Gay activist groups on a Catholic campus (need help)

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Catholic : One Thread

heres the deal,

there is a gay right activist group on my catholic school campus, and i have a bit of an issue with this... before anybody jumps on calling me a bigot, let me make somethings perfectly clear:

I have nothing against people living a CHASTE gay lifestyle. i also have no issue against gays having a support organization.

Heres the deal, i found flyers at the front desk of my dorm for the University of GLBTQ Confidential Group. The GLBTQ stands for Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, transgender, or questioning.

on the front of the flyer it says "We are a confidential group thta supports students who are exploring or living alternative sexual identities."

on the inside it also says "we recognize the need for advocacy and education in the wider university community."

It also names two faculty/staff members who work with the group and why they support the GLBTQ support group.

so my issue is, is this acceptable at a catholic school? if the group itself is acceptable, should faculty from the school be allowed to openly support this group? and finally, should the group be allowed to tag the name of my catholic school onto their GLBTQ support group? how should i respond, should i send a letter to the vice president, complaining that i am offended that they are allowing the catholic schools name to promote uncatholic values?

help from conservative catholics please...

-- paul (dontSendMeMail@notAnAddress.com), September 21, 2003

Answers

Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

to the top

-- paul (dontSendMeMail@notAnAddress.com), September 21, 2003.

Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

The purpose of Catholic education is the salvation of souls, not the civic transmission of certain quantity of information. Any state school can do that... no, our ancestors gave their fortunes to establish a CATHOLIC school which would bring the faith to bear on the truth of the human person and of the universe... our Good News does not need to feel second rate or brow beaten by those who would sneer at it. This is the insight of all Catholic educators: we have the tradition and the perennial truths which the world needs!

So it doesn't matter strictly speaking which groups seeks approval. The administration must ask themselves the key question: is this group going to help students and faculty save their souls? Will it promote the Gospel? Will people become more happy, healthy, and holy through it? If not, then it should not be allowed.

With respect to the Gay subculture trying to win converts to its "lifestyle" I ask, how can it be considered a true life style if it kills you? The average life span of active homosexuals is 20 years shorter than everyone else. How can it be considered a culture if it cannot of itself produce offspring and nurture the next generation?

WORDS MEAN THINGS. You cannot go through life with a voluntaristic will to power...hundreds of thousands of gay men have died because they tried to reinvent human nature forgetting that biology is as much a part of our existence as free will is.

Christians are called to love, not tolerate others. We are our brothers keepers. We cannot sit idle by while innocents are lied to by those who would harm them biologically, mentally, and spiritually.

Some will claim this is "homophobia" but I challenge them to tell me how hatred or fear could be the motive of someone who seeks to save the soul of another by guiding them in the true path of friendship, health and love.

Is it not true hatred to lie to people about their urges, whims, and feelings? Is it not true hatred to lie to people about their passions and "orientation" which is not a sacrament and not a means of salvation. It is not a means of health or sanity.

Is is hatred to lie to children, telling them that tolerance means accepting as truth what is conjecture, while taking as opinion what is revealed. The Confirmed Catholic and above all the educator must know that we love all people, but their ideas or thoughts are another matter: they may be good or bad, sane or insane. To beg to differ with someone is not hatred or fear. Those who exibit fear and hatred are the militant homosexuals, not active Catholics.

We seek all people's salvation - Jesus Christ is the way, the truth, and the life...not sex. not orientation, not selfishness.

Catholic educators cannot fail to act when a group comes on campus promoting a world view which accepts as licit and healthy the idea that sexuality is OK outside of monogamous matrimony. To do so would be to accept an anti-Gospel. To do so would be cowardice in the face of simple error and harmful doctrine.

No one dies from Catholicism and virtue, but according to the CDC in 2001 800,000 people are dying of AIDS - 60% of whom are active homosexuals... what a tragedy. Those men needed friends, and true brothers who should have helped them come to understand their bodies and souls, their passions and inspirations and not given themselves over to slavery of the flesh and world...

Pray, fast, and be prudent. They are the haters and fear mongers. You may be attacked and blackballed. They certainly will try to isolate you (since they will hardly be able to argue or debate with you). Prudence suggests that you gather together with others - lots of others and only work in concert with them.

Remember: we are motivated by brotherly love, they by the hot fires of passion and lust. We promise the cross but true love and friendship, they can offer immediate gratification, companionship, parties... but who is the hater and fear monger? Those who lie so that more may die young, or those who would have these friends join us in time and eternity together with the saints and Jesus?

Be not afraid.



-- Joe (joestong@yahoo.com), September 21, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

so my issue is, is this acceptable at a catholic school?

Do you think it's acceptable at a Catholic school? At any school?

if the group itself is acceptable, should faculty from the school be allowed to openly support this group?

and keep their jobs as Catholic educators? Absulutely not.

and finally, should the group be allowed to tag the name of my catholic school onto their GLBTQ support group?

Come on, paul. You know the answers to all these questions, don't you?

how should i respond?

By pursuing your education elsewhere.

-- jake (jake1@REMOVE@pngusa.net), September 21, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

If the catholic school decides it has no problems with it and lets the organization exist, then leaving that school would be what I'd do.

-- Abraham T (lijothengil@yahoo.com), September 21, 2003.

Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Hi paul.

I was wondering if the school has a H.Q.O.S.G.? The problem I see is that the Gay Rights Movement has an adverse effect on the rest of us who prefer to live in obedience to God. By the way, H.Q.O.S.G. is my imaginary group--Heterosexuals or Questioning, Organization and Support Group.

It seems that a "catholic" school should include all people into one group regardless of their sins and bring them closer to God.

rod..

..<

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), September 21, 2003.



Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

"For a school to be Christian, it is not enough to give a weekly religious education lesson or to schedule certain pious observances. The first necessity is for Christian teachers to communicate to their pupils the richness of their profound spiritual lives as well as forming their minds and their characters. For this reason it is important that the practical organization of the school, its discipline and its syllabus should constitute a framework adapted to its essential function and should be imbued with an authentic spiritual sense, even in the apparently most trivial and material details."

Pope St. Pius X

"In truth, an admirable document of the Magisterium of the Church....With what firmness of principle, with what lucidity of presentation, does the great Pontiff [Pope Pius XI in Divini Illius Magistri - Ed.] assign the respective roles of the family, the Church and the State in the great work of education, namely that of the child. What solid arguments are given to show how justified the Church is in requiring an educational milieu in harmony with Her children's Faith! We declare without hesitation that this capital document has lost nothing of its truth. Today, as in the past, the Church firmly declares that Her rights and those of the family are anterior to those of the State. Today, as in the past, the Church affirms Her own right to have schools where a Christian conception of life is inculcated by teachers of solid convictions, and where the entire teaching program is given in the light of the Faith"

Pope John XXIII December 30, 1959

"Education is essentially a social and not merely an individual activity. Now there are three essential societies, distinct one from the other and yet harmoniously combined by God, into which man is born: two of these, namely the family and civil society, belong to the natural order; the third, the Church, to the supernatural order. In the first place comes the family, instituted directly by God for its particular purpose, the procreation and the formation of offspring; for this reason it has priority of nature, and therefore of rights, over civil society. Nevertheless, the family is an imperfect society, since it does not in itself possess all the means for its own complete development; whereas civil society is a perfect society, having in itself all the means for its own special end, which is the temporal well-being of the community; and so, in this respect, that is, in view of the common good, it has the pre-eminence over the family, which finds its own suitable temporal perfection precisely in civil society."

Pope Pius XI, Divini Illius Magistri, Encyclical on Catholic Education, December 31, 1939

The Holy Roman Catholic Church: Been there. Taught that.

-- jake (jake1REMOVE@pngusa.net), September 21, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

jake,

You're faith is to be admired.

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


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

If Peter was told to put his sword back in it's sheath, his boldness was at least admirable in it's intent, and the ear was the appropriate place to vent the frustration.

-- (couldn't@resist.later), September 21, 2003.

Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

youre right, of course, jake...

i did know all the answers to the questions i asked, although sometimes it is all too easy to slip into secularism when youre my young age.

while, for scholarship and Air Force reasons switching schools is not an option for me, i will fight the schools official sanction of the group by sending letters and getting active against such a bold uncatholic group fostered in what is supposed to be a spiritually safe environment.

-- paul (dontSendMeMail@notAnAddress.com), September 21, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

If this school accepts any kind of federal or state funding it may have its hands tied....

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), September 21, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Paul,

If you can avoid it, don't fight this battle alone; and further, don't go out of your way to appear the leader of any group or petition. The very idea of a homosexual-lifestyle advocacy group calling themselves Catholic is completely absurd. Let the Catechism and the Rosary be your weapons of choice. God bless--I pray for your victory.

-- Skoobouy (skoobouy@hotmail.com), September 21, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Hey Paul, I think we are both the same age. I recently turned 21 :)

-- Abraham T (lijothengil@yahoo.com), September 21, 2003.

Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

"...don't go out of your way to appear the leader of any group or petition."

Pretty darn good advice when you consider that the "law" is on their side and not our side. I said "law"; that's right--"law". I do believe that God works in mysterious ways and things will work out for the good, even for those in serious sin.

rod..

..


-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), September 21, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Start a petition gathering gathering names of people who are just as outraged about hosting perversion on campus. Present the petition and a strong letter to the President of the University, President of the Alumni Association, the Bishop, anyone who *should* be opposed to such evil on a Catholic Campus.

Your University does not want publicity, I'm sure. It may prevent this group of sodomites from organizing just to avoid bad press. It may be inspired by your taking such steps to defend Catholic morality.

Please be assured of my prayers for you and your school.

-- Regina (Regina712REMOVE@lycos.com), September 22, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

paul,

The local Bishop is the one responsible for what's going on in any schools in his diocese. Send him a respectful email, or a nice letter with any of the group's propoganda attached and ask if he's aware of the situation.

Better to light one candle than to curse the darkness.

-- jake (jake1REMOVE@pngusa.net), September 22, 2003.



Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

@ anybody , just a question:

Suppose , one of those gay activist is one of your kids ??

Greets from a NON BELIEVER:

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


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Laurent,

Even if it was one of my kids, it still wouldn't make it right.

So what would I do about it? I'd pray for them. Try to talk to them about how God wants them to live a chaste life. And then point them to the CourageRC website (http://couragerc.org/).

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


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

>Suppose , one of those gay activist is one of your kids ??

Then I would work very hard to dissuade them from sinning. Just like if I found out they habitually sinned in any other way.

In Christ, Bill

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


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

If one of them was a child of mine, I would introduce him or her to celibate, chaste Catholics--among the laity. Watch out--they're out there, and they're happy.

-- Skoobouy (skoobouy@hotmail.com), September 22, 2003.

Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Laurent.

Allow me to make this very fine point. We are focusing on the sin and not the person. If my son were to rape or murder someone, I would be extremely saddened for him and his consequences. I would still love my son, but I would have to realize that there are consequences to meet. If I could prevent him fromm committing those sins, I definately would make every attempt to do so. If he were hanging around bad influences, I would do everything in my power to guide him the right way. I feel that anyone in serious sin should be guided in the right path. Homosexuals are people just like me and you, but our sins are not the same, only just as serious. If anything should be mentioned by all of us is this: We should love each other like brothers in God's family and should show our love by bringing them into God's ways.

rod

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), September 22, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

"Friends don't let friends drive drunk" or so goes the popular expression. Well, why not? What if the "friend" wants to drink himself into a stuppor and then drive home?

Normal people "get it" that even if the guy "wants to" or "chooses to" he should be stopped - out of friendship, because his health and the safety of other people are on the line here.

Friends don't let friends kill themselves or others - even though such homicide would be unintentional or even merely "possible" and not imminent.

In the very same way, friends don't let friends enter the gay subculture - which will kill them and kill others sooner or later by exposing them to the most seriously deadly pathogens known to man.

It's not a matter of what the person wants or chooses...if your friend chooses or wants something that will kill them or harm others, it's your duty as a friend to persuade them from that action.

This is why any charges of "homophobia" as in Hatred or fear of homosexuals is such complete BS. If those who oppose the homosexual actions of oral, anal, and masturbatory sex - because they are all physically harmful as well as psychologically and morally harmful...truly feared or hated gays, they'd shut up and let them do whatever they want... knowing that sooner rather than later the whole population of homosexuals would literally kill each other off.

Instead we preach "love the sinner, reject the sin" - befriend and help the poor man, by helping him reject the urge and desire for the actions which are always harmful to him and others.

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


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

If we decide not to help others find Salvation, we may as well wave goodbye and say "Go to Hell", because that may very well be the person's destination. The story of the Good Samaritan isn't just a bedtime story, folks.

rod..
-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), September 24, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

I don't see why gay peoples need a salvation ?? __ If you're not interested in their way of life , just let them !! __ If they commit a crime , OK , than you have to do something about it !!

But about the good samaritan , suppose you're the victim , the guy who saves you is gay ?? Greets from a NON BELIEVER:

-- Laurent LUG (.@...), September 25, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Suppose the guy who saves you is a murderer and rapist? Does that somehow make murder and rape acceptable??

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), September 25, 2003.

Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Laurent, the story of the Samaritan is two fold. Yes, we could understand it in terms of the here and now, fleshy world. But, I was hoping that the real meaning would be a little more obvious. This story deals with Salvation of the soul. We must take the time to guide others to God.

What if we were saved by Hannibal Lector (is that his name?). The point is, what are we being saved from? Or, saved to?

We need to look beyond this fleshy world and focus on our life after this one. It also makes for a better world here when we live it "cleanly" and abstain from hurtful vices and activities. It is so logical that a culture that cannot reproduce will eventually die. Who then will reproduce, who then will keep morality alive? Well, certainly not those farther from God, yes?

rod..

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), September 25, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Suppose the guy who saves you is a murderer and rapist? Does that somehow make murder and rape acceptable??

Of course not !!

Someone who is gay , therefore he/she is not a criminal as long they don't commit a crime !!

btw , Is discrimination acceptable ??

-- Laurent LUG (.@...), September 25, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

The Catholic Church is sophisticated enough to know the difference between the man and the sin. The man is still capable of great good, even if still guilty of some heinious crime.

Thus a "good samaritan" is possible - being Samaritan (a different religion than Judaeism) didn't make the man a 100% moral leper. He was still capable of much good on behalf of the man who was beaten and robed on the road to Jericho.

Ditto with murderers, rapists, gays, and bigots. Even Nazis and Communists were capable of good sometimes... their other crimes and faults didn't totally deprave them, so there is reason to hope for conversion and healing...

But this calls for discernment and discrimination.

Discrimination is TOTALLY ACCEPTIBLE - people "discriminate" all the time! Unqualified people can't fly airliners: that's "discimination". Unqualified people aren't graduated with honors and given medical degrees - that's discrimination!

People don't allow former sex-preditors to be in charge of young children... that's discrimination! To discriminate is to judge and decide.

"indiscriminate slaughter" such as atomic bombing a city or suicide bombers targetting public busses don't disciminate: they kill everyone regardless of civilian or military. If they discriminated they'd either target soldiers or just civilians...

Look at the gun laws: we as a nation are perfectly willing to discriminate between someone who has a violent or criminal record and someone who doesn't. The ex-con typically won't be allowed to purchase a hand-gun, whereas the guy with the clean record will.

Why do we do this? Because we feel that statistically and generally it's a bad idea to allow someone with a record of violence to have access to weapons...

In the very same way, we feel that since most rapists (and other people addicted to instant gratification...such as homosexuals) repeat their offenses when given the chance, it's PRUDENT to discriminate at least in some areas.

They don't lose their civil or human rights. They just aren't allowed access to children or women or positions where self-control is required.

Look at all the recent political appointees being grilled by the Senate: they were discriminating against many people based on their past writings, cases, beliefs...

If you try to go to work for Planned Parenthood and show up with a Pro-Life T-shirt that says "Abortion is murder", wearing a "I love the Pope" button and a cross around your neck...I'm sure those "open- minded arch liberals" will discriminate by choosing not to hire you!

-- Joe (joestong@yahoo.com), September 25, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Dear Paul,

It is disheartening to hear of this happening on a Catholic campus. But hey, nothing should take us by surprise today. Remain in God's peace. At the beginning of the school year our principal {public school} invited a social worker to speak with us, the staff. She was an avowed 'lesbian' and 'Christian'. The thrust of it is to create a "safe environment" for "gay kids". That's a given, we shouldn't attack or harass anyone.

In researching this issue to be able to present another view, I am overwhelmed by the amount of resources and information centers on the web that address people struggling and suffering with unwanted homosexual desires. Without making this information available to parents and teachers we are sorely delinquent in properly educating and equipping people to make the right decisions.

Of course to deal with this on a public school campus is another realm, we can't quite use "religion", but the 'gay agenda' is on the offense, and Christians need to have a plan. The best weapons are, as stated, prayer and at least another prayer partner. In the light of this, I would definitely discern the teaching at this 'catholic' school, you may as well save your money. That goes for anyone else involved in 'catholic' schools, find out how 'catholic' the administration really is.

There are a few really good organizations that offer support, workshops, retreats and newsletters. There are many testimonies of those who have been healed, who have gone through successful therapy that has dealt with why they have same-sex attractions.

The Catholic group "Courage" is the best in MHO, it encourages chastity and holiness, living out one's Catholic life. The other two excellent ones are "Exodus International" {www.exodus- international.org} and {www.narth.com}. Narth stands for "National association of research and therapy for homosexuals}. They are considered "ex-gay" groups. Also look at www.transformedimage.com

And so we press on in the battle. Jesus is Lord. Theresa

-- Theresa (Rodntee4Jesus@aol.com), September 25, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

worth repeating...

www.couragerc.net

-- Theresa (Rodntee4Jesus@aol.com), September 25, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

At the beginning of the school year our principal {public school} invited a social worker to speak with us, the staff. She was an avowed 'lesbian' and 'Christian'. The thrust of it is to create a "safe environment" for "gay kids".

I'll never cease being an advocate for Catholic homeschooling.

-- jake (jake1REMOVE@pngusa.net), September 25, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

yes Jake, me too. Still, let's pray we don't ever lose a heart for 'our' other kids that are out there in the world and their need for Jesus, not to mention the Christian leaders fighting the battle on the front lines.

-- Theresa (Rodntee4Jesus@aol.com), September 25, 2003.

Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Thanks for those URLs, Theresa. My collection of bookmarks grows ...
JFG

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), September 26, 2003.

Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Sexual prefference is not a matter of choice. Have you ever seen a pretty girl walk down the street and been able to choose not to be attracted to her? Do you think that gay people would make a choice to live a lifestyle that brings them so much hate from people like you? We all bleed red, my friend. They are people just like you and me. They may watch a different kind of porn, but that's their right. Why is it so immoral?

-- Anti-bush (Comrade_bleh@hotmail.com), October 13, 2003.

Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

That's right. Sexual preference is not a matter of choice, which is why the Church does not morally condemn any sexual preference as such, though it does of course recognize deviant preferences as deviant. Behaviors however are always a matter of choice, and the free choice of deviant behaviors in response to a deviant preference is sin.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), October 13, 2003.

Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

I'm not understanidng you. what do you mean by "deviant behavior"?

-- Anti-bush (Comrade_bleh@hotmail.com), October 16, 2003.

Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Behavior which does not conform to (therefore deviates from) the clear moral guidelines set down by God and available to all through the teaching of His Church.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), October 16, 2003.

Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Let's be honest here.

The day that I am not attracted by a female is the day to go see a doctor or something.

A man can go out and conquer his world, but because he makes a choice not to, he doesn't. Also, the marriage contract tends to get in the way of any thoughts of conquests. I think men are healthy to have those attractions; they are even healthier when they choose not to pursue those distractions.

rod

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 17, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

What exactly makes homesexuality immoral?

-- Anti-bush (Comrade_bleh@hotmail.com), October 18, 2003.

Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

The male sperm and the female ovum are being wasted and are not being utilized for their natural intended reason or purpose. Reproduction is a natural purpose for humans and homosexuality goes against our basic purpose. It is an action of death when humans refuse to reproduce or avoid reproduction.

rod..

..


-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 18, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

And what exactly makes any of that your buisiness, or anyone else's, for that matter?

-- Anti-bush (Comrade_bleh@hotmail.com), October 18, 2003.

Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Because you asked. I would not have said anything except for you goating me into it. Keep goating me, I don't mind.

rod..

..

.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 18, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Q1: "What exactly makes homosexuality immoral?"

The mere attraction to a member of the same sex is not immoral. It is homosexual activity that is immoral.

Even if one is an atheist, he knows (through the "natural law" inscribed upon his "heart") that homosexual relations are always unnatural and wrong -- just as an atheist (who has no "Ten Commandments") knows that rape, arson, and robbery are always wrong.

From the Vatican's "Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual Ethics":

"... according to the objective moral order, homosexual relations are acts which lack an essential and indispensable finality. In Sacred Scripture they are condemned as a serious depravity and even presented as the sad consequence of rejecting God. This judgment of Scripture does not of course permit us to conclude that all those who suffer from this anomaly are personally responsible for it, but it does attest to the fact that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered and can in no case be approved of."

From the "Catechism of the Catholic Church":

"2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered." They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

"2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

"2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection."


Q2: "And what exactly makes any of that your business, or anyone else's, for that matter?"

It is the "business" of everyone that some people engage in homosexual acts, because every human being is harmed by them and because every human should care about the spiritual welfare of everyone else.

Human beings do not live in isolation, as though each was an independent planet in space. Every good act of a person, even if seemingly done in private, has a positive effect on all of mankind, no matter how slight. Similarly, every evil act of a person (such as sodomy), even if seemingly done in private, has a negative effect on all of mankind (and, most importantly, gravely offends God). When a person is guilty of serious wrongdoing, he greatly harms himself spiritually and psychologically. This loss or "damage" then has a cascading effect on his family and on society.

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), October 19, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

The mere attraction to a member of the same sex is not immoral. It is homosexual activity that is immoral.

John , I see 2 things which are in contrast with eachother !!

If they cannot have sex , than they don't need to fall in love with eachother ,'cause it's completely senseless , since they may not make love with eachother !! __ So , just let them , it's their personal private business , as long they don't hurt you physical !!

PS: John , did you receive my mail a few days back ??

Salut & Cheers from a NON BELIEVER:

-- Laurent LUG (.@...), October 19, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Laurent?!

I can't use the word "gay" in my classroom because of the new meaning and mental images my students will assume. Private lives? I can't watch t.v. with my children because of the homosexual themes and flambouyance. The laws of the land are becoming perverted because of the "gay" rights movement. Be careful next time you need to replentish your blood supply. Let's hope that it isn't tainted. Watch what you say in public or you might get slapped with a harrassment charge against you for some innocent remark involving homosexuality. Let's hope that you bring your kids up with good morals that are strong enough to resist the powerful impact and influence of the "gay" movement. Watch out for the New Age Religions that claim homosexuality is not a sin and that is is actually a gift from God.

Or, are you saying that homosexuality should go back into the closet?

Every man's sin has an adverse effect on society whether it is in the closet or on the pedestal.

rod

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 19, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Jmj

Hello, Laurent.

Yes, I received your e-mail message.

Last time, I wrote: "The mere attraction to a member of the same sex is not immoral. It is homosexual activity that is immoral."

To this you made two incorrect responses. The first was: "I see 2 things which are in contrast with eachother !! If they cannot have sex , than they don't need to fall in love with eachother ,'cause it's completely senseless , since they may not make love with eachother !!

I didn't say anything about "falling in love." I spoke about attraction.
Let me take that sentence of mind and insert new words into it: "The mere attraction to a member of the opposite sex (to whom we are not married) is not immoral. It is non-marital heterosexual activity that is immoral."
See what I mean? Any mere "attraction" to any human being is sin-free. But ACTING OUT on that attraction is sinful, regardless of whether it is homosexual or heterosexual, when the couple is not married. Since two people of the same sex cannot possibly ever be married, their "acting out" is always gravely sinful.

Your second error: "So , just let them , it's their personal private business , as long they don't hurt you physical !!"

Start using the brain God gave you, Monsieur Luge! Go back and re-read my message, wherein I explain why we cannot "just let them" -- because SODOMY is not merely "their personal, private business," but is the business of ALL human beings (whom sodomy always harms, sometimes even physically).

Bl. Teresa of Calcutta, pray for us.
God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), October 19, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Rod , I don't care if someone is hetero , gay , lesbian , bisexual !!

What I ment with their private business: in their bedroom and those 2 adult persons wanna have sex with eachother !!

Let's hope that you bring your kids up with good morals that are strong enough to resist the powerful impact

Yep , you can be sure of that , good morals , like , as an extreme example , just don't go to bed with everyone , .... !!

I can't watch t.v. with my children because of the homosexual themes and flambouyance

Euhm , which channels are you watching (via cable , terristic or satellite ??) it's not only all that kind of TV , I've got over 2000 (F.T.A.) TV channels , I only watch a few of them (10) , none of them are porn , or like Big Brother / Gran Hermano) or soaps , 'cause I don't like it !! __ If I don't like a program , I put something else on I like , simple !! __ But Ok , I'm aware , you've got kids , and you have to raise them !!

(F.T.A) = Free To Air

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

John , sodomy ?? __ What the hell are you talking about ??

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

I spoke about attraction

Yes , I really like Clint Eastwood , his movies !!

falling in love

Most of the cases has to do with sex , but , later on !!

It is non-marital heterosexual activity that is immoral

It is homosexual activity that is immoral

The mere attraction to a member of the same sex is not immoral

The mere attraction to a member of the opposite sex (to whom we are not married) is not immoral

Any mere "attraction" to any human being is sin-free. But ACTING OUT on that attraction is sinful, regardless of whether it is homosexual or heterosexual, when the couple is not married. Since two people of the same sex cannot possibly ever be married, their "acting out" is always gravely sinful

I disagree , sex between 2 adult person (with permission from both) is none of our business , unless they commit fornication !!

In my country gay people can have a civial marriage !!

Salut & Cheers from a NON BELIEVER:

-- Laurent LUG (.@...), October 19, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

¡ Hay, Laurent! I don't have 20 zillion channels. I have regular t.v. channels that are free or unsubcribed. My point is: we don't watch t.v. cuz it is junk. I do watch one or two shows and NASCAR. I have a stack of religious movies, but even those I have to make sure the Gospel is true. There is a moral decay in television programming, if you haven't already noticed. I do not have those t.v. channels that you've inferred. Hey, I don't have to have those; I have ordinary t.v. that has replaced rot and smut. That's why my family can't watch t.v..

rod..



-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 19, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

There is a moral decay in television programming, if you haven't already noticed

Euh

Serious:

I agree , most of the time , commercial TV = Trash TV !!

A few of my favorite stations (no lie):

BBC MBC 2 ITV Tanzania DD-Sports and sometimes Bolivision

and also sometimes Fox News & CNN

But I don't watch that often (max.3 à 4 hours each day)

In my country , Cable TV & Terristic reception is very sad & garbage !!!!

But ok back Topic:

Salut & Cheers from a NON BELIEVER:

-- Laurent LUG (.@...), October 19, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Laurent, I recommend that you take another vacation from the forum. You are not helping anyone -- not even yourself -- by being here. Your ignorance of facts -- and your unwillingness to accept facts that we give to you -- are about as abysmal as anything I have ever seen in my life. You are in an incredibly deep pit of darkness.

An example of your ignorance is the following question of yours:
"John , sodomy ?? __ What the hell are you talking about ??"

How could anyone wanting to post at this forum not know what "sodomy" is? Or, not knowing it, how could anyone be so lazy as not to look it up in the dictionary? How do you expect me to respect you when you won't lift a finger to help yourself?

Then you stated: "I disagree , sex between 2 adult person (with permission from both) is none of our business , unless they commit fornication !!"

This shows me that you also don't know the definition of "fornication," which is heterosexual intercourse between two people, neither of whom is married to anyone.

You also wrote: "In my country gay people can have a civial marriage !!"

The civilized world rejects such decadent stupidity. As reflected in the laws of 99% of the world's countries, the word "marriage" applies only to the union of a man and a woman. Instead of this, your sick country's illegitimate "law" permits the cohabitation of sodomites. (But even if 99% of the world's countries' laws agreed with your sick country's illegitimate law, that STILL would not overturn the "natural law," which tells all of us that homosexual acts are mortally sinful.)

God bless you.
John

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


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

So John , you call me stupid !!

I've got a braindamage since the day I was born , so , thx for the compliment , I'll will remember that !!

Sodomy , I know what it means , but I ment sex & sodomy ????

This shows me that you also don't know the definition of "fornication," which is heterosexual intercourse between two people, neither of whom is married to anyone.

[u]Fornication:[/u]

a married couple , one of them have sex with someone else as his/her own partner or both have sex with a third person or even with more persons involved !!

PS , I love my country , just as you like yours' !!!!

But what would you do as the law in your country would say , they can marry ??

And again , I have no hate to gay-people or even to you , but you hate everything who's not following your faith !!!! __ I am I , nobody has to follow me , just only be yourself !!

Salut & Cheers from a NON BELIEVER:

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


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

The law in my country once said that people could purchase and own other people whose skin was a different color. The law in my country once allowed paying women less than men for the same work. The law in my country currently allows for the commercial slaughter of preborn children. There have been plenty of unjust and immoral laws. If my country passed an immoral law allowing homosexual "marriages", that law would be protested until it was revoked, just as slavery was, just as abortion is in the process of. A Christian would have no other choice.

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

Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

The law in my country once said that people could purchase and own other people whose skin was a different color.

Yeah , I know the history !!

The color of skin is not important to be a human !!

The law in my country once allowed paying women less than men for the same work.

Woman & man must get the same rights !!

The law in my country currently allows for the commercial slaughter of preborn children.

In my country , even euthanasia is allowed , that's just sick too !!!!

There have been plenty of unjust and immoral laws. If my country passed an immoral law allowing homosexual "marriages", that law would be protested until it was revoked, just as slavery was, just as abortion is in the process of.

Paul , it's true some laws , I don't like them , like abortion , Euthanasia , even slavery , 'cause the victim can/may not decide for his own !! __ But as you said , gay-people may never get permission to get marry , than maybe I've got a bit strange question , why there are white & black people ??

Salut & Cheers from a NON BELIEVER:

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


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Laurent, you wrote: "So John , you call me stupid !!"

Read my message again. You'll see that I didn't call you "stupid." I said that an invalid "law" of your country reflects "decadent stupidity." I didn't call you "stupid," but only "ignorant" (meaning lacking in knowledge that you sorely need to have) and unwilling to learn.

You wrote: "Sodomy , I know what it means , but I ment sex & sodomy ????"

I have no idea what you are talking about. I used the word "sodomy" to refer to same-sex copulation. (You'll find that meaning in the dictionary, if you can take a minute -- away from your mind-numbing "metal" music and your dozens of worthless TV shows -- to check.)

You defined "fornication" as "a married couple , one of them have sex with someone else as his/her own partner or both have sex with a third person or even with more persons involved".
Sorry, but that is a definition of "adultery." I already gave you the correct definition of "fornication."

You wrote: "I love my country , just as you like yours' !!!!"

When did I tell you not to love your country? Never! I told you that your country is "sick" because it has an "illegitimate 'law'" that needs to be changed.

You wrote: "I have no hate to gay-people or even to you , but you hate everything who's not following your faith !!!!

When did I ever say that I "hate" everyone who doesn't follow my faith? Never. I don't hate you. I only hate the bad things you keep doing and saying. If I hated you, I wouldn't spend a lot of time trying to help you. If I hated you, I would ignore you.

God bless you.
John

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


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Sodomy , sex/satisfaction against nature's will !! If you rape someone , that's really against nature !!!!

How will you call that ??

About sodomy , I was mixing it up with blasphemy , I was a bit pissed off , so sorry !!

Adultery and/or fornication is about the same subject !!

if you can take a minute -- away from your mind-numbing "metal" music and your dozens of worthless TV shows

At home I don't listen music , only at the rehearsals & concerts , at home maybe strange enough for you , I like the sound of silence or yeah , sometimes I listen to folk-music !! __ The TV-stations I named are no crap/trash TV !!!! __ There is extreme option for your TV , throw your TV away !!!!

About the law , as a citizen of your country , you agree with the law , even you don't agree !! __ As long they don't change the law , indeed , you can't do anything about it !!!! __ But I suspect a bloody war , if they would change the law for married gay-couples !!

A bit off topic:

If It's Tuesday , This Must Be Belgium: Good Movie !!

Back Topic:

Salut & Cheers from a NON BELIEVER:

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


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

So the only sin in homesexuality is sex outside of marriage, correct?

In that case, why not let them marry, in order to encourage monogamous relationships that will curb the spread of promiscuity and disease (the most common argument against homsexuality)?

-- Anti-bush (Comrade_bleh@hotmail.com), October 20, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

P.S. I think comparing gay marriage to slavery is just a weee bit harsh. After all, gay marriage usualy doesn't involve whipping a black person until he can barely stand up straight and telling him to pick your cotton. Ususaly.

-- Anti-bush (Comrade_bleh@hotmail.com), October 20, 2003.

Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Are you sure? Sorry.

You know, a man may not even realize that he is not a homosexual. He may, through a life crisis, believe that he is. I have read about "psuedo-homosexuality" in both men and women (psuedo-lesbianism). For example, some woman, because of their strict up-bringing as virgins, experimented and engaged in lesbianism as a substitute until marriage. And, we've all heard stories of prison inmates and their power plays of dominance. These conditions were a "learned" behavior, which can revert to a normal condition of heterosexualism. But, if a person continues to practice psuedo-homosexuality, how long before he can no longer revert back to heterosexuality?

rod..


-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 20, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

The mistreatment of slaves has nothing to do with the immorality of slavery. Many plantation owners treated their slaves very well. It was still WRONG in its very essence, as is homosexuality.

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

Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Jmj

Conrad, you wrote: "So the only sin in homosexuality is sex outside of marriage, correct?"

That is not what was stated above. I wrote:
"Any mere 'attraction' to any human being is sin-free. But ACTING OUT on that attraction is sinful, regardless of whether it is homosexual or heterosexual, when the couple is not married. Since two people of the same sex cannot possibly ever be married, their 'acting out' is always gravely sinful.

Now, since I wrote the above, it doesn't make sense for you to have responded with these words:
"In that case, why not let them marry, in order to encourage monogamous relationships that will curb the spread of promiscuity and disease (the most common argument against homsexuality)?"

Notice my words in bold type above. They "cannot possibly ever be married." When I say "cannot," I am not talking about secular legality -- but all the other "realities" and aspects of marriage as a God-given institution (sacramentality, psychology, physicality/union, fruitfulness, etc.). It just isn't possible for people of the same sex to be "married."

By the way, experience has already proved that so-called monogamy within "married homosexuality" is a non-starter. Almost all of these people (so deeply disordered as their minds are, so dark as their souls are) are incapable of an extended commitment to another person.

Therefore, there are only two choices:
(1) complete and permanent continence or
(2) reparative therapy, resulting in corrected sexual attraction (to the opposite sex). [If you have never heard of this, don't scoff, because it is proceeding, on a daily greater scale, right now.]

God bless you.
John

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


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Where in the bible does it say that homosexuals can't get married?

-- Anti-bush (Comrade_bleh@hotmail.com), October 21, 2003.

Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Conrad, you wrote: "Where in the bible does it say that homosexuals can't get married?"

I have to answer your question with two questions:

(1) Where, in the Bible, does it say that a religious truth must be explicitly stated in the Bible? [Hint: Nowhere.]

(2) The Bible eloquently, though implicitly, answers your question ...
by (a) showing not even one approved case of a homosexual "marriage,"
by (b) showing many cases of highly praised real marriages [i.e., formal heterosexual unions], and
by (c) condemning all homosexual acts, in both the Old and New Testaments, as abominable sins.

God bless you.
John

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


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

(Sorry. That was one question and one declarative statement. I was going to ask a second question, but greatly revised my words.)

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

Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Of course it doesn't show homosexual marriages. There were no open homosexuals back then. It was a crime punishable by death in most ancient societies (including the Romans, who even had a written law about it). Ancient people feared and persecuted what they didn't understand.

Think about this for a second: If there were no homosexuals, who would be our interior decorators? Hairdressers? Fashion designers? Who would go shopping with our wives and girlfriends to find the perfect curtain color? I'm sure as hell not doing it! Maybe you're into decorating, I don't know...

-- Anti-bush (Comrade_bleh@hotmail.com), October 22, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

bush,

Of course it doesn't show homosexual marriages. There were no open homosexuals back then. It was a crime punishable by death in most ancient societies (including the Romans, who even had a written law about it).

thats just stupid. the acient societies were at least partly PAGAN nations, and we note that there were many pagan nations that accepted sodomy as a practice (ie soddom and gamora, where the practice gets its name).

Ancient people feared and persecuted what they didn't understand.

as we've already seen, they didnt persecute much in the pagan nations, and it led to their destruction. further, i doubt that they understood the practice of sodomy any less than we understand it today. what changed is not the understanding, its the moral values that have declined.

AND who ever said that understanding something led to its moral acceptance. i understand that shooting someone in the head would kill them, i can even tell you the physical, bio, and chemical processes that lead to that death. does that make it acceptable for me to go out and shoot people in the head? your logic seems to say so. Think about this for a second: If there were no homosexuals, who would be our interior decorators? Hairdressers? Fashion designers? Who would go shopping with our wives and girlfriends to find the perfect curtain color? I'm sure as hell not doing it! Maybe you're into decorating, I don't know...

this, child, is perhaps one of the most bigotted thing ive heard in a long time on this forum. you are so blatantly biased that its disgusting. second, there is NO correlation between a persons sexuality and their hobbys (interior decorating included). unrealizing bigots like you have created that fantasy. How dare you insult us by calling us anti gay, and then slandering those people as you do?

-- paul h (dontSendMeMail@notAnAddress.com), October 22, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Conrad, I actually tried to reason with you, man-to-man. I expected better than you gave in return. Your reply was totally ridiculous, just as Paul H explained. Come back to the forum when you gain more knowledge and maturity, please. But leave now.

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), October 23, 2003.

Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Jeez, Paul! I was kidding! Man, you guys need to lighten up. I don't think all gays are like that. That's a stereotype, and yes, if used seriously, can be quite offensive. That doesn't mean you can't JOKE about it! Take a chill pill, buddy. :P

My point about ancient societies was that most of them did not understand what homosexuality was, and therefore feared it as the work of the devil, evil spirits, ect. The Romans publicly executed anyone suspected of homosexual acts (and yet they all took baths together...). Yes, sodomy was named after Sodom, but nobody has ever been certain if the sin of Sodom and Gamorrah was homosexuality. The fact is that in MOST ancient societies, homosexuality was persecuted. Pretty much all wierd behavior would get you a stoning. That was the ancient world. This is the 3rd millenium. Time to move past these prejudices. If we let homosexuals get married, then the aspect that makes it immoral--having sex outside of marriage--will be removed.

-- Anti-bush (Comrade_bleh@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

"My point about ancient societies was that most of them did not understand what homosexuality was, and therefore feared it as the work of the devil, evil spirits, ect."

A: That's true - along with various forms of mental illness, and many forms of physical illness as well. But regardless of their lack of understanding concerning root causes, they were still able to identify an abnormal condition as abnormal.

"Yes, sodomy was named after Sodom, but nobody has ever been certain if the sin of Sodom and Gamorrah was homosexuality."

A: On the contrary, The Church is completely certain that homosexuality was the sin involved, and since the Church is the only authorized interpreter of the Bible, that pretty much settles the issue. In any case, the passage cannot be reasonably interpreted any other way. To claim that God destroyed the city over a "lack of hospitality" is ludicrous.

"Time to move past these prejudices. If we let homosexuals get married, then the aspect that makes it immoral--having sex outside of marriage--will be removed."

A: Predjudice is certainly something to be rooted out. However, the constant infallible teaching of the Church that homosexual acts are morally abhorent is not a predjudice. It is a fact, which cannot be changed. We cannot "let" homosexuals marry, just as we cannot "let" men get pregnant. It isn't a matter of permission. It is a matter of definition. A man simply doesn't meet the definition of mother. And two men or two women just don't meet the definition of marriage. If we give men permission to get pregnant, they still won't be pregnant; and if we give homosexuals permission to marry, they still won't be married. It isn't possible. Of course the state can do whatever it wants from a legal perspective. It already allows the murder of preborn children - which doesn't change the moral status of such murders in the slightest. And likewise, "letting" homosexuals go through the motions of "marrying" wouldn't change the moral nature of homosexual acts whatsoever.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), October 25, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Wait..so if tommorow the Catholic Church decided that homosexuality was NOT a sin and that they could marry...then every reason for them not to get married that the Church origionaly used would be erased?

Tell me, if the Church said that being an albino was immoral, would that make it immoral?

-- Anti-bush (Comrade_bleh@hotmail.com), October 27, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

no, comrade, the church is not the determinant of morality.

morality is set in stone, declared by God. it is the church who interprets that morality. should the church all of a sudden fall from grace and preach that homosexual acts are not an abomination then it would do nothing to change the nature of the act, which is sinful. the only thing it would do is make sinners feel even more vindicated in their realm of worldly pleasure.

-- paul h (dontSendMeMail@notAnAddress.com), October 27, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

"Wait..so if tommorow the Catholic Church decided that homosexuality was NOT a sin ..."

This is a meaningless phrase. The Church never "decided" that homosexuality is sinful. Therefore it could never "decide" the opposite. God REVEALED the objective truth to the Church, including the fact that homosexual activity is inherently disordered and always immoral, and REQUIRED the Church to profess the fullness of revealed truth. The Church has absolutely no choice in this matter. It is OBLIGATED to profess the objective truth as revealed by God, until the end of time.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), October 27, 2003.


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

At what point did god reveal this? Let's look at this logicaly: What makes it immoral? I know you THINK god said it and all, but WHY? What are the ACTUAL, LOGICAL REASONS behind it?

-- Anti-bush (Comrade_bleh@hotmail.com), October 28, 2003.

Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

At what point did god reveal this? Let's look at this logicaly: What makes it immoral? I know you THINK god said it and all, but WHY? What are the ACTUAL, LOGICAL REASONS behind it?

These questions have already been answered. Pay attention. We shouldn't have to repeat ourselves, especially for an ex-Catholic who hates the Church, bashes the pope, posts obscenities on the Internet, and wants to act as an apologist for the likes of "Bishop-elect Vicky Gene Robinson."

Re-read the thread, read the Catechism, and then repent.

JFG

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


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

The answers you guys gave to my questions were that gays are immoral because God said they are immoral. I'd like to know where in the bible he said this. You said that gays can't get married because there weren't any gay marriages in the bible. There also weren't any albino marriages in the bible, but the Church seems to condone those. And yes, I do stand by the gay Bishop. The man devoted his life to god, and he considers himself married to his parter. Let him be. He never hurt you. He's been faithfull to his parter and lived his life as a good personb, which is more than can be said for most people.

-- Anti-bush (Comrade_bleh@hotmail.com), November 01, 2003.

Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Conrad writes: "The answers you guys gave to my questions were that gays are immoral because God said they are immoral."

We said much more than that. You apparently lack the intellectual skills to process what you were told. You are morally corrupt and cerebrally bankrupt, so it appears. As I said last time, "Re-read the thread, read the Catechism [at least on homosexuality], and repent." Stop harassing us, renegade.

"I'd like to know where in the bible he said this."

Unless you are a total moron, you know exactly where Same-Sex perversions are condemned in the Bible. However, corrupt heretics who try to justify sodomy (your pal Vicky and others) have gotten so sick in the mind and soul that they reject the biblical statements as no longer binding. Therefore, you won't find me wasting time digging them up for you again. You can find this with the Catechism's search engine too.

"I do stand by the gay Bishop."

I can assure you that this guy is not "gay" (happy and carefree). Nor is he a "bishop," since Episcopalians lack apostolicity. They have no valid sacrament of Orders. They have no true Christian priests and no true Christian bishops. Vicky Gene is just Mr. Robinson, in reality.

"The man devoted his life to god, and he considers himself married to his parter."

You can't even capitalize "God"? Anyway, a guy who commits perversions with another guy has not "devoted his life to" God, but to sin. I couldn't care less what "he considers himself." I care what God considers him -- a sodomite.

"Let him be. He never hurt you."

The fact that he is in the news and is getting the approval of some people "hurt[s]" me, you, and all mankind. People are being misled into thinking that sodomy may just be OK after all. Heck, as I was writing the last sentence, the illegitimate ceremony (live) was shown briefly on TV. Sickening!

"He's been faithfull to his parter and lived his life as a good personb ..."

Utter nonsense, as I'm sure you've gathered by now. Being "faithful" to a fellow Christian includes not doing anything that would lead him into mortal sin (such as sodomy).

God bless you.
John

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


Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

And it all comes back to: Why is sodomy a sin? Because your parents told you it was. They beleived it because their parents told them, and so on. But why? Can you actualy come up with a logical answer? Perhaos even a bible passage that says it?

-- Anti-bush (Comrade_bleh@hotmail.com), November 15, 2003.

Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Re-read the entire thread, Dip! You'll find your questions answered. (It you re-read it and come away thinking you weren't answered, then just give up, because it will mean that your brain ain't sharp enough to understand basic material.)

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

Response to Gay activist groups on a catholic campus (need help)

Apparently, Conrad, you were too lazy to do what you were told to do -- go back and re-read the entire thread, wherein you would find the answers to your questions -- "in spades." Hint: At least read the quotations from the Catechism -- especially #2357.

This has nothing to do with what anyone's "parents told" him -- unless you want to use the word "parent" to include God the FATHER, who is the source of the truths we are teaching you.

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), November 16, 2003.


Saw this on a Catholic news site:

U.S. National

Gary Chalmers, left, and Rich Linnell, both of Northbridge, Mass., in front of their home. The couple is one of seven plaintiffs in a closely watched lawsuit that claims same-sex couples have the right to wed under the state constitution.

BREAKING NEWS: Massachusetts high court OKs gay marriage November 18, 2003

SSOCIATED PRESS BOSTON, Nov. 18 — Massachusetts’ Supreme Judicial Court on Tuesday opened the door for marriage licenses to be issued to same-sex couples, ruling that the state may not deny them licenses.

Couples sued state to provide marriage licenses

THE CASE had become the focus of international attention. Advocates on both sides had predicted the court could make Massachusetts the first state in the nation to legalize gay marriage.

The lawsuit was filed by seven gay couples who sued the state Department of Public Health in 2001 after their requests for marriage licenses were denied. A Superior Court judge dismissed their suit in May 2002, ruling that state law does not convey the right of marriage to gay couples, and the couples appealed.

The high court heard arguments in March, and hundreds of organizations and individuals across the country filed briefs on both sides of the argument.

The court had three options: instructing the state to give marriage licenses to the seven couples; upholding the state’s authority to deny same-sex couples the right to wed; or referring the matter to the Legislature. The Legislature already considering various competing proposals to outlaw or to legalize gay marriages or civil unions.

Courts in Hawaii, Alaska and Vermont have previously ruled that banning gay marriage was unconstitutional, but no American court has ordered the issuance of a marriage license to gay partners, effectively legalizing gay marriage.

Since 2000, Vermont has recognized civil unions that give gay domestic partnerships many of the benefits of marriage.

Under the Supreme Judicial Court’s internal guidelines, a decision would have been due in early July. But the court waived that rule, leading to a monthslong wait for a verdict. Let the games begin!

Karl

-- Karl (Parkerkajwen@hotmail.com), November 18, 2003.


Maybe the anti-bush should define what he means by the word "sin" - or "harmful" for that matter and then we'll demonstrate why sodomy is a sin and is harmful.

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

You sau Sodomy is a sin because God said it was, yet you offer no biblical text to support that claim.

What kind of God would discriminate against people because of their sexual orientation? Certainly not the God I beleive in. Isn't God supposed to be above petty prejudices like that?

-- Anti-bush (Comrade_bleh@hotmail.com), November 20, 2003.


While there are several biblical passages clearly condemning homosexual acts, such passages are not necessary to demonstrate God's Word on the subject. This a Catholic site, not a fundamentalist Protestant site. While Bible passages are always useful in illustrating a point, the Bible is not the source of Christian truth. God is the provider of Christian truth, and His Church is the direct recipient of that truth. God told the Church "he who hears you hears Me"; "whatsoever you bind on earth is bound in heaven". The Bible always directs the faithful to the Church for doctrinal truth. The Bible identifies the Church as "the pillar and foundation of truth". The Church teaches, and has always taught, that homosexual acts are gravely disordered and seriously sinful. That's why the Bible says they are - because the Church held that truth from the beginning, and the Bible always reflects the inspired teaching of the Church.

God does not "discriminate" against people because of psychosocial disorders, and neither does the Church. Many people with a predisposition to homosexual behavior are fully functioning members of God's Church, just like many people with predispositions to promiscuity, alcohol, drug abuse, violence, and many other types of aberrant behavior. God identifies behaviors which are incompatible with holiness. He does not judge people on the fact that such behaviors are attractive to them. He judges them on whether they choose to do whatever is attractive to them, or to do what God requires of them. The responsibility to do good and to avoid evil is not a "petty predjudice". It is the key to personal happiness, fulfillment, spiritual health, and eventual salvation. Which is precisely why God has provided us with that responsibility.

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


Oh I see, because "your God" is above "petty differences" the real God is above differences too? Or do you believe that your preferences automatically change things in the universe?

Hmmmm. Let's see, "God" is knowable by human reason as all powerful, all good, and all knowing. He is also knowable as a Spirit (no parts) who is personal (thus can create personal souls such as our own).

Now being all good God created the universe as a knowable thing - intelligible, full of laws and orderly processes we can discover (hence the theological presuppositions behind "science" itself). Some of the laws our minds discover have to do with human health and limits... including sexual limitations.

Now human reason leads us to conclude after study and observation and historical precedent in various cultures and times, that homosexual activity leads to physical disease, psychological compulsions, obsessions, depression, substance and drug abuse, violent behavior and narcissium... in all cultures, in all times, despite favorable culture mores or not. And human reason concludes from the empirical evidence before us that the gay lifestyle leads to an early death (as evidenced in the obituaries).

Thus we conclude with our reason, that the actions which make up the gay lifestyle are dangerous, and hence, immoral.

We also conclude that since God - which we know from reason created an orderly universe with natural laws and limitations, boundaries both for the human body and mind - could not approve of gay activities as they only harm those involved. Now, if your "god" is OK with people harming themselves physically, emotionally, psychologically, and dying young.... how good and wise, and just could this god be?

-- Joe (Joestong@yahoo.com), November 21, 2003.


In Genesis 1:27 (NAB), we read the creation story:

"God created man in his image, in the divine image he created him; male and female he created them."

and, in Leviticus

"You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; such a thing is an abomination. You shall not have carnal relations with an animal, defiling yourself with it; nor shall a woman set herself in front of an animal to mate with it; such things are abhorrent." Leviticus 18:22&23 (NAB)

"If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives." Leviticus 20:13 (NAB)

Here is what St. Paul says about this:

"Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor boy prostitutes nor sodomites nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God." 1 Corinthians 6:9&10 (NAB)

He did not say this in one isolated place where we might wonder if "sodomite" really has the implication that we attach to the language today. Here what he says in his letter to Timothy:

"We know that the law is good, provided that one uses it as law, with the understanding that law is meant not for a righteous person but for the lawless and unruly, the godless and sinful, the unholy and profane, those who kill their fathers or mothers, murderers, the unchaste, sodomites, kidnapers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is opposed to sound teaching." 1 Timothy 1:8-10 (NAB)

Take it or leave it.

Karl

-- Karl (Parkerkajwen@hotmail.com), November 21, 2003.


Just nailing down the obvious for anti-bush who needs us to connect the dots for him....

Homosexual sex is not immoral because God arbitrarily decides (flips a coin) that it's sinful. It's sinful given the very fabric of nature which God created as intelligible (knowable - thus "science-able") and thus, full of knowable laws.

The homosexuals seem to be under the impression that their individual whim - their will power - can change natural limits; that because they want something not only is this thing instantly good for them, but the earth and planets, the stars and forces of nature shift just to make it so...and thus all terrible side-effects to the contrary must be accounted for by other malevolent forces and wills such as their homophobic neighbors.

Yet this concept of society and physical world is not rational, scientific, enlightened, or "liberal" in the classic sense of the term. It's magical. Childish. It posits a chaotic universe full of amorphic forces which have no rhyme or reason, can't be known, can't be respected... for them the body is a mystery: so use it for pleasure and then be stunned with shock when the pleasure drops off and weird diseases develop...

Look how they howled about AIDS not being a homosexual problem...when all the statistics in the US show that the majority of victims are homosexual males. The CDC repeatedly warns that the chief form of infection is oral/anal sex.

The gays are mystified by how this could be since oral/anal sex is SO pleasurable! Orgies are great fun...so how could they be harmful or "bad"? How could something that FEELS SO GOOD be "bad" or immoral (i.e. irrational, harmful, deadly)?

They conclude that their physical and mental health are harmed not by their actions or attractions but by society's disapproval! As if complete strangers who beg to differ with your moral actions somehow could make those innocent and harmless actions somehow toxic by hidden telekenesis or magical hexes!

Look at those who are anorexic: they typically either know it's a health problem caused by some genetic/psychological problem, or they think they're fat and keep starving themselves to death.

Their problem is a combination of physical/mental disconnect from the very serious and real and unavoidable laws of biology... becoming socially loved and glorified won't solve their health problem! Having "skeleton pride" parades and pushing each other to fast more and more won't make them healthier - even if subjectively they "feel real good about it".

This is because we live in a universe of knowable forces and consequences... choosing not to use your reason and will power to reject objective harm to oneself and others is either insane or immoral - so that's the real option homosexuals have: it's either a mental disorder, or immoral. Either way, the gay lifestyle will kill you all by itself - without society or the Church or your grandmother having anything to do with it.

God would not be a loving Father if he let people so fool themselves and so hurt themselves by believing in such a irrational universe without real consequences: he warned us to avoid sinful actions because they will kill us! He directed us to do certain things...because they lead to life (physical and social, spiritual and emotional)!

Nothing is arbitrary with the God known by reason and revelation. But everything is an arbitrary imposition in the world-view of the immature gay subculture.

If you were a true friend of a homosexual you would not let him "drive drunk" or stoned, or engage in sodomy - not because you are against him "feeling good" but because those activities are deadly and friends don't let friends kill themselves slowly or quickly.

-- Joe (joestong@yahoo.com), November 21, 2003.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ