Gay Professor has my class convinced that Gay marriage is good!

[Voco_proTatiano]

I am disgusted by one of my classes at a Catholic University. Not only is the professor stuffing his extremist beliefs down our throats about gay marriage but has 99% of the class convinced that it would do a lot of good for our country. . . . . . . . .
Peace be with you all,

Neomi

Dear Neomi,
If the professor is presenting this as Church teaching, then that is very wrong of him.
If on the other hand, he is being ‘Devil’s advocate’, then he is walking a dangerous path, but a fair one.
Consider the following:
There are gays, and many of them will not, or cannot abstain, and be continent.
Given that, it is better that they perform their foreign acts amonst their own people, than interface personally with the straight world.
Again, given that, it would be better again if they would form faithful one to one partnerships, for that would help to contain STDs, in the same way that faithful marriages contain, and limit the spread of STDs in the straight community.
If this is what your professor is advocating, then he is not spreading lies, for the above is indeed true.
I am not saying that this makes homosexual activity not to be a sin, but rather that the deleterious effects of that sin might be thereby ameliorated, in as much as the straight community is not aggravated, and STDs including AIDS are not thereby spread uncontrolably.
Further, if there is a genetic basis for a tendency to SSA, then by encouraging gays to form closed one to one partnerships with only gays, this will help to limit the spread of the offending genotype.
Preaching to gays that they should engage in heterosexual alliances would in this context be an utter disaster, for these alliances would be unstable, and the result would be a spread of single parent families combined with transmission of a genotype predisposed to SSA.
Calling faithful one to one personal relationships ‘gay marriage’ may not be helpful, but it does have some commonality of purpose, in terms of limiting inappropriate activity and controlling the spread of disease.
I am not asking for Papal blessings on such partnerships, but an understanding that, since there will be fires, it is better that fires be not lit in a tank full of gasolene, would be useful.

 

[yugnok]

Dear Neomi,
If the professor is presenting this as Church teaching, then that is very wrong of him.
If on the other hand, he is being ‘Devil’s advocate’, then he is walking a dangerous path, but a fair one.
Consider the following:
There are gays, and many of them will not, or cannot abstain, and be continent.
Given that, it is better that they perform their foreign acts amonst their own people, than interface personally with the straight world.
Again, given that, it would be better again if they would form faithful one to one partnerships, for that would help to contain STDs, in the same way that faithful marriages contain, and limit the spread of STDs in the straight community.
If this is what your professor is advocating, then he is not spreading lies, for the above is indeed true.
I am not saying that this makes homosexual activity not to be a sin, but rather that the deleterious effects of that sin might be thereby ameliorated, in as much as the straight community is not aggravated, and STDs including AIDS are not thereby spread uncontrolably.
Further, if there is a genetic basis for a tendency to SSA, then by encouraging gays to form closed one to one partnerships with only gays, this will help to limit the spread of the offending genotype.
Preaching to gays that they should engage in heterosexual alliances would in this context be an utter disaster, for these alliances would be unstable, and the result would be a spread of single parent families combined with transmission of a genotype predisposed to SSA.
Calling faithful one to one personal relationships ‘gay marriage’ may not be helpful, but it does have some commonality of purpose, in terms of limiting inappropriate activity and controlling the spread of disease.
I am not asking for Papal blessings on such partnerships, but an understanding that, since there will be fires, it is better that fires be not lit in a tank full of gasolene, would be useful.

Ya know I think she’s heard all this before in class. I don’t think she needs anymore convincing. We don’t need to turn this thread into a debate about whether or not homosexual relationships are good for society.

This thread is about the appropriateness of a teacher at a Catholic institution indoctrinating young students with a pro-gay agenda and in (its sounds like) a biased way–not being fair to the position of the Church.

If you want to debate the sinfulness of homosexual acts and relationships start a new thread.

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

Ya know I think she’s heard all this before in class. I don’t think she needs anymore convincing. We don’t need to turn this thread into a debate about whether or not homosexual relationships are good for society.

This thread is about the appropriateness of a teacher at a Catholic institution indoctrinating young students with a pro-gay agenda and in (its sounds like) a biased way–not being fair to the position of the Church.

If you want to debate the sinfulness of homosexual acts and relationships start a new thread.

Dear Yugnok,
It is clear you mind is closed, and you do not properly read posts before going off at half cock.

I am not denying the sinfulness of homosexual activities, and the church does not condemn the unfortunates who are afflicted with SSA.

I am only suggesting that certain behaviour modification might reduce the evil impact of any sin involved, and if it does, then that modification must be at least seen as a reductoin of the evil, and that in itself is good.

 

[yugnok]

Dear Yugnok,
It is clear you mind is closed, and you do not properly read posts before going off at half cock.

I am not denying the sinfulness of homosexual activities, and the church does not condemn the unfortunates who are afflicted with SSA.

I am only suggesting that certain behaviour modification might reduce the evil impact of any sin involved, and if it does, then that modification must be at least seen as a reductoin of the evil, and that in itself is good.

I read your post. Hence why I said this thread is not here to debate whether homosexual relations are good for society (reducing STD’s etc) or any other reason for justifying homosexual behavior (that its a lesser evil). The OP doesn’t need any more reasons to accept the homosexual agenda. If you couldn’t tell she is already discouraged enough as it is.

This thread is about her situation in her school. It doesn’t need to be hijacked by such debates–which will most certainly happen. Please stay focused on the topic; its just a matter of forum courtesy.

I wasn’t trying to silence you. As I said, if you want to debate start another thread and that will be the topic.

 

[Riley259]

I am disgusted by one of my classes at a Catholic University. Not only is the professor stuffing his extremist beliefs down our throats about gay marriage but has 99% of the class convinced that it would do a lot of good for our country. Most of the students claim to be Catholic BUT feel that implememting gay marraige in our nation will benefit children in the long run. I literally feel like I am the only one in class trying to fight the issue. It is draining and my fellow classmates become so angry when they argue their perversed points to me. Nobody cares about the traditional family anymore. I am so terrified for the day I will one day (God-willing ) be married and have children. How can a professor bias a class completely to this one topic is my question, and how are Catholics so easily swayed? It’s like losing a battle everyday in class. I leave in tears everytime. I wish i could record the responses I hear. Mind you the class is Social Problems and who would have known that the sole focus would be gays and their rights… I came to this institution hoping it would strengthen my faith but feel it is instead trying to tear it apart.

Also, I thought this was a great link that was overall short and easy reading

nogaymarriage.com/tenarguments.asp

Peace be with you all,

Neomi

The secular progressives seem to dominate higher education and this seems to occur at alot of Catholic universities and colleges as well. Pray that the truth may be spoken and taught as a buffer against the many falsehoods. Thanks for the link as well.

 

[Chancellare]

Hillary may not have invented it but she has said it. Maybe you should explain what you mean because I have a pretty good idea of what it means.

What does it mean to you then?

 

[Chancellare]

Hillary may not have invented it but she has said it.

The devil quoted freely from the Bible and nobody abhorred the Bible for it. If you hate Hillary that much, it does not detract from that idea any less, the OP and the rest of this thread don’t care less. I suggest let’s focus on the OP’s questions and offer suggestions instead.

 

[tonyg]

The devil quoted freely from the Bible and nobody abhorred the Bible for it. If you hate Hillary that much, it does not detract from that idea any less, the OP and the rest of this thread don’t care less. I suggest let’s focus on the OP’s questions and offer suggestions instead.

I hate no person. Hillary is for abortion, gay marriage and many other things that are contrary to the teachings of the Bible. I suggest you read the Bible and see what God thinks about people of the same sex living together in this sinful way.

 

[Sixtus]

I do not agree with your professor but debate is good. You have certainly raised a good topic for debate in this thread

 

[Chancellare]

I suggest you read the Bible and see what God thinks about people of the same sex living together in this sinful way.

We are not debating this. OP’s dilemma was how to respond to the Gay Professor’s actions in the class.

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

I hate no person. Hillary is for abortion, gay marriage and many other things that are contrary to the teachings of the Bible. I suggest you read the Bible and see what God thinks about people of the same sex living together in this sinful way.

Hi Christian,
Read the Gospel(s) to see what Our Lord has to say.
You will find surprizingly little, bearing in mind how common the practice was among the hated Romans and the puppet kings they installed.
Even John the Baptist is quiet about it, and uses some minor case of wife theft to condemn Herod. A crime no worse than that of David, stealing Uriahs wife.
At least Herod did not have Philip murdered.

 

[fix]

Hi Christian,
Read the Gospel(s) to see what Our Lord has to say.
You will find surprizingly little,

How can this be a standard to determine truth? How often is Christ recorded as using the term arson or embryonic stem cell research or direct abortion or masturbation, or anything else?

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

How can this be a standard to determine truth? How often is Christ recorded as using the term arson or embryonic stem cell research or direct abortion or masturbation, or anything else?

Please fix, address the whole comment.
VIZ:

Read the Gospel(s) to see what Our Lord has to say.
You will find surprizingly little, bearing in mind how common the practice was among the hated Romans and the puppet kings they installed.
Even John the Baptist is quiet about it, and uses some minor case of wife theft to condemn Herod. A crime no worse than that of David, stealing Uriahs wife.
At least Herod did not have Philip murdered.

In as much as your failure to address fully my comment, and your IRRELLEVANT side issues show, you clearly cannot fairly answer the point.
As for Arson, destruction by fire is destruction.
Male masturbation is clearly condemned by prophets that Our Lord quoted.
But Stem cell research, was not even a related concept.
Abortion was an accident, though procured abortion was available by herbs, and was known to the Romans. But infanticide was allowed to the Jews, as was the murder of children beyond control.

 

[fix]

Please fix, address the whole comment.
VIZ:

In as much as your failure to address fully my comment, and your IRRELLEVANT side issues show, you clearly cannot fairly answer the point.
As for Arson, destruction by fire is destruction.
Male masturbation is clearly condemned by prophets that Our Lord quoted.
But Stem cell research, was not even a related concept.
Abortion was an accident, though procured abortion was available by herbs, and was known to the Romans. But infanticide was allowed to the Jews, as was the murder of children beyond control.

Your entire quote does not prove your point. You asume that because nothing is recorded in the manner you deem necessary that it is of little import. In fact, Christ upheld the entire moral law. That law included the explicit prohibition of homosexual acts.

…What should be noticed is that, in the presence of such remarkable diversity, there is nevertheless a clear consistency within the Scriptures themselves on the moral issue of homosexual behaviour. The Church’s doctrine regarding this issue is thus based, not on isolated phrases for facile theological argument, but on the solid foundation of a constant Biblical testimony. The community of faith today, in unbroken continuity with the Jewish and Christian communities within which the ancient Scriptures were written, continues to be nourished by those same Scriptures and by the Spirit of Truth whose Word they are. It is likewise essential to recognize that the Scriptures are not properly understood when they are interpreted in a way which contradicts the Church’s living Tradition. To be correct, the interpretation of Scripture must be in substantial accord with that Tradition…

“It is clear, therefore, that in the supremely wise arrangement of God, sacred Tradition, sacred Scripture, and the Magisterium of the Church are so connected and associated that one of them cannot stand without the others. Working together, each in its own way under the action of the one Holy Spirit, they all contribute effectively to the salvation of souls”. In that spirit we wish to outline briefly the Biblical teaching here…
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19861001_homosexual-persons_en.html

We see that the Church is the authority in these matters as Christ is the head of the Church. Any interpretation of Scripture that contradicts Sacred Tradition or the magisterium is a false interpretation. Truth cannot contradict truth.

 

[stbruno]

TFP Student Action is a project of The American Society for the Defense of
Tradition, Family and Property (TFP). The American TFP is a civic
organization of Catholic inspiration that peacefully and lawfully opposes
the cultural revolution and promotes the principles of Christian civilization.
Address: TFP Student Action, 1358 Jefferson Road, Spring Grove, PA 17362
Phone: (717) 225-7147 ext. 229

tfp.org/student_action/contact_us.htm

Drop them a line about your concern. This organization is a college student organization that is trying to protect Catholic values in colleges, particularly Catholic ones. Perhaps if you contact them, they can afford you some very good advice.

God bless you!

There is a saying…it is better to stand up for something even if you are standing alone!

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

Your entire quote does not prove your point. You asume that because nothing is recorded in the manner you deem necessary that it is of little import. In fact, Christ upheld the entire moral law. That law included the explicit prohibition of homosexual acts.
Thankyou for your more considered rely.
Mark you though, I was never trying to state that homosexual activity was morally acceptable, I was only stating that it was a form of fornication, which was not condemned by Our Lord as especially more evil that heterosexual fornication.
I noted in the Item which you linked, paragraph #3 reads:

1. Explicit treatment of the problem was given in this Congregation’s “Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual Ethics” of December 29, 1975. That document stressed the duty of trying to understand the homosexual condition and noted that culpability for homosexual acts should only be judged with prudence

 

[kage_ar]

Were you my son or daughter, you would be withdrawn from this school and enrolled elsewhere. The administration would know why they had lost my tuition $$.

Enroll in your local state school.

 

[fix]

Mark you though, I was never trying to state that homosexual activity was morally acceptable, I was only stating that it was a form of fornication, which was not condemned by Our Lord as especially more evil that heterosexual fornication.

Again, that specific words are not recorded does not make your case. See Aquinas on that issue. As well as the bible stating certain sins cry out to heaven for justice. You know those sins.

I noted in the Item which you linked, paragraph #3 reads:
(my emphasis)
This seems to imply, at least a sympathy in the magisterium towards the SSA aflicted persons, that they may not be entirely responsible for their immoral actions.
I do not intend to get involved with the arguments of infallibility. As far as is possible, I will allow that argument to stand, even though the claims for it are incestuous.
As paragraph #3 states, judgements should be prudent.
That means that red-necked queer bashing is also a morally disordered condition, and, indeed, probably more so than the failure of the SSA aflicted to adhere to the teaching of continence laid upon them.

The document states:

… What is at all costs to be avoided is the unfounded and demeaning assumption that the sexual behaviour of homosexual persons is always and totally compulsive and therefore inculpable. What is essential is that the fundamental liberty which characterizes the human person and gives him his dignity be recognized as belonging to the homosexual person as well. As in every conversion from evil, the abandonment of homosexual activity will require a profound collaboration of the individual with God’s liberating grace.

Now the unfortunate phrase ‘Gay Marriage’, hides a beneficial-to-society contract, which as an alternative to a difficult teaching, offers a teaching which complies with the OT teaching that people with SSA syndrome should associate sexually only with their like, also , by encouraging a closed one-to-one partnership, will prevent the spread of STDs.

The ends never justify the means. That moral norm always holds true.

Note also:
Beneficial has its root in Latin ‘bene faceo’ : ‘I do good’.
So what is beneficial is per se ‘good’
Not that Homosexual intercouse is moral, but that ‘Gay Marriage’ reduces the harm thereby done.
And that which reduces harm is by definition good.

Please see above.

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

Again, that specific words are not recorded does not make your case. See Aquinas on that issue. As well as the bible stating certain sins cry out to heaven for justice. You know those sins.

The only sins that cry out to heaven for justice, are those which commit injustice. What is contracted between two adult persons voluntarily, and in a manner which cannot afflict others does not come under that heading.

The document states:

Yes, I too read that, but my useage of English allows that what is not white, is not necessarily black.
I never claimed that their sin was in all cases inculpable, only that in some, it might be.
It is the Greek fools who try to teach us that what is not full, is empty. This is called exclusion of the median. It is a false logic.

The ends never justify the means. That moral norm always holds true.

**
I NEVER CLAIMED THAT GAY MARRIAGE JUSTIFIED SEXUAL ACTIVITY BETWEEN SAME SEX PARTNERS.

I DID NOT EVEN IMPLY THAT G.M. ENCOURAGED SUCH ACTIVITY.

THE TWO ARE UNRELATED ITEMS, BUT G.M. PROVIDES A SAFER ENVIRONMENT, WHICH COULD BE PLATONIC, FOR SSA AFFLICTED PEOPLE TO LIVE THEIR LIVES, BOTH FOR THEM, AND FOR STRAIGHT SOCIETY.**

Please see above.
Sorry for shouting, but this seems to require a steam hammer to get it in.

 

[fix]

The only sins that cry out to heaven for justice, are those which commit injustice. What is contracted between two adult persons voluntarily, and in a manner which cannot afflict others does not come under that heading.

Homicide,Sodomy, Oppression of Widows and Orphans, Cheating Laborers of Their Due. That is the list and I do not know they are all equal in magnitude. There may be a hierarchy.

The business about consent and privacy does not minimize the sin or justify it. Objectively it is wrong.

Yes, I too read that, but my useage of English allows that what is not white, is not necessarily black.
I never claimed that their sin was in all cases inculpable, only that in some, it might be.

Ok.

It is the Greek fools who try to teach us that what is not full, is empty. This is called exclusion of the median. It is a false logic.

There is no false logic about what is related in that document. We are to treat everyone with respect. That does not mean we minimize sin.

**

I NEVER CLAIMED THAT GAY MARRIAGE JUSTIFIED SEXUAL ACTIVITY BETWEEN SAME SEX PARTNERS.

I DID NOT EVEN IMPLY THAT G.M. ENCOURAGED SUCH ACTIVITY.

THE TWO ARE UNRELATED ITEMS

, BUT G.M. PROVIDES A SAFER ENVIRONMENT, WHICH COULD BE PLATONIC, FOR SSA AFFLICTED PEOPLE TO LIVE THEIR LIVES, BOTH FOR THEM, AND FOR STRAIGHT SOCIETY.
**Sorry, but such a concept is still contrary to justice and charity. Anything that would encourage the state to legitimize such a union is wrong. Claiming two same sex persons need a “marriage” is absurd. It distorts what marriage authentically intends and gives scandal.