Salvation Army: Gay parents deserve to be put to death

[fr0d0]

"we hate gay people" is a sensationalist version of "homosexuality is considered a sin".

Personally I have no problem with them holding unpopular views. If they feel that this is justified, and they break no law and even treat anyone less than commendably, which is all I see them saying above, then I can't disagree with that. Believe me if I had some beef with them I wouldn't hold back.

I find your criticisms here hollow.

God "mandates", or more accurately humanity mandates spiritual death upon itself. We understand that to be human nature. You can disagree with that, and I'd be interested to hear your opinion, but either way that doesn't put God in the wrong.

Look at their words above.

I can't see how you think :

"We pledge to continue to offer services to all Australians and to treat each person with dignity, respect and non-discrimination."

=

"support, overtly, of a position that causes discrimination against homosexuals."

Come on be fair

[Minimalist]

Why is it still alright in the US to call for the death of a group of people as a participant in the political arena?

Because we have a lot of fine xtians in power, TGAC.

[Ben Davis]

"we hate gay people" is a sensationalist version of "homosexuality is considered a sin".

...and although their not quite equivalent statements, defining homosexuality as a sin is an overt mandate for discrimination. You make my point for me.

Personally I have no problem with them holding unpopular views. If they feel that this is justified, and they break no law and even treat anyone less than commendably, which is all I see them saying above, then I can't disagree with that.

The popularity of their view is irrelevant; it's unethical to discriminate against someone on the grounds of sexuality. I don't care if they think they can justify it, they're wrong and even if they break no law, their promotion of discrimination is also unethical. I can't disagree with them more.

Believe me if I had some beef with them I wouldn't hold back. I find your criticisms here hollow.

That speaks more to a skewing of your values than it does the efficacy of my criticisms. That's clearly the result of viewing homosexuality as a sin. Once again, you make my point for me.

God "mandates", or more accurately humanity mandates spiritual death upon itself. We understand that to be human nature. You can disagree with that, and I'd be interested to hear your opinion, but either way that doesn't put God in the wrong.

I do disagree. Humanity does not mandate spiritual death upon itself: in theory, god is the one making all the rules therefore he holds all the responsibility & accountability. If you're not familiar with the 'mafia boss' analogy, I suggest you look it up. Not only does that make god wrong but it makes him immoral.

I can't see how you think :

"We pledge to continue to offer services to all Australians and to treat each person with dignity, respect and non-discrimination."
=
"support, overtly, of a position that causes discrimination against homosexuals."

Come on be fair

I don't think that. I think:

"no human being is without sin, all sin leads to spiritual death"
=
'homosexuality is a sin, all sins lead to spiritual death'
=
"support, overtly, of a position that causes discrimination against homosexuals."

I also think "We pledge to continue to offer services to all Australians and to treat each person with dignity, respect and non-discrimination." is directly contradicted by the SA's position on homosexuality and only exists because some basic, human decency has been forced upon their doctrine. We have centuries of human rights development to thank for that, not a biblical view of what's 'right or decent'.

That's what's fair.

[fr0d0]

"we hate gay people" is a sensationalist version of "homosexuality is considered a sin".

...and although their not quite equivalent statements, defining homosexuality as a sin is an overt mandate for discrimination. You make my point for me.

I said that. They didn't .

(replies in progress)

[Ryantology]

God "mandates", or more accurately humanity mandates spiritual death upon itself. We understand that to be human nature. You can disagree with that, and I'd be interested to hear your opinion, but either way that doesn't put God in the wrong.

"Spiritual death" is a threat to use against someone you are not allowed to physically kill. It is nothing more, it is nothing less, and the very idea of death, spiritual or otherwise, for harmless activities is disgusting.

It is illogical that a God who knows everything would give people all of the necessary conditions to practice homosexuality would then hate it and punish people for doing it. Unless, of course, that God was a cruel despot with no sense of fairness or justice. The truth of the matter is that ancient Hebrew priests found gay sex icky and wrote their distaste into law, put God's name on it, and ensured millennia of persecution against homosexuals in all times and places where their insidious dogma ever held the minds of man.

What kind of god would view any kind of shared love as evil but a god of hate?

[fr0d0]

Personally I have no problem with them holding unpopular views. If they feel that this is justified, and they break no law and even treat anyone less than commendably, which is all I see them saying above, then I can't disagree with that.

The popularity of their view is irrelevant; it's unethical to discriminate against someone on the grounds of sexuality. I don't care if they think they can justify it, they're wrong and even if they break no law, their promotion of discrimination is also unethical. I can't disagree with them more.

You say that it's unethical, they (I presume) say it's ethical. What are you basing your ethical stance upon? Populist opinion that has influenced the law?

They have committed to non descrimination. A point you seem determined to ignore.

Given that all laws are based on populist opinion, surely your apparent suggestion here that it should be unacceptable to even think differently to the majority opinion... what kind of religiosity are you proposing here? It sounds grossly immoral to me.

---

Believe me if I had some beef with them I wouldn't hold back. I find your criticisms here hollow.

That speaks more to a skewing of your values than it does the efficacy of my criticisms. That's clearly the result of viewing homosexuality as a sin. Once again, you make my point for me.

Please show me any "clear viewing of homosexuality as a sin". I see none except in the sensationalism of the media repeated by you.
If you have to resort to lying to prove your point, I don't think you have a point. in fact I'm now convinced of that, and I won't waste my time further here entertaining your fantasy.

---

God "mandates", or more accurately humanity mandates spiritual death upon itself. We understand that to be human nature. You can disagree with that, and I'd be interested to hear your opinion, but either way that doesn't put God in the wrong.

I do disagree. Humanity does not mandate spiritual death upon itself: in theory, god is the one making all the rules therefore he holds all the responsibility & accountability. If you're not familiar with the 'mafia boss' analogy, I suggest you look it up. Not only does that make god wrong but it makes him immoral.

So humanity is perfect in your world view. That's great. Like I said, it still doesn't take anything away from the Christian world view that humanity is basically flawed. Nor does it change the fact that according to this world view, humanity is free to live or die spiritually.

Further, you don't need to assume God for this theory. This natural world reflects the same truth. People limit their own lives by acting negatively, and enhance their lives by acting positively. If nature didn't mimic God then the faith model could be demonstrated to be false Your mafia boss analogy would separate the theories. But it doesn't.

---

I also think "We pledge to continue to offer services to all Australians and to treat each person with dignity, respect and non-discrimination." is directly contradicted by the SA's position on homosexuality

I wouldn't disagree with you if you could show me where the SA has said this. Please show your evidence of your accusation of this supposed position on homosexuality.

I'm not saying it isn't possible. I'm not saying that no Christian has never said this. As I've said above, I think we need to be tolerant and not outlaw thought crime. I personally don't agree at all with discrimination, and see no biblical precedent for it.

[NoraBrimstone]

Lesbian parents are the best parents. The Sally Army are jealous.

[Walking Void]

Does anybody here support established charities? I prefer DIY.

[NoraBrimstone]

I support loads of Charities. I have Direct Debits for donations to Everychild, Save The Children, St Mungos, and (if it counts) UAF. I sponsor a child in Myanmar through World Vision. I also have a Virgin Money Charity credit card where all he cashback I earn goes to Cancer Research UK.

On a related note I'm doing the Shine Walking Marathon for Cancer Research UK in September with a few girls from work. We hope to raise about £2,500 for charity.

[Walking Void]

The 2 I do support are "Make a Wish" and "Children's Wish Foundation".