ok...so i was reading this book a couple of weeks back and came across this paragraph about gays/homosexuals..about two paragraphs..id just like to get peoples views on it...the paragraph goes something like this...this is a direct quote; "The Church's teachings on lifestyle stand consistent with her teachings on morality in general. it all comes under the basic distinction between what you fell and what you do about your feelings. You might want something, but that doesn't gve you the right to stealit; you might feel more comfortable if someone elsewere dead, but you can't expect permission to kill him. The same distinction applies to sexual activities, no matter whom (or what) you're attracted to; there's no possible licence for unchastityin the deposit of revelation. Since the church exists to preserve and teach that revelation, sha can never condone any lifestyles that defines itself by sexual activity that the deposit classifies as illicit. But just calls illicit, not the inclination to do it. (Homosexuality, for instance, is defined by the church as not normal - and, just statistically, it isn't - but not wrong; that is, it can't be called wrong if you understand the term to mean a set of involuntary feelings that can result from any number of causes, none of which is fully understood. Bu the gay lifestyle, like any other, is a matter of choice, and nobody has to live that way. It can be hard to see that, especially since people these days meant exactly the smae thing, but un the church's viewthere's a big difference: the same distinction between the inclination to act and the action itself. Here, too, the church's prohibition isn't about the sexuality - which a person doesn't choose - but about the culture that person does choose.) Sorry its kind of long, but thats it....just want to see what you guys think. thanks
I think that church makes one big mistake on the 'being gay is oke, but acting like it is a sin' when comparing it with 'wanting to steal is oke, but actually stealing stuff is a sin: When stealing things you're doing harm to someone else and it's morally wrong. If you are gay you are not doing anyone any harm. I think that'd it be actually morally wrong to act straight if you're gay, since you're pretending to love someone when you're not and you're living a lie.
Well, I tried that, doesn't work. All that does is cause more grief and pain, and a stronger lack of understanding due to trying NOT to be yourself. I grew up VERY Traditional Catholic, so for me being and coming out gay is polar opposite to what I have been taught. But I also know deep inside that I am truly gay, it is not something I can just turn off because how others perceive it. I also cannot live a lie, trying to be straight, was terribly depressing and not to mention the loathing and self hatred that comes with living such a lie causes ramifications within relationships. Right now a beautiful woman and two young boys ages 6 and 10 cannot understand why the man in their life had to go away. It is causing incredible pain and suffering because I believed that if I was married to a woman I would become straight, or at least same sex attractions would go away. Nope, didn't happen. So from this point on, although I still believe in God, I cannot be a part of a church that causes so many to live lives of quiet desperation. So while yes it is a choice to be gay *in the sense of choosing over pretending to be straight and suffering* Any person has to be true to themselves first, and foremost, because living a lie is a worse sin.
This pretty much explains why I am tired of the catholic church and gonna start attending UCC in my hometown. Its a better place for me.
Ufff, let's start: Of course not, but it gives you permission to buy it or to ask somebody to gift it to you. The one who wrote that confuses his own words. It's true that wanting something doesn't give you permission to steal it, but being gay is not equal to steal something, is equivalent to accept that you want to spend the rest of your life with someone of your own sex. Of course you will not kill him, you just ignore him. The same way I want every fanatic to be dead, but I just turn away from them when I found one. In other words, wanting something and how you get are not the issue, but if you get it the "right way" or "the wrong way". I mean, if I don't like a person, I can ignore him, or ask him to leave, or hurting him so he would not want to be here, or kill him. There's more than one answer, and some are bad ones, and other as good ones. Besides, Catholics are none to make any call about the correct way to do things, since the Inquisition, where any kind of torture or murder were right as long as you said it was under God's name (they wanted everyone to be catholic and pay to the church, but choose a wrong way to do it). Leaving aside the fact that "illicit" doesn't have anything to do with church (as it is synonymous of illegal), again the one who wrote this is confusing things. One thing is to be gay/bi (sexual orientation) and another very different thing is to be promiscuous. Church is against any living that revolves around a sexual lifestyle, but we know that since long before because it prohibits it for heterosexuals too. While I don't doubt the least bit that some (if not a lot, but I can't be too sure of that) gay people are promiscuous, that doesn't mean that is a characteristic proper of LGBT people, because straight people is just as promiscuous as anybody else. This means, you can't use the sexual lifestyle to condemn LGBT people, because is not a characteristic exclusive of them.
Thats mostly what i was thinking as well...cause i just recently accepted that i was gay and living in a place where almost evryone is narrow minded and in a culture where religion is prominent and custom teaches you that elders are always right and what ever comes your way take it...its been kind of difficult to actually come out, especially when you nuclear family is the chiefly family for the province...lol....expectations, expectations....when the idea hit me that i was living a lie and if i continued id be hurting others as well as myself i stopped dating and just concentrated on school and work, and recently people have been on my back asking when id get married or to hurry cause i might miss the bus.....and i have stopped going to church, i still believe in god but i just cant stand the looks you get....two days ago my dad called me into my room and asked to talk to me and started lecturing me on why i was always home and in my room or why i stopped playing sports or stopped going to church...i had the chance to tell him but i kinda chickened out...the major obstacle i have now is to tell my mum, dad and older sister...once thats done, i dont care about who i tell afterwards...lol....sorry about venting...going back to the quote....i really didnt think of it the way Cassandra did, and when i think about it, its true. they expect us to act in one way and dont apply those conditions on the so called normal people..i guess i still have the straight guy mentality, need to change that...thanks guys
Cassandra is right. Two things are going on in that quote: 1. They are attempting to attribute the moral principles of don't murder and don't steal as being some sort of religious truth that were inspired by Catholicism (which they aren't), and then hoping that the listener is gullible enough for them to be able to surreptitiously slip in don't be gay as another religious truth that should just be accepted. It's a typical tactic used by these sorts of people: make a statement that your audience will agree with (stealing and murder is bad), and then the following statement (homosexuality is bad) is more likely to also be accepted by proximity. 2. They are trying to equate theft and murder with homosexual sex. Obviously this is comparing apples to oranges. Theft and murder have victims; homosexual sex is victimless and actually benefits both parties. Who is being wronged when I have sex? No one. So why should it be 'illicit'? And it's very insulting when religions say it's not wrong to be gay, it's just wrong if you act on it. It's like telling a black person it's not your fault you're black, but since you are you have to sit in the back of the bus. I'd much rather have someone that just hates me outright, rather than one of these slimy individuals who hate within the bounds of social acceptability.
I think one needs to separate "lifestyle" from just being gay. The sin of being gay is sex with anyone and everyone willing to drop their pants, that is actually called lust. Doesn't matter if you are homosexual or heterosexual, having sex "at the drop of a hat" is considered sin. Sex itself is a beautiful thing, lust cheapens the act. I think they are trying to say is to keep sex a special thing between you and your life mate, and view "lifestyles" of having casual sex with just anyone is not a good thing.
It means they recognize homosexuality as a reality, a real condition, with causes that are not clear, and they do not say it is a phase, or that for having attraction to same gender a homosexual thought is a sin. They are saying perhaps a person can be born gay. This part is interesting to note, as other denominations of Christianity, if you research them...and I encourage it...will not say this. Also other religions around the world may not say this either. Many may say that it is a sinful thought, or that the cause is the devil or being sinful in other ways, etc. Their point is to tell their members who are gay to not believe they are going to not be able to enter paradise or heaven because of homosexual thoughts...but they expect them to behave with self control. Further, they believe anything beyond sexual (very plain simple sort) acts with a spouse of opposite sex is a sin, just as to use condoms, birth control pills, to not allow a pregnancy to happen, to have sexual acts with somebody who is married to somebody else, or for prostitution or rape. They encourage gays to become monks and nuns if they cannot marry somebody and procreate. However, they do not accept women who are Catholic to make love to another girl, or a man to have a relationship that is sexual with another man. This is based upon a couple verses in Old and New Testements, which are interpreted to mean that the ACT of homosexuality in intercourse is not acceptable to God, but that you can choose to refrain from doing that act...in same way an alcoholic can struggle to refrain from drinking. I am not Catholic, but I had a friend who became a nun. ---------- Post added 29th Nov 2012 at 11:10 AM ---------- I have always thought God does not want his people to lie, or deceive others. Would God who is good want me to be a fake person or be a genuine person, which? ---------- Post added 29th Nov 2012 at 11:11 AM ---------- On a different topic... What does that church, and others, and other religions for that matter, think about those who are not gay, but have gender issues???
