President Bush's Church

Anglican divide set to deepen as gay debate rages

JOHN INNES


A REPORT aimed at healing splits in the Anglican Church could deepen the divide over homosexuality, it is feared.

Both liberals and conservatives remain entrenched on the controversial issue, sparking fears that the Lambeth Commission’s Windsor Report, to be published today, may only fuel the row.

The Commission was set up last year to tackle the crisis of unification among the 70 million members of Anglican Communion around the world.

Although the body, announced by the Archbishop of Canterbury, has addressed unity in general, the gay debate is set to dominate the fallout of its findings.

And rumours the report may call for a series of "core covenants" for churches to sign up to and follow in a bid to unite them has heightened the concerns.

The Reverend Martin Reynolds, spokesman for the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement, said: "We are not in crisis. It is those people who find homosexuality unacceptable who are in crisis.

"We hope this report is the beginning of a long discussion not the last word."

But conservatives have called for the report to take tough action on those dioceses who support homosexuality.

The Reverend David Phillips, general secretary of the Church Society, said: "Every organisation needs rules. The Anglican Communion is being asked to decide what to do when some members deliberately break the agreed rules."

The row has hit boiling point after the diocese of New Westminster in Canada allowed same-sex blessings and the Episcopal Church of the USA backed the election of Gene Robinson, an openly gay man in a relationship, as Bishop of New Hampshire.

The debate reached the UK last year with the nomination of Dr Jeffrey John, a gay but celibate clergyman, as Bishop of Reading. The decision sparked huge controversy and led to Dr John swiftly withdrawing his acceptance of the post and becoming the Dean of St Albans instead.

African Anglicans, traditionally strong conservatives, have threatened to leave the Communion if action is not taken against the US and Canadian dioceses.

Such a split would end centuries of work to unite Anglicans around the globe.

It has been widely rumoured that today’s report may recommend covenants for churches to voluntarily accept.

The LGCM fears such a move could narrow the diversity of Anglicans and prevent the development of homosexuals in the church.

Rev Reynolds said: "We hope whatever comes out will keep all of us in the Anglican church. We do not want anyone to leave, even our detractors. We need them and they need us, we can live together."

Rev Phillips said the Communion was already split and some would leave no matter what the report recommends.

He said the best option was to call for action against the US and Canadian dioceses.

He said: "They have gone well beyond what the rest of the Communion thinks.

"The Church is already split and it is their actions that have split it. We need a body which can assess when people have gone beyond the boundaries."

A statement from the Church Society said action was long overdue," he said.

"Without such action the Communion has no future because, as the Anglican Homilies assert, discipline is a mark of the true Church."

The Lambeth Commission was set up following a summit of the Anglican primates at Lambeth Palace last October.

It is chaired by the Archbishop of Armagh and Primate of All Ireland, Dr Robin Eames, and includes liberals and conservatives.

Announcing the members at the time, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams said its main task would be to offer advice on finding a way through the situation.

In July this year, Dr Eames told the Commission’s website: "I would not be putting it too strongly to say that there is a sense of betrayal in parts of the Communion about the actions in North America."

But he has always stressed the Commission’s task was not to find answers to the questions of sexuality, but with assisting the Communion to respond to the developments and maintaining its unity.

And what do you feel about that Everose?

Not being a Christian, I try not to comment on pieces that only affect those of a particular church etc...

I am very glad that that the Episcopal Church of the USA backed the election of Gene Robinson as Bishop of New Hampshire, RF. Very glad.

Is that what you were asking of me?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Everose

I am very glad that that the Episcopal Church of the USA backed the election of Gene Robinson as Bishop of New Hampshire, RF. Very glad.

Is that what you were asking of me?

---

I was indeed, trying to get your opinion. ;)

Thank you for asking me then, RF. :)

Just for the record, Bush isn't an Anglican, he's a Methodist.

What was your intention on posting this?

:shuriken:

Sorry, Magic Nakor. I heard he attends St. John's Episcopal Church across from the white house and assumed it was his church. He is actually Methodist.'

I was baptized as a babe in the Methodist Church and confirmed into the Episcopal Church as an adolescent. I guess it kind of bugged me that we could have grown up in the same church and had such differences in that area of thought.

But the reason I posted this? Well, because I wanted to. :D I was a wee bit proud of American Episcopalians, even though I am no longer affiliated with an Episcopal Church.

I don't support same-sex marriages. People who say "you're wrong, and you live in the past" and "you don't know what you're talking about, give them (gays/lesbians) their freedoms". Remember this though, evolution is designed so the fittest survive, AIDS doesn't help that much. lol, if I was president or PM, I'd see to it personally that same-sex marriages are banned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cpt_azad

I don't support same-sex marriages. People who say "you're wrong, and you live in the past" and "you don't know what you're talking about, give them (gays/lesbians) their freedoms". Remember this though, evolution is designed so the fittest survive, AIDS doesn't help that much. lol, if I was president or PM, I'd see to it personally that same-sex marriages are banned.

---

more hetrosexual people have aids than homosexual and the increase in new incidents is faster in hetrosexual people

The Episcopal Church isn't the Anglican Church either, although if the Anglican finally fractures certain parts might join up. It's not a new issue, particularly in regards with the Anglicans; this split has been ongoing for several years now. I would like to get a copy of that report though. Could be interesting reading.

With regards to same-sex marriage, for the most part, you could slap whatever name you want on it if "marriage" is too troublesome due to religious connotation, but ensure the same legal rights as marriage, and many of the issues would disappear.

As for "survival of the fittest," at least in much of Europe and North America, our technology has transcended our need to be the epitome of health to survive.

:shuriken:

I couldn't find anywhere in the article I posted that said the Episcopal Church was the Anglican Church. They share the Anglican Communion, though.Episcopal Church

No, I just thought you were confused is all. ;) Sorry.

:shuriken:

As I said earlier, I dont like commenting on one Particular Church usually.

However it appears to me, that if a faith is supposed to be "all inclusive" then that should include the Clergy of that faith/church.

If its not "all inclusive" then the worshippers should ask themselves some serious questions regarding their faith.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vidcc

more hetrosexual people have aids than homosexual and the increase in new incidents is faster in hetrosexual people

---

there are also about 33 times the amount of heterosexual people as there are homosexual people. To try to dissuade the fact that AIDS hit homosexuals harder then Heterosexuals is a tricky job...go for it. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spinningfreemanny

there are also about 33 times the amount of heterosexual people as there are homosexual people. To try to dissuade the fact that AIDS hit homosexuals harder then Heterosexuals is a tricky job...go for it. :)

---

HIV and aids are not the "gay plague"..they are not "Gods punishment" for the sin of homosexuality.

I don't care to accept homophobic views which was what the original poster was giving. I have not one ounce of respect for biggoted views and i don't care one jot for the "god says it's wrong view"...a view that is used as a cover for bigotted ideas.

You can spin figures or statistics to justify your reasoning but the fact is that it is more of a hetrosexual problem than a gay one.

But then to the point azad made, surely a long term stable gay "marriage" would take the risk of aids away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spinningfreemanny

there are also about 33 times the amount of heterosexual people as there are homosexual people. To try to dissuade the fact that AIDS hit homosexuals harder then Heterosexuals is a tricky job...go for it. :)

---

Considering 5% of the entire population of Ethiopia was HIV positive in 1996, and that was considered UNDER reported.... and other African/Far Eastern Countries (eg Kenya, Vietnam) are also highly infected... I find this a very nationalistic viewpoint, as well as homophopic.

Its a fact that transmission relies on transmission of Bodily Fluids...

Its also a fact that, men transmit bodily fluids as a natural course of events...

Its much rarer for a female to pass it to a male, for obvious reasons... so that skews the stats somewhat.

I find that the flinging of the term "homophobic" is all too abundant.


But, on topic....

Why do you all try to cover that this was a gay problem? (nationally, Rat)

Now the idea that God is punishing gays is simply retarded...yeah because they know what God does...

I do though think that being Gay is a moral failure, and AIDS hitting gay communities is a side effect of sexually promiscuous idealism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spinningfreemanny

I find that the flinging of the term "homophobic" is all too abundant.


But, on topic....

Why do you all try to cover that this was a gay problem? (nationally, Rat)

Now the idea that God is punishing gays is simply retarded...yeah because they know what God does...

I do though think that being Gay is a moral failure, and AIDS hitting gay communities is a side effect of sexually promiscuous idealism.

---

A moral failure? Please... sexually promiscuous idealism? what is the idealistic thought in sexual promoscuity? Pretty much being promiscuous just means getting laid alot. Good thing you weren't a teen in the 70's. LOL
The morality thing is a judgement. Does that mean you think all gays are amoral, or immoral? Sheesh
You are entitled to your opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spinningfreemanny

I find that the flinging of the term "homophobic" is all too abundant.
.

---

only people awith anti gay views think that...usually the same people that use that defense say things like"i've got nothing againsts gays..but..."

Quote:

---

Why do you all try to cover that this was a gay problem?

---

It is a problem , but it's not exclusively a gay problem, it's a hetrosexual problem as well but that is ignored for convenience

Quote:

---

I do though think that being Gay is a moral failure, and AIDS hitting gay communities is a side effect of sexually promiscuous idealism

---

And i have no respect for beliefs such as that....where is the supposed compassion? where is the good that you say church does in a view like that?
I respect peoples belief in god but ever time i hear intollerant stuff like this it only confims to me that i am right to not believe

I am not interested in getting involved in another discussion on homosexuality. However, I think it is fair to point out that Aids is a virus, nothing more or less. It was introduced at some point to the US Gay community in the 1980s. It also got into the African heterosexual community probably about the same time. Thousands have died in the US, hundreds of thousands are dying in Africa. World wide it affects the population in proportions broadly reflecting general sexual orientation. That it became embedded in a few small specific communities does not reflect its overall general nature.

One must simply hope that this virus never develops a pneumonic strain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vidcc

It is a problem , but it's not exclusively a gay problem, it's a hetrosexual problem as well but that is ignored for convenience

And i have no respect for beliefs such as that....where is the supposed compassion? where is the good that you say church does in a view like that?
I respect peoples belief in god but ever time i hear intollerant stuff like this it only confims to me that i am right to not believe

---

How in any way am I being intolorant?

Have I stated any action that I think should be followed?

Here's a question. How does the church act in teenage pregnancy? in sex before marriage? in divorce? in the thousands of other immoral acts that they percieve? This is no different and has no seperate action. The actions are condemned but the person surely is not; in fact it is a point (at least in my church) that those with moral failures should be helped and not shunned.

side note;
My (former) girlfriend of about 5 months is pregnant. She's 18, and the baby is from another person before I met her. Did we throw her out? no. Did we ream her for doing wrong? no. She is instead encouraged to marry the person with whom she had the baby, but if she doesn't, will she be kicked out? no.

But, it is concided that AIDS is no longer just a gay problem; Its a problem period, and needs to be stopped, with the first stop being Africa (I will be traveling to Zambia this May to see firsthand.)

You say that as if it actually matters that her baby is from a relationship before your own.

While I am gratified by the fact that you havent thrown her out; I have to question why you feel the subject of this young lady, who may very well be able to identify herself from this information, should be brought up on a Public Forum.

It was quite possible to make it a "Hypothetical" case.

Who's baby it is; is immaterial. The baby hasnt done anything wrong, and any decent bloke would look to the baby as his own anyway in this circumstance, if there was still a relationship.

I hope that the fact she was pregnant from a former relationship is not the factor that split your relationship up, as i would feel very sorry for you if it was... the fact that it was from a former relationship, shows that she hasnt done anything wrong either in most peoples eyes.

I hope that you enjoy your trip to Zambia.

I have never travelled there myself, however if its anything like Kenya, then you should (provided you actually look around, and dont stay in the Tourist Places) get an idea of how lucky all of us in Europe and the USA actually are.

It will be a very humbling experiance for you, im sure, which may well change your feelings on many subjects. Not all of them being obvious to you at the moment ;)

Manny your intollerance shows in your statements and attitude.

I'm not going to comment on the girl apart from..."encouraging her to marry the father"...what kind of marriage is based on the shotgun approach? marriage shouldn't be entered into, considered or encouraged without a solid foundation and just the act of having sex producing a child is not a solid foundation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manny

But, it is concided that AIDS is no longer just a gay problem

---

it was never just a gay problem, it was however picked up as being just a gay problem and promoted that way.... It was just as likely that HIV was introduced to the USA via blood products for haemophiliacs...both hetro and homosexual. But using your accounting techniques it would have shown in a higher percentage of gays because there are less off them.

Quote:

---

How does the church act in teenage pregnancy? in sex before marriage? in divorce? in the thousands of other immoral acts that they percieve?

---

The Catholic church can ex-communicate you. They have even considered ex-communicating politicians who support pro-choice positions and some have considered it for people who vote for those poiticians. While it doesn't happen often, some gay men have been denied communion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vidcc

...... higher percentage of gays because there are less off them.

---

And the above fact that its more difficult for a female to pass the virus to a male....

Male to Male = Bodily Fluids.. infection almost certain

Male to Female = Bodily Fluids... infection almost certain

Female to Male = Rarely Bodily Fluids.. infection rare


Edit: In "normal" sexual relations for that type of relationship.... If there is a "normal" these days :rolleyes:

well in hetrosexual relationships rat i include women, but i did get your point about the speed of infection. With a man he has a higher chance of infecting each woman he sleeps with but the woman has a significantly lower chance of passing it on.

What i was doing in the bit you pointed to is that if there are 2 gay men in the world and one has hiv that's 50%...if there's 10 hetrosexuals and 2 have hiv that's only 20% but twice the amount of actual infections....i was just pointing out manny's accounting method to make it look like it was a mostly gays that suffer.

Rat Faced

I suspect, given the spread of Aids in Africa, Thailand and Russia, in heterosexual communities that it travels between females and males somewhat more easily than you suggest.

The humble condom has much to commend it. Its use in Gay communities brought infection rates down dramatically. Unfortunately, there are those who liken them to having a bath with one's socks on - and will not use them regardless of risk. There is also the religious element in Africa, but I think we did that one to death in a previous thread.

Quote:

---

Transmission. HIV/AIDS has been thought of in the past as a disease mainly affecting gay men or drug users. In fact, in 2004, most HIV infections come from heterosexual sex. And in heterosexual sex, women are more likely to become infected than are men.

---

source

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mathea

source

---

Thanks Mathea, saves me looking it up ;)

np... I was sure u were right but i looked it up all the same (whats wrong with me? venture outta the lounge for 2 days and im actually lookin things up :blink: )

On Bush's beliefs on life.....

this one goes out to all the conservative women out there. New Rule: If you're so sure the embryos needed for stem cell research are precious human life that can't be destroyed, then implant one in your uterus and bring it to term.

That's right. Put your cervix where your mouth is. Now, right now in America, there are thousands of stem cells sitting in fertility clinics that are not allowed to be used for research, will be destroyed after a year or two, and could be right now implanted in a lady's hoo-hoo - to make a screaming, mewling infant that would, ironically, make you sorry you were ever born.

Now here's how far back along the chain of life stem cells are. They're called stem cells because they haven't even decided what kind of cells they're going to be. So it's very close to declaring that life begins when you're just thinking about fucking somebody. Which is just about how most right wing prudes like George Bush would like it. The last people in Washington this obsessed with preserving sperm were Monica Lewinsky and her dry cleaner. This is, after all, an administration that absolutely hates Planned Parenthood. But then again, judging by Iraq, they hate planned anything.

Did you know that our president spent the entire month before 9/11 on his ranch working on the stem cell issue, trying, as he said, "to bridge the worlds of ethics and science." Seriously, could there be anything George Bush knows less about than ethics and science?

Okay, it comes down to this. Here's something that may be life. A tiny speck of sub-atomic goo. Here's something that is life: Michael J. Fox. One is invisible to the naked eye. The other was in "Back to the Future." With research properly funded, scientists believe we could do everything from curing Parkinson's to regenerating spinal cord tissue in Democrats.

So, ladies of the far right, what do you say? There are thousands of extra embryos sitting around in fertility clinic freezers all over America right now just waiting for a good home. There's no obligation and no salesman will call. So, ladies, if you're not going to finish those eggs, come on, go ahead, knock yourself up!

Billy M

I saw that the other night. ROFL

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Just lately i find myself drawn to his show even though i usually only watch it if there's nothing else on, i posted his plea to let Bush win in the funny section.