London Daily Mail Laura Clark March 15, 2007
Schools are teaching children as young as four about same-sex relationships to comply with new gay rights laws, it emerged yesterday.
They are introducing youngsters to homosexuality using a series of story books in preparation for controversial regulations coming into force next month.
Fourteen primary schools are already taking part in a £600,000 Government-funded study aimed at familiarising children with gay and lesbian relationships.
The research team behind the project intends to post the findings on national websites to help all schools use the books in their literacy lessons.
It also revealed it is leading workshops for local councils across the country which are asking how to implement new laws banning discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation.
The academics working on the study say showing children that homosexuality is part of everyday life helps reduce homophobic bullying in the playground.
They claim schools need to ensure they are serving the needs of gay pupils and parents to comply with the Equality Act.
However the scheme sparked alarm among Christian groups who fear the legislation could leave schools open to lawsuits if they refuse to use books with gay characters.
. . . more
Well, it is time to start defining what is a Christian?
@100 (Hurray!)
My priest (at my church here at college and at home) are not silent on the other sins. They cover many of them, either in sermons of during conversations with them.
As for “There are all sorts of Christian values that are widely accepted across the political spectrum…”, this is not that telling. Unless they are accepting of all Christian (real Christian, not pseudo-Christians) then they are treating the fount of Christian Wisdom like a buffet, picking and choosing as they please. Perhaps, the politicians simply use these as a vehicle of convenience (which is quite possible).
Also, Jim, I do not think anyone here wants to “tear them a new one”. This discussion is not about hating homosexuals. It is that we are concerned for their spiritual well-being, just as we are concerned for our own. I am very sorry that you feel that a personal attack has been made. We are simply endeavoring to become all one, joined to the Body of Christ, His Church. Just remember, we are all sinners, and if we warn our brother (or sister) of spiritual wrongdoing in a compassionate manner, we are not wrong.
May the LORD watch over all of us.
As for the “religious right”, much of the media portrayal does seem to be in line with what you are saying, but I really do not pay attention, as I listen to my religious leaders.
Augie’s point still stands though. A critique of homosexual marriage is not the same thing as a condemnation of homosexuals. Yet, in defending homosexual marriage, the charge that rejecting homosexual marriage is tantamount to the condemnation of homosexuals is all too often heard from the left (“homophobia” et.al) which is primarily polemical, along with the politically correct reaction which usually consists of finger wagging and overwrought assurances that everyone is a sinner, etc. that attempts to blunt the sting of the homosexual marriage critique.
Homosexual activists have to realize that the conflation of homosexual marriage into acceptance of the homosexual person won’t be accepted by the larger culture. Many people tolerant of homosexuals are perfectly willing to let homosexuals live their lives in peace but don’t accept that homosexual marriage should become a cultural norm. This is an entirely reasonable compromise.
Augie writes: “Note 9 reinforces the proposition that people who openly disapprove of homosexual conduct — for example, by advocating against homosexual marriage — are ‘hateful, intolerant, and mean-spirited.’ This proposition has a lot of well-tended currency these days. . . . . I reject this proposition, and I encourage others to reject it too.”
Of what does hate, intolerance, and mean-spiritedness consist? Let’s look at a very typical set of beliefs about homosexuals and homosexuality among the religious right:
1) homosexuals should not be allowed to marry. In fact, we need an amendment to the Constitution to ensure that gay couples never have legal rights as couples.
2) They should not be allowed into the military, or, if already in, should be kicked out.
3) They should never be allowed to adopt children.
4) They should undergo “reparative therapy.”
5) They should not be covered by hate crimes law.
6) They should not be allowed to be public school teachers.
7) Employers should be able to discriminate against or even fire them them merely on the basis of their orientation.
8) They should not be legally protected from discrimination in public acomodation, housing, or anything else.
9) They should be denied domestic partner benefits in the workplace.
10) Any public endorsement, actual or implied, of the “homosexual agenda” should be denounced and resisted.
11) Any and all homosexual activity is sinful. Homosexual must lead lives of absolute chastity, never having any intimate or romantic relations with someone of the same sex.
I’m not saying that all the people in this venue would agree to all the above. But the above list is a fair representation of how many in the religious right feel about homosexuality. In fact, many also claim to love homosexuals.
But that claim makes no sense to me. Take the above list and substitute another group, and then see if it makes sense to say that you “love” the people in that group:
“I love the Jewish people. But they shouldn’t be allowed to marry, and we should have a constitutional amendment to that effect. Jews shouldn’t be allowed to serve in the military, or if in the military should be kicked out. They should not be allowed to adopt children. Jews should undergo psychological therapy so as to eliminate their attachment to the Jewish religion. Employers and others should be able to discriminate against Jews on the basis of their jewishness, and Jews should never be allowed to teach children. Any public endorsement of Judaism should be denounced and resisted. The Jewish Agenda is an attempt to make Judaism acceptable in the larger society, and we must fight against that. If someone is a Jew by birth, that’s fine, but choosing to practice the Jewish religion is a sin. But I do not in any way hate Jews. In fact, I love them.”
Jim, I think you are unwilling to accept the idea that homosexual behavior is sinful. I do accept that idea. It is probably impossible for either of us to convince the other on this point.
You cannot expect people actively to condone behavior they believe is sinful. If you force it, you will at best get resentful compliance to thoughtcrime laws. Is that what you want?
I try to follow a live-and-let-live approach in practice. Unfortunately, the extension of hate-crimes laws, which I reject generally and in principle, was a step too far for me. Effectively banning politically-incorrect speech under threat of punishment was another. The press for homosexual marriage was the straw that broke the camel’s back.
So I have gone from being someone who never gave much thought to other people’s sexuality, or their practices or opinions concerning it, to someone who feels his culture is under attack. My approach is: live and let live, don’t expect me to embrace things I believe are wrong, and don’t attack my culture.
I do not find the analogy at the end of your post apt. Instead of using someone’s religious or cultural identity for your comparison, why don’t you pick a practice which you yourself believe is wrong? Then use its practitioners as your analogy group.
Note 4.
Not to mention that many Jews and Blacks resent homosexual activists using the Jewish and Black experience to lobby for homosexual marriage.
Augie writes: “Effectively banning politically-incorrect speech under threat of punishment was another.”
Can you point to one instance in this country where someone was fined or jailed because of this? The last I heard, the only people attempting to muzzle Fred Phelps via civil means was a group of Republicans.
Also, can you clarify how your life personally has been imposed upon by being “forced to embrace” something? Is someone suggesting or mandating that you cannot tell your children what you believe about these subjects?
I read all of this stuff, and i see one thing, and that is that we are going to end up like the Middle East Constantly battling each other over who is right, and what is the right religious path. I can see why the suicide rate is increasing i mean who wants to live a life where you constantly have “Know it Alls” who constantly sit around saying what is right and what is wrong. Let it be known that if this is kind of stuff (homosexuality, premarital sex, etc.) is against God’s will then why dont we let God take care of the it (be The Prosecutor). This entire thing boils down to being a power struggle “everyone wants to be god and tell people whats right and whats wrong”. If god truly exist wouldn’t god be pissed off that people are putting words into its mouth, so as these so called “do gooders” sit around and say whats wrong and right maybe they oughta think about whether are not they are given permission by the ultimate power to speak on their behalf before they open their pie-hole. The human race is a motley group of different personalities (yeah we are not gods by any means), so therefore “let the dead bury their dead” and focus on bettering ourselves and helping others rather than preaching about how people should live their lifes.
I would think both GOd and Satan would agree on letting people be people, and not try to be “GODS”
Peace :0)
BM
Substitute other groups into that statement and see how it sounds. “Many Catholics and Irish people resent Jews using the Irish Catholic experience to lobby for Jewish rights.” You’re welcome to make a statement like that, but you’re basically saying that one group is “beneath” another and that the dominant group has some right to assert control of public discourse.
Your statement might also be more accurate if you said “Many heterosexual Jews and Blacks…”, since I’m aware of few gay Jews who resent the comparison.
What about Wiccans or Muslims? (Is it considered a sin to be a practicing Wiccan or Muslim?) I certainly think they’re “wrong,” but I wouldn’t want to deny them the same rights that I enjoy.
Jim, it might help a little if you could understand that the Orthodox Church is not part of the “religious right” whose anthropology, eccelesiology, soteriology and eschatology are often not in accord with what the Church teaches. That there are areas of agreement on social and moral issues does not mean there is agreement on how to deal with the sin or the sinners. Your laundry list of anti-homosexual situations is a case in point. I don’t have time to refute each point except to say that do not agree with the majority of them and certainly do not endorse the punishment/banishment mentality behind the approach you outline (Should be no hate crimes laws at all so it is moot who is covered by them).
You and others keep comparing homosexual activity to either beliefs (especially religious beliefs) or genetic traits. It is neither a belief nor a trait. Homosexuality is an ideation and a behavior. It is not the ideation per se that is the sin. Ideation is the temptation. From a spiritual point of view it does not matter where the ideation comes from merely that it is a temptation to move away from God. Neither does it matter how difficult such ideation is to overcome. The behavior is the sin. The vast majority of people are capable of controling their behavior. Such control becomes more difficult, however, in a society that preaches that any attempt to control any sexual urge is wrong. In fact, all sexual urges should be satisfied because they are central to the identity of the person who has them. Expressing one’s sexuality is a matter of personal freedom and “rights”. Anyone who teaches otherwise is obviously a mean, judgemental oppressor who hates. Bunk, bunk, bunk, bunk.
The Bible is not foggy on homosexual behavior as it is not foggy on adultery and fornication. All are grave sins. There is also abundant explanation as to why such behavior is sinful. St. Paul also instructs us to leave alone people who persist in such behavior as they have choosen their path and they will reap the consequences.
Augie, Fr. Hans and I have all expressed our willingness to be obedient to that Biblical instruction. Nevertheless that is not enough for the homosexual advocates, they want us to not only stop calling homosexual behavior a sin, but to even stop thinking it is. Who is attempting to oppress whom?
note #106;
This is what the hard left is arguing for, but thankfully have not received (as of yet) in this country. They HAVE received it in Canada, for instance. What’s your point? That we accept the hard left/liberal/modernist view of culture, education, public square, etc.?
Note 108. Phil writes:
Not at all. The reason Jews and Blacks disapprove of the homosexual lobby comparing itself to their experiences is because homosexuality is defined by behavior, not ethnicity. Further, homosexuals as a demographic group are economically well off (no kids to support) weakening the comparison even more. The only reason for the comparison is polemical, mainly to imply the cause is morally just. The comparison between homosexuals and ethnic groups is tenuous once you think about it in any serious way.
There are no barriers to heterosexual marriage for Muslims or Wiccans. If two homosexual Muslims wanted to marry however (unlikely), or two homosexual Wiccans did (more likely), the answer would still be no. From the other direction, they already have the same right to marry that you do — to a member of the opposite sex.
Note 106. James writes:
Tip of the iceberg:
http://www.massnews.com/past_issues/2000/10_Oct/1000fist4.htm
@107
We are commanded to spread the Word of God. We are not “putting words into His mouth as you suggesting. He is very clear on His views on homosexuality (as has been stated). Also, as we are “our brother’s keeper” we should be concerned for their well-being, spiritual and physical. We are, as you suggest, trying to help others.
As an aside, the idea of “Christian War” was never popular in the East, as it is incompatible with Christianity. Mass murder does not make it a virtue. War can be justified, but is never just.
May the LORD watch over all of us.
Dean (not Scourtes) says “As an aside, the idea of “Christian War” was never popular in the East, as it is incompatible with Christianity. Mass murder does not make it a virtue. War can be justified, but is never just.”
This is the current popular interpretation, mostly put forth by de facto pacifists like the misnamed “Orthodox Peace Fellowship” and some seminary professionals. Others vehemently disagree and believe the East has a Just War tradition. See Fr. Alexander Webster’s work for example:
http://www.amazon.com/Virtue-War-Reclaiming-Christian-Traditions/dp/1928653170
The problem with the “no Just War in the Fathers” take is that it relies heavily on the “lesser evil” hypothesis, which turns God into a monster…
Is it considered a sin to be a practicing Wiccan or Muslim?
For example, if your child called you up and informed you that she was going to live by, worship according to, and believe the ideals of Wicca or Islam, would you tell her (or think privately) that she was sinning?
Phil, Answer to question #1. No
Answer to question #2: My son has a fundamental, existential and experiential understanding of the faith that far exceeds mine since he has spent 2/3 of his life serving in the altar. I cannot even develop a remote hypothetical response.