Chaperones lead Catholic schoolgirls out from "Nutcracker Suite" performance with same-sex roles, causing criticism, agreement

  • Thread starter Thread starter mdgspencer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
VanitasVanitatum:
The word’s etymology comes from Greek “homo”
Which goes back to PIE (Proto Indo European) Somo

Homo Sapiens… Sentient/Wise Man..

Church - Homosexual Persons
refers to persons - male or female - who are sexually attracted to persons of their gender

Church - Homosexual Sex - is a Sin…

_
You say it refers only to men but then say yourself that the church uses the term to describe both men and women.
 
Homo… Man… Nothing more.
But that’s just a coincidence since the word is Greek and I doubt most Christians know much about Latin. What do you think about its linguistic counterpart, heterosexual?
 
Last edited:
40.png
VanitasVanitatum:
Homo Sapiens… Sentient/Wise Man. .
Homo… Man… Nothing more.
?

As VanitasVanitatum has pointed out, the “homo” in “homosexual” comes from the Greek “homos” meaning “same,” not from the Latin “homo” which means “man.” The first part of the word “homosexual” is from Greek and the second part (sexual) is from Latin:

homosexual (adj.)​

1892, in C.G. Chaddock’s translation of Krafft-Ebing’s “Psychopathia Sexualis,” from German homosexual, homosexuale (by 1880, in Gustav Jäger), from Greek homos “same” + Latin-based sexual.
 
Last edited:
As I said, many people “also recognize that LGBT people had been oppressed for a long time.” That is to say that they were subject to “unjust discrimination” for a long time. Many were fired from their jobs, harassed and sometimes arrested by the police, disowned by their families, experienced physical violence, etc.
So we are to accept every change the homosexual activists want because of past sins of many (not just Catholics)?
 
40.png
Thorolfr:
As I said, many people “also recognize that LGBT people had been oppressed for a long time.” That is to say that they were subject to “unjust discrimination” for a long time. Many were fired from their jobs, harassed and sometimes arrested by the police, disowned by their families, experienced physical violence, etc.
So we are to accept every change the homosexual activists want because of past sins of many (not just Catholics)?
I didn’t say what anyone should do. I was just explaining why many people in some Protestant denominations worked to make their churches more welcoming to LGBT people, including those in same-sex relationships.
 
40.png
Thorolfr:
As I said, many people “also recognize that LGBT people had been oppressed for a long time.” That is to say that they were subject to “unjust discrimination” for a long time. Many were fired from their jobs, harassed and sometimes arrested by the police, disowned by their families, experienced physical violence, etc.
So we are to accept every change the homosexual activists want because of past sins of many (not just Catholics)?
No. We should accept change if we are convinced it’s for the better. Not because of past mistakes we have made. Those should only serve to remind us that we shouldn’t make them again and to make sure that others don’t make them now.
 
IOW, they accepted the sin along with the sinners because of past bad acts against homosexuals by other people.

Protestants can change their teachings; the Catholic Church cannot.
 
IOW, they accepted the sin along with the sinners because of past bad acts against homosexuals by other people.
No. They accepted the people. Nobody should have to accept something they deem immoral.
 
Why does PC Wokeness have to be weaved into every single fabric of society, into every play, TV Show or movie we watch?
 
Last edited:
Thorofor said “[he] was just explaining why many people in some Protestant denominations worked to make their churches more welcoming to LGBT people, including those in same-sex relationships.
 
You say it refers only to men but then say yourself that the church uses the term to describe both men and women.
We were/are speaking about the term “homo” … as in: “Man” in Latin

In the Church - homosexual persons refer to male and female

Man? / Mankind? – can refer to male & female
 
40.png
Freddy:
You say it refers only to men but then say yourself that the church uses the term to describe both men and women.
We were/are speaking about the term “homo” … as in: “Man” in Latin

In the Church - homosexual persons refer to male and female

Man? / Mankind? – can refer to male & female
But the “homo” in “homosexual” isn’t from Latin and doesn’t have anything to do with “man”.
 
Last edited:
But the “homo” in “homosexual” isn’t from Latin and doesn’t have anything to do with “man”.
Nope…

Etymologically …

English Homo comes from Latin… comes from Greek … comes from PIE

Man… — Not necessarily Male…
 
40.png
Thorolfr:
But the “homo” in “homosexual” isn’t from Latin and doesn’t have anything to do with “man”.
Nope…

Etymologically …

English Homo comes from Latin… comes from Greek … comes from PIE

Man… — Not necessarily Male…
The Latin word homo and the Greek word homos come from different Proto-Indo-European words.

Latin homo (“man” or “human”) comes from Proto-Italic *hemō which comes from Proto-Indo-European *ǵʰm̥mṓ (“earthling”) from *dʰéǵʰōm (“earth”). The Latin word humus (“earth” or “soil”) also comes from Proto-Indo-European *dʰéǵʰōm (“earth”). Cognates include Gothic guma and Old English guma.

The Greek word homos (“same”), on the other hand, comes from Proto-Indo-European *somHós from which we get the Old English cognate sama (English same ) and the Old Persian hama.

And the “homo” in “homosexual” comes from the Greek word homos meaning “same” as in same-sex.
 
We were/are speaking about the term “homo” … as in: “Man” in Latin

In the Church - homosexual persons refer to male and female

Man? / Mankind? – can refer to male & female
It’s already been explained that that was wrong.
 
Thorloft likely chose to talk only about Protestants because he knows that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top