Canadian Law & Homosexuals

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Catholic : One Thread

Up here in Canada, we're going through some tough times with homosexual activists (mostly named Svend) trying to warp our country's laws. Basically, they'd like to redefine marriage to include the possibility of same-sex 'partners' and to include homosexuals as a protected group under our 'hate crime' legislation.

In other words, if these go through, more and more Canadian Catholic parishes will be pressured to perform 'homosexual marriages.' Also, speaking/publishing against homosexual behaviour (even quoting from the Bible) will be punished.

Both laws are entirely unnecessary: homosexuals already qualify as common law spouses and have the same tax breaks, etc. (or so I've gathered from several court cases) and if a crime is committed, it's irrelevant whether or not it was committed out of hatred, just as irrelevant as if it were committed out of 'love.'

In general, I think the homosexuals are trying to justify their actions- or at least to tape up the mouths of those who make them feel guilty. However, in this crusade for their 'freedom,' they are seriously endangering ours.

Please pray for Canada, especially the Members of Parliament.

-- Catherine Ann (catfishbird@yahoo.ca), June 10, 2003

Answers

Catherine, i never got the chance to actually welcome you to the forum, but i have enjoyed the posts of yours that i have read so far...

more and more Canadian Catholic parishes will be pressured to perform 'homosexual marriages.'

there is always pressure on the church to succomb to sin. the church, however, is above the law of any country, so the legality of homosexual marriages should have no bearing on the catholic churches.

In general, I think the homosexuals are trying to justify their actions- or at least to tape up the mouths of those who make them feel guilty.

AMEN. we always know when we do right and wrong, and it is when we are most defensive that we are most always morally wrong. it wouldnt be 'coming out of the closet' if you werent hiding something out of shame in the first place, and shame is the first symptom of guilt.

However, in this crusade for their 'freedom,' they are seriously endangering ours.

this, alas, is the way of the world. in peoples quest for their view of perfection they accidently end up destroying an acceptable 'good.' there will be flaws in every system, but that doesnt mean the system isnt good.

-- paul (dontsendmemail@notanaddress.com), June 10, 2003.


Jmj

Catherine Ann, I'd like to welcome you too.
Someone on the radio this morning described Canada as becoming a "fun-house mirror" -- a place where lots of things are becoming a distortion of what God intended.
God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), June 11, 2003.


Dear Catherine Ann,
Don't let it discourage you. Pray and have faith; because God has told us many times through His saints, that our prayer has power. Much more than we think. ONE man's prayer has power to bring God's mercy when it's the right prayer.

Pray for homosexuals in sin. Ask God's grace for them and have faith in God.

JESUS healed lepers, who were like these poor souls, abandoned. Sick. If lepers had known they had ''civil rights'', they would've picketed Jerusalem. Can you imagine Tom Se-ll -eck bringinig a huge lawsuit against the Enquirer, for calling him a leper? And winning? That is how absurd the world is today.

But Jesus loved lepers. He came to one, and took him by the hand. (Luke 5:13) Never cease praying; Jesus will heal them all someway. If we have faith. But if they die in sin, Canada, the U.S., will not be to blame.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), June 11, 2003.


dear Catherine Ann,

it is quite simply so refreshing to hear a loud voice that rises above the hateful "political-correctness" that has surpassed the moral and civil laws that used to bind our lives. the slow, drip- drip of moral laxitude or indifference -- it is everywhere and we need to wake up to it -- or we end up back in Roman times.

did you see the film "American Dream". that is QUITE a case study.

there was a time when such a film would have been banned. instead it won (or was nominated for?) a ton of oscars.

all around the world, the age of consent is being lowered; the act of buggery is ceasing to be illegal; and the onslaught of "gay- inconery" ensures that on any given night there is at least 1 of them on our TV screen; they are adopting (having bought) young babies; they are being allowed onto the front line of the military (are they going to kiss the enemy to death -- please) -- and we are expected to stand by and be accused of being old-fashioned etc. they invade ours institutions (including the Church) masquerading but plotting. they demand equal rights but they have all the mores of the animal kingdom.

this is a death by a hundred-thousand cuts.

-- Ian (ib@vertifgo.com), June 11, 2003.


The fact that the State would make the Church perform same-sex marriages is un-likely. Because that would interfere with how a religion did things. Second, a gay person is allowed to be gay. There is nothing wrong with being gay. The actions are wrong. You MUST remember this. There was a priest that was killed in the 9-11 attacks. He was gay and people are pushing for is Sainthood. And why not? He is a person too. A homosexual can be just as holy as a heterosexual as long as the homosexual does not give into temptation and have a partner.

-- Scott (papasquat10@hotmail.com), June 11, 2003.


i don't think anyone disagrees that it is the act of homosexuality and not the homosexual that is to be loathed. i can only speak for myself but the point i was making was quite different. the facts that "more and more Canadian Catholic parishes will be pressured to perform 'homosexual marriages" and that "speaking/publishing against homosexual behaviour (even quoting from the Bible) will be punished" are just symptomatic of the decline in moral standards to which i refer. the media has bent over backwards for years to paint anything that criticises homosexuality as being small-minded or evil. all of the major TV shows give a very pro-gay outook when they touch upon the subject. have you see that despicable garbage called "Will & Grace".

if the choice is completey equal rights for gays,then i say no. because otherwise it means that they get to adopt babies, and so on. and the Catholic Church is gagged when it tries to speak the Truth. i'd rather be "out of touch" than play my part in this. homosexual acts should be illegal and punishable by incarceration.

you might also wish to know that, for every gay that is "good" (you mention the 9/11 priest -- but do you really know his background), there are plenty others "cruising". by a large, gays are very promiscuous. that is a generalisation, of course, for which i will get caned by the liberals, but every statistical statement of his nature, however accurate, is a generalisation. just ask yourself, why did AIDS spread like wildfire amongst the gay community. why did so many high profile gays die of AIDS? it is because they put it about like no-one else. you can hide from this if you want; but i am not giving into political correctness.

each individual homosexual is a human being worth of Christian charity and capable of giving Christian charity; but en masse, they are not even standing amongst the barbarians at the gates: they are inside the gates twisting the knife with a lovely smile.

-- Ian (ib@vertifgo.com), June 12, 2003.


Thank you for the welcome! I've really enjoyed reading your posts, too- I live in a rural area with a declining population of Catholics, so I like hearing Catholic opinions.

Paul, you said: the church, however, is above the law of any country, so the legality of homosexual marriages should have no bearing on the catholic churches.

and Scott said: The fact that the State would make the Church perform same-sex marriages is un-likely.

I'm not sure about this. We've already had a case where a Catholic school has been forced to allow a male student to bring his 'boyfriend' to the student prom (the Marc Hall case). If that's not interfering with "how a religion did things," then I don't know what is.

I know the Church's laws will never change, but I have to admit I'm worried about our parishes. I wouldn't be surprised if several priests fell for the agenda and performed "marriages" just to prove that they are modern and up-to-date (remember the "women's ordinations" a while ago?), claiming that they represent the Catholic Church.

On the other hand, Church and State have been in conflict before, not always with encouraging results. Under King Henry VIII, I think all English bishops but one signed a document stating that he was the head of their Church, or some such thing. (My history is shaky.) I wouldn't want to see a similar situation in Canada.

In a more positive light, it's possible that the bills will not even pass, in which case all my painful speculations would remain mere speculations.

Ian: no, I haven't seen "American Dream," but I think I read the review in the National Catholic Register. (That's how bad it's getting- we've subscribed to an American newspaper because the Canadian equivalent is loaded with "unbiased" articles and "new opinions.")

John F.: fun-house mirror describes the situation perfectly. The scary thing is that a lot of the people here have never seen a true reflection and wouldn't know the difference if they did.

Anyway, thanks for the encouragement. I'll keep praying!

-- Catherine Ann (catfishbird@yahoo.ca), June 12, 2003.


Catherine Ann,

Are you talking about something above and beyond this article which states that an Ontario appeals court declared Canadian's ban on homosexual marriages was unconstitutional?

-- Glenn (glenn@nospam.com), June 12, 2003.


Hi Catherine

Here in New Zealand we have similar legislation for gay marriage soon to become law. Surprisingly it appears as if the NZ Catholic Bishops have given approval for gay unions to be recognised. I havent done any research into the Bishops actual decion, but the below article is off a nz catholic website. Surprising to say the least.

WELLINGTON, New Zealand (CWNews.com) - The New Zealand bishops' conference this week added its approval of a government plan to grant same-sex couples the same legal rights enjoyed by married couples, in apparent contradiction to current teaching from the Vatican. The bishops said in a report to the Ministry of Justice they will support the registration system which will grant legal rights, including tax allowances, legal aid, and property entitlements, that married couples have, but opposed adoption by same-sex couples or access to "reproductive technology" to allow them to become parents. Opponents of the plan, including the Christian Heritage Party, were stunned by the bishops' acquiescence to the plan. The Rev. Graham Capill, leader of the party, said same-sex unions should be recognized in any form. "We are playing with semantics. To treat homosexual couples to a form of registration but not call them married is to give them the same status but not the same title," he said. In January, Pope John Paul II told European legislators that elevating homosexual relationships to a level with marriage was morally unacceptable. "I ask authorities to avoid any initiative which could favor or guarantee legal equality between the family and other forms of living together," he said. Last year, the Holy Father told the Pontifical Council for the Family, "In some countries it is sought to impose so-called 'de facto' unions upon society. 'De facto' unions between homosexuals represent a deplorable distortion of what should be the communion of love and life between man and woman in a reciprocal giving (which is) open to life," he said

http://www.dailycatholic.org/issue/archives/apr2000/83apr27,vol.11,no. 83txt/apr27nv1.htm

-- Kiwi (csisherwood@hotmail.com), June 13, 2003.


Hi Glenn,

I am talking about what the article discusses, but more about how the court's decision will be received in Parliament.

An Ontario court decided that the definition of marriage should be modified. The court's decision can be appealed by Parliament, and in an unofficial vote yesterday, the majority of members voted to appeal this decision. If it is appealed, it will either be debated in Parliament or taken to the Supreme Court- I'm not really sure which.

We don't have much of a chance in the Supreme Court; they have made unconstitutional rulings before this, and since they aren't elected, they are not accountable to either the voters or Parliament.

Kiwi: You have the Christian Heritage Party in New Zealand, too?

-- Catherine Ann (catfishbird@yahoo.ca), June 13, 2003.



Thanks Catherine Ann.

-- Glenn (glenn@nospam.com), June 13, 2003.

Sorry- I'm wrong again. They voted affirmatively yesterday, but the motion was to leave the court's decision intact. (In other words, we lost.) However, as I said earlier, it wasn't the official decision.

-- Catherine Ann (catfishbird@yahoo.ca), June 13, 2003.

And you, dear heretic, "should be ashamed of yourself" for being an imposter. Calling yourself "jesus," indeed! May He forgive you.
JFG

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), June 16, 2003.

First of all, I am a Roman Catholic and have been for 19 years. I attended 12 years of Catholic schooling, and can say that I grew academically and spiritually through that experience. I love being a Christian, and hold my faith and spirituality to be number one in my life. I have been a representative for the youth in my parish the four years I was in high school, have attended youth leadership conferences, have been very active in my youth group, and now that I am 2 years out of highschool, I am a group leader at retreats and conferences. I have always struggled with the Catholic Church, however, and its hypocrisy. Can someone please explain to me how the basis of our faith is to love and forgive UNCONDITIONALLY, while the Church still advocates hate? How the Man who ate with sinners and cheats and liars is to be our specific example of how we live our lives of forgiveness and understanding, and yet we still advocate exclusion and single out those we fear? For what? Are we afraid of what one person does behind closed doors? How is that our business? And moreover, how does that define a person as a whole? How can we judge a person on this basis? Have any of you ever met a homosexual, sat down and talked with he or she with the intention of getting to know them, not judge them? How the catechism of our faith says that we should recognize a couple wishing to be married as "individuals" becoming one, and then again in the same catechism, homosexuals are referred to as individuals. why not look at them as individuals becoming married as well? Do we not all have one heart, one soul, one mind? The Catholic Church works for peace in times of war, and prays for forgiveness for murderers on death row. I oppose the death penalty as well, but how can we forgive murderers of small children, of terrorists who have desecrated my country, my world,my loved ones and still not forgive and single out those who have a different sexual preference as we do? I have a family member who identifies herself as a lesbian, I love her and I encourage her to be all she is inside and out because that is how God speaks to me. If more Catholics would listen to their hearts and not to their fears, or the popular crowd, I think you will hear it too. I know that I pray every day for the Church, and even twice as hard for EVERYONE to be treated as equals, whatever race, sex, ethnicity, or sexual preference. Open your minds, and your hearts will follow.

Amanda

-- amanda (karkula@uiuc.edu), June 16, 2003.


The charge that the Church preaches "hate" for homosexuals or that those who oppose the highly unsanitary genital and other actions of homo-erotic sex because they're harmful to the individual involved are also somehow "hate-filled" is bogus.

Instead of facing facts, and actually reading what the Church teaches on this subject, those in favor of this "life-style" accuse their opponents of "hate" when hatred is the last thing we're preaching or promoting.

You can beg to differ with our understanding of medicine, biology, psychology, spirituality, and Christian morality. You can claim to have some insights as to supposed unique charisms such people have because of their "orientation" but the moment you claim your opponents are "haters" or preach "hate", is the moment you walking off into fantasy because Catholics simply do not hate homosexuals.

Look, if you are against people smoking in public would that make you a "hater" of smokers? If you are against people using nets which can kill dolphins does that make you a "hater" of fishermen? What about all those peace-niks who protest the war? Are they "haters" of soldiers? No.

Then why should you automatically charge the Church or other Catholics with "hypocrisy" because of some supposed "hate" towards homosexuals?

Just like people who smoke are doing something which really does harm their bodies, so too, homoerotic sex is harmful: biologically, emotionally, spiritually. You can die from it. But just like smokers...it won't kill you instantaneously. And like nicotine, it's addictive. It makes you "feel good" - but it will still kill you.

And so here I am, and Catholics are, asking you to not harm youself...and we're called "haters". Go figure.

-- Joe (joestong@yahoo.com), June 17, 2003.



last time I checked......heterosexual sex acts cause death and aids as well, and aren't exactly "sanitary".....as for hate....I know many who hate homosexuals...where did that idea come from? I can only wonder who fostered that idea. And another thing.....hypocrisy in the Church goes WAY back, if you cannot find this fact to be true, then you have a lot of reading to go back over (see Paul for instance or attempt to understand the downplayed role of women in the Church). Do not attempt to remove the fleck in your neighbor's eye until you remove the boulder from your own.

-- amanda (karkula@uiuc.edu), June 17, 2003.

Amanda, are you a student at the University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana? Or perhaps a faculty member?
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), June 17, 2003.

amanda, let me respond to some fun little quotes of yours...

last time I checked......heterosexual sex acts cause death and aids as well,

oh, yes, fornication which is also a sin, has caused a rampant spread in the frequency of viral STDs and teen pregnancy as well. BUT... two wrongs dont make a right (wow, thats the first sensible time ive ever used that cliche). AND, thats not to mention the fact that when we speak about frequency of occurance and origin, the landslide winner is active homosexuals.

as for hate....I know many who hate homosexuals...

hey, so do i. i also know a couple homosexuals. but that doesnt make me a psychological expert, and it doesnt make you one either.

where did that idea come from? I can only wonder who fostered that idea.

that idea came from a revulsion at the act of homosexual immoral relations, which was improperly translated into a revulsion of the person themselves instead of the sin being committed. if you think about it, the whole idea of homosexual relations really is rather unappealing and its obvious how that would translate into revulsion without any help from the church.

And another thing.....hypocrisy in the Church goes WAY back, if you cannot find this fact to be true, then you have a lot of reading to go back over

oh, dear God, you mean there have always been sinners? all the way back to ADAM AND EVE? thats it, lets make religion against the law, burn all the Bibles and ban all churches. See how dumb that sounds now?

hypocracy is an act of sin which is not being preached by the church. thats a lie which you are proclaiming as truth because it suits your purpose... or maybe you just dont understand the difference between condemning an action and condemning a person???

(see Paul for instance or attempt to understand the downplayed role of women in the Church)

i see myself everyday when i look in the mirror and i hate my new hair cut. downplayed role of women eh? how about this: Christ had twelve disciples. how many of them were women? do you think that twelve out of twelve happens to be coincidence, or did Jesus intentionally seperate men and women for different but equally important roles in the church?

your feminism is blocking your veiw of the importance of various roles. we cant all be stars, some people have to play the supporting role, so that the show can go on. how effective would a body be if it had ten thousand heads, and no feet? women are equal in their service, but it takes on a different more feminine form of service.

Do not attempt to remove the fleck in your neighbor's eye until you remove the boulder from your own.

as long as youre lecturing US on scripture, why dont you get it right? its 'dont point out the SPECK in your neighbors eye until you have removed the PLANK from your own.'

BUT... you are misinterpreting the scripture. you are taking do not judge to mean we are not allowed to consider anything morally wrong. that is not true. when we are told not to judge we are being told not to judge PEOPLE. namely, i shouldnt hate someone because they are gay, although i can recognize the fact that gay sexual acts are wrong. see the difference?

-- paul (dontsendmemail@notanaddress.com), June 17, 2003.


Thanks Paul.

Bingo.

Amanda, you need to analyse your own "arguments" before making them because words mean things.

It's just not helpful for your cause to claim your opponents are ALL "haters" or motivated by hate.

It's not helpful to claim your opponents are "hypocrites" either - that's a generalization and most sweeping generalizations are wrong.

Finally, when ever you quote scripture or theology, you open yourself to counter-points. EVERYBODY has invoked scripture to defend their moral views...it goes nowhere until you accept that there is a final living authority on earth who is the "court of final appeal" on what scripture MEANS.

Protestants have rejected the idea that the Church has such a court of final appeal in the Pope - and so they go round and round too.

I'm just trying to help you. If I "hated" you, why would I bother trying to talk you out of harming your body, mind, and soul?

If Catholics hated homosexuals wouldn't the easiest and quickest way for us to liquidate you be to PROMOTE as much free wheeling sex as possible? Justifying your every whim and urge - all of which leads immediately to dire physical and emotional damage?

You were created by God for a life of friendship and love. You must not confuse lust for friendship and sex with love. Your human and spiritual fulfillment cannot come from money or power or sex...it will come only through selfless friendship and selfless love.

That's what the crucifix tells us - and why Jesus died for us: to forgive our sins, and make us actually capable of living selfless lives for the good of others.

Lust and self-centered sex on the other hand leads to seriously harmful results that have nothing to do with other people's opinion of us.

-- Joe (joestong@yahoo.com), June 18, 2003.


Great post little paul, very well answered. We are to condemn the sin, i.e. the physical act of homosexuality, but love the homosexual as we are to love everyone. A celibate homosexual isn't a sinner. (Well no more than any of us for any of the other sins we commit).

God bless

P.S. ... I would imagine that Amanda was referring to St Paul when he spoke about women in the Assembly, rather than you, little paul!

-- Sara (sara_catholic_forum@yahoo.co.uk), June 18, 2003.


Of course I believe that people with homosexual attractions should "be treated as equals." My greatest concern here is that homosexual activist groups are attempting to usurp the place of marriage in our society. I would feel the same way if the Owners of Two Cats Association wanted "marriage" rights for the "legally unrecognized" union of their pets.

The Church teaches that the family is the basic building block of society. This is backed up by numerous studies showing that children are healthiest when raised by both a mother and father. (Ideally, the same mother and father the whole time, too.)

When other people try to claim identical legal protection for their non-familial unions (I can't think of a better way to describe them at the moment) they are attempting to replace the essential, unique and exclusive role that marriage plays.

-- Catherine Ann (catfishbird@yahoo.ca), June 19, 2003.


Paul on another homosexual topic thread you said

"As for God loving homosexuals, of course He does! God loves every human being perfectly and equally."

I used this to reply to a non Catholic about the Catholic position of homosexuality to which he responded:

>I don't think the Bible teaches this (or at the very least: if it does, it also teaches something else that contradicts it, alongside it).

"The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity."--Psalms 5:5

"As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated."-- Romans 9:9"

How should I reply to this gentleman?

-- Kiwi (csisherwood@hotmail.com), June 21, 2003.


Jmj

Hello, Kiwi.
In my opinion, the first step of a reply is to say that he is going astray by ...
1. depending on his private, unguided, literal interpretation of those verses, and ...
2. not relying on the Catholic Church's reliable teaching that God loves all and hates no one.

The second step of a reply is to explain that the Catholic interpretation of the Old Testament takes into account a proper understanding of ancient Hebrew idioms and figures of speech. In the two verses he gave you, the concept of "hatred" is not meant as we use it in modern English.

"The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity." --Psalms 5:5
It is not that God "hates" the "workers," but rather he hates their inquity. If he hated the people, he would not have suffered to save them.

"As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated." -- Romans 9:9"
It is not that God "hated" Esau, but rather that he preferred Jacob to him for the mission that he had in mind (to be the patriarch of the chosen people).

The expression "to hate" in Hebrew can me "to love less" or "to have a preference against." We can even see this in certain words of Jesus:
Luke 14:26 -- "If any one comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple."
Ask your opponent if he really believes that Jesus wants us to "hate" our closest relatives and our very lives. No. He means that we must prefer -- must "love more" -- Jesus and discipleship than we love those relatives and our lives.

After your opponent reads the above, you can ask him to realize that he has misinterpreted a long list of verses throughout the Bible and that he needs to begin re-interpreting everything from scratch, in light of the Church's full body of teachings in the Catechism.

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), June 22, 2003.


Thankyou John

-- Kiwi (csisherwood@hotmail.com), June 22, 2003.

kiwi,

johns post was right on. i would also remind him that we are all sinners, and that the purpose of being saved is that we can be forgiven and loved again. when we fail in our duty before God, are we not ALL workers of inequity? do we not ALL need to pray for forgiveness?

active homosexual lifestyle is a grave sin, and yet it is still JUST A SIN. if God cannot look past one sin to love his child, then how can any of us be loved, because we are all sinners?

best wishes and good luck.

-- paul (dontsendmemail@notanaddress.com), June 22, 2003.


all you hate mongers shoud be ashamed of yourselves!! you are the ones that are going to be judged when it comes time, for you are the ones spreading hate and intolerance in the world! god is not that petty that he would condem a person to eternal hellfire for loving another human being! are your lives that empty that you need to judge others??

-- brad amero (saturn_1@housemusic.com), June 30, 2003.

Jmj

Hello, Brad. You wrote:
"god is not that petty that he would condem a person to eternal hellfire for loving another human being! are your lives that empty that you need to judge others??

On your second "point" ...
Please quote the words that we wrote in which we "judge[d] others".
(When you find that there are no words of ours to quote, then post an apology for having rashly judged us.)

On your first "point" ...
Please quote the words that we wrote about God "condemn[ing] a person to eternal hellfire for loving another human being."
(When you find that there are no words of ours to quote, then post an apology for having accused us wrongly.)
Clues: (1) We don't "condemn" "person[s]," but rather actions. (2) We don't condemn "loving", but rather sodomizing (because God condemned sodomizing).
Thus: go ahead and "love" all you want in heart and mind, but fight off all temptations to commit (physical or mental) sexual perversions.

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), June 30, 2003.


Dear paul -

Who suggested that God ceased loving sinners? God loves each and every human being more than any human being could ever love anyone. And He continues loving each and every human being perfectly, no matter what they do. But that fact won't keep them out of hell, if that is their chosen destination.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), June 30, 2003.


Brad's problem is his equation of homosexual sex with "love".

So if you have a problem with two men doing an intriniscally unhygenic act with each other, leading inevitably to physical, emotional, and psychological harm - as well as immediate moral harm...he sees your "problem" as being simply a matter of rejecting "their mutual love" and thus, automatically: hate.

Who ever thought up this bait and switch maneuver was brilliant but it's still dumb as rocks. It only works if you never define what is being "hated" and what is claimed as "love".

How could love kill? How could true self-less love lead to immediate spiritual harm and long-term physical harm? It couldn't, by definition, thus, for everyone ELSE on earth, homosexual sex (anal and oral intercourse and masturbation for everyone else) is not "love" but the result of lust. And Lust actually creates hatred.

It's homosexuals like Brad who exhibit the greatest hatred, not concerned Catholics who worry about their immortal souls and their fragile bodies.

-- Joe (joestong@yahoo.com), July 01, 2003.


brad amero,

Do you suggest that God advocates free uninhibited sex with any all genders -as much as one can have, irregardless of marital status with as many as one chooses?

If not, what exactly are you saying???

-- Daniel Hawkenberry (dlm@catholic.org), July 01, 2003.


Jmj

Hi, Joe.

You defined "homosexual sex" as "anal and oral intercourse and masturbation" between two male humans.
While that stuff is bad enough -- and ought to disgust any thinking person enough to pass a Constitutional Amendment against it [never mind state laws] -- those three perversions are only scratching the surface of what "homosexual sex" includes. I am not going to go into detail here, in public, about the other mind-bogglingly sick things that these people do when they decide not to be chaste. I will say, though, that the only way that the Supreme Court could have made its recent decision is if they were unaware of what "gay sex" fully entails.
[I will provide any practicing Catholic adult with more info via e-mail if what I am saying comes as a surprise -- i.e., if someone thought that "gay sex" includes only the "obvious" things that Joe mentioned.]

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), July 01, 2003.


I happened to read my last post, and realized that I had not stated my position very clearly. I do believe that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.

In trying to emphasize the false premise "marriage is not exclusively for human unity and procreation," I equated the homosexual lifestyle with animal husbandry. Sorry...

Political update: Parliament closed for the summer before the issue could be resolved. Keep praying!

-- Catherine Ann (catfishbird@yahoo.ca), July 04, 2003.


LifeSite Special Report

'I do' ... and 'I do, too'. I’m Going To Marry Myself

Michael Coren on the issue of redefining marriage

Toronto, July 3, 2003 (LifeSiteNews.com) – LifeSite re-publishes as a Special Report today, with the permission of the author, a June 28 article by Michael Coren on the issue of redefining marriage:

“I have wonderful news, and I'd like to share it with all of you. I'm going to marry myself.

There, I've said it. Same-person marriage, at last. And I've never been as happy or as proud.

Well, both of us are really. Equally happy and proud. I'm going to rush down to City Hall with myself and get a marriage licence and everybody in that office will cheer and applaud because finally freedom has been achieved.

I love myself. I really, really do. Genuine, deep love. We've been together for years now and there is no way we'll ever break up. It's a special love and I know that not everybody will understand it. But what does that matter? We think alike, laugh at the same things, enjoy the same food. Even dress alike. Cute, I know.

It's true we can't have children, but we can always adopt. Or one of us could have brief, loveless sex with an obliging woman who will then hand over the little person after nine months. Nothing odd about that, it happens a lot these days.

You say these children are pawns, being used and exploited and indoctrinated? But there's no evidence for that. Okay, it's just started and we don't know what will happen in the future. But if I'm willing to take a chance on the lives of numerous little boys and girls, so should you.

There are always those religious nuts who will call me, call us, crazy but they should look at themselves first. There are only a few dozen of these evangelical Christian types around and they all live in one small town in Alberta. So who cares?

I mean, I may not have read the Bible or anything and I don't actually know any real Christians but I've been told the Bible in fact allows self-marriage and that the church has persecuted and executed millions of self-lovers over the centuries.

Didn't Jesus say, "Never, ever, ever judge anyone or anything and do whatever you like at any time"? Nothing more to be said on that one, then.

Then there are the hysterical people who say it's all a slippery slope and next we'll be marrying brothers and sisters and men to four women. But incest is illegal. Mind you, so was same-person marriage until recently, so I suppose the law can be changed very easily. And why not indeed? Love is everything.

It's all about equality. I demand to have what you have. In fact, I want more equality than you have. I demand that while I can say lots of nasty things in my community, in my newspapers and on friendly television and radio shows about your alleged stupidity and bigotry, if you dare say anything like that about me, I'll sue you or take you to a human rights tribunal. And you can be sure it will hear my case.

Even if I don't win, it'll cost you thousands of dollars and lots of stress to defend yourself. Sorry, but that's the price we have to pay for equality. You see, society is evolving. Just because you say that society might actually be getting worse with all of the materialism, moral decay and the rest, I know the very fact I can now marry myself means it's getting better and more enlightened.

It's been argued by some selfophobes that many, if not most, of the writers and columnists who support self-marriage have nothing to say about, for example, Arab children being bombed to death by a superpower, about poverty in the Third World caused by the West or any other major issue. But they are obsessed about self-love.

All I can say to these people is they don't understand just how painful it is for a person when he or she is not allowed to marry his or her own self. It's probably the most important issue in the history of the world. If you understand that, you'd understand why the views of millions of Canadians are totally irrelevant.

Wish us luck on our journey of devotion and discovery. Marriage is a lot of fun, and getting funnier all the time.

Published courtesy of LifeSite and with permission of Michael Coren

********************************************************************** *********

(c) Copyright: LifeSite Daily News, a production of Interim Publishing. Permission to republish granted but acknowledgement of source (use LifeSiteNews.com) is *REQUIRED*

-- Catherine Ann (catfishbird@yahoo.ca), July 04, 2003.


ok, maybe i should not have said that you are judging. that was wrong, we are mearly expressing our opinions and viewpoints on the subject of homosexuality.so i appologize for my remark. however, do you think that homosexuals are not entitled to equal rights under the law? i'm not talking about redefineing the definition of marriage but just the same rights as other married couples have.(although, i am in favor of changing the definition) also, i fail to see how "homosexuals like me" exhibit the greatest hate. what are you baseing this assumption on joe?? i don't hate cathloics or any religious group for that matter. i don't expect everyone to agree with my lifestyle....or except it. but its my life to live not anyone elses and i can't help haveing feelings towards members of the same sex,you may find that hard to believe,but its true. you are entitled to you opinions but why should i not have the same rights as others? and as for the whole confusing "love" with "lust".......well i totally disagree with that. you are assuming that all homos are sluts and sleep around. while that maybe the stereotypical view it does not hold true for all homosexuals. and why is love between a man and a woman not considered lust as well? and i still fail to see why god cares who i have sex with. i'm not here to bash anyone or say that their opinions are wrong. i may have givin you the wrong impression with my first post it was written rather hastily. if i came off as an ass i apoligize. we are all adults here and i hope we can have a civilized discussion. thank you.

-- brad amero (saturn_1@housemusic.com), October 21, 2003.

brad,

-heterosexuals, homosexuals, asexuals or even nonsexuals ALL have the same indivdual rights under law. Additionally, they all have the right to marry... Once and if married THEN the married couple have the responsibilities and or rights and or priveledges and or recognition extended them by both society/culture & God...

What constitutes a Marriage is defined by both society/culture & God... -the definitions of which may not agree/coincide...

God's definition will never change; therfore, those that are obedient to God and laws promulgated based upon God's Truth will never change...

EVEN if a pair of homosexuals can take advantage of false law and fool themselves into the belief that they are 'married' --they are NOT and never will be...

Your issue is with God, NOT with culture or with this BB....

-- Daniel Hawkenberry (dlm@catholic.org), October 21, 2003.


Brad, you're making a fundamental error, and it has led you down the worst possible path.

You wrote: "but its my life to live not anyone elses"

This is not true. Oh, I don't mean that any of us should "live your life." What I mean is that "your" life is not really your own. It belongs to God, who created your soul and redeemed you through Jesus's saving action. Here is what St. Paul told his Corinthian disciples:
"Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, which you have from God? You are not your own. You were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.

Once the Holy Spirit opens your heart to this truth, it will transform your life and make you shun all improper sexual activity.
Please pray for the graces you need.

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), October 21, 2003.


they may not be married in your eyes but it dosn't matter what others think. i have never in all my life thought of marriage as being between just a man and a woman.....even when i was a child i always thought of marriage as two people sharing their lives together regardless of what their sex was. even though a man and a woman was the norm. whats so wrong with that? i can't change my sexuality anymore than you guys can change yours......if god didn't want me to be gay then why did he make me that way??

-- brad amero (saturn_1@housemusic.com), October 21, 2003.

bradie,

"..they may not be married in your eyes but it doesn't matter what others think"

Why do you bring this up on a Catholic forum than if it doesn't matter? The fact is, it does matter, and this gay thing is not a marriage in anyones eyes.

"I have never in all my life thought of marriage as being just man and woman..."

Realy? What life did you live. Are you the big masculine type?

"..even though a man and woman was the norm."

We'll how is it the norm bradie? You just stated you never thought of this? See what that "gay thinking" does to your mind? You can't rember what bradie says from one sentence-to the next? How can you say it is the norm, but you never thought of this? :-)

What a "tinkerbell"!

-- . (David@excite.com), October 21, 2003.


No one expects a homosexual to apologise for his sexual orientation as such. But God detests all immoral activity, Brad. It's written quite emphatically in the Holy Bible. Both the Old and the New Testaments.

Before you soil your God-given body and soul ask yourself this: Am I possibly one of those destined for eternal life in heaven? If it seems you are, or ought to be, look at the small price God demands from you in this life. A pure blameless life. No matter what the world says; let the world doubt you, it won't affect your immortal soul. Your life CAN be blameless and pure.

Your sin of homosexual impurity is the same as a sin of heterosexual impurity before God, Brad. --Both sins are evil; and so you won't have any cause to claim double standards. Both you and all those sinners who seduce women and live immorally as heterosexuals will go down to hell. Both are polluting themselves. The main difference between such sins is the heterosexual won't have his sins rubbed in his face the way you have them.

But this is the judgment of the world. We have to disregard the world, which crucified Our Holy Redeemer. You CAN try to live a pure life. He wants you to, and He wants to give you eternal life if you'll follow Him. Do it.

Just live a good life without sin; do it for Jesus Christ, Brad.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), October 22, 2003.


"Your sin of homosexual impurity is the same as a sin of hetrosexuality impurity befor God."

How do you know this? I agree both are very grave sins. But, Brad has shown no sorrow for what he is doing. He is laying down with another man.

It must be something more to it than the way you see it Gene because gay men are not allowed to be ordained as priests, but hetrosexual men are. If it where the same in Gods' eyes than they could be ordained too.

So maybe the sins are different? If they arn't than how come gay men can't be ordained Catholic priests?

Man is created in the Image of God, and for a man to lay with another man is a abomination of life!

-- . (David@excite.com), October 22, 2003.


David,

The pain you inflict on Brad hurts me as well

-- Daniel Hawkenberry (dlm@catholic.org), October 22, 2003.


sin is sin regardless of what it is. on immoral act is no different that any other. and don't talk about me not knowing what i'm talking about david!! i guess what i ment to say was that while a man and a woman is the "norm" i never believed that marriage should be exclusively between a man and a woman, but between to people who love and care for eachother. and i find your reference to "tinkerbell" insulting and degrading!! also, do you believe EVRYTHING that the bible says? do you believe that every rule in the bible should be followed? do you do everything the bible says to do or not do??

-- brad amero (saturn_1@housemusic.com), October 22, 2003.

Disregard what gay-baiters say to you Brad. In this world we will have sorrows; and you'll always meet those who hate you; even when you may be living as a pure man. But don't give up on YOURSELF.

As we easily can see: all sinners who fail to come back to God, who disobey Him and live immorally will suffer for eternity. In hell a straight will not have it any better than a gay who never repented. To God, each will deserve His punishment.

There is no way to justify men married to men, or women married to women. You only place yourself in constant temptation by associating closely with another gay person. It will eventually lead to your damnation.

Just be honest with God. He is your real love, not another man. Another man has no claim on your immortal soul, Brad, but GOD does! You will never escape Him. Not here in this life, and most surely not afterwards.

Give Him all your love and pray for His grace. He can save you from this world. Trust Him!

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), October 22, 2003.


thank you for your words eugene....i know we don't see eye to eye on this subject, but i can tell that you are a kind person. as are most christians. its too bad that the fanatical people sometimes give the rest a bad name. i don't know why i posted on this bored on the first place. perhaps it was to try to get under peoples skin on this subject. but that is the wrong thing to do....i can't change your mind anymore than you can change my mind on the topic. however i am very much enjoying this debate. so i take it that you don't believe that people are born gay? and nobody has answered my questions from my previous posts.....can't come up with an answer??

-- brad amero (saturn_1@housemusic.com), October 22, 2003.

Brad,

Check out CourageRc at http://www.couragerc.net/. CourageRC is a Catholic apostolate that ministers to those with same sex attractions.

-- Glenn (glenn@nospam.com), October 22, 2003.


Change your mind? Your mind is never able to see God's Will, unless you're encouraged and helped. What if you WERE born gay? It would just come down to the same; obey God. He gave you a cross; because He made you whatever you are. You can curse Him for it, or you can accept His divine Will, and give Him your faith.

Maybe it escapes you, Brad; but everybody has a cross to bear. Not just being ''born'' gay. Some are born deformed, sick, helpless. How do these people cope? They just do.

It's very clear God wnts you as a pure soul. Why try to deny it? If you refuse, you have to live with guilt and possibly a grave disease; and it's your own choice. Yet, by accepting His Will for you, you can become a saint. Are you sure there's never been a homosexual who became a saint? Pray; maybe you'll see how love is the same; for the gay or the straight; if he comes back to God through Jesus Christ.

If you're willing to be burned alive in this world, let it be for Jesus Christ, as the holy martyrs were burned. Not for a vice. Don't give up eternity in heaven with God and His saints and angels; for AIDS. You're better than that! Repent your sins, save your soul.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), October 22, 2003.


Jmj

Hello, Brad. You wrote:
"and nobody has answered my questions from my previous posts.....can't come up with an answer??

We don't have to "come up with" answers. We had answers before you came to visit the forum. Its just that each person wanted to say other things to you, not necessarily answering your questions. On the other hand, Daniel gave you his answer to your first question -- about "rights." I'll go through your messages and look for your questions. Maybe I'll answer some of them now ...

(1) "do you think that homosexuals are not entitled to equal rights under the law? i'm not talking about redefineing the definition of marriage but just the same rights as other married couples have."

I prefer not to speak of "gays" or "homosexuals." Instead I speak of people with "Same-Sex Attraction" (SSA), and I do this for a good reason. Anyway, people with SSA are entitled to equal civil rights. However, not all privileges in life are "rights." A right is given to us by God, not by the government nor by the governed. The privilege of adopting a child (or of teaching children) is not a "right" from God. People/couples burdened by SSA cannot have the privilege of adopting children or of teaching children (whom they may molest or teach their lifestyle).

2. "also, i fail to see how 'homosexuals like me' exhibit the greatest hate. what are you baseing this assumption on joe??"

I'll leave that one for Joe.

3. "i can't help haveing feelings towards members of the same sex,you may find that hard to believe, but its true."

I believe you. I believe that, right now, you "can't help" it. But there are people who are willing and able to help you to overcome this. You just may not have heard about them yet. Moreover, even if you don't seek their help, your commitment to chastity and intense daily prayer can help you to control your SSA. It's called sexual self-mastery, and everyone has to practice it, regardless of his/her attraction.

4. "you are entitled to you opinions but why should i not have the same rights as others?"

What we are giving is not "opinions," but facts revealed to mankind by God. You should have the same "rights," but not all the same privileges. I am a man, so I don't have the privilege of going into a women's locker room, not even in a building that I own. I don't claim that to be a "right." Nor can you claim certain privileges as rights.

5. "you are assuming that all homos are sluts and sleep around. while that maybe the stereotypical view it does not hold true for all homosexuals."

You are right to say that it "does not hold true for all," but you are wrong to say that it is a "stereotypical view." It is the norm, as researchers have determined without the slightest doubt. The typical man with SSA, before dying from AIDS, has had thousands of "partners," hardly any of whose faces he can remember. The typical man with SSA has engaged in incredibly barbaric practices with partners. You may be an exception, Brad, but I am not making this stuff up.

6. "and why is love between a man and a woman not considered lust as well?"

It is not "lust" because it is natural, flowing from the way God made men and women. He created Adam and Eve, sir -- not Adam and Steve. The SSA is unnatural. It is a psychosexual disorder from which nuptial love (like that of man and woman) can never flow. What is experienced by two men (or two women) is not nuptial love, but something infinitely less beautiful.

7. "and i still fail to see why god cares who i have sex with."

If you fail to see why, you're not trying hard enough to see why. He made you and loves you, which means he wants what's best for you (chastity or heterosexual marriage), not what is worst for you (the mortal sins of sodomy).

8. "i can't change my sexuality anymore than you guys can change yours".

There are no guarantees, but with help that is now available (from God and reparative therapists), you CAN get rid of most or all of your Same-Sex Attraction. Every day, more and more men and women are shedding this SSA, and some are marrying and having children. I have listened to at least ten of them (in lectures and on TV) describing these events, and I have heard at least three therapists speaking about the origins of SSA and their success in treating it. [Not all Catholics here believe what I am saying to you about this, Brad, but that's OK because they don't have to believe it. It is something rather new, and they haven't accepted it yet, but (if they live long enough) I'm sure that they will accept it. I sense that the new insights into the causes of SSA and reparative therapy are going to explode and become very visible to the general public some day soon. If you want me to help you get in contact with one of these expert therapists, just say the word. If you want me to help you get in contact with a man who overcame his SSA, just say the word.]

9. "if god didn't want me to be gay then why did he make me that way??"

There is no doubt in my mind, Brad -- he did not make you "that way." It is possible that you may have some genetic predispositions (just as some people are predisposed to becoming alcoholics), but I am convinced that your SSA came about through unfortunate life experiences (and/or by an unfortunate missing of experiences or people that you needed). As I said, with the help of God and man, you can overcome or at least greatly improve your condition.

10. "I can't change your mind anymore than you can change my mind on the topic."

If I believed you, I wouldn't be trying to help you. Minds and souls can be changed by talking, reasoning, praying.

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), October 22, 2003.


Correction:
I wrote: "[God] made you and loves you, which means he wants what's best for you (chastity or heterosexual marriage) ..."
That should have been: "[God] made you and loves you, which means he wants what's best for you (celibacy or heterosexual marriage) ..."
[All of us must practice "chastity," whether we are celibate or married.]

-- J. F. Geci (jfgecik@hotmail.com), October 22, 2003.

Brad:
If you go on thinking like a homosexual, you'll never be normal again. Homosexual activity is abnormal; it is crazy. You know the human body wasn't created for homosexual passion. You have no right to claim it's good, when it's so plainly filthy. God has condemned it since the beginning of time; God the Creator. You have no way of pretending God 'made me this way.'' Why do you think you can accuse God? God made you a MAN. Please face that fact!

You refuse to be a MAN! God says come back to me; come back as a man; repent your awful sins. If you have no love for women; just stay away from them. But stay away from unnatural relations; as if you have no will power. Men have free will. You need to develop moral fiber; and come out of your self-indulgence. Save your immortal Soul, Brad!

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), October 22, 2003.


Thanks, Moderator!

God bless the Ladies that come to this forum. May the Lord bless them ,and their children.

-- - (David@excite.com), October 23, 2003.


Why can't we all just get along?

I can't even believe i am responding to this banter, and i am not even sure at this point what HOW i want to respond. *sigh* i know that whatever i say will be rebuked fiercely by at least one person, if not the entire board. but that is your RIGHT and i accept it.

i can say that my words are not in any way an attempt to attack your faith. having grown up around people with very strong faith, i can respect that. i cannot respect, however, some of the direct attacks made toward Bradley and Amanda. I can respect your various opinions, not the manner by which they were voiced. I can however, respect those who didn't attack them, but rather chose their words from a more educated pile and expressed their opinions with compassion, rather than hate...no, hate is such a strong word and it has been thrown around too much in this forum...how about great dislike. yes, there we go. they expressed their opinions with great dislike.

when i was in university i had a catholic priest as a prof-yes, i went to a catholic university. having not had much contact with a priest before (i was raised baptist--i'm ducking now for the oncoming assault! *i'm kidding*) i was expecting this priest to be very stoic in his ways, very old school (well, he was in his 70s). I was taking the class with two of my gay friends, one a gay male, the other a lesbian, and we waited to see how the Father would handle it.

He embraced them with much love. He was by far, the greatest man of faith i have met to date. Not just because of the way he treated my friends, but because of the passion he had for people...you could see the love he had for everyone.

Since the course was about Jesus, he told us that Jesus, if he were walking on the planet today, would spend a lot of time with fags and dykes, he would embrace them and love them. Jesus would understand how it feels to be an outsider, to be constantly attacked, because that is how he lived, as an outsider and being treated as if he had no human rights. He was misunderstood, misinterpreted and to some, very misguided.

Hmmm...the word misinterpretation is a pregnant one isn't it? I believe if you sat down 5,000 people who had never read the bible or been subjected to any type of preaching/missionary work, and had them sit down and read the bible cover to cover, you would get 5,000 different interpretations.

I think it's all subject to personal experience and personal interpretation. i have heard several different pastors speak on the same passage of scripture and heard several different interpretations. seriously, who knows? the bible was written in a time oh so long ago that a lot of the language isn't relevant today. (ok, i know i'm going to get attacked on that one, but i'm not saying the message, whatever it may be seen as, isn't relevant, i'm just saying that the language itself may be a little outdated and may cause some confusion).

So perhaps we are jumping the gun on the whole Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve thing. (Oh yeah...please come up with something better than that qutoation for your placards when you are protesting...that one is so old!) Can anyone say for a FACT that they know what the right interpretation of the bible is? Are you the divine one who understands each and every word as it was written? i highly doubt that, since most of the pro-gay marriage repsonses in this forum have been misinterpreted and rebuked by at least one person.

Have you ever played the game "Gossip?" One person says something to another person and it gets passed around the cicrle for a while. By the end of it, the initial sentence is so messed up that it doesn't even have the same meaning anymore. I think that a lot of what people are "reading" in the bible has been misconstrued and stretched over the years. i'm not saying that everyone and everything is wrong, i'm just wondering what is right.

i was fifteen when i left organized religion. i was sick of sitting in church every sunday and listening to the pastor talk about money and the "evil homersexuals" (his words, not mine) in one breath, and then about how god loves everyone. But what about the evil homersexuals? Hadn't he just got through saying that God didn't love them? but God loved everyone else? i had no idea who these evil homersexuals were, but i just couldn't understand how god could love everyone but them! what could they have done that was worse than murderers?

you can see my dilemma.

i may not belong to any organized religion, but i still have faith. i still believe in the law, but much like the rest of the world, the law must conform to ever our changing society. for example, there was a time when if you were caught spitting in public you were charged and sent to jail. there are other laws in place now to protect the vulnerable which weren't in place years ago. it works both ways.

I don't see the problem with giving gays equal rights. i have seen too many friends get beaten to a pulp and have society turn a blind eye to them as they lay bleeding on the sidewalk. i myself have been under attack for associating with gays, and my mother prays each night for my safety because she fears i will catch gay. gay is not an infectious disease, like the common cold, to be caught if a homosexual sneezes. if that were the case, i think a lot of parishes would be home to a lot of gay parishoners. 1 in 10 is the percentage of gays to straights in society...look to your left, look to your right...chances are, there is one nearby.

i respect your fears that changing the definition of marriage will open a floodgate of problems in the future. i have had several intelligent conversations with people about the topic and i have heard your fears. i will not dismiss them. i just don't understand how you can pass judgement. as my mom says: "I don't have to like it, but i cannot judge it, for God will do the judging on judgement day." Let them re-write the laws. It just means that in some people's eyes that heaven won't be as full-to-capacity as it might be and everyone will have more room to spread their wings.

I'm sorry to have wasted your space, but i could not be silent. i don't know if this made any sense to anyone because frankly, it was a long long post, and i'm starting to go cross-eyed. my point is this...how is offering gays and lesbians some basic human rights and freedoms going to, as Catherine Ann stated, "seriously endanger" your own freedom? you can still practice your religion, you can still go to the grocery store without fear of being attacked, you can raise your children to be however you want. you still have your freedom of choice and freedom of free speech, which is evident on this messageboard. once again, i apologize for taking up so much space.

peace

-- Lea (e-girl808@excite.com), November 02, 2003.


"He embraced them with much love"

A: Which is exactly how the Church relates to sinners of all kinds. Homosexuals are no exception.

"he told us that Jesus, if he were walking on the planet today, would spend a lot of time with fags and dykes, he would embrace them and love them"

A: The Bible makes it clear that Jesus did not hesitate to associate with sinners of all kinds, and to embrace and love them. So your priest was correct on that note. Hopefully he also gave you the rest of the truth - that Jesus, precisely because He loved them, would not leave them in their self-destructive lifestyles, but would call them out of sin and into holiness.

"Jesus would understand how it feels to be an outsider, to be constantly attacked, because that is how he lived, as an outsider and being treated as if he had no human rights. He was misunderstood, misinterpreted and to some, very misguided."

A: Jesus was attacked by the ungodly, precisely because He was godly, and spoke the truth. You can't compare that to people who are criticized because they have placed themselves in ungodly situations. As the Bible says, all must suffer, but it is far better to suffer for doing right than for doing wrong. (1 Pet 3:17)

"if you sat down 5,000 people who had never read the bible or been subjected to any type of preaching/missionary work, and had them sit down and read the bible cover to cover, you would get 5,000 different interpretations"

A" YES!! It has already happened! Which is exactly why there are thousands of conflicting sects in Protestantism, since personal interpretation of the Bible is the standard practice there. And which is why there are NO denominational divisions in Catholicism, where the Bible is correctly interpreted by the divinely bestowed teaching authority of the Church. What works works, and what doesn't doesn't. Which is why Jesus gave us the Church.

"I have heard several different pastors speak on the same passage of scripture and heard several different interpretations. seriously, who knows?"

A: Yep. The problem is pervasive in Protestantism. Who knows? Well, the Bible answers that question. Jesus told the leaders of the Church He founded, and no other, "he who hears you hears Me"; "the Holy Spirit will guide you to all truth"; whatsoever you bind on earth is bound in heaven". Therefore, anyone who takes the Bible seriously can know where to find the true interpretation - in the Church Christ founded for all men, and no other. That's why the Bible refers to that one Church as "the pillar and foundation of truth". (1 Tim 3:15)

"the bible was written in a time oh so long ago that a lot of the language isn't relevant today"

A: Accurate translations of the Bible maintain the essential meaning of the text, while expressing it in modern language. There are a number of shoddy translations of course. But there are also some extremely accurate ones. Even these however can cause much confusion among those who do not have the authority to interpret the scriptures.

"Can anyone say for a FACT that they know what the right interpretation of the bible is? Are you the divine one who understands each and every word as it was written?"

A: Yes, I can say that for a fact - not because I am the Divine One, but because the Divine One Himself guaranteed His Church that it would not teach falsely, and that the Holy Spirit would provide it with the fullness of truth. Either you believe God or you don't. Could you suggest a pro-homosexual interpretation for "No homosexual will enter the kingdom"? (1 Cor 6:9)

"Have you ever played the game "Gossip?" One person says something to another person and it gets passed around the cicrle for a while. By the end of it, the initial sentence is so messed up that it doesn't even have the same meaning anymore. I think that a lot of what people are "reading" in the bible has been misconstrued and stretched over the years"

A: That is a pretty accurate description of Protestantism. It's a shame that your only experience with Christianity has been in that tradition. In the Church Christ founded, the very opposite is true, for the Holy Spirit protects His Church against such scriptural guesswork and drifting ever farther from the truth of the gospel. We know He does because He said He would.

"i had no idea who these evil homersexuals were, but i just couldn't understand how god could love everyone but them! what could they have done that was worse than murderers? you can see my dilemma"

A: Yes, most certainly. Your dilemma is the inevitable result of listening to the private interpretations of unauthorized preachers of the Gospel. In the Catholic Church you won't hear about "evil homosexuals". You will hear about the evil of sin, and its harmful effects upon the people God loves. You will hear about God loving every person perfectly and equally, in spite of their sin. And you will hear about reaching out to sinners, embracing them in love as Jesus would, while helping them to turn away from the sin that is harming them, as Jesus would.

"I don't see the problem with giving gays equal rights. i have seen too many friends get beaten to a pulp and have society turn a blind eye to them as they lay bleeding on the sidewalk"

A: Gays already have equal rights. There is a small militant faction among gays who are pressing for special rights, which is a form of discrimination. But there are laws firmly in place which forbid violating the human or civil rights of any person, regardless of race, color, creed, or sexual orientation, and the Church fully supports such laws.

"i myself have been under attack for associating with gays, and my mother prays each night for my safety because she fears i will catch gay. gay is not an infectious disease, like the common cold, to be caught if a homosexual sneezes"

"That's a shame - both your friends' predudicial treatment of you, and your mom's irrational fears. Perhaps you could offer her some accurate reading material on the matter. You could find some things which are truthful and well balanced in a Catholic bookstore.

"i respect your fears that changing the definition of marriage will open a floodgate of problems in the future. i have had several intelligent conversations with people about the topic and i have heard your fears. i will not dismiss them. i just don't understand how you can pass judgement. as my mom says: "I don't have to like it, but i cannot judge it, for God will do the judging on judgement day"

A: Your mom has a false concept of judgment. On judgment day God will judge not specific actions, but PERSONS, judging each person as saved or condemned. THAT kind of judgement belongs to God alone. We don't judge persons or condemn them, which is why we receive sinners with love and compassion. But it is ridiculous to say we are not to judge specific actions. Are you undecided about rape? Or armed robbery? Or murder? Do you say "live and let live"? "I'm personally opposed to child molestation, but I can't judge anyone else's actions"? Hopefully not! We ARE called to judge behaviors as morally acceptable or not, based on the truth God has revealed through His Church. That kind of judgment is not only allowed, but REQUIRED of every Christian person.

"my point is this...how is offering gays and lesbians some basic human rights and freedoms going to, as Catherine Ann stated, "seriously endanger" your own freedom?"

A: As I already stated, there is no basic human right or freedom which is withheld from homosexuals. Obviously there are individual bigots who DO judge homosexuals - or blacks - or Jews - or Native Americans - or Catholics - or any other group you care to name, and who WOULD deny basic rights to those groups of people if the law allowed it - but it doesn't, thank God.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 02, 2003.


Lea, you made one other incorrect statement besides those brought to your attention by Paul M. You wrote:
"1 in 10 is the percentage of gays to straights in society ... look to your left, look to your right ... chances are, there is one nearby."

That is what some people suffering from the psychosexual disorder of Same-Sex Attraction would like you to believe, for it gives some of them a false sense of security -- thinking that something that represents 10% of society must be "normal."

However, the 10% figure is phony, arising from the bogus study of a very perverted homosexual man named Kinsey, working several decades ago. His statistics were found to be false, being based on a prison population, where the incidence of homosexual "acting out" was abnormally high. New studies in the 1990s [well-publicized, but you somehow missed them] showed that the people suffering from this affliction number 1% to 2% of the American population. (I wouldn't be surprised to find that it is only a fraction of 1% in some nations of Asia and Africa.)

Besides the fact that the published statistics put the lie to what you stated, I can testify from my own experience. I am over 50, but among the thousands of people I have known in my life, only one of them (a college co-alumnus) was suffering from Same-Sex Attraction.

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), November 02, 2003.


john, i seriously doubt that the percentage of homosexuals in the population is 1-2% where exactly are you getting these figures from? i would be curious to study this research. what organization came up with these statistics?

-- brad amero (saturn_1@housemusic.com), November 05, 2003.

Lea: "my point is this...how is offering gays and lesbians some basic human rights and freedoms going to, as Catherine Ann stated, "seriously endanger" your own freedom?"

Original Post: "In other words, if these go through, more and more Canadian Catholic parishes will be pressured to perform 'homosexual marriages.' Also, speaking/publishing against homosexual behaviour (even quoting from the Bible) will be punished."

-- Catherine Ann (catfishbird@yahoo.ca), November 05, 2003.


Jmj

Brad, you wrote: "i seriously doubt that the percentage of homosexuals in the population is 1-2% where exactly are you getting these figures from? i would be curious to study this research. what organization came up with these statistics?"

I'm not "getting these figures from" anywhere. What I wrote was this:
"New studies in the 1990s [well-publicized, but you somehow missed them] showed that the people suffering from this affliction number 1% to 2% of the American population."

See what I mean? It came out in the 1990s. Thus, I don't have them in front of me, so I can't direct you to them by name. However, you should be able to find them by doing some basic research. The question, though, is: are you willing to make the effort, or will you take the easy way out by clinging to the old discredited numbers?

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), November 06, 2003.


Ah, heck, Brad. Save yourself some time. I found a page that has a recap of all the recent studies that debunk the Kinsey 10% figure. Among other convincing things, the page tells about data published ...
1. in "USA Today" (1993) about a (Planned Parenthood) Alan Guttmacher Institute study, a 1989 U.S. study, and a 1992 French study.
2. in the "The Wall Street Journal" (1993) concerning surveys "with large samples from the U.S. [National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago (1989)], Canada, Britain, France, Norway, Denmark and other nations"

Click here for the summary.

JFG

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), November 06, 2003.


Pro-homosexual organizations, faced with the new research, have admitted that the 10% figure was a fabrication. Have you noticed that it no longer appears in pro-homosexual literature?

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 06, 2003.

Ahh....I can't believe this board is still up and people are still posting-and minds are still closed....such is the Catholic way (ps, if you are so good at interpreting, then read my post again....I don't know where the idea that I myself am homosexual, since i clearly stated that I wasn't....hmmmm, I guess we miss things sometimes when we read them, skewing the meaning perhaps?). You are so quick to correct others and their views, I am fed up with the Church and gay bashers that associate themselves and meaningless banter with it. (ahem....a few on this board) I am not going to post on this anymore, so start celebrating, and anything you may choose to reply with I will not read, so by all means....stop holding back. I am ashamed and pray every night for people like some who have posted here. The root of my arguement, there is no proof, no proof at all that God said homosexuality is immoral. Until I have a more reliable source than the Bible which has been orally passed down for several years, then translated, and now interpreted in so many ways, the grey area is without boundaries. The story of Sodom and Gomorrah can be interpreted in at least two ways. One may see that the base of the story was that homosexuality is wrong, another way sees the overall theme of the story being that hospitality was valued above all-more than Lot's daughters-that he was willing to place his daughters among rapists to show hospitality to his guests. I am more inclined to believe this interpretation since this behavior of hospitality above all else has been exhibited by many cultures, take Viking society for instance. And besides, everyone is quick to focus on the homosexual accents of the story and no one ever really hears about Lot sleeping with his two daughters after wifey turned to a pillar of salt. -at least that's not what my catholic school teachers taught- but it's in the Bible. Interpretation is scary and interpretation is dangerous. Be careful, it is not ours to know who will and will not get into heaven....and yes....that is judging. Brad and Lea, e-mail me sometime and maybe you can come to some of the peace action demonstrations and come see what events our gay-rights program have organized. Gay rights are civil rights too....let's not create another civil war between Catholics and gays. My heart and I cannot even fathom even the idea that anyone can find it in their hearts to have to "convert" a person from who he or she is, to someone he or she is not. That's lying my friends, that's hypocrisy, and that's Catholicism.

-- alk (karkula@uiuc.edu), November 09, 2003.

In fact, "converting" (read "healing") a person from what they are to the full potential of what they could be was a major element of Jesus Christ's earthly life. And a major element of the divinely ordained mission of His Church. The mere fact that a sick person wishes to remain sick is not a reason to withhold the offer of healing.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 09, 2003.

Dear Alk --
You're very sure of yourself. ''The root of my argument,'' you say, ''is there is no proof, no proof at all that God said homosexuality is immoral. Until I have a more reliable source than the Bible which has been orally passed down for several years, then translated, and now interpreted in so many ways, the grey area is without boundaries.''

''and now interpreted in so many ways,''---? ? ? What do you call reliable; Gore Vidal and Elton John, or some condom company?

The scripture is easily interpreted to mean sins of depravity merit eternal damnation, just as all sins do. You might want something more reliable to hang your hopes on, but God didn't give us anything else. Only His holy Word.

Tell others you don't believe the scriptures, but don't come here; we owe nothing PERIOD to the homosexual community whether U. S. or Canadian. The scriptures are plenty reliable, and they accuse you. Not you; the acts you defend. The same acts that are slowly exterminating you one by one, condom or no condom.

Go away and trust in yourself, if that makes you happy. No one has an obligation to make you respectable, we just have a duty to be just & impartial. Our faith is still true whether gays accept it or not.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), November 09, 2003.


The law of the land and the law/morals of the church are two entirely different things. Churches have never had any obligation to marry any couple of same or opposite sex. This is a civil issue. You can quote the Bible until your blue in the face, but the simple facts are that we as christians have have no right to force the beliefs of our faith on others. As far as a christian view of homosexuality, I think if we took the Bible as literal on women as we do on homosexuals, women would get pretty irate. To tout homosexual relations as unclean maybe correct; but if you consider the countless passages in the Bible about the uncleanliness of women during menstration, child birth, especially child brith of female offspring, you have to wonder about the application of such a standard. All I am saying is that you should get your heart right with God, and minister to others with the ONLY commandment that Jesus left for us, "love one another as I have loved you."

-- Julian Lukacs (lukacs.julian@intrepidblue.com), November 09, 2003.

"the simple facts are that we as christians have have no right to force the beliefs of our faith on others"

A: In fact, not only do we lack the "right" to "force" our beliefs on others, we also lack the means to do so. No-one can FORCE a belief on anyone else. If by "force" you mean absolute insistence on the fullness of truth, and unwillingness to water it down into a putrid soup of political correctness, then you don't know the definition of "force". I for one will always give such honor to the truth, and those who are offended by truth will just have to be offended - and no doubt those who are trying to live a lie will be offended. However, better to offend men than to offend God. But "force"?? Never!

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 09, 2003.


God gives us the commandments. There's a choice and we make it. You cannot pretend there is no sin; that your taste in the matter is a good choice no matter what God says. He decides for us what will offend Him.

The libertine homosexual would like to say there's no such thing as a sin; I decide what sin is.

Have you seen what that gay man or woman thinks is really sin? Holding a mirror up to his/her face; that's forbidden. No one must call them to account, that's ''hate''. If God says be a man; that's a sin!

Nothijng is so perverse as the sinner who won't believe anything is a sin. What he means is, there is no God. Why??? Because God interferes with us.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), November 09, 2003.


I know you cannot force someone to believe something, what I was more simply stating was that christian beliefs should not be used to shape laws and policies that affect others. If christians use their beliefs to infringe on the personal rights of others, that is completely wrong. You or I have no right to use the Bible as some sort of sledgehammer to keep people that we think are wrong down. God gave us common sense, not supreme judgement to interpret the scripture. Supporting the laws that protect the liberties christians, women, natives, etc..., and homosexuals is vital to us all. If we continue to wield the Bible as an instrument of oppression, christians will only alienate themselves from society and God.

-- Julian Lukacs (lukacs.julian@intrepidblue.com), November 10, 2003.

So we should toss out all civil law that is based on ...

Thou shalt not kill? Thou shalt not steal? Thou shalt not bear false witness? (perjury)

Law that is not based on morality, but only on the needs of the state, is not worth much, and in fact is extremely dangerous.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 10, 2003.


Julian:
If we continue to wield the Bible as an instrument of oppression, Christians will only alienate themselves from society and God.

That's your opinion. It's based on false premises; or it wouldn't be worth disputing.

Naturally oppression is un-Christian. Or did you imagine you had an esoteric, unknown truth to share with us? The very use of a word like ''wield'' when speaking of Truth, or God's Holy Word, is already biased against truth. That means you would somehow condone evil to keep the peace between ''society'' and Christians. And somehow you ignore a simple fact; truth can never alienate a soul from God. Oppression, yes; Truth no.

Before you assume any liberal platforms here again, temper your language. Learn what terms like force and oppression imply, before you accuse others. No one here favors injustice against homosexuals or anybody else. We favor truth over deceit and ignorance. So far the gays who have visited us in this thread are uncomfortable with the truth, and they favor deceit. But they don't fool the faithful Catholic.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), November 10, 2003.


"If we continue to wield the Bible as an instrument of oppression, Christians will only alienate themselves from society and God"

A: That is most certaily true! Oppression is bound to produce precisely the dual effect you describe, since it harms people AND violates God's law of love. On the other hand, if we continue to wield the Word of God as an instrument of TRUTH, Christians will still alienate a society which is hell-bent on living in untruth; but will thereby draw ever closer to God, Who is truth. That is the mission of the Church. To live in the truth and preach the truth without compromise; and Jesus assured us that doing so would result in persecution - and salvation.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 10, 2003.


i think julian made some pretty valid points. the simple fact of the matter is that only god can judge each of us, and he will do so when each of our times come. that being said should everyone be givin equal rights under the law? shouldn't we all just try to get along as best as possible since all we have is this short time together on this earth? life is too short to be bickering about something that ultimately is going to be determined by a "higher power". its obvious that we are not going to change eachothers minds about the subject and i don't expect you guys to accept the homosexual lifestyle, but i do expect that you would agree that there is nothing wrong with giving homosexuals full and equal rights. the same civil rights that heterosexuals now enjoy. i don't agree with the catholic faith BUT i don't try to discourage people from becoming cathloics, or tell them that they are wrong for what they believe in. i guess i'm just trying to appeal peoples compasionate side.i'm not saying that my lifestyle is right, i'm just asking if you think its wrong to give queers equal rights? does that make sense?

-- brad amero (saturn_1@housemusic.com), November 14, 2003.

and also i don't think that you can compare killing to homsexuality.....thats going a bit far paul.

-- brad amero (saturn_1@housemusic.com), November 14, 2003.

Dear Brad,

I didn't compare killing to homosexuality. My only mention of killing, stealing, etc. was as examples of civil law that is based on moral law - something YOU said should not be done. However, if you want a true comparison of murder vs. homosexual acts, they are both examples of mortal sin capable of condemning a person to Hell for all eternity. Given that similarity, any differences between the two are rendered irrelevant from a moral perspective.

As far as basic rights go, I certainly do believe that sinners of every description are still entitled to basic human and civil rights (unless of course they are such a menace to society that some of their rights have to be curtailed to protect the rights of others). What basic rights are denied to you because of your chosen lifestyle?

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 14, 2003.


well, i guess here in canada i'm not really denied anything. but for those in the united states i am truely frightened. religious conservatives there do not want gays to have any rights whatsoever and that is definitly not right no matter which way you look at it.

-- brad amero (saturn_1@housemusic.com), November 14, 2003.

not to mention other countries where it is illegal to be gay and where they are imprisioned or put to death.

-- brad amero (saturn_1@housemusic.com), November 14, 2003.

You are misinformed. U.S. law absolutely forbids the violation of anyone's human or civil rights based on gender, race, religion, or "sexual preference", and prosecutes such crimes especially vigorously, labeling them "hate crimes", which demans more severe penalties than similar crimes committed for other motives.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 14, 2003.

try telling that to the people who get gay bashed on a regular basis and who receive no justice because the police force won't look at it as a hate crime, nor will they touch it with a ten-foot pole. tell that to the people who are afraid to leave their homes for fear they will be killed. "hate crime" laws and all, there is no justice. i have seen this sad story unravel time and time again. fear breeds ignorance and i'm sorry to say that ignorance isn't bliss when it's being used to pummel you about the head with a baseball bat. it's the fear and ignorance which is partially perpetuated by the church that feeds the fires of this violence.

i am not knocking religion. believe all you want. have faith. pray daily. read your bible. heck, go to Bolivia and become a missionary, but please don't turn a blind eye to the hate that SOME people are nurturing. i say SOME because it isn't everyone and i am not attacking any particular person on this board.

this is a dialogue which could continue forever. there will be no winner, no loser, just a group of people who cannot come to an agreement on anything. you can't please everyone all of the time. you're right, he's right, she's right...everyone is right in their own minds.

je suis fatiguée. je suis finie. adieu.

-- la paix n'est pas si pire (paix@iname.com), November 14, 2003.


In stating that laws exist to protect the rights of all citizens, I surely didn't mean to imply that violations of the law do not occur. We have laws against drug dealing too but it goes on all over the place. There will always be bigoted, hate-driven individuals who ignore the law and violate the rights of others. However, my point was that there is no official withholding of any basic human or civil rights from homosexual persons - and there are methods in place to punish individuals who do so.

The other side of the coin is - individuals who constantly attempt to push their personal agenda - ANY agenda - on the public at large, and to impose their propaganda on our children through the school systems is bound to cause a negative response in people. And when the particular agenda being propagated is something innately immoral, and utterly unacceptable to a large percentage of the public, the response is going to be strongly negative. Virtually no-one seeks to withhold basic rights from people who are homosexual. But the homosexual agenda reaches far beyond basic human rights. Their goal is an impossible one - acceptance of their lifesyle as a valid societal option. they say the answer is "education". But the people they are trying to "educate" identify their efforts as harrassment. That kind of acceptance they seek is not going to happen - ever - for it is founded in untruth, and the Church will proclaim the fullness of truth until the end of time.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 14, 2003.


paul you say that we are denied nothing but we are. we are denied the right to marry

-- brad amero (saturn_1@housemusic.com), November 20, 2003.

Brad,

You are not "denied the right" to marry any more than you are "denied the right" to fly, or men are "denied the right" to give birth. Flight is simply not within the nature or the definition of "human beings". Giving birth is not within the definition of "male". There are no rights involved. And marriage, which is defined as a relationship between one man and one woman, cannot exist unless the definition is met. Two men or two women do not fulfill the definition of "marriage". It isn't a matter of "rights".

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 20, 2003.


it IS a matter of rights. i have the right to marry my boyfriend, just as much as you have the right to marry your girlfriend.i am going to be posting 10 reasons why christians should support gay marriage. one every day for 10 days. here is number one: 1)Because Christians support equal rights for all people (indeed, all humans). The “special rights” argument is patently false - this is obviously a clear case of all citizens being treated exactly equally with respect to all of the societal approbations that are associated with marriage: inheritance, taxation, hospital visitation rights etc. What is special about gays and lesbians being granted the same rights as heterosexual couples already have?

-- brad amero (saturn_1@housemusic.com), November 21, 2003.

Jmj

Brad, I don't know what is causing your forgetfulness. Are you perhaps taking strong drugs for AIDS? You have completely forgotten all the lessons we have taught you (above). Please go back and re-read this thread. Then pray for the grace to amend your life before it is too late.

Contrary to what you just said, it is NOT "a matter of rights."

Human rights are granted to people by God, the creator of their souls. And God has not granted to anyone a "right" to marry a member of the same sex. In recognition of this, the very definition of the word, "marriage," is: "the legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife." Let's see what God revealed to man by looking at the Bible ...

Hebrews 13:4 -- "Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled; for God will judge the immoral and adulterous."

What then is marriage?:
Mark 10:6ff -- [Jesus said, quoting Genesis] "... from the beginning of creation, `God made them male and female.' `For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.'"

What then is not marriage?:
[Brad, don't be the "poster boy" for Romans 1:18ff] ...

"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and wickedness of men who by their wickedness suppress the truth. ... Claiming to be wise, they became fools ... Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie ... For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a base mind and to improper conduct. They were filled with all manner of wickedness, evil, covetousness, malice. Full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malignity, they are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Though they know God's decree that those who do such things deserve to die, they not only do them but approve those who practice them."

Brad, we don't need to wait for you to fart out your ten "reasons why Christians should support" perversions. We can read them all in advance at this disgusting, anti-Catholic site.

At the end of the first argument that you copied, we find this question: "What is special about gays and lesbians being granted the same rights as heterosexual couples already have?"

As I said, "rights" are not "granted" by society or goverments, but by God. And he didn't give people with psycho-sexual disorders a "right" to act out their desires in any way whatsoever, much less by pretending to be married. This simple fact has been recognized by all civilized cultures since the days of the first human beings.

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), November 21, 2003.


john, you have to be one of the most ignorant people that i have ever encountered. rational thought seems to have escaped you! how can you deny the reasons that are on that website?? it is not up to you to decide who can marry and who can not. why do you care if gays can marry? we are not affecting your life. anyway it dosn't matter because we already can marry! at least in canada(only two provinces right now but soon across the country) let us have the right to marry and god will decide our fate in the next life. untill then don't try to deny us EQUAL RIGHTS!!

-- brad amero (saturn_1@housemusic.com), November 21, 2003.

"Brad, I don't know what is causing your forgetfulness. Are you perhaps taking strong drugs for AIDS? "

this statement alone is a testament to your bigotry and ignorance!!

-- brad amero (saturn_1@housemusic.com), November 21, 2003.


Far from it, Brad. My statement was reasonable. It is YOU who are "bigoted" (anti-Catholic) and "ignorant." You are so ignorant, in fact, that you reveal that you paid no attention at all to what I said. I told you that it is not for society or government to try to grant "rights," because human rights come from God alone. And God did not give people suffering from Same-Sex Attraction Disorder (SSAD) a right to attempt "marriage." Marriage is only for a man and a woman.

Therefore the following statement of your is rubbish:
"let us have the right to marry and god will decide our fate in the next life."

No one at all can "let [you] have the right to marry." Besides, even if I could give you a right to marry, I wouldn't do it, because sodomy is destructive to those who commit that crime/sin and also to society as a whole. As God has told us, it is an abomination.

May he help you out of the whole you are digging yourself (and may he cure you of AIDS, if you have it).
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), November 22, 2003.


ok, how is it that i am a bigot(anti-catholic)?? if you were paying attention to what i wrote than you would know...........ya know what.....forget it! have a nice life being ignorant. you'll be happy to know that i will not be posting here again.

-- brad amero (hghghg@fdkfkfk.com), November 24, 2003.

To me , it doesn't matter if gay-people want to marry !! __ I've got no problem with that !!

What gives other people the right to despise gay people , they are people with feelings too , just as other people !!

I noticed here a 1 thing , you may only live as the popes says or get lost and die in hell ?? __ What gives you the right to hate/attack people without any sensible reason , it seems some of you like hitler more than gay people !! __ You know , Hitler was real a sick scumback !!!! __ Hitler hated jews & gays too , just because his sick mind told him !! I really don't care who's gay or not !! __ For me , gays & lesbians are people , just as us !!

About sodomy:

btw , Be honest , who of you had never sex before his/her marriage ??

In that case , you are going to tell other people not to commit sodomy , what joke !!!!

What if one your kid is gay ?? __ Or what if a friend of you or a friend of your kid is/would be gay ??

BTW , aids is not only a disease gay-persons can get , also hetero can get it !!

Salut & Cheers from a NON BELIEVER:

-- Laurent LUG (.@...), November 24, 2003.


Late response to Brad...

couple of points:

1) you can't beg the question with the definition of marriage: claiming that you "always thought it was Y" doesn't prove that the term CAN POSSIBLY be so open to re-interpretation or re-definition, anymore than you could re-define what the state or constitution or the human person (objectively, publically, valid for all time and all people) on the basis of your subjective opinion.

For example: if I claim to have always considered myself King of the Universe and everyone else my subjects, that doesn't automatically make me King and everyone my slaves. My opinion and subjective view on things doesn't ipso facto "magically" change me into something new.

Or if I claim I've always considered the civil law to be a matter of personal choice, that would not shield me from the police should I rob a bank, stop paying taxes, or drive 100 mph in a school zone.

Ditto with the definition of the word "marriage". It has a settled meaning.

It has been defined (since way before Christ) as a public institution involving the covenant/pact/promise between one man and one woman who publicly vow to permanent fidelity (sexual and emotional) as well as the procreation and upbringing of children within a family.

Also from time immemorial there has existed the concepts of pre- marital and extra-marital sexual relations under the terminology of "fornication" and "adultery", as well as concubines and multiple wives... and while in pagan societies sexual expressions included sodomy, bestiality, and necrophilia, neither the pagans nor Jews or Christians (or Muslims, Hindus or Buddhists) ever considered Marriage to be anything but between a man and a woman - even though many thought "other" expressions and uses of sexuality were OK. They just had the decency and consistency to call those other expressions by other names.

So given the history of humanity and the usage of the word, it seems unfair to claim that the word is void of content and can be used for "anything" we want it be mean!

After all, two can play that game. If you claim "civil rights" means what are designated by a legislature, I or others could come in and change that to mean "whatever a minority chooses despite the express view of a majority". If we did that wouldn't you cry foul?

Or in Baseball...what if one team or one player decided that for him, subjectively, 3 strikes were not an "out" but automatically a homerun? According to your begging the question on marriage, the world of baseball would have to bow down to his whim and let him run the bases and get a "point" for his team.

"marriage is OK for same-sex people because I have always considered marriage to be defined as something between two people who love each other..." In other words, you re-define marriage in your own terms as the begining of an argument for re-defining marriage!

Rather than proving that this thing X can be simultaneously Y, you claim it to be Y from the start!

So from an historical, cultural, and religious point of view, the term "marriage" has always been defined as between a man and a woman.

Thus, by definition, homosexuals could not "marry", and thus by definition, whatever "union" two friends of the same sex may have, it can't be considered = equal to marriage, anymore than apples can be considered equal to oranges since both are fruit and grow on trees.

Analogy or similarity is not identity. Changing words won't do.

Secondly, we have to look at the civil rights aspect of homosexuals...

"civil rights" also has a definition which has never meant - FOR ANYONE - the right to not be opposed ideologically, to not be disagreed with, to have everyone say nice things about you and affirm all your whims and choices.

Civil rights have never meant that your "free speech" must be listened to, broadcast on privately or publicly owned Media outlets, purchased and promoted via the public school system and in Movies. After all, the Catholic point of view is not respected in most Media outlets - or in the public schools or in Hollywood. Yet our civil rights are not abused because the above outlets are considered "privately owned" - including the Public schools. They are owned by the NEA and federal government not the "public".

Civil rights don't include service in the military or the obligation of any private association to accept anyone who wishes to join them regardless of their own rules of admissions! Civil rights don't include military commissions or even marriage licenses on demand for the simple reason that not everything a person may desire is automatically a right... there is such a thing as "priviledges" and pre-requisites.

Thus the law itself has built in biases on the basis of age (drinking or driving licenses), background (fire-arm purchases, as well as mortgages and other loans), and physical and/or mental capacity (military service, grades in school, college admissions).

No one has the civil right to drive - just because they want to! (That's why you have to sign up for a license and it can be taken away! No one has the right to fly passenger airliners - just because they want to! No one has the right to graduate summa cum laude - just because they want to! In each case, you have to earn it, you must measure up to the prerequisites.

Now this is just with respect to civil law. If you want to bring natural (international law) into the debate, then the "bar" of standards goes way up, beyond what the civitas (state) may decide, to what the objective parameters of human nature and thus health dictate.

In the real, objective universe, there are knowable laws which people ignore at their peril. Just "choosing to fly" while jumping off a building will not work.

A final point is with respect to what is "natural" and what is "good".

It remains to be proven that homosexual attraction is genetic...in fact most genetic studies are beginning to show that it is NOT genetic or hard-wired into people as a matter of course... but then nearly everything we have - including cancer and certain psychological pathologies have some genetic precursers, because human beings are physical as well as spiritual.

According to your theory of nature the presence of ANYTHING would be slam dunk evidence that it's natural (i.e. good for the species and individual member). Yet what about cancer? What about depression? What about anorexia? What about psychopathology? It happens. People suffer these things... would that make it all "natural" and therefore wonderful and harmless and healthy?

Some people become blind or mute... would that make the absence or lack of something "natural"? No. It would be intelligible only as a lack or absence of something normally found in the individual member of the species Homo Sapiens.

Some people are violent - does that make it "natural" and hence OK to be violent? Some people are suicidal - does that make self- destructive urges OK and "natural" and protected civil and international law?

I think you should do some more thinking about these issues... try applying what you believe homosexuals should have in civil and international life to any other group of people. You also have to consider how anything can be "natural" (i.e. good for you) if the very action always carries grave physical risk to your biological health.... you have to ask yourself if FEELING GOOD about some act, thought or ommission is the same thing as REASONING AND KNOWING THAT it is in fact, objectively good.



-- Joe (joestong@yahoo.com), November 24, 2003.


There's a self-evident truth about the matrimonial bond. God has ordained the union of man and woman as the completion of the human person. He said we are to become as two in one flesh. A man becomes whole in holy matrimony, no longer being detached, but one with his spouse; and she with hers.

There is no bond whatsoever of this nature between two people of the same sex. They are detached in the flesh, no matter how faithful the pair might wish to be. I can agree they are true friends. If they are friends united in sin, the sin detaches each one from God their Creator; and without Him there is no lasting integrity. The bond of friendship here becomes a bondage to sin.

The marriage bond in matrimony is healthy and blessed. God Himself is in union with the spouses, and completes their holy love for one another. They love God in one another, and He blesses this love. Nothing of the sort can be accomplished in the pairing of two men, or two women. There is no integrity, and the love they enjoy is not a blessed love but pure selfishness and denial.

Because no matter the private disposition of these persons, each one must confess to being the offspring of a marriage between man and woman. If they believe in their own love, they deny the love which brought them to life. This love, of their own parents, is conjugal and it is God-given. It's holy. Other loves by definiton are unholy.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), November 24, 2003.


Thank you gayperson for proving just which side of this debate is full of hateful and spiteful people and which are people who are dispassionate and reasonable, using their reason to guide their moral decisions rather than their gut or feelings...

It just goes to show... people who have to insult others don't have arguments, they don't have reasons, they don't have a chance to win the debate in the public - so they run off to courts where lawyers can bend words to mean anything they want them to!

Via la democracia! If Liberals and Leftists really believed in democracy they'd stop trying to foist their moral views on the majority via the courts. They'd also attempt to argue their case with reasons instead of euphemisms and fallacies.

Oh well. We're going to win this cultural war because we're having babies and we don't send 'em to public schools... whereas the haters and nuts don't have kids (either because of abortion or the impossibility of it), and are slaves to the dupes at the NEA...

-- Anonymous (withheld@yahoo.com), December 12, 2003.


Oh no, only half the world hates us? Doesn't that mean that the other half LOVES US? Well, considering the world as it is, I'm actually happy that half the world hates us...I'd hate to be loved by North Koreans, Chinese Communists, and Islamo-facist dictators. I'd hate to be loved by psychopathic African tyrants who starve their own people and destroy their own economies while blaming other people for their problems!

But you have a real problem Mr.Gay man. Please explain why the Islamic terrorists attacked the WTC in 1993? Or continued to attack our embassies in Africa in the 1990s? Wasn't that when "the whole world loved Bill Clinton?

Get real. Hey, how many people LOVE the homosexuals when you force your beliefs on little children in public school or when you force your MORALITY on them abroad at the UN Cairo conference in 1994?

I distinctly recall how outraged the Muslim countries were that the Clinton Administration tried to FORCE ABORTION AND HOMOSEXUALITY on their countries by denying humanitarian assistance unless they comply!

Finally, I'm glad we have a president who's man enough and MATURE enough to NOT CARE if "half the world" hates him. It takes a man like that to bring real reform to injustice.

It doesn't matter that half of any group of people hate you, provided that the ones who love you are on the right side of things.

-- straight guy (withheld@yahoo.com), December 16, 2003.


If Bush is such an idiot, how come he's beaten the tar out of all you supposedly "sophisticated" people? How dumb must you all be if NONE of your candidates even come close to proving him wrong or coming up with BETTER alternatives to solving problems?

Just complaining about things doesn't make you a genius. So far the Left's only argument is "whatever you do or have done is a disaster and we could have done better, but we aren't going to tell you how"! Brilliant.

So homosexuality is genetic huh? Urban myth. All recent studies are proving that it's NOT genetic. Twin studies across the world are proving that large numbers of identical twins (sharing 100% the same genes) are not both gay... and other studies are continuing to prove that homosexuality is caused by environmental and emotional disorders.

But what as the "sophisticated" among you to say? You read YOUR OWN PROPAGANDA! You don't know the CDC facts, you don't accept responsibility for your own mistakes! Gays are the single greatest reason for their own early death to HIV and a host of other pathogens...and yet you consider yourself intelligent... ha!

What sophistication do you bring to bear on the Abortion issue? You rocket-scientists straight-facedly claim to not know (!) when human life begins! Amazing... 10th grade biology teaches that all living individual members of mammalian species begin at the moment of conception...but somehow the magic of "choice" transmogrifies a human being into a "lump of tissue"... and you call yourselves intelligent!

You claim moral or intellectual superiority when you don't know the first thing about world history or geo-politics... you claim the US created Saddam? Then please explain to me why his army was full of SOVIET armaments: T-72 tanks, AK-47 rifles, RPGs, MiG jets, etc? Why'd he have SCUDs? Where'd he get all those German built bunkers, Chinese radars and French Mirage jets?

Word of advice gay boy, you're in way over your head (pardon the pun). Your standard conservative can eat your best talking Liberal pundit's lunch. We READ WHAT YOUR SIDE WRITES...AS WELL AS OUR OWN. You guys are woefully unprepared.

So you claim Bush is an idiot? He won every debate in the election, then won the election, then won the re-count, and won in the Supreme Court, then won with education reform, health care reform, tax cuts, turning the economy around for the better, cleaned up Afganistan in record time and has now finished off Iraq, again in record time at near-miraculous odds...

So who's the idiot here? You can't even write English properly, and being gay you use terms of sexual violence instead of proving your points... ha ha ha. Looks like you are the idiot and we are on the winning side of history.

If I were you, I'd start reading more and emoting less. We not only have the moral high ground, we also have the intellectual high ground. Liberals and gays like you can't hold a candle to us. All you have is rage, hate, and emotion.

But fear not, if you convert now and stop your suicidal death-style, you'll live, discover true friendship and love and learn to be a constructive and productive member of a family and of society.

-- straight guy (withheld@yahoo.com), December 16, 2003.


Okay, I dont want to sound rude right off the bat but really, are you dumb?

"Also, speaking/publishing against homosexual behaviour (even quoting from the Bible) will be punished. "

No they wont, do you know anything? Section 319 (3) of the Canadian Criminal Code clearly states that if any statements are made under the following criteria, those making the statements will be exempt from prosecution.

So if the statements: * were relevant to any subject of public interest, the discussion of which was for the public benefit, and if on reasonable grounds it was believed to be true * were expressed in good faith, it was attempted to establish by argument and opinion on a religious subject * were expressed in good faith, it was intended to point out, for the purpose of removal, matters tending to produce feelings of hatred toward an identifiable group in Canada

Why dont you do a little more research before you go gay bashing since this IS online and if you bothered researching any of your statements before you publicly posted them online where they could be open to interpretation by anyone, you would know that this could be considered an offence. You should be happy Canada accepts people for who they are, even close minded Catholics.

-- Mira (youare_notastar@hotmail.com), December 16, 2003.


I have a little something to say about human rights and gays not being recognized with in the law as people with equal human rights. Since this forum started with a Canadian complaining about Canadian law, I feel it necessary to ignore previous comments made about Bush and the joke that is his administration, and I can say that, because over here in Canada and more specifically, Ontario, were run by liberals. Regardless, freedom of expression is part of our Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. So we as Canadian Citizens are free to express who we are as individuals, the glory of living in a free country, oh what’s that? Was also aloud security of the person? So wouldn’t that mean in turn were aloud to be protected from hate exhibited by those, who work against us? Just as your bloody church is? Your protected under the exact same things every other Canadian citizen is protected under. Now this whole board is just a crappy idea, because were fighting with each other on something that will never be resolved because equal human rights can never exist as long as individual opinions exist.

How are homosexuals hurting you, as an individual Catholic, anymore than you and your close-minded ways are hurting them? Is it just our existence that annoys you? Some one daring to not fall into line? Well too bad, you don’t like freedom of speech and expression? Go and move to where your savior came from, you won’t be missed. Canada doesn’t need any discrimination, were all given our own rights to exist how we please, just take it as it is and stop whining about something you'll just never understand because your just incapable of thinking out side of what your bloody church rams down your throat every Sunday. What are homosexuals hurting? Its not like they emit poison, unless you’re about to call teaching people about homosexuality poison.

What is it that you have that isn’t rage, hate and emotion? Aren’t wars fought because of your religion, don’t people die because of your beliefs, isn’t that expressing hate and rage and emotion? Id rather have rage, hate and emotion compared to the ignorance your exhibiting. Ignorance. That’s the worst expression of all, and that’s about all your expressing. I’m so glad that you can find comfort and salvation in leaders like Bush. Really, going in and killing hundreds of innocent people, and for what? Oil? Wonderful! I’m glad you find yourself justified in uniformly oppressing equal rights and expression. The winning side of history? Open your eyes, were already protected under the law, soon there wont be much you can do to stop us from living lives with families just like you. And when I refer to us, I’m referring to not only gays, but to those who wish to speak up and speak out about or lives, and our governmentally protected right to EXPRESS OURSELVES FREELY.

I’m not even gay. Rage, hate and emotion fuels every single human being, including you, including Bush, including every single person who wishes to oppress a free society. What emotions do you feel that are so infinitely superior to mine?

Rage, hate, emotion and freedom....I’ll take it over what ever salvation you could ever offer me.

-- Mira (youare_notastar@hotmail.com), December 16, 2003.


I’m not even gay. Rage, hate and emotion fuels every single human being, including you, including Bush, including every single person who wishes to oppress a free society. What emotions do you feel that are so infinitely superior to mine?

Believe it or not, there are people out there who are not full of rage and hate. I know some personally... and many of them are Catholic.

In Christ, Bill

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45@hotmail.com), December 16, 2003.


I’m not even gay. Rage, hate and emotion fuels every single human being, including you, including Bush, including every single person who wishes to oppress a free society.

Mira,

You have to a degree described the human condition -AND what you term a "free society" is but a meaningless relativistic term unless defined in comparison to and in contrast or agreement with Truth (God)... -Until you embrace Truth you are blowing in the wind - untethered...

-- Daniel Hawkenberry (dlm@catholic.org), December 16, 2003.


President Bush came out today in favor of a Constitutional Ammendment defining marriage, if it becomes necessary.

In Christ, Bill

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45@hotmail.com), December 17, 2003.


I would like to point out a few of the stupidities in mira;s posts

You should be happy Canada accepts people for who they are, even close minded Catholics.

the only people canada accepts are the gays. if you are a catholic concerned about peoples souls then canada will do its best to break you down, label you as close minded and bigoted, and toss you aside as moral highground antiquity... all because this is the "new morality," the new "free society"

What is it that you have that isn’t rage, hate and emotion?

charity, compassion, bravery, honor, logical thought, self control, wisdom, knowledge, spiritual connection AND contentedness... VIRTUE. these things are ALL just a small point of what it is to be human. only a beast locked into an animalistic state of being would be so dumb as to utter something like "theres nothing aside from rage, hate and emotion," BECAUSE we are humans is precisely WHY we are not limited to you faulty list.

Rage, hate, emotion and freedom....I’ll take it over what ever salvation you could ever offer me.

again, you say to us, i would rather be an animal in nature than fullfil the role of humanity which is given to me... you make yourself somewhat less than human. and why? all so you can endorse some inhuman lust as free choice. it makes me sick.

-- paul h (dontSendMeMail@notAnAddress.com), December 17, 2003.


Dear Paul,
We must always be mindful of the problems of a Mira, and the other ones here.

They live in darkness. Just picture the unfortunate ones like Mira, who reject light for total darkness every day of their lives on earth. Thinking they're alive when they're spiritually lifeless, with no more idea of what we're even talking about. They believe it's only a difference in knowledge, or correctness. It is always some of that. But in reality the question is between light and pitch dark. Jesus Christ very aptly said, ''I am the Light of the world''.

They reject light as they reject me & you. In their blindness, there can be no morality or strength. There can be no resistance to every corrupt urge felt in the darkness; and many of their lives nexcessarily finish in an act of murder and suicide.

They cannot feel what they cannot see. It can't matter to Mira, or to any sexual deviant, what is good or what is evil. All is unseen and dark.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), December 17, 2003.


A truly open and free society would allow any group to disagree with any other provided they don't resort to physical violence... and as such, there is no need for any minority group *(such as gays) to be given special protection or have special "hate crime" legislation passed...

What civil rights were violated prior to the super-rights granted to gays? NO ONE ON EARTH has the right to not be disagreed with! Yet you think that people have no right to disagree with your morality? You are defining "hate speech" as any word, deed, or look that you subjectively don't like! Insofar as the measure is arbitrary, the rule of law has ceased to exist and you don't realize it because for now, you're on top.

But what happens when you absolute minority are knocked off tomorrow or next generation? Then what principle of fair play will you invoke?

When absolute minorities are given laws passed via the courts which allow them to hate the majority, and speak openly about how evil and hateful Catholics are and how therefore they shouldn't be allowed to speak in public, or in schools, or in businesses, or anywhere where gays may overhear them... "civil" society breaks down.

Begging to differ about the health and safety of a "lifestyle" that kills most of its participants in their 40's, is considered "hate" and "intolerant"? On what basis? Your FEELINGS?

True tolerance is about people, NOT THEIR IDEAS. Where does it say we have to tolerate the idea of racism? But by law we have to tolerate the racist, the communist, the anarchist, the person who thinks the world is flat or who thinks he is a UFO created demigod...until they get violent.

But we don't have to TOLERATE their ideas!

How does this work? It works in the free expession of ideas and arguments. Catholics simply have better arguments and REASONS for our moral position, while homosexuals and proabortionists and hedons have little or not REASONS for PROVING that their position is good for you, causes social justice and harmony, or advances the interest of the state.

Not being able to advance your cause in open and fair debate, (democratically), you then jump to the courts! How unfair is that! Courts re-define words for the sake of the minority, and then accuse the majority of being illegal or hateful? How fair is that?

In a free society, the flow of information would lead one side to win and this would democratically be followed by laws. The loosing side would either have to change their message or accept that most people do not agree with them. They might have to admit to being wrong... You have a right to your opinion, but you don't have a right to be agreed with!

But Canada is NOT a free society for the majority. It is free for the minority who can control the courts and therefore the laws, restricting what is acceptible public speech and what is not...not on the basis of universally accepted logical principles but on the basis of raw political power.

And this is very dangerous for everyone because a back-lash is brewing. Heterosexuals never censored gays from SPEAKING OR ATTEMPTING TO PROVE THEIR VIEWPOINT. It wasn't regarded as "hate speech" for this absolute minority to attempt to prove anything or disdain the morality of the day... but turn about is not fair play apparently.

So what is the majority left to do? Shut up? If you can't accept a differing viewpoint full of reasons and not curse words, and you can't accept science and psychological studies and facts pointing to the biological, emotional, and moral disintegration that always accompanies homosexuality... then you are basically claiming that reason has no place in civil society and we are reduced to positions of brute power.

It's a very short-sighted strategy which will only work for about 2 generations...then you'll be swept aside by powers that re-define words to their liking. And THEN where will you turn to? (or rather, your decendents, which obviously won't be related to you)?

-- Joe (joestong@yahoo.com), December 17, 2003.


Okay, I dont want to sound rude right off the bat but really, are you dumb?

No, and I thank you for your desire not to sound rude.

"Also, speaking/publishing against homosexual behaviour (even quoting from the Bible) will be punished. "

No they wont, do you know anything?

"I think, therefore I am." Not to be misleading; I'm a Thomist, not a Cartesian, but I do believe that one can know reality.

Section 319 (3) of the Canadian Criminal Code clearly states that if any statements are made under the following criteria, those making the statements will be exempt from prosecution.

So if the statements: * were relevant to any subject of public interest, the discussion of which was for the public benefit, and if on reasonable grounds it was believed to be true * were expressed in good faith, it was attempted to establish by argument and opinion on a religious subject * were expressed in good faith, it was intended to point out, for the purpose of removal, matters tending to produce feelings of hatred toward an identifiable group in Canada

I'm sorry, but I think you took the above out of context. I don't understand its applicability in this case, and I don't know what is being referred to as "it."

Why dont you do a little more research before you go gay bashing since this IS online and if you bothered researching any of your statements before you publicly posted them online where they could be open to interpretation by anyone, you would know that this could be considered an offence. You should be happy Canada accepts people for who they are, even close minded Catholics.

I will do so... Lay off, though - as you say, this is a public forum. You're supposed to take everything with a grain of salt. I'm happy... So very happy... I'm going to Nicaragua in a few days.

And since this is a public forum, and I'd like to make a believable statement, I've actually worked myself up to some research.



-- Catherine Ann (catfishbird@yahoo.ca), December 17, 2003.

I repeat:

I really don't care who's gay or not !! __ For me , gays & lesbians are people , just as us !!

Salut & Cheers from a NON BELIEVER:

-- Laurent LUG (.@...), December 18, 2003.


Laurent,

And I'll repeat to you. We as Catholics are called to love our brothers and sisters in Christ (i.e. everyone). Part of that love is when we see someone sinning, we do everything we can to get them to stop sinning! So yes, they are people but we cannot simply allow them to continue sinning without trying to persuade them otherwise.

God Bless.

-- Glenn (glenn@nospam.com), December 18, 2003.


Glenn , if gay people wanna have sex or wanna get marry , that's there choice !! __ I see no reason for discrimination , simply there isn't ANY reason to discriminate anyone !! __ Another example , a lot of the handicapted peoples also know what discrimination means !!!!

Salut & Cheers from a NON BELIEVER:

-- Laurent LUG (.@...), December 18, 2003.


Glenn , if gay people wanna have sex or wanna get marry , that's THEIR choice (not there , sorry) !! __ I see no reason for discrimination , simply there isn't ANY reason to discriminate anyone !! __ Another example , a lot of the handicapted peoples also know what discrimination means !!!!

Salut & Cheers from a NON BELIEVER:

-- Laurent LUG (.@...), December 18, 2003.


Laurent,

I swear this has been said to you a hundred times in the past year or so you have been coming to this forum. Please understand where we as Catholics are coming from.

We, as Christians, are supposed to love all people. However, we, as Christians, have a MORAL obligation to help sinners out of their immorality. So even if you do not care if the gays are killing themselves both physically and spiritually, we DO!

-- Glenn (glenn@nospam.com), December 18, 2003.


That you're being catholics , that's your free choice !!

We both like and do have a moral , but discrimination is absolutely not a moral , it's totally immoral , you can't deny that !!

So , I don't see how gay people are killing/"killing" eachother ??

And yes , they can't get kids via the natural way !!

btw , Aids is not "available" for gay people only !!

Salut & Cheers from a NON BELIEVER:

-- Laurent LUG (.@...), December 18, 2003.


Laurent:
You are unfortunately disqualified from offering opinions in this SERIOUS matter, because you don't believe in God.

Your ridiculous opinions are no different from thinking-- Hey, I will be a male prostitute, and sell my body for a few dollars every day.

No one could argue with your reasoning by the wicked reasoning you set us here. You can be GAY, you can be a prostitute, you can curse, swear, lie, or anything! Because you are the unbeliever. So-- stay out of arguments over morality, they cannot concern you.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), December 18, 2003.


Eugene ,

1 I am dead-serious !! So , You think I'm not ??

2 I do have a good moral , for that you really don't need religion !!

3 Disscusions can't be fair , if you don't listen to more opinions !!

Salut & Cheers from a NON BELIEVER:

-- Laurent LUG (.@...), December 18, 2003.


Yes; most two-buck prostitutes expect you to believe they are moral, too. Because God doesn't have to tell them what to do. They KNOW what to do; --sell sex at 2 bucks a trick. You have that same kind of morals. Free from care.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), December 18, 2003.

You have that same kind of morals. Free from care

Explain , please !!!!

So , for you , everyone who doesn't believe , are scumbacks first class , who're "selling" their body for "$2" ?? __ I really don't think you know me !! __ As 1 example , NO 1 night-stands for me !!

Moral is not only SEX !!!!

If religion is that good , why so many people are in pain ??

Salut & Cheers from a NON BELIEVER:

-- Laurent LUG (.@...), December 18, 2003.


Moderator, please ban or suspend Laurent. We've seen far too many months of his atheism and tolerance of mortal sin. He has nothing of value to offer a Catholic forum -- and he obviously has chosen to reject everything doctrinal from Catholics.

Goodbye, Laurent. We will pray for your reversion to Catholicism, so that you will not be in hell for all eternity.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), December 20, 2003.


So John , if it doesn't fits YOU , you just order a ban , rather than defense yourself ??

And yes , I left the RCC (I will never return) , with that is nothing wrong !! __ It's not my fault I disagree with the RCC & the pope !! __ Call it , democrazy !!

Also , I'm happy with the way I live , just as you are with yours !!

Where have I insulted you ??

BTW John , you've got mail !!

Salut & Cheers from a NON BELIEVER:

-- Laurent LUG (my__way_@hotmail.com), December 20, 2003.


Order? Where did I order any to ban you? Why do you lie like that, on top of all your other crimes?
No, I don't "have mail." I have blocked any mail that you try to send me. Let me know when you return to the practice of the Catholic faith, Larry, and I will "unblock" your mail.
JFG

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), December 20, 2003.

Order? Where did I order any to ban you? Why do you lie like that, on top of all your other crimes?

Moderator, please ban or suspend Laurent.

click here ==> thread: sex before marriage , J. F. Gecik 20 december 2003

If that's isn't a clear order or maybe a request , than I must be stupid !! __ As you know , English is not my native , so sometimes , my expressions are not that good , so sorry to be stupid on that too !! __ Even sorry , I am born ; the world would be better off without perverting punks like me , in fact , that's what you're trying to say to non believers !!!! __ No , I will not commit suicide ,'cause I enjoy life too much , even my favourite girlfriend !!

-----------------------------------------------------------------

So , 'cause you block my mails , this is what I have tryed to send you , it's absolutely not ment as an insult or as an attack:

Dear John , just a question ,

point 2 , 8 , 9 of the ten commandments , I see a contradiction ??

http://www.10- commandments.org/

Discrimation of peoples , who have nothing done wrong to anyone !!!! __ Why not accept these people , they exists , they have their feelings ; just because of that , that makes them not criminal !! __ Look , personal , I don't wanna see other people having sex , that's really pervert !! __ (hetero , lesbian , gay , bi-sexual or whatever !!!!) __ Persons like rapists/violaters , child molestors , such creeps belong in jail or need help to cure !!

Salut & Cheers from a NON BELIEVER:

-- Laurent LUG (.@...), December 20, 2003.


Moderator: Please send this person one ONLY warning He states that he's an unbeliever. Let him know unbelievers aren't free to bust in here without good cause. Let him go to the Unbeliever forum and drop his load there.

_________ ///

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), December 21, 2003.


Laurent,

When someone asks "please" this is NOT an order. I think this might be where you are confused.

Please "cool down", Laurent, and rember this is a Catholic forum. I think an apology is in order here BUSTER!

Your hate for the Catholic Church is growing deeper again. Rember your "orginal" e-mail address?

-- - (David@excite.com), December 21, 2003.


David , Eugene , I wrote to John: If that's isn't a clear order or maybe a request

I know this is a catholic forum , that's why I need the answers from your people , if I visit an atheistic forum , then they will agree with my answers , obviously , no doubt about that ; but instead I rather ask it here !!

I have nothing against John or anyone else here or wherever without a good reason , I only disagree with the catholic teachings (is that wrong ??) ,'cause I see some contradictions , don't discriminate people of who/what they are if they have done nothing wrong !! I thaught all peoples are equal to eachother ?? __ Of course , it's up to you , if you disagree with these person , but than tell it them straight in their face , that's how I do it !!

----------------

Like , there are 2 persons in my life I really hate for what they have said & done to me and my family !! __ I told them that straight in their face !! __ Even one them , I gave that punk 10 seconds to leave my home , cause of what that creep told about my mother , I know my mom didn't like the person , but she was afraid of that creep (that "was" a friend of mine) !! __ After a few years , He told me straight into my face he would walk over her corpse , I almost exploded , if he hadn't leave my home , I would had beat the hell out of this *ssh*l*s !! __ Luckily for him he never returned !! __ btw , I even caught him for stealing cigarettes & money , I warned the cops .... the rest , I think you can guess .... !!!!

The otherone is unfortunely a family-member who really walk over corpses !!

----------------

Because John's blocking all my mails , in that case , I put my private questions online , so everyone can answer them if they want !! __ Sorry if it feels like I'm attacking you , that's really not my intention !!

PS: David , yes , I remember my first address I was using on this forum !!

Salut & Cheers from a NON BELIEVER:

-- Laurent LUG (.@...), December 21, 2003.


Laurent, I will not have anything more to do with you here, because you are not here legitimately. You have a wrong idea about what this forum is for and who is welcome here. This is not a "general" discussion forum where you, as an anti-Catholic, can stay indefinitely. This is a CATHOLIC forum, where three things are allowed to happen (according to the rules in the Moderator's Note thread:
1. Catholics may discuss their matters related to the Church and their faith.
2. Non-Catholics may ask sincere questions about Catholicism -- either to learn and understand better or because they are attracted to the Church.
3. Non-Catholics may present criticism of a Catholic belief or practice, in a sincere and respectful manner.

Although it is not a stated rule, I believe that all Catholics here understand #3 to be something limited in nature. That is, a given non-Catholic cannot keep attacking Catholicism indefinitely, because that in itself shows a lack of sincerity and respect. It comes across as proselytizing -- i.e., an attempt by the non-Catholic to act like a "missionary" who is out to convert Catholics to his own religion (or to atheism).

You are posting messages according to neither option #1 nor #2 nor #3, Larry. You have been coming here since 2001 -- and you do not come here for a valid reason. It seems that your involvement here is not a serious enterprise. It seems that this is just a place for you to "hang out," "kill time," and chit-chat frivolously. That is NOT what this forum is for (as explained above). The only other explanation I can think of for your presence here is that you are giving in to satan's temptations to come here and try to ridicule Catholicism and spread atheism.

One clear indication that you don't belong here is that, in two years, you have never learned ANYTHING from any Catholic -- despite your abysmal ignorance on almost every subject under the sun. You reject EVERYTHING that we try to teach you. You constantly blurt out the most disgusting comments that promote sexual immorality, tolerance for perverts, etc..

Your presence here is utterly worthless to the forum. You never post anything of value to anyone. Your presence here is a complete waste of our time and yours. That is why I have asked the moderator to ban you. (I'm glad that you have learned the meaning of the word, "to ORDER.") Please print out this answer and reflect on it every day -- as a reminder to you not to come here any more (until you are ready to return to the Catholic Church).

John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), December 21, 2003.


It seems that this is just a place for you to "hang out," "kill time," and chit-chat frivolously

Wrong , give your opînion or make fun is completely different !! __ I'm maybe not that educated as you , I never went to university or something else like that , sorry !!

The only other explanation I can think of for your presence here is that you are giving in to satan's temptations to come here and try to ridicule Catholicism and spread atheism.

1 Satanism is absolutely not my way of life , even you or anyone else here know that !!

2 I'm not here to ridicule you or anyone else , or your faith/belief !! __ Why would I ??

3 I said before , I never pushed nobody to follow me , that would be stupid , only be yourself !! __ Also , it's my right to disagree with someone else , just as you disagree with me or another persons !!

tolerance for perverts

I have/show no tolerance for perverts !!

promote sexual immorality

The ones who makes love , have to take the consequences of what they are doing !! __ You call that promote sexual immorality , or where have I told I approve adultery or fornication ?? __ People , in the past has done , or today & future will commit , these things , but you and I hope this will not happen ,'cause it's stupid , and makes them peoples sad !! __ Unfortunely , You can't deny it happend and still will happen !! __ Why some marriages are ending (unfortunely) with a divorce ??

Salut & Cheers from a NON BELIEVER:

-- Laurent LUG (.@...), December 21, 2003.


Laurent,

You still do not get it. The reason people are upset with you is that you continue to post thoughts like "let people do what they want as long as they aren't hurting anyone else". This is the atheistic viewpoint on life. But it is not Catholic. We can not allow or ignore a person performing a sinful action without speaking against it.

You also asked where you promote fornication. Sexual relations between unmarried adults is fornication. Since a homosexual relationship by definition cannot be marriage, you are promoting fornication.

Please stop and think before posting again on this forum. Ask yourself, "Am I asking for clarification on a question or am I posting my atheist views?". If the latter, do not bother.

God Bless.

-- Glenn (glenn@nospam.com), December 21, 2003.


Glenn ,

Am I asking for clarification on a question

that's all I'm asking !!

Salut & Cheers from a NON BELIEVER:

-- Laurent LUG (.@...), December 22, 2003.


Glenn , Am I asking for clarification on a question that's all I'm asking !! Salut & Cheers from a NON BELIEVER:

No Laurent, you were NOT asking for clarification. You insinuated that homosexual behaviour is OK or should be ignored when you posted this:

I repeat:
I really don't care who's gay or not !! __ For me , gays & lesbians are people , just as us !!


-- Glenn (glenn@nospam.com), December 22, 2003.

Glenn , may I ask , why peoples excist ??

Also , why there are a lot of kind / so many different peoples ??

Salut & Cheers from a NON BELIEVER:

-- Laurent LUG (.@...), December 22, 2003.


Laurent,

You asked why people exist. God created humans to love and worship him.

Why are there so many various people? Because God created us with free will. Each person may choose how they live their life.

-- Glenn (glenn@nospam.com), December 22, 2003.


Each person may choose how they live their life

Yep , that's true !! __ Thx !!

Salut & Cheers from a NON BELIEVER:

-- Laurent LUG (.@...), December 22, 2003.


Each person may choose how they live their life Yep , that's true !! __ Thx !!

And if you end up in hell, don't blaim God. Jesus often speaks of "Gehenna," of "the unquenchable fire" reserved for those who to the end of their lives refuse to believe and be converted, where both soul and body can be lost (Cf. Mt 5:22, 29; 10:28; 13:42, 50; Mk 9:43-48).

In Christ, Bill

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45@hotmail.com), December 22, 2003.


And if you end up in hell

Simply , WE both don't know what will happen after we're death !!

But as long we live , we can make our life boring or pleasant !!

Salut & Cheers from a NON BELIEVER:

-- Laurent LUG (.@...), December 22, 2003.


And if you end up in hell

Simply , WE both don't know what will happen after we're dead (not death) !!

But as long we live , we can make our life boring or pleasant !!

Salut & Cheers from a NON BELIEVER:

-- Laurent LUG (.@...), December 22, 2003.


Laurent, One thing I have found is that life will present you with enough challenges to make it not boring or unpleasent. Carpe diem is as much a Christian cry as otherwise.

We do know what happens after death because Christ told us. I am not sure what your experience in life has been. Have you been present when a human being has died? If so, you must have experienced the difference in the person before (even when very close to death) and after. Something is missing. It is what we call the soul.

Not sure if you are into logical arguments. But if you are, there is a good one here: http://catholiceducation.org/articles/apologetics/ap0085.html

You may have more interest in knowing that throughout history it has been precisely those who believed most strongly in the next world who did the most to improve this one. We have had an experiment in the 20th century where large areas of the world have thrown out religion. In every case, what followed was mass death. In no century, ever, in the history of this world have so many been killed.

As C.S. Lewis points out, "That's what you would expect. If you believe the road you're on goes nowhere, you don't take it too seriously. If you believe it goes to somewhere important, you keep it up. If a pregnant woman thinks her baby will be born dead, she does not take much care of it. If she hopes it will have life after birth, she takes care of her pregnancy."

In Christ, Bill

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45@hotmail.com), December 22, 2003.


Bill , thx for the link , I will study it after a good night sleep !!

I am not sure what your experience in life has been. Have you been present when a human being has died? If so, you must have experienced the difference in the person before (even when very close to death) and after. Something is missing. It is what we call the soul.

My last living grand-mom , I saw here just until 1 hour before she died , and about 2 hours after she died (may 1982) , she was 92 years old , almost 93 !!

I've seen my dad died in front of my eyes , +/- 4 years ago , January friday 7.00AM , I'll never forget this , he came down , went to the toilet , his behavior was very strange , than he went to living room , he dropped down in front of my eyes , nothing I could do about it , he died because of a brainattack , he was 78 years old !! __ I have tryed to reanimate him , a bit later , the doctor came , but it was already too late , I think the problem has already started the evening before ; my mom said she saw something strange about him just before they went to bed , but she didn't know what !!

Bill , you talk about a soul , I didn't see one !!

PS: I've seen the movie Ghost (1990) (Patrick Swayze , Demi Moore) a few times , strange enough , it's one of favourite movies all-time , another favourite movie is Braindead (1992) from Peter Jackson !!

I believe in life , I'm PRO-life , but if I see someone dying and I can reanimate that person , I'll do it !! __ Also , I even respect dead persons and their graves , if I see someone commit vandalism , I warn the cops , so they can catch those bastards !!

PS: Strange enough , I don't know the purpose or meaning of life , but as I said before , I enjoy life , I love it too much !!

Salut & Cheers from a NON BELIEVER:

-- Laurent LUG (.@...), December 22, 2003.


Bill , you talk about a soul , I didn't see one !!

Not something you see. Something that is different, something missing. Different than simple non-animation.

PS: I've seen the movie Ghost (1990) (Patrick Swayze , Demi Moore) a few times , strange enough , it's one of favourite movies all-time , another favourite movie is Braindead (1992) from Peter Jackson !!

Cool, but I am not talking about movies.

PS: Strange enough , I don't know the purpose or meaning of life , but as I said before , I enjoy life , I love it too much !!

One of the major differences between mankind and animals is that we ask 'what is the meaning of life'. I wonder why? In Christianity we say it is that part of Natural Law that leads us to God. Anyway, it is unexplainable by science alone.

In Christ, Bill

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45@hotmail.com), December 23, 2003.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ