SanFrancisco bishop Thinks Gay Propaganda Film Brokeback Mountain is "Very Powerful"

[estesbob]

Libero:

But what would he acheive, other than most probably scaring alot of homosexuals away? I have to say, I prefer the new Archbishops approach “the softy softy approach” but it probably doesn’t appeal to everyone - one thing I shall not deny

I the TRUTH scares them away they are lost souls anyway. The Archbisho mus be firm and uncompromising with Catholic teaching.

 

[GloriaPatri4]

Libero:

But what would he acheive, other than most probably scaring alot of homosexuals away? I have to say, I prefer the new Archbishops approach “the softy softy approach” but it probably doesn’t appeal to everyone - one thing I shall not deny

The “softy softy, tolerate anything approach” all because Heaven forbid we might offend someone or scare them away from the church and Oh gosh, if that happens we will lose their tithes is what got us into the mess we are in, in the church and in society. People need to hear the truth even if it does hurt. If we don’t hear the truth about the immoral lifestyle we may be leading how are we expected to change? Isn’t the main goal to get as many souls into heaven as we can?

 

[irenaeus1]

UtahMaggie:

He said it was “very powerful” and it was. He didn’t say he agreed with or condoned homosexuality actions.

Therein lies the problem.

In Christ,
Irenaeus

 

[Cactus]

Libero:

But what would he acheive, other than most probably scaring alot of homosexuals away?

Maybe the kids would be safer.

 

[frommi]

Cactus:

Maybe the kids would be safer.

That’s kind of a rough thing to say…you’re just using old stereotypes to make your point.

 

[setter]

estesbob:

I the TRUTH scares them away they are lost souls anyway. The Archbisho mus be firm and uncompromising with Catholic teaching.

Whoooaaaa there! …Your comment comes across as a sealed deal for these folks snared in a horrifically sinful and damning lifestyle. However, I would measure my comments so as not to prematurely concede victory to the devil for the harvest of these “lost souls”. I totally agree that “The Archbisho mus be firm and uncompromising with Catholic teaching” while making it clear to invite, extend and point the way to repentance and salvation, never giving up hope for the salvation of their souls (btw – not that this your intention was otherwise).

 

[setter]

frommi:

That’s kind of a rough thing to say…you’re just using old stereotypes to make your point.

Perhaps outdated stereotypes, but often the same agenda to desensistize and yes “recruit” developmentally vulnerable adolescents to their “lifestyle”, as this article examples:

Battle Rages To Protect Children From Homosexual Recruitment

June 30, 2005 – A Florida School Board Commissioner has won a victory over the homosexual agenda in her local regional library. Ronda Storms introduced a measure to prohibit the public library from posting exhibits on “Gay Pride Month” after she learned that the exhibit also included pamphlets for teens encouraging them to explore homosexual sex.

traditionalvalues.org/modules.php?sid=2342

 

[estesbob]

setter:

Whoooaaaa there! …Your comment comes across as a sealed deal for these folks snared in a horrifically sinful and damning lifestyle. However, I would measure my comments so as not to prematurely concede victory to the devil for the harvest of these “lost souls”. I totally agree that “The Archbisho mus be firm and uncompromising with Catholic teaching” while making it clear to invite, extend and point the way to repentance and salvation, never giving up hope for the salvation of their souls (btw – not that this your intention was otherwise).

That is not the impression I meant top give. The point is that they cant start to revocer from their sin untl they acknowledge they are sinning, Libero is afraid if the Bishop points out their sin it will “scare them away”. Thats was the basis of my remark about lost souls.

 

[Libero]

I the TRUTH scares them away they are lost souls anyway. The Archbisho mus be firm and uncompromising with Catholic teaching.

The “softy softy, tolerate anything approach” all because Heaven forbid we might offend someone or scare them away from the church and Oh gosh, if that happens we will lose their tithes is what got us into the mess we are in, in the church and in society. People need to hear the truth even if it does hurt. If we don’t hear the truth about the immoral lifestyle we may be leading how are we expected to change? Isn’t the main goal to get as many souls into heaven as we can?

Souls into heaven… That is going to be very hard to acheive after bible bashing snappy comments from an agressive bishop have driven all of the sinners away.

Somebody claimed eariler that homosexuals would interpret the bishops message as an excuse for their behaviour, I don’t think so - infact it is becoming apparent that the only people who are misinterpreting the bishops comment are the people on this thread.

Is there any way in which the Archbishop comprimised the Church’s teaching? Not really, a powerful message is not always a good message.

 

[Libero]

Maybe the kids would be safer.

I really do not understand what is being said here, I for one do not feel like I am under threat from the gays.

Perhaps outdated stereotypes, but often the same agenda to desensistize and yes “recruit” developmentally vulnerable adolescents to their “lifestyle”, as this article examples:

Odd that you would want to criticise the new Archbishop’s informed, caring, tolerant and understanding viewpoint on the matter then.

The Archbishop is very well the one person who may be able to make homosexuals feel as if they still have an equal place in our church - this is something that should be celebrated, not criticised.

 

[frommi]

setter:

Perhaps outdated stereotypes, but often the same agenda to desensistize and yes “recruit” developmentally vulnerable adolescents to their “lifestyle”, as this article examples:

traditionalvalues.org/modules.php?sid=2342

I would never condone ‘recruiting’ anyone into anything regarding their sexuality.

But, I really don’t think by and large the majority of people who are homosexual are out trying to get teenagers to ‘join the club’. And I would have a hard time faulting anyone who wants to make sure that teenagers aren’t doing harm to themselves by considering suicidal action because of their sexual orientation, which I think is the more likely scenario.

 

[estesbob]

frommi:

I would never condone ‘recruiting’ anyone into anything regarding their sexuality.

But, I really don’t think by and large the majority of people who are homosexual are out trying to get teenagers to ‘join the club’. And I would have a hard time faulting anyone who wants to make sure that teenagers aren’t doing harm to themselves by considering suicidal action because of their sexual orientation, which I think is the more likely scenario.

Not really-the claim that homosexual teens are more prone to suicide is an unrban myth-a myth created out of whole cloth by homosexual advocates to justify not confronting these kids about the sinfullness of their behavior. You see a lot of that in this thread-God forbid anyone should criticize homosexual behavior as it will drive them away form the Church. Thus far the Bishop is guilty of this also.

 

[Libero]

Not really-the claim that homosexual teens are more prone to suicide is an unrban myth-a myth created out of whole cloth by homosexual advocates to justify not confronting these kids about the sinfullness of their behavior. You see a lot of that in this thread-God forbid anyone should criticize homosexual behavior as it will drive them away form the Church. Thus far the Bishop is gultiy of this also.

That is not what I am saying - although I can understand you for deducing that.

There is a fine line between criticising and attacking - to many homosexuals, it may be hard to interpret a criticism as anything other than an attack, due to past history with the church. Thus we must be careful, why bother making a criticism, if one is not damaging church teaching, when it is likely that it may backfire?

 

[estesbob]

Libero:

That is not what I am saying - although I can understand you for deducing that.

There is a fine line between criticising and attacking - to many homosexuals, it may be hard to interpret a criticism as anything other than an attack, due to past history with the church. Thus we must be careful, why bother making a criticism, if one is not damaging church teaching, when it is likely that it may backfire?

Why bother making a criticism? Because those engageing in homosexual beahvior have put their immortal souls at risk. better a little criticism now than an eternity of damnation.

 

[Libero]

Why bother making a criticism? Because those engageing in homosexual beahvior have put their immortal souls at risk. better a little criticism now than an eternity of damnation.

Why bother making a criticism when it is so likely to backfire is actually what I meant.

 

[frommi]

estesbob:

Not really-the claim that homosexual teens are more prone to suicide is an unrban myth-a myth created out of whole cloth by homosexual advocates to justify not confronting these kids about the sinfullness of their behavior. You see a lot of that in this thread-God forbid anyone should criticize homosexual behavior as it will drive them away form the Church. Thus far the Bishop is guilty of this also.

An urban myth? Good grief…sounds like you have a conspiracy theory about this stuff. That’s disturbing. Are you suggesting it’s better to have someone knife themselves to death because we need to aggressively point out sinful behavior?

 

[setter]

frommi:

I would never condone ‘recruiting’ anyone into anything regarding their sexuality.

But, I really don’t think by and large the majority of people who are homosexual are out trying to get teenagers to ‘join the club’. And I would have a hard time faulting anyone who wants to make sure that teenagers aren’t doing harm to themselves by considering suicidal action because of their sexual orientation, which I think is the more likely scenario.

As this research finding points out, “Thus “society’s oppression” seems a simplistic and misleading explanation for suicidal ideation in gay teenagers”.

Gay Teens and Attempted Suicide
By Dale O’Leary

Self-identified gay teenagers are at greater risk than straight teenagers to attempt suicide. Gay activists say this problem is due to social homophobia, and that it will be remedied when society puts its stamp of approval on homosexuality.

Activists have grossly exaggerated the number of gay teenagers who have actually died by suicide (1). Nevertheless there is substantial evidence that such teenagers are at greater risk to attempt suicide, and thus it is important to examine the possible contributing factors.

Researchers Remafedi, Farrow, and Deisher (2) compared gay and bisexual adolescents who had attempted suicide, to a group of those who had not. The two groups totalled 137 males, aged 14 to 21. Of that number, 41 (30%) had made at least one suicide attempt.

From this study we see that gay teens that attempt suicide tend to be involved to an alarming degree in drug use, early sexual activity, and prostitution–activities which also predominate in the histories of straight teens who attempt suicide.

The researchers say that suicide attempts appear to be related to “‘coming out’ at a younger age, gender atypicality, low self-esteem, substance abuse, running away, involvement in prostitution, and other psychosocial morbidities.” In 44% of cases, subjects attributed the suicide attempts to “‘family problems,’ including conflict with family members and parents’ marital discord, divorce, or alcoholism.”

In fact, psychology has long known that homosexuality is associated with dysfunctional family structures. Statistically, gay men tend to report poor childhood relationships with their fathers, while lesbian women tend to report poor childhood relationships with their mothers (Bell, Weinberg and Hammersmith). Thus “society’s oppression” seems a simplistic and misleading explanation for suicidal ideation in gay teenagers.

narth.com/docs/gayteens.html

 

[estesbob]

frommi:

An urban myth? Good grief…sounds like you have a conspiracy theory about this stuff. That’s disturbing. Are you suggesting it’s better to have someone knife themselves to death because we need to aggressively point out sinful behavior?

I am suggesting that there is no evdidence that telling a teen homosexual behavior is sinful increases their risk if suicide.

The idea that informing them of this basic fact would cause them to knife themselves is nonsense. You yourself are using a bogus scenario to justify NOT informing teens of the sinfullness of their behavior.

 

[goofyjim]

estesbob:

I am suggesting that there is no evdidence that telling a teen homosexual behavior is sinful increases their risk if suicide.

The idea that informing them of this basic fact would cause them to knife themselves is nonsense. You yourself are using a bogus scenario to justify NOT informing teens of the sinfullness of their behavior.

But telling them AIDS is some divine retribution is enough to cause it. I have been chaste all my life but after discussing SSA with my local priest long ago I was confronted by a nasty newsletter from the condemned movement in Bayside, NY, that stated just that. So we can point out the sinfulness of the behavior but in a compassionate way.:twocents:

 

[setter]

goofyjim:

But telling them AIDS is some divine retribution is enough to cause it. I have been chaste all my life but after discussing SSA with my local priest long ago I was confronted by a nasty newsletter from the condemned movement in Bayside, NY, that stated just that. So we can point out the sinfulness of the behavior but in a compassionate way.:twocents:

Properly understood, STD’s are a the *temporal consequence * of one choosing sin. Not everyone who has been afflicted with STD’s has choosen sin, but demonstrates the collateral consequences of one’s sinful choices.

**1264 ** Yet certain temporal consequences of sin remain in the baptized, such as suffering, illness, death, and such frailties inherent in life as weaknesses of character, and so on, as well as an inclination to sin that Tradition calls concupiscence, or metaphorically, “the tinder for sin” (fomes peccati); since concupiscence “is left for us to wrestle with, it cannot harm those who do not consent but manfully resist it by the grace of Jesus Christ.” Indeed, “an athlete is not crowned unless he competes according to the rules.” (CCC)

Even then, as the CCC points out, “the Christian must strive to accept this temporal punishment of sin as a grace.”:

1473 The forgiveness of sin and restoration of communion with God entail the remission of the eternal punishment of sin, but temporal punishment of sin remains. While patiently bearing sufferings and trials of all kinds and, when the day comes, serenely facing death, the Christian must strive to accept this temporal punishment of sin as a grace. He should strive by works of mercy and charity, as well as by prayer and the various practices of penance, to put off completely the “old man” and to put on the “new man.” (CCC)