Congratulations To Pope Benedict For Having The Courage To State ("We Need To Save Ourselves From Self-Destructive Sexual Life Styles")

[Kaninchen]

Becuase we are concerned about their souls.

That may be the case but, as I said, while ‘preaching to the choir’ may be a valuable thing to do, in and of itself, it may be that the message is received by everybody else as either annoying or, in many cases, “it’s just Catholics droning on about sex again, same old, same old.”

 

[Other_Eric]

The Church teaches that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered - not the people!

It is the people who incubate the disorder. Protect yourself from the people who have allowed themselves to become so estranged from God that their sexuality has been almost irrevocably corrupted, and you protect yourself from the destruction wrought by such deviancy.

 

[graceandglory]

You would have all gay people be celibate for the rest of their lives or go into heterosexual relationships.

Like there’s something bad about that?





The church also requires all straight people to “be celibate for the rest of their lives or go into” the heterosexual relationship called the Sacrament of Marriage.

I’m not getting it… Where’s the problem ???

 

[cyberwolf001]

VIVA IL PAPA! :extrahappy: :dancing: :clapping:

 

[Other_Eric]

I can see the point of ‘preaching to the choir’ but, in what sense, does this sort of thing go beyond that?

I mean it just annoys gays (who, one would think, would be people who he would want to think again about their campaigns) and leaves the rest of us wondering why some Catholics seem quite so obsessed about naughty, naughty people having naughty, naughty sex in naughty, naughty ways.

Who cares what annoys the “gays?” The objections raised are typically the emotionally stunted psychological equivalent of a child having a temper tantrum. I therefore ask you what is the point of according such an immature reaction any serious consideration whatsoever when such individuals face the threat of eternal hellfire?

 

[Kaninchen]

Who cares what annoys the “gays?” The objections raised are typically the emotionally stunted psychological equivalent of a child having a temper tantrum. I therefore ask you what is the point of according such an immature reaction any serious consideration whatsoever when such individuals face the threat of eternal hellfire?

One might, just as well, say ‘Who cares what annoys the “Catholics”?’

This is all preaching to - or in this case, perhaps, performance for - the choir again but quite what you think it has to do with convincing people who don’t agree, or are indifferent to, your position, I can’t imagine.

You may say that what others think is unimportant to the ‘purity’ of the message and I have to say that I would understand that position but the rest of us are left with ‘oh, it’s just Catholics banging on about sex again.’

In other words, if people aren’t listening, then your approach may well end up with them listening even less. Which may be ok with you, I can see that.

 

[Elizabeth502]

I would suggest that it is Catholic moral theology (spoken by & through the Pope) that is the party of greater reason, common sense, believability here. I say that because the message goes hand in hand with a concern about the oversexualization of modern society, for which there is abundant evidence.

In societies where love is mostly divorced from sex (e.g., ancient Greece, ancient Rome, modern western nations), two things flourish: promiscuity (gay & straight) and homosexual behavior. Any time a society, let alone a gov’t, either ignores such situations or outright approves of them (such as these ancient societies, such as proposals to legitimatize “gay marriage”), the behavior continues & becomes so ingrained that the general public doesn’t think twice about moral aspects or practical consequences. I strongly believe that the publicity campaigns to approve of gay lifestyles are the work of the devil. They do not represent a progression toward equality, liberality, morality. They represent a devolution toward lifestyles & societies where debauchery was celebrated as a sign of privilege, even though in reality it was a form of enslavement to bodily desires.

Both secular ancient Rome and modern secularists were/are much more hung up on sex than the Pope or conservative, believing Catholics. The Pope believes that complementary sex (for which nature intended the sex organs) is valuable, legitimate, moral and holy some of the time. The anti-Pope contingent believes that it is all those things all of the time & must be engaged in as frequently as desired, in whatever form is desired, no matter how unnatural, & without restraint. (This is how Fr. Corapi distinguishes freedom from license.)

Sex is an appetite. We don’t indulge our other appetites with the lack of restraint that some people insist on with regard to sex & sexual choices. If we drink to excess & habitually, eventually we become alcoholics & destroy our livers, not to mention our lives, souls, relationships. If we overeat or eat the wrong foods, we become obese, and similarly jeopardize our health.

Brain research for at least the last 20 years has shown that every individual has within itself a spectrum of male/female characteristics, inclinations, and attractions. But only in decadent societies have those inclinations been acted upon without restraint and been socially approved of.

Unfortunately, the modern West has its own peculiar characteristic which the ancient societies did not: the primacy of *personal *identity. An ancient Roman would not have been able to relate to the concept that sexual orientation is central to personal identity. To him, sexual behavior was (correctly) a chosen behavior. If you asked him what his “identity” was, he would most likely answer “Roman” or even “soldier.”

My heterosexuality is, similarly and also correctly, not central to my identity. However, being American, being Catholic, and being female are all central to my identity. (And being wife, mother, and being in my particular career, have been important to my identity, if not central.)

Nor does any other heterosexual I know consider his or her sexual orientation that primary to his or her identity. Yet somehow being gay is different from being a person. Odd, really.

Don’t get me wrong: I’m a happy person; I love life. But with the way society is going, no day is too early for The Second Coming.

Just remember that the Devil does his best, most effective work through the appetites of the flesh. This is his primary avenue.

 

[estesbob]

So keep preaching, Bob! I recommend making your own grassroots campaign publicizing the Church’s position on this matter. Get your voice out there.

The more people who hear it, the more people will reject it.

Like they did in California?

 

[BRZ]

Well, basically all I hear from those like Exalt is “me, me, me” This only reaffirms my faith, not pushes me away from it. I believe the church is growing stronger, not weaker. It is the Churches responsibility to show the truth not cater to the times or to public opinion.

 

[Exalt]

Like they did in California?

Yes! Like they did in California. In 2001, the vote passed by a 23 point margin. In 2008, it passed by 4. Progress is indeed being made, Bob. Your position *will *continue to lose popularity and eventually. More and more Americans believe that there is nothing wrong with being gay and engaging in gay relationships.

You will lose. It’s just a matter of time. In 200 years, things like moral opposition to homosexuality, racism, sexism, and the rest of it will seem silly, archaic, and just plain backwards.

Well, basically all I hear from those like Exalt is “me, me, me”

And I all hear from you and Ratzinger is “repent of your sins, heathen! Repent and gird your loins! These gay people are destroying our way of life, kissing eachother and whatnot!”

You’re ridiculous. Your position is ridiculous. You and your Church is making a big deal about nothing.

This only reaffirms my faith, not pushes me away from it. I believe the church is growing stronger, not weaker. It is the Churches responsibility to show the truth not cater to the times or to public opinion.

Please, *please, *keep on preaching. Keep telling the world how kissing another man invites God’s wrath and how gay people are all so unhappy and diseased because of how unnatural their lifestyles are.

You make my job much easier.

 

[BRZ]

Arguing with you seems pointless. Popularity does not change the truth. What you are doing is wrong, I will pray for you.

 

[Exalt]

Arguing with you seems pointless. Popularity does not change the truth. What you are doing is wrong, I will pray for you.

When you give valid points to argue with, I’d be happy to oblige.

I’m not saying that popularity changes the truth at all. Like you, I believe in objective truth, of course. I’m saying that people will come to believe the *reality *that kissing another man is okay, responsible gay sex is okay, gay relationships are okay, gay marriage is more than okay, etc.

 

[estesbob]

You’re ridiculous. Your position is ridiculous. You and your Church is making a big deal about nothing.

Please, *please, *keep on preaching. Keep telling the world how kissing another man invites God’s wrath and how gay people are all so unhappy and diseased because of how unnatural their lifestyles are.

You make my job much easier.

You sound very unhappy. Perhaps if you were to embrace the teachings of the Church rather than rant at them you could find happiness. You wont find it lashing out at everyone who doesnt share your views on homosexual behavior.

Since you consider it your “job” to covnince everyone that there is nothing wriong with homosexual behavior Ill give you a simple task. Please tell me why I should abandon 3,000 years of consistent Judeo/ Christian teachings on homosexual behavior based on nothing more than your opinion that its “OK”. Please tell me what insights you gained that have escaped all who went before you?

 

[Exalt]

You sound very unhappy. Perhaps if you were to embrace the teachings of the Church rather than rant at them you could find happiness. You wont find it lashing out at everyone who doesnt share your views on homosexual behavior.

I’m unhappy at the moment. That’s true. But it’s probably not because I’m gay. I was just as unhappy being a conservative Catholic like you.

Since you consider it your “job” to covnince everyone that there is nothing wriong with homosexual behavior Ill give you a simple task. Please tell me why I should abandon 3,000 years of consistent Judeo/ Christian teachings on homosexual behavior based on nothing more than your opinion that its “OK”. Please tell me what insights you gained that have escaped all who went before you?

Short answer: “SLAVERY MUST BE GOOD! 3,000 YEARS OF TRADITION SAY SO!!!” ← That’s basically your argument. If that’s all you got, go away.

Long answer: Gay relationships aren’t a big deal. They are no different from heterosexual ones. They have same joys and sorrows, the same ups and downs. Some relationships are fickle and short, and others are long and rich. Some gay people are really messed up, others are quite secure - just like straight people. Gay people worry about their relationship, children, growing old, and all that - just the same as straight people do.

We worry about what our crush thinks. We get nervous when asking them out, just like straight do. We wonder what date to take them on first, and when we sit down at a table in a restaurant, we wonder about where to sit - so as to not make the other feel uncomfortable, just like straight people do.

When break ups happen, we cry. When things go well, we’re happy.

My argument is simple: Romantic relationships are something that every human should be able to experience, if he so desires. Aaaand it’s such a big part of being human that is cruel to forbid them that opportunity (and all it’s joys and sorrows) because they just so happen to like dudes instead of gals (or vice versa).

Do I have any big insights that are different from 1000 B.C.E. to 1950 C.E.? Yeah. We’ve got LOTS of big ideas that are WAY different from those times. Slavery rings a big bell, our understanding of war rings a big bell, as do the western view of marriage, our understanding of race - and I could go on and on. Aaand on top of all of that, our western understanding of sexual orientation has changed.

 

[Other_Eric]

It seems to me that Exalt has inadvertently hit upon one of the major problems we have had in the whole “gay marriage” debate. That is, that the democratic majorities that have protected marriage thus far are eroding and eventually, should things maintain their current course, such unions will be a fact of life in each of the fifty states. It is this stark reality that renders the Pope’s message so timely.

Exalt would have us recognize an equivalence between same-sex attractions and opposite-sex attractions, drawing on facial similarities between the passions both drives arouse. In drawing such equivalence, he then goes on to posit a right to pursue whatever one thinks will make one “happy” relying on a sort of maniacal individualism. Such an argument has a high degree of acceptability in today’s culture and renders arguments against his position to seem harsh, indifferent and needlessly puritanical.

Modern man has forgotten what sex is for. It is, in the end, the means by which the species is propagated. Such a potent faculty can never be said to belong to the individual. Its primary beneficiary is the culture, not the individuals involved in the act, and therefore the act is justly regulated by the state. Opposite-sex unions can, by their very nature, do what it is impossible for a same-sex union to do: beget and raise offspring for the benefit of the state. Since same-sex couples cannot perform this basic function, their relationships need no form of public sanction, much less subsidy.

Nursed on this constant need to “feel good” and proclaiming one’s own gratification the ultimate aim of any moral code, man has created for himself a self-centered view of himself and of sex. Sex becomes only a drive meant for one’s own temporary good end. In reality, sex exists for the benefit of the state. When same-sex couples can offer anything approaching a return on the investment they mean the state to make in them, then it will be time to more seriously consider their request. Until then, none of us should care how bad they feel.

 

[Elizabeth502]

I’m not saying that popularity changes the truth at all. Like you, I believe in objective truth, of course. I’m saying that people will come to believe the *reality *that kissing another man is okay, responsible gay sex is okay, gay relationships are okay, gay marriage is more than okay, etc.

Having surrendered to the devil’s propaganda, they will indeed convince themselves that those things are “okay.” Satan is the Father of Lies, capable over & over of manipulating objective truth into an illusion, and absolutes into relativism. Just the fact that people on CAF and the world at large are seriously repeating the oxymoron “gay marriage,” is proof of this successful manipulation.

This is no different than how Satan operates in our personal lives, convincing us that it was “okay” to tell that lie, “okay” to break the Sixth Commandment, “okay” to cheat on taxes (because “everybody” does it), okay to miss Mass, okay to go to Communion in a sinful state, etc.

 

[Elizabeth502]

I’m unhappy at the moment. That’s true. But it’s probably not because I’m gay. I was just as unhappy being a conservative Catholic like you.

The solution to unhappiness is the embrace of both psychological & spiritual health. The solution is not a descent into alternative lifestyles. A “transgendered” woman once discovered this by trying such an adventure, then realized that by focusing increasingly on sex and sexuality as the core of her life, she was miserable. She had sort of a “John Corapi” moment when she was at the bottom of existence, relying on the wrong things that would never give her happiness, and she was miserable. Sexual experimentation merely intensified her pain because it magnified her separation from God. At the bottom of the barrel, she became aware that there was nothing left but God; she had nothing left to lose. God heard her prayers. She recovered, her gender. her heterosexuality, her sanity, and her relationship with God because she threw herself on His mercy, abandoning herself to Him rather than to sex.

People do lots of things to deny & avoid the pain of separation from God. Homosexual behavior and an “LGTB” lifestyle is only one of the escapes chosen. Alcohol, drugs, promiscuity, rampant materialism are some other escapes.

 

[benedictus2]

That may be the case but, as I said, while ‘preaching to the choir’ may be a valuable thing to do, in and of itself, it may be that the message is received by everybody else as either annoying or, in many cases, "it’s just Catholics droning on about sex again, same old, same old."

Yes, indeed, same old, same old. Same as in the olden times of Sodom and Gomorrha.

There are no new sins. Only newer people committing same old, same old

 

[benedictus2]

Long answer: Gay relationships aren’t a big deal. They are no different from heterosexual ones.

You need a real quick course in biology.

 

[benedictus2]

Having surrendered to the devil’s propaganda, they will indeed convince themselves that those things are “okay.” Satan is the Father of Lies, capable over & over of manipulating objective truth into an illusion, and absolutes into relativism. Just the fact that people on CAF and the world at large are seriously repeating the oxymoron “gay marriage,” is proof of this successful manipulation.

This is no different than how Satan operates in our personal lives, convincing us that it was “okay” to tell that lie, “okay” to break the Sixth Commandment, “okay” to cheat on taxes (because “everybody” does it), okay to miss Mass, okay to go to Communion in a sinful state, etc.

Well put!