Excuses. My apologies, Apos
I misunderstood your post. Mea Culpa.
MRVISIBLE –
Funny you would say that. One of the things I have to believe to be able to face myself in the mirror, is that people who would imply that my beliefs are merely rationalizations, are people who are (to that extent) worthy only of contempt. Another thing I have to be believe in order to be able to face myself in the morning, is that people who can’t distinguish between when I’m talking about my own personal beliefs and arguing against someone else’s (IMO incorrect) personal definition of a given term, are people who have not been following along and therefore may be disregarded.
MILLER, define the term however you like; just don’t expect everyone to use your definition, and don’t claim yours is the only truth. I realize you haven’t done either of these things, but LISSENER has, and that’s the point – the only point – I have addressed myself to. I’m not trying to defend the “love the sinner, hate the sin” mentality, but only to point out that one moral belief does not a raging homophobe make. But you’re right; I think we’re a lot closer together than we are far apart on this, and I have no basis for quarrelling with the position you’ve staked out as your own, seeing that it’s – surprise! – much more rational that LISSENER’s. So, y’know, you go boy. 
APOS –
I largely agree with you as well, but this last point interests me. If the deciding factor of the degree of offensiveness is the “identification” of the action at issue with the fundamental personality of the person in question – how is that the problem of the person concluding the action is wrong? What I mean is, under this rationale it would appear to be okay to say “stealing is wrong” to someone who is a casual thief, but not okay to say so to someone who “self-identifies” as a thief – because then you’re “attacking their identity.” I mean, I can see your point, and I do also see why gay people do often (most of the time?) self-identify not just as people, but as “gay people” – our society basically demands they do so for purposes of survival, in a way that it never demands that the rest of us self-identify as straight. (What I mean is, if sexuality is front and center for many gay people, it is IMO in part, perhaps largely, because our society makes it that way by making such a big effing deal out of it. But surely you see that to the person making the moral judgment, that cannot (or should not) make any difference. I mean, morals vary from person to person, but ideally a moral system worth having will not vary in the way in which it is held by one single person. Relativity of morality at a societal level, sure, but relativity of morality at a personal level? How can it be considered moral if it’s relative? Do you see what I’m saying?
Nah, you got the name right. It’s my stance you got a little wrong.
Working from the Catholic standpoint (because I’m a Catholic, peoples…although that’s a whole 'nother discussion), my stance is that homosexual behavior is sinful. Homosexuality is a state of being…in what form, I don’t know: obviously, the debate is still raging as to whether it’s chosen, genetic, behavioral or somewhere in between*…but not sinful per se. I’ve never believed that a homosexual is, in Esprix’s words, a disappointment in God’s eyes from the mere fact of being a homosexual.**
Much of my personal conflict has come from two issues. The first is that, if I’m going to stand by this viewpoint, then I’d better make damn sure it’s the correct one. This creates an obligation to study the issue deeper: why does my church hold this view? What was God thinking? If it is true, then what are my obligations towards my fellow man? (These are rhetorical, folks, and I’ll still be searching for answers long after somebody gives a sarcastic response.)
However, the other conflict comes from, oddly enough, life on the SDMB. Some of the responses in threads like this scare the crap outta me, because it strikes me that there’s an inherent hostility directed towards me for having a mere thought. Miller is kind enough to admit that he doesn’t see me as a bigot and separates my viewpoint from my person. Jodi’s advocacy has been far better than any other I’ve seen in these threads. But some of the other responses…well, they made me feel that, just for thinking as I do, I’m not welcome on these boards. This really has been bugging me for a long time, as most Dopers are some of the nicest people I’ve ever met, and I’d felt that if I “outed” myself as a Catholic, I’d be pitted to kingdom come. Like Miller said, the lissener shrilling hasn’t helped any, especially when I made sincere attempts to extend the olive branch to him.
I don’t intend to hijack here. I just want to clarify, in my own words, what Miller said. Please return to your regular pit-fun.
*I’m not giving a definitive statement on that only because 1) I’m not a scientist and 2) the debate is still ongoing. I realize that in some people’s minds, this is a settled matter. It’s not for me, but I say that based on my not being a scientist and having not studied the matter enough.
**Of course, I realize from these discussions that many people here can’t fairly separate between the state of homosexuality and engaging in the lifestyle: to be gay is to act gay, if I’m reading you right. Fair enough. I do, however, want to make clear that if I say “homosexuality is not sinful,” I am referring to the status of having the homosexual inclination alone.
So if one of your beliefs is actually a rationalization there’s no-one on the planet who can talk you out of it, because by pointing out your rationalization, they automatically become contemptible.
Nice system, that.
Think whatever you like. However, once you go beyond thought and into posting on a message board, you’ve entered the realm of actions. Thoughts don’t have consequences, but actions do. By declaring homosexuality to be sinful in a public forum, you have an impact upon your reader. Some of them might even believe you. Some of them might act upon that belief as well.
I’m not asking you to change the way you think. I’m asking you to honestly assess the potential harm of your actions, and weigh that against the potential good.
What good is it going to do to declare homosexual behavior a sin? What are you hoping to achieve by stating it? How are you assisting your God in his work by doing so? And who might your declaration harm?
Think whatever you like. But when you express your thoughts, you have a responsibility for the consequences of your actions.
MrVisible “Some of them might even believe you.”
Don’t worry. There aren’t that many retards on message-boards. Chances that someone actually believes ResIpsaLoquitor’s nonsense are small.
It’s nice that everyone is taking the time to separate the homosexual from the homosexual action.
Do those same people know how insulting, demeaning and degrading it is to do so?
Just asking.
Esprix
ResIpsaLoquitor, although I don’t agree with you, I respect your opinion and your recent, reasoned posts on this very subject. Please expound on some of your beliefs.
What level of sin is this behavior? Is it venial sin or mortal sin?
Does it vary by infraction? Does sporting wood at the State Finals whilst pressing The Cradle onto some city boy carry the same weight as outright buggery?
I understand that concern, but I am Catholic, practical, in union with the Holy See, I’ve said as much many times before, and I don’t recall ever having been Pitted.
Not to say that there isn’t a certain mindset of freely bashing beliefs here, but I have never been personally attacked for being Catholic.
- Rick
I wish I understood precisely what that last sentence means.
Not to answer for Res, but a mortal sin is one that’s done with full advertence of the will - that is, it’s completely voluntary. It must be done with full knowledge - you must perceive the immorality of the act, and must freely elect to complete it regardless. It must concern a grave matter. There is no complete laundry list of grave matters; they may be discerned from the teachings of the Church, from Scripture, and from reasoning.
- Rick
But there’s the rub, ain’t it? If I eat ham or lobster, when I know that the book says I shouldn’t, is that a mortal sin? I personally don’t consider it an immoral or grave matter. Neither do nearly all Catholics.
I fart in the book’s general direction, in fact, concerning nearly everything in Leviticus, as do most Catholics, most Christians, and a considerable number of Jews.
How am I, practically, to judge the immorality or the gravity of any act?
I tried to stay out of this arguement, but I HAVE to point something out:
lissener, the original question that you’re quoting here was “would you give A shit,” NOT “Would you give shit to…”
Big difference in the meaning of that question.
If I can sidestep the theological diatribe for a moment, my underlying understanding is that if thoughts aren’t expressed, then they’re never discussed, and that mutual quest to fight ignorance isn’t achieved. We simply won’t be making progress without discussing the issue.
Think of it this way: if my viewpoint is correct, how will anyone know if I don’t talk about it? And, if my viewpoint is wrong, how will I prevent myself from fostering that bad belief in myself and in others if I keep silent around people who disagree with me? As I’ve said before: if I’m wrong, I want to know about it. I don’t think I’m wrong, but then, neither do most people on these boards. Or, to personalize it: someday in the past, a long time ago, some gay person somewhere must have said “I think how I feel is OK; I need to tell somebody.” I don’t think most people here would have supported telling him to keep quiet in order to avoid upsetting anybody.
Pretty much what Bricker said. The question is still a fair one, since in our real, pluralistic world, we have to make value judgments when various mores and cultures are competing with each other. Speaking for the Catholics, we’re taught that we have an obligation to form our consciences. The conscience is not, as we understand it, an objective Jiminy Cricket that tells us what’s right and wrong, but rather our internal sense of what we understand to be wrong. That’s still objective, of course…so as I said, we have an obligation to study and learn about what’s right and wrong so that the conscience doesn’t tell us the wrong thing.
To nitpick on the pork/lobster example, we might start from a default that there’s nothing wrong with eating a hot dog. Suddenly, some guy comes along and waives a Bible passage in your face, proclaiming the immorality of eating pork. Dubious? Yes. But at that point, one might consider: “Wait, I’m a Christian, and yet my book is telling me that hot dogs are evil.” At that point, you’d investigate: if eating hot dogs is bad, why is it in the Bible? If it’s ok to eat them, why is it ok? You might track down some readings on the subject. You might talk to a priest. You might post a question on the SDMB. In other words, you make an effort to resolve the doubt so that you can get on with your life.
I hope that doesn’t sound excessively complicated, especially since the bulk of moral decisions we make are taken for granted. Most of us don’t lie, cheat, rape or steal, so we don’t bother with that kind of analysis. However, as any quick parsing of GD should reveal, the more subtle questions go unanswered: is it theft if I download music from Kazaa? Is abortion wrong? Am I cheating on my spouse if I look at porno? Is homosexuality ok? And so forth.
Hi Bricker. Sorry for seeming unclear. On a side note, I appreciate your answer about sin; without a full understanding of ResIpsaLoquitor’s background, sometimes it’s a little like pinning the tail on the donkey.
Now that I have a better understanding of his views on sin, I suppose the question I’ve come here to ask is largely moot. I’ll go ahead anyway, just for clarity’s sake.
To ResIpsaLoquitor: in your opinion, does the sin of homosexual behavior vary by infraction?
Does sporting wood at the State Finals whilst pressing The Cradle onto some city boy carry the same weight as outright buggery?
[In Res’s mind, is a male who becomes aroused during a same-sex amateur wrestling match as “sinful” as one who engages in anal sex for gratification?]
Whew! Here I thought I was sinning! But since I don’t perceive any immorality with the act of love, then I’m ok. Thank goodness!
Esprix
Perhaps you missed this part of my post:
When I discuss gay rights issues, I’ve very carefully weighed the consequences of my actions.
I’d appreciate it if you could address the questions I’ve asked, and then give sincere consideration to the harm you cause.
Esprix I’m glad you’re okay
Please don’t ever think you’re sinning. To love someone [and act upon it] isn’t a sin.
Sinning, imo, is; To hurt someone. Like, letting millions of African children die of AIDS, because the Catholic church says condoms are bad. Worse: condoms cause AIDS.
I’m not even going to start on rape victims and abortion.
To go back to the OP: I think lissener might be a bit extreme, but I can understand his frustration when he reads posts about ‘SINS’
For heaven’s sake. Grow up. This is 2003.
Excuse about the smiley. I hate the things.
MR VISIBLE –
Oh, I wouldn’t say no one on the planet. But certainly not you. And, even if someone else, there would have to be some reasonablie indication that the belief in question is in fact a rationalization and not a truly held belief. And, y’know, we’d have to be talking about my beliefs in the first place.
ESPRIX – I do understand how it may be insulting to you to have people insist on separating the homosexual from the homosexual action. But, really, if a person holds the moral belief that the action is wrong, isn’t separating the person from the action pretty much the best they can do? I’ve asked this before: Assuming you’re dealing with a person who truly and deeply believes gay sex is wrong. Assume that that person is in every other respect a person of good will – that he or she does not even attempt to judge you for engaging in that “wrongful” action? What is it you want that person to do, other than stop believing in something they believe in? Which would be wonderful, of course, but really isn’t something you can ask of them, right? I’m serious: What is it you would prefer these people to do?
It seems like the available choices are (a) love the sinner AND the sin; (b) hate the sinner AND the sin; or © love the sinner and hate the sin. Realistically, (a) is not going to happen because you can’t force people to consider a given thing to be right when they have been raised to believe or have concluded that it is wrong. Option (b) is obivously the worst of the choices, for all concerned. Doesn’t that pretty much just leave us with ©?
Assuming again that you are dealing with people who consider homosexual acts to be a sin.
And, in the interestes of full disclosure, let me set forth my own opinion: Are homosexual acts a sin? I don’t know, and frankly I don’t care. On the one hand, the history of my faith and the position of my church, in which I am an active and faithful member, is that homosexual acts are sinful. On the other hand, it doesn’t make sense to me that God would put feelings of same-sex attraction – not just sex, but love and acceptance – in people and then declare they’re sinning when they act on them. On the third hand, I’m hardly confident I know more about the will of God that my entire church. So I guess I don’t know.
But, more importantly, I really don’t care. We are all sinners and all fall short in the eyes of God. Who is to say that my sin of being a total be-yatch when I lose my temper, and hurt someone else’s feelings, is not worse than, say, ESPRIX’s “sin” of expressing love for the person who holds his heart? In fact, it seems to me pretty obvious which of us is doing worse by God, and it isn’t ESPRIX. Especially since he genuinely doesn’t believe his actions are ungodly, while I’m pretty sure that, on my worst days, mine are. I do not consider it to be my responsibility to judge the “sin” of anyone else, and so I don’t spend much time contemplating the sinful nature of anyone other than me.
I’m going to be taking a break for a while. Spending too much time here.
Couple points to make on my way out. Sorry for the driveby, but I’m kinda done for now.
[ol][li]It has been said here that I have called my definition of homophobia “THE TRUTH.” This is not the case. I have said that the fact that one’s orientation is not a choice is THE TRUTH. My definition of homophobia is based on my OPINION that the denial of such a truth is irrational, and probably driven by fear (or its many forms: disgust, unfamiliarity, tenacity of indoctrination).[/li][li]It has been said here that, unlike others who may even agree with my definition of homophobia, I am the only one insisting that other people adopt my definition as their own. This is not the case. Every single time (cites to the contrary will get you an apology) that I have “defended”—or re-explained, or attempted to clarify, whatever—my definition of homophobia, it has been in response to a challenge to that definition. I could really care less if my definition becomes adopted as the “official” definition; I have never claimed anything further than it is how I understand that word’s meaning. The mere fact that all this debate has not changed that understanding should not be taken (though somehow it has been taken) to mean that I insist others acknowledge it as accurate, let alone that they adopt it as their definition.[/li][li]The word “shrill” keeps coming up. I think that is unfair. FWIW, I am certainly not, on this end, typing shrilly. The tone in my head as I write my posts is one of weariness and apathy. Call me inflexible, if you will, or implacable, or even insistent, but trust me; shrill I am not.[/li][li]As far as that goes, that I appear inflexible is only incidental: I have tried to read and consider everything that is said here, but so far none of it has changed my basic position. FWIW, my standard for a change of position is pretty high, because the position in question is whether I am fully as human and moral as all the rest of you. Anyone—anyone—who questions my humanity, on the basis of my homosexuality, is according to my understanding homophobic. Whether they commit homophobic acts or keep their homophobic thoughts to themselves is a different debate.[/li][li]That I will not give religious homophobes a “pass” is no more their problem than their homophobia is mine. They do not have to give me permission to be gay, though many of them still believe it is up to them to dictate the course of my private life. And they do not need my permission to succumb to religious prejudice. I’m wholly tired of people saying, “I’m sorry, but it’s my religious conviction, and I mean no harm. Why must you still call me a homophobe?” They want my forgiveness; they want me to give them permission to remain unenlightened. I will not give it because you do not need it: take responsibility for your own decisions and quite placing that responsibility on your church, and quit asking me for absolution for your fear.[/ol][/li]I have said before on this board that I will not waste time with posters who are not, in my opinion, debating in good faith: just because you can type doesn’t mean you have something worthwhile to contribute. I have broken that rule here recently, mostly for the sake of lurkers and in deference to the community as a whole. But the end effect of that is that each of these threads starts out with a good number of participants, some of whom even understand and defend my position. But those people have more sense than me and they back out of a thread when there’s no longer any substantive discussion going on. My recent practice of staying in each of these threads for the long haul has meant that as the sensible Dopers have their sensible say and then move on to other things, the thread dwindles to just me and a couple of master baiters who have no real investment in the discussion and just want to keep shaking it in their teeth until there’s nothing left to shake: it’s the shaking they’re here for, not the debate. This means that every one of these threads ends—when it ends—with me feeling isolated and ineffectual. This is not fun anymore.
So I’m going to go away for awhile, until I don’t care as much anymore, then maybe I’ll drift back in. I won’t at that point avoid these threads, so this will probably continue to cycle until the Rapture.
Anyway, again, defensively, please search all my threads and try to see that, inflexible as I am on this subject, I have tried always to play by the rules, and it’s unfair (and unfounded; cite me and I’ll cop) to say that I label people as homophobes simply for disagreeing with me; or that I put forth my opinion as absolute truth. I have been rude, I have been unforgiving, I have even been cruel, I think, at times. That I’ll cop to. But I will not cop to shady debating, absent cited proof to the contrary.
So as not to end on such a negative note, I will post a poem written by Julia Serano. Its subject—and its author—are transsexuals, but the position expressed is so close to my own that I’ll post it here; the parallels should be obvious, even though I myself am not transgendered. I’ll highlight the part that caught my attention. (Mods: this work is copyrighted 2003 by Julia Serano, but I have written permission from Julia to post it here: please email me if you need a copy of her permission.)
[ul] cocky
by julia serano
we’ve been told that we are living in a man’s world
and in this culture
no image represents power more than the phallic symbol
and if the penis equals power
then i am illegally armed
and my body
full of freckles and feminine curves
is like a stealth bomber
i fly just under everyone’s radar
but only because they choose not to see me
only because nobody wants to believe
that a sweet, petite green-eyed girl like me
could ever possibly be packing heat
they say that it’s not the size of the wand
but the magic that it does
well after months on estrogen
my penis is pretty small
but she has supernatural powers
she’s like some pissed off ancient greek goddess
she changes the meanings of everything around her
she turns all of my ex-girlfriends into unknowing lesbians
turns the men who hit on me these days into latent homosexuals
she can make the most entitled cat callers and womanizers
scurry away with their tails between their legs
all because of six small words
“i use to be a man”
and being a transsexual
i know that most people view my femaleness
as a facade
an elaborate hoax
but i am more real
than most people could ever hope to be
i am real because my gender
is not based on what other people think of me
and i may be an object of ridicule
but i am not the butt of anyone’s joke
because i know that people make fun of trannies
because we are the one thing that they fear the most
i am more bad-ass than any gangster
more dangerous than an entire marine core
my penis is more powerful
than the cocks of a million alpha males all put together
because when a man is defined as that which is not female
and a woman is that which is not male
then i am the loose thread
that unravels the gender of everyone around me
they say its not the size of the boat
but the motion of the ocean
well my penis gives most people sea sickness
she makes them dizzy
most people are not secure enough
in their own masculinity and or femininity
to survive a night in the sack with me
my penis turns simple sexual pleasures into political acts
she turns biological impossibilities into cold hard facts
my penis is the curiosity
that you’ve been told will kill your cat
see my penis can be deadly
especially to me
and i’ve heard almost every true crime story
about what frightened macho boys do to trannies
i’ve read about almost every bludgeoning and mutilation
bodies beaten beyond recognition
and i’ve imagined all of this happening to me
first person
and every time i get up in front of a crowd
to give one of my out-spoken word performances
i feel myself morph into a slow moving target
and i can’t tell you how many nights
i’ve walked back to my car holding my breath
half-expecting that inevitable blow to the back of my head
and sometimes i wonder why it hasn’t happened yet
and sometimes i wonder why they don’t just get it over with
and sometimes i just wish i was dead
i wish i was dead
see i never wanted to be dangerous
and i spent most of my life
wishing that i didn’t have a penis
i use to hate my body for not making sense to me
and nowadays i hate my body for being so in between
and some mornings i can hardly even get out of bed
because my body is so weighed down with ugly meanings
that my culture has dumped all over me
see i’ve been made to feel shame and self-loathing
so that everyone else could take comfort
in what their bodies mean
and if i seem a bit cocky
well that’s because i refuse
to make apologies for my body anymore
i am through being the human sacrifice
offered up to appease other people’s gender issues
some women have a penis
some men don’t
and the rest of the world
is just going to have to get the fuck over it
and if i am destined to be the loose thread
that unravels the gender of everyone around me
then i am going to pull
and pull
and pull
until every single person is exposed
until they finally see that all along
they were merely wearing the emperor’s new clothes
people don’t like it
when i turn the tables on them
but what the hell else am i suppose to do?
play a hand dealt from a deck of cards
that is stacked against me?
and if i seem a bit cocky
it’s because i’ve spent my entire life
being backed into a corner
and like a frightened animal
pumped full of adrenaline
and sick of hunger and hiding
i am finally desperate enough
to come out fighting.[/ul]