Homosexuality

[Jesus_lol]

[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1312330745' post='2280536']
Like sit around making baseless accusations?
[/quote]

or talk to my girlfriend, go ride my motorcycle, cook up some hamburgers, wash my hair, cut the lawn with scissors, trim my toenails, stare at the same spot on the wall as my cat for 15 minutes straight, organize my sock drawer alphabetically, lie down on a bench underneath a rockshelf and soak in the late afternoon sun next to the lake, play guitar for a little while...

but no, i generally dont make baseless accusations. When i make accusations, i am generally basing that off of a long period of observation. but i dont always keep notes and sketches of my subjects handy, because KnightofChrist(in this case) is not a red throated Cockatiel, and i am not an ornithologist.

[quote]
You're the one making the accusation, not you.
[/quote]

well, am I or aren't I?

[quote]
Either back it up with a specific link, or issue an apology to Knight.
[/quote]

well, im sorry we are talking about Knight while he isn't here, but i really dont plan on doing either of those things.

[quote]
And yes, I've read his posts, but have yet to see him post anything defending sodomy of any sort. If he's really "quite fond of it" as you claim, finding an example shouldn't be all that difficult.
[/quote]

and here is that reading comprehension thing. I never said that Knight defended sodomy of any sort. I merely mentioned it, because last time we had this discussion(not me and you, me and koc amongst others) he was asserting that homosexual sodomy was a worse sin than heterosexual fornication or sodomy, because it was a sin "that cried out to the heavens". (despite the fact that both heterosexual sodomy and homosexual sodomy are included in that whole "cried out to the heavens" thing, thus making that position very weak.
that point was ignored, and then further stuff was brought up about why homosexual sex was worse, including my aforementioned thing.

AFAIK, knight has never defended heterosexual sodomy, per se, but he has asserted that homosexual sodomy is somehow worse.

anyways, i think that is more than enough explanation and defending for what was a tagged on throwaway statement. i prefer when the body of my argument is attacked rather than relatively meaningless asides.


[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1312331386' post='2280542']
Of, course, I have no problem with the Church's teaching that sodomy is among the five sins that cry out to heaven for vengeance.
I'm sorry if you do.
[/quote]

another great weasel insult, this time at jaime (the artist formerly known as hot stuff). you know full well that he hasnt argued that sodomy isnt among those sins. merely that the often ignored heterosexual sodomy is included equally as well as homosexual sodomy in that list.

[mortify]

[quote name='jaime (the artist formerly known as hot stuff)' timestamp='1312348666' post='2280698']

Actually the burden of proof is on you. There is nothing in Church teaching that comes close to suggesting that anal sex is ever ok.
[/quote]

Fair enough. Here is a quote from Fr Heribert Jones, Moral Theology:
[quote] [color=#0000ff] [/color]
[color=#0000ff]Imperfect sodomy, i.e. rectal intercourse, is a grave sin when the seminal fluid is wasted.[/color]

[color=#0000ff] [/color]
[color=#0000ff]Excluding the sodomitical intention it is neither sodomy nor a grave sin if intercourse is begun in a rectal manner with the intention of consummating it naturally or if some sodomitical action is posited without danger of pollution.[/color]
[/quote]

This is from a pre-Vatican II text, and it surprised me to read it!

And btw, when you make an assertion like, "anal sex is always gravely sinful," the burden of proof rests on you. What counter evidence do you have?

[Jaime]

[quote name='mortify' timestamp='1312377842' post='2280805']

Fair enough. Here is a quote from Fr Heribert Jones, Moral Theology:


This is from a pre-Vatican II text, and it surprised me to read it!

And btw, when you make an assertion like, "anal sex is always gravely sinful," the burden of proof rests on you. What counter evidence do you have?
[/quote]
Well first I must say I'm impressed with the research. Secondly I must say

EWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW

OK now that I got that out of my system. There's a couple of problems here Mortify. First just because a theologian says something, it doesn't mean that it is a magisterial teaching. Secondly, I have a problem with Fr Jones definition of sodomy. One it goes against the traditional definition and B. Its horribly sexist. If the only means of something being sodomy is the loss of seminal fluid, then by his logic, two women would never commit a sin that cries to heaven. And quite frankly, that just doesn't make sense

[Azriel]

This thread makes my head hurt.

[southern california guy]

[quote name='Azriel' timestamp='1312401923' post='2280995']
This thread makes my head hurt.
[/quote]

I agree it's one of the dumbest threads I've read in a while.

[mortify]

[quote name='jaime (the artist formerly known as hot stuff)' timestamp='1312401145' post='2280988']
Well first I must say I'm impressed with the research. Secondly I must say

EWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW

OK now that I got that out of my system. There's a couple of problems here Mortify. First just because a theologian says something, it doesn't mean that it is a magisterial teaching. Secondly, I have a problem with Fr Jones definition of sodomy. One it goes against the traditional definition and B. Its horribly sexist. If the only means of something being sodomy is the loss of seminal fluid, then by his logic, two women would never commit a sin that cries to heaven. And quite frankly, that just doesn't make sense
[/quote]

jaime (the artist formerly known as hot stuff),

You're right in saying the statement of a moral theologian doesn't necessarily reflect magisterial teaching. However Fr Jone's manual is rather renowned, and I would be really surprised if a part of it actually contradicted Church teaching. And we have to keep in mind that his manual was written pre-Vatican II, you know... those uber conservative and "prude" times... so the fact that he recognizes anal sex need not be sinful, is rather significant.

As for your belief that his definition of sodomy contradicts traditional teaching, the burden of proof is on you my friend.

And as for lesbianism not being a sin that cries out to heaven, thats an interesting point. Not sure where that would fall. But with regards to sexism, not sure it matters. Afterall, we're born with original sin at the fault of a man, and not a woman

[Vincent Vega]

[quote name='ardillacid' timestamp='1311829645' post='2277400']
Yes, there was a space in between my first word, so I wasn't really speaking at you, don't you know? Don't take it all personally, that is such a canadien thing to do.

Yeah, flooping interesting canadiens, I know them. I was amazed to see how offended candiens get when i suggest that America has lower taxes, but then thousands of them would flock to Grand Forks on the weekends to shop. amazing

Since every post you've had in the last two weeks have been rebukes for other people's perceived immaturity. "oh my goodness (don't blasphemy) ERAMIGHT DOESN'T AGREE WITH DAN SAVAGE HE IS A HOMOPHOBE, oh my goodness (don't blasphemy) ANYONE ON THE FAR RIGHT AGREES WITH A TERRORIST IN NORWAY THEY ARE KILLERS"

actually, you and bill maher sound almost exactly alike. actually, now that i think about it, I think you even steal his phrases. But I can hear him anytime i want. which makes you superfluous.
[/quote]
Too close for missiles...I'm switching to guns.

[Groo the Wanderer]

i like to kiss girls
my daughter and my wife, y'all
thought i would just share...

[Jaime]

[quote name='mortify' timestamp='1312428521' post='2281277']

jaime (the artist formerly known as hot stuff) (the artist formerly known as hot stuff),

You're right in saying the statement of a moral theologian doesn't necessarily reflect magisterial teaching. However Fr Jone's manual is rather renowned, and I would be really surprised if a part of it actually contradicted Church teaching. And we have to keep in mind that his manual was written pre-Vatican II, you know... those uber conservative and "prude" times... so the fact that he recognizes anal sex need not be sinful, is rather significant.

As for your belief that his definition of sodomy contradicts traditional teaching, the burden of proof is on you my friend.

And as for lesbianism not being a sin that cries out to heaven, thats an interesting point. Not sure where that would fall. But with regards to sexism, not sure it matters. Afterall, we're born with original sin at the fault of a man, and not a woman
[/quote]


Well would you be surprised if some of the teachings by St Thomas Aquinas contradict Church teaching? He's still one of the doctors of the Church.

And as far as original sin goes, you have to be careful in your understanding. The name Adam translates into "All of mankind" so the understanding of the story is that Adam's sin is all of our sin. After all, the only woman who was full of grace since then was Mary.

[southern california guy]

[quote name='jaime (the artist formerly known as hot stuff)' timestamp='1312659958' post='2282526']


Well would you be surprised if some of the teachings by St Thomas Aquinas contradict Church teaching? He's still one of the doctors of the Church.

And as far as original sin goes, you have to be careful in your understanding. The name Adam translates into "All of mankind" so the understanding of the story is that Adam's sin is all of our sin. After all, the only woman who was full of grace since then was Mary.
[/quote]

So Hot Stuff, what exactly are you trying to say? Are you trying to argue homosexuality is okay by the Bible (Old and New Testament)? Because that seems to be the gist of what you're saying, yet you haven't come right out and said it. So as a Catholic do you approve of homosexuality?

[Deus te Amat]

[quote name='southern california guy' timestamp='1312679229' post='2282674']

So Hot Stuff, what exactly are you trying to say? Are you trying to argue homosexuality is okay by the Bible (Old and New Testament)? Because that seems to be the gist of what you're saying, yet you haven't come right out and said it. So as a Catholic do you approve of homosexuality?[/quote]



I don't follow. Where did hot stuff imply his heretical beliefs?

[Deus te Amat]

He's simply pointing out that sometimes, theologians, albeit with the best of intentions, are simply wrong. Aquinas was not excluded from that club. I can point out some of his theological errors, if you wish.

[missionseeker]

[quote name='southern california guy' timestamp='1312679229' post='2282674']

So Hot Stuff, what exactly are you trying to say? Are you trying to argue homosexuality is okay by the Bible (Old and New Testament)? Because that seems to be the gist of what you're saying, yet you haven't come right out and said it. So as a Catholic do you approve of homosexuality?
[/quote]




Where on earth are you getting that from???

[southern california guy]

I apologize jaime (the artist formerly known as hot stuff) I misunderstood.. This whole thing gets confusing...

Edited August 7, 2011 by southern california guy

[Deus te Amat]

Wait, what? Did you read his posts? I got something completely different out of it (although, I think he mixed up heterosexual and homosexual in the last sentence of the first post you quoted).

For example, in the last quote, he was showing mortify how that theologian is in error by revealing the illogic of the argument, as it would mean that a lesbian couple is not sinning. He is arguing in defense of heterosexual unions, not against. Please read that post again more carefully.

[southern california guy]

[quote name='Deus_te_Amat' timestamp='1312690310' post='2282809']
Wait, what? Did you read his posts? I got something completely different out of it (although, I think he mixed up heterosexual and homosexual in the last sentence of the first post you quoted).

For example, in the last quote, he was showing mortify how that theologian is in error by revealing the illogic of the argument, as it would mean that a lesbian couple is not sinning. He is arguing in defense of heterosexual unions, not against. Please read that post again more carefully.
[/quote]

Okay you're right. I responded too quickly. It's confusing though. I became confused about who wrote what.

[Deus te Amat]

Please be more careful when accusing a devoted Catholic of heresy.

[southern california guy]

Maybe I'll just take a break from posting and just read posts. jaime (the artist formerly known as hot stuff) was actually arguing on the exact same side as me and I completely misinterpreted what he was saying. That's a hazard of reading through posts too quickly.

jaime (the artist formerly known as hot stuff) I apologize. I wish I could erase some of dumb posts.

[Groo the Wanderer]

wanna see a neat trick?