Homosexual Artists, Musicians, etc

[prayerrider]

Klimt is interesting. Seems like I might have seen an exhibition in Berlin.

 

[prayerrider]

I’ll try to to recollect it.

 

[LawyersGunsAndMoney]

I love it when peace breaks out in a contentious thread.

 

[prayerrider]

I found the poem in my MFA thesis collection, but no attribution. The plot, such as there was, was a middle aged guy wandering through what seemed like a nondescript rust belt town, making observations as he went. Kind of an existential feel, like Waiting for Godot. It wasn’t a novel, it was story length. If any of that rings a bell.

 

[powerandglory]

I apologize. It wasn’t meant as a personal attack.

 

[prayerrider]

Apology accepted. Pax Christi.

 

[prayerrider]

Might still have it saved on my hard drive. Will check later.

 

[Jbrady]

Since a certain subset of Catholics decided that gay people are somehow responsible for everything bad that’s happened in the Church since Vatican II.

I call them “Westboro Baptist Catholics”. They’ve always been there, but it’s taken off sharply since the Alt-Cath media united against Pope Francis last year. Oddly, the thing that seems to have fired their ire wasn’t a sexual issue, but his statement to change the wording of the Catechism on the death penalty.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

It was around on here WELL before then. The cake case and the PA grand jury report kept galvanizing it back into action.
I myself had great confidence that the S Ct would rule for the baker and that is what happened. I think many Catholics have a real fear that the Church will be legally compelled to do things against Church teaching. I can somewhat understand that for countries like the UK, not so much the US, we don’t compel religions to do things (just look at Westboro Baptist).

 

[CarloCristofori]

Of course, there is nothing wrong with buying from them. But there is something wrong with buying material which promotes homosexuality or any other immorality.

 

[Jbrady]

Yes. They are a good case in point about how incredibly tolerant the United States is toward religious groups, even those on the idiot fringe. Instead of counting their lucky stars, they run around screaming “persecution” over … not being given free rein to persecute LGBT people, and Muslims and other groups.

 

[Sbee0]

It was around on here WELL before then. The cake case and the PA grand jury report kept galvanizing it back into action.
I myself had great confidence that the S Ct would rule for the baker and that is what happened. I think many Catholics have a real fear that the Church will be legally compelled to do things against Church teaching. I can somewhat understand that for countries like the UK, not so much the US, we don’t compel religions to do things (just look at Westboro Baptist).

I don’t think Westboro Baptist Church is a legitimate church. It’s a business that thrives off enraging people and suing them when they react and/or their right to protest is denied. The people that run the church just so happen to be lawyers. Not a coincidence imo.

Nothing they say or do should be taken seriously.

 

[MarkMcClendon]

So many Catholics have a hard enough time swallowing the official teaching that homosexual orientation is not per se sinful, and that unjust discrimination in regard to LGBT people must be avoided. I’m not really surprised that some people would have real qualms about the morality of even being courteous toward someone “infected with the gay”, let alone doing business with someone who is actively homosexual. “Lord, I thank you that I am not like this sinner”. (You all should recognize this from today’s Gospel at Mass.)

 

[Tis_Bearself]

The courts take them quite seriously. They have Constitutional rights in USA just like everybody else.

 

[prayerrider]

the official teaching that homosexual orientation is not per se sinful

Right! The orientation is just “differently ordered.” Time to rewrite that Catechism passage. Then the next step can be taken. One step at a time, one Catechism passage at a time. Progress!

 

[MarkMcClendon]

http://www.usccb.org/about/doctrine...inclination-guidelines-general-principles.cfm

The document itself even has an entire section entitled, “Homosexual Inclination Is Not Itself a Sin”

 

[prayerrider]

I just don’t see where all these Catholics are disagreeing with that. I don’t.
What I do see is Catholics pushing back against a concerted effort to normalize homosexual intercourse and to change Catholic teaching on Sacramental marriage.

 

[prayerrider]

Should the language be changed to “differently ordered,” then? As in, different but equal?

 

[MarkMcClendon]

It would be at least more consistent if folks would be as vocal about the “disordered” acts of heterosexuals, such as contraception and IVF, etc., instead of focusing so single-mindedly on gay people. Where are all the cries from the Catholic right against divorce? Where are the millions of dollars pouring in from the Knights of Columbus to make remarriage after divorce illegal, as it poured in in a attempt to stop same-sex marriage? Why is always just about gay people?

 

[prayerrider]

So if the attraction is to be understood as equal and valid, healthy and normal in Catholic teaching, how can there be any further condemnation of sexual activity resulting from the homsexual attraction? Isn’t that just a natural, healthy, different but equal form of sexual activity? And shouldn’t it be consecrated as sacramental same sex marriage in the Catholic Church?