KizlarAgha Posted May 12, 2005 Share Posted May 12, 2005 I don't see the problem. They didn't call it the "Practicing homosexual olympics." Being gay isn't a sin, unless it is acted upon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted May 12, 2005 Share Posted May 12, 2005 (edited) [quote name='track2004' date='May 11 2005, 04:00 PM'] America is about letting them co-exist. The same laws that allow the KKK to opperate allows the Catholic Church to opperate. I hate that the KKK still exists but if we say 'no you can't be here we don't agree with you; you're wrong' then when does Protestant America come knocking on the Bishops' doors saying the same thing.... The only real thing you can do is to respectfully tell someone you disagree with them and if they don't respect that to tell them to get out of your life. [/quote] So Track, would you attack people for wanting to boycott a company that gave corporate support to KKK rallies? My point with the "racist" example is to show that people have a right to put pressure on companies for their support of what is wrong. You liberals seem to think freedom of speech and such only applies to the left! Edited May 12, 2005 by Socrates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KizlarAgha Posted May 12, 2005 Share Posted May 12, 2005 [quote name='Socrates' date='May 11 2005, 09:33 PM'] So Track, would you attack people for wanting to boycott a company that gave corporate support to KKK rallies? My point with the "racist" example is to show that people have a right to put pressure on companies for their support of what is wrong. You liberals seem to think freedom of speech and such only applies to the left! [/quote] You don't know that he/she is a liberal. However, you have a perfect right to boycott whatever you choose. I just don't feel that it is degrading any moral fiber of anything. It isn't encouraging gay sex in my mind. A good example of right wing boycotting is the way we got Ebay to stop selling the eucharist. I cancelled my ebay and paypal accounts and so did many other people - the boycott was very successful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted May 12, 2005 Share Posted May 12, 2005 [quote name='track2004' date='May 11 2005, 04:29 PM'] On another note the concept we have now of sexuality didn't exist in Biblical times. Sex was about dominance and subordination. Male adult relations were frowned upon because one man became 'lesser' than the other. Homosexuality only really developed when Oscar Wilde (I think) was on trial for sodomy and the trail moved awat from the actual incident and into whether or not he was the 'type of person' who would commit sodomy. [/quote] I can't even follow what you're trying to argue here. Homosexuality (and all the other sins) has been around since Old Testament times, and was condemend as wrong then, and is still condemned by the Church today. The moral laws of God do not change. Your silly socio-babble about dominance and such is irrelevant to the morality of homosexuality, and reflects a total ignorance of Catholic moral teaching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KizlarAgha Posted May 12, 2005 Share Posted May 12, 2005 [quote name='Socrates' date='May 11 2005, 09:40 PM'] I can't even follow what you're trying to argue here. Homosexuality (and all the other sins) has been around since Old Testament times, and was condemend as wrong then, and is still condemned by the Church today. The moral laws of God do not change. Your silly socio-babble about dominance and such is irrelevant to the morality of homosexuality, and reflects a total ignorance of Catholic moral teaching. [/quote] You're quite mistaken. In ancient and medieval times, the ACT of homosexual intercourse was very much considered sinful. However, the concept of a person being "a homosexual", one who only sleeps with the same sex, didn't exist. It was thought of more as an inclination or a taste. Like a person who likes chocolate ice cream. That doesn't mean that he never eats vanilla, he just has a propensity for chocolate. In the same way, men in the ancient world could often prefer sex with juvenile boys but at the same time turn around and sleep with women. They weren't seen as "gay" or "straight" just as men, albeit men with certain perversions. The degree to which this was frowned upon differed temporally and locally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted May 12, 2005 Share Posted May 12, 2005 [quote name='KizlarAgha' date='May 11 2005, 09:39 PM'] You don't know that he/she is a liberal. However, you have a perfect right to boycott whatever you choose. I just don't feel that it is degrading any moral fiber of anything. It isn't encouraging gay sex in my mind. A good example of right wing boycotting is the way we got Ebay to stop selling the eucharist. I cancelled my ebay and paypal accounts and so did many other people - the boycott was very successful. [/quote] What, pray tell, is the point of holding a "gay olympics" if not to promote or support homosexuality? If it had nothing to do with homosexuality, why call it "gay"? Would you have any problem with a "pedophile olympics," a "pornographers olympics" or an "adultery olympics"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironmonk Posted May 12, 2005 Author Share Posted May 12, 2005 [quote name='KizlarAgha' date='May 11 2005, 11:33 PM'] I don't see the problem. They didn't call it the "Practicing homosexual olympics." Being gay isn't a sin, unless it is acted upon. [/quote] Anything by the "gay" community is about practicing it. This is not about being Holy... this is about practicing it. Anyone who flaunts their sexuality has a serious disorder to begin with. God Bless, ironmonk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KizlarAgha Posted May 12, 2005 Share Posted May 12, 2005 [quote name='ironmonk' date='May 11 2005, 09:50 PM'] Anything by the "gay" community is about practicing it. This is not about being Holy... this is about practicing it. Anyone who flaunts their sexuality has a serious disorder to begin with. God Bless, ironmonk [/quote] Straight people "flaunt" it all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted May 12, 2005 Share Posted May 12, 2005 [quote name='KizlarAgha' date='May 11 2005, 09:43 PM'] You're quite mistaken. In ancient and medieval times, the ACT of homosexual intercourse was very much considered sinful. However, the concept of a person being "a homosexual", one who only sleeps with the same sex, didn't exist. It was thought of more as an inclination or a taste. Like a person who likes chocolate ice cream. That doesn't mean that he never eats vanilla, he just has a propensity for chocolate. [/quote] How does this contradict my point? The Church has always considered homosexuality sinful and perverted. The laws of God don't change. Comparing a propensity to perverted sex to prefering vanilla ice cream is silly and irrelevant. Homosexual activity is an immoral act. Eating ice cream is not. What's your point? [quote]In the same way, men in the ancient world could often prefer sex with juvenile boys but at the same time turn around and sleep with women. They weren't seen as "gay" or "straight" just as men, albeit men with certain perversions. The degree to which this was frowned upon differed temporally and locally.[/quote] This is likewise against the laws of God. The fact that pagans practiced this this disgusting vice in ancient times is irrelevent to anything. The ancient pagans did many immoral things condemned by God. This was one of the ways Judaism differed from the pagans of the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KizlarAgha Posted May 12, 2005 Share Posted May 12, 2005 [quote name='Socrates' date='May 11 2005, 09:47 PM'] What, pray tell, is the point of holding a "gay olympics" if not to promote or support homosexuality? If it had nothing to do with homosexuality, why call it "gay"? Would you have any problem with a "pedophile olympics," a "pornographers olympics" or an "adultery olympics"? [/quote] It took me awhile to think on this one. At first I was going to dismiss it because it sounded outlandish, but then I thought about it for a while. I was going to then argue that pedophilia is illegal, but then again homosexuality is illegal within the church. So I suppose on those grounds you have a valid point. Nonetheless, I don't have a problem with the gay olympics because I feel that the homosexual culture has really become more than just the sex act itself. I think the three examples you listed are more explicitly related to the sexual act and therefore "more wrong." That's of course not a perfect solution to the problem, but it is what I offer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KizlarAgha Posted May 12, 2005 Share Posted May 12, 2005 [quote name='Socrates' date='May 11 2005, 09:55 PM'] How does this contradict my point? The Church has always considered homosexuality sinful and perverted. The laws of God don't change. Comparing a propensity to perverted sex to prefering vanilla ice cream is silly and irrelevant. Homosexual activity is an immoral act. Eating ice cream is not. What's your point? This is likewise against the laws of God. The fact that pagans practiced this this disgusting vice in ancient times is irrelevent to anything. The ancient pagans did many immoral things condemned by God. This was one of the ways Judaism differed from the pagans of the time. [/quote] Well I was referring to the middle ages as well. This sort of thing was rampant in the Byzantine empire. My comparison was perfectly valid but you've missed the point entirely. The point wasn't that the choice is comparable to a flavor of ice cream morally, the point was that the ancients viewed it as a choice that didn't categorize you. Just as eating chocolate ice cream doesn't make you a "chocolate" as opposed to a "vanilla" so having gay sex didn't make you "gay" as opposed to "straight." Morality aside, my point was that the modern constructs of sexuality aren't the be all and end all of the argument. That is why the church is right to focus on the act of homosexual intercourse and not the rigamarole that society puts with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted May 12, 2005 Share Posted May 12, 2005 [quote name='KizlarAgha' date='May 11 2005, 09:55 PM'] It took me awhile to think on this one. At first I was going to dismiss it because it sounded outlandish, but then I thought about it for a while. I was going to then argue that pedophilia is illegal, but then again homosexuality is illegal within the church. So I suppose on those grounds you have a valid point. Nonetheless, I don't have a problem with the gay olympics because I feel that the homosexual culture has really become more than just the sex act itself. I think the three examples you listed are more explicitly related to the sexual act and therefore "more wrong." That's of course not a perfect solution to the problem, but it is what I offer. [/quote] Abortion is today legal too, unfortunately, and I'm against that or any promotion of it. Of course, you may be a legal postitivist and disagree with me, but at least it seems you see my point. The problem is "homosexual culture" and "gay pride" etc. is built around the an immoral sexual act. Can you really, with a straight face (no pun intended), tell me that the "gay olympics" or any "gay" event has nothing to do with homosexuality? You've got to be kidding me! You cannot have homosexuality without the immoral acts (or the desire to do them). Do you really think any of the participants at the "gay olympics" make any pretense of living chaste lives. Homosexuality is at the very least an inclination towards an immoral act. If I have an inclination towards theft, should I celebrate and flaunt this in a "theft olympics" or a "theives parade"? Such public "gay events" celebrate and promote immorality, not morality and chastity. Even if the "olympics" do not involve directly "gay" sex, this is a central part of the lifestyle it promotes and celebrates. In the same way, I would not support a "Rock for Choice" event, even though no abortions are being performed onstage! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KizlarAgha Posted May 12, 2005 Share Posted May 12, 2005 [quote name='Socrates' date='May 11 2005, 10:09 PM'] Abortion is today legal too, unfortunately, and I'm against that or any promotion of it. Of course, you may be a legal postitivist and disagree with me, but at least it seems you see my point. The problem is "homosexual culture" and "gay pride" etc. is built around the an immoral sexual act. Can you really, with a straight face (no pun intended), tell me that the "gay olympics" or any "gay" event has nothing to do with homosexuality? You've got to be kidding me! You cannot have homosexuality without the immoral acts (or the desire to do them). Do you really think any of the participants at the "gay olympics" make any pretense of living chaste lives. Homosexuality is at the very least an inclination towards an immoral act. If I have an inclination towards theft, should I celebrate and flaunt this in a "theft olympics" or a "theives parade"? Such public "gay events" celebrate and promote immorality, not morality and chastity. Even if the "olympics" do not involve directly "gay" sex, this is a central part of the lifestyle it promotes and celebrates. In the same way, I would not support a "Rock for Choice" event, even though no abortions are being performed onstage! [/quote] Fair enough. I don't paricularly care to move down the slippery slope of moral relativism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironmonk Posted May 12, 2005 Author Share Posted May 12, 2005 [quote name='KizlarAgha' date='May 11 2005, 11:51 PM'] Straight people "flaunt" it all the time. [/quote] No we do not. It is normal to be straight. We do not go around telling everyone that we are straight. It is not a sin to have sex in marriage... it is a sin to fornicate, and practice homosexuality. A fornicator's olympics would be almost as bad... both sins can keep the person from Heaven... but only one is an abomination. Same sex attraction is a disorder. God Bless, ironmonk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted May 12, 2005 Share Posted May 12, 2005 [quote name='KizlarAgha' date='May 11 2005, 09:58 PM'] Well I was referring to the middle ages as well. This sort of thing was rampant in the Byzantine empire. My comparison was perfectly valid but you've missed the point entirely. The point wasn't that the choice is comparable to a flavor of ice cream morally, the point was that the ancients viewed it as a choice that didn't categorize you. Just as eating chocolate ice cream doesn't make you a "chocolate" as opposed to a "vanilla" so having gay sex didn't make you "gay" as opposed to "straight." Morality aside, my point was that the modern constructs of sexuality aren't the be all and end all of the argument. That is why the church is right to focus on the act of homosexual intercourse and not the rigamarole that society puts with it. [/quote] Whether these vices were practiced in the middle ages is again completely irrelevevent. People murdered, committed adultery and every other sin in the middle ages and every time in history? What's the point? Something is only wrong if nobody does it?? Homosexual "intercourse"and other perverted acts remain at the center of "gay culture" You admitted as much. If that was not there, there would be nothing to build the "rigamole" around. Thus supporting "gay" events is wrong, because it gives support to a "culture" built around immoral perversion. What about a "prostitution olympics" that was built around the "culture of pimps and hos"? 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