Kraft is a major sponsor of 2006 Gay Olympic Games

[KizlarAgha]

[quote name='ironmonk' date='May 11 2005, 10:15 PM'] 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 [/quote]
Yes, straight people do "flaunt" it in that they do all the same things that for a homosexual would constitute the very vague and homophobic concept of "flaunting" it. I can't tell you how many times I've heard conservatives say "I don't have a problem with gay people as long as they don't flaunt it." Flaunting it could of course be anything from having sex to public displays of affection to a man talking about his boyfriend. These are all very normal things for heterosexuals to do, and if we follow a definition of "flaunting" a sexuality, then heterosexual people are the worst transgressors.

I'm not arguing morality here, I'm arguing terminology. Regardless of homosexuality's inherent concupiscense, it is irresponsible to make statements about "flaunting" sexuality unless one is equally critical of all other displays made by heterosexuals.

[KizlarAgha]

[quote name='Socrates' date='May 11 2005, 10:17 PM'] 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"? [/quote]
I was merely pointing out that you were wrong when you said that Track was wrong on the topic of homosexuality as we know it not existing in ancient times. It didn't exist in the way we know it, even if the act of homosexual intercourse did. I was making no claims as to the morality of it, only the terminology. I agree that homosexual intercourse is a grave sin. What I'm trying to do is change the language we use so that it isn't overly broad; in an effort to be more conciliary.

Edited May 12, 2005 by KizlarAgha

[ironmonk]

[quote name='KizlarAgha' date='May 12 2005, 12:19 AM'] Yes, straight people do "flaunt" it in that they do all the same things that for a homosexual would constitute the very vague and homophobic concept of "flaunting" it.  I can't tell you how many times I've heard conservatives say "I don't have a problem with gay people as long as they don't flaunt it."  Flaunting it could of course be anything from having sex to public displays of affection to a man talking about his boyfriend.  These are all very normal things for heterosexuals to do, and if we follow a definition of "flaunting" a sexuality, then heterosexual people are the worst transgressors.

I'm not arguing morality here, I'm arguing terminology.  Regardless of homosexuality's inherent concupiscense, it is irresponsible to make statements about "flaunting" sexuality unless one is equally critical of all other displays made by heterosexuals. [/quote]
Wrong. You have a lot to learn about right and wrong... and about the faith.

[b]Ecclesiastes 10:2 [/b]
The wise man's understanding turns him to his right; the fool's understanding turns him to his left.

And also... the term "homophobic" is a term that is thrown around by the ignorant. Most of us do not fear homosexuals.... the act is an abomination.... if you are against pedophilia, that does not make you pedophobic... it is foolish to use the term homophobic towards people who love Christ. Homosexual acts are unacceptable, just as any sex outside of marriage.



God Bless,
ironmonk

Edited May 12, 2005 by ironmonk

[kateri05]

ooh the Pimps and Hos Games... might be fun

[KizlarAgha]

[quote name='ironmonk' date='May 11 2005, 11:25 PM'] Wrong. You have a lot to learn about right and wrong... and about the faith.

[b]Ecclesiastes 10:2 [/b]
The wise man's understanding turns him to his right; the fool's understanding turns him to his left.

And also... the term "homophobic" is a term that is thrown around by the ignorant. Most of us do not fear homosexuals.... the act is an abomination.... if you are against pedophilia, that does not make you pedophobic... it is foolish to use the term homophobic towards people who love Christ. Homosexual acts are unacceptable, just as any sex outside of marriage.



God Bless,
ironmonk [/quote]
You say wrong but you fail to back it up with any credible evidence. If you are going to use a vague, politically charged term like "flaunting" then you need evidence to back it up. You need to tell us what exactly flaunting is, and what about it is offensive and morally wrong - only then can we have a reasonable discussion on the subject.

I have provided one definition of "flaunting" and I have defined it as any behavior by a homosexual which gives a heterosexual an indication that the person isn't also heterosexual. That's the definition I used. I feel that, using this definition, we can easily see how hypocritical the notion of "flaunting" becomes because it involves behaviors which are perfectly acceptable for heterosexuals.

Now, I contend that it is perfectly acceptable to refer to homosexual intercourse as immoral. That is what the Church teaches. However, I also contend that this "flaunting" terminology doesn't apply to heterosexual couples, engaging in acts, outside of wedlock. This is also immoral according to the Church but nobody ever accuses these people of "flaunting their sexuality."

So, I think that the term "flaunting" shouldn't be used at all because it is a useless term. If you think that the behavior is wrong, that's fine. However the dictionary definition of flaunting is:

1 : to display ostentatiously or impudently
2 : to treat contemptuously

Now, if a gay man says that he has a boyfriend, is that "flaunting" according to you? That's a sense I've often seen the word used. However, going back to the dictionary definitions, we can see how completely misguided that is. It implies an intention on the part of the gay man to be contemptuous or impudent of another person's belief. It implies a motive that might not be there at all. That word is emotionally charged and wrong. If you feel that it is flaunting it is because of your own emotional projections of dislike - homophobia. Taking offense where it isn't intended is clearly an emotional projection.

[argent_paladin]

[quote name='KizlarAgha' date='May 11 2005, 10:19 PM'] Yes, straight people do "flaunt" it in that they do all the same things that for a homosexual would constitute the very vague and homophobic concept of "flaunting" it. I can't tell you how many times I've heard conservatives say "I don't have a problem with gay people as long as they don't flaunt it." Flaunting it could of course be anything from having sex to public displays of affection to a man talking about his boyfriend. These are all very normal things for heterosexuals to do, and if we follow a definition of "flaunting" a sexuality, then heterosexual people are the worst transgressors.

I'm not arguing morality here, I'm arguing terminology. Regardless of homosexuality's inherent concupiscense, it is irresponsible to make statements about "flaunting" sexuality unless one is equally critical of all other displays made by heterosexuals. [/quote]
v., flaunt·ed, flaunt·ing, flaunts.

v.tr.

1. To exhibit ostentatiously or shamelessly:

This implies that one exibits something without shame that should be shameful. One cannot, under normal circumstances, then "flaunt" one's heterosexuality, because no culture considers it shameful. However, one can flaunt one's homosexuality, because it is considered by many to be shameful. Thus one doesn't flaunt one's virtues, such as flaunting your honesty or grooming, unless one is being boastful (which is then a vice, not a virtue).

In any event, one cannot be ostentatious in displaying something that is done by 97% of the population. It would be like accusing someone of flaunting the fact that they have two legs. The only time this would be flaunting would be if you crashed a disabled support group and flaunted the fact that you don't need a wheelchair. Similarly, if someone went to a Courage session and proudly proclaimed that he/she was straight, that might qualify as flaunting.

Your grasp of the terminology is deficient because one should only be equally critical of situations that are equal. A situation where 97% of the population is one way and 3% the other is not equal.

[KizlarAgha]

[quote name='argent_paladin' date='May 12 2005, 12:50 AM'] v., flaunt·ed, flaunt·ing, flaunts.

v.tr.

  1. To exhibit ostentatiously or shamelessly:

This implies that one exibits something without shame that should be shameful. One cannot, under normal circumstances, then "flaunt" one's heterosexuality, because no culture considers it shameful. However, one can flaunt one's homosexuality, because it is considered by many to be shameful. Thus one doesn't flaunt one's virtues, such as flaunting your honesty or grooming, unless one is being boastful (which is then a vice, not a virtue).

In any event, one cannot be ostentatious in displaying something that is done by 97% of the population. It would be like accusing someone of flaunting the fact that they have two legs. The only time this would be flaunting would be if you crashed a disabled support group and flaunted the fact that you don't need a wheelchair. Similarly, if someone went to a Courage session and proudly proclaimed that he/she was straight, that might qualify as flaunting.

Your grasp of the terminology is deficient because one should only be equally critical of situations that are equal. A situation where 97% of the population is one way and 3% the other is not equal. [/quote]
I've seen figures saying only around 90% of people are straight, however, that is splitting hairs. You can pick and choose the definition you want. I've also supplied dictionary definitions for the transitive meaning of the word flaunt. Mine include contempt and impudence as prime factors. I didn't pick and choose either. I picked the top two definitions from Merriam Webster's dictionary to illustrate the point.

However, despite this discrepancy, definitions from dictionaries were compiled by people and can be fallible. As such, they can't be the be all and end all of a discussion, as useful as they are. I still contend that the use of the word "flaunting" by the right wing is specifically because of an inherent dislike, anger, or "homophobia." Even if I were to accept your proposition that a majority can't flaunt things, (which I disagree with) we are still left with a majority taking offense at a minority for a perceived offense which was not intended. That's wrong. Using this word is not conducive to a dialogue with homosexual individuals and I don't think it should be used in a rational discussion. "Flaunting" throws all pretense of rationality out the window.

Edited May 12, 2005 by KizlarAgha

[jmjtina]

[quote name='KizlarAgha' date='May 11 2005, 11:30 PM'] I have provided one definition of "flaunting" and I have defined it as any behavior by a homosexual which gives a heterosexual an indication that the person isn't also heterosexual. That's the definition I used. [/quote]
Flaunting is the term I would use when describing the rainbow sashers. Flaunting is the term I would use when describing another "Special Olympics" for those who have same sex attractions.

Flaunting is publicly refusing to follow Church teachings, and publicly displaying your intent to NOT follow Church teachings. And yes, these people flaunt and do so shamelessly. IN a Catholic Church, make public statements and push the envelope.

and you say it's NOT intended?


your definition of flaunting is like saying the married couple who wears thier wedding rings to Mass and walks in with thier newborn baby is flaunting thier sexuality.

[KizlarAgha]

[quote name='jmjtina' date='May 12 2005, 01:35 AM'] Flaunting is the term I would use when describing the rainbow sashers. Flaunting is the term I would use when describing another "Special Olympics" for those who have same sex attractions.

Flaunting is publicly refusing to follow Church teachings, and publicly displaying your intent to NOT follow Church teachings. And yes, these people flaunt and do so shamelessly. IN a Catholic Church, make public statements and push the envelope.

and you say it's NOT intended?


your definition of flaunting is like saying the married couple who wears thier wedding rings to Mass and walks in with thier newborn baby is flaunting thier sexuality. [/quote]
Well, you've clearly never had a girl-friend who just got engaged.

[littleflower+JMJ]

thats probably because if she got engaged she would be the one with the ring

[jmjtina]

[quote name='KizlarAgha' date='May 12 2005, 12:37 AM'] Well, you've clearly never had a girl-friend who just got engaged. [/quote]
if you think it's about thier "sexuality" then clearly your not a girl.

[KizlarAgha]

[quote name='jmjtina' date='May 12 2005, 01:39 AM'] if you think it's about thier "sexuality" then clearly your not a girl. [/quote]
I was just borrowing your own wedding ring example and remembering my friend Liz.

"Sophia, look at THAT AIRPLANE" *pointing*

"Look at that tree" *pointing*

"Look, a raccoon!"
"Where?"
"It must have gone off somewhere."

[jmjtina]

Just clearing the air on your objections to the term "flaunt" and it's definition and uses of the term.

pax.

[KizlarAgha]

[quote name='jmjtina' date='May 12 2005, 01:35 AM'] Flaunting is the term I would use when describing the rainbow sashers. Flaunting is the term I would use when describing another "Special Olympics" for those who have same sex attractions.

Flaunting is publicly refusing to follow Church teachings, and publicly displaying your intent to NOT follow Church teachings. And yes, these people flaunt and do so shamelessly. IN a Catholic Church, make public statements and push the envelope.

and you say it's NOT intended?


your definition of flaunting is like saying the married couple who wears thier wedding rings to Mass and walks in with thier newborn baby is flaunting thier sexuality. [/quote]
Yes, just as handicapped people flaunt their disabilities during the real special olympics.

You forget that not everyone follows the Church, but as I've already pointed out, a couple out of wedlock, with two kids, acting like a loving family, is just as much flaunting as a gay couple but nobody calls them on it. Clearly, flaunting is reserved for homosexuals.

A gay couple holding hands at disneyland would be a disgusting example of homosexuals flaunting their sexuality. With heterosexuals, it's either a gross PDA, or, more likely, cute and normal.

I'm not arguing that a homosexual relationship is on par with a heterosexual relationship, I'm merely arguing that we should as much as possible eliminate charged stock phrases like these and instead engage in a real and meaningful conversation with homosexual people. If you can't get past them "flaunting" their sexuality, then you'll make no progress. I'm in the business of saving souls where apologetics is concerned, not upholding a right wing agenda. In my experience, I've found dropping the self-righteousness and anger, and not accusing people goes a long way in reconciling them with your beliefs.

[littleflower+JMJ]

[quote name='KizlarAgha' date='May 12 2005, 01:52 AM'] You forget that not everyone follows the Church, but as I've already pointed out, a couple out of wedlock, with two kids, acting like a loving family, is just as much flaunting as a gay couple but nobody calls them on it.  Clearly, flaunting is reserved for homosexuals.
[/quote]
you obviously dont know her

jmjtina calls a spade a spade, doesn't matter who you are, if its not right, she'll make it known, with charity too.

yes, shes [i]that[/i] good.