https://uniting.church/freedom-to-decide-on-marriage/
Progress or division.
Progress or division.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
The Freedom to Marry as Opposed to not too Maarry.
- Thread starter brockley
- Start date
NZTailender
I can't believe I ate the whole thing
I feel like this thread title is peak brockley and PEWS currently has a migraine because of it
marc71178
Eyes not spreadsheets
And in other news, the Earth orbits the Sun.
Munificent_Fool
Well-known member
I love when organised religion credits itself with being open-minded and tolerant enough to accept what the general population decided years before it, as if their theology isn't one of the things leaving them trailing behind the rest of us on these issues, in the first place.
Talk about cafeteria Christians. Yes, adopt the new viewpoint when it becomes difficult to continue opposing it. Aren't we progressive.....At least if they refused you could credit them being earnest and serious about their vulgar bigotry as theologically consistent.
Talk about cafeteria Christians. Yes, adopt the new viewpoint when it becomes difficult to continue opposing it. Aren't we progressive.....At least if they refused you could credit them being earnest and serious about their vulgar bigotry as theologically consistent.
Last edited:
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Haha I actually edit a lot of his thread titles.
harsh.ag
Well-known member
That is one of the features, not a bug, of religions though. To be able to differentiate between fads and permanent attitudinal shifts and then, hopefully, fold the shift into the religion when it reaches a critical mass within the followers.
Munificent_Fool
Well-known member
Oh it's definitely a feature of religion no doubt. To say one thing for hundreds or thousands of years, and then disavow or minimise it when it becomes politically or socially expedient to do so. To say this isn't also a bug, is fatuous. Of course it is. Christianity in any traditional sense is anti-gay, regardless of how many of its adherents belatedly condone homosexuality or gay marriage. For them to say or imply it's their religion which paved the path for this institutional change is absurd. It's precisely the opposite.
They can chat **** about the diversity of Christian belief among their members all they like. As long as when they conveniently change their position, they come out and say, oh actually yeah we ****ed up the last 40 years. Actually G.O.D. was cool with the gays all along.
harsh.ag
Well-known member
In some ways (not all), that's a good thing. It means change is brought about by the people and it is not brought about for the people by an institution.
Munificent_Fool
Well-known member
Even though the institution claims to base its ethic on revealed truth specifically designed to inform our morality.
Similarly, I like the way you said earlier "fold the shift into the religion when it reaches a critical mass within the followers." I mean, what is this protean organism you think religion is? Again, it purports to inform our morality. Not the other way around. How is it ever a good thing that an institution stands in the way of something that any normal person of average intelligence regards as basic human decency?
The dark night of the soul and struggling with one's conscience against one's theology needn't happen if the doctrines aren't regressive in the first place.