North Carolina pastor tells his parishioners to beat the gay out of kids

[Kulindahr]

Pity.

[STRIKE]Objectively[/STRIKE] Geographically speaking, it's one of our most beautiful states. (The river rafting alone is a *gorgeous* experience)

Far more accurate that way . . . there are many objects in the state which are not beautiful -- beginning with most of the contents of 'evangelical' churches.

Why? That would just lengthen the day until we see this pathetic law removed.

Now if someone is in a position to get married or wants to have their partners status protected, then I could see leaving. However just being gay is not a reason to not live there.

I was thinking that if there are enough gays there, the departure could cripple the economy -- letting people know that there are consequences to their actions.

Patriotic billionaires with assets there should shut them down.

I went to Catholic school where the nuns would whack you with a ruler for being left handed. Interestingly, the Latin for left handed is "sinister".

I have to tell people that when they ask what's evil about a "bar sinister" in a coat of arms. But you can see why the term took on the meaning of "menacing": against a left-handed knight using his lance on the left, there's no real defense for a right-handed knight.

 

[bankside]

This is why civilised people cannot allow "freedom of religion" to act as an absolute. It cannot be a blanket behind which children are beaten by their stupid and cruel parents.

 

[Kulindahr]

This is why civilised people cannot allow "freedom of religion" to act as an absolute. It cannot be a blanket behind which children are beaten by their stupid and cruel parents.

I look at it this way:

1. Human self-ownership has to be honored at whatever level is possible at whatever age. In the case of all ages, this means "So no harm."
2. It's stupid to punish people for being what they can't help.
3. No Creator worth the name would want pain inflicted on His critters for being different, especially seeing as He gave us such variety of differences already.
4. The proper function of government is to protect our self-ownership.
5. It is not the function of religion to overstep the bounds given by the Creator.
6. There it is the government's business to step in and tell religions they may not abuse children, and this is not a violation of the freedom of religion.

 

[bankside]

Other religions might feel differently. I contend their objections are irrelevant. Stopping this kind of abuse does not require any effort to find justification or authority from within the religion itself to validate the law.