Forcing Morality on Others

[JaredM]

In your opinion, I would not totally agree. Our definitions of freedom would differ somewhat as well. Here’s a family example of someone non-religious who opposed gay marriage (and for that matter he opposed legalising homosexuality) and that’s my wife’s grandfather. He was a Col. in the Red Army and it may give you some idea of his views on religion when I point he was Jewish but refered to the Old Testament as, ‘a collection of books made up by some wandering nomads to justify and rationalise their barbarisms’. He considered homosexuality as a mental illness and considered it should be treated by helping those (as he saw it) afflicted with it to receive medical help and attention. He did think the laws in force in the USSR in his lifetime where homosexuality was punishable with a long stretch sentence in the Gulag should have been removed from the penal code. But he felt homosexuality ultimately eroded society. I would disagree with much of his interpretation let it be said but that’s an example of a non-religious individual opposed to homosexuality.

I’d consider his views as going too far for a number of reasons. But there are many, many non-Christians even who oppose homosexuality. Goggle the Dalai Lama’s views on homosexuality for example - you may be surprised!

Yes I understand that many people have many different views on homosexually, but officially doesn’t recognize homosexuality as a mental illness. Homosexuality in my opinion doesn’t cause harm, it’s just simply love between two consenting adults. If love is a mental illness then we are all crazy.

Funny how Stalin put up that penal code against male homosexuality yet his personal movie director was a flamboyantly homosexual.

 

[OrangeOwl]

Gottfried Leibniz (“co-inventor” of Calculus) actually coined the expression. Whilst Voltaire was actually mocking this view in his satire Candide. Leibniz actually had some interesting philosophical ideas… Hm. Brings back undergraduate memories.

Yes. Totally OT.

 

[JaredM]

I think the views towards homosexuality depends on your culture and westernization. Since Bulgaria, Russia, and Eastern Europe have much different culture and are not western countries they have a much more macho views towards homosexuality. Western countries have generally accepted homosexuality as mainstream average behavior.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societal_attitudes_toward_homosexuality

 

[JaredM]

I mean I’m sympathetic with homosexuality because my own sexuality is somewhat unique myself. Personally I don’t view anyone as a 100% straight or 100% gay. Most heterosexual males love a slender female, yet I’m attractived to female bodybuilder. Now that’s not really the social norm as to what a women looks like now is. That’s the main reason I have yet to have a girlfriend.

Interesting thing I found:

Public opinion about LGBT topics and people tends to be negative: according to 2005 poll, 43.5% of Russians support re-criminalization of homosexual acts between consensual adults;[4] at the same time, 42.8% of Russians support a legal ban on discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation

 

[edowitz1]

Roman Catholic Doctrine Vs. The Doctrinal Teaching of the Word of God

Eternal life is a merited reward [1821, 2010]. - Roman Catholicism
Eternal life is the free gift of God (Romans 6:23)

No one can know if he will attain eternal life [1036, 2005] - Roman Catholicism
The believer can know that he has eternal life by the Word of God (1 John 5:13)

The Roman Catholic Church is necessary for salvation [846]. - Roman Catholicism
There is salvation in no one but the Lord Jesus Christ, “for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men, by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12)

Purgatory is necessary to atone for sin and clean the soul [1030-1031]. - Roman Catholicism
Purgatory does not exist. Jesus made purification for sins on the cross (Hebrews 1:3)

Mary was preserved from all stain of original sin from the first instant of her conception (the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception) [490-492].
Mary, a descendant of Adam, was born in sin (Psalm 51:5; Romans 5:12)

Mary is the Mother of the Church [963, 975]. - Roman Catholicism
Mary was the earthly mother of Jesus ( John 2:1)

The Magisterium is the authoritative teacher of the Church. [85-87]. - Roman Catholicism
The Holy Spirit is the authoritative teacher of the church (John 14:26; John 16:13, I John 2:27)

The pope, as the Bishop of Rome, is the successor of Peter [882, 936] - Roman Catholicism
Peter had no successor, nor was he a pope.

The pope is infallible in his authoritative teaching [891]. - Roman Catholicism
God alone is infallible (Numbers 23:19)

Scripture and Tradition together are the Word of God [81, 85, 97, 182]. - Roman Catholicism
Scripture is the Word of God (John 10:35, 2 Timothy 3:15-17, 2 Peter 1:20-21). Tradition is the words of men (Mark 7:1-13).

The sacrificial work of redemption is continually carried out through the Sacrifice of the Mass. [1364,1405, 1846]. - Roman Catholicism
The sacrificial work of redemption was finished when Christ gave His life for us on the cross (Ephesians 1:7, Hebrews 1:3).

God desires that consecrated bread and wine be worshiped as divine. [1378-1381] - Roman Catholicism
God forbids the worship of any object, even t hose intended to represent Him (Exodus 20:4-5, Isaiah 42:8)

Justification is lost through mortal sin [1033, 1855, 1874] - Roman Catholicism
Justification cannot be lost. Those whom God justifies will be saved from the wrath of God (Romans 5:8-9).

Justification is furthered by sacraments and good works [1212, 1392, 2010] - Roman Catholicism
Justification is the imputation of the perfect righteousness of God (2 Corinthians 5:21). In Christ the believer has been made complete (Colossians 2:10).

Salvation is attained by cooperating with grace through faith, good works, and participation in the sacraments [183, 1129, 1815, 2002]. - Roman Catholicism
Salvation is attained by grace through faith apart from works (Ephesians 2:8-9). Good works are the result, not the cause, of salvation (Ephesians 2:10).

Mary, “the All-Holy,” lived a perfectly sinless life [411, 493]. - Roman Catholicism
Mary was a sinner; God alone is sinless (Luke 18:19, Romans 3:23, Revelation 15:4).

Mary was a virgin before, during, and after the birth of Christ [496-511]. - Roman Catholicism
Mary remained a virgin until after the birth of Jesus (Matthew 1:25). Later she had other children (Matthew 13:55-56, Psalm 69:8).

Each Sacrifice of the Mass appeases God’s wrath against sin [1371, 1414]. - Roman Catholicism
The once-for-all sacrifice of the cross fully appeased God’s wrath against sin. (Hebrews 10:12-18).

The Bishops, with the Pope, as their head, rule the universal church. [883, 894-896]. - Roman Catholicism
Christ, the head of the body is the Head of the Church. (Colossians 1:18).

The faithful receive the benefits of the cross in fullest measure through the Sacrifice of the Mass [1366, 1407]. - Roman Catholicism
Believers receive the benefits of the cross in fullest measure in Christ through faith (Ephesians 1:3-14).

God has exalted Mary in heavenly glory as Queen of Heaven and Earth [966]. She is to be praised with special devotion [971, 2675]. - Roman Catholicism
The name of the Lord is to be praised, for He alone is exalted above heaven and earth (Psalm 148:13). God commands, “You shall have no other gods before Me.” (Exodus 20:3).

Mary is the co-mediator to whom we can entrust all our cares and petitions 9 968-970, 2677] - Roman Catholicism
Christ Jesus is the one mediator to whom we can entrust all our cares and petitions (1 Timothy 2:5, John 14:13-14, 1 Peter 5:7).

Mary is the co-redeemer, for she participate with Christ in the painful act of redemption [618, 964, 968, 970]. - Roman Catholicism
Christ alone is the Redeemer, for He alone suffered and died for sin (1 Peter 1:18-19).

The sacrifice of the cross is perpetuated in the Sacrifice of the Mass [1323, 1382] - Roman Catholicism
The Sacrifice of the cross is finished (John 19:30).

Indulgences dispensed by the Church for acts of piety release sinners from temporal punishment [1471-1473]. - Roman Catholicism
Jesus releases believers from their sins by His blood. (Revelation 1:5).

The Magisterium has the right to define truth found only obscurely or implicitly in revelation. [66, 88, 2035, 2051]. - Roman Catholicism
No one has the right to go beyond what is written in Scripture (1 Corinthians 4:6, Proverbs 30:5-6).

Scripture and Tradition together are the Church’s supreme role of faith [80, 82]. - Roman Catholicism
Scripture is the church’s rule of faith (Mark 7:7-13, 2 Timothy 3:16-17).

 

[francisca]

Well, should we make fornication illegal? It’s certainly not the current rule of law. I suspect if we made that illegal, a few more people would be unhappy.

Yes, and there hasn’t been any “legal protection” for fornication yet.

Would you vote for giving “legal protection” to fornicators?

 

[JaredM]

Yes, and there hasn’t been any “legal protection” for fornication yet.

Would you vote for giving “legal protection” to fornicators?

The main difference is that you can’t tell who “fornicates.” People discriminate/attack homosexuals because you can tell who a homosexual is.

 

[JaredM]

Indeed. Shows a much different picture in Russia then just the Soviet machoism you told me about. Eventually though even Russia will be more open to homosexuality.

 

[francisca]

The main difference is that you can’t tell who “fornicates.” People discriminate/attack homosexuals because you can tell who a homosexual is.

So if all the neighbours know about the fornication then you would agree to give “legal protection” to the fornicators?

 

[JaredM]

True but I still think there should be protection for the homosexuals.

So if all the neighbours know about the fornication then you would agree to give “legal protection” to the fornicators?

How many people have been beaten up or made fun of fore fornication?

 

[JaredM]

Amen brother.

I’ve seen a few people beaten up in my day for fornication. It doesn’t make it right but remember sex outside marriage been acceptable widely is a relatively new thing in society.

I’m 18. Most of my high school years most people couldn’t stop talking about sex. Myself personalty I have yet to have sex myself, and it has nothing to do with celibacy but it has more to to with the fact that I’m attracted to female bodybuilders. And since they are so very rare, I’m lonely.

 

[benidict]

Amen brother.

I’m 18. Most of my high school years most people couldn’t stop talking about sex. Myself personalty I have yet to have sex myself, and it has nothing to do with celibacy but it has more to to with the fact that I’m attracted to female bodybuilders. And since they are so very rare, I’m lonely.

Outside of the morality issue. I would strongly urge you to wait until marriage. There are many reasons for this. You sound like a bright young man, and I sure would hate to see you come down with HPV, or Herpes or something. They are running rampant through the heterosexual community. Even if you do not agree with the Church over condom use, they are not 100% either. Im speaking from experience, and Id love to save you some hardship. And no, I was not always Catholic, But I would advise the same. In the mean time, Instead of gaining experience physically, may I suggest reading text from the Jewish sages on the issue of Sexuality? That way, if you do wait you will be light years ahead of your Catholic brothers who are still trying to figure it out. Peace If you like female body builders. well…your right, they are rare. so I shall pray for you. and I would suggest haning out at a gym. peace

 

[JaredM]

Outside of the morality issue. I would strongly urge you to wait until marriage. There are many reasons for this. You sound like a bright young man, and I sure would hate to see you come down with HPV, or Herpes or something. They are running rampant through the heterosexual community. Even if you do not agree with the Church over condom use, they are not 100% either. Im speaking from experience, and Id love to save you some hardship. And no, I was not always Catholic, But I would advise the same. In the mean time, Instead of gaining experience physically, may I suggest reading text from the Jewish sages on the issue of Sexuality? That way, if you do wait you will be light years ahead of your Catholic brothers who are still trying to figure it out. Peace If you like female body builders. well…your right, they are rare. so I shall pray for you. and I would suggest haning out at a gym. peace

I don’t think I’ll be able to find a female bodybuilder here anytime soon. At least not a girl with the kind of muscle I’m talking about.

4.bp.blogspot.com/_T9FK7xegbbE/TJ5pLdbwRfI/AAAAAAAAAVo/BD1SFNbqy2s/s1600/cindy%2Bphillips-02-bloggym.jpg

Maybe I’ll find my true love in California. Lost of female bodybuilders there.

 

[benidict]

I don’t think I’ll be able to find a female bodybuilder here anytime soon. At least not a girl with the kind of muscle I’m talking about.

4.bp.blogspot.com/_T9FK7xegbbE/TJ5pLdbwRfI/AAAAAAAAAVo/BD1SFNbqy2s/s1600/cindy%2Bphillips-02-bloggym.jpg

Maybe I’ll find my true love in California. Lost of female bodybuilders there.

actually my young friend…save your travel money. theres not. Lots of pretty blondes though. Im partial to asian mixes myself. plenty of those.

 

[benidict]

Ok im wrong. after checking out your thread there is at least one. in california.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

How does a society maintain any kind of morality without somebody forcing their morality on somebody else?

Since you will never get everybody to agree on what is right and what is wrong, shouldn’t the majority decide the matter? Or should there be two sets of morality. One for the majority, one for the minority. Those who believe stealing from the rich is right are free to do so. Those who believe it is wrong (the majority) have no say in the matter. The minority have their way. Why?

There are those who believe marriage between mothers and their sons is immoral (the majority) and ought to be outlawed. Those who disagree are to be allowed to marry. Why?

The majority agree that marriage between members of the same sex ought to be immoral and outlawed. The minority disagree, and demand their right to marry. The law permits this.

At what point do you see a degeneration of morals to the level of jungle politics? At what point will it be viewed that consenting adult men should have the right to slay each other in the arena while barbarians cheer them on? Even if the majority disapprove, the insane minority have their right to kill each other so long as they wish to.

What horrible world lies ahead of us, as it lies behind us with the Roman gladiators?

 

[edwest2]

Tonight I was discussing the Catholic religion with a non-religious friend. It’s something that I don’t do very often, because it’s not something I’m very comfortable with. I’m always afraid that I’m going to say something inaccurate about the Church or I’ll say it in such a way that’ll make my friend dismiss the Church entirely. What’s worse, sometimes I find myself just parroting the Church’s position on issues, when I’m not really sure that I’m convinced by her position myself.

Basically, he was saying that he doesn’t have a problem with religious people as long as they don’t force their views on others. I tried to say that we don’t, but part of me feels that we do.

I guess I’m thinking particularly about how Catholics are basically not allowed to support the legalization of gay marriage. I really can’t find a convincing argument against gay marriage that isn’t rooted in religious views. (And, please, let’s just leave it at that, because I don’t want to get into a discussion over whether something is or is not a convincing argument). So I’m supposed to tell non-Catholics that gay people can’t get married because the religion I adhere to says so?

This makes me feel uneasy. To what extent are Catholics obligated to turn the country’s laws into the Church’s laws? What is the Church’s position on enforcing the 10 Commandments on the non-Catholics?

On CAF, I have read people talk about how the Church tried, in the past, to keep/make divorce and adultery illegal. So exactly where do we draw the line, then? Are we supposed to also support banning condoms and making it illegal to not attend Sunday services or to eat meat on Lenten Fridays? In the very far fetched situation where a woman must choose between her life and the life of her unborn child, can I support her right to *choose *an abortion? Am I supposed to believe that separation of church and state is a bad thing?

I just don’t know. I am feeling very frustrated. I try very hard to be in line with the Church, but so often it feels like I’m losing this battle. I feel like I am constantly fighting against my own opinions, because I very often feel like I’m not allowed to have them (when they deviate from a Church position).

I don’t want anyone to change their minds on Church positions based on this post. In fact, I hope they don’t. Instead, rather, I hope someone can help me see the Church’s position. Or at least how to reconcile these conflicting thoughts in my head.

Pope John Paul II made it very clear that the Church proposes but does not impose. That is why your priest won’t be pounding on your door on Monday if you miss Mass on Sunday. God will not force you to love Him.

On Church positions, you should read the actual documents that give detailed reasons why the Church has taken a certain position. In 1968, in the midst of the Sexual Revolution, Pope Paul VI had Humanae Vitae published.

vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html

I was there. Gradually, young people were told it was OK to live together and have sex with your girlfriend. The Catholic Church wasn’t teaching that. The Pill was available so you didn’t have to worry about condoms anymore. Instead of looking at human sexuality as a serious commitment, it became a plaything. All fun and none of the fuss of having kids. Something Playboy had been preaching for a while.

In 1972, I watched as a woman on TV begged us to have compassion on poor young women dying in back alley abortions. Please, we were told. It would be used for emergencies like rape or incest or to save the life of the mother. After abortion was legalized in 1973, a little girl came up to my mother and said, “My mom was going to have a baby brother or a baby sister but she’s not going to have one anymore.”

Opinions are fine, but they need to be arrived at by reading and understanding what the Church is saying. If anyone tells me that they are for or against something, they usually tell me why. The Church has arguments that engage human reason and while based on truths revealed to us by God, they work in actual practice as well.

Here a Harvard researcher agrees with the Pope regarding condom use in Africa.

catholicposition.blogspot.com/2010/08/harvard-researcher-agrees-with-pope-on.html

Hope this helps,
Ed

 

[edwest2]

From George Washington’s Farewell Address, 1796, which was also printed in newspapers at the time.

"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

“It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?”

Peace,
Ed

 

[edwest2]

The man used to be responsible. In the late 1960s when some things turned into an “alternative lifestyle,” it was still possible for a father or mother to talk to their kids and if the girl got pregnant, to encourage both to do the right thing and get married. Who was pushing the “but we love each other” reason for shacking up? The Church? I don’t think so.

Hippies on both sides of the pond were constantly yelling Freedom. “You gotta be free man. Down with the Establishment.” And, “Hey man. If it feels good, do it.” “Don’t trust anyone over 30!” Well, if you were a teenager, there goes Mom, Dad, priests, nuns and most authority figures.

They were going to change the world. All that happened was more dope smoking, young women on welfare and men who felt a little less responsible.

Throw in abortion. What? She got pregnant by herself? The man became invisible in something called “a woman’s right to choose.” In some cases, she chose an irresponsible man before the abortion would enter the picture.

Peace,
Ed

 

[cathoichelp]

Pope John Paul II made it very clear that the Church proposes but does not impose. That is why your priest won’t be pounding on your door on Monday if you miss Mass on Sunday. God will not force you to love Him.

On Church positions, you should read the actual documents that give detailed reasons why the Church has taken a certain position. In 1968, in the midst of the Sexual Revolution, Pope Paul VI had Humanae Vitae published.

vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html

I was there. Gradually, young people were told it was OK to live together and have sex with your girlfriend. The Catholic Church wasn’t teaching that. The Pill was available so you didn’t have to worry about condoms anymore. Instead of looking at human sexuality as a serious commitment, it became a plaything. All fun and none of the fuss of having kids. Something Playboy had been preaching for a while.

In 1972, I watched as a woman on TV begged us to have compassion on poor young women dying in back alley abortions. Please, we were told. It would be used for emergencies like rape or incest or to save the life of the mother. After abortion was legalized in 1973, a little girl came up to my mother and said, “My mom was going to have a baby brother or a baby sister but she’s not going to have one anymore.”

Opinions are fine, but they need to be arrived at by reading and understanding what the Church is saying. If anyone tells me that they are for or against something, they usually tell me why. The Church has arguments that engage human reason and while based on truths revealed to us by God, they work in actual practice as well.

Here a Harvard researcher agrees with the Pope regarding condom use in Africa.

catholicposition.blogspot.com/2010/08/harvard-researcher-agrees-with-pope-on.html

Hope this helps,
Ed

I have read Green’s books - He does not totally agree with the Pope per say the media has not portrayed this well.
he believes condoms work in some places but he also believes that education involving positive body imagine and limiting sexual partners is really the key.
I both agree with Green and don’t its a complicated issue.
But what he said (and what the pope said for that matter0 has greatly been twisted by the media (shocking)
And suddenly tons of people think the Pope ok’ed condoms (not true- that was a different story but I am guessing most of you heard that- the Pope said nothing of the sort)
And w Green people suddenly thought that he was saying condoms don’t work in preventing the spread of AIDS -

here is an interview w Green that accurately states what he actually was saying - and believes -
ilsussidiario.net/News/English-Spoken-Here/Culture-Religion-Science/2009/9/15/AIDS-Green-Harvard-A-cultural-problem/37518/