Since We've Been Talking About Lgbtq Stuff A Lot Lately...

[Papist]

I am not following. Are you saying love is love and that can never be a bad thing?

[Apotheoun]

A person should never turn a disordered passion into a personally defining characteristic.

[LittleWaySoul]

I know that you are a straight woman. I don't know anything close to that specific about the sex life you have with your husband. You analogy doesn't work. You come out of the straight closet every time you mention that you're married to a man. Why is it suddenly tmi when gay people do that? Moreover, coming out of the closet doesn't usually entail announcing your sexual orientation to everybody you meet. It just means not hiding it.

 

The reason why "coming out" is even a thing is because everyone assumes that you're straight by default.  Even if you were a celibate non-heterosexual, it'd probably be a good idea to "come out" to your friends and family if they keep hounding you about "settling down and starting a family."  Coming out can mean anything from "I am in a relationship and you must approve!" to "Hey, your assumptions about my sexuality aren't true."  

 

It seems to me that some Catholics are uniquely suited to understanding what it's like to come out to one's family, with so many young people nervous about telling their families that they aren't called to married life.  

 

THIS

Edited May 22, 2013 by LittleWaySoul

[MarysLittleFlower]

hmm.. I don't know. If someone says that they have SSA, - imo treat them like everyone else, and with love. If they intend to have same sex relationships or already do, I'd still treat them with love but I wouldn't agree or pretend to agree with the relationships or the desire for them etc. There's a difference between loving the sinner and loving the sin. Loving the sinner means not wanting them to sin, not accepting that.

 

(I haven't watched the video yet so this is more of a response to the topic than the video!)

Edited May 23, 2013 by MarysLittleFlower

[God the Father]

I love the "Q," as if considering the possibility of being attracted to someone of the same sex qualifies you as a member of a minority group in need of support.

[LinaSt.Cecilia2772]

I love the "Q," as if considering the possibility of being attracted to someone of the same sex qualifies you as a member of a minority group in need of support.

 

Your comment seriously bothers me, because it comes off as insensitive and the sarcasm wasn't necessary.

 

I put the 'Q' in there for a reason (and it should be there), for those who SERIOUSLY are questioning their sexuality and how it can affect their life in a drastic way. The Q means something to those people, to be able to talk, ask questions and find SUPPORT when they aren't sure of themselves. There are many questioning people who can't talk about their sexuality without being shunned, ridiculed, called disordered, etc. because they are struggling with something they don't even understand themselves. The 'B' is in LGBTQ for a reason too, because there are people with both inclinations and attractions to both sexes. It's confusing, it's difficult, and it's something that's very sensitive to those who are questioning.

 

I'm not denying that there are people who take advantage of the 'Q' in LGBTQ. But be charitable to those who truly are questioning themselves and their sexuality. They're still human beings, and they are no less than you or me.

[Nihil Obstat]

I thought the Q stood for "Qwerty". I have heard of people identifying as that rather than as gay or lesbian or whatever. Not quite sure what it means.

[LinaSt.Cecilia2772]

I thought the Q stood for "Qwerty". I have heard of people identifying as that rather than as gay or lesbian or whatever. Not quite sure what it means.

 

http://www.depts.ttu.edu/scc/Virtual_Library/lgbtq.php

 

L stands for lesbians – women whose primary emotional, romantic, sexual, or affectional attractions are to other women. 

G stands for gay men – men whose primary emotional, romantic, sexual, or affectional attractions are to other men. 

B stands for bisexuals – men or women whose primary emotional, romantic, sexual, or affectional attractions are to both women and men. 

T stands for transgendered – a broad term that includes cross-dressers, transsexuals, and people who live substantial portions of their lives as other than their birth gender. A transgendered person is someone whose gender identity and/or expression differ from conventional expectations for their physical birth sex. Gender identity refers to the internal sense of being male or female, while gender expression refers to how someone presents his or her gender to the world through style of dress, mannerisms, and so on. A transitioning transgender person is one who is modifying her or his physical characteristics and manner of expression to – in effect –satisfy the standards for membership in another gender. Transgender people can be straight, gay, lesbian or bisexual. 

Q stands for questioning – someone who is questioning their sexual and/or gender orientation. Sometimes, the Q stands for “queer,” a term reclaimed by some LGBTs for political reasons. 

What people in these groups all have in common is that they challenge the heterosexist norms of mainstream society and are stigmatized as a result; otherwise, the LGBTQ community is very diverse with respect to ethnic and cultural backgrounds, physical ability, religion, personality traits, socioeconomic class, and many other attributes

 

 

It can mean both, but it was originally put in for those who are questioning.

[Little Flower]

I am confused by the purpose of this topic. Are we attempting to condone homosexuality?

 

 

You know, attractions for people of the same gender is really no different than for example attractions to young boys or something like that. They are all disordered passions, and although those who have them certainly have a heavy cross to carry, that does not mean that we should condone the actions that these attractions tempt them to. I doubt there is a single American who thinks that because pedophiles are sexually attracted to children, that that is OK to act on because "that is just how they are." However, people use that line of reasoning to justify homosexuality, which is just another kind of disordered affection. It is a disorder that should be treated, not something that we should all just accept and condone.

 

Just to be clear, I don't want to come across as judgmental; I believe that we should always treat others with love and respect no matter who they are or what they have done. LGBTQ people are no different. However, there is a difference between loving the sinner and condoning the sin.

[MarysLittleFlower]

I understand what you mean... the desire itself is not correct: because if consented to, it's a sin. I think what people sometimes say is that - we shouldn't treat homosexuals like a special class of people that we pick on, and ignore other sins. I think that all grave sins are serious: for example, fornication is serious too. It's also wrong to do that. But - there's the other extreme of also treating homosexual people like a separate group but in the opposite way: going beyond treating them with charity as persons (and recognizing that we are sinners too), - and actually supporting the homosexual attractions or actions. I don't really know what the people in this thread mean, since it's a Catholic forum I assume everyone who's Catholic agrees that homosexuality (as a behavior) is sinful... but just putting this out there :)

 

Maybe the reason people react differently to another desire that's against natural law - like pedophilia - is because there, we can easily see someone (the child) be hurt. In homosexuality, we often hear the argument that "no one gets hurt". Of course, sin hurts us though, in a deeper way that maybe others can observe. It hurts our souls. It's maybe just more hidden to other people, and sometimes ourselves, if we numb our conscience enough. There's always hope to turn to God though... we should never despair, but pray to repent and come back. Also, homosexuality affects society, and in turn, children, who grow up being taught it's okay.

Edited May 23, 2013 by MarysLittleFlower

[Lilllabettt]

I have seen similar "experiments" where people pretend to be fat, black, hijab-wearing Muslim women for a day/week/month.

They are offensive.

It is offensive for someone to put on a costume and "play" a role for awhile, and then take off the costume and go on to presume to talk about the lived experience of real people who are not wearing a costume at all.  This guy does not know what its like to be gay. He knows what its like to pretend to be gay. Thats it.

[LinaSt.Cecilia2772]

I am confused by the purpose of this topic. Are we attempting to condone homosexuality?

 

Just to be clear, I don't want to come across as judgmental; I believe that we should always treat others with love and respect no matter who they are or what they have done. LGBTQ people are no different. However, there is a difference between loving the sinner and condoning the sin.

 

I never said anything about condoning homosexuality. I was just pointing out that the comment was insensitive to those who are honestly struggling and questioning themselves and their sexuality. That's where treating others with love and respect comes in.
 

You know, attractions for people of the same gender is really no different than for example attractions to young boys or something like that. They are all disordered passions, and although those who have them certainly have a heavy cross to carry, that does not mean that we should condone the actions that these attractions tempt them to. I doubt there is a single American who thinks that because pedophiles are sexually attracted to children, that that is OK to act on because "that is just how they are." However, people use that line of reasoning to justify homosexuality, which is just another kind of disordered affection. It is a disorder that should be treated, not something that we should all just accept and condone.

 

 

In my opinion this is not a logical comparison at all, because there's a huge difference between the two. Pedophiles who purposefully go after innocent children WITH criminal intentions and sexual abuse is completely different from a person who is gay and has the capacity to love like heterosexuals do WITHOUT criminal intentions and abuse. Out of the many people I know who are gay, NONE of them have any desire to go after a person of the same sex and commit a crime. Comparing the two is disrespectful, especially to the people who are gay that are trying to live a chaste lifestyle. Yes, there are chaste gays out there too, and one of them happens to be my very Catholic best friend.

[MarysLittleFlower]

I agree that homosexuals don't have an intention to do something like pedophiles do, I think maybe the point is just that - both desires go against natural law... am I correct that this is what was meant? 

 

I think on one hand, it's true that the intention might be different, on another hand, I don't think that "wanting to love" excuses sin because we should love God first. I think a person who has SSA and chooses to remain celibate for the sake of following Christ, shows love.

Edited May 23, 2013 by MarysLittleFlower

[LinaSt.Cecilia2772]

I agree that homosexuals don't have an intention to do something like pedophiles do, I think maybe the point is just that - both desires go against natural law... am I correct that this is what was meant? 

 

Yep, wasn't disagreeing with you on that.
 

I think on one hand, it's true that the intention might be different, on another hand, I don't think that "wanting to love" excuses sin because we should love God first.

 

I'm not sure what you mean by "wanting to love"? Can you clarify?

 

I think a person who has SSA and chooses to remain celibate for the sake of following Christ, shows love.

 

Amen. :amen: :notworthy2:

[franciscanheart]

I am confused by the purpose of this topic. Are we attempting to condone homosexuality?


You know, attractions for people of the same gender is really no different than for example attractions to young boys or something like that. They are all disordered passions, and although those who have them certainly have a heavy cross to carry, that does not mean that we should condone the actions that these attractions tempt them to. I doubt there is a single American who thinks that because pedophiles are sexually attracted to children, that that is OK to act on because "that is just how they are." However, people use that line of reasoning to justify homosexuality, which is just another kind of disordered affection. It is a disorder that should be treated, not something that we should all just accept and condone.

Just to be clear, I don't want to come across as judgmental; I believe that we should always treat others with love and respect no matter who they are or what they have done. LGBTQ people are no different. However, there is a difference between loving the sinner and condoning the sin.

I don't know who you are or where you're from but homosexuality is not a disorder that needs treating like diabetes or cancer or something. What an ignorant thing to say!

It is not a sin to be gay. How dare you suggest that homosexuals are sinners simply because they are. And how dare you suggest they are in need of some kind of help!

If this is not at all what you meant to imply, perhaps you will rethink how you present your opinions on the matter.