Pope's stance on gays 'like Hitler'

  • Thread starter Thread starter bones_IV
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I am not gay but have friends who are gay. With a compassionate heart please remember this:

ENCYCLICAL LETTER DEUS CARITAS EST OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF BENEDICT XVI TO THE BISHOPS, PRIESTS AND DEACONS,MEN AND WOMEN RELIGIOUS
AND ALL THE LAY FAITHFULON CHRISTIAN LOVE:

“18. Love of neighbour is thus shown to be possible in the way proclaimed by the Bible, by Jesus. It consists in the very fact that, in God and with God, I love even the person whom I do not like or even know. This can only take place on the basis of an intimate encounter with God, an encounter which has become a communion of will, even affecting my feelings. Then I learn to look on this other person not simply with my eyes and my feelings, but from the perspective of Jesus Christ. His friend is my friend. Going beyond exterior appearances, I perceive in others an interior desire for a sign of love, of concern. This I can offer them not only through the organizations intended for such purposes, accepting it perhaps as a political necessity. Seeing with the eyes of Christ, I can give to others much more than their outward necessities; I can give them the look of love which they crave. Here we see the necessary interplay between love of God and love of neighbour which the First Letter of John speaks of with such insistence. If I have no contact whatsoever with God in my life, then I cannot see in the other anything more than the other, and I am incapable of seeing in him the image of God. But if in my life I fail completely to heed others, solely out of a desire to be “devout” and to perform my “religious duties”, then my relationship with God will also grow arid. It becomes merely “proper”, but loveless. Only my readiness to encounter my neighbour and to show him love makes me sensitive to God as well. Only if I serve my neighbour can my eyes be opened to what God does for me and how much he loves me. The saints—consider the example of Blessed Teresa of Calcutta—constantly renewed their capacity for love of neighbour from their encounter with the Eucharistic Lord, and conversely this encounter acquired its real- ism and depth in their service to others. Love of God and love of neighbour are thus inseparable, they form a single commandment. But both live from the love of God who has loved us first. No longer is it a question, then, of a “commandment” imposed from without and calling for the impossible, but rather of a freely-bestowed experience of love from within, a love which by its very nature must then be shared with others. Love grows through love. Love is “divine” because it comes from God and unites us to God; through this unifying process it makes us a “we” which transcends our divisions and makes us one, until in the end God is “all in all” (1 Cor 15:28).”

.DEUS CARITAS ESTOF THE SUPREME PONTIFF BENEDICT XVI TO THE BISHOPS, PRIESTS AND DEACONS, MEN AND WOMEN RELIGIOUS, AND ALL THE LAY FAITHFUL ON CHRISTIAN LOVE Given in Rome, at Saint Peter’s, on 25 December, the Solemnity of the Nativity of the Lord, in the year 2005, the first of my Pontificate. BENEDICTUS PP. XVI

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xvi_enc_20051225_deus-caritas-est_en.html
 
40.png
BlindSheep:
Interesting. What sort of child, do you think, would be best “matched” with a homosexual couple?
Click to expand...
Well, actually I believe to be the other way around (not with the homosexual bit though):

**Which parents are best matched to the child, and the task of providing for that child **

OK, think about this, it may be a bit black and white but it will serve to demonstrate my point.

Two couples apply for an adoption, and there is one child (YES, i know it doesnt work like this, but bear with me). The first couple is heterosexual. The mother works in a supermarket during the day, and the father is a shift worker. The second couple is homosexual (the sex isnt relevant in this example, so make it whatever you want it to be). The homosexual couple is comprised of a lawyer and a teacher.

Now, if you were interested in the child growing up in a stable environment where they will be provided for and loved, and given a good education, which couple would you in all reality send the child to?
 
BlindSheep said:
1. I see. And are you referring to homes, or children? Clearly calling children “second best”, and therefore treating them like commodities, is also fine with you.
  1. Interesting. What sort of child, do you think, would be best “matched” with a homosexual couple?
  2. Google it then, or use the search feature on these forums.
  3. What goes around, comes around.
Click to expand...
sigh
  1. I am refering to the homes. Not the children. Wanting the best available outcome for someone is a sign of caring. I find your thought processes perverse.
  2. What does the child need? Which couple can provide it? Does the kid need stability? Which couple has existed longest? Does the kid need lots of attention? Which couple has time at home? What about financial stability? And so on…
  3. My search terms were:
    “effects of gay parenting” And produced only positive reports.
“effects of gay parenting” +negative produced a mixture, including:

*NARTH (not trustworthy),
*American College of Pediatrics, which states in a positional papers support for the ‘traditional families’. So seems to argue from conclusions (the papers references were also ‘funny’)
*Paul Cameron who has been branded a liar in court by a judge and who’s work I studied previously and found methodological errors (yes, I am a social scientist).
*Phillip E Johnson, the founder of the Intelligent Design Movement; immediately dismissed because that movement is a front for a theistic movement that seriously misrepresents science on multiple levels.

*The negative impacts were various. Some where simply definitional, ‘kids of same sex couples more likely to consider same-sex experimentation’. Well, that’s not a negative effect.
*Sons of lesbians are more likely to be nurturing and affectionate!! Oooh, very bad!

Ok, so what was interesting.
*The quite a few of the studies focuss on single parents arguing that the are equivilent to same-sex couples, with especial focus on absent fathers.
*Some talked of the thousands of nuanced differences between male and female interactions, without specifying them, putting them in an appendix, or referencing the research document.
*Some used references to pison populations to extrapolate a ‘normal’ same-sex relationship and calculate rates of domestic violence. WHAT!
*Some referenced the timeless ‘conspiracy theory’ to explain why their views were not well known.
*Some talked about ‘homosexual activists’ which seems fair enough, but dont seem to realise they (NARTH, Cameron, etc) are also activists.

Again it’s the classical divide. Those who view homosexuality negatively see nothing positive. Or spin results so they seem negative. Those with a neutral stance seems to find no compelling evidence of negative effects.

Still reading this stuff…But honestly? Johnson? Cameron? Narth? “the usual suspects”.

I am looking up source research papers as well.

Maybe it would be less easy to dismiss these groups if they had of an agenda to push.

oh, and the usual “families under attack” fear-mongering.
  1. LOL, I see.
 
Digger71 said:
sigh
  1. I am refering to the homes. Not the children. Wanting the best available outcome for someone is a sign of caring. I find your thought processes perverse.
Click to expand...

They aren’t my thought processes, they are my criticism of the assumptions that appear to underlie your thought processes.
By the way, most of the special needs children I know of who were adopted were adopted by devout Christians, whio did not adopt them because they couldn’t get a healthy baby, but for the children’s sake.
  1. What does the child need? Which couple can provide it? Does the kid need stability? Which couple has existed longest? Does the kid need lots of attention? Which couple has time at home? What about financial stability? And so on…
Click to expand...
And do any kids need unstable, neglectful, impoverished homes?
Try googling the stability and longevity of homosexual relationships.
  1. My search terms were:
    “effects of gay parenting” And produced only positive reports.
“effects of gay parenting” +negative produced a mixture, including:

*NARTH (not trustworthy),
*American College of Pediatrics, which states in a positional papers support for the ‘traditional families’. So seems to argue from conclusions (the papers references were also ‘funny’)
*Paul Cameron who has been branded a liar in court by a judge and who’s work I studied previously and found methodological errors (yes, I am a social scientist).
*Phillip E Johnson, the founder of the Intelligent Design Movement; immediately dismissed because that movement is a front for a theistic movement that seriously misrepresents science on multiple levels.

*The negative impacts were various. Some where simply definitional, ‘kids of same sex couples more likely to consider same-sex experimentation’. Well, that’s not a negative effect.
*Sons of lesbians are more likely to be nurturing and affectionate!! Oooh, very bad!

Ok, so what was interesting.
*The quite a few of the studies focuss on single parents arguing that the are equivilent to same-sex couples, with especial focus on absent fathers.
*Some talked of the thousands of nuanced differences between male and female interactions, without specifying them, putting them in an appendix, or referencing the research document.
*Some used references to pison populations to extrapolate a ‘normal’ same-sex relationship and calculate rates of domestic violence. WHAT!
*Some referenced the timeless ‘conspiracy theory’ to explain why their views were not well known.
*Some talked about ‘homosexual activists’ which seems fair enough, but dont seem to realise they (NARTH, Cameron, etc) are also activists.
Click to expand...
Try risks of homosexual adoption.
Though if you find the American College of Pediatrics “biased”, I rest my case that you will dismiss any evidence you don’t like.
Again it’s the classical divide. Those who view homosexuality negatively see nothing positive. Or spin results so they seem negative. Those with a neutral stance seems to find no compelling evidence of negative effects.

Still reading this stuff…But honestly? Johnson? Cameron? Narth? “the usual suspects”.

I am looking up source research papers as well.

Maybe it would be less easy to dismiss these groups if they had of an agenda to push.

oh, and the usual “families under attack” fear-mongering.
  1. LOL, I see.
Click to expand...
Like the other side doesn’t have an agenda. :rolleyes:
 
40.png
fix:
Yes, it confirms the truth.
Click to expand...
The truth being that posters on these boards do deny the existance of homophobia, both within their own views and as queer bashing.

I rest my case.
 
40.png
Digger71:
The truth being that posters on these boards do deny the existance of homophobia, both within their own views and as queer bashing.

I rest my case.
Click to expand...
Why does this remind me of the people who insist that someone must be an alcoholic because he denies it - even though he might not drink at all? 😃
 
40.png
Digger71:
The truth being that posters on these boards do deny the existance of homophobia, both within their own views and as queer bashing.

I rest my case.
Click to expand...
I asked for a definition of homophobia? What do you say it means?
 
40.png
BlindSheep:
They aren’t my thought processes, they are my criticism of the assumptions that appear to underlie your thought processes.
By the way, most of the special needs children I know of who were adopted were adopted by devout Christians, whio did not adopt them because they couldn’t get a healthy baby, but for the children’s sake.
Click to expand...
The famous UK cases of gay adopton all concern disabled children that no-one else seemed to want. It seems there is something in common afterall.
Try risks of homosexual adoption.
Click to expand...
Thanks, I have now done so.
Though if you find the American College of Pediatrics “biased”, I rest my case that you will dismiss any evidence you don’t like.
Click to expand...
I read the background history, aparently it split from the AAP directly because it disagreed with the positional statements regarding homosexual adption and consists of a very small number of pediatritions. Something like 30,000 in the AAP vs 5 in ACP. A ‘traditionalist’ bias was in the positional papers. I am still reading their published research papers.
 
40.png
St.Sharky:
Well, actually I believe to be the other way around (not with the homosexual bit though):

**Which parents are best matched to the child, and the task of providing for that child **

OK, think about this, it may be a bit black and white but it will serve to demonstrate my point.

Two couples apply for an adoption, and there is one child (YES, i know it doesnt work like this, but bear with me). The first couple is heterosexual. The mother works in a supermarket during the day, and the father is a shift worker. The second couple is homosexual (the sex isnt relevant in this example, so make it whatever you want it to be). The homosexual couple is comprised of a lawyer and a teacher.

Now, if you were interested in the child growing up in a stable environment where they will be provided for and loved, and given a good education, which couple would you in all reality send the child to?
Click to expand...
Oh that’s an easy question: the heterosexual couple.
 
Try risks of homosexual adoption.

OK BlindSheep, that is most helpful.

Just going through the first page of hits I see the same references. Narth pops up a lot, but wors still is the major source quoted is Paul Cameron. Paul C has been expelled from many organisations, and, of course, was singled out in a courtcase for misrepresenting data.

You might again put this down to conspiracy theory, or you could simply recognise he is not trust-worthy.

By extension, it seems impossible that history of such a well publicised figure who’s work has been torn apart is not know to NARTH and others, so their inclusion of his discredited work simply discredits their work.

Again, the lack of honesty is amazing to behold. They need better, peer reviewed research from people without a history of mirepresentation.

I’ll read some more now.
 
40.png
BlindSheep:
Why does this remind me of the people who insist that someone must be an alcoholic because he denies it - even though he might not drink at all? 😃
Click to expand...
Eamples include:
Mathew Shepard
the defense of “homosexual panic”
unequal ages of consent
the bombing of the admiral duncan
Section 28
The activites of the Phelps
The beheading of homosexual in Saudi
Barred from military service
Shock theraoy for homosexuals
lack ocf civul unions
lack of job protection on sexuality basis.

to name a few I know off.

ho hum…
 
40.png
Digger71:
Eamples include:
Mathew Shepard
the defense of “homosexual panic”
unequal ages of consent
the bombing of the admiral duncan
Section 28
The activites of the Phelps
The beheading of homosexual in Saudi
Barred from military service
Shock theraoy for homosexuals
lack ocf civul unions
lack of job protection on sexuality basis.

to name a few I know off.

ho hum…
Click to expand...
unequal ages of consent? You’re right…there should be equal ages of consent…18…adulthood for both sexes.

Activities of the Phelps? Private citizens, not government agents. They have a right to peacefully assemble if they wish and those who disagree with them have the same right for a counter-protest.

Beheading of homosexual in Saudi? Has nothing to do with the U.S.

Barring from military service? I can live with Clinton’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” The military needs high morale and I don’t think that any signs of sexual advances, straight and gay, have a place in the military.

Lack of civil unions? Some states are pushing for that, although that right is not specifically guaranteed in the Constitution.

Lack of job protection based on sexuality preference? As long as anybody doesn’t push their advances sexually on anybody else, anybody can work in a job if they’re qualified to do so.

Matthew Shepard? Murderers were prosecuted, but murders aren’t limited to the homosexual crowd.

As for the others, I haven’t heard of them so I can’t comment.
 
40.png
Digger71:
Eamples include:
Mathew Shepard
the defense of “homosexual panic”
unequal ages of consent
the bombing of the admiral duncan
Section 28
The activites of the Phelps
The beheading of homosexual in Saudi
Barred from military service
Shock theraoy for homosexuals
lack ocf civul unions
lack of job protection on sexuality basis.

to name a few I know off.

ho hum…
Click to expand...
I thought you were talking about “the homophobia of the people on these forums”, but now it appears you’re talking about anything that happens anywhere in the world. Yes, WE are responsible for the activities of the Phelps or Saudis. :rolleyes:
 
40.png
LRThunder:
unequal ages of consent? You’re right…there should be equal ages of consent…18…adulthood for both sexes.

Activities of the Phelps? Private citizens, not government agents. They have a right to peacefully assemble if they wish and those who disagree with them have the same right for a counter-protest.

Beheading of homosexual in Saudi? Has nothing to do with the U.S.

Barring from military service? I can live with Clinton’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” The military needs high morale and I don’t think that any signs of sexual advances, straight and gay, have a place in the military.

Lack of civil unions? Some states are pushing for that, although that right is not specifically guaranteed in the Constitution.

Lack of job protection based on sexuality preference? As long as anybody doesn’t push their advances sexually on anybody else, anybody can work in a job if they’re qualified to do so.

Matthew Shepard? Murderers were prosecuted, but murders aren’t limited to the homosexual crowd.

As for the others, I haven’t heard of them so I can’t comment.
Click to expand...
How about states passing laws to invalidate your rights to contract law because of yr sexual orientation?

leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?041+ful+HB751
equalityvirginia.org/site/pp.asp?c=9eIDJJNoHmE&b=303511
roanoke.com/roatimes/news/story168923.html
 
40.png
BlindSheep:
I thought you were talking about “the homophobia of the people on these forums”, but now it appears you’re talking about anything that happens anywhere in the world. Yes, WE are responsible for the activities of the Phelps or Saudis. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I wrote:

There is a great deal of denial on these boards about homophobia and anti-gay discrimination. I have come across posts where queer-bashing is denied, or more amusingly claims that most violence experienced by gays is when two men are fighting over a third.

I thought that was clear enough.

And then along came fix saying homophobia was an invented word to silence opponents of gay rights. And I thought that was pretty clear too.
 
I realize that we have an innate need to be creatively self-expressive when posting our messages, but couldn’t we learn how to dance together without stepping on toes when in cyberspace? It does seem to be a difficult task to accomplish at times. Fortunately, in the ‘real’ world, the people I know couldn’t care less about labeling people. We enjoy diversity and tend to nurture healthy relationships, which keeps the channels of communication open. 🙂 Simply, we care about the feelings of those whom we have grown to love.

This was a very stimulating and informative experience for me. In my opinion, at times this thread was filled with musical tones from Robin Trower’s Bridge of Sighs and About to Begin! 🙂

Thank you 👋

Wildleafblower
 
40.png
wabrams:
Oh that’s an easy question: the heterosexual couple.
Click to expand...
Ah, right, so is this what you really think is best for the child or is this what you think will get you a fast track ticket to heaven?
 
This thread has become very judgemental and is now discussing other posters rather than the original topic. It will be closed if you people can’t get it back on track.

Walt
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top