how does gay marriage harm society?

[John21652]

Once again the issue defined.

articles.boston.com/2011-06-12/news/29650453_1_pride-parade-catholic-archdiocese-gay-pride-month

The belief promoted by some Catholics and ex-Catholics that good (the Church) is to be censured as evil and that evil (sodomy) is to be celebrated as good.

Charlenagne II, I just read the article you linked to.

What an amazing example of how people are capable of distorting the truth!

The writer quotes someone who says "The Roman Church is driving people away." In actual fact, the Roman Church is very welcoming of anyone who abides by the teachings of the Church, the decrees of Church leaders and followers of the true meaning of scripture. Those who choose to ignore those things and to follow an immoral lifestyle are ostracising themselves, not only from the Church, but from God. Yet the distorted logic of the moral relativists swings the argument around 180 degrees and blames the Church because of the free choices of those who ostracise themselves.

Every organisation you can possibly think of has rules and regulations pertaining to membership. Boy Scouts, PTA’s, Civic Councils and anything else you can think of. If members break the rules of an organisation, is the organisation to blame, or the individual who wont conform? According to the logic of the pro LGBT movement, the organisation is to blame. Next thing they’ll be screaming about how unfair it is that bank robbers are not welcome inside banks!!

The article you linked to quotes an Episcopalian Bishop who is openly gay and who supports gay marriage. He is quoted as saying *The simple message of the Gospel is that God loves all people. Anything that’s in contradiction to that is ungodly,’’ *According to his argument, there is no such thing as ungodly behaviour, except for not loving everybody. In other words, this Epicopalian Bishop has torn up the entire Christian rule book. St. Paul, a disciple of Christ himself, would turn in his grave if he knew a supposedly Christian priest would distort Christian teaching so badly. If this Bishop was in private business he’d be jailed for misrepresentation and maybe even for insider trading. He sure does have a vested interest in distorting Christian teachings and in undermining the accepted social norms of all of human history!

I think this quote should be mailed to that Bishop -

“Not to oppose error, is to approve of it, and not to defend truth is to suppress it, and indeed to neglect to confound evil men, when we can do it, is no less a sin than to encourage them.” Pope Felix III

 

[Charlemagne_II]

John

**I think this quote should be mailed to that Bishop - **

What I find more difficult to understand than anything is how all these renegade priests and bishops move into their respective ranks. Are they elevated from below or from above their own rank? Why is Christianity right now suffering such a heinous invasion of Trojan horses bent on seizing control of the Church and tearing its most ancient and sacred doctrines to shreds?

I wish someone would do an intelligent and methodical study of why and how this is happening … and being allowed to happen by the very people who could have prevented it in the first place!!!

 

[JackQ]

how does gay marriage harm society?

I’m late to the party, I see. Your body is made up of cells. Cells are structured a certain way, each part having a function. You can’t mix and match those parts. If a cell doesn’t have every part that it needs, that cell won’t be healthy. If a sizable number of your cells become that way, then you won’t be healthy.

The family is the cell of society. Each healthy family needs at least one man and one woman. There’s no reason for this other than that is simply the way things were made. We might as well ask why God made it so that stars would run on nuclear fusion rather than some other process.

Many live under the delusion that society is a completely man made thing. It isn’t. Society is an organic development. Thus we cannot change its nature by wishing, certainly not at the cellular level.

But sin is a disease that has invaded individuals, through them, families, and through them, society as a whole. The movement for gay marriage is a disease in the body politic. It is like a cancer. People may want it. People may like it. But it will eventually kill the society that adopts it.

Of course, in the United States we’ve nearly killed marriage already. Gay marriage is just the coup-de-grace.

 

[John21652]

John

**I think this quote should be mailed to that Bishop - **

What I find more difficult to understand than anything is how all these renegade priests and bishops move into their respective ranks. Are they elevated from below or from above their own rank? Why is Christianity right now suffering such a heinous invasion of Trojan horses bent on seizing control of the Church and tearing its most ancient and sacred doctrines to shreds?

I wish someone would do an intelligent and methodical study of why and how this is happening … and being allowed to happen by the very people who could have prevented it in the first place!!!

Well, we could argue conspiracy theories about how religion seems to have been infiltrated by those with a contrary agenda and say it is the work of Satan. Then again, we could also argue that in the face of widespread secular arguments which contradict Church teachings and foundational theology, that once good men are showing a complete lack of moral courage when their faith is being contested.

If it is the former, that the Christian religion has been infiltrated by those with an alternative agenda, under the cover of a ministry, then it is true evil and must be purged mercilessly.

If it is the latter, then men and women of strong moral fibre need to shore up the moral courage of those who are waivering. That means we all need to stand up and be counted.

In the case of the Episcopolian minister quoted in the article you linked to, he has obviouly carried around his own little secret for a long time. Now, in the face of what he percieves to be secular approval, he has abandoned his Christian beleifs and used his ministry to further his own agenda. That is not only moral cowardice, it is gross dishonesty. The only answer I see is “Off with his head”!

What this particular Bishop represents is also on display in the Anglican Church in Great Britain. There, that Church is rent by dissention similar to what this Epispocalian is displaying. To me, it is all an inevitable result of the rift in the Christian faith as a result of the Reformation. Human hubris gave free reign for men to invent their own theology and the objective truths which underpinned Christianity as represented by the Catholic Church were torn down by those who thought they knew better. We are nowing seeing the fruits of that hubris.

 

[Elizabeth502]

John

**I think this quote should be mailed to that Bishop - **

What I find more difficult to understand than anything is how all these renegade priests and bishops move into their respective ranks. Are they elevated from below or from above their own rank? Why is Christianity right now suffering such a heinous invasion of Trojan horses bent on seizing control of the Church and tearing its most ancient and sacred doctrines to shreds?

Well, I think John was speaking about an Episcopalian bishop, right, Charlemagne? We don’t have a lot of control over appointments of clergy from other faith traditions. But in general, I get your drift. What troubles is me is the general willingness of most faith traditions (it seems) to ‘go with the (secular cultural) flow’ instead of what religions used to do: stand for their own traditions, against that flow or in relation to that flow. There has always been something of a lack of uniformity among, and within, the various non-Catholic Christian traditions, but at least they were more consistent and less ‘corruptible’ (i.m.o.) than today.

Yesterday (Sunday) Fr. Mitch Pacwa was the guest on EWTN’s Bookmark. He was speaking about contemporary culture and how difficult it is for Catholics to stand against that, not just because of ‘the dictatorship of relativism’ in the moral sphere, but even because of language. (This is always my issue in particular.) It used to be that when a subordinate or a child in someone’s authority did something bad, they were told “That’s wrong.” The reference point was an absolute. The behavior is wrong; the behavior has always been wrong; you are not permitted to do that behavior. Objective reference point outside the individuals involved.

Now, he says, the language is, “That is unacceptable,” with the indirect pronoun phrase being “to me.” It’s the person ‘in charge’ making a personal comment about how a behavior is being subjectively received, not objectively judged. And we are talking here about the same behavior that would have been called simply “wrong” or “bad” less than 50 years ago.

It’s an interesting insight. In my own field (education) public school teachers get indoctrinated never to say “bad” or “wrong” because doing so would be “judgemental” (and make the child or other person “feel bad.”) You bet judgemental! Our point exactly! A little more 'feeling bad" would do wonders for the moral standards in the world of 2011!

 

[John21652]

I’m late to the party, I see. Your body is made up of cells. Cells are structured a certain way, each part having a function. You can’t mix and match those parts. If a cell doesn’t have every part that it needs, that cell won’t be healthy. If a sizable number of your cells become that way, then you won’t be healthy.

The family is the cell of society. Each healthy family needs at least one man and one woman. There’s no reason for this other than that is simply the way things were made. We might as well ask why God made it so that stars would run on nuclear fusion rather than some other process.

Many live under the delusion that society is a completely man made thing. It isn’t. Society is an organic development. Thus we cannot change its nature by wishing, certainly not at the cellular level.

But sin is a disease that has invaded individuals, through them, families, and through them, society as a whole. The movement for gay marriage is a disease in the body politic. It is like a cancer. People may want it. People may like it. But it will eventually kill the society that adopts it.

Of course, in the United States we’ve nearly killed marriage already. Gay marriage is just the coup-de-grace.

Plenty of room at the party. Pull up a chair and have a drink…

By the way, great post.

 

[michelleds]

Well, we could argue conspiracy theories about how religion seems to have been infiltrated by those with a contrary agenda and say it is the work of Satan. . . .

If it is the former, that the Christian religion has been infiltrated by those with an alternative agenda, under the cover of a ministry, then it is true evil and must be purged mercilessly.

This one gets my vote.

 

[zach_dunn]

Thank you for your explanation. I don’t understand you in the above excerpt. How does talking about divorce imply that I support gay marriage?

Because this is a thread about gay marriage and you start to point the finger at heterosexual marriage which gives the impression that you believe gay marriage is superior because apparently gay marriage has a lesser rate of separation. Just tryin to let you know.

 

[InSearchofGrace]

jrgiancola,

I know you said you would be leaving the thread. No matter, as others following the discussion will read the incongruence of your disbeliefs alongside your self-label as Catholic, an untenable position. Let me pick just one in your list of disagreements with Catholic doctrine, the one that is relevant to the OP.

I am a Roman Catholic man who:
believes that gay marriage should be permitted;
…
I am a Catholic because:
…
the Pope IS the vicar of Christ on Earth;
…

If you believe that the Pope is the Vicar of Christ as you stated, how do you square that with your position on homosexual acts and gay ‘marriage’ when the Pope, together with the bishops, taught and presented that the correct definition and true meaning of marriage, are as God’s plan found both in revelation and in the natural moral order? In fact, then Cardinal Ratzinger now Pope penned Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons, which cannot be more clear about the sinfulness of homosexual acts and gay ‘marriage.’

The conclusion reached:

The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behaviour or to legal recognition of homosexual unions. The common good requires that laws recognize, promote and protect marriage as the basis of the family, the primary unit of society. Legal recognition of homosexual unions or placing them on the same level as marriage would mean not only the approval of deviant behaviour, with the consequence of making it a model in present-day society, but would also obscure basic values which belong to the common inheritance of humanity. The Church cannot fail to defend these values, for the good of men and women and for the good of society itself.

This full substance of the document was approved by Pope John Paul II, the Vicar of Christ on earth! If you reject the Pope’s position on faith and morals, you reject Christ’s.

The belief that a god would create or permit the creation of homosexuals and then condemn them for forming loving, intimate relationships with each other is incongruent with Our Father, who is love itself, Jesus who is the divine mercy of God, and the Holy Spirit who is the giver of life. Scripture cannot be interpreted in a way which denies who God is. Therefore, many Catholics, including myself, look to reconcile the truth of Scripture with the truth of its writer.
…
Well, I can think of no better way to hate someone than to deny one dignity, acceptance and those inalienable human rights granted by God which include the right to love, be loved and share intimate love with another human being.
…

The teaching concerning the errors involved in same-sex “marriage” does not negate the recognition that we are made in the image and likeness of God, nor does it diminish the dignity of each human being, but rather calls attention to the proper use of sexuality within marriage. God created men and women for one another, that, in marriage, they might sexually give themselves to one another for the procreation of children. The intrinsically disordered nature of homosexual acts prevents a “same-sex” union from expressing an authentic Christian understanding of marriage.

By your rejection of not just one but several Catholic doctrines, i.e., homosexuality and gay ‘marriage’, contraception and masturbation, plus your morally relativistic views on abortion and pornography, you make yourself, at best, a dissenter, and place yourself outside the faith. A person claiming to be Catholic assents to teachings of the Catholic Church. One who accepts part of the Faith and reject others - today commonly called “cafeteria Catholic” or a follower of pluralism - is really nothing more than a form of heretic if he obstinately rejects the Church’s teachings. See Summa Theologica, Part 2 of the Second Part, Treatise on the Theological Virtues, Question 5, Article 3.

Ponder on that.
,

 

[GraceSofia]

jrgiancola,

If you believe that the Pope is the Vicar of Christ as you stated, how do you square that with your position on homosexual acts and gay ‘marriage’ when the Pope, together with the bishops, taught and presented that the correct definition and true meaning of marriage, are as God’s plan found both in revelation and in the natural moral order? In fact, then Cardinal Ratzinger now Pope penned Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons, which cannot be more clear about the sinfulness of homosexual acts and gay ‘marriage.’

The conclusion reached:

The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behaviour or to legal recognition of homosexual unions. The common good requires that laws recognize, promote and protect marriage as the basis of the family, the primary unit of society. Legal recognition of homosexual unions or placing them on the same level as marriage would mean not only the approval of deviant behaviour, with the consequence of making it a model in present-day society, but would also obscure basic values which belong to the common inheritance of humanity. The Church cannot fail to defend these values, for the good of men and women and for the good of society itself.

This full substance of the document was approved by Pope John Paul II, the Vicar of Christ on earth! If you reject the Pope’s position on faith and morals, you reject Christ’s.

The teaching concerning the errors involved in same-sex “marriage” does not negate the recognition that we are made in the image and likeness of God, nor does it diminish the dignity of each human being, but rather calls attention to the proper use of sexuality within marriage. God created men and women for one another, that, in marriage, they might sexually give themselves to one another for the procreation of children. The intrinsically disordered nature of homosexual acts prevents a “same-sex” union from expressing an authentic Christian understanding of marriage.

By your rejection of not just one but several Catholic doctrines, i.e., homosexuality and gay ‘marriage’, contraception and masturbation, plus your morally relativistic views on abortion and pornography, you make yourself, at best, a dissenter, and place yourself outside the faith. A person claiming to be Catholic assents to teachings of the Catholic Church. One who accepts part of the Faith and reject others - today commonly called “cafeteria Catholic” or a follower of pluralism - is really nothing more than a form of heretic if he obstinately rejects the Church’s teachings. See Summa Theologica, Part 2 of the Second Part, Treatise on the Theological Virtues, Question 5, Article 3.

I know I said, a hundred pages back, that I was leaving the thread, but I just want to say:
EXELLENT POST! :yup: And say thanks to you and others who have continued to patiently present the truth.

 

[InSearchofGrace]

Great article:

Will gays benefit from from same-sex marriage?

Public recognition of same-sex unions will not make homosexuals happier and will not give them the social acceptance that they crave.

…

Excerpt

*We are sociable beings. Hence we crave honor and feel the sting of disgrace. Accordingly, gays would be pursuing something of serious value if they were trying to overcome disgrace. But they do not now live in disgrace. Their lives are now viewed as a legitimate minority alternative. Their being known as homosexuals does not preclude their winning public recognition on other grounds. They are, again, merely seeking equality of public recognition. But this is not a making up of some serious deficiency, and it is in fact the kind of mild lack that is endured by everyone who pursues some love that is tolerated but not wholly understood or endorsed by the public at large. (We might also add that it is strange for a movement that began by presenting itself as a bold repudiation of conventional morality now to be demanding conventional recognition.)

The progress of same-sex marriage in American politics has been almost entirely the result not of legislation but of litigation. The final, national victory of same-sex marriage, if it comes, will come as the result of a ruling of the Supreme Court of the United States issued not only without the consent of a majority of Americans, but even against the legally expressed will of majorities in a majority of states. Public recognition of same-sex marriage is demanded as a sign of equal public acceptance, but the mode in which it is being sought ensures that the acceptance will be fraudulent. It will be in fact not a public acceptance but the acceptance of a legal and political elite that is able to force its will on the public.

Given the substantial—unprecedented, in fact—toleration and freedom that homosexuals already enjoy, and given the inevitable sense of grievance that a victory through litigation will produce in the defenders of traditional marriage, the proponents of same-sex marriage should ask themselves whether it is really worthwhile to exert themselves so much, and to so roil the politics of their country, in the pursuit of absolute equality of recognition.*

 

[Eugenius]

Because this is a thread about gay marriage and you start to point the finger at heterosexual marriage which gives the impression that you believe gay marriage is superior because apparently gay marriage has a lesser rate of separation. Just tryin to let you know.

Thank you for your response. This thread also discusses what marriage is and harm to society, which is why I mentioned divorce. This in no way implies that I think gay marriage would be better or that I think there would be a greater, or lesser, rate of separation.

 

[michelleds]

I know I said, a hundred pages back, that I was leaving the thread, but I just want to say:
EXELLENT POST! :yup: And say thanks to you and others who have continued to patiently present the truth.

+1:thumbsup:

 

[Charlemagne_II]

John

If it is the former, that the Christian religion has been infiltrated by those with an alternative agenda, under the cover of a ministry, then it is true evil and must be purged mercilessly.

This may be an explanation, but a difficult one to fathom. Infiltration suggests a degree of evil prroclivity that boggles the mind. Yet it’s possible that some men might enter a seminary at a young age, spend 8 year studying for the priesthood, spend another twenty years in the pulpit, all the while acting a part in which they do not believe; but acting it with such verve and conviction that others would see them as episcopal material to be elevated into a position that results in turning on and devouring the very institution they never believed in to begin with … all suggesting a degree of malevolence truly satanic.

Whew!! Why is it such people cannot be detected before they get to the tipping point?

 

[michelleds]

John

If it is the former, that the Christian religion has been infiltrated by those with an alternative agenda, under the cover of a ministry, then it is true evil and must be purged mercilessly.

This may be an explanation, but a difficult one to fathom. Infiltration suggests a degree of evil prroclivity that boggles the mind. Yet it’s possible that some men might enter a seminary at a young age, spend 8 year studying for the priesthood, spend another twenty years in the pulpit, all the while acting a part in which they do not believe; but acting it with such verve and conviction that others would see them as episcopal material to be elevated into a position that results in turning on and devouring the very institution they never believed in to begin with … all suggesting a degree of malevolence truly satanic.

Whew!! Why is it such people cannot be detected before they get to the tipping point?

OR couldn’t it be that the person is “co-opted” at some point after seminary? No one is free of satan’s attention and couldn’t it be that the person(s) doesn’t start out with malevolent intent but has a weakness, a crack if you will, that is gradually, almost imperceptibly weakened?

For instance, let’s say that Abe is raised in a Catholic home and wants to be a priest. He has sexual feelings for females, but he feels the call to be a priest more than he feels the call to be married. he goes thru seminary, continuing to feel sexual feelings. He sometimes fantasizes, perhaps even masturbates, but always confesses and prays for strength. then he gets a position in a parish, he’s busy, he’s sometimes overwhelmed. now the fantasies get more frequent, but he feels like he’s in control. he starts feeling embarrassed to confess such things all the time, since he’s now a full-fledged priest. so he doesn’t always confess the impurities. slowly, slowly, he is convinced that these things aren’t really all that bad.

now 10 years after seminary, an attractive, pleasant woman starts working as a secretary in the parish office. she’s a hard worker, doesn’t mind staying late…

well, you see where this is headed. I removed this little tale from the homosexual arena, just to limit the discussion. In essence, the secular world and temptations are satan’s playground and he uses them against all of us, every day, in every way he can.

Look at the brothers in St John of the Cross’ monastery!! they were not only PO’d at him for making them feel bad because he adhered to their Rule re poverty, etc, they kidnapped him, trumped up charges, and imprisoned him in a tiny little airless/windowless cell on a diet of bread and water.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

michelleds

**well, you see where this is headed. I removed this little tale from the homosexual arena, just to limit the discussion. In essence, the secular world and temptations are satan’s playground and he uses them against all of us, every day, in every way he can. **

Having read both “The Screwtape Letters” and “The Snakebite Letters,” I’m a veteran believer in what you say!

 

[michelleds]

michelleds

**well, you see where this is headed. I removed this little tale from the homosexual arena, just to limit the discussion. In essence, the secular world and temptations are satan’s playground and he uses them against all of us, every day, in every way he can. **

Having read both “The Screwtape Letters” and “The Snakebite Letters,” I’m a veteran believer in what you say!

I just finished re-reading Screwtape letters a few weeks ago! I haven’t read the Snakebite Letters yet…worth the read?

 

[InSearchofGrace]

…This thread also discusses what marriage is and harm to society, which is why I mentioned divorce. This in no way implies that I think gay marriage would be better or that I think there would be a greater, or lesser, rate of separation.

You don’t see the incongruence of your position, but a number of us do. Not just Zach.

Upthread, you said

Unfortunately a search on “foster children cage” and “foster children rape” turns up stories equally unpleasant about heterosexual foster parents, so I have a hard time seeing your links as truly representing the average gay parent. Do you happen to have any links to the “anecdotal” or “exception” stories about gay parenting? It would be interesting to really discuss those types of cases and the church’s response to them, so we know the accepted way to respond instead of just ignoring them.

Yes, there are plenty of foster care abuses in heterosexual homes. But I would not use it as a reason to justify a new category of abuses in homes of homosexual parents. It is like your gripe about high divorce rate in an apparent justification for gay relationships and gay ‘parenting,’ an incongruent position given your claim of agreement with Church teaching on homosexuality.

The point is there are other kinds of stories that portray the worst of gay parenting, more so than the occasional story of your young male neighbor who apparently grew up normal after being raised by a homosexual uncle and his partner. I say apparently because you really don’t know if he has latent psychological harm that would surface later in his adulthood.

Don’t gloss over researches of gay unions that are for the record beset by promiscuity and its attendant health and relationship issues which lead to break-ups, eclipsing break ups of heterosexual marriages. Read this comparative study by Dr. Timothy J. Dailey, Comparing the Lifestyles of Homosexual Couples to Married Couples.

And get this: because monogamy is not a central feature for many gay couples, the traditional marriage rule of fidelity is being rewritten by those proposing for ‘honesty’ by devising open infidelity arrangements going into gay ‘nuptials,’ as reported in this New York Times piece.

You asked for links of anecdotes and exceptions to gay ‘parenting’ stories. Did you bother to read the Zenit dispatch link I provided which has a list of anecdotes by writer and researcher Dale O’Leary? If you need to know about other stories like that of your male neighbor raised by a homosexual uncle and his partner, I provided the link to Dawn Stefanowicz’s published story. For more, why not put your search engine to use and get your fingers busy on the keyboard? Your information is only keystrokes away! You just have to be discerning as to reliability and independence of so-called exceptional stories, especially those accompanied by pro-gay spin.

The general public is better served with meaningful social science, which bases conclusions on formal surveys presenting relevant statistics on trends and prevalence given a set of factors and parameters. They are not based on anecdotes. To be credible and meaningful, such studies use random sampling, adequate sample size, and anonymity of research participants. They should also be carried out with no self-presentation bias.

The question is why are you more interested in anecdotes and exception instead of science based surveys that render quantitative facts and qualitative interpretation? I agree with you that preserving traditional heterosexual marriages is a battle front. But with the focus you bring to your posts, you are looking for justification for gay ‘parenting.’ This social construct is closely intertwined with gay ‘marriage.’

This is why your belief that you are against gay ‘marriage’ comes across as incongruent with the focus of your posts: traditional marriage is under siege, so why don’t Catholics sink it some more?
,

 

[Charlemagne_II]

michelleds

**I haven’t read the Snakebite Letters yet…worth the read? **

Yes. Snakebite is the devil who writes letters advising his nephew Braintwister how to corrupt the Enemy’s latest convert.

Kreeft is in some ways more interesting that Lewis because he tackles more contemporary issues … even liturgical music in one letter!

But also the papacy of John Paul is brought into play by Snakebite.

There is even a letter on what the new convert has learned in Professor Avant Garde’s theology class.

On the whole an enjoyable and stimulating read.

 

[jrgiancola]

LIZ:

If you had the courage of your convictions in your post 194, you would want to engage your debaters whom you accuse of “hate.” Posters like you are referred to in discussion forums as “drive-by” posters or “hit-and-run” posters – refusing to take responsibility for their words, or to face the music.

JOE: Drives you crazy, eh Liz? haha. Get a life.

LIZ So do I, so do many posters on CAF and off CAF who follow faithfully Catholic teaching on the subject of homosexual behavior vs. homosexual persons. We’re not judging homosexuals, and they don’t have “rights” to marriage. As to this:

JOE: I don’t have to deffend my beliefs to you or anyone; only to God. I’ve read most of the posts in the thread and it’s funny that the ones opposed to gay marriage and homosexual behavior in general never use the words “God” or “Jesus.” They just quote the catechism. The catechism is not infallible. And the church is not God.

I haven’t denied them that. Other posters haven’t denied them that. The Constitution doesn’t deny them that. The Church doesn’t deny them that. They are free to love and associate with whomever they wish, as are all of us. The institution of marriage is an entirely different issue.

But hey, you’re not listening, because you’ve created your own stereotypes and possibly get some satisfaction out of constructing phantom enemies.

 Actually, it's you and some of the other regulars here who have real serious delusions of grandeur.  One dude called me a heretic; he must be the Grand Inquisitor.  Perhaps he should burn me at the stake for having an interpretation of Scripture different from our church's interpretation.  Let's go back to the Middle Ages when our church was totally under the control of satan.  

 You come to this website and pontificate to anyone who is naive enough to believe you have any idea who God is.  You know what the Church is; you have no idea who God is.

Wish I knew how to separate the quotes and write comments like some of you do.