your opinions on gays

[Mijoy2]

Promiscuous means sleeping with more than one partner. It is possible to have two committed homosexuals and therefore no transmission of diseases.

You attempted to define “promiscuous”, now you would have to define “committed”.

The Church defines committed as sacremental, as in the sacrement of matrimony. To commit (in the relationship sense) is to marry, be open to life and be procreative, if one is to be in union with what the church of Christ teaches.

Anyone is free to hold another opinion, but they are not free to hold another opinion and state they are in union with the Church on the matter.

Choices have to be made to be in union with the Church, married people have to choose if they intend to be faithful to thier spouse or commit adultry. Single people have to choose between remaining chaste or committing the sin of fornication. People who are attracted to the same sex have to choose between acting on this attraction or surpressing the desire to act.

By the way, none of the choices, for many people, are easy choices. It is not only the self-proclaimed homsexual who has difficult choices to make, it is all of us.

 

[Bennie_P]

Going by this logic hetrosexual behaviour is a “mental disorder” as well.

Not everything that goes against the norm is a “mental disorder”, otherwise we would all be in trouble.

Heterosexual behavior that is not controlled, that is promiscuity going unchecked, in actions of adultery, multiple partners, wife swapping, etc. could be considered a mental disorder or at least addictive behavior, so what is your point? Is promiscuity justifiable and normal for those with SSA because some heterosexuals also fail at living chaste lives and are mentally disordered in their sexual behavior and attitudes?

Mental disorders have varying degrees of effects on the persons suffering from them and those around them. That isn’t to mean that we should ignore them or we should deny them for what they are. Any behavior which a person ignores the risks – physical health, mental health and spiritual health – and continues to participates in those behaviors despite the risk must be suspect as in the state of their mental health. You can not wipe away the
overwhelming negative consequences of homosexuality just by calling it normal.

 

[tigster]

Well i’m gay, and i’m catholic. We are not to judge anyone.
Everyone has a cross to bear.

 

[Bennie_P]

I could agree with that, yet God allows someone to be born into this state. Then He, through his Church, imposes restrictions on this individual’s sexuality he never consented to. So aren’t we back at the same place? The Church doesn’t impose special “crosses” to someone born with Cerebral Palsy or severe retardation does it? Am I still missing something?

There is no scientific evidence that persons are “born” into this situation or state. The comparisons to Cerbral Palsy, caused by medical malpractice or mental retardation, caused by genetic disorder, are comparing apples with pears and throwing in a few peanuts.

Persons may have had outside influences shaping their SSA that were outside of “some” of their control, but they have a choice to seek God’s will and God doesn’t give any of us a Cross which we cannot bear if we are willing to accept His Grace. We may stubble, but we have the means to overcome it.
The thing I think you are missing? Free will choice. You are trying to blame God for the fact that people make bad choices.

 

[estesbob]

Well i’m gay, and i’m catholic. We are not to judge anyone.
Everyone has a cross to bear.

II thought you said you were celibate? How does thast make you “gay” Being gay and having SSA are not the same thing-at least not by any definition I have ever seen.

 

[johnstown_johnn]

There is no scientific evidence that persons are “born” into this situation or state. The comparisons to Cerbral Palsy, caused by medical malpractice or mental retardation, caused by genetic disorder, are comparing apples with pears and throwing in a few peanuts.

Persons may have had outside influences shaping their SSA that were outside of “some” of their control, but they have a choice to seek God’s will and God doesn’t give any of us a Cross which we cannot bear if we are willing to accept His Grace. We may stubble, but we have the means to overcome it.
The thing I think you are missing? Free will choice. You are trying to blame God for the fact that people make bad choices.

Deviational behaviors at times have a “spiritual disconnect.” Some writings on those subjects suggest a “demonical presence.” If that can be substantiated then a Rite of Exorcism might just be the way out of such a morass. Unfortunately, the Church has diminished her accent on the Rite. Maybe it’s time to have a greater emphasis and increase the number of priests to perform them.

The child molestations cannot be ignored…they have to be addressed NOT ONLY by monetary settlements but SPIRITUAL approaches, even more so.

 

[rlg94086]

Once you reach a certain age and you haven’t married and haven’t had children and/or if you don’t dress or act like society believes a person of your sex should dress and act-you will get defined. I’m glad to hear that you’re not one who does that, but believe me-they’re out there. I left a parish because a rumor got back to me about my innocent friendship with another woman. There was nothing to the rumor, as I said earlier-I have never acted on my SSA and the woman I was friends with was heterosexual. She has remained my friend and didn’t want me to leave, but once the chatter began it was impossible for me to stay.

That is really terrible. To have gossip run amok is one of the worst things to happen…especially in your Church community.

I had gossip in the workplace once that I was gay, and later (in a different company) about a supposed heterosexual affair between me and a close best friend. Since they were not in my Church community, they were a little easier to dismiss. But, it was still unpleasant.

 

[Fitswimmer]

That is really terrible. To have gossip run amok is one of the worst things to happen…especially in your Church community.

I had gossip in the workplace once that I was gay, and later (in a different company) about a supposed heterosexual affair between me and a close best friend. Since they were not in my Church community, they were a little easier to dismiss. But, it was still unpleasant.

I’ve had it at work too, and even from members of my extended family. As you said, those are easier to ignore.

What’s sad about those who would gossip in that way, is that while they are condemning me for something that I have NEVER done, they are doing damage to the grace in their own souls.

 

[rlg94086]

I’ve had it at work too, and even from members of my extended family. As you said, those are easier to ignore.

What’s sad about those who would gossip in that way, is that while they are condemning me for something that I have NEVER done, they are doing damage to the grace in their own souls.

Exactly. I confess to having made assumptions that someone may be gay based on their looks, and it is something I always try to guard against. Stereotyping is something we all struggle with. However, the sin of gossip is taking it to the next level. It is corrosive to any community - work, church, family, etc.

 

[Dale_M]

II thought you said you were celibate? How does thast make you “gay” Being gay and having SSA are not the same thing-at least not by any definition I have ever seen.

Bob, the phrase “person with SSA” is rather unusual. I think it is favored by Courage, the apostolate which helps persons with same sex attractions live chaste lives. And the phrase is definitely favored here at CAF. But I haven’t seen it used anywhere else.

Here at CAF we make the distinction between being gay (acting on homosexual inclinations and accepting it as part of one’s identity) and having SSA (overcoming the inclinations, and living chastely). But I think we are pretty much alone on it.

Tigster did nothing wrong - s/he just wasn’t familiar with the lingo here.

 

[estesbob]

Bob, the phrase “person with SSA” is rather unusual. I think it is favored by Courage, the apostolate which helps persons with same sex attractions live chaste lives. And the phrase is definitely favored here at CAF. But I haven’t seen it used anywhere else.

That is the term I believe the Church uses. But come to think if it I dont hear about it much other than here. I hate the term “gay” and almost never use it my myslef. I always say “those who enage in homosexual behavior” so there is no confusion

Here at CAF we make the distinction between being gay (acting on homosexual inclinations and accepting it as part of one’s identity) and having SSA. But I think we are pretty much alone on it.

Tigster did nothing wrong - s/he just wasn’t familiar with the lingo here.

I guess we’ll have toteach them what OP means next?

 

[KarenNC]

Mono treme
Well it was to do with how gay men have sex. It’s pretty gross -using the same hole

Considering that every male human being on the planet uses “the same hole” for both sexual activity and urination…

 

[Dale_M]

[Y]et God allows someone to be born into this state. Then He, through his Church, imposes restrictions on this individual’s sexuality he never consented to. So aren’t we back at the same place? The Church doesn’t impose special “crosses” to someone born with Cerebral Palsy or severe retardation does it?

No, it doesn’t. But I think the comparison is not quite correct.

Persons born with a disability have a cross to bear simply from coping with the physical or mental circumstances which have befallen them. I guess I see it as a primary burden.

In contrast, the issue of same sex attraction is burdensome because it involves trying to conform human free will with God’s will. I guess I see it as a secondary burden.

Conforming our lives to God’s will is a struggle we all face, no matter the circumstances of our life. As Catholics, we are called to shape our decisions according to moral law and to develop an informed conscience.

Knowledge of what God intends for us forces us to make decisions which we may find unpleasant. Being unmarried, I can not have sex. Because abortion is murder, I can not support legalized abortion, no matter how much I would like. I am even obligated to be nice to people whose politics drive me up the wall - which can be very difficult here at CAF.

I wonder if you aren’t asking about the basic fairness of requiring life-long chastity for persons with same sex attraction. I admit, it doesn’t seem fair - it is a heavy cross to bear. But that doesn’t mean that it isn’t the right thing to do… and that is what counts.

 

[KarenNC]

That is the term I believe the Church uses. But come to think if it I dont hear about it much other than here. I hate the term “gay” and almost never use it my myslef. I always say “those who enage in homosexual behavior” so there is no confusion

I don’t believe I have seen SSA used anywhere else either (other than to mean Social Security Administration ). It is accurate and communicates the intent of the speaker pretty clearly, however, I have to admit.

I think the point is valid that it is useful in such discussions (particularly in this venue) to differentiate between those who act on such an attraction, those who do not and those who act on it in a promiscuous fashion.

 

[goofyjim]

There are some types of love that will never be understood. That’s right, I said love.

 

[estesbob]

I don’t believe I have seen SSA used anywhere else either (other than to mean Social Security Administration ). It is accurate and communicates the intent of the speaker pretty clearly, however, I have to admit.

I think the point is valid that it is useful in such discussions (particularly in this venue) to differentiate between those who act on such an attraction, those who do not and those who act on it in a promiscuous fashion.

I agree <"the sound you just heard was the sound of hell freezing over>

 

[Montalban]

Just a question. A number of you have expressed that homosexuality is a “cross to bear”, requiring a celibate life. This implies that God chose to inflict this particular person with this “cross” does it not? Same for children born with severe chronic health problems, or mental deficiencies. These are life-long crosses too that God imposed? I assume then, that as to such things, our free will is not at issue. God doesn’t ask if we wish to take on this cross certainly. Is this just one of the mysteries of God’s plan?

I thought and was taught that we have free will to accept or reject God’s crosses?

I don’t think God chose people to be homosexual any more than I do people born with a pre-disposition for muder.

I believe God is active in the world - but as God is a God of love, nothing negative comes from him

 

[goofyjim]

I don’t think God chose people to be homosexual any more than I do people born with a pre-disposition for muder.

I believe God is active in the world - but as God is a God of love, nothing negative comes from him

What is negative about love?

 

[ElizabethPH]

Having known several gay people over the years, I think it’s how they are “wired.” I don’t think they can help their SSA. What they can help is whether they choose to act on their SSA, or decide instead to live a life of chastity since they are not called to married life. I think they have a special cross to bear in this life, and deserve our compassion, not judgment.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

There is no scientific evidence that persons are “born” into this situation or state. The comparisons to Cerbral Palsy, caused by medical malpractice or mental retardation, caused by genetic disorder, are comparing apples with pears and throwing in a few peanuts.

Persons may have had outside influences shaping their SSA that were outside of “some” of their control, but they have a choice to seek God’s will and God doesn’t give any of us a Cross which we cannot bear if we are willing to accept His Grace. We may stubble, but we have the means to overcome it.
The thing I think you are missing? Free will choice. You are trying to blame God for the fact that people make bad choices.

If you are suggesting that homosexuality is somehow a choice rather than a genetic condition then we are at odds, and have probably no basis for discussion. I thought only a few fundamentalists nondenominational still refused to believe that.