Wrong to Support LGBT?

  • Thread starter Thread starter xdz
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
phil19034 said:
40.png
Thorolfr:
It’s mostly just shorter and easier to say than Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual/Transgender. All those individual words are understood by just about everyone.
Click to expand...
I don’t know about that.

When a man identifies as gay or a woman as lesbian, or either as bisexual does that mean they are having homosexual sex when they have the opportunity, or does it include those who choose to live a chaste lifestyle?

I’ve heard many who have the attraction, but choose to live a chaste life refuse to identify as LGBT.

So that’s where the confusion in religious circles is.

God Bless
Click to expand...
They probably shouldn’t identify themselves as anything because they don’t need to. Only those who support LGBT rights to have same-sex unions will wear those titles with Pride.

Additionally, people who have same-sex attractions might just think they do through childhood conditioning and psychological trauma. There is a possibility that it can rehabilitate. Now, I don’t claim to know that is the truth for every person with same-sex attraction because there could be some that do have real issues at birth, but God has imprinted in us the design of man and woman union in His reflection. After hearing Hudson Byblow’s testimony, I really believe a majority of people with same-sex attraction is caused by conditioning.
 
This is probably not the best phrasing, considering what the classic Protestant response to discovering that someone is experiencing same-sex attraction has been.

Maleficent individuals constantly try to get counsellors who do not affirm the misguided urges of some individuals who experience same-sex attraction and wish to act on it to be stripped of their licences, on the grounds that they are promoting “conversion therapy”. This used to refer to a backwards practice that is all but something of the past now (at least in respectable circles), but recently it has started to become a sort of catch-all term for not affirming mistaken notions in a therapy session with someone who is struggling with same-sex attraction.
[/quote]

It’s the best phrasing for those who found out they have been conditioned to believe they have same-sex attraction. That’s where my context is getting at. Of course, there is that danger of generalizing that term, as you have mentioned, but it’s the truth for many people with same-sex attraction.

For those born with same-sex attraction, they will be called into a chaste life in accordance with God’s divine law. For those conditioned with same-sex attraction, they will be called to rehabilitate and order their life back to the way God intended.
 
rightness said:
They probably shouldn’t identify themselves as anything because they don’t need to. Only those who support LGBT rights to have same-sex unions will wear those titles with Pride.

Additionally, people who have same-sex attractions might just think they do through childhood conditioning and psychological trauma. There is a possibility that it can rehabilitate. Now, I don’t claim to know that is the truth for every person with same-sex attraction because there could be some that do have real issues at birth, but God has imprinted in us the design of man and woman union in His reflection. After hearing Hudson Byblow’s testimony, I really believe a majority of people with same-sex attraction is caused by conditioning.
Click to expand...
One person’s testimony isn’t very significant or very scientific. Mr. Byblow’s testimony is no more significant than mine and I’m gay even though I never experienced any sort of childhood trauma or conditioning. I had a relatively normal and happy childhood.

And until just a few years ago, gay marriage wasn’t even legal in most of the country and it wasn’t the main reason that people wanted to identify as L or G or B or T. People have been identifying that way for decades, long before the possibility of gay marriage had even crossed anyone’s mind. People identify that way because they want to find other people like themselves so that they don’t feel alone and isolated anymore. They also want to come together and identify that way because it has allowed them to exert political pressure to change laws so that they can be protected from discrimination in employment and housing. In some states and cities, employers can’t fire people or deny them housing just for being gay anymore. And by coming together and identifying as LGBT, it was possible to convince the Supreme Court to strike down laws that existed in many states that allowed the police to arrest LGBT people for having consensual sex even in the privacy of their own homes.
 
Thorolfr said:
One person’s testimony isn’t very significant or very scientific. Mr. Byblow’s testimony is no more significant than mine and I’m gay even though I never experienced any sort of childhood trauma or conditioning. I had a relatively normal and happy childhood.

And until just a few years ago, gay marriage wasn’t even legal in most of the country and it wasn’t the main reason that people wanted to identify as L or G or B or T. People have been identifying that way for decades, long before the possibility of gay marriage had even crossed anyone’s mind. People identify that way because they want to find other people like themselves so that they don’t feel alone and isolated anymore. They also want to come together and identify that way because it has allowed them to exert political pressure to change laws so that they can be protected from discrimination in employment and housing. In some states and cities, employers can’t fire people or deny them housing just for being gay anymore. And by coming together and identifying as LGBT, it was possible to convince the Supreme Court to strike down laws that existed in many states that allowed the police to arrest LGBT people for having consensual sex even in the privacy of their own homes.
Click to expand...
Mr. Byblow also thought he was having a normal life, but when he found God and His church, he found out everything that was wrong about his lifestyle, his same-sex attraction, and his call to be transgender. God helped him see the truth, so I’m not going to presume it’s the same for you, but I hope you are opened to God the same way Hudson Byblow is.

God transcends all science and truths. For a marriage to be valid, it must be life-giving as a perfect reflection of Himself. You can’t explain God with science, so how are you going to change His laws? If God wasn’t life-giving, the world would not exist, none of us would exist, and it wouldn’t be a trinity because the Holy Spirit is created from the love between the Father and the Son.

I would like to ask you, do you feel the need to act upon your same-sex inclinations?
 
Thanks so much for this clarity.

There isn’t another religion that has said it so well as the Catholics!
 
prayerrider said:
Changing the Catechism language on same sex attraction is changing Church teaching…or reflective of such change.
Click to expand...
I am sorry to say that it does appear to me that there is a movement within the Roman Catholic church to accept SS marriage. I know one Roman Catholic college that puts out a magazine which congratulates graduates who have recently married. Yes, they do include photos of SS marriages. Many other Christian churches have already accepted this, and there is even a Protestant bishop who openly lives with his husband. There have been rumors and even a recent book about it, but who knows how many more Christian clergy are engaging in this type of immoral activity but behind closed doors?
 
OnAJourney said:
Sin only enters the equation when someone is acting upon their sexual desires and or inclinations outside of what is recognized as marriage by the Church.
Click to expand...
I thought that Jesus said that if a man looks at a woman with lust, he has already committed adultery. There is no physical action upon your desires and still it is a mortal sin of adultery?
 
Because it appears from different reports that this type of activity is prevalent in the Roman Catholic church. For example, the book “In the closet of the Vatican” by Frederic Martel has been mentioned recently on CAF.
 
Last edited:
If I spent my time talking LGBT I would probably be talking about people who are good enough at talking about themselves without me, and I would, at the same time, be missing all those other people who don’t spend all their time talking about themselves.

Those are beautiful people, no parade.
 
Lust isn’t the same as homosexuality, which is what the main thrust of my response was addressing. So let me be clear; being gay isn’t itself sinful. Can gay people experience lust as a sin? Yes. However in terms of being gay, acting upon the desire is sin even if you don’t also experience the sin of lust.
 
Last edited:
Actually, you have. “LGBT” and “Alternate Lifestyle” or any of the common variations of either are NOT equivalent. Similar to “baptized Catholic” and “practicing Catholic” there are several similarities and quite a bit of overlap, but they are not the same.

And the forlorn hope here is that you will ever admit the possibility that you might be mistaken in your position.
 
I think it’s wrong to support pride events, or homosexual relationships. It isn’t wrong at all and is actually a good thing to support a person personally, that is gay. But it seems wrong to do anything that may lead people to believe that you support homosexual relations.
 
AlNg said:
am sorry to say that it does appear to me that there is a movement within the Roman Catholic church to accept SS marriage.
Click to expand...
There is no such thing as “same sex marriage.” God instituted marriage between a man and a woman not a man and a man or a woman and a woman.

The Holy Bible clearly states:

Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind, because it is an abomination. - Leviticus 18:22 (DR)

For those who prefer the KJV,

Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an abomination.
 
Officially its not really up to the church to get into much more detail than they have done. Its been said how the church views homosexuality. Not as something to be changed. In the same way as heterosexuality, the sex act is for marrage between man and women for reproduction. Even outside of heterosexual marraige sex isn’t ok.

One’s sexual orientation isn’t a problem to be fixed. How we use sex determines whether we step into immorality or not.
 
rightness said:
I would like to ask you, do you feel the need to act upon your same-sex inclinations?
Click to expand...
I am sure you would like to know that. So many people here are so preoccupied with the intimate private details of the lives of others. You aren’t entitled to know that about anybody, unless they tell you because they want you to know. If more people would mind their own business, these threads wouldn’t even need to be started.
 
lilypadrees said:
There is no such thing as “same sex marriage.”
Click to expand...
Why do Roman Catholic colleges publish magazines which congratulate their graduates who have gotten married and state things like Jane and Mary got married or that Bob and Bill got married?
Also if there is no such thing as SS marriage, what in the world is this Wikipedia article talking about?

Same-sex marriage - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

en.wikipedia.org

Same-sex marriage in the United States - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org


www.britannica.com

Same-sex marriage | Legalization, Supreme Court, Equality, History, Status Around the World, & Facts

Same-sex marriage, the practice of marriage between two men or between two women. Although same-sex marriage has been regulated through law, religion, and custom in most countries of the world, the legal and social responses have ranged from celebration to criminalization.
www.britannica.com www.britannica.com

 
Last edited:
That is just a general statement of opinion with no reference to the articles cited. Can you tell me specifically what was wrong with the two Wiki articles cited and with the Encyclopedia Britannica article cited in the same post?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top