Our bodies are a gift from God almighty. Sexuality is a gift from God as well. As in anything given by a loving parent resposibility is given as well to treat it right. Sexuality was given to creat more life. Abuse of such gifts leed to distruction and eventually the loss of function. Needless to say homosexuallity is a sin according to the Bible and Christianity beliefs.
However, condemning anyone or treating them badley because of their own personal preferences is also a sin.
I have very strong Christian beliefs and my very closest friend anounced to me that he had chosen the gay lifestyle when we were very young and I loved him so much I was sure we would marry someday. I was devistated, but once I realized that I could not change his mind I had the choice to either hate him and loose him as a friend or accept him,love him and not treat him any different. I chose the later and I am still so happy that I did. I am married with 6 children and he is considered their uncle. We are still very close.I still do not agree with that life style. I continually pray for him. He has never pushed his life style on me. He understands how I feel and respects it.
Yes, others should be allowed to disagree and no one should have anything pushed on them. Tolerance goes both ways.
2007-07-03 11:53:07
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
"Why should it matter as long as we treat each other with respect and civility?" Key words : respect and civility. I don't dislike anyone based on their opinions alone...it's the actions they take pertaining to those opinions that irk me. I have friends who don't believe in the same things I do. And we get along great...because I don't mock their beliefs and they don't mock mine. I even have friends who do believe homosexuality is a sin. But they believe that it's not their place to tell anyone else how to live their lives as they are sinners also so we get along just fine. However you have to agree that most people do not act with respect and civility.
2007-07-03 13:36:23
·
answer #2
·
answered by evilangelfaery919 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I suppose medical professionals/pharmacists/nurses and many others. must be required to reveal their boundaries (whether or not self-imposed or no longer) after they follow for a role. If there's some thing at the task description that they're not able or unwilling to do, then they must no longer get employed. I do suppose it's hypocritical of them to impose their will on sufferers and different medical professionals through hiding a request through the sufferer from them. As a metaphor don't forget: if anybody isn't ready to raise some thing over 50 kilos, they could nonetheless be ready to different constituents required of a role, however they might move uncover anybody to aid them elevate if it used to be crucial; they must no longer going and depart some thing in undone (unlifted) within the core of the ground then HIDE the truth that it isn't performed from different humans who would entire the undertaking. BTW, the health practitioner or anything is flawlessly exceptional to gain knowledge of a specialised variant of treatment that doesn't use targeted methods; how else might their cult/faith get remedy except they'd unique medical professionals informed in the ones methods. If the ones medical professionals have been to use for a role OUTSIDE their specialised institution, nevertheless, they must receive their boundaries. They could ought to get a lesser role or take a cut back pay scale in view that they're confined. If they're so intrusive that they can not enable different humans to get their jobs performed as good, then the nut-task belongs of their little commune with the opposite humans like them.
2016-09-05 14:03:16
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Q: "Why should it matter as long as we treat each other with respect and civility?"
A: That would be the sixty four million dollar question.
Q: "Should we be free to believe as we choose?"
A: Absolutely
Q: "Should others be allowed to disagree?"
A: You betcha
Q: "Can we disagree without hating each other?"
A: Probably not. Our "hate" is what keeps each side righteous. It keeps each side fired up. It keeps each side burning for justice. If "hating" the bible-thumpers because of their bigoted prejudice makes me a better activist, then Im willing to live with that... and if my "hatred" makes them a better christian (someday) I can certainly live with that.
2007-07-03 11:36:12
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
When it comes to issues of identity and politics, the gloves are allways off. Civil debate is one thing, but when the potential outcome of that debate is the restriction of civil liberties of one of the parties, you can't really expect the contestants to sincerely make nice nice to one another. Its OK to be angry and express it. Loudly even. Quality of and sometimes life itself are at stake.
I remember marching next to ACT UP and Queer Nation contingients in pride marches. Never have I felt so strong or alive as when I could hear their loud obscene chants.
I'm sure the same might be said for the Right to Lifers when they loudly make their claims for public attention.
This is America. We do have the right to be loud,rude and obnoxious in defense of our very identities and beliefs about what is right and wrong.
These things are for the street of course. Legislatively I would hope our lawmakers would exercise more decorum. Still it is healthier for all when there is no prevaricating in the name of simple civility.
2007-07-03 11:18:45
·
answer #5
·
answered by Telemachus R 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
not a crime its how you are to be a homosexual
not right to believe its a sin-in my opinion
it doesnt really matter as long as respect for the person is given
believe as you choose
allow others to disagree everyone thinks differently
yes you cab disagree without hating its better to do it that way
hope i helped =]
email me if needed
-natasha xoxoxoxoxoxox
2007-07-03 11:17:16
·
answer #6
·
answered by insanity 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Great questions and it pretty much comes down to, can we communicate? Can we talk about our disagreements without fighting about them?
Unfortunately, I don't think it will ever be fully resolved. If you tell someone you believe they're going to hell if they do "such and such" or believe this thing or don't believe that thing,
And, alas, I fear there will always be zealots on both ends of any spectrum, which doesn't leave much room for "we can agree to disagree."
As Cyndi Lauper says, "Erase hate."
2007-07-03 17:27:27
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
It is not a crime or sin for a person to follow their natural feelings. Others are free to think what they want, that is not a crime either. It is not, but should be a crime for one group to try to shove their thinking down the throats of others.
2007-07-03 11:16:00
·
answer #8
·
answered by Ray T 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
Belief in anything is not wrong.
It's when you start using your beliefs as reasons to harm others - be it physically, mentally or emotionally -- THAT is wrong.
Disagreement is not wrong. But when we feel the need to harm - again physically, mentally or emotionally - someone who disagrees with us - THAT is wrong.
2007-07-03 11:09:47
·
answer #9
·
answered by Max Marie, OFS 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
the key is to think about you being a homosexual or your child or your wife? think about woman no longer wanting man and they go off with a woman, think about never getting any pussy because of homosexuality? think of the fact that we were neither born gay nor straight,think about the stories of Adam and Eve. think about how you ever got here. think about how homosexuality could end reproduction and increase AIDS and thus killing off an entire human race. Think about Sodom and Gomorrah and Noahs days...
2007-07-03 11:11:50
·
answer #10
·
answered by Tito 2
·
1⤊
7⤋