Homosexual programs in Churches

[NewUlm1976_2000]

Loving acceptance? Are you saying the Church should consider homosexual behavior as acceptable? I suspect what you call “streotypical” is in reality 2,000 years of unchamged teaching.

Are we really living in the same world as 2000 years ago? No, our modern times are different.

 

[LRThunder]

Are we really living in the same world as 2000 years ago? No, our modern times are different.

So, we’re supposed to tolerate sin?

 

[NewUlm1976_2000]

So, we’re supposed to tolerate sin?

The action in itself is not a sin, like heterosexual relations. As more legal unions are approved, there will be more committed monogamous relations which are not sinful. Society does not allow access to this leading to a chicken and egg problem.

 

[estesbob]

The action in itself is not a sin, like heterosexual relations. As more legal unions are approved, there will be more committed monogamous relations which are not sinful. Society does not allow access to this leading to a chicken and egg problem.

So weare wiser than all who went before us?

 

[estesbob]

The action in itself is not a sin, like heterosexual relations. As more legal unions are approved, there will be more committed monogamous relations which are not sinful. Society does not allow access to this leading to a chicken and egg problem.

So we are wiser than all who went before us? So deviant sex is only deviant because those who particpate in it cant marry each other? Sin becomes virtue and the Church becomes a pimp for deviancy. i think not.

 

[LRThunder]

The action in itself is not a sin, like heterosexual relations. As more legal unions are approved, there will be more committed monogamous relations which are not sinful. Society does not allow access to this leading to a chicken and egg problem.

Homosexual sex is a sin, no matter if it’s in a committed relationship or not.

Nature intends for a man and woman to be together, not man and man or woman and woman. That’s how God designed it. Have a problem with it, then take it up with him.

 

[mnavarro]

I believe that Gays have the same rights as a catholic staright male/female. I believe that they do not CHOOSE to be gay just like straight people do not CHOOSE to be straight. I have experienced many homosexuals of all different ages in my life. They all tell me similar stories; there were signs of their homosexuality at a young age. Now kids do not even know what is right or what is wrong, so how in the world can they choose to be gay at the age of four or six. I do not understand why we can not be accepting. I mean God DID make us all in the image of himself. Imago Dei

 

[East_and_West]

I would encourage you to show this thread to you Dominican spiritual director as you work through your discernment process. Perhaps he will be able to show you both how uncharitable you have been in this thread and how your comments appear to undermine the infallible teachings of the Church. First you call me a liar for no good reason, then you make that crack at the beginning of this post. You appear to have a serious lack of humility; a pressing need to be “right” at all costs; a compulsion to always “win”.

I encourage you to show this thread to your confessor/spiritual director. Perhaps he will be able to both show you how uncharitable you have in this thread and how your dishonest approach to apologetics undermine the Church’s honest attempt to help people leave the life of homosexuality behind. First you accuse me of calling you a liar when I have done no such thing and then you post insulting and demeaning remarks. You appear to have a serious lack of humility and a pressing need to be “right” at all cost, even using false claims to support true teachings, demonstrating a compulsion to always “win”.

Your uncharitable attitude and your apparent desire to undercut the the moral teachings of the Church by claiming they are not infallible seems to disqualify you serious consideration by people on this thread. It also calls into question whether you belong in a group whose identifying chrism is preaching Truth with Charity.

Your uncharitable attitude and your apparent desire to undercut the moral teachings of the Church by using false claims to support them, thereby invalidating our very sincere opposition to homosexuality seems to disqualityf you for serious consideration by those who appreciate intellectual honesty. It also calls into question whether you should be posting on a forums for those who have honest questions about the faith.

No one insulted you and no one called you names. Even if they did, that does not mean that you should respond in such a manner.

No one insulted you and on one called you names. Even if they did, thad does not mean you should respond in such a manner.

Go ahead, show this thread to your spiritual director and your vocations director. Impress them with your charity and humility. I regularly show my threads to my spiritual director.

Go ahead, show this thread to your spiritual director as you claim you do. I doubt he will be very impressed. I simply don’t want to the Church’s prohibition against homosexuality to be undermined because some people use false apologetic data. It puts the teachings of the Church in a bad light and makes it look like we will even sink into dishonesty to support our view. However, if we are honest and support the teachings of the Church in truth, then we have solid ground to stand on and people will be more than willing to come to the light of the truth, knowing that homosexuality is immoral and the Church is wise.

 

[East_and_West]

The action in itself is not a sin, like heterosexual relations. As more legal unions are approved, there will be more committed monogamous relations which are not sinful. Society does not allow access to this leading to a chicken and egg problem.

Give me a break. Even without legal recognition, homosexuals look for “the one” and never find it. Fr. Benedict Grochele points out in his book that homosexuals usually go from relationship to relation seeking the one and participate in casual sexual friendships. This is the nature of homosexuality. There is no true commitment. I know this first hand.

 

[v3orb]

Give me a break. Even without legal recognition, homosexuals look for “the one” and never find it. Fr. Benedict Grochele points out in his book that homosexuals usually go from relationship to relation seeking the one and participate in casual sexual friendships. This is the nature of homosexuality. There is no true commitment. I know this first hand.

If you knew this “first hand” as you claim, you’d realize that there are at least as many committed GLBs as heterosexuals. The ones you hear about are the promiscuous pop star types that exist in heterosexuality as well. I don’t think you have any right to criticize until you get some real-life education instead of hiding in your little books.

 

[estesbob]

If you knew this “first hand” as you claim, you’d realize that there are at least as many committed GLBs as heterosexuals. The ones you hear about are the promiscuous pop star types that exist in heterosexuality as well. I don’t think you have any right to criticize until you get some real-life education instead of hiding in your little books.

This is demonstrably false. One need onlyu look at states where civil unions or marriage are legal or look at companies that provide health benefits for homosexual couples to see that the number of monogamous homsexuals in a commited relatioship is miniscule.

 

[v3orb]

Then why is the lowest divorce rate in the entire country in a state that allows legal gay partnerships?

 

[East_and_West]

If you knew this “first hand” as you claim, you’d realize that there are at least as many committed GLBs as heterosexuals.

ROFL!!! Are you kidding me? Are you kidding me? I lived the gay life style! I know exactly what is out there. Furthermore, the statistics don’t lie. Homosexuals have WAY more sexual partners in their lives than heterosexuals. They have a higher instance of STDs, promescuity, drug use, ETC ETC ETC. Promiscuity is the norm in the homosexual community!!!

The ones you hear about are the promiscuous pop star types that exist in heterosexuality as well. I don’t think you have any right to criticize until you get some real-life education instead of hiding in your little books.

ROLF. “Real life education”. You are funny. I LIVED the gay life. I have about as much real life education as you can get. And there are nowhere near as many committed relationships in the gay world, as there are committed straight ones.

 

[estesbob]

Then why is the lowest divorce rate in the entire country in a state that allows legal gay partnerships?

Gee-is that also why the sun rises in the East in this state? How amazing!

 

[geraldffff]

I believe that Gays have the same rights as a catholic staright male/female. I believe that they do not CHOOSE to be gay just like straight people do not CHOOSE to be straight. I have experienced many homosexuals of all different ages in my life. They all tell me similar stories; there were signs of their homosexuality at a young age. Now kids do not even know what is right or what is wrong, so how in the world can they choose to be gay at the age of four or six. I do not understand why we can not be accepting. I mean God DID make us all in the image of himself. Imago Dei

Why do people call themselves “gay” is that a deceptive way of saying you are a homosexual. Can you explained the historicity of your use of this term. Is it not obvious that people who choose to be heterosexual are choosing that rather than choosing to act in a perverted way. You choose which socks to put on or which chair to sit in. It’s difficult to discern weather some people are intentionally dishonest, delusional, self deluded or ignorant. I choose not to be involved in homosexual activity therefore I am not a homosexual and it is no persons business what my sexual proclivities are. Why do homosexuals insist on exposing them selves? Why why why?

 

[Dale_M]

Why do homosexuals insist on exposing them selves? Why why why?

Tsk. Why do heterosexual insist on exposing themselves? We don’t think twice to see a straight couple hug or kiss in public, so why does it bother folks to see a gay couple do the same?

 

[geraldffff]

Tsk. Why do heterosexual insist on exposing themselves? We don’t think twice to see a straight couple hug or kiss in public, so why does it bother folks to see a gay couple do the same?/QUOT
I’ll try to clarify my question. Why is it necessary to declare what you do in private? I feel no compulsion to tell the world about my private disordered acts. What is the meaning of using the name “gay” when one wishes to expose the fact they are homosexual why not just say that? Is the intention to hid something.

 

[Dale_M]

I’ll try to clarify my question. Why is it necessary to declare what you do in private?

I think you asking why gays publicly identify as being gay, instead of letting people assume they are straight. Is that right?

What is the meaning of using the name “gay” when one wishes to expose the fact they are homosexual why not just say that? Is the intention to hid something.

One of the regulars here at CAF has asked a few times why venereal disease (VD) is now referred to as sexually transmitted disease (STD). I guess I don’t know, but I don’t think either name change has hidden anything - we all know the meaning of the old and the new names.

 

[geraldffff]

I think you asking why gays publicly identify as being gay, instead of letting people assume they are straight. Is that right?

One of the regulars here at CAF has asked a few times why venereal disease (VD) is now referred to as sexually transmitted disease (STD). I guess I don’t know, but I don’t think either name change has hidden anything - we all know the meaning of the old and the new names.

First I am asking why homosexuals have taken to referring to themselves as “gay”. You can read many vintage books and there is no hint in the context that gay in anyway is related to being homosexual.

Second I cannot understand why any person would go around and intentionally making public what their sexual exploits entail. When you potty train a child you build them up and praise them for doing their thing in the pot but you would not go around doing this to sane adults.

If one knows one is a homosexual because they are acting it out it should remain a private matter that one might discuss with a confessor but not advertise to all they come in contact with. So homosexual church programs are an oxymoron. It is like asking about Masturbation programs in the churches.

To put a finer point on it why expose ones self it would certainly raise eyebrows if every one went around with their nose in but cracks as dogs do.

During sleep one might have had both homosexual and heterosexual erotic dreams but that dose not mean they should put a label around their necks and force everyone to deal with their private issues.

 

[geraldffff]

I think you asking why gays publicly identify as being gay, instead of letting people assume they are straight. Is that right?

One of the regulars here at CAF has asked a few times why venereal disease (VD) is now referred to as sexually transmitted disease (STD). I guess I don’t know, but I don’t think either name change has hidden anything - we all know the meaning of the old and the new names.

Well I did a search and I found out why {VD} is now referred to as (STD) but your answer “we all know the meaning of the old and the new names” is sidestepping the original question which I also did a search on and did not find the clear answer I found in the first. So your answer is that you do know. Correct?

May I suggest this answer
"A euphemism is the substitution of an agreeable or less offensive expression in place of one that may offend or suggest something unpleasant to the listener; or in the case of doublespeak, to make it less troublesome for the speaker.[1] It also may be a substitution of a description of something or someone rather than the name, to avoid revealing secret, holy, or sacred names to the uninitiated, or to obscure the identity of the subject of a conversation from potential eavesdroppers.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism
Is this one correct in your opinion?