The roles of homosexuals in society and spiritual life

[NightRider]

Other Eric:

Hi Lisa!

I gave examples in my first post that would require even a chaste homosexual to disclose his sexuality publicly, or risk living in a different kind of sin. Moreover, I think you fail to acknowledge that the homosexual must be allowed some type of friendship where he could be free to at least disclose the struggles that he has as a result of his condition. If he does not, then Courage is a fraud. It’s all well and good to focus on oneself first by saying things like “do we really want or need to know” but sooner or later maturity and compassion about the subject must set in and realize that the homosexual cannot remain in a self-imposed bubble separate from the rest of society.

I suppose your first instinct would be to again refer to the parades, the clubs in school or the rainbow sashes, point to lurid and sexually explicit entertainment or perhaps set up a radical queer activist as a paragon of the things in the culture you decry. You would be right, they are all excessive but it would be both foolish and ignorant not to acknowledge that each of these has a strong counterpart on the other side of the aisle. The entire culture is awash is sexuality, not just the homos. Further, it completely ignores the possibility of a chaste existence and reduces the homosexual from a man to a string of sexual encounters.

It also seems that your prohibition would extend to even the benign ways in which people relate to each other. A fourteen-year-old girl giggling with her friends over how “cute” she finds a male classmate is just one example of the sort of casual way in which heterosexuals make their own sexual preference explicit in way that you would find beyond the pale if the same situation involved a homosexual attraction. Moreover, you have to take it further and the homosexual would have to make himself a pariah in order not to give offense to such tender sensibilities such as yours.

This is not to say that I am condoning sexually illicit behavior or excusing fragrant sexuality put on display. What I am saying is that you’re going to need to draw a line between the disclosures of Andrew Sullivan and David Morrison and explain why one is appropriate and the other is not.

Very well said. Thank you.

 

[fix]

eptatorata:

Does anybody else share the opinion that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was a psychopath and/or sociopath?

Was he homosexual?

 

[fix]

eptatorata:

I am not aware of homosexuals making their sex lives a public issue. Does your mind fill in the blanks or do they announce the specific acts they perform?

Not only do they make their proclivities public, they intend to foist it on the rest of us as acceptable.

 

[fix]

Lisa N:

Uh, what ARE you talking about? I’m afraid your arguments are way too obtuse.

Gender roles and sexual roles are two different things.

Lisa N

\Do not confuse these issues by bringing in facts and logic.

 

[Other_Eric]

Lisa N:

Again maybe you can explain why anyone would be proud of a particular sexual desire. I just don’t find it very impressive or interesting.

Hi Lisa!

I think the issue of “pride” in one’s sexuality misses the point. Certainly not every personal revelation of one’s struggles with chastity comes in the form of a rainbow sash worn during a mass. I also wonder why it is that every example you have given of persons who struggle with same-sex attractions has been one that is decidedly indicative of an unchaste existence. It is as though you find such people inherently incapable of living out the Church’s teachings in this area.

This thread started out by asking about the treatment a chaste individual might receive from the Christian community if it was known that he was subject to homosexual temptations. The initial answer was that there was no conceivable way that the community at large could possibly find out, implying that if it did become known any mistreatment such an individual received would be largely his own fault.

To this I simply pointed out that conditions might exist where such an individual would be required to make his situation known. I also twice pointed out that there are certain faithful Christians who have written very public testimonials about their own sexuality. Is such testimony outside of the confessional to be considered immoral?

The simple and apparently uncomfortable fact is that there are any number of plausible scenarios in which an individual’s sexual temptations are likely to become a matter of public knowledge. It does not necessarily have anything to do with “pride.” The question is what is the appropriate Christian response to this knowledge? Does it require that you avoid the individual, irrespective of his behavior? Would you have to assume the individual is a sexual predator and keep children away from him? Would the faithful be well advised to assume that association with the individual could lead to their own corruption?

 

[Lisa_N]

Other Eric:

The simple and apparently uncomfortable fact is that there are any number of plausible scenarios in which an individual’s sexual temptations are likely to become a matter of public knowledge. It does not necessarily have anything to do with “pride.” The question is what is the appropriate Christian response to this knowledge? Does it require that you avoid the individual, irrespective of his behavior? Would you have to assume the individual is a sexual predator and keep children away from him? Would the faithful be well advised to assume that association with the individual could lead to their own corruption?

OtherEric, I am obviously not making myself clear. I think indeed there are times and people who need to know about another’s sexual proclivities. If someone wishes to become a priest or work with small boys, certainly I think that is essential information that should be known to those who might encounter that person in some kind of unsupervised situation. I frankly do not want to see homosexuals be in charge of young men without supervision. I’ve seen too many cases from social workers to group home administrators to homeless shelter operators where adult males preyed upon young men. Similarly I don’t want heterosexual males in unsupervised or intimate situations with girls. I think better safe than sorry.

As to casual encounters such as sitting with someone during mass, working on a committee or fellow employees, I am not sure that anyone’s sexual activities need to be a part of that relationship.

IOW it’s a matter of need to know rather than either purient interest in someone’s sex life or the equally purient desire to proclaim it to the world (i.e. Governer whatever from New Jersey).

Lisa n

 

[Island_Oak]

Viajero:

…Or what if we learned about them from reliable sources, but still don’t know where they stand as far as living the Church’s teachings, what then?

We NEVER know the state of another’s soul, and even with all charity we probably can assume they are at least as sinful or tempted to sin as we ourselves are. If there is nothing outwardly scandalous or blatantly sinful about their conduct, then speculating or participating in or spreading gossip is surely as evil as any sin others might be engaged in that we might be curious about. Get a life, live it flawlessly and then see if you have time left over to throw stones at others.