Story: In US Capitol Rotunda, ex-LGBTs pray, repent on behalf of nation for sin of homosexuality

  • Thread starter Thread starter mdgspencer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

mdgspencer

Guest
Last edited:
God love them.
May they be a shining example for the rest of the country.
 
While the attraction is not a sin, acting on it is.
Please try to treat this as the light it is, rather than nitpicking at the details.
 
How about praying for everyone, regardless of gender identity, preference, or presentation, live for the glory of God?

How about for those hard of heart open themselves up to God’s love and salvation?
 
Last edited:
They are praying to end a material difference in people, whether it be gender dysphoria, or homosexuality, rather than the sins itself.

Plus I find it so insulting and close minded that they want to rid the world or society of a minority simply because it doesn’t fit their paradigm
 
Last edited:
No, it’s actually a salient distinction. The article calls them “ex-LGBT.” For those first three letters, this is impossible. No one chooses to be gay, so no one can choose to become “ex-gay.” Lifesite is equivocating, deliberately perhaps, between identity and practice.
 
I’ve never met a gay person who said he chose to be gay. Similarly, I didn’t choose to be straight. I didn’t overcome temptation. There was no choice at all.
 
repentant2 said:
40.png
blackforest:
No one chooses to be gay,
Click to expand...
That’s not true.
Click to expand...
Neither is it false.
 
Maybe it’s because I’m an American who exercises the Free Will bestowed on me by God, but I don’t like the idea of others repenting on my behalf. I’m quite capable of handling that myself. I don’t want their help. To do it in the Rotunda is a publicity stunt.

And don’t get technical on it and bring up priests. I’m aware that they do that and I’m ok with priests doing it.
 
Last edited:
Nobody knows what causes same sex attraction.

For some people, it’s a fixed and forever state (which the person may decide to act on or not)

For other people it’s a transient phenomenon.

For still others, they find themselves going back and forth between attractions.
 
did the OP imply otherwise? It says “sexual deviancy”, which certainly implies sexual acts.
 
It has been proven that it is not fixed in a forever state, although many “ex-gay” hardly say anything because of fear from the homosexual community. They are living proof that debunks their argument that homosexuality is an “inherit” trait of people. It also casts doubts that it should therefore be used as a ground to protect against discrimination, since unlike gender, it is not something set in stone.
 
repentant2 said:
But if homosexuality is brought on by environmental factors like abuse or conditioning it still wouldn’t be a “choice” but it wouldn’t be a “born that way” thing either.
Click to expand...
To partake in homosexuals acts is surely a choice? And only the acts have moral meaning.
 
Last edited:
We can debate whether anyone chooses to be gay. Good luck with that. I’m not interested in going down that rabbit hole. But there is no debate whether some or many (note I’m not saying all) people choose sexual sin (I say sin along with the thread title and not activity because this is a Catholic website after all). Straight or gay can choose sexual sin. Straight or gay can experiment sexually just like they can experiment with drugs. It’s only positive and from a Catholic perspective completely non-controversial that they or anyone repent of their sins, sins in this case (the activity) that are condemned both in the Bible and by The Church.
 
The funny thing is:
we as catholics do know where it comes/stems from, it’s just no one wants to say it in fear of being censored by the PC police.

The repentent people in the Rotunda and countless others know where it comes from. As do the excorcists. I just we as as faith could stop beating around the bush and name the cause already.
 
John10 said:
It has been proven that it is not fixed in a forever state, although many “ex-gay” hardly say anything because of fear from the homosexual community. They are living proof that debunks their argument that homosexuality is an “inherit” trait of people. It also casts doubts that it should therefore be used as a ground to protect against discrimination, since unlike gender, it is not something set in stone.
Click to expand...
Not much has been proven about this that I know of. Most studies are based on what people report about themselves. If someone says that they’ve changed, how do we really know that they have? Do we just take their word for it? Are the people who say they’ve changed the same as those who say they can’t change or are we comparing apples to oranges? Perhaps the one’s who say they’ve changed were a 4 on the Kinsey Scale (Predominantly homosexual, but more than incidentally heterosexual), but those who say they can’t change are a 6 on the Kinsey Scale (Exclusively homosexual). We would need to do scientific tests where a gay man, for example, was hooked up to various monitors to measure physiological responses and shown sexually explicit pictures of both men and women and only responds to the pictures of the men and then later when they say they’ve changed repeat the test to see if they only respond to the pictures of the women and not to the men.
 
Last edited:
The story and accompanying photo suggests that 17 people were in this group. It is not clear to me what they were doing in a legislature as they claimed they did not want to take way rights.

Do groups of people who consider their former way of life or attitude to be sinful often do this? Former murderers? Adulterers? Contraceptive users? People who lust after women in their hearts? Liars? Fraudsters?

Why not?
 
I’m talking about same sex attraction, not homosexual behaviors.

A person can prefer their own sex, but choose not to act on those feelings.

At the same time, a person could be “straight”, but decide to engage in same-sex behaviors (like girls who make out in bars to attract male attention)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top