Concerning my attitudes towards homosexuality

[Andruschak]

Although my First Communion (as a Catholic, not a Lutheran) will not be until the Easter Vigil, I noted this in another thread in this forum

“US Bishops Set to Tell Catholics Opposed to Teaching on Abortion or Homosexuality not to Receive Communion”

Now, how much opposition is required to fall under this threat? As a 22 years sober member of AA, part of our recovery program is “Live and Let Live”. As such, I cannot say I am ACTIVELY opposed to it. I may say “tut tut” and give lip service to the Church’s position that homosexuals are required to live a life of strict chastity. That includes masturbation. And how many Single heterosexual Catholics are living in strict chastity, without masturbation?

I see no problems with the concept of denying them “same sex marriage” rights and rites.

However, I do oppose criminalizing overt homosexual activity. I oppose the kind of discrimination that they used to suffer, and still do in some places. I oppose that kind of discrimination for the same reasons I would oppose a return of the “Jim Crow” laws, the anti-Jew laws, and the anti-Catholic laws. NINA, remember?

Is it OK for me to accept communion with this mind set, or will I be required to somehow change my opinions and/or feelings and/or attitudes on the subject, never mind how?

 

[LCMS_No_More]

Although my First Communion (as a Catholic, not a Lutheran) will not be until the Easter Vigil, I noted this in another thread in this forum

“US Bishops Set to Tell Catholics Opposed to Teaching on Abortion or Homosexuality not to Receive Communion”

Now, how much opposition is required to fall under this threat? As a 22 years sober member of AA, part of our recovery program is “Live and Let Live”. As such, I cannot say I am ACTIVELY opposed to it. I may say “tut tut” and give lip service to the Church’s position that homosexuals are required to live a life of strict chastity. That includes masturbation. And how many Single heterosexual Catholics are living in strict chastity, without masturbation?

I see no problems with the concept of denying them “same sex marriage” rights and rites.

However, I do oppose criminalizing overt homosexual activity. I oppose the kind of discrimination that they used to suffer, and still do in some places. I oppose that kind of discrimination for the same reasons I would oppose a return of the “Jim Crow” laws, the anti-Jew laws, and the anti-Catholic laws. NINA, remember?

Is it OK for me to accept communion with this mind set, or will I be required to somehow change my opinions and/or feelings and/or attitudes on the subject, never mind how?

You’re okay. This is basically what Courage is about and, in fact, is in line with the Catechism, even on the part about unjust discrimination.

 

[jmcrae]

Andruschak;

The Catechism teaches us that we are not to discriminate unjustly against homosexual persons.

What this means is that if they are the best qualified person for a job, then we ought to hire them, and we can’t deny them housing or food, etc. They also have the same right as the rest of us to walk the streets in safety.

BUT we don’t have to support their “right” to adopt children, or their “right” to be “married” in church or anywhere else.

 

[nydas]

Andruschak;

The Catechism teaches us that we are not to discriminate unjustly against homosexual persons.

What this means is that if they are the best qualified person for a job, then we ought to hire them, and we can’t deny them housing or food, etc. They also have the same right as the rest of us to walk the streets in safety.

BUT we don’t have to support their “right” to adopt children, or their “right” to be “married” in church or anywhere else.

The marriage would never involve the church. State only. So what is the big deal?

 

[jmcrae]

The marriage would never involve the church. State only. So what is the big deal?

Devaluation of the heterosexual family is the big deal, and the legitimization of the attitude that marriage is about consequence-free sex, instead of about bringing children into the world and providing for society’s future.

 

[nydas]

Devaluation of the heterosexual family is the big deal, and the legitimization of the attitude that marriage is about consequence-free sex, instead of about bringing children into the world and providing for society’s future.

Heteros are decaying family values without the help of the homosexuals. Stop using gays as a scapegoat.

And marriage is realitive the the persons involved. You may think its about producing kids. Others feel its just a way to show love between two people.

 

[Transformer]

Two notes:

And how many Single heterosexual Catholics are living in strict chastity, without masturbation?

Millions are, myself included. From a purely practical standpoint, it isn’t all that difficult once you’ve stopped. There is nothing unreasonable or implausible about the Church’s call to those with same-sex attractions and those who don’t struggle with that particular cross but arn’t married to live completely chastely.

Live and Let Live

Just a comment on this: Sometimes, “live and let live” just isn’t the loving way to think. If homosexual activity really is immoral, if it really does draw one away from God and really does always fail to bring love, then simply allowing someone to live that way without challenging their way of life isn’t loving. We have to challenge the lives of those who are harming themselves. If part of an AA class and love ever conflict, you know you have to choose love. “Live and let live” becomes wrong when it means “Live and let others harm themselves through an immoral lifestyle without help or interference.” If homosexual sex is wrong, then that’s exactly what a “live and let live” policy about it is. Be sure to do the loving thing.

As for recieving the Eucharist, I would look to other replies on this thread.

 

[jmcrae]

Heteros are decaying family values without the help of the homosexuals. Stop using gays as a scapegoat.

True - but homosexual marriage is the next step down the ladder towards total cultural decay.

We need to be pulling people back up the ladder towards the future of society; not saying “Oh, well - live and let live” when they keep moving further down into the darkness and emptiness of instant gratification that hasn’t got any future.

And marriage is realitive the the persons involved. You may think its about producing kids. Others feel its just a way to show love between two people.

It’s not about what anybody feels. The reality is that we (like every other species on the planet) are always one generation away from total extinction.

 

[fix]

However, I do oppose criminalizing overt homosexual activity. I oppose the kind of discrimination that they used to suffer, and still do in some places. I oppose that kind of discrimination for the same reasons I would oppose a return of the “Jim Crow” laws, the anti-Jew laws, and the anti-Catholic laws. NINA, remember?

This may help you understand the issue more:

1. “Sexual orientation” does not constitute a quality comparable to race, ethnic background, etc. in respect to non-discrimination. Unlike these, homosexual orientation is an objective disorder (cf. “Letter,” No. 3) and evokes moral concern.

1. There are areas in which it is not unjust discrimination to take sexual orientation into account, for example, in the placement of children for adoption or foster care, in employment of teachers or athletic coaches, and in military recruitment.

1. Homosexual persons, as human persons, have the same rights as all persons including the right of not being treated in a manner which offends their personal dignity (cf. No. 10). Among other rights, all persons have the right to work, to housing, etc. Nevertheless, these rights are not absolute. They can be legitimately limited for objectively disordered external conduct. This is sometimes not only licit but obligatory. This would obtain moreover not only in the case of culpable behavior but even in the case of actions of the physically or mentally ill. Thus it is accepted that the state may restrict the exercise of rights, for example, in the case of contagious or mentally ill persons, in order to protect the common good.

1. Including “homosexual orientation” among the considerations on the basis of which it is illegal to discriminate can easily lead to regarding homosexuality as a positive source of human rights, for example, in respect to so-called affirmative action or preferential treatment in hiring practices. This is all the more deleterious since there is no right to homosexuality (cf. No. 10) which therefore should not form the basis for judicial claims…

The Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith

 

[E.E.N.S]

Although my First Communion (as a Catholic, not a Lutheran) will not be until the Easter Vigil, I noted this in another thread in this forum

“US Bishops Set to Tell Catholics Opposed to Teaching on Abortion or Homosexuality not to Receive Communion”

Now, how much opposition is required to fall under this threat? As a 22 years sober member of AA, part of our recovery program is “Live and Let Live”. As such, I cannot say I am ACTIVELY opposed to it. I may say “tut tut” and give lip service to the Church’s position that homosexuals are required to live a life of strict chastity. That includes masturbation. And how many Single heterosexual Catholics are living in strict chastity, without masturbation?

I see no problems with the concept of denying them “same sex marriage” rights and rites.

However, I do oppose criminalizing overt homosexual activity. I oppose the kind of discrimination that they used to suffer, and still do in some places. I oppose that kind of discrimination for the same reasons I would oppose a return of the “Jim Crow” laws, the anti-Jew laws, and the anti-Catholic laws. NINA, remember?

Is it OK for me to accept communion with this mind set, or will I be required to somehow change my opinions and/or feelings and/or attitudes on the subject, never mind how?

The Church teaches that masturbation is just as wrong for a heterosexual as it is for a homosexual, and since you agree with the Church’s position about homosexual marriage being impossible, then by that reasoning it would make any homosexual intercourse an act of fornication in the least. Fornication is objectively wrong regardless if you are homosexual or heterosexual. So what exactly do you have a problem with?

 

[Amateur_Soul]

Also helpful concerning your interaction with people you know intend to commit sins:

NINE WAYS OF BEING ACCESSORY TO ANOTHER’S SIN

1. By counsel.
2. By command.
3. By consent.
4. By provocation.
5. By praise or flattery.
6. By concealment.
7. By partaking.
8. By silence.
9. By defense of the ill done

from: catholic.org/prayers/sin.php

Which to me says if someone were to ask your opinion about there behavior – whatever it may be – you inform them of your beliefs but do not condemn them (the person) but do not consent to their actions.

They also had this list:
THE FOUR SINS CRYING TO HEAVEN FOR VENGEANCE

1. Willful murder (including abortion)
2. The sin of Sodom. <----
3. Oppression of the poor.
4. Defrauding laborers of their wages.