Don't tell ME it isn't a deviancy! . . . Catholics only, please.

[Teshi]

DEBI. HE CAN BE "ALLIED WITH ROME" AND STILL DISAGREE WITH YOU.

It's as simple as that. You are not the Pope. You are not a bishop. You are not even a forum mod, so you need to get off his case, and Annabel's too.

 

[Debi1967]

DEBI. HE CAN BE "ALLIED WITH ROME" AND STILL DISAGREE WITH YOU.

It's as simple as that. You are not the Pope. You are not a bishop. You are not even a forum mod, so you need to get off his case, and Annabel's too.

And then you all need to let him handle it instead of treating him like a child that does not know how to fight his own battles .... I asked a question, one that again I do not need to be a MOD to ask or need ROBES to ask, that is all I asked was a QUESTION .... It is not I that is making the BIG DEAL out of this it was all of YOU!

OH and by the way it is not me he is disagreeing with, it is Dogma thank you .... there is HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGE difference in this, it was that he challenged the POPE .........................

 

[fragmentsofdreams]

And then you all need to let him handle it instead of treating him like a child that does not know how to fight his own battles .... I asked a question, one that again I do not need to be a MOD to ask or need ROBES to ask, that is all I asked was a QUESTION .... It is not I that is making the BIG DEAL out of this it was all of YOU!

OH and by the way it is not me he is disagreeing with, it is Dogma thank you .... there is HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGE difference in this, it was that he challenged the POPE .........................

We haven't touched Dogma yet in this thread.

 

[CaDan]

We haven't touched Dogma yet in this thread.

That movie rules.

"I rained fire, dude!"

 

[Debi1967]

http://www.christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=22985527&postcount=207

My reply assumes that you would place children in a home where one or both spouses was previously married (unless you would say that is not a serious sin).
Being in the limbo of the foster care system does measurable harm to children. Being raised by homosexual parents does not measurably affect a child's development.

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20030731_homosexual-unions_en.html

As experience has shown, the absence of sexual complementarity in [homosexual] unions creates obstacles in the normal development of children who would be placed in the care of such persons. They would be deprived of the experience of either fatherhood or motherhood. Allowing children to be adopted by persons living in such unions would actually mean doing violence to these children, in the sense that their condition of dependency would be used to place them in an environment that is not conducive to their full human development. This is gravely immoral and in open contradiction to the principle, recognized also in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, that the best interests of the child, as the weaker and more vulnerable party, are to be the paramount consideration in every case.

So I guess the answer given by fragment to PS139 when it was PS139 who brought this document into play, written by the Pope would be quite counter to what the Pope has declared would it not? Then if one took the time to read the whole Document they would see why it was condemned so, because of the matter of Grave Sin and therefore, it's Dogmatic value to begin with and the extension of furthering the explanation of Doctrine already established by the Church and the Church enforcing it's own Authority.... Which fragment directly contradicted in this thread and Dogma is not up for discussion is it in reality?

 

[Debi1967]

We haven't touched Dogma yet in this thread.

Correction when I did touch Dogma you did not address the post

http://www.christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=23052958&postcount=268

 

[Debi1967]

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s2c2a6.htm#2358

This is under the Section in the Catechism

PART THREE
LIFE IN CHRIST

SECTION TWO
THE TEN COMMANDMENTS
CHAPTER TWO
"YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF"
ARTICLE 6
THE SIXTH COMMANDMENT
You shall not commit adultery.113 You have heard that it was said, "You shall not commit adultery." But I say to you that every one who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.114

Which is in fact DOGMATIC!

It has been mentioned in this thread on a number of occasions that this issue is Dogmatic to the Church, so therefore this whole time we have been discussing a Dogmatic issue .....

Also to further this in the same section

2378 A child is not something owed to one, but is a gift. The "supreme gift of marriage" is a human person. A child may not be considered a piece of property, an idea to which an alleged "right to a child" would lead. In this area, only the child possesses genuine rights: the right "to be the fruit of the specific act of the conjugal love of his parents," and "the right to be respected as a person from the moment of his conception."170

 

[Protinus]

YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF

what is your neighbor is gay, lesbian, bisexual or transexual?

 

[CaDan]

"But still it moves."

 

[kimber1]

people seem to be missing the point....well some anyway.....
let it be...
let it be...

 

[Protinus]

people seem to be missing the point....well some anyway.....
let it be...
let it be...

let what be kimber? precious santimony in the face of derision of human spirit, dignity and hope?

 

[Debi1967]

what is your neighbor is gay, lesbian, bisexual or transexual?

Actually Protinus I have known quite a few of them in my life, I even have a family member that is, a Cousin as a matter of fact ....

Do I go around and say hey so and so you are going to hell? UMMM NO ..... But I do not approve of it either and my cousin knows this and why.... He respects me for my beliefs and I respect the fact that he thinks and feels the way he does and I do love him .... It does not mean that I do not hate the sin and wish and pray all the time that he will see this as such.... There is no hatred ....

You think that because God says that this lifestyle is disordered that all of the sudden it means that we are hateful people because we speak out against it and defend God's plan and the Natural order?

 

[Protinus]

You think that because God says that this lifestyle is disordered that all of the sudden it means that we are hateful people because we speak out against it and defend God's plan and the Natural order?

Did I say you were hateful? I asked you if you had peronal experience about living next to gay, lesbian, bisexual or transexual neighbors. You said no. You said that you had relative that was "gay" but that you don't think that he/she will go to Hell, or at least you said that you would not say it. You mentioned that is was not a problem saying that is was "disordered". What questions do you have of me? I can't change your perception of disordered and debased human behaviour and God's Plan for Natural Order, I can not do this!

 

[Debi1967]

let what be kimber? precious santimony in the face of derision of human spirit, dignity and hope?

Oh for your information,

3. Sacredness; solemnity; as the sanctity of an oath.

I try very hard to hold to the sanctity of the oath I have taken with the Church, to obey the Church and to place Her Authority above that of man, because Christ gave it to Her ....

I did not think that it was wrong then to be sanctimonious in this behalf ...

I have already mentioned where no one is perfect, but it is also stated in the Bible that although we are not perfect we are always to be trying hard to attain perfection and to emulate that of the Saints before us .... I am sure in their time they too were called nothing more than sanctimonious too

 

[Debi1967]

Did I say you were hateful? I asked you if you had peronal experience about living next to gay, lesbian, bisexual or transexual neighbors. You said no. You said that you had relative that was "gay" but that you don't think that he/she will go to Hell, or at least you said that you would not say it. You mentioned that is was not a problem saying that is was "disordered". What questions do you have of me? I can't change your perception of disordered and debased human behaviour and God's Plan for Natural Order, I can not do this!

what questions do I have? pleanty as times it is hard to know what you mean.....you come off with Brilliant posts at times and then others I am taken aback by the questions you ask .... You remind of this man I used to know and I asked him once why he always asked the most unusal questions just when it seemed not the right time .... His reply shocked me .... he told me that someone had to play the devil's advocate, that even if it was not his position he was going to throw it in the mix because both sides needed to be talked about ....

What I wonder though is this, is it always appropriate to do that? Are there times when it is not appropriate because then it only confuses things instead of clarifying them .... It is not always good to tempt God or top double guess ourselves all the time just for the sake of argument .....

Especially when we have already been told this is dogma

 

[marciadietrich]

That movie rules.

"I rained fire, dude!"

Ick, didn't like that movie. The other Jay and Silent Bob movies are better than Dogma. I actually confessed seeing it (not as a sin so much as an experience not positive spiritually) ... my priest had seen it which helped when trying to explain that one.

 

[Debi1967]

You said that you had relative that was "gay" but that you don't think that he/she will go to Hell, or at least you said that you would not say it.

For clarification, I will not say it to him because I find it highly inappropriate to say to anyone, online or off, hey you are going to HELL..... I do not think it is my place to do so ....

I do not know what is going to happen between them and God, between now and Judgement Day and Matthew 7 warns us about casting that kind of judgement, it is not mine ultimately to make but the Lord's on that Day.... Since I am not the Lord I will not say it to anyone ..... this position I have made clear more than a number of times to many people.....

The Bible is explicit though that if they die in and have not repented for and are still engaging in Mortal sin it ensures them of everlasting damnation .... Those are the words of God ....

 

[kimber1]

let what be kimber? precious santimony in the face of derision of human spirit, dignity and hope?

no no no. not you dear and the few other voices of reason here i won't say anymore since the conversation finally seems to have gotten back to the OP rather than targeting certain people

 

[Irenaeus]

This thread has run its course.