Confusing tolerance with beliefs

[Delphinus85]

Does anyone else get the feeling that the people working for tolerance towards homosexuals is so totally off base? I mean, If they were going around fighting for homosexuals to be respected as people, and to stop acts of violence on people just because they were gay, I’d totally agree with them! Matter of fact, I would support such a movement! But it seems to me that they are not preaching tolerance at all. They are trying to undermine anyone who believes otherwise! I mean, I have several homosexual friends. I am quite the opposite of “bigoted.” I do however disagree with what they are doing. Just like I have friends who are living together before they are married and are sexually active. I am friends with them and I respect their personhood, and I love them as people (they are my friends!) but i DO NOT approve of their actions anymore than I agree with my homosexual friends sleeping around.

Why can’t they just get it? They can’t make us agree that it’s okay any more than they can make us agree that it’s okay to have sex before marriage. So why are they doing that? It seems to me that if people were hurting others because of their sexual orientation, then they can talk. But simple disagreement hurts no one.

 

[Fitswimmer]

Does anyone else get the feeling that the people working for tolerance towards homosexuals is so totally off base? I mean, If they were going around fighting for homosexuals to be respected as people, and to stop acts of violence on people just because they were gay, I’d totally agree with them! Matter of fact, I would support such a movement! But it seems to me that they are not preaching tolerance at all. They are trying to undermine anyone who believes otherwise! I mean, I have several homosexual friends. I am quite the opposite of “bigoted.” I do however disagree with what they are doing. Just like I have friends who are living together before they are married and are sexually active. I am friends with them and I respect their personhood, and I love them as people (they are my friends!) but i DO NOT approve of their actions anymore than I agree with my homosexual friends sleeping around.

Why can’t they just get it? They can’t make us agree that it’s okay any more than they can make us agree that it’s okay to have sex before marriage. So why are they doing that? It seems to me that if people were hurting others because of their sexual orientation, then they can talk. But simple disagreement hurts no one.

Tolerance to me, means that we don’t have to agree with someone else’s choice, but we do have to view them as the same creatures of God that we are. It seems that there are still a good many people out there that cannot simply disagree, but must also condemn. Only God has the power to condemn, that is not something that is reserved for us.

I don’t agree with all the choices that my friends, family and co-workers make, but I still love them and I do not view myself as in any way better than they are because I have made different choices.

 

[Brendan]

Tolerance to me, means that we don’t have to agree with someone else’s choice, but we do have to view them as the same creatures of God that we are. It seems that there are still a good many people out there that cannot simply disagree, but must also condemn. Only God has the power to condemn, that is not something that is reserved for us.

God alone has the power to condemn people, but actions may be condemned, and beliefs might be correctly deemed to be false.

For example, are you really trying to say that the actions of a Klansman burning a cross on a person’s lawn cannot be condemned by humans?

Certainly, the Klansman is to be recognized as a creature of God and deserving of our love. Thus it is IN LOVE that we can condemn the actions, but love the person.

The same is true for all sin, from adultery to homosexual acts. We are, in love, to condemn the actions, for it is ONLY in condemning sinful action that we truely show love.

I don’t agree with all the choices that my friends, family and co-workers make, but I still love them and I do not view myself as in any way better than they are because I have made different choices.

You or I are not better, but are actions CAN (and should be). Also, when a friend, family or co-worker errs, we should help them recover from the error and to be strong enough to overcome the error next time.

A person is not defined by their actions, decrying particular actions of a person, in no way, is a condemnation of the person themselves.

That is all part of being a Christian family and part of the Body of Christ.

 

[Newbie2]

Politically and socially, the difference between tolerance and acceptance has been blurred. On purpose, too. As fellow Americans, we can tolerate others’ behavior, in a civil sense, whether it be homosexuality, adultry, etc., but that doesn’t mean we have to be accepting of it.

Certain political/social agendas are geared toward forcing us to not only tolerate immoral and sinful behavior, whatever it may be, but accept it and embrace it.

Jesus never said it would be easy.

 

[PaulinVA]

The difference is between tolerating and affirming.

Tolerate: To endure, to put up with
Affirm: To agree as valid and right.

Gay people do not want to be tolerated. They want to be affirmed. They want all of us to affirm their lives be legalizing same sex marriage. If we don’t agree, they call us bigots and homophobes.

So, ironicly, they are tolerant of no one’s views but their own.

 

[Delphinus85]

The difference is between tolerating and affirming.

Tolerate: To endure, to put up with
Affirm: To agree as valid and right.

Gay people do not want to be tolerated. They want to be affirmed. They want all of us to affirm their lives be legalizing same sex marriage. If we don’t agree, they call us bigots and homophobes.

So, ironicly, they are tolerant of no one’s views but their own.

Funny, it sounds like they are really insecure about their own decisions if they feel they need everyone in the world to affirm their decision

 

[Exalt]

Funny, it sounds like they are really insecure about their own decisions if they feel they need everyone in the world to affirm their decision

That sounds funny, coming from someone whose religion demands conversion.

Catholicism is evangelical in that it wants everyone to become Christian. Throughout it’s two thousand year history, one of it’s primary missions has been conversion. And yet you disapprove of people trying to convince you that there’s nothing harmful about being gay?

Heh. Sounds rather hypocritical to me, to be quite honest.

 

[Cristiano]

Funny, it sounds like they are really insecure about their own decisions if they feel they need everyone in the world to affirm their decision

That sounds funny, coming from someone whose religion demands conversion.

Catholicism is evangelical in that it wants everyone to become Christian. Throughout it’s two thousand year history, one of it’s primary missions has been conversion. And yet you disapprove of people trying to convince you that there’s nothing harmful about being gay?

Heh. Sounds rather hypocritical to me, to be quite honest.

It is not the same. Christians do not seek justification for their own beliefs. Conversion is for the other people’s good and not their own.

 

[Feedmysheep]

That sounds funny, coming from someone whose religion demands conversion.

Catholicism is evangelical in that it wants everyone to become Christian. Throughout it’s two thousand year history, one of it’s primary missions has been conversion. And yet you disapprove of people trying to convince you that there’s nothing harmful about being gay?

Heh. Sounds rather hypocritical to me, to be quite honest.

I’m not likely to sling the phrase “anti-Christian” at those who refuse to convert, though. I’m not likely to get the same consideration from people adhering to the gay agenda.

 

[Exalt]

I’m not likely to sling the phrase “anti-Christian” at those who refuse to convert, though. I’m not likely to get the same consideration from people adhering to the gay agenda.

Maybe you wouldn’t sling that particular phrase, but there are a slew of other phrases that I personally have recieved, and they are no better.

 

[Bennie_P]

That sounds funny, coming from someone whose religion demands conversion.

Catholicism is evangelical in that it wants everyone to become Christian. Throughout it’s two thousand year history, one of it’s primary missions has been conversion. And yet you disapprove of people trying to convince you that there’s nothing harmful about being gay?

Heh. Sounds rather hypocritical to me, to be quite honest.

Being called to conversion and demanding conversion is two different ideas and actions. Is anyone holding a sword over your head and demanding that you except Jesus Christ as your Lord and Saviour?

If one feels like they are being compelled to except the Church teachings then it might be coming from thier own conscience and convictions from thier sense of guilt. Last I looked this is still Catholic Answers Forum, so no one is hunting down “sinners” on the “we love to be sinners” forum and putting a sword to thier throats to accept the teachings of Christ and His Church, are they?

Everyone has a free will, and are free to choose to do as they want, but they shouldn’t expect others to agree to thier bad choices. If one wants help in thier struggles, then the Church is available to help and I for one will try to be at the head of the line with open arms.

 

[Exalt]

Being called to conversion and demanding conversion is two different ideas and actions. Is anyone holding a sword over your head and demanding that you except Jesus Christ as your Lord and Saviour?

If one feels like they are being compelled to except the Church teachings then it might be coming from thier own conscience and convictions from thier sense of guilt. Last I looked this is still Catholic Answers Forum, so no one is hunting down “sinners” on the “we love to be sinners” forum and putting a sword to thier throats to accept the teachings of Christ and His Church, are they?

Did I say that they were? I merely said it is pretty hippocritical to complain about a gay activisit trying to convince you that there’s nothing wrong with being gay when your religion demands conversion (- at the risk of eternal suffering and damnation, I might add, though it’s irrelevant.)

Everyone has a free will, and are free to choose to do as they want, but they shouldn’t expect others to agree to thier bad choices. If one wants help in thier struggles, then the Church is available to help and I for one will try to be at the head of the line with open arms.

You do realize that your Church is an evangelical one, right? You do understand that evangelization of the Gospel is a critical mission of the Church? If wanting the world to agree that Jesus is the Son of God is okay, then Catholics ought not to complain about gay people wanting the world to agree that there’s nothing wrong with being gay. They are free to complain about the message itself, of course, but not the fact that they are trying to spread that message.

 

[Magicsilence]

Did I say that they were? I merely said it is pretty hippocritical to complain about a gay activisit trying to convince you that there’s nothing wrong with being gay when your religion demands conversion (- at the risk of eternal suffering and damnation, I might add, though it’s irrelevant.)

You do realize that your Church is an evangelical one, right? You do understand that evangelization of the Gospel is a critical mission of the Church? If wanting the world to agree that Jesus is the Son of God is okay, then Catholics ought not to complain about gay people wanting the world to agree that there’s nothing wrong with being gay. They are free to complain about the message itself, of course, but not the fact that they are trying to spread that message.

In principle, you are correct. The very nature of belief necessitates some kind of disbelief in others opinions.

But, the method used by homosexuals is very different to our preaching of the gospel.

Wanting the world to accept Christ is done only for its own good.

Homosexuals wanting acceptance is done only for their own good.

So there is a fundamental difference in focus.

I want you to believe in Christ because it will change your life for the better.

The homosexual wants me to accept his belief because he won’t feel so isolated or rejected, or missing fulfillment of some psychological imbalance.

Peace and God Bless!

 

[manualman]

We are by nature social creatures. We crave love and acceptance of a community - by design. When what you want to do conflicts with the values of the community, it creates stress and anxiety in you. This is true in the case of refusing to laugh and go along with a racial joke (a moral good in conflict with the group values) and it is true in the case of homosexual sex (a moral evil in conflict with the group values).

The homosexual community believes that it is this ‘peer pressure’ (for lack of a better phrase) that is responsible for the misery that afflicts so many in their group (depression, routine cheap sexual encounters, suicide, unstable relationships…). They conclude that if they can change the values of our society to affirm their behavior and define it as normal, then their problems will go away and they can be as happy as anybody else. This is what is behind their drive. This approach betrays a worldview in which morality is not rooted in an immutable reality (Natural Law), but is merely the expression of the will of the majority in the group.

This worldview is the ultimate problem. Because of it, they do not take seriously the possibility of a Natural Law that trumps the will of men and are destined to perpetuate the BEHAVIOR which is the REAL cause of the misery that afflicts them - even if they succeed in changing the societal norms and values. Trying to defy Natural Law is like trying to defy gravity: You CAN jump off the bridge, but in the end you don’t defy the law. You only suffer the consequences of it.

Some nominal christians may also behave this way in regards to evangelization. They are usually the angry bullying ones that want to WIN arguments instead of discuss truth. Sometimes we all fall into that. But fundamentally, christians evangelize because what we have discovered has ALREADY saved us from despair. This is fundamentally different than someone trying to change a societal norm in a desperate ATTEMPT to escape despair. Watch a gay pride parade sometime and ask yourself if they really look more like folks trying to share a joyful truth with the world or if they seem like they are desperately crying out for somebody to love them.

 

[Newbie2]

That sounds funny, coming from someone whose religion demands conversion.

Catholicism is evangelical in that it wants everyone to become Christian. Throughout it’s two thousand year history, one of it’s primary missions has been conversion. And yet you disapprove of people trying to convince you that there’s nothing harmful about being gay?

Heh. Sounds rather hypocritical to me, to be quite honest.

Would it sound as hypocritical if we were comparing conversion to Christianity to, say, conversion to “another religion” like the(former) folks at Jonestown?

Previous posters put it well.

Is it that difficult to distinguish the difference between advocating something universally good vs. something (at a very minimum) is or could be evil or harmful? (And I’m talking about practicing homosexuality, not SSA or celebate homosexuals, to be clear )

 

[Keikiolu]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Delphinus85 forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
Funny, it sounds like they are really insecure about their own decisions if they feel they need everyone in the world to affirm their decision

That sounds funny, coming from someone whose religion demands conversion.

Do you know what “conversion” means?

Catholicism is evangelical in that it wants everyone to become Christian. Throughout it’s two thousand year history, one of it’s primary missions has been conversion. And yet you disapprove of people trying to convince you that there’s nothing harmful about being gay?

Conversion is not an act of convincing. Evangelization is simply speaking the good news, not to convince but only to inform.

There is no force involved. And if there IS force involved, it’s not evangelization but rather “brutalization”.

Homosexual-sex-act justifiers actively try to FORCE others to actually believe that is a positive thing that people be allowed to perform homosexual-sex-acts.

If they DON’T believe that, and publically affirm that belief, then they are to be persecuted for “hate crimes”.

Heh. Sounds rather hypocritical to me, to be quite honest.

Your typical misunderstanding of the meanings of “evangelization” and “conversion”, which you muddle together, makes it quite sensible that you’d think the way you do in this regard.

Best to you…!

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.

 

[Bennie_P]

Did I say that they were? I merely said it is pretty hippocritical to complain about a gay activisit trying to convince you that there’s nothing wrong with being gay when your religion demands conversion (- at the risk of eternal suffering and damnation, I might add, though it’s irrelevant.)

You do realize that your Church is an evangelical one, right? You do understand that evangelization of the Gospel is a critical mission of the Church? If wanting the world to agree that Jesus is the Son of God is okay, then Catholics ought not to complain about gay people wanting the world to agree that there’s nothing wrong with being gay. They are free to complain about the message itself, of course, but not the fact that they are trying to spread that message.

There you using that word demand again. But there is something wrong with acting out on one’s SSA. It creates harm to those that act on it, to those that love those that act on it and to society as a whole.
But how does a minority get the right to impose on to the majority a morality which cases so much pain?
Despite that we all have a free will, there is no demand to convert. “Gay” activist want to turn the mores of society upside down, who is really doing the demanding here?

Evangeliza´tion
**n.**1.The act of evangelizing; the state of being evangelized. The work of Christ’s ministers is evangelization. - Hobbes.
e·van·gel·izeplay_w(“E0246900”) (http://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/ibreve.gi...macr.gifzhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/lprime.gif) v. e·van·gel·ized, e·van·gel·iz·ing, e·van·gel·iz·es
*v.*tr. 1. To preach the gospel to.
2. To convert to Christianity.

*v.*intr. To preach the gospel.

 

[Exalt]

We are by nature social creatures. We crave love and acceptance of a community - by design. When what you want to do conflicts with the values of the community, it creates stress and anxiety in you. This is true in the case of refusing to laugh and go along with a racial joke (a moral good in conflict with the group values) and it is true in the case of homosexual sex (a moral evil in conflict with the group values).

The homosexual community believes that it is this ‘peer pressure’ (for lack of a better phrase) that is responsible for the misery that afflicts so many in their group (depression, routine cheap sexual encounters, suicide, unstable relationships…). They conclude that if they can change the values of our society to affirm their behavior and define it as normal, then their problems will go away and they can be as happy as anybody else. This is what is behind their drive. This approach betrays a worldview in which morality is not rooted in an immutable reality (Natural Law), but is merely the expression of the will of the majority in the group.

This worldview is the ultimate problem. Because of it, they do not take seriously the possibility of a Natural Law that trumps the will of men and are destined to perpetuate the BEHAVIOR which is the REAL cause of the misery that afflicts them - even if they succeed in changing the societal norms and values. Trying to defy Natural Law is like trying to defy gravity: You CAN jump off the bridge, but in the end you don’t defy the law. You only suffer the consequences of it.

Some nominal christians may also behave this way in regards to evangelization. They are usually the angry bullying ones that want to WIN arguments instead of discuss truth. Sometimes we all fall into that. But fundamentally, christians evangelize because what we have discovered has ALREADY saved us from despair. This is fundamentally different than someone trying to change a societal norm in a desperate ATTEMPT to escape despair. Watch a gay pride parade sometime and ask yourself if they really look more like folks trying to share a joyful truth with the world or if they seem like they are desperately crying out for somebody to love them.

There are so many things that bother me about your post, but for the sake of my own sanity, I’ll just talk about two.

#1. I’m sorry, but are you a psychologist? Do you have any studies that show that homosexual behavior *CAUSES *all those things? You don’t. Because they’re aren’t any. You have a correlational study that shows that gay people are slightly more likely to be depressed (or to have unsafe sex or whatever) than straight people. That’s it. The cause? It’s hard to say. I can tell you one thing though:

It isn’t easy to be gay when there are people like you in the world.

(Especially when they happen to be your parents, by the way, which is frequently overlooked in these forums. Depression *possibly *being linked to a lack of acceptance from your parents because they think you’re going to hell or acting against God or some other ridiculous, faith-based notion? Um. Yeah. That’s not hard to fathom. Even someone like you ought to see how that could possibly cause depression.)

#2. Gay pride parades are not representative. You’d get mad at me if I picked, oh, say, that one dude who posted a few months back saying that gay people ought to be put in concentration camps as being representative of Catholics on this issue.

 

[Exalt]

There you using that word demand again. But there is something wrong with acting out on one’s SSA. It creates harm to those that act on it, to those that love those that act on it and to society as a whole.
But how does a minority get the right to impose on to the majority a morality which cases so much pain?
Despite that we all have a free will, there is no demand to convert. “Gay” activist want to turn the mores of society upside down, who is really doing the demanding here?

Evangeliza´tion
**n.**1.The act of evangelizing; the state of being evangelized. The work of Christ’s ministers is evangelization. - Hobbes.
e·van·gel·izeplay_w(“E0246900”) (http://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/ibreve.gi...macr.gifzhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/lprime.gif) v. e·van·gel·ized, e·van·gel·iz·ing, e·van·gel·iz·es
*v.*tr. 1. To preach the gospel to.
2. To convert to Christianity.

*v.*intr. To preach the gospel.

“Convert or you burn in hell forever.”

There’s no greater demand than that, Bennie.

 

[Exalt]

Homosexual-sex-act justifiers actively try to FORCE others to actually believe that is a positive thing that people be allowed to perform homosexual-sex-acts.

If they DON’T believe that, and publically affirm that belief, then they are to be persecuted for “hate crimes”.

Wait, wait, wait.

You’re saying that we think that you ought to be persecuted for hate crimes for saying that being gay is wrong?