Gay, Catholic, and Doing Fine

[Ave Maria]

I have heard a lot about how mean the Church is, and how bigoted, because she opposes gay marriage. How badly she misunderstands gay people, and how hostile she is towards us. My gut reaction to such things is: Are you freaking kidding me? Are we even talking about the same Church?

Gay, Catholic, and Doing Fine - LifeTeen.com for Catholic Youth

I thought that many of you would enjoy this article, especially those of you who struggle with temptations toward the same sex. I am one of those persons who struggle with temptations toward the same sex. Modern culture would call me bisexual. However, I am chaste and I am so happy that I am chaste. I am also celibate and intend to be celibate for the rest of my life. I could marry a man if I wanted to but I really do not want to because I don't feel like I could handle raising children with my disabilities.

So to sum it up, I posted this article to show that it is clearly possible to be gay, bisexual, lesbian and an orthodox practicing Catholic. May God bless all of you.

Ave Maria (Holly)

 

[MikeK]

Nice work, Holly. You've come a long way!

 

[Struggling Sinner]

The term "gay" is a political construct like how "Pro-Choice" is. It has a strong association with a political group of people who deny that the behavior is a sin.

A better term that doesn't have political baggage attached is same-sex attraction or SSA for short.

 

[WarriorAngel]

Good on you, hun.

 

[GNJ]

It was an okay article - gives people some perspective. But comparing having same-sex relationships/gay marriage to eating sand - "it won’t nourish you; it will hurt you" - "she opposes it because it’s impossible, just as impossible as living on sand", made me a little mad.

 

[Rhamiel]

very nice article

 

[benedictaoo]

I thought they had to change being gay?

 

[WarriorAngel]

If they desire to Bene - some have been able to. [according to the atheists study who doesnt give a fig for religion - 60% did]

 

[Genersis]

I thought they had to change being gay?

No. They do have to abstain from any relationships or sexual relations with the same-sex though.



Personally, I think the actions the Church takes in the political arena is where it struggles to avoid being bigoted and hateful.

 

[WarriorAngel]

Being hateful is 'accepting' the sin that leads to eternal separation from God and ignoring the soul - who does live on. The Church - in spite of the world trying to make her look bad - is more concerned for ppl.
This life is temporary - so why put all your eggs in the basket of living on earth - when it all ends here anyway.
Nobody gets out alive.

So the Church is loving - because she wants to nourish the soul - that matters more than the flesh due to it's eternal properties.

 

[Genersis]

There's nothing loving about about opposing same-sex couple recognition in legislative protection from domestic violence.
Nor is it loving to oppose just about every other legal recognition, and then still claim support of equal treatment.
Though I guess if you want to be pedantic, they do claim homosexuals should be treated equally, it says nothing about their relationships.

I get that the Church is theologically against same-sex couples existing, but I really hate it being used as an excuse to deny the fair treatment of such couples.

 

[Rhamiel]

There's nothing loving about about opposing same-sex couple recognition in legislative protection from domestic violence.
Nor is it loving to oppose just about every other legal recognition, and then still claim support of equal treatment.
Though I guess if you want to be pedantic, they do claim homosexuals should be treated equally, it says nothing about their relationships.

I get that the Church is theologically against same-sex couples existing, but I really hate it being used as an excuse to deny the fair treatment of such couples.

I would not say that it is "pedantic"
we think that such relationships are harmful to the human person on an existential level. So to support them or recognize them as equal would be like public health services saying food and poison should be treated the same.
as for domestic violence laws, no one is allowed to assault someone else, it is not like the law allows homosexual couples to beat each other senseless.

I have not looked into all the issues facing this topic, but I do not think we really need state recognized civil unions to work out these problems

 

[Tallguy88]

Guys, let's not turn Holly's thread into a debate. We all know what we each believe. No need to rehash it here.

I'm glad you've found peace with yourself Holly. I'm still working on it.

 

[Ave Maria]

Nice work, Holly. You've come a long way!

Good on you, hun.

Hey everyone. That's not my article. I do struggle with temptations toward the same sex but that's not my article.

 

[benedictaoo]

No. They do have to abstain from any relationships or sexual relations with the same-sex though.



Personally, I think the actions the Church takes in the political arena is where it struggles to avoid being bigoted and hateful.

I know what the Church says about it but thank you.

I know the proper perspective. They do not have to change or apologize or be ashamed for who they are. They just can't have sex with anyone of the same sex. Neither can they have sex with the opposite sex if they are not sacramentally married to them. No one can.

 

[benedictaoo]

If they desire to Bene - some have been able to. [according to the atheists study who doesnt give a fig for religion - 60% did]

And if they don't, leave them alone and accept them for who they are... people.

 

[Struggling Sinner]

I would not say that it is "pedantic"
we think that such relationships are harmful to the human person on an existential level. So to support them or recognize them as equal would be like public health services saying food and poison should be treated the same.
as for domestic violence laws, no one is allowed to assault someone else, it is not like the law allows homosexual couples to beat each other senseless.

I have not looked into all the issues facing this topic, but I do not think we really need state recognized civil unions to work out these problems

The suicide rate among homosexuals (probably the active ones) is still very high in proportion to heterosexuals even in places that are extremely accepting of them and have changed the definition of marriage to accommodate homosexual activists which goes to show that so-called "same-sex marriage" won't make gays happy.

 

[Amrak]

the easiest way for young christian gays is to seek a conversion method (such as the Paul Clinton Programs) because it will make a young man feel pure and full of confidence to travel the hard road towards enlightenment

 

[Ave Maria]

There's nothing loving about about opposing same-sex couple recognition in legislative protection from domestic violence.
Nor is it loving to oppose just about every other legal recognition, and then still claim support of equal treatment.
Though I guess if you want to be pedantic, they do claim homosexuals should be treated equally, it says nothing about their relationships.

I get that the Church is theologically against same-sex couples existing, but I really hate it being used as an excuse to deny the fair treatment of such couples.

There are already laws protecting people from domestic violence.

Also, it is loving to oppose recognition of same-sex couple's unions. If we were to condone it we would be condoning mortal sin and mortal sin sends people to Hell if they die in that sin. It is not loving to condone that which sends people to Hell.

 

[Tallguy88]

There are already laws protecting people from domestic violence.

Also, it is loving to oppose recognition of same-sex couple's unions. If we were to condone it we would be condoning mortal sin and mortal sin sends people to Hell if they die in that sin. It is not loving to condone that which sends people to Hell.

Here's where I have problems.

I agree with everything you just said.

But, I can also see the benefits for civil unions, too. Not just for gay couples, but any two people regardless of relationship or sexual status. Case in point. I'm not sure if I will ever get married. If not, I might like to enter into a civil union with someone for the tax benefits and legal protection. Completely non-sexual and Platonic. But I also know that it will mainly be used by gay couples to have a marriage-like relationship.

So while I'll continue to oppose gay marriage, if some sort of civil union bill were proposed, I might be willing to support it, given the right provisions.