@FundieVision
To be fair, Jerry is still wrong, but in this case he seems downright liberal compared to Howard. The most logical course of action would be to find commonality here and hopefully have more understanding. We can talk it out with Jerry, Howard just needs to stfu and learn to not be a complete asshole.
We may disagree with Jerry, and he may be a troll, but to be fair to him, he isn't advocating violence. We are, oddly enough, on the same side as Jerry in this thread. I think we can agree that non-violent fundamentalism is 100k times preferable to barbarism.
We need to talk about choice and how sexuality is inborn and natural with Jerry, let him have his own choice of religion and make desicions about how he expresses his inborn sexuality. I don't know what his sexuality is, but that is his business, not yours.
While fundamentalism may have a bad track record with the closet, it is ultimately the individual's choice whether or not to express their sexuality.
I agree that forcing people to conform to the opposite sexual identity is wrong. But there are better ways to talk about self acceptance.
@Jerry
Thanks for not wanting to castrate my friends. But, you need to realize that religion is a choice, sexual orientation isn't. If we choose to be non-Christian, we ask you to respect out choice even if you don't respect our belief or lack there of. I may not like Christianity, but I respect your choice to belong to that religion.
Homosexuality is a natural sexual orientation between consenting adults of the same gender. The most important word there is consent, and I assure you that the vast majority of the LGBT community highly values consent.
Forcing them, and it is forcing, to be either abstinent or remain in unwanted heterosexual relationships breaks consent. Would you be alright being forced into a homosexual relationship. I'm pretty sure you wouldn't. It would break your consent. Nobody wants to force heterosexuals to be homosexual, only to let homosexuals be homosexual.
Since your religion is a choice, and in your religion your god expects the individual to choose it willingly; why should people outside your faith be compelled by its commandments? After all, isn't that breaking their choice? Anti-LGBT opinions are religiously based, so if your church doesn't want to marry them, fine. They have the freedom of religion and they don't have to render services. But the state must remain religiously-neutral, neither advancing nor barring religions (apart from violations of rights, but that's a whole different conversation). The state has the power to issue secular marriage licenses, so they cannot base marriage laws on a religion's commandments. And the state cannot make laws against homosexuality since such laws would be religiously based.
As I said above, sexual identity is inborn, but the expression of it is a choice. While I think it is wrong of churches to command their followers to conform against their sexual identity, I recognize that sexual expression is a choice as religion is. But I think it is much more important to start with allowing the LGBT community to live as equal citizens with whatever sexual identity have and expression they choose.
Like it or not America is not a Fundamentalist Christian nation. It is a nation that lets its citizens practice whatever religion they choose and how they choose to do it.
There will be a day to discuss sexual expression of church followers, but for now I think it'd be better to lower the proverbial torches and pitchforks expressed by Howard. Can we agree to non-violence?
I may not like being evangelized to, but keep it out of legal contexts, and we'll have a conversation where hopefully we both come away with insights into each others' world view. I probably won't agree with you, and you probably won't agree with me, but that's the beauty of it.
If neither of us manage to convert each other (which is not my goal, I'd rather get to live and let live), we can still learn from one another and treat each other better. I'm glad to know you aren't in the habit of castrating people. If we can agree not to harm each other, then we can learn to live together.
Please note, I don't think Howard is too far gone, but I don't know how to reach people who've gone as far as wishing physical harm on others.
