"Hey im not catholic but i agree that homosexuality is wrong. "
Then why do all of the newer confessionals have glory holes in them?
No, why do you think I’m surprised? Being against something != being surprised by it.
Nice post, dropzone. Enlightening.
As far as what’s-it’s-face and his “i agree” post, DNFTT.
But it all breaks down to individual people, doesn’t it? And if one person has a “right” then so does another and what conceivable difference does it make where/who/or what their relationships lie with. I don’t see how anything is any more relative than whether or not the PERSON holds the same value as any other person. I mean, if you take the relationship angle out of the equation, it would be the same as saying male is equal to female, black to white, blond to brunette, but your relationships somehow cancel all that out. How can you take away a basic tenet of the individual when you add the relationship aspect back in? Isn’t that contradictory? I mean, why not just say that certain people are inherently unequal then to begin with.
(And no, Captain, I’m not trying to pick on you. Asking in the general sense, is all.) I hope that makes sense.
Because gay people don’t pay taxes.:rolleyes:
There’s a difference between lobbying for something I disagree with and lobbying for institutionalized bigotry. I disagree with the NRA over how easy it should be to buy a handgun, but I don’t think the NRA is immoral because of the difference. Lobbying to protect the second-class citizenship of a large segment of the population isn’t the sort of issue I can “agree to disagree with,” however. It’s reprehensible, and should be treated as such.
However, this is the Pope we’re talking about here. He’s three hundred and fifty years old and is the closest thing God has to a best friend. Either one of those alone would be enough to unhinge most people, so I have to give the Pope at least a little credit for holding it together this long.
My pastor ribs a gay couple in the congregation for living in sin because they haven’t been through a commitment ceremony. Things are changing.
Gay people are part of the “every single one of us” I mentioned.
And why would that be a bad thing? Why shouldn’t a gay spouse be as equally entitled to the same benefits as a straight spouse?
Just like the NRA should only concern themselves with gun owners, NOW should only concern themselves with women, the AFL-CIO should only concern itself with union members, the AARP should only concern itself with old people, Phillip-Morris should only concern itself with tobacco farmers and smokers…
My point is, everyone has an agenda to push, even the Catholic church.
The Pope isn’t telling non-Catholic politicians how to vote.
“But,” I hear the argument being cast, “the Pope’s trying to force non-Catholics to live their lives according to Catholic beliefs.”
Well, there are hundreds of organizations in Washington (and in the capitals of other countires) trying to force us to live our lives according to their own beliefs. A) That doesn’t mean the politicians will listen to the lobbying organization when it comes to voting on legislation, and B) even if they do (and you disagree), you can always work to vote them out of office.
Miller: I see what you’re saying, but…
Eve’s OP said she wasn’t surprised that the Pope took a stance against gay marriage, ergo her rant wasn’t so much about that. Her ire was more directed at the fact that the Pope was trying to force his beliefs on non-Catholics.
And so, my arguement was: you may hate, loathe, despise and froth at the mouth over what he’s saying, but just because he’s lobbying a loathesome opinion, it doesn’t mean he’s trying to force his beliefs upon non-Catholics any more or less than NRA lobbyists are trying to force their beliefs on non-gun owners. I don’t care how loathesome (or popular) an opinion is, the lobbyist (whomever he works for) is trying their darndest to force that opinion upon society as a whole. And if the politicians decide enough times to side with the “unpopular” opinions of lobbyists, then the electorate will (or should) vote them out.
The Pope isn’t passing any legislation. He’s giving his opinion (no matter how loathesome you may find it) to those who do pass legislation. That is all. They may take it or leave it, just as they may take or leave any opinion given to them.
You (generically speaking, not directed at anyone in particular)don’t agree with the Pope? No one’s forcing you to be Catholic. You don’t agree with your legislator’s voting record? No one’s forcing you to vote for him or her. And the Pope can’t force unwanted changes to society-as-a-whole any more than the NRA or the UAW can.
EVERYONE on Capitol Hill, in the White House, or with a big enough soap box has been since Day One, is currently, and will keep on trying to force their own personal beliefs on everyone else.
I am not justifying or agreeing with the content of the Pope’s memo. Please don’t take my arguement here as such.
Happy
Well, it breaks down to individual behavior. The Catholic Church says that homosexual sex is wrong, in itself, while heterosexual sex is not wrong, in itself. It also says that state recognition of marriage will encourage commission of the sexual act. Now, in the case of heterosexual marriage, that’s not a problem from the Catholic Church’s perspective. But, in the Catholic Church’s eyes, if a state recognizes homosexual marriage, it will encourage commission of and legitimize an immoral act, and that’s a problem, because the state has a responsibility not to encourage immorality.
Of course, you might disagree with any of these positions, but they’re all value statements…none of them are statements of fact (with the exception of the statement that state recognition of marriage will encourage commission of the sexual act).
Are you Catholic and therefore endorse this position? Or do you take a different stance from this as a human rights issue = value statement? Thank you for answering so politely.
snort Yeah right.
Try fugly. I went to Catholic school, and I wore a uniform. The Catholic school girl uniforms of fantasies wouldn’t be allowed.
The plaid skirts are usually made of this cheap, shiny, itchy, stiff, scratchy polyestor, and the plaid is usually really ugly. Then the blouses were prissy, with the big rounded collars, and the cardigans, blech.
On a related issue:
“I am mad at the Pope! The Pope says he does not want my brothers and sisters to use condoms! Well, what the fuck has he got on his head?” - Judy Tenuta
I’m not Catholic.
Whooooops! Me, not Hamish.
The fuck? I swear, I logged out first. And it is still not Hamish.
Cleanup in aisle 5… crumbled cookies, cleanup in aisle 5…
That works better if you actually change the user name before apologizing for forgetting to change the user name the first time. 
Does that mean then, that your “value statement” finds gay people to be inherently unequal to straight people? Please, correct me if I’m misunderstanding.
One sad thing is that the Vatican’s teachings on sex is the one thing that drove me away from Catholicism. Birth control, premarital sex, homosexuality, masturbation, sex ed-all that.
If they stopped being so fucking uptight about it, I’d go back to Catholicism faster than you can say Hail Mary, Full of Grace.