T
ThinkingSapien
Guest
How do the gay people that you know dress?Thorolfr;13156816:
No they don’t.Most gay men do dress just like straight men (although they might have better fashion sense).
- Status
C
cjforJesus
Guest
it is very harmful
both physically and spiritually,but it is also an addiction. St Augustine called it the “unnatural vice”
When men engage in that type of sexual contact the submissive partner receives intense stimulation of his prostate where there are also many nerves related to sexual arousal. In addition the resulting orgasm releases a flood of bonding hormones called oxytocin. It creates a very euphoric feeling that probably can be mistaken for love.
Men can love each other very much but to wish to masturbate with a member of the same sex and actually do it is crossing the line.
T
Thorolfr
Guest
According to Psychology Today:
psychologytoday.com/basics/oxytocin
So that oxytocin is dangerous and addictive stuff and even hugging or kissing of loved ones should be discouraged
E
edwest2
Guest
I’m not referring to extremes or controversy but facts. Take the various statements made by gay right groups and publications like the Advocate (that covers LGBT issues). Instead of taking a proper journalistic approach, they do something that is wrong. Headlines frequently prejudge prior to the contents of the article itself.
Antigay person or persons or group says…
Transphobic person or persons or group says…
Homophobic person or persons or group says…
In some cases, certain groups that publish credible, checkable information are listed as “hate groups.”
Kids in kindergarten are being taught about homosexuality:
abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=1230620
Among others, the book titled King and King is given to children in public schools to read. It affirms not only same-sex attraction but gay marriage.
amazon.com/King-Linda-Haan/dp/1582460612
“Diversity” is a word to promote homosexual behavior in the classroom:
amazon.com/Beyond-Diversity-Day-Curriculum-Sexualities/dp/074252034X
Anti-sodomy laws were overturned. Prior to that, gay persons who wanted to engage in sodomy had no impediment.
Gay marriage is a meaningless concept and an impossibility. I have not seen any evidence that homosexual behavior, not Same Sex Attraction, is not a disorder at some level, but that was overruled by a vote taken under pressure from radical gay activists and closeted gays in the American Psychiatric Association in 1973. In 2013, Transgendered Persons were reclassified in the following manner:
“Whereas previously a man who “self-identified” as a woman (or vice versa) could have been classified as mentally ill, now the DSM-5 uses the term “gender dysphoria,” which means it is only a mental illness if you’re troubled by this self-identification. Elated activists in the “LGBT” community had lobbied the APA for the change for years.”
Lobbying for such a change by the LGBT community is neither scientific or rational regarding a diagnosis.
So there you have a pattern of propaganda based on emotion and dismissing opposing claims based on nonexistent phobic conditions or hate. That is neither rational nor informative to the average reader, unless the reader is convinced that labeling someone without further inquiry is the correct approach. Religious leaders, including the Catholic Church, are not immune from being accused of being wrong or not supportive of ‘gay rights.’
There are many legal avenues that are open to gay persons who want to give their property and assets to a gay partner. A durable power of attorney could be drawn up that could include making medical decisions. A will could be drawn up as well.
Parental rights are being ignored regarding information about homosexual relationships being given to students in public schools without parental notification - who decided that? Young minds are not prepared emotionally or psychologically for such information. But as soon as ‘gay marriage’ is legal, they are propagandized.
Gender Identity is a related issue but only receives a one-sided treatment by the media, unless one looks elsewhere.
illinoisfamily.org/education/urgency-of-addressing-gender-confusion-in-public-schools/
Which bathroom should kids use in school? What’s wrong with limiting it to their biological sex (no, I’m not referring to ambiguous situations)?
time.com/3734714/transgender-bathroom-bills-lgbt-discrimination/
Again, propaganda rules the argument.
Ed
T
Thorolfr
Guest
So what groups that publish credible, checkable information have been listed as hate groups?
E
edwest2
Guest
I’ll give you one. Mass Resistance, otherwise spelled as one word. They have been listed as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center.
massresistance.org/docs/issues/gay_strategies/after_the_ball.html
Ed
T
ThinkingSapien
Guest
Southern Poverty Law Center has listed MassResistance as an anti-gay because of “their propagation of known falsehoods — claims about LGBT people that have been thoroughly discredited by scientific authorities”
SPLC said:
E
edwest2
Guest
So, you entirely ignored my first reply? It is correct to state that LGBT groups are targeting kids in schools to normalize gay behavior, causing confusion about human biology at the very least. Parents should be notified. Gay behavior is a perversion.
What “scientific authorities”?
Ed
T
ThinkingSapien
Guest
Nope, I didn’t. Had another reply window open but was looking for a link first.
The comments in the review section of “King and King” were rather interesting. But it brought to me a kids cartoon about a group composed of three characters that decided to take on female form taking care of a little boy. Throughout the series another family has evaluated them as being a good family that love and care for the boy and that their love and nurturing is what really matters. One of the character’s showed jealously in several flashbacks when the leader of their group developed an affinity to a man and seemed to try to chase him off and convince him that he would be unsuccessful at any relationship with her. Watching it with my sister we noticed how some aspects of the show could be cast as pro-trans (given that the characters are only females because that’s the form they have decided to take), pro same-sex parenting, and even a bit lesbian
. Possibly more so in the episodes with one female kissing on another in the past couple of seasons.Last week I saw a thread on facebook in which some parents found out about one of the episodes and flipped their lids over it. They found out because of an article on Huffington Post ( huffingtonpost.com/entry/cartoon-networks-steven-universe-includes-lesbian-couple_55ae61a0e4b07af29d565e34 ). While they’ve seen their kids watching the cartoon they’ve never paid attention to it and somehow missed first-hand information on what was going on. They all declared their kids would never see the cartoon again.
Sure. Many people/groups/organizations trying to make decisions or changes for the world of tomorrow include kids as targets of their messages and media.
As in “to make not strange.” Sure.
Not sure what you are talking about there.
I am aware there are parents that see it as such.
I’m curious about that myself. But for now my only intention is to have the the declaration(s) made by the SPLC on MassResistence available for review.
E
edwest2
Guest
By normalize gay behavior - it’s been around for a long time - I mean being out and proud is a recent occurrence. It is not unknown.Nope, I didn’t. Had another reply window open but was looking for a link first.
The comments in the review section of “King and King” were rather interesting. But it brought to me a kids cartoon about a group composed of three characters that decided to take on female form taking care of a little boy. Throughout the series another family has evaluated them as being a good family that love and care for the boy and that their love and nurturing is what really matters. One of the character’s showed jealously in several flashbacks when the leader of their group developed an affinity to a man and seemed to try to chase him off and convince him that he would be unsuccessful at any relationship with her. Watching it with my sister we noticed how some aspects of the show could be cast as pro-trans (given that the characters are only females because that’s the form they have decided to take), pro same-sex parenting, and even a bit lesbian
Last week I saw a thread on facebook in which some parents found out about one of the episodes and flipped their lids over it. They found out because of an article on Huffington Post ( huffingtonpost.com/entry/cartoon-networks-steven-universe-includes-lesbian-couple_55ae61a0e4b07af29d565e34 ). While they’ve seen their kids watching the cartoon they’ve never paid attention to it and somehow missed first-hand information on what was going on. They all declared their kids would never see the cartoon again.
Sure. Many people/groups/organizations trying to make decisions or changes for the world of tomorrow include kids as targets of their messages and media.
As in “to make not strange.” Sure.
Not sure what you are talking about there.
I am aware there are parents that see it as such.
I’m curious about that myself. But for now my only intention is to have the the declaration(s) made by the SPLC on MassResistence available for review.
lifesitenews.com/news/san-diego-firefighters-win-lawsuit-over-forced-participation-in-gay-pride-p
It is very common for the media to promote it - and not just the more extreme people on either side of it, meaning for or against promoting gay behavior. The vast majority of the media is positive towards it and depictions of ‘married’ gay couples or gay couples in relationships are increasing on TV and other media. Catholics, at least, should not be indifferent. Or allow this to turn into another “Hey. What’s the big deal?” mess in society.
The perversion of human sexuality in the “mainstream” started in the late 1960s and has gotten worse and worse in every decade that followed till today.
Ed
T
ThinkingSapien
Guest
Do I oppose gay people publicly identifying as gay? No.
Do I oppose gay people feeling or expressing pride in aspects of their self identity? No.
Do I support the firefighters being told to participate in a gay pride parade or suffer penalties? No. On a related note the cheif of the Atlanta fire department was let go this year because continued anti-gay expressions (ref).
Throughout USA history you’ll find that many minority groups have had campaigns to make their presence known, express pride about it often times in response to negative treatment against the group(s) (African Americans, Latin Americans, Muslim Americans, Gays, and others). Without information that convincingly shows that the attributes in which they express pride or linked to harm of others I don’t have feelings of opposition to it. So one can be out of the closets and into the streets and I’m fine with it (so long as traffic isn’t severely impacted in the process
). There may be other conditions that could cause me to have feelings of opposition, but they haven’t yet occurred.The media" is the result of human expression. Just as people have had feelings of opposition and support among the media corpus and other records you will find evidence of opposition and support. Human expressions but influence people and are influenced by people. That’s part of being in a society.
How do a vast majority of people feel about it?
The last Pew research survey I saw on the topic suggest that Catholics are not indifferent to it.
Views on sexuality have changed since the 1960s. Well, they’ve changed since before then too. They also have differed over cultures and geographies. Views of human sexuality are not static.
C
cjforJesus
Guest
Homosexual masturbation is wrong.It always has been and always will be no matter what psychiatrists say. There are are myriad of sexual deviations related to erotica.One becomes aroused by many things that they see and perceive as beautiful and sexual. As the catechism states the psychological genesis of homosexual attraction remains largely unexplained.The acts (sodomy) are gravely depraved.
That being said I pretty much understand the agenda you are promoting on this Catholic forum.You are not seeking the truth with charity but trying to shove sexual perversion down the throats of Catholics.
As I said before, the culmination of the Kinsey agenda is to incorporate the last taboo,and that is children… Teach them about sexual perversions young and desensitize them and they will be easy targets.
F
faustinamary
Guest
Its also related to NOW and abortion. Margaret Sanger was a bisexual and the more you delink sex and children, then maybe that leads to support of homosexuality. Also, for a lot of people, if pushed to support some other issue that they don’t feel sympathy for, they seem to support this issue more.
E
edwest2
Guest
There’s a difference between views and legalizing those views. I am sick and tired of “gay behavior is OK” propaganda. That is supported by the Church, which includes human Biology.Do I oppose gay people publicly identifying as gay? No.
Do I oppose gay people feeling or expressing pride in aspects of their self identity? No.
Do I support the firefighters being told to participate in a gay pride parade or suffer penalties? No. On a related note the cheif of the Atlanta fire department was let go this year because continued anti-gay expressions (ref).
Throughout USA history you’ll find that many minority groups have had campaigns to make their presence known, express pride about it often times in response to negative treatment against the group(s) (African Americans, Latin Americans, Muslim Americans, Gays, and others). Without information that convincingly shows that the attributes in which they express pride or linked to harm of others I don’t have feelings of opposition to it. So one can be out of the closets and into the streets and I’m fine with it (so long as traffic isn’t severely impacted in the process
The media" is the result of human expression. Just as people have had feelings of opposition and support among the media corpus and other records you will find evidence of opposition and support. Human expressions but influence people and are influenced by people. That’s part of being in a society.
How do a vast majority of people feel about it?
The last Pew research survey I saw on the topic suggest that Catholics are not indifferent to it.
Views on sexuality have changed since the 1960s. Well, they’ve changed since before then too. They also have differed over cultures and geographies. Views of human sexuality are not static.
The Sexual - without love - Revolution was a planned disaster, which included millions of dollars being spent on prostitutes, photographers, printers, warehousing and other employees. Not to mention strip clubs (gentlemen’s clubs), topless bars and ads in certain publications for no strings attached sex with women.
I lived through all of it, and, in some cases, it made sex more important than any risks involved, including HIV/AIDS. So, certain companies went beyond The Pill to add the IUD, Barrier, spermicidal foam, the morning after pill, and legal abortion. This has meant literal death for millions of human beings.
In 1973, when the US Supreme Court, not the people whom were lied to, legalized killing babies in the womb, we add no-fault divorce, and now, any LGBT person who wants to adopt can do so, in violation of the best interests of the child.
Gay marriage is a legal fiction that once the US Supreme Court made another grave error, immediately resulted in a man with two women filing for the right to marry both of them.
I think any rational human being can see what’s coming next. lifesitenews.com/news/sibling-incest-should-be-legal-says-danish-professor-of-criminal-justice-et
But common sense has been thrown out, along with throwing away the idea of what the word ‘family’ actually means.
The media is controlled by people with agendas. I’ve watched it deform over the decades. Anything that means more sex and different kinds of sex are championed. The “mainstream” media manipulates.
Ed
A
Alexander_Wolf
Guest
That’s a very good book. It details how all previous “researches” were done only on inmates and psychopaths, it details what new researches were made on normal people as they should have been from the beginning… From the book we learn how the opponents of removing homosexuality from DSM( most of them Xhristians btw) after they lost scientific debates initiated the infamous voting procedure.. We learn how psychologists were fighting against obscurantists.
It’s a very good book. Catholics should read it very carefully.
Human sexual orientation which includes three orientations based on sex 0 homosexuality, bisexuality and heterosexuality are OK. They are not behavior. But I’m not surprised that obscurantist wage war against science. As for biology… Mother Nature is perfectly fine with homosexuality, yes. Unlike the god invented by the ancient Jewish tribes.
Will you advocate for removing your daughter’s child from her family since she is a sodomite(using yours and the likes of yours words) and she is gonna marry and have a child with her partner ?
That’s rich coming from a believer in supernatural
More lies? They are told that families are different.
Yeah… Nope.
Does you daughter know that you are against removing anti-human anti-homosexual criminal laws that violate The Universal Declaration of Human Rights?Does she know you view her as mentally ill?
Not surprised in the slightest.
Will be reported for slander and lies.
T
ThinkingSapien
Guest
There is entanglement between people’s views and the laws. They are not mutually independent systems.
Okay, people can and do petition for a change in the law.
People decide what words mean. Because of this the usage of words has changed over time. The entries in dictionaries are updated if a usage becomes popular enough.
“…]Almost all words change their meanings. This is one of the aspects of language that is firmly established. It ought to be evident to all of us that words will take on new meanings as we generally find it confusing to read writing that is more than a few hundred years old. Many of the words carried a different significance than we give to them today…]”
Had this discussion with someone in these forums already. There may be usages of the word “family” that are not compatible with your own. I understand that you might find these other usages to be invalid, and that’s fine. A discussion of words and whether or not they have static and intrinsic meanings is an interesting discussion. One I think might have enough content for a thread of it’s own.
E
edwest2
Guest
The valid definition of marriage is a man and woman have a child and take care of and love that child. That’s it. The Catholic Church is the only authority I trust.
It may be novel to rearrange the social furniture but in the case of sex, and this is all about sex, there are lines which should never be crossed. Reinventing words has no place in any discussion about this. Not on a Catholic forum. There is one truth only.
So - no redefinition of family, ever.
No one lobbies for change, and no group, and then says, “Well, we didn’t mean for it to become law,” because you/the group explicitly said so in the first place.
Ed
R
Rau
Guest
I was interested to hear an Australian senator (she is in a same sex relationship and has / children) remark that she supports SSM but would oppose polygamy. She said the “gender” of partner should not matter but the number does. Of course, if one questions this position, or suggests that rationality says polygamy must be allowed, one is accused of a “slippery slope” argument, as though that descriptor renders flawed the observation of the evident logical progression.
Her position is self-serving, rather than reasoned.
The position that marriage is between one man and one woman rests on the practical reality of the male and female bodies and the good of the family.
Her position is self-serving, rather than reasoned.
The position that marriage is between one man and one woman rests on the practical reality of the male and female bodies and the good of the family.
G
Galnextdoor
Guest
You took “no they don’t” out of context. If you are going to quote me, please use and read the whole quote.
I said they don’t wear high heels, do they wear them where you live?
- Status