If you kick your 25 year old son out of your house because he doesn't have a job yet, does that mean you hate unemployed people ?

why do you repeat the "he doesn't hate his son" point if i explained to you that i did never say this? i know you are always in these threads with something about gay problems beeing the one saying it's not as bad and such things because you are as well not very cool with that idea (i believe you were even banned because of that once or twice, sry if i'm wrong i believe you were the one) and you can think what you want but seriously, i don't believe thinking something is just wrong does let someone say his son he will never let him in his house anymore and he does never want to see him again.

and not sure what so bad with the word "hate". as example i hate muggy weather but i don't think i have as much problems with that then the father had that his son is gay. so, with my definition of that word, if i hate something like that, he absolutely hates the idea of beein gay because he likes it even less than i like muggy weather^^

and btw, he even said in the letter "if you won't be at my funeral, my firends and "my family" will understand. so, he doesn't even see his own son as his family anymore because no one says a family member that "my" family will understand. he would have said "our" family then.

and yeah we never know the real story so maybe that was about something totally different and not even about gay and the guy posting that letter is a liar. so everything i believe about that case is only if it is like i think, a guy who left the home to work or study anywhere saying then to his father that he is gay and maybe didn't do it before because he didn't know how to explain this to his father because he knew that his father has exreme problems with that because of his belief.

I don't entirely disagree with you on the matter of God's word; however, I would stress not thinking in absolute terms when it comes to God's word as accepted texts vary withn religious traditions, many accepting unwritten word as part of their tradition (many of the Catholic positions are based on the belief that precedents set by the apostles and other represenatives of God carry as much weight as scripture) and other doctrine determined by extension (derived from ambiguous scriptures usually in the hope of addressing specific modern issues; this would be like the Catholic churches positions against contraception and same-sex relationships). As far as I'm aware (don't quote me on this though), the Hadith plays a role in Islamic traditions which is not God's word; rather it is the words (inderect) of Muhammad.

Furthermore, it is often difficult to seperate what is a religious issue and a cultural issue as the two often play hand in hand. What is accepted into many religions as doctrine is little more than what is the commonly accepted belief which has little to do with actual written word. This is why you will often see those with a discriminatory perspective using religion to back their claims (such as when slavery and black rights were still big issues). The fact that there is no written word to back their claim is irrelevant and the issue comes down to their world view being imposed on their religion not the religion being imposed on their world view.

 If someone believes their position is inherently right then it falls that their infallible God would not say otherwise. The issue then comes down to a person erronously believing their own view to be right and that their God is infallibe. These two combined make their position unquestionable and questioning is then deemed offensive.

Now, onto the matter of opinions. I'm not arguing against people stating he is pathetic, I'm just pointing out that it is hypocritical to do so. You yourself acknowledge that judgement should be left up to God yet you make a judgement when you call the man's actions pathetic. To me, it simply seemed the father was recognizing that the son's lifestyle was no longer tolerable to what he viewed as right. He did not wish harm upon the son; however, to tolerate his lifestyle would be to stand against his own convictions. I can respect that, just as I can respect the son for standing by his own convictions and coming out even if it costs him the support of his father.

That's not at all what this letter is about... The comparison is totally out of whack.

If not, on what level does it relate to the letter apart from the two parties living in different places?

It really sucks to know that you can't be totally honest about something with people that you think so highly of like your own family. I wish he never told him and just kept living a lie that his dad would've loved him no matter what.

That must have been heartbreaking. I literally felt my own heart sink as I read that. :/

Who knows , maybe this man never loved his child enough because he hoped he was born a girl, or because he sucked at baseball and chose basketball over it, and as a result, his child went on seeking love from other dudes.

All i was saying is that there were no hatred in that letter nor towards his son. That's why i quoted. Whether or not he actually hates gays is unknown to us and like you said, it could be something entirely different. His son might have AIDS, for all we know

You know, gay couples are a lot more likely to get AIDS than heterosexuals... just putting that out there :)

Hate is not necessarily bound to anger. Just because the letter was not laced with death threats does not make it less hateful. If anything, it is more hateful, for the man has some form of regret that he must disown his son, and yet disowns him. This is hate at its most pure, not tinted with emotions which might excuse it, but institutionalized, conciously chosen hate.

It is this kind of hate that must be purged from the world.

So what if he has AIDS? wow I feel sorry for your kids.