I was recently in a friendly--for the most part--discussion about gay marriage.
Now, I really have no valid opinion on the subject, but I will say that I don't think galaxies are going to explode, if gays and lesbians are given the right to say "I do". After all, in the words of the great country music legend/drag queen icon Dolly Parton, "They should have to suffer, right along with the rest of us."And besides, I really don't think it's my place to judge them. What they do is between them and the God to whom they so cavalierly flip the finger.
It's their choice, it's their consequences. At least, that's how I see it.
However, because I made the statement that I didn't really agree with the homosexual "lifestyle", I was called a "hater".
Several times. Often vehemently.
Now, why am I a hater?
All I did, was to express an opinion; I don't "hate" gay people. My sister is a lesbian, and a very good friend is bi-sexual. The father of another good friend came out several years ago, and he and his "partner" are friends of ours, as well.
I simply disagree with how they live their lives. Is that so shameful and intolerant, really?
I mean, I disagree with how drug addicts and theives live their lives too, but am I considered a hater for it? I don't think so....And really, don't gays pretty much disagree with how I live my life, too, having that yucky natural, vaginal sex with someone of the opposite gender, and all.....ICK!
In fact, over the years, I've been derisively called a "breeder" and a "straight"; like there's something weird, or perverse about it. Why are they not considered haters, for that? For having that intolerant opinion about me, and what I do in my bedroom? For "hating on" my lifestyle?Why do we allow political correctness to only go one way? If you understand what I mean, that is? Why aren't both sides held to the same standard of decorum?
And you know, while I'm at it, speaking of hate, do atheists ever attack any other religions besides Christianity? They can say the most ignorant, vile, hateful, despicable things about Jesus Christ and the faith He founded, but they never seem to tag other faiths as severely, if at all.
Why is that?
Maybe it's because we Christians are an easy target; we might defend our faith in a debate, but other than that, we won't fight back very hard. They know nothing will really happen to them, if they nastily belittle our beliefs. I mean, it's not like we're going to issue a fatwa against them or anything, right?
And, they say these mean, hateful things because--as we all know--we're the haters. Not them.
Funny how hypocrisy works, isn't it?
For years beyond counting, the Catholic Chruch has always placed children for adoption and foster children with a man and a woman as the mother and the father. Catholic Charities will not place children with homosexuals or with unwed couple.
For the good of these children, please tell the homosexuals to leave us alone and not sue us.
It's no BS that the medical scientific community have proven children are far better off with a mother and a father.
Psychiatrist Rick Fitzgibbons explains why same-sex adoption is misguided, saying that advocates of the practice "are ignoring the rights of children and important social and psychological research." He survey an impressive range of studies, providing evidence that the placement of adoptive children with homosexual couples is contrary to the children's best interest.
Additional sources for this storySome links will take you to other sites, in a new window.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And while I was doing research, I found this...
Source URL: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/mar/06032203.html
By John-Henry Westen
SAN FRANCISCO, March 22, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) - In one of the most startling attacks on the Catholic Church coming from a governmental body in the United States in half a century, the governing body of the city of San Francisco - the Board of Supervisors - voted unanimously Tuesday to approve a non-binding resolution blasting the Catholic Church for its opposition to homosexual adoption.
While many city's residents agree with the Church's stand against homosexual adoption, the resolution stated "It is an insult to all San Franciscans when a foreign country, like the Vatican, meddles with and attempts to negatively influence this great city's existing and established customs and traditions, such as the right of same-sex couples to adopt and care for children in need."
The city supervisors levelled an ad hominem attack on former San Francisco Archbishop William Levada, who has been appointed to head the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), one of the most senior posts in the Church. " Cardinal Levada is a decidedly unqualified representative of his former home city, and of the people of San Francisco and the values they hold dear,'' the resolution stated.
The supervisors also demonstrated their childishness as they attempted another dig at the Cardinal by indicating in the resolution that the CDF was once known as the Office of the Inquisition. "That the Board of Supervisors urges Cardinal William Levada, in his capacity as head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith at the Vatican (formerly known as Holy Office of the Inquisition), to withdraw his discriminatory and defamatory directive that Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of San Francisco stop placing children in need of adoption with homosexual households," reads the resolution.
The resolution attacked the teaching of the Catholic Church that homosexual adoption does "violence" to children since they would be placed in an environment that is not conducive to their full human development. The resolution blasted the teaching as "hateful and discriminatory rhetoric (that) is both insulting and callous, and shows a level of insensitivity and ignorance which has seldom been encountered by this Board of Supervisors.''
Demonstrating their own profound ignorance, at least in terms of biological realities, the supervisors contend, "Same-sex couples are just as qualified to be parents as are heterosexual couples."
Concluding, the board urged current San Francisco "Archbishop Neiderauer and the Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of San Francisco to defy all discriminatory directives of Cardinal Levada."
See related LifeSiteNews.com story on recent, major French government study which concludes that raising of children by same-sex couples should not be allowed:Reasoning Behind France's Rejection of Same Sex Marriage Published in Englishhttp://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/mar/06032004.html
Lula, how about referencing an article and commenting on it and maybe quote a section … but please leave the article elsewhere?
Lula, this is from San Francisco ... the gay capitol of the USA (maybe the world) ... what do you expect, hahaha. But I don't see anything wrong in the articles title, do you?
Straw man; Lula already said they're better off with a mother and a father, when possible. I don't want to have to get into how the Great Society has destroyed urban America and the black family unit.
Boobztwo, you probably claim to be very tolerant and accepting of others, but your liberal atheism is showing. Most of what I see in your posts is arrogance, dismissiveness , and belittlement of other ideals. You're free to argue, just stop being such an ass, if you can.
Lula and I are discussing. We're not angry, we're not upset and we're not being jerks. You are. Please knock it off.
But I do have to agree with you on one thing: it's San Fran; what do you expect? Their city council also recently passed "legislation" requiring businesses to pay a $10/hr min. wage. can they even do that? I thought min. wage increases came from Congress. At any rate, that'll be great for jobs and business growth, won't it? You won't see a McDonald's for 10 miles outside the city. Which is probably what they want, anyway; San Fran hates McDonald's.
Rightwinger, this may seem strange to you, but when you quote someone by name, they are probably going to have something to say about it (I normally do). If you actually want to debate ‘Science or God, you just let me know but drop the tough guy act, it’s not very conciliatory. And besides, Lula is perfectly capable in her own defense as you will learn with time. If you just want to pat backs, you had better be Catholic because if you aren’t ... you are just waiting for the shoe to fall but don’t know it yet … and it will I assure you.
BT posts:
Lula posts:
This is the point of Rightwinger's article and of the examples I've given. When it comes to adoption or placing foster children in homes, we have told the homosexuals to leave us alone, but by the San Francisco article, they call us hateful, discriminatory and ignorant for it.
The sexual progressive forces have turned "discriminate" into a negative word, when it is not. There are two kinds of discrimination, just and unjust. Unjust discrimination is treating people differently becasue of irrational prejudices and that certainly is wrong. Just discrimination means choosing between competing rights based on a legitimate priority, or for some good reason---like to protect the health, safety and welfare of society or our children in particular. At those times, we should and must discriminate.
It's neither hateful, unjust discrimination nor ignorant becasue science that has been peer reviewed has clearly shown across the board, children do much better with a mother and a father. And so the Church when opposing homosexual adoption is quite in line with science.
So why do you insist we Christians leave the "gay" community alone but refuse to tell the homosexuals the same for us?
BT,
The debate over "Science or God" is a different blog.
Lula, I don’t care to discuss homosexuality with you or any Christian who abjectly condemns them to a person … unheard and unseen. These arguments of yours are a disgrace to logic and common sense. I am willing to bet that you know little more than what you have seen on TV and in your Catholic hate mail. I don't care what the RCC does or doesn't do or why anymore ... they are a nonentity to me ... meaningless. The debate over "Science or God" has long since been decided … you just like to list your arguments for practice I suppose. Heaven forbid but I thought we were discussing hate not gays. “Why am I a Hater?” not “Why we hate and condemn fags” … is all. Enjoy yourself if this bigotry is appealing to you.
Humm ... no 'science or god' then huh?
PS: the other article is “Science and God (One and the same?)” by the way.
Quote feature is not working.
posts:
Lula, I don’t care to discuss homosexuality with you or any Christian who abjectly condemns them to a person … unheard and unseen.
...........................
Fine. Don't then.
But here's the distinction. I have not ever condemned the person who calls him/herself "gay", but rather their sexual behavior, homosexuality, which is intrinsically disordered and against the natural law since the body parts don't fit.
.................
Heaven forbid but I thought we were discussing hate not gays. “Why am I a Hater?” not “Why we hate and condemn fags” … is all.
Your statement makes me wonder if you read Rightwinger's article. We are discussing both as well as a few others thrown in. Those people who criticize homosexuality are called "haters".
Do you think calling people "fags" is a loving term? I don't but that's me.
Then why do you advocate against them having certain rights and privileges that have absolutely nothing to do with sexual behavior? As if the sexual behavior of people you don't even know is any of your business anyhow.
As far as the individual goes, and what is done in privacy, I have a "live and let live" attitude. But we are in a full blown sexual and cultural revolution and that's where I am focused. Since our founding, one side subscribes to the fact that Almighty God is the source of our rights (not the State) and are based on a moral code and natural law. The other side subscribes to the libertine, "anything goes" atheistic philosophy which shows increasing intolerance for what still remains Judeo/Christian and the natural order among these are the institutions of marriage and the family.
As far as i know everything the homosexual movement wants changed whether in municipal, state or federal laws, policies, education has to do with imposing full societal affirmation of homosexuality as normal, acceptable, respectable and even good.
The atheistic philosophy is not one of "anything goes". It is one that uses real life evidence to explain why certain choices are better than others that have in many cases severe consequences. Telling someone not to do something because they will burn in hell and then promising them the option of a confessional to avoid such hell after a choice is already made sounds like a rather ineffective way to solve societal problems.
They simply want the same legal rights and protections that others are afforded.
Unfortunately for people like you who don't understand the constitution the first amendment states:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"
So you may keep your Judeo/Christian traditions in your church but when the issue makes it to Supreme court the argument will not be made on religious grounds because that will not hold constitutional muster..
Here is a timely news article that goes to the heart of this discussion.
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/santorum-rips-obama-admin-for-censoring-abstinence-as-artifact-of-a-bygone?utm_source=LifeSiteNews.com+Daily+Newsletter&utm_campaign=e53fcacf86-LifeSite
Last 2 paragraphs
He also took a moment to criticize those who were poised to label his position or statements “hateful” because he defended marriage, something he said doesn’t mesh with the values America promotes.
“Everybody’s trying to impose their values. ... Come into the public square make your case as to why same-sex marriage should be the law of the land. I have no prob with that at all. Make the argument,” he said. “But accept the fact that other people who disagree with you don’t hate people who disagree with them, they just happen to believe that marriage is a good that should be preserved.”
Did you not see that there is a word I used to describe the '"anything goes" atheistic philosophy'?
My point stands.
Interesting Smoothseas. I hadn't thought of it until you framed it this way. However, oh yes, penance for one's sin (Confession) is indeed Christ's way of solving societal problems. He knew He wasn't going to be physically here on earth with us and so in His Infinite Mercy and Love, Our LOrd Jesus Christ came, redeemed us, set up His Church and gave her priests His own authority to forgive sins.
On the night of His Resurrection, Our Lord appeared to His Apostles in the Upper Room. "He breathed on them and he said to them: Receive ye the Holy Spirit. Whose sins ye shall forgive, they are forgiven them; whose sins ye shall retain, they are retained." St.John 20:22-23. There's plenty more too.
We are talking about the sexual act of homosexuality. Any sexual act outside the lawful marriage covenant is a sin, an offense against God's law. Sins cause societal problems.
For the most part, when people commit sins against the virtue of chastity, they know from their conscience and in their heart, they done wrong. For those who acknowledge this and want to obtain forgiveness, forgiveness is offered and given. The healing begins and problems go away. One person at a time.
Societal problems are solved one person at a time.
Lula, what do you suggest the gay community do to appease your frail marriage vows / system? Most don’t use the Church today anyway … so you have all those marriages to contend with too. Am I myself not “wed” because I didn’t use the Church? You know if this is about marriage, you might be better served going after the divorce system which makes it so easy to split the marriages asunder. Your attack should be waged against the legal system, not the people trying to use it to gain some support through it. The world is changing and just because you choose to live your life with a two thousand year old philosophy … well you will just be left further and further behind until …? If you despise gays so much, then you will fail to recognize their unions anyway, so nothing will change for you or your God … but legal unions would provide comfort and support to one of the groups trying to destroy the RCC hahaha. When you can attack them for something more than their private personal habits (like some actual crime), maybe I will listen … but right now you are just practicing open Biblical bigotry, and that I won’t be party to. As far as I know, these people just want some civil relief, humm … the parts don’t fit properly you say, hehehe, you do live a sheltered life for sure. But then again, the Bible is replete with Intolerance, Bigotry, and Obsession, isn't it?
No the issue is the civil marriage contract. It has absolutely nothing to do with sex and absolutely nothing to do with religion. The issue does not concern religious vows it concerns the rights and protections that couple are allowed by the government.
If you think the issue is sex take it elsewhere because other peoples sex life is none of your business.
What I meant by that is Rightwinger's article and the discussion is mainly about homosexuality.
Knock, knock...there is a sexual revolution going on that's direct aim is changing people's view of homosexuality. The Homosexual movement activists are steadily working to impose changes in law, policies, education as well as the institution of marriage so that homosexuality is societaly accepted as normal, respectable, even good.
Homosexual "marriage" is a public manifestation of homosexuality.
Homosexuals already have the same legal rights and protections that others are afforded.
What they want is special rights based on their so called "sexual orientation" which is homosexuality.
Knock knock....there have been revolutions going on for centuries to change peoples bigoted views.....Remember slavery and the civil War? Remember the Civil rights movement? How about the women's suffrage and women's rights movements?
Over Santorum's cold body.
Yea, you got me there, hahaha. But he still has to get elected and I do not think his chances are all that good. I know I won't be voting for him anyway.
RW - Late to the party I see. I am like you in many ways. My brother is gay, and I have had friends "come out" to me before doing so with their parents (asking advice - I always tell them to trust their parents to love them). So it really is a non-issue with me.
But I also do not do generalizations. Some of the Gay crowd are very hate-filled. Some are the most respectful and nicest you would ever meet! I guess you could say they are just like everyone else in that respect. They are individuals and each has their own approach to life.
So do not look on the haters as representative of the group over all. My brother is a "who cares!" type. But then he was like that even before he came out. It is not he that sends us the Christmas cards each year (he never was very responsible), it is his spouse.
I doubt there are many gays on this thread. But as you have noted, the responses are all over the board. It does not take being something to be bitter or happy. It only takes your outlook on life. Let the haters spew their venom. You always have the satisfaction of knowing they are miserable.
EXACTLY! Yes. Nicely put.
What about them? The Civil War freed the slaves, the Civil Rights Act passed; women have the vote, and work outside the home all the time. Welcome to 1980.
To all those on here who seem to credit gays with enlightened, tolerant, all-accepting world views, while those of us who question their "lifestyle choice" are ignorant, mouth-breathing cave dwellers, I found this:
http://rainbowallianceopenfaith.homestead.com/GayAgendaSwiftText.html
Sweet, huh?
Thanks, Doc; well put. this thread kind of got out of hand a few days ago. LOL
Nice to see you, again, Doc. Maybe I'll hang around for a while, this time.
Why don't you ask yourself? The correlation between those movements and the current topic should be obvious....for those willing to think for themselves.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
