Is promoting homosexuality "social justice"?

[kozlosap]

Like shaking hands or hugging…??

(“near occasion of sin” )

Pretty much defined the dangers of homosexual “attraction” as you like to call it.

so, if you are a chaste, single and straight person, then you are a “former heterosexual”? Sorry, I could never say that I am a former straight person anymore than a gay person who is chaste and single be a former gay person. You are who you were born to be.

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

Like shaking hands or hugging…??

No, like love and other things connected to interpersonal relationships.

Surely heterosexual men interact with women for more than just getting into their panties? Or are men really that hedonistic that the hedonism they “see” in gay men is really just a projection of how men would act if women weren’t forcing them to have a veneer of civility?

Please tell me I’m misunderstanding you, men can’t be that bad, right?

(“near occasion of sin” )

Pretty much defined the dangers of homosexual “attraction” as you like to call it.

Could you please elaborate? What are these dangers?

 

[JimG]

so, if you are a chaste, single and straight person, then you are a “former heterosexual”? Sorry, I could never say that I am a former straight person anymore than a gay person who is chaste and single be a former gay person. You are who you were born to be.

Perhaps we should just drop the terms ‘homosexual’ and ‘heterosexual,’ and just refer to actions, not orientations which are a suspect category in any case.

 

[Zoltan_Cobalt]

That just makes you look ignorant because homosexual is about orientation and being a celibate Catholic wouldn’t make you any more or less “homosexual”.

Of course not…one is or isn’t homosexual…but it is not only about orientation…

The true definition of homosexuality is same-gender sexual conduct.

A homosexual is a person who defines himself or herself by the participation in or desire to participate in such conduct. This definition is both logical and intuitively sound.

 

[kozlosap]

Perhaps we should just drop the terms ‘homosexual’ and ‘heterosexual,’ and just refer to actions, not orientations which are a suspect category in any case.

Sounds like a good idea, but if can’t figure out how that would work, especially when dealing with real people and not just the groups that we all stereotype (including myself), here on CAF.

 

[Zoltan_Cobalt]

Do you object simply to one revealing their sexual inclinations (“homosexual”), or are you misusing the word “homosexual”? You do understand that one can be “homosexual” and “celibate”?

A person’s sexual inclination is none of my business and is really no concern unless it involves children.

Yes, I know that one can be “homosexual” and “celibate”.

But why the label? Why not just a “celibate individual”?

 

[kozlosap]

A person’s sexual inclination is none of my business and is really no concern unless it involves children.

Yes, I know that one can be “homosexual” and “celibate”.

But why the label? Why not just a “celibate individual”?

Now I’m confused - are you insinuating that gay individuals would become your business because they are around kids and they are all inherently predators, or are you speaking of the adoption situation?

 

[Zoltan_Cobalt]

so, if you are a chaste, single and straight person, then you are a “former heterosexual”? Sorry, I could never say that I am a former straight person anymore than a gay person who is chaste and single be a former gay person. You are who you were born to be.

Let’s say that “Barney” joins a bible study group in a large parish. The leader conducts the obligatory “let’s go round the room and tell a little about ourselves.”

How should Barney introduce himself…?

“Hi everyone. I’m Barney and I’m a single guy.”

Or…

“Hi everyone. I’m Barney. I’m gay…but I’m celibate.”

The sad FACT is that as soon as it is known that Barney is a homosexual, 80% of the people in that room will have negative reactions to him. Only 20% will have any understanding or acceptance at all. If that is OK with Barney…fine.

As far as being born “who you were born to be”…I think the jury is still out on that one.

 

[Zoltan_Cobalt]

Now I’m confused - are you insinuating that gay individuals would become your business because they are around kids and they are all inherently predators, or are you speaking of the adoption situation?

If I remember correctly, we did have a bit of a problem with a number of our priests and children…???

 

[kozlosap]

If I remember correctly, we did have a bit of a problem with a number of our priests and children…???

Pedophiles are both straight and gay. Being gay does not = pedophile.

 

[tttsssfff]

Is promoting homosexuality “social justice”?

No, but there is nothing wrong(in my opinion) with promoting the idea of getting the government out of marriage in general. Let people voluntary associate with each other.

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

Of course not…one is or isn’t homosexual…but it is not only about orientation…

The true definition of homosexuality is same-gender sexual conduct.

A homosexual is a person who defines himself or herself by the participation in or desire to participate in such conduct. This definition is both logical and intuitively sound.

I’m opposed to sodomy including heterosexual sodomy and people sodomizing the language as you are currently doing.

The first instance of the word homosexual in the English language, in the book that coined it in the English language and brought it to the public sphere, Psychopathia Sexualis, uses it in phrases such as “homo-sexual inclinations” and other books in the psychological field also used it that way such as Studies in the psychology of sex which used it as “homosexual attraction”. The book that introduced the word homosexual into English also introduced homosexuality as “Great diminution or complete absence of sexual feeling for the opposite sex, with substitution of sexual feeling and instinct for the same sex. (Homo-sexuality, or contrary sexual instinct.)”

Your debasement of the words homosexual and homosexuality is worse from a linguistic standpoint than having marriage also include same sex relationships.

Let’s say that “Barney” joins a bible study group in a large parish. The leader conducts the obligatory “let’s go round the room and tell a little about ourselves.”

How should Barney introduce himself…?

“Hi everyone. I’m Barney and I’m a single guy.”

Or…

“Hi everyone. I’m Barney. I’m gay…but I’m celibate.”

The sad FACT is that as soon as it is known that Barney is a homosexual, 80% of the people in that room will have negative reactions to him. Only 20% will have any understanding or acceptance at all. If that is OK with Barney…fine.

As far as being born “who you were born to be”…I think the jury is still out on that one.

It’s doubtful that a celibate gay person would introduce themselves as such. Openly gay celibate Catholics don’t run around telling everyone they are gay, they just don’t work to hide it. They’d probably introduce themselves by their profession, what they hope to gain from that Bible study group or why they are joining that group.

 

[Rau]

Is promoting homosexuality “social justice”?

Voluntary association is fine. Admitting all forms of voluntary association under the banner of “marriage” is not. If legal structures are required by said association(s) define the requirements and ask government to create them.

 

[Zoltan_Cobalt]

Pedophiles are both straight and gay. Being gay does not = pedophile.

I accept that all gays are not pedophiles but all the priests charged and convicted of molestation were admitted homosexuals and in some cases openly gay and very outspoken about it.

 

[Rau]

I accept that all gays are not pedophiles but all the priests charged and convicted of molestation were admitted homosexuals and in some cases openly gay and very outspoken about it.

Factually wrong. There have been priests involved with girls and women only.

 

[andrewstx]

A person’s sexual inclination is none of my business and is really no concern unless it involves children.

Yes, I know that one can be “homosexual” and “celibate”.

But why the label? Why not just a “celibate individual”?

IDK. Perhaps it’s because they are celibate/chaste individuals who having SSA are still abstaining from physical sex with the same gender?

 

[Zoltan_Cobalt]

I’m opposed to sodomy including heterosexual sodomy and people sodomizing the language as you are currently doing.

Let’s see…sodomy is the ramming of the male sexual organ into the lower digestive tract of another person. A common form of gay sex.

Now you are intimating that I, Zoltan, am performing that act with “the language”.

Joie, old sport, I don’t know how to tell you this, but “the language” has no digestive tract at all. So it really can’t work.

I would think that an intelligent writer like yourself could come up with a better analogy than a disgusting, perverted sexual practice.

The first instance of the word homosexual in the English language, in the book that coined it in the English language and brought it to the public sphere, Psychopathia Sexualis, uses it in phrases such as “homo-sexual inclinations” and other books in the psychological field also used it that way such as Studies in the psychology of sex which used it as “homosexual attraction”. The book that introduced the word homosexual into English also introduced homosexuality as “Great diminution or complete absence of sexual feeling for the opposite sex, with substitution of sexual feeling and instinct for the same sex. (Homo-sexuality, or contrary sexual instinct.)”

That’s all really special…but it is not a definition.

My DEFINITION is logical, intuitively sound and is in agreement with the Church’s definition as found in the catechism

Your debasement of the words homosexual and homosexuality is worse from a linguistic standpoint than having marriage also include same sex relationships.

Another, Joie de Vivre analogy

It’s doubtful that a celibate gay person would introduce themselves as such. Openly gay celibate Catholics don’t run around telling everyone they are gay, they just don’t work to hide it. They’d probably introduce themselves by their profession, what they hope to gain from that Bible study group or why they are joining that group.

You don’t know Barney…

 

[Zoltan_Cobalt]

Factually wrong. There have been priests involved with girls and women only.

That’s true, but I was talking about the massive child molestation scandal that is still plaguing
the Church today.

Were there any multimillion dollar law suits brought on by women and girl victims?

 

[Zoltan_Cobalt]

IDK. Perhaps it’s because they are celibate/chaste individuals who having SSA are still abstaining from physical sex with the same gender?

So why is it necessary to announce to a society (that stigmatizes SSA) that one participates in or desires to participate in such conduct?

 

[Rau]

That’s true, but I was talking about the massive child molestation scandal that is still plaguing
the Church today.

Were there any multimillion dollar law suits brought on by women and girl victims?

As am I. Does the size of financial settlement really matter, or are the facts of the crime more pertinent?

Form your own view on what value of law suit the following might be worth in the USA…one abused girl suicides and the other plunged into alcohol abuse and a resulting severe disability. They were sisters in primary school, victims of the same priest.
abc.net.au/lateline/content/2012/s3640045.htm

This priest abused boys too.