Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> You can't have both, it's a fight over which one is more important

Of course you can. Most religious people the world over are tolerant and accepting in their beliefs.




Except that if you check what Catholics, many Christians, and Islamic texts teach about LGBTQ behavior, you'll find that what the Churches/Mosques teach is very different than what the majority of people in those churches follow.

The "tolerant and accepting" ones are the ones the churches would call "apostate" or "heretical."


> if you check what Catholics, many Christians, and Islamic texts teach about LGBTQ behavior, you'll find that what the Churches/Mosques teach is very different than what the majority of people in those churches follow

One, most of those texts have been translated and transliterated many times over. Two, it's no shock that every religion heavily editorialists its scripture. Three, the only people calling out heretics and apostates among their flock are, almost by definition, the extremists.

TL; DR You can be well received in the eyes of your God(s) without having to promote or support the murder and oppression of your fellow human beings.


You are drawing a straw man. Outside of Islam (which Sharia law, I believe, calls for death by stoning for Gay sex), most Christian religions do not call for the death of LGBTQ people. They oppose the agenda and oppose adoption, that's very different than supporting "murder."

Second, the claim "You can be well received in the eyes of your God" is a religious statement, because you don't know what my God is.

Third, "heretics and apostates among their flock are, almost by definition, the extremists." Maybe religion itself is "extreme" and most of its followers are lax, not that the followers are tolerant and there are a few extreme and intolerant members.


> oppose the agenda and oppose adoption

"Oppose the agenda" is opposition to their right to exist as equal members of society. (In places like Ghana, the "agenda" is survival.)

> maybe religion itself is "extreme" and most of its followers are lax

This is a hypothesis. It's falsified by the observation of numerous tolerant and religious societies.


The only reason Christians no longer call for killing gays is because they have been convinced to stop doing this - often using force.


Like when? Like when has force ever been used outside of, say, lawsuits?


The first major step towards making Church civilized was probably the Great Revolution. But it required many, many more sacrifices over the next few centuries.


The texts largely don’t matter, Catholicism for example has very little to do with what’s there in the Bible.


A Catholic will firmly disagree with that belief.


Only the illiterate one.


Wrong. Here's a Catholic's Biblical Guide to Homosexuality and why it is not acceptable. They can read. They also can quote the original Greek.

https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/the-bible-on...


There are similar writings on women and children and animals, all now ignored. You don’t get a multi-millennia institution out of static principles.


It's addressed in the article. They've clearly thought about it even though we may disagree.


I’m sorry, but it’s a Christian equivalent of Flat Earth. There’s too much bullshit there to even start untangling it.


Or maybe it disagrees with your worldview, you can't wrap your head around other people's beliefs and refuse to even try to understand where they may be coming from (making you a de-facto bigot), and you call it a name because you don't care to understand it or unwrap it.


It’s not about the worldview, it’s about understanding what’s written and realizing it’s all bullshit. In this particular case it’s about a fake criterium, which was only invented after deciding “shellfish good, gays bad” to provide an excuse.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: