about the Catholic Church.
It is interesting. If it makes people Nicer, Bless it.

The Church is made up of People.
We all know what People are like.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10485
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Catholic church possibly becoming less intolerant

Postby CorruptUser » Sat Oct 25, 2014 5:23 am UTC

LaserGuy wrote:
mobiusstripsearch wrote:Please explain. "Gay couples should be allowed to wed" seems pretty arbitrary to me, especially with 2000+ years of historical experience where gay couples did not wed.


You realize that part of the reason for this, certainly in Western world, is because Christians were (and still are...) actively persecuting homosexuals, right? Like, that, for example, same-sex unions were perfectly legal in the Roman Empire and ancient Greece for hundreds of years. At least one Roman emperor had a homosexual wedding. It was only after the empire (or, more specifically, the emperor) became Christian did the practice become outlawed in 342 CE, and homosexual relations subsequently outlawed in 390 CE.


A bit late to the party, but it should bear mentioning that said Roman Emperor was Nero, who did that as more of a joke than anything else. Not the best precedent. I mean, granted, not all we know about him may actually be true; he could've been a wonderful emperor who just got a horribly unfair treatment by the history books due to politics, but currently he's the guy whose score you always beat in the Civilization games.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests