takoma wrote:I'm trying to get this straight: One should have the right to believe homosexuality is wrong, but not the right to believe that's bigoted? How do you determine which beliefs one has the right to hold?

You can believe it is bigoted. You just can't legislate on it.

Big law firms. Where everyone on this board who works works.

You don't want Catholics to be forced to do things counter to their supposed beliefs. So you demand that the rest of us live according to Catholic doctrine?

And yes, you're a bigot. Look it up. If that bothers you, stop acting like one.

Could someone explain the phrase "Big Law" to me.

I'm trying to get this straight: One should have the right to believe homosexuality is wrong, but not the right to believe that's bigoted? How do you determine which beliefs one has the right to hold?

You are entitle to hold whatever "beliefs" you chose. The problem arises when one group forces or attempts for force another to conform their beliefs or act in contradiction to their beliefs to accommodate the other (e.g., forcing Catholic owned business to provide insurance providing coverage in contradiction to their belief, the issue of fertility treatments for an issue unrelated to fertility as previously stated, the attempts to force BSA to embrace homosexuals, what is essence a mandate that forces Big Law to actively recruit homosexuals (not just the most qualified candidate) so that their diversity numbers "look right",the pressure on churches to sanction and perform gay marriages irrespective of religious doctrine, etc.).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I am not anti-gay. However, the gay lobby is so strong that it isn't just total acceptance, it is special rights.


I'm not racist, I just don't understand why black people feel like they're entitled to marry white women.

If there's one inviolable rule of the universe it's that no racist, sexist or homophobe has ever realized that they are one.

Sorry. I have many friends who are gay. I have been to their commitment ceremonies. I have a gay uncle. I believe gays are born gay just as heterosexuals are born heterosexual. I am not homophobic. I do, however, believe that a large segment of the gay lobby is looking for special rights in that they will not stop until they have pushed a total acceptance homosexuality without regard to an individual's religious or moral beliefs. It so happens that many of may gay friends acknowledge this, also. Are they also, homophobic?

Please list the special rights that they want that you do not have. I'm drawing a blank.

Not the PP, but I have bolded one part of his statement that is very true. That IS pushing for special rights. In addition, those who identify as the opposite sex want this covered by insurance (and with ObamaCare, that's on us). They also want fertility treatments covered, even though, biologically, they are infertile because they have the same internal and external sex organs, not because there is a true medical issue.

I have no issue with homosexuality. I do have an issue when liberals, homosexual or not, call people bigots if they choose to believe homosexuality is wrong.

I don't think, in general, people are justified in calling you a bigot if you don't think fertility treatments should be covered by insurance. I think that's a complicated issue, and as a conservative, I see your point. But it's also an incredibly minute issue. The "rights" that gay Americans are campaigning for are, overwhelmingly, marriage and family law rights. And I can't see how people think that's the government's business.

I think it is a matter of condemning the act--not the person. There is a difference.

I'm trying to get this straight: One should have the right to believe homosexuality is wrong, but not the right to believe that's bigoted? How do you determine which beliefs one has the right to hold?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I am not anti-gay. However, the gay lobby is so strong that it isn't just total acceptance, it is special rights.


I'm not racist, I just don't understand why black people feel like they're entitled to marry white women.

If there's one inviolable rule of the universe it's that no racist, sexist or homophobe has ever realized that they are one.

Sorry. I have many friends who are gay. I have been to their commitment ceremonies. I have a gay uncle. I believe gays are born gay just as heterosexuals are born heterosexual. I am not homophobic. I do, however, believe that a large segment of the gay lobby is looking for special rights in that they will not stop until they have pushed a total acceptance homosexuality without regard to an individual's religious or moral beliefs. It so happens that many of may gay friends acknowledge this, also. Are they also, homophobic?

Please list the special rights that they want that you do not have. I'm drawing a blank.

Not the PP, but I have bolded one part of his statement that is very true. That IS pushing for special rights. In addition, those who identify as the opposite sex want this covered by insurance (and with ObamaCare, that's on us). They also want fertility treatments covered, even though, biologically, they are infertile because they have the same internal and external sex organs, not because there is a true medical issue.

I have no issue with homosexuality. I do have an issue when liberals, homosexual or not, call people bigots if they choose to believe homosexuality is wrong.

Anonymous wrote:

I am not anti-gay. However, the gay lobby is so strong that it isn't just total acceptance, it is special rights.


I'm not racist, I just don't understand why black people feel like they're entitled to marry white women.

If there's one inviolable rule of the universe it's that no racist, sexist or homophobe has ever realized that they are one.

Sorry. I have many friends who are gay. I have been to their commitment ceremonies. I have a gay uncle. I believe gays are born gay just as heterosexuals are born heterosexual. I am not homophobic. I do, however, believe that a large segment of the gay lobby is looking for special rights in that they will not stop until they have pushed a total acceptance homosexuality without regard to an individual's religious or moral beliefs. It so happens that many of may gay friends acknowledge this, also. Are they also, homophobic?

Please list the special rights that they want that you do not have. I'm drawing a blank.

I am not anti-gay. However, the gay lobby is so strong that it isn't just total acceptance, it is special rights.


I'm not racist, I just don't understand why black people feel like they're entitled to marry white women.

If there's one inviolable rule of the universe it's that no racist, sexist or homophobe has ever realized that they are one.

Sorry. I have many friends who are gay. I have been to their commitment ceremonies. I have a gay uncle. I believe gays are born gay just as heterosexuals are born heterosexual. I am not homophobic. I do, however, believe that a large segment of the gay lobby is looking for special rights in that they will not stop until they have pushed a total acceptance homosexuality without regard to an individual's religious or moral beliefs. It so happens that many of may gay friends acknowledge this, also. Are they also, homophobic?

I am not anti-gay. However, the gay lobby is so strong that it isn't just total acceptance, it is special rights.

I'm not racist, I just don't understand why black people feel like they're entitled to marry white women.

If there's one inviolable rule of the universe it's that no racist, sexist or homophobe has ever realized that they are one.

Indulgences are nothing new and granting indulgences does not change the morals or teaching of the church. Pope Francis will not change the Church's stance on homosexuality because it would go against the morals and teachings of the church. It isn't something that will be changed upon the whims of any Pope--and Francis has not given any indication that he would like to or thinks that it should be changed. You obviously do not understand Catholicism...

Anonymous wrote:I am not concerned with what two consenting adults do behind closed doors. I am in favor of gay marriage.

But you have to realize that Catholicism, like many faiths, is rooted in scripture. The Bible says it's a sin for a man to lie with another man. It's not going to get re-written. It just isn't.

Gay persons cannot expect a whole religion to change it's doctrine on this. Individuals can think for themselves, but the church body is not going to change in regards to this.

Why not? We had Limbo/Purgatory time until the pope cut for those who follow him on twitter: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/07/17/pope-twitter-purgatory_n_3609470.html. Pope Benedict rewrote the entire mass. Don't get me started on the history of celibacy for priests. Why can't this pope reverse the church's stance on homosexuality?

Anonymous wrote:And yet the general attitude toward people who have sex while using birth control or outside of marriage is a bit more, shall we say, lenient than the attitude toward those of us who have sex with people of the same gender.

I think the Pope's statement was a huge step forward, simply because he dared to say that being gay isn't something he's prepared to judge.

I'd love to see more of his flock follow suit.

I'm 17:59 and I agree that there is, at least among lay Americans, much more of a don't ask don't tell attitude when it comes to birth control and extramarital sex. That being said, I stated what I did partly to make the point that, despite what many on DCUM would believe, the Catholic Church doesn't "hate gays" doesn't "discriminate against gays". Its position on homosexual sex is completely consistent with its stance on any form of sex that isn't between a married man and woman who are open to having children (i.e. not trying to prevent it with birth control). That's very different from hating or judging people themselves.

He's only been pope a short while, but I think we will see some real evolutions in the Church over the coming years. No, not as much as many might want, but for a 2,000yr old institution I think some of those shifts will be a long time in coming.

Anonymous wrote:I'm glad he said it, but the reality is that Pope Francis' statement really isn't a departure from current Catholic teaching.

Homosexuality is not the supposed problem. It's homosexual sex, which to the Catholic Church is no different from any intercourse that occurs outside of marriage and/or using birth control. Official Church position on sex generally is that any time sex occurs, it should be between married people who are open to the idea of the children that could result from that union.

Sex that clearly won't result in kids, i.e. gay sex or sex with birthcontrol, is considered a sin. Extramarital sex is seen the same way.

"Never take sex advice from people who claim to never have sex." DH told me this years ago, and it worked.