Catholics are ceding too much ground to the homosexual agenda

[Nom_the_Wise]

I don’ t know. She was in an innocent way trying to imitate acts that she knew were sexual, like removing the clothes from the doll etc. She thought she was “doing it” as she would have said. It was innocent but she was at the same time precocious. My point being the thought of practicing on another girl didn’t repel her.

She might have already suffered from abuse. I’m no psychologist but that sounds like it *could *be acting out.

 

[CrimsonThorn]

I don’ t know. She was in an innocent way trying to imitate acts that she knew were sexual, like removing the clothes from the doll etc. She thought she was “doing it” as she would have said. It was innocent but she was at the same time precocious.

Ok sure, still not homosexuality.

Little boys have the “ill show you mine if you show me yours” deal between themselves and it is not homosexual behavior that drives this, but curiosity of their bodies.

And if the girl you describe was indeed precocious, that isn’t exactly the normal maturation of kids, and a bad example to maybe make a point with considering you’ve used a disordered individual as that example.

 

[BroomWagon]

Yes, like Matthew Shephard and those who were bullied long enough that they saw no other way out but suicide

Let’s not forget, a number of the top serial killers have been homosexual as well.

Patrick Kearney
John Wayne Casey
Juan Corona
Jeffrey Dahmer
Henry Lucas
Donald Harvey
Bruce Davis

In fact, the top 6 or 7 serial killers have been gay, the top female serial killer was lesbian.

 

[Baelor]

Ok, so having such a condition does not necessarily lead to murder.

Irrelevant. The OP stated that homophobia was an “invented evil.” He should not have set the burden of disproof so low that any demonstration of homophobia whatsoever is sufficient evidence.

The term is used as a cudgel to stop debate.

And should not be.

Also, I would think such a condition is very rare. Certainly not as common as the homosexual apologists would have us believe.

That it happens at all is problematic enough. In some countries, being homosexual is illegal. Even in the US, there is rampant and unjust discrimination against homosexuals. All of these are unacceptable.

It is not relevant in the least. The condition of same sex attraction is a trial. That does not mean that others with trials have it “easier”. This notion of comparing crosses seems ugly and counter productive.

Remember that the OP was the one who claimed that all the crosses are identical, not I.

 

[Baelor]

That is actually not the correct definiton of ‘homophobia.’. It is only what the ‘agenda-ists’ have decided. They use their language as a jackhammer to silence debate.

Take it up with Merriam-Webster, not me, and then provide a better one.

 

[Baelor]

While they have the legal right to get married, it isn’t unheard of that some people never get married for never having found “the one.”

That is not the same thing at all. The point is that a heterosexual addict to masturbation is an addiction that can be overcome. A homosexual may never, ever overcome that state of disorder, and will thus potentially never be able to marry. That is the difference. The sexuality of said addict is still ordered and has the potential to be overcome; not so (definitvely) for the homosexual. Furthermore, masturbation is a discrete act; homosexuality is not. One who masturbates chronically still does not have a fundamentally disordered sexuality, unlike the homosexual.

 

[CrimsonThorn]

Take it up with Merriam-Webster, not me, and then provide a better one.

Homophobia is not a real fear or concept.

I think the examples you and others have cited was violence or mocking of people because they are gay. This is up there with sexism and racism and all other forms of “hatecrimes”, but not “homophobia”

 

[CrimsonThorn]

That is not the same thing at all. The point is that a heterosexual addict to masturbation is an addiction that can be overcome. A homosexual may never, ever overcome that state of disorder, and will thus potentially never be able to marry. That is the difference. The sexuality of said addict is still ordered and has the potential to be overcome; not so (definitvely) for the homosexual. Furthermore, masturbation is a discrete act; homosexuality is not. One who masturbates chronically still does not have a fundamentally disordered sexuality, unlike the homosexual.

Masturbation can be overcome just as much as a homosexual can overcome living the gay lifestyle (which means they can abstain from having homosexual non marital sex) even if their attraction does not change. A masturbator chooses to stop the ACTIONS without changing his or her attraction Same cross, one is not heavier than the other.

 

[Baelor]

From an online dictionary:

Your definition does not address the definition of homophobia.

Furthermore, it is historically unsound. I would recommend looking up etymologies in the future instead of attempting to construct an argument (that is irrelevant anyway) based on them.

Homosexual comes from the Greek word for “same” or “like,” “homoios,” and the Latin word for sexual, “sexualis.” This is clear from its opposite, the first part of which comes from the Greek word for “other,” “heteros.”

“Homo” is the Latin word for human.

There is nothing loving or charitable about hijacking both the language and the culture.

That does not merit an uncharitable response.

 

[Baelor]

Let’s not forget, a number of the top serial killers have been homosexual as well.

Patrick Kearney
John Wayne Casey
Juan Corona
Jeffrey Dahmer
Henry Lucas
Donald Harvey
Bruce Davis

In fact, the top 6 or 7 serial killers have been gay, the top female serial killer was lesbian.

This is relevant how?

 

[PaulinVA]

The homosexualist definition of homophobe is, “Anyone who disagrees with me”. There is no need for fear or anxiety to be shown on the homophobe’s part to prove the diagnosis. So, it’s 'just a hateful pejorative to use when all else fails.

But, what does anti-gay really mean? I don’t think it denies the existence of homosexuals or people with same sex attraction. So, what does it mean? That they shouldn’t have certain specific rights? That trhey shouldn’t have certain protections? What is the opposite of anti-gay?

 

[Baelor]

Masturbation can be overcome just as much as a homosexual can overcome living the gay lifestyle (which means they can abstain from having homosexual non marital sex) even if their attraction does not change.

1. There is nothing to “overcome.” inherently. Not all homosexuals need to overcome the “gay lifestyle” because they were never part of it in the first place.
2. You have simply elaborated on the point I was making. The OP said that marriage was a God-given good and that man is not meant to be alone. The homosexual is called to be alone; the addict to masturbation is not, as you have demonstrated.

 

[CrimsonThorn]

1. There is nothing to “overcome.” inherently. Not all homosexuals need to overcome the “gay lifestyle” because they were never part of it in the first place.
2. You have simply elaborated on the point I was making. The OP said that marriage was a God-given good and that man is not meant to be alone. The homosexual is called to be alone; the addict to masturbation is not, as you have demonstrated.

A masturbator chooses to stop the ACTIONS without changing his or her attraction Same cross, one is not heavier than the other.

Priests and nuns are called to be alone by God. So homosexuals, pedophiles, bestialists, or regular ole single people who never find “the one” are also called to be alone by God.

 

[BroomWagon]

This is relevant how?

It’s relevant whenever the victim card, Matthew Shepard, etc. is brought up.

By the way, I think it’s been shown, Rest his soul, but he was dealing drugs. The way it is portrayed in the media may not be the way it happened.

 

[Baelor]

Priests and nuns are called to be alone by God. So homosexuals, pedophiles, bestialists…

Of course they are, and the Church acknowledges that this is a more difficult vocation.

It’s relevant whenever the victim card, Matthew Shepard, etc. is brought up.

In what way? The only way that is relevant is if you think that the murder of homosexuals because of their disorder is justified because most serial killers are homosexual and so one is acting in self-defense. If this is not what you meant, please clarify explicitly.

 

[atheistgirl]

From an online dictionary:

It is NOT what the militants say it is. I refuse to adopt their terms, any more than I call abortion ‘women’s health care.’

There is nothing loving or charitable about hijacking both the language and the culture.

You defined homo.

Not Homophobia.

Do you have the correct definition for homophobia?

Sarah x

 

[BroomWagon]

Of course they are, and the Church acknowledges that this is a more difficult vocation.

In what way? The only way that is relevant is if you think that the murder of homosexuals because of their disorder is justified because most serial killers are homosexual and so one is acting in self-defense. If this is not what you meant, please clarify explicitly.

No, that’s not the only way it is relevant. People like to point out supposed violence against homosexuals. Point is, that violence is not a one way street.

 

[Baelor]

No, that’s not the only way it is relevant.

We shall see.

People like to point out supposed violence against homosexuals.

Are they unjustified in doing so? Should we not bring up serial killers who target only women because female serial killers exist?

Point is, that violence is not a one way street.

1. You are arguing against no one; your claim is a straw man.
2. Homophobic violence is different than incidental homosexuality in serial killers whose motives are not parallel.

I ask again: how is this relevant?

 

[CrimsonThorn]

Of course they are, and the Church acknowledges that this is a more difficult vocation.

It is not a more difficult vocation because there is no sex. It is more difficult because you are called to give up everything. And in addition to giving their lives to God, they are still misunderstood, hated, discriminated against, attacked, etc.

So if you want to play it that way, priests have an even heavier cross to carry than homosexuals. Homosexuals don’t have it that hard then after all.

 

[CrimsonThorn]

You defined homo.

Not Homophobia.

Do you have the correct definition for homophobia?

Sarah x

That’s because there is no real definition for homophobia.

Is there then such thing as Heterophobia?

Maybe all homosexuals are really just Heterophobic.