Rob Osborn
-
Posts
3852 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Rob Osborn
-
-
3 hours ago, Godless said:
I think we've established that this is a false definition. You certainly haven't offered any valid argument to support it.
Here the test, the ultimate rubber meet the road test- (yes, its extreme but proves tge point)
Would you have empathy for a serial child molester/murderer who after molesting his victims then tortures them till death and then cuts them up into little pieces all while laughing about it?
-
3 hours ago, Godless said:
And this really is the root of our differences. Having taken the time to befriend and get to know people in the LGBT community, it is clear to me that the love they have for their partners is no different from the love I have for my wife. The emotional bonds are often just as strong, and the sense of commitment and personal sacrifice that they make for their partners runs just as deep. Perhaps more so because some elements of society still choose to marginalize them.
Thats where we disagree. I honestly dont think that the true spiritually and godly love that heals the soul and mind and is sealed and ratified by the Holy Ghost as happens in a husband and wife relationship is remotely the same thing as a homosexual couple have together. The long term results, as statistics show, especially in male homosexual relationships, testify to the reality that there really is no long term truly monogamous relationships in general. Why? Because they do not actually achieve the true spiritually connected godly peace only achievable by man and women legally married together.
-
4 hours ago, Suzie said:
If you don't mind, how do you show it?
Well, for instance I have neighbors who are gay and we, especially my wife, communicate regularly with them, even chat on Facebook and show no disrespect to them or treat them differently.
-
4 hours ago, lostinwater said:
Thanks Rob. Valid point. i am not in the same frame of mind that these people are always wrong - but i definitely respect your beliefs. i think that is the point everyone was trying to make though. That these people should be treated compassionately - and that where possible, we try to understand someone's past before judging their current condition, and avoid making blanket statements - even if it seems to us like those statements might be generally accurate - and there seems to be plenty of circumstantial evidence/studies to support it.
Honestly, i said something a while back in this thread - that loving one's neighbor was the most important thing - and @yjacket correctly pointed out that loving God was actually the most important thing. I lack some of the backbone that you do, and so even though i believe that statement is still basically accurate, backtracked on it - because it wasn't technically correct.
Perhaps you are in a similar situation - and are just a more persistent person than me?
I am in complete agreement that we should treat these people, and technically all people as compassionately as is possible, even show sympathy for the things they suffer with, they are Gods children the same as us.
Conversations like this sonetimes are hard to get through because we all use words a little differently and as such semantics really are important. I have actively been in dialogue with trans and gay people for many years and I research carefully the points of arguments and the words used by both sides. A word like "empathy" is one of several words that is used as a type of hidden ammo to push the cause for affirmation in their groups. Ironically, "sympathy" is not used by them very much because it carries the connotation that their drive for affirmatiin lacks moral validity. After all, they dont want straight people to have pity on them, no, they want equality and you dont get equality morally speaking if we see their cause sympathetically.
-
56 minutes ago, lostinwater said:
There is a great book called Just Mercy - written by a man who defended many of them as a lawyer. One of the greatest books i've ever read. Strongly recommend. Yes, i do have sympathy/empathy towards them. Not because they deserve it - because they need it. How grateful i am that Jesus gives all of us what we need, at least as much as we're willing/able to accept - and not what we deserve. If we all got the empathy and compassion we deserve, Jesus would never have come at all - and it wouldn't matter if you were a white liar or a serial killer - we'd all be headed to exactly the same place, guaranteed.
And Rob - i really believe you do have compassion towards these people - porn stars, transgender, serial killers. We can argue the semantics of language (sympathy vs empathy) - but i'd bet dollars to pesos that if you saw a serial killer getting beaten, you'd try to stop it. If you saw them weak with hunger, you'd feed them. If you saw them weeping, you'd try to comfort them. You are a man of impeccable morals - or else you'd not feel prompted to defend what you've said so strongly.
Of course I have compassion and sympathy for trans and gay people, same with murders and the like. But thats different than empathy. Empathy carries with it a sense of affirmation. Affirmation means "emotional support or encouragement."
So, when I say I do not have empathy for trans and gay agendas it means I do not support and encourage their cause by having felt and share their desires and feelings.
-
56 minutes ago, Godless said:
No, it absolutely does not. For example, I used to struggle with smoking and borderline alcoholism. I quit smoking cold turkey 6 years ago and have a much healthier relationship with alcohol than I used to. I empathize with people who have the same struggles, but without affirming their decisions and actions.
To take it a step farther, I empathize with people who are struggling with addiction to gambling and cocaine. I have never been addicted to those things, but I understand addiction well enough to still have that same empathy without affirmation of their actions. This is exactly what @anatess2 was trying to get at. As a heterosexual, you may not understand SSA. But as a human being, you understand sexual attraction, and very likely have fought thoughts and urges that your church would deem inappropriate. That is the common ground that can allow empathy towards LGBT individuals to take root. You don't have to condone or affirm their urges, just like you wouldn't condone or affirm the heterosexual impulses that virtually all straight individuals, including you most likely, deal with at some point in their lives.
I dont cant have empathy towards a trans or homosexual who have supposed desires and feelings because the love I share with my wife is completely different, in fact, the opposite of what they feel. I thus cant empathize with them because they do not experience the peace and eternal reflection of godly joy I feel.
-
1 hour ago, Carborendum said:
Where did you get that from?
Can you just get off the semantics train. You're beginning to grasp at straws now.
No, I just understand semantics really well and how political agendas and movements such as the LGBT use trickery to confuse people with words to get them on their side.
-
1 hour ago, MormonGator said:
A lack of empathy or sympathy or whatever you want to call it will only end up hurting YOU in the long run. The people you have no sympathy/empathy for don't care about your opinion. You also have the frightening certainty that a lack of sympathy/empathy will eventually turn on ones self. You'll become Young Goodman Browne from the amazing Hawthorne story.
You are absolutely in my prayers.Let me ask you this- Do you have empathy for serial killers?
-
22 minutes ago, anatess2 said:
Once again... where in this feeling of pain does it say he then has to ACT the same way or approve to ACT the same way. Feeling something and acting on something are TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.
Now, of course, the question is - do you believe that the only way to empathize with a gay guy is to desire a guy yourself? That is, of course, silly. You can empathize with that feeling of desire because you've felt desire yourself - regardless of the gender it is directed to. For example, She knew that he had lost his father when he was very young, just like she had, and felt a deep empathy for him rise in her heart. She, of course, can still feel empathy for the loss even if she lost a mother instead of a father. It is the FEELING that you're empathizing with not the OBJECT of that feeling.
The use of the word empathy connotates affirmation for their cause or feeling.
-
Did you guys read further? It states-
"
The difference between the meanings of the words sympathy and empathy is as much emotional as it is grammatical. Knowing which word to use for a given situation can be tricky.
A good rule of thumb is to determine which word to use based on the level of connection that the subject of the sentence feels with the object.
For example, if the subject identifies with, and shares the pain of, the object, “empathy” is the correct word to use: She knew that he had lost his father when he was very young, just like she had, and felt a deep empathy for him rise in her heart.
Instead, if the subject is aware of the object’s suffering but feels no direct connection other than sorrow for the object, “sympathy” is the right word to use: As he watched the hurricane footage from his warm, dry apartment, he felt sympathy for those losing their homes."
-
A primer on empathy ans sympathy-
-
23 minutes ago, Carborendum said:
Rob, I'm really trying to help you here. I agree with the fundamental principles you're espousing. But your application needs some modification. And when you say some things off the top of your head, you need to speak from a position of knowledge and fact, not emotion and presupposition. Example:
Really? Do you have any studies or statistics to back it up?
Transgenders in the US are at around 0.3%
Klinefelter's syndrome 0.2% to 0.1%
Hermaphrodites: 0.05%
That is just two causes that could account for over half of the transgenders in America. Your opinion and personal views do not make up fact.
The vehemence with which you're attacking the topic indicates that you either have a personal experience which really impacted your life negatively, or you yourself have some issues with chastity. This level of attack and refusal is not in line with the Charity that we're supposed to have for all mankind.
Try to have more empathy. And, NO, that does not mean that you have to tell them that what they did was ok. It just means that you understand when you feel weak and confused that you have also made some bad decisions in your life.
I dont think you know what empathy really means. For example, I can have empathy for the guy shoveling snow in the bitter cold because I too have shoveled snow in the bitter cold. I can have empathy for a person suffering from the flu because I too have suffered from having the flu. What I cant do is have empathy for a transgender because I have never been there, do not know what their feelings are. In context here, having empathy for a trans means one sides with their feelings and affirms their position. I cannot do that. The whole goal of the LGBT is to create an attitude if empathy so that their cause is justified. It all boils down to having empathy for sin.
-
30 minutes ago, anatess2 said:
Explain where in my post is the sin. I'll paste the post in its entirety right here to make it easier for you:
Being gay does not mean you are acting it out. It is just like a guy who gets attracted to a girl but he didn't do anything about it. There is no difference in the desire, there is no difference in the choice to not act on it. The only difference is, the guy got attracted to a girl, the gay guy got attracted to another guy. That's why he calls himself gay.
Okay, where in that paragraph above is the sin?
The definition and context of the word "empathy" is definable where one places themselves into the others shoes to feel and side with them in their feelings. There is a context of morality that plays into the semantics of usage of the word. The LGBT want us to have empathy (in a strong moral sense) showing we affirm their plight.
We have to get the semantics correct before we go accusing each other of things because we dont understand words in their proper context and semantics.
-
31 minutes ago, Carborendum said:
Living in a bubble again. I've heard interviews with porn stars. They're not demonic. Most of them simply don't know any better. Many get into it because they had no marketable skills, they were never taught to value their chastity, and they ended up doing it just to pay the bills. Yes, I think we ought to have some empathy for such individuals.
One particular star started the XXX church which is a Christian church for former porn stars who are trying to get back to the strait and narrow. One recent convert (to the XXX Church) said that he only got into it because he was starving. He had just lost his last minimum wage job. He was about to become homeless and he saw this ad. He went and he got paid. He was able to eat. He was so grateful just to be able to eat, he didn't think about how wrong it was. Later, he just got addicted to the sex, the money, and the fame. He finally got to a point where he knew all his life was a waste and he came back to God.
No, I'm not saying it was right in any way shape or form. But, YES, we ought to have some level of sympathy for such individuals.
I also read a story about Hugh Hefner which really made me pity him. The details are inappropriate to be repeated here. But to draw a metaphor: I had set up a bunch of mouse traps around the house. I heard a "snap". And I went to take out the mouse. It was still alive and eating the bait. The bar was cutting off its head, but he was still eating. I wondered how he didn't know he was already dead. The article I read about Hugh made me believe he was that mouse. He was already dead, but he just didn't know it. I had such pity for him and felt such disgust for his life.
Theres a big difference between sympathy and empathy and how they are used in this context.
In the LGBT community, having empathy means siding with their cause because you can feel what they desire and want it for them too
-
14 minutes ago, anatess2 said:
Okay, so this is the problem.
Being gay does not mean you are acting it out. It is just like a guy who gets attracted to a girl but he didn't do anything about it. There is no difference in the desire, there is no difference in the choice to not act on it. The only difference is, the guy got attracted to a girl, the gay guy got attracted to another guy. That's why he calls himself gay. The guy is fine because eventually, when the right moment comes, he can go marry the girl he is attracted to and express himself sexually. The gay guy is stuck because... there will never be a right moment that will come that will allow him to go marry the other guy so he can express himself sexually.
Do you see now where the empathy for gay people comes in? Can you imagine living a life where you can't express yourself sexually?
Like I said, I do not have empathy for sin.
-
13 minutes ago, anatess2 said:
Hello Rob. Being gay is not a sin. Having sex with someone your own gender is the sin. They are not the same.
I define being gay or homosexual as acting it out. the tendency to have SSA is not being gay or being homosexual. Perhaps some who say they are gay who have SSA but do not act exists, I dobt define that as being gay. Its no different than saying I am attractef to lots if women but I am not an adulterer.
-
Compassion towards a sinner is what Christ taught us. He didnt tell us to have empathy with sin.
-
11 minutes ago, Carborendum said:
You think we should not?
Absolutely not. Why should we have empathy towards the devils tools?
-
21 minutes ago, Carborendum said:
Well, I thought I pointed that out.
There are some people who are born with sexually ambiguous bodies. Some are hermaphrodites. Some are fertile. Others (like Klinefelter's syndrome) are infertile. Some are XY chromosomed individuals who (due to hormonal imbalance in the womb) ended up with female parts (and the reverse resulting in male parts).
Not all transgendered are the type that the OP described. For his (the OP's) case, I'd agree with you that it is unambiguously just plain confusion and emotion that is not based in reality. But I'm talking to YOU about these other cases where there is ambiguity.
Ambiguity is rare in the trans community.
-
18 minutes ago, Vort said:
The funny thing is that I agree with everything you wrote above, and yet I still maintain that you have an empathy deficiency.
You are not being asked to show empathy toward sin. You are required to show empathy for your fellow beings who find themselves in a fallen state, and more often than not in the grip of sin. Can you imagine if the Lord had been as aloof as you are? Can you imagine his response to the woman taken in adultery -- IN THE VERY ACT?
You claim to see little difference between transgenders and homosexuals. This does not reflect well either on your powers of perception or on your ability to empathize with other human beings. You are not asked to embrace sin, but you are asked to at least make honest effort to understand why people think and feel as they do.
I honestly find it difficult to have empathy for the general movement of gays and transgenders. Like I said before, I know two people who became transgenders and watched their slow gradual fall. I watched the light go out in them as they steadily began to deny God and embrace sin. During this they became hostile towards all who will not pretend with them about their changed genders. How is it that I am supposed to feel empathy for them? Thats like saying we should find empathy for pornography stars.
-
35 minutes ago, anatess2 said:
Catholicism is not an opinion unless you believe Mormonism is also an opinion.
Catholic all male schools have a higher percentage of homosexuals than the general public.. Thats a fact.
-
32 minutes ago, Vort said:
You know, Rob, you exhibit surprisingly little empathy. Most of us on this site are not looking to celebrate or even justify sin or perversion. But the ability to see through another's eyes and understand another's position is a powerful and useful trait, and it begins with having empathy.
The difference between the two is profound, even stark, if you care to look.
- Homosexuality: Sexual attraction to members of one's own sex.
- Transgender: Someone who identifies as a member of the opposite sex.
The two issues may or may not be related, and in some cases may even be separate manifestations of the same underlying issue, but they are clearly not the same thing.
I have a hard time showing empathy towards sinfulness. The LGBT community has a drive to normalize and embrace sexual deviancy. They have already been successful in convincing the masses that its normal to want to cut off perfectly working body parts (sex change)and then tell everyone its not a disorder. Then they get mad when people like me dont want to play pretend with them wanting me to pretend a boy is is a girl.
-
2 hours ago, Carborendum said:
What way? Homosexual or transgendered? While related, I don't believe them to be the same issue because of the prevalence of sexually ambiguous bodies. Apart from that, yes, I'd agree that they are related.
As far as homosexuality, perhaps it is best if you started a new thread and we can address it there.
I dont see very much difference in transgenders and homosexuals.
-
2 hours ago, anatess2 said:
This, once again, is wrong.
Seminary is the preparatory school for Holy Orders. You can't receive Holy Orders unless you attend and graduate from Seminary. As I've already told you, gay and lesbian Catholics who do not think they can succeed in Holy Matrimony take the vow of celibacy and become Priests and Nuns. Therefore, they attend Seminary. This is a GOOD THING. The Mormon Church also encourage gay and lesbian Mormons who do not think they can succeed in Eternal Marriage to be celibate.
No, Seminary doesn't make Catholic boys gay in the same manner that all-male Military Academies or all-male colleges such as Wabash don't make American boys gay.
Well, you are entitled to your own opinion.
Gender Identification - NO HATE!
in LDS Gospel Discussion
Posted
Thanks. We more than likely share a lot in common morally speaking, perhaps more than either of us realize..
For someone to be gay or questioning their gender doesnt really bother me, let them live their lives as they wish, its the social justice movements of their support groups that I have major issues with. They are very militant about the way they do things demanding acceptance and rights at the expense of the morally true to lose their rights and voice. Freedom of speech and freedom of assembly are under attack, two of our most basic but most important rights. But they dont stop there, no, they publicly ostracize people and businesses into exile to be shunned and ridiculed in the name of "equality" as if their brand of beliefs is the only one that should be recognized and accepted. We are now seeing this new "micro aggression" dependency in the rising generation unable to confront the realities of true free speech and so censorship is the new rule, and any dissent or conservative view is bigotry or hate talk and needs censored.