Are Gay Pride festivals immoral?

[camerong]

Really? Why does everyone always throw that one in there?

Probably because incest is potentially the closest analogy–incest can occur between two loving, consensual adults, and yet it is still wrong.

 

[Slayd]

Probably because incest is potentially the closest analogy–incest can occur between two loving, consensual adults, and yet it is still wrong.

I was merely curious as to why someone would think that a gay pride parade was celebrating incest.

 

[Dale_M]

Probably because incest is potentially the closest analogy–incest can occur between two loving, consensual adults, and yet it is still wrong.

hmm… I’m not so sure about that. Adultery might come closer, since it is not illegal, but still regarded as sinful. Incest is illegal, which homosexual activity is not, at least in Western democracies.

However, even the adultery comparison may fail, since it involves breaking vows to another person, which is not the case in homosexual behavior.

Perhaps a better comparison would be what is regarded a sinful, self-destructive behavior. Perhaps drunkenness?

 

[Dale_M]

Again I will say, IT IS GOD NOT YOU TO JUDGE WHAT IS AND IS NOT SINFUL.

Gary, to some extent you have a point. After all, Jesus did say we are not to judge:
Matthew 7:1-5:

1
1 2 "Stop judging, that you may not be judged.
2
For as you judge, so will you be judged, and the measure with which you measure will be measured out to you.
3
Why do you notice the splinter in your brother’s eye, but do not perceive the wooden beam in your own eye?
4
How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me remove that splinter from your eye,’ while the wooden beam is in your eye?
5
You hypocrite, 3 remove the wooden beam from your eye first; then you will see clearly to remove the splinter from your brother’s eye.

usccb.org/nab/bible/matthew/matthew7.htm

However, the Catholic Church does claim the ability to determine what is sinful behavior. Its one of its essential beliefs: that its teachings on faith and morals are infallible. Please note, this is not a matter of individual Catholics deciding what is right and what is wrong. It simply is a matter of individual Catholics being aware of what is considered revealed Truth.

Since the Church teaches that homosexual behavior is sinful, and since we are obligated to look after the welfare of our brothers and sisters, fraternal correction is appropriate. In fraternal correction, we seek to warn others who are sinning, perhaps without their understanding of the dangers of their behavior. The real issue is being charitable when correcting our brothers and sisters - this is something on which many Christians fail, especially online.

 

[buffalo]

CHOICE hmm You missed what I said. Did you choose be straight and who you are? Or did you grow and develop and be encouraged to be WHO YOU ARE . It is also written WE ARE NOT TO JUDGE. Let God .

If one continues reading they will come across fraternal correction. True Christian charity demands fraternal correction.

 

[white_sheep]

This is an area where the much talk is needed.

No it isn’t. The talk is over, the jury is in, the answers are clear.

Is being gay a choice?

Generally, no. Some may actively choose it but not that I know of. However, failure to be chaste according to one’s station in life is a choice.

Is two people of the same sex, that love each other and lead a moral life wrong?

Definitely not. If I may infer by this statement that you are implying that they are living in an actively homosexual relationship, then the answer is no and they are not leading a moral life.

Jesus law is a law of love not hate.

Certainly. And he loves it when we follow his command and live our lives in chastity according to our state in life.

I really think this an area that only God himself can answer.

You think incorrectly. The Magisterium has answered the questions.

 

[camerong]

hmm… I’m not so sure about that. Adultery might come closer, since it is not illegal, but still regarded as sinful. Incest is illegal, which homosexual activity is not, at least in Western democracies.

However, even the adultery comparison may fail, since it involves breaking vows to another person, which is not the case in homosexual behavior.

Perhaps a better comparison would be what is regarded a sinful, self-destructive behavior. Perhaps drunkenness?

Incest is not illegal in most places, to my knowledge. Marrying a close relative is illegal, but there is no law against adult brothers and sisters having sex, and in fact, such a law would very likely be considered unconstitutional, just like laws against sodomy.

I think incest between loving adults actually is the very closest analogy to homosexual sex. Such a sexual relationship, unlike adultery, could involve hurting no one and breaking no vows. Drunkenness, unlike incest, is objectively dangerous to oneself and others, and is objectively unhealthy. Incest, if it produces no offspring, is only wrong because it is seen as immoral, not because it contains any dangers or objectively harms anyone. I think someone defending homosexual sex as moral would, if pushed, have to admit that incest between consenting adults is also moral (for the sake of clarity, we’ll imagine non-vaginal incestuous sex, so there is no chance of harmed offspring; in that situation, contrived as it is, there is nothing objectively wrong with it outside of morality).

 

[Dale_M]

Incest is not illegal in most places, to my knowledge. It is in almost all of the United States.

There are a few states in the US which do not punish incest, but most do. Marriage laws between closely related adults are somewhat more lenient, but not much.

Incest is a statutory rather than common law prohibition.35 All fifty states and the District of Columbia have some variation of a prohibition of incest on the books; these include both criminal proscriptions (punishing either sexual behavior or marriage between persons too closely related) and marriage proscriptions (voiding marriages between persons too closely related or prohibiting clerks from issuing such persons marriage licenses).36

The criminal statutes vary widely; indeed, a few states impose no criminal penalties whatsoever on incestuous behavior. Rhode Island repealed its criminal incest statute in 1989,37 Ohio’s criminal statute targets only parental figures,38 and New Jersey does not punish acts committed when both parties are over eighteen years old.39 Other states, however, have a wide variety of criminal penalties for an assortment of behaviors and relationships. Massachusetts threatens up to twenty years in prison for engaging in “sexual activities” with relatives nearer than first cousins,40 Hawaii up to five years for “sexual penetration” with certain blood relatives or in-laws (such as a motherin- law),41 and Utah up to five years for “sexual intercourse” with a first cousin — even a “half”-first cousin.42 Some states have begun to merge incest with family-neutral rape or statutory rape laws,43 which accounts for at least some of the current variety of sanctions.

The marital prohibitions vary only slightly less than the criminal penalties, as all fifty states and the District of Columbia still have some prohibition on marriage between certain relatives, although a few states make limited exceptions.

harvardlawreview.org/issues/119/june06/note/inbred_obscurity.pdf

 

[garyfigurski]

Some of you are missing what I said. I was not making a judgment if they are right or wrong! The CHURCH (which is also ALL of us) need to pray for the Holy Spirit. Joan of Arc ref. was to show that The Church can error, as The Church is made up from mankind who can error. Which is why Jesus left us the Holy Spirit to guide His Church. When the Holy Spirit (in my knowlege) speaks to The Church, through our Holy Father He will speak an infallible statement. IF SOMEONE KNOWS OF AN INFALLIBLE STATEMENT, from the Holy Father-please let me know. In the meantime do not judge, and yes you are no matter how you sugarcoat it .Again LET GOD JUDGE. IS THERE AN INFALLIBLE statement on this from The Church, that I don’t know of? If not we need to pray not judge.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

Some of you are missing what I said. I was not making a judgment if they are right or wrong! The CHURCH (which is also ALL of us) need to pray for the Holy Spirit. Joan of Arc ref. was to show that The Church can error, as The Church is made up from mankind who can error. Which is why Jesus left us the Holy Spirit to guide His Church. When the Holy Spirit (in my knowlege) speaks to The Church, through our Holy Father He will speak an infallible statement. IF SOMEONE KNOWS OF AN INFALLIBLE STATEMENT, from the Holy Father-please let me know. In the meantime do not judge, and yes you are no matter how you sugarcoat it .Again LET GOD JUDGE. IS THERE AN INFALLIBLE statement on this from The Church, that I don’t know of? If not we need to pray not judge.

Are you saying it is we who err, and not the militant homosexuals who insist on parading (literally) their sins in public?

 

[garyfigurski]

Are you saying it is we who err, and not the militant homosexuals who insist on parading (literally) their sins in public?

Read it again. No right or wrong statement was made. Sins? you a “lumping a group together, We are judged by God one on one! Judging a whole group of people with one rash statement IS WRONG. I asked if there was an infallible statement issued by The Holy Father now or in the past, on a pride festival on having pride on who you are. How do you know by saying “sin” how EACH ONE leads there lives? " LET HE WHO IS WITHOUT SIN CAST THE FIRST STONE”

 

[tvdxer]

That is disordered. To be proud of having a mental disorder makes no sense. As I said above, it would be the equivalent of having a “depression pride” festival. This is clearly wrong, for a mental disorder is an ontological evil (even if it’s not a moral evil). That is, by being proud of having a mental disorder, one loves an evil, that is, a good (attraction to the opposite sex) where that good ought to be, and loves a disordered “good” itself (attraction to the same sex).

ldpride.net/deafpride.htm

Although “deaf pride” seems to me to actually be “pride” in the strength of the deaf in facing adversity and the established.“deaf culture” (American Sign Language, etc.), rather than in simply not being able to hear.

Nonetheless, I think such events are at the height of immorality. They are an opportunity to flaunt debauchery: men kissing men, women kissing women, crossdressing, “spanking booths”, etc. The whole point of “gay pride” is to be “proud and out” of being an ACTIVE homosexual (or bisexual / transgendered), which of course implies sodomy and therefore is gravely immoral. The agenda of the philosophy behind these events is to make the local culture accept and accomodate sodomy, which it (the philosophy, not so much the events) has largely been successful in doing, as evinced by the jump in tolerance of and indifference to homosexual relationships even in the last decade.

 

[garyfigurski]

ldpride.net/deafpride.htm

Although “deaf pride” seems to me to actually be “pride” in the strength of the deaf in facing adversity and the established.“deaf culture” (American Sign Language, etc.), rather than in simply not being able to hear.

Nonetheless, I think such events are at the height of immorality. They are an opportunity to flaunt debauchery: men kissing men, women kissing women, crossdressing, “spanking booths”, etc. The whole point of “gay pride” is to be “proud and out” of being an ACTIVE homosexual (or bisexual / transgendered), which of course implies sodomy and therefore is gravely immoral. The agenda of the philosophy behind these events is to make the local culture accept and accomodate sodomy, which it (the philosophy, not so much the events) has largely been successful in doing, as evinced by the jump in tolerance of and indifference to homosexual relationships even in the last decade.

 

[WatchingMedia]

absolutely not.

What are you using as your Catholic source of information? Pope Nancy?

Yes. Anything that promotes the homosexual lifestyle and homosexual acts is not only immoral, but gravely sinful. Encouraging the homosexual lifestyle is sinful.

CCC 2nd Edition:

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents** homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,**141 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. **Under no circumstances can they be approved. **

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

 

[garyfigurski]

What you say has some truth.But that is not the intent of all gay people.You cant “lump” a whole group as right or wrong. Are all people who are not gay all moral? Each of us will be judged by GOD (not each other) Lets look at each person for who they are and stop lumping people into groups.

 

[WatchingMedia]

Read it again. No right or wrong statement was made. Sins? you a “lumping a group together, We are judged by God one on one! Judging a whole group of people with one rash statement IS WRONG. I asked if there was an infallible statement issued by The Holy Father now or in the past, on a pride festival on having pride on who you are. How do you know by saying “sin” how EACH ONE leads there lives? " LET HE WHO IS WITHOUT SIN CAST THE FIRST STONE”

Yes. Read the “Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition” revised in accordance with the official Latin text promulgated by Pope John Paul II, first printed in the US in March 2000.
This is the “authentic reference text” of the Catholic Church for teaching.
The Holy See holds the copyright.
The Imprimi Potest was by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger of the Interdicasterial Commission for the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
Read it from cover to cover.

You are not judging a person; you are approving and promoting sin - the gay lifestyle.
1868 Sin is a personal act. Moreover, we have a responsibility for the sins committed by others when we cooperate in them:

• by participating directly and voluntarily in them;
• by ordering, advising, praising, or approving them;
• by not disclosing or not hindering them when we have an obligation to do so;
• by protecting evil-doers.

 

[Scoobyshme]

Clearly it is immoral because it creates a scandal. It tries to make something that is a sin seem like it’s somehow not a sin.

 

[Dale_M]

Joan of Arc ref. was to show that The Church can error, as The Church is made up from mankind who can error. Which is why Jesus left us the Holy Spirit to guide His Church. When the Holy Spirit (in my knowlege) speaks to The Church, through our Holy Father He will speak an infallible statement. IF SOMEONE KNOWS OF AN INFALLIBLE STATEMENT, from the Holy Father-please let me know.

Gary, the charism of infallibility extends beyond certain, rare, statements by the pope. It includes the entire teaching authority (Magisterium) of the Church on matters of faith and morals.
Catechism of the Catholic Church:

I. MORAL LIFE AND THE MAGISTERIUM OF THE CHURCH

2032 The Church, the “pillar and bulwark of the truth,” "has received this solemn command of Christ from the apostles to announce the saving truth."74 "To the Church belongs the right always and everywhere to announce moral principles, including those pertaining to the social order, and to make judgments on any human affairs to the extent that they are required by the fundamental rights of the human person or the salvation of souls."75

2033 The Magisterium of the Pastors of the Church in moral matters is ordinarily exercised in catechesis and preaching, with the help of the works of theologians and spiritual authors. Thus from generation to generation, under the aegis and vigilance of the pastors, the “deposit” of Christian moral teaching has been handed on, a deposit composed of a characteristic body of rules, commandments, and virtues proceeding from faith in Christ and animated by charity. Alongside the Creed and the Our Father, the basis for this catechesis has traditionally been the Decalogue which sets out the principles of moral life valid for all men.

2034 The Roman Pontiff and the bishops are "authentic teachers, that is, teachers endowed with the authority of Christ, who preach the faith to the people entrusted to them, the faith to be believed and put into practice."76 The ordinary and universal Magisterium of the Pope and the bishops in communion with him teach the faithful the truth to believe, the charity to practice, the beatitude to hope for.

2035 The supreme degree of participation in the authority of Christ is ensured by the charism of infallibility. This infallibility extends as far as does the deposit of divine Revelation; it also extends to all those elements of doctrine, including morals, without which the saving truths of the faith cannot be preserved, explained, or observed.77

2051 The infallibility of the Magisterium of the Pastors extends to all the elements of doctrine, including moral doctrine, without which the saving truths of the faith cannot be preserved, expounded, or observed.

vatican.va/archive/catechism/p3s1c3a3.htm

The Catholic Church’s prohibition on homosexual acts is an infallible teaching, because its teaching authority on faith and morals is infallible. The infallibility of the Magisterium is a fundamental tenet of the Catholic faith. Statements by the pope are not needed to make a teaching infallible.

 

[WatchingMedia]

What you say has some truth.But that is not the intent of all gay people.You cant “lump” a whole group as right or wrong. Are all people who are not gay all moral? Each of us will be judged by GOD (not each other) Lets look at each person for who they are and stop lumping people into groups.

Some truth?
“The Catholic Church is not a salad bar. You may not pick and choose what you want to believe”. Cardinal John O’Conner

You list yourself as Catholic. Your belief system is contrary to the teachings of the Church which may be the product of poor catechesis.
You now know that the CCC 2nd Edition exists, and therefore now have an **obligation **to read it to form a correct conscience.

 

[catherine126]

Originally Posted by tvdxer View Post
ldpride.net/deafpride.htm

Although “deaf pride” seems to me to actually be “pride” in the strength of the deaf in facing adversity and the established.“deaf culture” (American Sign Language, etc.), rather than in simply not being able to hear.

I think that gay pride, therefore, could theoretically be moral IF it were taking pride in the strength necessary to face their “cross,” e.g. living a chaste life in spite of same-sex attractions. (Catholics out there that struggle with this, you could set such a positive example! Come to us!)

Gay pride will be a solid part of our culture for a long time to come. I agree that a counter-celebration of chastity might be valuable. I certainly had never received any education about this virtue. Most of the time, we just hear that “The Church says x y and z are wrong,” instead of what’s right and what the potential benefits are.

I am sad to say that I have had gay friends who have been beaten up and insulted simply due to the way they dress (perhaps more masculine or feminine than current gender norms.) That doesn’t even have to do with their sexual behaviors! In fact, some of these friends have been more chaste than I and other school friends were (Oh my Jesus, forgive us our sins.) People who experience their gender or sexual attractions differently do feel unsafe in our nation’s schools, and that seems wrong to me. I don’t suppose that gay pride festivals are a viable way of promoting their basic human rights, especially in light of CCC 1868, but I am indeed troubled about creating emotionally safe spaces for all sinners, regardless of what their particular crosses are.

1868 Sin is a personal act. Moreover, we have a responsibility for the sins committed by others when we cooperate in them:

• by participating directly and voluntarily in them;

• by ordering, advising, praising, or approving them;

• by not disclosing or not hindering them when we have an obligation to do so;

• by protecting evil-doers.