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

[PatrickSebast]

I suggest, if you are an adult, to go to any gay web site. There you can see, without preconception, what they’re talking about. You can also google LGBT to find out how unified this all is. Paranoia is often used as a claim without supporting evidence.

Or, you can read this article:

catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=26840

God bless,
Ed

Big surprise. If you go to gay websites or look at gay political groups the people are typically under one banner. That doesn’t change the fact that gay people can and do believe different things. Gay Agenda is a bad term because it assigns a certain belief to ALL gays. It attempts to unify a diverse group under a blanket statement and just like every other time this has happened it is a stupid thing to do. If you have a problem with a group like LGBT or and idea attack the group or idea, stop trying to defend the use of umbrella statements, even the very article you posted shyed away from the term and probably only used it because of an awareness of its audience.

This is a simple one question process:

Is the group in question (gays) unified under one solid and well outlined idea? If yes then you can put them in an umbrella group, if the answer is no then you can’t. Catholic Agenda would be fine for instance, Black Agenda on the other hand is not because it ascribes beliefs to someone based on a small part of who they are as a person.

With gays the answer is no, and thus gay agenda is a bad term to use. This isn’t some clever debate where you get to pull out statistics and websites stating otherwise as evidence, umbrella terms have a proper use and an improper use and “Gay Agenda” is an improper use.

 

[edwest2]

Perhaps you can explain the web site gayagenda.com They show it as a Registered Trademark.

This is not just a perception created by conservatives.

Respectfully,
Ed

 

[portarica]

Perhaps you can explain the web site gayagenda.com They show it as a Registered Trademark.

This is not just a perception created by conservatives.

Respectfully,
Ed

If it is registered trademark, then by definition the use of that term is non-inclusive , so that sort of runs counter to the argument that the “gay agenda” is some monolithic idea shared by all gay people.

That would be like trademarking the term tea party.

thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-10-01/the-tea-party-patriots-trademark-war/

Peace

 

[PatrickSebast]

Perhaps you can explain the web site gayagenda.com They show it as a Registered Trademark.

This is not just a perception created by conservatives.

Respectfully,
Ed

Just because some members of a group embrace an umbrella phrase about themselves it still wouldn’t excuse the use of an umbrella phrase. I didn’t point any blame at conservatives, I pointed blame at people who would use the phrase. When gayagenda.com uses the phrase they probably trying to do one of two things, claiming a unity that doesn’t exist in order to strengthen their opinion OR they intend for it to be a satiric title. I can’t really say though because I don’t know the founder and the information isn’t clearly available on their front page. I doesn’t matter though because it is still a blanket statement that puts words in peoples mouths that they aren’t saying. If a bunch of Asian Americans started a website called Asian Agenda which discussed how they wanted to brink eastern principles in western culture then that wouldn’t make it any less ridiculous for me to start spouting phrases like “The Asian Agenda is to uproot our entire culture and individual values and transform us into a collectivist society with a more socialist government!” I could say “Asian Agenda intends to…” or “Look at the goals of this group Asian Agenda!” Umbrella statements simply aren’t honest statements and they are disrespectful to our fellow man.

 

[Miserys_Fence]

“The gay lifestyle” is merely a label of convenience, created by people who are too lazy and/or ignorant to think for themselves. See, it’s easy! Just let society do all your thinking for you!

Miz

 

[kjn_23]

Well I’ll start with the fact I’m a gay catholic lives in chastity.

For me…

Gay Agenda

10:00a Wake Up, Make Coffee, Eat Breakfast, ect.
11:30a First Class of the Day Starts
1:20p Class ends
2:00p Go to work
10:00p Get off work
11:00p Start Homework/Studying
2:00a Bedtime

Hope that helps…

I don’t count basics rights such as EOE or EOH to be an agenda. I’m gay, therefore I find members of the same sex attractive. Not sure why that’s grounds to fire me or deny me housing (ect.).

Now Gay Lifestyle…

I like to a gay bar on occasion and spend time with other gay people and accepting straight people. I’ve been to a pride parade, because why should I be ashamed of my attractions. I don’t act on them, but they are there. On occasion I like to wear shirts with some foil and studding, but I see tons of straights wearing them. Hmm… what else… The occasional drag show to watch the queens practice their art. I think that about cover anything in my lifestyle that would be “Gay” to a straight person.

PS. I use gay to define any man who is attracted to the same sex. I personally find being called a person suffering from SSA demeaning.

Just my two cents… Sorry if I seem angry, but no matter what people say… Words can break a persons heart.

 

[2cats]

RealJuliane and Stephe1987, please cite a reliable, credible source for your statistics about throat cancer, number of partners, life expectancy, etc.

And, just curious, is there also a high rate of throat cancer among female prostitutes? One would expect it to be comparable if it’s tied to oral sex.

I’m not gay nor is any member of my family, but I have known quite a few gay people, and none were promiscuous. In fact, most of them were in monogamous, committed relationships. This evidence is anecdotal, I admit; I don’t have statistics. But it bothers me when people perpetuate the steretype that gay people are promiscuous. Frankly, I’ve known many more promiscuous heterosexuals than promiscuous homosexuals. Granted, the pool of people is larger, and my point here is not to condone homosexual acts or heterosexual acts outside of marriage. My point is just that gay people don’t have a monopoly on promsicuity.

 

[PetersKeys]

homosexuality is not a lifestyle. it is a form of slavery. if anything it is the shackling of ones lifestyle, since sin shackles us as slaves. It is a consequence of sin and temptation. Sin is never to be viewed as a lifestyle. But rather a trap.

A true lifestyle gives certain freedoms to a person. It does not shackle them more into sin. homosexuality is a form of slavery to sin. It is a cross for some people to bear.

 

[challam2010]

homosexuality is not a lifestyle. it is a form of slavery. if anything it is the shackling of ones lifestyle, since sin shackles us as slaves. It is a consequence of sin and temptation. Sin is never to be viewed as a lifestyle. But rather a trap.

A true lifestyle gives certain freedoms to a person. It does not shackle them more into sin. homosexuality is a form of slavery to sin. It is a cross for some people to bear.

I suggest you read posting #13 in this thread for a more complete explanation. Stating that “homosexuality is a form of slavery to sin” is grossly unjust and incorrect in light of the Church’s statements and the love that Jesus bade us show one another.

 

[Tigg]

Well I’ll start with the fact I’m a gay catholic lives in chastity.

For me…

Gay Agenda

10:00a Wake Up, Make Coffee, Eat Breakfast, ect.
11:30a First Class of the Day Starts
1:20p Class ends
2:00p Go to work
10:00p Get off work
11:00p Start Homework/Studying
2:00a Bedtime

Hope that helps…

In other words, you do what we all do in life…fight against concupiscence and our sinful inclinations. If we are recovering alcoholics, we fight against the temptation to have a drink, if we are suffering from drug addiction, we fight against the temptation to do drugs, if we suffer from lust (whether gay or straight) we pray for the strength to not succumb. Everyone carries a cross - some heavier than others.

Why would the gay “lifestyle” be different from any other as far as the call to deny self, take up our cross and follow Christ???

 

[estesbob]

Well I’ll start with the fact I’m a gay catholic lives in chastity.

For me…

Gay Agenda

10:00a Wake Up, Make Coffee, Eat Breakfast, ect.
11:30a First Class of the Day Starts
1:20p Class ends
2:00p Go to work
10:00p Get off work
11:00p Start Homework/Studying
2:00a Bedtime

Hope that helps…

I don’t count basics rights such as EOE or EOH to be an agenda. I’m gay, therefore I find members of the same sex attractive. Not sure why that’s grounds to fire me or deny me housing (ect.).

Now Gay Lifestyle…

I like to a gay bar on occasion and spend time with other gay people and accepting straight people. I’ve been to a pride parade, because why should I be ashamed of my attractions. I don’t act on them, but they are there. On occasion I like to wear shirts with some foil and studding, but I see tons of straights wearing them. Hmm… what else… The occasional drag show to watch the queens practice their art. I think that about cover anything in my lifestyle that would be “Gay” to a straight person.

PS. I use gay to define any man who is attracted to the same sex. I personally find being called a person suffering from SSA demeaning.

Just my two cents… Sorry if I seem angry, but no matter what people say… Words can break a persons heart.

Interesting. I am a recovering alcoholic -in fact I just celebrated 25 years of sobriety. Knowing that I have this problem I make a point not to visit bars or hang around people who drink too much. Which begs the question as to why a person who struggles with same-sex attraction would go to homosexual bars and strip shows?

 

[InSearchofGrace]

“Gay lifestyle” isn’t a term I use, but to me without context it just use means openly and actively practicing homosexuality. Usually there is some context that hints at a certain aspect of it in any given post though. Generally I don’t have much of a problem with how the term is used however…

“Gay Agenda” is more the term that concerns me. It seems like most people who use that term legitimately believe that homosexuals as a whole are out to attack their way of life. There are people on this forum who have openly expressed the belief that there has been some underground gay society influencing society towards something since sometime in the mid 1900’s. There are others here who act like all gay people are unified under one banner in what they want and expect from society and that they are all loud, sexually expressive, and trying to force ideas like infidelity and the destruction of monogamy down out throats. Gay Agenda is almost always a term that accompanies some level of paranoia and tries to group homosexual people into one group. I am willing to be the same people who use that term wouldn’t be terribly happy if someone started using the term “Christian Agenda” in a similar manner though.

I would define “gay lifestyle” the same way: openly practicing homosexuality. Usually, it applies to same sex couples dating / living together in some form of formal civil union. Like a gay brother of mine who was in a domestic partnership for ten years.

The term “gay agenda” is generally taken to mean the advocacy for cultural acceptance and normalization of homosexual orientations and relationship. It includes changing policies and laws to allow same sex marriage, adoption of children by gay couples, making (homo)sexual orientation as a civil rights classification, ability of openly gay people to join/participate in the military, and inclusion of LGBT history and themes in public education.

I don’t think anybody believes that there is an “underground” gay society, since gay groups wish nothing but be visible and heard.

You may not like the term “gay agenda” for the reasons you stated. However, the following links are indicative that no less than the Obama administration and Catholic Church acknowledge a gay agenda, just with opposite positions on what gay groups are lobbying for.
Obama administration reveals plans to advance gay agenda

Obama inches toward gay agenda

Opposing the Homosexual Agenda: Religious Bigotry or Science and Justice?

Bishop Tobin: Catholic apathy on same-sex ‘marriage’ must end
As a Catholic, I agree with the Church teaching (show compassion to homosexuals, regard homosexual behavior as a sin) and what our Bishops have taken as position against the gay agenda of promoting homosexual unions. Having a gay brother in the family, I am happy that homosexuals are no longer discriminated in the work place and there is now wide agreement against persecution and hatred of gays.

. . . . . .

 

[MarianD]

I don’t believe in a “gay” lifestyle. If someone wants to dress up and be flamboyant, go ahead. I think it’s odd, but I don’t see anything morally wrong with it.

I simply see it wrong to have homosexual sex. It’s also wrong for a gay person to marry someone of the opposite sex if they cannot truly love them (some gays can, so this doesn’t apply to all of them). I also see it as morally wrong for gays to marry each other in the strictest sense of the word (i.e. the Sacrament of Marriage), but I do not oppose civil marriages or civil unions for gays.

If one is a gay Catholic, he/she is expected not to deny this identity, but rather to deal with it with the help of the Church and its members. Complete celibacy is only required if a gay person has absolutely no attraction to the opposite sex and can’t marry a person of the opposite sex with feelings of romantic love, and this is only because of the various problems this can (and, as proven by various cases, will) cause if there is no true love there.

Gays should be loved and treated no differently than straight people. They should have help coping with their cross, but they should never be discriminated against or seen as any less or any more than heterosexuals.

Gay priests? I see no problem with it. There is no link between them and the sex abuse scandal. That’s linked with priests who just can’t control their urges and don’t seek God’s help to help them overcome their urges. Gay relationships? I’m not too sure about that one. I don’t see it as a sin in and of itself, but it is certainly a “near occasion of sin” and should be avoided.

 

[Julianna]

RealJuliane and Stephe1987, please cite a reliable, credible source for your statistics about throat cancer, number of partners, life expectancy, etc.

And, just curious, is there also a high rate of throat cancer among female prostitutes? One would expect it to be comparable if it’s tied to oral sex.

I’m not gay nor is any member of my family, but I have known quite a few gay people, and none were promiscuous. In fact, most of them were in monogamous, committed relationships. This evidence is anecdotal, I admit; I don’t have statistics. But it bothers me when people perpetuate the steretype that gay people are promiscuous. Frankly, I’ve known many more promiscuous heterosexuals than promiscuous homosexuals. Granted, the pool of people is larger, and my point here is not to condone homosexual acts or heterosexual acts outside of marriage. My point is just that gay people don’t have a monopoly on promsicuity.

:clapping:

Excellent…just how many prostitutes have throat cancer?

As for promiscuity…go to any straight club on a Friday night…it’s everywhere. I really didn’t know promiscuity was only tied to homosexuals.

There are 4 sets of gay men in my neighborhood. I don’t ask them about their sex life and they don’t ask me. I have never seen them in a pink tutu parading down the street or in any town parade holding a pink toy poodle. Nor have I seen them wear chaps with the butt out mowing the lawn. They haven’t been ringing my door bell telling me to support the gay agenda:shrug: When my daughter was in Girl Scouts she sold them cookies and was invited into their home. I was there…I didn’t see a portrait of Liza Minelli over the fireplace, and a Queen Anne pink settee in the living room. I never felt fear for my son or daughter living across the street.

Not sure where all this throat cancer…stuff is coming from. Unless of course, it is pure paranoia.

 

[PatrickSebast]

I would define “gay lifestyle” the same way: openly practicing homosexuality. Usually, it applies to same sex couples dating / living together in some form of formal civil union. Like a gay brother of mine who was in a domestic partnership for ten years.

The term “gay agenda” is generally taken to mean the advocacy for cultural acceptance and normalization of homosexual orientations and relationship. It includes changing policies and laws to allow same sex marriage, adoption of children by gay couples, making (homo)sexual orientation as a civil rights classification, ability of openly gay people to join/participate in the military, and inclusion of LGBT history and themes in public education.

I don’t think anybody believes that there is an “underground” gay society, since gay groups wish nothing but be visible and heard.

You may not like the term “gay agenda” for the reasons you stated. However, the following links are indicative that no less than the Obama administration and Catholic Church acknowledge a gay agenda, just with opposite positions on what gay groups are lobbying for.
Obama administration reveals plans to advance gay agenda

Obama inches toward gay agenda

Opposing the Homosexual Agenda: Religious Bigotry or Science and Justice?

Bishop Tobin: Catholic apathy on same-sex ‘marriage’ must end
As a Catholic, I agree with the Church teaching (show compassion to homosexuals, regard homosexual behavior as a sin) and what our Bishops have taken as position against the gay agenda of promoting homosexual unions. Having a gay brother in the family, I am happy that homosexuals are no longer discriminated in the work place and there is now wide agreement against persecution and hatred of gays.

. . . . . .

The Obama administration itself has not use the term Gay Agenda, that was simply the term the writer of the article chose. The Church also has never used it as it is a decidedly American term, true some officials in the US church have made use of it, but it is pretty easy for a person to get caught up in rhetoric without thinking about its sensibilities. Besides I am sure I could site many things individual Bishops have done that would upset most people on this forum. As I said before there really isn’t much to debate, any terminology that places people under a metaphoric umbrella that they don’t belong too simply isn’t responsible or charitable. When a person says
“Well look here at what the Gay Agenda is trying to do to America”

If someone in the room simply says “I’m gay and that isn’t my Agenda for America at all”

Then what does the original speaker say? “I should be able to use the term anyway because this guy did it?” Not an argument any parent would accept from their children.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

Interesting. I am a recovering alcoholic -in fact I just celebrated 25 years of sobriety. Knowing that I have this problem I make a point not to visit bars or hang around people who drink too much. Which begs the question as to why a person who struggles with same-sex attraction would go to homosexual bars and strip shows?

Congratulations on your sobriety anniversary!!!



One day at a time.

(from an Al-Anon)

 

[flameburns623]

Is the OP asking if Catholics have any stereotypes about how homosexuals, lesbians, bisexual, or transgendered people live?

Probably.

Considering that I have never met a male who has volunteered the information that they are ‘gay’. Met a few I strongly suspected were such, but somehow–the conversation never got around to discussing our sexual preferences. Do people outside the straitlaced Midwestern United States frequently have such conversations?

I’ve actually only met ONE female who volunteered the information that she was lesbian. She could’ve tatooed the information on her forehead, she was so obvious, but she decided she had to verbalize the fact as well.

She’d spent months trying to provoke someone at our workplace into saying or doing something to sue us over. She kept bringing up sexual topics in the workplace and making everyone very uncomfortable. She eventually left us, went to a competitor company and apparently pulled the same stuff–eventually successfully generating a lawsuit against that competitor.

So the only thing I actually know about the ‘gay lifestyle’ is that there is at least one lesbian walking through life with a lawyer shoved in her back pocket.

Dunno if I would want to extrapolate from a survey sample of one in order to generalize about the entire population, however.

 

[Kolbe300]

Great question. You’ve seen a different answer from just about every person who replied. (And we wonder why it’s impossible to have a meaningful converstation on a topic when everyone is thinking something different from the same term.)

Personally, I find the term “gay lifestyle” quite funny. The term is absolutely impossible to define. We can’t even agree on the definition of the word “gay”. How in the world could we possibly agree on what that lifestyle would be.

As a gay man, I live a “gay lifestyle”. I happen to be Catholic and believe in the teachings of the Church. Because of that, my gay lifestyle includes a lot of Sacraments and being single and celibate. Lots of people would rather me not live the “gay lifestyle” but what other choice do I have? I could try out the “heterosexual lifestyle” that so many enjoy but I’m not really big on premarital sex, contraception, and all the other sinful things that go along with the “heterosexual lifestyle”. The vast majority of heterosexual males I work with spend most of their time looking for ladies to have sex with. And they like to talk about it, too. That kind of thing makes me glad I’m living my gay lifestyle and not their heterosexual one.

Long story short: the term “gay lifestyle” is absolutely, positively, undeniably pointless. It can’t be defined, just as “heterosexual lifestyle” can’t be defined. When we use either term as a blanket statement (which is impossible NOT to do), we do an injustice.

 

[RobbyS]

*However, the Church also acknowledges that "[homosexuality’s] psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. . . . The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s cross the difficulties that they may encounter from their condition. *

Even though we’ve been admonished by the Church as above, I’ve noted in these threads a very different attitude toward those who engage in “the gay lifestyle.” Some of the postings could be considered overt homophobia, while others lie somewhere along that continuum.

I’m not sure I understand what you consider comprises that “gay lifestyle.” Is it political action for gay marriage, marching in gay pride parades, protesting against discriminatory laws, “flaunting” their homosexuality – what? I’m looking for an explanation.

I’m curious if you expect a homosexual person living as a celibate Catholic to forego all sociopolitical connection with his/her peers – to basically go back in the closet in actions, if not in words.

For the record, I’m not gay, I have no gay friends or family now, I don’t support gay marriage, I have NO AGENDA HERE. I’m just curious about the disparity between the above statement from the Church and many of the postings I’ve seen from Catholics on this Forum.

Thank you for your answers.

I think it engagement in homosexual practices. My attitude is that homosexuality is something like alcoholism. It can’t be “cured” but it can be “handled.” Associating with people who are OK with the lifestyle, it seems to me, is something that ought to be avoided by anyone trying to be faithful.

 

[RobbyS]

Great question. You’ve seen a different answer from just about every person who replied. (And we wonder why it’s impossible to have a meaningful converstation on a topic when everyone is thinking something different from the same term.)

Personally, I find the term “gay lifestyle” quite funny. The term is absolutely impossible to define. We can’t even agree on the definition of the word “gay”. How in the world could we possibly agree on what that lifestyle would be.

As a gay man, I live a “gay lifestyle”. I happen to be Catholic and believe in the teachings of the Church. Because of that, my gay lifestyle includes a lot of Sacraments and being single and celibate. Lots of people would rather me not live the “gay lifestyle” but what other choice do I have? I could try out the “heterosexual lifestyle” that so many enjoy but I’m not really big on premarital sex, contraception, and all the other sinful things that go along with the “heterosexual lifestyle”. The vast majority of heterosexual males I work with spend most of their time looking for ladies to have sex with. And they like to talk about it, too. That kind of thing makes me glad I’m living my gay lifestyle and not their heterosexual one.

Long story short: the term “gay lifestyle” is absolutely, positively, undeniably pointless. It can’t be defined, just as “heterosexual lifestyle” can’t be defined. When we use either term as a blanket statement (which is impossible NOT to do), we do an injustice.

The “gay lifestyle” has taken on the aspect of a subculture. In part it is like that depicted in the media and certainly owes a lot to the media.someone like the “witch” thing and “gothic.” Gay originally meant simply “libertine,” dissolute behavior involving sex with any object at hand, just to multiply experiences. So Teddy Kennedy was 'gay" and so
are a lot of people who think of homosexuality as simply a choice of partners, since they
and gays enjoy the same sort of sex. Sex being basically just a form of entertainment, like shooting up and drinking.