Attention anti-Brokeback ranters

[Jennifer123]

goofyjim:

I agree that the will is free, but same sex attraction may be as biological as whether I guy finds a blonde more attractive than a brunette. Jury is still out on this one. No conclusive evidence either way.

It’s irrevelent whether it’s biological, it is still opposed to the natural order. We as a society don’t condone drug or alcohol addiction, obesity, violent crime, all of which may have a genetic component.

As for choosing this lifestyle, we all sin, and sin in many ways is affected by our fallen will. A lot of us wouldn’t choose to sin if we could do so, that is why Jesus’s sacrifice allows us to be reconcilled to Him even though our fallen nature separates us from Him.

I just ask that we all treat each other with charity here. Sometimes hard to do, believe me, but we must try.

 

[goofyjim]

Jennifer123:

It’s irrevelent whether it’s biological, it is still opposed to the natural order. We as a society don’t condone drug or alcohol addiction, obesity, violent crime, all of which may have a genetic component.

As for choosing this lifestyle, we all sin, and sin in many ways is affected by our fallen will. A lot of us wouldn’t choose to sin if we could do so, that is why Jesus’s sacrifice allows us to be reconcilled to Him even though our fallen nature separates us from Him.

I just ask that we all treat each other with charity here. Sometimes hard to do, believe me, but we must try.

The behavior may be opposed to the natural order. I don’t believe that is so with the attraction alone.

 

[TZiggy]

. No one is forcing your local Priest to marry gay people. S’why we have a seperation between Church and State. You don’t get to legislate morals, end of story. That isn’t the job of government.

But they would make our priests marry homosexuals if they could. ANTI-DISCRIMINATION laws are being used to precisely that end. That is why your “feelings” are so dangerous.

And, hey, if I can’t be a member of your Church and still practice what I feel is right in the political arena, if you think there should be limits and conditions placed on my chosen spirituality, then that’s not very Christian of you at all.

If your “feelings” contradict the faith and morals of our universal church, you’ve already excluded yourself no matter where you sit on Sunday.

Many have already explained, but I’ll reiterate: Being gay is not a sin. Acting on it is. Promoting the lifestyle is tacit approval of living a sinful life. Your feelings while they may be well intentioned are misguided.

 

[Celtic_FC]

It’s a dangerous lifestyle.

 

[Marilena]

pnewton:

That any one cares about a hypothetical gay cowboy “love” affair. Exactly who are they trying to sell this hogwash to? Macho effeminates? I know of not one soul that has seen it. In my town it lasted a week and then moved on for lack of sales. The Passion, on the other hand, was sold to capacity for weeks.

The only reason anyone in my area thinks it deserved any award is for being able to film it without getting sick all over the set.

 

[DreadVandal]

goofyjim:

I agree that the will is free, but same sex attraction may be as biological as whether I guy finds a blonde more attractive than a brunette. Jury is still out on this one. No conclusive evidence either way.

Its not obvious that a guy’s preference for a blonde over a brunette is biological either. In fact, it is very difficult to take any human behavior or preference and reduce it down to one cause (though this is what materialistic determinists want to do). For the most part, I would guess that our make-up is a combination of genetics, environmental influence, and personal choices. We should not underestimate the role that habit plays in forming one’s character.

 

[DreadVandal]

goofyjim:

The behavior may be opposed to the natural order. I don’t believe that is so with the attraction alone.

If the attraction were not opposed to the natural order, then neither would the behavior be opposed to the natural order.

 

[jman507]

coyote:

I think this is a misunderstanding of my point. My point is that this impassioned criticism of THIS movie is hypocritical. It does not stand alone. It is but one example of hundreds.

Personally, I am not threatened by this genre. I think the whole to-do is exaggerated.

Despite what the paranoid believe, this too shall pass.

But the objection is not so much the sin. The Passion as well as the Bible is full of all kinds of sins. Actually, unless its a story of complete nonsence, its going to deal some way with a sin. The problem is going to come when it comes to its point, message, moral. The problem with this movie is that, it is a serious drama, its up for an Oscar, & it attacks Catholic (though not just limited to Catholism) morals. To attack sexual morals is a worse poisen on a culture than say violence, because sexual morals go straight to the family. Attack the family you attack the most sacred part of a culture. If Mary and Joseph followed their desire there’d be no Jesus on the Cross.

The problem is this first the sympathy for breaking of the vows. The message of follow your heart, but that is not true love. True love will deny oneself, and with that vow it will deny oneself for the good of those who you vowed to serve and protect. Next with the homosexuality you add on top of that the sex that has completely cut itself off from its intended purpose of being open to life.

Yes, there are many other bad movies out there, but this one was more of a perfect storm. Now I’m sure there are some people who protested the Passion , but I’m sure they didn’t exactly protest every Passion play being done, espcially cause of the special circumstances regarding Gibsons film.

 

[Jennifer123]

jman507:

The message of follow your heart, but that is not true love. True love will deny oneself, and with that vow it will deny oneself for the good of those who you vowed to serve and protect.

Very well said. It reminds me of Jer.17:9"The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately corrupt; who can understand it?"
So many things are justified because it feels “right” in the heart.

 

[Liberalsaved]

Yawn…didn’t get the award anyway so you can all stop complaining about it. Though I’m sure the more militant conspiracy theorists here will find a way to tie this into the “agenda”.

Still, now I gotta see Crash. What an upset.

 

[Liberalsaved]

DreadVandal:

What rights are you talking about? There is no such thing as gay rights.

You know, I gotta wonder how you’d feel if America just got tired of putting up with the bigotry that so often comes from the members of the Church and decided to pass laws against you.

No one who gets married in the church shall have the economical benefits proferred on the state’s dime to married couples.

Church marriages not legally recognized by the federal government.

I gotta wonder. Because that is eesentially what you want done to gays. And so far you’ve shown me nothing but sarcasm, insults and rhetoric to support your right to impose your values on a religion-free legal system.

 

[Liberalsaved]

pnewton:

That any one cares about a hypothetical gay cowboy “love” affair. Exactly who are they trying to sell this hogwash to? Macho effeminates? I know of not one soul that has seen it. In my town it lasted a week and then moved on for lack of sales. The Passion, on the other hand, was sold to capacity for weeks.

The only reason anyone in my area thinks it deserved any award is for being able to film it without getting sick all over the set.

Passion of the Christ relied on the same controversy, in addition to Mel Gibson’s involvement and the fact that Christians went to see it time and time again, plus the novelty of a film shot in arabaic.

 

[DreadVandal]

Liberalsaved:

Yawn…didn’t get the award anyway so you can all stop complaining about it. Though I’m sure the more militant conspiracy theorists here will find a way to tie this into the “agenda”.

Still, now I gotta see Crash. What an upset.

Why should we care what gets the award anyway? The Oscars are a joke. The fact that Titanic won best picture several years ago confirms that.

 

[Liberalsaved]

DreadVandal:

Why should we care what gets the award anyway? The Oscars are a joke. The fact that Titanic won best picture several years ago confirms that.

Titanic WAS amazing at the time. Today it just looks worse compared to all the monstraous historical melodramas they’ve made since.

 

[DreadVandal]

Liberalsaved:

You know, I gotta wonder how you’d feel if America just got tired of putting up with the bigotry that so often comes from the members of the Church and decided to pass laws against you.

No one who gets married in the church shall have the economical benefits proferred on the state’s dime to married couples.

Church marriages not legally recognized by the federal government.

I gotta wonder. Because that is eesentially what you want done to gays. And so far you’ve shown me nothing but sarcasm, insults and rhetoric to support your right to impose your values on a religion-free legal system.

Homosexuality is opposed to the order of nature and therefore it is not a right in any sense. Marriage is for the purpose of procreation according to the order of nature. That is why society sanctions it. The rights that human beings have are those rights in accordance with the natural law that is discoverable by reason. None of this has anything to do with religion.

 

[DreadVandal]

Liberalsaved:

Titanic WAS amazing at the time. Today it just looks worse compared to all the monstraous historical melodramas they’ve made since.

You’ve got to be kidding me. I bet you think Forest Gump was amazing and deserved best picture over Shawshank Redemption.

 

[Liberalsaved]

DreadVandal:

You’ve got to be kidding me. I bet you think Forest Gump was amazing and deserved best picture over Shawshank Redemption.

I am not kidding. Titanic was amazing for the time. And both FG and SR were impressive. While my favorite by far is SR, that’s a personal thing and I can understand why either deserved it.

 

[Liberalsaved]

DreadVandal:

Homosexuality is opposed to the order of nature and therefore it is not a right in any sense. Marriage is for the purpose of procreation according to the order of nature. That is why society sanctions it. The rights that human beings have are those rights in accordance with the natural law that is discoverable by reason. None of this has anything to do with religion.

Give me scientific proof of your natural order claim. That is, proof of how it hurts society. You have yet to provide anything except your opinion on the matter, and science is on the other side in this debate. Saying “It’s not what God intends” doesn’t fly in a court of law in this country, and shouldn’t.

 

[DreadVandal]

Liberalsaved:

Give me scientific proof of your natural order claim. That is, proof of how it hurts society. You have yet to provide anything except your opinion on the matter, and science is on the other side in this debate. Saying “It’s not what God intends” doesn’t fly in a court of law in this country, and shouldn’t.

The empirical sciences have not come to any clear conclusions in the matter. Natural law is the moral law grasped by reason. It is innate in all human beings. It is the moral law that demands that one respect the natural order of things and that one pursue virtue and excellence. Homosexuality is intrinsically disordered and destructive of society since it redirects the sexual drive away from procreation and toward perverted, unhealthy sexual acts. As such, it not only has no rights, but may be criminalized by the state should that be deemed prudent. Our law is based upon English common law which has natural law as its foundation. Justices like Scalia and Roberts understand that. Unfortunately, liberal judges do not and so they make the law say whatever they want it to say.

 

[Urf]

You’ve said the exact same thing in like 57 different, posts, allow me to take your post apart.

DreadVandal:

The empirical sciences have not come to any clear conclusions in the matter. Natural law is the moral law grasped by reason. It is innate in all human beings. It is the moral law that demands that one respect the natural order of things and that one pursue virtue and excellence. Homosexuality is intrinsically disordered and destructive of society since it redirects the sexual drive away from procreation

The world needs more babies. We’re probably going to go out of existence because everyone will become gay and no one will reproduce, right? Right?

and toward perverted, unhealthy sexual acts.

explain. All you’ve given is your opinion.

As such, it not only has no rights, but may be criminalized by the state should that be deemed prudent. Our law is based upon English common law which has natural law as its foundation. Justices like Scalia and Roberts understand that. Unfortunately, liberal judges do not and so they make the law say whatever they want it to say.

Change in a changing world, what’s this? Hey I think we should have emperors because that’s what it was like during the time of Jesus and Jesus was cool. I think that’d be nice. Women should also be property of men like they used to. Stupid liberals messing things up.