What is it that homosexuals really want?

[Deus_lo_vult]

Until you can show me how chewing gum makes another do evil - I think we’re at an impasse.

If being distracted at Mass is doing evil entire congregations should be barred from Mass. Not to mention the children

Children don’t even need to attend Mass until the age of reason (7 yrs). So it’s beyond me why young parents don’t leave their children with caregivers more often.

No offense iloveangels

And no, you’re wrong, the mere act of tempting someone to sin is a form of scandal. Prostitutes sin and commit scandal by TEMPTING men to sleep with them, even if those men do not end up sleeping with them.

 

[iloveangels]

BTW, homosexual attraction is intrinsically disordered. And the homosexual act is a grave sin, in every case. Whether anyone sees it or not. Whether something is sinful or not doesn’t really have anything to do with whether you get caught or not.

 

[Wellok]

Oooh, the slippery slope argument. What are you trying to squeeze in here, Wellok?

Apparently Children and Dressing “gay” are equally scandalous.

He’s distracted by the way gay men dress at mass, kids crying or playing in the pews distract me.

 

[Deus_lo_vult]

Apparently Children and Dressing “gay” are equally scandalous.

He’s distracted by the way gay men dress at mass, kids crying or playing in the pews distract me.

Anything that gives people the impression that an active homosexual lifestyle is licit, (and that can include homosexual fashions)is a form of scandal.

You make fun of me by intimating that there’s something funny about same sex attraction. Curious. I thought you were trying to assert the complete equality of homosexuals…and you do that by joking that it would be funny if I was homosexual?

 

[iloveangels]

Apparently Children and Dressing “gay” are equally scandalous.

He’s distracted by the way gay men dress at mass, kids crying or playing in the pews distract me.

Honey, if a guy shows up at mass in drag, I won’t be distracted. I will point and laugh.
Anybody who’d do that would have it coming to them.

 

[Wellok]

Children don’t even need to attend Mass until the age of reason (7 yrs). So it’s beyond me why young parents don’t leave their children with caregivers more often.

No offense iloveangels

And no, you’re wrong, the mere act of tempting someone to sin is a form of scandal. Prostitutes sin and commit scandal by TEMPTING men to sleep with them, even if those men do not end up sleeping with them.

I guessing, family values. Also Babysitters are expensive. Maybe

[BIBLEDRB]Matthew 19:14[/BIBLEDRB]

Who knows, the little sin machines.

Actually the catechism states causing another to do evil. Not just thinking about it.

 

[mitex]

I think some of you are terribly judgemental.

I’m the kind of person Jesus ministered too folks. From the prostitute who was washing Jesus’ feet to the Samaritan woman at the well who was cohabitating with another man.

And while Jesus never spoke of homosexuality I’m sure he ran into a few of them and ministered to them along the way.

 

[Wellok]

Anything that gives people the impression that an active homosexual lifestyle is licit, (and that can include homosexual fashions)is a form of scandal.

You make fun of me by intimating that there’s something funny about same sex attraction. Curious. I thought you were trying to assert the complete equality of homosexuals…and you do that by joking that it would be funny if I was homosexual?

Nope. I just didn’t get why you found it scandalous. I get it now. Sorry If I made light of it.

I truly with all my heart wish you the best in your struggle. No humor intended. Truly.

 

[Deus_lo_vult]

I guessing, family values. Also Babysitters are expensive.

Who knows, the little sin machines.

Actually the catechism states causing another to do evil. Not just thinking about it.

Even looking lustfully at someone is sinful, so causing them to look lustfully at you is a form of scandal:

But I say to you, that whosoever shall look on a woman to lust after her, hath already committed adultery with her in his heart. (Matthew 5:28)

AND he said to his disciples: It is impossible that scandals should not come: but woe to him through whom they come. (Luke 17:1)

The incident which mitex described involved a mother who refused to seat her child next to him:

But he that shall scandalize one of these little ones that believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone should be hanged about his neck, and that he should be drowned in the depth of the sea. (Matthew 18:6)

Do not think that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets. I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For amen I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot, or one tittle shall not pass of the law, till all be fulfilled.He therefore that shall break one of these least commandments, and shall so teach men, shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven. But he that shall do and teach, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you, that unless your justice abound more than that of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5: 18-20)

You’ve lost, Wellok.

 

[Deus_lo_vult]

Nope. I just didn’t get why you found it scandalous. I get it now. Sorry If I made light of it.

I truly with all my heart wish you the best in your struggle. No humor intended. Truly.

Well, not that it will persuade you to dispense with making homosexual cracks about me, but I’m a heterosexual, so the only struggle of mine you need pray for is the same as yours. As to praying for a homosexual’s struggle, pray for mitex. I know I will.

 

[michelleds]

I think some of you are terribly judgemental.

I’m the kind of person Jesus ministered too folks. From the prostitute who was washing Jesus’ feet to the Samaritan woman at the well who was cohabitating with another man.

And while Jesus never spoke of homosexuality I’m sure he ran into a few of them and ministered to them along the way.

The problem, as it is so frequently, is gross mischaracterization. Mitex, you posted an erroneous teaching-- stating that we had to accept people as homosexuals. I pointed out to you that we are to accept people and fight discrimination and mistreatment but don’t have to accept homosexuality as an identity.

Then you said that the Church had a ways to go. You said you were threatened or scared.

John asked a series of questions, questions necessary only bc u refused or were unable to forthcoming.

Finally you admit that perhaps the reason ppl in your church knew you were gay was bc of your manner of dress and hairstyle.

Then here comes wellok to argue that u should wear any thing you want. A discussion then ensued about scandal.

Losing the argument, wellok resorted to calling another poster homosexual and you pop on to pop off that we’re all judgmental!

 

[Wellok]

Even looking lustfully at someone is sinful, so causing them to look lustfully at you is a form of scandal:

The incident which mitex described involved a mother who refused to seat her child next to him:

You’ve lost, Wellok.

So you are saying there are many at mass with same sex attraction and that’s why it’s scandalous? He is a tempter to the “gay” lifestyle, even though he’s committing no homosexual acts? He has to relearn how to speak and walk because they may be perceived to be “gay”?

That’s why I draw the conclusion about the alcoholic. Many alcoholics are in recovery and don’t drink. Still there is wine at Mass. They may be temped to drink again. I wouldn’t say priest is scandalous by celebrating the Eucharist.

Similarly children. I can’t blame a child for distracting me because he’s hungry or tired etc. It’s just what kids do.

Maybe a female Eucharistic minster can visit you if you find being around men distracting at Mass.

 

[mitex]

So you are saying there are many at mass with same sex attraction and that’s why it’s scandalous? He is a tempter to the “gay” lifestyle, even though he’s committing no homosexual acts? He has to relearn how to speak and walk because they may be perceived to be “gay”?

That’s why I draw the conclusion about the alcoholic. Many alcoholics are in recovery and don’t drink. Still there is wine at Mass. They may be temped to drink again. I wouldn’t say priest is scandalous by celebrating the Eucharist.

Similarly children. I can’t blame a child for distracting me because he’s hungry or tired etc. It’s just what kids do.

Maybe a female Eucharistic minster can visit you if you find being around men distracting at Mass.

I can change the way I dress but that’s about it. Nothing I can do about the voice or body type.

 

[Deus_lo_vult]

So you are saying there are many at mass with same sex attraction and that’s why it’s scandalous? He is a tempter to the “gay” lifestyle, even though he’s committing no homosexual acts? He has to relearn how to speak and walk because they may be perceived to be “gay”?

That’s why I draw the conclusion about the alcoholic. Many alcoholics are in recovery and don’t drink. Still there is wine at Mass. They may be temped to drink again. I wouldn’t say priest is scandalous by celebrating the Eucharist.

Similarly children. I can’t blame a child for distracting me because he’s hungry or tired etc. It’s just what kids do.

Maybe a female Eucharistic minster can visit you if you find being around men distracting at Mass.

Of course it’s not the child’s fault. No one here insinuated anything like that. Children are not accountable for the things they do up to a certain age, it is their parents, ultimately, who are to be blamed for their children causing distractions during Mass.

 

[John21652]

I can change the way I dress but that’s about it. Nothing I can do about the voice or body type.

Don’t worry about your voice or body type. Just dress appropriately for the occasion when you go to Church and join in being friendly. That’s all you have to do. If anyone askes about, or makes any snide remarks about you, then just accept that they are being rude and ignore them. You’ll do alright.

 

[Wellok]

The problem, as it is so frequently, is gross mischaracterization. Mitex, you posted an erroneous teaching-- stating that we had to accept people as homosexuals. I pointed out to you that we are to accept people and fight discrimination and mistreatment but don’t have to accept homosexuality as an identity.

Then you said that the Church had a ways to go. You said you were threatened or scared.

John asked a series of questions, questions necessary only bc u refused or were unable to forthcoming.

Finally you admit that perhaps the reason ppl in your church knew you were gay was bc of your manner of dress and hairstyle.

Then here comes wellok to argue that u should wear any thing you want. A discussion then ensued about scandal.

Losing the argument, wellok resorted to calling another poster homosexual and you pop on to pop off that we’re all judgmental!

You are mischaracterizing his posts and mine.

He can correct me if I’m wrong. I got the impression that he is effeminate. His speech, walk and the way he dresses.

I have the opinion that he need not change who he is. It isn’t sinful. The appearance of “gayness” isn’t a sin. His nature is how God made him. He serves God’s purpose. He has also been celibate indicating his dedication to the Catholic way.

I see nothing in the Catechism that says effeminate men need to butch it up to be Catholic.

If the priest came to him and said “You’re driving the boys crazy, stop wearing tight pants” I could see the sin of scandal being committed. He hasn’t indicated that.

The woman that assumes he’s engaging in homosexual acts because he sounds gay, and moves her child away, lacks Charity.

Again he wasn’t calling anyone to accept homosexual acts. Just act like he’s a “real” human being, worthy of being a “real” Catholic.

 

[mitex]

You are mischaracterizing his posts and mine.

He can correct me if I’m wrong. I got the impression that he is effeminate. His speech, walk and the way he dresses.

I have the opinion that he need not change who he is. It isn’t sinful. The appearance of “gayness” isn’t a sin. His nature is how God made him. He serves God’s purpose. He has also been celibate indicating his dedication to the Catholic way.

I see nothing in the Catechism that says effeminate men need to butch it up to be Catholic.

If the priest came to him and said “You’re driving the boys crazy, stop wearing tight pants” I could see the sin of scandal being committed. He hasn’t indicated that.

The woman that assumes he’s engaging in homosexual acts because he sounds gay, and moves her child away, lacks Charity.

Again he wasn’t calling anyone to accept homosexual acts. Just act like he’s a “real” human being, worthy of being a “real” Catholic.

I think I can finally come to an agreement with you.

 

[Deus_lo_vult]

I can change the way I dress but that’s about it. Nothing I can do about the voice or body type.

You don’t need to worry about how you sound or your biology. It’s why I don’t understand why people are called “ugly”, I mean, as if they can possibly do anything about it that isn’t totally vain or excessive, like going under the knife.

 

[iloveangels]

You are mischaracterizing his posts and mine.

He can correct me if I’m wrong. I got the impression that he is effeminate. His speech, walk and the way he dresses.

I have the opinion that he need not change who he is. It isn’t sinful. The appearance of “gayness” isn’t a sin. His nature is how God made him. He serves God’s purpose. He has also been celibate indicating his dedication to the Catholic way.

I see nothing in the Catechism that says effeminate men need to butch it up to be Catholic.

If the priest came to him and said “You’re driving the boys crazy, stop wearing tight pants” I could see the sin of scandal being committed. He hasn’t indicated that.

The woman that assumes he’s engaging in homosexual acts because he sounds gay, and moves her child away, lacks Charity.

Again he wasn’t calling anyone to accept homosexual acts. Just act like he’s a “real” human being, worthy of being a “real” Catholic.

Just wear ordinary everyday clothes that are modest and appropriate to your gender and don’t worry about it. Don’t know what your gender is? Drop your pants and look in the mirror. The overwhelming majority of people have very clear gender markers, in fact, they’re very obvious.

Some guys have high voices, big deal. Some ladies have low ones, big deal. You can’t go drawing all kinds of assumptions on that stuff. Homosexuality and appearance often don’t have a lot to do with each other. Sometimes they do, sometimes not. And you can’t tell which is which except by behavior and specific signaling. Honest.

PS, NO ONE should be wearing revealing clothing to mass, no matter what you have to reveal or not. That should also clarify this.

PPS, if a straight person keeps getting hit on by gays, then you are making some kind of dressing mistake that looks like a signal. Change your appearance a bit and it will stop when you find it. It’s really obnoxious and a big mistake on their part. Gays who make this mistake often get punched in the nose a lot.

 

[mitex]

Just wear ordinary everyday clothes that are modest and appropriate to your gender and don’t worry about it. Don’t know what your gender is? Drop your pants and look in the mirror. The overwhelming majority of people have very clear gender markers, in fact, they’re very obvious.

PS, NO ONE should be wearing revealing clothing to mass, no matter what you have to reveal or not. That should also clarify this.

I wouldn’t call it revealing. What I wore was usually a rugbee shirt or a polo and pants.

But then again the pants lol…