Unethical treatment of LGBTQ humans / Understanding LGBTQ - 101

[St. SteVen]

To be fair, people who don't conform to the traditional Judeo-Christian convention of family structure have banded together for socio-political reasons and have thereby precipitated a conglomerate identity. There is a fairly reasonable suspicion that two or more of the groups that make up the whole do not see eye-to-eye on much of anything except that they don't want to miss out on having some weight to swing around in Washington and Hollywood.

Actually I think this is a lot like the BLM organization. (Black Lives Matter)
Very few black people support it. Same with the LGBTQ politcal movement.
Most gays/trans want nothing to do with it.

/ cc: @O'Darby

 

[St. SteVen]

And I think it might be unreasonable to expect some folks to control or hide their fear of the way things are changing in society. I can't pretend that it doesn't cause me quite a bit of apprehension at times. Backlash seems to be the way of things in the 21st-century socio-political world.

Not sure why everyone thinks I am supportive of the LGBTQ political organization, I'm not.

My real issue is with the church, and Christians that refuse to take positive steps
to reach this largely unreached people group except on their own terms.

/

 

[St. SteVen]

Reading over this, I don't like the way it sounds, but we're all broken.

Agree.
UR to the rescue.

U L T I M A T E
R E S T O R A T I O N

/

 

[O'Darby]

Actually I think this is a lot like the BLM organization. (Black Lives Matter)
Very few black people support it. Same with the LGBTQ politcal movement.
Most gays/trans want nothing to do with it.

/ cc: @O'Darby

Or look at the abortion movement. How many of the supporters for whom this is ostensibly a huge issue really have any reason to care anything at all about a woman's access to abortion? That was a great mystery to me before the LGBTQ movement was even on the scene. All of these special interest movements seem to be surrogates or covers for a larger agenda that has little or nothing to do with what the movement is supposedly about. Whether one views it in Marxist terms or Satanic terms or whatever, the overarching goal does seem to be the complete overturning of traditional morality, values and institutions. My wife spent the first 37 years in the USSR before its collapse, and she keeps saying "This is just like the Soviet Union!" One of the key goals there was indeed the destruction of the traditional family structure and familial loyalties.

 

[BarneyFife]

Not sure why everyone thinks I am supportive of the LGBTQ political organization, I'm not.

I figured as much, but surely you can see that most Christians aren't able to make these distinctions.

My real issue is with the church, and Christians that refuse to take positive steps
to reach this largely unreached people group except on their own terms.

It could be that when you use a generalization like "the church," it has some people thinking you're lumping them in the same way they're identifying you with "the LGBT community."

The hardest part of advocacy is diplomacy, after all.

Agree.
UR to the rescue.

U L T I M A T E
R E S T O R A T I O N

/

I've said too much.


.

 

[CadyandZoe]

True story: At City-Data, a longstanding female poster immediately named me "my new favorite poster" for comments similar to those I have made here. A week later, a moderator named mensaguy banned me for being a gay-bashing Neanderthal. The fact that I am able to view issues from a nuanced perspective and cannot be pigeonholed as you attempt to do is something of which I am proud. What precisely is "another gay agenda apologist" in your mind? Who is the "we" of whom you so grandly speak?

You have mixed the apples and oranges I was attempting to separate. If you would care to search my posts, somewhere here I have made PRECISELY the distinction you are making between the LGBTQ movement and the lack of any such campaign on behalf of adulterers. But what you and others completely miss, because you are incapable of nuanced thinking, is the Rather Large distinction between the LGBTQ movement, which even many gays view with dismay, and the struggle of an individual with the homosexual orientation and how the Christian community should respond to him or her.

You are all mixed up. I can tell by your terminology. You want me to treat a homosexual as an individual and yet your complaint is against the "Christian community." So in your mind it's okay to treat a homosexual as an individual but not a Christian? You claim not to prejudge homosexuals but feel free to prejudge all Christians?

You are subject to self-deception, explaining away subjects that make you uncomfortable. You entered a thread entitled "Unethical treatment of LGBTQ humans / Understanding LGBTQ—101." The philosophical position implied in the title of this thread is that some people should NOT be treated as individuals but rather as a class. It assumes that all LGBTQ people think alike and don't have their own opinions, values, likes, hopes, dreams, etc. The man who wrote the title permitted himself to remove a person's name, giving them a letter instead. An entire society, previously dedicated to liberty and indiviualty, is now gripped in a class struggle where a letter is stamped on the foreheads of certain people in our society. Your name is not "Joe"; your name is "G" or "B" Your name is not "Mary" your name is "L" all distinct individuality is removed.

On a Christian message board, in a morality forum, we SHOULD be discussing the ethical treatment of ALL human beings regardless of subcategory. Instead, someone decided that this board wanted to discuss Marxism and Marxist beliefs and categories. The Land of the free and the home of the brave is slowly being transformed into the land of the classes and the home of the fearful.

You are blind to your own classism, treating all Christians as a "community" as if such a thing actually existed. All those who espouse classism subdivide the country into various "communities". The so-called influencers in our culture talk about the "black community," the "Mexican American community," the "Gay community," and all sorts of other divisive categories.

Paul the apostle, in his epistle to the Galatians talked about those "in Christ."

Galatians 3:27-29 For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s descendants, heirs according to promise. ​

Among those "in Christ," there is NO class affiliation. Those in Christ have no issue with the moral treatment of individuals. Jesus taught us to forgive those who persecute us, love our enemies, and pray for those who injure us. In Christ, there are no classes, so those in Christ don't speak in terms of an alleged "Christian community." Actual, true, real Christianity is not interested in community. Our "fellowship" is Christ-centered. Our unity is by the Spirit.

In the pride of your nuanced view, you missed the forest for the trees.

 

[CadyandZoe]

I figured as much, but surely you can see that most Christians aren't able to make these distinctions.

You too Barney? Who gave you permission to speak for "most Christians"?

 

[CadyandZoe]

Christians did not exist when Jesus was here. Much of the Roman Catholic doctrine was assimilated into Protestantism and is still being passed along as Christian groups continue to split off from one another. In a nutshell that is why even the independent church in your neighborhood today most probably believes that there is a trinity, dead people are alive, God is in control of everything that happens, the Four Gospels are written to Christians, and water baptism is relevant. And then there's everything that you know about our sin nature was taught to you by them.

I do not accept your presupposition, which assumes that Jesus' moral teaching is relative to the Jews alone.

 

[BarneyFife]

You too Barney? Who gave you permission to speak for "most Christians"?

You just proved my point. I know exactly how you feel because you shared it with me in a hateful private msg. So you can get off your high horse now.

.

 

[St. SteVen]

Whether one views it in Marxist terms or Satanic terms or whatever, the overarching goal does seem to be the complete overturning of traditional morality, values and institutions.

Right.
The MO is always the same.
An organization identifies a "victim" whom they will "defend" in theory.
They rally troops of supporters around their supposed cause. They collect all sorts of support.
Which they use for their own purposes. The victims never get the promised help. (scam)

/

 

[St. SteVen]

St. SteVen said:
My real issue is with the church, and Christians that refuse to take positive steps
to reach this largely unreached people group except on their own terms.

It could be that when you use a generalization like "the church," it has some people thinking you're lumping them in the same way they're identifying you with "the LGBT community."

Is there a better way to frame it?
I wrote: "the church, and Christians". The institutions and individuals.

Or is the finger pointing the problem?
I want them to understand what they have done and are doing.
And it ain't good.

"And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself." - Matthew 22:39 NIV

To which the church replies:

"But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?” - Luke 10:29 NIV

LGBTQ is the Samaria of today. The hated neighbor. WWJD?

The hardest part of advocacy is diplomacy, after all.

Agree. And...
You would know.

/

 

[BarneyFife]

True story: At City-Data, a longstanding female poster immediately named me "my new favorite poster" for comments similar to those I have made here. A week later, a moderator named mensaguy banned me for being a gay-bashing Neanderthal. The fact that I am able to view issues from a nuanced perspective and cannot be pigeonholed as you attempt to do is something of which I am proud. What precisely is "another gay agenda apologist" in your mind? Who is the "we" of whom you so grandly speak?

You have mixed the apples and oranges I was attempting to separate. If you would care to search my posts, somewhere here I have made PRECISELY the distinction you are making between the LGBTQ movement and the lack of any such campaign on behalf of adulterers. But what you and others completely miss, because you are incapable of nuanced thinking, is the Rather Large distinction between the LGBTQ movement, which even many gays view with dismay, and the struggle of an individual with the homosexual orientation and how the Christian community should respond to him or her.

A problem I see here is that you are bluntly distinguishing yourself as a nuanced thinker in contrast with people you don't know as being incapable of nuanced thinking, which is bound to come off to most folks as arrogant elitism on your part. Good luck at effective communication here. You'll get a few votes from someone, most likely—maybe even a longstanding female poster.


.

 

[BarneyFife]

St. SteVen said:
My real issue is with the church, and Christians that refuse to take positive steps
to reach this largely unreached people group except on their own terms.

Is there a better way to frame it?
I wrote: "the church, and Christians". The institutions and individuals.

Or is the finger pointing the problem?
I want them to understand what they have done and are doing.
And it ain't good.

"And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself." - Matthew 22:39 NIV

To which the church replies:

"But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?” - Luke 10:29 NIV

LGBTQ is the Samaria of today. The hated neighbor. WWJD?


Agree. And...
You would know.

/

Just..



.

 

[St. SteVen]

—maybe even a longstanding female poster.

LOL
Hey! Gay men like him too! - LOL

(No, I'm not gay!)

/

 

[St. SteVen]

Just..



.

That's the problem.
A paradigm isn't even worth 20 cents today. (sigh)

(pair of dimes) - LOL

And it takes a paradox to moor your ship.

.

 

[Wrangler]

The fact that I am able to view issues from a nuanced perspective and cannot be pigeonholed as you attempt to do is something of which I am proud.

Yet, your thoughts betray you. Revealed. "Pigeon holed" as you say.

I doubt the veracity of your story. Clearly, you don't have a nuanced perspective at all. See James 1 on being double minded.

What precisely is "another gay agenda apologist" in your mind?

Consult your favorite lexicon. I speak English with words already defined.

Who is the "we" of whom you so grandly speak?

"We" are the community here at CyB.

 

[BarneyFife]

LOL
Hey! Gay men like him too! - LOL

(No, I'm not gay!)

/

Yes you are. I have it on bad authority—and that's all I need to make a really truthful decision.


.

 

[St. SteVen]

Yes you are. I have it on bad authority—and that's all I need to make a really truthful decision.


.

What are you doing later? - LOL

/

 

[Wrangler]

because you are incapable of nuanced thinking, is the Rather Large distinction between the LGBTQ movement, which even many gays view with dismay, and the struggle of an individual with the homosexual orientation and how the Christian community should respond to him or her.

I am a black and white thinker and very capable of nuance. I am also very capable of identifying BS.

I previously asked how you parse the movement from the people. Perhaps you answered and I missed it. What you call nuance, I call a thinly veiled attempt at subterfuge.

It's awesome how you come here and lecture the Christian community in how we ought to deal with sinners - as you attempt to paint them "in a nuanced way" as not being sinners. They have no burden to stop sinning. No. No! NO! Only the Christian community has the burden to respond to them as you dictate.

 

[BarneyFife]

That's the problem.
A paradigm isn't even worth 20 cents today. (sigh)

(pair of dimes) - LOL

And it takes a paradox to moor your ship.

.

Don't explain your jokes. It's poor forum.

What am I gonna do with you/me/us?

(I think people are jealous 'cause we don't agree on that much but we still get along great. )


.