by Max Barry

Latest Forum Topics

Advertisement

Search

Search

[+] Advanced...

Author:

Region:

Sort:

«12. . .2,3552,3562,3572,3582,3592,3602,361. . .2,6342,635»

The Forest of Aeneas wrote:What would be even more amusing about that argument (if it wasn't as overused to justify LGBTphobia) is how sinners - not sins - go to Hell. So evidently, God doesn't even live by that argument.

This may be true for Protestantism (not Protestant, so my understanding is limited), so if that is what you're referring to, I'd be willing to deffer to your knowledge and agree that it's definitely paradoxical.

In terms of Catholicism though, there's a bit of a misunderstanding here that most people (Catholic included) fall into. Under Catholic theology, we are all sinners, so in that respect, sinners can go to Heaven or Hell. The differentiating factor between the two is whether or not forgiveness is asked for. As an all-loving God, anyone can receive forgiveness for any sin no matter what, as long as they are sincere in asking for it. That's a whole thing, and it's not directly relevant here, so I'm not going to elaborate. The point is that it's not whether or not one is a sinner, it's whether or not one is repentant for said sins. This also means that God doesn't send people to hell, rather that they choose it through a lack of repentance, but that's pretty semantic.

Of course, this frames being LGBTQ+ as a sin, which has it's own issues, but that fits better in the next bit I'll write out. Summary of that just to make sure it doesn't get lost is that LGBTQ+'ness isn't a sin, though some acts of it may be in some circumstances that no one can really concretely judge except God. Even then, not all sins mean eternal damnation, and forgiveness is always still available. So it only does harm to be bigoted.

The Forest of Aeneas wrote:What's also even more strange is how, since being LGBT is not a choice, God would create people as LGBT and then send them to Hell for that? If gay sex or transitioning or same-sex marriage or whatever was actually a sin, I really don't think God would create people to be inclined to those '''''sins'''''.

Sorry if it feels like I'm being pedantic here, but I think the framing of how LGBTQ+ people exist is important here. As both a Catholic and a now 3rd year Biology major (passed all my chem courses!), LGBTQ+'ness is largely a result of environmental factors. God doesn't necessarily "create" people individually, it's more an expression of free will through the course of evolution that results in individual phenotypes, and it'd be kinda hard to have a "gay gene" for lack of a better term. If there was a gene that made people want to engage in homosexual behavior rather than heterosexual behavior, it'd probably die in a generation or two, as homosexual behavior does not result in the passing on of genes. Even if such a gene was recessive, meaning it could be passed on, it'd be gradually lost over time as it is still selected against, it would just take much longer. That's before taking into account how such a gene, by nature of what genes do, would have to be exceptionally complicated and fragile, making creation by mutation very hard to do.

Really, very little human behavior is genetic. Most brain connections are created after birth, and while some mental genetic conditions exist, they are usually a result of common errors during the creation of gametes (sperm and egg), which doesn't apply here. Even genetic dispositions only increase the probability of environmental factors causing something, which still involves the surrounding environment.

So yeah, you are right that being LGBTQ+ is not a choice, but it's not a "God created them" type situation, as believing as much would either undermine genetics or theology (as in, to believe God controls all environmental factors violates free will). As such being LGBTQ+ is not a sin in itself, but under current teachings, acts pertaining to it can be depending on specifics.

Moreover, the point isn't really that important in my opinion. LGBTQ+ stuff is still pretty new in the modern cultural consciousness, and Church teachings can evolve with the world. I'm not going to bank on this being the case, but I don't think we (as Catholics) can ever truly declare anything that causes no harm to one's self or others a mortal sin, but that's just in my opinion. Please don't think I'm talking on behalf of the entire Church, I'm too dumb for them to let me do that.

But all that to say whether or not LGBTQ+ behavior is a serious enough sin to warrant hell, even in the absence of repentance, is something I'm not really convinced of. A sin of that type is known as a mortal sin, and it has three requirements. It has to be a serious matter, done with the knowledge that it is wrong, and with full consent in the activity. The second and third are conditional, so not too important here, but whether or not it's a grave matter is contentious, and I'm not confident in my ability to say, though it feels like it's probably not to me. Even if it is, forgiveness is still available.

Really, when it comes down to it, it's all about a relationship with God. You can't get to heaven by just strictly following rules, so there's no reason to blindly enforce said rules. Humans are beings of limited intelligence, and there's no nuance in rules for real world situations. I'm not confident in declaring anything someone else does a sin unless it causes undue harm to another being, so I'm absolutely not going to do so categorically. God doesn't act as a lawyer, so if someone has a good relationship with God, nothing else matters, and if they don't believe in God, then the whole thing matters even less. In both cases, me being judgmental, or believing someone's actions to be a sin, or making broad claims about the morality of real people, only does harm. The Church teaches love and acceptance towards everyone, so that's what I'll live out.

Hopefully this doesn't come across as argumentative or bigoted. As I've said, religious people have a reputation for both of those, for good reason, and I'm just trying to concisely express why bigotry should not be a part of Catholicism.

Also, good source Station 8. I've just skimmed it, and it seems pretty in line to what I'm trying to get across. It does make the point that the only mentions of homosexual behavior involve other condemn-able things being done at the same time, which I think supports my belief that homosexuality itself isn't a mortal sin. It does feel pretty Protestant though, so I can't say it's entirely what I believe without a closer reading and a lot of reflection.

Einswenn, Jutsa, Mount Seymour, Uan aa Boa, and 4 othersThe void territories, Nation of ecologists, Ardelark, and The Forest of Aeneas

It's honestly really interesting to read what Catholics (especially Catholics with any scientific background) have to say about these types of issues.

Rhodevus wrote:It's honestly really interesting to read what Catholics (especially Catholics with any scientific background) have to say about these types of issues.

They have too much to say if you ask me. Apologies to the scrollwheels of the Forestians around the world.

Einswenn, Rhodevus, Jutsa, Mount Seymour, and 4 othersUan aa Boa, Nation of ecologists, The most serene republicans, and The Forest of Aeneas

The most serene republicans

Canaltia wrote:To illustrate, there are homosexual people who are biphobic, calling them "traitors" or "fake allies", or people who accept any sexual orientation, but still view transgenderism as a sickness, or people that get angry when people change their orientation within the LGBTQ+ sphere.

I hate that I can think of more than one experience to go with each scenario you described, and all of them in LGBTQ+ spaces, most of them in specifically progressive/left-wing spaces as well. The biphobic gay person in particular is one that I keep finding in the wild all the time, and in many variations too. Some think bisexuality is a phase or something temporary, others think every bisexual is a banging machine of horny with a three digit body count. Some think it's a combination of both, and some of it comes from very influential people like Glenn Greenwald (I'm still not fully over those tweets). It sucks.

And it also sucks when people discover you refuse to identify with anything in particular, because then all of your behaviour becomes an excuse to speculate on your gender/sexuality. Not everytime and not in every space of course, but some people will take any excuse to dissect you.

Shout out to the dude who thought I was a closeted transgender lesbian back when I looked really girly though, I thought that was very funny

Prusmia wrote:Congratulations you just wrote an essay saying, be nice.

being not nice (aggressively inconsiderate, which is a choice) creates (statistically directly) all of the things that everyone can see as being wrong with our world. i'm willing to trust the ability of my imagination to elude the mythical threat of boredom inflicted by peace.

I’ve never understood why there are these types of gatekeepers within LGBT+ spaces. Most of them already know what it’s like it to be shunned and insulted for being who they are, yet do it to others. It’s bizarre.

As the bisexual president of West Barack and East Obama, I proclaim that everyone, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity, will be sent to the salt mines if they try to undermine my power. This truly is an equal opportunity nation ❤️🧡💛💚💙💜

Einswenn, Jutsa, Mount Seymour, Shwe Tu Colony, and 8 othersCanaltia, Lofia, Zerphen, Nation of ecologists, Galaxiak, Santichushari, Nordustra, and The Forest of Aeneas

Ive been reading through these and really want to say something but i am entirely unable to formulate thoughts

Galaxiak wrote:Ive been reading through these and really want to say something but i am entirely unable to formulate thoughts

Same here...

Galaxiak

People are often stuck in their mindset. Biphobia 'sort of' makes sense (very very VERY heavy quotations there), as people with a single-side sexuality only have the understanding of someone who is attracted to one side. Whether it be straight people, who are confused why anyone would look at their gender and be attracted to them, or gay people, who are confused why anyone would look at the other gender and be attracted to them (or, they remember themselves having a 'bisexual phase' where they were trying to come to terms with their homosexuality, and think others are stuck in this 'limbo' rather than it being an actual sexuality).

This is also very true for transgender or non-binary people, as it is quite hard to grasp not wanting to identify as the gender you were assigned at birth. Because for the majority of people, their parts match their minds. And in a western culture/society, which places very strict gender roles on both sexes, having people outside this binary can have people asking some very hard questions about their entire cultural norms.

There is always push back to any sort of progress. Has been at every point in human history.

Einswenn, Jutsa, Canaltia, Nation of ecologists, and 2 othersGalaxiak, and The Forest of Aeneas

Rhodevus wrote:Biphobia 'sort of' makes sense (very very VERY heavy quotations there), as people with a single-side sexuality only have the understanding of someone who is attracted to one side.

There's another practical explanation I have gathered while exploring the topic back in time. In some less liberal yet still somewhat ok countries (like Russia/Eastern Europe where queers are restricted in love expression and forced to hide affection at public places but at the same time [relatively] freely existing and building relationships) bisexual people are under higher risk to "pick one side" eventually which most often is the heterosexual one to get integrated into socio-cultural environment and/or gain welfare/state perks of marriage. Many people whom I talked to and who disliked bisexials were expressing concerns that bi are "not serious [here]" and couldn't be trusted in long-term perspective. Frankly speaking, I find it quite a fair position in long-term precisely, but as for general take on peope biphobia is not justified that much.

Also I feel obliged to mention those gay/lesbian people who, in contrary, are very passionate about bisexuals finding it "quite hot" for the latter to be "on both sides at the same time".

Canaltia, Nation of ecologists, and The Forest of Aeneas

I don't think it's fair to dislike bi people because of "the long term". For one, that makes no sense at all.

on the one hand, you have societal pressures, which are forcing them to pick. Being forced to be gay or straight when you're really bi, is just another way of being pushed into the closet. It's unfair to criticize people for everyone else's mistakes.

On the other hand, who is the same in the long term? Any straight or gay person who think they were the same person 5 or 10 years before is just not intelligent. You learn more and discover more about yourself in the long-term. if that means that a bi person discovering they were straight or gay? well, that's on them. If their SO is scared that they will break up because they may or may not choose "a different side", then that's probably not a great relationship, or that couple is identical politically, socially, culturally, religiously and economically (not likely).

And yes, chasers. The bane of existence for every marginalized community

Rhodevus wrote:If their SO is scared that they will break up because they may or may not choose "a different side", then that's probably not a great relationship, or that couple is identical politically, socially, culturally, religiously and economically (not likely).

I feel like you could miss the key part of my observation: my example is from a more radical, conservative and restricted society. I cannot blame bi people for choosing the "best" or more "strategically convenient" scenario of living under heteronormative rules if they are still ok with just one of the sides (much worse is when gay people have to live in heterosexual marriage if they want to be married) because otherwise they get nothing from life at all. I don't know why some people are that desperate about marriage but this trend is still present and in less liberal countries it keeps being the only one way of life possible.

Einswenn wrote:I feel like you could miss the key part of my observation: my example is from a more radical, conservative and restricted society. I cannot blame bi people for choosing the "best" or more "strategically convenient" scenario of living under heteronormative rules if they are still ok with just one of the sides (much worse is when gay people have to live in heterosexual marriage if they want to be married) because otherwise they get nothing from life at all. I don't know why some people are that desperate about marriage but this trend is still present and in less liberal countries it keeps being the only one way of life possible.

See the first part of my explanation to cover this point. Blaming a victim of societal pressure for succumbing to societal pressure is bad. For both bi and gay people, in places where any sort of homosexual relationship isn't allowed/not approved of.

What you have quoted explains the second part of your discussion, which relates to people not trusting bi people in the long-term.

Santichushari

West Barack and East Obama wrote:I’ve never understood why there are these types of gatekeepers within LGBT+ spaces. Most of them already know what it’s like it to be shunned and insulted for being who they are, yet do it to others. It’s bizarre.

I know, it’s ridiculous. We have hate inside a place that gets a lot of hate. Look at the battleaxe bi people, truscums and many more groups. (No, you don’t need dysphoria to be trans and pan, omni and poly people like me aren’t contributing to biphobia. This is random, but I want a Caesar salad.) I really don’t see why hate exists in communities that are already hated on! I’ll respect your opinion(s), as long as I know it’s not harming any others or being hateful.

Cameroi wrote:being not nice (aggressively inconsiderate, which is a choice) creates (statistically directly) all of the things that everyone can see as being wrong with our world. i'm willing to trust the ability of my imagination to elude the mythical threat of boredom inflicted by peace.

I’m tired of all the greed in governments and in the people. Like, can’t we just get along? We’re all just citizens of Earth, after all. We don’t need to hate one another like they’re a bunch of cockroaches in a roach infestation. Peacefulness is nicer, no? I do not like yelling. In fact, I speak so quietly that some can’t even hear my voice. Violence isn’t the way to go. Just send your weapons to the Moon, get rid of your anger in a punching bag and apologise to people you’ve harmed. No, actually apologise. Yelling out sorry won’t work for many people. It’s not funny to make fun of people or joke about harming or doing bad things to someone. (Um, Dad, that’s what you do to me nearly every single day of my life. I don’t need, well, I won’t say it here. :P) There is one classmate of mine at school who will get mad at me and poke fun at me for the slightest thing. Getting offended by “jokes”, not knowing if someone’s talking to me or even responding to something someone said that wasn’t directed at me! For god’s sake, those “jokes” aren’t funny and I’m autistic! I don’t understand most social cues! Ai, what is with hate? I hate hate!

Biphobia (in the absence of homophobia) always seemed weird to me. Like, intuitively, wouldn't that just be the default position? It's either that or asexuality. Kind of how people don't have a favorite colour from the moment of birth, but as they are influenced by the environment around them, they sorta discover one. You could make the point that in that moment, either no colour or every colour is one's favorite, and it's completely fine for that to remain as is. It's not a perfect analogy, but that's how I picture it.

That's not to say I don't understand why it's a thing, but if you're starting a war online between red and blue, you should probably just recognize that it's arbitrary and chill out. So what if I don't want to "pick a side"?

Hello Forest! I'm Urbania, i recently came from Wintreath. I'm gonna let my nation die and decompose in these here woods.

How's it going?

XXURBANXX wrote:Hello Forest! I'm Urbania, i recently came from Wintreath. I'm gonna let my nation die and decompose in these here woods.

How's it going?

Good, but not great. Could be better.

Lofia wrote:Good, but not great. Could be better.

Same. I'm gonna sleep off the depression. Goodnight!

Lofia, The most serene republicans, and The Forest of Aeneas

XXURBANXX wrote:Same. I'm gonna sleep off the depression. Goodnight!

I'm still somewhat struggling with depression, but it has gotten a lot better just before the quarantine was lifted. I don't get that feeling as often as I used to. I hope you will find some light through that awful feeling. We will come back stronger than ever!

XXURBANXX, The most serene republicans, York Zionia, and The Forest of Aeneas

Lofia wrote:I'm still somewhat struggling with depression, but it has gotten a lot better just before the quarantine was lifted. I don't get that feeling as often as I used to. I hope you will find some light through that awful feeling. We will come back stronger than ever!

Ok, thanks! I too struggle with depression

Lofia, The most serene republicans, and The Forest of Aeneas

The most serene republicans

To change the subject, we haven't talked about music in a few months... What kind of stuff have you been listening to? Anything new?

Alcantaria, Shwe Tu Colony, Nation of ecologists, and The Forest of Aeneas

The most serene republicans wrote:To change the subject, we haven't talked about music in a few months... What kind of stuff have you been listening to? Anything new?

Right now, Titanium by David Guetta :P

Unrelated, but I got pissed off by a song's title having a double negative recently, because I am a pedant xD.

Lofia, Nation of ecologists, and The most serene republicans

The most serene republicans wrote:To change the subject, we haven't talked about music in a few months... What kind of stuff have you been listening to? Anything new?

Just YouTube copyright-free music recently. I've been listening to Two Steps From Hell (https://youtu.be/9O4_awEHh1g) and Kupla's lo-fi music (https://youtu.be/Gjx6UQOjswo) on repeat.

The most serene republicans and The Forest of Aeneas

The most serene republicans wrote:To change the subject, we haven't talked about music in a few months... What kind of stuff have you been listening to? Anything new?

It's Eurovision time so most of the new music in my playlist are from the contest. This year Hold Me Closer by Cornelia Jacobs (Sweden) was my winner after my [former] love of the year - Sekret by Ronela Hajati (Albania) - changed their music and made stage performace worse than I could imagine so they didn't even qualify to the Grand Final. Other notable entries were from Finland (Jezebel by The Rasmus), Spain (Slow Mo by Chanel), Estonia (Hope by Stefan). Fun pop-rock-folk song made a fuss with Moldavian entry Trenulețul by Zdob şi Zdub & Advahov Brothers.

Nation of ecologists, Phillip isle, and The Forest of Aeneas

Congrats to The Forest of Aeneas for passing their resolution!!!

Sorry, just practicing for 4 days time.

«12. . .2,3552,3562,3572,3582,3592,3602,361. . .2,6342,635»

Advertisement