Bisexuality and The Police

 

No. I don’t mean the rock band. It’s an unexpected advert curtesy of the other police that I caught a glimpse of instead. It took me several attempts to get the shot, as the car was rocking back and forth threatening to flatten me against bemused commutes. Plus, the purple safety bar was unfortunately very much in the way, hence the angle.

I’m not sure whether you can read the small print, so to ensure you need not squint yourself into a wrinkly visage, I’ll lend a helping eye:

“At Stonewall we’ve campaigned for 25 years for equality. We’ve had major successes with legalising same sex marriage, repealing Section 28 and lifting the ban on gay people serving in the forces. But 99% of young gay people still regularly hear homophobic language at school, 100 homophobic hate crimes are reported to police every week and 2.4 million people have witnessed homophobic bullying at work in the last five years.

Lots done. Lots to do.”

Atta police. Keep up the good work. 

Whenever the law enforcement agency appears in the press of late, it is once again to emphasise its shortcomings. Either you hear more about PlebGate or a shooting gone wrong. These are important issues, and keeping them in the public eye will hopefully ensure that appropriate measures are taken so that they might not reoccur in the future. There is little media coverage of the things that the men and women entrusted with serving and protecting the public are getting right. Don’t they deserve some acknowledgement for this?

Snippets from the Underground series.

Russia’s Stance on Homosexuality

Let’s Talk Opinion in conversation with Project O

Question 6: If you could share an opinion on a single international incident or topic that you either feel strongly about or that might not be known to the rest of the world what would it be? You have our attention.

“Russia needs to get its act together. What the f**k? Is this the 19^th century? This goes for the rest of the world, but they are the ones in vogue right now. In over half the countries in Africa, homosexuality is “illegal”. How can you make one’s sexuality illegal? This is ludicrous. Some places even enforce the death penalty. Of course, this stems from religion – the plague of the world. Wake up! God is not listening to you. And if he is, he is a douche bag. Jesus is supposed to be about love. You a**hole.” Jonathon Saia

 

While I am very much in agreement with the spirit of Jonathon’s answer regarding the issue of homosexuality, being a promoter of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender rights myself, I think it is important to distinguish between our support for the gay community and our disagreement with the Christian position on homosexuality.

He is right to indicate that the Christian church ought to adjust its position on homosexuality, be open to change and rectify this instance of discrimination which results in appalling acts of violence and even in the death of gay people around the world by the hand of those who use religion to justify their heinous actions.

The Church could do a lot more to prevent this. But we should remember that not all Christians share the attitudes of the Church in this, as exemplified by the following: Why I Can’t Say “Love the Sinner / Hate the Sin” anymore. Many Christians are indeed as committed to equality and would want to see gay people’s rights and safety protected just as much as a non-believer would.

Furthermore, we ought also remember that many gay people are themselves Christians, and whilst it is a struggle due to the inherent contradictions that their faith engenders, it must be said that they are the ones who have the power and capacity to change things from within.

I am an atheist, so for me God is an idea created by Man in his own image – an
attempt to make sense of a world that can be unsafe, fragmented and uncertain. Since human beings are flawed, then all our creations are similarly so. In making God in his own image Man has also imbued this idea with his preconceptions, not to say prejudice.

But there is also another side to this idea, one that emphasises love, collaboration, solidarity and kindness. Many Christians, indeed many people that subscribe to other faiths too, tend to subscribe to this side of the coin, and do their best to curtail the first.

We shouldn’t make a habit of throwing them into the same basket with fanatics and fundamentalists that – had they not religion as an excuse – would have found another way to perpetrate harm on others.

Jonathon’s answer gave me a lot to think about, and I hope that my contribution will be of interest to him, as well as to the other participants.

Here are some snippets of the discussion that followed:  

navigator1965 says: Jonathan, Sorry, but your submission didn’t work for me. #6 I don’t see how your general disrespect for monotheistic religion and specific disrespect for Christianity materially differs from some other person’s general disrespect for homosexuals.

cineaste says: Because if God’s message is really saying, “I do not love homosexuals” as MANY Christians are vocal to say, than he is not worthy of respect.

Dotta Raphels :  Hi there, it’s good to read your takes here. I think what this project has done is give me a birds eye view into what people want me to see of them (at the end of the day, it’s exactly what you let out that is seen or perceived as you) That said, I respect your opinions and applaud your support to fundamental rights especially in the sexual orientation department and all.
I think when attitudes of “I don’t give a damn” is thrown around too much, it really may be a sign of something deeper and frankly, being frank many times offends.
As a follower and believer in the words and doctrines of Christ, it pains me to hear you refer to “God” as a douche bag regardless of intent, The one thing this project has been is REAL and intensely discreet in respect to civility and maturity.

IMO everyone has managed to make their point without disrespecting others beliefs or opinions.
To disagree is an absolute welcome, but lets do it with class. I have enjoyed your take and I hope the project has also opened you up to new horizons in regards to diversities and humanity as a whole. Thanks for sharing.

cineaste says: I am not speaking of people of faith in general. Many people believe in God and also believe that gay people are worthy of respect and love. What I am referring to are the people who use God as an excuse to persecute LGBT people. Hopefully he is NOT listening to them because ostensibly, theoretically, God is about love. But if they are truly doing God’s bidding, if this is behavior that God truly wants, than he is an asshole.

Susan Irene Fox says: Jonathon, as someone who is as intelligent as you are (I’ve been to your blog, so I know of where I speak – btw, loved the Myra Breckenridge post), you must be able to differentiate between the characteristics God and the people who misuse His name. As you so aptly stated, “Jesus is supposed to be about love.” In this you are correct. I am proud to be Christian, to be a follower of Jesus, and we are not all like the Christians who blithely toss around hate or judgment.

I would respectfully request that you not lump us all together, and please don’t judge the God who created and loves us all by the actions of the vocal and fundamentalist extremists who presume to speak for Him or for the rest of us.

Thank you, and thanks for sharing your opinions. We all have so much to learn from one another, it would be terrific it we could be open enough to do it graciously.

 

What is your take on this issue?

You have the stage. Make your voice heard. All opinions welcome.

*

Let’sTalk Opinion posts engage with issues that are important to other bloggers, connecting with others on matters close to their heart. If you like a topic and would like to contribute, please feel free to add to the comment box, reblog, share, email or message me on Twitter @shardsofsilence.

Or if you happen to be a fellow Hogwartsian send me a letter by owl.

#BenedictCumberbatch goes Brokeback Sherlock

Welcome to The Batch on Sunday: Your Online-Home For All Things CumberVic

The Batch on Sunday reports!

After flying low under The Batch on Sunday’s radar, vicbriggs reveals the project that kept her in trouble, and out of the celeb columns, since the premier of Midnight Snog.
We are pleased to report that the delectable Benedict Cumberbatch – now officially the world’s sexiest actor, because if our colleagues at Empire Online say so, it is so! – has not abandoned his collaboration with the Dreamscapes Epic director, busy schedule or not.

When Vic imparted the nature of her latest project however, The Batch on Sunday could not help but be somewhat perplexed at the turn the CumberVic professional relationship has taken.
Despite flirting with rainbow innuendo in Sherlock, the explicitly erotic nature of the next Dreamscapes instalment may be one step further than even the multifaceted Cumberbatch could have been expected to take this early in his Hollywood takeover.
Mind though, since every time you try to google Cumberbatch, the top option is always “Benedict Cumberbatch gay”, this must be one for the boys!

BoS: “We await with trepidation the release date for Brokeback Sherlock, the next chapter in the Dreamscapes Epic starring Benedict Cumberbatch. Can you tell our readers what has inspired you to pursue this angle?”

VB: “I have to admit that it was Benedict himself who got this particular project off the ground. I was at a loss as to what the next step for Dreamscapes might be. At one point, even considered abandoning it altogether, but then one night Benedict shows up at my flat… Twenty cigarettes and almost as many espressos later, Brokeback Sherlock was born.”

BoS: “We understand that Benedict is not the only Sherlock star to make an appearance in your Brokeback Mountain meets Sherlock fandango. This is the first time you have worked with Martin Freeman, is it not? If so, why did you choose him, over other potential options, to act opposite the Batch in Brokeback Sherlock?”

VB: “I have always admired Martin’s work, starting with the Office and the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, but there were other, perhaps less well known appearances that I enjoyed just as much. There is a mixture of strength and vulnerability that was needed for this piece – so difficult to enact – and Martin gets it right every time. I could not think of a better choice for the role. And, of course, there was the matter of chemistry. Watching Martin work opposite Benedict on the Sherlock set would’ve removed any doubts, if I had any left in that respect.”

BoS: “There is great secrecy surrounding Brokeback Sherlock’s key scenes. Unfortunately, we were unable to get hold of the leaked shower stills for this piece, as they were taken down within seconds of hitting the web. Is such secrecy really necessary, and don’t you think it will end up ultimately damaging your Epic’s ratings at the blox-office?”

VB: “I find that actors work best without distractions, particularly paparazzi interference. This is a project that endeavours to be very sensitive about how intimate relations between men are portrayed. There is humour, and tenderness, and heartbreak too. Given the difficulties encountered during the filming of BBC’s third series of Sherlock, I thought it best to avoid such unnecessary pressures, and ensure that both Martin and Benedict would be able to put their best foot forward for this project.”

BoS: “We understand that they put forward a little more than their foot hehe! Is this a strictly behind the camera project for you, or do you still make an appearance on-screen?”

VB: “Ha! Actually, I do, but only in a cameo appearance this time.”

BoS: “Any chance of a preview?”

VB: “I’m afraid it may be too steamy for an interview. Let’s just say, if you’ve dreamt of it, it’s probably going to make an appearance in Brokeback Sherlock.”

Brokeback Sherlock is due to be released on a vicbriggs blog-screen near you in November, following into the footsteps of PROJECT R: Relationship Interrupted.

Well. You can’t say better than that! Although… Vic may be underestimating the dreaming capacity of The Batch on Sunday reader. Only Brokeback Sherlock will tell!
We bid farewell to the Dreamscapes Epic director, and await her November addition to the #BenedictCumberbatch portfolio!

*

New to The Batch on Sunday and want an urgent pre-Brokeback Sherlock Benedict Cumberbatch fix? Take a look at the links below.

In the order of appearance:

1.  I don’t fancy Benedict Cumberbatch. Daily Prompt: Pants on Fire or the confession that started it all.

2. Sex with you-know-who will steam up your windows. Beware!

3.  COMING SOON… a snippet of Cumberthings yet to come.

4. The Batch on Sunday Interviews vicbriggs on working with #BenedictCumberbatch and life after Sex with you-know-who.

5. Midnight Snog – the sequel to Sex with you-know-who is finally out.

6. Truth stranger than fiction… #BenedictCumberbatch, for you to no longer doubt that the story of my meeting Benedict Cumberbatch can be an essay on time and the meaning of life.

7. Danger! Danger! High Voltage!!! On the (un)expected side-effects of writing/thinking/dreaming of Benedict Cumberbatch.

Enjoy! and thank you for stopping by

http://dailypost.wordpress.com/2013/10/12/daily-prompts-strange/

Project O – Harsh Reality EXCLUSIVE: Interview with vicbriggs and AOpinionatedMan

vicbriggs and AOpinionatedMan on life, the universe and Opinion!

I’m a story teller. I want to share my story with you. It may be mine today, or perhaps someone else’s. Ideas tail me until I give them space on the page and I can think of nothing more joyful than to send them chasing after you, make you smile, laugh, or shed a tear if that’s what you need today.

Project O : truth + fiction. After submitting my Opinion piece preview for the project (you can read this here: https://shardsofsilence.wordpress.com/2013/08/26/project-o/   ), I decided I’d delve a little deeper and see what I can come up for you. It soon became clear that an interview was in order.

Opinionated Man came to the virtual rescue. But. It always helps to visualise.

Disclaimer:

The interview below is between a fictionalised Opinionated Man and myself. To avoid any confusion, I shall refer to him as iOM. 

September 1, 2013. 10:03am GMT.

Altitude: 37000 feet (plus minus a couple of toes)

Ground Speed: 548mph

Somewhere south of Prague, nosing ahead towards Vienna; final destination: Iasi.

iOM walks towards me with an assured step. His shoulders move in rhythmic sequence one after another, as if driving his body forward, towards this place that contains me. I just stand here, watching him walk. Interesting. I never noticed before that he keeps his arms balancing slightly apart from his torso, that he walks tall and straight, carrying his height to its full.

Half way down the seat-path he twitches his nose and fans it with his hand. I laugh. Yes. This is one stinky plane. No two opinions about it. We could’ve chosen a better place for this interview, but needs must.

We await the lukewarm pretend-coffee liquid to be brought around. Once the green-coated, cherry-lipsticked, and rather grumpy Tarom stewardess (excuse me, ‘pilotical’ incorrectness alert!), ok: flight attendant leaves us; Lilliputian coffee cups in hand, iOM turns towards me and gets straight to the point. 

iOM: You are relatively new on the blog scene, having just celebrated your first month blogniversary. We first crossed swords over the question of women being crazy. In your opinion, did your background influence your position on the matter?

vicbriggs:  Very much so. My first instinct was to rebuff your claim, but that’s the lazy route. I remembered how a fellow thinker once dealt with someone who called her a feminist dyke (not that I’m suggesting here in any shape or form any equivalence between your view and that of her assailant). Rather than getting angry, she embraced the term transforming it into something positive: “Yes. I’m a feminist and a dyke. It’s wonderful that we live in a society where we can be one and the other, and be proud and vocal about it, wouldn’t you agree?” she said. It completely befuddled her wannabe attacker.

Opinion on gender issues in my country of birth, a small former Soviet republic, is still dominated, to my great chagrin, by a misogynist male population. It was tough growing up as a woman in Basarabia, but I think I owe my strength and commitment to women’s cause to that place. 

iOM: Are things different in that respect in your new home country?

vicbriggs: Things are much better in Britain. Women do have a voice here and their social standing is relatively better than in Eastern Europe. Nonetheless, there are still many hurdles to be overcome. There is a backlash of conservatism against the advances of feminism on women’s rights.

Since the recession, some politicians have even suggested that women ought to return to the home as their rightful place. Women’s pay is still considerably lower than men’s in equivalent jobs. Whilst men do not have to sacrifice their career in order to have a family, many women are still faced with that choice.

Wouldn’t it be wonderful if society viewed both men and women as equally responsible for the upbringing of new generations? I think a lot can be done to share the burden, and I do believe that men suffer because of these attitudes too. Many would like to have the chance to be more involved as fathers.

My last few years in academia have also thrown light on the difficulties female academics have to face. Male students are never told at the very start of their phd that they have to break through a glass ceiling and that those of their gender have a tough time making it in this ‘industry’.

iOM: In your previous piece for Project O, you recounted how your grandfather’s attitude towards his wife was the first prompt for your unearthing how important it is for people to be allowed to voice their opinions. What, if anything, in your opinion, acts as the Grandfather-figure for others today? What keeps people silent when they ought to speak out?

vicbriggs: Fear. There are many reasons why people chose to remain silent, or are compelled to be so. Fear, whether of rejection, of reprisal, of not fitting in, is a big factor.

States and their governments are well versed in using the power of fear to keep their citizens and/or subjects in check. The Cold War provided the perfect opportunity for both superpowers and their allies to curtail the rights and freedoms of their own people, whilst pointing the finger over the Iron Curtain. When “they have it worse than you” no longer served as an excuse, they found other enemies to scare us with into silence.

The war on terrorism provided the ultimate threat. When your enemy cannot be identified, you live forever in fear. The truth is that no one has as much power and opportunity to hurt us than those we’ve put in charge of our decisions, our laws, and ultimately – since politics now infiltrates every aspect of society – our lives.

This is why projects such as yours (Project O) are so important in offering others a platform, a voice. It is wonderful to be able to be a part of it, and I hope that it will encourage others to express their thoughts and beliefs, whilst respecting those of others.

iOM: Speaking of respect, what do you understand by it?

vicbriggs: Good question, and a difficult one to answer. I suppose respect starts with an open mind. Listen before you speak your mind. Do not judge people before they’ve had a chance to explain their position. Give them a chance to defend it. If you disagree, do so by approaching the issue at hand rather than going for the jugular. Never make it personal, even if at times it feels so. If we were all a little more willing to listen and to at least try and empathise with others, then we’d make the first step towards mutual respect.

iOM: You’ve had a chance to travel and interact with people from cultures and backgrounds other than your own. How did this influence your opinions, if at all?

vicbriggs: I owe a lot of who I am today to these experiences. It’s opened my eyes to other ways of life, other modes of thinking, to others’ ability to cope in tough circumstances. Travelling has made me feel closer to my fellow women and men. I am a better person for it.

iOM: You say that you are a feminist and a democrat, and that you can’t be one without the other. Does that influence the way you view nascent democracies?

vicbriggs: New democracies have a lot of work to do for their women citizens. Outmoded attitudes ought to be left behind. It is not easy. I appreciate that in societies where religion is an important factor there is an additional hurdle to overcome. But I stand by what I said If you are a democrat, you are a feminist.

A Modern Greek philosopher and friend once told me that you can be a Greek or a Christian, not both. Greeks have managed it somehow, so I think there is hope for new democracies to subscribe to feminist values without abandoning their beliefs. But they do need to adapt them to new realities.

iOM: And if they don’t adapt?

vicbriggs: If they continue to oppress and devalue more than half of their citizens, then they do not deserve the label. They may be something, but not democracies.

Women ought to fight for their right to an opinion. Men, if they have that right already, and even if they don’t, ought to join women in their cause. If we stand together, if we persist and never give up, then we are bound to succeed. “Constant Vigilance!”

iOM: If everyone is entitled to their opinion, surely some clashes are bound to happen?

vicbriggs: Absolutely. But as long as there is a mutual respect and a desire to listen and understand the position of your opponent or adversary, then opinion will be in good hands.

As I mentioned before, the one line I draw is on sexism, racism and homophobia. If you deny people of a different gender, race or sexual inclination an equal standing in the conversation, then you are an opponent unworthy of respect. You cannot expect to be listened to when you belittle others. You are entitled to your opinion, sure. But no one likes a dick.

iOM: The last question. Do you have anything more to add regarding the importance of this project to you and to the world?

vicbriggs: The fact that so many people have chosen to take time and participate, voice their opinion in this context , is inspiring. I am grateful to be a part of it.  We have so many projects of our own that sometimes we can lose sight of what is most important to us. Project O has prompted me to delve deep and consider what I value most and why.

I hope that you will be able to make this a return feature on your blog. Perhaps we can rename September as the month of opinion and encourage more writers to participate every year with new sets of questions related to this topic.

Thank you for initiating the project. And thanks to you all for joining in.

Our lukewarm cups long emptied, we said our goodbyes and Opinionated Man left to hunt down another blogger for their opinion. From theory to action, I landed in Iasi and sticking a protester’s banner on my arm tattoo-style, went of the Union Square and screamed my lungs out to save Rosia Montana from the greedy claw of gold-diggers (literally) and preserve this place of outstanding natural beauty for future generations. The future is too late a time to make amends. Begin now. Grab a cause.

You have a voice. Use it.

For a rather more humorous take on AOpinionatedMan’s Project O questions, follow the link to my original contribution: https://shardsofsilence.wordpress.com/2013/08/26/project-o/

And here is the link to all other contributions by my fellow-bloggers. Enjoy! http://aopinionatedman.com/category/project-o/

God @TheTweetOfGod Sigh… maybe Nietzsche was right.

 Humour will save us all in the end…

Dear lensgirl53,

Thank you for your considered reply to my comment. I will attempt to engage in what follows with the main points you make. Of course, if you feel that there are additional ones in need of consideration, just let me know, and I will happily oblige.

lensgirl53: I know this is controversial

Not at all, I assure you, if by controversial you meant your own contribution to the debate of course. The issue at hand is indeed a controversial one.

lensgirl53: but I can’t just let this slip by because of some people’s casual toss of the word and understanding of “prejudices”…

Nor should you let it ‘slip’, as you say. I am glad that you didn’t. As I’ve said many a time in the past: You have a voice too. Use it.

Do correct me if I’m wrong, but I assume that in this particular case by ‘people’ who casually ‘toss the word … “prejudices”’ around you meant me?

If I may be so bold as to protest.

In my line of work, tossing words around is not current practice. My choice of words in general is measured, and my use of this word in particular, particularly so, given the issue under discussion.    

Perhaps we ought to return to the context in which I appealed to the term. I said, and I quote: “As far as I am concerned, Man created God in his own image – and somehow seems to have managed to imbue his invention with his own prejudices in the process.”

Notice that I do not claim this statement to be a truth universally acknowledged. The above shows clearly that I do nothing other than simply put forth my position regarding the idea of God. It was important to elucidate this point, since my reply was to someone with a religious background, who had expressed a view coloured by that background, regarding a political and social matter of some import.

It would be helpful perhaps for me to clarify at this point why I felt it necessary to take issue with Mandy saying, and I quote, “…even though I don’t agree with homosexuality.”

She did not say that homosexuality is morally reprehensible. Had she done so, I would have rebutted in quite a different manner. I would have also taken a less genteel line in such a rebuttal.

What Mandy said was that she did not agree with homosexuality. Does not agree… on what?

Homosexuality is not a person, a political group with a manifesto, or an institution with a set of policies that one could disagree with.

Is it same-sex coitus that Mandy disagrees with? This would be an insultingly reductive view of homosexuality. I persist in the hope that this was not Mandy’s position.

Is it that Mandy disagrees with the existence of homosexuality as a counterpart to heterosexuality? Does she believe that heterosexuality is a ‘natural’ occurrence, whilst homosexuality is a lifestyle choice? If so, then this would suggest that, when she says she disagrees with homosexuality, what she means is that she disagrees with homosexuality as a valid lifestyle choice. I leaned towards this interpretation of her statement, and my comment on her article makes this plain.

Allow me to repeat that part of my reply which illustrates the above point:

“I struggle to understand what there can be to ‘agree’ or disagree with about homosexuality. Homosexuality is not a matter of opinion. You can’t disagree with homosexuality as if it’s equivalent to coffee-drinking, governmental policy on education, or… whatever-have-you: whaling! for example. Homosexuality is not a lifestyle choice.” (vicbriggs)

So far, so good. Now that you understand my reasons for engaging with Mandy on this issue, I will return to my later statement which incited your reply:

“As far as I am concerned, Man created God in his own image – and somehow seems to have managed to imbue his invention with his own prejudices in the process.”

As I have already indicated above, this statement is nothing other than a clarification of my position regarding the idea of God.

I am willing to acknowledge that since for me God is an idea, rather than an entity, and since I was writing a reply for someone for whom the opposite is the case, I ought to have taken pains to make the distinction clearer perhaps.

As for Man imbuing the idea of God with his own “prejudices”? I stand by this. I’m afraid that if you want to disagree with me on this, you’ll have to do it from within the framework of my argument rather than the Christian one, since my point is a philosophical rather than a religious one.

Suffice to say that all human beings are incapable of leaving their preconceptions fully off the table, and since this is the case, anything they create will necessarily be “imbued” with those preconceptions. Since for me God is Man’s creation, it follows that this idea is necessarily contaminated by humanity’s own shortcomings.

My statement was not intended to challenge anyone else’s faith. Everyone is entitled to make sense of life and death, themselves and the world in the manner of their own choosing. Religion does not do it for me, but I know it does work for others, and I’m not some militant atheist who requires for religion to be obliterated or else.

That being said, I am militant about maintaining a clear separation between public and private. Religion belongs to the latter and has no business dictating policy in the former.

I do take issue with those who use their faith to discriminate against others.

 

lensgirl53: Therein lies the difficulty of explaining our position on such delicate subjects as homosexuality that the Bible says is a sin…along with lying, murder, stealing, etc.

Actually, the Bible may say that homosexuality is a sin, but it does not say that it is a sin along with those others you mention. The sins you enumerate, as you well know, come from the Old Testament’s Ten Commandments. Commandment nr.9, lying: “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.” Commandment nr.6, murder: “Thou shalt not kill.” Commandment nr.8, stealing: “Thou shalt not steal.”

Notice again, how I’m being pernickety about the choice/use of language and the context that language implies?

I do this because in choosing to enumerate homosexuality as a sin in the context of ten commandment sins, you are implicitly creating an image of homosexuality as a sin so great that it would be worthy of an eleventh commandment. If that was not your intention, then perhaps you ought to have referred to other sins that are not mentioned in the Ten Commandments, but appear in the Bible elsewhere. Consistency and parity of position would be appreciated in this context.        

 

lensgirl53: Now, I could start quoting scripture here but what would be the point? If a person does not believe in God or a Bible then those words will have no meaning. But if you are inclined to look it up…try the book of Romans and read it in its entirety.

The western secular world is in many ways also a post-Christian world, so you are mistaken in your assumption that the values and norms of Christianity as presented in its key texts have no meaning for those who do not believe. Meaning however does not equate faith. I am able to understand you and your beliefs and simultaneously adhere to my own worldview, my own set of “truths”.

Thank you for your suggested further reading. I was brought up as a Christian and have read the Bible and many other religious texts extensively as a result. In fact, at my last count, I had read the Old Testament (in its entirety) six times and the new one, almost as many.

I was a believer as a child, and then I grew up.

lensgirl53: As far as the desire of homosexual behavior….they may be inclined to a certain sexual orientation but the real sin is the act of immoral sex (hetero..and homo) The Christian perspective is that we should exert self-control in all things and when we fail, as we will do….then we are forgiven through our faith in Christ. Simple as that…a gift from a loving Father.

Interesting. Your explanation is insufficiently developed I’m afraid. I am still in the dark as to what, in your opinion, constitutes immoral sex. Care to elucidate?

My guess is that you make in the above a distinction between sex within marriage as moral, and church un-ratified sex as immoral, irrespective of whether it is a heterosexual or same-sex relationship? If so, where does that leave civil marriages, where the couple chose not to have a religious wedding?  

lensgirl53: And quit judging Christians, while saying that they “judge” others…it just isn’t so.

Quit judging Christians? I would ‘quit’ if I had been judging Christians in the first place. I’m afraid you have projected onto me and mine your own preconceptions of what un-believers ought to be like, what an atheist or agnostic may be expected to think or “believe,” and how they are likely to act around believers.

Please reread my comment to Mandy. Perhaps on second inspection you will be able to see that I do not judge her, and by extension, I do not judge Christians: https://shardsofsilence.wordpress.com/2013/09/21/be-happy-be-gay/

I have no interest in judging anyone. I am a thinker, a philosopher-in-training. What I try to do is engage with people at the level of ideas, which I find to be a fruitful and enriching experience.

Nor do I ever once say that Christians judge others.

Again, you appear to take it as a given that if a non-believer challenges a believer on any point, they are necessarily judging them, making some sort of personal attack. I can’t change your perception of this. Only you have the power to make that change. I can only refer you back to the above.

I have copy-pasted your comment before writing my reply in order to ensure that I do not attribute to you any words or opinions that you have not expressed in writing. Please be so kind as to return the courtesy and only claim that I say something when I do in fact say it, rather than when you believe it to be implied in what I say.

There is a distinction. And it is an important one: When I write/say something: that is my opinion expressed. When you write that I say something: that is your interpretation of my opinion, which may or may not correspond to my actual position.

lensgirl53: I would rather live as if there is a God to die and find out I am right, than to live as if there is no God to die and find out I am wrong!!

Therein lieth the crux of the matter: You believe that there is something to find out after death. I do not.

 

Thank you for your comment and for taking the time to read my reply. Additions and corrections to the debate are of course very welcome. Until then, I bid you farewell.

*

Writing this article was made possible by Project O. To read my original contribution, please follow the following link: https://shardsofsilence.wordpress.com/2013/08/26/project-o/

For Mandy’s contribution to Project O, please follow this link: http://aopinionatedman.com/2013/09/20/project-o-article-80-mandy-uk-scheduled-for-9-20-1800/comment-page-1/#comment-63799

To read other contributors’ Project O pieces, and find out more about the project’s inception and aims, follow the link below: http://aopinionatedman.com/category/project-o/

There is also an interview with vicbriggs and OpinionatedMan coming up in October. Will link it up to my blog as soon as it is published. Alternatively, you can follow me on Twitter for updates: @shardsofsilence