DiscussMormonism.com

New report from Spong's desk:

From time to time a report comes across my desk that is so important that I want to share it with my readers. That is the case with this report from the Royal College of Psychiatrists in the United Kingdom. It is not that their thought is new, it is that they have undertaken to report it systematically and with the full scholarship and authority of their offices. They have also included a bibliography, which is attached.

When a prejudice is being debated there is a necessity for both sides of the debate to possess facts not just opinions. That is what is so often missing when religious people debate homosexuality. This report was issued because of the raging argument and dislocation going on in my church and in many others about homosexuality. The time has come for people to realize that pious homophobia is not a substitute for truth. The time has also come for Church leaders at every level to be confronted by competent scholarship, and for weak and fearful bishops, who believe that unity in ignorance is a legitimate goal for the Christian Church, to be told that it is not.

I commend this report to your study and hope that you will help to distribute it widely. For any part of the Christian Church to break apart over the use of outdated and thoroughly discredited ideas about homosexuality is a tragedy. For any part of the Christian Church to be as woefully uninformed on this subject as so many ecclesiastical leaders seem to be is a sign of incompetent leadership.

I think what i UL'd says it all. Thoughts? Comments? Roger

Full report can be found on Spong's site <support@johnshelbyspong.com>

Roger Morrison wrote:

The time has come for people to realize that pious homophobia is not a substitute for truth.

What truth? Homosexual behavior is a sin. That won't change.

charity wrote:

Roger Morrison wrote:

The time has come for people to realize that pious homophobia is not a substitute for truth.

What truth? Homosexual behavior is a sin. That won't change.

Believe as you choose. I don't believe/think it is in any way a "sin". Not any more than being a "south-paw" was so considered a few generations ago.

by the way, i don't think you responded to my question re "...accountable for thoughts..." Warm regards, Roger

charity wrote:

Roger Morrison wrote:

The time has come for people to realize that pious homophobia is not a substitute for truth.

What truth? Homosexual behavior is a sin. That won't change.

Is bigotry a sin?

Roger Morrison wrote:
Believe as you choose. I don't believe/think it is in any way a "sin". Not any more than being a "south-paw" was so considered a few generations ago.

by the way, I don't think you responded to my question re "...accountable for thoughts..." Warm regards, Roger

God never said being left handed was a sin. He did say that about homosexual behavior.

I don't know where "accountable for thoughts. . . " came from.

Are you asking if we are accountable for thoughts as well as behaviors?

We aren't accountable as sinning for random thoughts. I think it was President McKay who said "you can't stop the seagulls from flying overhead, but you don't have to let them sit on your shoulder." Flying overhead a sin? No. Sitting on the shoulder a sin? Yes.

guy sajer wrote:

charity wrote:

Roger Morrison wrote:

The time has come for people to realize that pious homophobia is not a substitute for truth.

What truth? Homosexual behavior is a sin. That won't change.

Is bigotry a sin?

bigotry = stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own.

Homsexual behavior is not a creed, a belief, or an opinion.

charity wrote:

guy sajer wrote:

charity wrote:

Roger Morrison wrote:

The time has come for people to realize that pious homophobia is not a substitute for truth.

What truth? Homosexual behavior is a sin. That won't change.

Is bigotry a sin?

bigotry = stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own.

Homsexual behavior is not a creed, a belief, or an opinion.

A bigot is a prejudiced person who is intolerant of opinions, lifestyles, or identities differing from his or her own.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigotry

prejudice and/or discrimination against one or all members of a particular group based on negative perceptions of their beliefs and practices or on negative group stereotypes (Anti-Defamation League).
www.in.gov/cji/youth/compliance/glossary.doc

Is bigotry a sin?

Roger Morrison wrote: For any part of the Christian Church to break apart over the use of outdated and thoroughly discredited ideas about homosexuality is a tragedy.

Interestingly enough, it seems a lot of splintering in Christian history has been about sex. Henry VIII wanted a divorce so he could marry Anne Boleyn, and voila, the Church of England was born. Martin Luther ended up marrying a former nun, establishing a model for clerical matrimony.

Even in the restoration movements, sex seems to be a factor. The RLDS/Community of Christ completely disavow plural marriage. The FLDS embrace it.

And it's certainly arguable that certain aspects of Joseph Smith's "revelations" gave him a pass with behaviors that would not have been considered kosher in any Christian framework without a purported heavenly stamp of approval.

Now the Episcopal Church is splintering over the ordination of gay bishops (but aren't they as a rule fairly tolerant of homosexuality otherwise, or am I mistaken on that?)

It seems to me that many mainstream Christian churches are trying in recent years to formulate positions regarding homosexuality that appear more enlightened and tolerant, whether or not they actually are.

But splintering over sex is nothing new. Even Spong should know that, belonging to a church that exists entirely because of it. Really, the only difference between Henry VIII and Joseph Smith is that the former was able to wield considerable political power to create his own church, and the latter had to rely on persuading others that he had had communion with the heavens to do the same. Both got additional wives out of the bargain.

guy sajer wrote:
A bigot is a prejudiced person who is intolerant of opinions, lifestyles, or identities differing from his or her own.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigotry

prejudice and/or discrimination against one or all members of a particular group based on negative perceptions of their beliefs and practices or on negative group stereotypes (Anti-Defamation League).
www.in.gov/cji/youth/compliance/glossary.doc

Is bigotry a sin?

I am intolerant of hijackers who fly planes in buildings, of pedophiles, of scam artists, of bullies, of aduilterers, of thieves, of. . . well,I could go on. Do you notice what all of the above have in common? Breaking the laws of God.

Do I have a prejudice against any of the above? Well, I wouldn't let a Muslim etremist at the controls of a 747. And I wouldn't let a pedophile baby sit my kids. I wouldn't send an adulterer to the bank with the day's receipts. (In case you have a question about that, an adulterer thinks he/she only has to be honest and faithful if it is convenient. Cheat on your husband or wife and you would just as easily cheat on a boss.)

Am I intolerant of Southern Baptists? Or atheists? Or Jews? Homosexuals? Absolutely not. For 10 years I worked with two individuals who were gay. One was openly so. One was not. I did not condone their lifestyle. We never talked about their living arrangments. We ate lunch together at work sometimes, we were cordial. I am retired now and I don't see them socially. We send Christmas cards. Or does the fact that we don't exchange gifts means I am bigoted.

charity wrote:

guy sajer wrote:
A bigot is a prejudiced person who is intolerant of opinions, lifestyles, or identities differing from his or her own.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigotry

prejudice and/or discrimination against one or all members of a particular group based on negative perceptions of their beliefs and practices or on negative group stereotypes (Anti-Defamation League).
www.in.gov/cji/youth/compliance/glossary.doc

Is bigotry a sin?

I am intolerant of hijackers who fly planes in buildings, of pedophiles, of scam artists, of bullies, of aduilterers, of thieves, of. . . well,I could go on. Do you notice what all of the above have in common? Breaking the laws of God.

Do I have a prejudice against any of the above? Well, I wouldn't let a Muslim etremist at the controls of a 747. And I wouldn't let a pedophile baby sit my kids. I wouldn't send an adulterer to the bank with the day's receipts. (In case you have a question about that, an adulterer thinks he/she only has to be honest and faithful if it is convenient. Cheat on your husband or wife and you would just as easily cheat on a boss.)

Am I intolerant of Southern Baptists? Or atheists? Or Jews? Homosexuals? Absolutely not. For 10 years I worked with two individuals who were gay. One was openly so. One was not. I did not condone their lifestyle. We never talked about their living arrangments. We ate lunch together at work sometimes, we were cordial. I am retired now and I don't see them socially. We send Christmas cards. Or does the fact that we don't exchange gifts means I am bigoted.

What I notice is that you avoided answering the question.