Do you support gay marriages?

[Cassius]

Well for practical reasons yes, but personally, nah.

[Cassius]

Basically, the Bible is for the Church to interpret, not a gaggle of random posters on an internet forum. Debate closed.

[Cassius]

Basically, the Bible is for the Church to interpret, not a gaggle of random posters on an internet forum. Debate closed.

Uh, the Bible is for God's children, not a group of robed elitists in a dark room.

And with your logic we might as well shut down the whole forum.

Of course the Bible is for God's children... and being children, they lack the ability to interpret the Bible correctly by themselves.

[Cassius]

Basically, the Bible is for the Church to interpret, not a gaggle of random posters on an internet forum. Debate closed.

Uh, the Bible is for God's children, not a group of robed elitists in a dark room.

And with your logic we might as well shut down the whole forum.

Of course the Bible is for God's children... and being children, they lack the ability to interpret the Bible correctly by themselves.

So presumably I am just God's infant and the elites are his adult children. Even as a Catholic, that hierarchical metaphor is disturbing.

Well I'm not really a fan of the whole 'God's children' concept; I'm not the son of God, Jesus was the one and only son of God. My basic point is that individuals who are not priests and have no formal training or education in scripture have no right or competence in interpreting the Bible, in the same way as a person who has no medical training has no right or competence to make pronouncements upon medical issues.

It's exactly why I have turned so sharply against religion. There is no room for critical thinking. You just have to unflinchingly accept whatever biblical interpretation comes down the pipe. What a great thing for society—we need more of that!

Well it leaves more time to deal with serious issues like earning a living and playing badminton, so I think on balance it's a good thing

[Cassius]

Basically, the Bible is for the Church to interpret, not a gaggle of random posters on an internet forum. Debate closed.

Uh, the Bible is for God's children, not a group of robed elitists in a dark room.

And with your logic we might as well shut down the whole forum.

Of course the Bible is for God's children... and being children, they lack the ability to interpret the Bible correctly by themselves.

So presumably I am just God's infant and the elites are his adult children. Even as a Catholic, that hierarchical metaphor is disturbing.

Well I'm not really a fan of the whole 'God's children' concept; I'm not the son of God, Jesus was the one and only son of God. My basic point is that individuals who are not priests and have no formal training or education in scripture have no right or competence in interpreting the Bible, in the same way as a person who has no medical training has no right or competence to make pronouncements upon medical issues.

I would question whether priests have enough life experience to interpret the breadth of human existence and therefore make pronouncement's on it.

But who does? No one does, yet someone must do so to in order for society to function. In my view it may as well be priests.

[Cassius]

I hope Hell exists.

Who are you hoping to hang out with?

Not you.

you build your theology around me... I'm flattered.

seriously though Hagrid, it's sad to see you so having so much hate that hell is the one piece of religion you still want to hang onto.

I don't think it's absurd to harbour some hatred towards people who hide behind outlandish fairy tales in order to justify their oppression of an already-marginalized group—especially since I happen to be a member of that group.

I don't believe in Hell. But if the freedom of religion excuse is going to be used to give people an out to discriminate against me and others like me, I think they ought to hold a mirror up before they judge the character of someone else. Plus, if that's what someone's religion honestly is, maybe it's time to spread the truth that the religion is in the wrong rather than let the discrimination continue. And if it does continue, they shouldn't expect upstanding citizens to just roll over. After all, using their strict rules, an unbiased observer may find that these oppressors are more deserving of a ticket on the Hell-bound train than a man who's simply trying to live equally among his peers while loving another man.

So I agree with you, shua: It's sad that I have this hate. I'm no saint. But who's hatred is coming from the more legitimate place? Who's really the victim? I'm sure you'll give some middle-of-the-road answer, but I'd say it's pretty clear who threw the first stone.

Christianity has a place in our society, but as long as it continues to use its influence to put down others, it's place will rightfully continue to diminish.

"Christianity has a place in our society as long as it moulds itself to conveniently fit 'who I am' as a person".