F
Faithdancer
Guest
The right number.
- Status
F
Faithdancer
Guest
I ignore the word “perverted” in this discussion as it is not a term commonly used in Catholic moral theology.
Sex outside of marriage is fornication, and is a mortal sin. I’m fine with making it illegal.
To argue that because “A” is allowed, even though it is wrong, therefore we should also allow another wrong, “B,” is flawed reasoning. Faithful, knowledgeable Catholics will never be swayed by any argument based on such a false premise, or any argument grounded in moral relativism.
Catholic Christian morality is absolute and grounded in divine and natural law; that will never change.
B
Bradski
Guest
OK, I’ll have a shot and see if you agree. I’d say you’d have 20 – 25% left.
But it’s a quite commonly used pejorative in these forums, so I think we can safely use it in this context. Sex outside marriage is a perversion. Those having sex outside marriage are perverts. At least, that’s how it works with gay people so I don’t see that we have to differentiate.
Thanks for the heads up. The ‘sins’ mentioned by Seeker were adultery, sex outside marriage and divorce. Apparently you think that they’re all evil.
But it seems that the Catholics on this forum are used to the idea of pre-marital sex and divorce. They may think it’s sinful but they don’t seem to spend a lot of time arguing about it as compared to, say, homosexuality. It appears that once everyone accepts something and realises that society isn’t crumbling as a result, then they tend not to worry so much about it.
It certainly is. I think the point is more: how come you’re arguing about B when A is meant to be just as bad?
C
Crescentinus
Guest
Here, we see Bradski and others preach to us that we must be homosexualists.
F
Faithdancer
Guest
Quoting post #349 in this thread: “When adulterers become as militant as homosexuals and try to establish a legal definition of adultery-within-marriage as “normal marriage,” then there will undoubtedly be many more threads devoted to the evil of adultery on CAF.”
F
Faithdancer
Guest
Unfortunately, some of those “others” call themselves Catholic. Pray for them, most of all.
E
Elizabeth502
Guest
I’m certainly fine with making it illegal at least until a student has graduated from high school. Therefore, there would be no need for passing out contraceptives to high school students, by the school administrators.
EDITING TO CORRECT SELF:
…there would be no EXCUSE to pass out contraceptives…
R
RobbyS
Guest
The pagans. Despite Gibbon’s attempt to paint the Romans in glowing terms, they engaged in practices that would turn the stomach of the worst libertine alive today.
R
RobbyS
Guest
Remember John XXIII’s famous comment about throwing open the windows? A lot of Catholic just jumped out of them, including many nuns and priests. They did the same thing in Luther’s day, of course. And though many joined the Lutherans etc, more just took up worldly ways.
A
aragonjohn1
Guest
mental imaging = whoa!!!
F
fix
Guest
Having an agenda does not equal conspiracy. The agenda is quite public and known.
S
Seeker1961
Guest
They’re not asking for acceptance because they already have it! Nobody is calling them disordered or evil, nobody is trying to outlaw divorce or imprison those who live together without being married or who commit adultery. They don’t to demand rights that they already have.
P
pnewton
Guest
I have noticed that evengelization requires different approaches at different times. Starting with condemnation of sin (not the person) works well with sin that is already condemned in the person’s mind as well as the person’s unconscious (the guy who knows he is in sin already). With homosexuals today, they have had it drilled in them that what they do is a perfectly acceptable practice. While an understanding of sin must come at some time, it might be best to start with the basics, ala Thomas Aquinas. Or better yet, just follow the example of Jesus who ate with sinners and tax collectors. If we start with on openness to friendship with homosexuals and lawyers (modern dynamic equivalency transtlation
), then we will be able to share common ground with which to share the gospel.
S
Seeker1961
Guest
Speaking for myself, I have never said that the Church should or will change.
What I do know is that secular society changes all the time. When I was a kid, divorce was something people talked about in whispers, now there are greeting cards. Living together outside of marriage was something “nice people” didn’t do.
The Church isn’t going to change and we know that-so in light of that how do we continue the mission that Jesus gave us to reach that world as it changes?
S
Seeker1961
Guest
S
Seeker1961
Guest
well, I can tell you this much-if I were trying to make homosexuality more accepted in society I certainly wouldn’t use the stereotypical images of gay people that are used on TV today. To me, those images are about making straight people laugh at gay people, not accept them as people like them. However, I guess you would have to be part of the actual gay community to know that those characters are clowns and not in any way descriptive of the way most of us live.
M
markeverett49
Guest
John XXII held the faith and assumed others would too if they became aware of it. I think he would be shocked to see how many Catholics have seen Vatican II as a green light to abandon parts of the faith.
E
edwest2
Guest
A famous repetition. Vatican II, which was a good thing, was turned into a scapegoat. A scapegoat for dissidents inside the Church -
online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704586504574654282563939764.html
and for the Sex without love Revolution, which we have suffered through to this day. The Church was not responsible for the graphic porn being sold in Adult Bookstores or for strip clubs or for topless bars. GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEADS CATHOLICS. THE CHURCH did not cause any of that. Here’s another quote; “Religion is the opiate of the masses.” THE PLAN of the dissidents, Hippies and radicals was to turn SEX into the opiate of the masses, and so they opened all those places for the PLANNED addictions that many of us suffer from to occur.
We protested in the 1970s and we still protest today, but the media was gradually turned into the image and likeness of their twisted and immoral world. And they had and still have, millions of dollars and high priced lawyers that tell us “WE have the First Amendment right to do this” you religious nuts.
No, we are not without blame but it should come as no surprise that we are getting in your face immorality now, 24/7.
Peace,
Ed
E
Elizabeth502
Guest
M
markeverett49
Guest
The Gospel carries enormous appeal and Christian churches span the globe. Ironically, the faith of many nations has been hollowed out by Christian churches that water down the gospel to make it “contemporary” and “relevant.” The Episcopal Church is the most “tolerant” I know of, and what they have lately come to tolerate is the fact that most of the people they assiduously affirm feel no need to go to church while many of the long-time faithful have joined other churches.
- Status