Lost the cultural debate on homosexuality

[Sixtus]

…of course I jest…

If you look at human history in regard to social issues you will see repeated cycles

One party or parties subjugates a specific party

The requirement needed to maintain subjugation become increasingly hideous as the oppressed party attempts to achieve freedom

The “other parties” separate from the original support of subjugation, this usually results in the originator becoming extreme to maintain their subjugation advantage.

The extreme actions turn the greater society against the originator, which is usually done by promoting the subjugated party

Society reaches equilibrium or repeats the cycle.

So in your specific question your real answer may be that as a heterosexual you did not know of the suffering by homosexuals, now you see the society turning against the bulling, beating, shame, etc. So society is refusing to condone the poor treatment of people who are homosexual.

btw Do you know what psychiatrists same abut “gay-hate”? Look it up it is rather interesting.

AMEN That is the human reality, either the Church accepts the reality of humanity or becomes extinct

 

[LCMS_No_More]

Why then bother to be gay? People run around pretending to lust after men and then they don’t perform? What’s the point? No one, at least no one I know, objects to men having men as friends or women having women as friends. The issue is precisely about men having sexual intercourse with men and women with women. Beyond that there is no issue except as the gay activists try to make one up.

If I had an unnatural attraction for a person of the same sex but remained chaste, as you suggest that they do, I’d stay as far away from the typical activist as I possibly could.

You know this. Why are you playing this game?

CDL

Actually, there is another form of sexual activity that is VERY common among homosexual persons of both genders. A person who understands the issues underlying SSA will know that one of the ways it plays itself out is through a desire to consume what the other possesses. One doesn’t consume through their lower GI tract.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

Scratch a liberal politician hard enough, and you’ll uncover a fascist.

Wrong. Fascism (corporatism, as defined by the Father of Fascism, Benito Mussoulini) is inherently a right-wing ideology. On the other hand, totalitarianism (which is expressed either through fascism OR Stalinist Communism) is more akin to what you want to say. Just a thought about getting our terms straight.

Both right-wing and left-wing extremes result in totalitarianism.

Part of me agrees with Other Eric about outlawing homosexual sex. It won’t solve the underlying issues of SSA (part of which, IMO is caused by fathers failing to FATHER their boys into MEN), but at least it will help to curb a lot of the cultural decay that is going on around us.

Banning pornography would also help.

 

[Titus]

It seems to me that the words “homophobia” and “unchristian” are used as a quick and easy substitute for rational thought. Nowhere is there any citation to anything that would demonstrate that Mr. Hayes is wrong. Once it is understood that the condition of having same-sex attractions arises from serious pathology, then it does not take that great a leap of imagination to believe that those attractions may form only the beginning of a seriously depraved sexuality. Indeed, the John Jay statistical report and research conducted by Dr. Paul Cameron tend to bear out everything Mr. Hayes has written. It would be nice if someone actually attempted to engage this argument rather than shut it down immediately with a few choice buzzwords.

Homosexuality is a cross many Catholics are called to bear with chastity and acceptance. They are not paedophiles. There are straight paedophiles and gay paedophiles, and their sexuality is disordered, illegal and despicable. They are in a totally different category from those with SSA; since what they do to the other person is abuse- the person is below the age of consent- unlike in a gay relationship. I don’t defend the ‘gay culture’, but to equate it to paedophilia is homophobic, unchristian and downright rude.

Can we see this report?

 

[Titus]

Wrong. Fascism (corporatism, as defined by the Father of Fascism, Benito Mussoulini) is inherently a right-wing ideology. On the other hand, totalitarianism (which is expressed either through fascism OR Stalinist Communism) is more akin to what you want to say. Just a thought about getting our terms straight.

Both right-wing and left-wing extremes result in totalitarianism.

Part of me agrees with Other Eric about outlawing homosexual sex. It won’t solve the underlying issues of SSA (part of which, IMO is caused by fathers failing to FATHER their boys into MEN), but at least it will help to curb a lot of the cultural decay that is going on around us.

Banning pornography would also help.

Fantastic post. I agree!

 

[ALLFORHIM]

Hi,

I was saddened to hear that my state(NJ) is now the third in the country to legalize same sex unions(they are not calling it marriage).

I do feel powerless to change any of this. I just teach my children that it is not ok to commit homosexual acts just like it is not ok to have sex outside of marriage. I will never teach my children to hate gay people(that is sinful)but, they need to understand that even though society says it is ok it is not in the eyes of God. I would also never teach them to shun someone who is gay. When approached by someone who is gay that is trying to tell them that their lifestyle is fine, what I would like them to say is this------ Homosexual lifestyle is not ok in the eyes of God but neither is adultery or pre-marital sex or sodomy etc. I want them to know that they should never single out homosexuals as somehow being worse then an adulterer. The only difference with homosexuals is that they are glorifying their sin and trying to make us do the same.

Just my :twocents:

 

[Philthy]

I’m gay. I didn’t choose to like guys, and all I want is to be a good Catholic. I don’t want to have a boyfriend or join the gay community. I like to think of it as a challenge from God and all I really want is acceptance. Will I go to hell or be rejected from the Church for something I did not choose?

Hi swemperor!

You will not go to Hell for anything you didnt choose - only for evil things you do choose. Take me, for example - Im a married heterosexual and I am attracted to lots of women - I cant help it, I didnt choose it, but I am attracted to them. I wont be going to Hell for being attracted to them, praise God. If, however, I yield to my adulterous temptations, reject Christs example of chastity, ignore His gift of grace to overcome temptation and CHOOSE to engage in an adulterous affair I can definitely expect to go to Hell. But I wouldnt be condemned for being attracted to women other than my wife - I’d only be condemned for choosing to act on that impulse. See the difference?

 

[Other_Eric]

Homosexuality is a cross many Catholics are called to bear with chastity and acceptance. They are not paedophiles. There are straight paedophiles and gay paedophiles, and their sexuality is disordered, illegal and despicable. They are in a totally different category from those with SSA; since what they do to the other person is abuse- the person is below the age of consent- unlike in a gay relationship. I don’t defend the ‘gay culture’, but to equate it to paedophilia is homophobic, unchristian and downright rude.

Can we see this report?

Your indifference and outright hostility to simple statistical analysis illustrates one of the reasons that Christians are losing the debate on homosexuality. I encourage you to read the statistical analysis I mentioned earlier. It is available here: bishop-accountability.org/reports/2004_02_27_JohnJay/index.html

 

[bigsarge05]

Regardless of anything else, this is correct.

The wise thing is not to judge. One may point out to a homosexual it is wrong spiritually, morally, etc.

But if all we do is say you’re wrong or your bad etc, then we’re taking the risk of running them right out of the church, which is were they (we all) to be.

Love the sinner, hate the sin.

Regards,

Jesse

 

[Titus]

Your indifference and outright hostility to simple statistical analysis illustrates one of the reasons that Christians are losing the debate on homosexuality. I encourage you to read the statistical analysis I mentioned earlier. It is available here:

I don’t have hours to read the full document, but from a quick look it appears to be entirely concerned with priests and deacons? Is this fair?

So- it does not relate to the vast majority of homosexuals. And so does not prove the suggestion ‘Homosexuality= Paedophilia’ made by Mr Hayes.

If I appear hostile to statistical analysis, I am sorry. I am willing to engage in full debate with anyone, and am prepared to lose aswell.

 

[homewardbound]

The darkest hour is just before the dawn. And of course it is ridiculous to compare black people to homosexuals, one is natural, unchosen, God-given; the other is a choice (to do the sexual acts, not the preference).

Catholics must always ‘love the sinner, hate the sin’, This doesn’t mean avoiding the difficult truth- we are not helping if we do so.

How can the preference not be a choice also? If homosexuality is a sin, how could God create someone with sinful unnatural attractions?

 

[Other_Eric]

I don’t have hours to read the full document, but from a quick look it appears to be entirely concerned with priests and deacons? Is this fair?

So- it does not relate to the vast majority of homosexuals. And so does not prove the suggestion ‘Homosexuality= Paedophilia’ made by Mr Hayes.

If I appear hostile to statistical analysis, I am sorry. I am willing to engage in full debate with anyone, and am prepared to lose aswell.

It is interesting that you do not have time to read a document that you have asked to see. It finds that over 80% of the abuse cases in the United States were homosexual in nature. As for whether or not this is fair, I have no reason to doubt that it is. It tends to support the idea that those with same-sex attractions are much more likely to succumb to sexual predation than their heterosexual counterparts. Whether this dysfunction manifests itself in such clinical pedophilia, ephebophilia or some other grave dysfunction that seeks to take sexual advantage of the vulnerable, I think it takes only a slight adjustment to forgive Mr. Hayes his use of the term “pedophile” in a more colloquial context.

Given the numbers that Mr. Hayes uses to support his thesis, it is certainly defensible to say that homosexuality is the equivalent of pedophilia given the disproportionate number of same-sex sexual abuse cases when compared to the incidence of homosexuality in the general population.

 

[ALLFORHIM]

Hi,

I just heard on the news that at the Episcopal conference(not sure what they called it)in Africa that the American branch was told to stop allowing gay marriages and appointing gay bishops. They were told do it or else. Not sure what that means. Just wondering whaat you guys think of that. The rest of the Episcopal world thinks America is too liberal.

 

[Dale_M]

Allforhim, I think the Anglican Communion came up with a deft solution to help preserve their unity. It clearly signaled to the U.S. Episcopal Church that it should not cave in to the secular culture of our country. It also gave the Episcopal Church less than a year to make changes. We’ll see soon where U.S. Episcopalian loyalties lie.

Other Eric, I agree with Titus that Catholic priests are probably not a representative sample of pedophiles. The self-selection, the weeding out process of seminary and the requirement of celibacy makes priests a rather unique group.

 

[ALLFORHIM]

Allforhim, I think the Anglican Communion came up with a deft solution to help preserve their unity. It clearly signaled to the U.S. Episcopal Church that it should not cave in to the secular culture of our country. It also gave the Episcopal Church less than a year to make changes. We’ll see soon where U.S. Episcopalian loyalties lie.

I am on the side of the Episcopal Communion. I was raised Episcopalian and my grandfather was a minister in the church, so I was very unhappy to find out they were caving into the secular world. Way too liberal for me.

 

[Jaypeeto3]

If homosexuality is a sin, how could God create someone with sinful unnatural attractions?

God did not create people with homosexual desires in them.
Homosexual desires, like other disordered desires, stem from CONCUPISCENCE, which is the damage done to ourselves as a consequence of Original Sin.

Concupiscence manifests itself in different people in different ways. Homosexual attraction is one of those many ways.
Everyone has concupiscence in one way or another.
We have to resist our temptations with the help of Christ.

God bless,
Jaypeeto3 (aka Jaypeeto4)

 

[mlchance]

It is incredibly stupid to suggest that male gay paedophiles molest boy children, and male straight paedophiles molest girl children. Paedophiles have a sexual orientation towards children.

Actually, that is precisely what studies that coorelate sexual orientation of sex offenders with preferred genders of their victims shows. Homosexual male sexual predators overwhelmingly target males. Heterosexual male sexual predators overwhelming target females. Furthermore, a homosexual male is something on the order of 20 times more likely to be a sexual predator than a heterosexual male.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[a_cermak]

I am on the side of the Episcopal Communion. I was raised Episcopalian and my grandfather was a minister in the church, so I was very unhappy to find out they were caving into the secular world. Way too liberal for me.

I, on the other hand, joined the Episcopalians because they were liberal. The Episcopal Church, as a body, does not have any rites of Blessing for gay marriages. I don’t believe any Dioceses do either. That does not mean that some Episcopalian priests do not perform ad-hoc blessings of gay unions (after all if you can bless a house, a field, a dam, or a pet , why not a couple) as a pastoral solution for their gay members. Whatever the worldwide communion decrees, it will not change the fact that roughly 70% of the Episcopalians in the US do not consider monogamous homosexuality to be sinful.

I think the American cultural battle (and to some extent the intra-Episcopalian cultural battle) over homosexuality is regional. Where I am in Chicago, yes, it’s been lost. It is only a matter of time, say a decade or two before civil unions or some such are enacted. Where I work, in an engineering firm, gay employees are no big deal and anyone who had a problem with homosexuality would probably be told to keep their opinions to themselves on company time and at company functions, plus they would most likely be shunned by everyone else.

 

[Dale_M]

anyone who had a problem with homosexuality would probably be told to keep their opinions to themselves on company time and at company functions

And well they should. We are not called to pass judgement on anyone - just the opposite, in fact.

We should explain the Church’s position, if someone is open to the discussion, so that they can make their own choice. But we are all sinners and no one of us is better than the other.

 

[goofyjim]

Yes, it is obvious to me that we are fast losing the cultural war on this issue. We have become soft and too timid. In order to avoid hurting the feelings of those with same-sex attractions, Christians end up watering down or doing outright violence to Christ’s Truth. Stemming this foul tide is going to involve much more in the way of legal, social and cultural action.

Maybe those with same sex attraction should just be forced to be homeless after spending tons of dollars on therapy that usually doesn’t work. If they are not acting on their attractions leave them alone.