“Secret Catholic”, you could have worded this better.
It’s a comparison. There may be better ones, but I think it gets the point across. I do not intend to offend anyone, but I am ultimately more interested in getting the truth across than not offending anyone.
There comes a point where you have to make a point that homosexual behavior is bad- it’s disordered and in fact, evil in the Catholic sense of the word (just as all sin is evil). The “gay” community is a “community” of people living disordered lifestyles.
I don’t know about all bulimics - maybe there are some whose goal is to spiral each other ever downwards - but at least some are gathering together specially to help each other up.
There is a difference between the “alcoholic community” (a term not in common use, but that certainly corresponds to reality to a good degree) and the “AA community”. There are same-sex support groups like Courage. This is a very different thing from the “gay community”, as none of these people typically identify themselves with these disordered behaviors even if they have the inclinations towards it, similarly as we all have some inclination to sin.
Many of the members of such a group which is being made visible are probably like my friend’s 9 (yes that’s a nine) year old, they were told what they were told, they were told it often, and by many people.
A 9-year-old child is certainly not “gay” or “lesbian” or any such thing! They may have same-sex attraction or be inclined towards the preferences and activities of the opposite sex (a phenomenon which I have witnessed as well), but they are not “gay”. To have same-sex attraction is not a sin! To identify as “gay” is a choice, not a genetic or social necessity. You are right that some people try to pigeonhole others into these categories, but that does not make them so.
Don’t be naïve. A person cannot be separated from what he/she practices. To call certain practices unnatural, disgusting, sick, evil, perverted and other such “loving” labels WILL have effects on others. You cannot “wash your hands” and assert that “you were only talking about the practices and not the person”. The phrase “hate the sin, love the sinner” is hypocritical.
This sounds like a statement from the devil himself! I urge you to reconsider it! Yes, of course we can separate a person from his actions and certainly from his sins, which go against his very self. If you slept with your sister and others called your actions “unnatural, disgusting, sick, evil, and perverted”, would you have the same complaint?
The problem is that you have been desensitized to the sin of homosexuality and don’t see it as “that bad”, when indeed it is! Is it the correct pastoral decision to say these things about homosexuals today- probably not, for a lot of people- because they don’t even see the problem with their ways. Should we hate homosexuals? Absolutely not!- For they are created in the image and likeness of God himself! But hating sin hypocritical? Not unless you are willing to label Jesus the Christ as such.
I have always been disgusted by the term “Love the sinner, hate the sin.” It is very insincere, and thrown around too much. I understand a person’s intention is to tell others that the sinful things they do are hurting them and their relationship with God, but really, it seems to mean something else entirely to many people when they hear it.
Terms acquire connotations with time. Perhaps this
phrase is not prudent in many cases, because of its connotation for some people- but certainly the concept is perfectly valid and correct.
Does blaming the Orlando gay nightclub massacre on Christianity cause hatred and violence against Christians?
I find it pretty
hateful when I’m accused of having Orlando LGBT blood on my hands.
Great observation. Agreed. Additionally I find the term “hate” rather “hateful” and overly used. it is endemic of a feelings-based culture and a conversation stopping tactic.
