News:


Main Menu

Who Does More Blocking?

Started by Brian Stoffregen, February 29, 2024, 01:49:45 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Have you blocked posters on ALPB Forum?

I self-identify as liberal and have blocked no one.
3 (20%)
I self-identify as liberal and have blocked posters.
0 (0%)
I self-identify as conservative and have blocked no one.
12 (80%)
I self-identify as conservative and have blocked posters
0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 15

MaddogLutheran

Quote from: John Mundinger on March 06, 2024, 07:40:53 AM
Quote from: MaddogLutheran on March 05, 2024, 11:00:12 AM
Quote from: John Mundinger on March 05, 2024, 10:19:52 AMAt the same time, I reject the idea that any one of us is a better reflection of the divine image in which we are created. 

Nobody here is saying that.  I don't think I've heard anybody here say that--it would be obscene for a Lutheran to make such a claim.  That is not what affirming traditional sexuality and marriage is doing.  Your false dichotomies remain unhelpful.


I agree that no one has said that, specifically.  But, it is a logical conclusion that those defined by "traditional sexuality and marriage" better reflect Genesis 1:27.
I realize you remain hung up on your novelties, in this case that being created in the "image of God" provides has some mystical support for your political beliefs.  But it still doesn't justify you putting the worst possible construct on the beliefs of others.

I don't find Genesis 1:27 relevant to your novelty because it's one of the Bible's earliest paradoxes, a very Lutheran "both/and".  How can we be created male or female, and also be created in the image of God, if God has no sex?  Yet another circle I have no interest in squaring.  It seems rather obvious that the male/female dichotomy is our Creator's design/method for us to procreate.  Each sex is unique, while also being create in the image of God.  Which means it's both very important and not at all to the holes you keep trying to poke in a traditional understanding of sex and marriage.

You apparently dislike the Missouri concept of pure doctrine, yet you pursue it enthusiastically trying to obtain biblical proof to questions that don't have the answer you want.

I cast no aspersions on the infertile, or those who do not feel like they need to conform to contemporaneous gender stereotypes.  I only know, from Genesis 1:27, the circumstances of our creation.
Sterling Spatz
ELCA pew-sitter

George Rahn

Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on March 06, 2024, 11:35:21 AM
Quote from: Dan Fienen on March 06, 2024, 11:33:26 AM
Quote from: John Mundinger on March 06, 2024, 08:33:22 AM
Quote from: Dan Fienen on March 06, 2024, 07:59:54 AMSo, we are guilty of saying what we have not said because you think it is a logical conclusion from what else we have said?

I didn't say you were "guilty" (no you are putting words in my mouth).  Rather, I am suggesting that you are not aware of the discrepancy between what you say and what others hear.
I am aware, but what do you suggest that I do about it? Any explanation that I give of what I really meant is disregarded. It seems that the standard these days is that when conservatives are misunderstood, it is because they are not speaking/writing clearly enough. When conservatives misunderstand liberals, it is because conservatives are not listening/reading carefully enough. Heads you win, tails we loose.
Welcome to my world on this forum.

"...won't you come on in."  😆

Rev. Edward Engelbrecht

Last year we had a discussion like this. Here is a list of social harm associated with homosexuality.

May 26, 2023, 03:34:40 PM
Last Edit: May 26, 2023, 03:43:37 PM by Rev. Edward Engelbrecht
So to summarize the examples of social harm associated with homosexuality:

1. Disruption of propagation, family.
2. Physical harm from some male homosexual practices, leading to infections and long-term damage.
3. Higher rates of violence and divorce among lesbian couples.
4. Far, far higher reporting of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) among homosexuals. As a consequence there are much higher rates of emotional and psychological issues. No doubt, some of these stems from social rejection or abuse by heterosexuals. However, the reporting also shows a high rate of sexual abuse by same sex persons. Bisexual persons are especially affected, according to the surveys.
5. Lesbian couples currently have twice the divorce rate of others couples and they adopt children at much higher rates than other couples. This should mean adopted children of Lesbian couples will experience divorce and its complications at significantly higher rates. Time will tell.

So one could conclude that there are higher levels of social harm associated with homosexuality, whether caused directly by homosexual behaviors or by issues associated with homosexual behaviors. That's not to say that every homosexual couple is affected in these ways but the reporting shows that most are affected by one or more of the issues above.

John Mundinger

Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on March 06, 2024, 11:34:34 AM
Quote from: John Mundinger on March 06, 2024, 08:30:17 AM
Quote from: Dan Fienen on March 06, 2024, 08:06:30 AMHomosexuality and transgenderism has been around for a long time, so yes, it's not just a fad. But the current significant uptick in frequency especially of transgenderism may reflect social contagion,  i.e. a fad.

A better explanation is that it is psychologically healthier for individuals to be honest about who they are and that it is easier for folks to come out of the closet in the current environment than it had been in previous generations.  If it is a fad, the fad is that of being honest not of being homosexual.
From what I have read, some Native American tribes had more than two genders. They recognized and accepted that there were effeminate men and masculine women.

Not only did they recognize them, they were considered shamans in some cultures.
Lifelong Evangelical Lutheran layman

Whoever, then, thinks that he understands the Holy Scriptures, or any part of them, but puts such an interpretation upon them as does not tend to build up this twofold love of God and our neighbour, does not yet understand them as he ought.  St. Augustine

John Mundinger

Quote from: Dan Fienen on March 06, 2024, 11:33:26 AM
Quote from: John Mundinger on March 06, 2024, 08:33:22 AM
Quote from: Dan Fienen on March 06, 2024, 07:59:54 AMSo, we are guilty of saying what we have not said because you think it is a logical conclusion from what else we have said?

I didn't say you were "guilty" (no you are putting words in my mouth).  Rather, I am suggesting that you are not aware of the discrepancy between what you say and what others hear.
I am aware, but what do you suggest that I do about it? Any explanation that I give of what I really meant is disregarded.

Just because I do not often agree with you doesn't mean that I disregard what you say.

Quote from: Dan Fienen on March 06, 2024, 11:33:26 AMIt seems that the standard these days is that when conservatives are misunderstood, it is because they are not speaking/writing clearly enough. When conservatives misunderstand liberals, it is because conservatives are not listening/reading carefully enough. Heads you win, tails we loose.

One suggestion for what you can do about it would be to resist the temptation to add comments like the one above.  It might be an honest expression of your frustration but it does nothing to promote better understanding.
Lifelong Evangelical Lutheran layman

Whoever, then, thinks that he understands the Holy Scriptures, or any part of them, but puts such an interpretation upon them as does not tend to build up this twofold love of God and our neighbour, does not yet understand them as he ought.  St. Augustine

Richard Johnson

I think we can probably give up on this conversation for the moment. No need to beat dead horses, do you think?
The Rev. Richard O. Johnson, STS

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk