The issue of gay intolerance

[PEPCIS]

"Lynx:

State legalized, I’m talking about, I would never ask, nor would most, to have those things be forced down the throats of churches who would hold to what they believe.

PEPCIS:

Stop it. That’s a lie that your repeating. You cannot control what the millions of other homosexuals will, and/or will not do. There are far too many homosexuals who are barging in on church services and disrupting their worship services. There are far too many homosexuals who are, and will continue to, force churches to live by every single pro-homosexual law that is passed.

I’m not lying, I’m generalizing.

No, you are REPEATING a lie. Those who speak for homosexuals - the ones that actually get their comments put in major media outlets - repeatedly state that “Oh, we won’t make churches conform to this law that we are trying to pass”, while the reality is that the homosexual movement will override such comments, regardless of whether they are given in earnest or not.

You, as well as MOST homosexuals say the same thing: “I would never ask, nor would most, to have those things be forced down the throats of churches who would hold to what they believe.” Yet you cannot guarantee that promise be fulfilled. It is a lie to us.

Maybe you didn’t know it was a lie before. But it is by the very fact that you cannot guarantee what you so boldly promise.

Lynx:

In the same way I can’t stop a bunch of protesters barging in on a church service and causing more people to be upset and angry, you can’t] stop some of the really twisted people who’ve murdered people in homosexual relationship claiming that God told them to do it.

Just do me this one thing: give me just one example where there is some “really twisted people who’ve murdered people in homosexual relationship claiming that God told them to do it.” Please.

That’s more pro-homosexual propaganda. If you can’t be turned from your anti-homosexual position, then you will be treated and repeated for being “homophobic.” Never mind that true clinical homophobia is a rare diagnosis itself. Homosexuals will literally shout you down and repeatedly barrage you with the charge that you must be homophobic, because you are reacting solely out of “irrational fear and prejudice.”

Lynx:

Because they feel like they’re trapped with their backs against the wall, and so to back the other way does the other side feel, forced to defend their positions with every last breath of defense, clinging to their own ideals and beliefs with no openness to the others side.

I understand. But that’s how they SHOULD feel when they are faced with the truth, and their backs against the wall, and no other argument that will work. When the truth wins out, you should acknowledge, not lash out at the messenger with “every last breath of defense, clinging to their own ideals and beliefs with no openness to the others side.”

 

[CWBetts]

Again, this is not off topic. I’m simply wondering how one can be so committed on focusing on the sins of another (homosexuality) and wish to restrict the legal rights of said homosexual sinner, when they themselves are mortal sinners and enjoy their legal rights. How is this off topic? This is the exact topic of the thread

You don’t want to address the other points connected to the topic of the thread because that means you would have to face the truth, and that would be uncomfortable, because you would have to either keep on living your nice, comfortable life, or drastically change your life. That’s why your not discussing that component of our on-topic discussion.

Again, do you think this is an accident that we’re having this conversation? Of course not, there are no accidents with God. God destined this conversation, God is trying to show me something and God is trying to show you something. Why are you denying the truth that God is trying to show you: that your actions and your decisions to participate in modern American life are abhorrent and out of line with His infinite love and mercy. And before you flex your will against other mortal sinners (homosexuals) and try to deny their legal rights, you should consider flexing your will on yourself and possibly leave the modern American system or give up some of you legal rights, since not perfoming mortal sin is the criteria of possessing legal rights (according to your argument)

“If”? Do the research and find out the true nature of your “if”

And I agree it doesn’t make homosexuality any less an evil, but this thread is about tolerating homosexual activity and the legal rights issue revolving around homosexuals; if the criteria for legal rights is performing no mortal sin, then you, and most other modern American participants don’t deserve their legal rights.

I’m not talking about the evilness of this or the evilness of that, I’m discussing Legal Rights and the issue of Legal Rights being given or taken away from mortal sinners (homosexuals and ALL other mortal sinners [again this is the exact topic of this thread]).

So, back to my YES or NO question. Why are you afraid to answer? Do you not want to turn your analysis of mortal sin on yourself? Are you afraid to? Why are afraid to?

What is this thread for, if not to get to the core of the truths we all hold dear.

YES or NO

Consider yourself reported and ignored.

 

[zachforn]

Consider yourself reported and ignored.

That answers my question. Thank you.

Comfortable Catholics give Catholicisma bad name.

 

[zachforn]

I understand. But that’s how they SHOULD feel when they are faced with the truth, and their backs against the wall, and no other argument that will work. When the truth wins out, you should acknowledge, not lash out at the messenger with “every last breath of defense, clinging to their own ideals and beliefs with no openness to the others side.”

Post #250 addresses this issue perfectly as well as my recent discussion with CWBetts.

Backs to the wall and some people shut down and refuse to believe the truth.

 

[CWBetts]

Post #250 addresses this issue perfectly as well as my recent discussion with CWBetts.

Backs to the wall and some people shut down and refuse to believe the truth.

You gave us no reason to believe your posts. No sources, reliable or otherwise. I did a quicjk google search, came up with nothing.

 

[zachforn]

You gave us no reason to believe your posts. No sources, reliable or otherwise. I did a quicjk google search, came up with nothing.

O a quick google search? Now that’s scholarly? Take some time. Check out some books. Do you think someone doing a quick google search of the Catholic Faith is going to have any idea?

 

[zachforn]

You gave us no reason to believe your posts. No sources, reliable or otherwise. I did a quicjk google search, came up with nothing.

Here’s an brief reading list (very brief) revoling around some issues of petroleum production. Yes, you will disagree with some of the points the authors make ( I disagree with some of them), but by reading these, and others, a picture begins to form about the horrifying consequences of our craving for cheap oil, which we are all guilty of.

Field Notes from a Catastrophe: Man, Nature, and Climate Change

The Tyranny of Oil: The World’s Most Powerful Industry–and What We Must Do to Stop It

Any Ecology Book to understand how system interact with one another

Night Fire: Big Oil, Poison Air, and Margie Richard’s Fight to Save Her Town

When Citizens Revolt: Nigerian Elites, Big Oil and the Ogoni Struggle for Self-Determination

Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money and Power

The Global Politics of Energy

Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things

Silent Spring

 

[CWBetts]

Here’s an brief reading list (very brief) revoling around some issues of petroleum production. Yes, you will disagree with some of the points the authors make ( I disagree with some of them), but by reading these, and others, a picture begins to form about the horrifying consequences of our craving for cheap oil, which we are all guilty of.

Field Notes from a Catastrophe: Man, Nature, and Climate Change

The Tyranny of Oil: The World’s Most Powerful Industry–and What We Must Do to Stop It

Any Ecology Book to understand how system interact with one another

Night Fire: Big Oil, Poison Air, and Margie Richard’s Fight to Save Her Town

When Citizens Revolt: Nigerian Elites, Big Oil and the Ogoni Struggle for Self-Determination

Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money and Power

The Global Politics of Energy

Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things

Silent Spring

You fail to say how me, living in the United States, with no controlling interest in any oil company, has any power to change anything. If I had major controlling interest in say, Exxon-Mobil, thin I would be complicit because it would be in my power to change things. It is not. The fact is that I need my computer to stay in contact with my university (distance learning classes). I need my car to get to and from job interviews. To equate me with an unrepentant killer is wrong. Even if I were to stop using my car, computer, etc, can you please tell me how that would improve the plight of those abused? it can’t. You have fallen into the trap of thinking that material things are inherently sinful. That is the heresy of gnosticism. It is not the object, but the use that is sinful.

 

[CWBetts]

O a quick google search? Now that’s scholarly? Take some time. Check out some books. Do you think someone doing a quick google search of the Catholic Faith is going to have any idea?

Do not presume that I do not know how to research. A google search is a good starting point…and there you go dragging us off topic again, trying to get away fromn the fact that homosexual activity is wicked, and I have a right to not be exposed to it, and to keep my family from being exposed to it. It annoys me that when there is no real argument, homosexual activists try to cloud the issue with unrelated distractions.

 

[zachforn]

You fail to say how me, living in the United States, with no controlling interest in any oil company, has any power to change anything. If I had major controlling interest in say, Exxon-Mobil, thin I would be complicit because it would be in my power to change things. It is not. The fact is that I need my computer to stay in contact with my university (distance learning classes). I need my car to get to and from job interviews. To equate me with an unrepentant killer is wrong. Even if I were to stop using my car, computer, etc, can you please tell me how that would improve the plight of those abused? it can’t. You have fallen into the trap of thinking that material things are inherently sinful. That is the heresy of gnosticism. It is not the object, but the use that is sinful.

We’ve already been through all this! Posts # 288, 283, 272, 250.

Please, at the least, reread #288. Because you have the choice NOT to participate. But you don’t exercise that choice. You don’t NEED a computer, or car, or any of the other comforts of modern american life, billions of people around the world do it every day.

Why won’t you realize this is not off topic, this is the topic: the legal rights that mortal sinners should or should not have!!

And sorry, I agree, google is a good starting point, but it’s only a starting point.

 

[CWBetts]

We’ve already been through all this! Posts # 288, 283, 272, 250.

Please, at the least, reread #288. Because you have the choice NOT to participate. But you don’t exercise that choice. You don’t NEED a computer, or car, or any of the other comforts of modern american life, billions of people around the world do it every day.

Why won’t you realize this is not off topic, this is the topic: the legal rights that mortal sinners should or should not have!!

And sorry, I agree, google is a good starting point, but it’s only a starting point.

I have read your posts, and they are vastly off topic. Owning any of these things is not a mortal sin. And since you say it is, then you are a hypocrite, because you are doing thise very things you say we must not. And for my classes, I ver much do need a computer. Its called getting an education.

 

[CWBetts]

There is no doubt about it; homosexual sex is just a sin and this will never change - it goes against the moral law and is a church teaching that is infallible.

The issue now is the perception that those who do not support gay marriages/unions are intolerant. I am simply unable to refute why we are NOT intolerant.

One argument is that once we allow gays to get married, we will change the definition of marriage. Change for whom? So what?

I think we should treat them the same way we treated the other religions when they first appeared in Christiandom … we must have felt threatened and we probably didn’t want their influence in our midst. I mean, I think we’ll lose more Catholics to the Protestants and Muslims than to gays! If we can get along with the Protestants and the Muslims in our midst… hey …

It was culturally unacceptable to bury people who committed suicide in Christian cemeteries … but we changed that practice, not the doctrine - Suicide remains a sin if it was done willfully and without a psychotic cause.

I figured I would quote the OP, so that everyone would be reminded of the real topic.

 

[ladybri77]

Lynx, did you get a chance to read post #299? Just wondered what your thoughts were.

 

[zachforn]

I have read your posts, and they are vastly off topic. Owning any of these things is not a mortal sin. And since you say it is, then you are a hypocrite, because you are doing thise very things you say we must not. And for my classes, I ver much do need a computer. Its called getting an education.

You may have read the posts, but you did not understand them, becuase you would see how they are dealing with the exact topic that started this thread (post #1).

How is not owning these products not a mortal sin? Here are the three criteria for mortal sin:

1. its subject must be a grave (or serious) matter;
2. it must be committed with full knowledge, both of the sin and of the gravity of the offense (ignorance is no excuse);
3. it must be committed with deliberate and complete consent, enough for it to have been a personal decision to commit the sin.

(Edited)
Let’s drop it.

 

[PEPCIS]

"PEPCIS:

You use a LOT of coded language. The “freedom to express yourself” is a euphemism for “to choose the homosexual lifestyle.” But that is what the homosexual lobby MUST do, because otherwise they are taken to task for choosing a lifestyle. Choosing the “freedom to express yourself” is a bonafide right under the Constitution. Choosing the homosexual lifestyle is not.

How is it any different in that sense? One doesn’t choose to be a homosexual, one ~is~ or ~isn’t~ in much the same one doesn’t choose to be black or white, Asian or Hispanic, a boy or a girl, or something in between.

Well then, now that’s the rub isn’t it? Is your statement a truth, or is it a lie masquerading as truth?

First off, you can’t say with any scientific certainty that homosexuals are “born that way.” So for you to make the equation that “Homosexuality = Black color skin” is an unproven statement.

Second off, you can’t say with any culturally, historical context that homosexuality is morally equivalent to heterosexuality.

The BEST that I can offer in the way of concession is to say that my conversation with some of the other posters has left me considering that PERHAPS, young children may grow into homosexuality by the nurture of their environment, and as American culture becomes more accepting of the lifestyle, the odds of a proliferation of the orientation will increase as well.

This, however, is not a concession of its nature as a sin against God and His creation. It’s just to say that the initial environment of that child may be foisted upon him and create a propensity toward homosexuality. But this is no better than if the child had such things foisted upon him that created a propensity to some other sin. Such deviancies must be treated as such, and indeed, there are many, many people who have been treated for this, and have escaped that lifestyle through many noble organizations such as NARTH.

Lynx:

I say by telling children how wrong homosexuality is, it’s harming children, because then they never get to talk about how they feel, and how they are, and how they know themselves to be, because they’re too afraid they’ll be punished or hurt in some way because of it, so they instead hide it from their parent, friends, neighbors, secretly hiding their own true hearts and feelings, and sometimes, when they’ve had enough of being afraid, they let it out and protest angrily in a church because of all the harm and hurt that was done to them, making them afraid to exist the way God made them in the first place.

Are you listening to yourself? Here is what you are saying:

1. 
   *]Homosexuality is not wrong.
   *]People are wrong to tell others that homosexuality is wrong.
   *]If children hear that homosexuality is wrong, they will internalize their hatred and direct it toward the church.
   *]Such children will grow up to hate God and stay away from the church.
   
   All of that is dependent on the assumption of the first statement being true. As I stated earlier, you can’t prove that it’s true, so you simply assert it. It’s like the pro-abortionists who continually deny when life begins. Scientifically, it can only be stated one way: at conception. Yet, because they hate that scientific conclusion, they ignore it make their own philosophical pronouncements and treat it as if it were a scientific conclusion.
   
   In much the same way, because you cannot prove yourself scientifically, you simply make a philosophical pronouncement and treat it as if it were a scientific conclusion.

 

[PEPCIS]

Okay? So stop gay bashing and do something useful, like campaigning for human rights!..or you know, something.;]

LolLolLolLol…you got me laughing!!! “Gay bashing.” LOL

 

[CWBetts]

You may have read the posts, but you did not understand them, becuase you would see how they are dealing with the exact topic that started this thread (post #1).

How is not owning these products not a mortal sin? Here are the three criteria for mortal sin:

1. its subject must be a grave (or serious) matter;
2. it must be committed with full knowledge, both of the sin and of the gravity of the offense (ignorance is no excuse);
3. it must be committed with deliberate and complete consent, enough for it to have been a personal decision to commit the sin.

(Edited)
Let’s drop it.

1. It is not a sin because my buying a cdomputer does not as a direct result cause death. Basic moral theology.

Yes, lets drop it.(Edited)

 

[PEPCIS]

I would love if you actually think about this: what do you do that is abhorrent to God that you have normalized?

You seem to want to discuss what Others have done and are doing that is WRONG. But think about what you are doing. Because here is what I know, I know that if you participate in even the most surface level of contemporary American culture you are performing a WRONG . Do you know how plastic are created?. . .

Here is a summary of what you are saying, Zach:

• I am a thief.
• You are a liar.
• You are a sinner, and I am a sinner, therefore, you have no right to question what I am doing.

That is an error in logic which works like this:

• We live in a society where laws govern our actions.
• You make an argument against me enforcing those laws because I break a different law than the one that you are breaking.
• You still want to live in this society where laws govern our actions, just not YOUR actions.

And then, if truth be told, you’d be the first one to condemn others for driving their motorcycle to work while you fly to distant points on the globe for your fun.

 

[PEPCIS]

Though I believe he is lacking in charity, it is in no way wrong to say that something is wrong, provided it is done in charity. We should be willing to accept correction, in order to bring us closer to God. If we are overly defensive, could that not mean that we may be feeling somewhat convicted?

Charity. Greater love has no man than that he is willing to lay down his life for another. - Jesus

You are showing charity toward those who would embrace homosexuality by defending the Biblical/Catholic position. It is NEVER uncharitible to share the truth of God’s Word.

 

[PEPCIS]

That’s an absurd example, and I think you well know it, putting words in my mouth, you should be ashamed of yourself ~grinz teasingly~

No, I do not think it’s absurd. If a person wants to enter a relationship with another adult, and he does it in secret, it does not make it right or moral.

That’s why conspiracy against the US is actually a REAL CRIME - because it is done in secret, and involves planning how to hurt the people collectively. It could be argued that “planning” does not actually hurt anyone, because it only involves two (or more) consenting adults.

Besides that, homosexuality is not confined to “two consenting adults” because it assumes the following: That it is conceded that it is an immoral choice but such that it can only harm the two consenting adults that embark on this action.

So, we can see that you agree it is an immoral choice, otherwise, why make the argument that it is only done with “two consenting adults”. That’s the same argument made for prostitution and drugs. But there is sufficient research to show that such vices are crimes against society because they only serve to pollute society by influencing others and spreading that influence as far as society will allow.

Lynx:

Love ~IS~ a choice, and so I choose to give my love freely, regardless of whether i think someone is wrong or not.

Sure, love is a choice. But the object of that love sets the context of whether that love is moral or not. You can love snuff films, but your “love” would be an active involvment in murder. You could love children, but that would involve actively harming them.