Sexuality forums

[Elusivia]

This way we can actually discuss sexuality in that forum rather than being bombarded with HOMOsexuality and those hat want to discuss homosexuality can do so where the other threads are....

I think HOMOsexual was uncalled for and a bit insulting...Try not to do that ever again

 

[La Bonita Zorilla]

Once again I pray to God that a homosexuality forum would not/should not be placed in the Christian Only section.

I wish it wouldn't too but it seems self-indulgent to pray for such a thing.

The doctrinal stance that some of the individuals that claim Christianity who are homosexuals is more a form of Universialism/Unity than Biblical Christianity.

It's not so easily placed in a simple little box because not everybody's the same. Like everyone else, homosexuals, and homosexual Christians, are a diverse lot. I once say in a slew of gay male personal ads a guy seeking "GAY SDAs" (Seventh Day Adventists). I was like----why? Maturity gave me insight that this was a person to whom his faith tradition was highly important despite his having a minority sexual orientation. There are queer Jews and Catholics, Mainstreamers, Baptists, Quakers, Calvinists, and just about everything else.

 

[Lanakila]

Also, since they are stickies and ALWAYS at the top (with long titles to boot) makes the issue of homosexuality stand out more in the sexuality forum than it ever did before.[/QUOTE]

There is no way they stick out more now, IMO. That forum was being called the homosexuality forum by quite a few members. Plus many of the threads were just new threads over the same topics over and over.


I hope the archiving I did just now, although not perfect, (sorry about a few goofs) makes the sticky threads more manageable.

 

[No gods]

The doctrinal stance that some of the individuals that claim Christianity who are homosexuals is more a form of Universialism/Unity than Biblical Christianity.

.:Forum Rule 1:.
Rule No. 1 - No "Flaming"

1) You will not post any messages that harass, insult, belittle, threaten or flame another member or guest. You may discuss another member's beliefs but there will be no personal attacks on the member himself or herself. This includes implied accusations that another member is not a Christian.

 

[Lanakila]

Its not directed at another member. Its an opinion about a group of people, that some members belong to.

 

[La Bonita Zorilla]

Its not directed at another member. Its an opinion about a group of people, that some members belong to.

I agree it's not a flame because the position of Christ is much closer to a"form of Universialism/Unity than that which is euphemistically called "Biblical Christianity".

 

[Inspired]

edited, because I just don't care anymore.

 

[paxvobiscum]

Also, since they are stickies and ALWAYS at the top (with long titles to boot) makes the issue of homosexuality stand out more in the sexuality forum than it ever did before.[/QUOTE]

There is no way they stick out more now, IMO. That forum was being called the homosexuality forum by quite a few members. Plus many of the threads were just new threads over the same topics over and over.


I hope the archiving I did just now, although not perfect, (sorry about a few goofs) makes the sticky threads more manageable.

Then there is your answer...Let's call it a Homosexual Forum....and split it.

 

[paxvobiscum]

Its not directed at another member. Its an opinion about a group of people, that some members belong to.

The group as a whole is a person.

 

[Inspired]

edited, because I just don't care anymore.

 

[notto]

Its not directed at another member. Its an opinion about a group of people, that some members belong to.

So wouldn't that be considered putting posts that put down another Christian group or denomination?

If Christian Forums is true their rule 6, then wouldn't comments like these used by GySgt be in violation of putting down another Christian group or denomination and by that nature, he is constantly calling many in these forums 'so called' Christians (over and over and over).

Discusions of what we believe personally related to theology are one thing. Claiming that all those that do not agree who post here 'so called' Christians and constantly being able to get away with it is another.

Are you really saying that it is okay here to call any church or group of Christians 'so called' Christians (repeatedly) even when directly responding to someone who holds that view as long as we don't mention them by name?

Does that mean that I can label GySgt's beliefs as those of being a 'so called' Christian and repeatedly call it just that when responding to him?

Can I call groups or denominations that hold your personal views 'so called' Christians and get away with it even though we both hold to the same creed of rule 6? I thought that rule 6 was fairly clear and that those that believe it our considered Christians. Calling any group that believe and follows rule 6 'so called' Christians would seem to be in violation of rule 2.

..

 

[paxvobiscum]

edited, because I just don't care anymore.

Sorry to hear that, Inspired.

 

[TheBear]

I hear you, notto. And I agree.

Everyone's constructive feedback in this thread is very much appreciated.

I am going to close this Suggestions thread for a bit, while we sort things out.

Thanks for all of your patience with this.

 

[Erwin]

Erwin's last word:

One thing I can never understand is why certain members who don't like sexuality topics seem to find the time to enter that forum and make complaints. If you don't want to read about these issues, DON'T ENTER THE FORUM. It's as simple as that.

Btw, some members are right, Rule #1 was indeed breached. We will look into this.