Morally Straight or Morally Gay?

[Baelor]

Bill,

To start with there is no universal understanding of what it means to say

“I am gay”

Does this mean you have SSA?
Does this mean you have SSA and are thinking of acting on it?
Does this mean that you have SSA and have acted homosexual?
Does this mean that you have SSA, are thinking of acting on it, have acted on it and accept that you will forever act on it?

There is no consensus on what this means.

Bill clearly means sexual orientation, which is why he said “orientation” in the very next sentence (as opposed to “action,” also in the very next sentence). His definition is that shared by pretty much everyone everywhere.

Some individuals still believe that the Sun travels around the Earth. Is there consequently “no consensus” there either?

 

[InSearchofGrace]

Bill clearly means sexual orientation, which is why he said “orientation” in the very next sentence (as opposed to “action,” also in the very next sentence). His definition is that shared by pretty much everyone everywhere.

Some individuals still believe that the Sun travels around the Earth. Is there consequently “no consensus” there either?

Wait a minute there.

Bill Martin started with “Since being gay merely is not a sin …” .

GAY Definition & Meaning | Dictionary.com

adjective
of, pertaining to, or exhibiting sexual desire or behavior directed toward a person or persons of one’s own sex; homosexual

Behavior includes action. Hence, Coptic is right in that there is no consensus when the word “gay” is used, as self reference or reference to others, as a speaker or writer, and as a listener or reader.

If you will excuse my saying, the kind of participation displayed by you in the forum (in this and other threads) is not helpful. It seems aimed at brow beating and frustrating one particular opponent in the course of debate.
,

 

[Baelor]

Bill Martin started with “Since being gay merely is not a sin …” .

Please read my posts in their entirety:
Myself:

which is why he said “orientation” in the very next sentence (as opposed to “action,” also in the very next sentence).

Perhaps my last post was unclear; Bill Martin used “gay” in reference to the orientation, which he stated was in contrast to action. There is thus no doubt about what Bill Martin meant, since he told us explicitly.

dictionary.reference.com/browse/gay
adjective
of, pertaining to, or exhibiting sexual desire or behavior directed toward a person or persons of one’s own sex; homosexual

The secondary definition exists. No one is denying that.

Behavior includes action. Hence, Coptic is right in that there is no consensus when the word “gay” is used,

We are not talking about “gay.” We are talking about “He is gay.” Almost every listener would feel that the description is suitable even if the given individual is celibate.

 

[InSearchofGrace]

That would never happen. The BSA has never been a hotbed for discussions of sexuality. The policy change does not alter that.

Never been a hotbed for discussions of sexuality, perhaps, but an avenue infiltrated by homosexual / child sex abusers who did not have to announce their sexual orientation. Consider BSA’s share of abuse cases:

In 1991, journalist Patrick Boyle investigated the confidential files of the Boy Scouts of America (BSA), publishing his findings in a five-part series in The Washington Times as well as in his 1994 book, Scout’s Honor: Sexual Abuse in America’s Most Trusted Institution. According to BSA records, 416 male Scout employees were banned between the years of 1971 and 1989 as a result of sexual misconduct. Boyle found that 1,151 cases of sexual abuse were reported within this time period. The Boy Scouts had one million adult volunteers and four million Scouts (including Cub Scouts, Boy Scouts, etc.) during this time period. The majority of the victims were believed to have been Boy Scouts, who typically range in age from eleven to seventeen. Boyle found that Scoutmasters perpetrated the majority of the abuse, but Assistant Scoutmasters, of which there were roughly 147,000, were also responsible. Further, Boyle reported that most of the abuse occurred during camping trips. The Scouts claimed that sexual abuse in this organization was not a major crisis, but Boyle argued that sexual abuse is more common in Scouting than accidental deaths and serious injuries combined.

Boyle also discussed the impact of the abuse on the victims through individual narratives. Given that the information in confidential files is limited, the effects of the abuse on children are unknown. However, Boyle asserted that out of the approximately four hundred abuse cases he investigated, four victims attempted suicide and at least three leaders who were charged with abuse also made suicide attempts.

More than fifty lawsuits were filed against the Scouts by families of boys who were abused prior to the introduction of its Youth Protection program. Boyle claims that the organization has paid at least fifteen million dollars in order to settle cases out of court, with payments ranging from $12,000 to $1.5 million. Of particular interest is the case of Doe v. Goff in 1999, in which a victim filed a law- suit against his abuser, the Boy Scouts, and the Rainbow Council of Boy Scouts, the latter two of which he claimed were negligent in their investigation of Goff’s moral fitness and in implementing appropriate child protection programs. However, the court decided that the organizations were not negligent and should not be held liable for the abuse. The majority opinion stated that the organizations could not reasonably have foreseen the abuse, that the overwhelming majority of Boy Scout leaders are not sexual predators, and that the organizations’ subsequent implementation of child protection programs did not ren- der them liable for the abuse.

Conversely, in a civil trial in April 2010 an Oregon jury awarded the largest known verdict in the history of the BSA, $18.5 million, to a former Scout. In this case, the BSA was found liable for allowing a former Assistant Scoutmaster to continue to work with children after the abuser admitted to molesting seventeen boys. During the trial, it came to light that the BSA began keeping records detailing sexual abuse within the organization soon after its inception in 1910; this represents the largest compila- tion of known or suspected records of child sexual abus- ers, with an estimated six thousand files. As a practice the BSA does not release detailed statistics on child sexual abuse. The majority of such cases are settled out of court to ensure that the files are kept confidential. One news report estimated that the BSA settled sixty similar cases out of court recently.

Also revealed during the trial was the fact that between 1965 and 1985 the BSA had classified 1,600 individuals as “unfit” to work with children. This number is much larger than Boyle uncovered in his 1991 investigative report.

In cooperation with experts in the field of sexual abuse, the Scouts developed an extensive training program that is meant to raise the awareness of both children and Scoutmasters. This program is similar to the Safe Environment program for priests, lay staff, and volunteers in the Catholic Church. The BSA now has a requirement that all employees and volunteers must pass a background check in order to be employed by or work with the organization. Additionally, among other protections for youth, there now exist internal policies requiring a minimum of two adults at every event and prohibiting adults from being left alone with individual Scouts. The BSA has been criticized, however, for not making their youth training program mandatory, and their recently implemented policies prohibiting homosexual Scout leaders have come under scrutiny by various civil rights organizations.

 

[InSearchofGrace]

…

The secondary definition exists. No one is denying that.

**We are not talking about “gay.” We are talking about “He is gay.” **Almost every listener would feel that the description is suitable even if the given individual is celibate.

Kinda like

Sexual attraction need not be checked; it should not be dwelt upon.

a statement you made elsewhere …

Pedantic, hair splitting alright, as raised by a few posters with your style of argumentation.

Further, in your last sentence, you in substance admit that not all listeners would necessarily assume that a person described as gay is celibate. Not a default term by any means.
,

 

[Slavonic]

Bill,

To start with there is no universal understanding of what it means to say

“I am gay”

Does this mean you have SSA?
Does this mean you have SSA and are thinking of acting on it?
Does this mean that you have SSA and have acted homosexual?
Does this mean that you have SSA, are thinking of acting on it, have acted on it and accept that you will forever act on it?

All of the above.

“I am straight”

Does this mean you have OSA (Opposite Sex Attraction)?
Does this mean you have OSA and are thinking of acting on it?
Does this mean that you have OSA and have acted heterosexual?
Does this mean that you have OSA, are thinking of acting on it, have acted on it and accept that you will forever act on it?

 

[Baelor]

Never been a hotbed for discussions of sexuality, perhaps, but an avenue infiltrated by homosexual / child sex abusers who did not have to announce their sexual orientation. Consider BSA’s share of abuse cases:

Let us distinguish between homosexuals who have sex with teenagers and sex abusers who target teenagers. They are not the same thing. Furthermore, that charge could be leveled against any number of organizations.

More importantly, it is simply irrelevant. If the BSA was already an avenue infiltrated by homosexuals or sex abusers, the new policy is not changing the status quo. Homosexuals are not a single bloc of homogeneous individuals. If the BSA starts discussing sexuality in its programming, I will rail against that vehemently and relentlessly. Sexuality has no place in BSA. That does not mean that Scouts who are gay (especially if they are celibate) should be required to hide their condition outside of Scouts as well, given that that standard is not upheld for any other moral issue in the BSA, and morality was the justification of the BSA for opposing gay Scouts.

 

[Baelor]

Kinda like

a statement you made elsewhere …

Pedantic, hair splitting alright, as raised by a few posters with your style of argumentation.

The Vague is the enemy of the Good. You are welcome to block me or to simply ignore my posts if they offer you substance.

Further, in your last sentence, you in substance admit that not all listeners would necessarily assume that a person described as gay is celibate.

Yes, but because those listeners would assume that every individual is sexually active, not because “gay” connotes sexual activity.

 

[InSearchofGrace]

The Vague is the enemy of the Good. You are welcome to block me or to simply ignore my posts if they offer you substance.

As you are welcome to block me or Coptic or any poster. But I don’t get if your posts “offer substance” ?

Yes, but because those listeners would assume that every individual is sexually active, not because “gay” connotes sexual activity.

It’s just the other side of the coin.
,

 

[fix]

As an Eagle Scout, I recited this many times…

Recently the BSA changed policy for membership and presently bans Adult leaders that are openly Gay. I anticipate that this will be the next hurdle that the LGBT agenda will tackle.

In a separate but related thread it is pointed out what Homosexuals are doing to the Body of Christ. The American Psychiatric Association and the American Psychological Association is now run by Homosexually interested parties promoting normalcy of Homosexual behavior…The United Church of Christ is being touted as supportive of the California attempt to ban NARTH and if no one was watching the United Church of Christ is supporting the recent change for the BSA as if Christianity as a whole comes from the voice of this group…

In the world of Christian thought Homosexuals are taking over Churches as seen here…

Prior to the voting by the BSA this thread was started…

The following are comments from postings as it regards this change…

The Jay Report was mentioned and here it is…

We admit that there was a problem with trusted priests, not all priests are bad, we admit that the problem is one of authority taking advantage of those that look for trust…

We now face the BSA pending changing policy with Adults that are openly gay, not priests, not dedicated to any particular belief and we are being asked to trust our children to these leaders…

Should we start the CatholicBSA as is noted by the Baptists to coordinate vigilence for our children?

Not a bad idea. The BSA has given in to the gay agenda. More to follow.

 

[InSearchofGrace]

Let us distinguish between homosexuals who have sex with teenagers and sex abusers who target teenagers. They are not the same thing. Furthermore, that charge could be leveled against any number of organizations.

More importantly, it is simply irrelevant. If the BSA was already an avenue infiltrated by homosexuals or sex abusers, the new policy is not changing the status quo. Homosexuals are not a single bloc of homogeneous individuals. If the BSA starts discussing sexuality in its programming, I will rail against that vehemently and relentlessly. Sexuality has no place in BSA. That does not mean that Scouts who are gay (especially if they are celibate) should be required to hide their condition outside of Scouts as well, given that that standard is not upheld for any other moral issue in the BSA, and morality was the justification of the BSA for opposing gay Scouts.

Of course, there’s a difference and the phenomena is certainly not unique in any organization with youth programs.

I beg to differ that this is irrelevant in the framework of BSA change in policy. What needs to be understood is the solution reached (policy change) to appease those conflicted with homosexuality issues, the celibate and non-celibate alike, is likely to lead to more problems, more pressure from gay activists. Already, before it can take effect (next year?), there is clamor to open BSA to adult gay leaders and Scout Masters.

Sexual orientation is being sold and marketed by gay activists as vastly apart from active or expressed homosexuality. They go side by side, not exactly opposites, the desire or inclination finding expression in action, the advocates hoping that the latter would be deemed benign or harmless by a more and more accepting sexualized culture. Families would find it increasingly difficult to protect their impressionable youth from undesirable influence.
,

 

[JimG]

From someone who lives in a country that has accepted SSM the aggressiveness of homosexualism is astounding. You must do everything in your power and always pray to stop this pestilence. Homosexualism leads to persecution of all dissenters: if a Church does not submit and undergo a process of sensitivity training or a slow coaxing into getting the congregation to be more “sensitive” (implicaton: we are heartless prunes) and all that jazz, open warfare results: slander, lawsuits, loss of jobs and even possibly prison.

If you allow your country to be homosexualized within 5 years most of your country will have mandatory education programs that begin sensitivity training, brainwashing and sexualizing your children starting
in grade 1.

They will persecute your Churches. A week ago I had to go up to receive Communion from a Eucharistic Minister who was clearly gay in dress and demeanour: although, because I need such “sensitivity” training, I gave him the benefit out of the doubt as a young person/man/late teenager-early tweens who was simply a product of our modern times and culture. When I went up to receive (I am a 27yr old man) he looked at me, closed his eyes and as it were shuttered in passion as if I had aroused him. His eyelids, closed, trembled. It was as if I were sin for him. I did not appreciae it. At that point it was obvious that he was, of course, gay.

The Church bulletin I took home had a special section dedicated to “What the Church is doing for our gay youth”. Not only is that shockingly insulting to “our youth” (as if they were ALL gay) it was morally neutral by context. By “gay” do we understand openly gay Catholic youth? Since when was *gay Catholic *not an oxymoron? People with homosexual inclinations or who struggle with SSA should not be taught to identify or reduce themelves to these desires or inclinations.

"What the Church is doing for our gay youth".

As if it were obligatory that we busy ourselves with the worries and needs of one set of peope struggling like everyone else with sin and not be worried about, oh, say, the people who are starving to death on the streets in front of the church (and there are plenty right there where the church is located downtown): yes, I am oh-so concerned about the needs of this curious and musingly new generation of our *oh-so soft *and tenderly sensitive sons: with their *all-so *delicate feelings. That’s homosexualization.

To top it off, as I was leaving Mass and the church that day, directly across the road, on the second story of a townhouse, a woman was unfurling from her balcony-porch a giant rainbow flag for all to see. It was as if they were saying: we have conquered.

Do not let this come to pass in your country. It gets much worse and what I have described is not the change in social life (get used to being invited to diner parties and as you wait for the meal to be ready you are entertained with pornography on the television as if it were nothing) that comes about but simply what happens to your schools and your churches.

It seems to me that your warning is timely and should be heeded by all in the United States. This seems to be the direction we are headed.

 

[fix]

Of course, there’s a difference and the phenomena is certainly not unique in any organization with youth programs.

I beg to differ that this is irrelevant in the framework of BSA change in policy. What needs to be understood is the solution reached (policy change) to appease those conflicted with homosexuality issues, the celibate and non-celibate alike, is likely to lead to more problems, more pressure from gay activists. Already, before it can take effect (next year?), there is clamor to open BSA to adult gay leaders and Scout Masters.

Sexual orientation is being sold and marketed by gay activists as vastly apart from active or expressed homosexuality. They go side by side, not exactly opposites, the desire or inclination finding expression in action, the advocates hoping that the latter would be deemed benign or harmless by a more and more accepting sexualized culture. Families would find it increasingly difficult to protect their impressionable youth from undesirable influence.
,

This is a key point. This attempt to make the desire itself a stand alone issue seems disingenuous. Are we to believe there are crowds of persons self identifying as “gay” that reject the cultural ideology that is so closely tied to the gay movement?

 

[InSearchofGrace]

All of the above.

“I am straight”

Does this mean you have OSA (Opposite Sex Attraction)?
Does this mean you have OSA and are thinking of acting on it?
Does this mean that you have OSA and have acted heterosexual?
Does this mean that you have OSA, are thinking of acting on it, have acted on it and accept that you will forever act on it?

Much as you wish to put SSA and OSA as both normal and natural attractions, and the physical relations that result thereby, they are not.

The OP also used an operative word here: moral.

While both attractions unacted upon are not immoral, acted upon SSA can never be moral. Acted upon OSA in marriage is moral.

 

[Baelor]

As you are welcome to block me or Coptic or any poster. But I don’t get if your posts “offer substance” ?

“Offer no substance [to you].” i.e. if they are of no help to you, feel free to ignore them.

It’s just the other side of the coin.

Not at all. They still mean gay as “sexually attracted to someone of the same sex.”

 

[Baelor]

What needs to be understood is the solution reached (policy change) to appease those conflicted with homosexuality issues, the celibate and non-celibate alike, is likely to lead to more problems,

The problems should be avoided.

more pressure from gay activists.

The pressure should be resisted.

Already, before it can take effect (next year?), there is clamor to open BSA to adult gay leaders and Scout Masters.

The BSA needs to revise its inconsistent policies anyway. It really should not single out homosexuality and gay sex as issues when there are any other number of moral issues.

I would advocate for a consistent policy against acted-upon homosexuality, but only if said policy also prohibited adulterers, fornicators, and so forth. As much as we may want to oppose the homosexualist agenda on every front, these fronts must be coherent. The BSA is not, which leaves an opening that is being (and, frankly, should be, if it is not corrected) exploited.

 

[CopticChristian]

All of the above.

“I am straight”

Does this mean you have OSA (Opposite Sex Attraction)?
Does this mean you have OSA and are thinking of acting on it?
Does this mean that you have OSA and have acted heterosexual?
Does this mean that you have OSA, are thinking of acting on it, have acted on it and accept that you will forever act on it?

Your agenda is attempting to sidetrack the conversation. If you have not noticed the BSA recently changed policy to admit openly “gay” boys and in the future I imagine openly “gay” leaders.

The conversation is about Morally Straight or Morally Gay…

Now the BSA Oath has been in place for a long time and I imagine it was never intended to include sexuality. I know when I recited it I had no notion of being Moraly Heterosexual…it just meant that I was on the right Moral track…

Morally Straight or Morally Gay is tongue in cheek play on words that is intended to cause a conversation about what the BSA stands for and what it means for an average young man to be in the BSA, knowing that some guy in his tent is not just SSA but has accepted the notion that “men are his thing”…something I never experienced or would want any of my children to experience, if that person is not just struggling but acting out.

My troop was with a Catholic Church and I imagine that many of these troops will be aligned with perhaps the United Church of Christ that condones and approves of aberations of normallity.

Reality is that in life, as a Physician, as a student, as a human…never do I meet people or talk to them and know anything about them as far as their desire for sex.

It does happen that people volunteer this. I cannot imagine introducing myself and saying Hi…my name is Coptic, I am a Doc…and I prefer missionary position how about you…that is pretty much how I feel about someone saying Hi…and I am gay.

When someone says “I am gay” it is difficult to know what that means and it is not a given what it means…the best response for me would be…

Ok, I understand you say you are gay…what do you mean by that…?

Well, I have SSA…and I would say…well in my opinion that does not mean you are gay…etc.

Well I have SSA and on occasion I act on it…Okkkkkkk, thank you for that information…may I get you some coffee…have you heard about the Catholic Church?

Well I have SSA, I act on it regularly and I live with my SSA partner…isn’t that lovely…the coffee is over that way…excuse me…while I get some fresh air…

There is no way to know what it means when someone says “I am gay”…“he is gay”…without asking "what do you mean by that’…this is reality.

 

[Baelor]

There is no way to know what it means when someone says “I am gay”…“he is gay”…without asking "what do you mean by that’…this is reality.

Yes there is. Have you met a someone who identifies as gay but is NOT sexually attracted to men?

 

[CopticChristian]

Yes there is. Have you met a someone who identifies as gay but is NOT sexually attracted to men?

Ok, as you belabor the obvious, understandint that you are not a Physician, Psychologist or any kind of Health care worker…I cannot expect much nor should I expect less from these types of questions…

Yup, gawlee…someone says they are “gay”

Well then we know that they are SSA…and then what does that mean beyond that…

When someone says “I am gay” it is difficult to know what that means and it is not a given what it means…the best response for me would be…

Ok, I understand you say you are gay…what do you mean by that…?

Well, I have SSA…and I would say…well in my opinion that does not mean you are gay…etc.

Well I have SSA and on occasion I act on it…Okkkkkkk, thank you for that information…may I get you some coffee…have you heard about the Catholic Church?

Well I have SSA, I act on it regularly and I live with my SSA partner…isn’t that lovely…the coffee is over that way…excuse me…while I get some fresh air…

There is no way to know what it means when someone says “I am gay”…“he is gay”…without asking "what do you mean by that’…this is reality.

 

[Baelor]

Ok, as you belabor the obvious, understandint that you are not a Physician, Psychologist or any kind of Health care worker…I cannot expect much nor should I expect less from these types of questions…

Yup, gawlee…someone says they are “gay”

Well then we know that they are SSA…and then what does that mean beyond that…

Exactly. So we do know something about what it means. We know the person is sexually attracted to the same sex (likely exclusively).

I have never met a person in my real life who has meant “gay” as “someone who is sexually attracted to the same sex and is also having sex with the same sex.” There is thus no more reason for me to ask what is meant by “gay” than to ask what is meant by any other word in the sentence.

Furthermore, the poster in question explicitly demonstrated that the sexual attraction was the only component of his definition of gay, making your subsequent response totally irrelevant. It had already been answered.