N
notself
Guest
He was talking about spiritual death.
- Status
N
notself
Guest
I agree. The death penalty should be banned.
C
Chancellare
Guest
O
Other_Eric
Guest
The death penalty is a necessary tool the state uses in its defense of human dignity. “Gays” as well as those not held captive by such errant desires ought be exposed equally to its application.
J
Janet_S
Guest
The intent behind the UN declaration is a push for gay marriage world wide. Since same-sex marriage defies common sense and attempts to redefine and to weaken the institution of marriage, I hope the US continues to resist.
Of course, in this day and age we can’t have a truly honest discussion about this with the gay rights activists, and so many people have been deceived. If you don’t agree with them, if you express any doubt about the causes, the nature, or the permanence of homosexual tendencies, or if you point out any of the downsides and risks of the homosexual lifestyle, you are labelled a bigot, a hater, and ultimately a persecutor of gays. We have become so politically correct that we are no longer allowed to be real people. And those who pride themselves as being so “tolerant” are anything but when it comes to those who resist their progressive ideas.
But we have to fight against this, and we can’t let them define who we are. In spite of what they say, not everyone who criticizes the homosexual rights movement is advocating the persecution and and killing of homosexuals. What we know and what they deny is that there are problems inherent with the homosexual lifestyle–diseases, promiscuity, high rates of substance abuse and depression. No amount of social acceptance --including gay marriage as a civil right–forced on the public will change that.
Of course, in this day and age we can’t have a truly honest discussion about this with the gay rights activists, and so many people have been deceived. If you don’t agree with them, if you express any doubt about the causes, the nature, or the permanence of homosexual tendencies, or if you point out any of the downsides and risks of the homosexual lifestyle, you are labelled a bigot, a hater, and ultimately a persecutor of gays. We have become so politically correct that we are no longer allowed to be real people. And those who pride themselves as being so “tolerant” are anything but when it comes to those who resist their progressive ideas.
But we have to fight against this, and we can’t let them define who we are. In spite of what they say, not everyone who criticizes the homosexual rights movement is advocating the persecution and and killing of homosexuals. What we know and what they deny is that there are problems inherent with the homosexual lifestyle–diseases, promiscuity, high rates of substance abuse and depression. No amount of social acceptance --including gay marriage as a civil right–forced on the public will change that.
N
notself
Guest
There is nothing dignified or human(e) about an execution.
H
holy_wood
Guest
Read Genesis, Exodus or Deuteronomy lately? Ever here of the Crusades or Inquisition? How about the Church’s “Just War” doctrine?
You can quote any verse about “loving thy neighbor” you want but it does not change the fact that God does not condemn the death penalty. To say so is to contradict the scriptures and the traditions of the Church.
Governments must decide under what circumstances the penalty applies. You may not like it but that does not make it immoral or evil. In the end God alone shall stand as judge.
I don’t believe killing gays is acceptable but killing an unrepentant pedophile, murderer, or repeat rapist may be completely justified.
L
LRThunder
Guest
I don’t think the death penalty should be used for sexual sins, however it should be used for murder, and only in specific circumstances for specific types of murder. Basically, a person acting in self defense shouldn’t face execution, but the Timothy McVeighs, Bundys, Mansons, etc should.
O
Other_Eric
Guest
By not making sexual sin a capital crime, you cheapen sexuality.
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
**That would take a book - you could do your research yourself 
, no ? Short of writing a book, I couldn’t possibly give you a satisfying reply. 
**
BTW, liberty to give public expression to one’s religious convictions - e.g. RCism - is itself based on rights; otherwise the foundation for this would be unprincipled: it would be mere licence, without any foundation in the lex aeterna, which is the primary & ultimate foundation of all law & all rights.
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
##** This last sentence I don’t understand - clarification, please ? Thanks. **
**What about those who commit the perversion (as Muslims see it) of shirk ? Homosexuals may be perverts - but so are Trinitarians. And many of the latter view RCism as a perversion: RCism is, from their POV, on a par with homosexuality, both being sins, both being damnable **
**STM that RCs need to be very careful about getting cosy with Muslims on this issue. You don’t have to be homosexual in Iran to swing from the end of a crane; faith in the Blessed Trinity will get you there too. It’s a pity that a shared faith puts Catholics who are homosexuals beyond the pale in the eyes of Catholics who aren’t (it’s also very bad ecclesiology, since homosexuality does not break communion with the Church). **If they had the oppportunity, some people would happily exterminate both like vermin; the terms both are attacked in by some Islamists are identical: Jews, Christians, homosexuals - all vermin, according to some. Hitler tried - he’s had disciples
Getting cosy with men whose hatred of those groups is faithful to that man’s, is not a good idea for a Church.Here’s hoping your idea is practical.
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
Have you a source for this assertion ? Thank you
Why is that ?
It’s just rather unfortunate that some Catholics - as well as other Christians are quite happy to call for their execution, or to kill them anyway. It is no invention of homosexuals that they are quite likely to be killed.
There are problems with any lifestyle: marriage, for instance - so it’s not clear that point is quite as weighty as many seem to think. (Incidentally, spouses get up to some practices that attract criticism only if done by homosexuals.)
The Church lets other problematic things go unrebuked: arms manufacturers, whose products kill numbers that even the most ambitious spreader of AIDS, & the most hardworking abortionist cannot hope to equal, are not barred from any of the sacraments. This is weird: & typically Catholic.
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
**Why not burn homosexuals alive in public ? **
This would:
- **entertain the public **
- give homosexuals a taste of their future
- punish them, albeit far too inadequately
- imitate many holy men who burned the impious
- purify the atmosphere
- be very traditional
- **show the world that it can stuff its human rights trash where it belongs **
- purge the Church of worthless members
- keep down the population
- help to bring back the SSPX & SSPV
- **show that the Church had learnt from the life of the Servant of God Queen Isabella the Catholic, that glorious promoter of the Holy Office of the Inquisition **
- be in accord with the Bible in both Testaments
- be very ecumenical
**So there is a lot to be said for it. **
D
dzheremi
Guest
The problem of homosexuals being legally executed in several countries is a much more urgent problem than the problem of their “marriages” not being recognized in many more countries, so it seems to me that a movement to stop the murder of homosexuals in Iran, Saudi Arabia, etc is a much more worthwile target than pressing for “equal rights” in other arenas (legal marriage, etc). Also, such a movement would likely garner support from people and organizations that would NOT support legalized gay marriage. I don’t think most people who oppose gay marriage would want homosexuals to be brutalized or murdered, even though they disagree with homosexuality as a lifestyle. Hence, it seems like the gay rights people are overshooting their goal by about a million lightyears by not addressing the more simple and urgent problem, in favor of instead pushing for social acceptance which they’re not likely to ever get (not from the Catholic Church, anyway).
O
Other_Eric
Guest
I am in favor of public executions. They serve as a deterrent to others. Though, I would quibble with you over the best method, preferring the guillotine for its swift efficiency.
The point that you seem to miss is that capital punishment is not meant to be used as a form of morbid entertainment. Nor is it meant as an artificial penance imposed from without. Its necessity is the unfortunate yet pragmatic response to serious deviancy. It is meant to be used as a means of protecting society from destructive elements. Same-sex attraction is undoubtedly one of these.
D
dzheremi
Guest
Wow. That’s just…wow. I hope that yours is a minority view, Other Eric. I don’t support that at all.
O
Other_Eric
Guest
The fact is that reality, fallen as it is, requires grim, messy responses from those of us who take the Truth of Christ seriously.
D
dzheremi
Guest
I trust God to punish those who sin unrepentantly. I don’t think that the work of the Lord requires killing people, and last I checked, “God told me to” won’t hold up in court, either.
Frankly, I do not see how carrying out the “messy responses” you write about is really taking Christ all that seriously, but that is for you to reconcile and defend. He gave His elected the power to forgive sins, and this is all that I personally need to be sure of.
Frankly, I do not see how carrying out the “messy responses” you write about is really taking Christ all that seriously, but that is for you to reconcile and defend. He gave His elected the power to forgive sins, and this is all that I personally need to be sure of.
N
notself
Guest
delete
N
notself
Guest
If the statute of limitations had not run on the crimes against Catholic children and the perpetrators were convicted, would you support the beheading of as many as 4300 (4%) of the priests in the US?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholic_sex_abuse_cases#
Would you personally execute someone who was convicted of deviant behavior assuming you were authorized by the State?
- Status