Since We've Been Talking About Lgbtq Stuff A Lot Lately...

[Lil Red]

attn gay people: you should not have any close relationships with people of the same sex, you might end up wanting to bang them. Also you shouldn't have close relationships with people of the opposite sex because they might want to bang you.

 

Sorriez. Near occasion of sin and all. Maybe it would work out for you if you find some hermaphrodites.

 

i literally LOL'd. :hehe: thanks for this. :hehe: 

[franciscanheart]

FranciscanHeart,
 
I was actually talking about "disordered" according to the Church definition (dis-order, out of order), not the physical or psychological definition.
 
I'm not sure why you assume that I was talking about the heart or the condition of the two women that were being discussed - I brought up the point if being in such an arrangement could be an occasion of sin or not. I said that for me, it would be, if I were in that situation. I don't have SSA. But for example if I was constantly seeing a man that I was attracted to, but couldn't be with him because let's say he's married, - that would be an occasion of sin for me. So I was wondering, if it could be in that situation. I'm not saying how the particular two women experience this, I don't know them. But about the situation itself, for anyone.

SIGH. This is exhausting.

Yes, the situation could lead to an occasion of sin. But then, it could not. Simply being in the room with another homosexual is not a near occasion of sin.

True story: someone could be sexually attracted to another person and, by God's grace, have a wonderful friendship with that person without sinning.

:o I KNOW: Mind-blowing.

[MissyP89]

Hey Papist,

 

To offer you some perspective ... if someone were to ask you, you'd say you were heterosexual, or colloquially "straight." But it doesn't mean you are currently sexually active with women. It just denotes your attraction to them.

 

The colloquial term for homosexual is "gay" or "lesbian." But there are celibate lesbians and sexually active lesbians. The name does not (and will never) imply that the person is currently in a relationship with someone of the same sex. It also does not reference whether or not they're sexually active. Someone who says "I am gay" can very well be celibate. It's just a description, like "tall" or "Chinese" or "Catholic."

 

At the same time, if I say I'm bisexual, it doesn't mean I am currently sexually active with one or both genders. It just means I am attracted to both.

 

I hope that helps clarify this stuff for you.

[MarysLittleFlower]

FransciscanHeart,

 

Here's what I was referring to:

 

"The term homosexual is a clinical term that may be offensive when used as a noun to identify individuals who are trying to overcome same-sex attraction, as well as those who embrace a gay identity. The former typically prefer the terms same-sex attraction or same-gender attraction and the latter typically prefer the termsgay (referring to men) and lesbian (referring to women). Those who are overcoming same-sex attraction typically do not like the terms gay orlesbian because they imply a political, cultural, and social identity."

 

See even those with SSA don't all like the term "gay" because they don't want to label themselves as this social identity, rather they want to say that they are - for example - a Catholic who has attraction to the same sex. They don't want to maybe label themselves as "gay" with everything that comes with that - like people assuming that they are pro-gay 'marriage', or that they are in relationships, etc, Quote from: http://www.samesexattraction.org/what-same-sex-attraction.htm

 

Edited May 23, 2013 by MarysLittleFlower

[franciscanheart]

If I'm ignorant, please provide a quote from the Church showing that your interpretation is correct, otherwise it's just one opinion vs another. :) maybe I'm wrong in the terminology, but maybe that's because people use terminology in different ways.

Okay, HOLD UP. Did you read that long post I posted on Page 3? Please tell me you not only read it, but you have comprehended the meaning. Please.


Concerning THIS post: LORD JESUS IN HEAVEN ABOVE HAVE MERCY ON ME A SINNER. AND WHILE I'M AT IT: THANK YOU FOR MAKING THIS A CONVERSATION ON THE INTERNET; SOMETIMES YOU HAVE PERFECT WAYS OF SAVING ME FROM MYSELF.

Okay, moving on.

Let's start with some really basic schooling, mkay?

gay
/gā/
Adjective
(of a person, esp. a man) Homosexual.
Noun
A homosexual, esp. a man.
Synonyms
merry - cheerful - jolly - joyful - blithe - mirthful

ho·mo·sex·u·al
/ˌhōməˈsekSHo͞oəl/
Adjective
(of a person) Sexually attracted to people of one's own sex.
Noun
A person who is sexually attracted to people of their own sex.


:o THEY MEAN THE SAME THING!

Dear Lord, thank you for the gift of language. I love language. I love etymology. I love a good thesaurus. I also love that you gave me a brain which allows me to associate words with meanings. You are an awesome God. I will praise you all my days. Amen.

SO. We've established now that Gay = Homosexual. On to SSA. What is SSA? Same Sex Attraction.

OH MY GRACIOUS: WOULD YOU LOOK AT THAT?! :blink: Same Sex Attraction is the sexual attaction to people of one's own sex. Which is... OHMYGRACIOUS: HOMOSEXUAL. WHICH IS GAY.


Overview:
Gay = Homosexual = SSA.


Thus endeth the lesson. (Maybe I should have gone into teaching. ... Probably not. I don't deal well with stupid.)

[MarysLittleFlower]

SIGH. This is exhausting.

Yes, the situation could lead to an occasion of sin. But then, it could not. Simply being in the room with another homosexual is not a near occasion of sin.

True story: someone could be sexually attracted to another person and, by God's grace, have a wonderful friendship with that person without sinning.

:o I KNOW: Mind-blowing.

 

I didn't mean just being in a room together or gay people being in a room or gay people being around those of the same sex, etc. I meant specifically being in a more than friendship relationship, with romantic overtones, even if there's no physical expression of that. I'm not saying the couple that was talked about before is in this relationship, it's actually unclear to me if their relationship is just friendship or more, - I'm not talking about them, but in a hypothetical scenario. I think that might be an occasion of sin. An analogy would be dating someone and never planning to marry them: the Church only encourages dating if a person plans to marry, because otherwise it would just lead to sin down the road.

[Lil Red]

FranciscanHeart,

 

I was actually talking about "disordered" according to the Church definition (dis-order, out of order), not the physical or psychological definition.

 

I'm not sure why you assume that I was talking about the heart or the condition of the two women that were being discussed - I brought up the point if being in such an arrangement could be an occasion of sin or not. I said that for me, it would be, if I were in that situation. I don't have SSA. But for example if I was constantly seeing a man that I was attracted to, but couldn't be with him because let's say he's married, - that would be an occasion of sin for me. So I was wondering, if it could be in that situation. I'm not saying how the particular two women experience this, I don't know them. But about the situation itself, for anyone.

 

i think this is what gets a lot of people under the collar. you (and others) who try to speak about the gay experience as if it were their own and correlate it to their own experiences, just really can't. you're not gay, and you don't understand what gay people go through - especially gay Catholics. it's not a simple matter of extrapolating your experiences as a straight person to experiences gay people have. what gay people probably want to hear from their family and friends? "I love you, and this doesn't change the fact that I love you." and not compare gay people to child rapists. that would be good. 

[MarysLittleFlower]

Just becuase I use a word differently than you, FH, you don't have to call me "stupid". Oh well. I posted a quote explaining what I meant, from a website about SSA. Not all people with SSA want to be called "gay". That's what I meant.

Edited May 23, 2013 by MarysLittleFlower

[Lil Red]

SIGH. This is exhausting.

Yes, the situation could lead to an occasion of sin. But then, it could not. Simply being in the room with another homosexual is not a near occasion of sin.

True story: someone could be sexually attracted to another person and, by God's grace, have a wonderful friendship with that person without sinning.

:o I KNOW: Mind-blowing.

 

weird! it's like people could have self-control or something!! 

[franciscanheart]

FransciscanHeart,
 
Here's what I was referring to:
 
"The term homosexual is a clinical term that may be offensive when used as a noun to identify individuals who are trying to overcome same-sex attraction, as well as those who embrace a gay identity. The former typically prefer the terms same-sex attraction or same-gender attraction and the latter typically prefer the termsgay (referring to men) and lesbian (referring to women). Those who are overcoming same-sex attraction typically do not like the terms gay orlesbian because they imply a political, cultural, and social identity."
 
See even those with SSA don't all like the term "gay" because they don't want to label themselves as this social identity, rather they want to say that they are - for example - a Catholic who has attraction to the same sex. They don't want to maybe label themselves as "gay" with everything that comes with that - like people assuming that they are pro-gay 'marriage', or that they are in relationships, etc, Quote from: http://www.samesexattraction.org/what-same-sex-attraction.htm

You changed your entire post. :|

Also, simply because some people don't want to believe that their homosexuality is ingrained in their being doesn't mean that they aren't homosexual or gay. Whatever ignorant connotation you want to associate with a faithful, celibate Catholic who tells you they're gay is your own business, but I'll tell you that the crap you've said in this thread is completely unhelpful in spreading love, compassion and Truth.

[Papist]

What proof will be satisfactory to you? Because I can tell you that all those men and women involved in Courage -- you know, that program of support and encouragement provided in Catholic Churches for homosexuals who want to live a celibate, chaste life -- will tell you they are gay. That's why they're there.

:wall:

I am not debating you. I asked for clarity of the term "being gay" and you helped. If it is what you say, then fine. I have no problems with that. My point is that many people have the understanding I described, making a dialog on this topic problematic. Problematic b/c you and I may believe the same, but we both don't know it b/c are understanding of term(s) differ. I believe it is important to have the same understanding of the term(s). Hence, my question.

[MarysLittleFlower]

i think this is what gets a lot of people under the collar. you (and others) who try to speak about the gay experience as if it were their own and correlate it to their own experiences, just really can't. you're not gay, and you don't understand what gay people go through - especially gay Catholics. it's not a simple matter of extrapolating your experiences as a straight person to experiences gay people have. what gay people probably want to hear from their family and friends? "I love you, and this doesn't change the fact that I love you." and not compare gay people to child rapists. that would be good. 

 

I know what it's like to be attracted to someone. I made the connection how it's hard to be in a more than friendship relationship with someone and NOT be tempted, which would be an occasion of sin, - if the couple is heterosexual and plans to get married, there's no way out of that but they can limit actual temptations by not passionately kissing, having group dates, etc. Homosexual people can't marry though and I was talking specifically about "romantic" type of relationships, (where they're not living together or doing anything directly against chastity, I was talking about more what could happen in a person's heart).

 

So if it's not like that for them, and they aren't tempted by this, and are just friends, that's good. I meant if it is a real temptation that could be avoided by maybe changing the nature of the relationship or how often they see each other etc. It might depend on the type of relationship. I don't know what type of relationship this couple has, so I was talking about a hypothetical case if it's more than friendship but without physical violations of chastity.

Edited May 23, 2013 by MarysLittleFlower

[franciscanheart]

I am not debating you. I asked for clarity of the term "being gay" and you helped. If it is what you say, then fine. I have no problems with that. My point is that many people have the understanding I described, making a dialog on this topic problematic. Problematic b/c you and I may believe the same, but we both don't know it b/c are understanding of term(s) differ. I believe it is important to have the same understanding of the term(s). Hence, my question.

I'm glad I could help clarify.


I don't know where that belief starts but it's ignorant. (See MissyP's post above for a kinder explanation than I've given so far.) I say ignorant with no malice intended; I mean it for what it is.

[MissyP89]

Just becuase I use a word differently than you, FH, you don't have to call me "stupid". Oh well. I posted a quote explaining what I meant, from a website about SSA. Not all people with SSA want to be called "gay". That's what I meant.

 

OK, and that's fine. People should be called what makes them feel comfortable.

 

All we're saying is that if you look them up in the dictionary, they mean the same thing. :) And that most people use them interchangeably.

[Papist]

The terms can be confusing, does "being gay" imply that one just has same sex attraction and does not act upon or entertain the temptations? Or does it mean acting on or entertaining those temptations?

 

Why define someone by their temptations that they do not entertain or act upon? We don't call a man that is tempted to have relations with a woman that is not his wife an adulterer if he does not act or entertain that temptation. And I am sure all of us have been tempted by many sins, but I doubt we define ourselves by those temptations.

Good point. But there needs to be a term for the inclination. Perhaps 'gay' is not the ideal, but it is short and easy. I don't care. I just want to know the term(s) meaning.