Your opinion on homosexual relationships

[goout]

Yes. Consent is key. It is not my place to judge what anyone does behind closed door.

Does that include snorting cocaine, or is that against your moral code cause it harms people, even though it is freely chosen?

I see you claim to be Catholic, yet you seem to exclusively represent atheist beliefs, or beliefs contrary to Catholicism.

Is that an accident or are you being deceptive?
If you are being deceptive, why do you do that?

 

[goout]

Hi goout. I’m not looking to start a conversation, but just as a heads up, but your post gives the impression that you believe all such persons promote deceptions about the nature of human beings. If it wasn’t your intention to make that generalization it might be advisable to clarify.

It wasn’t a generalization. It was an observation on what a role model is.

What does “role model” mean to you? It seems to me a role model would direct people toward things that promote the flourishing of human dignity.

The question was about LBGTQA+ media personalities. In other words, someone who publicly is in promotion of an agenda and lifestyle that detracts from the stability of the family and promotes deceptions about human nature.

How can such a person be a role model?

 

[PRmerger]

Nope. As long as it is consensual.

So adultery is ok then? Obviously, the 2 (or more) who are engaging in it are consenting.

You’re ok with that?

 

[BlueEyedLady]

The person above you has just stated, categorically, that even my completely lustless nature

and compared me, despite my celibacy, to

See? Even a celibate person, who doesn’t have sex and doesn’t even want to have sex and has never wanted, sins by being in love. If falling in love is already a sin, why do we have to deny ourselves several decades of caring for a loved one? Just because straight people cringe at this thought? When you, collective abstract straight “you”, fall in love with a person you’ll never marry, it’s just “love”. When we do the same, it’s “temptation” and

I’m just done. I’m fed up with constantly having my nose plunked into my second-classness. I’m fed up with being talked down to. I’m just sitting here remembering how I wrote her birthday cards, how my heart started beating twice faster when she called, how her hand felt in mine, how I walked her to the train station in the midwinter and stood there waving 'til the train disappeared, my toes frozen, my nose runny. And all you people see in it is “sex! lust! sin! abomination! damnation!” I gave up on a hope to share my life with her, but it’s not enough, I’m now expected to hate and foul my feelings for her as well?

Every time I log onto this forum, I have to see a banner with a man and a woman kissing passionately. Everyone is completely fine with it. It isn’t “rubbing sexuality in faces”. But God forbid I casually mention being in love with a woman, not a man! You can deny it all you want, but it is double standards. It is prejudice. It is homophobia. Just stating that same-sex marriage is impossible isn’t, but this attitude definitely is. And if this attitude reflects how God feels about me, then I have no hope for salvation. Ever since my conversion several years ago I’ve been depressed and suicidal. Three guesses why.

I’m really glad you shared this. For what it’s worth, I think this is why the anti gay marriage side lost. They totally failed to make room for gay people and instead tried to make the “problem” go away by pushing them aside.

It wasn’t just about marriage - the other side fought to discriminate in housing, employment, to keep gays out of the military, boyscouts, teaching, etc. They cried out when gay people were depicted in popular culture and the media.

Catholicism is the one I struggle with the most. Conservative protestants make sense - gays are bad, end of story. But Catholicism has more nuance and love in their teaching on homosexuality, at least on paper. But it doesn’t allow gays to marry, and if my understanding is correct, it also doesn’t allow them in religious life. So the vocation of single is assigned to them.

If the only message I as a straight person hear is “There is no place for gays in public or church life”, I can only imagine what gay people hear. A lot is said about where gays don’t belong, but beyond closeted and chaste, you never hear where they should go or what they should be.

 

[PRmerger]

and compared me, despite my celibacy, to

Oh, sheesh.

I thought that I might have to go there, even though I was hopeful that I wouldn’t…

No one is saying you’re the same as an adulterer.

You pick a disordered desire and I’ll run with it.

We don’t have to choose adultery (or the desire to have sex with someone you’re not married to).

Choose any disordered desire, Tagetes, and we can discuss.

We can engage in a discourse as to how this person’s disordered desire, and the treatment of the Church to this person, differs from the treatment you’ve received.

 

[PRmerger]

I’m really glad you shared this. For what it’s worth, I think this is why the anti gay marriage side lost. They totally failed to make room for gay people and instead tried to make the “problem” go away by pushing them aside.

It wasn’t just about marriage - the other side fought to discriminate in housing, employment, to keep gays out of the military, boyscouts, teaching, etc. They cried out when gay people were depicted in popular culture and the media.

Catholicism is the one I struggle with the most. Conservative protestants make sense - gays are bad, end of story. But Catholicism has more nuance and love in their teaching on homosexuality, at least on paper. But it doesn’t allow gays to marry, and if my understanding is correct, it also doesn’t allow them in religious life. So the vocation of single is assigned to them.

If the only message I as a straight person hear is “There is no place for gays in public or church life”, I can only imagine what gay people hear. A lot is said about where gays don’t belong, but beyond closeted and chaste, you never hear where they should go or what they should be.

Do you feel the same way about polyamorists?

 

[goout]

I’m really glad you shared this. For what it’s worth, I think this is why the anti gay marriage side lost. They totally failed to make room for gay people and instead tried to make the “problem” go away by pushing them aside.

It wasn’t just about marriage - the other side fought to discriminate in housing, employment, to keep gays out of the military, boyscouts, teaching, etc. They cried out when gay people were depicted in popular culture and the media.

Catholicism is the one I struggle with the most. Conservative protestants make sense - gays are bad, end of story. But Catholicism has more nuance and love in their teaching on homosexuality, at least on paper. But it doesn’t allow gays to marry, and if my understanding is correct, it also doesn’t allow them in religious life. So the vocation of single is assigned to them.

If the only message I as a straight person hear is “There is no place for gays in public or church life”, I can only imagine what gay people hear. A lot is said about where gays don’t belong, but beyond closeted and chaste, you never hear where they should go or what they should be.

This makes a caricature of mercy and sympathy, and a caricature of the Catholic position.
Where to begin?
There are certainly anti-gay people in Christian circles who discriminate out of fear and hatred, just as there are enemies of the Church who discriminate out of fear and hatred.

The Catholic Church is not anti-gay. The Catholic Church is pro-marriage and family. The CC address the questions of marriage, human life, and familial flourishing with the only answer that exists: the union of a man and woman. We don’t need to say one thing derogatory about a gay person to observe that only the union of a man and woman pro-creates human life and is designed for it’s flourishing.
The union of a man and woman is uniquely ordered to the existence and flourishing of human life.

That’s worth protecting if we value human life.
Certainly Christians also need to do much better at welcoming gay people into parish and social life. It can be done.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

This makes a caricature of mercy and sympathy, and a caricature of the Catholic position.
Where to begin?
There are certainly anti-gay people in Christian circles who discriminate out of fear and hatred, just as there are enemies of the Church who discriminate out of fear and hatred.

The Catholic Church is not anti-gay. The Catholic Church is pro-marriage and family. The CC address the questions of marriage, human life, and familial flourishing with the only answer that exists: the union of a man and woman. We don’t need to say one thing derogatory about a gay person to observe that only the union of a man and woman pro-creates human life and is designed for it’s flourishing.
The union of a man and woman is uniquely ordered to the existence and flourishing of human life.

That’s worth protecting if we value human life.
Certainly Christians also need to do much better at welcoming gay people into parish and social life. It can be done.

That really doesn’t address what I said. It wasn’t even about marriage, it was about totally pushing gay people out of society.

You can tell people they’re evil and “destroying the family” all you want, but until you make a place for them to connect with others and contribute meaningfully, they won’t listen. I don’t blame them. What chaste person wants to be called sinful and compared to an adulterer when they’re following church teaching? How are anti gay people supposed to be believed that it’s about “protecting the family” when it extended so far beyond that?

 

[PRmerger]

That really doesn’t address what I said. It wasn’t even about marriage, it was about totally pushing gay people out of society.

You can tell people they’re evil and “destroying the family” all you want, but until you make a place for them to connect with others and contribute meaningfully, they won’t listen. I don’t blame them. What chaste person wants to be called sinful and compared to an adulterer when they’re following church teaching? How are anti gay people supposed to be believed that it’s about “protecting the family” when it extended so far beyond that?

Just so we’re clear: no Catholic should be telling a gay person that he’s evil.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

Just so we’re clear: no Catholic should be telling a gay person that he’s evil.

You just told a chaste gay person that god is unhappy with them in the same way that god is unhappy with someone who chooses to cheat on their spouse, chooses to drink, or chooses to behave selfishly. The only choice the poster you’re addressing has made is to follow church teaching. If that’s to be compared to active mortal sin, then what hope is there?

If gay people should be kept out of the military, discriminated against in employment, barred from certain professions, and on and on with every other anti gay effort, then they just aren’t going to listen because the message is clear: “you are nothing more than your attractions and there is no room for you here”.

 

[at9009]

You just told a chaste gay person that god is unhappy with them in the same way that god is unhappy with someone who chooses to cheat on their spouse, chooses to drink, or chooses to behave selfishly. The only choice the poster you’re addressing has made is to follow church teaching. If that’s to be compared to active mortal sin, then what hope is there?

If gay people should be kept out of the military, discriminated against in employment, barred from certain professions, and on and on with every other anti gay effort, then they just aren’t going to listen because the message is clear: “you are nothing more than your attractions and there is no room for you here”.

The connotation does seem to be (and I don’t think anyone means this) that a gay/ssa person is only merely tolerated as long as they are able to stay closeted, shut up, and hide in the back of the pews so everyone else can pretend they don’t actually exist.

Not to mention don’t ever talk about your problems and don’t expect any real means of support because talking about struggles or mentioning one’s sexuality is equating to pushing it in others faces. However, we’ll have plenty of dedicated ministry, support, charity, compassion to people who are looking to marry, couples, and singles with premarital dating. Celibate gay/ssa people… well if you have a Courage ministry near you, you possibly have that (though it is far from a perfect ministry: spiritualfriendship.org/2015/09/20/spiritual-friendship-and-courage-on-the-need-for-variety-in-ministry/) or you just learn to survive on scraps.

It’s honestly not surprising with this lack of support that many lose hope and leave. The sad part to me is when that happens rather than try and support that person to come back to the Church, the response seems to be ‘don’t let the door hit you on the way out’ kind of attitude.

The good news is that there are more vocal celibate gay/ssa people like Ron Belgau, Eve Tushnet, Joey Prevor, and others at places like spiritualfriendship.org who are trying to engage the conversation of what it is to be a gay/ssa person in various vocations (from celibacy to opposite sex marriage) while believing in a traditional sexual ethic. “Washed and Waiting” by Dr. Wesley Hill (though he comes from an Anglican perspective) is a great read for anyone on this topic, as is Eve Tushnet’s Book: “Gay and Catholic” though I haven’t read hers yet.

I’ve honestly kind of stopped looking for support within my parish. I didn’t find any or even felt safe enough to be open about being celibate or why I was celibate. I have found support in my celibacy elsewhere which is what it is I guess.

 

[NM505StKate]

So adultery is ok then? Obviously, the 2 (or more) who are engaging in it are consenting.

You’re ok with that?

That is between them. Of course I am not all for monogamy but to each their own.

 

[NM505StKate]

Does that include snorting cocaine, or is that against your moral code cause it harms people, even though it is freely chosen?

I see you claim to be Catholic, yet you seem to exclusively represent atheist beliefs, or beliefs contrary to Catholicism.

Is that an accident or are you being deceptive?
If you are being deceptive, why do you do that?

To your first question. it is illegal to possess cocaine but I have no qualms if they are doing it. Can’t one be Catholic but also question?

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

To your first question. it is illegal to possess cocaine but I have no qualms if they are doing it. Can’t one be Catholic but also question?

For the most part I’m watching this thread with interest. The church has done a poor job in the arena of post modernist rhetoric with this issue. Though your position is false, I wanted to see if any posters were adept or interested in refuting you on your chosen ideology of the subject. I’m currious because yours is a commonly articulated position of (for lack of a better term) progressives. No one has done so. You have stated your position, perhaps overstated it with logical gaps. You have dominated the thread very skillfully.

As for the Catholic comment.
I think it’s unfair to deny someone the term catholic because they reject all or part of the faith. You are Catholic by your baptism. Posters shouldn’t question that. But by the same rules of fair play, perhaps you should consider a qualifier such as , non practicing etc. because you are not “questioning” as you put it but denying centeral parts of the faith.
There should be some honesty in your part.

 

[goout]

As for the Catholic comment.
I think it’s unfair to deny someone the term catholic because they reject all or part of the faith. You are Catholic by your baptism. Posters shouldn’t question that. But by the same rules of fair play, perhaps you should consider a qualifier such as , non practicing etc. because you are not “questioning” as you put it but denying centeral parts of the faith.
There should be some honesty in your part.

Honest discussion is good.

 

[goout]

To your first question. it is illegal to possess cocaine but I have no qualms if they are doing it. Can’t one be Catholic but also question?

Yes, we all have questions. I have lots. One I have is why people don’t simply say yes when they mean yes, and no when they mean no.
Questioning is different than militating for positions directly contrary to that you claim to espouse.

 

[Tagetes]

You just told a chaste gay person that god is unhappy with them in the same way that god is unhappy with someone who chooses to cheat on their spouse, chooses to drink, or chooses to behave selfishly. The only choice the poster you’re addressing has made is to follow church teaching. If that’s to be compared to active mortal sin, then what hope is there?

 

[NM505StKate]

For the most part I’m watching this thread with interest. The church has done a poor job in the arena of post modernist rhetoric with this issue. Though your position is false, I wanted to see if any posters were adept or interested in refuting you on your chosen ideology of the subject. I’m currious because yours is a commonly articulated position of (for lack of a better term) progressives. No one has done so. You have stated your position, perhaps overstated it with logical gaps. You have dominated the thread very skillfully.

As for the Catholic comment.
I think it’s unfair to deny someone the term catholic because they reject all or part of the faith. You are Catholic by your baptism. Posters shouldn’t question that. But by the same rules of fair play, perhaps you should consider a qualifier such as , non practicing etc. because you are not “questioning” as you put it but denying centeral parts of the faith.
There should be some honesty in your part.

Fair enough. I don’t find that I am dominating anything. I am trying to just post my opinion. I don’t know how to put in questioning. I go to mass every Saturday with my folks so I can’t really say non practicing.

 

[NM505StKate]

Yes, we all have questions. I have lots. One I have is why people don’t simply say yes when they mean yes, and no when they mean no.
Questioning is different than militating for positions directly contrary to that you claim to espouse.

What claim am I espousing?

 

[goout]

That really doesn’t address what I said. It wasn’t even about marriage, it was about totally pushing gay people out of society.

This is how your post started:

I think this is why the anti gay marriage side lost.

I directly addressed your post, point by point.