School Curriculum

[PadreSantiago]

I am not a troll and if you would of read my post you would see my point. Here it is again friend!

Some things in the bible do not apply to today because the bible was written 2000 years ago. Is that simple enough? Do you need more examples?

You would also do well to note that the top half of my post is the meat of my arguments I just threw that quote there in the end as a quick example.

Edited November 16, 2005 by PadreSantiago

[Socrates]

The only reason the quoted parts about Deuteronomy "don't apply" is that they refer specifically to a different political-economic structure which is no longer in existense. They are not about chattel slavery, but about a form of indentured servitude, in which a man sells himself as a slave to another man in order to pay off his debts. It places a limitation on his servitude by saying that he cannot be kept a slave past a certain limit.

However, this has nothing to do with the prohibitions on homosexuality, which are moral in nature. Homosexuality remains the same now as it was in Biblical times, and is repeatedly condemned in both the Old and New Testament.

You can't just assert, "Some things in the Bible no longer apply, and the condemnation of homosexuality is one of these." That is no argument at all. The burden of proof is on you to show why the Biblical teachings on homosexuality "no longer apply." And simply saying that they are over 2000 years old won't do.

If you don't beleive in the Bible, that's your opinion, but such "arguments" as this will carry no weight when debating with Christians who actually do believe the Bible is the inspired Word of God.

As to the "meat" of your argument, it's thin gruel indeed! You're merely playing with semantics.
In short, homosexual activity cannot constitute a marriage because it cannot create new life, which is the chief purpose of human sexuality. It is a perversion and mockery of the life-giving love of man and wife, and deserves no special legal recognition.

If you are truly interested in debating this topic, and not just trolling, I suggest you run a search on this topic, and dig up some of the old debates where this has been debated in depth. You might learn something.

Edited November 16, 2005 by Socrates

[scardella]

[quote name='PadreSantiago' date='Nov 15 2005, 06:56 PM']And yes obviously couples that are gay, MEN THAT IS can't procreate.  But think of this friend, lesbian partners can procreate.  With science!  Science is cool!  [/quote]

Science is cool, but it doesn't give us license to play God. Science is inherently amoral. Just because something is possible doesn't mean that you want to do it.

You're admitting that homosexual marriage between men cannot procreate. It is inherently closed to life, even if their sexual organs function normally. Thus, you admit that a homosexual marriage (at least between men; on the women I will speak of next) cannot occur. They cannot fulfill one of the primary ends of marriage by definition.

Furthermore, neither the anus nor the mouth were designed with sexual contact in mind. On one of the previous discussions on this, I read an interesting article (which escapes me for the moment) by a doctor on this issue. Anal sex can permanently damage the anus and is at much higher risk of transferring STD's. I don't think teeth make for an inviting place to put your penis. As a rule of thumb, just because a fork can fit in an electric socket, it doesn't mean you want to stick it in there...

Concerning female homosexuality, lesbian partners cannot procreate. Procreation involves begetting a child, which can only occur when a sperm fertilizes an egg. That can only happen between a man and a woman. Right now, technology only allows the DNA of one partner to be present in a cloned baby. However, it hasn't even been done successfully on a human yet. Cloning is not and cannot be procreation. With cloning (and In-vitro fertilization, birth control pills, condoms, etc.), you are dissociating the sexual act from procreation. You are, in effect, playing God.

A large percentage of AIDS in the US (I read over 50%) is in the homosexual community. I'm not even touching on other, more common, STD's. You might want to peruse [url="http://www.inoohr.org/homosexualstatistics.htm"]this site[/url].

[quote name='PadreSantiago']And your talk of "union" define that.  In my dictionary under the 4th definition:

a. marriage
b. sexual intercourse

ok so a union  means marriage or sexual intercourse.  Now I wonder what the definition of sexual intercourse is?

1.Coitus between humans.
2.. [b]Sexual union between humans involving genital contact other than vaginal penetration by the penis.[/b]

Ok so as you can see UNION=Sexual union between humans involving genital contact other than vaginal penetration by the penis. [/quote]

I think I've sufficiently disproved definition #2.

[quote name='PadreSantiago']But the thing to remember is you are caught up in definintions of words.  Words are just symbols they can mean different things to different people.  For example in Englaaand they call an apartment a flat!  Isn't that crazy?  The words you follow (the bible) is a well written book with HUGE amounts of knowledge and wisdom that apply to life; now and then.  In fact I'd say that  99% of the bible is good people![/quote]

The definition thing was the thing I addressed first. I'm trying to get at the thing symbolized, which is far more important than the symbol itself. However, my arguments don't rely on semantics.

Are you denying Inspiration of Scripture? Are you Catholic? Protestant? Non-Christian? That may be helpful to our discussion.

[quote]But I want you to realize that in 2005 some things have changed.  And in this day and age you have no right to define a union as simply between a man and woman.[/quote]

I'm not the one defining it. The word marriage describes an a priori reality. That's the way it has been, that's the way it is, and that's the way it will always be. Pot calling the kettle black! You're the one who is trying to change definitions!

[quote]But remember you can hold your beliefs friend!  Hold onto them, close to your heart as you would your child.  But children grow up unless they goto never never land.  So hide these beliefs and tell yourself and your friends you are right but don't infringe on their sexuality.  That's why I like ideas more than belief, it's really easy to change an idea but not so easy to change a belief.[/quote]

We're trying to discuss truth here. It's independent of one's beliefs or ideas. Why should I attempt to hide a lamp under a bushel basket? All people have a right to know the truth. I'm just trying to defend it. Isn't that what children naturally do? When they know something, they will argue until they're blue in the face. They also naturally seek those who know things better than they do. I follow that by defering to the Catholic Church's teaching.

Furthermore, as an aside, because I so much enjoy Peter Pan, it's Neverland. If you would read the book, you would find that it acknowledges the inevitability of growing up, but encourages the reader to retain a bit of Neverland. It's something I wish I retain more of. I found the movies "Neverland" and "Hook" to expand on those ideas quite nicely. I think GK Chesterton would agree with me. Wonder and awe are some things the world could use a good dose of.

[quote]Ok now about the alcholic thing...this is in reply to statingtheobvious

DeoxyriboNucleic Acid!  Alota people hear the word but they don't know what it means.  DNA people it's the legos of life.  Alcholism is a disease friend.  If you have the alchohol gene it's like a light switch, in that you could go 50 years without having a drink but then one day have one and BOOM your addicted.  That's how it works.  It's heridtary, it's in the genes.  My Grandmother was an alcholic, her son was an alcholic and I am one as well.  That is completely different than homosexuality..  Lots of things can be addicting btw caffenine is addicting, church is addicting, running is addicting, watching tv is addicting.  The fact is the human race is addicted, period.  My point is that homosexuality is not a disease.  So you cannot compare the two. 
[right][snapback]790517[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Your argument just suggest that it is not a [b]genetic[/b] disease. That doesn't change the fact that it is disordered, I'll leave the debate as to whether it's a disease, genetic or no, to others.

I found this [url="http://www.cityofgod.net/courage-seattle/nagel-john6.htm"] homily on homosexuality[/url] linked in another [url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=1468&b=1&st=&p=&"]thread on the phorum[/url]. However, [url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=32721"]this thread[/url] is much more enlightenening on the subject.

Finally, I suggest that you read some of [url="http://www.phatmass.com/directory/index.php/cat_id/414"]these articles[/url].

Ok, that's enough for now...
Note, if you're not familiar w/ phatmass: the blue text is hyperlinks...

Edited November 16, 2005 by scardella

[PadreSantiago]

wow you people are stubborn. Ok lesbian partners can procreate here's how it works USING SCIENCE a woman can have another mans semen injected into their egg. It's like a surragate mother but with the father.

but that doesn't even matter because marriage has nothing to do with procreation it has to do with love and or tax breaks. People marry all the time and don't have kids so don't tell me you have to have kids to be married that's stupid.

[color=red]this is a child friendly phorum, so keep your sexlife private [/color] When I'm worried about stds I wear a condom! Hurray for science! But again It doesn't matter if anal sex is dangerous, it's not your decision to say whether they can do it or not. The whole homosexuals 50% stds thing doesn't matter either it's their choice.


Now when it comes to scripture I guess you could say I'm agnostic in that I believe in a higher being but not religion. I think the bible is just a book of proverbs that are not to be taken literally, it's just a guide. It has good ideas you know like not killing people, not stealing, love thy neighbor all that, but it was written by men. And it had to be written in a way that would make sense to joe six-pack 2000 years ago, it had to apply to him.
Also I believe that god is not some sort of old man with a beard in heaven shaking a finger down at us. God is everything and everywhere. god doesn't think like you or me, god just is. God is gravity and god is the internet. God doesn't hear my prayers or punish me when I'm bad. You see when I was a kid and my mother and family pushed religion on me before I could even grasp the concept of god or church and in hindsight that is wrong. I'm glad I made a choice to have a personal relationship with god all the time without having a priest or a book put restraints on that. And since I don't bow down to any man or church but god I can have my own morals. God knows what's in my heart.

Edited November 17, 2005 by cmotherofpirl

[Norseman82]

[quote name='PadreSantiago' date='Nov 11 2005, 08:38 AM']It is ok to be gay and they are born that way.  Why would god create people that were gay if it were a sin to be gay?  [right][snapback]785630[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

God didn't create people gay. He created us in His image and likeness. It is a consequence of the Fall that this perversion came into the world.

[quote name='PadreSantiago' date='Nov 11 2005, 08:38 AM']  And to expect people to be chaste because they are gay is stealing their right to have a happy life.  [right][snapback]785630[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Since when is happiness an absolute right?

What if it makes someone happy to go to your house and rob it? Those pesky anti-theft laws are stealing their right to a happy life, you know.

[Socrates]

[quote name='PadreSantiago' date='Nov 16 2005, 01:14 PM']wow you people are stubborn.  Ok lesbian partners can procreate here's how it works USING SCIENCE a woman can have another mans semen injected into their egg.  It's like a surragate mother but with the father. [/quote]
The child wasn't the result of the lesbian "union." The kid still has a man for a father. And, frankly, this way of making babies is contrary to human dignity. A child should be conceived out of love between man and woman, not be the result of some guy jacking off into a test tube while looking at porno mags to have his sperm sold to the highest bidder.
Think of the poor kid! What will mom have to tell him about his daddy?

[quote]but that doesn't even matter because marriage has nothing to do with procreation it has to do with love and or tax breaks.  [/quote]
And that's where you're wrong. The main purpose of marriage is procreation and raising a family. Marriage should at least be open to the creation of new human life, and this is something homosexual activity can never accomplish.
The reason for giving married people tax breaks is to support the basic human institution of the family.
Tax breaks are not the reason for marriage - you've got this ass-backwards.

[quote][color=red]family forum remember [/color] [/quote]
Hey, you can save that carp for the locker room. This is a family forum.

The point is that sex organs were made for procreation.
Homo "sex" cannot create life, only spread disease.

[quote]I'm glad I made a choice to have a personal relationship with god all the time without having a priest or a book put restraints on that.  And since I don't bow down to any man or church but god I can have my own morals.
[right][snapback]791627[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Of course. I'm sure Adolf Hitler felt the same way.

Edited November 17, 2005 by cmotherofpirl

[PadreSantiago]

[quote]Since when is happiness an absolute right?

What if it makes someone happy to go to your house and rob it? Those pesky anti-theft laws are stealing their right to a happy life, you know.[/quote]

you are so silly! Your timing is great; are you a pitcher and or comedian? Here's a quote from a little thing called the declaration of independence:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

So in answer to your question; we as americans have had the right to absolute happiness since oh say I don't know July 4, 1776 give or take. =)

Now as to your silly argument about someone breaking into my house to make themselves happy. Come now, we all know you can't infringe on others rights. That's not part of the deal. But being gay or being married and gay does not in any way shape or form infringe on your rights. So it is ok. and so I say good day to you sir!

And wow! I got compared to Adolf Hitler! That's a first. You make me blush sir. I mean it's one thing to call someone evil, but do be compared to the POSTER BOY of evil of the last 100 years. Wow i don't even know what to say. Well first off I'd like to thank all the gay people whose rights I've been standing up for, that was SOOOO adolf hitler of me. I bet adolf hitler loved gay people! Especially gay jews! Ich sage guten Tag zu Ihnen sir...

Edited November 17, 2005 by PadreSantiago

[dspen2005]

[quote name='TheOliverOrder88' date='Nov 4 2005, 09:07 PM']Not really a debateable topic, I am sure you all agree with me on this.

I get very very frustrated with my school when they teach something that is contrary to Church teacher. Like for instance, my freshman religion teacher came out and said that being gay was "ok" and that you were borne that way.

All of my religion teachers (except for one) are so liberal. It makes no sense to me, when I go to a Catholic school that they don't teach Catholic doctrine. Our school is not run by the archdiocese but shouldn't there be some authortive figure who enforces it.

  Help me on this.
[right][snapback]779151[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

the question of genetics and its role in sexual orientation is still disputed. if it is discovered, or knowledge comes to light, that orientation has a genetic component, that still doesn't mitigate moral responsbiliity. alcoholism has a genetic component -- rather, i should say, "can" -- yet this still does not stop society and morality from restraining that compulsion. some genetic consequences are not healthy.... should we embrace these unhealthy disorders as being compatible with natural moral law?

[PadreSantiago]

I'm glad to see someone accepting the possibility that it's in the genes. But come on listen to yourself. You are talking about homosexuality like it's a disease. Alcholism is a disease but homosexuality isn't.

[Norseman82]

[quote name='PadreSantiago' date='Nov 16 2005, 10:58 PM']you are so silly!  Your timing is great; are you a pitcher and or comedian?  Here's a quote from a little thing called the declaration of independence:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

So in answer to your question; we as americans have had the right to absolute happiness since oh say I don't know July 4, 1776 give or take.  =)

Now as to your silly argument about someone breaking into my house to make themselves happy.  Come now, we all know you can't infringe on others rights.  That's not part of the deal.  But being gay or being married and gay does not in any way shape or form infringe on your rights.  So it is ok.  and so I say good day to you sir!

And wow!  I got compared to Adolf Hitler!  That's a first.  You make me blush sir.  I mean it's one thing to call someone evil, but do be compared to the POSTER BOY of evil of the last 100 years.  Wow i don't even know what to say.  Well first off I'd like to thank all the gay people whose rights I've been standing up for, that was SOOOO adolf hitler of me.  I bet adolf hitler loved gay people!  Especially gay jews!
[right][snapback]792211[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

OK, but.......




since these inalienable rights are endowed by our Creator, they must be taken into context, so the "right to happiness" therefore cannot include homosexual marriage since our Creator revealed that homosexual acts are unnatural and wrong.

[PadreSantiago]

Well see except there's this other little thing that's kinda important in america. In fact we owe it all to Catholics. the word is secular, alot people hear the word but don know what it means. Seperation of church and state people. Your getitng hung up on the creator aspect, that means nothing. The fact is the declaration gives us as americans the RIGHT to pursue happiness and your church can't decide what that includes. And again you can pursue happiness AS LONG AS YOU DON'T INFRINGE ON OTHERS RIGHTS. And since being gay doesn't infringe on your rights than your sol.

[Norseman82]

[quote name='PadreSantiago' date='Nov 16 2005, 11:30 PM'] Your getitng hung up on the creator aspect, that means nothing.  [right][snapback]792288[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Then why did you post it??????

[Socrates]

[quote name='PadreSantiago' date='Nov 16 2005, 11:30 PM']Well see except there's this other little thing that's kinda important in america.  In fact we owe it all to Catholics.  the word is secular, alot people hear the word but don know what it means.  Seperation of church and state people.  Your getitng hung up on the creator aspect, that means nothing.  The fact is the declaration gives us as americans the RIGHT to pursue happiness and your church can't decide what that includes.  And again you can pursue happiness AS LONG AS YOU DON'T INFRINGE ON OTHERS RIGHTS.  And since being gay doesn't infringe on your rights than your sol.
[right][snapback]792288[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Sorry to feed the troll, folks, but thought I'd add something before I hit the sack . .

Padre, it's obvious you know absolutely zip about American history or constitutional law. America's law is based on the U.S. Constitution, which says absolutely nothing to promote "gay marriage" (which did not even exist until a few years ago.
The Constitution does not state that religious values can play no part in law. The first amendment merely states that the federal government "shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," which meant simply that the U.S. could not establish a "national church" like the Church of England, and people would be free to worship in the church of their choice.
This law did not even apply to the individual states, most of which had their own official state churches during the early years of the Republic.

Furthermore, most states had laws against sodomy at the time. None of the American founders voiced any objection to this.

In fact, you like to quote the Declaration of Independence ( a declaration of independence from Great Britain, not a legal document) to support "gay marriage."

But did you know that it's author, Thomas Jefferson (also the man credited with the idea of "seperation of church and state) as governor of Virginia, recomended castration as the penalty for sodomy?

So much for Jefferson and the Founding Fathers being gay rights activists!

[PadreSantiago]

I have held my tongue friend and been nice. What does the bible say about calling people trolls?(Matthew, chapter 7 verse 12) No matter call me a troll again. I welcome your insults.

Now, what I'm saying is your beliefs can't be pushed onto the american public. Gay people have the right to live their lives just like you and me. Your morals don't apply to them. If they have to goto Vermont or New Jersey then they will YOU CAN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT! The best part is you don't know who they are, hahaha they could be serving your food, teaching your children, or even be your boss! Not to be cliche but they are here and they are qwerty.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='PadreSantiago' date='Nov 17 2005, 02:19 AM']I have held my tongue friend and been nice.  What does the bible say about calling people trolls?(Matthew, chapter 7 verse 12)  No matter call me a troll again.  I welcome your insults.

Now, what I'm saying is your beliefs can't be pushed onto the american public.  Gay people have the right to live their lives just like you and me.  Your morals don't apply to them.  If they have to goto Vermont or New Jersey then they will YOU CAN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT!  The best part is you don't know who they are, hahaha they could be serving your food, teaching your children, or even be your boss!  Not to be cliche but they are here and they are qwerty.
[right][snapback]792341[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

In the same way, the gay rights groups representing 2% of the population have no business pushing their aberrent and dangerous lifestyle onto the rest of us, or attempting to redefine normality to suit themselves at the expense of the rest of society.