Our Tribe

Page:   1 2

Joined in 2012
October 23, 2012, 08:23

Where we've been.

The first nursing system set up in the US was set up by a lady lover (Lillian D. Wald).

The father of computer science and artificial intelligence (Alan Turing) and the first woman in space (Sally Ride) loved the same sex.

The epidemic of Samurai killing each other so as to win the affections of the men playing women in Kabuki plays in ancient Japan prompted the Tokugawa government to ban Grand Kabuki. Imperial China called homosexuality “passion of the cut sleeve.”

One of the greatest art forgers (Elmyr de Hory), Clyde Barrows (Bonnie and Clyde), and a leader of the Dutch Resistance in WW2 (Willem Arondeus) did the same sex tango.

The Opera “A Midsummer Night’s Dream” and Tchaikovsky’s Sixth Symphony, were written by homo men, for homo men.

Lorraine Hansberry who wrote "A Raisin In The Sun," King James who commissioned the writing of the "King James Bible" and our 15th President James Buchanon we can call our own.

Giovanni Casanova, Janis Joplin and Winston Churchill said they had same-sex sex. Alfred Hitchcock said he would have if he didn't meet his wife first. Gary Cooper was bi, so was Jack Kerouac.

Homosexuality was commonplace among the Aztecs, coal minors in South Africa, Italian Gondoliers, and Genevan printers; it was esteemed by Celt and Azande warriors and the Spartans. It played a major part with the people in jazz age Harlem to English girl boarding schools to the early civil rights movement (Bayard Rustin).

We can claim several Popes, at least one Queen (Christina. Possibly Hatshepsut and Queen Modjadji) and King Kamehameha had man lovers (Aikane). We have Pulitzer Prize winners like they grew on trees.

Never let anyone make you feel insecure with who you are, you're in good company.

Joined in 2012
October 24, 2012, 06:35

Sounds good, makes me not feel so alone in history now.

I don't know why but I really want to find out if there were any gay couples in the bible. Either it really wasn't that big of a deal, or there were no gay people back then 🙁

Joined in 2012
October 24, 2012, 14:39

Keep in the mind the Bible is lacking in even mentioning straight loving relationships. The closest thing you'll find to a loving relationship is between David and Jonathan and the Roman Centurion with his male servant.

This is what I had to say about the Centurion story:

Bruce Gerig did the best study on David and Jonathan I've read:

*scroll half-way down to; "Studies on Jonathan and David*

This is my take on the relationship from a different angle with David and Jonathan:

Hopes this helps ; )

Joined in 2012
October 24, 2012, 20:40

Sweet thanks for those links!

I'll have to check them out in a couple days – our internet provider is doing maintenance for all their customers thursday and friday, so most likely no internet >.< (thank goodness I have some books to read).Will check them out when I can get back on, thanks again!

Joined in 2005
October 25, 2012, 16:56

Dont forget Alan Jones !!

(OK – bad Joke) but in fact there are rumours about MANY other well known people

Some of them are known to be so but theres no proof

At least one (maybe two) aussie PM's I know of.

Oh and Michael Kirby who is one of our Patrons at freedom2b – BUT also respected in Law not only in Aus but worldwide !

The problem of course is that people often dont want to hear about it and so short of a signed confession – wont believe it.

(Jonathan and David are a classic case of that)

BUT the list is very very long ! (Great topic BTW)

Joined in 2005
October 25, 2012, 18:00

Actually – interestingly – this is in star observer

“There’s a big controversy around how Tchaikovsky died, with some people arguing he was forced to commit suicide or risk exposure of his sexuality.”

Tchaikovsky’s homosexuality is widely acknowledged, but little is known about exactly how comfortable he was with his sexuality. His marriage to Antonina Miliukova lasted less than three months, and most of his friendships were with gay men

Joined in 2012
October 25, 2012, 18:43

Hey RQC, thanks for the links, I just checked them out (and the internet is running better now, woohoo).

I wouldn't be surprised if those who voted on what went into the bible excluded any and all hints of homosexual behaviour. As far as I understand it, homosexuality was a taboo topic back then as well. Homosexual sex was regarded as something bad back then because romans used it as a means to humiliate their fallen enemy/enemies (one would assume that most men back then were mainly heterosexual too – like a 90% heterosexual and 10% gay ratio – heck, probably even more like a 3 or 5% gay ratio, and they would probably have been in the closet in fear of being stoned to death or something).

Thanks for that link Shadow!

Joined in 2012
October 26, 2012, 05:39

The truth is homosexuality wasn't a big deal when Jesus was around. The rabid homophobia with connecting homosexuality with Sodom and other verses in the Bible didn't come until centuries later by bigoted Bible translaters.

My take on Sodom for instance:

Joined in 2012
October 26, 2012, 05:44

It's a myth some parts of the Bible were taken out and hidden by councels or the Catholic Church. Everything from the gnostic gospels to the apocrypha books you can read and understand why they were kept out of some Bibles.

Joined in 2005
October 26, 2012, 08:18

Hhmmm – thats a very short sentence for a complex (and very interesting) subject. (Canonisation)

When you say – "the Bible" – which bible do you mean ? When Jesus talks about "The scriptures" hes not talkiing about what we call the Old Testament and would have (at least) included the Oral Torah (which the Jews believed in the time of Jesus – and many still do) – was given to Moses at the same time he got the 10 commandments. These meant that Jewish interpretation of the Bible can be VERY different to ours today.

Then there are books in some bibles (e.g. the Catholic Bible) that arent in the Protestant Bible. In fact the 14 Apocryphal books WERE in the English bibles (such as the 1611 King James) UNTIL 1880 – the English Revised Version So the bible the protestants use changed substantiallu (from 80 books down to 66 books) quite recently.

Then there are differences between the original versions of text that are used as the basis of what we call the bible.

For example the ending of mark

This link from above – also discusses the difference sources used to generate the various bibles

and Lets not forget about things like the "Secret Gospel of Mark"

Also there are some cases where the current bible STILL has deliberate misstranlations. For example – John 16:13 uses a Neuter pronoun but the popular english Translations all use a masculine one. It should be noted a major theological point hinges on this and great debates raged for a considerable time on the Gender of the Holy Spirit – but what you read is NOT accurate.Nonetheless – in other places – (such as the the fact that the Old testament Hebrew uses "She" to refer to the Holy Spirit). In those cases – translators hold (reasonably) that grammatical gender has no correlation with actual Gender. Point here is there are inconsistancies in the way such things are translated – done not for accuracy but to match an already decided theological position.

My point being – that canonisation was a process that produced different results – the new translations that we tend to use this days; whilst not adding or removing books – do tend to look across more of the older surviving texts (although how they weigh them is also a complex and interesting topic) in order to be assured we are closer to the originals (which of course we dont have). Whilst its reasonable to note that many of the differences arent that significant it opens the question – WHICH ONE was written by God ? (My answer to that was I dont believe it matters – God knew what would happen) However – this is a problem for those who believe GOD wrote the bible 100% word for word because there ARE differing words – both in the old texts we use to construct the bible and in the translations..

And Modern Politics STILL have a significant impact on our Bibles. For example – The USA religious right Lobbied hard and successfully in 1997 to ensure that the Zondervan New International Inclusive Language bible – which translated pronouns accurately – was NEVER to be published in the USA. The CNP ( are just one of such groups that lobby very hard to ensure current bibles are NOT corrected based on current scholarship.

Some of these changes significantly alter understanding…

For example – Matthew 11:12 is translated by the NIV as

"From the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven has been subjected to violence,[a] and violent people have been raiding it."

however we now know that these are specific Legal Terms – and so what the author was actually saying was along the lines of

"From the time of John the baptist, Heaven's Kingdon has been used and robbed by people who have no Legal right to it. This prevents those who do have a legal right to it from enjoying thir own property"

(There are quite a lot of examples of this – for example – now we know that in new testament times there were two legal forms of divorce available to jews.; Any Matter Divorce and Sexual Immorality – based on Exodus 21:10-11.

Any Matter divorce was becoming more popular by Jesus's times – but was ONLY available to men (where as Sexual Immorality was available to both men and women). There was a large amount of debate going on in rabbinic circles on whether "Any Matter" was OK. Matthew 19:3-8 is actually someone asking Jesus if Any Matter Divorce is OK – and Jesus was saying – he did not like the Any Matter Divorce LAW ! It was a specific legal question based on a specific law… Thats quite important to understand when you translate the bible … and misunderstanding / miss translation of this point has altered our divorce laws for centuries.

Page:   1 2
WP Forum Server by ForumPress | LucidCrew
Version: 99.9; Page loaded in: 0.048 seconds.