O
Ockham
Guest
That’s almost as bad as pro"choice" Catholics. You can’t condone sodomy or abortion and be a Catholic in good standing. That’s not opinion, but fact.
- Status
L
larkin31
Guest
the point was that I would defend your right to speak whatever religious position you held! We were discussing the right of speech here and your right to your religious views…
W
wisdomseeker
Guest
this is all true. but the problem here is that they are trying to show us that what they are doing is no sin at all. that is what they are doing. if they dont think is a sin, then there is no need for confession and they are entire to receive the Body and Blood of Christ or they simply dont believe that Christ is present in teh Eucharist. they dont need to forgiven if they dont believe they are commiting a sin. it is up to the Church to condemn such acts and apparently in this Parish no one is condemning but accepting. i personally think that these people are not at fault but those in authority to care for God’'s Church are the ones at fault.
O
Ockham
Guest
Even free speech has limitations. You can’t slander someone or make hate speech against a visible group. Catholics to be in good standing can’t support sodomy or abortion privately or publically. It’s really that simple.
the point was that I would defend your right to speak whatever religious position you held! We were discussing the right of speech here and your right to your religious views…
L
larkin31
Guest
Then why were you claiming that Christian free speech was being threatened? You seem to be flip-flopping here and I can’t follow your point.
O
Ockham
Guest
When did I do that?
Honestly, I don’t know what your motivation here is. Church teaching is clear. The people posting it here have been clear. What are you unclear about?
I’ll summarize for you: Sodomy is a mortal sin. Mortal sin will put you in Hell. The Church wants you in Heaven. It’s just that simple.
L
larkin31
Guest
I am unclear as to what, precisely, you and the RCC define as “sodomy.” I have asked at least three times, and I can’t find it in any documents–but I have certainly not read them all. I have asked if married couples can be guilty of this, and I have received no response. All I have read is, basically, don’t give in to lust. Which of course is true for ALL couples.
L
larkin31
Guest
from freedictionary.com:
*sodomy:
Anal or oral intercourse between human beings, or any sexual relations between a human being and an animal, the act of which may be punishable as a criminal offense.
The word sodomy acquired different meanings over time. Under the Common Law, sodomy consisted of anal intercourse. Traditionally courts and statutes referred to it as a “crime against nature” or as copulation “against the order of nature.” In the United States, the term eventually encompassed oral sex as well as anal sex. The crime of sodomy was classified as a felony.
Because homosexual activity involves anal and oral sex, gay men were the primary target of sodomy laws. Culturally and historically, homosexual activity was seen as unnatural or perverse. The term sodomy refers to the homosexual activities of men in the story of the city of Sodom in the Bible. The destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah because of their residents’ immorality became a central part of Western attitudes toward forms of non-procreative sexual activity and same-sex relations.
Beginning with Illinois in 1961, state legislatures reexamined their sodomy statutes. Twenty-seven states repealed these laws, usually as a part of a general revision of the criminal code and with the recognition that heterosexuals engage in oral and anal sex. In addition, state courts in 10 states applied state constitutional provisions to invalidate sodomy laws. As of early 2003, eight states had laws that barred heterosexual and homosexual sodomy. Three other states barred sodomy between homosexuals.
In Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186, 106 S. Ct. 2841, 92 L. Ed. 2d 140 (1986), the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the Georgia sodomy statute. Michael Hardwick was arrested and charged with sodomy for engaging in oral sex with a consenting male adult in his home. A police officer was let into Hardwick’s home to serve a warrant and saw the sexual act. Although the state prosecutor declined to prosecute the case, Hardwick brought suit in federal court asking that the statute be declared unconstitutional.
On a 5–4 vote, the Court upheld the law. Writing for the majority, Justice byron r. white rejected the argument that previous decisions such as the Court’s rulings on Abortion and contraception had created a right of privacy that extended to homosexual sodomy. Instead, the Court drew a sharp distinction between the previous cases, which involved “family, marriage, or procreation,” and homosexual activity.
The Court also rejected the argument that there is a fundamental right to engage in homosexual activity. Prohibitions against sodomy were in the laws of most states since the nation’s founding. To the argument that homosexual activity should be protected when it occurs in the privacy of a home, White stated that “otherwise illegal conduct is not always immunized whenever it occurs in the home.” Because the claim in the case involved only homosexual sodomy, the Court expressed no opinion about the constitutionality of the statute as applied to acts of heterosexual sodomy.
The Bowers decision was severly criticized. Justice lewis powell, who voted with the majority, later stated that he had made a mistake in voting to affirm the law. In July 2003 the Supreme Court reversed itself on the issue of sodomy. In Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. ___, 123 S. Ct. 2472, 156 L. Ed. 2d 508, in a 6–3 decision, the Court invalidated a Texas anti-homosexual sodomy law by invoking the constitutional rights to privacy.*
There is ambiguity in the term. Does the RCC clarify any of this for its married followers?
O
Ockham
Guest
Your question has been answered already. You are either not observant or deliberately trying to distract and confuse. For the record, sodomy is anal sex. It is a mortal sin whether between a married couple or two men. Ok? Got it? There should be nothing more for you to ask on this subject as everything you need to know has been presented to you.
L
larkin31
Guest
Why are you telling me what I can or can’t ask? Your answer is very abrupt. If you are annoyed by this discussion, I recommend that you simply ignore me.
So, the RCC does not call oral sex or manual stimulation (mutual masturbation) between married partners a “disordered” form of sex or “sodomy”? If you are not comfortable with these questions, perhaps another Catholic poster can answer for the Church or direct me to an information page. I ask respectfully and am genuinely interested. Another poster above (or on another thread) stated that the RCC allows any sex between a married couple. I seem to have received different answers from different Catholics.
- Status