Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
You're in cult territory there.Does this apply to anyone who disagrees with any teaching of the church in any way? Seems like the pews are going to be pretty empty if 100% unquestioning acceptance is the litmus test.
I call it baloney because I'm familiar with the claptrap having heard the whole spiel before.
It wasn't a political viewpoint. From their religious viewpoint, SSM does not exist.It's literally determining if a believer is really a believer by verifying the correctness of their political viewpoint on one specific subject.
Be careful, calling people bigots is not allowed here.I agree. Bigots frequently exhibit exemplary faith.
In any case if legislatures are able to pass religious laws the state is not secular - by definition. I have observed the hankering after a theocracy by posters here on CF.
exactly!A man wearing a dress that wants to be around children should be a red flag.
Well, it certainly started out that way. God did make man and woman for each other.The institution itself.
Well, that would be a testable assumption. What percentage of drag queens have been caught molesting kids, as opposed to the percentage of religious leaders caught molesting kids?A man wearing a dress that wants to be around children should be a red flag.
That's really the important question. (Barbarian checks)Is pedophilia more common in transvestites than in the general population?
If his actions were suspicious, like having Bible studies in the hot tub, (an actual case) and spending too much time one on one with certain kids yes,Well, that would be a testable assumption. What percentage of drag queens have been caught molesting kids, as opposed to the percentage of religious leaders caught molesting kids?
Would a minister who wanted to work with kids be a red flag? Maybe so, just on the probabilities.
It's somewhat naive to think that every Catholic is in lock step with every position that the church holds. People aren't sheep. If they have a moral problem then they don't check up and then say to themselves 'Ah, so that's what I should think.' If you're an adherent to dogma then so be it. But most people accept that their church is a guide and not a rule book. And even though they do their very best to conform to the teachings, in real life some faithful often reach a conclusion that in practical matters what they are taught and what their experience is in lived situations doesn't match.Yes, you can absolutely call them not faithful if they are going against the doctrines of their faith. To be faithful means you support the doctrines and teachings of your faith.
And if you are a member of the Greek Orthodox Church and support SSM, you are not faithful to the Church and it's teaching. Because the Greek Church still calls homosexuality a sin and does not support SSM.
Greece becomes first Orthodox Christian country to legalise same-sex marriage
Greece's parliament has approved a bill allowing same-sex couples the right to wed and adopt children after decades of campaigning by the LGBT community for marriage equality in the socially conservative country.www.abc.net.au
So you'd apply the same criteria to a transvestite, given that they seem to have a much lower incidence of pedophilia than ministers?If his actions were suspicious, like having Bible studies in the hot tub, (an actual case) and spending too much time one on one with certain kids yes,
I doubt that there have been sufficient studies to make such a judgement and I would err on the side of caution.So you'd apply the same criteria to a transvestite, given that they seem to have a much lower incidence of pedophilia than ministers?
Is that your expert opinion?It's somewhat naive to think that every Catholic is in lock step with every position that the church holds. People aren't sheep. If they have a moral problem then they don't check up and then say to themselves 'Ah, so that's what I should think.' If you're an adherent to dogma then so be it. But most people accept that their church is a guide and not a rule book. And even though they do their very best to conform to the teachings, in real life some faithful often reach a conclusion that in practical matters what they are taught and what their experience is in lived situations doesn't match.
They see couples who have been in loving relationships for many years. And they see that the sky hasn't fallen because of it. That there are no practical reasons for denying it. Except that God apparently doesn't want it. So what do the faithful do? They ask God for guidance.
How they then reach the conclusions they do is something you'll have to ask each of them. You can discuss what you think as regards their lack of faith while you're at it.
After a couple of decades discussing matters like this with countless Catholics on many forums, three specifically dealing with Catholicism? If by 'expert' you mean 'very knowledgeable' then yeah. It is.Is that your expert opinion?
So you'd hold a minister to a higher standard, given their record of pedophilia?I doubt that there have been sufficient studies to make such a judgement and I would err on the side of caution.
I'm intrigued why you think transvestites are interested in making the rest of us into transvestites. What is your evidence for that?I doubt that there have been sufficient studies to make such a judgement and I would err on the side of caution.
It’s fine for men to dress as women if they choose but there is no need to pass the behavior onto children.
I’m not Catholic so I don’t knowAfter a couple of decades discussing matters like this with countless Catholics on many forums, three specifically dealing with Catholicism? If by 'expert' you mean 'very knowledgeable' then yeah. It is.
Not all people who molest children are pedophiles. Pedophiles are only interested in those who haven’t reached puberty.So you'd hold a minister to a higher standard, given their record of pedophilia?
I merely noted that what evidence exists, suggests that transvestites are much less likely than ministers to be pedophiles.
Less than 5% of pedophiles have some other paraphilia:
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0306624x03258477
On reflection, it might also mean that ministers have very high rates of other paraphilia. Which we might want to check before we held them to a stricter standard than transvestites.
But are you really willing to risk kids by assuming so?
What is your evidence that they don’t want to influence children?I'm intrigued why you think transvestites are interested in making the rest of us into transvestites. What is your evidence for that?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?