Should homosexual people be allowed to visit their partners in hospital when it's 'family only'?

[Petergee]

How do you know that they sodomize each other repeatedly? Or is that just an assumption on your part?

“Homosexual partners” by definition are two people who repeatedly sodomise each other. No assumptions necessary.

 

[pathia]

“Homosexual partners” by definition are two people who repeatedly sodomise each other. No assumptions necessary.

So when we describe people as ‘partners in crime’ they’re sodomizing each other too? Since when did ‘partner’ imply sex?

 

[Petergee]

I don’t think Gays had any other choice but to seek out the same rights the rest of us enjoy in this country.

Homosexuals have always had the same rights as everybody else. It wasn’t until about 20 years ago that sonme of them started demanding so-called “rights” that nobody else has.

 

[Petergee]

So when we describe people as ‘partners in crime’ they’re sodomizing each other too? Since when did ‘partner’ imply sex?

You seem to have missed the fact that I was talking about “homosexual partners”, not the simple word “partner” which can have many meanings.

 

[Petergee]

That what Jesus would say?

I don’t think there’s any need to be so vehement about it. There is nothing ‘Frankenstein’ or ‘evil’ about it any more than another sin. Having the same genitals doesn’t mean the couples are intrinsically different from straight couples

Yes it does. What the so-called “couple” desire to to to each other is intrinsically disordered.

 

[pathia]

Yes it does. What the so-called “couple” desire to to to each other is intrinsically disordered.

There can be love without desire. My partner and I have no sexual interest what so ever, generally speaking, in anything, yet we still love each other.

 

[Petergee]

There can be love without desire. My partner and I have no sexual interest what so ever, generally speaking, in anything, yet we still love each other.

I love my partners of various kinds too without desiring any sexual activity with them. That has nothing to do with the fact that “homosexual partners” means “two people of the same sex who have repeatedly sodomised each other”. I can’t believe you are seriously trying to disute this, or maybe you’re just trying to create a red herring to try to confuse the issue for some readers.

 

[ConcernedApathy]

The only possible reason to deny one half of a couple the chance to visit the other half in the hospital is abject cruelty. Pious hatred masquerading as morality is an ugly thing.

 

[AmandaB]

Wow Petergee, you seem to know it all! Each person you take down one after another like dominoes…but stop and think for a minute at how this looks. We are of the same religion yet interpret it MUCH differently. Funny when the people were stoning the prostitute that Jesus stopped them and told them if they had not sinned, they could cast a stone…weird then, because by your definition that would be condoning her sins. You can throw rocks literally or figuratively. Not controlling someone isn’t agreeing with their sins, it’s respecting them as a person. You can offer advice and pray for them, but you should not control them. Oh and I have a question I have been just dying to ask someone that holds your opinions-when we look at the ten commandments-how many of those have you broken??? I assume many (like the rest of us) so shouldn’t you be more worried about that? How do you know that the person you’re spending all your time judging wasn’t a really good person who brought a lot of good things to the world and their sin of homosexuality was taken up with GOD and he forgave this person, while YOU were spending a very long time in purgatory for judging??? I’m not saying this would happen, but I’m just trying to say be really careful, because from all the teaching Jesus did, he seemed to REALLY stress peace and not judging others. This has been something that I have been really scared of doing, you can never be too comfortable with your judgments, they could get you into a lot of trouble. In fact, just writing this makes ME nervous, because I am in a way doing the same thing to you, which is wrong. I have a lot of sins of my own that I should be focused on!!! Peace to you:hug1:

 

[pathia]

I love my partners of various kinds too without desiring any sexual activity with them. That has nothing to do with the fact that “homosexual partners” means “two people of the same sex who have repeatedly sodomised each other”. I can’t believe you are seriously trying to disute this, or maybe you’re just trying to create a red herring to try to confuse the issue for some readers.

So you’re saying all homosexual partners sodomize each other, yet here I am saying that we don’t. You’d be surprised how many sexless homosexual relationships there are.

 

[Zoe_Brain]

“Homosexual partners” by definition are two people who repeatedly sodomise each other. No assumptions necessary.

I’m given to understand that a lot of conventional marriages involve mutual oral sex too.
Of course if you don’t count that as sodomy, then few lesbian couples would qualify as homosexual.

Hint: when in a hole… stop digging.

 

[Doc_Keele]

Last time I checked no hospitals explicitly allow patients to have sex in hospital, so the issue is irrelevant. What’s “disordered” about giving someone love, support, companionship etc whilst they are ill? What would be morally disordered is denying them that.

 

[Other_Eric]

Wow Petergee, you seem to know it all! Each person you take down one after another like dominoes…but stop and think for a minute at how this looks. We are of the same religion yet interpret it MUCH differently. Funny when the people were stoning the prostitute that Jesus stopped them and told them if they had not sinned, they could cast a stone…weird then, because by your definition that would be condoning her sins. You can throw rocks literally or figuratively. Not controlling someone isn’t agreeing with their sins, it’s respecting them as a person. You can offer advice and pray for them, but you should not control them. Oh and I have a question I have been just dying to ask someone that holds your opinions-when we look at the ten commandments-how many of those have you broken??? I assume many (like the rest of us) so shouldn’t you be more worried about that? How do you know that the person you’re spending all your time judging wasn’t a really good person who brought a lot of good things to the world and their sin of homosexuality was taken up with GOD and he forgave this person, while YOU were spending a very long time in purgatory for judging??? I’m not saying this would happen, but I’m just trying to say be really careful, because from all the teaching Jesus did, he seemed to REALLY stress peace and not judging others. This has been something that I have been really scared of doing, you can never be too comfortable with your judgments, they could get you into a lot of trouble. In fact, just writing this makes ME nervous, because I am in a way doing the same thing to you, which is wrong. I have a lot of sins of my own that I should be focused on!!! Peace to you:hug1:

It never ceases to amaze me how many people on these forums will invoke this “judgment” canard in order to justify what is, in the end, cruel indifference to the eternal salvation of another. You, AmandaB, would have it that merely calling an evil for what it is constitutes such “judgment.” You seem to worship a god who calls humanity, not to deeper knowledge of what is just, but to an impenetrable ignorance. Ultimately you are calling Christ a liar since, to use your logic, He cannot be “the way, the truth and the light,” but can only offer wandering, unawareness and darkness.

Though I would point out that Petergee’s use of the term “judgment” is incorrect in this context, the merits of what he is saying are essentially correct. A same-sex relationship is defined by its immoral sexual activity. Without that, it would cease to exist. It is a relationship that is utterly depraved in all its particulars. Any “good” that proceeds from such an arrangement is necessarily counterfeit and self-centered. These are the bare facts. Pointing them out is no more sinful than calling the sky blue or the pope Catholic.

Since there is nothing virtuous about the relationship to preserve, to allow such a couple to visit with one another in a hospital is therefore not compassionate. What it is, in reality, is the lending of an implicit stamp of approval to an immoral relationship that threatens to damn these individuals for all eternity. Turning a blind eye to the jeopardy these people put themselves in isn’t merciful; it’s hatred every bit as black as Satan.

You attempt to use this past Sunday’s Gospel reading to illustrate how Christ preventing the women caught in adultery from being stoned to death means we ought to refrain from calling evil what the Bible explicitly condemns as sinful. You seem not to notice that Christ never chastised the crowd from tearing the adulteress from her lover and, once no longer in peril, He did not throw the adulteress back into her lover’s bed for a “visit.” In turning people enamored of sodomy away from the hospital rooms of their lovers, we are acting exactly as Christ did in saying “go [away] and sin no more.”

 

[Christopher68]

The only possible reason to deny one half of a couple the chance to visit the other half in the hospital is abject cruelty. Pious hatred masquerading as morality is an ugly thing.

Very well stated!

 

[seekerz]

I don’t even see why this question is necessary or what conditions could possibly restrict a sick person’s visitors to ‘family only’. Regardless of sexual orientation, sick people should be accessible to the people they are close to, end of story.

What is to be gained by preventing homosexual people from visiting their ‘partners’ in hospital? Is this experience likely to change their behavior/orientation/feelings toward each other? Wrong is wrong and right is right but downright mean behavior is not the answer to choices we see as immoral. “Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.”

 

[Pug]

A same-sex relationship is defined by its immoral sexual activity. Without that, it would cease to exist. It is a relationship that is utterly depraved in all its particulars. Any “good” that proceeds from such an arrangement is necessarily counterfeit and self-centered. These are the bare facts. Pointing them out is no more sinful than calling the sky blue or the pope Catholic.

Since there is nothing virtuous about the relationship to preserve, to allow such a couple to visit with one another in a hospital is therefore not compassionate.

Why is this type of discussion centered upon the hospital? Why not, say, movie theater ticket sales?

 

[Other_Eric]

Why is this type of discussion centered upon the hospital? Why not, say, movie theater ticket sales?

I think that the visiting of the sick in a hospital is germane to relationships that attempt intimacy in a way that attending a movie is not. I think, however, that to deny a couple movie tickets on grounds similar to the ones we are discussing here is perfectly defensible.

 

[Pug]

I think that the visiting of the sick in a hospital is germane to relationships that attempt intimacy in a way that attending a movie is not. I think, however, that to deny a couple movie tickets on grounds similar to the ones we are discussing here is perfectly defensible.

Could you explain what it is about a hospital visit that relates to some type of intimacy in a way that sitting together in a darkened room in a social setting doesn’t?

I know you are a lapsed Catholic, but I did find a point of some interest, perhaps, to others on the thread. It is from the USCCB health directives:

In the event that an advance directive is not executed, those who are in a position to know best the patient’s wishes—usually family members and loved ones—should participate in the treatment decisions for the person who has lost the capacity to make health care decisions.

It didn’t seem that it excludes black sheep and the like. It seems more interested in the ones who know the patient’s wishes.

 

[dachsiemom2]

I work in a hospital and occassionally have a homosexual patient. If they want their partner to visit then why not. We shouldn’t judge. The partners are their closest family. Usually the partner is POA and can make medical decisions for the other in the event that they cannot do so for themselves.

 

[Petergee]

The only possible reason to deny one half of a couple the chance to visit the other half in the hospital is abject cruelty. Pious hatred masquerading as morality is an ugly thing.

You’re begging the question. The fact that two people have sodomised each other does not make them a “couple”. Or a “family”.

It’s very sad to see that even on a Catholic forum, simply stating these facts which are obvious from universal Natural Law, exposes one to the kneejerk accusations of “homophobia” and “hatred of homosexuals”. The fact that pro-sodomy agitators routinely and immediately descend to such nonsensical name-calling and calumnies in itself proves that they know deep down that there is no logical justification for their position.