by turtleturtle 146 Replies latest jw friends
I don't know about the WBT$ propaganda.
It's just a pity that the WBT$ isn't paedo-phobic.
I see it as very hypocritical that they denounce being gay (for whatever stupid reason), but in reality do NOTHING to stop paedophilia within the congregations.
There is a difference (to them) as someone can abstain from sex, you can't abstain from your race - excellent point.
I think most of the bible is crap, but it is what it is and the video is a very mild interpretation of it - agree.
I disagree with the video but as Cofty keeps asking how would you have them interpret the bible? The bible's view of homosexuality can only be interpreted one way - negative.
Why is this particular strain of pragmatic incredulity reserved for threads where people argue that homophobic JW teaching is unacceptable? - SBF
Because both the OT and the NT explicitly condemn gay sex. There is no sensible way to get around that.
The practice of shunning and prohibition regarding blood transfusions are based on a blatant perversion of what the bible says.
It is about holding the WT to their own claims regarding the authority of scripture.
This is hard to follow. Are you saying it's more important to you that JWs are faithful to scripture (as you understand it) than that they stop making homophobic statements? Or what are you saying?
As I've pointed out repeatedly, other Bible believers can interpret the Bible as compatible with gay marriage. If JWs can deny hell in the NT they are certainly capable of reinterpreting homosexuality too.
other Bible believers can interpret the Bible as compatible with gay marriage
No they can't. They first have to reject the authority of the bible.
Why do you spell bible with upper-case "B"?
If JWs can deny hell in the NT they are certainly capable of reinterpreting homosexuality too.
There is absolutely no comparison. Hell has been to be read into the text. It originates in non-canonical books. The bible's prohibition on gay sex is explicit. Going round in circles now. Bye.
I do not agree with the video! But, this thread confused me. So I have a question.
Here is my question: IF IF IF IF I believed homosexuality, with or without sex, was against bible teaching would it be discriminatory to teach that to my kids? And if not should I have to use preapproved language vetted by the LGBTQ community?
Does everyone have to believe that homosexuality is ok and teach that to their kids?
Again, I don't agree with the video.
The listener: "Here is my question: IF IF IF IF I believed homosexuality, with or without sex, was against bible teaching would it be discriminatory to teach that to my kids? And if not should I have to use preapproved language vetted by the LGBTQ community?"
its not about getting any pre approval. When they believed that black people were cursed as slaves, based on the bible, should they have used pre-approved language endorsed by the black community before teaching that rubbish to their children? The answer is they shouldn't have been prejudiced in the first place (whether or not endorsed by the bible) and the answer is the same now.
Several comments still appear to equate homosexuality with a sex act. I repeat if a heterosexual drifter enters a heterosexual unmarried relationship with a worldly person, they are generally allowed to get on with it. No one asks whether they are having sex. The partner is often accepted/associated with too in time. If a drifter/fader has a homosexual relationship even years after leaving, they are more likely to be shunned whether or not they are known to be having sex. Remember the bible only comments on a sex act, not the relationship. The sin in both cases would be exactly the same: fornication (whether homosexual or heterosexual). This is an example of the type of discrimination that occurs as a result of the prejudice encouraged by JW teachings like this video.
The bible teaches that slavery is great (same way it denounces homosexuality) now it a religious group made a cartoon with a mom teaching her child in a warm and fuzzy way how there is nothing wrong with slavery. Everyone would flip out. Because its in the bible doesn't give it a pass. Freedom of religion is fine. Be in the kkk and make racist cartoons or make cartoons about gay people but why should it be shielded from criticism for what it is?
The bible is full of ethnic genocide, slavery and mistreatment of women. If anyone wants to make a cartoon about any of that I'm gonna call that out, not because they put that in the bible but because they are keeping it alive in a really distasteful way.
Cofty you keep asking how else should they deliver their message? I don't think that is the point here. The point is the message is ugly and when tm3 bellows it from a worldwide stage or when they make a cartoon it makes it more real against the backdrop of modern society and this just might wake people up . How many jolted awake by tm3? That didn't go against the bible doctrine. We need to say that this propaganda piece doesn't work in modern society. I don't care if its from the bible or Quran or whatever. Its practicing and teaching discrimination.
The Dark Lords are back pedaling on the Sophia don't say gay video for a good reason. Stating that it was for internal use is a waste of time argument. If it was for internal use they would have simply shared it in the KHs, conventions and by extension in the individual homes of the dubs. The government, at least for now, wouldn't be driven to action in those venues because it is protected under our Constitution. At least for now.
The problem is they put it on the world wide web for everyone. Now it can be squarely in the government's crosshairs and it certainly is in the crosshairs of corporations and individuals. As it should be.
The Dark Lords will likely remove these types of videos and keep them confined to the local KHs and vertical supply chain to the dubs. Taking it out into the world makes it hate speech, regardless of their beliefs. It is hate speech. It is prejudicial. It is homophobic. Regardless of how sweetly they have presented the message.
