People Are Not Lesbian,Gay,Bisexual,Transgender Or Questioning...

[Guest]

I just have never felt any attraction to a male. I don't think it's possible for me. I'm 99.9% sure of that. Actually 100% sure. No matter how lonely or any other factors. I believe people who have ssa when they say they always had it. I don't think they're lying. Are there cases where it developed in people because of loneliness or not being sure of their identity or not having a father figure? Yeah probably. But the gay people I've met say they are attracted to the same sex the way I'm attracted to women. They always have been. They aren't "confused" as the meme implies. God bless people with ssa. I actually found this meme to be an attack on them from a religious page on Facebook. 

[truthfinder]

Thanks Josh - I see what you're saying now.

I'll have a think on it and might post back later.

[Guest]

"He or she is bi-sexual", "He or she is stupid", "She is lesbian", "He is a nut case" etc. etc.

As Catholic Christians, he or she is a beloved child of God.  Full stop end of story and the whole and entire story.

We can use all the rationalisations and reasons etc. etc. in the book for using tags and labels, stereotyping; however, our call and vocation is to love our neighbour as a brother or sister and a beloved child of God.  It is not our call to of necessity integrate worldly and secular thinking into our spirituality.  And our spirituality is not something we take out now and then.  We cannot avoid the fact that our spirituality is with us always and everywhere at all times, woven through our entire person and personality, every thought, word or deed conscious or unconscious.  We are going to be confronted perhaps again and again with worldly and secular type of thinking and we are called to stand against it very often, not for it always of necessity.  It is what the "Vocation and MIssion of The Laity" is in part all about.

Where the meme in the opening post is concerned.  I do not agree with it in any way. Everyone is a person, not a tag or label.  Think about it, how on earth can a person be a homosexual, or sexually confused etc?    A person is a (highly complex) human being created and beloved by Almighty God and for whom Jesus lived and died terribly - absolutely no exceptions whatsoever.

I do hold that science in its various fields and other areas of expertise might need their labels and categories, even stereotypes (a type of 'shorthand specialist type language')- but cannot agree such should be carried over into ordinary daily life.  Science and theories are entirely valid and absolutely worthwhile and to be highly valued, and one subject while still only theories often.  Relationships in the day to day are another vitally important subject entirely. 

The meme was quite disturbing to me.

Edited January 10, 2017 by BarbaraTherese

[Ice_nine]

On 1/9/2017 at 1:39 AM, Nihil Obstat said:

Incidentally, I am at this exact moment doing some reading for my class which starts on Tuesday, which is dealing with how even the Kinsey scale is seen as kind of passé with the really hip theorists.

 

lol it has been some years since I've really delved into the subject. what class is that reading for?

[Nihil Obstat]

24 minutes ago, Ice_nine said:

lol it has been some years since I've really delved into the subject. what class is that reading for?

Special topics in philosophy of science. I will know a bit more detail after class today.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, BarbaraTherese said:

"He or she is bi-sexual", "He or she is stupid", "She is lesbian", "He is a nut case" etc. etc.

As Catholic Christians, he or she is a beloved child of God.  Full stop end of story and the whole and entire story.

We can use all the rationalisations and reasons etc. etc. in the book for using tags and labels, stereotyping; however, our call and vocation is to love our neighbour as a brother or sister and a beloved child of God.  It is not our call to of necessity integrate worldly and secular thinking into our spirituality.  And our spirituality is not something we take out now and then.  We cannot avoid the fact that our spirituality is with us always and everywhere at all times, woven through our entire person and personality, every thought, word or deed conscious or unconscious.  We are going to be confronted perhaps again and again with worldly and secular type of thinking and we are called to stand against it very often, not for it always of necessity.  It is what the "Vocation and MIssion of The Laity" is in part all about.

Where the meme in the opening post is concerned.  I do not agree with it in any way. Everyone is a person, not a tag or label.  Think about it, how on earth can a person be a homosexual, or sexually confused etc?    A person is a (highly complex) human being created and beloved by Almighty God and for whom Jesus lived and died terribly - absolutely no exceptions whatsoever.

I do hold that science in its various fields and other areas of expertise might need their labels and categories, even stereotypes (a type of 'shorthand specialist type language')- but cannot agree such should be carried over into ordinary daily life.  Science and theories are entirely valid and absolutely worthwhile and to be highly valued, and one subject while still only theories often.  Relationships in the day to day are another vitally important subject entirely. 

The meme was quite disturbing to me.

I didn't like the meme. I thought it was disturbing coming from a religious page. The reason I didn't like it because it says that someone who has ssa doesn't really have ssa. That it can just be "prayed" away and they can be a normal guy who likes girls again. Or a normal girl who likes guys. From all the people I've met in the real world with ssa this isn't the case. Ssa isn't something they just decided to pick up one day.

Edited January 10, 2017 by Guest

[LittleWaySoul]

23 hours ago, BarbaraTherese said:

"He or she is bi-sexual", "He or she is stupid", "She is lesbian", "He is a nut case" etc. etc.

As Catholic Christians, he or she is a beloved child of God.  Full stop end of story and the whole and entire story.

We can use all the rationalisations and reasons etc. etc. in the book for using tags and labels, stereotyping; however, our call and vocation is to love our neighbour as a brother or sister and a beloved child of God.  It is not our call to of necessity integrate worldly and secular thinking into our spirituality.  And our spirituality is not something we take out now and then.  We cannot avoid the fact that our spirituality is with us always and everywhere at all times, woven through our entire person and personality, every thought, word or deed conscious or unconscious.  We are going to be confronted perhaps again and again with worldly and secular type of thinking and we are called to stand against it very often, not for it always of necessity.  It is what the "Vocation and MIssion of The Laity" is in part all about.

Where the meme in the opening post is concerned.  I do not agree with it in any way. Everyone is a person, not a tag or label.  Think about it, how on earth can a person be a homosexual, or sexually confused etc?    A person is a (highly complex) human being created and beloved by Almighty God and for whom Jesus lived and died terribly - absolutely no exceptions whatsoever.

I do hold that science in its various fields and other areas of expertise might need their labels and categories, even stereotypes (a type of 'shorthand specialist type language')- but cannot agree such should be carried over into ordinary daily life.  Science and theories are entirely valid and absolutely worthwhile and to be highly valued, and one subject while still only theories often.  Relationships in the day to day are another vitally important subject entirely. 

The meme was quite disturbing to me.

 

To be honest I don't see self-identifying as "gay" (as opposed to "SSA") to be all that problematic. I know several self-identified gay men and women; some faithful Catholics, some not. I also know someone who identifies as SSA. That's that person's prerogative. But while obviously everyone's identity is fundamentally rooted in God's love for us, I do believe that there are other ways in which we can be identified without viewing these ways as the most important aspect of our selves.

For example, I could identify myself as pro-life, straight, sleep-deprived, artistic, independent, inquisitive, lazy... and so on ad infinitum. I don't make any one of those facets out to be my ultimate identity, but each one does form me in its own way.

We use this kind of language all the time without ever misunderstanding one another. If I were to tell you, "I am a Star Wars fan," I doubt you'd correct me by saying that, "No, you are a beloved child of God." By identifying myself in a certain specific way, I am merely giving you one piece of information about me; I am not excluding every other possible facet of my own self-identification.

Everyone's sexuality is a pretty big part of their life. It affects the way they see and interact with the world and with other people. Coming out and labeling it with a succinct and recognizable word doesn't seem like an issue to me if someone is comfortable with doing so. 

Besides, no one tells heterosexual people to call themselves OSA (opposite sex attracted). Does that mean we're conflating our attraction to the opposite sex with our deepest identity by calling ourselves "straight"? I would argue that it does not. 

[Also to prevent any confusion: I stand with the Church and her teaching on same sex unions. Here I'm really only speaking about terminology and addressing the "identity" argument against anyone identifying as gay.]

[CatherineM]

I thought the Q was for qwerty. We also add a 2 to ours for aboriginals who are two spirited. 

[philothea]

If I have to assume, I assume everyone is bisexual, because hey, nobody has met everyone in the world yet, right? Who knows who might wind up being attractive.

Doesn't change how people ought to behave, though. 

[Guest]

Just now, philothea said:

If I have to assume, I assume everyone is bisexual, because hey, nobody has met everyone in the world yet, right? Who knows who might wind up being attractive.

Doesn't change how people ought to behave, though. 

Hi Philothsa. Why in the world would you assume that? As a male I experience 0% sexual attraction to any male. I can recognize that a guy is good looking but there are 0 feelings of attraction. Brad Pitt for instance. I wish I had his hair. But when you say "Who knows who might wind up being attracive" I just don't see any truth in this. Unless you have ssa. 

[Guest]

12 hours ago, LittleWaySoul said:

 

We use this kind of language all the time without ever misunderstanding one another. If I were to tell you, "I am a Star Wars fan," I doubt you'd correct me by saying that, "No, you are a beloved child of God."

Sorry, LWS, perhaps I did not make my meaning clear - it is more about dismissing or summarising others with a tag and using tags consistently without prethought in describing others - most often too there is a stereotype attached, not so much using a tag to describe oneself.  If I choose to dismiss/describe myself with a tag, my choice.  It cannot change that in essence I am a beloved child of God.

I did have a giggle though, because if someone said to me "I am a Star Wars fan", I just might start to laugh and say "No, you are a beloved child of God.........think about it."   Be that as it may, in speaking or writing about myself, I often state "I am a fan of St Therese" for one example only.  My choice.  I do strongly suspect in some quarters there is a stereotype attached to a fan of St. Therese.

In describing myself I state at times "I suffer a mental illness" or "I have a mental illness".   I NEVER say "I am mentally ill." If I hear someone say "He (or she) is mentally ill".  I laugh and say "No, she (or he) suffers or has a mental illness, but she (or he) is not mentally ill, she is a child of God..........think about it...........what on earth is a Mentally Ill?".

Just a way of evangelizing and opening up conversation on the subject at times.  The risk factor!..........some do walk away and say something like or similar to "You are a complete weirdo (nut, idiot, stupid etc.), Barb"  and all I can do is laugh because I am not a complete weirdo etc, I am a child of God.  Then on the other hand at times it has been a conversation piece as it were, opening up a conversation on an important subject and opportunity to evangelise.

Edited January 11, 2017 by BarbaraTherese

[LittleWaySoul]

12 hours ago, BarbaraTherese said:

Sorry, LWS, perhaps I did not make my meaning clear - it is more about dismissing or summarising others with a tag and using tags consistently without prethought in describing others - most often too there is a stereotype attached, not so much using a tag to describe oneself.  If I choose to dismiss/describe myself with a tag, my choice.  It cannot change that in essence I am a beloved child of God.

I did have a giggle though, because if someone said to me "I am a Star Wars fan", I just might start to laugh and say "No, you are a beloved child of God.........think about it."   Be that as it may, in speaking or writing about myself, I often state "I am a fan of St Therese" for one example only.  My choice.  I do strongly suspect in some quarters there is a stereotype attached to a fan of St. Therese.

In describing myself I state at times "I suffer a mental illness" or "I have a mental illness".   I NEVER say "I am mentally ill." If I hear someone say "He (or she) is mentally ill".  I laugh and say "No, she (or he) suffers or has a mental illness, but she (or he) is not mentally ill, she is a child of God..........think about it...........what on earth is a Mentally Ill?".

Just a way of evangelizing and opening up conversation on the subject at times.  The risk factor!..........some do walk away and say something like or similar to "You are a complete weirdo (nut, idiot, stupid etc.), Barb"  and all I can do is laugh because I am not a complete weirdo etc, I am a child of God.  Then on the other hand at times it has been a conversation piece as it were, opening up a conversation on an important subject and opportunity to evangelise.

Ah, that makes more sense to me! Yes, we should avoid stereotypes and judgment of others. It's always essential to keep in mind everyone's status as children of God.