the Bible on slavery

dong20

Sexy Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Posts
6,058
Media
0
Likes
28
Points
183
Location
The grey country
Sexuality
No Response
Stronzo said:
This is nothing more than a pissing match to see who has the bigger figurative scholong dong20. I agree.

Unfortunately playainda in unable to 'look at the issue' from any other perspective than a derogatory and frightened one.

And to answer him directly; I'm undoubtedly no more 'touchy' about being gay than he is about being a black "Christian".:cool:

By Gum...there's nowt so queer as folk (pun intended)...some still say that here, honestly!

Well as we are 98% indentical, genetically to Halibut....that 2% 'extra' we have must be the bits the Halibut don't need and God clearly hated waste.:rolleyes:
 

Wave

Experimental Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Posts
133
Media
0
Likes
5
Points
163
Age
34
Location
Cleveland (Ohio, United States)
Sexuality
69% Gay, 31% Straight
Gender
Male
speaking of coming at it from a different perspective, Dong20, you should all keep in mind that the Greek Testament (called the new testament) was written for believers and followers of JC, not for gentiles. slavery is "condoned" only in as much as slaves who hade become belieivers were encouraged and instructed to be good slaves to their masters so that their masters might see that their slaves had changed somehow. thus, the masters might come to Christ as well. their persepctive as slaves was on eternity, not the here and now. and they had been empowered to actually care about their "owners," not despise them.

out of context, that looks like slavery is condoned. but if that is the case, why did YHWH send moses to free the hebrew slaves in egypt?

we're all slaves, and we can all be set free. :wink:
 

dong20

Sexy Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Posts
6,058
Media
0
Likes
28
Points
183
Location
The grey country
Sexuality
No Response
Wave said:
speaking of coming at it from a different perspective, Dong20, you should all keep in mind that the Greek Testament (called the new testament) was written for believers and followers of JC, not for gentiles. slavery is "condoned" only in as much as slaves who hade become belieivers were encouraged and instructed to be good slaves to their masters so that their masters might see that their slaves had changed somehow. thus, the masters might come to Christ as well. their persepctive as slaves was on eternity, not the here and now. and they had been empowered to actually care about their "owners," not despise them.

out of context, that looks like slavery is condoned. but if that is the case, why did YHWH send moses to free the hebrew slaves in egypt?

we're all slaves, and we can all be set free. :wink:

It was more a 'importance' perspective in comparison to the many other injustices being perpetrated worldwide today that I had in mind.

If you (and I assume you do) think slavery is wrong, then by referring to it in the terms it does (i.e. non condemnatory) then I don't see how (in logical terms) we can say that God was not even at best turning a blind eye to the issue, and a sin of omission or inaction against an injustice is still a sin, in the same way ignorance of a law is no defence against its enforcement even if one doesn't support its premise.

You make an interesting point about Moses; as I recall during their escape to freedom Moses had to intercede on behalf of the Hebrews to protect them from Gods wrath for worshipping a 'false' idol, sounds like the behaviour of a spoiled brat or challenged tyrant than a wise omnipotent being to me.

God only 'forgave' the Hebrews and covenanted with them when they agreed to worship only him so their freedom was hardly uncondtional, and later he 'taunted' Moses that he would never live to reach the 'promised land' which of course he never did. As I understand it, God really only aided Moses in freeing slaves when he was asked to do by Moses (so credit to him), but it's not like God took the initiative.

I'd argue Moses was looking out for his own. As a cynic I'd argue that God sent the plagues and parted the sea to piss off Pharoah (who of course was a threat to his authority) rather than out of a more noble motivation but then as I said I'm a cynic when it come to religion.

In the end, however you cut it, no one comes out smelling of roses.:rolleyes:
 

headbang8

Admired Member
Joined
May 15, 2004
Posts
1,627
Media
12
Likes
815
Points
333
Location
Munich (Bavaria, Germany)
Sexuality
80% Gay, 20% Straight
Gender
Male
Wave said:
speaking of coming at it from a different perspective, Dong20, you should all keep in mind that the Greek Testament (called the new testament) was written for believers and followers of JC, not for gentiles. slavery is "condoned" only in as much as slaves who hade become belieivers were encouraged and instructed to be good slaves to their masters so that their masters might see that their slaves had changed somehow. thus, the masters might come to Christ as well. their persepctive as slaves was on eternity, not the here and now. and they had been empowered to actually care about their "owners," not despise them.

we're all slaves, and we can all be set free. :wink:

That freedom is vanity, and evil should not be resisted, because not resisting makes a point to your oppressors? Hmmm...
 

dreamer20

Worshipped Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Apr 14, 2006
Posts
7,987
Media
3
Likes
23,113
Points
643
Gender
Male
Wave said:
out of context, that looks like slavery is condoned. but if that is the case, why did YHWH send moses to free the hebrew slaves in egypt?

we're all slaves, and we can all be set free. :wink:
He set them free only to subsequently cause them extreme hardship and kill most of them, as stated in the OT. While Egypt flourished, as usual, many Hebrews died in the desert under Moses' rule. YHWH also condoned and helped Abraham use fraudulent methods to obtain slaves and other wealth and asked for Isaac as a human sacrifice. A very bizarre, insane, immoral, cruel and unpredictable deity indeed, according to the picture painted of him in the OT.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/sla_bibl.htm

http://www.religioustolerance.org/imm_bibl1.htm

http://www.religioustolerance.org/imm_bibl2.htm

dreamer20
 

playainda336

Legendary Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Oct 25, 2005
Posts
1,991
Media
223
Likes
2,363
Points
443
Location
Greensboro (North Carolina, United States)
Verification
View
Sexuality
60% Gay, 40% Straight
Gender
Male
Stronzo said:
This is nothing more than a pissing match to see who has the bigger figurative scholong dong20. I agree.

Unfortunately playainda in unable to 'look at the issue' from any other perspective than a derogatory and frightened one.

And to answer him directly; I'm undoubtedly no more 'touchy' about being gay than he is about being a black "Christian".:cool:
...*sigh* again with the insults. My, defeat must suck. u_u;

Anyway, I don't see how anything I've said was derogatory (sp?) or even defamatory towards gay people. In fact, the only thing I've been seeing that was defamatory was your context translation of the Bible. You know, another thing I've read about arguements is that people will always attempt to make you doubt yourself by accusing of you of things they themselves are doing. So maybe you feel inferior or something? (Since you assume I feel inferior)...and maybe you hate yourself? Or are you frightened by a world in which homosexuality is found out to be not genetic? I have no clue. And I really can't care in a situation anymore than the person involved does.

So if you do, I'm sorry for you. But if you truly love yourself then you wouldn't care what people say about you or do to you anyway. You should be confident in what you believe and stick to it. That's what I was always told. Just be yourself and never forfeit your own views to accomodate another's. That's why (probably about 50 posts back on whichever thread) I proposed it'd be best if we agree to disagree. I'm sorry you keep burning my olive branches, but uhhh...*shrugs*...I kinda feel there's no need to extend another. :rolleyes:
 

B_Stronzo

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2005
Posts
4,588
Media
0
Likes
133
Points
183
Location
Plimoth Plantation
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
playainda336 said:
...*sigh* So if you do, I'm sorry for you. But if you truly love yourself

'love myself'... ooooooooooo how liberal of you. I love myself sometimes three times a day if I get enough privacy.

..then you wouldn't care what people say about you or do to you anyway. You should be confident in what you believe and stick to it. That's what I was always told. Just be yourself and never forfeit your own views to accomodate another's.

You've obviously been 'told' many things. I think you need to come to terms with your ethnicity and your real place in this society. You appear not to be very happy with the equality of all peoples. And that makes me truly sorry for you. It makes me wonder why (in truth) you find such an insatiable need to keep espousing inequality at a place where your pov is immensely discredited and disproved.

You've not addressed Lex once.. tellingly. No matter. There's some masochistic piece of you that must need the requiting.


That's why (probably about 50 posts back on whichever thread) I proposed it'd be best if we agree to disagree. I'm sorry you keep burning my olive branches, but uhhh...*shrugs*...I kinda feel there's no need to extend another. :rolleyes:

Okay I'll accept the olive branch you've never presented.

Here:

"While I think you should continue practicing being black (and would never persecute you for it) I can't say I approve of your ethnicity. My Bible instructs me you're subservient by nature."

Olive branch accepted precisely in the manner in which it was proffered.

There finally. We're on level ground.

Glad me made amends.
 

b.c.

Worshipped Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Posts
20,540
Media
0
Likes
21,784
Points
468
Location
at home
Verification
View
Gender
Male
Couldn't respond to any of the above...out of town for a few days. Too much to reply to now, but let me just (try) to respond to some of Lex's and Stronzo's recent comments re. my take on this in a general sort of way.

Lex, as I said before, this to me is not an argument. It's more of a debate.

Stronzo, my "darkies" satire was not directed at or meant to convey what I thought your take on slavery and religion was, but rather the take of the authors of the referenced web site in your original post.

Re. your faith, I never meant to imply you were of the Christian faith. But you seem to me to have been a man of some faith, at some point in time, or else why would it matter so to you? I don't give a damn what "the church" (any church) says or does...why do you?

Before you answer, I know... because we should. Because the church is one of those institutions that contribute to bigotry and discrimination, and this should be unacceptable to us, and African Americans in particular haven't done their part in realizing this and taking up the cause. As I said, I get it.

I would think you'd know I'm no homophobe (one sexual persuasion is just as good as the next, no es verdad?) And what you mistake for racism (me? that's a laugh), "distancing oneself", lack of understanding, and apathy on my part, is perhaps really something else, I think.

Maybe idealistic guys like I once was, after a certain while, after a certain age, become pessimistic guys, tired of expecting (like you) the best out of people only in turn to get (too often) the worst from them. I touched on that in another thread of yours, on reconciling religion.

Because I've had my fill of guys who run around saying what we all should do. "Let's take up arms, and protest, and stand up against this or that" (gay rights for example), then come election time, some of these same people (these so called "conservative/Republican" gays I mentioned in that other thread for example) go run off behind closed curtains (in that VOTING booth) and push that button for those guys that get in office with a conservative agenda.

When I alluded to that (up somewhere above) you called it "racist" that I should say that the kind of government we now have is a result of how too many (of a white majority) voted. I mentioned white voters because of the context in which you've framed this thread. Not racist, just facts.

You address oppressed people to rally up behind this cause (of yours/of ours) when the people who really need to be informed, attacked, addressed, confronted are the ones who put conservative policies and policy makers in office.

Don't come say we have common causes, but on voting day go vote for a conservative agenda because you (not meaning you personally...you generally) for example don't believe in affirmative action, or you believe there is a need for massive welfare reform (too many of "those people" on the take), or you don't give a damn about racial profiling, or you don't believe in gun control legislation, or a need for a national healthcare system, you don't care about environmental issues, you think the minimum wage is high enough - and all those OTHER issues that affect (directly or indirectly) "oppressed people".

In short: Let's all not be brothers and sisters just when it's politically expedient for us. I said this somewhere else here in this forum before: People too often vote for candidates because they believe their guy is going to do something about "those people".

Then they discover, they are "those people".
 

B_Stronzo

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2005
Posts
4,588
Media
0
Likes
133
Points
183
Location
Plimoth Plantation
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Thanks for the thoughtful reply b.c.


b.c. said:
Re. your faith, I never meant to imply you were of the Christian faith. But you seem to me to have been a man of some faith, at some point in time, or else why would it matter so to you? I don't give a damn what "the church" (any church) says or does...why do you?

I do have 'some faith'. I've always had it b.c. It's just not that faith. And I only care what 'the church' does/says in how it oppresses decent people. That's the sum and substance of it plain and simple.


I would think you'd know I'm no homophobe (one sexual persuasion is just as good as the next, no es verdad?) And what you mistake for racism (me? that's a laugh), "distancing oneself", lack of understanding, and apathy on my part, is perhaps really something else, I think.
No I never mistook you for a homophobe. But I saw your 'distance' as apathy - to me equally offensive.

Maybe idealistic guys like I once was, after a certain while, after a certain age, become pessimistic guys, tired of expecting (like you) the best out of people only in turn to get (too often) the worst from them. I touched on that in another thread of yours, on reconciling religion.

I understand entirely and only hope I remain resolute.

Because I've had my fill of guys who run around saying what we all should do. "Let's take up arms, and protest, and stand up against this or that" (gay rights for example), then come election time, some of these same people (these so called "conservative/Republican" gays I mentioned in that other thread for example) go run off behind closed curtains (in that VOTING booth) and push that button for those guys that get in office with a conservative agenda.

Well put. To me too it defies comprehension yet I know it happens too often.

When I alluded to that (up somewhere above) you called it "racist" that I should say that the kind of government we now have is a result of how too many (of a white majority) voted. I mentioned white voters because of the context in which you've framed this thread. Not racist, just facts.

Thanks for explaining that for it seemed otherwise at that moment.


Don't come say we have common causes, but on voting day go vote for a conservative agenda because you (not meaning you personally...you generally) for example don't believe in affirmative action, or you believe there is a need for massive welfare reform (too many of "those people" on the take), or you don't give a damn about racial profiling, or you don't believe in gun control legislation, or a need for a national healthcare system, you don't care about environmental issues, you think the minimum wage is high enough - and all those OTHER issues that affect (directly or indirectly) "oppressed people".

I beg you. NEVER mistake me for one of those 'yous'.

In short: Let's all not be brothers and sisters just when it's politically expedient for us. I said this somewhere else here in this forum before: People too often vote for candidates because they believe their guy is going to do something about "those people".

Then they discover, they are "those people".

The first sentence in the above paragraph nutshells it perfectly.

Thanks again for putting things so clearly, R.
 

b.c.

Worshipped Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Posts
20,540
Media
0
Likes
21,784
Points
468
Location
at home
Verification
View
Gender
Male
It's good that those points were made clearer.

However, in turn, I still take issue with the parts of your posts which seem to take Black people to task over their faith. In the other thread you implied that Black people, in particular, African Americans, don't even have a religion of their own because they are practicing "the white man's religion". And in this one you point out that their religion historically advocated slavery.

As I've said before, I think people have the right to choose, which includes freedom of choice with regard to faith. And while religions, as much everything else man made, are far from perfect, especially in their historic treatment of minorities (the role of women in the Catholic Church for example), I found those elements of your posts objectionable, not from a religious standpoint, but from a historical one.

Faith has allowed African Americans since slavery to persevere: has given them hope, strength, belief in a greater cause, a greater power, at times when there was little else to believe in. To suggest to a people so long removed (snatched) from any semblance of their ancestry that they have no ownership in their faith (just to make your point) was I think rather presumptuous and unfair.

I think the obvious Black influences in church (gospel for example) as well as time, blood, sweat, and tears, have given them ownership in their particular religion, imperfect as it is.
 

B_Stronzo

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2005
Posts
4,588
Media
0
Likes
133
Points
183
Location
Plimoth Plantation
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
b.c. said:
It's good that those points were made clearer.

Yikes b.c. Nice set up dude! That's some impressive shit.

It appears there was no real clarification. You have a giant chip on your shoulder. You're still right where I thought you were. And Lex was wrong. We're on entirely different pages.

However, in turn, I still take issue with the parts of your posts which seem to take Black people to task over their faith. In the other thread you implied that Black people, in particular, African Americans, don't even have a religion of their own because they are practicing "the white man's religion".

Categorically mistaken. I take all Christian bigots to task and if that happens to be black Christians then they're equally fair game. But that wasn't the purpose of this thread. It was to see if the fervor for gay rights was as intense as that for black rights. It's not. That much is crystal clear.

You're (as Lex stated when he referenced the hyper-sensitivity of black Americans to this analogy) looking for something I never implied. The only implication I made was that the 'White Man's' religion was imposed and that black man's was stripped from his generational history. Oddly I seem to be more offended by it than you. There's a big difference there.

And in this one you point out that their religion historically advocated slavery.

Find it. Never. I said Chrisianity did that generally. Remember I'm no apologist for my race or my ancestral religion but truth is truth and those fuckers did your ancestors in and now they're after my brothers. Why is this lost on you? You appear fairly intelligent.


Faith has allowed African Americans since slavery to persevere: has given them hope, strength, belief in a greater cause, a greater power, at times when there was little else to believe in. To suggest to a people so long removed (snatched) from any semblance of their ancestry that they have no ownership in their faith (just to make your point) was I think rather presumptuous and unfair.

Similarly I think your apologist attitude about the Christian faith where it applies to black Americans is in direct opposition to the use of it by those indiviudals I cited (like playainda) to marginalize gay people. I still maintain it too. You'll find me unequivocal on that issue and intransigent beyond the known.

I think the obvious Black influences in church (gospel for example) as well as time, blood, sweat, and tears, have given them ownership in their particular religion, imperfect as it is.

b.c.?

I strongly suggest you go back and reread that context in which I posted my responses to this issue. I've given due credence to the social/survival phenomenon and I won't go over it again.

Your bias is far more apparent than you think. And I was not mistaken in my take on you. I wish you could see how vile Christianity becomes to those it seeks to ostracize without somehow making homosexuals and blacks into and "us and them" situation.

Your take is what I thought it was. You'd have seemed far more eccumenical in your thinking if you'd kept this last post buried in that place in your psyche where you store your hidden agenda since in just that way BronxBombshell's racism thread outed the subtleties of ingrained prejudice this thread has exposed yours.

I suggest you dust of the politics of your youth and reapply should they once have had the perspective of fair play. Your compacence is nearing (if not downrightly already possessing) a revisionist's bias.
 

b.c.

Worshipped Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Posts
20,540
Media
0
Likes
21,784
Points
468
Location
at home
Verification
View
Gender
Male
Setup?? No "setup"... paranoia, perhaps?

I have a chip on MY shoulder?? Ahem... really...

All I've alluded to was 1) the right of people to practice the faith of their choice and 2) the historically factual influences of religion on the Black spirit, which helped carried a people through times of oppression.

As to the first, in your quest for your rights, you seem determined to deny others theirs. You mention "Christian bigots". I didn't make mention of any particular religion in my post. Hopefully you don't suggest that to subscribe to any faith makes one a bigot.

And for the second, how does stating historical fact make me an "apologist" for the Christian faith (again...you said Christian...i merely said faith)? Are you saying Black Americans should be "apologetic" for having been at times inspired by faith?

All this ado and self righteous posturing about how the Black man was stripped of his "generational history" for which you're "offended". Unless you're a practicing druid, or you're still praying to Odin, or Zeus, or sacrificing to the "sun god" - then you've probably been stripped of your "generational history" too.

Because a person's faith is not based in what you call "generational history" it should be, by that definition, meaningless to them? And what affair is that of yours anyway (except that some of them have not embraced gay rights within their church, for which you are, understandably, outraged)?

For all your protests about biases you seem to have a bunch.

And now I have a "hidden agenda" (???) No. Just a point of view, as resolute as you are in yours.

Agendas, it seems, is your department.
 

B_Stronzo

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2005
Posts
4,588
Media
0
Likes
133
Points
183
Location
Plimoth Plantation
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
b.c. said:
Setup?? No "setup"... paranoia, perhaps?

None. We're clear at least now.


Agendas, it seems, is your department.

Think as you must to justify your stance. I'll leave you to it.
You've not understood (by choice) a thing I've written. Be that as it may I'm more in the know than I was before.

All this ado and self righteous posturing about how the Black man was stripped of his "generational history" for which you're "offended". Unless you're a practicing druid, or you're still praying to Odin, or Zeus, or sacrificing to the "sun god" - then you've probably been stripped of your "generational history" too.

No. Mine's intact for all it's worth. I'll will it to you since you seem to have taken to it so well.
 

ruinean

Sexy Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Posts
59
Media
14
Likes
43
Points
238
Location
Oregon (United States)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
I know some will not like this (no matter what I say) but the bible and koran, all religion is pure crap!

You can believe in a creator, in your own soul, but religion is horseshit and it's adherents are the exact opposite of the model which the religion pretends to strive for.

Little redeeming value and vastly outweighed by it's enormous history of conflict and blood.
There is one obscure passage from one obscure ancient text saying man should not lie with a man as with a woman and the whole world goes ape shit trying to kill their own kids and brothers for who they love, NICE!

Never mind that the two GREATEST and most graphically sexual love stories in the book are between Ruth and Naomi, and between Johnathan and David, who went on to get "god's" blessing as the most favored of the most favored. The greatest Jew in their history. Guess what, he was a screaming queer, he and Johnathan spent years getting it on before David brought down the house of Saul.

The "christian" tradition does not allow for gay marriage right? Wrong. See Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe. By John Boswell. "...purpose has been to give ecclesiastical blessing to homosexual or lesbian relationships, thus making them actual nuptial ceremonies." Throughout "christian" history there has been a blessing of the joining of two souls, and that has and does still include people of the same gender. Quietly, but it is there.

Instead today in ALL religions we have violence and rationalization of scapegoatism and hatred. That is all it amounts to. Even the Buddhist kingdom of Nepal has seen regicide and factions rioting for different governments.

I think there has been much good and very much beauty in the name of religion, but all that it has ever added to humanity it has MORE than taken away in stupidity and blood. We are at a point where we can now say we are beautiful, moral, and kind living things, filled with love and selfless adoration, having nothing to do with superstitions and hate, WE CAN BE THAT. But, in my old age I am pessimistic, we will NOT be that will we?

Humanity must shake this idiocy or die.
 

Lex

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2004
Posts
8,253
Media
0
Likes
118
Points
268
Location
In Your Darkest Thoughts and Dreams
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Stronzo said:
Yikes b.c. ...
You have a giant chip on your shoulder. You're still right where I thought you were. And Lex was wrong. We're on entirely different pages. ...
SIGH.

I disagree here with you, Stronzo, and I love you enough to say so. I think in reading these last few posts, that b.c. really highlighted where he IS on the same page with you while also showcasing where he took some exception or has divergent thought.

This is remarkably similair to the veiled racism thread where you and I debated/argued for pages until we both (each?) took a break and reflected and really found the common ground that seemed to not be there before hand because we are both too busy trying to be heard and beat the other down with our point of view to effectively listen and reflect (this is not a condemnation).

Debate and disagreement do not have to yield argument and malcontent. Sometimes, more kinship can grow from it, no?

I'm outta here for a bit--these racism/religion threads (and coming out) have really exhausted me. You guys have fun.

Hugs all around.
 

DC_DEEP

Sexy Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Posts
8,714
Media
0
Likes
95
Points
183
Sexuality
No Response
ruinean said:
...The "christian" tradition does not allow for gay marriage right? Wrong. See Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe. By John Boswell. "...purpose has been to give ecclesiastical blessing to homosexual or lesbian relationships, thus making them actual nuptial ceremonies." Throughout "christian" history there has been a blessing of the joining of two souls, and that has and does still include people of the same gender. Quietly, but it is there. ...
A very good, if difficult, book. I'm a few pages into chapter 4. Thanks for bringing it up, ruinean.
 

B_Stronzo

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2005
Posts
4,588
Media
0
Likes
133
Points
183
Location
Plimoth Plantation
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Lex said:
SIGH.

I disagree here with you, Stronzo, and I love you enough to say so. I think in reading these last few posts, that b.c. really highlighted where he IS on the same page with you while also showcasing where he took some exception or has divergent thought.

This is remarkably similair to the veiled racism thread where you and I debated/argued for pages until we both (each?) took a break and reflected and really found the common ground that seemed to not be there before hand because we are both too busy trying to be heard and beat the other down with our point of view to effectively listen and reflect (this is not a condemnation).

I have no 'common ground' with him (unlike you) for one painfully obvious reason: he's a heterosexual male. Were he white, middle class and monied he'd still have the same stance. There's effectively no difference. Here I'm expected (and largely do) to understand the plight of generational black Americans where the abuses to homosexuals at the hands of the religion he'd serve to defend seem somehow not worthy of real commentary only to reluctantly say "oh I get it" with due exhaustion.

Similarly, were I to have expressed "oh I'm so sick of black Americans going on about racial equality" I'd have been lambasted off this fucking board. My point Lex? The two, for me , are equal in their need for social rectification and reconciliation. However that has distinctly not been the case when it comes to my black brothers and sisters (I expect no commentary of any great length from my white ones since by-in-large I find them pretty self-involved) bolstering my own in our common fight.

BronxBombshell is so absent from this conversation it screams for her input. A myriad of white posters weighed in on that thread to express sympathy and fellowship. What's here?? Largely horseshit. With the notable exceptions of you and Fred and player and select others, the homosexual plight is pretty much "oh them again" (or at least that's what I've gotten from this lame discussion).

********************************************************

Here's where I am in unequivocal terms: I, as a happy and proud homosexual man, am fighting for my very existence in this "land of the free" while others who could lend an immensely helpful hand are sitting back wiping their brows implying "better them than us" since they perceive themselves mainstreamed. Well it's a lie. I'm living it and I tell you it's a lie. That's the very reason I posted the "then they came for me" poem so known to so many oppressed peoples.

Did I expect more especially from our black members? Yes, I did. But I'm now of the distinct opinion that no one can truly understand or participate (unlike those white civil rights workers who travelled to the deep south in the 1960s from New York and gave their lives for the equaliy of all Americans) unless they are homosexual in this sobering present-day attack on your people and mine Lex: gays, bisexuals, lesbians (though less so) and trans-gender people.

I suggest everyone with a civic bone in his or her body pay very strict attention to the not-so-subtle force in this country manifest on this board most overtly by the posts of that nasty little "playainda" who not only wears his prejudice on his sleeve but takes due glee in repeating it to incite. Again were he a white middle class bigot aiming his biased rhetoric against blacks he'd have been figuratively lynched by now.

The inequity of the thing is palpable to me and all because of that endlessly corrupting old tome every uses as a launching pad for contrary rhetoric; The Old and New Testaments.

*******************************************************

Additionally, there's has never been an effort to 'beat others down' on my part Lex. If I can defend my stance on this issue it should come as no great surprise to you. I can and I do. If you construe that as 'beating down' then good. I've been effective for I'll 'beat down' all bias and prejudice (no matter how subtle) wherever it rears it's destructive head.

I'm entirely aware of myself and my motivations to know what's in my heart. As I stated in the very beginning of the sister thread to this one re the imposition of the "White Man's Religion" I was only interested in the broad take of those of African descent who were brought here against there will and stipped of all pieces of their background only to (of necessity) be drawn to a religion (Christianity) that has served them - in many instances - well.

I've gone over the social implications of it the other thread ad infinitum. I acknowledge time and time again the "saving" quality of that institution on it social importance to the subsequent generations.

However, I find (nearly without exception) every LPSG poster of Afam descent defending the present day form of the morphing of that religion into the cultural black norm. For the last time: I get that part.

Again, I'll refer you back to my original thread-starting post:

Stronzo said:
So, in the spirit of "playainda336's" post regarding homosexuality on that thread I'd like to ask others who are black how they reconcile practicing a faith handed them by those of European descent?

I realize the significance of Christianity to those of African descent in a social context in as much as it was the glue which held community together in past generations when there was little else to hold onto. But how can the concept of bigotry and social marginalization be so lost on many in the current generations when only one or two generations ago the same bias was imposed on ethnic peoples in just that same way as homosexuals are challenged and ostracized today? It defies logic and comprehension to me.

Or is that just the point; when it comes to Christianity logic is heaved out the window?

For my boyfriend and me, when we were arguing pro gay marriage in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts two years ago, we were perlexed by those among the Black community who were so adamantly against homosexuality per se and using the Bible as their reference point. These are the same people whose ancestor's religion was denied them as was the sum total of their existence when they were forced to these shores against their will.

I'd especially like the response of those on the board who have the perspective of both situations.

I have my own argument certainly with the Christian church but I'd think many in the Black community would be aghast at the nature of how this same theology has now focused itself on another minority. Oddly, it doesn't seem to be the case often.

I hope that restates my position in ultimate clarity.

I've not once seen anyone (black or white or orange) justify the use of that same religion by those who should take equal issue to ostracize their homosexual brethren.

What I have seen is endless excuses for it's existence in today's form.

Comparatively, I dare say were I to suddenly find that same faith recinding its position on homosexuals I'd watch my fellow gay folks charging back to Christianity to embrace it... :rolleyes:

What I truly find sobering is that so many of these responders (in particular b.c.) take on an apologist's stance on the Christian faith which subjugated their own people (hence the initiation of this off-shoot thread) and turning a blind eye to the very sort of condemnation anti-abolitionists used to rid this land of racial inequality during the days prior to the War Between the States.

The selectivity of it (especially from seemingly intelligent people) astounds me. Again, I say when it comes to Christianity all bets are off. That nasty corrupting faith (sorry Fred.. you know I love you) has done more damage to humankind than I can possibly recount here. And still it does more in the overt intent of subjeciting and objectifying your gay brothers Lex to a position of marginalization.

Debate and disagreement do not have to yield argument and malcontent. Sometimes, more kinship can grow from it, no?
I'll go with 'no'. Not in b.c.'s case. I made an effort at reconciliation to which he immedately responded (in what amounted to a pretty clever set up) to accuse me of things that were manifest from his insecurities not my implications. Nasty shot that.

But again, I'm informed and englighted though not in the manner I'd hoped. For that alone I have good appreciation much as I don't like the realization.

Stronzo.
 

Shelby

Experimental Member
Joined
May 17, 2004
Posts
2,129
Media
0
Likes
15
Points
258
Location
in the internet
I believe in equality. As a white, monied, heterosexual male I relish beating on gays, blacks and women (I'm sure I'm leaving someone out - sorry) about the same.:biggrin1: