Tab'le De'Bah-Rye Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 (edited) I have a question about a subject that has come up a few times in the past and even right now there is a thread relating to it. Should gay/lesbian people who have committed themselves to a chaste life in order to remain faithful to the church be allowed to be priests, nuns, or religious? Do you think the fact that you are gay would somehow make you less able to fulfill that role in the church? I hope that made sense. Or if I worded it this way: Does being gay make a person unfit for these roles? Even if they are 100% faithful to the church, live a chaste life, etc etc. I would very much appreciate your perspective on this subject! I know what my thoughts are but again, they are not popular. AwE-sOme thinking Crosscut, i wonder, i get what your getting at, can a priest live with another man he loves more than anyone else and has to live with him or visa versa for a nun, but they do that anyway don't they in religious orders. But also 1 of the dictionary meanings of gay means homosexual and i may be wrong but doesn't homosexual have something to do with sexual intercourse with the same sex. Than what is the meaning of sexual intercourse? Get your dictionaries out, lets study some words. Edited February 27, 2014 by Tab'le De'Bah-Rye Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slappo Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 What are your thoughts on anti-discrimination laws? Sorry I couldn't respond to this until now. I'm torn. Jesus never said feed the hungry, and shelter the homeless except for the gays. Social justice doesn't call for a just wage for all the straight people willing to work. At the same time, if I want to sublet my spare bedroom in my house, I may not want to rent it out to an active homosexual couple because I don't particularly want active homosexuals living in my house sharing my bathroom, kitchen, etc around my kids, but I would have no problem subletting to you, or my old college buddy. If it was an attached apartment, that's a different story entirely, and I don't see why I wouldn't rent it to anyone who can pay the rent and keep the property in decent condition. I think the idea of discrimination in almost all work environments based on homosexuality is extremely bad, and I support that my employer (The State of Alaska) has personnel rules that forbid discrimination on sexuality. At the same time I don't want my kid's youth minister to be a practicing homosexual, nor do I think the Church should be required to hire a practicing homosexual as a youth minister or DRE. I can't think of any examples outside of religion where this would apply though, and I don't see the church not hiring practicing homosexuals for ministerial positions to be discrimination in so much as they don't meet the required job traits (active practicing Catholic upholding the moral teachings of the Church). I would boycott a grocery store that didn't sell stuff to homosexuals, but I would have no problem with a Catholic wedding planner refusing to plan a gay wedding. I don't feel like there's a one size fits all shoe for anti-discrimination laws, but I think it extends to beyond just homosexuality. I don't want a person who watches porn subletting a room in my house. I wouldn't expect a Catholic wedding planner to be required to plan a wedding of two Catholic's that the Church won't recognized (lack of annulment or something like that). I don't want a DRE that supports abortion to work at my parish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anastasia13 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 I don't think government granting permission to get married is very civil. It seems extremely uncivil to involve a criminal syndicate in the proceedings. Marriage licensing is an innovation. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof... Indeed, civil. Why`s Gov gotta get involved in sacraments anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIKolbe Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 What are your thoughts on Arizona's legislation, phatmass? It's whack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossCuT Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 agreed not even close...God hates homosexual acts and the Bible says He hates it worse then other sins... Prayers for gay people who are harassed but it's not comparable...I liked Bizzles rap although he could of did a little better job conveying his point and with a little more charity... I guess I wasnt implying anything into the severity of discrimination, just the appearance of a reason to discriminate. Its true that a homosexual person has an easier time hiding than someone who is black. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FutureCarmeliteClaire Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 You still haven't said which gay you are. That's all i'm asking. All i got (and sorry i haven't read every single post i got lost) is you are not sexually involved with women and that you are more romantically attracted to women. There is nothing wrong with romance with the same sex, it's called best friends. I get romantic with male friends d&m style and they freak out, i even say i love you, some freak some don't at the i love you. I hope i find a wife or God sends me one that is more romantically attracted to women rather than men, a wife being the other way around would be trouble for me. Pyjama parties are great. But anyhow back to the question, which Gay are you? i don't get it, sorry. Whatever Gay you are though i understand, be quick to keep your six shooter in it's sheath and not fire randomly at suspected enemies, not that you have but i sense you have pulled the old six shooter out and are ready to shoot. And please don't sarcastically passive aggressive keep up the good work stuff at me. And no i'm not going to shower you with rose petals because your Gay or even if you win a gold medal at the olympics. wut Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
franciscanheart Posted February 27, 2014 Author Share Posted February 27, 2014 I guess I wasnt implying anything into the severity of discrimination, just the appearance of a reason to discriminate. Its true that a homosexual person has an easier time hiding than someone who is black. We shouldn't have to hide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatherineM Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Why`s Gov gotta get involved in sacraments anyway? Money. Money for the license. The protection of divorce court and child custody laws encourages people to marry. Only having to pay survivor's benefits to legal spouses, encourages marriages. Insurance stuff to. All designed to get you to but the license. Plus there was a time when the government recognized that families are good for society. Long ago now seems like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossCuT Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 We shouldn't have to hide. I didnt say they should. And in fact I dont think they ever should have to. Im merely pointing out the fact that sexual attraction is not as inherently physically identifiable as skin color, does that make sense? If a homosexual person felt pressured, afraid, and/or whatever else because of the discrimination in the world (which I wish they would never have to feel), they would have an easier time hiding it than someone who was black. Im not suggesting they hide it. Im pointing out facts. Nothing more. Of course you all made points that there ARE physical manifestations of homosexual attraction which I agree can be very easily identifiable, but they are not as deducible as skin color. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossCuT Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Id also like to reiterate my question from earlier for anyone who wants to answer. Im honestly curious. Maybe this is a pointless question with an easy answer, but its one that has upset me in the past. I have a question about a subject that has come up a few times in the past and even right now there is a thread relating to it. Should gay/lesbian people who have committed themselves to a chaste life in order to remain faithful to the church be allowed to be priests, nuns, or religious? Do you think the fact that you are gay would somehow make you less able to fulfill that role in the church? I hope that made sense. Or if I worded it this way: Does being gay make a person unfit for these roles? Even if they are 100% faithful to the church, live a chaste life, etc etc. I would very much appreciate your perspective on this subject! I know what my thoughts are but again, they are not popular. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
franciscanheart Posted February 27, 2014 Author Share Posted February 27, 2014 Id also like to reiterate my question from earlier for anyone who wants to answer. Im honestly curious. Maybe this is a pointless question with an easy answer, but its one that has upset me in the past. I haven't forgotten. I intend to go back over the last few pages and start answering again soon. In more pain today from the pelvic fracture than I've experienced the last couple so I'm requiring more rest and more meds. (The meds make me loopy.) More soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossCuT Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 I haven't forgotten. I intend to go back over the last few pages and start answering again soon. In more pain today from the pelvic fracture than I've experienced the last couple so I'm requiring more rest and more meds. (The meds make me loopy.) More soon. Blah! Well I hope you feel better. Ive had my fair share of health crap recently and its not fun. :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dUSt Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 We shouldn't have to hide. I think the "you can play straight. We can never play white." line in the rap is more about the inability for black people to blend in with the majority. I know a lot of gay people, and most of them don't act "gay"--whatever that even means. If a gay person walks into a store, they are not treated any differently--if a black person walks into a store, they are followed around to make sure they don't steal anything. I didn't interpret that line as meaning "hiding" at all. I also feel, similar to how comparing gay people with pedophiles is offensive, comparing the struggles gay people go through with that of black people is offensive. It's not even the same ballpark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
organwerke Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Sorry I couldn't respond to this until now. At the same time, if I want to sublet my spare bedroom in my house, I may not want to rent it out to an active homosexual couple because I don't particularly want active homosexuals living in my house sharing my bathroom, kitchen, etc around my kids, but I would have no problem subletting to you, or my old college buddy. If it was an attached apartment, that's a different story entirely, and I don't see why I wouldn't rent it to anyone who can pay the rent and keep the property in decent condition. This is a particular case in my opinion. I don't think it has to do with discrimination. I think that every owner has the right to decide to which persons he wants to rent his apartment or bedroom. I too wouldn't like to have an active homosexual couple as many other different kinds of persons (ethero active couples that aren't married, persons who smoke, etc. etc.). I could decide to rent a bedroom only to women for example if I don't want to have men in the house and I could ask for many other requirements in the people who would like to live in my apartment. I don't think this example can count as "discrimination", as the other ones you mention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
organwerke Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 (edited) I think the "you can play straight. We can never play white." line in the rap is more about the inability for black people to blend in with the majority. I know a lot of gay people, and most of them don't act "gay"--whatever that even means. If a gay person walks into a store, they are not treated any differently--if a black person walks into a store, they are followed around to make sure they don't steal anything. I didn't interpret that line as meaning "hiding" at all. I also feel, similar to how comparing gay people with pedophiles is offensive, comparing the struggles gay people go through with that of black people is offensive. It's not even the same ballpark. There is a strange curious thing: I know more than one gay persons who are quite racist, who say things against immigration or immigrants and this is something that i find strange and disturbing because I wouldn't expect to hear these things form persons that are often themselves victims of discrimination. But also I think that this fact shows that a sexual inclination is not so fundamental in determining the character and the ideas of a person. Edited February 27, 2014 by organwerke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now