mrstickball said: dtwei -
It's their religion. It's their choice. If that person believes that homosexuality is wrong, and feels that he needs to go through an exorcism to make himself better, then that is his prerogative. Even if you believe it's wrong, I don't think arguing violence against those people really should be tolerated in the forum.
If this person was not coerced into this activity, and did it of his own volition, why should you, or anyone else, attack this person's choice to involve themselves in the activity? |
There's a point when religious beliefs turn into extremist crap. Exorcisms are just cruel and unusual.
It is more likely that he was coerced into taking the exorcism than letting him of his own accord. Their ideas are archaic and morally unjustified. I think I am allowed think that is a horrible act due to my idea that no one should be punished for something they did not decide.
He never would have thought that homosexuality was unnatural by himself. Someone told him that it was morally evil. He was influenced into this or basically manipulated.
I was making a point with the violence. Them being beaten for their hair color is just as outrageous as beating someone for their sexual orientation. I do have a major problem with bigotry and I'm not all that fond of exorcism either.
EDIT: And in response to this.
"For all I care, they could be dancing to the Flying Spaghetti Monster, asking him to remove the guy of all his hair. If it's consenual, I fail to see why your arguing against it. 1) Didn't we have this same problem 50 years ago, but in reverse, calling for action against homosexuals?"
That ritual is hardly evil or as morally horrible. My point stands that it is not consensual. And the last point (1) is pretty much irrelevant to the debate.