The Silencing Of Christians On The Matter Of Homosexuality

[havok579257]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1341717068' post='2453327']
Yes. I have seen a picture of an aborted baby.

I have never participated in an abortion, but I have been lucky not to have been faced with such a difficult decision.
I don't see abortion as something that threatens the safety and stability of society, so I don't think it is a government issue.
I am fine with people trying to convince others not to have abortions, debate or discussion is fine. But I think ultimately adults are old enough and mature enough to make their own decisions, We don't need nor want our decisions to be made for us by our government.
[/quote]

just following your arguement, abortion does threaten the stability of society in the united states. its slowly eradicating a race of people from american society. so america will lose some of its multi culturalism. cause right now black babies are being aborted at a rate higher than live births in america. given a certain amount of time, the black race will be eradicated from america. thus losing the culture of the black person. i would say this would affect society.

[ThePenciledOne]

[quote name='Ed Normile' timestamp='1341685619' post='2453156']
Would St John the Baptist be so delicate ?

If not would he be somehow un-christian ? I ask as sometimes you have to stand for something or you stand for nothing at all.

ed
[/quote]

I'm not asking if St. John would be so delicate, because it's an entirely different issue/time period, so honestly that's a straw man argument you are making.

All I was asking is that we have to be cautious and understanding, given that most that are pro-homosexual rights/marriage/what have you, hold the issue very close to their hearts and become very passionate/engaged quickly. It is the task that we reach to them through Love, after all Jesus probably ate with homosexuals, besides the tax collectors, prostitutes and the rest...I don't see what is so 'unchristian' or whatever. Sometimes, we feel that to defend Catholicism we need to brandish a banner and shout "GO PAPA B", but in reality, we need to just obey the Lord's Will in the moment and just Love people.

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1341698514' post='2453197']
Is it possible to debate this topic?
What aspects are up for debate?

I am pro choice (especially when it comes to capable adults making choices for themselves)
I am against government enforcement (especially on matters that do not make society unstable and dangerous)

So if you and me were to debate the topic, what is it that we could discuss in a mature, respectful way?
[/quote]

I would have to ask that question as well, since the premises are numerous. I would have to ask if marriage or whatever issue would be up for debate as well, considering it would change any level of discussion.

[BigJon16]

Personally, I think we should be loud like St John the Baptist, yet also compassionate and understanding like Jesus Christ Himself.

Throughout His public ministry, Jesus was very compassionate towards people (obviously) but He never hesitated to call someone out when they were doing something wrong. He lived His life in a way that brought peace and love to those around Him, but in a way that also challenged them to become better people.


We should not be silent. It is widely known already that we, as Catholic Christian people are against "Gay Marriage." But what people don't realize is that we are not against the individuals with Same Sex Attraction.

Clarification:
Whenever someone asks me, "What are your views on Gay Marriage", I make those views very clear.

"I am against Gay Marriage".

But I then make a point to say something along the lines of:

"But I'm not against the person".


Too often do people in our society jump the gun and think that just because we are against "Gay Marriage" that we are also against those with Same Sex Attraction. That is not true.

[quote name='ThePenciledOne' timestamp='1341673518' post='2453125']
I think the way we approach this issue is often wrong. We end up not being cautious enough, because this issue lies extremely close to the heart of those of the pro-homosexual side. The result is that we have to be more delicate in what we say and what we do. Sure, they may not be as 'tolerant' as we are, but as Christians we have to be the more loving side in this. And the fact is that as close as these persons identify themselves with the movement, we cannot forget that they are people and are as deserving of Love as anyone else.
[/quote]

This^

[quote name='Ed Normile' timestamp='1341685619' post='2453156']
Would St John the Baptist be so delicate ?

If not would he be somehow un-christian ? I ask as sometimes you have to stand for something or you stand for nothing at all.

ed
[/quote]

But also this^

Both methods, blunt and loud like John the Baptist, or loving and compassionate like Christ, are, in my opinion, both very essential when used together in a Christ-like fashion.

To end with some[b] Church teaching[/b]

[quote]
2357 ...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. [u]Under no circumstances can they be approved.[/u]
[/quote]


[u][b]BUT[/b][/u]

[quote]2358.. [Homosexuals] 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.
[/quote]

Pax and carrots.

[Luigi]

You really need to stop calling it "Gay Marriage."

The current Newspeak is 'marriage equality.'






It'll probably change by next week (what'd you bet.. "my obvious constitutional right"?). I'll let you know, so you can keep up with the most current "thought" on the subject.

[BarbTherese]

Catholicism in some societies is becoming increasingly counter to the prevailing culture (counter-cultural). It's not easy in some of my own particular communities and environments here in Australia to be Catholic and one can be called names even experience rejection and none of these are easy when one actually experiences same. "They have persecuted me and they will persecute you". Also, sticks and stones will surely break some bones, but names can't hurt unless I take them personally on board.
Went to a social gathering last Sunday night and discovered that I need to try to brush up on my 'political correctness' and an ever increasing burden (to me) in the general community for one.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1341717068' post='2453327']

Yes. I have seen a picture of an aborted baby.

I have never participated in an abortion, but I have been lucky not to have been faced with such a difficult decision.
I don't see abortion as something that threatens the safety and stability of society, so I don't think it is a government issue.
I am fine with people trying to convince others not to have abortions, debate or discussion is fine. But I think ultimately adults are old enough and mature enough to make their own decisions, We don't need nor want our decisions to be made for us by our government.
[/quote]You brought up two things and didn't explain or defend them that is at adds with anti-abortion. These are a good place to debate abortion.
1- Right of the fetus to live. How do you defend that a fetus' rights are secondary to others? Is it your definition of personage, or hierarchy based on ability to care for themselves, or something else entirely?
2- You state you don't believe abortion poses any threat to society. Can you explain or defend the fact that abortion delegates stages of human life to be subject to the whims of more powerful people, and orders society to selfishness and dismisses empathy as irrelevant and only viewed in a utilitarian usefulness to individuals or immediate benefit to society in general?

[Annie12]

[quote name='Anomaly' timestamp='1341764958' post='2453499']
You brought up two things and didn't explain or defend them that is at adds with anti-abortion. These are a good place to debate abortion.
1- Right of the fetus to live. How do you defend that a fetus' rights are secondary to others? Is it your definition of personage, or hierarchy based on ability to care for themselves, or something else entirely?
2- You state you don't believe abortion poses any threat to society. Can you explain or defend the fact that abortion delegates stages of human life to be subject to the whims of more powerful people, and orders society to selfishness and dismisses empathy as irrelevant and only viewed in a utilitarian usefulness to individuals or immediate benefit to society in general?
[/quote]

[b]That[/b] and...

[b]Where does your reasoning come in that a mother has more right to kill her child in the womb than she does outside of the womb?[/b] According to science that unborn individual is alive and is a separate individual than the mother. The only thing that binds them together is an umbilical cord which is meant to nurture and help that unborn individual to grow. Abortion is and never has been a normal part of development in the womb because it is an intrusion to the child's development which ultimately results in the killing of that unique and unrepeatable human being. It is a human with a unique set of DNA which is growing and forming at the fastest rate that a person will grow through out the entire life cycle.

[Norseman82]

[quote name='Ed Normile' timestamp='1341685619' post='2453156']
Would St John the Baptist be so delicate ?

If not would he be somehow un-christian ? I ask as sometimes you have to stand for something or you stand for nothing at all.

ed
[/quote]

Unfortunately, if John the Baptist, St. Paul, or even Christ Himself posted on the internet soem of teh things they said/wrote in the NT, they probably would be banned from (or at least censored on) Catholic forums by the "charity police".

[quote name='BigJon16' timestamp='1341722213' post='2453358']
Personally, I think we should be loud like St John the Baptist, yet also compassionate and understanding like Jesus Christ Himself.

Throughout His public ministry, Jesus was very compassionate towards people (obviously) but He never hesitated to call someone out when they were doing something wrong. He lived His life in a way that brought peace and love to those around Him, but in a way that also challenged them to become better people.
[/quote]

Christ also turned over tables in the Temple and called people "broods of vipers", something that modern-day Catholic forum moderators would probably ban or issue warnings to Him over.

[quote name='BigJon16' timestamp='1341722213' post='2453358']
"I am against Gay Marriage".

But I then make a point to say something along the lines of:

"But I'm not against the person".

[/quote]

My friend's wife said it this way regarding SS couples: "I like you, and I like you - just not together!"

Edited July 8, 2012 by Norseman82

[Lil Red]

if you don't like the rules, Norse, you know where the door is. Don't let it hit you in the arse on the way out.

[Winchester]

Why are we talking about the SS?

Godwin's law, beeshes.

[stevil]

[quote name='Anomaly' timestamp='1341764958' post='2453499']
You brought up two things and didn't explain or defend them that is at adds with anti-abortion. These are a good place to debate abortion.
1- Right of the fetus to live. How do you defend that a fetus' rights are secondary to others? Is it your definition of personage, or hierarchy based on ability to care for themselves, or something else entirely?
2- You state you don't believe abortion poses any threat to society. Can you explain or defend the fact that abortion delegates stages of human life to be subject to the whims of more powerful people, and orders society to selfishness and dismisses empathy as irrelevant and only viewed in a utilitarian usefulness to individuals or immediate benefit to society in general?
[/quote]
Decent questions here. (funny that we were going to talk about homosexuality but we are talking about abortion instead)

1. Rights
I don't get overly excited about the term "Rights". Animals have the right to live and yet we kill and eat them. Animals have the right to be free and yet we enslave them. People have the right to marry and form a family and yet some people choose to support law making it illegal for homosexuals to marry and adopt children. All I am stating is that I accept that the feotus has had its right to live taken away from it. I just recognise that it isn't my choice to enforce a decision on the mother, I recognise that it is her decision to make.

2. Threat to society.
When mothers have an abortion, for the most part society does not get invovled. Relatives, freinds, neigbors, communities and society allows it and accepts it. It is very rare that an abortion causes violence in society. Sometimes there are some Christians taking violent steps in defence of the children but this is rare.

[stevil]

[quote name='Annie12' timestamp='1341766107' post='2453501']
[b]That[/b] and...

[b]Where does your reasoning come in that a mother has more right to kill her child in the womb than she does outside of the womb?[/b][/quote]
Yes, trying to draw the line on when it is acceptable and when it is unacceptable is a difficult task.
Once the baby is born, others see it and start to have feelings for it. Grandparents, cousins, friends etc. These people then become much more likely to want to forcably defend the life of the baby. Thus the risk of violence in society.
Once the baby can live without the support of the mother's womb then killing it is an active act, You would need to take action specifically to kill it.
Anyway, this is certainly hard to argue. But as long as it doesn't cause violence and instability within society, I don't deem it to be the place of government to decide.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1341775770' post='2453564']

Decent questions here. (funny that we were going to talk about homosexuality but we are talking about abortion instead)

1. Rights
I don't get overly excited about the term "Rights". Animals have the right to live and yet we kill and eat them. Animals have the right to be free and yet we enslave them. People have the right to marry and form a family and yet some people choose to support law making it illegal for homosexuals to marry and adopt children. All I am stating is that I accept that the feotus has had its right to live taken away from it. I just recognise that it isn't my choice to enforce a decision on the mother, I recognise that it is her decision to make.

2. Threat to society.
When mothers have an abortion, for the most part society does not get invovled. Relatives, freinds, neigbors, communities and society allows it and accepts it. It is very rare that an abortion causes violence in society. Sometimes there are some Christians taking violent steps in defence of the children but this is rare.
[/quote]1- Animals do not have the same rights as humans because they are a lesser species. Please show me the first piece of art any animal has created within their own society. (apes and monkeys have only done this when trained by humans)

2- The violence is done within society when humans devalue themselves and others as no greater than any other species and can be killed as inconvenient vermin, less important than a cow or other food source.

Eventually the fundamental way we answer questions of how we value humans as individuals and as a community leads us to values on abortion and homosexuality.

[Annie12]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1341776088' post='2453569']
Yes, trying to draw the line on when it is acceptable and when it is unacceptable is a difficult task.
Once the baby is born, others see it and start to have feelings for it. Grandparents, cousins, friends etc. These people then become much more likely to want to forcably defend the life of the baby. Thus the risk of violence in society.
Once the baby can live without the support of the mother's womb then killing it is an active act, You would need to take action specifically to kill it.
Anyway, this is certainly hard to argue. But as long as it doesn't cause violence and instability within society, I don't deem it to be the place of government to decide.
[/quote][quote name='stevil' timestamp='1341775770' post='2453564']
Decent questions here. (funny that we were going to talk about homosexuality but we are talking about abortion instead)

1. Rights
I don't get overly excited about the term "Rights". Animals have the right to live and yet we kill and eat them. Animals have the right to be free and yet we enslave them. People have the right to marry and form a family and yet some people choose to support law making it illegal for homosexuals to marry and adopt children. All I am stating is that I accept that the feotus has had its right to live taken away from it. I just recognise that it isn't my choice to enforce a decision on the mother, I recognise that it is her decision to make.

2. Threat to society.
When mothers have an abortion, for the most part society does not get invovled. Relatives, freinds, neigbors, communities and society allows it and accepts it. It is very rare that an abortion causes violence in society. Sometimes there are some Christians taking violent steps in defence of the children but this is rare.
[/quote]

From these responses I can tell that we are on two completely different pages. First of all, being a Catholic I believe that God endowed EVERY human being with a special human dignity which in turn makes us above animal (in other words God made every human being in his image and likeness). So, weather a person is loved by human beings or not doesn't lessen their dignity because that child was created by God and is loved by God. This said Abortion is (in my eyes and many other's eyes) murder of one of his very special creations.

You also mentioned above that is its accepted by everyone. This is really not true. half of America is against it and Ireland, the Philippines and many Arab nations have laws protecting the unborn and many religions are opposed to it as well.

In response to what you said about it not harming society, that is also false. With abortion legal in many country's places like Japan, Russia, China and many European counties are not going to be able to replace generations. Specifically in china and japan, there will not be enough women for the men. ( which is why Traditional marriage is so important. without the men and women procreating we wouldn't be able to replace aging generations.) I found this website which gives A LOT of info about the dangers of abortion to society [url="http://www.priestsforlife.org/magisterium/kucera.htm"]http://www.priestsfo...rium/kucera.htm[/url] (its from a catholic viewpoint)

Edited July 8, 2012 by Annie12

[stevil]

[quote name='Anomaly' timestamp='1341776826' post='2453571']
1- Animals do not have the same rights as humans because they are a lesser species. Please show me the first piece of art any animal has created within their own society. (apes and monkeys have only done this when trained by humans)

2- The violence is done within society when humans devalue themselves and others as no greater than any other species and can be killed as inconvenient vermin, less important than a cow or other food source.

Eventually the fundamental way we answer questions of how we value humans as individuals and as a community leads us to values on abortion and homosexuality.
[/quote]
1. I don't put value on an entity based on its ability to produce (original) art.
2. I don't deem my own life in threat when a mother decides to have an abortion. None of my friends or alliances are in threat either. I don't see society going to war over this, hence I will not get caught up in this war. I don't see abortion as a threat to my survival.