Jesus_lol Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 [quote name='CatherineM' timestamp='1309647200' post='2262299'] We tend to chastise through personal messages, not in public. [/quote] lol, really? hasnt worked that way for me, people always rebuke me in public and I always call them out in public. hmm well i suppose i have told a few friends over private messages to cool it on certain issues, but for the most part of my 5 odd years here, its out in the open :D message to Debra Little and Lumiere. While i can sympathize with a lot of what you are saying, you guys should seriously consider taking this a lot less seriously than you have been. I wont vouch for Norseman, we have had our disagreements in the past, but you really have no call to be judging catherineM on the level that you have been. do you think after 21 THOUSAND posts here maybe she, and many of us here, simply stop making the same tired arguments to the same people? Insanity is trying the same thing over and over and expecting different results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archaeology cat Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 [quote name='dominicansoul' timestamp='1309671846' post='2262509'] the title of this thread is not correct ... the Catholic Church does not deny anyone anything, just as God does not deny anyone anything ... we humans deny ourselves by the poor choices we make, and the way we decide we are gonna live contrary to God's laws ... [/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lumiere Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 [quote name='TeresaBenedicta' timestamp='1309662155' post='2262419'] Debra, sister in Christ... we accept you. We love you. I mean this most sincerely. If you would like to educate us to the truth as you see it, then please, please do. Provide an argument as to why/how SSA is not inherently disordered. But if you choose not to provide an argument, there is little more we can say. We have given arguments. We have provided Church teaching. No one has said anything against you as a person. No one doubts the struggles you've had in your life. In fact, I find admirable that you remain celibate, despite your difficulties with what the Church teaches. [/quote] She has provided you with an argument: "It is only disordered for a straight person to have gay sex. It's natural for us. There is no connection with the opposite sex for gays, emotional and otherwise. We have to be allowed to be true to ourselves in the same way straight people are." It is you who aren't listening. If this was a discussion just about the position of the Church, that would be one thing, but it is actually a discussion about the "the gay agenda". If people were being fair and respectful then a discussion about homosexuality would be no more emotional than a discussion about the use of birth control or adultery, both of which go against the same Church policies as homosexuality. I don't see people agitating to prevent adulterers or people with only two children from working in certain jobs or from living in certain places. You don't hear the same hatred or anger in the arguments. What the Church does inside the Church is one thing, but when that spreads into prejudice and anger in society as a whole, then it affects me and mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lumiere Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 [quote name='Jesus_lol' timestamp='1309674389' post='2262528'] message to Debra Little and Lumiere. While i can sympathize with a lot of what you are saying, you guys should seriously consider taking this a lot less seriously than you have been. I wont vouch for Norseman, we have had our disagreements in the past, but you really have no call to be judging catherineM on the level that you have been. do you think after 21 THOUSAND posts here maybe she, and many of us here, simply stop making the same tired arguments to the same people? Insanity is trying the same thing over and over and expecting different results. [/quote] If those people have been reprimanded then why are they considered to be "Church Militants"? Why are they allowed to represent the Church? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papist Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 [quote name='tgoldson' timestamp='1309664990' post='2262458'] It has been my experience that extreme examples used to illustrate a point are often interpreted as insults. Not all homosexual people are offended by the Church's teachings. It's possible to disagree without taking offense. [/quote] Did I use an extreme example? If so, why? Then explain why a man sexually attracted to another man is also not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lumiere Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 [quote name='CatherineM' timestamp='1309653823' post='2262346'] [/quote] As I am getting ready for church I have thought of an example of how the fear of "the gay agenda" colors these discussions. I believe it was you Chatherine M who spoke about religious people being forced to marry gay couples in Canada. If it wasn't you I apologize, I don't have time to look for it now. In any case, in Canada the provinces hire people to perform marriages for people who can legally marry in that province but who don't want to marry in a church. Currently, since same sex marriages are legal, those people must perform same sex marriages if asked to do so. If it is against their religion, no they cannot refuse, but they can get another job. I repeat, it is only those who work for the provinces who cannot refuse to marry same sex couples. (The provinces are like the states in the U.S.) [b]NO CHURCH, MOSQUE, OR TEMPLE HAS BEEN FORCED TO PERFORM SAME SEX MARRIAGES IN CANADA![/b] The way the original post was worded made it sound as if Churches did not have the right to refuse to perform same sex marriages. People in the U.S. will read that and then they spread it around and the "Gay Agenda" hysteria builds. The way the original post was worded was not entirely honest and I think such things contribute to the fear and hatred in these discussions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrestia Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 [quote name='Papist' timestamp='1309694476' post='2262568'] Did I use an extreme example? If so, why? Then explain why a man sexually attracted to another man is also not. [/quote] The difference between SSA and pedophilia seems obvious to me. If I were gay I would find the implied association insulting and demeaning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papist Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 [quote name='tgoldson' timestamp='1309698024' post='2262578'] The difference between SSA and pedophilia seems obvious to me. If I were gay I would find the implied association insulting and demeaning. [/quote] That's is the point. Making same-sex attraction as ordered as opposite-sex attraction is equally insulting and demeaning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 [quote name='Lumiere' timestamp='1309692414' post='2262564'] If those people have been reprimanded then why are they considered to be "Church Militants"? Why are they allowed to represent the Church? [/quote] The Church militants don't need reprimanded since they haven't done anything wrong. Explaining Church teaching is exactly what they are supposed to do and by and large they do it well. CatherineM was a CHURCH canon lawyer so insinuating that she doesn't know exactly what so is talking about is absurd. People are free to disagree and disbelieve what the Church teaches, but no one has no call to insult the people teaching it.The only anger and hatred I see is coming from the people who disagree with the Church. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norseman82 Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Lumiere' timestamp='1309691687' post='2262563'] She has provided you with an argument: "It is only disordered for a straight person to have gay sex. It's natural for us. There is no connection with the opposite sex for gays, emotional and otherwise. We have to be allowed to be true to ourselves in the same way straight people are." It is you who aren't listening. If this was a discussion just about the position of the Church, that would be one thing, but it is actually a discussion about the "the gay agenda". If people were being fair and respectful then a discussion about homosexuality would be no more emotional than a discussion about the use of birth control or adultery, both of which go against the same Church policies as homosexuality. I don't see people agitating to prevent adulterers or people with only two children from working in certain jobs or from living in certain places. You don't hear the same hatred or anger in the arguments. What the Church does inside the Church is one thing, but when that spreads into prejudice and anger in society as a whole, then it affects me and mine. [/quote] The "argument" is not correct. From the Holy Bible, the first chapter of Romans (Douay-Rheims, courtesy www.awmach.org): [quote]23 And they changed the glory of the incorruptible God into the likeness of the image of a corruptible man and of birds, and of fourfooted beasts and of creeping things. 24 Wherefore, God gave them up to the desires of their heart, unto uncleanness: to dishonour their own bodies among themselves. 25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. 26 For this cause, God delivered them up to shameful affections. For their women have changed the natural use into that use which is against nature. 27 And, in like manner, the men also, leaving the natural use of the women, have burned in their lusts, one towards another: men with men, working that which is filthy and receiving in themselves the recompense which was due to their error. [/quote] Edited July 3, 2011 by Norseman82 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norseman82 Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 [quote name='Lumiere' timestamp='1309696495' post='2262574'] [b]NO CHURCH, MOSQUE, OR TEMPLE HAS BEEN FORCED TO PERFORM SAME SEX MARRIAGES IN CANADA![/b] [/quote] But I recall a case in which a Catholic magazine publisher was brought before the "hate speech police" (or whatever the official term is) simply for discussing what the Church taught. Maybe CatherineM has more details, since she is in Canada herself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatherineM Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 Bishop Henry in Calgary was brought before the Alberta Human Rights Tribunal for explaining Church teaching on gay marriage in our Catholic newspaper. They aren't making priests, rabbis, or imams marry same sex couples, yet. That's a big yet because the head of the groups here pushing for these "reforms" are very upfront that it is one of their goals. There are already plans in place as to how it will be handled by the archdiocese when it does eventually happen. In Ontario, the Catholic school board has been forced into doing sex education for grade school kids. Polygamy is also going to be coming soon. Already, refugees from countries where multiple wives are common are being allowed to bring more than one wife with them, giving them quasi-governmental recognition. Cases against the BC polygamists have been dropped. Everything that Canada does, you can expect the US to follow eventually. The advocacy is being paid for by the same group of people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4588686 Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 [quote name='CatherineM' timestamp='1309713940' post='2262650'] Bishop Henry in Calgary was brought before the Alberta Human Rights Tribunal for explaining Church teaching on gay marriage in our Catholic newspaper. [/quote] That's asinine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrestia Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 [quote name='Papist' timestamp='1309707702' post='2262627'] That's is the point. Making same-sex attraction as ordered as opposite-sex attraction is equally insulting and demeaning. [/quote] Ahhh, I thought that you were trying to say that a person's feelings about an action is a separate issue from whether it is ordered or disordered. Personally, I'm not insulted when people disagree with me or church teachings. I would be insulted if someone expected the Church to bend so that they could do what they want, but that is for all issues across the board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Debra Little Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 [quote name='TeresaBenedicta' timestamp='1309662155' post='2262419'] Debra, sister in Christ... we accept you. We love you. I mean this most sincerely. If you would like to educate us to the truth as you see it, then please, please do. Provide an argument as to why/how SSA is not inherently disordered. But if you choose not to provide an argument, there is little more we can say. We have given arguments. We have provided Church teaching. No one has said anything against you as a person. No one doubts the struggles you've had in your life. In fact, I find admirable that you remain celibate, despite your difficulties with what the Church teaches. [/quote] It's not that big of a deal to remain celebate when you're not interested in anyone anyway. And if I was interested I'd still say no because I don't believe it's right and it's against God's Word. And I will in no way marry again because the 1st and only was a huge disaster lol. In his favor, though, he accepted Christ as his Savior and made his peace with God. Father came and gave him last rights the day before he died and,. of his own accord, held a memorial service for him. That spoke volumes to me. I don't know if he ever got right with the Church because by that time he was semi comatose and unable to respond. But I believe he will be in heaven. I don't know how to think of last rights with a semi comatose person. I am assuming it is effective. Thank you for your affirmation of me. I appreciate it. You are sweet. Let's leave it this way and forget it okay. I am who I am but I have no intention of doing anything with it. I have been to confession for the couple of times I did. I am right with God and the Church. I can't change who I am. This is just how I choose for my life to be. What others choose is beyond my control. Whether gay sex is a sin for others they alone will have to decide and it's between them and God. I know there are a lot of gays who choose to remain celebate. I have no interest in men beyond friends and have absolutely no connection with them. I love all my Phatmass brothers and sisters and in no way, because of this discussion despise or hate any of you. I am honored to be part of this forum. There now I feel peaceful and right. Amen![quote name='TeresaBenedicta' timestamp='1309662155' post='2262419'] Debra, sister in Christ... we accept you. We love you. I mean this most sincerely. If you would like to educate us to the truth as you see it, then please, please do. Provide an argument as to why/how SSA is not inherently disordered. But if you choose not to provide an argument, there is little more we can say. We have given arguments. We have provided Church teaching. No one has said anything against you as a person. No one doubts the struggles you've had in your life. In fact, I find admirable that you remain celibate, despite your difficulties with what the Church teaches. [/quote] It's not that big of a deal to remain celebate when you're not interested in anyone anyway. And if I was interested I'd still say no because I don't believe it's right and it's against God's Word. And I will in no way marry again because the 1st and only was a huge disaster lol. In his favor, though, he accepted Christ as his Savior and made his peace with God. Father came and gave him last rights the day before he died and,. of his own accord, held a memorial service for him. That spoke volumes to me. I don't know if he ever got right with the Church because by that time he was semi comatose and unable to respond. But I believe he will be in heaven. I don't know how to think of last rights with a semi comatose person. I am assuming it is effective. Thank you for your affirmation of me. I appreciate it. You are sweet. Let's leave it this way and forget it okay. I am who I am but I have no intention of doing anything with it. I have been to confession for the couple of times I did. I am right with God and the Church. I can't change who I am. This is just how I choose for my life to be. What others choose is beyond my control. Whether gay sex is a sin for others they alone will have to decide and it's between them and God. I know there are a lot of gays who choose to remain celebate. I have no interest in men beyond friends and have absolutely no connection with them. I love all my Phatmass brothers and sisters and in no way, because of this discussion despise or hate any of you. I am honored to be part of this forum. There now I feel peaceful and right. Amen! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts