Am I evil?

[CopticChristian]

I have what some consider liberal views. I also don’t think the church is right on everything. When I voiced these opinions on another thread 90% of people told me I was wrong. One even suggested I convert to the Protestant religion. Now, I don’t think the church is infallible, look at the covering up of paedophile priests as a shocking example. Does this make me evil? Because I was always brought up to question everything and except nothing. Clearly covering up child abuse is wrong, so why not other things that I view as immoral?

Rabbit,

Tell me…what you believe

What is the Church correct concerning…list these for me

What is the Church incorrect concerning…list these for me

What is it you believe it means that the Church is infallible? and how does that relate to Scandal?

What other things do you view as immoral?

 

[Apolojez]

I have looked through all of your posts and can’t find a single one that doesn’t deal with homosexuality and your arguments against the Catholic Church. So, my question is: Why are you here? No matter how you rationalize homosexuality, the Church is NEVER going to change its stand. No matter how you try to disparage the Catholic Church’s teachings, she will never change to accommodate heretical ideas. If you don’t like it, leave! It’s that simple. There are hundreds and thousands of other Christian churches who embrace homosexuality and homosexuals, and have varying degrees of “rules” that are easily bent to fit just about anyone. You can worship the way you desire…that is, IF that is truly what you desire…which I don’t think is the case. Like so many other malcontents who seem to gravitate to Catholic and/or conservative sites, you have an agenda. It isn’t to “learn” or to ask questions, it’s to wield a personal axe.

I didn’t realize just how progressive our new pope is and that he supported same-sex unions in Argentina a few years back and has also hinted that priestly celibacy is merely a discipline and can always be changed.

 

[R_C]

I didn’t realize just how progressive our new pope is and that he supported same-sex unions in Argentina a few years back and has also hinted that priestly celibacy is merely a discipline and can always be changed.

A-hem…what are you trying to do here? Take it easy and realize you just spoke a lot of …nonsense (I’m being kind now) at the very least, factually inaccurate.

 

[Sister_Terese]

A-hem…what are you trying to do here? Take it easy and realize you just spoke a lot of …nonsense (I’m being kind now) at the very least, factually inaccurate.

Thank you. I appreciate your help in this regard.

 

[Sister_Terese]

I didn’t realize just how progressive our new pope is and that he supported same-sex unions in Argentina a few years back and has also hinted that priestly celibacy is merely a discipline and can always be changed.

When making such ugly and base accusations, it would be incumbent upon you (the accuser) to provide proof of your allegations. Please do so. Otherwise, keep your suspicions and groundless accusations to yourself.

 

[CopticChristian]

Another example, a gay couple in a loving relationship who adopts children. The children brought up in a loving environment, do well and are happy. Compared to a situation where gays can’t adopt, the children grow up in care, become criminals as adults, cause further people to suffer and spend most of their adult life in gaol.

Rabbit,

This is not true…

Homosexual Couples and Parenting:
What Science Can and Cannot Say

by A. Dean Byrd, PhD, MBA, MPH7

7 A. Dean Byrd, PhD, MBA, MPH, is president/CEO of the Thrasher Research Fund and Faculty, University of Utah School of Medicine, with appointments in the Department of Family and Preventive Medicine and in the Department of Psychiatry. He is also adjunct professor of family studies at the University of Utah.

What is clear is that there is little support in the scientific literature for the
“scholarly consensus” that lesbian, gay, and bisexual families with children are just
as stable as heterosexual families with children. The evidence itself on the stability of
lesbian, gay, and bisexual parents compared to heterosexual parents is scarce. Further
research is needed that controls for parental sexual orientation, parental gender, presence
of children, and stepfamily status simultaneously with respect to predicting adult sexual
relationship instability.

The ways in which homosexual relationships differ in terms of monogamy, mental
health, physical health, the stability of homosexual men and women, and the longevity
of homosexual relationships must be considered in terms of potential impact on children.
Given the prevailing legal and psychological standard—the best interest of the child—
one can reasonably conclude that, based on this standard, the optimal health, well-being,
and best interest of a child may not be best served by homosexual family structures. The
current available research does not demonstrate cause-and-effect relationships, but risk
factors are beginning to emerge, such as those highlighted by Stacey and Biblarz (2001)
and other researchers cited in this paper. Those studies strongly contradict nearly twenty
years of prior studies indicating there were no differences between children reared by
heterosexual versus homosexual couples. Such risk factors must be fully investigated
because the health and well-being of children—their best interest—remains the gold
standard (Byrd, 2010).

and

Child Outcomes Associated with Lesbian Parenting:
Comments on Biblarz and Stacey’s 2010 Report

Walter R. Schumm
Kansas State University

Address correspondence to Dr. Walter R. Schumm, School of Family Studies and Human
Services, Justin Hall, Kansas State University, 1700 Anderson Avenue, Manhattan,
KS 66506-1403 USA (e-mail: schumm@ksu.edu). This report is a revision of a paper
presented February 16, 2010, at Hotel Nikko in Mexico City, Mexico, at a symposium on
adoption sponsored by Renacer (www.Renacer.com.mx).

To this author’s knowledge, there have not been any studies showing that if
parents do not value “self-control” in their children, the children will develop lower
levels of self-control—but such a connection is plausible based on the notion that “if you
don’t aim for it, you will probably miss it.” Support for this hypothesis may be found in
a recent study by Moffitt, Arseneault, Belsky, et al. (2011) that reported that better self-
control in childhood predicted positive outcomes in adulthood in terms of fewer criminal
convictions, fewer financial problems, less chance of becoming a single parent, better
physical health, and less substance abuse.

If poor parental self-control is associated with the development of poor self-
control in adulthood, as well as childhood, it is worth noting that Trocki, Drabble, and
Midanik (2009)—although they did not control for presence of children—found that
same-sex sexual orientation was associated with greater impulsivity (lack of self-control)
and substance abuse among adults. While the perfect set of studies doesn’t yet exist, a
plausible hypothesis is that sexual orientation in parents might be related to poor parental
self-control or impulsivity (Trocki et al., 2009), which might predict lower expectations
for children in terms of self-control (Bos, 2004)—which would also predict lower levels of self-control in young children and would ultimately predict lower levels of self-control
in adulthood and greater adult difficulties (Moffitt et al., 2011).

The Dutch heterosexual parents were also significantly higher on structure and
limit-setting in the 2007 report (biological mothers, ES = 0.46, p < .05; social mothers
versus heterosexual fathers, ES = 0.37, p < .001). Biblarz and Stacey (2010a) also cited
MacCallum and Golombok (2004) for providing evidence on “disciplinary control”;
however, that study found that heterosexual mothers in two-parent families exercised less
disciplinary “aggression” than did lesbian mothers (ES = 0.23) and that children rated
the quality of heterosexual maternal discipline higher (ES = 0.64). Thus, some research
seems to indicate that heterosexual parents may be doing better than lesbian mothers in
areas that may be critical for socializing children to become better citizens as adults.

Where is your evidence for the resultant criminals from other than the gay adoption?

 

[Michael_Allen]

The clear and constant teaching of the Catholic Church has always been that homosexual acts, like sexual acts outside of marriage, are intrinsicly evil.

It seems to me that the churches have only recently begun to think about loving and stable same-sex relationships. That’s a context somewhat different to the historical view. That doesn’t make those loving relationships right per se, but may give us a reason to pause, talk (especially with those couples) and reflect for a period of time.

Anyway, that’s the way I see it, but I accept that there are strong opinions held on both sides.

God bless +

 

[Michael_Allen]

When making such ugly and base accusations, it would be incumbent upon you (the accuser) to provide proof of your allegations. Please do so. Otherwise, keep your suspicions and groundless accusations to yourself.

The news feeds were full of those reports yesterday, from a journalist who said he received a call from Pope Francis in the past. That’s not to say he is reliable, but google Pope Francis and same sex unions and you’ll find all the major news corps covering the story yesterday. Priestly celibacy is, of course, a discipline that could be changed. I imagine it will be, in time, as momentum does seem to be building (helped by the Ordinariate) though I pray we still get many men choosing to dedicate their whole life to their priesthood. Pope Francis apparently said in the past that he supported priestly celibacy, but that the discipline could be changed (pretty uncontroversial, I think). Again a Google search will show multiple news feeds from yesterday.

 

[Apolojez]

A-hem…what are you trying to do here? Take it easy and realize you just spoke a lot of …nonsense (I’m being kind now) at the very least, factually inaccurate.

No need for the defensive friend. I’m simply discussing a moral issue. If I’m wrong then please correct me. He did suggest civil unions as cardinal in Argentina as opposed to allowing gay marriage did he not? And although he is opposed to it, he did point out that the celibacy of priests “can change” did he not? This suggests that he at the very least has an open mind when discussing moral issues doesn’t it? Don’t get offended with me for bringing it up.

Nobody is suggesting total upheaval in the CC. I have social views and I have religious views. I personally would be open to allowing priests to marry and allowing women priests someday but that’s just my opinion. Now socially I believe in complete equality across the board.

 

[Apolojez]

When making such ugly and base accusations, it would be incumbent upon you (the accuser) to provide proof of your allegations. Please do so. Otherwise, keep your suspicions and groundless accusations to yourself.

Wow. And peace be unto you as well sister. As cardinal in 2010 when Argentina was considering legalizing gay marriage he suggested civil unions instead. He could have stuck with the same Church stance on homosexuality but he chose to go a different path. This says he at the very least has an open mind.

Last year, during an interview, he mentioned being “dazzled” by a woman while he was a young seminarian. Which I thought was a wonderful thing to share. He noted that celibacy was a disciple and therefore “can change” but said he was “firm” in his support of priestly celibacy. He acknowledged the Eastern rite are “very good priests” and said those pushing for the same in Roman Catholicism do so “with a certain pragmatism.”

The mere fact that he’s willing to discuss these issues is progress from the norm.

 

[Apolojez]

Rabbit,

This is not true…

and

Where is your evidence for the resultant criminals from other than the gay adoption?

This is a strawman argument CC. The first quote implies gay couples aren’t as stable because there isn’t enough research and yet the reality is there isn’t enough research because of the resistance to gays having children. Lack of research on the matter doesn’t prove that gays cannot raise children just as well as others.

The second implies gays inherently have no self control and therefore would be detrimental to a child’s development. Are we to believe heterosexuals have no issues with self control? You have to apply the same criteria to both sides for it to be a valid argument.

 

[Sister_Terese]

The news feeds were full of those reports yesterday, from a journalist who said he received a call from Pope Francis in the past. That’s not to say he is reliable, but google Pope Francis and same sex unions and you’ll find all the major news corps covering the story yesterday. Priestly celibacy is, of course, a discipline that could be changed. I imagine it will be, in time, as momentum does seem to be building (helped by the Ordinariate) though I pray we still get many men choosing to dedicate their whole life to their priesthood. Pope Francis apparently said in the past that he supported priestly celibacy, but that the discipline could be changed (pretty uncontroversial, I think). Again a Google search will show multiple news feeds from yesterday.

You’ve got to be kidding!!! I wouldn’t believe anything that comes from the mainstream media or the internet!

 

[CopticChristian]

This is a strawman argument CC. The first quote implies gay couples aren’t as stable because there isn’t enough research and yet the reality is there isn’t enough research because of the resistance to gays having children. Lack of research on the matter doesn’t prove that gays cannot raise children just as well as others.

The second implies gays inherently have no self control and therefore would be detrimental to a child’s development. Are we to believe heterosexuals have no issues with self control? You have to apply the same criteria to both sides for it to be a valid argument.

Apolojez,

No, the first instance is that not enough study is done on what information is available…and to suggest that we abandon the Best Interest of the Child to further Homoexuality is in my opinion misguided…

The second says that based on the information we have and more study of what we have should be done, not more use of Children to evaluate Immoral/Unnatural behavior in the best interest of a person performing Homosexual acts and not in the Best Interest of the Child.

 

[Apolojez]

Apolojez,

No, the first instance is that not enough study is done on what information is available…and to suggest that we abandon the Best Interest of the Child to further Homoexuality is in my opinion misguided…

The second says that based on the information we have and more study of what we have should be done, not more use of Children to evaluate Immoral/Unnatural behavior in the best interest of a person performing Homosexual acts and not in the Best Interest of the Child.

Thank you for replying CC. I suppose I feel we shouldn’t begin with a preconceived notion that homosexuality is harmful for a child because we really don’t know. I do agree that abuse of a child will improve their chances of repeating the abuse on others someday but that’s not the same issue here IMO. I’ve heard where serial killers had normal families despite their nature. Heck I’m sure we all know a few whackos with great kids.

 

[Apolojez]

You’ve got to be kidding!!! I wouldn’t believe anything that comes from the mainstream media or the internet!

May I ask would think less of him if he acknowledges these?

 

[CHRISTINE77]

Wow. And peace be unto you as well sister. As cardinal in 2010 when Argentina was considering legalizing gay marriage he suggested civil unions instead. He could have stuck with the same Church stance on homosexuality but he chose to go a different path. This says he at the very least has an open mind.

Last year, during an interview, he mentioned being “dazzled” by a woman while he was a young seminarian. Which I thought was a wonderful thing to share. He noted that celibacy was a disciple and therefore “can change” but said he was “firm” in his support of priestly celibacy. He acknowledged the Eastern rite are “very good priests” and said those pushing for the same in Roman Catholicism do so “with a certain pragmatism.”

The mere fact that he’s willing to discuss these issues is progress from the norm.

you are twisting his words:

In a letter asking for prayer from Argentine monasteries, Bergoglio called same sex marriage “an attempt to destroy God’s plan” and likened gay adoption to a form of discrimination against children.

He suggested civil unions in 2010 as an attempt to have an alternative to gay marriage. Actually, I have heard some US bishops are suggesting the same thing on the East Coast currently.

Civil unions are not marriages. Marriage is between a man and a woman ONLY, and that’s all it can ever be. Civil unions give homosexuals the same advantages as marriage, but without the travesty of being called a marriage.

Homosexuals will stop at nothing.

 

[Apolojez]

you are twisting his words:

In a letter asking for prayer from Argentine monasteries, Bergoglio called same sex marriage “an attempt to destroy God’s plan” and likened gay adoption to a form of discrimination against children.

He suggested civil unions in 2010 as an attempt to have an alternative to gay marriage. Actually, I have heard some US bishops are suggesting the same thing on the East Coast currently.

Civil unions are not marriages. Marriage is between a man and a woman ONLY, and that’s all it can ever be. Civil unions give homosexuals the same advantages as marriage, but without the travesty of being called a marriage.

Homosexuals will stop at nothing.

I’m not twisting his words. Obviously he doesn’t support gay marriage. He was a cardinal at the time. But because he suggested civil unions as a social compromise then that itself is HUGE. I personally agree that the solution is to preserve marriage as a religious sacrament yet allow secular civil unions with the same social rights as a marriage.

I don’t believe homosexuals should stop until they are treated equally. Asking for society to not treat them as lesser human beings isn’t much IMO.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

I’m not twisting his words. Obviously he doesn’t support gay marriage. He was a cardinal at the time. But because he suggested civil unions as a social compromise then that itself is HUGE. I personally agree that the solution is to preserve marriage as a religious sacrament yet allow secular civil unions with the same social rights as a marriage.

I don’t believe homosexuals should stop until they are treated equally. Asking for society to not treat them as lesser human beings isn’t much IMO.

Well, I am glad to hear this. I thought you were leaning toward gay marriage from your posts. I am okay with civil unions also. But I do think homosexual advocates are absolutely pushing for marriage.

 

[laircy]

I’m sure many people, if given the choice between having a child raised by a loving and compassionate gay man and a drunkard racist wife-beater who’s straight would actually need time to think about it. The problem is that in the first case, the the main word most people see is “gay” rather than “loving and compassionate”.

I highly doubt anyone is saying that a “drunkard racist wife-beater who’s straight” is better simply because it is a “straight” relationship. No. This is a false dichotomy. The second one is unacceptable for obvious reasons, and the first, no matter how “loving and compassionate” one plays it off, is unacceptable as well, because this is necessarily raising children to believe that what is objectively wrong is acceptable. If love is to will the good of the other, it is not love to teach and show children to approve of sin (which is, by definition, not good).

 

[CopticChristian]

This is a strawman argument CC. The first quote implies gay couples aren’t as stable because there isn’t enough research and yet the reality is there isn’t enough research because of the resistance to gays having children. Lack of research on the matter doesn’t prove that gays cannot raise children just as well as others.

The second implies gays inherently have no self control and therefore would be detrimental to a child’s development. Are we to believe heterosexuals have no issues with self control? You have to apply the same criteria to both sides for it to be a valid argument.

Apolojez,

When considering Homosexual parenting you have to examine the inherent unstable nature of the Homosexual…

psychcentral.com/lib/2011/higher-risk-of-mental-health-problems-for-homosexuals/

His team looked at rates of mental disorder among 7,403 adults living in the UK, whose details were obtained from the Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey 2007. Rates of depression, anxiety, obsessive compulsive disorder, phobia, self-harm, suicidal thoughts, and alcohol and drug dependence were significantly higher in homosexual respondents.

Four percent had a depressive episode in the last week, compared to two percent of heterosexual people. The rate of alcohol dependence was ten percent versus five percent, and for self-harming it was nine percent versus five percent.

The proportion of homosexual people who described themselves as being fairly or very happy was 30 percent, versus 40 percent for heterosexual people.

Dr. Chakraborty believes the findings are “very worrying.” He said, “This study is the first time the mental health and well-being of gay, lesbian and bisexual people has been examined in a random sample of the population.

“Our study confirms earlier work carried out in the UK, USA and Holland which suggests that non-heterosexual people are at higher risk of mental disorder, suicidal ideation, substance misuse and self-harm than heterosexual people.”

traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/a02rStatistcs.html

• 73% of psychiatrists say homosexuals are less happy than the average person, and of those psychiatrists, 70% say that the unhappiness is NOT due to social stigmatization (13).
• 25-33% of homosexuals and lesbians are alcoholics (11).
• Of homosexuals questioned in one study reports that 43% admit to 500 or more partners in a lifetime, 28% admit to 1000 or more in a lifetime, and of these people, 79% say that half of those partners are total strangers, and 70% of those sexual contacts are one night stands (or, as one homosexual admits in the film “The Castro”, one minute stands) (3). Also, it is a favorite past-time of many homosexuals to go to “cruisy areas” and have anonymous sex.
• 78% of homosexuals are affected by STDs (20).
• Judge John Martaugh, chief magistrate of the New York City Criminal Court has said, “Homosexuals account for half the murders in large cities” (10).
• Captain William Riddle of the Los Angeles Police says, “30,000 sexually abused children in Los Angeles were victims of homosexuals” (10).
• 50% of suicides can be attributed to homosexuals (10).

freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1502263/posts

The Statistics on Homosexuality and its Effects
Catholic Apologetics International ^
Posted on Friday, October 14, 2005 2:03:29 AM by Exton1
The Statistics on Homosexuality and its Effects Catholic Apologetics International

So, what you want to do is expose children to parenting by people that have a higher rate of depression, substance abuse and suicide…what is going on with these people? You want them to have more children to parent?