in thinking jesus can NOT cure homosexuality as it is NOT an illness

[thefinerthingsinlife]

christian lady has written a book claiming jesus can cure homosexuality

I'm not getting into the debate of wether there is a God/Jesus etc. It just this has really mad me angry, how can you cure something that is NOT an illness. I find this extremely insulting and judgemental.

Lenin - I really don't think that you or anyone else has the right to restrict what someone says, ever. Free speech is not free speech if there are restrictions on it, and yes, free speech means that sometimes, someone somewhere, will be offended. That's a price worth paying for freedom of speech.

[Obvious caveat is speech which incites a crime but it is not a crime to disagree or disapprove.]

Some people think that gay people should not be parents. Get over it. Some Christians think I'm destined for hell as I lived with my DH before we were married. So what - I don't care. An awful lot of men in the world think that I shouldn't work and should wear a burqua. Big deal, good luck with that one guys.

I think we all need to be a little bit more robust.

So free speech applies everywhere except Mumsnet? Brilliant.

Right to trial by jury applies all the time except during times of national financial crisis when it can be restricted to save money?

And take a look at some of the threads on Chat or AIBU - I'd love to know what some of them have got to do with being parents.

There is no right to free speech in any private forum. Mumsnet can apply whatever standards they choose.
The right to free speech is about states restricting freedom and stopping an opinion being expressed anywhere.

Jesus can bring people back from the dead, and that isn't an illness either...

RobF - What, recently?

Coalition - the exact same argument (albeit switch 'schools' for 'private forum') was used to bring in Section 28.

Rhinestone - It's not an argument - it's a statement of fact. Mumsnet own this forum, they can apply whatever rules they like about what people can and cannot say.

Schools are a public space - state schools anyway - as they are run by the state.

Or do you think if I started gayparents.co.uk and 'GodHatesFags' registered and started posting about curing gays I would have to allow it?

That hit a nerve then coalition - an example of the tremendous antipathy towards the church. I'm with you on that - though don't have the exact-same points you do - and I am a christian. The church should be deeply ashamed of a lot of its history and rightly so imo. HOwever, the church has not and doesn't necessarily represent christianity or christians. Jesus openly loathed the religious leaders of his day, calling them eg a den of vipers (etc), repeatedly and uncompromisingly condemning them. Imo things haven't changed - 'religion' doesn't represent what should be and is designed to be a relationship, in fact tragically misses the point, the form without the power, "loading up burdens on peoples' backs, not lifting a finger to help". The lovely Jesus said that.

The church aside, the premise of this thread is one christian who has written one book, the subject of which is generally offensive to most - I think that is universally agreed. A debate has ensued about the validity of gays and has sequed into the rights of gays to be parents without feeling they have to justify that. Ok so far. However, I don't accept that the (now accepted and acceptable) bashing and denigrating of christianity and christians should be the result. It is now common in our culture for both christianity and christians to be derided as a matter of course. That is erasing and offensive imo. As a christian, I do take a level of responsibility for the history of the church, and some representatives of the church in the present day, but they/it does not necessarily represent the whole. As everyday muslims flinch from fundamentalist islam, so do many christians similarly flinch from our fundamentalist arm. Don't lump us together.

I don't know what you're on about smokingnuns.

I object to the narrative of persecution that a privileged group (i.e Christians) are trying to construct.

This is different to the narrative of persecustion that a persecuted group (i.e Gay people) constructs.

I don't feel particularly privileged coalition - the very opposite these days. I alluded to the history of the church and the present church as not representing christianity (sadly) or christians. Christians are now the persecuted, though have always been in various parts of the world and in history.

I'm a CHristian and have noticed this tendency to talk about CHristians being "marginalised" and "excluded" etc over the last couple of years.

Sorry but I think its a bit of a persecution complex and some people like it, but it is not true. Persecuted for being a CHristian in the UK? Don't make me laugh!!

(Have no issue with gays people or gay people having babies either, just for the record)

I don't think gay people should have to justify themselves. I also think they should have the same right to get married and none of this 'nearly but not quite the same' civil partnership. The same right to adopt (based on the individuals involved and not a label) I don't think we should be counting them or labelling them or interfering in any way with their right to have the life they want.

But to say that they are in a special category and people mustn't have opinions about them undermines the equality that is theirs by right. Do we really want to say "oh well gay people. you have to be careful round them. It's not like talking to proper people"

Acting on opinions is different. The B&B owners who barred gay people didn't get half what they deserved.

btw swallowedAfly I've been trying to find where 'mn clearly states that.' Are you sure you didn't just dream it?

smokingnuns - Can you give examples of this persecution then? Most examples I have seen quoted have been privledges being reduced rather than persecution.

How does any of this help us live our lives in peace and harmony?

Surely, whatever we believe, the one given should be that we do not deliberately set out to cause harm to others, either physically or emotionally.
In a democracy, aren't we entitled to our own beliefs, as are others to theirs. If we don't agree, as long as no harm is being done, then tough! Move on!! Life is too short.

However, you could help explain to me how any of this conversation really helps anyone trying to be a better parent,(the purpose of MN as I understood it), or is this simply a case of airing wider views and belief systems because the opportunity has arisen?

Christians discriminated against here? Not often, although it does happen.

Mocked sarcastically and told negative things about themselves or their faith? Yes, quite often, and it does get tiresome, especially for those who are just middle-of-the road Christians minding their own business and have nothing to do with fundamentalism, homophobia etc.

Disagreeing with someone is not the same as discriminating against them.

Quite so, Weegie.

I remember in my long ago CU days if the CU came in for a bit of namecalling someone would happily note that Jesus said christians would be persecuted in his name - talk about setting things up for a persecution complex!

I haven't read the whole thread, hate homophobia, and apologise if somebody has made this point before but, if Jesus can "cure" anything, wouldn't he better off trying his hand at cancer fIrst?