Same-sex civil unions are not a religious issue

[Bill_7154]

Homosexual activity is intrinsically evil, immoral and unnatural.

Why is it ‘evil’? That is a very strong word, implying very strong anti-moral behavior IMO. Considering that it is between 2 consenting adults and that lots of behaviors are violent and one person doing terrible violence toward another individual, I see the latter as evil behavior and not the fomer. So I wouldn’t call it evil, let alone intrinsically evil and am curious why you do?
I’m also curious as to whether or not homosexual behavior makes you angry as it does not make me angry. For me there is a big difference between recognizing that some behavior is wrong and the way I feel towards the people who engage in those behaviors. Is it this way for you with some behaviors and not others (some behaviors that are wrong do make me angry but not this)?

God Bless,
Bill

 

[Bill_7154]

I am a Catholic who happens to be gay. I have made a choice for myself that came from the witness and support of wonderful people who were more interested in my relationship to God than the “political and legal realities in our society”. No matter what civil society approves of, I answer to God and God alone for my behavior and choices.

This is the way I view homosexuality. I see it as between the individuals and God. I also think that there are a heck of a lot of behaviors that civil society should be concerned about as priorities over homosexuality. I have homosexual friends and they behave a lot nicer to tons of people than a lot of straight people do. They also treat other people better than a lot of Catholics do IMO. Maybe they are exceptions, but I wouldn’t guess this to be the case. I would trust my infant son with them before trusting him with a lot of people based on the way many in society behave in general and treat others in general. I just don’t understand why some people get ‘bent out of shape’ when thinking about or talking about homosexuals. I wasn’t raised to be ‘sensitive’ towards them or anything, and due to my age (45) I was raised before it was popular to have sensitivity training, etc. When I was a child someone who was a male nurse would be laughed at (at least behind his back), now it’s extremely common for men to be nurses. Neither did I know any homosexuals growing up (or at least if I did I didn’t know they were homosexual). It just puzzles me why some people get angry about homosexuality. I feel that some people hate them without even knowing them. In this regard I consider it to be similar to racism, where some people hate other people they don’t even know because of their ethnicity or color of their skin, or interratial marraiges. I don’t know if anyone would want to take the time to explain why this is or not.

God Bless,
Bill

 

[Elizium23]

I try not to hate homosexuals, and while I do not always succeed, I try to apply the love of Christ to my brothers and sisters equally. I try to think with the mind of the Church in this regard, which says that homosexuals are to be free of any unjust discrimination. The problem is not the person. We must “love the sinner, hate the sin.” There is a distinction between homosexuals who suffer from what forumers will call “SSA - same-sex attraction” and homosexualists who engage in sinful acts, embrace the lifestyle, and evangelize for these unnatural activities even down to innocent children in school.

We do not tolerate thieves in our society, they are arrested and locked up for their crimes. We would not stand for the formation of a Thieves’ Guild, which promoted the thief lifestyle and began to seek tolerance of thieves and decriminalization of theft and the general degeneration of private property. However, the vast majority of us are indeed thieves. We have stolen something or taken without asking or damaged property or somehow violated the rights of our neighbors. Is our dignity as human beings any less because we have sinned? No, and our dignity and right to life must be defended with all our heart. But we must confess our sins for what they are, admit our guilt, and resolve to do right and avoid even the near occasion of sin.

Homosexuals are called to a life of chastity, and they earn my respect when they carry their cross and embrace the love of God over their personal satisfaction. Homosexualists, on the other hand, see depraved acts as a moral right and a good for society. They don’t see that their activities destroy charity and fail the unitive and procreative aspects of true marital love. They seek to impose so-called tolerance and acceptance on all of society, but they won’t stop there.

They are cogs in the wheel of a greater force, the population control movement, which seeks to wipe out entire cultures, while the “counter-cultures” that refuse to embrace the culture of death thrive and multiply without bound. Homosexualists go hand-in-hand with abortion, contraceptives, euthanasia, anti-immigration, and global warming/climate change alarmists. These are all avenues which can be promoted to achieve the goal of genocide. I am afraid that the United States, and much of Europe, is swallowing this hook, line and sinker. Population control has reached a critical mass and a fever pitch with liberals’ embrace of all its doctrines - they even sold one to conservatives, so that it is a two-pronged attack.

Catholics stand firmly against every aspect of population control. Faithful Catholics can rest assured that we will be fruitful and out-multiply all the cultures of death in the coming decades. Catholics and the Church respect life, and respect the individual dignity of the human person. This shines forth in all the doctrines of social justice. It cannot be ignored. Homosexuals must be loved and accepted and embraced by a Church which they think hates them. We must let go of our prejudice and permit ourselves to see Christ in all their faces, and invite them to see Christ in us and our deeds. But we will accept them in their chastity and continence, and rebuke those who would promote depraved acts which go against the moral law.

 

[Bill_7154]

We do not tolerate thieves in our society, they are arrested and locked up for their crimes. We would not stand for the formation of a Thieves’ Guild, which promoted the thief lifestyle and began to seek tolerance of thieves and decriminalization of theft and the general degeneration of private property. However, the vast majority of us are indeed thieves. We have stolen something or taken without asking or damaged property or somehow violated the rights of our neighbors.

The big distinction between thieves and homosexuals is that with stealing both parties are not consenting to the behavior whereas with homosexuality both parties are consenting adults.

God Bless,
Bill

 

[Bill_7154]

Catholics and the Church respect life, and respect the individual dignity of the human person. This shines forth in all the doctrines of social justice. It cannot be ignored. Homosexuals must be loved and accepted and embraced by a Church which they think hates them. We must let go of our prejudice and permit ourselves to see Christ in all their faces, and invite them to see Christ in us and our deeds. But we will accept them in their chastity and continence, and rebuke those who would promote depraved acts which go against the moral law.

This is where the crux of the issue is for me. IMO there are plenty of individuals in the Church that do hate homosexuals, making the Church, at least in part, hating homosexuals. So I think that homosexuals do not have a groundless position in claiming that the Catholic Church hates them. I used to be friends with a homosexual who told me that when he was a young adult (or a teenager, I forget) a priest condemned him to hell. This stuck with him and had a significant impact on him. He turned his back on the Church after this and I believe that he was an activist, at least at times in the past prior to me meeting him. I wouldn’t be surprised if there was a connection there, at least in his eyes. I think that this set him back and set the Church back as well (the priest’s actions). I’m certainly glad that a priest has never condemned me to hell, particularly as an impressionable youth. I think we can, and should, do better.

God Bless,
Bill

 

[Crescentinus]

I don’t believe that a committed Catholic can marry someone of the same gender or have a relationship with someone of the same gender-whether it is legal to do so or not. I do not believe that the Church should be expected to change Her position on this.

But, that does not stop the activists from whining about how evil we Catholics are. They will NEVER stop until we are all converted!

 

[mangy_dog]

Why is it ‘evil’? That is a very strong word, implying very strong anti-moral behavior IMO. Considering that it is between 2 consenting adults and that lots of behaviors are violent and one person doing terrible violence toward another individual, I see the latter as evil behavior and not the fomer. So I wouldn’t call it evil, let alone intrinsically evil and am curious why you do?
I’m also curious as to whether or not homosexual behavior makes you angry as it does not make me angry. For me there is a big difference between recognizing that some behavior is wrong and the way I feel towards the people who engage in those behaviors. Is it this way for you with some behaviors and not others (some behaviors that are wrong do make me angry but not this)?

God Bless,
Bill

A sin is a sin is a sin.

Some sins-like adultery- are sinful as soon as you think about it, or, being married and desiring another female/male other than the perosn your married to. In the eyes of the Lord, you have already committed adultery.

The activity or actualization of homosexual acts is a sin against the natural order that God created for one man and one woman. It is not only evil, it is an aberration of nature brought on by human beings with a free will and intellect…and a soul breathed by God-made in His image.

Evil-unnatural-immoral-aberration.

 

[mangy_dog]

This is where the crux of the issue is for me. IMO there are plenty of individuals in the Church that do hate homosexuals, making the Church, at least in part, hating homosexuals. So I think that homosexuals do not have a groundless position in claiming that the Catholic Church hates them. I used to be friends with a homosexual who told me that when he was a young adult (or a teenager, I forget) a priest condemned him to hell. This stuck with him and had a significant impact on him. He turned his back on the Church after this and I believe that he was an activist, at least at times in the past prior to me meeting him. I wouldn’t be surprised if there was a connection there, at least in his eyes. I think that this set him back and set the Church back as well (the priest’s actions). I’m certainly glad that a priest has never condemned me to hell, particularly as an impressionable youth. I think we can, and should, do better.

God Bless,
Bill

Your honest opinion is not honest at all.

You insist that catholics hate homosexuals. And I’ll tell you why this is so off in left field and groundless.

The insistence of claiming homosexual activity as something “natural” and harmless- is the part that cathlicism will not compromise with.

You don’t even touch on the lesser symptoms of homosexuality: tendencies; feelings; mannerisms and everything that falls short of actualization. No. You want to jump straight into actualization…the carrying out of homosexual acts-as something good and natural.

And then-blame the priest and blame the church for not “being with the times” or “not giving in to the new age philosophy” or " the church being in the dark ages" or blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

All of your false premises and misconceptions are not going to change or twist how the Catholic Church view this issue. And that, my friend, is the crux of the matter.

 

[InSearchofGrace]

I sense it is difficult for you not to demand responses that conform to your exact specifications.

I am a Catholic who happens to be gay. I have made a choice for myself that came from the witness and support of wonderful people who were more interested in my relationship to God than the “political and legal realities in our society”. No matter what civil society approves of, I answer to God and God alone for my behavior and choices.

If civil society chooses to make civil marriage legal for gay couples, it won’t change my life one bit, I still won’t be partnering up. Since I always thought the best part of being gay was being able to leave the whole raising children to the other 97% of the population, I’ve really never understood the drive to adopt. It would be ideal if every child in this nation had the kind of wonderful parents I had-parents who loved me unconditionally. Of course, they did have a gay child. Maybe they shouldn’t have been allowed to be parents because of that.

You were invited, not demanded, to give responses in the affirmative or negative or at least which side you favor as to the posed questions.

Faithful Catholics are required to stand against same sex “marriage,” along with abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem-cell research, human cloning — all definitively declared by the Church to be objectively and absolutely immoral.

So you made a decision to be a returned Catholic; however, your post suggests a bit of detachment to the position of the Catholic Church, the Bride of Christ, your God and mine, at least on the subject of SS"M". It’s good that you sound unwavering as to not partnering up regardless of political and legal direction of the SS"M" movement.

Legalized SS"M" is a hot issue because even if it would not or does not play a factor in your personal life, the concern is beyond its effect on you or a few. Law is instructive, including bad laws such as Roe v Wade.

In Canada and in places in the U.S. where inroads to legal SS"M" have been made judicially or legislatively, speaking of the wrongness and immorality of homosexual sex becomes regarded as bigotry and hate speech, homosexuality is taught to children in schools as normal, and our Church is marginalized and persecuted. Just think about it and no reply is required or demanded of you with this question: would you say that you will remain on a personal level unaffected?

In close, I wish to respond to your last two sentences. You were born from the love between your parents, a gift from God. How could there be any second guessing as to your birth, or your mother and father being parents?

May God keep you in His embrace, Seeker.

 

[Seeker1961]

You were invited, not demanded, to give responses in the affirmative or negative or at least which side you favor as to the posed questions.

Faithful Catholics are required to stand against same sex “marriage,” along with abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem-cell research, human cloning — all definitively declared by the Church to be objectively and absolutely immoral.

So you made a decision to be a returned Catholic; however, your post suggests a bit of detachment to the position of the Catholic Church, the Bride of Christ, your God and mine, at least on the subject of SS"M". It’s good that you sound unwavering as to not partnering up regardless of political and legal direction of the SS"M" movement.

Legalized SS"M" is a hot issue because even if it would not or does not play a factor in your personal life, the concern is beyond its effect on you or a few. Law is instructive, including bad laws such as Roe v Wade.

In Canada and in places in the U.S. where inroads to legal SS"M" have been made judicially or legislatively, speaking of the wrongness and immorality of homosexual sex becomes regarded as bigotry and hate speech, homosexuality is taught to children in schools as normal, and our Church is marginalized and persecuted. Just think about it and no reply is required or demanded of you with this question: would you say that you will remain on a personal level unaffected?

In close, I wish to respond to your last two sentences. You were born from the love between your parents, a gift from God. How could there be any second guessing as to your birth, or your mother and father being parents?

May God keep you in His embrace, Seeker.

Somehow that sounds like the way my Mom’s neighbor says “Bless their heart” when she’s really thinking the exact opposite!

Luckily for me, and for many others, the opinions of the posters on this or any other board have no bearing on our lives here and now or for eternity. It’s all entertaining, but who it’s all said and done it’s between us and God.

 

[InSearchofGrace]

Somehow that sounds like the way my Mom’s neighbor says “Bless their heart” when she’s really thinking the exact opposite!

Luckily for me, and for many others, the opinions of the posters on this or any other board have no bearing on our lives here and now or for eternity. It’s all entertaining, but who it’s all said and done it’s between us and God.

I will overlook your cynicism – the wish sent your way is sincere.

 

[Bill_7154]

A sin is a sin is a sin.

Some sins-like adultery- are sinful as soon as you think about it, or, being married and desiring another female/male other than the perosn your married to. In the eyes of the Lord, you have already committed adultery.

The activity or actualization of homosexual acts is a sin against the natural order that God created for one man and one woman. It is not only evil, it is an aberration of nature brought on by human beings with a free will and intellect…and a soul breathed by God-made in His image.

Evil-unnatural-immoral-aberration.

I don’t know if you were trying or not, but this did not explain for me why it is ‘evil’.

God Bless,
Bill

 

[Bill_7154]

Your honest opinion is not honest at all.

You insist that catholics hate homosexuals. And I’ll tell you why this is so off in left field and groundless. .

Are you insisting that there are no Catholics that hate homosexuals? I wouldn’t consider that to be honest. I do consider it to be honest to say that there are some Catholics that hate homosexuals. It certainly isn’t groundless.

The insistence of claiming homosexual activity as something “natural” and harmless- is the part that cathlicism will not compromise with. .

This is what is groundless as it is not something that I have said. Your perverting my post into being something that it was not. This tells me you either a. don’t know how to comprehend a simple post (which I don’t think is true) or b. your mind becomes clouded when reading posts about, when thinking about, homosexuality. Your emotions start to take over and you don’t think clearly.

You don’t even touch on the lesser symptoms of homosexuality: tendencies; feelings; mannerisms and everything that falls short of actualization. No. You want to jump straight into actualization…the carrying out of homosexual acts-as something good and natural…

How do you know what I ‘want’? You don’t. Either you think your a mind reader or your emotions are still gettting the best of you. Again your putting words in my mouth. And it seems your perfectly comfortable doing so here. Are you capable of having an honest conversation when discussing homosexuality?

And then-blame the priest and blame the church for not “being with the times” or “not giving in to the new age philosophy” or " the church being in the dark ages" or blah, blah, blah, blah, blah…

I find your opinions to be interesting. It seems that they must be driven by emotion because again your making assumptions here. Priests are human beings, as such, they are less than perfect. They make mistakes. It is disingenuous to not recognize that they make mistakes. It is my understanding that neither God nor Jesus Christ granted priests the authority to condemn any individual to hell. Until I learn otherwise this will remain my understanding. It has nothing to do with ‘being with the times’ or any new age philosophy. Your mind is running wild there as this is not where I am coming from at all. Maybe you need to relax and take some deep breaths before responding to my posts in the future so you can respond to what I actually say and not what you immagine to be my belief system.

All of your false premises and misconceptions are not going to change or twist how the Catholic Church view this issue. And that, my friend, is the crux of the matter.

Gee wizz, I don’t even know where to begin. Since you’ve taken my post and perverted it and run wild with it I dont’ think that it will be possible to have a rational conversation with you, at least on this topic. If homosexuality makes your blood boil it’s OK to say so. It simply does not make my blood boil.

Peace,
Bill

 

[Elizabeth502]

I do consider it to be honest to say that there are some Catholics that hate homosexuals. It certainly isn’t groundless.l

And, your point is?

(There are undoubtedly Catholics who “hate” their mothers, their fathers, their blood brothers, their non-blood brothers, a co-worker, a current or former boss, or an entire different class of people – some ethnic group, some race, some nationality. Among those who “hate” the French, there are undoubtedly Catholics among such “haters.”)

Why do you care who “hates” whom, why they hate them, or whether anyone on this forum does or does not “hate?”

It has nothing to do with the subject of same-sex civil unions, faux same-sex “marriage,” etc. Nothing.

It’s a Catholic doctrinal issue, devoid of emotion. It’s a simple fact: promoting such unions by any means – advocating for them, voting for them, declaring that the Church must be wrong about the issue and can’t we just “love” them (insert novel defintion of “love”) is denounced by documents proceeding from the Vatican and from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. Not denouncing of homosexual inclinations, but the support of their behavior and the support of such “legalized” unions. “Hate” has zero to do with it. It doesn’t matter whether all of the people following Church doctirne love homosexuals or hate homosexuals.

Doctrine, and the moral guidance of the bishops, is unrelated to an individual’s “love” and “hate,” no matter how that love and hate is defined.

 

[Seeker1961]

The question is, does the organization in question (church, political party, club, whatever) create or allow a comfortable environment for those who bring hatred for others.

My Pastor here has made it VERY clear from the pulpit that hatred for others-no matter what our disagreements might be with their choices is a sin. (He’s made a special point of repeating that since election season started). I would like to think most Pastors would do the same thing.

People will still hate each other though, for reasons of their own choosing. We’re pretty good at it.

 

[fix]

And, your point is?

(There are undoubtedly Catholics who “hate” their mothers, their fathers, their blood brothers, their non-blood brothers, a co-worker, a current or former boss, or an entire different class of people – some ethnic group, some race, some nationality. Among those who “hate” the French, there are undoubtedly Catholics among such “haters.”)

Why do you care who “hates” whom, why they hate them, or whether anyone on this forum does or does not “hate?”

It has nothing to do with the subject of same-sex civil unions, faux same-sex “marriage,” etc. Nothing.

It’s a Catholic doctrinal issue, devoid of emotion. It’s a simple fact: promoting such unions by any means – advocating for them, voting for them, declaring that the Church must be wrong about the issue and can’t we just “love” them (insert novel defintion of “love”) is denounced by documents proceeding from the Vatican and from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. Not denouncing of homosexual inclinations, but the support of their behavior and the support of such “legalized” unions. “Hate” has zero to do with it. It doesn’t matter whether all of the people following Church doctirne love homosexuals or hate homosexuals.

Doctrine, and the moral guidance of the bishops, is unrelated to an individual’s “love” and “hate,” no matter how that love and hate is defined.

Well said. Another point is that topics like this seem to reveal that we do not always fully accept Church teaching. If we only accent half of the truth then we really turn the truth into a type of lie.

Do we really see homosexual acts as evil? Do we really see that codifying into civil law support for these acts as bad? After reading so many responses over the years to these question, you can also substitute abortion or contraception, I think it becomes clear that my questions answer themselves.

 

[R1ch4rd]

Well said. Another point is that topics like this seem to reveal that we do not always fully accept Church teaching. If we only accent half of the truth then we really turn the truth into a type of lie.

Interesting post. Our state just voted on an amendment to define marriage as the union between one man and one woman. The amendment failed to pass and we find that nothing has changed because we have a state law against SSM. I should point out that it was not proposed by gays or those wanting SSM but rather by those of us who wish to define marriage by our God’s plan and lock it into law.
Those for the amendment, including the Church, gave the false impression that we were voting against something proposed by gay’s when in reality we were voting for something proposed by those opposed to SSM . So, after 16 million dollars spent by both sides, nothing has changed and the real fight will continue. Seems everyone plays politics these days.

 

[mangy_dog]

I don’t know if you were trying or not, but this did not explain for me why it is ‘evil’.

God Bless,
Bill

You’re welcome sir.

 

[mangy_dog]

Are you insisting that there are no Catholics that hate homosexuals? I wouldn’t consider that to be honest. I do consider it to be honest to say that there are some Catholics that hate homosexuals. It certainly isn’t groundless.

This is what is groundless as it is not something that I have said. Your perverting my post into being something that it was not. This tells me you either a. don’t know how to comprehend a simple post (which I don’t think is true) or b. your mind becomes clouded when reading posts about, when thinking about, homosexuality. Your emotions start to take over and you don’t think clearly.

How do you know what I ‘want’? You don’t. Either you think your a mind reader or your emotions are still gettting the best of you. Again your putting words in my mouth. And it seems your perfectly comfortable doing so here. Are you capable of having an honest conversation when discussing homosexuality?

I find your opinions to be interesting. It seems that they must be driven by emotion because again your making assumptions here. Priests are human beings, as such, they are less than perfect. They make mistakes. It is disingenuous to not recognize that they make mistakes. It is my understanding that neither God nor Jesus Christ granted priests the authority to condemn any individual to hell. Until I learn otherwise this will remain my understanding. It has nothing to do with ‘being with the times’ or any new age philosophy. Your mind is running wild there as this is not where I am coming from at all. Maybe you need to relax and take some deep breaths before responding to my posts in the future so you can respond to what I actually say and not what you immagine to be my belief system.

Gee wizz, I don’t even know where to begin. Since you’ve taken my post and perverted it and run wild with it I dont’ think that it will be possible to have a rational conversation with you, at least on this topic. If homosexuality makes your blood boil it’s OK to say so. It simply does not make my blood boil.

Peace,
Bill

Okey doke…sorry.

 

[Kevin_B]

Again, sorry for the delay on my response. The churches teaching on the subject:

In those situations where homosexual unions have been legally recognized or have been given the legal status and rights belonging to marriage, clear and emphatic opposition is a duty. One must refrain from any kind of formal cooperation in the enactment or application of such gravely unjust laws and, as far as possible, from material cooperation on the level of their application. In this area, everyone can exercise the right to conscientious objection.

It clearly states “homosexual unions”, not “same-sex unions”. There is no reason to assume that two people of the same gender who put each other in their wills or want hospital visitation rights are homosexual. Of course, there are homosexuals who will enter into civil unions . There are also couples who gave no intention of sexual fidelity who enter into marriages. But just like we do not end marriages because of the bad eggs, so we are not required to oppose civil unions because of the bad eggs. Just like a justice of the peace does not require a couple getting married to assure sexual morality, so we do not require two people getting a civil union to require sexual fidelity.

And this article is absurd.
catholicnewsagency.com/news/bishop-conley-warns-against-dangerous-colorado-civil-unions-bill/

He claims that same sex civil unions will erode the unique status of marriage as being between a man and woman.

WHAT? LOL! if marriage is between a man and woman, and civil unions are between two people of either gender, than marriage still has the unique status of being between a man and women. I almost issued when I read that, it was quite possibly the worst logic I have heard in my life. I mean, through out this entire article he talks about redefining marriage. How can you redefine marriage when you are only taking about civil unions? Thomas Aquinas he is not! He claims that he is opposing civil unions, but the entire article is simply about why homosexual marriages are wrong. He completely ignored the issue of civil unions. Why? Because it is entirely impossible for someone to argue with a straight face that it is an infallible doctrine of faith that you may only pass on your possessions to someone of the opposite sex. It’s so absurd it hurts me to think about it.

And besides, these are the opinions of a bishop, not infallible church teachings. How many times did Jesus mention civil unions? How about st Paul? Did any of the early church philosophies mention the danger of same-sex civil unions? Of course not, they did not exist. Marriage is an institution that has been around forever and was created by God. Civil unions are an institution which have been around for decades and were created by humans. How can someone possibly say with a straight face that a legal document falls under the church’s infallibility on issues of faith?