Gay-friendly league table of Sussex churches to be drawn up (From The Argus)

Pathetic

Why bother? Christianity is on the way out.

I am not homophobic, but I have never read such rubbish. When my late husband we a live we had a great deal to do with Churches in Brighton and Hove. I would think 75% of vicars in this area were either gay or bi-sexual. There was a running joke amongest many congregations, that if the gays left the church it would be empty and have to close down.
I hope tax payers are not having to fund this project.

Wasn't Jesus gay anyway?

Colin Houlson wrote:
Wasn't Jesus gay anyway?

Jesus definitely had a bit of sugar in him.

LOL@Betty Blue - "I'm not homophobic, but..."

PrestigeLyon wrote:

Colin Houlson wrote:
Wasn't Jesus gay anyway?

Jesus definitely had a bit of sugar in him.

LOL@Betty Blue - "I'm not homophobic, but..."

Sugar? Was that one of the disciples?

Betty Blue wrote:
I am not homophobic, but I have never read such rubbish. When my late husband we a live we had a great deal to do with Churches in Brighton and Hove. I would think 75% of vicars in this area were either gay or bi-sexual. There was a running joke amongest many congregations, that if the gays left the church it would be empty and have to close down. I hope tax payers are not having to fund this project.

Why is it rubbish ? And who said anything about the taxpayer? They don't fund church affairs. The church is funding it (at the huge cost of a few bits of paper and stamps) The only point is to provide easily accessible INFORMATION. For the life of me I cant see what anyone can have against that? If I was a religious LGBT person and new to the city (we do after all have a large transient population) then being easily able to find out where would be a suitable place to worhsip seems like a good idea.

cheezburger wrote:
Why bother? Christianity is on the way out.

Pastafarianism is the way forward. I believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster

Spanners wrote:

Betty Blue wrote: I am not homophobic, but I have never read such rubbish. When my late husband we a live we had a great deal to do with Churches in Brighton and Hove. I would think 75% of vicars in this area were either gay or bi-sexual. There was a running joke amongest many congregations, that if the gays left the church it would be empty and have to close down. I hope tax payers are not having to fund this project.

Why is it rubbish ? And who said anything about the taxpayer? They don't fund church affairs. The church is funding it (at the huge cost of a few bits of paper and stamps) The only point is to provide easily accessible INFORMATION. For the life of me I cant see what anyone can have against that? If I was a religious LGBT person and new to the city (we do after all have a large transient population) then being easily able to find out where would be a suitable place to worhsip seems like a good idea.

All churches should be gay friendly.

Betty Blue wrote:

Spanners wrote:

Betty Blue wrote: I am not homophobic, but I have never read such rubbish. When my late husband we a live we had a great deal to do with Churches in Brighton and Hove. I would think 75% of vicars in this area were either gay or bi-sexual. There was a running joke amongest many congregations, that if the gays left the church it would be empty and have to close down. I hope tax payers are not having to fund this project.

Why is it rubbish ? And who said anything about the taxpayer? They don't fund church affairs. The church is funding it (at the huge cost of a few bits of paper and stamps) The only point is to provide easily accessible INFORMATION. For the life of me I cant see what anyone can have against that? If I was a religious LGBT person and new to the city (we do after all have a large transient population) then being easily able to find out where would be a suitable place to worhsip seems like a good idea.

All churches should be gay friendly.

Agreed, but since this is not the reality in which we live I still fail to see how providing information to LGBT community is "such rubbish". Would you complain if the church drew up a league table of churches based on their ease of access for the disabled? I doubt it

Spanners wrote:

Betty Blue wrote:

Spanners wrote:

Betty Blue wrote: I am not homophobic, but I have never read such rubbish. When my late husband we a live we had a great deal to do with Churches in Brighton and Hove. I would think 75% of vicars in this area were either gay or bi-sexual. There was a running joke amongest many congregations, that if the gays left the church it would be empty and have to close down. I hope tax payers are not having to fund this project.

Why is it rubbish ? And who said anything about the taxpayer? They don't fund church affairs. The church is funding it (at the huge cost of a few bits of paper and stamps) The only point is to provide easily accessible INFORMATION. For the life of me I cant see what anyone can have against that? If I was a religious LGBT person and new to the city (we do after all have a large transient population) then being easily able to find out where would be a suitable place to worhsip seems like a good idea.

All churches should be gay friendly.

Agreed, but since this is not the reality in which we live I still fail to see how providing information to LGBT community is "such rubbish". Would you complain if the church drew up a league table of churches based on their ease of access for the disabled? I doubt it

I would have found it more appropriate to find out which churches have disabled access, than if they are gay friendly. Do you gay people walk into churches and announce you are gay. Do you not want to fit into society with people knowing whether you are gay bi or straight. You people always want to be different.

To all those gay people who go to church, and all those gay vicars promoting it - have you ever read the Bible?!

Tony Davenport

Betty Blue wrote:

Spanners wrote:

Betty Blue wrote:

Spanners wrote:

Betty Blue wrote: I am not homophobic, but I have never read such rubbish. When my late husband we a live we had a great deal to do with Churches in Brighton and Hove. I would think 75% of vicars in this area were either gay or bi-sexual. There was a running joke amongest many congregations, that if the gays left the church it would be empty and have to close down. I hope tax payers are not having to fund this project.

Why is it rubbish ? And who said anything about the taxpayer? They don't fund church affairs. The church is funding it (at the huge cost of a few bits of paper and stamps) The only point is to provide easily accessible INFORMATION. For the life of me I cant see what anyone can have against that? If I was a religious LGBT person and new to the city (we do after all have a large transient population) then being easily able to find out where would be a suitable place to worhsip seems like a good idea.

All churches should be gay friendly.

Agreed, but since this is not the reality in which we live I still fail to see how providing information to LGBT community is "such rubbish". Would you complain if the church drew up a league table of churches based on their ease of access for the disabled? I doubt it

I would have found it more appropriate to find out which churches have disabled access, than if they are gay friendly. Do you gay people walk into churches and announce you are gay. Do you not want to fit into society with people knowing whether you are gay bi or straight. You people always want to be different.

"you people"?! Wow -well that post clearly marks you out as the homophobe you purport not to be. As it happens I'm a married hetrosexual man with one kid. And a confirmed atheist to boot. And I still find your comments difficult to digest. Who is talking about walking into churches and announcing sexuality ? Only you. This is merely about providing information to people in the comfort of their own homes so they make make their own choices. The fact is that society in just about every area (including the various churches) is not 100% impartial or accepting to the LGBT community. Still it must be comforting to folk to know that you, Betty Blue, consider it more "acceptable" to be disabled than gay.

Spanners wrote:

Betty Blue wrote:

Spanners wrote:

Betty Blue wrote:

Spanners wrote:

Betty Blue wrote: I am not homophobic, but I have never read such rubbish. When my late husband we a live we had a great deal to do with Churches in Brighton and Hove. I would think 75% of vicars in this area were either gay or bi-sexual. There was a running joke amongest many congregations, that if the gays left the church it would be empty and have to close down. I hope tax payers are not having to fund this project.

Why is it rubbish ? And who said anything about the taxpayer? They don't fund church affairs. The church is funding it (at the huge cost of a few bits of paper and stamps) The only point is to provide easily accessible INFORMATION. For the life of me I cant see what anyone can have against that? If I was a religious LGBT person and new to the city (we do after all have a large transient population) then being easily able to find out where would be a suitable place to worhsip seems like a good idea.

All churches should be gay friendly.

Agreed, but since this is not the reality in which we live I still fail to see how providing information to LGBT community is "such rubbish". Would you complain if the church drew up a league table of churches based on their ease of access for the disabled? I doubt it

I would have found it more appropriate to find out which churches have disabled access, than if they are gay friendly. Do you gay people walk into churches and announce you are gay. Do you not want to fit into society with people knowing whether you are gay bi or straight. You people always want to be different.

"you people"?! Wow -well that post clearly marks you out as the homophobe you purport not to be. As it happens I'm a married hetrosexual man with one kid. And a confirmed atheist to boot. And I still find your comments difficult to digest. Who is talking about walking into churches and announcing sexuality ? Only you. This is merely about providing information to people in the comfort of their own homes so they make make their own choices. The fact is that society in just about every area (including the various churches) is not 100% impartial or accepting to the LGBT community. Still it must be comforting to folk to know that you, Betty Blue, consider it more "acceptable" to be disabled than gay.

Now! I did not say that. If disabled people in wheelchairs want to attend church they need to know if it has disabled access. This would have to be visable. How can you tell if a church is gay friendly?

"How can you tell if a church is gay friendly?" Tough one....but I'll go right out on a limb and say by compiling the list you call "such rubbish". We have come full circle

Spanners wrote:
"How can you tell if a church is gay friendly?" Tough one....but I'll go right out on a limb and say by compiling the list you call "such rubbish". We have come full circle

You win.

Betty Blue wrote:

Spanners wrote:

Betty Blue wrote:

Spanners wrote:

Betty Blue wrote: I am not homophobic, but I have never read such rubbish. When my late husband we a live we had a great deal to do with Churches in Brighton and Hove. I would think 75% of vicars in this area were either gay or bi-sexual. There was a running joke amongest many congregations, that if the gays left the church it would be empty and have to close down. I hope tax payers are not having to fund this project.

Why is it rubbish ? And who said anything about the taxpayer? They don't fund church affairs. The church is funding it (at the huge cost of a few bits of paper and stamps) The only point is to provide easily accessible INFORMATION. For the life of me I cant see what anyone can have against that? If I was a religious LGBT person and new to the city (we do after all have a large transient population) then being easily able to find out where would be a suitable place to worhsip seems like a good idea.

All churches should be gay friendly.

Agreed, but since this is not the reality in which we live I still fail to see how providing information to LGBT community is "such rubbish". Would you complain if the church drew up a league table of churches based on their ease of access for the disabled? I doubt it

I would have found it more appropriate to find out which churches have disabled access, than if they are gay friendly. Do you gay people walk into churches and announce you are gay. Do you not want to fit into society with people knowing whether you are gay bi or straight. You people always want to be different.

No doubt just an equally valid way to convey INFORMATION to yet another group of people who suffered not just physical obstacles, but also attitudinal obstacles. And what do I mean by that?

Here's two very good examples of just how language can create division as an attitudinal obstacle.

"...you gay people....", "...you people always want to be different."

Tell me, do YOU people come with a genetic disposition to be rude, or is it caused by environment?

Rick H, not clear if your post is aimed at me as well as Betty Blue. If it is then please could you reread what I have written - we are fighting in the same corner

Spanners wrote:

cheezburger wrote:
Why bother? Christianity is on the way out.

Pastafarianism is the way forward. I believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster

And his noodly appendages. I prefer to follow ceiling cat.

Rude people are born rude. We find it offensive when people tell us it's a lifestyle choice.

Tony Davenport

Spanners wrote:
Rick H, not clear if your post is aimed at me as well as Betty Blue. If it is then please could you reread what I have written - we are fighting in the same corner

@Spanners: mea culpa - was lazy with the quote pyramid ;)

Churches will not be "gay friendly" until they tear out all the pages in the Bible that are homophobic. Why any gay people believe in God is beyond me.

yorkie44 wrote:
Churches will not be "gay friendly" until they tear out all the pages in the Bible that are homophobic. Why any gay people believe in God is beyond me.

Yorkie
Good to see that you display the open-minded attitude you clearly desire from Christian folk?
As for the problem of the Bible being anti-gay, isn't it against sinners as well?
According to Christian tradition & teaching, Jesus didn't come to minister to the Saints but the sinners.
Good luck in this life & the next!

yorkie44 wrote:
Churches will not be "gay friendly" until they tear out all the pages in the Bible that are homophobic. Why any gay people believe in God is beyond me.

Why anyone, regardless, has a belief is also beyond me and, funnily enough, my sexuality has never informed my spiritual beliefs.

That said, I think you'll find that there are no homophobic sections of the Bible at all; just homophobic interpretations.

Tony Davenport wrote:
To all those gay people who go to church, and all those gay vicars promoting it - have you ever read the Bible?! Tony Davenport

Yes, I have! I refer you to RickH's reply to yorkie44-
"I think you'll find that there
are no homophobic sections
of the Bible at all; just
homophobic interpretations."

I refer you also to http://www.christian
gays.com/education.s
html
"The Bible in the original
languages never condemns
same sex romantic love as sin"
Reading the Bible in an informative & useful way depends on understanding the context & original language of the particular passage as well as the biases & culture in which it was translated.

I also refer any LGBTQ people who are reading this & searching for spiritual answers to

http://ufmcc.com/
&
http://www.mccbright
on.org.uk/

Tony Davenport wrote:
To all those gay people who go to church, and all those gay vicars promoting it - have you ever read the Bible?! Tony Davenport

Yes we do thank you
- I can't help but think God cannot fail to be disappointed about how much energy is wasted debating this issue- energy that could be used doing something constructive like helping the poor, reaching out to the lonely etc
why don't we focus on the many things we have in common rather than allow the differences and need to be right to dominate?

Let's just get it straght on this (pun intended)...homosexu
ality is a sin and cuts right across what is right or wrong...and this is clearly wrong...no matter how much you people of this persuasion protest, you simply c annot escape this basic truth...if you want to carry on your perverse practices in the privacy of your own sordid homes then carry on doing so and be damned, but please do not bring such obscene behaviour out on to the streets...and as we full know at places like Preston Park during the disgusting so-called Gay Pride thing...you people have absolutely no moral srupples or respect for other decent people who have...sorry, but you are the real bigots here and, in my view. should be arrested for what you do...you are just beyond words!

Bob Hove

This is a very interesting little thread. Gay-friendly. Interesting term. Very very vague. Could host a load of different interpretations. Let me demonstrate (I hope).

More traditional churches would hold that sex outside of marriage for anyone is considered a sin. That would probably make them unfriendly to a lot of people, but instead they could be classed specifically as gay-unfriendly with such a stance, despite treating everyone equally, whether you agree with the stance or not.

As pointed out by others here, I would expect the majority of churches to have an attitude that is called 'love the sinner, hate the sin'. Yes it's a horrible sounding term, but its the one that is used.
The church would argue that the term applies to everyone, for all their actions. However people, gay and straight, don't like the idea of being told something they are doing is 'wrong', and object because of that. That in itself shouldn't be a reason for labelling a church as 'gay friendly or unfriendly'.

What I suspect this survey will end up becoming is a list of traditional churches labelled as unfriendly for holding to their belief that people need to be responsible for thier behaviour towards God, and those that don't, which would be incorrect labelling for the above reasons.

"Gay-friendly churches"? Isn't that something of an anomaly? Kind of like "black-friendly white supremists"? I've never understood why anyone who was gay would want to subscribe to a belief system that condemns their lifestyle anyway? Having said that I've never understood why ANYONE would want to subscribe to any religion-based belief system, although admittedly they make quite entertaining fairytales. Bloody hell, form your OWN religion, re-invent Jesus or invent your own deity and build your own place of worship, if that's what you really feel you need. What I'm trying to say is, it's all nonsense. If you're commendably brave enough to defy convention and choose/celebrate an "alternative lifestyle" such as same-sex relationships, then who needs something as conventional and intolerant and limiting as religion? In the words of Grouch Marx, "I wouldn’t want to belong to any club that wouldn't have me as a member." Spot on! Stuff 'em.

nicole/bob wrote:
Let's just get it straght on this (pun intended)...homosexu

ality is a sin and cuts right across what is right or wrong...and this is clearly wrong...no matter how much you people of this persuasion protest, you simply c annot escape this basic truth...if you want to carry on your perverse practices in the privacy of your own sordid homes then carry on doing so and be damned, but please do not bring such obscene behaviour out on to the streets...and as we full know at places like Preston Park during the disgusting so-called Gay Pride thing...you people have absolutely no moral srupples or respect for other decent people who have...sorry, but you are the real bigots here and, in my view. should be arrested for what you do...you are just beyond words!

Bob Hove

Following on from my last post (5 minutes ago, does ANYONE (gay OR straight) REALLY want to belong to the same "club" as the moron who wrote what's above? No, I think not...

KarenT wrote:

nicole/bob wrote: Let's just get it straght on this (pun intended)...homosexu ality is a sin and cuts right across what is right or wrong...and this is clearly wrong...no matter how much you people of this persuasion protest, you simply c annot escape this basic truth...if you want to carry on your perverse practices in the privacy of your own sordid homes then carry on doing so and be damned, but please do not bring such obscene behaviour out on to the streets...and as we full know at places like Preston Park during the disgusting so-called Gay Pride thing...you people have absolutely no moral srupples or respect for other decent people who have...sorry, but you are the real bigots here and, in my view. should be arrested for what you do...you are just beyond words! Bob Hove

Following on from my last post (5 minutes ago, does ANYONE (gay OR straight) REALLY want to belong to the same "club" as the moron who wrote what's above? No, I think not...

I do, i think he is spot on.....
Its distgusting what you do, i think that if you wanted a gay friendly church.. you symbol should be a big pink pineapple.... then us normall folk would know to keep away.. It's terrible that this is aloud to happen in todays society...
You will be judged by the lord almighty... and I hasten to add... You will deffinatley be beaten by the bishop !!!

bertnz wrote:

KarenT wrote:

nicole/bob wrote: Let's just get it straght on this (pun intended)...homosexu ality is a sin and cuts right across what is right or wrong...and this is clearly wrong...no matter how much you people of this persuasion protest, you simply c annot escape this basic truth...if you want to carry on your perverse practices in the privacy of your own sordid homes then carry on doing so and be damned, but please do not bring such obscene behaviour out on to the streets...and as we full know at places like Preston Park during the disgusting so-called Gay Pride thing...you people have absolutely no moral srupples or respect for other decent people who have...sorry, but you are the real bigots here and, in my view. should be arrested for what you do...you are just beyond words! Bob Hove

Following on from my last post (5 minutes ago, does ANYONE (gay OR straight) REALLY want to belong to the same "club" as the moron who wrote what's above? No, I think not...

I do, i think he is spot on.....
Its distgusting what you do, i think that if you wanted a gay friendly church.. you symbol should be a big pink pineapple.... then us normall folk would know to keep away.. It's terrible that this is aloud to happen in todays society...
You will be judged by the lord almighty... and I hasten to add... You will deffinatley be beaten by the bishop !!!

Why is it about religious fanatics - they never seem to be able to spell properly? Why don't you pray for some literacy? In fact this person is too stupid to be serious - it's got "I'm bored and I want to wind people up" written all over it! :D

nicole/bob wrote:
Let's just get it straght on this (pun intended)...homosexu ality is a sin and cuts right across what is right or wrong...and this is clearly wrong...no matter how much you people of this persuasion protest, you simply c annot escape this basic truth...if you want to carry on your perverse practices in the privacy of your own sordid homes then carry on doing so and be damned, but please do not bring such obscene behaviour out on to the streets...and as we full know at places like Preston Park during the disgusting so-called Gay Pride thing...you people have absolutely no moral srupples or respect for other decent people who have...sorry, but you are the real bigots here and, in my view. should be arrested for what you do...you are just beyond words! Bob Hove

Oh you again, and before you start I'm not gay, I'm married with kids. But, as the cliche goes, some of my friends are gay - inc a couple of vicars - and they don't carry on in public. The worse of "gay behaviour" is no more sordid than the drunk hettie's in West St every w/end. I've read the bible and it is totally open to interpretation (it is really just a collection of stories, some with morals and preaching attached). I'm never going to broaden your attitude to life and community, but leave you with this: If everyone had your attitude and those not conforming to your precise beliefs were erradicated, what would we have left? A few thousand hardened (NO pun intended) Daily Mail and This Morning fans.... Oooo, great!

"You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination." - Leviticus 18:22

"Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God." - 1 Corinthians 6:9-10

"If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltiness is upon them." - Leviticus 20:13

All sounds very gay-friendly!

Of course religious apologists will claim "Oh, it's all taken out of context" or "Oh, well God doesn't really mean that". Rubbish. It's very clear. Read the passages around it. It's not taken out of context at all, and yes, it really does mean just what it says.

Tony Davenport