Anglican Bishop Attacks Gay People

dignitized · Sep 9, 2007

Isn't Nigeria suffering from conflict between Christians and muslims currently?

Trevorocity · Sep 9, 2007

ContentInHim said:
Well, I'm not going to some "gay" internet rag website - to read their interpretation of the actions of a righteous Anglican priest. I happen to agree with him - from the little I can see (well, not stoning, obviously). SIN IS SIN! Apparently some believe it is not sin by calling it not sin. God doesn't work that way.

May God bless this bishop for his righteous stand!

Then move there. Sounds like you'd be a lot happier living in an oppressive religiously dominated regime anyway. Don't the let door hit you on your way out.

Dannager · Sep 9, 2007

ContentInHim said:
Well, I'm not going to some "gay" internet rag website - to read their interpretation of the actions of a righteous Anglican priest. I happen to agree with him - from the little I can see (well, not stoning, obviously). SIN IS SIN! Apparently some believe it is not sin by calling it not sin. God doesn't work that way.

May God bless this bishop for his righteous stand!

How interesting. You agree with him that homosexuals are unfit to live, because sin is sin? And I have to assume you'd admit that you've sinned. You're unfit to live, then? You're inhuman? You're satanic? You're insane? Get rid of the bigoted attitude and chuck your religiously-motivated vitriol in the trash where it belongs. I understand that the pretense of righteousness makes you feel superior to other people, but that doesn't mean it's morally acceptable for you to wield it for that purpose.

DoomRyderOCST · Sep 9, 2007

Horizonol said:
The title isn't fully accurate. The bishops didn't attack 'gay people'- he condemned those who practice homosexuality.

You stole my thunder. After reading the thread title, I thought some Anglican Bishop had gone postal on a bunch of homosexuals.

thenewageriseth · Sep 13, 2007

SeraphymCrashing said:
http://gayrepublic.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1779&lead=1

(Nigeria) - The Anglican Bishop of Uyo, Nigeria, Isaac Orama, has publicly assaulted the "activities of homosexuals and Lesbians", and described those engaged in them as "insane people''. In an interview with the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) given on 2 September 2007 he said: "Homosexuality and lesbianism are inhuman. Those who practice them are insane, satanic and are not fit to live because they are rebels to God's purpose for man."

Now I know there are some people here who might agree with this bishop, but frankly this is appalling.

Couldn't he have put it across in a nicer way?

That homosexuality is wrong?

Meshavrischika · Sep 13, 2007

SeraphymCrashing said:
http://gayrepublic.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1779&lead=1

(Nigeria) - The Anglican Bishop of Uyo, Nigeria, Isaac Orama, has publicly assaulted the "activities of homosexuals and Lesbians", and described those engaged in them as "insane people''. In an interview with the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) given on 2 September 2007 he said: "Homosexuality and lesbianism are inhuman. Those who practice them are insane, satanic and are not fit to live because they are rebels to God's purpose for man."

Now I know there are some people here who might agree with this bishop, but frankly this is appalling.

why this is suprising is a mystery to me... this is a COMMON idea in the church

BlueAfgani · Sep 13, 2007

However, homosexuality is wicked and should be illegal. There are still sodomy laws on many of the books. However, they are not being prosecuted. Sad.

That's about a big brotherish as you can get, having the government dictate what kind of sex you can and can not have just because some nut finds it immoral.

You're just a different shade of big government liberal.

BlueAfgani · Sep 13, 2007

Well, I'm not going to some "gay" internet rag website - to read their interpretation of the actions of a righteous Anglican priest. I happen to agree with him - from the little I can see (well, not stoning, obviously). SIN IS SIN! Apparently some believe it is not sin by calling it not sin. God doesn't work that way.

I guess this just goes to shows rabid fanaticism isn't isolated to Islam.

Meshavrischika · Sep 13, 2007

BlueAfgani said:
I guess this just goes to shows rabid fanaticism isn't isolated to Islam.

Calling something what it is (sin) is not fanatacism. It's the truth. How you act in response to your convictions makes you fanatical.

Loving in spite of the sin is what I believe Christ would have us do... but not to be able to label something what it is (in our religious sense) is fanatacism IMHO.

He (the bishop) went overboard saying they were not fit to live, etc... that was too harsh. A simple "it's wrong" should suffice. (not to mention his insanity comment is kind of offensive to people with mental illness)

He was not PC, and was not really in a great place by saying they were insane and not fit to live, but he was well within his rights and within alot of churchs ideas of homosexuality.

Morcova · Sep 13, 2007

Br. Max said:
I'm not saying his anger is right - I'm saying he's got valid reason for his anger when so many of the early Christians in so many areas of Africa were tortured and anally raped for their faith.

Pathetic.

You sound as bad as a pagan crying about the "burning times".

BlackAndy · Sep 13, 2007

As opposed to homosexuality as I am I find this bishops views to be quite unChristian.

SpiritualAntiseptic · Sep 14, 2007

Morcova said:
Pathetic.

You sound as bad as a pagan crying about the "burning times".

You do know that in the 1880s Africa had many Christian martyrs who were mutilated and were burned alive for refusing to give consent to homosexual acts by tribal rulers?

The martyrs were quickly realized as saints and are a source of pride and courage for Africa. To them, homosexuality means a lot more than the west sees it as.

Lord_Marx · Sep 14, 2007

SpiritualAntiseptic said:
You do know that in the 1880s Africa had many Christian martyrs who were mutilated and were burned alive for refusing to give consent to homosexual acts by tribal rulers?

The martyrs were quickly realized as saints and are a source of pride and courage for Africa. To them, homosexuality means a lot more than the west sees it as.

While I think that it's important to examine the roots of any given form of hatred, I think that this hate is completely misdirected (targeting rapists would make far more sense).

I also feel that the blame for the crimes that occurred in the past belongs to those who committed the abuses in question alone. No person or group should be condemned for the crimes of another.

MrPirate · Sep 14, 2007

Br. Max said:
I'm not saying his anger is right - I'm saying he's got valid reason for his anger when so many of the early Christians in so many areas of Africa were tortured and anally raped for their faith.

There never EVER a valid reason for bigotry.

And shame on you for defending such hatred.

MrPirate · Sep 14, 2007

ElsanRandiMom said:
why this is suprising is a mystery to me... this is a COMMON idea in the church

Calling for the deaths of people because they are different is a common idea of the church????

kiwimac · Sep 14, 2007

While there may be historical reasons for this Bishop's words, his words were graceless, ie. lacking the grace of Christ. He should be removed from his See.

WarEagle · Sep 14, 2007

I don't know if I'd have said what he did, but the Bible does say that homosexuality is a sin and that homosexuals (along with all sinner) face God's wrath on judgement day.

To be honest with you, I'm more surprised that an Anglican said something negative about homosexuality and wasn't lynched by his own fellow Anglicans. Anglicans/Episcopals have actually supported this sin very strongly.

rebel_conservative · Sep 14, 2007

Thread title needs to be changed. The Bishop did not attack any gay people.

How about...

"Anglican Bishop said something that offended gay people"?

I am not saying I agree with what he said, at all, I think it was vile and unChristian.

DoomRyderOCST · Sep 14, 2007

kiwimac said:
While there may be historical reasons for this Bishop's words, his words were graceless, ie. lacking the grace of Christ. He should be removed from his See.

I agree that he poorly worded his statement, but unless he truly serves his call in a consistently graceless manner, I don't see why he should be removed from his See. We all speak in a graceless manner from time to time.

MrPirate · Sep 14, 2007

rebel_conservative said:
Thread title needs to be changed. The Bishop did not attack any gay people.

How about...

"Anglican Bishop said something that offended gay people"?

I am not saying I agree with what he said, at all, I think it was vile and unChristian.

If he had stated that Jews were inhuman and those that practice Judiasm are insane, satanic and not fit to live would you be rushing to his defense?

Anglican Bishop Attacks Gay People

Well-Known Member

Regular Member

Back in Town

The Doom Ryder of Cheesy Song Titles

Stranger in my town, commoner in my realm

for Thy greater honor and glory

BlueAfgani

Guest

BlueAfgani

Guest

for Thy greater honor and glory

Well-Known Member

Everyone is entitled to my opinion.

SpiritualAntiseptic

Guest

Well-Known Member

MrPirate

Guest

MrPirate

Guest

Bishop of the See of Aotearoa ROCCNZ;Theologian

Well-Known Member

Baruch HaShem! Praise G-d!

The Doom Ryder of Cheesy Song Titles

MrPirate

Guest

Similar threads