I don’t know. Mind explaining it?
::Place Long-suffering “Sigh” Smiley Here::
The last line of the OP is
A few post later, we find the words:
The two sentences contradict each other. Presumably, either Lord Ashtar has changed his position, or he is holding self contradictory positions. That, in short, is what I meant by the post that has confused you so.
Actually, in the Episcopal church, the last two of your points are true, and as for “egalitarianism gnosticism”, if you mean what I think you mean by it, it’s not doing too badly. As I put it, and Episcopalian Bible study consists of people sitting around trying to sort out what something means rather than being told what it means. Then again, in a recent trainwreck, you accused me indirectly of not being religious.
Lord Ashtar has a point. There are a lot of things in Catholicism I disagree with, several of which the new Pope appears to support. That’s why, when I had the opportunity and incentive to convert several years ago, I didn’t. As I told my Catholic fiance, I’m a reasonable Episcopalian, but I’d make a lousy Catholic! At the same time, my brother was engaged to a Catholic girl who lived in another part of the country. He did choose to convert and is raising his kids Catholic. I don’t know how much the issues which kept me from converting matter to him or what his stance on all of them are, but in his case, if he did want to marry his girl, he felt he did have to convert. He is less religious than I am. My brother has far more grounds and cause to gripe about the Pope and worry about his actions than I do. Face it, I’m perfectly entitled to disregard him. Technically, my brother doesn’t have that option.
I will throw in a plug, though. If you folks like the ceremony and tradition of the Catholic church, but not the policies, as the signs say, “The Episcopal Church welcomes you.” 
CJ
With you so far…
And the Vatican actively endorses this? Cite?
I see what you’re saying now. Let me attempt to clarify.
The RCC, as I understand it, says that homosexual sex is immoral. Debating them on a theological level, or challenging them as you put it, I’m okay with. Jumping up and down and telling them how wrong they are because they’ve never been gay and how dare they tell you how to live your life and say you can’t be with the person you love (especially considering that most of their leaders are celebate) isn’t going to make much headway.
Still… 
You said it, mate.
Considering that there are a lot of priests and nuns that are gay would be another reason.
Being gay is not a sin.
Engaging in homosexual acts is a sin.
And whether you agree with this or not isn’t the issue.
The issue is that you can’t demand that the Catholic Church endorse homosexual sex because it’s congruent with your views.
Well, actually, you can. But it’d be ridiculous to expect it to work.
You’re right. Thanks for correcting me.
Well, if I’m challenging a belief of the Catholic Church, is it not implicit that I am also demanding that they change? If I’m arguing against the Catholic belief that homosexuality is a sin, I think it’s an obvious, if unstated, corrolary that the Catholics should stop believing homosexuality is a sin. Else, what’s the point in the challenge?
Indirectly? IIRC, she was pretty darned direct, but I’m not going back THERE to verify. :eek:
This is exactly it. Only I would add “counterproductive” to ridiculous.
But how are you challenging them? Are you making appeals to emotion and claiming that they don’t really understand human nature or are you going to quote Jesus and Paul?
Actually, he might be able to. In some states, registered independents can choose to vote in one of the Party primaries. You can do this in New Hampshire, for example.
If you’re saying that the argument, “The Church should stop saying homosexuality is a sin because I say so!” is ridiculous, then I agree. If you’re saying that marshalling the host of logical, moral, and theological evidence and arguments against the view of homosexuality as sinful is ridiculous, or that expecting individual Catholics to be capable of independent thought or to question their religiously indoctrinated preconceptions is ridiculous, well, I have to disagree with you on that one.
I don’t really expect the church to endorse homosexual sex, condoms, or anything of the like. I do expect them to stop trying to force non-Catholics to abide by the same moral code that they apply to Catholics. Is it that difficult to grasp that this “butting out” is a two-way street?
Not just independents, sometimes. I was able to vote for John Edwards in the Virginia Democratic presidential primary, and nobody would ever mistake me for a Democrat.
This can be done because Virginia does not register voters by party.
Well, see, that’s the thing. Your second point is still just because you say so. You’ve got more arguments as to why you say so, but I’m still willing to bet that the Church trusts it exegesis more than it does yours.
And individual Catholics are encouraged to question, because the understanding is that, at the end of the questioning, they will agree with the Church. If they don’t, well, then they’re not really Catholics any more, are they?
The problem is that the Church sees homosexual sex and fornication (remember, the Church isn’t anti-condom, it’s anti- “the belief that wearing a condom makes fornication safe, which leads to an increase in fornication”) in the same vein as segregation and the second Gulf War.
I don’t think anyone would refuse the Church’s help in stamping out segregation or ending the second Gulf War, but again, you can’t tell the Church, “we’ll take your help on the stuff we both think is bad, but we’ll keep right on doing the stuff on which we disagree.”
Texas also does not register voters by party. Typically the parties police their own primaries and only allow people on the party’s seperately-kept rolls to vote in the primary, but it would be trivial to get entry into either party’s primary.
Regardless, the point does not apply because no one is saying they demand to have an actual vote in the decision making. They’re just taking issue with the decisions being made.
Enjoy,
Steven