What do you consider the "gay lifestyle" to be?

  • Thread starter Thread starter challam2010
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
There is no such thing as the “gay lifestyle”. Just like there is no such thing as the “straight lifestyle”. There are many different lifestyles live by people both gay and straight. Some right and some wrong. Some healthy and some unhealthy. But you cannot put all gay people into one “lifestyle”. That would be like saying all Catholics, Evangelicals, Baptists, Methodists, Anglicans, and Protestants all live the “Christian lifestyle”. They all do the exact same thing and have the exact same beliefs. Doesn’t really work though, right? 👍
 
Think of sin as darkness. Does darkness exist? No. Darkness is just the absence of light.
Edit: Didn’t mean to say “Does darkness exist? No” because sin actually does exist. I meant to say “Does light cause darkness? No”
 
There is no such thing as the “gay lifestyle”. Just like there is no such thing as the “straight lifestyle”.
Those who proclaim themselves to in fact be living an ‘actively gay’ lifestyle, and are cohabitating with a member of the same gender, to whom they refer as their “partner,” are people that others generally consider “living a gay lifestyle.” That is as opposed to those who are oriented to the same gender (whether they have stated that publicly or not), but are not engaging in the behavior and language just described, and no particular “lifestyle” can be attributed to them.

Ditto for heterosexuals. I know plenty of heterosexuals who are cohabitating with someone, “actively.” And they are open about it. I don’t call that a straight lifestyle; I call that a fornicating or cohabitating lifestyle (or in some cases an adulterous one). Myself, I posted earlier on this thread what I considered elements of “the gay lifestyle.” That doesn’t mean that I myself use the term. (I don’t.) I was just responding to the question that was asked, because I happen to know how that tends to be understood, by those who use it.

I.m.o. gays (or those with SSA) suffer perhaps more from their own set than from straights, to this degree: In my earlier post I listed items 3 and 4, which I think to many people represent the majority of homosexuals, even though it probably doesn’t. However, just as with other interest groups that have vocal activists, the loudest, most visible, most prominent, and the most controversial of such groups tend to be the ones the public identifies as representative of the whole group, even if that is slightly or grossly inaccurate.

I’ve lived in regions (and still live in one of them) that much of the country has enormous misunderstandings about, to the point of absurd and humiliating stereotypes. And I’m talking educated people having such stereotypes, not ignorant people with little access to information. I remember vividly at one family reunion that I was almost un-invited before it happened, and when the event did occur, relatives provoked shouting arguments based on assumptions that because I lived there, I shared the views of the minority number of people living there, who were in the news.

In my understanding, when Catholics used the terms ‘the gay lifestyle,’ they are distinctly not referring to SSA (or ‘a gay orientation’), but rather, cohabitating with a partner who is their romantic/sexual ‘significant other.’ I also have to say that not all gays would agree with you that there is no such thing as ‘a gay lifestyle.’ A fairly prominent gay man in entertainment believes strongly that, to quote him, “being gay is a lifestyle.” (To include, apparently, some or a lot of items 3 and 4 in that earlier post of mine.) And the people in the gay community with whom he associates share that view of his. IOW, to him – and I say this with some amusement, but not mockery or disrespect or disparagement – there’s some kind of ‘identity ranking’: a person with ‘gay credentials,’ so to speak, is not just someone with attraction to the same gender, but someone who is immersed in a subculture. (Anyone else called gay or claiming to be gay is someone who is merely choosing to engage in nonstandard sexual activity, temporarily or permanently.) I’m just reporting it, that’s all.
 
I’ve been to Courage and the issue I have with it is this. It’s always just about “the struggle.” My biggest problem with relation to same-sex attraction is the place it puts on within the Church and how people in the Church view it. I classify those who choose a religious vocation as first class because of two things: first, they choose to model Christ directly and second, they sacrifice their rightly ordered sexuality in purity and it’s all freely given out of a desire to love God. I classify those who choose marriage or straights who are in the single state as second class because, while they don’t model Christ directly, they do use their rightly ordered sexuality in a chastity according to their state. A homosexual person must be third class because, while they are required to sacrifice their sexuality or face eternal torment in hell, that sacrifice is of something that is intrinsically disordered, thus defective, making said sacrifice null and void. Even becoming a religious wouldn’t remove the fatal defect and allow the homosexual person to move from third class status…his or her sexuality is so defective and disordered that their sacrifice of it is worthless to God as it is stained irreparably by their very defect.
I think you are forgetting all the sacrifices people make who are not married. For instance, when I was younger in school, I had problems with temptations for voluptuous women who would prance around in their tight near non-existent clothing. The images would grab away at my primitive conscious and create lust and temptation. It was a problem because there was lust at every corner of the campus. Your situation is no different than this. It is not lower than others. Even married men face the same temptations as you when they see another attractive woman. Yet they don’t act on it because of their sacrifice for marriage.

Lust is a very tough cross to bear because it involves the primitive animalistic mind in the human brain. When a woman wears, say, a really short skirt, or a tight top, and shows off her curves it registers images in a part of the male brain that incites lust which men cannot control due to instinct. This is one reason why modesty in women is so important. Immodest sexualixed clothing brings out primitive urges in men that causes other people to fall.

You also might wanna try antidepressants. They help lower the libido. Which can make you concentrate more on spiritual things. Origen castrated himself so he could live a life un-impeded by sexual urges. Of course I don’t recommend that…
 
I think you are forgetting all the sacrifices people make who are not married. For instance, when I was younger in school, I had problems with temptations for voluptuous women who would prance around in their tight near non-existent clothing. The images would grab away at my primitive conscious and create lust and temptation. It was a problem because there was lust at every corner of the campus.
Would you say that a sacrifice that is willingly chosen is more or less meritorious than one that is not willingly chosen and done out of mere obedience?
Your situation is no different than this. It is not lower than others. Even married men face the same temptations as you when they see another attractive woman. Yet they don’t act on it because of their sacrifice for marriage.
My concern is the VALUE of a heterosexual choosing celibacy compared to a homosexual, out of obedience, living a celibate life. I posit that the heterosexual gains merit by their choice while the homosexual does not.

The only glitch in my theory is where Samuel tells Saul in 1 Sam 15:22, “to obey is better than sacrifice.”
You also might wanna try antidepressants. They help lower the libido. Which can make you concentrate more on spiritual things. Origen castrated himself so he could live a life un-impeded by sexual urges. Of course I don’t recommend that…
Um, no to the pharmaceuticals. I’m not rich and I’ve seen what in the news what happens when people run out of pills and can’t get more. Although I have to admire your prowess in figuring out that I suffer from pretty severe depression. Sometimes, I’d like to take a trowel to the part of my brain that thinks the negative thoughts I get…they’re pretty intensely bad and I feel correspondingly bad. 😦

My issue isn’t that I’m “horny.” The depression and my diabetes take care of that. My issue is that I see my same-sex attractions as something that is like an anchor attached to my life. No matter what I do, it’s there holding me back and keeping me down. Again, it’s not the desire for sex with other dudes (it used to be a problem, but I know too much for it to be a real problem nowadays…I know the futility before I even think about acting out), it’s the fact that I don’t see anything good coming from it. Sacrificing my sexuality isn’t meritorious, it’s only obedience.

And castration akin to what Origen did is also a mortal sin.
 
Would you say that a sacrifice that is willingly chosen is more or less meritorious than one that is not willingly chosen and done out of mere obedience?

My concern is the VALUE of a heterosexual choosing celibacy compared to a homosexual, out of obedience, living a celibate life. I posit that the heterosexual gains merit by their choice while the homosexual does not.

The only glitch in my theory is where Samuel tells Saul in 1 Sam 15:22, “to obey is better than sacrifice.”

Um, no to the pharmaceuticals. I’m not rich and I’ve seen what in the news what happens when people run out of pills and can’t get more. Although I have to admire your prowess in figuring out that I suffer from pretty severe depression. Sometimes, I’d like to take a trowel to the part of my brain that thinks the negative thoughts I get…they’re pretty intensely bad and I feel correspondingly bad. 😦

My issue isn’t that I’m “horny.” The depression and my diabetes take care of that. My issue is that I see my same-sex attractions as something that is like an anchor attached to my life. No matter what I do, it’s there holding me back and keeping me down. Again, it’s not the desire for sex with other dudes (it used to be a problem, but I know too much for it to be a real problem nowadays…I know the futility before I even think about acting out), it’s the fact that I don’t see anything good coming from it. Sacrificing my sexuality isn’t meritorious, it’s only obedience.

And castration akin to what Origen did is also a mortal sin.
but we all make sexual sacrifices. The married man, the single man, the woman. There are many men who probably would like to sleep with every woman they find attractive. But they cannot. Men think about sex every 30 seconds. They are anchored by the thoughts just as you are. Go to a sex addicts center and see what people struggle with. And yet it shows they are trying and willing to make sacrifices.

And if your sexual urges are giving occasion to sin, then yes, sacrificing them is meritorious. Monks go through temptation all day with this.

You say the urges aren’t there as much. If that is true then you already have half the battle won, since lust is a very magnetic thing. pornography makes more money than all the sports industries combined.

You also have the issue of marriage. A good woman who you can relate to and eventually love and care for. A good pious discreet woman is a wonderful gift for a man. You cannot reject these gifts since you have never experienced them. Granted, many western women tend to be kinda rebellious, loud, materialistic, and manly acting, but there is always that rare one that is graceful, beautiful, feminine, and knows how to take care of her man. With such a woman, that ‘anchor’ seems to miraculously disappear.

One reason why I think there is an increase in men with SSA is because of the loss of femininity, humility, discreetness, and chivalry in women. Due to the feminist movement which made women brass and unfeminine. Thus many men were unable to respond to women in a natural chivalric manner. This lead to confusion between the sexes and thus the increases in SSA. Now we have men dressing and wanting to be women, and women dressing and acting like men. There is an utter loss of the identity of being a man or a woman. And this causes a jaded hazed view of thinking.

You say you don’t see anything good coming from it. However think of the Virgins words to St. Bernadette. “I cannot promise you happiness in this life, but I can in the next life”. Think of eternal happiness in heaven, and once you are in heaven these struggles will seem like such small issues based on the reward factor. I think peoples problem is that they are not able to fully see the risk/reward factor as regards to heaven. I admit, I myself sometimes cannot because I have never experienced heaven. but I think if someone experienced heaven for just 5 seconds they would realize the sacrifice was totally worth it.
 
but we all make sexual sacrifices. The married man, the single man, the woman. There are many men who probably would like to sleep with every woman they find attractive. But they cannot. Men think about sex every 30 seconds. They are anchored by the thoughts just as you are. Go to a sex addicts center and see what people struggle with. And yet it shows they are trying and willing to make sacrifices.

And if your sexual urges are giving occasion to sin, then yes, sacrificing them is meritorious. Monks go through temptation all day with this.

You say the urges aren’t there as much. If that is true then you already have half the battle won, since lust is a very magnetic thing. pornography makes more money than all the sports industries combined.

You also have the issue of marriage. A good woman who you can relate to and eventually love and care for. A good pious discreet woman is a wonderful gift for a man. You cannot reject these gifts since you have never experienced them. Granted, many western women tend to be kinda rebellious, loud, materialistic, and manly acting, but there is always that rare one that is graceful, beautiful, feminine, and knows how to take care of her man. With such a woman, that ‘anchor’ seems to miraculously disappear.

One reason why I think there is an increase in men with SSA is because of the loss of femininity, humility, discreetness, and chivalry in women. Due to the feminist movement which made women brass and unfeminine. Thus many men were unable to respond to women in a natural chivalric manner. This lead to confusion between the sexes and thus the increases in SSA. Now we have men dressing and wanting to be women, and women dressing and acting like men. There is an utter loss of the identity of being a man or a woman. And this causes a jaded hazed view of thinking.

You say you don’t see anything good coming from it. However think of the Virgins words to St. Bernadette. “I cannot promise you happiness in this life, but I can in the next life”. Think of eternal happiness in heaven, and once you are in heaven these struggles will seem like such small issues based on the reward factor. I think peoples problem is that they are not able to fully see the risk/reward factor as regards to heaven. I admit, I myself sometimes cannot because I have never experienced heaven. but I think if someone experienced heaven for just 5 seconds they would realize the sacrifice was totally worth it.
If a reward in heaven is the only goal for mankind, then the experience of living is just a futile happenstance. In His wisdom, don’t you think if god wanted us to just go to heaven He would have just put us there?

There seems to be much more to life than that, thats why Jesus had the focus on love and relationships with our fellow man. And maybe it isn’t just about getting to heaven but getting to heaven by having legitimate , loving relationships with our fellow men ( a biblical gender usage term.)

Peace
 
Let’s see they were banished from the garden, had two boys who begot the rest of humankind? And we get baptized to erase the sin of eating an apple .

Is that the original sin you are talking about? And from that sin God decided to have kids born with their spines open or their eyes forever closed ?

I just want to make sure I believe in the correct original sin and that “original” sin is not just a concept to explain how we all are not perfect and by being baptized we are welcomed into the family that has the best knowledge on how to improve upon our imperfection.
Such bitterness and sarcasm…I pray the peace of Christ come upon you.

I acknowledge and BELIEVE these facts:

1.) God is an omnipotent Goodness, all just and all holiness

2.) We have an inherited corrupted nature due to pride and disobedience. (Wasn’t God wonderful that HE respected us enough from the very beginning to give us free will to choose our own course?)

3.) Even in our rebellion, HE loved us and did not forsake us, but sent a Savior if we can only **now **be obedient to His WILL!

4.) We will constantly fall due to our weakened state, but HE has provided the means of restoration through the Sacraments.

5.) Even in sickness and evil, He works His justice for the good of all mankind.

I ADORE, I TRUST, I BELIEVE!
 
Such bitterness and sarcasm…I pray the peace of Christ come upon you.

I acknowledge and BELIEVE these facts:

1.) God is an omnipotent Goodness, all just and all holiness

2.) We have an inherited corrupted nature due to pride and disobedience. (Wasn’t God wonderful that HE respected us enough from the very beginning to give us free will to choose our own course?)

3.) Even in our rebellion, HE loved us and did not forsake us, but sent a Savior if we can only **now **be obedient to His WILL!

4.) We will constantly fall due to our weakened state, but HE has provided the means of restoration through the Sacraments.

5.) Even in sickness and evil, He works His justice for the good of all mankind.

I ADORE, I TRUST, I BELIEVE!
You may detect sarcasm , but not bitterness.

I am not bitter because I believe in Jesus’ message about the value of every person. In that message He tells us it is incumbent to treat the least like they may be Him.

To do so, we must first realize that the value in each person comes from God and contrary to what you feel, our sins are not the result of what we have inherited , but from how well or how poorly we love and treat everyone, including ourselves.

You present a paradox in the conclusions of your post , part of it speaks to free will and part of it speaks to being predestined to certain states because of the inheriting of pride and disobedience and we have your concept of constantly falling due to our “weakened” state .

I like to think that what Jesus taught inspires us to always become better and to be continually growing as opposed to be continually falling. We should always be looking to emphasize the Jesus in all of us, because isn’t that what was meant by treating the least like they may be Him?

Peace
 
Someone please tell me: Why are there so many of these sorts of posts? And, why are nearly all of them so wordy and whiny?

I would imagine that every single possible question and answer has been addressed like 5000 times already, no? It’s like a venting station. And if you read them, they never lead to a conclusion or decision. It’s just a huge gasbag of feelings and angst and disorder.

Can’t we just have some code that auto sorts all of these posts into an enormously long thread. They all end up unraveling to the same point of disorder anyway.
 
Someone please tell me: Why are there so many of these sorts of posts? And, why are nearly all of them so wordy and whiny?

I would imagine that every single possible question and answer has been addressed like 5000 times already, no? It’s like a venting station. And if you read them, they never lead to a conclusion or decision. It’s just a huge gasbag of feelings and angst and disorder.

Can’t we just have some code that auto sorts all of these posts into an enormously long thread. They all end up unraveling to the same point of disorder anyway.
because liberals aren’t here to learn about the faith or salvation. They are here with an axe to grind and an agenda to put forth and try to put it forth under some kinda post-modern hippie “humanism” rose colored glasses filter in order to make themselves look like they are “open-minded and accepting” of people.

Jaded open-mindedness for the sake of open-mindedness in order to look like an intellectual humanist. Pretty much…

In reality, they are just feeding off the post-modernistic view of politically correct humanism.

and whats funny is that many of these people who say they value human beings and freedom are virulently pro-abortion usually. Then again, they are so jaded by the 60s cultural “revolution” that they are too ignorant to even realize their utter hypocrisy.
 
Someone please tell me: Why are there so many of these sorts of posts? And, why are nearly all of them so wordy and whiny?

I would imagine that every single possible question and answer has been addressed like 5000 times already, no? It’s like a venting station. And if you read them, they never lead to a conclusion or decision. It’s just a huge gasbag of feelings and angst and disorder.
I have wondered aloud the same thing, and recently on one of these duplicative threads. I agree, for the vast majority of those who start them, and many who race to join them, there is no sincere interest in truly learning answers, from the sources, to the questions posed. Their purpose, largely, i.m.o., is to wear down Catholics and Catholic positions to mental exhaustion and the point of surrender. There are selective few posters who themselves are gay and who struggle and sincerely are trying to live in step with Catholicism; sometimes they contribute, and when they do so I believe they are sincere. There’s another (also small) segment who are not Catholic, or gay, and are nevertheless trying to learn. But often this group is difficult to persuade, because as I mentioned here or elsewhere, if you are not willing to learn the theoretical principles behind the moral theology, the theological conclusions will be difficult to understand. People want shorthand, sound-bite answers to all their moral dilemmas nowadays. If they can’t have them (because such answers aren’t available, or because they’re too impatient to study), then they tend to abandon the search for philosophical consistency, and just march on and randomly argue from a more shallow, more intellectually or politcally convenient place.
Can’t we just have some code that auto sorts all of these posts into an enormously long thread. They all end up unraveling to the same point of disorder anyway.
I think I suggested a long time ago (maybe I didn’t, but wished it) a composite sticky in the Apologetics forum, listing all the links to date wherein this subject has been discussed (homosexual behavior and gay marriage/unions). People would be directed there first for such discussions. If a poster tried to open yet another thread, there would be a convenient hyperlink combining those threads, to which the first replier could immediately direct him or her.

Yes, it’s been discussed ad nauseum: the same questions and answers, over and over.

The only similar syndrome is that pertaining to masturbation, and the same efforts are exerted there, by posters who essentially want others to exonerate them or give them permission, or non-Catholics on a campaign to discredit Catholic moral theology. As with SSA, there are stickies, I think, but in the case of neither topic is there a collective list of links where this has already been debated for several years.

For Catholics (gay, straight, teenage, adult) there is actually no excuse for not knowing where the Church stands on sexual issues. The information is abundant in the Catechism, on newadvent.org (Catholic Encyclopedia online), on CAF, and through one’s local parish priest – which I would trust as the definitive word more than some catechetical programs, not all of whose leaders are well-trained or well-informed.

I’m sure that if those sources are not sufficient, any sincere inquirer could request of the parish priest, or the diocesan office, that some pamphlet/brochure/flyer become available on sexual morality, which compiles in simple language the essence of some of the above.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top