M
MilesVitae
Guest
By “gayness,” do you mean same-sex attraction, or the gay “lifestyle,” homosexual activity?My objection is to the strength of the word. Which I think is inappropriate. Evil is a pretty strong word. If you had written that you did not want to support something you believe is morally wrong, I would not have objected.
Not everything that is wrong is necessarily evil. I find people who spit on the sidewalk repulsive. I think they are doing something wrong. But I do not consider them or the act evil.
I did not mean to suggest that you were gay bashing. However defining gayness as evil could legitimate and contribute to the real evil of gay bashing. It is an inappropriate and potentially harmful use of language. It is to strong. There are many things one may believe are wrong, but would you call all of them evil?
I am just encouraging a more appropriate use of language.
If the former, then I would agree. I do not refer to being gay in that sense as evil. But, once again, if we are discussing homosexual activity - yes, that is morally evil. I would also speak of heterosexual fornication as morally evil.
I can understand that, for some, the word evil may be very strong, conjuring up images of serial killers or genocidal dictators. Properly speaking, however, all sin is evil and I used the term in the context of a Catholic moral theology forum with the (perhaps poor) assumption that those who would be reading would take it in that sense.
In another context, I would agree (without denying my position) that it would be an imprudent choice of words - perhaps it was here, as well.