Rally at archdiocese backs ousted Eastside Catholic High School vice principal Mark Zmuda

[manualman]

Unless you guys back off you won’t be around in fifty years time. You’re just turning your own folks against you now.

Ah yes, the constant refrain. Roman emperors, Napolean, Nietzsche, Stalin and now…
Sparkleness.

NOW, we’re doomed.

In case you’re honestly interested, nobody here is asserting any sort of need to seriously discriminate against you (properly defined). We’re simply interested in truth and Natural Law. Nobody here is proposing criminalizing sodomy or coming after you somehow. We simply object to granting legal status of marriage for a relationship that simply and objectively doesn’t qualify. Marriage is only given legal and social perks because of how it innately builds civilization and the next generation. That isn’t true of same sex unions.

Part of the problem is the English language. We use “love” to cover too many meanings. The Greeks got it much better. They had (at least) three major words to cover different types of love: Eros, Filia and Agape.

Eros practically defines itself. It’s where we get “erotic.” It is the love that desires to possess. Filia (spelling?) is an affection based on knowledge of the beloved. Agape is the love that places the beloved at a higher value than the self.

It might surprise you that Christianity has absolutely no issue with men sharing Filia and Agape with one another. We’re precisely CALLED to it, in fact. Eros is where the train jumps the tracks. Eros is only healthy and beneficial in a marriage relationship and part of that is that the two be complementary such that new life tends to come from the relationship.

When two men (or a married man and woman using contraception) engage in erotic love, that love is uncoupled from its live-giving nature and becomes inward focused, narcicisstic and unhealthy. That’s what sin IS: actions that damage us and our souls. I don’t expect to convince you of course. But at least you know what you’re dealing with better.

 

[Sparkleness]

Homosexuality is a mental disorder. Like Down syndrome. But worse.

Being a blockhead isn’t a disorder, but being rude to ones brother is a sin! A SIN I TELL YOU!

:tsktsk:

Who’s being intolerant now? And lets be serious, with your Church’s track record when it comes to homosexuality and pederasty you guys really have no right to lecture anyone.

 

[manualman]

1. Lets put this argument in reverse. I bet you would be calling for tolerance if it was the gay community going “Nope, sorry lads, no masses for you, why? Because our great queen so! all hail the man in the dress” (and at a pride march that’s a lot of men ).
2. Alcoholism is not an inclination dude, it’s just a bad habit. You weren’t born craving a bottle of beer the same way I was born wanting another man.

1. This would be a better argument if there were a serious effort afoot in America to criminalize sodomy. There isn’t. We just dont’ believe it warrants the special legal and tax perks awarded to actual marriage (the kind innately ordered towards making expensive and time consuming babies.). As it stands, it’s an apples to pumpkins analogy. Sorry.
2. Never been to an Indian reservation, I see. You should go sometime and learn something. It’s rather hard to assert “your bad habit, man” to a community where over 80% of the men are alcoholics. Somethings ARE inborn that ARE harmful. I have no answers for why, but the evidence is out there. Do you honestly believe that you popped out of momma and wanted right then to cuddle male babies??? Or do you mean since puberty, not since birth? Honest question.

 

[Sparkleness]

Ah yes, the constant refrain. Roman emperors, Napolean, Nietzsche, Stalin and now…
Sparkleness.

NOW, we’re doomed.

Fear me and my fabulousness!!! Our well dressed armies shall proclaim the good news. Our numbers may be small, but we do have lovely soft furnishings

In case you’re honestly interested, nobody here is asserting any sort of need to seriously discriminate against you (properly defined). We’re simply interested in truth and Natural Law. Nobody here is proposing criminalizing sodomy or coming after you somehow. We simply object to granting legal status of marriage for a relationship that simply and objectively doesn’t qualify. Marriage is only given legal and social perks because of how it innately builds civilization and the next generation. That isn’t true of same sex unions.

The goverment of France disagrees with you, Marriage is the legally recognised union of two persons in all civil affairs.

It’s a bit of a development from the dynastic version of marriage promoted by the church, but than in itself built upon and altered earlier conceptions of marital life. Have you ever heard of the Sacred Band of Thebes, an army of men formed solely of same-sex men who worked in pairs? It’s a version of marriage that long predates Catholicism.

Part of the problem is the English language. We use “love” to cover too many meanings. The Greeks got it much better. They had (at least) three major words to cover different types of love: Eros, Filia and Agape.

Eros practically defines itself. It’s where we get “erotic.” It is the love that desires to possess. Filia (spelling?) is an affection based on knowledge of the beloved. Agape is the love that places the beloved at a higher value than the self.

Okay, not sure where we’re getting here. Greek is a far more fluid and artistic language than English, that’s not news.

It might surprise you that Christianity has absolutely no issue with men sharing Filia and Agape with one another. We’re precisely CALLED to it, in fact. Eros is where the train jumps the tracks. Eros is only healthy and beneficial in a marriage relationship and part of that is that the two be complementary such that new life tends to come from the relationship.

Nope, google the sacred band dude.

When two men (or a married man and woman using contraception) engage in erotic love, that love is uncoupled from its live-giving nature and becomes inward focused, narcicisstic and unhealthy. That’s what sin IS: actions that damage us and our souls. I don’t expect to convince you of course. But at least you know what you’re dealing with better.

I never actually got this, how can contraception be bad if NFP is essentially a form of contraception? Do you sin every time you make your charts and record the temperature? Or is it just okay because the Catholic church has a pretty big monopoly on training people in the practice?

I am devoted to my partner, and I want to unite my holdings with his (part of our marital contract) as well as make a statement of affection. I’m going to do that regardless.

 

[TEPO]

Being a blockhead isn’t a disorder, but being rude to ones brother is a sin! A SIN I TELL YOU!

:tsktsk:

Who’s being intolerant now? And lets be serious, with your Church’s track record when it comes to homosexuality and pederasty you guys really have no right to lecture anyone.

It’s not an ‘us-verses-them’ thing here as you portray it to be. That’s just your POV. I’ve got my sins that I deal with too. Everyone does, but people shouldn’t go around proclaiming it to the world in spite.

 

[Sparkleness]

1. This would be a better argument if there were a serious effort afoot in America to criminalize sodomy. There isn’t. We just dont’ believe it warrants the special legal and tax perks awarded to actual marriage (the kind innately ordered towards making expensive and time consuming babies.). As it stands, it’s an apples to pumpkins analogy. Sorry.

Nope, marriage was not a concept created by the Catholic church nor should it’s benefits be restricted only to one group. I actually will have a stepdaughter since her mother is such a unless cow and ran off so I think I should have those benefits when I have been raising a child.

1. Never been to an Indian reservation, I see. You should go sometime and learn something. It’s rather hard to assert “your bad habit, man” to a community where over 80% of the men are alcoholics. Somethings ARE inborn that ARE harmful. I have no answers for why, but the evidence is out there. Do you honestly believe that you popped out of momma and wanted right then to cuddle male babies??? Or do you mean since puberty, not since birth? Honest question.

I’m a sociologist, and I have studied Indian reservations. They deal with it badly because it’s just not a native part of their culture, the same situations can be found in other parts of the globe (The Sami of the nordic countries for instance) where they have the same issues.

It’s not biology, it’s just growing up not knowing how to use something properly for them. For you I’d wager it’s just not having much self control.

 

[CaptFun]

I’m only here because I have to do some research on Catholicisms views on Homosexuality but…Wow, just WOW. You guys don’t just need a reality check, you need some psychiatric help and a lot of it. Were you not hugged enough as children, did the priest hug you too much?

I’m a fag, and I’m in no way disordered. I don’t eye up hot guys because I mistake it for wanting a woman or because I’m some bogeyman and emissary of darkness and sin, I do it because thats just how my brain is programmed to run.

We’re here, we’re queer and it’s about time you all got over it. All it’s going to do is stress you guys out in the long run and as some of you in this thread already admit, it’s a fight you are going to lose. Oh wait, you actually already lost it where I live.

I got nothing against rosary rattling or your masses, go ahead and repent for how awful you are (and some of your comments in this thread have been very rude and awful). Just keep your nose out of our lives and let us get on with them, then we won’t need to protest about you stopping us living ours.

Btw, I’m getting married, thats right married to my boyfreind next week. He has the most adorable daughter from a previous marriage and we’re going to raise her ourselves. <3

Enjoy that image, because there isn’t much time left. Unless you guys back off you won’t be around in fifty years time. You’re just turning your own folks against you now.

To demonstrate your tolerance towards people with other points of view perhaps you could
hire someone to do a fiery summary of the most dire warnings against homosexuality in the Bible — and pay someone else to play the highlights at all the Gay Pride Parades.

I know this is less permanent and would not guarantee a living to a person who is diametrically opposed to your point of view – and doesn’t bring in the marching to the HQ factor like this Catholic school story – but its the best analogy I can come up with.

In all charity we must warn you about sins*** of all kinds*** (as we should for everyone - all the while being doubly aware of our own sins) - including the mistake of acting out homosexually. Heterosexuals have many ways to fall as well - and the Church teaches them the truth as well. You and I willl be accepted back by the Lord, gladly, even if these sins seem impossible to overcome – as He died for us (you and I and everyone) and will give us the graces to overcome them. <When we repent … or are trying to.

This teacher was indulged to a great degree, then pushed the envelope further. He apparently didn’t care enough about his responsibilities as a Catholic School teacher and administrator to keep its rules. And perhaps becoming a cause celebre for political groups hostile to the Church was his plan? The result seems to be the same at any rate.

Maybe your “coming here” is part of God’s plan to steer you on a better path.

Since you evangelized us with such passion, we should return the deed. And wish you well (personally). Some sins are deadly. And some have the additional problem of dragging another person into them.

A Catholic School of all places, should shield its students from spiritual dangers as much as it does physical or public safety dangers. It made the right call in dismissing this person. In my opinion.

 

[Havard]

Hey Sparkleness, and welcome to CAF.

That bright pink is hard to read against the background. Is there a darker version by any chance?

 

[Sparkleness]

It’s not an ‘us-verses-them’ thing here as you portray it to be. That’s just your POV. I’ve got my sins that I deal with too. Everyone does, but people shouldn’t go around proclaiming it to the world in spite.

No, I certainly don’t tell anyone when I eat my boyfreinds easter eggs or I spend more on a new pair of boots that cost a lot more than I claim

I don’t go around calling people disabled and worse than down syndrome.

Is down syndrome a ?sin then? Are they all going to be joining me in hell? It must be awful if you’re comparing it to a morally evil individual like myself

Gawsh, it must be nice to be right all the time

Edit: Hey Havard, and yes there is. Any better?

 

[ServusHumilis]

Time to start speaking up, silent majority!

 

[TEPO]

No, I certainly don’t tell anyone when I eat my boyfreinds easter eggs or I spend more on a new pair of boots that cost a lot more than I claim

I don’t go around calling people disabled and worse than down syndrome.

Is down syndrome a ?sin then? Are they all going to be joining me in hell? It must be awful if you’re comparing it to a morally evil individual like myself

Gawsh, it must be nice to be right all the time

Edit: Hey Havard, and yes there is. Any better?

I don’t think anyone is an evil individual. No such thing in my book.

 

[manualman]

1. Nope, google the sacred band dude.
2. I never actually got this, how can contraception be bad if NFP is essentially a form of contraception? Do you sin every time you make your charts and record the temperature? Or is it just okay because the Catholic church has a pretty big monopoly on training people in the practice?
3. I am devoted to my partner, and I want to unite my holdings with his (part of our marital contract) as well as make a statement of affection. I’m going to do that regardless.
4. Yes, I do need to google them as they are buried deep in the dustbin of history. Fatally flawed ideas usually are.
5. Great question. NFP isn’t contraception at all. By definition, contraception is the employment of devices and methods to enable the user to have sexual intercourse at will while rendering the act infertile. In this way, contraception trains its users to a mindset in which sex has nothing innately to do with making babies. NFP trains users exactly the opposite. It constantly reinforces the profound connection between sex and procreation to the point where if a serious reason exists to avoid pregnancy, the couple must refrain from sex during the fertile periods and only utilize the naturally infertile periods. The sexual relationship never loses its innate nature of nudging the couple towards considering more children. As an aside, did you know that every single nation on earth where contraception is cheap, widely available and socially respectable has a BELOW REPLACEMENT fertility rate? Interesting, no?
6. As written, there’s nothing wrong with that statement. In the bible, David and Johnathon had that sort of relationship. More recently, Cardinal John Henry Newman and another priest had that sort of relationship. Filia and Agape. Gay activists have for years insisted that relationships like that MUST have been secret gay bondings, but they have no evidence. They simply can’t conceive of a same sex relationship that gives full rein to Filia and Agape without causing Eros. And that’s sad, isn’t it? Isn’t it the Filia and Agape that you most deeply crave? Sounds like it from this portion of the post.

 

[manualman]

For you I’d wager it’s just not having much self control.

Sociologists usually have better reading comprehension.

In my limited engineer’s experience, of course!

 

[Viewer]

1. Yes, I do need to google them as they are buried deep in the dustbin of history. Fatally flawed ideas usually are.

:doh2:

It begins.

I don’t want to get too involved in this, but for anyone who doesn’t know what…Sparkleness…shakes head.

He is technically correct, there are versions of a legally recognized homosexual union with the earliest compleate records in greece (the sacred band) at around the 4th century BC. There are ones going far beyond that but they’re fragmented.

I’m going to back out now, because I know where this will all end up.

Sparkleness, please don’t aggravate everyone. You don’t seem like an idiot, and you must know how devout Catholics react to your openess

Suffers of down syndrome are not going to hell (bad taste whoever made that comparison).

 

[Brendan]

Homosexuality is a mental disorder. Like Down syndrome. But worse.

FYI, it’s a MORAL disorder, not necessarily a mental one. The Church takes no stance as to it’s origin

 

[Havard]

No, I certainly don’t tell anyone when I eat my boyfreinds easter eggs or I spend more on a new pair of boots that cost a lot more than I claim

I don’t go around calling people disabled and worse than down syndrome.

Is down syndrome a ?sin then? Are they all going to be joining me in hell? It must be awful if you’re comparing it to a morally evil individual like myself

Gawsh, it must be nice to be right all the time

Edit: Hey Havard, and yes there is. Any better?

Much thanks.

The Church doesn’t think you’re evil Sparkleness. The Church does believe that sex is part of the natural order created by God, though, and to that end we do have beliefs on what sex is all about. I know you don’t agree with these beliefs, but they are not superstitious nor simplistic. The Theology of the Body in our Church is very rich in intellectual rigour, and I would recommend studying it if you are truly interested.

 

[manualman]

:doh2:

It begins.

I don’t want to get too involved in this, but for anyone who doesn’t know what…Sparkleness…shakes head.

He is technically correct, there are versions of a legally recognized homosexual union with the earliest compleate records in greece (the sacred band) at around the 4th century BC. There are ones going far beyond that but they’re fragmented.

What begins? Is there an allusion in “Sparkleness” I’m missing. Quite a bit of modern cultural references do go over my head, I admit.

I don’t deny that homosexual inclinations have been around for many centuries and that earlier cultures in some places may have been quite tolerant of its open practice. But it’s open practice in a dead and gone culture hardly is a ringing endorsement of its beneficial societal value, is it? Especially when advocating for the overthrow of a Judeo-Christian moral viewpoint that has accompanied the most successful civilizational rise in human history!

P.S. For the record, I find TEPO’s put-downs uncharitable and unhelpful as well. Name calling is a poor substitute for debate or even charitable admonishment.

P.P.S. The purple text is MUCH better than the pink!

 

[TEPO]

FYI, it’s a MORAL disorder, not necessarily a mental one. The Church takes no stance as to it’s origin

We’re not in apologetics we’re in world news. I can give a personal opinion here.

 

[TEPO]

P.S. For the record, I find TEPO’s put-downs uncharitable and unhelpful as well. ***Name calling ***is a poor substitute for debate or even charitable admonishment.

This is world news and that is a troll. BTW, I didn’t call anyone any names. Until now.

 

[Havard]

and that is a troll.

What makes you say that?