B
BlueShadow123
Guest
I noticed you live in Wisconsin. Around what area? I’m about 5 minutes from the lake. Its gorgeous.
- Status
A
alacoque
Guest
The lake is pretty biiig…where by the lake do you live? I live right on the border of Brown Deer and Milwaukee - about a mile west of the lake. I rent now but used to own a home in Whitefish Bay, right across the street from the lake! It’s awesome, no??? Especially, if you’re close enough, at night in the early spring when the ice packs start to break up and it sounds like buildings are falling down all around you. yikes!!
But, I agree - the lake is a force unto it’s own and it feeds my soul even on its worst days. I’m originally from WI (Green Bay) but lived for a time in CA - so the lake, to me, is the ocean I miss so much!
B
BlueShadow123
Guest
You’re not too far from me. Whitefish bay is a nice place. Right now I live in Grafton which is about 8 minutes away from Port and about 10 minutes from Mequon. They really built this place up. Have you been to the beach in Port? I love going to the bluffs and walking out to the lighthouse. There is a nature park called Lions Den which is right on the lake, its so gorgeous to walk around in.
You cant miss Port, its a really small, older looking town on the beach, with a small church on the hill.
Whitefish Bay is right by Bayshore mall, right? I love that place, but it still doesn’t beat Mayfair.
D
dailey
Guest
Nicely said…but just for the record, I am already in agreement. I do not believe in gays acting on their desires or getting married, etc. I can’t even imagine what a terrible cross that must be for them to carry. I was just specifically questioning the thoughts that someone could actually chose who they were attracted to…
B
BlueShadow123
Guest
Do you choose who you’re attracted to?
Assuming you said No, what makes you think they do?
C
comrade1789
Guest
Yeah, I know right? Gosh I wish I could choose who I was attracted to, it might make working with some stunning women a little easier if I could turn off the attraction switch at will!
C
comrade1789
Guest
I am also a recovering alcoholic, and therefore attracted to alcohol. The more I resist, and avoid the near occassion of sin and rely on God, the more God uses that God-Shaped hole to fill with Himself. If I spent the whole of my life grumbling against God saying “why can’t I drink like normal people, why did you make me this way” then I would be nothing more than a dry drunk who hasn’t grown spiritually. It would be my own fault for looking at the hole inside of me as a curse, and so a curse it would become, If I looked at it as potential, a blessing saying “Wow God, look at all this room for you to work in, come in and dine with me” then a blessing it would become. I strongly believe, as many other faithful, that homosexuals (and here we are speaking about the ones with SSA, there are many variations, some that include people who don’t really have a SSA, but other factors contributing to their homosexual behavior) are like everyone else in that they have a God-shaped hole in them that can only be filled by God, and until they realize that, they will continue to fill it with that which only satisfies for a moment, but ultimately destroys them. Since sexuality involves the whole person, the homosexual would benefit if he or she could see this not just as a cross to bear, but as a sign of a very immense hole to be filled, the bigger the hole, the more room for the gifts of God. In our overly sexualized society, people have made a god out of sex and their “right” to sex, but the fact is, sexual activity outside of the sacrament of holy matrimony is disordered and a mortal sin. There are worse things than realizing “oh woe is me, I will never be able to have intimate sexual relations, or romantic relationships!” It is sad, to a degree only. It becomes despair when one remains fixated on it, and a sin, because they look only to how they can gratify themselves, instead of how they can please God. The more one puts God first and grows in their chaste life, the more benefit one gains from it, and the joy that chases out the despair becomes far more prescious than our disordered desires.
Fact is, sex outside of marriage (and depending on the circumstances and the hearts involved, sometime even within a marriage) is disordered for all of us. Because people have rejected God, they lay claim to something that isn’t theirs to have, and shake their fists at God if they are reminded that they must not have it.
I can’t choose who or what I am attracted to, but I can certainly gain the upper hand and no longer have unruly passions, but ruled and ordered passions by, well, ruling and ordering them. How do I rule and order my passions? By realigning my moral compass to God, his Scripture, the canon “rule” of Scripture, and His Church all help me daily to do so. I don’t think I ever heard anyone argue that those with SSA could choose who they were attracted to, it seems like a manipulated arguement (I am not saying you are manipulating it, but those who claim that we claim that are), because if they can get us arguing about wether someone has the choice of who they are attracted to, then they think they have already proven their position. But the arguement itself is a fallacy, because in order to engage in this arguement, we accept the fallacy that attraction is good enough reason for sin. We all have our own “junk,” things we have to resist. But muscle and strength are built up through resistance, what strong and godly saints homosexuals, and all of us for that matter, could be if we would just bone-up and put our shoulder to the wheel and make a decision for Christ in our lives.
E
edwest2
Guest
That’s the answer - self control. And like anything worthwhile in life, we all have to work at it. And we need to understand that God is not out to ruin our “fun.” He established guidelines for our behavior.
I know. It’s a lot easier to just do it anyway, and believe some or all of the following:
I can’t control myself. So, who can control you?
My teacher said we’re all going to be sexually active. And that makes it OK?
For Catholics, holiness is not optional. The saints tell us: never give up. On Catholic Radio, I heard a priest say, “If you fall, get back up.” We give more encouragement to people who are trying to quit smoking.
Catholics should not be in a sexual relationship unless they are married. However, movies and TV shows drown that message out. In fact, real intimacy has been reduced to “just sex.”
If you want to avoid unwanted pregnancy, STDs, HIV/AIDS and a host of other problems, stay celibate.
Peace,
Ed
I know. It’s a lot easier to just do it anyway, and believe some or all of the following:
I can’t control myself. So, who can control you?
My teacher said we’re all going to be sexually active. And that makes it OK?
For Catholics, holiness is not optional. The saints tell us: never give up. On Catholic Radio, I heard a priest say, “If you fall, get back up.” We give more encouragement to people who are trying to quit smoking.
Catholics should not be in a sexual relationship unless they are married. However, movies and TV shows drown that message out. In fact, real intimacy has been reduced to “just sex.”
If you want to avoid unwanted pregnancy, STDs, HIV/AIDS and a host of other problems, stay celibate.
Peace,
Ed
B
BlueShadow123
Guest
V
voglhund
Guest
It is not anti-Christian to hope that some day homosexual persons will enjoy the same civil rights as heterosexuals including marriage. There are many homosexual persons who have put their faith in Christ and wish to live a committed, monogomous life together as a postive example in a society that worships self-indugent hedonism. The homosexual Catholic is well aware of Scripture and Church teaching on this matter. Many have studied, prayed, and sought godly counsel on this matter. At the end of the day, some follow their consciences and embrace celibacy, others follow their consciences and live in committed homosexual relationships. For this latter group, telling them that they are going to hell, arguing about Church teaching and Scripture, calling them names, or telling them that they are not Christians/Catholics is not helpful. They have already wrestled with and continue to wrestle with these issues. They are following their consciences.
E
edwest2
Guest
How is gay marriage a civil right? Where does the Church support this idea? We all have a conscience but it must be properly formed and informed.
I dated a young lady who was bisexual until she gave her life to Christ.
Please read what the Church teaches:
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20030731_homosexual-unions_en.html
Peace,
Ed
V
voglhund
Guest
We all have to properly form and inform our conscience. So we study, pray, agonize, and seek counsel. In the end I will be held accountable for following mine and you yours. I am not in a position to tell another human being that he/she needs to follow my conscience or he/she will go to hell. I can articulate Church teaching, pray with the person, discuss the issues, etc.
Marriage has existed for centuries as both a civil right and religious expression. For example, before the Holy Roman Empire existed Roman citizens could have a civil marriage. It existed to protect money, land, titles, etc. Families arranged marriages to strengthen alliances, build economic power, protect assests. It protected children insofar as children were the property of the father as was his wife. At the same time there was religious marriage. They had little to do with each other.
Today we have both civil and religious marriage. You don’t have to belong to any religion to get married. If you belong to a religion you can get married by one of its ministers. You have to be a member in good standing for most ministers of a particular faith to perform the marriage. For convience I suspect, most of those ministers are licensed by their respective states so that the marriage is also recognized by the state making it a civil marriage as well as a religious one.
Civil marriage in the US comes with rights and responsibilites. It’s not just about protecing the inheritance rights of offspring. It’s not just about societal norms around child rearing. There are matters of money and property involved as well as the responsibility for caring for one’s spouse.
I doubt that the Catholic Church will ever support gay unions whatever you call them. The Church seems to see two same-sex people living together in a loving, committed, monogomous relationship as destructive to the heterosexual family that God has ordained.
As for your comment about the bisexual woman, I am glad that she knows Christ. I hope that she has found peace. However, your statement implies that people who are still homosexual don’t know Christ. Not true.
E
edwest2
Guest
I don’t imply things. I either say them or I do not. The bisexual young lady made a choice. That’s all I’m saying.
The word “seems” implies either vagueness in Church teaching or, perhaps, a lack of comprehension regarding the motivation of Church teaching.
I don’t think the word monogomous really applies to many successful gay marriages:
nytimes.com/2010/01/29/us/29sfmetro.html
It’s odd that following a non-scientific vote in 1973, homosexuality was arbitrarily removed from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual. I was around during the time period in question and homosexual people simply asked to be left alone. Fine. No problem. I did not, nor did I know anyone who even suggested they wanted to bully or harass gay people. Now, the other shoe has dropped. Homosexual people no longer want privacy. What I can’t understand is why this issue appeared at the ballot box. Go to your lawyer, make arrangements and do what you like. I find it even stranger that individuals can leave their estates to their pets, but not this?
No. The issue is much broader.
Peace,
Ed
C
comrade1789
Guest
Each and every position you have presented here is dealt with in the document that is a sticky to the Social Justice forum, and the same one pointed to by EdWest. Please read it first so that our discussion can be more fruitful.
Thank you.
vatican.va/roman_curia/co…unions_en.html
V
voglhund
Guest
I’m not sure what you would like to hear to make the discussion more fruitful. I am well aware of what the Church teaches on this matter. I have seen it both correctly and erroneously represented in the posts. It’s not much of a debate if we all agree. If you review the discussion you’ll see that folks with ideas different than Church teaching have not been treated with respect e.g. you are not a Christian if you believe that way. I decided to jump into the discussion. I dislike bullies. I dislike people who lack compassion or understanding of the struggles encountered by the homosexual pontificating on the issue. I am a Catholic and in good conscience dissent with the Church on this issue.
V
voglhund
Guest
I disagree that homosexuality was arbitrarily removed from the DSM. If you had reviewed the various studies posted earlier you would find that homosexual behavior exists in nature not just humans. Since there is no psychology involved in animals other that humans it was scientifically sound to remove it as a psychological disorder. Homosexual people didn’t ask to be left alone. I have no idea where that idea came from. Homosexual people demanded that they not be treated as mentally ill because they aren’t. They have been committed to asylums, subjected to electro-shock therapy, banned from employment, banned from raising their children, prosecuted as criminals, and received little or no justice when attacked or murdered for looking gay, being gay. This is a social justice issue. Things haven’t changed very much since the DSM has changed. There are plenty of blogs, etc. that advocate persecuting, beating, and killing homosexuals.
You are absolutely correct in stating that the issue is much broader.
E
edwest2
Guest
You raise good points.
"The American Psychiatric Association’s definition of homosexuality as an illness in its second Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (1968) provided crucial underpinnings for federal discrimination against homosexuals. From the late 1940s, civil laws had in many states criminalized homosexuality defining it as a sexual pathology and providing imprisonment and institutionalization as punishment. A core of American psychiatrists and psychologists provided written arguments supporting the definition of homosexuality as an illness. "
As you can see, certain outcomes occurred not because of prejudice but because of the experts who studied human beings and their behaviors. Today, we rely on experts who may or may not subject any of us to certain treatments.
Animals do not have human cognition. We can train them to a point but that’s it. They operate on what we call instinct. It is incorrect to compare animals to human beings, especially on a psychological/behavioral level.
For Catholics, at least, self control and self mastery have real world and spiritual benefits. Consider the fact that prior to The Pill, the average number of kids in my neighborhood was two. By controlling our sexual desires, we can eliminate our exposure to STDs and assure our spouse that we are committed to them and family life. The current error that is being heavily marketed is that no one has sexual self control and let’s just keep handing out condoms. That is reinforced by laughing at abstinance, once again, as if No One Has Any Self Control. Do you believe you have no sexual self control? Seriously, human sexuality, and its misuse, is the greatest problem facing the West today.
Peace,
Ed
D
dailey
Guest
Wait, I’m confused??
I never said that gays choose who they are attracted to?
B
BlueShadow123
Guest
I never said you did. It was a question.Wait, I’m confused??
D
dailey
Guest
Well to answer the question…I don’t believe anyone (gay/straight, etc) chooses who they are attracted to.
- Status