From: RFaussette@aol.com
Date: Wed Jan 22 2003 - 12:18:42 EST
In a message dated 1/22/03 11:30:43 AM Eastern Standard Time,
burgythree@hotmail.com writes:
I have commented before on the rather silly concept of a "scientific proof."
rich responds:
I came to this list because you were all Christians and scientists. How can
one dialog scientifically with the above?
rich had written:
A healthy people does not condone homosexuality. Zoroastrians are against
homosexuality precisely because it lowers birth rates. So are Orthodox Jewish
communities.
burgy responded:
Those are three claims. Without grounds, they are simply opinions. Believe
them if you wish.
rich responded to burgy:
You call them opinions. Here is where I got the zoroastrian view of
homosexuality and note their reason - to preserve and expand the religion.
It's not my opinion. It's their belief as they express it and I am not going
to be so intolerant as to unilaterally choose to ignore it.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_zor.htm
One principle that might influence condemnation of homosexuality is the
importance of family life within the faith. Orthodox Zoroastrianism currently
does not accept converts from other religions; one must have a Zoroastrian
mother and father in order to be accepted into the faith. To preserve and
expand the religion, homosexuals as well as celibate persons would be pitied
and pressured into marriage.
I could also quote from Lamm's The Jewish way in Love and Marriage (on
homosexuality) but it's way up on the shelf...
rich adds:
Dear Burgy,
I live in NY. Grew up just north of Harlem in Washington Heights. I worked
with a 'queen' who danced naked in a cage in the East Village and we got
along quite well. I've had gay friends I've had to visit in the hospice as
they were dying of AIDS and many gays attend my church. We don't talk about
one another's sins. We just build community. We are maintaining 2,000 years
of His teaching and if we were all gay our efforts would be in vain because
our community would end with this generation. My position is that gays must
be tolerant OF US, recognize that homosexuality is an alternate life style
and show respect and deference to the Christian breeders who maintain His
teaching WITHOUT ALTERATION AND WITHOUT WHOM the Christian world would cease
to exist (LITERALLY CEASE TO EXIST). Those gays who are part of my Catholic
community know their responsibilities. Those gays who say the churches are
hateful and bigoted don't know their responsibilities.
The suggestion that I am intolerant or hateful because I hold this position
is absolutely ridiculous. All are welcome in His Church but some are carrying
more of the burden than others while those others carrying less of the burden
are championing not spiritual needs but physical desires. Who should defer to
whom?
Gays should defer to those who carry the full weight of the Cross. That is
not intolerant or hateful. That is logical and appropriate.
rich
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Jan 22 2003 - 12:20:35 EST