BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: GUEST
Date: 11 May 12 - 11:13 AM

Richard Bridge: "I'd also point out that characterising the changing of a point of view as "flip-flopping" is a foolish macho posture. Rational thought evidence and discussion ought to lead to changes of view. Anyone whose views are not susceptible of being altered by such things is a fool or a bigot."

GfS: "....and in the meantime, the Democrats are bitching about Romney who is accused of being a 'flip flopper'..when Obama has made comments both ways, but for him it's called 'evolving'...This is hilarious...and going to be a real trip watching the Democrats finagle there way out of this one!!!"

...Like I said.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 11 May 12 - 11:53 AM

Exactly, Whistle-Stop, nobody is in the least affected or harmed by people, of whatever sex, getting married.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Amos
Date: 11 May 12 - 12:01 PM

Eliza, it could not have been put more succinctly. Marriage is surely the first great "no harm, no foul" proposition.


A

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: akenaton
Date: 11 May 12 - 12:13 PM

" Rational thought evidence and discussion ought to lead to changes of view. Anyone whose views are not susceptible of being altered by such things is a fool or a bigot."

As far as I can see, the Pro Gay Marriage "liberals" have never put forward rational thought evidence or discussion, but rely on a threadbare "equality" agenda, exemplified by the posts of mauvepink and others here.

In this society equality does not exist. While you lot engage in mental masturbation over the "rights" of a minute sexual minority, whose behaviour is producing over 70% of new aids infections, we are being systematically robbed by our respective governments.
Pensions, savings and public services are being decimated, one in five and rising of our young people are without jobs, thrown on the scrapheap, life blighted before it has begun.......and you have the fucking audacity to get uptight over "marriage rights" for homosexuals.

You know nothing about attaining equality, you live in some La-La Land inhabited by TV celebrities, popsingers and burt out politicians.

You and your worn out "liberalism" do our children a huge disservice and make the battle against the forces of real evil...the corporate capitalists,the arms manufacturers, the global drug and insurance cartels, a thousand times harder.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 May 12 - 12:25 PM

Akenaton: "You and your worn out "liberalism" do our children a huge disservice and make the battle against the forces of real evil...the corporate capitalists,the arms manufacturers, the global drug and insurance cartels, a thousand times harder."

A HUGE 'Amen' to that!!!!

'Straining at a gnat, while swallowing a camel!'
...other than the FACT, that ANYTHING that eats away at the natural family unit, the so-called 'liberals' get right behind it!

You'd think that our elected officials would consider the PEOPLE, as a 'special interest'!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Bobert
Date: 11 May 12 - 01:01 PM

Flip-flopping ain't a bad thing if one is moving toward become more tolerant and compassionate... Actually, flip-flopping is how intelligent people become wise...

I understand Obama's struggle here... Black Christians tend to be conservative when it comes to gay marriage...

As for Romney??? He has a much larger problem on his hands here with credibility here with his "I don't remember" stand on being involved with assaulting a gay classmate... Something as hateful as that isn't something that anyone could reasonably not remember...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 May 12 - 01:35 PM

Bobert: "Flip-flopping ain't a bad thing if one is moving toward become more tolerant and compassionate... Actually, flip-flopping is how intelligent people become wise...
I understand Obama's struggle here...
As for Romney??? He has a much larger problem on his hands here with credibility here....."

GfS: "....and in the meantime, the Democrats are bitching about Romney who is accused of being a 'flip flopper'..when Obama has made comments both ways, but for him it's called 'evolving'...This is hilarious...and going to be a real trip watching the Democrats finagle there way out of this one!!!"

...Like I said."

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Don Firth
Date: 11 May 12 - 01:47 PM

GfinS, if you were to suddenly decide to LEARN something and express yourself in a manner that doesn't make you look like a half-witted, foul-mouthed barbarian, that would not be "flip-flopping," that would be a step in the right direction and possibly a glimmer of growing awareness.

That is, if your intention is to actually try to say something intelligent and not just pee in the punchbowl.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Don Firth
Date: 11 May 12 - 01:59 PM

And I note that Akenaton is still beating the "homosexuality spreads disease" hum-drum. One would think that if he were REALLY interested in curtailing the spread of HIV/AIDs, he would encourage homosexuals to form stable, monogamous relationships.

Especially since it does not affect anyone else in any significant way. And "moral outrage" based on ignorance does not count as being "affected in any significant way."

Hypocrisy reeks!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Amos
Date: 11 May 12 - 01:59 PM

YOUR ASSERTION ABOUT THE "NATURAL FAMILY" IS INTERESTING. In most cultures it takes a lot of strenuous control to keep these "natural families" together and make them the "natural" option. The United States has one of the highest divorce rates despite 200 years of devout Christian influence protecting the "natural" family from "unnatural" evil influences.

Where do you get the idea that a highly refined cultural practice --monogamous formalized marriage with legal and cultural practices support it and a large commercial industry behind it--is actually natural?

Go study bonobos.


A

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 11 May 12 - 04:18 PM

As far as I can see, the Pro Gay Marriage "liberals" have never put forward rational thought evidence or discussion, but rely on a threadbare "equality" agenda, exemplified by the posts of mauvepink and others here.

Why do you insist on making this personal Akenaton? You bullied me off one thread some time back with your potty mouth and you seem to insist on putting my name in the frame on such discussions. You don't have a clue do you what this is about? I doubt you ever will. And I am not being personal when I say I actually pity you your mind and your obsession on the subject of homosexuality. I am being honest.

Because this is not about being pro-gay, gay positive, or any such agenda as you would insist it is based on liberalism. I have said in many thread before where you have 'pointed out the error of my ways' with your supposed intellectual superiorty. If the only insult you can throw at me is "liberal or liberalist" then I will wear that tag with great pride. Am I allowed to mention pride without it upsetting you predispostion to attacke anything remoteley attached to being gay?

This is not about marriage. It's not about HIV/AIDs, and it's not about the arguments about what causes homosexuality, whether it is genetic )which I believe it to be) or a mix of nature and nurture.

This is, plainly, a human rights issue. It's about allowing all people to have the same rights as each other, no matter their minority or majority position within society. It's about outing those bigots and the haters who actually fear so much about themselves they have to diverta attention onto others. It's about allowing everyone to be seen in the same light, to be treated the same in law as all others, and to be able to access all the things that the majority of people can within and under the human rights banner.

I refuse to get into a battle of wits with an unnarmed opponent. It is very obvious you do not understand the issue here, and the principle of equality, or else you would drop this constant line you have.

I know nothing about you with the exception of what I have seen issue from your mouth on here. You know nothing about me except that which you see here. I have heard people say some good things about you - once away from your 'pet' topic - and I can respect their views. I have no idea why you personalise your contributions. Attacking me and calling me names will not make the issue any less viable or important. If it makes you feel big to attack someone and mouth off at them then so be it.

I keep revisiting BS because there are lots of good threads on here and decent people trying to have open discussion. Sadly, sir, your actions do you and your ilk a disservice in that, far from actually making a valid contribution to a thread, you try to belittle others who say anything different than your own deep rooted fear or hatred about something you constantly show you know nothing about. What do you actually fear? What is it to you if a gay person gets a right to be able to marry, shop in the same shop as you, raise children, be free from assault, drink out of the same glass you drink out of, etc?

So call me names. Call me liberal. Think and call me whatever you want. You don't have a right to do that but you seem to think you do. I wonder how you would feel if you had your rights taken off you, or never given to you, because of your sexuality whatever it is?

I will leave this thread once again. You win big man. As I say. I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with any unnarmed opponent but I don't need to stick around for what will become the usual meltdown of what was a reasoned and decent thread with good intentions

mp

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Bobert
Date: 11 May 12 - 04:29 PM

Hmmmmmm??? Look at the states that have banned gay marriage... They also have the highest heterosexual divorce rates???

Tell us again about them "family values"...

As for flip-flopin' Mitt... Hey, he has flip-flopped on just about everything in which he now says he believes and according to his campaign is going to shake the etch-a-scetch again before the election???

Go figure???

Fact is stranger than fiction...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 11 May 12 - 04:33 PM

mauvepink, I heartily agree that this is in fact a Human Rights issue, and concerns equality and fair treatment of all. I also agree that certain people and one in particular have been abusive and offensive in their posts, instead of discussing things in an adult and civilised manner. As you do, I believe this vituperative attitude stems from fear and hatred. IMO, this type of contributor is not worth bothering with, as they are beneath contempt. For what my humble opinion is worth, I have found your comments and posts well expressed and interesting. I would have found them so even if I hadn't necessarily agreed with them (although I do, unreservedly!) Surley folk can have opposite viewpoints without viciously and offensively attacking posters. Let's just ignore such nastiness.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 11 May 12 - 04:43 PM

Agreed. A most cogent and dignified response, mp, on which congratulations.

~Michael~

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: akenaton
Date: 11 May 12 - 06:12 PM

Please show me where I have attacked MP or any other poster personally.

I have commented on MP's posted content, as it is a fine example of waffle and platitude, containing nothing of substance to add to the breadth of the debate.

Each post can be reduced to the phrase....."its just not fair!"

That is not a satisfactory argument.

Eliza....you pronounce me "abusive and offensive"....and in the next line accuse me of being motivated by "fear and hatred"???
Think before you set your half baked,un substantiatable opinions to print.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Don Firth
Date: 11 May 12 - 06:13 PM

And I also, mp.

And your comment, "those bigots and the haters who actually fear so much about themselves they have to divert attention onto others," is right on target. I'm sure that's the basis for the most vituperative homophobia. Fear of what lies within themselves.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 11 May 12 - 06:39 PM

What's that tag? "Homophobia is a man's fear that gay men will treat him like he treats women"?

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: John P
Date: 11 May 12 - 06:56 PM

Wow! I had no idea! All the proponents of civil rights on this thread haven't a clue that our world is being screwed by "the corporate capitalists,the arms manufacturers, the global drug and insurance cartels". Bowl me over! I've never heard that before. I'm shocked! I've always thought that gang has our best interests at heart. Thank you, thank you, thank you Akenaton and GfS for cluing me in on how our world works! Obviously, I should stop working on the things I might be able to fix and instead worry about things I haven't a chance of making a scratch on. Who would have thought that there is no such thing as voting for the lesser of two evils, or that righting the wrongs we are able to right is a stupid thing to do?

Now which one of you wants to have a real debate about civil rights?

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Bobert
Date: 11 May 12 - 07:11 PM

Here's the real deal...

The United States has tens of millions of closet homosexual/homophobists...

Huh???

Go in any bar in these anti-gay-marriage st and see how many men come in and hang with other men while their wives wait at home for them to come home... Tens of millions... Yeah, they talk all this homophoblic stuff but if these guys love women so much then why don't they go the fuck home and be with one rather than spend night after night with other men???

This is the joke without a punchline...

Redneck Nation is an entire sect of latent homosexuals... Race cars... Fishing... Hunting... Boating... Whatever it takes to be with other men...

Hey, I'm fine with that...

What I am not fine with is latent gays bashing gays...

It's hypocritic... Just come the heck out, Bubba!!!

B~

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: gnu
Date: 11 May 12 - 08:11 PM

Bobert... that's a tad drastic, innit? I like spending time with my buddies but I don't wanna fuck em.

And, I'll add that, if they wanna fuck each other, I don't care. None a my business. To quote another Mudcatter, I just hope they have the courtesy to give their buddy a reach-around while they are at it.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 12 May 12 - 12:33 AM

..or ladies dressing to impress other ladies....and going to the hairdressers...Gosh Bobert, you might be onto something!....or blues payers, who play with more balls than Stevie Ray....

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: akenaton
Date: 12 May 12 - 03:53 AM

When you resort to wild accusations which have no foundation in fact(the last few posts), its a sure sign there is nothing left in the locker.

This happens on every thread regarding the "Gay marriage" issue you finally fall back to the default position of trying to undermine your opponent by insisting that if he or she is against "Gay marriage" they must be a latent homosexual in denial.

I know dozens of local ladies who are very much against the whole idea of the redefinition of marriage ......can you dig up some newspeak to undermine their opinions?

I'm surprised that you go along with these people Bob,I treat your views with the utmost respect (tho' some I don't agree with) and thought that over all these years you knew me a bit better.
I never go to the pub, drink alchohol very rarely and for quite a few years, I have cared for an increasingly sick wife on most of the time that I am not at work.
I do not intend to say anymore about my personal life, but is it not disgracefull that one should have to defend themselves from such insinuations after so many years on this forum?

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Bobert
Date: 12 May 12 - 08:59 AM

I ain't going along with gay bashing, Ake...

I'm just throwing out the hypothesis that a lot of the bashers very well might be latent homosexuals...

I mean, it ain't all about sex but which gender you'd rather spend your time with...

Think about it...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 12 May 12 - 10:18 AM

Ha! akenaton, if you read my last post again, you will find that I mentioned NO names. But if the cap fits....

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: saulgoldie
Date: 12 May 12 - 10:33 AM

Racism is racism is racism. Sexism is sexism is sexism. Homophobia is Homophobia is Homophobia. You either believe that all humans are entitled to fair and equal treatment, or you don't. If you don't then you are obligated to embrace the fact that you think some humans are somehow sub-human. Embrace it. Defend it. Own it. Or join the civilized people who are not sexists, bigots, or homophobes. We really are not evil. We are just intolerant of irrational hatred.

Saul

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 12 May 12 - 11:59 AM

Simply Simpletons Spouting.
Try getting an education on the subject OUTSIDE the political rhetoric.
I'd hate to see some of you embarrassing yourselves, in such grand style....but then, some of you deserve to be!...SAUL!


GfS

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: John P
Date: 12 May 12 - 12:29 PM

I agree with Akenaton that assuming all or most anti-civil rights people are gays-in-denial is not a good idea. It's pretty much on the same level as saying all gay people are perverts. On the subject of civil rights, Akenaton is wrong-headed, illogical, unethical, selfish, and way too interested in other people's sex lives. But that's all we know about him from his posts. It's usually best to respond to what people actually say than to try to discern their inner emotional state and then speak to that too-often incorrect assumption. All I know about Akenaton's personal life, from what he's said over the years, is that he seems to love his wife very much.

Akenaton does have some serious problems in these debates: he draws fallacious conclusions (many of them!) from health data, and then won't (can't) support his conclusions when these fallacies are pointed out to him. He almost always rudely describes all opponents as brain-washed victims of a left-wing gay agenda, allowing him to dismiss anything they say. He has selected one minority group to irrationally deny civil rights to, and that can only be called bigotry. But none of these things make him a closet homo; he's just someone who is too stubborn to give up positions that don't make any sense and who isn't willing to take on, or at least respond to, new information on the subject.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: GUEST,Manuel
Date: 12 May 12 - 04:14 PM

Akenaton, I think you and I would agree that we live in a world infested with red herrings thrown out whenever convenient by evil and powerful people who will not have their lucrative pursuits interfered with by others, such as the State, and must therefore keep those others perpetually "otherwise occupied". There are too many people, many of them good and well-intentioned, in this world who will never learn to look for the bigger picture.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: John P
Date: 12 May 12 - 05:00 PM

Name one.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: gnu
Date: 12 May 12 - 05:22 PM

Saul... well said. Bravo! Bravo!

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 12 May 12 - 05:30 PM

...except deceivingly inaccurate!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Bobert
Date: 12 May 12 - 06:49 PM

Me thinks there is a epidemic of polymorphous perverse guilt gripping the country and it is producing all this homophobic reaction by folks who are more than likely latent homosexuals themselves...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 12 May 12 - 07:24 PM

Why??..because you might fall into the latter category??

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: gnu
Date: 12 May 12 - 07:34 PM

Bobert... careful. Whether homosexuality is (not) wrong or right, insinuation could close this thread as it may offend some and could be considered a "personal" thing. You know, breaking the only rule at the Mudcat? Ya know eh?

Now, this here latent homosexual thing. Are there any tests I could take to see if I am a latent on accounta I prefer the company of people I like to hang out with and most of them are male? And, by "hang out with", I mean have some beers, watch the game, tell lies and stories, play tunes and sing songs, go fishin an huntin (when I used to hunt), build shit, fix shit and whatever. If I was gonna hang it out, I wouldn't want any of them for company. Unless your tests could show otherwise... but my guess is nahhhh. Of course, I have never met Spaw in person so there is no definitive answer I guess.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Bobert
Date: 12 May 12 - 07:51 PM

I'm not part of the bashers, GfinS, so that leaves me out of the epidemic...

Hey, gn-ze... I am in no way, shape or form talking right or wrongness... That is 100% not me...

I have thrown out a hypothesis that there are alot of folks out there bashing homosexuals who may very well be latent homosexuals who have been told "Hey, that shit ain't right" and rather than come out they have to pretend to hate gay people...

Meanwhile they go out and spend most of of their waking hours with folks of the same gender (by choice)...

I think my hypothesis is going over everyone's heads here...

Read closer...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Bobert
Date: 12 May 12 - 10:41 PM

BTW, the studies of polymorphous perverse guilt are interesting... Lotta folks out there with lot's of "baggage" from adolescent behaviors and rather than live up to them these folks go 180 degrees the other way... And guess who suffers???

Yup, gay people...

I know that I am way out in front of this but I had the pleasure of having many in depth discussions on this and other mental health issues with Dr. Paul Baxter in the 70s.... So what I am throwing out is way beyond folks thinkin'...

Ya'll gonna have to Google this up and do some reading... I'm not going to get into the details here... I could... But I'm not...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 13 May 12 - 12:55 AM

Bobert: "I'm not part of the bashers, GfinS, so that leaves me out of the epidemic.."

Did it ever occur to you, that disagreeing with the POLITICAL INTERPRETATION of homosexuality, has NOTHING to do with 'hating' them, or being a 'basher'?????...or is that beyond your scope of understanding??

Bobert: "Meanwhile they go out and spend most of of their waking hours with folks of the same gender (by choice)..."

'Choice'....ahh, the word that partisan politicos despise!...

Bobert: "I think my hypothesis is going over everyone's heads here.."

Yeah, "I'm not crazy..it's the rest of the world"!!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: John P
Date: 13 May 12 - 02:57 AM

Did it ever occur to you, that disagreeing with the POLITICAL INTERPRETATION of homosexuality

And what, pray tell, is the political interpretation of homosexuality?

Saul said: You either believe that all humans are entitled to fair and equal treatment, or you don't. If you don't then you are obligated to embrace the fact that you think some humans are somehow sub-human.

And GfS has taken two pot shots at him so far for doing so.

So, GfS, please defend the concept that denying civil rights to people is affording them equal treatment. Please tell us explicitly why you think Saul was out to lunch for saying that it's bad to discriminate against minority groups. Come on, get specific. So far you're just farting. Bumper sticker slogans are easy. And lazy. And ignorant.

My offer of a real debate on the subject stands. If you have the balls.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 13 May 12 - 09:40 AM

John p: "GfS, please defend the concept that denying civil rights to people is affording them equal treatment."

I'm not denying anybody anything...except credence for nonsensical false premises. People can do and fuck anything they want....what they want to call it, is just a matter of interpretation of gibberish!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Bobert
Date: 13 May 12 - 11:52 AM

Fucking isn't the issue...

Getting fucked over is...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: John P
Date: 13 May 12 - 12:14 PM

GfS, try again, in English this time. Your last post doesn't make any sense. Do you think everyone should have the same civil rights or not? A simple yes or no will suffice.

You do say "I'm not denying anybody anything". Does that mean that you are now in support of gay marriage? If not, what does it mean?

It's really hard to jam with someone who doesn't tune their instrument, doesn't know the chords, can't keep time, and shouts at people if they don't play the tune they want to play. Ambiguity stalks your posts, sheltered by syntactical confusion and excessive choler. Language literacy and clarity of expression in a conversation is the same as musical skill in a jam session or recording project. You are extremely sub-par, and it makes you exactly as welcome as a really bad musician would be if you were trying to play music. It also means you often have to repeat yourself using different words in order to be understood. Do you think everyone should have the same civil rights or not?

The offer of a real debate on the subject stands.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 13 May 12 - 12:15 PM

Bobert got it right.

And any of you who waste your time arguing with Gust from inSanity are doing just that - wasting your time. He/she has some pretentions to being a musician, and should stick to that. In politics and social issues he is clueless. He wrote:

I'd hate to see some of you embarrassing yourselves, in such grand style....but then, some of you deserve to be!...SAUL!

Now that is a classic "pot calling the kettle black," except that Saul made perfect sense and Gust RARELY makes any sense. He's just here to argue, and if you keep arguing with this baby troll, he'll keep it up.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: gnu
Date: 13 May 12 - 03:18 PM

Thanks for the explanations, Bobert... I am on board now.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Wesley S
Date: 13 May 12 - 03:22 PM

Interesting article:

Full story here

When Same-Sex Marriage Was a Christian Rite

Contrary to myth, Christianity's concept of marriage has not been set in stone since the days of Christ, but has constantly evolved as a concept and ritual. Prof. John Boswell, the late Chairman of Yale University's history department, discovered that in addition to heterosexual marriage ceremonies in ancient Christian church liturgical documents, there were also ceremonies called the "Office of Same-Sex Union" (10th and 11th century), and the "Order for Uniting Two Men" (11th and 12th century).

These church rites had all the symbols of a heterosexual marriage: the whole community gathered in a church, a blessing of the couple before the altar was conducted with their right hands joined, holy vows were exchanged, a priest officiatied in the taking of the Eucharist and a wedding feast for the guests was celebrated afterwards. These elements all appear in contemporary illustrations of the holy union of the Byzantine Warrior-Emperor, Basil the First (867-886 CE) and his companion John.


A Kiev art museum contains a curious icon from St. Catherine's Monastery on Mt. Sinai in Israel. It shows two robed Christian saints. Between them is a traditional Roman 'pronubus' (a best man), overseeing a wedding. The pronubus is Christ. The married couple are both men.

Is the icon suggesting that a gay "wedding" is being sanctified by Christ himself? The idea seems shocking. But the full answer comes from other early Christian sources about the two men featured in the icon, St. Sergius and St. Bacchus, two Roman soldiers who were Christian martyrs. These two officers in the Roman army incurred the anger of Emperor Maximian when they were exposed as 'secret Christians' by refusing to enter a pagan temple. Both were sent to Syria circa 303 CE where Bacchus is thought to have died while being flogged. Sergius survived torture but was later beheaded. Legend says that Bacchus appeared to the dying Sergius as an angel, telling him to be brave because they would soon be reunited in heaven.

While the pairing of saints, particularly in the early Christian church, was not unusual, the association of these two men was regarded as particularly intimate. Severus, the Patriarch of Antioch (AD 512 - 518) explained that, "we should not separate in speech they [Sergius and Bacchus] who were joined in life". This is not a case of simple "adelphopoiia." In the definitive 10th century account of their lives, St. Sergius is openly celebrated as the "sweet companion and lover" of St. Bacchus. Sergius and Bacchus's close relationship has led many modern scholars to believe they were lovers. But the most compelling evidence for this view is that the oldest text of their martyrology, written in New Testament Greek describes them as "erastai," or "lovers". In other words, they were a male homosexual couple. Their orientation and relationship was not only acknowledged, but it was fully accepted and celebrated by the early Christian church, which was far more tolerant than it is today.



Such same gender Christian sanctified unions also took place in Ireland in the late 12thand/ early 13th century, as the chronicler Gerald of Wales ('Geraldus Cambrensis') recorded.

Same-sex unions in pre-modern Europe list in great detail some same gender ceremonies found in ancient church liturgical documents. One Greek 13th century rite, "Order for Solemn Same-Sex Union", invoked St. Serge and St. Bacchus, and called on God to "vouchsafe unto these, Thy servants [N and N], the grace to love one another and to abide without hate and not be the cause of scandal all the days of their lives, with the help of the Holy Mother of God, and all Thy saints". The ceremony concludes: "And they shall kiss the Holy Gospel and each other, and it shall be concluded".

Another 14th century Serbian Slavonic "Office of the Same Sex Union", uniting two men or two women, had the couple lay their right hands on the Gospel while having a crucifix placed in their left hands. After kissing the Gospel, the couple were then required to kiss each other, after which the priest, having raised up the Eucharist, would give them both communion.

Records of Christian same sex unions have been discovered in such diverse archives as those in the Vatican, in St. Petersburg, in Paris, in Istanbul and in the Sinai, covering a thousand-years from the 8th to the 18th century.

The Dominican missionary and Prior, Jacques Goar (1601-1653), includes such ceremonies in a printed collection of Greek Orthodox prayer books, "Euchologion Sive Rituale Graecorum Complectens Ritus Et Ordines Divinae Liturgiae" (Paris, 1667).

While homosexuality was technically illegal from late Roman times, homophobic writings didn't appear in Western Europe until the late 14th century. Even then, church-consecrated same sex unions continued to take place.

At St. John Lateran in Rome (traditionally the Pope's parish church) in 1578, as many as thirteen same-gender couples were joined during a high Mass and with the cooperation of the Vatican clergy, "taking communion together, using the same nuptial Scripture, after which they slept and ate together" according to a contemporary report. Another woman to woman union is recorded in Dalmatia in the 18th century.

Prof. Boswell's academic study is so well researched and documented that it poses fundamental questions for both modern church leaders and heterosexual Christians about their own modern attitudes towards homosexuality.

For the Church to ignore the evidence in its own archives would be cowardly and deceptive. The evidence convincingly shows that what the modern church claims has always been its unchanging attitude towards homosexuality is, in fact, nothing of the sort.

It proves that for the last two millennia, in parish churches and cathedrals throughout Christendom, from Ireland to Istanbul and even in the heart of Rome itself, homosexual relationships were accepted as valid expressions of a God-given love and committment to another person, a love that could be celebrated, honored and blessed, through the Eucharist in the name of, and in the presence of, Jesus Christ.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: frogprince
Date: 13 May 12 - 11:21 PM

Somebody bring the smelling salts for Ake and Gfs!!   : )

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: akenaton
Date: 14 May 12 - 03:51 AM

Frogprince.....my stance on this issue is on health, but I do understand the concerns of those who feel that re-definition would have a negative effect on the the family structure.

The religious aspect does not bother me in the least, but it does concern a huge body of religious people wordwide, who don't share my atheistic views.

Reserve the smelling salts for your "liberal" friends who are so agitated by the "right" of homosexuals to purloin the word marriage, yet support wholeheartedly an economic system which has inequality at its black heart.

The battle for homosexual rights is a sham, a sop to the conscience of those too cowardly to bring real equality to all.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Stu
Date: 14 May 12 - 06:20 AM

"my stance on this issue is on health"

OK. Better stop the rutting millions out every Friday and Saturday night too then.


"Reserve the smelling salts for your "liberal" friends who are so agitated by the "right" of homosexuals to purloin the word marriage"

Huh? I thought this was a health issue. If health is all you're worried about why are you suggesting the word 'marriage' is being purloined? Even then that seems odd . . . surely 'marriage' is more than a word, more a commitment to another human being whom you love deeply. In which case, whether it's same-sex or mixed-sex marriage, why would that matter as it's between two people and it's only a sham when they don't love each other.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: John P
Date: 14 May 12 - 10:26 AM

I haven't seen anyone stealing the word "marriage" except those who want to make it mean only their own limited definition. The rest of us are perfectly willing to share the word.

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: Wesley S
Date: 14 May 12 - 11:16 AM

I noticed that when describing marriage that Mitt Romney described it not as between "a" man and "a" woman - but as between "one" man and "one" woman. To distance himself from polygamy perhaps?

Subject: RE: BS: A Sad Day in North Carolina
From: frogprince
Date: 14 May 12 - 04:51 PM

Possibly, Wesley; but I would be more apt to think that he is simply aware that that is the phrasing that the "protection of marriage" people have been pushing for at least a few years now.