07 Apr '16 22:35>
I get that many religions condemn homosexual activity. Fine. But does that mean that its adherents are required to persecute non-adherents for such activity? If so, can someone explain to me the logic behind this?
Originally posted by sh76Christians aren't 'required' to persecute anyone, and those who do, especially in the name of their faith, actually have very little faith, indeed.
I get that many religions condemn homosexual activity. Fine. But does that mean that its adherents are required to persecute non-adherents for such activity? If so, can someone explain to me the logic behind this?
Originally posted by SuzianneIf one's actions are closely linked to and consistent with one's beliefs, that'd be a sign of strong faith, I'd have thought.
Christians aren't 'required' to persecute anyone, and those who do, especially in the name of their faith, actually have very little faith, indeed.
Originally posted by SuzianneBut if there are Christians who feel it is consistent with the tenets of Christianity, as countless many have over the centuries, and they implement it, then it does not mean they necessarily have very little faith.
That's my point. Persecution of others, in the name of religion, is not consistent with the tenets of Christianity.
Originally posted by sh76If I could be so bold as to widen (or add to) the parameter of your question, maybe? How about this: "But does that mean that its adherents are required to discriminate - and actively support discrimination - against non-adherents for such activity?"
I get that many religions condemn homosexual activity. Fine. But does that mean that its adherents are required to persecute non-adherents for such activity? If so, can someone explain to me the logic behind this?
Originally posted by FMFOh, I see that, while your OP uses the word persecute, your thread title uses the word discriminate. As you were. 😉
If I could be so bold as to widen (or add to) the parameter of your question, maybe? How about this: "But does that mean that its adherents are required to discriminate - and actively support discrimination - against non-adherents for such activity?"
Originally posted by sh76What is your definition of "persecution"?
I get that many religions condemn homosexual activity. Fine. But does that mean that its adherents are required to persecute non-adherents for such activity? If so, can someone explain to me the logic behind this?
Originally posted by FMFHow are we to distinguish actions based upon faith or otherwise?
But if there are Christians who feel it is consistent with the tenets of Christianity, as countless many have over the centuries, and they implement it, then it does not mean they necessarily have very little faith.
Originally posted by FMFAgain, what do you call "discrimination?
Do you think it's right for Christians to support systematic discrimination against homosexuals?
Originally posted by whodeyThat is an over generalization. Some Christians in the past did not persecute Jews and some Christians to this day persecute Jews.
Christians also used to persecute Jews for rejecting their Messiah. Today they don't.
Originally posted by twhiteheadThat is correct.
That is an over generalization. Some Christians in the past did not persecute Jews and some Christians to this day persecute Jews.
What has mostly changed is secular law which prevents Christians from persecuting Jews.