The American heartland

[evmori]

I'll just take that as you can't quote anything that is contradictory so the point you are trying to make doesn't exist, Merlyn.

 

I'm not the one who made the claim packsaddle, so nothing is incumbent on me. Show me the contradictions!

[Trevorum]

Just to be clear: I don't CARE what the bible says about homosexuality any more than I care what it says about shellfish. It is completely and totally irrelevant and any attempt to argue from it as an authority is vacuous.

[Eagledad]

>>Just to be clear: I don't CARE what the bible says about homosexuality any more than I care what it says about shellfish. It is completely and totally irrelevant and any attempt to argue from it as an authority is vacuous.

[molscouter]

"I disagree; the bible is not clear on the issue, and difference Christian sects have widely different opinions."

 

Merlyn, not every court decision is unanimous. While in case of the courts, majority rules, it still could be interpretted to mean the various rulings are not clear either. Interesting that you seem to want to pounce on disagreements about interpretations of the Bible, but accept majority rules in other cases when it suits your purpose.

(This message has been edited by molscouter)

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Merlyn, not every court decision is unanimous.

 

Because the law isn't always clear in what it means.

 

Interesting that you seem to want to pounce on disagreements about interpretations of the Bible, but accept majority rules in other cases when it suits your purpose.

 

You don't seem to realize what I'm arguing.

 

I disagree with some court decisions and agree with others; however, I recognize that court rulings are binding, and merely wishing a court ruling had gone the other way does nothing.

 

Here, some people are trying to say that the bible is clear on something; if it was clear, why is there disagreement on what it means? How does that possibly show that the meaning is clear?

 

I might recognize that a 5-4 court decision is the law, but if someone pointed to a 5-4 decision and said the law was "clear," I'd disagree with that assessment, too. Disagreement in interpretation is pretty much a direct indication that something is NOT clear in my book.

[CalicoPenn]

Homosexuality wasn't political 35 years ago? The Stonewall Rebellion in NYC was in 1969 - 40 years ago. The first gay pride march, which was political, as were all those that followed at the time, occurred in 1970 - 39 years ago. The APA stopped classifying homosexuality as a disease in 1973 - 34 years ago. The facts don't bear out a statement that homosexuality wasn't political 35 years ago. It was quite political back then - and that was especially true in academia at the time.

 

That some historians have claimed that dying cultures have two distinct commonalities isn't in doubt - however, lets keep in mind that this is not a statement of fact but rather a statement of opinion - and that opinion has, on its face, a bias rather than any kind of neutrality. One could just as easily have said that it was over reaching economies and over extended territory that were the two distinct commonalities among dying cultures, or that it was invasion by other cultures and changes in diet that were the two distinct commonalities among dying cultures - and evidence for those statements could easily be found to give them the imprimatur of fact.

 

 

[Trevorum]

Merlyn, you do realize that religion is ALL interpretation? That is precisely why it fosters so much disagreement, strife and violence. People do not fight wars about the Periodic Table.

 

[GernBlansten]

Trev, you've seem to have forgotten the Alchemy War.

[Trevorum]

(sshh ... you're just gonna confuse people ...)

[GernBlansten]

It really wasn't much of a war, more of a police action. A few nastily worded essays published in scientific journals followed by a few repugnant rebuttals. Not too many casualties, just a few promising careers.

[packsaddle]

...and thus spawning Scientology, I think. Interpretation isn't the problem though. The problem is when people are convinced their interpretation is THE absolute, unassailable truth. Mix in some myth and handle a few snakes and suddenly you can justify anything. More importantly, you can make a heck of a lot of money by fleecing the flocks of believers while engaging in the very practices you condemn while passing the loot.

[evmori]

Here, some people are trying to say that the bible is clear on something; if it was clear, why is there disagreement on what it means? How does that possibly show that the meaning is clear?

 

Produce the contradictions or recant!

[GernBlansten]

GET THE COMFY CHAIR!

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Ed, I'll recant as soon as all Christians agree on what the bible says about homosexuality.

[evmori]

So there are no contradictions regarding homosexuality in the Bible. Thanks for confirming that, Merlyn.