I really don’t know. Was just giving what I thought gays wanted from the Catholic church. Maybe someone with more information will answer this.
I think that these answers are unworthy of you.
If you are able to state what you think gays want from the Church (quite accurately I think) - then surely you can state whether you think the Church’s position constitutes mistreatment.
It doesn’t take much information or intelligence to say that someone who “feels” mistreated “believes” they have been mistreated.
What I was asking you is whether it really is mistreatment or not. The Church cannot change who she is. She cannot change sin into “not sin”. She can love the sinner…but the sin remains a sin. Is that mistreatment? Is that treating someone unfairly?
Surely you can offer your own thoughts on this…Or not…but you are the one who opened this line of discussion.
This is a tricky question because often isn’t the mistreated party the first one to realize this is the case. Often (not always) feelings are our first indication that something is wrong. Yes, there are times when a person is projecting but in general terms when someone feels like they are being mistreated, when a child feels bullied there is generally some truth to it.
I do think many gays feel that if they don’t get full recognition, that consists of mistreatment. Many people in western societies have very thin skin, not grasping what true oppression is like.
Often (not always) feelings are our first indication that something is wrong.
True again - yet in each of these cases, a careful examination is necessary to determine if the feelings are correct.
Yes, there are times when a person is projecting but in general terms when someone feels like they are being mistreated, when a child feels bullied there is generally some truth to it.
And I think there can be some truth here too…Which is why we are discussing the matter.
Church teaching is clear that we are to love those who have SSA. This does not mean that we condone the actions. I can love my child and not condone his breaking windows.
If individuals fail to love and mistreat others - then such people are sinning just as much as those who engage in homosexual activity.
I think that this is quite correct on both points. We do not know what true oppression is.
There is also an unfortunate tendency to cry foul when no foul has been committed.
I think, after reading the OP, that the question may have been better worded as “has the CC mistreated gays?” Instead of “How.” Because the How very directly assumes that it has happened. I don’t know that it has happened.
In fact, if you look through the other posts in the thread, the Catholic Church (as an institution) has not mistreated gays.
I’m probably going to upset people with this next statement, but it’s something I’ve come to believe, so let’s have at it: The main reason gays want to have legal marriages is because of AIDS. When AIDS/HIV forced a change of lifestyle, I believe gay people felt a paradigm shift toward monogamy. They couldn’t have the life they’d been used to having, and suddenly felt left out. And I’m certain they’re fighting for gay marriage simply because Conservatives/Catholics/Christians/Republicans (all the usual suspects) don’t want gay marriage. I’ll bet a dozen donuts that if gay marriage was suddenly magically accepted by everyone, then nearly everyone, including nearly all gays, would drop the subject.
The only reason they want it, in other words, is because they can’t have it.
And let’s just get to the bottom line. The basic foundation. Sex outside of marriage is a sin. Whether it’s gay, straight, with anyone or anything. Sex outside of marriage is a sin. That’s the part that gets conveniently ignored by activists. The fact that it’s gay is irrelevant. Superfluous. Beside the point. Heinz Field is beside the point, too.
Now, do I care if gays get married? At most, they make up around 2.5% of the population. Part of me says, who cares? Why should I care? (yes, I know there are zillion reasons why I should care–but seriously–I’ll never recognize gay marriage myself, to me it’s meaningless).
They’re such a tiny minority, that they only have “power” if we pay attention to them. I think we ought to just ignore the whole issue and move on to something relevant.
Then when they get their hackles up because of mistreatment, we can just say, “Whatever,” and :shrug:
That has a lot to do with the fact that adulterers are not pressing television shows to have a friendly adulterer character on every program, and there are no adultery lobbies pushing to make adulterers a protected class, and there is no push to allow adulterers to marry their mistresses, and there are no adultery pride parades in which thousands of adulterers march down major city streets every year letting everybody know they’re committing adultery. There is no ‘adultery flag’ being flown at baseball games, and there is no adultery symbol that people post as their profile picture on facebook, or put on their car as a bumper sticker.
There is no call for ‘equal rights’ for adulterers. I don’t see anyone on facebook calling me names for believing the Bible says adultery is wrong. I don’t see studies coming out telling me how normal and healthy adultery is or that people are just born that way. Kids are not spending a day at school each year with their mouths taped shut to tell the world that the poor adulterers have been silenced. We’re not hearing people tell us that by ‘rejecting’ adulterers we are causing them harm and depressing.
You have made an awful lot of assumptions and made statements about other people’s thought processes, beliefs, and motives, that are not only uncharitable, but flat out wrong.
Almost no Catholic was talking about homosexuality before the “gay” lobby started attacking natural marriage with the so-called same-sex “marriage” debate. We weren’t going into “gay” bars trying to proselytize them. We weren’t trying to pass laws against homosexual behavior. We were minding our own business when all of a sudden people started calling us bigots because we wouldn’t accept redefining the original concept of marriage to include a definition that was made up out of thin air, denies children the right to a mother and a father, and goes against the very design of our bodies.
As far as I can tell, adulterers are protected by law.
Yes. They are. So are gay people.
I see your statement in a different light today. (Daylight, quite literally)
Adulterers are protected under criminal law, but they’re liable under civil law in divorce proceedings. At this point, gays aren’t because they can’t get divorced.
You’re right. I should’ve worded it differently, as I don’t believe that the CC as a whole mistreated gays. I guess I worded it that way because my friend made the statement that the CC mistreats gays. So without knowing that, I can see how it may have come across that I thought that the CC mistreated gays. :o
I want to thank you all for the discussion. I’ve talked with my friend further, and we just have to agree to disagree. She said something about the CC “has lobbied against equal civil rights for homosexuals, actively opposed laws changing to give equal protection under the law to certain types of sinners. Church doctrine doesn’t separate sins. I’m not saying that, nor is the pope. What he is saying,and that I agree with,is that the church has had an unhealthy and unjust focus on certain sins.” I guess the whole discussion started with the mainstream media publishing an interview of the Pope and misleading people what the Pope said.
Anyway… Thank you a great discussion!
When one asks about the “actions” of the Church, it’s not always clear what is meant by “actions”, and exactly who/what is referred to by “the Church”.
In the context of this topic, I would have thought it makes most sense (at least in the first pass) to focus on the **teachings **of “the Church”, and consider whether they constitute a “mistreating”.
A quick summary of relevant teachings:
- SSA is not a sin, and persons experiencing SSA are no less deserving of love and respect;
- Sex outside marriage is wrong;
- Gay couples are not eligible to be married.
In my view, these are reasonably formed teachings, but I can well understand that many people, not sharing the same foundational beliefs, would not see it that way.
But having said all that (and now moving on to a second pass), I think Church authorities have made mistakes in the course of communicating and explaining catholic positions in this area. [Mind you, it’s very hard to do so within the restrictions of modern media such as TV etc.] I recall reading a brochure issued in our Diocese that referred to the nature of the relationship shared by a gay couple (and here we can take the case of a committed, monogamous gay couple) as just a “friendship”. Now I understand the use of that word to define boundaries, but the tone failed utterly to show an understanding of the nature and depth of that “friendship”. I though it came across a little insulting and heartless. It was poor communication.
My 2c, as told to me by someone who grew up in San Francisco:
“I never understood the argument that ‘the Church hates gays,’ I have never seen a hospital run by homosexuals for dying Catholics, but I have seen hospitals run by Catholics for dying homosexuals.”
The church’s stance on the homosexual matter is this:
They (homosexuals) are called to a life of chastity like us (heterosexuals) and “all” sexual activity must be within the norms outlined by the Bible and Church teachings on human sexual reproduction. It is not a sin to be “gay” but rather to live a gay lifestyle.
Regardless of a persons orientation, having sex outside of marriage or committing homosexual acts are both mortal sins. I fear people are falling into judging which mortal sins are worse. Truthfully, some sins are worse than others; however, it doesn’t make one better than the other. In all honesty, it doesn’t matter if you’re having sex outside of marriage or doing homosexual acts. They’re both wrong and damnable in of themselves.
I believe everything concerning this subject has already been stated by the Church and the Bible. Anyone who still persists in reviving this subject simply wishes to distract and wear down the church.
Pope Francis stated that we’re obsessed with gays, abortion, and contraception. The reason he said this is because there is no more to be said concerning these subjects. Discuss them if you wish but it’s really a waste of time.
Very good point
Forgiveness implies that there is something to be forgiven. The problem with the “Gay Pride” lobby is that those who subscribe to it don’t want forgiveness. Pride is even in the name of their political lobby. They want someone to tell them that homosexual behavior not only isn’t a sin but that it’s normal and good. So even inviting them to be forgiven is offensive to those who are activists in the “Gay Pride” lobby. And they will accuse any Catholic of being hateful even when all the Catholic did was to accurately tell them what the Church teaches about homosexuality. Proof of this is that they think the Catechism of the Catholic Church and even the Holy Bible itself is hate literature. That’s why they felt compelled to make their own translation of the Bible which omits all the parts that condemn homosexual behavior. Notice that I’m not saying that every homosexual is like this. I’m sure that there are some Catholic homosexuals who honestly struggle with SSA and who will admit that the attraction (though not a sin) is disordered and the behavior a sin, but they don’t appear to have any voice in the media or in the homosexual community as a whole. Thus, these appear to be a very small minority among homosexuals.