Homosexuals Hijack Christian Fish Symbol

[Jennifer123]

Is that the goal of all homosexual “activists”?

Yes - do you believe there are certain people of homosexual orientation that have an agenda to pursue that includes making homosexuality palatable to the American public?

 

[Jabronie]

This is the actual page on the diocese website–

la-archdiocese.org/ministry/mlgc/index.php

I just threw up all over my keyboard.

 

[lak611]

Yes, but he doesn’t say what that is on that page, and I can’t find any mention of Chastity and Homosexuality together on his website.

Catholig

That’s the biggest problem I have with their website. A ministry to gay and lesbian Catholics MUST teach clearly about chastity in order to be a faithful Catholic ministry. The Catechism is clear on that matter. Chastity is a requirement of all Catholics, no matter what their state in life happens to be.

 

[skuld]

Let’s not get our bowels into an uproar over this.

The fish symbol has been parodied often enough that it hardly means anything serious. And, it’s not a “Catholic” symbol. The Fundamentalists were the first to use it as a bumper sticker. Which is why I’d never display the thing. I’m a Catholic, not a Christian Zionist Evangelical.

BTW, the 1st century Christians did not go about displaying the fish from windows and banners. It was a secret sign employed to identify individuals as Christians and shown covertly.

Thank you. I was getting a bit annoyed reading the idiocy displayed on this particular thread.

 

[El_Paulo]

Yes - do you believe there are certain people of homosexual orientation that have an agenda to pursue that includes making homosexuality palatable to the American public?

Some do and some don’t, surely?

 

[rlg94086]

Some do and some don’t, surely?

Of course, but the original comment was about “activists.” Those are the people who are very vocal about mainstreaming homosexual relationships. There are many people living in homosexual relationships who just want to be left alone.

 

[Jennifer123]

Of course, but the original comment was about “activists.” Those are the people who are very vocal about mainstreaming homosexual relationships. There are many people living in homosexual relationships who just want to be left alone.

Thank you and IMHO “mainstreaming” means taking images and expressions that are considered “wholesome” and making them their own.
While the fish symbol may seem innocuous, it is just one more image and expression that may no longer mean, to larger society, its original intent, i.e. marriage, family, covenant, etc.
This is a planned strategy that is at least 20-25 years in the making, These activists are nothing if not patient and persistant.

 

[El_Paulo]

Of course, but the original comment was about “activists.” Those are the people who are very vocal about mainstreaming homosexual relationships. There are many people living in homosexual relationships who just want to be left alone.

The original comment was about ‘gay rights activist’ and not ‘homosexual activists’ - it seems to me that there could well be a difference. When a point of view is supported by a blanket label given to a certain group it serves no-one, and may even wholly misrepresent a section of society or subsections of particular groups.

In this discussion I think it is important to be acurate about who one is actually referring to, that’s the point I was trying to make.

 

[rlg94086]

When it comes to “activists,” I think the terms gay and homosexual are interchangable. The activists are the ones pushing to have their relationships be accepted as equal to that of heterosexuals. Other non-activists are content to be free to live as they want without forcing society to accept their relationships as having equal value.

The original comment was about ‘gay rights activist’ and not ‘homosexual activists’ - it seems to me that there could well be a difference. When a point of view is supported by a blanket label given to a certain group it serves no-one, and may even wholly misrepresent a section of society or subsections of particular groups.

In this discussion I think it is important to be acurate about who one is actually referring to, that’s the point I was trying to make.

 

[skuld]

When it comes to “activists,” I think the terms gay and homosexual are interchangable. The activists are the ones pushing to have their relationships be accepted as equal to that of heterosexuals. Other non-activists are content to be free to live as they want without forcing society to accept their relationships as having equal value.

“Gay” and “homosexual” are interchangeable, but the poster you quoted (or the one he/she quoted) pointed out the difference between “gay rights activists” and “homosexual activists.” In the case of the former, it means people who are not necessarily gay but who encourage homosexual activities, whereas the latter means people who are gay themselves and are currently fighting for a cause–an unknown cause.

 

[Jeffrey]

Agreed… I think Card. Mahoney and whoever else had this idea in LA… should be excommunicated IMMEDIATLY… for they are giving the devil and his minions a window of oppurtunity. IMO.

As the author says, reaching out in compassion to those with SSA is correct, but you have to call the sin a sin.

 

[Jeffrey]

Yup.

Is that the goal of all homosexual “activists”?

 

[El_Paulo]

Yup.

Can’t you have a ‘homosexual activist’ who is simply ‘active’ about encouraging others with SSA to stay faithful to Church teaching?

And equally (as someone posted), a ‘homosexual activist’ who is ‘active’ about something other than homosexuality?

There needs to be a clarification of the definitions being used so that others can understand who is being talked about, and what ‘actions’ are being attributed to them. I think this is fundamentally important…

…ESPECIALLY if they’re going to be excommunicated!

 

[geezerbob]

Can’t you have a ‘homosexual activist’ who is simply ‘active’ about encouraging others with SSA to stay faithful to Church teaching?

And equally (as someone posted), a ‘homosexual activist’ who is ‘active’ about something other than homosexuality?

There needs to be a clarification of the definitions being used so that others can understand who is being talked about, and what ‘actions’ are being attributed to them. I think this is fundamentally important…

…ESPECIALLY if they’re going to be excommunicated!

A quick reading of the threads in this forum will show that the usual usage of the term “homosexual activist” is in regards to those pushing for homosexual marriage and/or the acceptance of the homosexual lifestyle as normal and acceptable behavior.

 

[El_Paulo]

A quick reading of the threads in this forum will show that the usual usage of the term “homosexual activist” is in regards to those pushing for homosexual marriage and/or the acceptance of the homosexual lifestyle as normal and acceptable behavior.

It doesn’t make the term accurate, however, and I think it is valid to challenge poor usage of such terms especially when individuals may be covered by it who do not share the activities attributed to them. In addition, when people propose that a particular action needs to be taken (like excommunication) I think that one can see that it becomes even more important to be clear about the ‘who’.

The term ‘gay rights activist’ is no better - there are some people I know who would say they campaign for ‘gay rights’ but would say they do so in keeping with the teaching of the Church.

It does not benefit the discussion, and thus the possibility of any consensus, to use broad definitions that clarify little.

Blessings

 

[pablo_rafael]

I would just like to add a personal opinion.

I think the rainbow fish symbol is a great symbol for those of us who are both gay and Christian. It was a symbol first used by those who were under persecution and forced to worship in secret, something we gay Christians can easily relate to.

Gay Catholics have to stand against two forces. We must deal with those in the church who think we are degenerate rejects who don’t measure up to the high standards of everyone else. We also have to deal with those homosexuals who use their orientation to promote all manner of immorality and vulgarity.

Most of the gay people I have been associated with are strongly religious, faithful church-goers, live decent lives and have no desire to promote anything immoral. A surprising number are teachers(like me) or other church workers. We are not the gays you see on TV or in other media. We are decent people who want to be loved for who we are and want to be able to express our faith along with others who belong to the body of Christ.

For me the rainbow fish symbol is perfect.

Pablo

 

[rlg94086]

Hi Pablo,

Can you clarify what you mean by “gay” since there is confusion about the terms in the last few posts.

Are you talking about Christians living an active homosexual lifestyle (i.e. engaging in homosexual acts with partner)? If so, in the case of Catholics, such a person should not be receiving communion. They are living in a state of mortal sin, in the same way that someone who had a civil divorce and remarried should not receive communion.

In some other Christian churches homosexuality is wholly forbidden. In others, it is accepted. IMO the combination of the fish symbol with the rainbow, is basically a defiant symbol of solidarity that says “I don’t care what you believe, you will accept us!”

For early Christians, the symbol was completely different, it was used as a hidden code to let other Christians know “this house is safe.” There is nothing hidden about a well known Christian symbol on a bumper sticker.

God bless,

Robert

I would just like to add a personal opinion.

I think the rainbow fish symbol is a great symbol for those of us who are both gay and Christian. It was a symbol first used by those who were under persecution and forced to worship in secret, something we gay Christians can easily relate to.

Gay Catholics have to stand against two forces. We must deal with those in the church who think we are degenerate rejects who don’t measure up to the high standards of everyone else. We also have to deal with those homosexuals who use their orientation to promote all manner of immorality and vulgarity.

Most of the gay people I have been associated with are strongly religious, faithful church-goers, live decent lives and have no desire to promote anything immoral. A surprising number are teachers(like me) or other church workers. We are not the gays you see on TV or in other media. We are decent people who want to be loved for who we are and want to be able to express our faith along with others who belong to the body of Christ.

For me the rainbow fish symbol is perfect.

Pablo

 

[setter]

I would just like to add a personal opinion.

I think the rainbow fish symbol is a great symbol for those of us who are both gay and Christian.

Gay Catholics have to stand against two forces.

“gay and Christian” and “Gay Catholic” are mutually exlusive terms.

 

[setter]

The term ‘gay rights activist’ is no better - there are some people I know who would say they campaign for ‘gay rights’ but would say they do so in keeping with the teaching of the Church.

I would be appalled at the naiveté of any serious Catholic who would adopt the label ‘gay rights activist’ in their effort to promulgate orthodox Church teaching and outreach to SSA afflicted individuals.

 

[pablo_rafael]

“gay and Christian” and “Gay Catholic” are mutually exlusive terms.

And yet here I am.
Gay, Christian, Catholic
All aspects of my being seem pretty unified and put together to me.