Gay friends

[Other_Eric]

I am nothing if not bold but it’s not like my thoughts are that original. I have my opinion and St. Thomas has his.

People typically condemn the thing they are least likely to do (so they won’t be called a hyopcrite) OR will condemn it louder than anyone (like a closet case).

And one should not compare my ideas to those of saints, etc. it really goes to my head

Original or not, these thoughts serve only to elevate what is disordered. I am not likely to commit rape against a woman, yet I can see that this sin would be far less grievous than two individuals of the same sex consenting to depraved lusts. At least in the former case, the procreative possibility of the sexual act is maintained, whereas in the latter case, it is actively avoided. We must not allow our own shallow conceptions of fair play to override the wise judgment of the Church.

 

[setter]

Yes, but never in the form of a “business card for the proper reparative therapist”. Are you for real?

I asked you this before on another thread and you never replied. I wonder: how effective have you been with your approach in converting those active homosexuals back to the truth? I’m very interested in how that’s working for you.

This makes two of us …we are all awaiting the report card for effective evangelism in applying your approach and style.

 

[Imagine23]

Original or not, these thoughts serve only to elevate what is disordered. I am not likely to commit rape against a woman, yet I can see that this sin would be far less grievous than two individuals of the same sex consenting to depraved lusts. At least in the former case, the procreative possibility of the sexual act is maintained, whereas in the latter case, it is actively avoided. We must not allow our own shallow conceptions of fair play to override the wise judgment of the Church.

I cannot believe that I just read that.

You are actually saying that you think two consenting gays having sex is worse that a woman being raped. And your rationale is that the rapist might impregnate the woman.

You are seriously depraved. Please seek counseling immediately.

 

[Imagine23]

You are still projecting …hint: Love the sinner, hate the sin.

This assumes it should be a sin. Why is that so? Who does it harm?

I know you theists have a warped view of morality, but think about sins in the sense of who is harmed and you will see that this gay issue is really no issue at all.

 

[Other_Eric]

Yes, but never in the form of a “business card for the proper reparative therapist”. Are you for real?

I asked you this before on another thread and you never replied. I wonder: how effective have you been with your approach in converting those active homosexuals back to the truth? I’m very interested in how that’s working for you.

This makes two of us …we are all awaiting the report card for effective evangelism in applying your approach and style.

When I find one with same-sex attractions, I will let you know. However, we must be on guard against presenting the faith as something other than it is just to make it palatable to those with disordered tastes. If we do that, we have created a false Church for them to worship at and are therefore guilty of scandal.

Moreover, this idea of measuring evangelistic merit by its popularity is extremely crude and lacking in basic Scriptural knowledge. Proclaiming the Truth will be unpopular sometimes. The episode of Christ telling the crowds that they must eat His body and drink His blood comes to mind. Christ knew that most people would not be able to accept this teaching, yet He said it anyway.

That a majority of those with same-sex attractions, or even all of them are unable to accept the Church’s teaching is wholly irrelevant. Christians are bound to give the unvarnished Gospel message neither adding to nor omitting the least thing. If those with same-sex attractions do not accept it, then we shake the dust from our feet and go on our way as Christ commanded.

 

[blessedtoo]

When I find one with same-sex attractions, I will let you know.

Yes, I figured as much. For those of us with more direct experience of homosexuality, I’d like you to know that handing out business cards to reparative therapists is not effective in the least. However, you seem to be under the mistaken impression that if, as Catholics, we are not constantly slamming the Cathechism over the heads of our homosexual loved ones, somehow we are misrepresenting Church teaching. You are wrong. On another thread an article was linked written by a woman who had self-identified as lesbian until she returned to the Church. She made suggestions about how to evangelize to the homosexual community. It was a thoughtful, and thought-provoking article, albeit slight watered-down. Yet your response was the same rigid, dogmatic and impractical gibberish that you always regurgitate on these forums. I wonder if perhaps you should consider volunteering in an Catholic outreach ministry to the homosexual community, get some first-hand experience, and then come back and chat with us.

 

[mlchance]

This assumes it should be a sin. Why is that so? Who does it harm?

Sin always harms the sinner if no one else. The detrimental physical and psychological consequences of living a homosexual lifestyle have been so thoroughly documented that they cannot be rationally denied.

I know you theists have a warped view of morality…

Ad hominem. You’ve lost the argument.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[Imagine23]

Sin always harms the sinner if no one else. The detrimental physical and psychological consequences of living a homosexual lifestyle have been so thoroughly documented that they cannot be rationally denied.

Ad hominem. You’ve lost the argument.

– Mark L. Chance.

Not quite. The Christian view of sin, which you also equate to a sense of morality is extremely warped.

Our concerns as far as morality goes should take into account the extent to which our actions harm other humans. It’s as simple as that.

Your view of sin involve numerous actions (such as worshiping “false” gods, making graven images, etc.) which cause absolutely no harm to other humans. You also include as a sin an act between consenting adults which does no harm to you.

What exactly are the psychological consequences that are so well documented? I have family members and friends who are gay and they seem quite stable.

Maybe you have more familiarity with the gay lifestyle than me though. That would make sense.

 

[Imagine23]

When I find one with same-sex attractions, I will let you know. However, we must be on guard against presenting the faith as something other than it is just to make it palatable to those with disordered tastes. If we do that, we have created a false Church for them to worship at and are therefore guilty of scandal.

Moreover, this idea of measuring evangelistic merit by its popularity is extremely crude and lacking in basic Scriptural knowledge. Proclaiming the Truth will be unpopular sometimes. The episode of Christ telling the crowds that they must eat His body and drink His blood comes to mind. Christ knew that most people would not be able to accept this teaching, yet He said it anyway.

That a majority of those with same-sex attractions, or even all of them are unable to accept the Church’s teaching is wholly irrelevant. Christians are bound to give the unvarnished Gospel message neither adding to nor omitting the least thing. If those with same-sex attractions do not accept it, then we shake the dust from our feet and go on our way as Christ commanded.

Being such a strict constructionist as you are (and having already presented the psychotic view that consenting gay sex is much worse than raping a woman) I assume you support the institution of slavery, since it has ample support in the Bible.

 

[Imagine23]

Original or not, these thoughts serve only to elevate what is disordered. I am not likely to commit rape against a woman, yet I can see that this sin would be far less grievous than two individuals of the same sex consenting to depraved lusts. At least in the former case, the procreative possibility of the sexual act is maintained, whereas in the latter case, it is actively avoided. We must not allow our own shallow conceptions of fair play to override the wise judgment of the Church.

I can’t believe any of the other holy and righteous Christians on this board have condemned this statement.

Do you understand what this guy above said? He said him raping a woman is not as bad as two gay men having consensual sex. His twisted rationale is that he might impregnate the woman.

Why is this person not banned from this board? I’ve personally never heard something so evil and psychotic from a Catholic.

 

[Mary3]

One of my good friends is openly gay as well. In my case in comparison to the OP’s I think it would be sinful for me to attend the wedding he is planning to a forty something year old man while he is 21. It is very disturbing. He is my friend but there is a line I will not cross. I know that i will turn down his invitation. Neomi

Me, too, Neomi. I have a wonderful coworker who is openly gay. When he invited me to his “wedding” last year, I declined. He suspected I might, and so he asked before he invited me about my sentiments on his “marriage”. It was only because we had developed a friendship that I was able to share my feelings about his lifestyle. I was not rude or disrespectul to him, and affirmed my deep affection for him, but was clear that I could not support his lifestyle. Because he cares about me, he respects my religious convictions.

We are still close friends today. I intend to keep it that way. Sure, I could scold him constantly and warn him about losing his salvation. I think I will have a better chance of reaching his heart as a friend than as his judge. Never underestimate the impact of your loving, if mostly silent, witness to the truth.

 

[setter]

Originally Posted by Imagine23
This assumes it should be a sin. Why is that so? Who does it harm?

I know you theists have a warped view of morality, but think about sins in the sense of who is harmed and you will see that this gay issue is really no issue at all.

Not quite. The Christian view of sin, which you also equate to a sense of morality is extremely warped.

Our concerns as far as morality goes should take into account the extent to which our actions harm other humans. It’s as simple as that.

Your view of sin involve numerous actions (such as worshiping “false” gods, making graven images, etc.) which cause absolutely no harm to other humans. You also include as a sin an act between consenting adults which does no harm to you.

What exactly are the psychological consequences that are so well documented? I have family members and friends who are gay and they seem quite stable.

Maybe you have more familiarity with the gay lifestyle than me though. That would make sense.

Rather than just throwing out opinions and derogatory comments toward those who come from a faith perspective, why no try making the argument by directly refuting the believer’s basis for condemning homosexual activity? As Catholic Chrisitian beliebers, we believe in a Creator who has built in natural law into our being and order of creation; we believe that we are spiritual being held accountable to the Creator’s absolute normas and standards for morality; we believe that the Creator has communicated to His creatures the order of creation and natual and revealed moral law; we believe that beacuse of original sin, there exist deviation from the normal of orginal design that can only be fully corrected through God’s provision and grace; …now try to convince us rather than just blowing smoke, accusing, arguing from presumption.

 

[setter]

When I find one with same-sex attractions, I will let you know. However, we must …

We figured as much. Your response also begs the question which all who are familiar with your posting history are curious to know: Why the preoccupation and self-ascribed uncompromising lack of toelrance for and condemnation of SSA, not homosexual actions, but SSA in itself?

Let me guess …none of our buisness! …

 

[Julian_Peters]

Thank you to all those who have participated in this discussion. This thread is now closed.