Oh, literally a troll? Not figuratively?
I'm not the one approaching this with an agenda.
You're literally and figuratively full of shit. You're ignoring points that blow up your attempts to give Hillsong and Pratt the benefit of the doubt.
Oh, literally a troll? Not figuratively?
I'm not the one approaching this with an agenda.
Nobody is saying that Pratt is defined by his church, but his membership and fellowship at such a church can only be seen as a tacit endorsement of their practices, no matter how you slice it (especially when he denies their nefarious behavior).
Examples?
I'm not here to defend it, but I am trying to understand how we can live together in a pluralistic society. I got a warning that this wasn't a place for "philosophical" discussion, so I'll happily just step out on the convo, but I think this is a really important topic to both protect the rights and dignity of LGTBQ+ people, and to find reasonable expectations from those who disagree and will not quickly learn to change their minds.So basically you're here to defend homophobia as as simply a different opinion.
I'm not here to defend it, but I am trying to understand how we can live together in a pluralistic society. I got a warning that this wasn't a place for "philosophical" discussion, so I'll happily just step out on the convo, but I think this is a really important topic to both protect the rights and dignity of LGTBQ+ people, and to find reasonable expectations from those who disagree and will not quickly learn to change their minds.
I agree.
I agree.
Do you think a church/mosque/synagogue/club could say that polyamory is not something they allow members to take part in? Or open marriages?
I agree.
Do you think a church/mosque/synagogue/club could say that polyamory is not something they allow members to take part in? Or open marriages?
I'm sidestepping? This is a thread about how a religious institution is acting towards LGTBQ+ people. Do you not consider poly people part of the LGTBQ+ community?Stop with your side questions that having nothing to do with LGBT folks
I'm sidestepping? This is a thread about how a religious institution is acting towards LGTBQ+ people. Do you not consider poly people part of the LGTBQ+ community?
Because it fits well under this thread which already has a lot of traction. I see no reason to push it into it's own thing considering it's most of the conversation on this one.
Reminds me of when people shit on Obama back in the day because his pastor/whatever said incendiary things. A church doesn't make a person.
polyamory is not considered part of the lgbtq+ community, it is not a sexuality nor a genderI'm sidestepping? This is a thread about how a religious institution is acting towards LGTBQ+ people. Do you not consider poly people part of the LGTBQ+ community?
All over social media people are calling out Ellen in return stating "why is she intolerant of his beliefs?"
The scary thing is the incredible amount of support posts like these are getting.
Poly is a lifestyle. Not a sexuality.I'm sidestepping? This is a thread about how a religious institution is acting towards LGTBQ+ people. Do you not consider poly people part of the LGTBQ+ community?
That's a very interesting distinction. Not one that my poly friends share, but would be a helpful way to articulate this.
Anyone can be poly, it's not something you're born as. :)That's a very interesting distinction. Not one that my poly friends share, but would be a helpful way to articulate this.
That's a very interesting distinction. Not one that my poly friends share, but would be a helpful way to articulate this.
That's a very interesting distinction. Not one that my poly friends share, but would be a helpful way to articulate this.
That's a very interesting distinction. Not one that my poly friends share, but would be a helpful way to articulate this.
You keep insisting I'm up to something. I'm not. I just care about actually learning and trying to let peoples ideas bump up against preconceived notions. The language my poly friends use is that they are born "non-monogmous" and therefore their desire to be in poly relationships is as much a part of their identity as someones monogamous hardwiring.
I mean, yes, people are born with the ability to be attracted to & love multiple people. Whether people are ok with polygamous relationships (in modern context) is very much a cultural thing or something that a whole lot of environmental factors affect. I think you're really confusing "attraction to multiple people is natural for animals, humans included" with the cultural idea of polygamy & monogamy and you deciding to be with one or multiple partners at once. Even monogamous people can be attracted to more than one person, but for whatever reason, in their mind being with a single partner is the way they want to do the whole relationship. That's really not biological. That's not the same thing as being gay.You keep insisting I'm up to something. I'm not. I just care about actually learning and trying to let peoples ideas bump up against preconceived notions. The language my poly friends use is that they are born "non-monogmous" and therefore their desire to be in poly relationships is as much a part of their identity as someones monogamous hardwiring.
You threw antinomianism at me lol... Didn't expect to see that term here.Whoops, didn't know I hit post.
Anyway, what I was going to say was that what you're essentially arguing for is antinomianism. How do we love God (the greatest commandment which is above loving our neighbour)? Jesus says, "If you love Me, keep My commandments." Now of course there's disagreement over what is a 'commandment', which is why I'm trying to take it out of the realm of homosexuality which is controversial. But it's very difficult (theologically speaking) of arguing a position of there being no ethically standard in the life of a Christian. If you want to argue about what fits in that ethical standard, then yeah there's going to be more to discuss. And I would happily stand beside you and argue that the ethical standard for American evangelical Christianity is flawed in many, many ways. To bring it back to the topic of the thread, even within the generally accepted sexual ethic of American evangelicals there is huge hypocrisy, where homosexuality is seen as a mortal sin but no one would ever dare preach against divorce and will happily look the other way when it comes to pre-marital sex.
Also of course I'm not arguing salvation by works. As Luther said, "We are saved by faith alone, but the faith that saves is never alone."
The personal beliefs thing and not being defined by his church are such bullshit. It's like if I went to klan rallies, but when someone called me out on it, I said I don't personally believe minorities are inferior to whites and the klan doesn't define me. If you are willing taking part in an organization that promotes bullshit, then that shit is on you too.
I am a touch confused- Why can't someone just find proofs as examples for substantiating Ellen Page's claim and refuting Chris Pratt's (to move forward the discussion given Pratt essentially refuted Ellen Page's by implying she is either mistaken/or a liar by way of personal anecdote)?
Yup.The personal beliefs thing and not being defined by his church are such bullshit. It's like if I went to klan rallies, but when someone called me out on it, I said I don't personally believe minorities are inferior to whites and the klan doesn't define me. If you are willing taking part in an organization that promotes bullshit, then that shit is on you too.
Believing the teachings of the Bible and loving all people – including those who have different perspectives – are not mutually exclusive. In fact this is the very definition of tolerance and inclusiveness.
Brian and Bobbie Houston and in all those years Pastor Brian has been a vocal opponent of gay conversion therapy and has made it clear to our pastors that we do not support that approach.