when you say you define yourself more as a Christian- more into love and forgiveness, etc
are you implying the catholicism is NOT like that?

uh, Catholics are Christians too. The real name for what people usually use the word 'christian' for is Protestants.
Catholics are actually the 1st Christians.

Also Catholics tend to be a lot more liberal than most Protestant Churches. All the way up to the Vatican doctrine and common teachings.
For example, Evangelicals are the ones that are a lot more strict and condemning, and because they take the bible literally they believe evolution should be banned in schools.
But there's just some tight and harsh judgments on the Catholic Church that hasn't been accurate for a long time.

Sorry, but the greatest commandment is "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength."

Oh dear. I've read the Bibe. Front to back. You really don't want to start using it to back up your argument, otherwise you're going to have to explain why we don't still put people to death for working on Sundays or for blaspheming or for cursing their parents or I could go on and on and on... Let's not even get started on what the Bible has to say about rape and women in general. You can't pick and choose. Either every word in there is Gospel truth or it's about interpretation, and that explains why there are plenty of Christians who HAVE read the whole Bible and have no problem reconciling their faith with homosexuality.

And, btw, by saying that homosexuality is a sin and therefore homosexuals are sinners, living in sin, you ARE judging/pointing fingers. Just like I am by saying that you are a bigot and an ignoramus for believing such rubbish.

"I am open to the idea that they may have been 'born' with it, I do believe homosexuality is a sin."

Hi, Winsome, I was born gay. Did you notice there's no condescending quotation marks around born? It's offensive to me that you believe that what is an unchangeable part of me is a "sin" (see the quotation marks?). It's really ignorant.

But following along with your train of thought, riddle me this: If God has a hand in creating all people, and God does not make mistakes, why would he create *me* a gay guy? I guess even a loving, accepting, and forgiving God needs to create someone so that he can channel all his pent up hate, eh?

Christians get a bad wrap because of a rotten handful, I know a lot of them that are just are genuinely accepting and open, because of the above, because they believe that God does not make mistakes.

I am really proud of all the members of the DB community calling out all these failtastic commenters! It's great knowing that there so, so many awesome people! It's one of the reasons I love visiting the site and engaging in conversations with everyone. So, thank you guys!

Sis??? Is that you?

hear, hear.

Church. FAIL.

If you read the dialogue, the dialogue itself invokes the function of the church as a sanctuary.

Tae-sub – [Stopping, looking ahead] “…It’ll be okay [to go inside] even if I’m not religious, right?”
Kyung-soo – [Looking ahead with him] “I think so.”

The writer was inviting the church and actually trying to present the church as a loving entity. Instead, what happened is the reality of human anxieties, fears, and prejudices.

For those who are defending the right of the church and its parish members to uphold their beliefs, let them get worked up about this scene (a scene, a fictional account, a symbolic representation) after they commit themselves to ridding all the actual adulterers, the cheaters, the liars, the child abusers, etc. within their own congregation, denomination, their faith, and so on. Please, the hypocrisy.

The church loses would-be faithful members with these hypocritical, empty gestures that are more about symbolic pomp of the supposed righteousness of the church than about the actual, complex, messy problems that merit church attention.

"It is institutionalized homophobia that creates the sort of society where a 13 year old feels he has no other option than to blow his own brains out because he can’t live with the bullying and teasing and cruelty, and like it or not, organized religion still plays a large part in perpetuating that sort of intolerance and ignorance."

So true. Not just the bullying either, but murder. Remember Matthew Shepard?

It's wrong to say that only Christians are anti-gay or bigotted. Because non Christians can be just as anti-gay.

I, personally, am a Christian and I have not bullied anyone.. I also doubt that all those who bullied the poor kids were Christian.

It's unfair to say all Christians are one way simply because a minority or even majority act that way. Not all interpretations are right because people aren't perfect. People misuse religion. That has always been the case.

Since you have read the Bible.. I wonder if you have also read the passages of hope and love and generosity, because that, I believe is the true message. We are flawed... but we can grow with our personal relationship with God. Everyone has their own relationship. I don't believe I can judge anyone else, since I have sinned.

Sadly, many people don't understand this, even though they claim to be Christian. Christianity is not about hate. Hate it the opposite of what Jesus teaches us.

I feel for those children who died and I too believe that bullying is wrong.

But this is not a purely Christian phenomenom.

Thanks for the clarification. I had a hard time believing that the production would have gone so far as to set up for filming without the necessary approval. Why? Would have been a costly risk to take.

My guess as to why they must have not have shot the scene elsewhere is that, by the time the church reneged, the production probably couldn't afford to do so financially or time-wise, given how these episodes are shot to closely to their air time.

Okay.. once again.. The Crusades were a political power play done under the guise of Christianity and religion and have nothing to do with Christianity. Same with Hitler and the Nazis who committed those crimes.

I feel really offended as a Christian. Maybe you should read some history about how the church was run back then. It was more of a political control institution rather than a religion.

Political Christianity (anti-gay, anti-abortion, etc) has NOTHING to do with anything Christian. It all has to do with people using a organization to coerce members into believe certain things... Once again.. done by humans, not God.

You make several logical flaws in this poorly constructed argument.

First of all, homosexuality cannot be against the order of nature if it is naturally occurring. I'm a gay woman, and trust me when I say: it is absolutely genetic. I in no way, shape, or form chose to be gay. In fact, I put a great deal of energy into "choosing" otherwise. It has taken me the better part of my adolescence and early adulthood to accept who I am, and I am still overcoming the effects of a decade of repression.

Secondly, any basic ethics class will teach you about the slippery slope you enter once you make broad generalizations like "Example of homosexuality being against the order of nature?? Simple!! A gay relationship does not bear fruit." Your procreation argument implies that infertile men and/or women (alternatively, women past menopause) should not be allowed to engage in romantic/sexual relationships. And yet I suspect you have absolutely no problem with heterosexual relationships that have no possibility of "bearing fruit."

I am not misunderstanding you; I'm deliberately deconstructing your argument to illustrate how flawed it is. I understand where you're going with this (not because you articulated yourself well - rest assured you didn't - but because it's an argument I've heard before). Unfortunately for you, there's a major logical fallacy inherent here. You're presupposing that the only purpose for romantic and sexual relationships is procreation. I'm pretty sure that most people would disagree, and as I've pointed out above there are a number of troubling details you're going to have to confront if you opt to travel down that road.

1. The Bible teaches that adulterers should be stoned to death, and hence married men and married women who are in adultery should be stoned to death just as the Bible teaches that homosexuals should be stoned to death. Should the Bible be re-interpreted correctly?

2. The Bible teaches that any person who divorces his wife or her husband has committed adultery and should be stoned to death and hence any Christian who divorces his wife or her husband should be stoned to death just as the Bible teaches that homosexuals should be stoned to death. Should the Bible be re-interpreted correctly?

3. The Bible teaches that any bride who is found on the wedding night not to be a virgin should be stoned to death, and hence any Christian bride who previously had sex should be stoned to death just as the Bible teaches that homosexuals should be stoned to death. Should the Bible be re-interpreted correctly?

4. The Bible teaches that Jews can have slaves and can enslave the insolvent and prisoners of war and hence any Christian can have slaves and can enslave the indigent poor and other races just as the Bible teaches that homosexuals should be stoned to death. Should the Bible be re-interpreted correctly?

5. The Bible teaches that Jews can rape their females slaves and merely pay a fine or set their female slaves free and hence any Christian man can rape their female slaves and merely pay a fine or set their female slaves free just as the Bible teaches that homosexuals should be stoned to death. Should the Bible be re-interpreted correctly?

like! :)

:) <3
I feel really honored. In the name of the Moony Faction , thank you.

lol....yes moony meia gets wxtra love form yummy faction

<3 :)
I feel honored. In the name of the Monny Faction, thank you. :)