Let A Thousand Weddings Bloom

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ2

Your religious views on the nature of God are shallow and superficial, and to be blunt, simple-minded.

Gay people are not evil, and being gay is not a sin. These points are not up for comment or argument by the likes of you.

Please stop posting bigotry and slanders against people whom you do not and cannot pssislby understand. And more than that, I would expect you to apologize for the terrible things that you have been posting.

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ2

Keep educating the word on "your truth." You are doing a much better job of demonstrating just how much of a crackpot and crank you are, than I ever could.

If this is your cause, to stamp out gay people and be-foul our society with anti-gay propoganda, and set the tone for violence against gay people, then that is your choice. But it is a waste of your engergy and your life.

You only have one life; go ahead and throw it away on this nonsense, if you will.

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ2

Keep educating the word on "your truth." You are doing a much better job of demonstrating just how much of a crackpot and crank you are, than I ever could.

If this is your cause, to stamp out gay people and be-foul our society with anti-gay propoganda, and set the tone for violence against gay people, then that is your choice. But it is a waste of your engergy and your life.

You only have one life; go ahead and throw it away on this nonsense, if you will.

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ2

Keep educating the word on "your truth." You are doing a much better job of demonstrating just how much of a crackpot and crank you are, than I ever could.

If this is your cause, to stamp out gay people and be-foul our society with anti-gay propoganda, and set the tone for violence against gay people, then that is your choice. But it is a waste of your engergy and your life.

You only have one life; go ahead and throw it away on this nonsense, if you will.

TTWSY - ALL of my biases as applied to your posts have to do with your interpretation of proper human conduct by way of your tightly wound moral philosophy - a charcoal-filtered world-view that is primarily informed by ultra-conservative Catholic theology and metaphysics.

I'm not afraid to say that I find this orientation infinitely less satisfying now than when I departed Catholicism for good at age 17, nearly 50 years ago. I realized Catholicism had no answers then, and that view hasn't changed one iota since.

Relatively intelligent humans who have had the great good fortune to be born into a life of relative freedom have a confounding destiny - they must either learn to think for themselves, or be lost to the pre-patterned cognitive mechanics of political ideologies and religious primitivisms of one kind or another.

All of this is ideological and theological structure is more appropriate to dealing with the insecurities of pre-modern man, in my view.

Many opt for the security of a predictable future offered by religion - the good life is not now of course, but much later, after you're dead. But then, who really knows much about beginnnings and endings with absolute certainty?

By comparison, any kind of flexible humanist philosophy looks very good to me, not to mention it's more explicit conformation to the reality of our observed existential fate.

Individualism can be an aggravating and sometimes lonely calling, but it does have it's rewards along the way.....one can actually acquire wisdom based on unconditioned experience.

Even so, we can see that we're all stuck in the same quagmire together. Appealing to supernatural forces for solice and support under such unholy circumstances as we find ourselves in is a thoroughly empty gesture, but that hasn't stopped anyone from crying out in the night for the divine guidence they learned about as school children......

We eventually discover that every problem is a human problem - something divinities surely have very little acquaintence with.

Can we expect yet another Vatican-sanctioned rebuttal??

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
PERSIFLAGE
POSTED ON: | JUNE 20, 2009 6:12 PM

IRT:
From another thread - homosexual behavior seems to be very common-place in the animal kingdom.....and earthy animals is what we are, after all.”

ANS:
We are not animals and we never have been. Man became man instantly when God breathed a soul into matter. Until that point there never was the existence of man, who is made to the image and likeness of God, viz. man is a spiritual being.

Consequently, matter cannot give what it does not have. Matter is the antithesis of spirit. The powers of man are reason and free will imbued in the fundamental principles of human nature, the intellect.

No animal can reason, or has a free will. Hence, animals act on instinct; they cannot reason. Consequently, man is given dominion over the whole Universe by virtue of his intelligence that is mans intellect and free will that no other creature in the Universe has.

Consequently man is not an animal, he does not act under instinct, but he has a free will to chose, Although man can choose to act like an animal, an animal cannot act like a human. He cannot reason, write a book, design a city, score music, and become an artist.

IRT:
“If we are something more, that something has nothing to do with sexual preferences, or even gender for that matter. That something is what we all are - including our kindred animal brethren and everything beyond. “

ANS:
To the contrary, it has every thing to do with sexual preferences because man has a right to choose, an animal has no right to choose.

IRT:
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1905237,00.html?cnn=yes

“We have known for at least a decade that hundreds of animal species — including birds, reptiles, mollusks and, of course, humans — engage in same-gender sexual acts. But no one is quite sure why.”—Time magazine

ANS:
Thus, “Time” magazine says “NO ONE IS QUITE SURE WHY.” The reason is the Natural Law. All things act according to their nature. Animals act according to their animal nature and man according to his human nature. Hence man has a choice, animals do not.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
PERSIFLAGE
“UNDERMINING MARRIAGE”
POSTED ON: | JUNE 20, 2009 4:34 PM

IRT:
“The convoluted hypothesis that homosexual partnerships somehow threaten and undermine private ownership of property is just plain retarded (implicit communism?).”

ANS:
I think you’re letting your biases slant your reasoning. The analogy of private property was an example of a social right being forfeited as we are doing by the transmogrification of the social right of Marriage and the Family necessary for the State’s existence. The post is not saying that gays don’t believe in private property. That would be ridiculous.

Redefining Marriage as gay marriage is changing the meaning and structure of the family and that is equally having a devastating affect on the economy and society.

Hence, Frum says the transmogrification of Marriage is more devastating than what Russia did to private property. Redefining Marriage, and compromising the structure of the family is a presage for the collapse of the State.

IRT:
“This knot-headed idea is just more clear evidence that your entire thesis from start to finish is full of empty doctrinaire theology and rhetoric and nothing more. Grasping for straws in a very big way.”

ANS:
No, I think its your frustration in looking for the ridiculous so you don’t look ridiculous.

IRT:
‘Given the relatively small numbers represented by the homosexual population in the USA, how do the statistics involved in gay marriages represent a threat to your beloved 'traditional' family.”

ANS:
The point is, it’s not that gay marriage per se that will cause the collapse of society; it is what gay marriage purveys. Gay marriage is a contagious idea that impugns the primary purpose of Marriage that sustains the State and its social order.

Marriage protects the children that sustain the State. Gay Marriage and Gay Unions, are of no social value to the State and are detrimental to the State. Neither protects children, the family, or the State. Consequently, they are not subsidized.

Hence, France, Japan, and Russia are subsidizing family births with bonuses because their death rate exceeds their birth rate, due to Contraceptives, Abortion, and Gay Sex. America is at the border of zero population.

Consequently the post says, the foundation of all societies, the family, is being undermined and that is a presage for social suicide. Thus, the post explains why it is traditional for Marriage to be compensated by the State, viz. it is to sustain the State’s existence.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
PERSIFLAGE
THERESA NEUMAN & YOGA

IRT:
“In addition, Therese Neuman was not known to either eat or drink for many years prior to her death - and she was very closely observed by the nuns in her convent and many others over the intervening years.

Naturally this seems to border on the supernatural, but another far more likely explanation (barring deception, which seemed unlikely) would involve viewing this as evidence for the extraordinary power of mind.....over matter, if you will.”

ANS:
That would seem quite impossible to go for years without food or drink, and I don’t believe that mind over matter can sustain life without the intervention of God. No matter how powerful thought is, it cannot changes the Natural Law. That’s God’s domain.

Hence such phenomenon proves the intercession of God in these matters. Without question the Creator who made the Natural Laws can suspend them, and Jesus did just that.

Now if a Yogi priest happens to accomplish such a feat, viz. going years without food or drink, then all that proves is God interceded. Saints are not the only ones that receive favors from God.

it is written that to gain eternal happiness one only has to keep the Commandments and perform the Works of Mercy, and keep the two Great Commandments—“Love your neighbor as you love yourself and as God so loves you,” and “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”

However, it is a lot easier to travel on the road to Paradise in a luxurious limousine (Catholicism) than in a horse and wagon (Other religions). Augustine say, “Love God with your whole heart, your whole mind and all your strength, then do what ever you want.”

I did read your Time Magazine link about Homosexuality causing murder; they seem to have no answer, or any proof it does or doesn’t. However, the statics show that gay sex has a strong propensity toward violence, domestic violence, and sadomasochism.

The DOJ study by Reisman finds male homophiles infecting hundreds of young boy with AIDS. Their studies seem to say the opposite of “Time.” “Time” has a predisposed left wing bent that slants its opinions. Sometime back it wrote that at times the intentional taking of an innocent human life is appropriate, in its defense of Abortion.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
PERSIFLAGE
“MORALITY”
POSTED ON: | JUNE 20, 2009 4:34 PM

IRT:
You are welcome to believe the most outlandish and freakish notions conjured up by the Catholic Church and assorted ancient philosophers - this does not constitute evidence of their true and separate origins and/or existence .... outside the minds of men.”

ANS:
All knowledge comes from that which exists through our sense; otherwise, we would not know anything because it would all be in the mind.

The Natural Moral Laws (NML) are the laws of the proper behavior of all men based on man’s human nature. Anything that contradicts human nature is a violation of the moral law. Hence, to legalize stealing is a violation of man’s right to own property. A law that proscribes the right to marry is an unjust law that violates the social nature of man. Nor can one morally take away one’s right to speak, hence, the freedom of speech.

These rights are not given by man but by God imbued in his human nature. They are promulgated by man’s conscience, determined by reason, and verified by the fruits they bear.

Yes, you have a right to believe and do what ever you want, but you have no right to choose the consequences for your acts, that is determined by the Natural Moral Law that act through the Natural Law.

MORALITY:

http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p3s1c1a4.htm

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
PERSIFLAGE
NATURAL LAW
POSTED ON JUNE 20, 2009 4:34 PM

IRT:
“There are no natural/moral laws handed down from supernatural/divine sources that have ever been proven to exist outside the minds of men. There is in fact no 'supernatural' anything, outside the minds of men. Please provide proof positive to the contrary.”

ANS:
So you believe there are no NML. That’s exactly what the Fascists, Communists, the Agnostics, and Atheists believe. They make their own moral laws. When man makes the laws of morality, he consequently screws up society. The fruits of those societies that do are patently destructive.

Of course, there are no (NML) to a pagan. If you don’t believe in the God of our Judeo-Christian heritage, the God, our Founding Fathers (FF) based our Bill of Rights on, you cannot believe there is a NML. Hence, there is no recognition of the NML in atheistic and agnostic countries.

Thus, your morality is what you think it is, it is subjective, relative, and pragmatic. Consequently, the agnostic atheist and the pagan are often heard to say, “Believe what you want but don’t force your morality on me!” The Court did that in “Roe v. Wade.” They ignored the NML, wrote their own moral laws, and removed the NML of the Right to Life. Subsequently, over 50 million unborn have been murdered.

Let me ask you, why do societies have to have laws against murder, stealing, and regulate marriage? Why don’t animals have such laws? And, can any society have a social order without these laws?

Second, who determines what these laws we abide by are and what are they based on? Are there unjust laws and just laws? Why? Did the FF, just out of the clear blue sky make up the Bill of Rights. If not, what did they base these rights on if they were not whimsical.

Third, why do nations rise and fall? What causes this to happen? If you haven’t figured it out yet, try violations of the NML.

Fourth, when we contrast North Korea against South Korea is their any differences between the two? Why? Try this, one is in consonance to the NML, the other makes its own moral laws. The former depends on man, the latter depends on the Natural Law.

So what are these NML? Why do they exist? Who makes them. The FF knew who made them and they knew that they were inviolable. Read the Declaration of Independence; our rights were endowed by God. Even a pagan should be able to perceive the NML exists from the fruits they bear. The social success of any society is directly in proportion to its adherence to the NML.

“HOMOSEXUAL GAY SEX UNDERMINES THE FAMILY, SOCIETY, AND WOMEN.”

A massive exercise in social engineering has been unleashed to undermine and destroy the traditional rights and power that women have long enjoyed in traditional society. Briefly stated the emphasis has been shifted from content to process. As George
Gilder observed over 20 years ago in his book Sexual Suicide, most people enjoy their real satisfaction and gratification, not at work, but in the domestic and sexual aspects of life.

The new technology of reproduction has in fact separates women from their own femininity, assures the bondage of women to male technocracy, and removes men from the civilizing and socialization process of responsible fatherhood.

Men are freed to pursue their own sterile and, without woman, meaningless, sexual cycles in uncivilized groups, while technology sustains the community. In the pursuit of a nonexistent and unattainable equality, women have been induced to forsake their true nature and to relinquish their natural erotic power over men.

In the process, women have been deluded into becoming a subordinate class. In an authentic sexual society, the female physique is dominant.
Man becomes dependent on the woman's love for him. He relies on her for sexual identity in a way in which she, who already has a sexual identity, never has to rely on him. She can bear a child whether he stays or not, while he loses his child if she leaves.

His tie to the future, and his engagement in civilized society, passes through her womb. As Gilder states, in a sexually suicidal society, the male body becomes the physical ideal, and the male pattern of insecurity, dominance, and group aggression will prevail over domestic, and individual values.

Society forces others to underwrite and support marriage, not because marriage is good for the couple, but because it is good for the children, they produce. A union that cannot produce children is not one that the rest of society should be forced to subsidize. Thus, even if homosexuals can and do form permanent, emotionally serious partnerships, they do not merit the formal recognition of marriage.

Attempts to redefine the institution of marriage to accommodate same-sex or gay marriage diminish marriage and inflict serious harm on the prestige and morale of those who make major economic and personal sacrifices to create and sustain their families.

wOMAN HAS A NATURAL ROLE BY DESIGN IN MARRIAGE:

“Traditional Family Marginalized by Artificial Birth Control”

Much of the economic and social confusion in society is the logical consequence of the moral unraveling of the family and the reduced status of women due to the artificial suppression of her natural vocation within the home, which is motherhood.

Scientific and technological progress has had a leveling effect on society, which tends to minimize and marginalize this special vocation of women. While some medical advances have extended life and made it more livable, other technologies, particularly in the area of biological and genetic engineering, have destabilized society and confused the traditional understanding of the difference between right and wrong.

The invention of various birth control devices has confused the fundamental relationship between love and sex and challenged the collective wisdom concerning the general and specific ends of human sexuality and human existence.

The widespread, uncritical acceptance of birth control has unleashed a sexual revolution that based on the principle of sex for pleasure that has lead to all and any form of sexual and pseudosexual activity.

The order and continuity of the long term rhythm of the female sexual cycle which links past and future generations has been destroyed and with it the sense of meaning in life which is essential for the psychological growth of both men and women. Having abandoned their own true sexuality, women are now encouraged to emulate, the immaturity and aggression of male sexuality.

From another thread - homosexual behavior seems to be very common-place in the animal kingdom.....and earthy animals is what we are, after all.

If we are something more, that something has nothing to do with sexual preferences, or even gender for that matter. That something is what we all are - including our kindred animal brethren and everything beyond.

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1905237,00.html?cnn=yes

From another thread - homosexual behavior seems to be very common-place in the animal kingdom.....and earthy animals is what we are, after all.

If we are something more, that something has nothing to do with sexual preferences, or even gender for that matter. That something is what we all are - including our kindred animal brethren and everything beyond.

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1905237,00.html?cnn=yes

TTWSY - you are a veritable blitzkrieg of bizarre and unfounded notions, supported by 'professionals' with exactly the same bigoted mindset. And how many times must the following be said?

There are no natural/moral laws handed down from supernatural/divine sources that have ever been proven to exist outside the minds of men. There is in fact no 'supernatural' anything, outside the minds of men. Please provide proof positive to the contrary.

You are welcome to believe the most outlandish and freakish notions conjured up by the Catholic Church and assorted ancient philosophers - this does not constitute evidence of their true and separate origins and/or existence .... outside the minds of men.

Another thing to ponder - American homosexuals are as steeped in consumerism and capitalism as the most inveterate flamingly heterosexual libertarian.

The convoluted hypothesis that homosexual partnerships somehow threaten and undermine private ownership of property is just plain retarded (implicit communism?). This knot-headed idea is just more clear evidence that your entire thesis from start to finish is full of empty doctrinaire theology and rhetoric and nothing more. Grasping for straws in a very big way.....

Given the relatively small numbers represented by the homosexual population in the USA, how do the statistics involved in gay marriages represent a threat to your beloved 'traditional' family arrangements e.g. one man, one woman, 2.5 children, and an all-too-likely divorce in the future??

You really need to get a grip on reality - your perceptions are seriously impaired by a near-lethal overdose of religion.......

“HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE-UNDERMINDS WOMEN AND THE FAMILY”

L.M. Farrell, Ph. D writes, “The long-term survival of civilization rests on two fundamental institutions, the nuclear family, and the right to private property that is necessary to sustain the nuclear family.

As David Frum notes, (Saturday Night, December 1995), the dismal consequences of the Russian experience in eliminating the right to private property are now well known to all Less commonly acknowledged is the social and economic crisis that has been unleashed because of the revolutionary change in thinking about the family.

The traditional view is based on the common sense observation that marriage and the family is a public institution, in which all society has a stake in preserving, because families create the
next generation of society.

More recently, society has fallen into the bad habit of thinking of the family only as a private relationship between two people. This has destabilized family life and contributed to the growth of other social ills including an increase in the number of children who will learn less in school, earn less at work, commit more crimes, suffer more sexual troubles, and adjust less well to society than previous generations.

While the negative effects of family breakup are clear, policies designed to re-engineer the family and re-educate public opinion continue, often supported by taxpayer dollars.

Attempts to strengthen the family have been complicated by the complacency of lawmakers, judges, public officials, and other members of society, entrusted to defend the common good. The family has been complicated by those who choose to regard changing attitudes about the primary structure of the family as a mere change in public taste, much like the disappearance of the hat, as Frum observes, to be accommodated and even hurried along.

Court decisions which require employers to extend employee benefits, originally provided to married spouses to help sustain the family, to all cohabiting couples have effectively abolished marriage as a distinct legal status.

When homosexuals ask why their cohabitational relationships should not be treated like heterosexual relationships, the only rational response is to treat all cohabitations as private matters entitled to no special status nor subsidies from third parties such as employers or government.—L.M. Farrell, Ph. D.”

http://www.ewtn.com/library/ISSUES/HOMARRIA.TXT

DANIELINTHELIONSDEN
“A MIND IS A DANGEROUS THING WHEN IT IS GOVERNED BY ONE’S IRASCIBILITY!”
POSTED ON JUNE 19, 2009 4:28 PM

IRT:
“You say that gay people are evil. But I know that is not true. And if that is not true, then it is a lie, your lie.”

ANS:
There you go with your pseudepigraphy again. Show where I said homosexuals are evil. Again, how many times do I have to write this before you can comprehend it? Man is made to the image and likeness of God, therefore, man is sacred and endowed with dignity. Sin is the destruction of human dignity and its sacredness. Hence, man is directed by God to do good and avoid evil.

If what has been said is a lie, then put your money where your mouth is, or otherwise your rhetoric is just hot air. I just repeated what the New York Times said, what gays say in their magazines and media outlets; they certainly aren’t homophobic. Have you ever heard of the “Advocate?” If you haven’t it’s a gay magazine. Try reading it sometime and check out the advertisements that are carried by this magazine. I don’t think you can handle it.

http://www.drjudithreisman.com/archives/CALIF%20HEARING5.pdf

These “adolescent” initiates range, Herdt explains, “from fourteen to just under twenty-one.” THE HARD DATA ON HOMOSEXUAL V. HETEROSEXUAL CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE

A major study reported in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) concluded “Sexual abuse of boys appears to be common, underreported, under-recognized, and under treated ”citing to other “large scale studies” in which 34% of 1001 men who had sex with men attending a sexually transmitted clinic….reported histories of sexual abuse.”

Writing in Gay and Lesbian Youth (1989), the heterophobic Dr. Herdt explained the need for aggressive sexual recruitment of boys and girls. He wrote, “We had not foreseen that…gay youth would also have to contend with the new horrors of AIDS [that]…teenage gays and lesbians would shun older gays as role models or even as friends. [To meet this challenge, said Herdt, only now has gay culture begun to institutionalize “socialization” techniques for the transmission of its cultural knowledge to a younger generation… “[as] local “gay” movements provide their own infrastructural support for the coming out process in teens.

DANIELINTHELIONSDEN
“YOU NEED TO GET A LIFE”
POSTED ON JUNE 19, 2009 4:28 PM

IRT:
Gay people are a part of life.

ANS:
Yes, they are a part of life and therefore must live according to the rules of lfe, the Natural Moral Law, or perish.

“The people of our time are more and more convinced that the human person's dignity and vocation demand that they should discover, by the light of their own intelligence, the values innate in their nature, that they should ceaselessly develop these values and realize them in their lives, in order to achieve an ever greater development.

In moral matters, man cannot make value judgments according to his personal whim: "In the depths of his conscience, man detects a law which he does not impose on himself, but which holds him to obedience. . . . For man has, in his heart, a law written by God [conscience]. To obey it is the very dignity of man; according to it he will be judged."

Moreover, through His Revelation, God has made known to us Christians His plan of salvation. He has held up to us Christ, the Savior and Sanctifier, in His teaching and example, as the supreme and immutable Law of life: "I am the light of the world; anyone who follows Me will not be walking in the dark, he will have the light of life."

Therefore, there can be no true promotion of man's dignity unless the essential order of his nature is respected. Of course, in the history of civilization many of the concrete conditions and needs of human life have changed and will continue to change. But all evolution of morals and every type of life must be kept within the limits imposed by the immutable principles based upon every human person's constitutive elements and essential relations-- elements and relations that transcend historical contingency.

These fundamental principles, which can be grasped by reason, are contained in "the Divine Law--eternal, objective, and universal- -whereby God orders, directs, and governs the entire universe and all the ways of the human community, by a plan conceived in wisdom and love.

Man has been made by God to participate in this law, with the result that, under the gentle disposition of Divine Providence, he can come to perceive ever increasingly the unchanging truth." This Divine Law is accessible to our minds.

Hence, those many people are in error who today assert that one can find neither in human nature nor in the revealed law any absolute and immutable norm to serve for particular actions other than the one which expresses itself in the general law of charity and respect for human dignity.”

DANIELINTHELIONSDEN
“YOU NEED TO GET A LIFE”
POSTED ON JUNE 19, 2009 4:28 PM

IRT:
Gay people are a part of life. You have a special sense of privilege and entitlement that you think makes you better. Well, guess what? YOU'RE NOT BETTER THAN ANYBODY! especially gay people.

ANS: George Orwell said it correctly, “During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.”

You have no idea what I think, and that’s evident. You’re so blinded by your biases that you can’t even see what you read much less know it.

Yes, I have several special senses of privilege. One is to know the truth when I see it. The second is to be an American and fight like Hell with the truth to keep a bunch of perverts who think good is evil and evil is good, from destroying this country.

I can see that it’s a “child” and not a “thing” being born when a butcher plunges a surgical scissors into the back of its skull and sucke out its brains. That’s been denied by the morally blind left who only have compassion for themselves after they’ve screwed around, became pregnant, and had their child murdered. I can see abortion is murder when the abortionist botches his abortion and then strangles the helpless survivor Have you any qualms about that?

Another privilege I have is to be able see the consequences from gay sex. Have you ever witnessed someone dying from AIDS, or watched a partial birth abortion? If it’s self-righteous to care about unborn innocent children being ripped apart in a mothers womb and their flesh sold on the open market than so be it.

If it is being hypocritical to care about the 26 million AIDS victims who have died worldwide and the 35 million with HIV notwithstanding twice that number with STDs then sign me up as being a hypocrite. If caring about the recruitment of young children NAMBLA and the like to be raped and sexually exploited than so be it. I plead guilty.

I said it over and over again, hate the sin love the person, but when one is blinded by their predispositions they become incapable of discerning the truth. and resort to this pseudepigraphy.

Hence, the famous defense for the flummoxed is obloquy, live in the alternate world and claim that everything what they can’t understand is a lie, and telling the truth is hatred.

Gloria Steinem, finally said one thing that is true. “The Truth will set you free, but first it will piss you off.” That, I can do nothing about. So you’ll just have to remain pissed off until you can see the reality around you.

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ2

Gay people are a part of life. You have a special sense of privilege and entitlement that you thinks makes you better. Well, guess what?

YOU'RE NOT BETTER THAN ANYBODY! especially gay people.

You say that gay people are evil. But I know that is not true. And if that is not true, then it is a lie, your lie.

On the contrary, what are you? who are you? a Godless agent of Satan? one of wolves in sheep's clothing that Jesus warned us about?

You speak as God would speak, putting words into the mouth of God and of Jesus. Far from being your "persosnal religion," you are promoting a politically hostile anti-gay sentiment, which sets the stage for violence against gay people.

But people like shouid keep in mind, that liberal people have second amendment rights too.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
FARNAZ1MANSOURI1
POSTED ON | JUNE 18, 2009

IRT:
“You can read quite a bit of "Killer Priest" on google books. Seems to be a fairly serious work.
http://books.google.com/books?id=Wfnm4_ZJTTQC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Fr.+Hans+Schmidt

ANS:
The book says “Killer Priest” and is about a lunatic priest not two not three etc. I assume you haven’t even read it, since you say, “it seems.” You might read this link. What’s more, the Catholic Church has nothing to do with the guy, he’s not living according to the Church, and the Church is not participating in his murders. They are against the Fifth Commandment.

This comes from the New York Times:
New York Times: Homosexuals Commit 68% of All Mass Murders In a January 2l, 1984 editorial, The New York Times reported, "many of the most violent multiple murders have been committed by homosexual males. No priest mentioned in murder cases. No mention of murders by priest in John Jay Bishops' report that gives extensive data on the investigation.

Compared to heterosexual distrust or dislike, the rare assault inflicted on someone at a bar, and the singular although horrible aberrant murder--it is fair to say that the on-going, most significant "hate crimes" against homosexuals are, as Kirk and Madsen noted, inflicted by homosexuals.

"[In 1987] the San Francisco police responded to no fewer than 100 calls per month for gay and lesbian domestic violence ...[T]here are thousands upon thousands of victims of gay men's domestic violence in the United States each month."

California hearing Judith Riesman
http://www.drjudithreisman.com/archives/CALIF%20HEARING5.pdf

Current Court records reveal that 1/3 of all child abusers are homosexuals. Since the total homosexual population is statistically, not more than 1- 1/2 to 2- 1/2 percent of the population, this means that homosexuals are sixteen (16) times more likely to abuse children than are heterosexuals.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
PERSIFLAGE
POSTED ON: JUNE 19, 2009 8:06 AM

IRT:
“Certainly nobody expects the Catholic Church and it's minions to keep up with the times!! The Church remains mired in the past – regarding 'concupiscience' et al - see Augustine below."

“whenever I get those feelings I just slip on my hair shirt and kneel on a broom handle for an hour or so.
And Wala! Distressing thoughts are immediately replaced by distressing feelings....very painful, but in a good way.”

ANS:

http://caae.phil.cmu.edu/Cavalier/80130/part1/sect3/texts/R_Augustine.html

I think your link on Augustine belies your contention about the Church. The problems he presents are not rendered unimportant today. They do not deteriorate because of changing times. The problems of a just war still remain and the rules for a just war are not inhibited by time.

The reason this is true is because the principles of human behavior never change because the nature of man never changes. Thus, the “Ten Commandments” will never be antediluvian or meaningless because they pertain to human nature. Hence, the Bill of Rights are based on human nature, man’s inalienable rights will never change unless man’s nature changes, and then he wouldn’t be a man.

Further, the laws of mathematics aren’t affected by time, nor is any laws of physics like the Law of Gravity, unless they never were right in the first place. Time only makes us understand the laws of nature better; it doesn’t change them; it just expands our understanding of them which have always existed from their creation.

Consequently, the teachings of the Church also cannot be antediluvian or obsolete. Why, because they pertain to God, who is unchangeable. He doesn’t exist in time therefore God is Omniscient, and Prescient.

The Commandments are God’s natural laws for human nature. Hence, Jesus says His laws will not pass away. “Lu 21:33 “Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.” The Church’ will pass away, but the word of Christ will not because He is the Word and the Word was made Flesh.

TTWSY - I never said there was not a highly developed conspiracy against homosexuality running amuck in the USA in the recent past, and very probably supported by elements of the mass media.

I don't think you will find that to be so much the case today. And do read the brief Times article that I included for for your enlightenment.

Much has changed and continues to change in both the political and social climates of today regarding homosexuality and it's acceptance as normative behavior, compared to even a decade ago.

Certainly nobody expects the Catholic Church and it's minions to keep up with the times!!

The Church remains mired in the past - regarding 'concupiscience' et al - see Augustine below.....whenever I get those feelings I just slip on my hair shirt and kneel on a broom handle for an hour or so.

And Wala! Distressing thoughts are immediately replaced by distressing feelings....very painful, but in a good way.

http://caae.phil.cmu.edu/Cavalier/80130/part1/sect3/texts/R_Augustine.html

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
PERSIFLAGE
POSTED ON JUNE 18, 2009 10:44 PM

IRS:
“Drawing correlations between mass murderers and homosexuality is beyond absurd - it's verging on a kind of homophobic hysteria. Read the brief Time article below, and then read the far more extensive cover of sexual sadism.”

ANS:
I can't believe you would call the New York Times homophobic. You really don't want to admit to the truth.

Your dispute is not with me, it’s with the New York Times, the Justice Department’s $800,000 study, the California hearings on Homosexuality, The Advocate, "Teen Sex: They're Doing it‹ And AIDS Is Killing Them By the Thousands," March 24, 1992.
Kenneth Wooden, WEEPING IN THE PLAYTIME OF OTHERS, McGraw Hill, New York, 1976, At. 81

Here are just a few of the multitude of documents these studies have been drawn from.

Children and Youth Commission, Portland, Oregon.

Herdt, GAY AND LESBIAN YOUTH, Harrington Park Press, New York, 1989, at 3.

Alan Bell and Martin Weinberg , HOMOSEXUALITIES, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1978, at 85.
Id.

Murray cites to a report from the Journal of the American Medical Association in Herdt, GAY CULTURE, at 142.
Id.

The Advocate, August 23, 1944 at 20.
The full report, Judith Reisman and Charles Johnson, Partner Solicitation Characteristics as a Reflection of Male Sexual Orientation, is available via First Principles Press, Inc., Louisville, KY, 1994

Eugene Abel, et. Al., "Self-Reported Sex Crimes of Nonincarcerated Paraphiliacs," Journal of Interpersonal Violence, Vol. 2, No. 1, March 1987, AT 5-25.

Abel in Reisman and Johnson in Partner Solicitation, at 57.

Robert Knight, "Sexual Disorientation: Faulty Research in the Homosexual Debate," Family Research Council, Family Policy, Washington, DC., June 1992, at 2.

The Advocate, March 24, 1992. at 41.

Louisville Eccentric Observer (LEO),(a city paper) "The New Face of AIDS," MAY 17, 2000, p. 15.

See ads like the Lasson Newspaper, March 9, 1992, George Mason Junior-Senior High School, Falls Church City, VA, Student Paper, offering "support groups" and a "helpline" for "Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Youth (14-21) since 1985." See the poster offering those who might identify as "minority" youth scholarships and the like, April 23, 2992 via the social work system of Multnomah County

Department of Commerce Library of Congress No. 4-18089-- data on boys and girls:

Herdt, GAY CULUTRE, at 44.
Id., at 36.

William Holmes and Gail Slap, "Sexual Abuse of Boys," JAMA, December 2, 1998, p. 1855.
Id., p. 1856

Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1992, U.S. Department of Commerce Library of Congress No. 4-18089-- data on boys and girls

Hello, All, Interesting Chat,

What might we say about Fr. Hans Schmidt, mass murderer, for whom I believe stigmata may have played a part? Heterosexual, je crois.
Googleable. A sort of psychopath for all straight seasons, no?

Farnaz Q

Drawing correlations between mass murderers and homosexuality is beyond absurd - it's verging on a kind of homophobic hysteria. Read the brief Time article below, and then read the far more extensive cover of sexual sadism.

It is almost without doubt that the vast majority of mass murderers and serial killers would be nominally male and heterosexual, although in the latter case, frequently of the deviant and/or sexually dysfunctional varity. Sexual perversion has virtually nothing to do with sexual persuasion per se........

Statistically speaking, heterosexual males are the major source of most of the world's societal problems, both large and small - that observation would be very hard to argue with.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,907794-2,00.html

http://www.forensicpsychiatry.ca/paraphilia/sadism.htm

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
ONOFRIO
“THE IRRATIONALITY OF A NOVICE TROGLODYTE”
POSTED on: | JUNE 17, 2009 10:57 PM

IRT
“Pedophilia of the Church, which preferred to let it continue and sweep it under their rug of deceit and lies”

I see you still haven’t removed the beam yet.

ANS:
http://www.catholicleague.org/research/abuse_in_social_context.htm

“According to a survey in the New York Times, 1.8 percent of all priests ordained from 1950 to 2001 have been accused of child sexual abuse.

Thomas Kane, author of Priests are People Too, estimates that between 1 and 1.5 percent of priests have had charges made against them. Of contemporary priests, the Associated Press found that approximately two-thirds of 1 percent of priests have charges pending against them. [vii]

“Dr. Thomas Plante, a psychologist at Santa Clara University, found that “80 to 90% of all priests who in fact abuse minors have sexually engaged with adolescent boys, not prepubescent children.

Compared to heterosexual distrust or dislike, the rare assault inflicted on someone at a bar, and the singular although horrible aberrant murder--IT IS FAIR TO SAY THAT THE ON-GOING, MOST SIGNIFICANT "HATE CRIMES" AGAINST HOMOSEXUALS ARE, AS KIRK AND MADSEN NOTED, INFLICTED BY HOMOSEXUALS.

“[In 1987] the San Francisco police responded to no fewer than 100 calls per month for gay and lesbian domestic violence ...[T]here are thousands upon thousands of victims of gay men's domestic violence in the United States each month."—from the link previously given you. My friend take the beam out of your eye before you try to remove the speck in the eyes of the Church.

Here's a particularly enigmatic and modern case of stigmata just below. This phenomenon has been rather widely studied medically, and the wounds (which appear periodically) are clearly a psychosomatic manifestation generated at a deep unconscious level - they simulate but do not replicate the actual wounds to be expected with an real crucifixion.

In addition, Therese Neuman was not known to either eat or drink for many years prior to her death - and she was very closely observed by the nuns in her convent and many others over the intervening years.

Naturally this seems to border on the supernatural, but another far more likely explanation (barring deception, which seemed unlikely) would involve viewing this as evidence for the extraordinary power of mind.....over matter, if you will.

Experienced yogans have achieved similar feats. Remarkable all the same! Why the field of western psychology doesn't seem to take a greater interest in these types of phenomena is curious to me - although research money for studying such strangeness is probably mighty hard to come by!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stigmata
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therese_Neumann

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
ONOFRIO
“THE IRRATIONALITY OF A NOVICE TROGLODYTE”
POSTED on: | JUNE 17, 2009 10:57 PM

IRT
“As for pederasts and pedophiles - need I say more on that score? These types didn't suddenly materialize with your favorite whipping boy *The Sexual Revolution*, and the Catholic Church has sheltered too many of them for too long.”

ANS:
Like I have previously said, “Take the beam from your own eye before you take the speck out of your brothers' eye.”

““Homosexuals Commit 68% of All Mass Murders” In a January 2l, 1984 editorial, The New York Times reported, "many of the most violent multiple murders have been committed by homosexual males”

They’re not talking about the Catholic Church: I can’t recall the pedophile and pederastic priest being accused of murdering people.

You might try worrying about this rather than the Church who has corrected their problem. The advocates of homosexual lifestyles are impervious to its consequences. “ In New York schools alone a study showed 5 percent of PSS teachers are pedophiles, in respect to 0.25% in all Catholic priests of the last 30 years and little if anything is done about it by public school officials. One child in the New York Public Schools is said to be molested per day by PSS personnel.”

Reading the article further you’ll find that all their pedophiles are transferred to other school districts of NY. You might also not that .25 percent of priest in the last 30 years were found guilty compared to the 80 percent of homosexuals in the Q Public, who admit to pedophilia and pederasty.

The so called cover-ups weren’t really cover-ups. These homosexual priest were evaluated by professional doctors who told the dioceses these profligates were cured. That stands to reason when the American Psychiatric Association and the American Psychological Association, and its Psychiatrists and Psychologists are telling you homosexuality poses no problems and the Bishop acted on such advise you have a hard time blaming the Church.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
ONOFRIO
“THE IRRATIONALITY OF A NOVICE TROGLODYTE”
POSTED on: | JUNE 17, 2009 10:57 PM

IRT:
What do you call it when St Teresa recounts kissing the open wounds of Christ? Pietas?” “As for necrophilia - what do you call the adoration paid by Catholic faithful to martyrs' body parts and the embalmed corpses of saints? What do you call it when St Teresa recounts kissing the open wounds of Christ? Pietas?”

ANS:
If Mother Theresa did kissed the wounds of the Pieta, she did not adore a statute. The statue was a reminder of Christ’s suffering and death, as is a picture of your mother, wife, or best friend to remind you of them. She openly is expressing her humble thanks for the Son of God dying on the Cross for her and saving all mankind from eternal damnation. You should do the same.

The awesomeness of God doing such magnanimous act of love for mankind is inconceivable. Thus, it is written, Joh 15:13 - Greater love than this no man hath, that a man lay down his life for the good of others.

You really have to stop your willful neglect of the truth, or your refusing to acquire a modicum of knowledge of the subject you are spouting off about before making such reckless and ignoramus remarks. You could have avoided making your self look so nescient and mindless by first doing some homework on what you evidently have little or no sense of.

Catholics do not adore the relics of the saints. The preservation of the saints’ bodies are a testimony to the sacred and holy lives they lead and the Church venerates them, not adores them.

The Church venerates saints that those who want to live a holy life have the saints as models. Moreover, Catholics pray to the saints for their intercession to assist their prayers of necessity and lay them before the throne of Jesus that Jesus might grant the favors those in prayer ask.

All this talk of incorruptible bodies and other miraculous phenomena got me to pondering a particularly gnarly question: Is a well preserved corpse long after death a sign of saintliness, or is no corpse left behind more direct evidence of high spiritual achievement? See the links below.

Our readers must decide this critical question for themselves........

And, there is always cremation for those that can't achieve 'the rainbow body' on their own.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incorruptibility
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subtle_body
http://www.enlightennext.org/magazine/j21/white.asp

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ2,

Your huffing and puffing continues:

"It appears evident from these fatuous and vacuous statements, that you know little of what you have pontificated on, and less about the terms you used."

My house ain't blown down...

Look in the mirror, TTWSYF. You're not only a mangler of the English language, but well stocked with ignorance yourself. Remember "Ramsey"?

Regarding sexuality - you definitely "protest too much", betraying your own prurient obsessions. Furthermore, you are clearly ashamed of your own loyalties, since you won't own up to your Opus Deism. Neither have you denied using Opus Deistic mortification techniques, which implies that you yourself practice the very sado-masochism you deplore in others.

Nevertheless, I propose a parley:

You stop fulminating ignorantly about queer love lives, and I'll stop spouting acerbically about the implicit sado-masochism of Catholic aesthetics.

Can you do it? Can you stop hiding behind your dogma and apopleptic adjectives, step down from your cathedra, and trust God? Or are you lost without fear?

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
ONOFRIO
“THE IRRATIONALITY OF A NOVICE TROGLODYTE”
POSTED on: | JUNE 17, 2009 10:57 PM

IRT:
“As for necrophilia - what do you call the adoration paid by Catholic faithful to martyrs' body parts and the embalmed corpses of saints? What do you call it when St Teresa recounts kissing the open wounds of Christ? Pietas?”

ANS:
You really have to stop willful neglect or refusing to acquire knowledge that one should acquire and know before making such ignoramus remarks. You could have avoided making your self look so nescient and mindless by first doing some homework on what you evidently have little or no sense of.

Catholics do not adore the relics of the saints. The preservation of the saints is a testimony to the sacred and holy lives they lead and the Church venerates them, not adores them. The Church venerates saints that those who want to live a holy life have the saints as models. Moreover, Catholics pray to the saints for their intercession to assist their prayers of necessity and lay them before the throne of Jesus that Jesus might grant the favors those in prayer ask.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
ONOFRIO
“THE IRRATIONALITY OF A NOVICE TROGLODYTE”
POSTED on: | JUNE 17, 2009 10:57 PM

IRT:
“You mention *stigma*. What of the stigmata? A prime example of sado-masochistic psychopathology; the transcendent acme of self-loathing.’”

ANS:
I will answer your shallow statements so that other will not believe by not answering them they are true, but are as ridiculous and insensible as they are.

Consequently, a stigmata is not a stigma. I will not tell you the difference because you are too lazy to look them up, a characterization of your inordinate comport and lack of scholarship.

Can you tell me where I even mentioned a stigma? To claim that a stigmata is a prime example of sadomasochistic self-loathing is unbelievable. First, you should look up what sadomasochistic means and then what a stigma is. You know not what either means.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
ONOFRIO
“DELUSIONS AND IRRATIONALIZATIONS”
POSTED ON JUNE 17, 2009 9:34 PM

IRT:
Said Church revels in its very own *Culture of Death*, and resents the competition.
Thee:
"the stigma of sado-masochists necrophiles, pederasts, pedophiles" “You're obviously blind to the sado-masochistic potential of the Stations of the Cross, featured prominently in Catholic churches worldwide - whips, domination, torture, naked flesh, ecstatic eyes rolled skyward...Ever seen a carven Spanish *Corpus Christi* with its all luridly gaping wounds, an agony of ecstasy?”

ANS:
Oh, I am not blind to the sadomasochists during Our Lord’s Passion of the Cross. First, you should look up what sadomasochist means. If you don’t know it yet, the Jewish hierarchy was the SMs, not Christ. Jesus was an innocent man put to death because Pilate preferred to please man than God. Pilate washed his hands of the fiasco claiming Jesus was innocent.

Next find out what the Corpus Christi is and maybe you wouldn’t make such a stupefying remark.

If anyone is blind, it’s you. My friend, before you try telling Catholics what they believes, try first finding out what they believe instead of believing what you think they believe. You only irradiate your ignorance of the Catholic Faith.

Because of your remarks, I don’t believe you have the slightest knowledge of what Catholics believe and that’s why I gave you the link to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, viz. to avoid you embarrassing yourself by making these outlandish asinine and thoughtless statements whose only basis rest on your mordant and delusional biases.

It appears evident from these fatuous and vacuous statements, that you know little of what you have pontificated on, and less about the terms you used.

Consequently, I can assume you don’t want to know the truth or you would have checked the Catechism before you made these mindless and callow statements. I therefore have to conclude that you can’t handle the truth or you would have sought it rather than offering this prattle.

That is evidenced from you not even checking what the truth is and relying on your lack of knowledge blinded by your prejudices.

ONOFRIO,

Thanks for the respect, it's much appreciated. You get props from me also. From reading your posts it seems like your mind is a sea of knowledge while mine is just a puddle...lol I hope we can communicate again because I'm sure I could learn a thing or two from you.

I pray you have a healthy, prosperous life. God bless you

And I doff my fedora to you Onofrio - for sharing your talents and incredible depth of knowledge.

I agree that Thomas Baum is a kind of Catholic Gnostic with a most genuinely beneficent message, which he bases on honest experience. We may just find the true seed of Christianity there.

On the other hand, a doctrinaire reading of Catholic theology as a guide to the sanctified life is quite a different matter - and something I had more than enough of in my youth!

Rather than adopting a religious view, I personally prefer to keep my own fate a mystery until that very last moment, if it ever arrives at all.

Nostrovia!

Persiflage,

Thank you for your kind remarks and your reflections; they mean a lot to me.

As for the reams of good sense with which you've blessed this thread - I salute!

Such a broad church, the Catholic, to include souls as utterly different as TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ2 and Thomas Baum...

Middlenmae,

Respect for maintaining good cheer in response to my acidic devilry.

I hope you have a great day too.

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ2,

Thee:
"And finally, Elias in 1 Kings 18 cf. brought down the fires from heaven and those who mocked and vilified God and they perished. Thus, it is written, “Then the pagans fell down in awe and the Baal prophets, four hundred and fifty, were taken down and killed by the pagans for their worshiping false gods.” "

Says it all, really. You'd just love to see me slaughtered thus, wouldn't you Titwisy. Me, and Persiflage, and Danielinthelionsden, and all the others who've challenged your fulminations on this thread.

What a pity for you that the auto-da-fe is no longer de rigueur, O Opus Deist.

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ2,

Thee:
"Ramsey the Pharaoh of Egypt believed man instead of God."

Who is this Ramsey? I didn't know the pharaohs of Egypt took Scots surnames!

I assume you mean Ramesses II. He was actually quite pious, you know. Had texts inscribed all over the temples of his realm, detailing how his god Amun ("the Hidden One") saved him in extremis from a surrounding Hittite horde - the defining moment of his life.

In Ramesses' time, Egyptian theologians articulated the perichoresis of three divine hypostaseis. Hymns were composed that revered the transcendent cosmocrator "Hidden is his identity", "whose image is not revealed in the writings". Seems rather familiar, no?

If the pope had a conference with Moses and Ramesses, he would find he had much more in common with the latter...

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ2,

Thee:
"Those who are incapable of distinguishing the difference between a man and woman, the vulva, and an anus, the difference between a penis and a vagina, who think Chastity is an immoral dissipated vice are blind to reality."

And now you descend to libel.

If you actually read my posts, you would know that I praised genuine chastity just now. Scroll down a little to

Posted by: onofrio | June 17, 2009 10:57 PM

I quote myself:
"I have no objection at all against those who commit to genuine chastity. It can be a beautiful thing indeed."

The Catholic Church's complicity in covering up sexual abuse by its priests is the "immoral dissipated vice" (are there vices that are not immoral?) at which I kick.

You must be feeling relieved to have ejaculated that little litany of genitalia just now...it ought to add zest to your *mortifications* for a while...

TTWSY ........

Opinions are opinions - research results are often skewed or just plain fabricated in order to prove and/or support a deeply held point of view or set of prejudices.

You and your carefully selected ally Dr. Reisman both seem unrelenting with regard to closely held & compatable views on homosexuality, although probably not so much with regard to religious issues in general.

Dr. Reisman has made false allegations in regard to pedophelia in the past - her imagined linkage between homosexuality and the sexual abberation of pedophilia is both specious and disproven elsewhere, in any number of other research projects.

Pedophiles (whether male or female) are far more likely to be overtly or latently heterosexual (where celibacy is involved).

In very restricted and closely scrutinized environments, opportunity seems to be the key to sexual selection - whether in the priesthood or in highly structured and controlled prison populations.

What are we to make of this homophobic alliance between you and your 'expert' witness??

Obsessions make for strange bedfellows. One person's truth is another person's nonsense......

The Truth is out there - it's just a lot more complicated than we often imagine. And typically beyond the ken of the comparatively simple and highly slanted religious point of view.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_Reisman

http://www.enotes.com/microbiology-encyclopedia/epidemics-pandemics

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ2

Thee:
"Anyone who countenances and defends the indulgence of lustful sexual unions of the same sex are a debaucherous personification of immoral orgy. They are immorally and myopically blind"

Steady on there, Titwisy, you're starting to sputter.

Thanks for the laughs, O Flagellant.
"debaucherous personification of immoral orgy" ought to win some sort of award!

Given that you - in your utter rectitude - deem certain orgies "immoral", could you perhaps explain to me what a *moral orgy* might be? Would that be the sort that takes place under the proper ecclesiastical auspices, amid ignudi, pyxes, chasubles, stoles, et cetera?

As for "myopically blind", pray tell, how can one who is already sightless also be short-sighted?

I supposes such *paradoxes* are routine for self-flagellating Opus Deists...

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ2

Enough navel gazing. Come join the real world, why don't you? Otherwise, this kind of silly discourse should be kept to your own crowd, in your own narrow and pretentious version of what I am sure you regard as "Christianity."

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ2

Gay people are not evil. You seem like a fairly ignorant and backward person on matters of sexuality. If you seek to defend your ignorance and predjudice with religious arguments, all you do is degrade your own religion and religion in general. Your views are silly and foollish.

You are the one in peril, who needs help.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
PERSIFLAGE
ENCYCLOPEDIA/EPIDEMICS-PANDEMICS
POSTED ON JUNE 17, 2009 12:18 PM

"The 'Moral Punishment' explanation for plagues, epidemics, etc. - is self-righteously pure fantasy bordering on delusion, and at it's most inhumane."

ANS:
Really! I don’t think Catholicism does that but if you have any proof other than your mordant rhetoric then I’ll be glad to check it out if you give any credible references.

Satan thought he was God, and never contemplated a Hell until he fell from the sky like a lightening bolt into an eternal pit of fire.

Sodom and Gomorrah thought God's existence was poppycock. Unfortunately, they found out too late. All of Noah’s neighbors laughed at him for building an Ark after he warned them. Unfortunately, they found out too late, as did those who built the Tower of Babel. Ramsey the Pharaoh of Egypt believed man instead of God. Unfortunately, when he did believe, he was too late and the remnants of his whole army lay at the bottom of the sea.

Further, the Rich Man (Luke16:22cf) thought there was no Hell until he ended up in it and begged Abraham to tell his brothers. Abraham said, “They have the Scriptures.: “Yes” said the Rich Man, “but if they just see you,” said the Rich Man, “they will believe you.” “Then Abraham said to him, not even if one rises from the dead would they believe, if they do not believe the Scriptures and the prophets.”

And finally, Elias in 1 Kings 18 cf. brought down the fires from heaven and those who mocked and vilified God and they perished. Thus, it is written, “Then the pagans fell down in awe and the Baal prophets, four hundred and fifty, were taken down and killed by the pagans for their worshiping false gods.”

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
PERSIFLAGE
ENCYCLOPEDIA/EPIDEMICS-PANDEMICS
POSTED ON JUNE 17, 2009 12:18 PM
http://www.enotes.com/microbiology-

Tried to access your link, couldn’t
ENOTES:
“We're sorry, the page you requested could not be found.

IRT:
“See below what God hath wrought and some of His handiwork - putting a religious/moral spin on the fragility of human life vs. the very long history of the devastation visited on the human race through viral and bacterial pathology, seems about as narrow-minded, uninformed, and ideologically driven as humans can get.”

ANS:
Try accessing this link and see what Homosexuality and those who defend it have wrought if you have the courage to see the truth.

http://www.drjudithreisman.org/hatecrimes.html

|| Articles White Papers Broadcast Books Reference Kinsey Information:Updates Proposed Bill Laws Biopics
White Papers

CALIFORNIA COMMITTEE HEARING
RE: AB 1785 (Villaraigosa)
TATE BOARD OF EDUCATION "HATE CRIME" LEGISLATION

Testimony (A Work in Progress) by
Judith A. Reisman, Ph.D.
The Institute for Media Education
Research Advisor, California Protective Parents Association
Sacramento, California
August 2000 © Reisman

IRT:
“Hyper-religous folks, no matter how learned, simply can't escape the compulsion toward moral rectitude, sanctimony, and a distinctly implied sense of superiority for believing 'rightly'. With any degree of real insight, this mindset is virtually impossible to maintain.”

ANS:
You just think it is a sense of superiority because truth always trumps erroneous belief. Anyone who countenances and defends the indulgence of lustful sexual unions of the same sex are a debaucherous personification of immoral orgy. They are immorally and myopically blind

Those who are incapable of distinguishing the difference between a man and woman, the vulva, and an anus, the difference between a penis and a vagina, who think Chastity is an immoral dissipated vice are blind to reality. They’ve become a slave to their inordinate passions and concupiscence and therefore have no moral authority to vilify the Church because they are helplessly blinded by the predispositions of their own perverse orgies.

Unfortunately, it’s inevitable and mundane for those who defend gay sex to vilify the Church because no one can defend that evil trumps virtue unless they are incapable of reasoning or are an embodiment of profligate evil themselves.

Anyone who can sanction these visages of perversions that are documented in this white paper are either paranoid or schizophrenic.

ONOFRIO,

I took your question about who or what ordained me as sarcasm and I do apologize.
The who that ordained me, as far as what the world calls ordaining, was my Bishop.
What gave me authority and understanding
to speak on the Gospel was God. There are many who have gone through the perverbial
proper training to get ordained, but many were not called by God and therefore lack
true revelation and compassion to carry out the job properly. I was called by God,
I still have his number in my cell phone, just jokin (-:

As for David, I can concede to the fact that it was possible for him to have been
foot loose and fancy free in his day due to his position, as history has shown us.
You used some great examples to back it up as well, but think about it, every example you used has documented history of such a lifestyle, have you truly ever read any such thing pertaining to David or Johnathan for that matter?

Now onto my man Jesus Christ. As a christian you know He is th center of my faith. For me to believe that He did anything wrong is for me to denounce my faith. I know it sounds very closed minded
but when it comes to your faith there are
core teachings one must hold onto or else they will fly around from one thing to another or just give up completely. This is my choice...I choose to believe in Jesus Christ and that compels me to live the life that I live. I didn't mean to get preachy on you. So I can't agree with you on Jesus having any relations while he walked the earth.

As for the the joining of the Bride and Groom, I'm not that sure about any sexual
activity between them. My unerstanding is that we will be changed into our immortal spiritual bodies, no more flesh-no more sex, basically no more carnality of any kind. Perhaps you could elaborate more on your remarks about the sexual relations (mysterious, spiritual kind).

I appreciate your feedback, I do have to admit you kinda scared me at first, but I'm glad you took the time.

Have a great day!!!

To say that Dr. Judith Reisman has a hang-up re. homosexuality is probably an under-statement. She seems to have made it her life's work.

To pass her off as an 'expert' on the 'pathology' of homosexuality is about as disingenuous as one can get. She appears to be yet another obsessive-compulsive personality type with fixations on the 'perversity' of homosexuality.

She accused early sex researcher Alfred Kinsey of assaulting young boys when there was no evidence whatsoever that this was true.

Support for our own view of things, no matter how blatantly subjective and covertly prurient, is never hard to find.......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_Reisman

Onofrio - you've brilliantly captured the symbolic sado-masochism permeating Christology and assorted clerical practices through the ages and up to the present - including of course the ingenious torture of heretics throughout history, that dared doubt the 'absolute truth' of the prevailing orthodoxy.

Ironic and strange how the abolute changes over time! Self-flagellation and mortification indeed. Suffering, above all, remains the rough road to the divine.......

Blood, gore and pathos all around, and yet Christianity is somehow found to be superior to Buddhism in this skewed schematic of the sacred.

All in all, swearing off religion seems both more prudent and salutary than swearing off sex....

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
ONOFRIO
POSTED on: | JUNE 17, 2009 10:57 PM

TRY READING THIS REPORT IF YOU HAVE THE COURAGE TO KNOW THE TRUTH.

http://www.drjudithreisman.org/hatecrimes.html

Dr. Judith Reisman Home About Dr. Reisman Links Contact
Articles White Papers Broadcast Books Reference Kinsey Information:Updates Proposed Bill Laws Biopics White Papers

CALIFORNIA COMMITTEE HEARING
RE: AB 1785 (Villaraigosa)
TATE BOARD OF EDUCATION "HATE CRIME" LEGISLATION

Testimony (A Work in Progress) by
Judith A. Reisman, Ph.D.
The Institute for Media Education
Research Advisor, California Protective Parents Association
Sacramento, California
August 2000 © Reisman

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ2

Thee:
"Chastity is not a detriment to man but a gift that perfects him and leads him to eternal happiness. Homosexuality is a ticket to the Culture of Death."

I have no objection at all against those who commit to genuine chastity. It can be a beautiful thing indeed. Yet I've always suspected that in Catholic parlance *chastity* and *vocation* can be code for *repressed/denied homosexuality*.

Catholic ecclesial-sexual MO (in its darkest form) - corral all the heterosexual faithful into marriages that produce a maximum number of offspring; divert queer folk (already guilt-ridden via church dogma) toward the exalted repression of the religious *vocation*.

Result - strident numeric growth (and hence revenue); an aesthetic brimming with repressed homoerotic desire; a culture of duplicity, cover-up, and bad faith.

The cost - embittered failed celibates using the sanctity of the priesthood to cover and/or facilitate their tortured lusts; abuse-victims bearing long-term psychological scars that may in turn make them abuse-perpetrators.

Yes, Titwisy, chastity - whether practised by hetero- or homo- or bi- sexuals - can be the door to a rich dimension of spirituality. But that's unfortunately not its only trajectory in the Catholic Church. I think its disingenuous of you to use its uncommon blessing as a cover for the sins of the Church.

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ2

O TheTruthWillSetYouFree, learn from your own moniker.

Those *IRTs* of yours are not replies at all, just prefabricated bursts of dogmatic assertion.

Thee:
"The Catholic Church has to operate in the Sexual Revolution and consequently in the Culture of Death."

Said Church revels in its very own *Culture of Death*, and resents the competition.

Thee:
"the stigma of sado-masochists necrophiles, pederasts, pedophiles"

You're obviously blind to the sado-masochistic potential of the Stations of the Cross, featured prominently in Catholic churches worldwide - whips, domination, torture, naked flesh, ecstatic eyes rolled skyward...Ever seen a carven Spanish *Corpus Christi* with its all luridly gaping wounds, an agony of ecstasy?
You mention *stigma*. What of the stigmata? A prime example of sado-masochistic psychopathology; the transcendent acme of self-loathing.

As for necrophilia - what do you call the adoration paid by Catholic faithful to martyrs' body parts and the embalmed corpses of saints? What do you call it when St Teresa recounts kissing the open wounds of Christ? Pietas?

As for pederasts and pedophiles - need I say more on that score? These types didn't suddenly materialise with your favourite whipping boy *The Sexual Revolution*, and the Catholic Church has sheltered too many of them for too long.

Thee:
"these sexual "orientations" have their own publications, internet sites, and organizational structures"

Indeed. Like the Vatican.

By the way, have you ever visited the magnificent collections of pagan classical statuary in the Vatican museums? Lots of naked flesh, particularly male flesh, in flagrant display. And of course there's the Sistine Chapel itself, with its handsome ignudi perched overhead in an array of fetching poses. A lovely setting for a papal mass, yes?

Thee:
"My friend, take the beam from your eyes before you take the speck from your brother’s."

Don't talk to me of beams and specks, friend.
The Truth Will Set You Free...

See below what God hath wrought and some of His handiwork - putting a religious/moral spin on the fragility of human life vs the very long history of the devastation visited on the human race through viral and bacterial pathology, seems about as narrow-minded, uninformed, and ideologically driven as humans can get.

Hyper-religous folks, no matter how learned, simply can't escape the compulsion toward moral rectitude, sanctimony, and a distinctly implied sense of superiority for believing 'rightly'. With any degree of real insight, this mindset is virtually impossible to maintain.

The 'Moral Punishment' explanation for plagues, epidemics, etc. - is self-righteously pure fantasy bordering on delusion, and at it's most inhumane.

True-believing Christians have been engaging in these superstitious punishment fantasies for centuries. In a modern setting, this is odd - an atavistic psycho-pathology prevelant in the Middle Ages.

It's Thomas Aquinas fantasizing about unrepentant sinners burning in
everlasting hellfire - you can almost see him nodding in agreement with their well-earned fate.

It's no wonder conventional religion/religious views are rapidly falling by the wayside - being more and more viewed as an endless source of trouble in an already troubled world.

In the theocratic scheme of things, God is undeniably the greatest of all killers.

http://www.enotes.com/microbiology-encyclopedia/epidemics-pandemics

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
DANIELINTHELIONSDEN
POSTED JUNE 17, 2009 8:39 AM

IRT:
“All of your arguments amount to a bullying campaign against gay people, and attempt to beat them down, to keep them in their place, and to assert and persevere your own position of superiority over them, with God and Jesus as your allies. It's not good. It doesn't fly.

ANS:
I have not made the Natural Moral Laws; they are Gods. All men are created equal. Either you adhere to the laws of human nature or suffer the consequences.

What doesn’t fly is protecting illicit sex. Who is one’s friend who sees his friend is about to destroy his life and helps him do it, or the one who warns his friend, to the best of his ability, to prevent his death and show him a way were he will enjoy life to its zenith? Chastity is not a detriment to man but a gift that perfects him and leads him to eternal happiness. Homosexuality is a ticket to the Culture of Death.

And who is it that claims to be a friend of the Homosexual? Is it the one who lies to him and tells him, as did the American Psychiatric Association and the American Psychological Association, and its Psychiatrists and Psychologists, that homosexuality poses no problems and blame. In the face of such stats as:

“According to the British Journal of Sexual Medicine and The HIV/AIDS Surveillance Report of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services: ‘Homosexuals carry one-half of the country's syphilis, although they are only 1.5 to 2.5 of the population, and are fourteen times more likely to have had the disease than heterosexuals.

Two-thirds of all the AIDS cases in the U.S. are the direct result of homosexual conduct. Homosexual young people are twenty-three times more likely to contract sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) than their heterosexual counterparts. In San Francisco, the sexually transmitted disease rate is twenty -two times higher than the national average.”

Is it the friend that tells children that gay sex has no problems? Or is it the Church who warns and admonishes them to do good and avoid evil, Who tells them that that they put themselves in grave danger such as death to participate in illicit sex? Is it not the Church?

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
ONOFRIO
POSTED ON JUNE 17, 2009 1:06 AM

The ultimate fruit of sexuality is the creation of human life through acts proper to a man and woman in marriage.

“The laws of nature so ordained by God dictate that there is a natural psychological and physical complementarity between man and woman. This complementarity is ordered toward exclusivity in marriage where the man and woman mutually support each other and find their crowning glory in procreation Marriage is the integrality of the gift of self, the beloved to the beloved, the beloved to the lover.”

Gay Marriage is an oxymoron. Homosexuals are called not to Marriage but to Chastity.

“Chastity is a moral virtue. It is also a gift from God, a grace, a fruit of spiritual effort. The Holy Spirit enables one whom the water of Baptism has regenerated to imitate the purity of Christ.

While homosexuals may not choose their desires, homosexuals do have the ability to choose whether they act on those desires, just as an alcoholic has the choice of whether to act on his desire to get drunk, and just as a heterosexual has the choice of acting on his desires.

“Chastity presupposes respect for the rights of the person, in particular the right to receive information and an education that respect the moral and spiritual dimensions of human life.

“Chastity includes an apprenticeship in self-mastery which is training in human freedom. The alternative is clear: either man governs his passions and finds peace, or he lets himself be dominated by them and becomes unhappy.

“Charity is the form of all the virtues. Under its influence, chastity appears as a school of the gift of the person. Self-mastery is ordered to the gift of self. Chastity leads him who practices it to become a witness to his neighbor of God's fidelity and loving kindness.

“The virtue of chastity blossoms in friendship. It shows the disciple how to follow and imitate him who has chosen us as his friends, who has given himself totally to us and allows us to participate in his divine estate. Chastity is a promise of immortality.

“Chastity is expressed notably in friendship with one's neighbor. Whether it develops between persons of the same or opposite sex, friendship represents a great good for all. It leads to spiritual communion.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
ONOFRIO
POSTED ON JUNE 17, 2009 1:06 AM

The Church must operate in a culture of sexual depravity. In the ambience of a dysfunctional moral culture. When the American Psychiatric Association and the American Psychological Association, and its Psychiatrists and Psychologists are telling you homosexuality poses no problems and the Bishop acts on such advise you have a hard time blaming the Church.

Homosexuality poses no problems? Is it not a problem that over 26 million AIDS victims have died and are dying as AIDS proliferates across the world? They aren’t Catholic priest plagued by this depravity.

Is it not a problem that 34 million people are infected with HIV and STDs are multiplying at alarming rates? The Catholic Church isn’t the cause; it’s those who defy the Church’s teachings.

To hide the fact that 84% of AIDS children appear to be infected by heterophobic bi/homosexuals, the “World AIDS Day” artfully reports, “16% of adolescents with AIDS, aged 13 through 19… have been infected through heterosexual contact.”64

The Advocate magazine included this table, identifying at least 59% of adolescents with AIDS directly infected by adult bi/homosexuals. It is reprinted here verbatim.

Said "The Advocate" gay magazine: “Now in the big cities, if you have sex with two [gay] men, you have a 50% chance of…someone who is HIV positive. Since homosexual activity allegedly starts younger than in the past--at about age 15 or younger “advisors” lure boys into “coming out” (‘the most important rite of passage in gay life’) to venereal disease for most, and death for at least 25% in approximately 5 years.

The advocates of homosexual lifestyles are impervious to its consequences. In New York schools alone a study showed 5 percent of PSS teachers are pedophiles, in respect to 0.25% in all Catholic priests of the last 30 years and little if anything is done about it by public school officials. One child in the New York Public Schools is said to be molested per day by PSS personnel.

The lunacy you speak of is all on the agnostics who defend gay sex. Yes, the Church has a lot to say on the dignity of man, there is no one of greater authority on the moral dignity of human nature.

My friend, take the beam from your eyes before you take the speck from your brother’s.

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ2

All of your arguments amount to a bullying campaign against gay people, and attempt to beat them down, to keep them in their place, and to assert and perserver your ownn position of superiority over them, with God and Jesus as your alllies.

It's not good. It doesn't fly.

TTWSYF:
"To choose someone of the same sex for one's sexual activity is to annul the rich symbolism and meaning, not to mention the goals, of the Creator's sexual design."
______________________________________________________________________________________
I have never once engaged in sex for its symbolic meaning. I have engaged in it as an expression of romantic love for my partner and for recreational purposes, but never as an acknowledgement of a deity's "design."

TTWSYF:
"The ultimate fruit of sexuality is the creation of human life through acts proper to a man and woman in marriage."
______________________________________________________________________________________
There will never be any "ultimate fruit" as a result of our sex. On the day we met, he was sterile and I was in the early stages of menopause. Making babies ain't on our agenda when we knock boots - we do it because we love each other, we want each other, and it feels good. As for what combinations of organs, orifices, and/or objects are "proper," that's not for a church to decide either.

TTWSYF:
"Instead of being called to Marriage, Homosexual persons are called to Chastity for the perfection of their moral and physical life and their eternal happiness. “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.”—CCC"
______________________________________________________________________________________
The Catholic church has every right to decide for itself what marriages it will or won't solemnize, but it doesn't get to decide for everyone else.
My husband and I weren't "called to marriage" just because we're heterosexual. We got married because we wanted to - and no one at the Clerk of Court's office asked us what our reasons were, or if we were fertile, what our favorite sexual positions were, or if we even liked each other. I see no good reason that consenting adults who wish to marry should be denied simply because they have similar genitalia.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
ONOFRIO
POSTED ON: JUNE 1, 2009 3:07 AM

[No one in the world defends little children more or even equal to the Catholic Church." If that is so, then the Church hierarchy should stop playing damage control. Or have they all got *something to hide

"Those who abuse children have abandon the Church and are an anathema and an abhorrent abomination to the Church.]

IRT:
Such zeal. Yet the Church hierarchy has a history of protecting abusers, of special pleading for them, of blaming their victims, and paying for their silence.

The Church mouths such formulaic censure, yet remains semper eadem in practice.

ANS:
It is written, “Brother, take the beam out of your eye before you remove the speck from your brother’s eye.”

I can see you know little about the Catholic Church by the myopic question you have asked, It belies your myopic lack of knowledge and your mordant predisposition towards the moral comport this nation is in today. The Catholic Church has to operate in the Sexual Revolution and consequently in the Culture of Death. That Sexual Revolution carries the stigma of sado-masochists, necrophiles, pederasts, pedophiles, zoophiles, hebephiles, and similar ideologies. All of these sexual "orientations" have their own publications, internet sites, and organizational structures.

If you have the courage to see the truth, you will use the link below and witness to the findings of the Department of Justice’s $800,000 study by Judith Riesman, one of the most outstanding social scientist of today.

http://www.drjudithreisman.com/archives/CALIF%20HEARING5.pdf

Concentrate on this item particular: “WHERE ARE THE ARRESTS OF THOUSANDS OF MEN WHO GIVE AIDS TO BOYS? By Judith A. Reisman, PhD

This essay was originally written circa 1995, revised 2006. You won’t find it is the Catholic Church that is promoting gay-sex. Some 70% to 80% of homosexuals are involved in these disgusting sexual escapades.

http://www.drjudithreisman.com/archives/CALIF%20HEARING5.pdf

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ2,

You start off as The Truth Will Set You Free and end as Hail Jesus, Mary, and Joseph. In the heart there seems to be a lump of Latin - perhaps an Ave Maria, a Deo Gratias/Gloria...

There was once a Calvinist huffer who - like yourself - posted slabs of dogma on this blog. I dubbed him *theo-machinist* for his doctrinaire predictability.

Your mechanical Vaticanism makes him seem almost organic.

Until you confirm otherwise, I shall assume you are an Opus Deist, and post accordingly.

Do you wear one of those sharp chains around your upper thigh, to mortify your flesh?

Or perhaps you prefer flagellation.

Do you struggle with homoerotic desires, O TruthWillSetYouFree? Do you gaze lovingly upon the well-toned torso of the tortured cross-man?

The truth WILL set you free...if only you will embrace it.

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ2,
O Titwisy Fam De Gagah Jemji (the Second)

Pontificator deluxe,

You never answered the question I put to you back on the Arroyo blog.

ARE YOU A SYMPATHISER OF OPUS DEI?

I'm assuming the answer is YES, since you have persistently evaded response.

“HOMOSEXUALITY ACTS ARE A MATTER OF CHOICE.”

“While they may not choose their desires, homosexuals do have the ability to choose whether they act on those desires, just as an alcoholic has the choice of whether to act on his desire to get drunk and just as a heterosexual has the choice of acting on his desires.

For this reason, the Catholic Catechism states, "Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, traditions has always declared that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered. They are contrary to Natural Law. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

In Romans 1:18-32, still building on the moral traditions of his forebears, but in the new context of the confrontation between Christianity and the pagan society of his day, Paul uses homosexual behavior as an example of the blindness which has overcome humankind.

Instead of the original harmony between Creator and creatures, the acute distortion of idolatry has led to all kinds of moral excess. Paul is at a loss to find a clearer example of this disharmony than homosexual relations.

Finally, I Timothy 1, in full continuity with the Biblical position, singles out those who spread wrong doctrine and in verse 10 explicitly names as sinners those who engage in homosexual acts.

To choose someone of the same sex for one's sexual activity is to annul the rich symbolism and meaning, not to mention the goals, of the Creator's sexual design.

Homosexual activity is not a complementary union, able to transmit life; and so it thwarts the call to a life of that form of self-giving which the Gospel says is the essence of Christian living. This does not mean that homosexual persons are not often generous and giving of themselves, but when they engage in homosexual activity they confirm within themselves a disordered sexual inclination that is essentially self-indulgent.

As in every moral disorder, homosexual activity prevents one's own fulfillment and happiness by acting contrary to the creative wisdom of God. The Church, in rejecting erroneous opinions regarding homosexuality, does not limit but rather defends personal freedom and dignity realistically and authentically

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ2,

O Titwisy Fam De Gagah Jemji (the Second)

Pontificator deluxe,

You never answered the question I put to you back on the Arroyo blog.

ARE YOU A SYMPATHISER OF OPUS DEI?

MARRIAGE AND HOMOSEXUALITY

The ultimate fruit of sexuality is the creation of human life through acts proper to a man and woman in marriage.

“The laws of nature so ordained by God dictate that there is a natural psychological and physical complementarity between man and woman, which is ordered toward exclusivity in marriage where the man and woman mutually support each other and find their crowning glory in procreation.”

To claim that homosexuals have a right to marry makes as much sense as a person living in a straw house trying to put a fire out by pouring gasoline on the fire. Gay marriage is a contradiction of human nature.

It is written, “The Truth will set you free.” Marriage of gays is not a truth but a contradiction of the Natural and Moral Law (NML). Instead of marriage perfecting the homosexual, it is a denigration of the dignity and sanctity of one’s human nature..

“Homosexual condition; for most of them it is a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. The 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"—Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC 2358).

Instead of being called to Marriage, Homosexual persons are called to Chastity for the perfection of their moral and physical life and their eternal happiness. “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.”—CCC

However, no one can persevere in a continuous virtuous life unless they continuously call on God to succor to them in his trials and needs through God’s love and graces.

Hence, it is written, "with man nothing is possible; with God all things are possible," and anyone who ever fled to His protection was never left unaided, even though their sins were great and many.

And Middlenmae, you never answered my question:

Who or what ordained you?

Middlenmae,

Thee:
"As for David and Johnathan, yes they did love each other but like many other things
in the bible its hard for people to understand a true love which comes from God without perverting it with your own ideas and lusts"

I am not projecting *lusts*, nor do I see anything *perverse* in the love between Jonathan and David. Whether it stayed platonic or not, we cannot tell, but it was remembered as something exceptional. On Jonathan's part, at least, there's an implied sense of strong homoerotic attraction. And why not? David was supposed to have been a handsome charmer.

Thee:
"if you do your studying about David you'll actually find that he was a ladies man and had many wives"

Having a wife/female partner and/or children has never been a bar to homoerotic relations between men, especially those with power and influence. Achilles fell out with Agamemnon over a girl, yet loved his Patroclus best of all. Alexander the Great married the princess Roxane, to sire an heir, but remained devoted to his comrade-in-arms Hephaestion. Napoleon adored his Josephine, but on campaign also enjoyed watching his muscular guardsmen taking a wash.

It's not surprising that David was highly sexed, given his prowess and power. Nor is it surprising that he would express this energy through both regular married relationships and through intimate homoerotic ones. Happens.

Middlenmae,

Thee:
"As for Jesus being in a relationship the bible is extremely clear that the church is
His bride so what other relationship would you be looking for."

The man Jesus, if he really was a man with a fully human nature, would have had sexual desires of some sort - the common lot of humanity.

According to your view, Jesus must have sublimated these desires into an ideal *agape* love for his followers - both male and female - as a collective entity. The NT imagines this collective as an eternal female - *the Bride of Christ*.

Does this ideal, sublimated, theologised love for *the Bride* imputed to Jesus prove that he was actually heterosexual during his earthly sojourn? I don't think so. Nor does it rule out the possibility that he was involved in a sexual relationship/marriage with one (or more) of his closest female followers - those who looked after his *needs*, as even the Gospels admit.

If the latter were the case, it wouldn't be the first time a sect leader used his charisma to gather a harem! Human, all too human.

According to the NT's *Bride* fantasy, all *saved* males become integrated into a female entity with which the Jesus *the Bridegroom* presumably has sexual relations (albeit of a mysterious, spiritualised, heavenly sort). So how is an individual *saved* male, as part of this *Bride*, meant to enjoy this passionately intimate consummation without some kind of divine homoeroticism? Perhaps he and his brethren in *the Bride* will all become Jonathans to the eternal David!

Or maybe they will all be turned into Bathshebas - *spiritual* ones, of course.

;^)

ONOFRIO,

Thank you for reading my post, I hope you
didn't feel it was a complete waste of your time. As for K.J. I don't truly know about his personal affairs so I'll go far enough as to take your word for it, even so,
If God could use a donkey to warn a man of
certain impending death ahead, He surely could use a imperfect human to translate His word for the reading of millions of people.

As for Jesus being in a relationship the bible is extremely clear that the church is
His bride so what other relationship would you be looking for. Paul on the other hand states himself that he was a single man, so the bible is clear on both of your rebuttle examples.

As for David and Johnathan, yes they did love each other but like many other things
in the bible its hard for people to understand a true love which comes from God without perverting it with your own ideas and lusts, if you do your studying about David you'll actually find that he was a ladies man and had many wives.

I hope this gives you some more clarity on what I was saying. Hope to hear from you soon.

God bless you (-:

Middlenmae,

Who or what *ordained* you, O Merrily Trite Chirper of Sameold?

So, "God does not condone homosexuality"
according to your KJV. Yet King James himself was known to fancy a pretty lad...

And "the soul of Jonathan was knit to the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul" (1 Samuel 18:1).

Just best friends? Or something deeper, more passionate?

And the NT's deafening silence about the marital status of Jesus and Paul does make one wonder...

Hello everyone, I hope all is well. This is my first posting, I hope you enjoy it. First of all, I am an ordained minister and from what I have studied in the KJV of
the bible, God does not condone homosexuality. As far as Him creating people that way, well thats just not the case. He created Adam and then He created Eve, in His image and likeness. They both
disobeyed the one thing God told them not to do and then SIN entered the world.

After this happened Adam and Eve reproduced
children after their own likeness which is
the fallen state of man as it is today. The important thing to see here is that SIN entered the world as a cosequence of
their choice to disobey and therfore caused
a seperation of man from God. Now when SIN entered the world along with it came the cosequences of it which is all the sickness and disease we have and death.
God doesn't create people anymore, but he allows their births and knows there outcomes.

With that being said Jesus never tried to change the world, because He knew it served a purpose the way it was. He did come to make a way of escape from the judgement of it and in the process of doing so he also showed us how we should live. Those he came in contact with
he shared the truth with them and the choice was always their's to accept or reject it. The bible does have stipulations
on how a Christian is suppose to live, but trying to force the rest of the world to do so is not one of those stipulations.

So I said all of this just to get the point across we should share the truth we
believe as Christians with everyone we come in contact with, the choice made by
the ears that the truth falls on will be on them. The same goes for clergy...we can do what God requires of us or what the state does...the coseqences will reflect
the decision.

God bless...have a great day all (-:

More and more, the anti-gay people are looking like silly cranks. It is not necessary to argue with them, because their arguments are lame an unconvincing. If they don't want to live in the real world along side gay people, then they can go into their houses and lock the doors. What a waste of their pitiful lives, to squander all their energiesw and efforts in a fruitless effort to block the freedom and liberty of their fellow Americans.

"To Justillthen from Daniel. I apologize if my post made it seem I am on the side of religion on the gay question."

Ok, let's make one thing clear.
"Religion" is not anti-gay.

In fact, for *decades,* more major, even Christian, denominations have been willing to marry same-sex couples before whatever God, than have states been able to overcome the Christian fringes claiming it's an 'abomination.'

In *claiming* this is "religion" vs gays, actually, certain right-wing churches have been *denying the religious freedom of conscience to other Christians who see things differently, * to say nothing of everyone else in the country with faiths of our own.

"Religion" isn't against gay marriage.

Certain elements of certain loud and aggressive ones would have you think that, though.

To Justillthen from Daniel. I apologize if my post made it seem I am on the side of religion on the gay question. I always try to get above the left/right wing battle and arrive at as objective a view as possible (although of course even the best minds are confined to their times). I wrote with the intention of supporting neither side on this problem and just trying to see ahead at what we can expect from the solution proposed to this problem in this weeks on faith question. In other words I simply asked what can be expected if "this" is put in relationship with "that" in the particular sense that the on faith question this week in fact stated and requested an opinion on. The on faith question was "is this a good solution to the problem?" and I tried to answer it the best I can--not trying to support one side over the other.--For the question in fact did not ask a person to take sides. The question was what is expected to occur from the solution proposed between gays and religion. Hope that answers your question. Thanks for the conversation.

I think as soon as you say "church" as in house where like minded believers who subscribe to a set of principles congregate, the whole idea that these people would be forced to do something that violated the very principles on which they congregate is anathema to me. Just as that notion offends so too does the notion that marriage is not one of the most regulated private affairs in the country. To put forward the notion that there is some cold and clinical divide between religion and the State on this issue is to argue something that is both untrue and absurd. The State has gone so far as to tell people that they are to closely related to this person or that; that one's intended most be of the same species; that one can only have one spouse at a time and so on and so forth. The real canard here is that homosexuals are being singled out for restriction. It needs to be pointed out that the limits on marriage are many and varied leaving only one group with the legal sanction to do it-one man to one woman, both of whom have reached the age of majority

Ms. Jacoby,

I generally enjoy your posts because of your writing style and knack for coming at things from angles that seem odd at first, and end up making some sense.

"That is just another canard of the Christian right."

Ms. Jacoby, unfortunately it is not. Proponents of progressive secularism in this country have a history of saying, "We only want X and will never push for Y." Now debates rage about whether pharmacists and doctors will be compelled to provide medical and surgical abortions against their conscience. When abortion was legalized, it was supposed to be about choice. When RU-487 was permitted to be sold in the US, the FDA was careful not to compel its sale more than any other drug permitted in the US. But when doctors or pharmacists do not want to become involved, all sorts of excuses are put up to rationalize why they should be compelled.

The bottom line is that if somebody has a right to receive something, then somebody else has to give it, and if nobody else wants to give it, compulsion is the only option left.

The previous poster who discussed the low rate of marriage among homosexuals where it is permitted has a very salient point. This whole phenomenon is about social acceptance. They are free to make vows however they want, and then to contractually award each other all the prerogatives of a married couple. That's not what they want. They want to be recognized and esteemed.

Mark my words. There will be lawsuits if someone who is esteem-deprived gets told "No," and interprets that as, "Because we don't like your kind, f--."

I'd also like to point out that the polls of those under 30 vis-a-vis gay marriage are more likely studying apathy more than anything else. As they get married and start having children, they will feel differently in many cases.

Moreover, the rising incidence of deliberately starting families out of wedlock, and of couples who opt never to marry, and of a demand for gay marriage - all of it only becomes comprehensible when we start asking ourselves about the cause for the failure of 50% of (traditional) marriages, and what effect that has had on our collective psyche.

Daniel12,

Your metaphor of religions surrounded by that which they disagree with is nothing new at all. Been that way since religions inception.

Come to think of it, we are all individually surrounded by what we disagree with as well. As well as by that which we do agree with. It is the way of things.

It seems the contra position inferred from your post is that religion should have a say in all these divisive issues. Well, they do have a say, and are quite vocal about it. But they do not have a deciding say, (unless they do!), as we are not a theocracy and there is no Ayatollah to rule on what shall be.

Homosexuality and homosexual unions have been around for millennia and will continue to be so. The homosexual community includes a vast reserve of exceptional people, as they have throughout history. As does the heterosexual community. Including them into society as equal and good and valuable is the only right thing to do, and it is spiritually and morally correct as well.

After all, they have been seen as the evil, though they are not that, even as in your priest example the evil sometimes abided inside the monastery or church.

Sorry for any confusion in my previous post - I suspect I should have referred to racial/ethnic purists more accurately as anti-miscegenationists.

A variation of the mindset does seem to have re-surfaced in those most adamantly opposing the full emergence of gay rights in the USA and elsewhere today.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miscegenation

I posted this link on Susan's previous thread in response to suggestions on how to 'improve' the human race by ridding it of 'defective' persons. See Eugenics just below.

All the various complaints rendered against gay persons, their preference in mates, and their civil rights begin to sound suspiciously like the sing-song mind of racial/ethnic misogynists of old....

What a glorious place the world would be if everyone was just like ME - what a truly disgusting thought.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics

Gays will be married by RCC bishops long before the Johanna Justin-Jinich's are no longer gunned down in campus bookstores by antisemitic gunmen.

May her memory be a blessing to those who knew her.

Gays will be married in by priests RCC churches long before the Johanna Justin-Jinich's of this world stop being gunned down in the campus bookstores by crazed antisemitic gunmen.

May her memory be a blessing to those who knew her.

Part one.

It has been proposed that gay marriage will be allowed so long as clergy, religious groups and their employees do not have to participate...

Is this a good solution to the divisive issue of gay marriage? Yes, for gay people. For religion--no such thing. But if religious people cannot recognize that then so much the worse for them. In other words, every advance of gay marriage is bad for religion no matter how much religious groups think that distancing themselves from gay marriage will preserve religion.

Think about it. Pretend this "solution" to the problem were to be the solution to everything religion disagrees with. We would have religious groups surrounded on all sides by all they disagree with. Mainstream religious groups would find themselves in the positions of religious cults, reduced to a narrow field of practice.

Eventually religion would fade away completely. Just read for yourself the very wording of this "solution": Gay marriages are allowed so long as RELIGIOUS GROUPS AND THEIR EMPLOYEES DO NOT HAVE TO PARTICIPATE. If we were to now propose this solution in a widespread sense, which is to say if someone were to announce that it would make good sense to allow most everything religion disagrees with so long as clergy, religious groups and their employees do not have to participate...

Part two.

Well, use your brain. Again, that makes religion surrounded on all sides--makes religious people feel besieged. I am reading a book now by French philosopher Michel Foucault called "discipline and punish"(Susan Jacoby, you might want to check it out as it is an intersection of your interests in the Enlightenment age, women's rights, problems with religion, torture and the law--so much more. But I warn you that Foucault opens the book with a description of torture which not only is something most wicked people would not imagine, but was THE LAW at the time). In this book Foucault while discussing chain gangs (the book is on the history of the penitentiary, etc.) talks about a priest who cut into pieces his pregnant mistress. While on the chain gang women especially hurled stones, etc. at him.

The point is I analyze the priest's crime in this fashion: He was one of the those religious people who instead of feeling his temptation toward women to be something located in himself--an evil located in himself if we want to call desire for woman evil--located the evil outside him, as coming from woman.--Therefore woman had to be destroyed no matter when really thought about God (if he exists) would sanction no such thing.

Well when we have "solutions" to gay marriage and other things the church disagrees with as proposed here, the church gets more and more surrounded with what it disagrees with and the members of the church are faced with either abandoning religion, becoming more and more secular, or are forced more and more to feel that evil is not located in themselves so much as it is located outside...and if located outside, the religious group must arm itself, stockpile food, buy a piece of property out somewhere in the countryside, be prepared to fight evil in the name of God who will return quite soon and damn all the sinners to hell...

That should be clear enough. So much for "solutions". But this is not a defense of religion--merely an analysis for anyone to take as he will.

"Well then, it doesn't cost anyone anything to add an exception to the rule to make them shut up, now does it?"

Posted by: ZZim

Nope, but it's still an occasion to point out that the anti-gay forces in religion and politics have been claiming gay marriage would be forced on churches, as a reason to hurt gay couples, when it was never true.

I'm all for reassurances. I've felt like a broken record *assuring* people of this easily-accessible fact while they've spent millions to claim otherwise, all along.

If these provisions make equal marriage rights OK for a majority of Americans, well, great. Have another reassurance. :)

"No one in the United States has ever contemplated requiring members of the clergy to perform marriage ceremonies that violate their faith."

Well then, it doesn't cost anyone anything to add an exception to the rule to make them shut up, now does it?

WmarkW: "It wouldn't take long before the analogy of interracial marriage prohibitions got applied to intrasexual ones."

That'd be because laws used against same sex marriages in one way or another use the exact same arguments and scare tactics based on prejudice: Sometimes, they're even the same *laws,* like the forgotten and obsolescent one from 1914 that Mitt Romney dug up to prevent out-of-state gay couples from getting married in Massachusetts.

It was a law that was *explicitly* about interracial couples, though the first paragraph is more neutral. I wonder how Romney even *knew* about it, but he sure used it, overt racism and all, against gay people he'd promised not to go after as governor when he was running.

So, the comparisons are already evident, Wmark.

Walter-in-Fallschurch,

"..."why would god create people that way, then loathe them for it?" a mysterious god indeed. maybe it's his 10% tithing to hell."

:-)))

ccnl, you said,
"So we have a Christian God who supposedly created all of us to include homosexuals. Said God is therefore responsible for the defective gene/mind-set that causes homosexuality?"

interesting point. first is it a "defect" or just a "difference"? it's certainly not not useful for reproduction, but under-reproduction is not really a problem for humanity.... could be argued we need some of that. so, if a gay couple doen't have kids, they don't get the "kid benefits" of marriage. if they adopt or inseminate, they get the same benefits "regular" couples would. it's not really so hard in terms of governmental implementation.

obviously the judeochrislamic problem with gay marriage is about other than government benefits. it has something to do with masturbation or something apparently. which brings us back to your question, a variation of which could be, "why would god create people that way, then loathe them for it?" a mysterious god indeed. maybe it's his 10% tithing to hell.

We see InterfaithNation aka JJ has escaped the mental ward yet again!!

Apparently, JJ has escaped the mental ward!!!

Lepidopterix:

See the State Supreme Court Decisions of New York, Oregon, Washington State, New Jersey, and the Court of Appeals decision from the State of Maryland for a proper legal understanding of why marriage is confined in those states to a male and female combination.

There really isn't space here to go into the actual details involving "suspect class" classification for sexual orientation, lack of validation of same sex marriage as a fundamental right, and rational state interest in the current definition of marriage.

Of course, the Iowa Supreme Court chose an alternative constitutional view.

That is the beauty of federalism.

What is in the best interest of one state may not be in the best interest of another.

The issue is best left to the state legislatures.

re secular religions:
"and i love (hate) the god/man association...with hitler, mao etc... i would put kim jong-il in that category: north korea is not a "godless society" - they have a new god named kim jong-il."

me, from another thread.

susan,
great stuff:
"The Gulag...was the product of a secular religion that exhibited the main characteristic of all religion: imperviousness to evidence."

"The sole reason why many religions appear tolerant today is that their power has been limited by decent secular governments, secular law, and secular values."

thanks.

gay marriage is a no-brainer. make sure gay couples have ALL the rights/responsibilities of "regular" marriage. if there needs to be a rule about "no pastor is "forced" to marry a gay couple", fine. (none was anyway...) if the couple wants a "church" wedding they can find a pastor who'll do it. a public judge cannot refuse to "marry" them. DUH.

Call gay sexual activity in or outside of "unions" what it is and this debate will then be on a fair footing:

To wit:

From below, on top, backwards, forwards, from this side of the Moon and from the other side too, gay sexual activity is still mutual masturbation/outercoursing caused by one or more complex sexual defects. Some defects are visually obvious for example in the complex maleness of some well-known female comedians, singers and actresses. Of course not all having these abnormal tendencies, show it outwardly as alluded to in the following synopsis:

From Wikipedia:
"Biology and sexual orientation is research into possible biological influences on the development of human sexual orientation. No simple cause for sexual orientation has been conclusively demonstrated, and there is no scientific consensus as to whether the contributing factors are primarily biological or environmental. Many think both play complex roles.[1][2] The American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Psychological Association have both stated that sexual orientation probably has multiple causes.[3][4] Research has identified several biological factors which may be related to the development of a heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual orientation. These include genes, prenatal hormones, and brain structure. Conclusive proof of a biological cause of sexual orientation would have significant political and cultural implications. [5]"

And before getting disturbed by such words as "mutual masturbation", Google these said words. There are over one million references to said activity.

And for those followers of some version of the Commandments:

Thou shalt Not Commit Adultery and Thou Shall Not Covet Thy Neighbors Wife/Husband/Partner with the corollary of Thou Shalt Not Fornicate pertain not only to heterosexual couples but also homosexual couples. This probably is no concern to non-Christians or non-Jews but it should be a major concern to those religious types that believe in the teachings of the OT, NT, the Commandments and all of its corollaries.

So we have a Christian God who supposedly created all of us to include homosexuals. Said God is therefore responsible for the defective gene/mind-set that causes homosexuality? One might conclude from this that the Christian God would therefore approve same-sex outercoursing unions since that is the only sin-free state where any type of couple-sex can be performed.

Re: Blog Reply to Last Week

The "Gulag Argument" against secularism is very real, and in my opinion very important. Both the Inquisition and the Gulag came about because the church and state didn't provide a check and balance against each other.

While I'm no fan of religion, it has had the beneficial effect of providing a form of social organization for those excluded from government:
Southern Blacks largely organized civil rights protests through churches
A Polish Pope provided a focal point to oppose European communism
Buddhist monks protested the government of Myanmar, because there are few non-governmental organizations in that country

Since absolute power can corrupt absolutely, it seems likely that secularism is a luxury only a free society can afford.

Rob Roy,
If you look at hetero divorce statistics, you could easily conclude that hetero marriage is also a sham.

The way I see it, it doesn't matter how many same-sex couples takea dvantage of the right to marry, it matters that the right is there.
If the rate of marriage among hetero couples dropped precipitously, would that be grounds for a governmental mandate that hetero marriage was no longer a viable right, since not enough people were doing it?

Ahab,

Seeing as how same-sex couples do often raise children together, and seeing as how hetero couples are not required to produce or adopt children in order to enjoy the full spectrum of rights and benefits that come with a marriage license, potential progeny or lack thereof is no reason to deny same-sex couples the right to marry.

Gay marriage is a sham. The reality is very few homosexual couples opt for "marriage" when available. This is well shown in Canada where single digit percentiles choose it. It is all about social normalization. It also leads to a proliferation of lawsuits against those who disagree. And the country certainly needs more lawsuits!

It is not so much the religious aspects that are important to what the state recognizes as a marriage as the civil ones.

The definition of civil marriage endorses the particular values in a marriage, and requires the state to pay for those endorsements with state funds.

In several states now, the main focus of marriage is romantic love between any two people of any sex connected to nothing else.

In those several states that recognize marriage between any two consenting adults of any sexual combination, the state is now required to pay for the benefits accruing to those marriages, despite the fact that the initial benefits were intended to support the needs of child bearing women and their biological progeny.

Who cares about religious marriages, really?

It is the civil definition of marriage that is the most important.

It has implications for what we as a civil society want marriage to be, and it commits the treasuries of the several states.

Same sex marriage never was an across the board civil right.

It is a new right, that should be decided in the state legislatures as in the several New England states.

"No one in the United States has ever contemplated requiring members of the clergy to perform marriage ceremonies that violate their faith."

While heretofore true, I'm glad the language was added. The diversity lobby has often turned the lack of prohibition into a requirement. For instance, if minorities score lower on a test than whites, it's discrimination to use a test even if it measures job ability.

It wouldn't take long before the analogy of interracial marriage prohibitions got applied to intrasexual ones.