I'm an Episcopalian.........I have problems......

[KoKo]

I believe that Gays should be able to form unions where they get "survivor benefits...where they can get whatever insurance and "legal guardian" responsibilties that the rest of us get.

But, I can't deal with what's going on with my church and the ordination of the Gay Episcopal Bishop.

I feel I'm being torn in two! I support the right for gays to be together......for a "civil ceremony" for union if they wish......but I cannot accept that the union between two people of the same sex is part of what I believe as a Christian.

And........even worse is that I feel I am being put into the "Fundie Corner" of religious belief because I will leave my church if this Bishop is ordained........

It's a horrible dilemna......and I love all my gay/lesbian fellow DU'ers.........but I cannot accept a "marriage" in my church or this ordination.

So, this means the "fundies" win......because we who support all survivor rights and insurance rights for gays and lesbians are now put into some "Predjudiced Group."

I wish it didn't have to come to this......but on this issue......I cannot change.......:-(

Is there anyone else having my problem.......any Episcopalians out there?

[DEMActivist]

1. Answer one question?

Why?

What is it about "marriage" that makes you think a gay marriage reduces a hetrosexual marriage? On what basis do you think that 2 people of the same sex going through a "ceremony" dimishes you, your beliefs or your marriage?

You've already said you are willing to give them all the CIVIL benefits, but deny them the Christian benefits. Why?

[KoKo]

7. I hate to say this Dem......but I believe the same as Bush...marriage is a

union between a man and a woman. I really wish I wasn't saying this....and I hate that I have to.....but it's true......I do believe that. But, I don't believe that gay/lesbians should be denied some union of their choice outside the Episcopal Church. For their own church....interpret what you want to believe and go forward with marriage......if you can find the biblical passage you want......doesn't bother me given the diversity of biblical interpretation that exists with all kinds of different churches here in the US.

BUT.....when my church decides it will forsake what I grew up with and change it.....then they have thrown me out for another group.......so I will have to leave.

And, I suppose that will allow the "New" group to come in...........but my Church has left me on this issue........that's where I am, Dem........it is.........I need something left to believe in.......and if it isn't my political system here in America.....then it has to be my church. If my Church leaves me.......then what do I have left....?????????

[DEMActivist]

18. Wait....stop....explain...

Please stop and think about my question. Take out politics. Take out fundamentalism.....

Answer the single question "Why?"

Why does a ceremony between anyone (same sex or not) diminish who, what and why YOU are?

Would you feel the same about a marriage between and young boy and girl being forced into a loveless marriage by an unwanted pregnancy?

KoKo, I firmly believe that if we heterosexual "Christians" stop for one minute and truly answer that question, we find in our belief system that it's not religious belief that does this to us, but politics and upbringing.

I truly do not believe that any true Christian, a true believer in God, would condon the condemnation of a loving couple regardless of their sex. I say this as 1) a Catholic and 2) a heterosexual 50+ woman.

[SuffragetteSal]

161. Don't give up - try to keep an open mind & heart

I am sure you're church has not left you on this issue, as you say above. You may be in the minority within the church but you can bet there are others who feel exactly as you do. You may want to set up an appointment to talk to someone within the church about your feelings and thoughts on this issue. I am sure there is someone that can help you feel more comfortable.

It is an honest post KoKo01 and it is the first step in understanding yourself in regards to your faith and the church you choose to attend.

IMHO, your inability to accept this change may be related to the teachings that those who head the church are very father-like and deserving of utmost respect. If you can come to the place where you accept that they are afterall only 'men' - mortal souls, just as we all are.

I wish you good luck.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

2. Why can't you accept it?

I understand that you believe what you believe as a Christian but where did CHRIST tell you to believe that?

Honestly Koko, I mean no disrespect, I really like you, I just wonder where the belief comes from.

My father was a Jewish man. IN the end of his life, a lesbian Episcopal minister came to our home as part of hospice service. She really bonded with our family and gave us all room to complete with my father and gave him room to complete his life. So much so that my father asked for her to be the one to do his eulogy AND to read the Kaddish. My mother has said when she passes she also wants this minister to perform the service.

My parents weren't even happy about ME being gay but fell in love with this woman and her loving message.

[KoKo]

10. Dem.........how did you have time to see my reply...I was posting and

you answered just as my post appeared!!!!! Yikes. ...Read what I said.....then I will answer.....I have to eat supper.......but will think about your post.....and try to answer....because this is tearing me apart inside........

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

17. Funny, because i read your post a few moments after I posted

Hope your meal was nice.
I guess what I am having trouble separating is your desire to HOLD ONTO SOMETHING familiar in a time when so much is being ripped away and changing in the world insofar as human rights are concerned (which I can understand) and your focusing on the ordaining of gays and marriage of gays as a convenient focus (if you will) for the things that are really missing and being taken away.

I guess I see the exclusion of gays in terms of equal rights as an issue of hate and irrational fear.

It seems to me that your response to DEMACTIVIST is a response borne of fear for the future but , somehow, the gay issue became a focus rather than the issue of hatred and how it is shaping life these days for all of us.

I know I'm rambling a bit. I hope this post makes sense.

[FoxNewsIsTheDevil]

32. Christ still wants people to follow Old Testament law

It specifically goes against homosexuality in the Bible. I have no problem with civil unions, but when it starts to get into the church.....

[Aaron]

50. I'm no bible scholar so correct me if I'm wrong but aren't there many

old testament laws that are disregarded daily? Like stuff about how to make bread, what clothes to wear, etc.? Is not being gay one of those laws or is it different somehow?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

69. Did Christ tell you that?

[mitchtv]

157. Funny, as a Catholic , I was taught that Christ, relieved us

of Old Testament laws, especially those in leviticus. You know Kosher and all that . More that one crop in the field, garments of two fibers. Boy you cotton polyester crowd could be in deep doo doo. What makes the homosexuality rules any different?

[Ediacara]

183. Hmmm...

Old Testiment laws tell you that you can't wear garments made of two different materials, it's an abomination. They also say you cannot eat animals with cloven hooves (artiodactyles), also an abomination. Being gay is also an aboniation, equal in "value" to wearing mixed clothes or eating artiodactyles.

YET.... millions upon millions of Christians daily wear 50-50 cotton-poly shirts, or underwear with elastics, or wool mittens with leather grips. And millions upon millions of Christians eat pork, bacon, and ham.

WHY is it that Christians choose to single out being gay as the Old Testiment law they'll follow, while blatently ignoring many others on a daily basis?

The old testiment tells us a lot of weird things, pi for example is three exactly, and the world was made in 6 days. Perhaps the Old Testiment should be viewed as the metaphorical writings of a very ancient and minor tribe in western Asia?

[InkAddict]

3. Feel Your Pain

it must be almost like sharing the Sacrament with a Lutheran.

[KoKo]

11. I have shared the sacraments with Lutherans and love them.........

Lutherans are not so different from Episcopalians...........they aren't.....nor, in many ways are Presbyterians..........

Edited: I spelled sacraments wrong.....sorry...

[xchrom]

12. a little levity

right when it's needed. that was delicious.
sorry i'm gay and an episcopalean -- and you get no sympathy from me on either the ordination of the ''gay'' bishop or on the marriage issue. straight people have had it their way on religous views for far too long. it's time for someone else's two cents. christ is for every one not just straight people.
and remember -- if it hadn't been for wealthy straight people needing to figure out exactly who was going to inherit the goods -- there would have been no ''holy wedlock''. the church meddled in the material world when it came up with marriage as we understand it now. a long time went by before the church even bothered marrying serfs.

[gratuitous]

4. Well, I'm not Episcopalian, but . . .

I'm Church of the Brethren, which is about as low church as you can get. Our congregation's pastor is gay, but his sexual orientation has nothing to do with his ability to do the job of pastoring. The man clearly has the "call" to be a pastor, and provides wonderful leadership for our congregation and the wider district of which we're a part.

Can you articulate what you're feeling more fully? What is it specifically about Gene Robinson that you object to? Do you feel he's unqualified to be a bishop? Do you feel he doesn't have the call to fulfill that office?

[annagull]

5. Episcopalian here--and I have no problem with it

What do I care what Father Joe does with his partner? Christianity is supposed to be about love--and we all deserve love and fufillment and acceptance by our church and community. I am proud of our church today, just as proud as when women were admitted to the clergy.

[KoKo]

13. Anna, we can "love everyone" but at some point one does have foundations..

Otherwise why would we all here be against Bush.......at some point people draw a line........
This is my line..........

[Az]

40. If you obey no other teaching

Treat others as you would have them treat you.

[Cornus]

53. Perhaps it's time...

...for you to reconsider EXACTLY where you draw that line. IMHO you need a serious consciousness raising regarding what it means to be gay in this society.

[Mairead]

130. When you're thinking about where to draw your line, consider

the Golden Rule: What is hateful to you, do not do to another. That is the whole of the Law, all else is commentary.

So if it would hurt you to be judged and rejected, then as a christian you must choose not to judge and reject. Struggle if necessary. All human institutions are mere vanities--things that people create so they can feel superior in their separation from God. For if God is love, then God is love for all, and the most inclusive are the most like God.

Just a thought.

[Paschall]

150. So KoKo, how old are you?

Did you live through the adoption of the New Liturgy? The church changes. And it's sometimes painful. (Ask yourself why gay Episcopalian ministers are okay, and a gay in a high-profile leadership position in the church is not.)

I hope the General Convention will vote wisely for Robinson's ordination.

A gay Episcopalian here.

[jonnyblitz]

169. you "love everyone" they just arent as equal as you...

total horsehit.

[Northwind]

6. try this

Ignore, for a momnent, the dogmatic teachings of your particular demonination of christianity.

Go instead to the source, the teachings of Jesus himself.

Did he, at any time whatsoever, condemn gays?

If, not shouldn't you follow that example?

Second, what were the two greates commandments according to Jesus?

"Love thy god as no other"
"Love thy neighbor as thyself."

Is there any way in which those things can be construed as a condemnation of a sexual orientation?

If not, you have something to think about.

[Rowdyboy]

8. I'm an Episcopalian...

I'm also gay. My feelings are that the diocese of New Hampshire selected Bishop Robinson. The Convention has only turned down one other Bishop in the last 100 years. Why should we start now?

I hope you don't leave. Episcops have always been in the forefront for human rights. Thirty years ago there was enormous dissention over allowing women into the priesthood. Today it is commonplace. We had an upheavel over the "new" prayerbook. Now, few think twice.

I've been tempted to say that I would leave the church if Bishop Robinson isn't confirmed but I changed my mind. Our faith should extend beyond disagreement on any one particular issue-I'll simply live with it for the time being.

Society changes and evolves. Please think through your decision and, remember, only one other Bishop in the last century has failed to be confirmed. Episcopalians tend to respect the decision of the individual diocese....Steve

P.S. I appreciate your having the guts to be honest. Many people would not.

[KoKo]

14. Thanks Rowdy.....I'm tearing my guts out about this...........

I understand what you want..........I just can't see my way to compromise on this........

I know......it's hard...........

[Rowdyboy]

27. What do you object to? The Bishop or the Rites?

Since we have actively gay and lesbian priests, why is there a problem with one being a Bishop? Its basically an administrative job rather than a pastoral one.

Rites blessing same-sex unions? Well, Hell, Koko, we have rights blessing animals on St Francis Day-we have rites for everything under the sun.

I wish I could view this issue through straight eyes, for just a while, but thats not possible. Regardless, you should do what is right for you but I believe, in the end , you'll "see the light" :)

[KoKo]

78. I see the gay/lesbian lifestyle as Social/Sexual....not religious .......

in that it's a choice.

I do feel that way.......and, as I said....I think adopting children.....having survivor benefits...or marrying in your own church that you have founded to express your own religious belief .......is important to you.

But, not to change my belief that believes in your rights as humans to love each other...share in benefits and in trials and tragdies and Joys and Success and adopting Children and fulfilling whatever it is you want to do.......but not to change my church......for your own beliefs.......I have my beliefs......it's a small church foundation, now....Episcopal......founded on a King who wanted an excuse to divorce his first true wife.....and there was the "reformation in the background" but Henry VIII was first and foremost for himself.......
and I believe the "Reformation" was good..as a protestant......

But, I will not go as far as you want........and I'm being honest about it......and it's hard.....because I love you all.........I do...I wouldn't be here on DU with so many others of diverse beliefs.....if I wasn't a "renegade" myself......but on this.....I stand firm......

[Paragon]

103. Why would anyone CHOOSE to be a homosexual in this climate?

Gluttons for punishment? They ENJOY ridicule and being treated as less than human?

Boy, that sounds like SO much fun -- I'm gonna CHOOSE to be gay tonight; maybe if I run into the right sort of people, they'll beat me within an inch of my life! Wheeeeee!!!

[Az]

155. Understanding changes

It was once believed that women did not have the mental capacity to deal with work enviroment conditions as men do. Understanding changes. At one time it was believed that homosexuality was a choice. There is growing evidence that it is entirely biological. It happens in most higher order mammals. It is brain induiced (focus is on the hypothalimus).

The research is simply showing that the brain determines your sexual preference. If your brain is wired for men you like men. If you brain is wired for women you like women. Here is a little test. Explain to me why you chose to be sexually aroused by whatever you are aroused by. Our sexual preference is not a rational descision. It is guts and juices. It is primal.

[Mairead]

132. If you look at the science, I think you'll find

that the most experienced psychologists and anthropologists--people who've made it their life's work to study other humans--believe that human sexual response is normally distributed.

To take one example: the late cultural anthropologist Prof. Marvin Harris believed, given the variety shown in the human cultural record, that there are only a few 'obligatory' heterosexual or homosexual people, and that the vast majority are bisexual to some degree. I.e., that most people are Kinsey 3s, and next most are 2s and 4s, and very few Kinsey 0s or 6s. The preponderance of Kinsey 0s is due to social pressure, not innate characteristics. He offers a number of examples, including communities in which same-sex behavior for males is culturally obligatory during adolescence and young adulthood--all males in the age range are expected to participate, and virtually all do. The ones who don't are the ones looked on as oddballs.

So homosexual behavior is 'a choice' for most only in the sense that eating only chocolate ice cream and wearing only black clothing is 'a choice' -- it's possible for most, but more or less unnatural. But for those few with an allergy to chocolate and the dies used for cloth, such a choice is neither natural nor healthy.

[wellstone_democrat]

145. isn't hetero marriage "social/sexual"

and not "religious?"

I'm an Episcopalian, I'm straight and married. I consider the "blessing" of my church on that inherently civil contract that is fundamentally a societal one for the orderly transferrance of property (!) to children important to me as a believer. But, my relationship is no more "holy" because it is mainstream or accepted than is that of a dear relative whose long-term relationship with his partner cannot be "blessed" by church or state at this time.

I have a lot of "problems" with various things my own congregation does---their prayer/medical circle thing (St Luke something or other) appears to me like some fundamentalist festival on Sunday night. BUT, I assume that they get whatever the heck they need out of it. I find the blessing of animals (frankly) stupid. But, again, the owners seem delighted. And the various other programs that seem to be injecting some charismatic, evangelical elements are also not my cup of tea...but, the church does all of these things in a spirit of love, inclusion and, even at times, just out of habit. What is wrong with the installation of Bishop Robinson? Or, the blessing of gay unions? Nothing from my perspective. I'd like my church to extend that love and blessing to all adult loving unions.

However, heterosexual marriage is no less a "social/sexual" choice or construct than homosexual unions. You may be uncomfortable with it for a variety of reasons but I fail to see how their unions are a "choice" and "our" unions are not.

[Paschall]

151. The General Convention will not be voting on Robinson's...

..."lifestyle," but his capacity to fill his role as a bishop. Applying your logic to the ordination of a heterosexual bishop, every vote of the General Convention would be a sanction of the candidate's marital arrangements. I don't think that's how the lay delegates or the House of Bishops view the matter. Nor should they.

I think you're suffering from residual homophobia. It's okay. This, too, will pass.

[alaine]

23. I have to agree with the p.s.

Although, as a gay person, it hurts my heart and I am fighting the urge to say something mean.

I was raised Baptist. My mental associations with holiness are with Baptist rituals, which I learned when I was really young; with the hymns, the invitation, the communion, etc. and nothing I have tried to replace these with (Wicca, Buddhism, Taoism, etc) have worked or come even close to giving me the feeling that I had of holiness when I was so young. I think it is in part because I was so open and in part because my psyche was still forming, so these associations are permanent. I understand where you are coming from even though my definition of holiness excludes anything that requires such judgement. But that in itself is an intellectual process, not a feeling or emotional conviction, which is where you seem to be at. I guess this is just your process and this is where you are at regarding it. I really don't think much more is asked of people than this, but I wish you peace in getting it worked out in a way that you can live with.

[KoKo]

108. Thanks, Alaine.....our feelings when we were young do stay..and

that feeling of acceptance and holiness......there are still places for it.....even though we change....and maybe don't accept so much sometimes.

But, it was nice you shared that........thanks. :-)'s

[Ramsey]

9. Well, I'm also Episcopalian

And I don't have a problem with gay marriage, gay bishops or gay anything. I support this man for bishop. My church never taught me that homosexuality was a sin or that love between two people, whatever their gender, had imposable limitations. In fact, the church I attend has a large percentage of gay parishoners, many of whom have told me they joined the Episcopal church because of its reputation for being tolerant and open-minded. I like the Episcopal church because it was one of the first to have women priests, something I greatly admire and which others said was unacceptable and against the laws of the church and god. That wasn't armageddon either, was it?

I will never understand why it is considered "christian" to believe that some people should not have the same rights as the rest of us and an equal chance at happiness. You have not explained why a gay bishop is such anathema to you. To me, the premise that marriage can only be between a man and a woman is archaic and arbitrarily cruel. Neither do I believe that god cares whether men love men, women love women, or men and women love each other. In the end, isn't it supposed to all be about love? Period.

You will do what you have to do, but I must admit, I personally find your attitude to be somewhat conservative, even "fundie". I strongly believe in live and let live, and if gays want to marry, or be bishops, it is not my place to oppose them. After all, do unto others as you would done unto you.

[KoKo]

15. Ramsey, I'm not a Fundie....believe me...did you read my post at all?

I can't even reply to what you say unless you read what I said......:-(

[Ramsey]

21. I read it twice

Every word. I din't say you were a fundie. I said that I find your opposition to a gay bishop, to the point that you will leave the church, to fall on the conservative side of the attitudinal spectrum. Not to mention the intolerant side.

I do not understand why you oppose this so vehemently. You didn't really explain. I was raised Episcopalian and always admired the denomination's tolerance and forward-thinking. I was never taught by this church to believe the things that you say your church teaches you. So I guess I'm confused about that. But it doesn't change the fact that in my opinion, your views on this are conservative and I disagree. And so does my church.

[TheDonkey]

16. Why can't you change? Your current position is wrong...

...sorry I can't be more helpful but you are wrong.

Why can you not accept Gays and Lesbians being part of your religious leaders? Do you think that Bishop has worked less hard to achieve that position that anyone else.

Your pre-concieved ideas about homosexuality are clouding your brain. It is a prejudice, plain and simple.

No where does Jesus say men who love men should not be married, nor women who love women. You need to figure out just WHY you don't accept homosexuality and why it can bother you so much. Why can't a gay or lesbian citizen have the SAME rights as you, or the next person.

[KoKo]

22. I am wrong........and you are Correct??????Have you thought about this?

Have you thought about telling me that my tradition in Episcopal Church is wrong?

What else is wrong about my thoughts? And, you are Correct??????

Yes?

[Ramsey]

24. It isn't Episcopalian teaching

At least not from my experience as a member of the same church. The Episcopal church of teaches tolerance and open-mindedness.

I think you must belong to a more conservative branch than I am familiar with. But even if that were what the church teaches, I would have to agree that it is wrong, and not what Jesus would have taught. The church can say and do whatever it likes, and we all know how oppressive and regressive organized religion has been over time. Just because the church says it doesn't make it right, from a moral perspective.

[TheDonkey]

29. I'm confused?

I didn't mean to say your religious position is incorrect.

BUT, your opinion on homosexuality is most definelty incorrect. The thing is being gay & lesbian is not a religious position. What scares me is that people would equate religious rhetoric to ban multiracial marriages (it hadn't happened before, why start now, that's not right!?) as well as enslave people.

The point is, how did you come to the conclusion that gays and lesbians are lesser than heterosexuals. How can you say, "Well I think they should have the rights, but I don't want them to take MY word!" and your doubts of having a gay bishop are wrong.


Is it because you don't understand homosexuality. Is it because you are scared of homosexuality? Is it because you read in the Bible that it is bad and they are not equal to heterosexuals and should not be thought that.

[DEMActivist]

34. Are you saying the "Church" can't be wrong?

I'm a practicing Catholic. Are you telling me I can't disagree with the teachings of the Church like:

No birth control
No divorce
No female priests
The vow of celibacy
Other religions are not "true" religions

Please don't tell me you think I'm unchristian or not a "Catholic" because I dare to disagree with the wrong headed dogma of my church.

I follow the teachings of my faith without blind allegiance to the organized "Church" when they are wrong.

[Dem2dend]

86. A practicing Catholic who disagrees with the doctrine

is like a practicing Dem who votes Repub in every election.

the Catholic Church has many doctrines that make no sense whatsoever
as you listed. These are the main points.
Why do you consider yourself Catholic when you reject the core beliefs? Wouldn't it be simplier to find a religion more in tune with your belief?

[DEMActivist]

91. Because I don't believe one should "cut and run"

When they disagree but stand for the changes you find necessary.

It's the same reason I don't agree with the "anybody but Bush" doctrine around here. You don't keep giving them your vote (money) in hopes that you can change the doctrine "someday."

You stand and fight, insisting on those things which are important to you.

[Dem2dend]

100. How can you...

fight to change a number of church doctrines that haven't changed in years?

Much like the example I cited, could a practicing Dem change the party by continuing to vote Repuke?
When your views are in direct conflict with doctrines on five different core beliefs, doesn't continuing to worship in the church make you seem hypocritical?

You are obviously free to call yourself whatever you'd like, but if you don't practice what they preach, what do you identify with in the faith?

[ButterflyBlood]

105. this is kind of what i agree with

or to put things in another way, it's a lot like being a Repuke figuring that "you can change them from the inside"

I don't see the point of changing something you disagree with when there are alternatives you do agree with. If I like Pepsi more than Coke, it makes more sense to drink Pepsi than drink Coke and keep lobbying to make Coke more like Pepsi.

(from someone who was raised Catholic but refuses to consider myself ex-Catholic since I was against it from practically day one)

[lynndew2]

123. Amen Dem

This whole thread kinda freaks me out cause I see most threads here are athiest. You Point was "Right on" thank you.

[mitchtv]

159. I was taught "the Apostles Creed" contained all the was

necessary to be a RC.there is only 1 phrase that gives me trouble..." the one about believe the holy catholic church" a kind of catch all where they try to say "oh, this is included there ,this too , etc.

[atreides1]

38. Maybe wrong is to strong a term.

I too am an Episcopalian, I was baptized and raised a Catholic, I have
been a Baptist, a Buddhist, a Mormon, and I even attended Mosque with
a very good friend who is a Muslim.

But I have never felt more accepted, nor been with more tolerant people then those that I have met in the Episcopalian Church.

Perhaps you can explain what part of tradition says that a Bishop cannot be Gay, and to emphasize a previous question, when did Jesus
condemm Gays in his teachings.

I always thought that you are suppose to love the sinner and forgive the sin, not hate the sin and distance yourself from the sinner. I guess I can't remember what part of the teachings of Christ taught
that hatred is a good thing.

There are many traditions that we all grow up with, but their comes
a time when some traditions should be placed in history, and new
traditions should be created. If you get a chance watch "The Fiddler
on the Roof", and maybe you'll understand what I'm trying to say.

God Bless you and may Christ help you through this time of turmoil.

[KoKo]

26. My positions is "wrong" and yours is "right?" Really........you are God!

I really didn't want to get into such dogmatic beliefs in this post of mine. You sound very arrogant to me.. how could you see my viewpoint and discuss when you've accused me, in your judgement, of being WRONG!

The Repugs also think I'm WRONG.......The Fundies think I'm WRONG......

So, you here on DU also think I'm WRONG???????????

[TheDonkey]

42. *see my #29 post

I am happy you believe gay and lesbians deserve legal protection. But what bothers me and you seem to be avoiding is why don't you believe that seperate is not equal?

Why are you afraid of gays and lesbians taking a vow of commitment, or being a religious leader?

For these reasons I said your position is wrong. You haven't really supported why you feel this way other than, "tradition". But I'd hate to break it to you, sometimes traditions can be wrong or misleading.

[KoKo]

94. I think it's a matter of form one's own church based on your beliefs......

rather than forcing an existing denomination to change to suit your beliefs.

Why not form the Gay/Episcopal Church....or give a name of your choosing. There are many protestant churches who have formed their own affiliations with churches of their own making......the AME/Episcopal churches which African Americans in the South have formed to say nothing of all the "br ak away" fundamentalist churches all over America.

Found a church which teaches the way you believe where you don't have to deal with the fight against other peoples beliefs and live in harmony with your principles.

It's asking others or besieging others to change to what Gays believe which has some folks upset.

It's your way or no way? I don't believe that you or any other DU'ers feel that "hard line" but it could become that....

I think that's what I'm getting at.......Why not form your own Christian Church with what you believe.....and make it stronger than the existing churches rather than confronting what already exists and causing so much dissention? Is it so important to be in the Episcopal Church (a sort of dying denomination, if one lives in the Southeast) and no where else where you can create a fresh new vision?

[KoKo]

95. Okay. reading through the thread..I ask..why not form your own Church?

Would that not be important? Christian teachings are broad enough that no one need be confined to the known Protestant denominations. Look at Martin Luther and the Catholic church.......

Why go at the established churches and make them change, when gays/lesbians could start their own church movement and create something maybe better and more inclusive that exists and be a beacon to the whole Christian world?

I'm not so much a fan of the Episcopal Church myself that I wouldn't like to start something new......why not?

[DEMActivist]

98. Because they shouldn't have to...

Why do you think "this is my church go create your own because I don't like your lifestyle" is a Christian philosophy?

That's equivalent to my teenager and her friends writing a note to a fellow friend who sat with the wrong group at lunch and then signing it "Your friend in Christ."

As I explained to her....Jesus walked among the sinners. He didn't sit at another table and pass them notes.

[KoKo]

106. Dem....because it's what I would do....really......and probably why I'm

renegade enough (along with all the rest of us fun bunch) to be here on DU.........

Think about it......we had problems with where we were after 2000 Selection.......If gays/lesbians have problems with wanting to have the churches sacraments and blessings then why not form a demonination where that can be done. It would be so much happier than reforming an existing church.. Look at some of us and the DLC......

I am NOT making light of this.. with comparison to what has happened to Democrats..I think there is a comparison to those of us here on DU and being not accepted for who we are that's comparable to what gays/lesbians often feel.....but I'm maybe being simplistic..but (people often take me the wrong way). I'm wondering why folks would want to change an existing church when they could make their own....and the New Testament is filled with hope about this.

I think I would be happier here in the DU community if we started a religious group than in most places......but I am a Christian........so I would have to have some basic structure......

I think this is what I'm trying to say.

[DEMActivist]

111. And your solution is another "Green" party debate?

Your solution is to fracture the level headed, progressive churches into separate parties only to fight forever over which is the most "principaled" church?

Don't you understand how unChristian "get out of my church" is?

[KoKo]

140. Dem, it has always come to "get out of my church" if you think about it...

From the splintering of early Christian Sects down through the ages to the splitting of the Catholic Church into Eastern Orthodox and Roman Orthodox, down to the Reformation and then from that to the splintered Fundamental churches we have all over the US today.

It's always about that. But, if we can all follow some basic teachings from the New Testament then basically we have a map......even though some of us will take different directions to get to the same place.

And, many will leave the Episcopal Church anyway, over this.........so the splintering keeps going on and it doesn' t mean one has to dislike the people who have caused the splintering or those who leave because of it...... At least we should try not to. I will try not to, anyway.

[ButterflyBlood]

182. because that's implying they aren't fit to worship with you

which is not a good attitude.

[fortyfeetunder]

113. Koko you are wrong about the AME church

<<the AME/Episcopal churches which African Americans in the South have formed to say nothing of all the "br ak away" fundamentalist churches all over America.>>

I was confirmed Episcopalian almost 30 yrs ago. And just like the other DU'ers, all the churches I belonged to were tolerant and forthright on the issue of human rights and respect for others. I have gay relatives and friends and their sexual orientation is none of my business.

Now you suggest forming a Gay/Episcopal church and suggested like the AME (African Methodist Episcopal) churches in the South. Well the reasons the AME churches were formed were for an entirely different reason than what you suggest. Remember these churches formed as a result of institutionalized and codified slavery, segregation and oppression centuries ago. Gays are not in that same position and why should they be segregated?

This would be contrary to what Jesus talked about...I am sorry you feel the way you do.

[KoKo]

137. Forty you are correct about the Episcopa AME......I only used it as an

example and in no way meant to equate slavery with gays or to belittle either group.

My point is that a solution could be to found one's own church. It was thrown out as an idea for the marriage issue.....and only as an idea.

[fortyfeetunder]

152. Other examples

Here is the example you might want to use. There are other spin-offs from the American Episcopal Church as I know it

1) Those who still use the 1928 Book of Common Prayer
2) Those who reject both US Books of Common Prayer and use the good old Anglican service from Ol' England

But to suggest gays go off and have their own church...wouldn't you think that dilutes the diversity of the church if other groups who felt otracized from their own church went off and formed their own.

There is strength in numbers
There is strength in diversity

[greatauntoftriplets]

19. I am a recovering Catholic...

...and am APPALLED by the pope. I cannot even capitalize that word. My sister is the principal of a Catholic grade school, and she is horrified at the anti-gay vitriol coming from the Vatican.

I have many gay friends. I have lesbian neighbors with a child -- one of the partners gave birth to the child -- and both women are wonderful parents to their 11-year-old daughter. She is smart, well balanced, happy. If these women could get married, I'd throw a shower for them, I'd be so goddamned happy.

Sorry you can't feel that way.

[KoKo]

31. I DO NOT believe that Homesexuality is abominable before God, I DON't!

But........I cannot condone a Gary Episcopal Priest's Ordination or Celebrate a Gay Marriage in the Episcopal church with the same vows and ceremony I took with my husband.

I can't...........

[m_h_lovecraft]

35. Once again...

Treat the marriage issue as mutually exclusive...
Why is it that you cannot "condone" the ordination of a gay person?

[Ramsey]

37. Why not?

You have not explained why you cannot accept this, at laast not in any way that I can get my mind around your rationale. I don't think calling it tradition or dogma is adequate. Why does it change your view of the church? Do you think the church should never aim for progress, should they never have allowed women to be ordained as priests for example? I think these issues are worth thinking through. Just why does the ordination of a gay priest threaten the foundations of your faith?

Honestly, I just don't understand where you are coming from.

[David Zephyr]

49. And Why Is That?

I think you already know from my postings that I am also a member of the Episcopal Church.

Why do you say, "cannot condone a Gay Episcopal Priest's Ordination or Celebrate a Gay Marriage in the Episcopal church with the same vows and ceremony I took with my husband."?

I'm truly curious.

KoKo01, also I'm sure that you would have to admit that at some time in your life you have had a priest who was gay, but was either in the closet or confused about his orientation, but gay nonetheless, right? Your not knowing didn't cause concern then, so the only change (or variable in the equation) now is your knowledge.

Also, did you have trouble with female priests? And if not, why not?

[KoKo]

85. David (Well it seems I can now post replies) anyway....I grew up in the

Southern part of the US.......we were more conservative but Episcopalians were then, the "thinking persons/intellectual church."

We also had a long history and were sometimes "snobs" about it looking down on the emerging fundamentalists churches because we were better educated, had more history/money/ or if we were poor...it was because of the Civil War...so we were poor but proud.

So, my background may be very shaded by that.....

But, I do believe that whatever "differences" we have should always be subordinated to the common good of society and order but with a health dose of rebellion every once in awhile.....so I'm sort of a traditionalist.....who has lived like a rebel all my life.......but with a core belief.

[Liberal Veteran]

51. Then ask yourself why.

Please do not take this as an attack because it is supposed to make you think.

On one hand, you claim you do not think homosexuality is abomination in the eyes of God.

On the other hand you don't like the idea of a gay bishop or gay marriage being blessed by the church.

It sounds to me like you are at war with yourself, not the church.

From the tone of your message, it sounds as though you have purged yourself of the social prejudice against homosexuality in your head, but not in your heart.

I sympathize. I am a gay person and I do sympathize with what you are struggling with, because in a sense, every person who is gay experiences a similar struggle purging themselves of the what we were taught to believe from an early age about homosexuality.

I cannot make it easier for you, but maybe it would help to think of it this way. Feelings do not alway make sense, but if you cannot logically explain why you have the feelings you do, then you may want to consider the possibility that the feelings are not the offspring of your rational thought and instead the product of your social upbringing and if that is the case, you can and should remind yourself where those feelings are coming from and not act upon them. Remember, we are what we do, not what we ponder or feel. If that is the approach you take, you may find that your discomfort with this issue will lessen over time, but you have to make the decision for yourself.

And don't put too much pressure on yourself. It would not be desirable or healthy to obsess overmuch on the issue.

I hope that helps you somewhat.

[Rex]

56. If you can't explain WHY here on DU then maybe it would

be better to move on to another subject. It seems that everyone is trying to guess why you cannot condone gay marriage in your church. They will continue to do so unless you fully elaborate as to why you feel this way.

[Liberal Veteran]

57. Not all feelings can be explained....

And it is something that as a gay person that I never considered: The process of moving beyond the societal prejudices one has been raised with is as difficult for heterosexuals as for homosexuals, in some respects, maybe moreso.

As a gay person I had to learn to cope with my beliefs and prejudices about homosexuality as a matter of survival and sanity. That's a powerful driving force that it requires one to reconcile one's beliefs with what you know about yourself. It is a right here, right now thing for us.

For heterosexuals, I imagine the situation is much more abstract and therefore much more difficult to reconcile.

[Rex]

63. I agree, not all emotions can be put into words

It just seems like KoKo's posting here is to have someone help rationalize why she feels the way she does...but the problem is that more information needs to be given as to why she feels that way.

Looks like she is having problems posting.

[DemLikr]

64. It's aligning one's actions with one's words.

If it is apparent that a given policy or religious doctrine is based on prejudice and hatred, then it is appropriate to change one's actions to reflect that.

Using "tradition" and "what we're used to" as an excuse to hang onto cruel and senseless cultural artifacts is reprehensible.

Time to get guts, suck em up, and do what's right.

[DemLikr]

60. "I can't..."...how about "I won't," which is what you really mean.

You don't believe gay loving relationships are as deserving of recognition and support as is your straight marriage.

You apparently feel that the validity of your marriage is somehow undercut or threatened if it is placed on an equal plain with a gay committed relationship.

My relationship falls below your "line in the sand." Screw your line in the sand.

Seems to me your attitudes and actions as expressed in this thread are those of a bigot, regardless of how you cloak it in church-speak.

[Northwind]

88. Why?

Seriously. Why?

[RapidCreek]

110. The question has been asked several times and you have

failed to answer it. WHY can't you? Why can you not condone a gay Episcopal Priest's Ordination or Celebrate a Gay Marriage in the Episcopal church with the same vows and ceremony you took with your husband? This question is principal to the issue. Before anyone can offer insights, you yourself must honesty address it and supply an equally honest answer.

In my opinion your use of the word condone reveals a deep seated resentment of homosexuals.

From Websters Dictionary - Condone: to pardon or overlook voluntarily; especially : to treat as if trivial, harmless, or of no importance.

Why is it you feel you are in a position to condone another consenting adults sexual orientation or their right to harmlessly enjoy the pursuit of happiness in the same fashion you do? Your use of the phrase "cannot condone" belies a perspective that another's sexual orientation is somehow harmful or less trivial and more important than your own.

You assertion that you "love" your fellow homosexual parishioners, is facile and specious and smacks of a sanctimonious sophism.

From Websters Dictionary - Love: 1 a (1) : strong affection for another arising out of kinship or personal ties <maternal love for a child> (2) : attraction based on sexual desire : affection and tenderness felt by lovers (3) : affection based on admiration, benevolence, or common interests <love for his old schoolmates> b : an assurance of love <give her my love>
2 : warm attachment, enthusiasm, or devotion <love of the sea>
3 a : the object of attachment, devotion, or admiration <baseball was his first love> b (1) : a beloved person : DARLING -- often used as a term of endearment (2) British -- used as an informal term of address
4 a : unselfish loyal and benevolent concern for the good of another: as (1) : the fatherly concern of God for humankind (2) : brotherly concern for others b : a person's adoration of God

It is a very large stretch to describe the emotion you claim to have for our homosexual brothers and sisters with the word defined above. Love is not a grudgingly given exclusionary sort of tolerance.

If perhaps you were a Catholic, I would understand and applaud your inclination to leave that Church, as equatable acceptance of homosexuality is tolerated, neither in the clergy or as it relates to matrimonial union. The Episcopal Church, on the other hand, seems to be a much more progressive, honest and inclusive religious practice. This characteristic of your chosen sect, you seem to have a serious problem with, however. Why not become a Catholic? At least you wouldn't be faced with a guilt born of hypocrasy.

RC

[m_h_lovecraft]

20. Gay pastors & bishops

I understand your belief in man-woman matrimony, and I for one have no problem with allowing religions to bless it one way or the other. I believe government should have ZERO input except to encourage and legislate equal protection fairness in civil/secular matters.

But I wonder why are you so upset about a gay bishop? He's loved by you, such as that you proclaim for all people, but he's not good enough to teach the Word? Is it because you really believe that homosexuality is wrong, a mortal sin and that a gay man, though worthy of earthly human compassion, could not possibly live up to the responsibilities of spreading the Word?

[Az]

25. I am not an Episcopalian but let me try to help

First let me state that I understand the pressure you are under. This is part of your enviroment. Your world. You are seeing your family break apart over an issue you are personally torn apart by. There are few things as emotionally disruptive as this sort of experience. You have my honest sympathy.

Let me ask you this. Where do you derive your knowledge of what god's thoughts on gays marrying from? Do you think awareness of the world around us has changed over time?

According to the bible people should be celebate. Failing that they should only partake in sex when married and then only for the purpose of procreation. Under this notion should couples incapable of bearing children be allowed to marry? It certainly does not seem to be what the letter of the law would indicate.

Perhaps times and enviroments change. Perhaps like Jesus tried to teach the pharacies there are things more important than the letter of the law. Perhaps love needs to be acknowledged in whatever form it presents itself. Perhaps god is more concerned about love than biology.

I do not envy you the turmoil you are going through. I have my own opinions and they may not be the same as yours but if I can present any ideas or alternate views that may benefit you I am more than happy to oblige.

[KoKo]

112. Thanks Az........

I appreciate your reply and I understand what you are saying although we have differences....

[LoZoccolo]

28. You know what?

You'll find that just about every major religion has practices it considers forbidden that don't make a lick of sense to anyone outside of it, or that its practitioners don't have any explanation for other than that it's a moral absolute to them.

But if they're not forcing it on anyone outside of it through the government, why get in a big argument on DU about it? I was saying this yesterday on a thread, that we have a very coalesced opposition that doesn't seem to get in these sorts of tussles, and not all of them are fundamentalists.

[Az]

33. Sometimes we need to be people

The focus here is politics but sometimes we need to also simply be there for each other. I kind of think thats important.

[cprise]

30. I am a gay humanist

You don't seem like a fundie to me (that label is extreme), esp. when you make the distinction between internal Episcopal matters and civil rights. But your view is definately conservative.

I hope that you change your mind, and help make it possible for gay Episcopalians who choose committment to just get on with their lives, without having to face the much more difficult task of choosing themselves out of their fellowship.

How much do you want the Episcopal church to be about things that matter, and about things that don't? (Don't answer... just consider it)

[roughsatori]

36. How do you "love" someone that you think you are better than?

If gays are so adled that they can not become ordained to serve God in your view of religion, I wonder how you can claim to "love" them.

I was reading about the execution of gay men in the middle-ages by the church. They would place them in stocks then throw stones at the men's heads, even after they seemed to be dead, the "Christians" kept throwing stones. A Priest intoned "we hate the sin, not the sinner."

I understand you seem conflicted, but it is hard for me to sympathize with you. My sympathies would more easily be with the gay man or woman who has devoted their life to God and still be denied ordination by people like you.

I don't mean this as an attack at all on you. Your post was just one more in a string very depressing posts by DUers for me to read as a gay person.

I am really starting to think heterosexuals who truly think of gays and lesbians as equals must be extraordinary people to have broken through society's conditioning and love those who are different from themselves.

[papau]

39. What has changed? - Marriage is unchanged male with female

The Bishops will adopt a blessing - a set of prayers - perhaps write a few - that fit a same sex union.

And that is it.

So this addition to the liturgy means one must leave?

But then folks have left because the 1928 prayer book was rewritten and lost much of the 15th century English phrasing.

And then there were those who left when the song book was updated.

In the Midwest there was a leaving over too much "High Church - meaning candles and song and Mass" rather than low church - meaning more sermon and Mass only once per month.

Whatever floats your boat. There are many paths - even many "Catholic" flavors.

Good luck.

[CWebster]

41. That is so sad

People used to have the same reaction about Afro-Americans.

It is called separate but equal.

[Az]

44. It takes time

for societies to wake up. At one time women were property. We still feel the reverberations of the world waking up to that. Those that have woken up are insensed at those that have not waken up. Remember many of the religious institutions of this world favor fixed notions of morality. They continue to teach these values even while the rest of society moves onward. It is not easy for those caught between these battling forces (its not easy for the oppressed victims either of course).

People have to work out the balance of their world. Its a struggle and sometimes they try to find some stability by sticking their feet into the ground and refusing to move until they can sort things out. Our minds are emotional devices. They stay fixed in position until some major events forces a shift in the balance. During this period of fluxuation progress can be made if there is support guiding this. But if there is no progressive support or alternate paths available the mind typically falls back to the older position and paves over the disruption.

[CWebster]

48. The fact that there is inner turmoil is progress

but my heart goes out to Gay souls that have to abide in the limitations of other's hearts.

[m_h_lovecraft]

43. Religious rules?

Why are we subject to religious rules at all? Doctrine is man-made, man-drafted, man-promoted. You are Episcopalian if believe rule set X, you are Catholic if you follow rule set Y, Jewish rule set Z... if you believe the rules you do so because you bought them not because God or Christ laid them down only to filter them through the manic minds of man.

With rules, there are choices: defy them, follow them, seek change from within, or walk away.

[Cornus]

59. My choice was...

...to walk away. That was done after 17 years of Catholic education, 30 plus years as a *devout* Catholic and much introspection. I finally just decided that I could not abide the hypocracy. and left. I'm now recovered and living happily ever after.

[RapidCreek]

129. Good for you!!!

Right on Cornus!!!

RC

[Lars39]

45. Question: are you comfortable with gays in ANY leadership position,

not just in the church you attend? There are a lot of people who are for gay rights, but they just don't want it *in their face*. I don't understand the reasoning, but I know this viewpoint exists. :shrug:

[m_h_lovecraft]

46. Simple fact of the matter

Bigotry supported by or originating from religious doctrine...
IS STILL BIGOTRY.

[Stuckinthebush]

58. I would amend that to say...

Bigotry supported by or originating from religious doctrine...is the worst kind of bigotry.

[silverlib]

47. marriage?

I wish the Methodist Church, who does not recognize gay relationships or gay pastors, much less bishops, would reconsider. I'm envious of the Episcopalian stance. Judgments are up to God and I think God grows - otherwise He would not be perfect, for stagnation is death.

I've questioned "marriage" itself for many years, as a heterosexual female Methodist. I've had a difficult time with the current nonseparation of church and government. That piece of paper that is called a 'marriage license' has become worthless, as far as I'm concerned, in the eyes of God. It represents nothing more than legal rights. I want my relationship recognized and blessed by God. So I have a hard time wondering why anyone would covet the piece of paper. I believe a ceremony before God sanctifies a relationship, but only God can ultimately decide, so we need to get the government out of our relationships. If we had a government that covered our health and welfare issues, there would be no need for them to be involved in relationships and cause tax payers to stand on the religious and often bigoted platforms as to legal representation of relationships.

Gee, I hope this makes sense!

[Marymarg]

52. The Episcopal Church

As an Episcopalian in the ultra-crazy Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth, let me share with you what it has been like here. Although women's ordination has been accepted by the Church for over 25 years, because of the sensibilities of some hard-core "traditionalists," here, in Fort Worth, we are denied the services of women priests. I cannot really relay the amount of hurt that this has created. The lesson in this which speaks to your situation is that insisting that some people should be excluded from the sacraments which are supposed to be available to all, is what creates schism, hard feelings, all kinds of awful ramifications.
The reason I became an Episcopalian is that I loved the inclusiveness. My first priest, from whom I took Inquirers' Class, quoted Alice in Wonderland as to the position of the Church: "All win; all must have prizes." This sentence sums up how I feel about how the world should be and how we should view each other. It has been my experience that anything short of total tolerance, causes a lot of pain.
Trust me, if you love the Church, be patient. It will take time, but this will be worked out. :)

[Riptide]

54. I am an Episcopalian (since birth)...

I 100% support the ordination of the Bishop. Frankly, I do not see how gay people being married would change my marriage to my husband. Why would two men or two women being married undermind the marriage that my husband and I have? I just don't get it.

The Episcopal church is not sending you out. You are choosing to leave. But, don't fret. There are many churches out there who continue to treat homosexuals like second class citizens.

[KoKo]

55. I can't reply to any more posts getting "SCRIPT ERROR" from DU!

I just posted to Admins as to why my long replies to you all are not going through......

sorry... to Nothingshocksme and DEMActivist.........because I spent alot of time replying and it wouldn't go through......

[KoKo]

61. I love you all who have replied....but all my answers are gone/DU Glitch

or whatever.........I've been posting replies to everyone here......and have gone to "As Admins" and reported I cant reply to you......and I can't: Keep getting "SRIPT ERROR" your "BROWSER CAN'T.....blah.

It's the new DU-2......let's you post then kills it...........

Whatever.......thanks to all......

[Lars39]

62. I want to commend you for being brave enough to post your feelings.

This thread has shown some of the most sensitive replies I've seen on the subject. A lot of spiritual/mental growth taking place. :)

[DEMActivist]

67. I, too, am proud of DUers...

and their approach to this discussion.

I think it shows a wonderful tolerance and understanding, particularly from the gay/lesbian community here. It makes me more sure of my decision to stand shoulder to shoulder with this community and defend your rights.

KoKo, I'll ask only one thing of you now - substitute the word "gay" in your posts with any of the following words and ask yourself how you feel about the post:

African American
Muslim
Korean
Mormon

I, too, admire your courage in posting your thoughts and feelings on this subject. Now we just have to get to the "whys" and see if we can help you change it.

[mitchtv]

163. I can't help it, I don't think straights should be allowed to decorate my

home, or arrange flowers in my church.

[KoKo]

89. Thanks, Lars.....I don't usually get into this.....and with my posting

problems....I'm getting a little "psycho" posting detailed replies and getting "Script errors" but it seems to be corrected since 11:00 p.m. tonight est.......but my brain is starting to go dead.......

[jonnyblitz]

171. bigotry disguised as "spirtual struggle" is lame..sorry..

i dont buy it...

[Flubadubya]

142. KoKo01... check your mailbox for tip on posting.

[Cheswick2.0]

65. Is this really a God thing?

It seems more like an emotional reaction to change.


Mark 12:30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this the first commandment.

Mark 12:31 And the second like, this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.

If you believe Jesus then you know that love is the greatest directive we are given. Love your neighbors truly and soon you won't want to deny them equal rights in society or church.

[PassingFair]

66. I think all these argument are missing the underlying fear....

Folks are afraid of gay couples having unfettered access to and control of children. I'm certainly not saying that this is a rational fear. I don't think that abuse levels could ever come near your standard father/stepfather/boyfriend abuse of young girls, but I believe this is the underlying fear. People don't want gays to be able to adopt with impugnity.

Just voicing my take on this...please don't flame me.

[KoKo]

68. I have asked Admins...why I can no longer reply...it may not make it......

If I get another "SCRIPT ERROR YOUR POST.....blah...blah" or "ERROR WARNING.......blah, blah" then I'm thinking as a member of the :tinfoilhat: group on DU that I've been "tombstoned."

I'm waiting for an answer down in the "Ask Administrators" Forum as to why all the detailed answers to the questions you have all asked have not gone through........and to Rowdy Boy, NothingShocksMe and DEMActivis....my apologies.....and to others......I tried to answer but there is some glitch with either my "Mindspring ISPN/Netscape Browser/ or whatever that I cannot reply any more. I pray that this post goes through............

And.......they think I'm an "hysteric" for reporting my reply problems......Sigh........I don't know what else to do.........

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

70. I'm your buddy and I still think the world of you

I do have to admit that I hope you come out on the other side of this inquiry trusting that God wants my life to be as fulfilled as yours and trusting that God might bring me to my partner the same way your religion leads you to believe God would bring you to yours...and with all the same blessings.

It's just what i hope.

[Rowdyboy]

72. Ditto, KoKo...

Want to talk to you more about this though....

[David Zephyr]

82. Me, Too.

And KoKo---I really do hope you will stay Episcopalian.

And you know what? I think it is really great that you treasure the vows you made with your hubby. That says a lot about you to me in spite of how you might feel about this other issue.

I've been with my mate since 1973 (30 years at the end of this year) and I'm cool with you not being totally cool with that.

And like NSMA says (by the way, she is my angel, but don't let her know it), I know you very well by now from all of your postings and I know your heart and you are AOK with me.

I just hope this works out for you somehow.

--DZ

[berry]

96. Koko--this is off-topic, but about your posting problem.

I've gotten in the habit of writing my replies to notepad, and even saving them to a file called DU posts (because I have sometimes gotten the "error, you have done something illegal" message that slaps me offline). Only then do I copy to the reply form. When it doesn't go through (after checking, because sometimes it DOES go through even when it appears not to--hence all the double and triple messages we see lately), I try again. Usually, it does go through the second time. But at least I have not lost all the time it takes to write a reply.

You must be going crazy! I know I did until I figured out this clever plan to foil the glitch-monsters.

While I'm here, I'll just weigh in briefly about the topic. As some others have said, this is a remarkable and enlightening thread--so however you may feel about starting it, it has elicited a lot of wisdom and expressed a lot of the affection I think the people here on DU feel for you.

Personally, I have no problem with gay ordination or marriage (I'm a Lutheran), but I remember having a TERRIBLE time when our synod merged and we lost the old Augustana hymnal. I still complain about it (in a self-mocking sort of way), and that was 30+ years ago! I don't know--it's a nostalgia thing, I guess. And maybe that's part of what is troubling you. But I also wonder if the issue is dividing your congregation. That can be traumatic--my parent's church had a terrible, bitter time when the (somewhat elderly and authoritarian) pastor was accused of some sexual impropriety--I can't remember the details, must have blocked it out, but his advances (whatever they were) were rebuffed by the adult parishiner, so I suppose it was a fairly minor sin. Still, everyone felt betrayed--they had trusted him. Lots of people left, others tried to get him removed. Still others struggled to forgive him.

My point--sorry to run on there--is that your problems with this gay marriage/ordination issue will be harder to resolve if your home church is engaged in a civil war about it. So I would say, give it time. Let yourself not decide, one way or another, for a while a least. And remember to forgive yourself (if you think you need forgiving)--guilt just makes everything harder.

[KoKo]

104. berry, many thanks for "notepad" tip! And, for your comments about

your experiences. My church hasn't even mentioned it in the latest bulletin...(they are a quite, don't rock the boat church) but I got fired up watching the PBS Newshour tonight where they went into a big discussion about the Bishop and his background and what this meant for the the Episcopal Church.......I thought it was important....because it does raise questions which are going to have to be dealt with down the line. PBS said it threatened to split the church down the middle.

Probably an exaggeration......but still worth of some time here to get folks views.

:-)'s

[Tinoire]

122. Did you by any chance open a second DU window right before

or as you were posting? I've had the same problem and finally realized it was happening only when I opened a second window.

Wise tip from experience- do a Control + C (or whatver you do to copy) before hitting post. I've lost so many posts and pulled out so much hair over DU 2!

Peace and good luck with your searching

[ButterflyBlood]

71. OK explain when you can post again

if you don't think homosexuality is "an abomination" as you said in the other replies then don't you think God could bless a homosexual union in the same way as a heterosexual one? And if so then what's wrong with such marriages being performed in your church?

[KoKo]

74. Okay....after making a fool of myself in "Ask Admins"...I'll try but if

this post doesn't go through....then I have to join anxious hubby for a Friday movie....or I'm not being fair to him here.......and if there's another damned "SCRIPT ERROR" I have to leave it..

Homosexuality is not an abomination....I don't feel the Fundies view of the Bible condemning it is correct as aa practicing Christian/Episcopalian.

But, I do believe that the Christian Marriage Ceremony is for the union of Male and Female to produce children and to continue until death. Yes, there are "unfortunate marriages" which need to be "put apart" but I really believe in trying one's utmost to keep those marriages together.

I don't have problems with gay couples adopting children.....but they must realize it will be hard......as raising all children is hard....and not as "romantic and rewarding" as one thinks when one starts out.......but that's true no matter the gender or convictions of anyone who becomes a parent.....and gays don't have any better chances of sucess or failure with raising children than the rest of us........but I do believe that unless we remake our whole society (which I know gays and others feel is more realistic than I do....or more idealistic than I do) that most folks feel that that "marriage" is a male and female joined in the sight of God to have a life together according to the scriptures and Episcopal teaching, in a church of choice..to be a unit which provides both the male and female components of life on this earth.

I see this as biological.....but that gays have the right to chose a different "social life style" than my view of biological........and yes...I think there are two species which can produce without male/female interaction.....seahorses and the other (which I forget) but most of our biological interactions on earth are with Male/Female....producing progeny.......and the church for those who are religious sanctifies that.

So......to me .........Gays have a social/sexual lifestyle.......and can do what they want with that.....but biological and religious sanctification of that goes into science/sprituality..........

So.......Gays must found their own church and find scriptures in the Bible (if they want to be Christians or whatever religious group) to support their beliefs.. Then they can marry in their own faith.......but not to change my whole reilgious foundations because they want to for their own beliefs.

Without writing a "Masters or Doctoral Thesis" on this subject....complete with scripture references and the history of the CHURCH in Westernn Society.......this is the best I can do. But, my view cannot be changed on this.......I've gone as far as I can go to accomodate. I'm sort of maybe....with Howard Dean on this.....

It's a line I have drawn........as much as I love you all............ (Now if this post will only go through.........)

Edited: for spelling mistakes/typos

[ulysses]

77. hi, Koko

But, I do believe that the Christian Marriage Ceremony is for the union of Male and Female to produce children...

My dad - who taught me to be a liberal but who shares your blinders regarding gay folks - gave me the same "to produce children" rationale once. I asked him what the difference was between a married gay couple and my wife and I, since we can't produce biological children either. Should I not have married?

I don't mean to harsh on you, and like others I'm impressed with everyone on this thread so far, but be careful where deterministic trains of thought will lead you if you're not careful.

[DEMActivist]

80. You beat me to it!

Thanks, Uly for bringing this into the conversation.

I was going to pose a similar question, but only someone who has dealt with this issue firsthand can bring it home like you just did.

[ulysses]

83. it's just something

that's gotten well under my skin in the last while. At the base, the same attitude produced the look of something like horror on the faces of a few of my friends when I told them I was shooting blanks.

:hi: DA!

[KoKo]

90. Thanks Uly....I seem to have replies going through. Gays can adapt.....

I think it's good........I did reply somewhere here....and don't want you to think that I object to that.

But it's the "anatomical differences" which have to be adapted to......which make things more "choice" than natual......that hangs me up. That's where the biology comes into play which makes me say: It's a choice in who you love and if you want to adapt to do that it's fine........but I just have a different feeling about making all that effort.......and having to change the way we were made to fit together........that makes "gayness" choice rather than biological function.

So, whatever anyone wants to do......but it's different from what I want in my church with vows to mean.

(Some would say it's only what you are used to and anatomical aids are fine if you love each other.....but I still can't agree) Then someone would say.......why can't you agree.........

I don't know to the depths of why....except it's the adaptation involved.......:shrug:

[charlie]

97. A couple of things

I can't fathom this business about "choice." I've had no choice in my sexuality, the thought of romancing a man gives me the willies. If I woke up on a 100% gay planet tomorrow, I'd be miserable. I don't understand how some can think gays had any choice in their affairs of the heart.

As for "anatomical differences" and what's "natural", I'd just like to point out that there's not a single sexual act that's peculiar to gays. Heteros and gays do the same things, just with different genders, so why should gays be considered unnatural?

That you're torn about this says you've got heart KoKo. Go with your heart, I don't think it's ever going to be comfortable for you to do otherwise.

[mitchtv]

168. incidentally homsexuality isfound to be

not uncommon in nature. Iread an article last night in Smithsoian about tranvestism in blue gills and cuttlefish. what a kick!

[ulysses]

99. I'm not sure I'm following you on the adaptation thing

But it's the "anatomical differences" which have to be adapted to......which make things more "choice" than natual......that hangs me up.

Adapted to what purpose? I don't think "adaptation" is necessary for sexual pleasure in a gay relationship, and if it is necessary...well, frankly, we're a toolmaking species. If procreation is the point, I'd refer you again to my original question to you - my wife and I are heterosexual, yet we have to "adapt" in order to start a family. Does that make us wrong in some way?

If you really think that being gay is a choice, then I guess I don't have much to offer you other than the suggestion that you keep talking to the gay community here and think about what they tell you. Hope you find the answers you need.

[KoKo]

139. No, Uly, I don't think being Gay is a choice. My problem is that marriage

sacrament in the Christian Church is between a man and a woman and that's what I believe. I don't think that should change. And, I feel bad that I'm put into a "Fundie Corner" because there are other non-Fundie Christians who believe the same thing.

But, as I said, I believe if gays want to have a civil union for insurance benefits and any other benefits other married people have......that's okay by me. And whatever gays want to do in the privacy of their homes, is okay by me also.

[ulysses]

144. I thought you said you thought it was a choice.

And, I feel bad that I'm put into a "Fundie Corner" because there are other non-Fundie Christians who believe the same thing.

That's certainly true. Still, I have to call it a blind spot same as with my dad. I suspect you'd agree or you wouldn't have started this thread.

Honestly, I'm not sure what you want at this point. You've said that you've drawn a line in the sand on the issue which, insofar as it's an issue between yourself and your church only, is fine. But what are you hoping to gain from the discussion if you come to it with no willingness to examine why you believe what you believe? Again, I don't mean to be harsh, and I don't think you're a fundie - you're willing to admit that there's an issue here and you're not trying to deny civil rights to gays. I just suspect that you're going to eventually have to seriously question some of your underlying assumptions before you reach any kind of peace on this.

[KoKo]

156. Uly, I replied to God, Bush,Cheney at the end of thread.....I think what

I've decided after reading this thread is to wait until the Episcopal Church makes a definite statement about this. When I see their reasoning then I will see what I think about it.

I really didn't start this post to do some kind of bashing or start a flame war....and so far thank goodness it hasn't turned into that at all.

I really thought given our political nature on this board and that this issue is stirring up a hornet's nest out there that I could find some help with my dilemna. And, I've kind of walked myself through explanations and thought as I've replied trying to figure out what it is I really believe at my core about this.

My church is being a hypocrit about this by not making definite statements about a change in their philosophy and therefore they are leaving congregations wondering and trying to cope while the heirarchy gets mega news coverage over the Bishop who wants to be ordained.

This is why I posted. Hey, I've been on DU for a long time. I can't be all that narrow minded.....can I????????

Peace.

[ulysses]

165. I don't think you're being narrow-minded, exactly

Then again, I'm heterosexual and a lapsed Methodist, so it's not really mine to say.

I think you've, metaphorically, walked, late at night, into a coffee table where your beliefs and sense of ethics are concerned. That's just human, and although it's not fun when it happens, it's also how we grow. We all have beliefs and assumptions that are challenged from time to time - what we do with those opportunities to expand our understanding says a lot about us.

No one here can tell you definitively what you should do regarding the Episcopal Church. At any rate, the issue is internal and particular to you, and whether or not you ask yourself why you believe as you do regarding gay marriage and ordination is your decision. I suspect that the greater rewards lay in doing so, for what it's worth.

[Andy_Stephenson]

167. " I can't be all that narrow minded.....can I????????"

on this issue your being very narrow minded.

Let them have the benefits...But by God don't let the filthy fags marry...not in my church!

Sheisse!

[Andy_Stephenson]

178. KoKo...I know this is not what your saying...however

Unless your gay...you will never understand the pain I have at being seperated from God by men.

Doesn't God want us to all be happy and fulfilled? What sin of mine is so great you would deny me access to him?

[blondeatlast]

146. Have you discussed this with your pastor?

It seems that you are struggling with a personal belief versus a rather new doctirne of your church. I think he/she is in the best position to advise you; and it may very well be that he/she is as conflicted as you are.

I see no reason why you should try to rationalize your feelings, some things about humans are just, well, human and can't be helped. If we had all the answers to our feelings we wouldn't be debating spirituality on DU. I have PMed you with an important message, please consider taking my advice, I think you will find it very worthwhile.

I can only imagine what a terrible struggle this must be for you. My spirituality is one of the most important things in my life, and if I were in your position I would be in literal pain, I think.

Just remember that God is with you and in the end, follow His lead.

God bless you.

[Andy_Stephenson]

162. Everything is fine by KoKo all is hunky dorey

"But, as I said, I believe if gays want to have a civil union for insurance benefits and any other benefits other married people have......that's okay by me. And whatever gays want to do in the privacy of their homes, is okay by me also."

Just don't let the fags marry! That is what I hear.

[mitchtv]

172. unfortunately, it seems to be what i hear too

and since Christ never mentioned "Homo" sexuality i don'tunderstand the issue . ok to be a priest, but not a Bishop??? beats me

[fortyfeetunder]

116. Good thought

One of the reasons for the procreation clause was to offset the high infant mortality not to make "us" extinct.

However, the 1974 Book of Common Prayer now has the option to exclude the phrases about "procreation" in the wedding vows.

My spouse and I took didn't use it in our wedding because at the time we didn't anticipate having any, and we didn't want that pressure later.

[Az]

81. Just one question

I know this has been rough going but allow me one more question.

Do you believe that the love you feel for your chosen mate is any different than the love a gay or lesbian couple would have for each other?

[KoKo]

87. No.......I don't .....but it's bioligically hard with out "aids." so it's

different.....It is different "anotomically.........

Hey.......I'm always honest....and don't beat around the bush....I told you I'm very torn on this subject but I'm trying to answer the best I can .........:shrug:

[ButterflyBlood]

102. still begs the question

do you believe a homosexual union can ever be valid and recognized in God's eyes?

[KoKo]

109. I don't know the answer to that Butterfly.....Honestly, I don't

I don't know if any of us do......

[ButterflyBlood]

170. well then

I would say just leave it up to God.

It seems now you are trying to make judgements on your own about what's valid and what's not. Some of the comments above about you don't want homosexuals marrying the same way you did your husband sort of remind me of fundies saying that allowing civil unions is an insult to all heterosexual married couples and makes their marraiges less valid, which I just thought was absurd. If it is valid in God's eyes, you should have no problems with it, and if it isn't, it still in the end doesn't really affect you.

I can understand and have sympathy for your internal pain though. God bless you in whatever path you take.

[Ramsey]

92. So only people who want to procreate should marry?

And only have sex when they plan to procreate? Because if the main reason the church sanctifies marriage, as you argue, is to promote procreation and fulfill our biological imperative, then only those who wish or plan to do so should be allowed to marry, even if they are heterosexual, right? And we should ALL only be having sex to procreate, right?

You see the hypocrisy I hope, it is only because gay sex can specifically be identified as recreational, as opposed to procreational, that they bear the brunt of these arguments and prejudicial edicts. But heterosexual couples have recreational sex all the time, in the comfort of their sanctified unions.

Why don't you and those of you who think this way found YOUR own church, because I think you are quite frankly out of the mainstream of thought with respect to the Episcopal church, which has after all approved a gay bishop.

And I still argue that the Episcopal church teaches nothing of the kind. Are you sure you aren't infiltrated by Southern Baptists? By the way, I grew up in the South as well, and I don't think the stuff you are saying can be ascribed to being "southern", as I personally have a very different experience in this very same church.

[shimmergal]

73. I'm an Episcopalian too,

a straight, divorced woman who joined the E's before they ordained women. I never would have done it (gone from Methodist to Episcopalian) if I hadn't been convinced they WOULD have women priests before too long.

Also I had some doubts about the stance on divorce & remarriage, and the church has modified that too over the years.

I won't leave the church whichever way it goes on the present issues.
However I don't want to see people or congregations split off either. I'm convinced that all "mainstream" protestant denominations will in some way accept gay unions and clergy within a generation. That leaves those who're totally opposed with two places to go within Christianity: fundamentalism (which is probably an impossible step for 99% of DUers) or Roman Catholicism (which is good on other social justice issues but horrible on "the pelvic issues." In fact a RC spokesperson on Buchanan and Press yesterday insulted ALL unmarried people, het or gay, by saying we're living a less good way.)

If it helps, KoKo01, here's two things to consider:
1) I don't think Jesus EVER said anything about homosexuality one way or another.
and
2) Gene Robinson says he and his partner are living as celibates, which actually makes his "lifestyle" no different from that of a
heterosexual male with a roommate. As far as I know, no one in the Episcopal church considers being gay to be a sin ipso facto (the fundies do, at least some of them.)

Hope you decide to stay in whichever way the decisions go. I don't think it helps the church or humanity when people decide they can't worship together with those who think differently.

But I can identify with your struggles--I've gone through similar on other things....

[lumpy]

75. I know of no tenet in the Episcopal church

that opines one way or the other regarding homosexuality and no referance in the New Testament either. The Episcopal teachings I learned were more concerned with personal spiritual growth. Very little dwelling on sin and a willing acceptance of the sinner. The Church has been well known for non-discrimination and acceptance. As in some Eastern religions faith is a personal endeavor concerning only the concept of the relationship between Christ abd the adherent. When Christian churches enter into the political area of life it diminishes the very concepts that Christ was trying to teach, life everlasting, love and acceptance of others and forgiveness of personal sins. Christianity should not be used as a polical tool.

[sam sarrha]

84. Jesus NEVER taught anything but how to Love and be more tolerant..

of others. all the kill, punish, torture, war in the name of god.. is all in the old testament, which Jesus reformed. if you believe in the negativity of the Old Testament you are not a 'Christian'. i believe that they attached the old testament to the new to keep Jesus teachings from being mistaken for Buddhism

[jonnyblitz]

76. you love us BUT.....

whatever.

[supernova]

79. If you don't mind a Presbyterian's 2 cents...

I wish we had the Episcopal Church's problem. I wish we were nominating an openly gay General Assembly Moderator. I've heard this man several times in recent weeks giving interviews. What a wonderful, loving ambassador for the E.C. He's terrific, both in his intellectual capacities and in his obvious empathy for people.

Instead, in order to avoid the issue completely, we Presbys struggle with the "chastity in singleness" clause in the Book of Order. :puke: It basically puts a lid on anybody (gay or straight) who's not married and wants to be in a position of leadership in the Church. You can't be in any kind of non-married sexual relationship and be a church officer.

Don't talk about your sexuality, don't grow in that aspect of your life. What this means in practical terms is I don't talk about my dating foibles at church. This doesn't help anybody and only delays the inevitable. I say we get it out in the open already.

Now, here's where I am diverge with the PCUSA. The older I get, the more I realize that our relationship to God is really more about being fully who we are in His/Her presence. And that S/He rejoices in all that we are, including our sexuality. So if God isn't so upset about it homosexuality -- need I mention invented it? --, why should we be? Do we really need to be more conservative than God?

I really hope some day we can welcome gays, both single and married, into the Presby church. Until then, as a Church, We aren't fully loving and fully accepting of gays, I'm afraid. And we'll continue to misunderstand why there's a few empty seats on Sunday morning.

So, I hope the E.C. does right by this man who wants to be Bishop. He sounds like a saint.

[Stuckinthebush]

101. Ex-Presbyterian here

Hell, I still think of myself as a Presbyterian, but have been a happy UU for 5 years now.

Dad's a Presbyterian minister and I went to Presbyterian College.

One of the things that finally drove me out was the PCUSAs inability to face this issue head on.

Good for the EC. I applaud them for attacking this issue now not later.

Here is the reality, folks. Homosexuality has been around forever and will be around forever more. Homosexuality will be accepted by the overwhelming majority of Americans in the next 10 years. It is way past time for the bigotry sanctioned by any religious organization to be forever destroyed.

There is no excuse for the continued persecution of homosexuals in our society. Furthermore, there is no excuse for anyone to hide behind religious arguments to further this persecution.

This is not a philosophical or theological argument - this is about being human. Love thy neighbor. That's it, that's all, case closed, move on.

[supernova]

133. Well, if we don't resolve this

argument in a healthy way (re: MY WAY! LOL!) I may be joining you in the UU Church.

We have the same tired arguments every year. *sigh*

[Ellen Forradalom]

93. Turn it over to God.

Don't let this one thing tear you up inside. Take a wait-and-see attitude and trust in God. It is not worth the agony. No matter which way it turns it, it will be all right.

I'm also an Episcopalian. I always try to take my faith back to the basics: that we should love another as God loves us, and to follow the teachings of Christ. Christ was not particularly concerned with social norms except insofar as they come between man and God.

[KoKo]

107. Turn it over to God is a good thought this late....and a nice finality....

People have been great on this thread.....And, I've gotten good insight......and glad to hear all the thoughts......

[Ellen Forradalom]

184. The church does teach that we are all part of the body of Christ

If we are going to tear an arm or a leg off that body, it had better be for a good reason. This reason isn't good enough, in my view.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

114. I'm an Episcopalian

and I have no problems with it. Perhaps it's because I've been involved in parishes with a lot of gay and lesbian members, many of whom are the finest human beings you could hope to meet.

One evening at the women's prayer group in my (now former, since I've just moved) parish a few years ago, I had an "a-ha!" moment. Seeing the radiant happiness of one of the members who had brought her new (and equally radiantly happy) partner to introduce to the group, I realized that, regardless of the gender of the parties involved, the emotions behind the relationship were exactly the same. (By the way, this couple is still together, ten years later.)

Later, in that same parish, I witnessed the distraught grief of a man (a kindly, giving sort) who had just learned that his partner of 23 years had an advanced form of cancer that would almost certainly kill him within a few months.

The idea that homosexuality is a sin comes from the same *ancient* Hebrew mentality that says that menstruating women are unclean or that a rapist can escape punishment if his victim is an unbetrothed virgin and he agrees to marry her.

Also, by saying that gay and lesbian Christians are second-class Christians and therefore not eligible for marriage or holy orders, are you not (perhaps unconsciously) buying into the discredited idea that homosexuality is something that people "do," just to be rebellious or purposely wicked, rather than a deep part of their total personality, whether innate or determined very early in life.


In fact, there already are gay priests and gay bishops: it's just in most are in the closet. Ironically, the heaviest concentration of gay priests seems to be in the Anglo-Catholic branch of the Episcopal Church, which is often the most adamant in its rejection of full ecclesiastical rights for sexual minorities.

I'm old enough to remember the flap about the ordination of women, and how so many people threatened to leave the Episcopal Church. In the end, dioceses were given "local option." At present, only two dioceses still forbid the ordination of women, and the parishes that left the mainstream Episcopal Church over the issue seem like tight, self-righteous gatherings of one-issue fanatics.

Some conservatives may point to the small but noticeable decline in the number of Episcopalians, as compared to the rapid growth of fundie megachurches, but as the Episcopal Church leaders themselves now recognized, the problem was never in attracting people (the typical parish is full of people who were brought up in other religions, so much so that being a "cradle Episcopalian" is like being a "native Oregonian") but in having poor-quality programs for teenagers and college students while the fundies were out there recruiting like crazy.

So,Koko, I hope you think about some of the things that I've said and try not to act on your gut reaction.

[drdigi420]

115. bigotry is ugly, especially cloaked in religion

leave the church for a multitude of other reasons, but because of a gay bishop? so sad

[Sperk]

117. One of the main reasons I left the Catholic church....

could not tolerate their attitude about gays. Or should I say, didn't feel comfortable calling myself a Catholic knowing what their official policy on homosexuality was/is. It was very difficult for me for a loooooooooooong time. I felt displaced and alone but I JUST COULD NOT be part of, what I saw to be, sanctioned prejudice.

Then I realized that my faith and my religion were two different things. I wasn't alone at all and I wasn't displaced. I feel quite good about my decision now. As a matter of fact, I feel much closer to God now that the middle man is gone.

It's kind of funny, when you have no organized religion to associate yourself with, you have no choice but to express your beliefs through you actions. Amazing really.

Note to religious DUers....please take no offense to this post... this is what works for me but I totally understand and respect the importance of religion to most people.

[dsc]

118. Why is gay marriage a ditch you want to die in?

I can actually see your point better on not wanting the gay bishop than the gay marriages. I presume that churches don't have a ton of say over who will be the priests. But I would presume that churchs can decide who to and who not to marry. Wouldn't you just have to decide to go to churches which refused to marry gays and thus not alter your religion one iota?

My point is that it seems that regardless of what your opinion on these issues are they can't be the central fabric of your faith. Do you really wish to give up the spiritual norishment that Episcipalinism gives you over issues you are unlikely to encounter?

[Sperk]

119. only speaking for myself here, and I understand that many

gays tolerate their churches intolerance, so who am I to get all snitty? But....because there has such intense pain and suffering due to gay bashing, I just could not stand to have by soul attached to that in any way shape and form. I mean really, if a church said blacks couldn't marry or no black/white marriages etc. who here would stay with that church, regardless of what good the Church did or how much you loved the church? I guess what i'm asking is....
do you see you faith and your religion as one in the same or two different things?

[dsc]

120. actually my point was kind of the opposite

She is thinking of leaving her church because it will marry gays. I can't see why the fact that some churches in a denomination marry gays would prevent one from going to other churches in that denomination. Again I see your position easier than hers.

[Sperk]

149. If she truly believes that her church is committing a sin in the eyes

of God, then I guess she should leave the church.

[shimmergal]

126. The sacrament of marriage is performed by the couple themselves.

The couple, their covenant, and God are all that's essential to make a marriage. At any rate, this is what I learned when I took confirmation class prior to joining the Episcopal church. All the other stuff--the ritual, the priest's blessing and pronouncement, the witnesses and audience, is just frosting on the cake--nice, but not essential for a valid Christian marriage.

Traditionally, of course, the marriage was thought of as a man and woman being joined together. But none of us can truly judge another couple's love and commitment, and certainly none can know the mind of God for sure. Some gay couples may already be married, in God's eyes, under this principle.

So it seems to me that talking about a church deciding "whom to marry" is not quite accurate. God & the couple make that marriage; the church can perform--or refuse to perform--a recognition of it, but either way, the ritual doesn't affect the sacrament's validity.

On priests and bishops--dsc, in the Episcopal church, the congregation has the major say in whom to call as their priest.
But not much input into who becomes their bishop, which is why situations like that in the Fort Worth diocese happen.

[dsc]

127. Then I can understand

why the bishop would be a big deal and priests wouldn't be. I still am baffled by the marriage thing though. Especially since it evidently is a different ceremony in any case (the link Rowdyboy provided in his thread).

[Rowdyboy]

121. Koko, isn't what you're saying just about the same as...

"I didn't leave the Democratic party, the Democratic party left me"? I don't know your background but I have a pretty good idea of you as a person (from your posts) and I respect you very much. Just ask yourself the basic question..."Is this the hill I want to die on"? Gays and lesbians are already serving as priests, is an administrative post so important? We have rites blessing animals. Are committed, long-term, monogamous gay couples unworthy? Does you affiliation hinge on one issue or are you more generally dissatisfied with the direction the church is taking?

I'm not a "cradle" Episcop-I joined the church at age 45 because of its tolerance towards gays and women and my need for support during the my mother's terminal illness. My partner and I have been together in a monogamous relationship since 1989. He teaches high school Spanish, I'm a semi-retired state employee. My small-town, Mississippi parish priest has been remarkable (my partner has been a member since 1980, me since 1998). The congregation has been incredible. I have never once regretted my decision to join with these people, and I am VERY shy and standoffish (fits into the "frozen-chosen" lifestyle pretty well).

I feel like we've hi-jacked your church. I needed a place to experience God and the Episcopal Church was the only place with the lights on. They were the only mainstream denomination that did not consider me filth. But now, my inclusion will result in your exclusion and this makes me sad. It was not my intent to make others leave. That said, I have no intention of going anywhere. I am an Episcopalian, not a gay-Episcopalian.

We ask nothing except to worship beside you and, should the diocese choose, serve as administrators. Homosexuals, as equal Christians, would like to have rites to signify our relationships (I don't care about this personally because I have no desire for a ceremony. I've been married for 14 years in God's eyes).

I will keep you in my thoughts and prayers. Regardless of doctrine, we have more in common than we have separating us.

[KoKo]

135. I understand what you're saying Rowdy......It's a hard issue to deal with

and there is a little of the "I didn't leave the Democrats they left me" in that the Episcopal Church's cutting edge philosophy has left many of it's congregation feeling left out. Sexual preference shouldn't divide us but it can when it becomes more important than worshiping together and trying to follow teachings which help us be kinder to our fellow man and the earth we live on.

The fact that sexuality is 24/7 as an issue one way or the other in the media is taking away from how we could be relating to each other......or should be. I don't know how it can be solved......

But, I'm glad you have found a place you can feel comfortable and have refuge. Some of us will have to keep seeking and there will be common ground some day.

[Tinoire]

124. This is a hard one

I'd suggest you talk it over with your trusted Bishop or priest asking the why and why not and asking for the biblical references on the subject. This is one you're going to have to research with the guidance of your church, the Bible and your conscience.

I don't envy your torment at all and hope you find your answer soon.


Peace

[jonnyblitz]

131. this is a hard one? LMFAO

Yeah its real hard NOT being a bigot. You religious folks never cease to amaze me with your religious justifications to keep certain "undesirables" as second class citizens.

[salin]

138. Changing one's heart

and having to acknowledge that some of what is there, is not consistent with how one sees oneself - is indeed a very hard and painful process. I think the post was reflecting upon the process of doing that level of soul searching (something many people willingly never choose to do - and hence we are stuck in society with so many people harboring prejudices and bigotry), rather than showing empathy for the particular viewpoint or prejudice being expressed.

I think the process of coming to terms is a difficult and sometimes painful one (mostly becuase of the self reflection required, and sometimes what one sees in that mirror - in a moment of clarity - is not pretty, and does not jibe with how one generally has perceived onself to be). I don't think it is more or less difficult due to whether the particular soul searching is related to religion or not. (eg a white person in the south, circa 1963, who had always been accepting of Jim Crow, suddenly appalled by the 16th Street Bombing, and/or other egregious - but now highly visible - action of other white folks fighting the civil rights marchers, suddenly - in reviling the actions of there fellow whites - has to look in the mirror and say... have I been complicit in this? While I see my attitudes diverging... have I bought into this system and what role have I played... this person might have a painful transition period to reconcile who he/she is currently, has been and wants to be... as identifying those differences he/she will have to face up to their complicitness. Ten to one that person did not walk around seeing themselves as hateful, causing pain, etc. - until going through this process.)

[KoKo]

141. Johnny.......what are you talking about! Episcopals aren't Fundies...

But, I get your point. To you we all are Fundies.......LOL's I don't have a problem with what you choose not to believe and am not into persecuting anyone or trying to convert them either.......We Episcopals were taught to be very tolerant. My post is really about how tolerant can Episcopal's get before they don't have any core beliefs or litergy left.

[Tinoire]

179. :eyes: Johnnyblitz :eyes:

I'm not surprised this is all going right over your head. You rush to conclusions without even understanding what people are talking about. If you are happy that way, I won't rock your boat.

Nowhere did you see anything ever in any posts of mine that indicated using religious justifications to keep "undesirables" as second class citizens.

If such is how you reach your conclusions and judge people, I am very sorry for you.

[TrogL]

125. Jesus is silent on homosexuality

http://members.shaw.ca/trogl/bibquote.html

[dawgman]

128. My father is an Episcopal Deacon and he sees no problem with any of it.

He believes that the only true morality lies in the Jesus mantra of Love your neighbor as your self and love the lord YOUR god. Follow those two rules and all else will fall into place.

[Lost4words]

134. So , on this issue you and Bush see eye to eye.

too many bible thumpers, use your god given brain for once!
:puke:

[jonnyblitz]

136. I'm a gay athiest........i have problems.....

with episcopalians... :hi:

[greekspeak]

143. You are in a position I do not envy

Your religion is obviously very important to you. That people are trying to change it scares you, and you think the status quo is good. Sort of like having your covers yanked off you early on a cold morning. It hurts, it is scary at first to face that spiritual crisis. I feel for you and the pain you are feeling inside.

As a gay person who is fighting alongside you in "the good fight," you words and positions feel like daggers in my soul. It hurts when people tell you that there is not enough room for you to excell greatly in God's house. I am an athiest, but if I were ever to come knocking on the door to that house, and a freind told me to stay in the living room because I dont belong in other rooms because of who I am, I would probably turn my back on the house. I can't imagine something worse than having a freind or compatriot tell me I am less than them because of who I am.

I hope that you consider carefully in your soul search on this issue. I hope that you read your Bible, and open your heart and mind to what it says there. I hope that you will see there that the walls built around gay people by Christianity are of card stock that will blow down in a stiff wind.

[Andy_Stephenson]

147. I have been following this thread since yesterday...

The fears I started having after Bush made his log in the eye speech are solidified and concreted in this thread.

Termite and I will be together 17 years Aug 18. We are not married and so are not afforded the same protections as KoKo01 and her husband. I have seen KoKo say in this thread that I have chosen this lifestyle...to that statement I would say BULLSHIT! Why would I choose to be ostracized...hated and miserable? Being gay is a part of me just as surely as my hair is red. KoKo...when did you decide you were straight. In the Biblre it talks about going against nature...But what is my nature if I am gentically gay? Well that nature is a gay nature. God made me, God does not make mistakes. Paul talks about un-natural affections...to me heterosexuality is un-natural.

I have been feeling very uneasy since GW made his statement. With Kokos thread here...I believe more than ever that I and every other Gay person in this country is now under a severe threat of reprecussions. Koko I challenge you...to show me via Jesus' words where homosexuals are condemned. We are told from a very early age to live a Chirst Like life. That is what I do...God does not hate me and I would venture to say he has blessed me continually.

Unfortunately, there are people such as yourself still caught up...thinking my marrying termite and having the same rights and priviledges as you and your husband diminishes your marriage...How exactly??? If termite (god forbid) had a heart attack...and was in hospital, his family could deny me the right to see him if he were unconcious. Is that fair? Not only would I have to fight his family to see him...but I would be worried sick about my soulmate. I have read all your arguments in this thread and was really shocked to see such narrowmindedness from you. I really thought you were way above it. But if people such as yourself harbor such bigotry, then there really is no hope for GLBT folks when they come to take us to the gulag.

Perhaps GLBT folks should stop paying taxes since we are not afforded the same rights and privledge as you...I for one am considering this tactic...Let the straight people pick up the slack...Pay for your own damned childern to go to scholl and stop passing the plate for me to pay for your brats education! GLBT folks are not welcome...unless apying their fair share. I have paid my fair share and want my fair share of rights. If you don't want to give me the same rights as you have...don't ask me to pay for yours.

[Stuckinthebush]

153. GBnC.....

There are many, many, many of us here and in the US who are behind you 100% on this.

We all will fight this fight together.....

[KoKo]

154. GBnC, here's my reply to Uly way up in the top of this thread....

No, Uly, I don't think being Gay is a choice. My problem is that marriage



sacrament in the Christian Church is between a man and a woman and that's what I believe. I don't think that should change. And, I feel bad that I'm put into a "Fundie Corner" because there are other non-Fundie Christians who believe the same thing.

But, as I said, I believe if gays want to have a civil union for insurance benefits and any other benefits other married people have......that's okay by me. And whatever gays want to do in the privacy of their homes, is okay by me also.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

My problem is having the wedding sacraments in the Episcopal Church administered to gay couples. I have no problem with civil ceremonies or whatever ceremonies would be legally binding to allow health insurance, visitings rights, power of attorney in case of illness, and whatever legal rights I have with my husband. I only object to the same ceremony for Hetero's applying to Gay Marriages in my Church. I feel gay lifestyle is a valid lifestyle and understand the committment to each other.....but I still feel it's an alternate valid lifestyle to what I believe constitutes marriage in the traditional sense. If my church makes an alternative lifestyle part of the tradition then I will have to try to understand their reasoning.

Also, the gay Episcopal Bishop that all the hoopla is about in news who is requesting ordination was a married minister with two children who got a divorce and now requests that he be the first "openly gay" ordained Bisop in the Episcopal Church. The Episcopal Church does not allow divorce. So, he's already gone against the church's teachings, been allowed to remain a minister and now is pushing further.

What is my church all about if the rules only apply to the congregations as far as membership and not to the clergy hierarchy, itself. I am trying to deal with has been my church teachings in the past and understand where they are going and if I can go with them. I think others are having the same questions.

This isn't about only your rights and lifestyle...it's how is this going to work with my religious beliefs which are that you should have every legal right in whatever partnership you desire, but in the Episcopal Church how will this work until the church changes it's policy. And there are many of us who are struggling with this.


I'm sorry your reading of what I'm saying has you convinced I'm narrow minded. I have sincerely tried to answer as many posters as I could about where I was coming from and tried to understand where they are coming from. If you have seen something different in my replies then I don't know what else I can say.......

Peace....

[Andy_Stephenson]

158. Marriage is a civil union...

Don't you have to have a mariage licence? Takes it from the realm of the Church IMHO. For too long...far too long...GLBT folk have been treated as second class citizens. The time has come to demand the rights we deserve as much as you or anyone else.

If your being painted with a fundie brush...you might want to examine your position. I will agree with you on the Bishop issue...if he is divorced then no he should not be a Bishop...But in the first post you make it sound as if being gay is the problem not his former marriage.

As for the sacrement of marriage being for men and women only...do you realize the Catholic church performed gay marriages at one time? It makes me angry! Very angry that people such as yourself would say "but I still feel it's an alternate valid lifestyle"...Living in an apartment as opposed to a house is a lifestyle...I did not CHOOSE to be gay...get the "lifestyle" thinking out of your head. I am the way god made me and did not choose a "lifestyle". Let me ask you...when did you decide to live a straight "lifestyle"? God that phrase really raises my hackles, that phrase more than any other pisses me off! Why would anyone choose to be gay? Given the treatment we recieve...I give up...GLBT folk get ready...the gulag is calling and the "Lifestyle" Choice people will help out shrubs agenda. KoKo hon wake up...smell the coffee and realize the crap your espousing.

No agenda here...just a pissed off "queer" trying to make sense of all this. Want to help me pull the log out of my eye? Or should I attend a Homosexual re-education camp? I fear with attitudes like yours...the latter may be what happens...God help us all!

[greatauntoftriplets]

166. My parents were married by a judge.

Did that make their marriage any less valid? Or does it make me illegitimate?

[KoKo]

174. Why would being married by a judge make your marriage less valid???

I don't understand what you are saying. If I had been married by a judge my marriage would be valid in the eyes of the law, too. And I wouldn't need any other document to have status with pensions, health benefits, or anything else.

I don't have any problem with Gays/Lesbians having civil marriages. I support that.

[Andy_Stephenson]

175. There are none so blind...

as those who will not see.

[Az]

176. I am curious

Do you believe that your church is representational of the religion as set down by Jesus? Do you believe your church can make mistakes? Do you believe your church can change for the better?

Or is the problem one of what you want your church to be? If everyone else in your church decided to condone same sex marriage and clergy would you leave? Or would you accept it as progress? Would you see it as an opportunity the challenge yourself to be a better christian?

I think the problem here is that you have a vision of how you think your church is supposed to be. But as I understand it we humans are flawed. We are incapable of being perfect. So why would you assume that your vision of how the church should be is right? You say you are drawing a line in the sand. But what if what god really wants you to do is move forward?

Sometimes we are wrong. Sometimes what we feel is true is false. It is not easy to come to terms with this. In fact it is against our vary nature. I do not see an easy path through this for you. Your mind is currently struggling with many factors and your church is divided on the issue as well. You have no place to turn to for an easy answer. Your fellow DUers are pressuring you. Your mind is entering a state where it is about to either alter significantly or you are going to retreat into the comfort of the past. The church may find a way to avoid this issue. It may bury it. But the issue will not go away. Society will move forward. Gays and lesbians will become more and more accepted as a vital and natural part of society. Fringe groups will initially condone their coupling and eventually the religions will have to come along to maintain relavance. I would personally recommend you champion progress but I know it may not be a thing you are ready for. Again, you have my sympathy and my aid should you choose to accept it.

[KoKo]

180. AZ....I hear Ya! In your fine post to me......let me take what I can deal

with in your post.....at this point.

Quote from you:

Do you believe that your church is representational of the religion as set down by Jesus? Do you believe your church can make mistakes? Do you believe your church can change for the better?

Or is the problem one of what you want your church to be? If everyone else in your church decided to condone same sex marriage and clergy would you leave? Or would you accept it as progress? Would you see it as an opportunity the challenge yourself to be a better christian?

I think the problem here is that you have a vision of how you think your church is supposed to be. But as I understand it we humans are flawed. We are incapable of being perfect. So why would you assume that your vision of how the church should be is right? You say you are drawing a line in the sand. But what if what god really wants you to do is move forward?

The Episcopal Church is a product of Henry VII and the Protestant Reformation.

We are "Fallen Away Catholics" who revised our beliefs to accomodate....Henry and Cranmere..........

We are so close to the Catholic Church that we are the "fallen away Intellectual Wing" of it, even today long after Anne Bolyn......but this is My Humble Opinion..........

So......we are the logical Denomination to be Explorers and Groundsetters for "new ideas" in Christianity.........

That said.......Episcopals and Catholics and Lutheran's have been working to define "common ground" in their litergies to accomodate all the differences since the Schism..............

It doesn't seem to have totally worked.......even with all the discussion.

But, Lutheran, Episcopal and Catholics are the ones who claim the "right" to "Appostolic Succession" (the "laying on of hands from the appostles......Peter.....which is the foundation of our beliefs."

So......maybe Episcopalians can be "intellectually arrogant" and go "out on a limb" to accept new things (Henry VII being our first example) and I'm PROUD to have belonged to the "Church of the Thinking
People") BUT............the THEOLOGY.....makes me wonder why god created Eve for Adam.......

So, AZ.....you can see I have some theology things.....sitting on the back burner here.....

That go beyond the fact that I think Gay/Lesbians should have full legal/partnership rights in the eyes of the LAW......

This is a quick hit post from "top of my head....." but I'm open to discussion.....because I don't want any of the people on DU that I'm here with to think I'm some kind of Fundie........

But.....whatever.....we are all trying to get BUSH OUT in 2004..THAT's why we are here.........
but so many of us really have "convictions" and that's good. :-)'s

I could ad.....but time constraints......but still I put "something" out...

[Andy_Stephenson]

181. Koko please read...

Do you wear pants?

It's a sin according to leviticus.

If your kids sass you God Commands you to
20:9
For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death..."

22:11
Thou shalt not wear a garment of divers sorts, as of woollen and linen together.

Leviticus says a lot of things.

Handicapped people should NEVER go to Church according to leviticus

21:18
For whatsoever man he be that hath a blemish, he shall not approach: a blind man, or a lame, or he that hath a flat nose, or any thing superfluous,
21:19
Or a man that is brokenfooted, or brokenhanded,

21:20
Or crookbackt, or a dwarf, or that hath a blemish in his eye, or be scurvy, or scabbed, or hath his stones broken;

21:21
No man that hath a blemish of the seed of Aaron the priest shall come nigh to offer the offerings of the LORD made by fire: he hath a blemish; he shall not come nigh to offer the bread of his God.

Shit...I have a bad left foot...Guess that is sending me straight to hell because I cannot offer up the burnt offering.

BTW when was the last time you sacrificed a lamb to god? Did the neighbors complain? Or did you cover it with "I am BBQing"?

King David says to Jonathan in 2nd samuel 1:26

"very pleasant has thou been unto me: thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of woman"

I find Jesus' words a bit more enlightening...We are al sinners and through Christ we all forgiven...did you miss that message?
Now lets see what Jesus has said shall we....


Matthew Chapter 5

5:3
Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

5:4
Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted.

5:5
Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.

5:6
Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.

5:7
Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.

5:8
Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.

5:9
Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.

5:10
Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

5:11
Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.

5:12
Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.

5:13
Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men.

5:14
Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid.

[Lexingtonian]

148. Let me try

Well, I come from another direction on this. I'm with Quakers, and the Meeting I am currently with decided to take gay marriages under its care (there's Quakerese for you) ten years ago. There have been two such marriages in that time, of which I have attended one.

The general Quaker notion about marriage is, somewhat simplified, that God creates the condition and it is not our decision. The function of the group is taken to be as having a duty to discern such a relationship for what it is and acknowledge our roles accordingly. Thus Quaker marriage ceremonies are formally not assertions but affirmations of an existing condition. And marriages not 'made' by the group, they are 'taken under the care' of the group in recognition of the great value and frailty of each one.

I have found it useful to think of the condition of marriage along the lines that Judaism does, as a covenant extended between two people reflective of the Covenant between Man and God. And Covenant is the choice to admit memory and the best of our natures into an asymmetrical relationship- to admit as a context that there was a time of love and mutual understanding at the origin of our relationship, that we would always expect justice and mercy of each other, that we would try to be guided by all the knowledge, understanding, and wisdom we can muster- and pursue all that could be shared of Life together.

The crucial question then posed, in my opinion, about homosexual relationships proffered us as applicants for marriage in the present time is whether we can fairly discern them as covenantal ones or not.

I think the criteria set of (1) balance in asymmetry of identity and task division, of (2) living by the best of their human potential, and (3) decision to share Life fully, are finally not reasonable to dispute.

Any fair examination will find most applicants, heterosexual or homosexual, meeting (2) and (3) to an extent which we may or may not find admirable, but sufficient for them as they are and desire, and usually as extensive as the wisdom they have attained permits. We are permitted some extra argument about a part of (2), which is whether their part in our communal life is contributory or significantly detrimental.

It seems to me that once thinking evolves to the point of such criteria, the sticking point about gay marriage for most people tends initially to be criterion (1) and then a lot of wariness about (2). The first is a matter of ignorance or lack of experience. The latter is all the selfimportant interpretation of experience, always a pretense that the dysfunctional relationship between straight and gay society is the fault of one side and not the other.

Lastly, I do have friends who are openly gay and there is some division among them whether gay marriage is the same thing as heterosexual marriage. To put together all I have been told, they seem to be telling me it is different in form but not significantly so in function. So one must also admit that a decision must be made to be practical and ignore form or find an aesthetic distinction. I believe moral duty makes one consider the matter but also compels one away from decisions based on form rather than substance.

*

Having said all that, I learned the rough outlines of the controversy about the Episcopalian bishop just yesterday from local TV news. It is an unhappy controversy, with possibly too many and somewhat convoluted issues being put on the table at once for most members to get their minds around them. One has to hope an inspired approach develops, because if the small minded end up making the decision it will probably lead to the threatened schism (if I understand correctly what the people leading the 'conservative' side were saying, between the lines).

[JNelson6563]

160. did you know the word "but"

negates all that came before it?

I'm sorry to see religion spreading it's negative effects on an otherwise enlightened person.

Julie

[Andy_Stephenson]

164. AMEN!

pun intended!

[DrBB]

173. I'm Episcopalian, I'm in favor of the bishop & gay marriage. Here's why

Last gay marriage I went to, we sang the hymn "God is love and where true love is, God himself is there." For me it's that simple.

I cannot accept that the union between two people of the same sex is part of what I believe as a Christian.

Why not? I know lots of people in your state--generally liberal but having a hard time with this--and I respect that it's hard. But tthink for a sec: all of the things Jesus taught have an underlying ethical component. That which is wrong, or sinful, is so because it does harm, because it lessens the humanity of those who do it, and attacks the humanity of those who are victims of it.

This attitude about homosexuality is of a different character entirely: it is a blanket taboo, with no inherent ethical content, and has much more to do with atavistic feelings of ritual uncleanness than analytic concepts of harm and humanity.

The priest in my church who decided that he was duty-bound to offer the marriage sacrament to gay couples did so because to do anything else was to treat them as less fully members of the church, less fully human than heterosexuals. And that, he decided, was sinful.

Obviously there's more to it than that, but that's the thumbnail version.

edit: had to amplify a little

[Uzybone]

177. Im an Episcopalian myself

and I have no problems with it. Ok...I have a few reservations about performing the ceremony of marriage on a gay couple just becasue of tradition. I doubt that will happen though. But the ordination of a gay Bishop means nothing to me one way or the other. Is he qualified for the position is all I care. The only thing I would wonder about his relationship is whether or not he was "sleeping around" like I would if he was straight. The last thing the church needs it to have this wedge issue split us apart. Gays are brothers and sisters too and need to treated as such. Sexual orientation, which no one has any power to control, should not be used to discriminate against anyone.

[Ellen Forradalom]

185. Why not a gay bishop?

After all, Episcopalians believe in salvation through good taste! :-)

[Kazak]

186. The word is merely a word...marriage.

Lighten up...

[thermodynamic]

187. Why do you think your religion is correct?

I don't give a rat what it's called. I just want the same privileges and rights that you're automatically given.

I am not obscene. I am not immoral. I am no less of a person than you are. Why should somebody like me, who IS moral and virtuous make you walk away like that?

Don't leave the church.

I wanted to emigrate to Canada because I'm sick of the shit the US is dishing. People have told me to stay and rise above it.

I've cried out saying I'd kill myself. More than once. On both occasions I've been asked to life it through and fight. I am.

Don't leave the church just because you don't agree with it on ONE PETTY ISSUE! Geez, it's a man who loves a man. Not a man who chants "Satan, I'm your man! Come take my followers as a gift!"

I'll at least give the church some credit for opening its collective mind and realizing that everything it teaches may not be right. No religion should belittle or damn someone just because they're different. And consider the possibility that we don't know the original translations or the original contexts of the religions. Anybody could have perverted the religious texts for their own personal or political gain, using homosexuals as scapegoats.

Do what you want, I cannot stop you. I think it's all petty in the end. That's why I don't believe in organized religion. It's petty. Not to mention greedy, no religion should contrive and twist in order to get "tithes and offerings", that's a load of bullcrap designed to make the believers feel guilty (more like pidgeons) in order to give up their money in order to feel good enough to sleep at night. Organized religion is a petty farce and I left it. So if I can leave something for petty reasons, so can you. Go ahead, make their day. Find some other derivative of Christianity to give tithes to. It's the same sci-fi in the end.