10 Rules for Talking to Gays

[francisca]

the surest way to push people away from the church is to smack the gay out of them with fast lines and hard-lined perspectives that do not allow for a person to know that they are being listened to.

I know this sounds rather crass, but again, having been on the inside, I can tell you there are words and actions that turn people off faster than the speed of light - and they all stem back to the faith-guide not meeting the needs of the person who is coming for guidance.

I’m a mother and
Please forgive me for saying this:

Those homosexuals has made their own choice in life.

But young people are confused.

At this point of time, those homosexuals, in my opinion, their feelings or even their salvation is not of any priority ( may God forgive me for saying this). At this point of time, the whole human race is at stake, future generation is the bet should we allow homosexuality chance our humanity.

Those who has made the wrong choice, may they repent. If not then, I will still speak the truth. The truth will sounds hard even I try to sugarcoat it (I really don’t mind to sugarcoat it so long it still means the same thing) for none can hide from from the truth with or without sugarcoat.

Sugarcoat shouldn’t change red become green. If it does then it becomes dishonesty. In the end, some simple truth will always be hard for some people.

Surely one to one approach should be different than speaking in forums.

 

[LemonAndLime]

Personally i firmly believe with great fervor that sodomy is rape and not homosexuality.

You can believe what you want, but you can’t have an opinion on facts.

“Sodomy” can be consensual!

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

Personally i firmly believe with great fervor that sodomy is rape and not homosexuality.

I’m a mother and
Please forgive me for saying this:

Those homosexuals has made their own choice in life.

But young people are confused.

At this point of time, those homosexuals, in my opinion, their feelings or even their salvation is not of any priority ( may God forgive me for saying this). At this point of time, the whole human race is at stake, future generation is the bet should we allow homosexuality chance our humanity.

Those who has made the wrong choice, may they repent. If not then, I will still speak the truth. The truth will sounds hard even I try to sugarcoat it (I really don’t mind to sugarcoat it so long it still means the same thing) for none can hide from from the truth with or without sugarcoat.

Sugarcoat shouldn’t change red become green. If it does then it becomes dishonesty. In the end, some simple truth will always be hard for some people.

Surely one to one approach should be different than speaking in forums.

You do realize that for chastisement to work you and the person being chastised have to share the same belief system right? That homosexual who you are talking to is a real person with real feelings and real emotions, and people get real angry real fast when you immediately start telling them they are doing something real bad, it’s a natural reaction when someone starts insulting you to start ignoring them. In America insulting someone like that is a way of getting real hurt, real bad, real fast. Why you start with that tactic you immediately lose any shred of ethos you had. You need to establish a rapport with them a kind of connection which is why ultimately the most effective way to get them to stop is if you are friends. Preach, if necessary use words. You can say all you want, but what matters most is what they see you do, if they see you live a life of humility, charity and general goodness you have a connection, your words carry meaning and weight. Why did people take everything Mother Teresa said at face value? Because she basically oozed goodness and holiness giving her authority and weight. Instead your tactic has about as much tact as accosting two guys who are making out and telling them they are doing something gravely wrong, from their point of view some random stranger has just come up and started telling them they are horrible people. How do you think they’ll react? Is it going to be be “Oh my God, gasp I’m sorry Jimmy, I can’t hang out with you anymore it’s a mortal sin” or is it going to be more like “I wonder what this dumb broad wants Uh who the [censored] are you?” People in general hate it if you immediately start them.

 

[LVCIVS_DEI]

You can believe what you want, but you can’t have an opinion on facts.

“Sodomy” can be consensual!

With all due respect i find that to be completely and utterly ridiculous.
Human interpretation (despite popular belief) is not impeccable.
And i refuse to believe that GOD would burn down a city because it is inhabited by homosexuals, in fact i find the thought alone to be utterly blasphemous.
I believe thesis is just as wrong as Monophysitism.
No offense intended.

 

[nickybr38]

With all due respect i find that to be completely and utterly ridiculous.
Human interpretation (despite popular belief) is not impeccable.
And i refuse to believe that GOD would burn down a city because it is inhabited by homosexuals, in fact i find the thought alone to be utterly blasphemous.
I believe thesis is just as wrong as Monophysitism.
No offense intended.

There was more to Sodom and Gomorrah then just the sin of sodomy. Beyond just being willing to sleep with the same sex they were also rapists, murderers and men driven by lust for money and material things.

That doesn’t mean sodomy only = rape. It just means sodomy was one of the many sins that the people of Sodom and Gomorrah were guilty of.

 

[Angela77]

Very nice!

 

[LVCIVS_DEI]

There was more to Sodom and Gomorrah then just the sin of sodomy. Beyond just being willing to sleep with the same sex they were also rapists, murderers and men driven by lust for money and material things.

That doesn’t mean sodomy only = rape. It just means sodomy was one of the many sins that the people of Sodom and Gomorrah were guilty of.

I believe it implies lust and not homosexuality.
(Not the same)
And for the record:
I am straight.

 

[nickybr38]

I believe it implies lust and not homosexuality.
And for the record:
I am straight.

No matter what you feel it means the majority agree that it means the action of … well… cough

If it makes you feel better to say that sodomy is only rape that’s fine. So what do you call it when two consensual males get it on, so to speak? Homosexual acts? Making love? What DO you call it, if not sodomy?

 

[LVCIVS_DEI]

No matter what you feel it means the majority agree that it means the action of … well… cough

If it makes you feel better to say that sodomy is only rape that’s fine. So what do you call it when two consensual males get it on, so to speak? Homosexual acts? Making love? What DO you call it, if not sodomy?

Just love.
And for the record the truth is not a democracy.
And even tradition can be wrong.
Just because ppl think it is disgusting or awkward does not make it a sin.
I mean we don’t live in the times of Leviticus anymore and are thus not subject to there blasphemous laws…

 

[nickybr38]

Just love.
And for the record the truth is not a democracy.
And even tradition can be wrong.
Just because ppl think it is disgusting or awkward does not make it a sin.
I mean we don’t live in the times of Leviticus anymore and are thus not subject to there blasphemous laws…

What?? WHAT? Wait… you don’t think homosexual acts are a sin then?
Well, I’m done discussing this with you then. Sorry but I’m not willing to completely highjack this thread by trying to debate the issue. if you believe that there’s nothing wrong with homosexual acts then so be it. There are others here far more qualified to try and speak truth to you but somehow I think your own version of truth would trump theirs anyway.’

Furthermore, the laws of Leviticus are blasphemous? What Bible do you believe in then? So parts of the Bible contain truth and others contain lies? Seriously… my head is boggled. I gotta leave this thread. I can’t handle this mentality… I just can’t.

 

[michelleds]

Just love.
And for the record the truth is not a democracy.
And even tradition can be wrong.
Just because ppl think it is disgusting or awkward does not make it a sin.
I mean we don’t live in the times of Leviticus anymore and are thus not subject to there blasphemous laws…

I can understand how you might think that the source of calling homosexual acts sinful (not the inclinations or feeling) is Leviticus; however, that’s not the case. There’s Natural Law as well as St. Paul’s writings, and then there’s the Didache and the Early Church Fathers. The issue is that homosexual acts are closed, permanently and irreparably, to Life. It is a closed system of sameness that can never blossom forth into new life (a baby).

And to be very clear, someone who feels sexually attracted to someone of their own sex is not a sinner just for having those feelings. the acts are what is sinful. (lingering thoughts would be the act of lust, but that’s really another topic)

 

[LVCIVS_DEI]

What?? WHAT? Wait… you don’t think homosexual acts are a sin then?
Well, I’m done discussing this with you then. Sorry but I’m not willing to completely highjack this thread by trying to debate the issue. if you believe that there’s nothing wrong with homosexual acts then so be it. There are others here far more qualified to try and speak truth to you but somehow I think your own version of truth would trump theirs anyway.’

Furthermore, the laws of Leviticus are blasphemous? What Bible do you believe in then? So parts of the Bible contain truth and others contain lies? Seriously… my head is boggled. I gotta leave this thread. I can’t handle this mentality… I just can’t.

I just saying what i believe, I am not saying its true per definition.

Leviticus teaches that one should stone adulterers and the ten commandments teaches that killing is a mortal sin.
Leviticus was written by a people called the levites (hence the name), not god.
The ten commandments however are dircectly from GOD.
For example Christ tought us that the the Sabbath exists for humanity, not vice-versa
Mark 3:1-6

 

[LVCIVS_DEI]

I can understand how you might think that the source of calling homosexual acts sinful (not the inclinations or feeling) is Leviticus; however, that’s not the case. There’s Natural Law as well as St. Paul’s writings, and then there’s the Didache and the Early Church Fathers. The issue is that homosexual acts are closed, permanently and irreparably, to Life. It is a closed system of sameness that can never blossom forth into new life (a baby).

And to be very clear, someone who feels sexually attracted to someone of their own sex is not a sinner just for having those feelings. the acts are what is sinful. (lingering thoughts would be the act of lust, but that’s really another topic)

St. Paul spoke of adultery.
He spoke of men leaving there wives.
Not homosexual acts.
That is what i believe.

 

[michelleds]

St. Paul spoke of adultery.
He spoke of men leaving there wives.
Not homosexual acts.
That is what i believe.

Why do you believe that you personally are so much more intelligent or discerning or capable than many centuries of spiritual greats who have proceeded you? You espouse beliefs that are contrary to the Blessed Pope John Paul and Pope Benedict today and all of the Catholic thinkers before them. Do you not fear hubris?

And St. Paul specifically spoke of homosexuality and it is a blatant error to read otherwise. If you are reading so-called progressive Christian theologians, they are merely making hay with the moral relativism of the day.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

**St. Paul spoke of adultery.
He spoke of men leaving there wives.
Not homosexual acts.
That is what i believe. **

Did your priest tell you you can ignore the teachings of the Church and believe what you want to believe?

 

[LVCIVS_DEI]

Why do you believe that you personally are so much more intelligent or discerning or capable than many centuries of spiritual greats who have proceeded you? You espouse beliefs that are contrary to the Blessed Pope John Paul and Pope Benedict today and all of the Catholic thinkers before them. Do you not fear hubris?

And St. Paul specifically spoke of homosexuality and it is a blatant error to read otherwise. If you are reading so-called progressive Christian theologians, they are merely making hay with the moral relativism of the day.

Can we please restrain ourselves from personal attacks and stay on the issues.
For even the holy father can be mistaken at times.
Like the case of Honorius I who openly thought Monophysitism.
And he was anathematized by name for doing so.
When we believe our shepherds are in error it is our duty to speak out.
In a respectful way of course.

PS:And if i remember correctly john Paul II placed a statue of Buddha over the tabernacle.
Is that not wrong?
I mean no disrespect to his holiness i am merely asking.

 

[LVCIVS_DEI]

**St. Paul spoke of adultery.
He spoke of men leaving there wives.
Not homosexual acts.
That is what i believe. **

Did your priest tell you you can ignore the teachings of the Church and believe what you want to believe?

I am simply saying they might need to be revised.

 

[damian_clarke]

Individual homosexuals need to be treated with respect and love. We also need to make it clear that what they are doing is worng. My bigger concern is with the whole gay marketing machine that keeps pushing their agenda on the rest of us. Homophobia is now a term used for anyone who opposes gay marriage. The annual gay pride parade in Johannesburg shows the true colors of the gay movement. Drag queesn and bondage practitioners with genital shaped balloons. What exactly does that have to offer society.
Yet we are the bigots according to the media. We are the ones incapable of love and happiness. It really makes me mad at times.

 

[damian_clarke]

The gay lifestyle is very destructive in a number of ways. We had a gay surgeon who lectured us twenty years ago at med school. He was brutally murdered in his flat by a young man he had picked up with the intention of having sex. There is a greater risk for disease and there is also a risk of physical violence in a lifestyle that is essentially a selfish one based on satisfying physical sensation without being open to life.

 

[LemonAndLime]

The gay lifestyle is very destructive in a number of ways. We had a gay surgeon who lectured us twenty years ago at med school. He was brutally murdered in his flat by a young man he had picked up with the intention of having sex.

Does that only happen to gay people? So I assume that when a man picks up a woman for sex that murder doesn’t occur then?

There is a greater risk for disease and there is also a risk of physical violence in a lifestyle that is essentially a selfish one based on satisfying physical sensation without being open to life.

Greater risk of physical violence? Source please, same for disease.