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

[Voco_proTatiano]

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.

It is clear that in this context, ‘sodomy’ refers to ‘homosexual rape’. Yes, that cries out to heaven for justice.
If you think I interpret wrongly, give me the reference, and I will dilligently study the Latin.

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

If no harm is done, and there is mutual consent, then who cries out for justice?
It is no concern of yours; unless a crime involves you, or someone who is helpless.

Thus Our Lord commands you:
Judge not: that you be not judged.
Condemn not: that you be not condemned.
Forgive: and you will be forgiven.
Release: and you will be released.

Ok.

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.

**
**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.

So what is your attitude to Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson?
Yes, they are fictional, but what if?
What is wrong, with two people, living together as brothers, or even as sisters, having a legal contract together, so that in the event of death, or incapsacity of one, the other has automatic rights, similar to those between husband and wife?
Can you object to a platonic partnership.
Is not a monastery just an extended platonic partnership.
As I said, there is no necessary connection between two members of the same sex co-habiting and mortal sin, except in a dirty mind.

 

[fix]

It is clear that in this context, ‘sodomy’ refers to ‘homosexual rape’. Yes, that cries out to heaven for justice.
If you think I interpret wrongly, give me the reference, and I will dilligently study the Latin.

Start with the doc you cited, He gives adequate proof for the proscription regarding homosexual acts.

If no harm is done, and there is mutual consent, then who cries out for justice?
It is no concern of yours; unless a crime involves you, or someone who is helpless.

Harm is more than physical violence. Why should civil law contradict natural law? How is that good for humanity?

Thus Our Lord commands you:
Judge not: that you be not judged.
Condemn not: that you be not condemned.
Forgive: and you will be forgiven.
Release: and you will be released.

I agree we ought never judge anyone’s soul. We are required to judge words and actions. Failure to do that leads to sin and chaos. Popularly such a poor understanding of that tract leads to being a sociopath. We kill our conscience. Imagine teaching your children that one must never judge good acts from bad acts? How is that consistent with the Gospel imperative?

So what is your attitude to Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson?
Yes, they are fictional, but what if?
What is wrong, with two people, living together as brothers, or even as sisters, having a legal contract together, so that in the event of death, or incapsacity of one, the other has automatic rights, similar to those between husband and wife?
Can you object to a platonic partnership.
Is not a monastery just an extended platonic partnership.
As I said, there is no necessary connection between two members of the same sex co-habiting and mortal sin, except in a dirty mind.

Platonic is fine. Why the need to have the state call it a marriage?

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

Start with the doc you cited, He gives adequate proof for the proscription regarding homosexual acts.

I am looking for a scriptural reference, preferably Gospel, but OT will do.

Harm is more than physical violence. Why should civil law contradict natural law? How is that good for humanity?

Sometimes we have to accept, at least for the present, that which is less than perfect.
sometimes, just a lesser evil.

I agree we ought never judge anyone’s soul. We are required to judge words and actions. Failure to do that leads to sin and chaos. Popularly such a poor understanding of that tract leads to being a sociopath. We kill our conscience. Imagine teaching your children that one must never judge good acts from bad acts? How is that consistent with the Gospel imperative?

Platonic is fine. Why the need to have the state call it a marriage?

The state calls it ‘Civil Partnership’: the people call it marriage, some to condemn it, for they are queer bashers, and some, in charity, for the civil protection it offers are similar to some of the protective aspects of marriage.

 

[Redbandito]

It is a HUGE mistake to make the assumption that this university is Catholic in name only. There are a handfull of Excellent Catholic Universities and I’ll bet everyone here could scream out five or six of thier favorites but sadly I’ll bet no one can come up with more than ten that are true to thier faith (and funding.) My wife went to one in seattle where the priest in charge of the Chapel was openly gay. I went to a decent Catholic College in Montana but even it was beginning to show signs of elite progressivism. (That was 1997) These schools are given blank checks to rob our youth of the values that parents have worked so hard to instill. And parents (read “moneybags”) are LETTING them though thier ignorance
and face burying. When I was in school and things like this happend three or four of us would argue, debate and teach the teacher, but to no avail sadly the profs go on instructing thousands of kids a year. It is time for the church, the parents, the students to make Catholic universities accountable for thier actions.

I can:

1. University of Dallas
2. Franciscan University of Steubenville (my alma mater)
3. Christendom
4. Catholic University
5. St. Thomas in Houston
6. Our Lady of Corpus Christi
7. Thomas Aquinas College in California
8. Notre Dame (Hey, they’re making a comeback. Apparently all the professors in their law school make daily mass).
9. St. Vincent College in Pennsylvania
10. Ave Maria

We should support each of these. The rest will follow.

 

[Redbandito]

I am looking for a scriptural reference, preferably Gospel, but OT will do.
Sometimes we have to accept, at least for the present, that which is less than perfect.
sometimes, just a lesser evil.

The state calls it ‘Civil Partnership’: the people call it marriage, some to condemn it, for they are queer bashers, and some, in charity, for the civil protection it offers are similar to some of the protective aspects of marriage.

Well, it’s not a Gospel, but it is Romans. Paul makes the point that not solely to commit sodomy, but even to lust for another man is “shameful,” “perversion,” and that ultimately they will receive “due penalty” (or judgement) for it.

26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. (Romans 1:26-27).

That being said, the worst sin to each of us must be our own. Pre-marital and extra-marital sex are also sinful. We must spend focus on getting that message out. However, the fact that people are living these lifestyles in no way justifies homosexual marriage (which is a legal fiction).

And I don’t get from your argument why we must cave on marriage for people with ssad. They are free to choose to live an alternative lifestyle. However, how does that entitle them to the same rights as a legitimate union of man and woman? How do they deserve to get the same tax breaks that a man and a woman can get due to the government’s desire to support marriage and reproduction when they can’t reproduce? There simply is no Biblical nor constitutional argument that can be made to support the Gay Marriage agenda. The only way it will ever become acceptable is through liberal, activist judges bypassing Congress and legislating from the bench.

 

[fix]

I am looking for a scriptural reference, preferably Gospel, but OT will do.
Sometimes we have to accept, at least for the present, that which is less than perfect.
sometimes, just a lesser evil.

The state calls it ‘Civil Partnership’: the people call it marriage, some to condemn it, for they are queer bashers, and some, in charity, for the civil protection it offers are similar to some of the protective aspects of marriage.

The Vatican doc gives Scripture references and authentic interpretations. Remember Christ founded a Church, not a book.

There is no need for the state to codify freindships. It is a cover to attack marriage.

 

[yugnok]

What I want to know is what is all this talk about whether or not the Bible condemns homosexual acts or does Jesus condemn homosexual acts? We all know Paul does very clearly. So if people want to sit here and question and debate the canon of scripture, they should start a new thread and people would be happy to discuss it there. This thread is about the OP and her professor.

Please do her the courtesy of staying relevant to her post.

 

[Michael_C]

Neomi,

Defending the faith against Catholics is very draining. The fact that a school says it’s Catholic and teaches such things that are contrary to the truth is a violation of the third commandment. Remember that Jesus says those that suffer for his name sake are blessd. Stay prayerful and allow the Holy Spirit to strengthen and guide you.

 

[maryj]

Whip up a copy of this MP3 and slip it into his mail box. If you don’t have a burner on your computer PM me and I’ll gladly send you a copy. Give it a listen yourself
biblechristiansociety.com/download/mp3/marriage_and_the_eucharist.mp3%between%

 

[Grace_Angel]

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

I like the “gay marriage will benefit children in the long run”
Whose children? because a gay couple cannot have children, or had they not heard of it? A gay couple is BARREN forever. So how are children going to benefit from this barren situation?
Are gay couple to get someone who isnt gay to have a child for them? and buy the child, like a sack of potatos? or a pound of flesh?
And tell me Neomi, why have you and your genuinely catholic student friends not led a boycott of this person’s classes? Why have you not got your parents involved? Why have not the Bishops of US been informed of this man’s teaching? Why is he permitted to continue. Neomi, you can do something about it.
Writing about it on a discussion board wont fix it, it might give you some ideas and maybe courage but we cannot fix it. Howev er, you and a few others (for confirmation- or better still tape his talks for surety) and take them to Amercian Catholic Bishops Conference. If you are serious do something. Let him go and preach his vile ideas in a secular place and NOT in a catholic institution which pays him and he uses his position to disseminate dissent and sin. arggghhhhharrrr
Grace Angel.

 

[Digger71]

That is one (of three or four) reason I oppose Catholic education. I have known too many people who say that Catholic schools drove them away from the Church. I would rather send my kids to a school that cannot support any particular religion (which includes saying it teaches something it does not) than to a school that claims to be Catholic but teaches heresy.

Not sure I follow you logic…are you saying people left the Catholic Church because they schools taught heresy?

In my experience it was the hypocrisy that drove them away.

I suppose both start with ‘H’.

 

[Digger71]

This is a tiny little nit - but I am guessing that calling this person “professor” is probably heaping far more qualification on him than is appropriate. My guess is that he is someone who has accepted a teaching position with the college, but I could be totally off base and he truly is a credentialed professor.

Not that I guess it matters, but but it bugs me when people are made to appear to be more than they truly are.

Ok - sorry for the slight high-jack.

~Liza

When in doubt, throw in a completely unsubstatiated accusation.

ding ding thanks for playing.

 

[Digger71]

My mother and father raised ten children with love and guidance not a village. If my memory serves me correctly it was Hillary who said that. People like Hillary and their twisted way of thinking may be one reason why this is allowed.

You could have put the quote in to google and learnt something…

Anyway, the phrase “it takes a whole village…” refers to the fact that all to be a fully rounded, skilled, self-sufficient person you need more than your family. From having baby sitters, to school. From having fire departments to police. All play a part in sustaining the child until adulthood.

Did your parents draw wages, if so, who paid them (local or ‘big’ business). Did they make the clothes you wore themselves, did they grow and hunt all the food?

When you (and the 9 others) grew up, did you rely only on your parents advice? Did you learn your work skills just from your parents? Did your parents lack attributes (humour, self control, dress sense) that you picked up elsewhere?

Hilary, hilary, hilary. The fact she stood by her cheating husband is pretty Catholic.

 

[Digger71]

A gay couple is BARREN forever. So how are children going to benefit from this barren situation?

They have spritual children, grace, learning, mercy, suffering, self-sacrifice, forgiveness, honesty, acceptance… just like any other barren couple.

Remember, same-sex couple are physically ‘barren’, and that implies nothing at all about the other fruits of love.

kisses!

 

[Digger71]

TFP Student Action is a project of The American Society for the Defense of
Tradition, Family and Property (TFP).

And property?

Interesting alignment there. And i thought marriage was about love and procreation…silly me.

 

[MichaelTDoyle]

Unfortunately, because they are commiting something abominable to the Lord, grace is problematic. Because they are not practicing chastity and not complementary with each other, they are perverting their natures’ to satisfy their desires at the expense of those around them.

No sin is private; all sin has negative repercussions for everyone around them.

A heterosexual couple who is barren must bear that cross and may do so with dignity, not so those who actively practice homosexual sex. They distort the proper use of their bodies, which has of course an effect on every other aspect of them, for we are not just bodies detached from mind and spirit but a unified whole.

I know this is difficult to hear, but it is plain truth, statistically (as has been pointed out) and logically. Far better to be chaste with dignity and pray for grace.

 

[Digger71]

]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.

Really? My will is already made out. My best friend will get the house, but he has to pay inheritance tax. If we marry he wont have to. And the best part is, we can get married and not have sex. So he gets the full value of what i give regardless of the fact he is gay and I am not.

I think that is just (why should only a spouse get those inheritance rights) and fair (he deserves it).

Catholic marriage is not about property, state sanctioned marriages are normally about property.

They’re different, get over it.

 

[Digger71]

Unfortunately, because they are commiting something abominable to the Lord, grace is problematic. Because they are not practicing chastity and not complementary with each other, they are perverting their natures’ to satisfy their desires at the expense of those around them.

No sin is private; all sin has negative repercussions for everyone around them.

A heterosexual couple who is barren must bear that cross and may do so with dignity, not so those who actively practice homosexual sex. They distort the proper use of their bodies, which has of course an effect on every other aspect of them, for we are not just bodies detached from mind and spirit but a unified whole.

It is amusing to read this.

1. “Abomnible”, hmmm, which word (from greek or hebrew) is that again?
2. “Chastity”, a movable feast. No sex before marriage, licence with your spouse after marriage.
3. “Complimentary”, physically not always perfect (best fit), mentally—unsupported assertion.
4. “perverting their natures”, sorry, these blokes dont fancy women, they would be perverting their natures to bed them.
5. “A heterosexual couple who is barren must bear that cross”, as must a same-sex couple who would love to have children together but cant…(miracles and mutations aside, of course).
6. “for we are not just bodies detached from mind and spirit but a unified whole.” except same-sex attraction types who have their feelings stereotyped as just physical without regard for the intelligent, emotional, and spiritual bonds by some.

 

[Digger71]

26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. (Romans 1:26-27).

You will notice before the excert, that same-sex actitities are not mentioned. God 'gave them over because of…" IDOLOTRY.

The only interpretation of the passage possible in the full context is that God made straight men gay as a punishment for idolitry.

Read it and weep.

 

[Grace_Angel]

They have spritual children, grace, learning, mercy, suffering, self-sacrifice, forgiveness, honesty, acceptance… just like any other barren couple.

Remember, same-sex couple are physically ‘barren’, and that implies nothing at all about the other fruits of love.

kisses!

OH Digger grow up! for goodness sake! I was talking about barrenn ness of the physical. and the comment was that gay marriage is good for children in the long run and I was answering to that. So dont play funny business and quote out of context.
A gay couple may enjoy their sexuality, but the Church has something strong to say about that. A gay couple may indulge and enjoy their type of sexuality but it is forever barren of the physical. It cannot ever produce fruit from that union. It is barren. And perhaps that should say something about its “rightness” ouj can kiss and hug, and canoodle till the cows come home, but it is still barren.
Grace Angel.