• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Marvel Unveils Gay Rawhide Kid in February

Started by delekkerste,

117 posts in this topic

Illiterati-migration

Illiterati-migration

Posted
Posted

I wasn't hateful in my post or derogatory in any way. And actually, I have 3 friends that are homosexual, including one that I was roomates with for more than a year. Believe me, there is no hate or disrespect intended in my posts.

 

I dig it, Bug. I didn't think you were hateful at all... but, I don't think you understand that there is no choice for a homosexual. It's the way they are. So, apply that to the bible. Actually, don't. You know, I typed out a lot of thoughts here and most all of them go toward the "disproving the bible" thing... and I'm not here to do that. I just wish that homosexuals weren't merely being tolerated by people who think they live on a higher moral ground.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bugaboo-migration

Bugaboo-migration

Posted
Posted

I really wasn't meaning to get into it with you Mud......sorry about that.

 

I actually only collect a few titles since I just got back into it for the first time since I was a kid.

 

I currently only buy:

 

Ultimate Spidey

The Ultimates

Ultimate X-Men

Wolverine (yeah..yeah..yeah....I know....He's a killer......but he has a good heart and only kills the "bad" people. smirk.gif )

 

None of the other books have interested me, and these are characters that I grew up with as a kid. The other garbage I'll stay away from. And I know that some of you allready think Ultimate X-Men is garbage. smile.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darthdiesel

Darthdiesel

Posted
Posted

One of the instances is in the story of Soddam and Gahmora (sp?).

 

Sodom and Gamorah. Gammora was that flying turtle that Godzilla use to whoop @$$ on and was controlled by those two tiny twin Asian chicks in the cage.

 

 

Being raised Catholic, I was also taught to consider homosexual acts "wrong", but the ideology acceptable. That's why there are admittedly gay priests. They are prohibited from acting on their carnal desire as much as straight priests.

 

I have close college buddies that have come out of the closet and thinking back on all the times I made inappropriate remarks that were offensive makes me feel bad, but that is their lifestyle choice and I can tolerate it much better now. We are still friends and their sexual preference has never been a problem for me. I just watch the puerile jokes more.

 

It is not the lifestyle for me, but to each his own. According to my religion, it is "wrong", but I'm not one to preach having lived with my wife for 4 years prior to getting engaged and another 2 before we were finally married. Also put me down for copious amounts of pre-marital sex. But, just because I did it, doesn't make it right. In this day and age, we are asked to be tolerant of those different from us.

 

Bugaboo, I will support you in teaching your children that acts of homosexuality are "wrong" within the confines of the teachings of your faith and mine (all of Judeo Christianity is affected by that Sodom and Gamorah story -which Donut, btw, is THE story in the Bible directed against homosexuality, lumping it in with excessive acts of carnal nature and promiscuity performed by its citizens who meet a firey doom at the judging hand of the angel of God) but you must equally let your children know that harassment of those different from us is just as reprehensible.

 

However, it was never my intention to turn this into Sunday School. I just felt Bug was getting a bad rap for the choice of his words.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bugaboo-migration

Bugaboo-migration

Posted
Posted

Not to worry Khaos......I can totally understand where you are coming from. I certainly don't think I'm on a higher moral ground and I've done plenty wrong in my life. And you're right.....the people that just "tolerate" homosexuals without even knowing them is something I don't agree with.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Illiterati-migration

Illiterati-migration

Posted
Posted

I just watch the puerile jokes more.

 

YOU?!?!?!?!?!?!

 

but just because I did it, doesn't make it right. In this day and age, we are asked to be tolerant of those different to us.

 

I think this is the main point that everyone needs to understand. No one is so righteous that they have never done anything wrong. And some of our perceived "wrongs" are just more readily visible (and more dramatically different) than others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darthdiesel

Darthdiesel

Posted
Posted

Green Lantern, X-Men, wherever the Beast is appearing these days

 

I think in the last New X-Men issue, Beast basically admits to Scott (Cyclops) when questioned further that he was just going along with the "outing" to make a point about mutants and place in society. I don't think the Beast IS gay...maybe I've got my head in the sand tho...we'll see next issue how it develops.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lighthouse

lighthouse

Posted
Posted

this series certainly doesn't look like it's going to offer any sort of flattering or positive view of homosexuality.

 

And that's precisely my concern. I have no problem with humor, including humor at the expense of 'protected' groups. I freely admit to laughing at South Park's various gay stereotypes, Chris Rock's material that uses the N-word, Jewish comedians making fun of other Jews, and my assistant manager's never-ending stream of 'dead baby' jokes. But all of those fall into the same category as Ennis' "D1cks" series. You know going in what you are going to get, and if it's not for you, move on...

 

But based on the discussions here and on three other forums I read, that's not what they are doing with the Rawhide Kid series. They aren't announcing in advance that this is a joke. A legitimate western series where the lead character happens to be gay would likely sell as well as any other western series. But packaging this as a western series and delivering discriminatory humor instead is just wrong.

 

I have openly gay friends and openly gay customers, but to me, they are just friends and customers. We read a lot of the same books, watch a lot of the same shows, and laugh at a lot of the same jokes. And I suspect that if there was a mature readers title making fun of gay cowboys that wasn't called Rawhide Kid, we'd probably share a laugh over it. I think with this title, we are more likely to share disappointment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lighthouse

lighthouse

Posted
Posted

My question to you, and actually to everybody else, is to cite just where in the Bible homosexuality is taught to be wrong? I can't find it.

 

Fourteen years of Catholic school are bound to come in handy sometime...

 

It depends on which scholars you follow, but there are four main discussions of homosexuality in the Old Testament. There are NONE in the New Testament.

 

The four main discussions are:

Genesis 19 (the Sodom and Gomorrah story)

Leviticus 18:22 "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination"

Leviticus 20:13 "If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death; their blood is upon them"

Judges 19 (the story of Gibeah)

 

Every Judeo-Christian scholar discounts Lev 20:13. While the condemnation of homosexuality in Lev 18:22 is normally accepted, the sanctions set forth in Lev 20:13 are not. Lev 19-20 also includes capital punishment for a dozen other 'crimes' including cursing one's parents, and the repeated use of the death penalty as a sanction in these chapters is looked upon as a likely mistranslation or misinterpretation.

 

Current interpretation of the story in Gen 19 is that God's punishment had little to do with homosexual sex, and was in fact a punishment meted out on the community for its systematic attacks on travelers. Every member of the city was punished for allowing the continued attacks and gang-rapes of travelers and visitors both male and female. It is a closer analogy to a community known for harboring terrorists than a community of homosexuals.

 

A fair amount of theological study now suggests that homosexual sex is seen in the Old Testament as comparable to intercourse during menstruation or masturbation, activities which do not promote the growth of the family and are therefore wasteful, but far from criminal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bugaboo-migration

Bugaboo-migration

Posted
Posted

I understand what you are trying to say lighthouse, but it's this "current interpretation" that always worries me. This terminology tends to follow with current trends and secular thinking and in many instances is "bent" to go along with them. I don't think that the several referrences in the Bible can be discounted that easily just because current culture and thinking wants it to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bugaboo-migration

Bugaboo-migration

Posted
Posted

That's my point. It's been translated for thousands of years with basically the same meaning by people that can read these languages. Now....all of a sudden, since it's not politically correct......the interpretations are trying to be changed with "current interpretation" given as the meaning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CosmicBob

CosmicBob

Posted
Posted

Yes, but how do you know it's been translated the same all these years? I've not read any Bibles written in Greek, Latin, Middle English or Old French. Or even Bibles written in modern English from the 1800s. Plus then there was the "new" Modern Bible that came out in the 70s without all the thee's and thou's and stuff.

 

And the Lutheren version of the Bible is different than the Catholic version or some other sect's. Yours may be different from mine for all I know.

 

Then there was Thomas Jefferson's Bible where he cut and pasted the parts he liked and made his own version! HAR HAR! Now that takes some stones!

 

So, my point being, if you can't get to the original source, it's very difficult to say that one translation/interpretation is better or worse than another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bugaboo-migration

Bugaboo-migration

Posted
Posted

Of course I haven't read every interpretation ever done on the Bible.....I doubt anyone has but that's not really a good arguement. The interpretation regarding homosexuality has remained the same and can be researched on the internet.

 

And i'll also have to disagree with lighthouse that it's not mentioned in the New Testament. It is.....more than once.

 

And.....just for CosmicBob......I'll give two interpretations of one of the instances......both with the same meaning. From the New Testament Romans 1:26-27

 

----------------------------------------

King James Version (which has been around for a long time):

For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet."

 

New modern version (without all the thee's and thou's and stuff.....as you put it):

Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

-------------------------------------------

 

I'm sorry......I just don't see how they could be so far off on their interpretations on these passages. It seems pretty clear. If someone is going to re-write or change interpretations that drastically then why don't they just re-write the whole Bible and wait for their punishment??

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing