Eric,
The post you provided only provides part of the story… The National review on page 2 of this article points this out…
nationalreview.com/articles/301641/canadian-crackdown-michael-coren
nationalreview.com/articles/301641/canadian-crackdown-michael-coren?pg=2
As I write, two Canadian provinces are considering legislation that would likely prevent educators even in private denominational schools from teaching that they disapprove of same-sex marriage, and a senior government minister in Ontario recently announced that if the Roman Catholic Church did not approve of homosexuality or gay marriage, it “would have to change its teaching.” What has become painfully evident is that many of those who brought same-sex marriage to Canada have no respect for freedom of conscience and no intention of tolerating contrary opinion, whether that opinion is shaped by religious or by secular belief.
Homosexuals have taken over the APA and the DSM is nowunder revision for LBGT as it has been with more acceptable language for this group. Thank God for people like William Glasser, MD and Stanton Peele, PhD.
The DSM should be viewed as garbage and unbelievable as this is now becoming the Bible for the gay population to point and say “see we are not disordered”…well then my response is “you were in one edition so why is there a difference now”…and then when you realize that alcoholism and addiction is not a disease and the DSM promotes this kind of thinking you realize that it is “think speak” as predicted with the minister of information at hand.
One of my troubled Christian brothers is propogating ideas as to sexuality and Christianity within the stream of Christian thought, it is tantamount to those working outside the Church and those working inside the Church to erode and cause acceptance…saying
The Bible is unclear on homosexuality
The sin of Sodom is hospitality
God does not believe that you cannot accept being gay
Homosexuality is a cultural phenomenon and has to be rethougt
I believe that marriage is not the pre-condition or sine qua non for the expression of a properly ordered sexuality, but is the fulfillment of that expression. I think it’s possible to have sex before marriage which is not debasing, and hence not sinful.
I’m not claiming that all sex before marriage is ethically good–I think the danger of using a partner sexually is quite present, almost overwhelmingly present.
I think it would be easier to have ethically good sex in a marriage, if for no other reason than the sacrament is a means of grace and could so assist the couple. And if sex before marriage does not actually lead to marriage, I think there is something amiss.
There is an attempt to cause reflection on the morality of heterosexuality and accept immoral behavior as ethical.
The moral theology of the Church has no leg to stand on without Christ. Christ is the Way, and the Goal, and even the Walking of the Way is Christ.
The Church and it’s theology is attacked in particular the Moral component.
I do not believe that biological utility represents a theological or moral mandate. I don’t believe that our genitals need to match up for procreation to have physical union. The sex act has a greater moral value than something more intangible like emotional unity. The criticism that homosexual sex is not “open to life” suggests that procreation is the moral standard, though it appears to define “life” in purely material/biological terms and rejects as of less value such things as intimacy and self-giving.
The rationalization that parts is parts and they have nothing to do with the thought
The misuse of sexuality is a sin. There is opportunity to sin in a committed homosexual relationship however simply being intimate with my partner is not de facto sinful.
The notion that an active homosexual relationship, because it is a commited one, is not sinful if committed.
The Roman doctrine prejudices the physical act over intention–that is, when it comes to sex, it prejudices the life-giving biology of sex over the life-giving intimacy of sex. Ultimately it seems that intimate, bond-creating, household strengthening; relationship-building, non-vaginal sexual expression between two married people is simply not as valuable as perfunctory vaginal intercourse between two married people.
Rome is attacked and the constant theme of what sexuality should be about from this homosexual perspective is a constant theme for acceptance.
I don’t understand the Catechism. I believe it wants to say that heterosexuality is normative in itself, but that doesn’t mean that homosexuality in itself is wrong?
The teachings of the Church and the Catechism are attacked and potentially stated as not exact in teaching.
Thoughts like this are slipped in…
To be honest, I believe the Federal Defense of Marriage Act needs repealing, and the States themselves need to determine their position on this issue on their own.
and then the true agenda of my poor deluded Christian brother comes forth…
What, then, does gender have to do with anything when determining civil marriage? To insist that it has some greater value while, in practice, denying that it does is to say that there is something intrinsically wrong with a woman-woman or man-man couple based simply on the facts of their gender. Not on anything else. It is, therefore, arbitrarily discriminatory in a negative sense.
Since the government only rhetorically or theoretically has recourse to a moral context here, it cannot defend, based on what it already practices, the denial of civil marriage to homosexual adults
The working from without is clear. The working from within is subtle and has to be guarded against on both fronts. It just takes observation, reflection and an understanding of when things don’t make sense to say “huh”
This notion of “we are a minority”…Balderdash…minority of behavior?
The notion is “all we want is what you have”…Balderdash…thank God Canada is proving that this is nothing but a Trojan Horse waiting for the lilliputians to attempt to erode the social fabric of society and as long as the Catechism says that Homosexuality is disordered…they will try to get that removed…
Good luck with that one…
