Tennessee county beats hasty retreat from call to ban homosexuals

Associated Press ^ | March 18, 2004 | BILL POOVEY

[narses]

"a lot of priests need to go to jail if caught"

Yes, they should.

[tinacart]

I'm not Catholic (but adore Mel!), but agree with you 100% as a Christian. BTW, on our radio this morning Armstrong and Getty were degrading and mocking Tenneseeans (and the "holler" dialect) - born in Cleveland, TN (Gum Holler) and proud of it. Guess that's why I still possess common sense, know right from wrong (down from up), and good from evil, even after being indoctrinated in the socialist state of Cali for 38 years!

[narses]

So you posit a system of laws very different than that currently governing us. What 'moral code' ought to be the basis of the laws you propose?

[sinkspur]

Gluttony.

[Torie]

You're one tough sister. I have this image in my mind of you as a circa 1950's nun rapping the knuckles of second graders with a ruler that are caught doodling rather than studying their catechism or whatever.

[narses]

I neither claimed the UCMJ nor the many state laws as a "trump card" nor did I concede that it is 'irrelevant'. Your strawman and red herring tactics reveal the paucity of your logical and rhetorical weapons.

[Unam Sanctam]

If a human being is simply what they choose to do, then either, in the case of an active homosexual, one must both love the sinner and the sin or hate the sinner and the sin. However, Christians are called to love the sinner and hate the sin, so they must be two separate things. Homosexual activity does not fundamentally define one's identity as a human being.

[narses]

Thanks!

[AntiGuv]

Sure, I have no objection to enshrining a moral precept into law regardless of coincidence with those moral precepts embraced by whatever particular religious teaching.

They should not be enshrined into law on the basis that they are a religious teaching, however.

[narses]

Gluttony and weight are not congruent 'deacon'. Go buy a clue.

[narses]

Thank you, I think. I certainly want those tough Sisters teaching my children (and they have), don't you?

[sinkspur]

In lots of cases, fat people eat too much.

Or, are you angry because I'm beginning to hit a little too close to home?

[narses]

And tell us again "deacon" how you reconcile your "Holy Orders" with your support for legalizing fornication, adultery and homosexual acts? Go ahead, while you SCREACH 'hypocrite' at me, defend yourself.

[narses]

LOL, you 'hit' like a girl. I am moderately UNDERWEIGHT 'deacon' but suffer on occasion from the venial sin of gluttony. Do tell, when will you reconcile your alleged HOLY ORDERS with your support for legalizing MORTAL SIN that acts against not only God and Man but society as well?

[Torie]

Well sometimes folks of faith think that a religious teaching = correct moral principle = it should be enshrined in law. Per the transitive principle, the religious teaching becomes what should be the law, because it is the religious teaching. Granted, those who can handle complexity, may well make the equation a bit more complex. But there is nothing errant per se with positing the theorem that Branch Dividians hate sodomy as akin to murder, and I am a Branch Dividian, and therefore I think sodomy should be criminalized. No, I don't know what Branch Dividians actually thought, except that the leader should get all the sexual action.

[Torie]

No.

[timm22]

What 'moral code' ought to be the basis of the laws you propose?

I suppose the moral code that should be the basis of law is respect for individual rights. Basically, that violence, theft, and fraud are wrong.

In many ways the basis I'd like is different from the basis that is currently used for our laws, which is majoritarianism. But in some ways I'd say it is similar, in that a few areas still remain where the majority respects the rights of individuals.

What moral code do you think should be the basis of our laws?

[sinkspur]

Do tell, when will you reconcile your alleged HOLY ORDERS with your support for legalizing MORTAL SIN that acts against not only God and Man but society as well?

Sorry, narses. Not everything that is sinful should be illegal, as you, yourself, acknowledge when you say that being drunk in one's home shouldn't merit a visit from the cops.

[AntiGuv]

What 'moral precept' is 'enshrined' into law in our nation and why is that and/or your 'moral precept' more important than mine?

At its most basic, it's "Do No Harm" and "Do Unto Others As You Would Have Done Unto You" - which are of course the very reasons the law even exists.

I have no problem telling people that they are wrong when they are wrong. Your particular moral precept is less important (to use your terminology) foremost because it is wrong. There are other reasons, of course, (because it is immoral - see the first part of this comment - and because it is based on myth) but that's the primary reason.

If I did not think your moral precept was wrong then we would obviously not even be having this debate. BTW, the reason why we live in a secular nation is so that people with one belief system, such as myself, need not tell people of another belief system, such as yourself, just how wrong they are. That prevents a great deal of acrimony and sooner or later that route results in people getting killed.

[narses]

At its most basic, it's "Do No Harm" and "Do Unto Others As You Would Have Done Unto You" - which are of course the very reasons the law even exists.

Where did your 'precepts' come from?

I have no problem telling people that they are wrong when they are wrong. Your particular moral precept is less important (to use your terminology) foremost because it is wrong. There are other reasons, of course, (because it is immoral - see the first part of this comment - and because it is based on myth) but that's the primary reason.

So the Catholic Faith is WRONG? It is 'immoral'? It is based on 'myth'? Really? According to who? You? What is your AUTHORITY for such a sweeping claim?

If I did not think your moral precept was wrong then we would obviously not even be having this debate. BTW, the reason why we live in a secular nation is so that people with one belief system, such as myself, need not tell people of another belief system, such as yourself, just how wrong they are. That prevents a great deal of acrimony and sooner or later that route results in people getting killed.

You DO tell me that my moral precepts are "wrong" though. Who gives you that authority and what 'moral precepts' are you using as your guide and claiming as "right"?