"Gay Day" Ruined Our Day at Cedar Point

[gmarie21]

In terms of people being “open about their sin” how are they different?

Out of curiosity, have you ever been to a “gay pride” function by accident or on purpose? Have you seen what the actions that are expressed at these functions?

 

[Consecrated]

There is nothing perverted about passionate kissing. Period. It’s inapproariateness (to the extent that it exists) is entirely based on the context of the act. I guarantee that the OP doesn’t characterize passionate kissing as “sticking facial parts down each other’s throats” when it is him/her and their spouse in the privacy of their bedroom. Therefore usage of that phrase was a deliberate attempt to stir up hatred and indignation among those reading her post.

Horse-pucky!

You’re telling me you’ve never french kissed your spouse? or that doing so is dehumanizing?

i assumed (and said as much) that we were talking about french kissing between two people of the same sex. This behavior is indeed gravely disordered and dehumanizing no matter the environment in which the SS couple happens to be. When it occurs in a PUBLIC environment, well, that’s forcing their dehumanizing behavior on others, and those others should speak up to remind us all what’s really going on. It is also disordered, although I think in a different degree, for a man and a woman to french kiss in public, given that the action has such an obvious sexual connotation. Sexual behavior between married people is meant to be private (and among non-married people, non-existent). Airing it in public is exhibitionism, and yes, is disordered.

Asking whether I’ve ever french kissed my husband really has no bearing on this conversation that I can see.

So yes, I guess we agree:

BillP:

It’s inapproariateness (to the extent that it exists) is entirely based on the context of the act.

Compassion for those who struggle with sin is a good, holy, charitable thing, a virtue. I guess I don’t understand how it’s NOT compassionate to call deviant behavior what it is.

 

[BillP]

Out of curiosity, have you ever been to a “gay pride” function by accident or on purpose? Have you seen what the actions that are expressed at these functions?

Ma’am, In live in Atlanta, GA. Pretty much the “Gay Capital of the South” so, yeah, I’ve absolutely run into these things, usually by accident.

I’ve seen half naked men practically having sex with each other in the street during the Gay Pride parade. I’ve seen half naked women doing the same thing. I’ve even seen transvestites that I honestly couldn’t tell which gender God made them dressed very flamboyantly.

So what? I have never once been raped at one of these events, nor have I even ever been propositioned.

As distasteful as I find their behavior personally, I don’t think its my place to set myself up as the “distasteful behavior police” even if i have to explain such weird behavior to children.

BTW, I’ve seen behavior that’s almost as distasteful and overtly sexual among teenagers at the local movie theater/Starbucks, although it must be admitted, the teens weren’t as fashionably dressed as the Gay men.

 

[pnewton]

I think people tend to act a bit arrogant …,

You may think I too am one of the arrogant ones, but I never pulled out the “I’m praying that God will fix you” card for someone I disagree with here. You may think I am judgemental, but I have not accused anyone of hatred here.

I see a reflection of what has become a serious problem in our society. The biggest sin is intolerance and no one may judge anyone, unless the judge them to be judgemental. Righteous anger (anger at sin and the way it destroys the sinner and the innocent bystander) is not hatred of anything, except the sin.

If you think someone has been arrogant or holier than though, could you show us where anyone has said anything about oneself and one’s own spiritual practices, besides the one person who says he will be praying for others, of course. (lest there be any misuderstanding, I think - opinion only - such a statement is inappropriate in context, but is by no means arrogant.)

 

[pnewton]

Ok, I guess we can get testy with moneychangers…if they’re actually changing money in the Temple…in Jerusalem…

Don’t BE judgmental and you won’t be labeled judgmental. Other than that, I’m afraid I’ve got nuttin for ya!

Then for consistency sake, only call others judgemental when they have an physical beam in their eye.

And he didn’t “get testy” in that incident. He made a scourge of whips out of cords and physically drove them out.

 

[dfp42]

So we must tolerate objective immorality as if it were normal? I not saying not care for the welfare of people but to go with the flow seems wrong.

 

[gmarie21]

BTW, I’ve seen behavior that’s almost as distasteful and overtly sexual among teenagers at the local movie theater/Starbucks, although it must be admitted, the teens weren’t as fashionably dressed as the Gay men.

As have I. I have no problem correcting such behavior in public whether of same-sex or opposite-sex. Maybe that is where we differ. And I address the appropriateness of the behavior, not the soul and dignity of the person. They are two distinctly different things.

 

[Rascalking]

You may think I too am one of the arrogant ones, .)

Not in the least, I was just saying that human nature, in my opinion, leads us to be holier than thou sometimes.

And sometimes you don’t need to point out to a direct statement, you can read between the lines.

 

[BillP]

i assumed (and said as much) that we were talking about french kissing between two people of the same sex. This behavior is indeed gravely disordered and dehumanizing no matter the environment in which the SS couple happens to be. When it occurs in a PUBLIC environment, well, that’s forcing their dehumanizing behavior on others, and those others should speak up to remind us all what’s really going on. It is also disordered, although I think in a different degree, for a man and a woman to french kiss in public, given that the action has such an obvious sexual connotation. Sexual behavior between married people is meant to be private (and among non-married people, non-existent). Airing it in public is exhibitionism, and yes, is disordered.

Asking whether I’ve ever french kissed my husband really has no bearing on this conversation that I can see.

Look, I took exception to a poster referring to “French Kissing” as “sticking their facial parts down each others throats” and characterized it as intentionally inflammatory, hateful and dehumanizing.
"gmarie21:

So you think it’s okay to let your children be exposed to two women sticking facial parts down each others throats infront of children (or two men, or a man and a woman)?

You defended the OP’s characterization:

I agree that the wording was harsh, but it matches the action. Let’s think a little about what’s really going on in a same-sex display of romantic (lustful?) affection. Calling an action (not a person!) what it is, and using words that make the perversion of the act more clear is not hate and vitriol.

And further amplified your views that “french kissing” itself was “dehumanizing”

Actually, it is the action itself that is “dehumanizing”. The words used were calling that fact into the forefront of the discussion.

I replied that in fact it is no such thing. That you only consider it "dehumanizing because of who is doing it. And asserted that you would not characterize “French Kissing” as “sticking facial parts down each others throats” when done by married, opposite sex people in private. An assertion that you confirm in the post above.

Therefore, it is inflammatory to so describe the act when it is done in a different context. It is patently an attempt to inflame and dehumanize those you disagree with. QED.

 

[gmarie21]

Look, I took exception to a poster referring to “French Kissing” as “sticking their facial parts down each others throats” and characterized it as intentionally inflammatory, hateful and dehumanizing.

You defended the OP’s characterization:

And further amplified your views that “french kissing” itself was “dehumanizing”

I replied that in fact it is no such thing. That you only consider it "dehumanizing because of who is doing it. And asserted that you would not characterize “French Kissing” as “sticking facial parts down each others throats” when done by married, opposite sex people in private. An assertion that you confirm in the post above.

Therefore, it is inflammatory to so describe the act when it is done in a different context. It is patently an attempt to inflame and dehumanize those you disagree with. QED.

By the same standard, describing an abortion procedure is also inflammatory? How about when the murder of someone is described? Or how someone went about torturing? Or how someone desecrated the Eucharist? Or something that isn’t sinful, like when someone describes how they released their waste?

 

[BillP]

I see a reflection of what has become a serious problem in our society. The biggest sin is intolerance and no one may judge anyone, unless the judge them to be judgemental.

It is very ironic that what you see as increased licentiousness, I see as increased compassion.

Do you really think we were better off when society was less tolerant?

• When Countries had laws specifying the death penalty for following the “wrong” religion?
• When US States imprisoned people for marrying outside their race?
• When governments executed people for acting on SSA?
• When Gay people were denied the ability to make a living?
• When those who divorced were socially ostracized?

REALLY?

Righteous anger (anger at sin and the way it destroys the sinner and the innocent bystander) is not hatred of anything, except the sin.

Color me as skeptical and lacking in Charity, but I’ll be more likely to give the “righteously angry” the benefit of the doubt when they start railing against all sinfullness equally and not picking and choosing the sinfulness they choose to correct based on what they find personally distasteful. I’ll also be more open to their concerns when they choose to express them in calm, reasoned, respectful language rather than talking about “sticking facial parts down each others throats”.

You may take issue with me for “praying that God will fix” the OP, but you misunderstand. That wans’t said out of arrogance or a sense that I am in any way better than the OP. It was said as my effort to remember that God loves that person too and was posted in lieu of a post as vitriolic and dehumanizing toward them as their was towards the poor people she takes exception to at the amusement park.

 

[dfp42]

Is it increased compassion not to speak out on wrong doing as a Catholic?

 

[BillP]

By the same standard, describing an abortion procedure is also inflammatory? How about when the murder of someone is described? Or how someone went about torturing? Or how someone desecrated the Eucharist? Or something that isn’t sinful, like when someone describes how they released their waste?

Only if you describe an abortion as “murder” when say an unwed mother had one, but as a “procedure” when a married woman has one.

Only if you describe a murder as “inhuman slaughter” when done by a Black person, but as an “unfortunate accident” when a White person does it.

The basic description of a specific act doesn’t change depending on who is performing that act, unless one wishes to advance a specific agenda (such as creating a climate of hatred).

 

[gmarie21]

It is very ironic that what you see as increased licentiousness, I see as increased compassion.

Do you really think we were better off when society was less tolerant?

• When Countries had laws specifying the death penalty for following the “wrong” religion?
• When US States imprisoned people for marrying outside their race?
• When governments executed people for acting on SSA?
• When Gay people were denied the ability to make a living?
• When those who divorced were socially ostracized?

REALLY?

Color me as skeptical and lacking in Charity, but I’ll be more likely to give the “righteously angry” the benefit of the doubt when they start railing against all sinfullness equally and not picking and choosing the sinfulness they choose to correct based on what they find personally distasteful. I’ll also be more open to their concerns when they choose to express them in calm, reasoned, respectful language rather than talking about “sticking facial parts down each others throats”.

You may take issue with me for “praying that God will fix” the OP, but you misunderstand. That wans’t said out of arrogance or a sense that I am in any way better than the OP. It was said as my effort to remember that God loves that person too and was posted in lieu of a post as vitriolic and dehumanizing toward them as their was towards the poor people she takes exception to at the amusement park.

I’m not the OP, I’m the PP. And as a sinner, I have no problems with people pointing out my sins.

 

[BillP]

As have I. I have no problem correcting such behavior in public whether of same-sex or opposite-sex. Maybe that is where we differ. And I address the appropriateness of the behavior, not the soul and dignity of the person. They are two distinctly different things.

Do you also “correct” Protestants who “flaunt” their heresy “in your face” by wearing shirts that identify them as heretics?

Do you “correct” those who eat meat on Fridays during Lent?

Do you “correct” those you see purchasing contraceptives in the Grocery store?

Why not?

 

[gmarie21]

Only if you describe an abortion as “murder” when say an unwed mother had one, but as a “procedure” when a married woman has one.

Only if you describe a murder as “inhuman slaughter” when done by a Black person, but as an “unfortunate accident” when a White person does it.

The basic description of a specific act doesn’t change depending on who is performing that act, unless one wishes to advance a specific agenda (such as creating a climate of hatred).

Well, abortion is murder for all. Also, those who advocate it are openly supportive of violence toward women. But, to those with hardened hearts, sometimes one must speak beyond using the term “murder” and continue to describe the details of what that entails. Remember, sometimes God subtly pushes some to His Will, sometimes He uses a 2x4 to the head to get their attention.

 

[gmarie21]

Do you also “correct” Protestants who “flaunt” their heresy “in your face” by wearing shirts that identify them as heretics?

Do you “correct” those who eat meat on Fridays during Lent?

Do you “correct” those you see purchasing contraceptives in the Grocery store?

Why not?

I have corrected Protestants within my family and without, but I have also educated them on those things in which we disagree (and in which they see as myths). I do this in different ways, to the more aggressive who only understand and respond to aggressive, I use aggressiveness (some call it passion), to those who are delicate, I am delicate. Remember, it depends on the audience.

I have corrected family not only on all the Fridays during Lent but also on Ash Wednesday. I’m also the one who tries to get the extended family to refocus on the true meaning of Christmas. And I have no problem reminding them that when they are going through the downs of their lifestyles that the Church is ready for them, and I direct them to multiple mass times at parishes in their areas with the addition of letting them know the confession times also and to not be afraid to go.

I haven’t seen someone purchase contraceptives at a grocery store yet, but the only time I’ve been in that aisle recently was to purchase a pregnancy test.

 

[dfp42]

I’m sure God does love everyone but I know he doesn’t love the sin. I think this is where the confusion is. I could for example kill and God will indeed still love me. But that doesn’t mean what I did was ok. There are disordered things. It’s when society starts acting this way that we get confused with everything being ok or accepted as a norm.

 

[dfp42]

I think we should focus perhaps on hitting up cedar point again. I’m down for going. I live like 2 hrs from there. I could use a ride on the dragster… Front seat I might add.

 

[Jea9]

I can see that this thread has gone way past where I’m sure the OP intended it.

These aren’t directed at me BillP, but I’m going to respond.

Do you also “correct” Protestants who “flaunt” their heresy “in your face” by wearing shirts that identify them as heretics?

I’ve personally never seen a Protestant wearing a t-shirt that says that they are a Baptist or whatever (of course I’m not in the bible belt as you are), but I HAVE corrected Protestants and non-Christians about their heresy. Yes. I have told them that Christ set up His Church with Peter as the head and that throughout the past 2,000 years only the Catholic Church has maintained this authority.

Do you “correct” those who eat meat on Fridays during Lent?

I have corrected Catholics who don’t think this applies to them and explained to non-Catholic Christians as well as my own father who is not Christian, WHY we give up meat on Fridays.

Do you “correct” those you see purchasing contraceptives in the Grocery store?

I’ve never WATCHED someone purchasing contraceptives in the grocery store, but I have corrected (or attempted to) my niece and others who were not aware that these things were objectively sinful.

I get your point that you think it’s wrong to point out another’s sin, or rather you argue against HOW one should do it. Or maybe your argument lies with not doing anything at all but making a complaint on an internet forum. I guess I don’t get your point. Can you explain why you think it’s wrong to be upset when forced to witness sin?