A Memo From Obama

[dominicansoul]

[quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1323626566' post='2349143']

I am talking about Christians in America. I think that is clear from the context and the descriptors that I used.
[/quote]

but the memo is directed at other countries... that is why I suggested you actually read it.... no one is talking about Christians in America... only you....

[4588686]

[quote name='dominicansoul' timestamp='1323641276' post='2349299']

but the memo is directed at other countries... that is why I suggested you actually read it.... no one is talking about Christians in America... only you....
[/quote]


Are Catholics persecuted in Poland?

[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1323640432' post='2349290']

[/quote]


This is one of the more thoughtful things you've said in a while.

[dominicansoul]

[quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1323644786' post='2349343']


Are Catholics persecuted in Poland?

[/quote]

oh, man, have they ever been, especially in the last century... !!!


I think obama needs to concentrate on our country. Leave other countries alone. Why give billions of dollars in "aid" to other countries anyway, when our national debt has grown to over $15 trillion?

[penguin31]

[quote name='dominicansoul' timestamp='1323651155' post='2349449']
Why give billions of dollars in "aid" to other countries anyway, when our national debt has grown to over $15 trillion?
[/quote]

Because as much as we have sufferings and problems here in America, there are foreign countries with bigger problems and much more crippling poverty than beyond what we face here in America. For the problems we as a society currently, there are dozens upon dozens of nations who still need our help - and the call to be charitable to those in need doesn't go away just because it's a "bad time" or because it's inconvenient now.

I believe in being smarter in how and why we give out aid both domestically and internationally, but America's aid monies still do a *tremendous* amount of good. And I for one am not about to tell those less fortunate that we aren't going to be there for them anymore because suddenly it's a little less convenient for us as a society. That would be disasterous not just from a foreign policy perspective but from a basic humanitarian perspective.

Edited December 12, 2011 by penguin31

[dominicansoul]

[quote name='penguin31' timestamp='1323663718' post='2349617']
I believe in being smarter in how and why we give out aid both domestically and internationally, but America's aid monies still do a *tremendous* amount of good. And I for one am not about to tell those less fortunate that we aren't going to be there for them anymore because suddenly it's a little less convenient for us as a society. That would be disasterous not just from a foreign policy perspective but from a basic humanitarian perspective.
[/quote]

Try telling them they will no longer be getting aid because their priests preach against homosexual sins....

I agree with your post, I wouldn't want America to isolate itself and never send aid to poor countries or help out when disasters strike...

The trouble comes when our politicians use money for blackmail... If obama just addressed violent persecution, I wouldn't have a problem with this memo, but he pushes a radical agenda when he mentions, "intolerance..."and "homophobia." Again, I ask... who will be defining these terms and applying them to what they witness in other countries???

[penguin31]

[quote name='dominicansoul' timestamp='1323665785' post='2349642']
Try telling them they will no longer be getting aid because their priests preach against homosexual sins....
[/quote]

And that's where *I* have the problem too. The normalization of homosexuality has caused great amounts of trouble, much of which isn't even really known about. So when you try to take a stand against something so many now consider normal, it rubs people the wrong way.

I just get concerned at the idea of abandoning our humanitarian responsibilities as a society because of a political disagreement or due to it being financially or politically inconvenient.

[dominicansoul]

[quote name='penguin31' timestamp='1323666711' post='2349647']

And that's where *I* have the problem too. The normalization of homosexuality has caused great amounts of trouble, much of which isn't even really known about. So when you try to take a stand against something so many now consider normal, it rubs people the wrong way.

I just get concerned at the idea of abandoning our humanitarian responsibilities as a society because of a political disagreement or due to it being financially or politically inconvenient.
[/quote]

I sure would like to abandon our "humanitarian" aid to the international planned parenthood federation ... (another one of the accomplishments of this administration....)

[4588686]

[quote name='penguin31' timestamp] The normalization of homosexuality has caused great amounts of trouble, much of which isn't even really known about. [/quote]


I'm listening

[dominicansoul]

[quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1323808788' post='2350578']


I'm listening
[/quote]

that's a first

[Kia ora]

[quote name='Ice_nine' timestamp='1323483530' post='2348316']
No. But I do think the prescribed gender roles in a given culture is not something that is authentic female spirituality. Ugh, that's not worded too great but I hope it makes sense
[/quote]

I think that [i]authentic[/i] female spirituality is something that females find for themselves, not what is prescribed upon them by anyone else. Is that sort of what you meant?

Edited December 18, 2011 by Kia ora

[AccountDeleted]

[quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1323625969' post='2349134']


I would say the same thing about religious affiliation. I think that sexuality is much more central to an individuals identity than religious affiliation in that human being will always have a sexual identity while it is only by happen stance, where and when you happened to be born, that you have any sort of religious identity. Sexuality is a fixed part of any human being while religion is an adopted one.
[/quote]

I don't quite understand this. I agree that gender is a fixed part of any human being, but what do you mean by sexuality? that seems to be a choice to me. Some choose opposite sex, some same sex and some celibacy. That doesn't seem fixed to me. I think it is naural to choose opposite sex (most animals do) but it is still a choice. That's why I don't understand how homosexuals say that are 'born' that way. I choose celibacy, it isn't a fixed state. Maybe I just don't know what you mean?

And certainly sexuality is 'central' to an individual's identity but how is it fixed? And for me at least, religion is more 'central' to my individuality than sexuality is even though they are both choices. Please explain??

[Jesus_lol]

[quote name='nunsense' timestamp='1324203047' post='2353256']
I don't quite understand this. I agree that gender is a fixed part of any human being, but what do you mean by sexuality? that seems to be a choice to me. Some choose opposite sex, some same sex and some celibacy. That doesn't seem fixed to me. I think it is naural to choose opposite sex (most animals do) but it is still a choice. That's why I don't understand how homosexuals say that are 'born' that way. I choose celibacy, it isn't a fixed state. Maybe I just don't know what you mean?

And certainly sexuality is 'central' to an individual's identity but how is it fixed? And for me at least, religion is more 'central' to my individuality than sexuality is even though they are both choices. Please explain??
[/quote]

Concentrate really hard, and see if you can choose to find another woman sexually attractive. If you can successfully pull that off, then your argument is perfectly valid! of course, then you would be gay, and acting on that would be a sin... but dont worry, you could just choose to stop being gay, problem solved. No risk involved!

[AccountDeleted]

[quote name='Jesus_lol' timestamp='1324204975' post='2353261']
Concentrate really hard, and see if you can choose to find another woman sexually attractive. If you can successfully pull that off, then your argument is perfectly valid! of course, then you would be gay, and acting on that would be a sin... but dont worry, you could just choose to stop being gay, problem solved. No risk involved!
[/quote]

You still don't explain what you mean satisfactorily (to me). I can choose to act on impulses or not. That is not fixed. If I accept your argument (as I understand it - fixed) then homosexuals really are 'born' that way - it is a fixed state. I don't accept that. I believe it is a choice made by following perhaps affinities and/or attractions. There are many who claim to be bi-sexual as well. Sorry, your explanation doesn't do it for me.

[Ice_nine]

[quote name='Kia ora' timestamp='1324202197' post='2353253']
I think that [i]authentic[/i] female spirituality is something that females find for themselves, not what is prescribed upon them by anyone else. Is that sort of what you meant?
[/quote]

Um, let's see. When you say "find it for themselves" it seems like relativism to me, so I don't think that's what I mean. What I was trying to say is that, for example, being domestic, looking pretty, and other things that our given society does/did list as "feminine traits" don't necessarily indicate innate femininity. If you ever hang around fundies, you'll find some of them disagree, even to the point of saying women can't teach men [i]anything[/i]. Having a female professor in literature may even be considered sinful to them. ridiculous but true.

Being motherly and fatherly, whether physically so or not, are both innate parts of one's being. Bearing social graces and brute force are not.

And again I'm not articulating this very well, and there are people who can talk about this with more fluency. And to be honest I'm still exploring the issue myself, but as I'm exploring it I assent to the wisdom of the Church (which you may or may not find respectable but I'm being honest).


[quote name='Jesus_lol' timestamp='1324204975' post='2353261']
Concentrate really hard, and see if you can choose to find another woman sexually attractive. If you can successfully pull that off, then your argument is perfectly valid! of course, then you would be gay, and acting on that would be a sin... but dont worry, you could just choose to stop being gay, problem solved. No risk involved!
[/quote]

There was a time in my life where I could be turned on by things that I'd rather not fully disclose to the world wide web. I wouldn't have described myself as "gay" 'cause it wasn't women exclusively by any means. Hell there was nothing consistent about my "sexual orientation." I wasn't gay, straight, or bi I was just a flooping mess and a half.

I think a lot of the darker sexual stuff was intermingled with mental illness/various mood disorders or what have you. But regardless I didn't like that quality about myself so once my mind started getting right and that sertraline kicked in, through prayer and self-control and all that I think I've conditioned my mind miles away from the state it used to be in. I still struggle sometimes with certain things, but not even nearly as bad as I used to.

With all that said I believe there have been studies that indicate women tend to be less-fixed in their orientation than men are, and I don't expect my experience to translate to every other female. This is obvious. My only point being is that inclinations and impulses [i]can[/i] be mastered. It may be more or less difficult depending on a persons given circumstances.

But I think if I concentrated real hard I could find women sexually attractive. I just disagree that it would make me "gay." I think it would just be the result of some conditioning you know? Maybe there's more fluidity in the way my mind is structured and people have more deep-seated tendencies, but I'd still disagree about the designation of "gayness" as an inherent quality.

And while you're free to disagree with me, please keep in mind it's not the easiest stuff for me to admit about myself. So if you could avoid any personal criticism that'd be gr8 thx

[Kia ora]

[quote name='Ice_nine' timestamp='1324236730' post='2353336']
Um, let's see. When you say "find it for themselves" it seems like relativism to me, so I don't think that's what I mean.[/quote]

Some of my female friends are great athletes. One is a basketball referee and a marathon runner, another is a mountain bike fanatic who recently won a race, others are rock climbers. Are they unfeminine or boyish? That sort of question, I think is misplaced. Because whether I say that they're feminine or unfeminine, it's still just my opinion isn't it? And I don't think it's my place to impose my opinions on other people. I prefer to leave it up to them, and accept what they say.

When I say that females find 'it' for themselves, I meant that it's really their choice whether to think of it as feminine or masculine. Maybe that is relativistic. I watch My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic or at least I used to when time permitted. I didn't think of myself as pursuing a feminine activity.

[quote name='Ice_nine' timestamp='1324236730' post='2353336']
And again I'm not articulating this very well, and there are people who can talk about this with more fluency. And to be honest I'm still exploring the issue myself, but as I'm exploring it I assent to the wisdom of the Church (which you may or may not find respectable but I'm being honest).[/quote] Many feminists and post-modernists have explored the issue of gender roles in society. You should check them out. Even though they may not be Catholic, they still have lots of interesting stuff to say.

Edited December 19, 2011 by Kia ora