Christian Colleges Tangled in LGBT Policies.

HARK! said:

The truth doesn't change. If homosexual acts are a natural source of propagation; where is the evidence of resultant progeny?

It is perverted choice that flies in the face of the inherent design of every life form to reproduce.

Click to expand...

Nice strawman. Sexuality involves a lot more than just propagation. It is hardly "perverted" since we are animals and quite a few animals have homosexual individuals.

HARK! said:

Again, minority isn't a sex.

Click to expand...

its not a skin color either

Subduction Zone said:

I would like to hear you justify your claim that it was a bad example.

And I did not make any historical claims about LBGQ in Christendom. Why limit you view to such an extent? Yes, Christendom has been wrong in almost its entire history as far as that issue goes. I will agree with you on that.

Click to expand...

Christianity has been right it's entire history and that's where I disagree with you. initial point of this diversion was the matter of LGBT Christians being just as Christian as the rest of Christendom. That is why they are especially relevant.

The attempt on your part to bring up slavery is merely a guilt trip, not designed to offer any substantive take on the issues at the time or try to get to any real understanding of Christianity and slavery. Hence to me it seems like a bad example to bring up to demonstrate the apparent changing within Christianity. Slavery, at least in the form of African slavery is minor part of the tradition and one more easily explained with the Spanish encounter of Islam rather than directly attributing to Christianity. We've seen what developed naturally out of Christian society, it was serfdom.

HARK! said:

It's chocked full of scientific information.

For example:

Prior to December 14, 1973 the American Psychiatric Association(APA) considered same sex attractions disordered.The disorder was listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders‐II (DSM‐II)

Was this publication peer reviewed?

Click to expand...

That is not "scientific information" that is history.

And you do not appear to understand peer review. You should have asked if the classification was refuted, and I do believe it was. That refutation probably passed peer review. I know that some do not like this fact, but science improves as we learn more and more.

Ignatius the Kiwi said:

Christianity has been right it's entire history and that's where I disagree with you. initial point of this diversion was the matter of LGBT Christians being just as Christian as the rest of Christendom. That is why they are especially relevant.

The attempt on your part to bring up slavery is merely a guilt trip, not designed to offer any substantive take on the issues at the time or try to get to any real understanding of Christianity and slavery. Hence to me it seems like a bad example to bring up to demonstrate the apparent changing within Christianity. Slavery, at least in the form of African slavery is minor part of the tradition and one more easily explained with the Spanish encounter of Islam rather than directly attributing to Christianity. We've seen what developed naturally out of Christian society, it was serfdom.

Click to expand...

So it was right when it endorse slavery almost universally. That is an interesting take.

I like how facts are now a "guilt trip".

HARK! said:

What is your source for this information?

Click to expand...

its the 2017 National Crime Victimization report compiled by National Center for Education Statistics and the Bureau of Justice Statistics


as I said.

I find it difficult to believe that 36% of those who attend Christian college are gay.

Click to expand...

you don't have to be gay to be gay bashed

Quartermaine said:

its the 2017 National Crime Victimization report compiled by National Center for Education Statistics and the Bureau of Justice Statistics


as I said.


you don't have to be gay to be gay bashed

Click to expand...

I don't see why this is so hard for some to understand. They seem to want it both ways. If you can't be gay bashed unless you are gay then they are claiming that at least 36% (or whatever the figure was) is gay.

Subduction Zone said:

So it was right when it endorse slavery almost universally. That is an interesting take.

I like how facts are now a "guilt trip".

Click to expand...

I didn't say they were right to endorse slavery.

Ignatius the Kiwi said:

If alll 40,0000 agree on the trinity a majority agree on LGBT issues in rejecting them, have you made a point about the tradition as a whole?

Click to expand...

Tell you what. You go survey all of them and report back what you find. I'll wait.

pitabread said:

Tell you what. You go survey all of them and report back what you find. I'll wait.

Click to expand...

I'm not the one whose relying on surveys. You are.

Ignatius the Kiwi said:

Alright but that doesn't address what I said, about either the removal of children from households with traditional values or how it is ineffective to appeal to religious rights in such a case. If you view conversion therapy as abuse or teaching that homosexuality is intrinsically disordered as being abusive, why would you let your adherence to the rights of the religious (be they Christian, Muslim or Jewish) prevent you from wanting to remove those children from that environment?

Click to expand...

conversion therapy is by it's nature and in its practice abuse.

It's not even as if states aren't doing this today. I recall a month or two ago there was a Muslim man in Washington DC whose autistic son had to go to hospital and when he came to pick him up he was shocked to learn that his child was actually a girl. This Muslim father promised to do everything he was told after being told by his lawyer that if he objected it was likely they might take away his son. He then proceeded, when he had his son back in his care to move his son out of DC. A commendable action by this Muslim Father and something Christian parents going forward could learn from.

Click to expand...

I read about this and needed a shovel to dig through all the garbage.

Quartermaine said:

conversion therapy is by it's nature and in its practice abuse.

Click to expand...

Well of course you would think that. You're not part of historical Christianity. The only thing I know you believe is liberal progressivism.

Quartermaine said:

I read about this and needed a shovel to dig through all the garbage.

Click to expand...

Do you think this Muslim man should be punished for denying his son transition therapy?

Ignatius the Kiwi said:

I'm not the one whose relying on surveys. You are.

Click to expand...

And they support my contention that Christianity is not an unchanging monolith.

pitabread said:

And they support my contention that Christianity is not an unchanging monolith.

Click to expand...

What surveys support that? How would you even begin to quantify such a thing? A more sane thing to do is actually read the well known and respected Christians throughout the ages to get a sense of what Christians in general believe and believed. I never argued that Christianity was unchanging monolith but rather that there is a consistent tradition of which LGBT people cannot claim to be rightfully supported by. LGBT Christians represent a modern heresy and I suspect they will die out quite naturally in the course of the liberal Christian assimilation into secular society.

Again, this is like saying the four rightfully guided Caliphs don't represent Islam but your liberal Muslim neighbor down the road does. Clearly the latter is a perversion of the authentic spirit of Islam represented by a commitment to expanding the Ummah and placing everything under the subjection of Allah and his law.

HARK! said:

It's chocked full of scientific information.

For example:

Prior to December 14, 1973 the American Psychiatric Association(APA) considered same sex attractions disordered.The disorder was listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders‐II (DSM‐II)

Was this publication peer reviewed?

Click to expand...

The DSM is not a research publication. DSM III debuted around 1980. It has been replaced. Insurance companies recognize diagnoses for conditions listed in ICD-10, not DSM.

Psychiatric diagnoses are of marginal value, IMHO, because they typically are based solely on observation and patient report.

HARK! said:

HS isn't college. You were saying?

Click to expand...

I'm saying there's no relevant difference -- care to explain why you think I'm wrong?