Chances are on his death bad he'll regret all the time he missed with his son. Further more isn't god ment to be the only one who can pass judgement.

I'm not hating. You seem to be implying that being gay is somehow a punishment

I'm saying not to think so simply in terms of right and wrong. i take no sides in this argument. Initially, I simply pointed out that people were attacking the father rather than attacking his position. If you ever want to convince someone of your own beliefs, insulting them is not the way to go. Within the father's address you can clearly note that he focused on not supporting the son's lifestyle; he said nothing against the son himself. He even wished him good fortune. He did not seem so concerned about his pride to me; rather than not wishing to enterain a lifestyle he felt betrayed his own convictions.

Furthermore, I don't believe in defining right and wrong so narrowly (I hesitate to even assume there is such a thing). You perceive the father's actions as wrong because they go against your perceived limitations as to what a father's role is. This role is unquestionable, much in the same manner that this father may believe his own beliefs to be unquestionable.

If you are concerned with the father's extremes in regards to what he feels is right, why would you be so willing to believe so strongly in your own sentiments. It's fine to note that the fathe's actions were questionable; however, I think people should exercise caution to not insult the father and be so offended when their own views are questioned.

You've read it wrong. Probably my fault for lumping the nazis and the commies together in one sentance.

What I meant was that the nazis killed for their twisted ideal of their country, and that the communists killed for communism.

I forgot to bolf the part I was responding to. There, now my reply probably makes more sense.

I haven't really said anything about the father yet. So to summarize my thoughts on the whole thing:

I think the whole situation is more tragic than anything. The father's beliefs being so strong that he has to sever connections with his son over such a superficial issue, and for a god that (most likely) won't be there to tell him that he did the right thing after he dies. It's a horribly unnessecary and immoral action made by a pehaps otherwise moral person. I just see it as an example of what religion can do to people.

I honestly would like to see somebody honestly defending the father's actions, purely for the fact that their stance will be shot to pieces. Yes it's very easy to take the middle ground, but if our society was based that way, there would be no rule of law, no judgement and no consequences to actions. There needs to be logical actions and motives behind both sides.

The insults directed at the father were based on the outcome of his actions. Nobody is forcing him to keep contact with his son, but to many, the very idea that disownment of your own flesh and blood is a reasnable choice for ANY situation AT ALL is enough to put that parent's ability as a parent into question. This is why you see a lot of "bad father" insults. If you disagree, then I'm willing to listen to why you believe disownment of family would EVER be classed as a sensible decision.

Also, keep in mind that the son is a victim here. How would you feel if your parents, the ones who are supposed to love you unconditionally, suddenly take that away? Yes, it can be justified that this may have been hard for the father to do, but the very idea of showing a family member that unconditional love is even being questioned is, in itself, a despicable act. I don't care what any book says about that.

Now on top of this, imagine living in a society that has a good chunk of discrimination towards who you are. In that situation, anyone on the receiving end of this needs all of the support they can. Now, imagine how it would feel if the ones who should be providing the most support for you, the ones who should be standing up for who you are, decide "nope, we're no longer supporting who you are", then how would that make them feel?

Say a child came to you, and claimed that they were being bullied. He is clearly distressed and scared. Do you see any right or wrong side to this? Do you perceive the actions of the bully as wrong because they go against your perceived limitations as to what a bully's role is? Maybe the bully's beliefs are unquestionable...the line has to be drawn somewhere. 

As I said before, I wish the son all of the support in the world. He came out, thinking that being honest with his father was the right thing to do, and the father showed him otherwise. The father, once again as I've mentioned before, done nothing legally wrong, but out of all the ways to handle this, he chose to disown his own son. It was approached in a way that showed no remorse whatsoever. No "I love you, but....", just flat out dosownment. Tell me, why should those who insult the father relax when he couldn't even provide the same kind of constraint and reasoning with his own son? In that sense, this is a father that cannot be reasoned with.

I can forsee deep regret from this father on (or close to) his deathbed, that he spent all of his life hating, and it cost him a life with his son. You only get one chance at that... 

My initial reaction to this letter was something along the lines of "I hope one day the father needs a kidney and that his son will tell him to 'Go fuck himself'" but that's a little harsh but initial reactions are often very viceral.

With a little more thought put into it, I'd just say that this man is an horrible father and a coward.

No matter our age, there's always a part of us that needs the approval of our parents and by cutting his son out of his life this father has caused irreparable emotional damage to his son. He's also a coward because instead of dealing with the feelings that his son's revelation has caused him, he chose the easy way, pushing the problem aside, afraid to face why he's so repulsed by homosexuality. He hid behind his faith to avoid his own inadequacies because I'm pretty sure he wouldn't have cut his son out of his life if he had stolen a bike or has sex before marriage.

So small percent of animals doing something = completely natural and ok in human society ? So i guess child murder and cannibalism are also ok and natural ?  The very fact that homosexual couples can't reproduce ( the main purpose and goal of sex ) should tell you something

Some beliefs are objectively bad, and need to be dealt with. That's really as far as this discussion needs to go.

1. Like atheism ?

2. Refer to the picture