As is often pointed out, when there are pro-divorce or pro-masturbation parades demanding the moral accpetance of their notions, we can discuss this. When July is desiganted as masturbation-pride month, we can talk.
I;m not sure he could have been more charitable and Christian if he’d tried. I assume nothing short of embracing the lifestyle will be seen as cruel to you?
Indeed as the CCC says:
This is just not true. There is more push back against this serious sin because there is so much effort is used in trying to normalize what is not normal. The effects of this effort are very serious especially to children.
The Catechism certainly suggests equivalent.
Except, you know, the Catholic Church.
But gay people don’t just want to be left alone. They are being left alone. They are free to engage in whatever sexual practices they want (no matter how sinful) and make any private contracts they want in regards to property, children, power of attorney, etc.
No. They’re looking for “legal approval” that their relationships are just as good. And they’re not being left alone - your faith does not instruct its adherents to leave people alone. It tells them that everyone who is not an adherent is a broken person and in need of fixing. And some much more than others.
Well, and atheists don’t leave Christians alone either, you constantly state our beliefs are false. No one has the right not to hear unpleasant opinions about them. As long as neither of us tries to use force to impose our views on the other, we can say whatever we please.
What are we supposed to do, interrogate people on the way to Communion as to whether they are in mortal sin?
Obviously! But they have "Pride" parades to try to reinforce in each other the propriety of what they know in their guts is unseemly. These parades are "in your face", disrespectful of children in the vicinity. But, of course, that's the point: Recruitment of the young. And the icing on the cake is that they get to use the decency of good people against them, knowing that they won't be beaten or imprisoned for flouting the morals of civil society.
Nothing will satisfy these deviants short of seeing the free speech of church people across America curtailed, and the buildings shuttered. :nope: RobNo Simon, until gays became radicalized, most people couldn’t have cared less. Don’t mess with kids and our church, and you will be treated with respect. As long as I’m alive, man-on-man sex will be a revolting thought to me, but I don’t hate them. Some of them I consider to be friends. And I don’t care if you believe me.
RobThis is a tiny, tiny proportion of gays and lesbians. Many gay people don’t want the “right to marry” and don’t march in any parades, nor are they out to recruit anyone. The worst segment of their tiny slice of the population is right out in front of the media trying to pretend that they really do represent ALL gay people. It’s not true. Pretty much NOTHING you see in the media is true.
I’m loving the psychoanalysis on this thread.
Oh, what a load of nonsense. Children don’t get turned gay by pride marches.
I’m sorry but this kind of implies that they should be beaten or imprisoned for “flouting the morals of civil society”.
Coz gayz are skeletor amirite?
I’m sorry, but I fail to see how that post was incorrect or cruel. It was a bit blunt and goes straight to the Truth, perhaps, but cruel? I don’t see it. “We just want to be left alone” has come a very long way to what we have today, which is “embrace us or else.”
Within a few years after the Bill of Rights was ratified, Congress passed the Alien and Sedition Acts, which ignored it. Back during World War I, Gene Debs was sent to prison for daring to criticize the Government of the United States. So the First Amendment is protection only if our leaders chose to honor its words. As your use of the term “bigot,” You beg many essential questions when you imply that someone who says homosexuality is wrong is ipso facto a “bigot.” Francis Parkman wrote a once widely read boon.”the Oregon Trail,” in which he described the life of the Dakota indians. Do you know how they treated homosexuals? They made them wear dresses, and do the work of women. That is a fair presentation of how homosexuals have been treated historically. A far number of those thought to be homosexual, of course, were not, but only what not many years ago were called “sissies.” Effemminate boys too puny to be included in masculine endeavors. Had nothing to do with religion, of course. The thing is, however, that
There is absolutely no proof at all that there are any gay people who were “converted” because they saw a pride parade or knew a gay couple that got married. There would be no gay people at all if straight people stopped giving birth to them.
True. It’s the same as saying that ALL people who believe in Christ are like Fred Phelps and his family or that ALL people who are committed to their faith are like the Taliban. Those are the people that make the news, but they aren’t representative of all people who believe in a Higher Power.