Are Gay Pride festivals immoral?

  • Thread starter Thread starter coolcatholicguy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I personally am disappointed by the fact that (at least in Finland) the general population is so liberal that if anyone in any way disapproves of the homosexual “lifestyle” and for example opposes gay “marriage”, that person is immediately branded a bigot or even a Neo-Nazi. It’s very sad. That said, I also think that these Gay Pride festivals are immoral, but most Finns seem to disagree.
 
God asks us to rise above our drives and instincts. Gay pride parades are all about an adoration of sexual perversion and promiscuity outside one man one woman marriage. They celebrate and in your face middle finger to all we call holy. They exhibit public nudity and simulated and sometimes not simulated public sex. They are about pride the greatest of sins.
 
ProPatria said:
I personally am disappointed by the fact that (at least in Finland) the general population is so liberal that if anyone in any way disapproves of the homosexual “lifestyle” and for example opposes gay “marriage”, that person is immediately branded a bigot or even a Neo-Nazi. It’s very sad. That said, I also think that these Gay Pride festivals are immoral, but most Finns seem to disagree.
Click to expand...
If Catholics defended their faith with anything approaching the zeal of militant homosexualists, the world would not be in such a sorry state.
 
Not only are they wrong (what with the mindless debauchery associated with such “festivals”), they’re also darn stupid. I don’t see straight people asking to celebrate their sexuality. :rolleyes:
 
coolcatholicguy said:
I’m not saying I believe in gay pride, I’m just asking because my city recently had one.
Click to expand...
You betcha. First of all active homosexuality is acting against Church doctrine. Publishing the propensity and being proud of it is leading our society in the wrong direction. Patenerships are between male and female only.
 
The commandment of love is not a general one and it does not follow the craziness of the world or my own moods.
Love as I have loved you.
The beauty of life is in discovering how Christ loves me and you and not in all the rest.

About being gay I think that the Bible has already the answer to those childish questions… Sodom and Gomorrah as an example.
In the Catechism of the Catholic Church there are the 4 mortal sins that cry to heaven for vengeance and
The sin of impurity against nature –Sodomy and homosexual relations (Genesis 18:20)
is one of them.
Do you have the minimum idea of how much experience of God are you missing with all this?
 
garyfigurski said:
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.
Click to expand...
You are completely correct that people with same sex attraction can not be lumped together. Those who are living a chaste lifestyle are not (necessarily) living in sin. Those who are engaging in homosexual acts certainly are in a state of mortal sin, based upon many criteria (Holy Scripture, Church doctrine, Magisterium teaching, engaging in sex outside of marriage, etc.).

No one claims people without SSA are necessarily in a state of grace either. They could for example, engage in sex outside of marriage (as do all who commit homosexual acts, by definition), steal, cheat, kill, etc. and similarly be in mortal sin.

No one is lumping anyone into groups. No need. However, if you are a faithful Catholic then you accept the teaching of the Church who represents Christ on earth.
 
jjdrury81 said:
absolutely not.
Click to expand...
I like you.
una_fides said:
They are an abomination to God. Read about what happened at Sodom and Gomorrah.
Click to expand...
This statement is inappropriate and uncalled for. It is exclusive towards an entire faction of strong Catholic people and believers. Sodom and Gomorrah was not] about the homosexual act. It was about desert hospitality as well as the possibility of creating demigods by having sex with angels and spiritual beings, violating the First Commandment.
 
GenerationChi said:
This statement is inappropriate and uncalled for. It is exclusive towards an entire faction of strong Catholic people and believers. Sodom and Gomorrah was not] about the homosexual act. It was about desert hospitality as well as the possibility of creating demigods by having sex with angels and spiritual beings, violating the First Commandment.
Click to expand...
Do you believe that the Bible is the Word of God and as such cannot contain any error?
 
The Word of the Lord God Almighty the Immutable Creator of the Universe:

Leviticus 18:22-30 “Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind: because it is an abomination. Thou shalt not copulate with any beast: neither shalt thou be defiled with it. A woman shall not lie down to a beast, nor copulate with it: because it is a heinous crime. Defile not yourselves with any of these things with which all the nations have been defiled, which I will cast out before you, And with which the land is defiled: the abominations of which I will visit, that it may vomit out its inhabitants. Keep ye my ordinances and my judgments: and do not any of these abominations. Neither any of your own nation, nor any stranger that sojourneth among you. For all these detestable things the inhabitants of the land have done, that were before you, and have defiled [the land]. Beware then, lest in like manner, it vomit you also out, if you do the like things: as it vomited out the nation that was before you. Every soul that shall commit any of these abominations, shall perish from the midst of his people. Keep my commandments. Do not the things which they have done, that have been before you: and be not defiled therein. I am the Lord your God.”
1Ki 14:24 There were also the effeminate in the land, and they did according to all the abominations of the people, whom the Lord had destroyed before the face of the children of Israel.
What, you may ask was the penalty that in that time God established for homosexuality??
Lev 20:13 If any one lie with a man as with a woman, both have committed an abomination: let them be put to death. Their blood be upon them.
But that was the Old Testament you say. What about the New?

Romans 1:26-32 “For this cause, God delivered them up to shameful affections. For their women have changed the natural use into that use which is against nature. And, in like manner, the men also, leaving the natural use of the women, have burned in their lusts, one towards another: men with men, working that which is filthy and receiving in themselves the recompense which was due to their error. And as they liked not to have God in their knowledge, God delivered them up to a reprobate sense, to do those things which are not convenient. Being filled with all iniquity, malice, fornication, avarice, wickedness: full of envy, murder, contention, deceit, malignity: whisperers, Detractors, hateful to God, contumelious, proud, haughty, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Foolish, dissolute: without affection, without fidelity, without mercy. Who, having known the justice of God, did not understand that they who do such things, are worthy of death: and not only they that do them, but they also that consent to them that do them.”
1 Corinthians 6:9-10 “Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God? Do not err: Neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers: Nor the effeminate nor liers with mankind nor thieves nor covetous nor drunkards nor railers nor extortioners shall possess the kingdom of God.”
This is serious life or death, heaven or hell stuff we are talking about and to parade such abominable behavior will most certainly bring about the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience. Disgusting sins must be confessed as what they are. We must love the sinner, but hate and detest the sin! To try to downplay it as if it’s not a big deal is to do an injustice to all those who hear. As Jesus said, “He that has ears to hear let him hear.”
 
Where do you think the term Sodomy came from ??? Hint: Sodom & Gomorrah.

Genesis 19:4-13 But before they went to bed, the men of the city beset the house, both young and old, all the people together. And they called Lot, and said to him: Where are the men that came in to thee at night? bring them out hither, that we may know them: Lot went out to them, and shut the door after him, and said: Do not so, I beseech you, my brethren, do not commit this evil. I have two daughters who, as yet, have not known man; I will bring them out to you, and abuse you them as it shall please you, so that you do no evil to these men, because they are come in under the shadow of my roof. But they said: Get thee back thither. And again: Thou camest in, said they, as a stranger, was it to be a judge? therefore we will afflict thee more than them. And they pressed very violently upon Lot: and they were even at the point of breaking open the doors. And behold the men put out their hand, and drew in Lot unto them, and shut the door. And them, that were without, they struck with blindness from the least to the greatest, so that they could not find the door. And they said to Lot: Hast thou here any of thine? son in law, or sons, or daughters, all that are thine bring them out of this city: For we will destroy this place, because their cry is grown loud before the Lord, who hath sent us to destroy them."
Notice how the text repeatedly refers to these angelic beings as “men.” Why is that significant? Because angels look like men. They assume that human likeness. Read the book of Tobit concerning how the angel Raphael could not be distinguished as anything more than a man. There is nothing in the text to indicate that the men / people of the city had any knowledge that these were angelic beings. All it states is that they were men. Lot tried to appease their insatiable lust by offering his own daughters, a serious sin though certainly a lesser evil, and the men would not accept. They wanted these men and were even willing to go to the point of violence to get to them. Such is the disgusting nature of lust out of control. It turns to rage.

I have seen how those who promote the homosexual agenda rage against not only those who actively oppose it but even against those who simply do not go along. What happened to freedom of speech and religion? Now they try to categorize anything that condemns a behavior as evil as “hate speech.” It is now a crime in some places just to preach the Word of God.

John 15:20 Remember my word that I said to you: The servant is not greater than his master. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you. If they have kept my word, they will keep yours also.

Luke 18:7-8 And will not God revenge his elect who cry to him day and night? And will he have patience in their regard? I say to you that he will quickly revenge them. But yet the Son of man, when he cometh, shall he find, think you, faith on earth?

I was honestly shocked to see the question as to whether these gay festivals are immoral. Of course they are! There can be no question. Look at the disgusting immodesty that takes place and how these abominable acts are flaunted as if they are good.
“And as they liked not to have God in their knowledge, God delivered them up to a reprobate sense, to do those things which are not convenient. … Who, having known the justice of God, did not understand that they who do such things, are worthy of death: and not only they that do them, but they also that consent to them that do them” (Rom 1:28,32)
 
una_fides said:
Do you believe that the Bible is the Word of God and as such cannot contain any error?
Click to expand...
I thank you for your question, put in a very respectful matter on a very difficult subject. So you know, I am a majoring in theology, specifically interested in Biblical exegesis and bearing a profound respect for it. Still, I believe that the Bible is the Word of God as told by God’s people with all the beauty and difficulties that come with that. It requires its reader to be conscious not only of his or her own biases - for its good and bad - but also to be knowledgeable of the historical and literary context of the text which is read. The text only becomes that much more beautiful in doing so.

As for your quotations from Leviticus, let us make light of the dangers of prooftexting. May I ask if you have ever eaten a lobster – or more generally – any shellfish (Leviticus 11:9-12). Is one who eats shellfish also committing “to’ebah” (often translated to English as abomination)? Should we damn them too? Or what of those indigenous people who eat bugs or snakes (Leviticus 11:41)? Shall we damn them because they were born in a situation that cannot afford them chicken or beef (perhaps in so similar a way to the homosexual population, born as they are)? Shall we even begin to damn women who wear pants (Deuteronomy 22:5)? The Hebrew word “to’ebah” is used in all of these passages. Where is the line between damnation and cultural exception?

Now that we’ve briefly talked about original languages by using the Hebrew “to’ebah”. I would now specific address the dangers of not referencing the original text by looking at your Romans passage. The Greek utilizes the terms “para physin” which is translated as “against nature” or “unnatural”. Romans 11:24 in the Greek also uses “para physin” which in this instance is in reference to the actions of God. You logically cannot damn homosexuals for acting in “para physin” and not also put into question the actions of God. So what does “para physin” actually mean? It is more accurately translated as “out of the ordinary”. One must then apprise “para physin” as a neutral phrase, and as a neutral phrase cannot be used in the absolute.

Beyond the aforementioned passages, l’d like to bring up Leviticus 25:44 in order to see the dangers of blindly accepting Scripture without proper discernment of its historical and literary context:

“As for the male and female slaves whom you may have, it is from the nations around you that you may acquire male and female slaves.” (Leviticus 25:44)

Shall we then, by the “Word of God” permit slavery purely based on the fact it is said in Leviticus? One might say that this is an archaic belief that is refuted by the New Testament, a law overturned by the Christian Scriptures. However, if one is to believe that the Scriptures contain absolutely zero contradictions or that religion is not itself organic, one cannot believe anything within the Bible is self-contradicting as is the case. However, if one does believe the Jewish Law is overturned by the Christian Scriptures, let me reference a few other passages:

“Servants, be submissive to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and gentle, but also to those who are unreasonable. (1 Peter 2: 18)

“Slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling, in singleness of heart, as you obey Christ;” (Ephesians 6:5)

What we have here are two passages, one attributed to the Rock of the Church and the other to the Apostle to the Gentiles. Does the Church, however, accept these wholly in our modern era? No, all Christians now denounce all that slavery is: an oppression of a minority. And is not our denial of gays’ and lesbians’ right to love also an oppression? What is stopping the Church for liberating homosexuals of tyranny except for an *ignorance and fear *of what they are? Or, with this new information, shall we revert back to injustice for the sake of preservation of fundamentalist theology?

(I wish now briefly to criticize unapologetic apologetics, though there is a great beauty in how a good apologist defends the faith. Apologetics assume that the faith has been the same for all time, however, any good historical theologian will know that the Early Christian Fathers were in constant debate. Some won out – for good or for ill – and that is how we have decided between orthodoxy and heresy. Even today, our faith is evolving. Let us recall Vatican II, a major overturning of Canon and Catechism.)
 
On the subject of sodomy, the Catholic Church boasts of itself usage of a treasury of knowledge from the Greek philosophers to art; look at any writing of Aquinas and you’ll know it’s true. So let’s look at the word sodomy itself; it’s a word dated in the 13th Century. It may derive itself from the city of Sodom, but it’s a relatively new term. Obviously this is much after the time of Christ. Indeed, a basic historical review of pre-Christianity would reveal a profound acceptance and tolerance of homosexuality and bisexuality amongst those who considered themselves heterosexuals.

Now onto the passage quoted, it is not about sleeping with men, but of** desert hospitality** (as I previously stated). The importance of this custom is found in Genesis 18:1-8, Judges 13:15, Exodus 2:20, Job 31:32 and abundantly in more passages. One can imagine how important it is to take in the stranger when a person lives in conditions as harsh as the desert, walking from place to place in lethal weather. It is something lost on those of us who’s travels are so accommodated by motels and diners, trains and cars. My interpretation highlights the importance of historical exegesis.

As a side conversation, it’s astonishing to me that anyone could begin to consider the rape of women a lesser evil than homosexual relations. Here, I’d criticize Lot for giving up his daughters so easily, then begin to question whether or not one can honestly consider women to be of some lesser race than men such that it is a “lesser evil”.** No one should be raped, whether they gay or straight woman, straight man or lesbian.** Indeed, this is a serious crime against faith; to believe that any human person – woman or gay – should be regarded without infinite dignity “rooted in his creation in the image and likeness of God” (CCC, 1700) is abhorrent. Excuse me for my bluntness if I believe that is archaic by every and any standard.

Blatant** discrimination against homosexuals has destroyed the unity of Christendom and even the faith lives of many would-be Christians**. You say that the promoters of the “homosexual agenda” rage against its opposition. I humbly put propose the** reality of the violence against homosexuals and those who are perceived to be homosexual**. They are beaten, violated, and murdered for being who they are. You ask what happened to freedom of speech, I ask what happened to the right to life, liberty, and happiness? Go and preach the Word of God, but what if it violates its purest basis: Love?

Yes, I am a gay man. However, I was also born and raised Catholic. I struggle to find a community in the Church that I love because I am rejected by so many of you. I feel called to vocation – a need that we feel deeply – and yet I am unwanted because I happen to have been born gay (Yes, born gay, for what good is it to me to choose homosexuality, to choose rejection, to choose discrimination, to put myself in danger). I did not choose to be gay, however it is a constant choice to remain in my Church. I hesitate to ask, must I leave because you hate my life so much? Remember, I am not merely a user-handle on a forum nor an amorphous blog a thousand miles away. I am a human person who bleeds and feels and thinks.

Now, I challenge you. Is it more important to preserve outdated and hateful theology than to love? Beyond Leviticus, beyond the Catechism, beyond the Magisterium, let us look at the Greatest Commandment handed down to us by Christ, Our Lord: “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Matthew 22:37). Indeed, if we cannot live up to that simple standard, we should no longer count ourselves as Christian.
 
Despite what has been said it still baffles me that gay pride festivals themselves are considered immoral. Even under the catechism, the festivals themselves are not the homosexual act. They are not orgies. I will concede that sexual activities go on, but they are far from sanctioned by the coordinators of such civic events. They are simply poor choices that any man or woman regardless of their sexuality could commit. A straight woman or man can commit adultery just as easily as a homosexual man or women.

To criticize the festival for that which is an accidental - speaking using the philosophical term - is illogical. That is like to criticize the whole Catholic Church - its history and its people - because in the 11th to 13th centuries the atrocities of the Crusades and Inquisition were committed. In fact, the hierarchy of the Church condoned, supported and licensed these atrocities against human dignity.

It seems to me that all of the hatred towards homosexuality stems from ignorance and bigotry. If the matter is dependent on procreation, than why can a sterile man and wife be married and have sex? If it is a matter of natural law, then why has it occurred in animals and why did God make people homosexual? Indeed, deeper than our sexuality, it seems what is most natural to humanity (as being created in the image of God) is love - which is shared between hetero- and homosexuals. Or even if it is about the story of Sodom, a historical-literary criticism reveals more. Moreover, this is how Ezekiel interprets the text:

“Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy.” - Ezekiel 16:49 – they tried to rape them instead, as we see. Rape and grave inhospitality are the sins, not the homosexual act alone.

Tell me why homogenital acts are wrong!

Don’t get me wrong. Even as a gay man myself, i would never condone the wantonness that occurs at gay pride festivals as it occurs without a love graced with God. However, I do support love and respect for one’s self and who one is despite the endangerment that entails.
 
GenerationChi said:
I thank you for your question, put in a very respectful matter on a very difficult subject. So you know, I am a majoring in theology, specifically interested in Biblical exegesis and bearing a profound respect for it. Still, I believe that the Bible is the Word of God as told by God’s people with all the beauty and difficulties that come with that. It requires its reader to be conscious not only of his or her own biases - for its good and bad - but also to be knowledgeable of the historical and literary context of the text which is read. The text only becomes that much more beautiful in doing so.
Click to expand...
It is essential to understand biases when reading and interpreting Scripture, and your biases are clearly made manifest in your following explanations. I understand that you have SSA and are an open homosexual and judging from your comments, you support it in all its manifestations, but God has revealed through Scripture, Tradition, and the Magisterium that acting out on SSA is a mortal sin, and it is contrary to nature. I do not believe you need me to show you these things, but since you are arguing against the clear meanings of Scripture, I will point out these additional proofs to you. Understand that Jesus Christ has taught through his Church for 2000 years most clearly on this matter, and it is up to you to choose to follow him and put him first or to elevate your own desire to fulfill you own lusts above his. I am a celibate man, and I’m doing just fine. If you believe you are gay, then you too are called to holy celibacy. You can be celibate just like the Virgin Mary and St. Joseph and very many of the saints throughout history. Ask their intercession and beg for God’s grace, and He will guide you through the difficult path ahead.
 
una_fides said:
It is essential to understand biases when reading and interpreting Scripture, and your biases are clearly made manifest in your following explanations. I understand that you have SSA and are an open homosexual and judging from your comments, you support it in all its manifestations, but God has revealed through Scripture, Tradition, and the Magisterium that acting out on SSA is a mortal sin, and it is contrary to nature. I do not believe you need me to show you these things, but since you are arguing against the clear meanings of Scripture, I will point out these additional proofs to you. Understand that Jesus Christ has taught through his Church for 2000 years most clearly on this matter, and it is up to you to choose to follow him and put him first or to elevate your own desire to fulfill you own lusts above his. I am a celibate man, and I’m doing just fine. If you believe you are gay, then you too are called to holy celibacy. You can be celibate just like the Virgin Mary and St. Joseph and very many of the saints throughout history. Ask their intercession and beg for God’s grace, and He will guide you through the difficult path ahead.
Click to expand...
Good post.

If I could also suggest a website:

www.couragerc.net/

Pax†
 
GenerationChi said:
As for your quotations from Leviticus, let us make light of the dangers of prooftexting. May I ask if you have ever eaten a lobster – or more generally – any shellfish (Leviticus 11:9-12). Is one who eats shellfish also committing “to’ebah” (often translated to English as abomination)? Should we damn them too? Or what of those indigenous people who eat bugs or snakes (Leviticus 11:41)? Shall we damn them because they were born in a situation that cannot afford them chicken or beef (perhaps in so similar a way to the homosexual population, born as they are)? Shall we even begin to damn women who wear pants (Deuteronomy 22:5)? The Hebrew word “to’ebah” is used in all of these passages. Where is the line between damnation and cultural exception?
Click to expand...
You have the answer. The difference is one was a temporal dietary law that God changed in the New Testament, and the other prohibitions were regarding sexual abuses that were contrary to nature and contrary to the natural law. Just because the same word is used does not mean that it is the same type of offense. The Greek word used in both cases, translated “abomination,” is also understood as being interpreted as “disgusting” or “appalling.” To the Jews, to eat such foods was to be to them something “disgusting.” That does not mean that God could not modify their dietary laws so that what was once unclean would then be clean to them, as He did in the NT through a revelation given to St. Peter, the first Pope. The natural law, on the other hand, cannot change. The ban on homosexuality was listed with other moral evils including adultery and bestiality. Obviously those things are of the moral realm and are unchangeable. Regardless of whether society makes them legal one day and even if most people thought them to be acceptable, they would always be evil actions, contrary to God’s moral law violating the 6th and 9th Commandments, prohibiting lust and the acting out of that vice.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top