E
Why is the US Catholic church so obsessed with the gay issue?
- Status
T
ThinkingSapien
Guest
I think it was more than just arguments. So long as they remained hidden “homosexual” was more of a concept (abstraction). But once the term becomes associated with real people in one’s lives whether that be daughter, neighbor, coworker, and takes on a role in the media that someone consumes (whether it’s a fictitious character or a real actor that is also gay) then the word is no longer about an abstract “other” and about friends and loved ones.What do you mean that same-sex marriage advocates having nothing to show for their position? How about same-sex marriage now being legal in all 50 states and being accepted by more than half the population in the US? Their arguments must have been persuasive enough to convince a lot of people including five justices on the US Supreme Court and the judges on many Courts of Appeal, the voters in a number of states, three quarters of Catholic adults under 30 (according to a Pew Research Center survey from last year), a majority of the people of Ireland, etc.
pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/10/16/young-u-s-catholics-overwhelmingly-accepting-of-homosexuality/
T
Thorolfr
Guest
X
xNoOnex
Guest
I will admit, it is a bit cynical.
However, I truly didn’t mean it as a judgement on people’s hearts as much as a general statement on American politics. It goes beyond religion; it’s the same reason why every year people only seem to care about abortion, gay issues, and gun control. In America, most people in general only seem to see the small picture; its what’s pushed down our throats.
But… Yeah, cynicism. I try to fight it, but sometimes, its awfully hard.
E
edwest2
Guest
Homosexuals were never hidden. I knew LGBT people long ago. And the media took note as well.
content.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,19691031,00.html
This is another false argument because while we all worked together, I didn’t give a second thought to what they did on their own time. We all got along. Their lives were their lives. Now, it’s shoved in everyone’s face. That is wrong.
I respect people’s privacy.
Ed
Z
Zoltan_Cobalt
Guest
Prop 8 did not "outlaw"same sex marriage. It simply amended the State Constitution to define marriage as between one man and one woman. It was an initiative. Voted on by the people not the legislature. Yes, it passed 52% to 48%. It was overturned by a single state judge who, after his decision, announced that he and his partner had been “closet” homosexuals for 30 years.
Would California vote today and re-approve Prop 8??? Hard to say. California has a huge (and growing) immigrant population that is predominately Catholic. There is a move to allow illegal aliens to vote (More Catholics) So I would not be overly confident of majority vote in favor of SSM.
As for the rest of the country…remember only 12 states approved SSM by popular vote or by their legislature. The rest were ORDERED by Federal Courts and/or the Supreme Court to accept SSM. While there are polls and studies (most very questionable) about public acceptance of SSM, I tend to wonder why the gay community had to rely on court decisions, rather than a popular or legislative vote…if popular opinion was really in their favor.
T
Thorolfr
Guest
I don’t think that the large Catholic Latino population in California would decrease the likelihood that California would now vote to approve same-sex marriage. As noted by a Pew Research Center survey from three years ago:
pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/06/19/latinos-changing-views-of-same-sex-marriage/
E
edwest2
Guest
T
ThinkingSapien
Guest
It’s good to hear that your response to someone being homosexual isn’t advisarial. Not everyone has reacted that way and in the past reactions were such that it would motivate more homosexuals to be hidden (closeted) outside of certain communities.
Recall that within living memory in the USA there was a time that if someone were known to be homosexual that s/he could also be classified as sociopathic (which could have an impact on employment status, job opportunities and position within ones community). Policies and reactions in the USA had in the past such that it could be extremely disadvantage for a homosexual to be openly gay (ex: “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” allowed someone to be gay in the military as long as they were not openly making it known they were gay. If they were openly gay they could be dismissed and barred from the military). The USA now is post-Lavender Scare. Things have been changing and it seems more can be openly gay with less penalties.
Part of the intent has been for people to seet homosexuality as more common than they had previously thought. I don’t think a “keep it to yourself” strategy would have accomplished this goal very well.
E
edwest2
Guest
Even as a boy in the mid 1960s, I knew who homosexual persons were. Keep in mind, however, that years - decades - of studies of homosexual persons were carried out and reports were published. And thanks to a few here, I was able to confirm their classification fell under a ‘disorder’ according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual used by the American Psychiatric Association. They were not classified as “sociopathic.” In 1967, CBS did a documentary titled “The Homosexuals,” with Mike Wallace. People knew where the gay bars were.
I believe the APA was sincere about helping homosexual persons who sought help. However, in 1973, radical gay activists, and closeted gays in the APA, would force a vote not based on research, but a fight. So, what was a disorder yesterday became not a disorder the following day. It is not rational to lobby for a change in diagnosis. And similar lobbying was used recently to reclassify Transgendered persons.
“Whereas previously a man who “self-identified” as a woman (or vice versa) could have been classified as mentally ill, now the DSM-5 uses the term “gender dysphoria,” which means it is only a mental illness if you’re troubled by this self-identification. Elated activists in the “LGBT” community had lobbied the APA for the change for years.”
“activists” not psychiatric professionals? Hardly a rational reason for a change.
Source: ncregister.com/daily-news/psychiatrys-new-normal-transgendered-persons
So, I’m sick of a total “out” stranger telling everyone watching him on CNN to “stop being homophobic.” Might as well have been, “Have you stopped beating your wife?” I’m sick of kids as young as 5 being exposed to “gay sexual relationships are OK” propaganda, without their parents being informed.
It’s so strange that all the LGBT people I worked with in the 1970s and early 80s found work. In fact, I walked into work one day and read the notice on the Bulletin Board regarding the just started “Sexual Reassignment Surgery” procedure. One employee went from being a woman to a man, kept her job and there was no outcry. And it was a big hospital.
I don’t walk up to total strangers and ask them about their sexual orientation. If I see 100 people in a day, I can tell who is black, white or Oriental but I cannot tell if any of them are gay. That’s my problem. Keep your private life private. I never asked friends, “So, what do you and your wife do in the bedroom?”
Ed
T
Thorolfr
Guest
But I can usually tell even in my own church who’s married to whom because they arrive at church together every Sunday, sit with each other and are listed together in the Church directory, etc. My partner and I have never made an announcement in our ELCA church that we are gay or what we do in bed. But people know that we belong together and are gay because we also arrive together, sit together and are listed together in the Church directory. People treat us as a couple without us having said anything about it.
K
Kal2012
Guest
To me, it boils down to respect.
I’ve had gay classmates, coworkers - etc. I never really cared if they were gay or not.
However, I find that some gay people really find it hard to accept alternative points of view. Especially when I defend the Salvation Army (which my grandparents belonged to and were officers in - way before the SA was supposedly “anti-gay”) - they have a right to believe what they want to believe. It’s not anti-gay to do social work. Or the Boy Scouts (before their recent announcements) or point out how it really is impossible for Rick Santorum to ban contraceptives in America.
It really is “if you don’t accept my agenda/beliefs, then I won’t accept you.” There is no agree to disagree. There is only agree or we can’t be friends.
How shallow.
I’ve had gay classmates, coworkers - etc. I never really cared if they were gay or not.
However, I find that some gay people really find it hard to accept alternative points of view. Especially when I defend the Salvation Army (which my grandparents belonged to and were officers in - way before the SA was supposedly “anti-gay”) - they have a right to believe what they want to believe. It’s not anti-gay to do social work. Or the Boy Scouts (before their recent announcements) or point out how it really is impossible for Rick Santorum to ban contraceptives in America.
It really is “if you don’t accept my agenda/beliefs, then I won’t accept you.” There is no agree to disagree. There is only agree or we can’t be friends.
How shallow.
I
Ignatius
Guest
Actually, it is not The Church which is obsessed with the issue, The issues of immoral behavior of all kinds have been around since the beginning.
It is those who are opposed to the constant teaching of The Catholic Church who are obsessed with the issue.
E
edwest2
Guest
OK. But the current dogma is: If you don’t agree with gay marriage, and things like teaching little kids that gay relationships are OK, you better shut up or be accused of being various things. And you are definitely not friend material.But I can usually tell even in my own church who’s married to whom because they arrive at church together every Sunday, sit with each other and are listed together in the Church directory, etc. My partner and I have never made an announcement in our ELCA church that we are gay or what we do in bed. But people know that we belong together and are gay because we also arrive together, sit together and are listed together in the Church directory. People treat us as a couple without us having said anything about it.
Ed
Z
Zoltan_Cobalt
Guest
I am aware of that poll. I don’t trust it. The question that should have been asked is…how do you define marriage?
G
geekborj
Guest
You are sensitive and you are in the right path.
Two points:
- The Church is right that there are existing powerful movements to undermine the Faith and the destination of the souls of many.
- The Church is simply proclaiming what is true. If this proclamation is seen as a threatening even to faithful like us, then the issue is really serious. Had this same proclamation made 60 years ago, it will just fall into deaf ears.
If you remember Jonas in his declaration of the filth in Nineveh, did he ever use “non-harsh” words? Or did he plainly tell the people of their sins abound? What should the Church say about the structures of sin abound in the Country from the unjust laws to biased closing of faith-affirming companies just because they refuse to give support to immoral acts of others?
B
Bradski
Guest
Different poll. Quite possibly different answers. I’d bet the percentage who said ‘A union between a man and a woman’ may well be more than those who had no objection to gay marriage.
But really, are you peeking at these type of results from behind the couch? Not really wanting to see them? Because Zoltan, my old mate, just check out the second largest group and the smallest group who support it. If you’re under thirty you are nearly two and half times as likely to support it as someone who is over 60.
Think all those people are going to change their minds? The polls (assuming that anyone wants to keep checking) are only going to get worse for you. A lot worse. Maybe you should devote some time to matters where you may have a modicum of success. Better sex education perhaps?
C
catholic1seeks
Guest
Hmm.
Something seems a bit out of place, though, when we have fellow Christians being murdered every day in the East, and the primary topic of Catholic blogs, news pieces, commentary, and radio and TV shows is dedicated to the issue of two persons who love each other wanting to officially commit themselves to each other.
C
catholic1seeks
Guest
Stop painting with broad strokes. The issue of whether it is OK or not for two men or two women to commit themselves in a life of love, and whether or not they can be able to, is simply DIFFERENT and SEPARATE from various persons who may be having particular agendas, which not every gay person or activist would support.
C
catholic1seeks
Guest
Yes. Well. Thankfully it is only some gay people.
Some Catholics used to persecute persons of other faiths. Etc. But let’s define the Church by its best qualities.
Let’s do the same with this issue. What is intrinsic to it, and not what some people may feel or act like.
- Status