I wish you could know

[wifeandmomoftwo]

Kolbe-

My question was not meant to imply if you think of yourself as a “straight man” that you would become straight.

I read this and then questioned you as to the"why"

1. By labeling someone, we discourage those who may wish to try and move beyond homosexual attractions. Some people, especially young people, are able to further their psychosexual development with spiritual and psychological aid. If we labeled them “gay” and “lesbian”, they might think there’s no possibility of moving beyond these attractions.
2. T**here is more to a person than one’s sexual attractions. **Even if one experienced same-sex attractions for most of one’s life, he or she is first and foremost a child of God created in His image. To refer to that person as “gay” or “lesbian” is a reductionist way of speaking about someone. We are even trying now to avoid using the term homosexual as a noun, or as an adjective directly describing the person (i.e. homosexual person). Although it takes more words, we prefer to speak of “persons with same-sex attractions”.

 

[whatevergirl]

Hi whatevergirl, and thank you for your post. It does make sense, and the way you present it is a breath of fresh air. Here are a few thoughts.

Whatevergirl, I could not have worded that better myself. I absolutely agree. But, somehow, and for reasons I simply can’t seem to understand, the topic always goes back to addressing the subject of sex between a homosexual couple. That is why it is so bothersome for me to hear someone say that the offering of my love (having nothing to do with sex) could make someone feel like vomiting. And that is the heart of the problem. Some people, knowing I’m a homosexual, view me as incapable of true love. Why? Because they refuse to look at me without thinking of the “sex” in my sexuality. That is why I said that some people are so blinded by the sin of the homosexual act (of which I am not committing) that they can’t even see me.

Right, as long as you are still referring to the SEXUAL love a homosexual offers another. When that homosexual man or woman follows the call of celibacy, they can find the full, awesome, and all encompassing love that God designed for mankind. In his Theology of the Body, John Paul II explains that the fullness of truth and love can be fulfilled through the vocation of marriage AND celibacy. A homosexual is fully capable of knowing true love and of truly loving. True love is not only found in marriage. Does that make sense? I think you and I are on the same page.

God didn’t design homosexual love. But God left nothing out when He gave me the capacity to love. As soon as people can see beyond my sexuality and into my human dignity, they will realize that. I believe the challenge is for the Christian to be able to look at an active homosexual and realize that person’s dignity and that person’s full capability of sharing as true a love as any human being. They won’t find it in the bedroom, but with our love, patience, empathy, and encouragement, we can help them find it in Christ.

Thank you again for your post. I hope your Christmas was wonderful!

That is true…but there are two types of love, we are talking about here though. I can love people without having sex with them. lol I can love my daughter, my son, my neighbor. But, there is also a love between a married couple, and God intended for that couple to show its love for one another through a sexual ‘union,’ if you will. A homosexual can most certainly love me as a friend–or another as a brother or sister in Christ, but he/she cannot show the type of love that is reserved for a married heterosexual couple–and that is love displayed through sex. God didn’t design sex for a heterosexual couple to be misused either–mere gratification is not what we’re speaking of here. I think that a homosexual might believe that because he/she loves his/her partner, that the sexual part will just flow from that ‘love.’ But, that is where the rub comes in–that is where a homosexual’s love, in the sense of how my husband and I view one another, is not what God designed. Doesn’t mean that a homosexual is incapable of loving another human being, but in a relationship with another person (from a marital standpoint) it will never be complete…it will never fulfill God’s best for that couple, because that couple is going against how God designed love…to be fulfilled. I doubt that most homosexual couples who are living together–would view having sex as wrong, and abstain from it. But for those who do abstain, that could be a topic for a different thread! But, most I would imagine, live out their union with a sexual relationship of some sort–if they are able. (just like a heterosexual couple who is living together might do, but are not yet married)

So we agree that sex is something that God designed and since it has a procreative aspect to it–it stands to reason that a homosexual couple wouldn’t be able to achieve that ‘level’ of intimacy that God designed–and thus, cheating themselves of God’s best. (even though for them it might not feel like they are cheating one another) And that’s the thing–God didn’t intend for people to be ‘married’ and not involve themselves in the marital embrace. Now there are illnesses and situations that preclude a couple from that, but speaking in a general sense–God put a design in place for a couple to share a beautiful union in this way.

I hope you had a nice Christmas, Kolbe! It has been nice getting to know you more here. You seem like a wonderful person. And I can only imagine how hard it must be for you - and I apologize (per your words above) if I came across like I was debating you…I only want to share what God’s best is for you…and I hope you do find that, someday. God bless!

 

[cargau]

You are absolutely right. I don’t know what it is to wear your shoes. I respect your decision to be celibate.

The Church teaches that engaging in homosexual activity is sinful. Young people get urges to engage in fornication. A cleptomaniac pines to steal stuff. A serial murderer has a bent to kill people. I could go on and on. We all have our temptations in life. Yet we are not programmed robots. We have the freedom to choose our actions, we call this free will.

I am not trying to minimize the struggle that you and others no doubt must endure. As I said, I cannot really understand or know your cross and I will not even try.

If you are asking Catholics to accept the sinful nature of homosexual activity as mainstream normality, I won’t buy into it. If you label me as a homophobe, so be it. But, sin is sin.

As for me, I will love and pray for you, but I still hate the sin.

 

[daeve]

And the love that was born this day did not preach that He was a homosexual! His love is not joined with a desire for sex with the same gender. But that of a homosexual, by definition, is always coupled with desire for sex with the same gender. You insist that your love is pure and without desire for sex with the same gender
but at the same time you insist that you are a homosexual. You present yourself as unfit to be called a homosexual because your love you say is without sex and yet you insist to be called a homosexual which be definition is coupled with sex. How do we call a person like that? Seems want to eat his cake and keep it too.

I’ve been reading this back and forth between agangbern and kolbe and I think you two just cannot communicate with each other. So I, in my infinite wisdom as a buttinsky old lady, will translate. At least, this is what I’m gleaning from your posts.

Kolbe is talking about the love we give each other. Plain old brotherly love, as they used to call it. Not all love is sexual and a person who’s sexual attraction is to another of the same gender CAN and DOES feel brotherly love to other people. Just as I can love my grandson or my grandfather without feeling any sexual stirrings, I can love a man my own age without those stirrings too. I’m not attracted to every male in the universe. (Most of you are more trouble than you’re worth anyway.) But I still love you the way Christ taught me to love you.

Agangbern seems to be saying that a homosexual cannot separate sexual love from any other kind of love. This is what I’m reading, although I admit right now, it may not be what he’s trying to convevy. This is not true. I have and have had in the past many very close friends who were homosexual or lesbian, and they were completely capable of loving me as a friend and nothing more.

As for my love of them, I WILL stay out of their business unless and until they ask for my advise. In that case I’ll tell them what I know (and they already know somewhere inside) to be the truth. They are called to a life of celibacy, just as I am, being a divorced Catholic. It’s is a cross to bear, and it’s not easy or much fun. But there you are.

I got a totally different sense from the opening post. I don’t see anything in any of Kolbe’s posts suggesting he wants us to accept homosexual acts as normal.

Kolbe, I believe I know where you’re coming from, and hope you can feel the brotherly love I have for you. I’m finished with this thread, and think it should probably be closed.

 

[Kolbe300]

As the reader, I see a proclamation about one’s sexual orientation, using a label generally associated with homosexual activity.

Right, a label YOU (and many others here) associate with homosexual activity. What label don’t you associate with homosexual activity? Same sex attracted? You can use that term all day long, I have no problem with it. Where the problem lies is that the overwhelming majority of people in this country dealing with same sex attraction refer to their sexuality as homosexual, regardless of homosexual activity or not. The activity is an assumption YOU are making.

I then proceed to read a criticism about the “number of threads” and their apparently offensive tone that compels you to throw your computer out the window.

Right, “apparently offensive.” You see how that works? Until you are offended, it’s assumed that I’m just seeing things.

According to you, we are a bunch of buffoons who are ignorant about homosexuals.

Is that what I said? Or did you have to add “buffoons” and “ignorant” to ensure those on the board are sufficiently offended by me? I admitted with honesty what I observed as a gay man reading these threads. A couple of people completely agreed and, not surprisingly, they admitted to being among the minority on this board.

You asked us to step in your shoes. How about you try on ours?

I had 28 years of practice trying on your shoes. I DO try on your shoes. That’s why I apologized when you saw me as using trickery. That’s why I apologized when you felt manipulated by me. I try to be empathetic to another person’s position. That’s why I try very hard to be as kind and loving as possible. Do I always succeed? Absolutely not. But I certainly try.

You expected to receive “warm tinglies” by baiting the members here with insults, and then resent it when some become defensive.

Blessedtoo, I wish you could know how much “warm tinglies” was the last thing I desired or expected from those on this board. I am sorry if you think I am insulting. I never want to insult anyone.

Not one poster has made slanderous statements about homosexuals, alleging their lack of compassion or callousness.

Maybe you should take a closer look at some of the threads on here about homosexuals. Or how about this thread, after stating so many times that I am living the Church’s teachings, that I am on your side, that I’m am NOT making a case for homosexual acts, I’m told that the love **I **offer someone could make that person vomit. Why? Because I identify my sexuality honestly. Not only is that slanderous, it is crude, it is rude, and it was very painful to read. Yet, not one person, NOT ONE came on to say that maybe that wasn’t an appropriate thing to say. NOT ONE.

We are even trying now to avoid using the term homosexual as a noun, or as an adjective directly describing the person (i.e. homosexual person). Although it takes more words, we prefer to speak of “persons with same-sex attractions”.

And that is what it all boils down to. The only reason “we” are trying to avoid describing a person as a “homosexual person”, is because “we” are unable to realize that one’s sexuality does not equal one’s sexual acts. It’s because “we” are having trouble seeing that the homosexual person (the term from the Catechism) is a child of God, first and foremost. Can anyone here explain to me how a person with same sex attractions differs from a homosexual person?

The Church teaches that engaging in homosexual activity is sinful.

Again, the above is being said to me when I have NEVER so much as HINTED that the act isn’t sinful.

Yet we are not programmed robots. We have the freedom to choose our actions, we call this free will.

Exactly. Unfortunately, what many refuse to believe is that many homosexual persons are not choosing their orientation. But if they are honest about their orientation, it’s assumed they are sexually active.

If you are asking Catholics to accept the sinful nature of homosexual activity as mainstream normality, I won’t buy into it.

Do you see what I mean? It’s always assumed.

As for me, I will love and pray for you, but I still hate the sin

Thank you very much for your prayers. And please remember that for many homosexuals, that sin you hate isn’t even there.

As much as I would love to continue and to work on our misunderstandings, I have got to separate myself from this a bit. Being here has been very difficult and when I realized that I’m only feeling worse and worse by the day, I need to take a big step back.

Thank you all again, and God bless.

 

[HailMary]

 I was saddened so much by the enormous lack of empathy and abundance of callousness I saw from many Catholics on this board.

take pity on them.

 

[Kolbe300]

I’ve been reading this back and forth between agangbern and kolbe and I think you two just cannot communicate with each other. So I, in my infinite wisdom as a buttinsky old lady, will translate. At least, this is what I’m gleaning from your posts.

Kolbe is talking about the love we give each other. Plain old brotherly love, as they used to call it. Not all love is sexual and a person who’s sexual attraction is to another of the same gender CAN and DOES feel brotherly love to other people. Just as I can love my grandson or my grandfather without feeling any sexual stirrings, I can love a man my own age without those stirrings too. I’m not attracted to every male in the universe. (Most of you are more trouble than you’re worth anyway.) But I still love you the way Christ taught me to love you.

Agangbern seems to be saying that a homosexual cannot separate sexual love from any other kind of love. This is what I’m reading, although I admit right now, it may not be what he’s trying to convevy. This is not true. I have and have had in the past many very close friends who were homosexual or lesbian, and they were completely capable of loving me as a friend and nothing more.

As for my love of them, I WILL stay out of their business unless and until they ask for my advise. In that case I’ll tell them what I know (and they already know somewhere inside) to be the truth. They are called to a life of celibacy, just as I am, being a divorced Catholic. It’s is a cross to bear, and it’s not easy or much fun. But there you are.

I got a totally different sense from the opening post. I don’t see anything in any of Kolbe’s posts suggesting he wants us to accept homosexual acts as normal.

Kolbe, I believe I know where you’re coming from, and hope you can feel the brotherly love I have for you. I’m finished with this thread, and think it should probably be closed.

daeve,
You can not know how much I appreciate that post. You summed up perfectly what I have seen and believe. I’m going to take a break from this and I can walk away now knowing at least someone gets it!

Thanks again.

 

[rlg94086]

As for my love of them, I WILL stay out of their business unless and until they ask for my advise. In that case I’ll tell them what I know (and they already know somewhere inside) to be the truth. They are called to a life of celibacy, just as I am, being a divorced Catholic. It’s is a cross to bear, and it’s not easy or much fun. But there you are.

This is exactly the tack I take in dealing with homosexuality. I have a cousin who is a lesbian and my wife and I have have friends/aqaintances who are gay. I would not attend a gay “wedding,” as I don’t believe it is licit, but otherwise I treat them as any other friend/relative I love that disagrees with me morally. This includes being there when they are in pain, and it includes drawing the line when it comes to my household (if they stay the night, they won’t be sharing a room…just as cohabitating heterosexuals staying the night at our home).

This can cause some friction, of course. Some of you may have read of my brother’s former wife who let him know she was “bi” and invited a woman to live with them. When we refused to accept them as a “family unit,” it didn’t go over too well. But, I still treated my brother, his wife, and the third wheel in a loving manner. I just stood by my guns morally. In the long-run, my brother and I still have a great relationship after his marriage situation split up and he came to his senses.

Being upright in your beliefs is not incongruent with being loving.

 

[KathleenElsie]

This is exactly the tack I take in dealing with homosexuality. I have a cousin who is a lesbian and my wife and I have have friends/aqaintances who are gay. I would not attend a gay “wedding,” as I don’t believe it is licit, but otherwise I treat them as any other friend/relative I love that disagrees with me morally. This includes being there when they are in pain, and it includes drawing the line when it comes to my household (if they stay the night, they won’t be sharing a room…just as cohabitating heterosexuals staying the night at our home).
…
Being upright in your beliefs is not incongruent with being loving.

This is how we have dealt with the situations you have mentioned also.

We do go a little further in that we do not invite family members that are openly living with someone they are not married to into our home to spend the night since we have young children in the house. At 10 years of age the oldest child is now aware the situation and has asked questions. The family knows what Holy Mother Church teaches about this situation and they might not like our decision but they have followed our wishes.

 

[rlg94086]

This is how we have dealt with the situations you have mentioned also.

We do go a little further in that we do not invite family members that are openly living with someone they are not married to into our home to spend the night since we have young children in the house. At 10 years of age the oldest child is now aware the situation and has asked questions. The family knows what Holy Mother Church teaches about this situation and they might not like our decision but they have followed our wishes.

I guess I look at it a little bit differently…it’s a teaching opportunity. If someone is cohabitating, your children know it (i.e. they know they live at the same house). If they are coming to visit, and you make them sleep in separate rooms, then the children understand that you don’t accept such behavior as acceptable. Of course, most of these couples end up refusing to stay overnight and stay in a hotel, so it really becomes a non-issue; but, my kids know we offered and what the rules of the offer were.

EDIT ADD: We don’t stay at their homes btw, nor do we allow our kids to sleep at their home. I know that is strict, but that’s the way we are.

 

[KathleenElsie]

I guess I look at it a little bit differently…it’s a teaching opportunity. If someone is cohabitating, your children know it (i.e. they know they live at the same house). If they are coming to visit, and you make them sleep in separate rooms, then the children understand that you don’t accept such behavior as acceptable. Of course, most of these couples end up refusing to stay overnight and stay in a hotel, so it really becomes a non-issue; but, my kids know we offered and what the rules of the offer were.

EDIT ADD: We don’t stay at their homes btw, nor do we allow our kids to sleep at their home. I know that is strict, but that’s the way we are.

We do this also.

 

[blessedtoo]

Right, a label YOU (and many others here) associate with homosexual activity. What label don’t you associate with homosexual activity? Same sex attracted? You can use that term all day long, I have no problem with it. Where the problem lies is that the overwhelming majority of people in this country dealing with same sex attraction refer to their sexuality as homosexual, regardless of homosexual activity or not. The activity is an assumption YOU are making.

If you do return, and I hope you do, I have some answers to your questions.
You have to admit that words and labels have powerful meanings in our lives. You have used the word “Christian” many times on this thread in a derogatory way. To many, that word immediately conjures up negative feelings. I prefer to identify myself to people as a Catholic, being very specific about who and what I am by using that label.
As a member of the groups Courage and Encourage, I have come to understand that the use of certain terms and labels to describe same sex attraction DO carry weight and meaning, beyond what each individual may actually practice. I am sure there are plenty of folks who identify as gay yet abstain from the behavior. However, the word itself has always been associated with with the movement, the lifestyle, and activism. I didn’t assign it that meaning. Those who marched and advocated for “gay” rights did. Gay pride parades typically are not celebrating a group of people who promote abstinence. Whether we like it or not, the words we use carry connotations as the general rule.

The Courage and Encourage groups strongly suggest that Catholics who are trying to live a life of chastity refrain from identifying themselves with words that might confuse others as well as themselves. To me, this logic made sense and still does. From the Courage website:

Courage discourages persons with same-sex attractions from labeling themselves “gay” and “lesbian” for the following reasons:
1) The secular world usually uses those terms to refer to someone who is either actively homosexual or intends to be. When a person decides to “come out” and say “I am gay” or “I am lesbian”, the person usually means “this is who I am - I was born this way and I intend to live this way. I have a right to find a same-sex partner with whom to have a romantic sexual relationship.” To “come out” as being “gay” or “lesbian” doesn’t usually mean “I have homosexual attractions and I have a deep commitment to living a chaste life”.

**There are people within the Catholic Church who might argue that those who label themselves “gay” or “lesbian” aren’t necessarily living unchastely. That’s true, but the implications of the terms in today’s society don’t commonly connote chaste living. Furthermore, they are limiting their own possibilities of growth by such self-labeling, and reducing their whole identity by defining themselves according to their sexual attractions. At Courage, we choose not to label people according to an inclination which, although psychologically understandable, is still objectively disordered. **

couragerc.net/FAQs.html
couragerc.net/CatholicLanguage.html

Is that what I said? Or did you have to add “buffoons” and “ignorant” to ensure those on the board are sufficiently offended by me?

Perhaps we can BOTH admit to an over-sensitive nature and call a truce. IMO, you seem to take offense where none is intended and here you accuse me of the same. You seem to have “read into” statements meanings that are not there and here, you accuse me of the same. So maybe we both have to knock the chips off our shoulders.

I’m told that the love **I **offer someone could make that person vomit. Why? Because I identify my sexuality honestly. Not only is that slanderous, it is crude, it is rude, and it was very painful to read. Yet, not one person, NOT ONE came on to say that maybe that wasn’t an appropriate thing to say. NOT ONE.

I agree that it was harsh in it’s delivery. I think you may have misinterpreted the meaning due to a language and cultural difference. I’ll venture a guess that the poster was referring not to the “love” offered, but to the sexual act itself. Having read most of this member’s post, I suspect that was his point. He can answer that one himself. But, I can understand why that would be painful to hear if the meaning was not clear.

continued…

 

[blessedtoo]

And that is what it all boils down to. The only reason “we” are trying to avoid describing a person as a “homosexual person”, is because “we” are unable to realize that one’s sexuality does not equal one’s sexual acts. It’s because “we” are having trouble seeing that the homosexual person (the term from the Catechism) is a child of God, first and foremost. Can anyone here explain to me how a person with same sex attractions differs from a homosexual person?

The debate was over the term “gay”, not the word homosexual.

Again, the above is being said to me when I have NEVER so much as HINTED that the act isn’t sinful.

Some folks do not read the entire threads and should not post unless they have.

Exactly. Unfortunately, what many refuse to believe is that many homosexual persons are not choosing their orientation. But if they are honest about their orientation, it’s assumed they are sexually active.

Please read the above quote and check out the link.

As much as I would love to continue and to work on our misunderstandings, I have got to separate myself from this a bit. Being here has been very difficult and when I realized that I’m only feeling worse and worse by the day, I need to take a big step back.

I hope you do come back. Believe it or not, you are among friends and we do not wish to make you feel “worse”. This whole thread is a perfect illustration of the enormous amount of confusion IN OUR OWN CHURCH on the issue of homosexuality.
Again, from the Courage website:

But the subject is too important to avoid. There is a very simple way to set in motion a dialogue which leaves people unharmed and able to listen and learn. You just say from the start:
“Let’s make a promise to one another. No matter what we have to say to one another, let’s make a firm commitment to be respectful, even if we deeply disagree.”

 

[blessedtoo]

I do not debate, discredit, doubt or minimize the enormous achievement of your committment to chastity. I applaud that and your dedication to God’s will. If others have given the impression that they dispute or question your committment, then they are surely not expressing Christian love or compassion. If I have done this, I apologize. I have no quarrel with you on this matter and support anyone who strives to live according to Church teaching.

My issue is that when a Catholic comes to CAF and devotes the bulk of their post to criticizing his fellow Catholics, I get distressed. There is so much division in our Church on the issues of morality and sexuality that to perpetuate that division, even if the claims may have some truth to them, is to create hostility among the faithful.

To assume, as it appeared in your OP, that the members of this forum have never “walked in your shoes” or are so unenlightened about the plight of the homosexual, that they need a primer on compassion and love APPEARS arrogant. That may not have been your intent, but that is how it appeared to me. Because there are so many members here who are SSA, or who have gay family members, I felt compelled to dispel this notion that we have a “complete lack of understanding”.

In my diocese, I have not witnessed the blatant hostility or “unloving” approach that you describe. Anyone familiar with my city will know that we have the unique distinction of being the only diocese where a Bishop was removed from his duties due to allowing the heterodox group Dignity to celebrate Masses in our Cathedral. We had a very large and vocal percentage of Catholics who dissented from Church teaching on homosexuality and it has only been in the last few years that our new Archbishop has been able to affect some change. In my experience here, the opposite of your charge is true. The dissenting Catholics are nothing but “compassion and love” but without the truth. It is a false compassion that only hopes to make someone “feel” better.

A challenge for both of us: I will re-read all my posts and you re-read all of yours but let us do this with the heart and soul of the other in mind. It is difficult to know the intent behind an anonymous post on the internet, but now that we’ve conversed for a bit, we may be able to view the statements as they were written, and not as we perceived them.

You game?

 

[Kolbe300]

A challenge for both of us: I will re-read all my posts and you re-read all of yours but let us do this with the heart and soul of the other in mind. It is difficult to know the intent behind an anonymous post on the internet, but now that we’ve conversed for a bit, we may be able to view the statements as they were written, and not as we perceived them.

You game?

Blessedtoo,

Hello again. I’m back after a much needed break. Thanks for your posts at the end there. There is no doubt that there has been plenty of misunderstanding here on both sides. I am always game for trying to come to a better understanding of things. I believe I have come to a better understanding of where you and others are coming from. Hopefully the same is true for you (and the others). Anyways, I’ve re-read the whole thread and am more than willing to continue a discussion. As for where the thread goes from here(if anywhere at all), it doesn’t really matter to me. I think much of the entire thing boiled down to the terms used and how people perceive those terms.

I hope you had a great New Year! Here’s hoping for many blessings in 2008.

 

[Spirithound]

This is the first time I’ve posted to this board, so I start by saying hello to all of you. I am a devout Catholic, a wannabe apologist, and a gay man. I came to this board interested in learning and sharing with others, both Catholic and non-Catholic
As I mentioned before, I am a homosexual man. I am also celibate, because I believe Christ has asked that of me. (Did your view of me change when I told you I was celibate?)
I will pray for all of you and hope you pray for me.

Welcome Kolbe, and God bless. I must admit that my view of you did change once you said you were celibate. If I may offer some explanation, I think it’s in the terminology. I’ve seen “gay” to mean for the most part those who are active in the homosexual lifestyle, with celibate homosexuals preferring either that term, or “person with SSA”.
Thank you for your prayers, and I will also pray for you.

 

[Atlanta_Jen]

No judgment here, Kolbe. :hug1: God bless!!

 

[blessedtoo]

Blessedtoo,

Hello again. I’m back after a much needed break. Thanks for your posts at the end there. There is no doubt that there has been plenty of misunderstanding here on both sides. I am always game for trying to come to a better understanding of things. I believe I have come to a better understanding of where you and others are coming from. Hopefully the same is true for you (and the others). Anyways, I’ve re-read the whole thread and am more than willing to continue a discussion. As for where the thread goes from here(if anywhere at all), it doesn’t really matter to me. I think much of the entire thing boiled down to the terms used and how people perceive those terms.

I hope you had a great New Year! Here’s hoping for many blessings in 2008.

Welcome back! You’ve no idea how much thought I’ve given to this thread in your absence! That is a reflection of the profundity of your posts AND my complete lack of any kind of social life!

Terminology, words, language, and labels are big troublemakers it seems! But the real troublemaker for me is making assumptions. I assumed a wee bit too much from your initial post (and one or two that followed) and drew conclusions about your intent. This is a common pitfall of internet conversation and I will do my best to discern more carefully the STATED intentions of other posters.

This thread along with another on which I am engaged has prompted me to prayer and thoughtful contemplation on the issues of compassion and empathy. Thank you for that!