Jump to content

murmsk

Members
  • Posts

    330
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    17

Posts posted by murmsk

  1.  

    Although when I have suggested some of its materials to my evangelical

    friends they just shrug it off as someone trying to rationalize all the

    facts to make earthly makes sense, instead of taking it on faith...

     

    You just can help people who choose to be ignorant.

     

    steve

  2. But are the women who espouse these views really going along with it

    willingly if that's the only worldview they've known? For many of these

    women, a patriarchal society is the only way of life they've known but

    if women have access to a different way of living and they aren't

    threatened with hellfire if they choose this other way of life, how many

    would still choose the complimentarianism way of life?

     

    The answer to this question is answered by looking at woman who have grown up in a home that treats both sexes equally and see how many believe in the complimentarianism way of life. If you remove the brainwashing and fear I suspect it is pretty close to zero.

     

    My great-Grandmother, wife of a baptist minister, would have been a proponent and practicer of complimentarianism. If you asked my Grandmother she would have said that she agreed with it cause it was in the bible but as she and my grandfather had a fairly equal relationship. My mother grew up in this contradiction which caused considerable friction in her life.

     

     

    steve

  3. One important aspect on my "Sense" is that it is dynamic. As I live and learn the sense changes.One of the reason this has to be is that I expect, when all is said and done and I have ultimate knowlege (I am dead), to be wrong in my understanding. If I was looking for truth this would bother me, since I am only looking for wisdom or the like it is ok to be wrong as long as it makes me a better person.

     

    steve

  4. I don't use the word belief anymore. To me, the word implys a lack of logic.

     

    find a more acceptable word to replace "belief" or "conviction."

     

    I am comfortable with the use of the word "sense". I have a sense that there is a

    "God" or a "more". I have a sense that Jesus was somehow special. It is a dynamic statement there is no understanding of rigidity.

     

    steve


     


  5. Glad you found it worthwhile.

     

    there are several On Being programs that I have listened to and al are good civil and meaningful discussions.. Check out the one on the Future of Christianity. It is a discussion between the new president of Focus on the Family and a progressive. It was very very encouraging and point on.

     

    steve

  6. This is perhaps the only respectful discussion between two people on opposite sides of the issue.

     

    Interestingly I have always been more pro-choice but some of her discussion points made me very uncomfortable. I had a hard time with her matter of fact discussion of the fetus and I think that view makes her uncomfortable as well because later she discusses that its a problem for her.

     

    This is a very worthwhile listen

     

    http://www.onbeing.org/program/pro-life-pro-choice-pro-dialogue/4863

     

    Steve

  7. As I mentioned, this was sparked by my conservative Christian friend diverging from the "homosexuality is un-natural" argument to now saying it IS natural, but that that's the problem (according to him).

     

    It would seem to me that a more accurate comparison would be to that of a rapist. Both are based primarily in an urge to dominate. Therefore if you can make the argument that the urge to rape is "natural " then perhaps you could make the same argument as applied to pedophiles.

     

    steve

  8. I agree a new thread is needed.

     

    I spent the weekend AI (away from the internet) and did a bit of thinking on why this thread sparked so much emotion in me.

     

    It seems whenever the conservative Christians start to lose the discussion about homosexuality they play the pedophile card as a deflective move. ....The Catholic Church attempting to deflect their pedophile priest problem with clouded references to gay priests. The GLBT community has spent the last ??? years with the unfair comparison with pedophiles, to perpetuate that is not helpful.

     

    I found the "natural" reference almost offensive..... not entirely sure why, but I did. Maybe I am uncomfortable with anything that might de-horrify the molestation of a child and humanize the pedophile.

     

    steve

  9. I spoke with a friend of mine who was a psychologist at a prison with a large population of pedophiles and thus spent the better part of 10 years counselling people who have been sent to prison for molesting children.

     

    I presented the thought that a pedophiles attraction for young children might be similar to an attraction to an adult. His response was that they indeed have an attraction that seems to be hard wired but categorically disagreed with any similarity to an adults attraction to another adult. He said it was an attraction to dominate rather than an attraction to a person. Examples he used of similar attractions would be that of a serial rapist or one who gets satisfaction from torture, some serial murders and the like. He refused to say it was or might be genetic.

     

    steve

  10. It seems to me it is something to consider rather than emphatically calling it a mental illness or assuming that in all cases, there are no loving thoughts toward children or with those who may have been born with such an inclination or desire for those younger than themselves.

     

    I suppose if one views this desire like you would view the desire to watch someone die. I see a much closer resemblance between these two desires than between the sexual desire for another adult and the sexual desire for a child.

     

    This is the definition of mental illness I got from a google search

    Mental illness or mental disorder is a condition that affects thoughts, feelings or behaviors of someone who is strong enough to make social integration problematic,

     

    I am very uncomfortable with this definition because it is too tied to social values and customs. I would prefer it to be tied to hurt and damage to ones self and others

     

    Of course we should view all people with grace as long as it doesn't put anyone else at risk. I do feel for all who struggle with thoughts that by definition will hurt others.

     

    I stand by my statement there there is nothing at all loving about a relationship between an adult and an child. It is pure aggression.

     

    steve

  11. If it is the decision of the moderator board that this place chooses to not discuss anything political in nature , while I think it is a mistake, I can live with it.

     

    If however where ones opinion falls has any effect on the decision making process then there is a problem.

     

    steve

  12. In the first place I said reconsider the policies not blindly change them.

     

    Yes it is working ..... but could it be more?

     

    My personal opinion is we could use a bit more diversity in opinion around here. One of the problems that has been pointed out in the news media of late is that folks with differing opinions don't have to talk with one another anymore because we have the ability to easily find groups that agree with our points of view. Thus we, as a society, are losing our ability to have respectful disagreements and exchanges of viewpoints. This place has the ability to have respectful discussions about the issues that are and should be discussed in our faith communities ie: gun control, like few other places due to its active moderator group. You have the control to keep the discussions positive and respectful. I worry that this place will become another group where disagreement is not tolerated.

     

    steve

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

terms of service