My two bits
Submitted by d on August 16 1999 at 22:28:02
In reply to Who or What are we, anyway? Submitted by Chris on August 15 1999 at 11:01:46
|
First, sexual orientation is not a sin. Paul would just assume men stay single (i.e. have a null orientation or at least act as if they did). Depending on how you read the Bible, FOR THE CHRISTIAN, men sleeping with men (or women with women) may be (I've got some reading to do on this myself). (For the non-God-Fearing-Person [Christian, Jew, Muslim, or other], what's a sin or not is irrelevant, on the assumption that they don't care what my God thinks.). On sins of the fathers and unfairness: Yup, the Bible does explicitly mention people's sins being visited on to their children unto the 3rd or 4th generation (and in one specific case, unto the 10th). Unfair? Sure looks that way. But I'm not omnicient, and I assume there's information I don't have access to. Also, there is a practical reality for "sins of the fathers" affecting the sons and daughters: "As the twig is bent, the tree shall grow." If a child's closest role model for good behavior is a no-good-rotton-scoundrel, well, there's more of a chance that the kid will grow up to be a no-good-rotten-scoundrel. [Hmm, this is beginning to sound like an ad for mentor programs.] On the Kansas Board of Education ruling: Theres talk that this may get the people of Kansas riles up enough to finally abolish the independent BOE and allow the legislature to control that body. They may not politically live to regret the day they made that ruling. And finally: Comparing, or appearing to compare, Jim to a CA was tacky and not the best example. While at times Jim can be abrasive or appears in is replies to not have absorbed the full intent of the post he is replying to (something easily explained by his busy schedule and humankind's general lack of telepathy :^) ), he is nothing like Echols et al. As he pointed out, CAs tend to try to disrupt communication (MarchHare possibly being a counter-example - I didn't see her early posts but I gather they were CA-like). I've never seen Jim intentionally disrupt communication. |