(Jun 15, 2019, 12:45 AM)Lord Octagon Wrote: [ -> ]So I'll give my view on the subject. Previously I was slammed for "Bible bashing" and waving "cherry-picked scripture" despite not even once quoting from the Bible. My view is rooted in my Catholic faith and pairs with my High Tory politics.
I do not agree with homosexual relationships being about 'love' because, in the context of romantic relationships, love is ultimately affirmed in the Sacrament of Matrimony and leads onto procreation through intercourse. The only purpose of intercourse is for procreation, and "cultivating of mutual love" in the case of using periods of infertility as natural contraception (natural family planning).
Intercourse is the most intimate way of expressing ones love the significant other. The purpose on the biological level is to procreate however, on a pshychological level it's to strengthen the bond between partners, to bring them closer to eachother and to show trust in eachother, it's called "making love" for a reason, you are expressing with your body how much you love another person. How come a man and a woman can have intercourse "cultivating of mutual love" but a same sex coupple can't? I can tell you from first hand experience that the love is real, so is the lust but, it's not only lust, lust is not limited to the LGBT community.
So, marriage, sex and procreation are inseparable. Homosexuality, therefore, is against the natural law because a homosexual couple can never procreate and bring forth God's gift of children. As a result, a homosexual relationship separates that sacred bond between body and soul.
Oh yes, marrige, sex and procreation are very seprable. To marry someone isnt to have sex with them, and to have sex with someone isnt always to procreate and procreation isnt always done by having intercourse. If it's against natural law. There are evidence of animals showing homosexual affection. (You can read more about that here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_an...l_behavior)
A sterile man or woman cannot procreate and bring forth God's gift of children. As a result, a heterosexual relationship seperates that sacred bond between body and soul.
Pope Benedict XVI stated in Deus caritas est that the fullness of a person is achieved by a unity of soul and body, but neither spirit nor body alone can love, only the two together. If this unity is broken, if only the body is satisfied, love becomes a commodity.
I mean, I can tell you from personal experiences that the love is real and not just a commodity, im sure many others will too.
It is also due to this violation of the natural law that the Sacrament of Matrimony can not be received by homosexual couples, and so sexual relations is immoral in that sense as well.
As for gender ideology, that is not even religious dogma - it's scientific fact that there exists only man or women. Females have at least one X allosome and no Y allosomes - that means those with monosomy X are female and those with trisomy X, tetrasomy X, pentasomy X, etc are also female. Males have at least one Y allosome and at least one X allosome (as a human cannot develop without crucial genes located on an X allosome), so XY, XXY, XXXY, XYY, etc are all males.
Gender/sex cannot be different, there is no logical sense to this. You cannot reject religion for irrationality but somehow accept gender ideology as rational. Gender dysphoria is, medically, a mental illness and we should provide support to those suffering its symptoms.
Gender dysphoria is a tricky one, becasue its subjective, like most things are with psychiatry. A big part of "treating" GD is by supporting the individual. Hormone Therapy or surgery paralell with counselling.
According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) Gender Dysphoria is not a mental illness.
"Persons experiencing gender dysphoria need a diagnostic term that protects their access to care and won’t be used against them in social, occupational, or legal areas." -DSM-5
The reason they are suffering is because they are extremly uncomftrable in their own skin. So the best way for you to help them is by supporting them and respecting them.
So yeah. For homosexuality, Church teaching is clear and I follow the Church in its instruction of morality and interpretation of the natural law. For genderisms, science is clearcut on that.
And for those who are going to act like "Reeeeeee, Bible basher" you should really look up what that term means - such "Bible bashers" are completely anti-Catholic and I have to face them daily in my apologetics. "Bible bashing" is rooted in the belief of sola scriptura - the Bible should be the only thing considered when deciding teachings. This is not a belief held by the Catholic Church. "Bible bashing" is aggressively evangelical and would more be likened to the 'cherry-picking' of scripture that Monty stated, although incorrectly accused me of doing.
Pax Christi
Personally I like Pride, Colors, Love, Parades, weird people just being weird, exacly the way I like it
I don't know what most of you guys are on about, maybe its different where you live but, from what ive seen here, pride is what it is, you have a parade here and there and the local businesses taking full advantage of this, personally i dont think anyones pushing anything onto you but that view might be clouded of me being on the inside looking out. I like pride for what it is. To be able to be proud of who you are without the judgment and ramifications that usaly comes with, because its the pride month, its "more socially acceptable"
For you feeling its being pushed onto you, i wouldnt really blame pride on that, but the coorperations for hyping it the way they do so they can turn a profit off it, there's also 10 other months you can chose from, take any of them :)
Again, I dont know how pride is where you live, but here, there is a parade now and then, sometimes there are a gathering on a grassfield (outside a church kek) and a hell of a great time in the bars at night time.
(Jun 15, 2019, 03:36 AM)Decay Wrote: [ -> ] (Jun 15, 2019, 12:45 AM)Lord Octagon Wrote: [ -> ]So I'll give my view on the subject. Previously I was slammed for "Bible bashing" and waving "cherry-picked scripture" despite not even once quoting from the Bible. My view is rooted in my Catholic faith and pairs with my High Tory politics.
I do not agree with homosexual relationships being about 'love' because, in the context of romantic relationships, love is ultimately affirmed in the Sacrament of Matrimony and leads onto procreation through intercourse. The only purpose of intercourse is for procreation, and "cultivating of mutual love" in the case of using periods of infertility as natural contraception (natural family planning).
Intercourse is the most intimate way of expressing ones love the significant other. The purpose on the biological level is to procreate however, on a pshychological level it's to strengthen the bond between partners, to bring them closer to eachother and to show trust in eachother, it's called "making love" for a reason, you are expressing with your body how much you love another person. How come a man and a woman can have intercourse "cultivating of mutual love" but a same sex coupple can't? I can tell you from first hand experience that the love is real, so is the lust but, it's not only lust, lust is not limited to the LGBT community.
Because a same-sex couple cannot be validly married by the Sacrament of Matrimony. Lust may not be limited to LGBT but it is certainly a part of
So, marriage, sex and procreation are inseparable. Homosexuality, therefore, is against the natural law because a homosexual couple can never procreate and bring forth God's gift of children. As a result, a homosexual relationship separates that sacred bond between body and soul.
Oh yes, marrige, sex and procreation are very seprable. To marry someone isnt to have sex with them, and to have sex with someone isnt always to procreate and procreation isnt always done by having intercourse. If it's against natural law. There are evidence of animals showing homosexual affection. (You can read more about that here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_an...l_behavior)
Just because you can have sex with someone without being married doesn't make that action moral. Only those bound by holy matrimony can morally have intercourse, for the purpose of procreation. As for animals, Pope Pius XI's Casti connubii reaffirmed the dignity of the human conjugal act as distinct from the conjugal acts of animals, by its volitive nature - the act is not merely biological but rooted in the will and therefore a personal act.
A sterile man or woman cannot procreate and bring forth God's gift of children. As a result, a heterosexual relationship seperates that sacred bond between body and soul.
Sterility doesn't ipso facto forbid one from marriage unless they withhold such information from the spouse prior to marriage, or have a permanent biological inability to sexual intercourse. If a validly married couple are sterile, sexual intercourse is not immoral and is what I was referring to in terms of "cultivating of mutual love" - one should also not exclude the possibility of ever having children.
Pope Benedict XVI stated in Deus caritas est that the fullness of a person is achieved by a unity of soul and body, but neither spirit nor body alone can love, only the two together. If this unity is broken, if only the body is satisfied, love becomes a commodity.
I mean, I can tell you from personal experiences that the love is real and not just a commodity, im sure many others will too.
It is lustful as you're not having sex for procreation or for the "cultivating of mutual love" during periods of infertility in a valid marriage for purposes of natural family planning but without excluding the possibility of children. Love is therefore merely a commodity between same-sex couples.
It is also due to this violation of the natural law that the Sacrament of Matrimony can not be received by homosexual couples, and so sexual relations is immoral in that sense as well.
As for gender ideology, that is not even religious dogma - it's scientific fact that there exists only man or women. Females have at least one X allosome and no Y allosomes - that means those with monosomy X are female and those with trisomy X, tetrasomy X, pentasomy X, etc are also female. Males have at least one Y allosome and at least one X allosome (as a human cannot develop without crucial genes located on an X allosome), so XY, XXY, XXXY, XYY, etc are all males.
Gender/sex cannot be different, there is no logical sense to this. You cannot reject religion for irrationality but somehow accept gender ideology as rational. Gender dysphoria is, medically, a mental illness and we should provide support to those suffering its symptoms.
Gender dysphoria is a tricky one, becasue its subjective, like most things are with psychiatry. A big part of "treating" GD is by supporting the individual. Hormone Therapy or surgery paralell with counselling.
According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) Gender Dysphoria is not a mental illness.
"Persons experiencing gender dysphoria need a diagnostic term that protects their access to care and won’t be used against them in social, occupational, or legal areas." -DSM-5
The reason they are suffering is because they are extremly uncomftrable in their own skin. So the best way for you to help them is by supporting them and respecting them.
They can be respected a human beings, but it does not mean I have to refer to them by their preferred 'gender' if it does not match up to their true sex. They are rejecting a basic truth about themselves, if you're born male or female you should learn to live with that fact because the reality is you cannot change that unless you can completely change your genetic structure throughout your body.
So yeah. For homosexuality, Church teaching is clear and I follow the Church in its instruction of morality and interpretation of the natural law. For genderisms, science is clearcut on that.
And for those who are going to act like "Reeeeeee, Bible basher" you should really look up what that term means - such "Bible bashers" are completely anti-Catholic and I have to face them daily in my apologetics. "Bible bashing" is rooted in the belief of sola scriptura - the Bible should be the only thing considered when deciding teachings. This is not a belief held by the Catholic Church. "Bible bashing" is aggressively evangelical and would more be likened to the 'cherry-picking' of scripture that Monty stated, although incorrectly accused me of doing.
Pax Christi
I don't care what you believe in, you have no right to tell someone who they can love based somewhere in a book written two thousand years ago just because it said it was wrong. Religion shouldn't be law and people should not be treated any differently because of their gender.
My views of this might be different. My country was the first to legalize gay marriage, and most people here don't particularly care about gay individuals, it's a common sight. However, personally, I think you should be able to be in a relationship with members of the same gender, if that is what you want. I see no issue with that.
But I don't support LGBTQ. I support gay and lesbian rights, but that is about it. Now a days the entire movement behind it has become crazed people, and a lot of third wave feminism snowflakes, trying to deny our base biology. Which goes too far, and catering to such things should not be done.
If you are off one gender, but you feel like you should be the other gender, you need to get the appropriate help, since it's a mental condition in my books, unfortunately it is not divined a such everywhere.. Saying that, if you are a guy and want to act more girl like, or vise versa, knock yourself out. But don't go around spouting non-sense about being a non-binary wolf-dog or whatever.
I think awareness about homosexuality is still important, it's not as accepted as many people think, especially in certain countries, and areas of the world, but I think a month is much, a day would suffice just fine.
However saying that, religious people criticizing people for who they have feelings towards? That is something that disgust me. How all mighty and privileged of you to sit on a high horse build on horrible deeds throughout history, believing in your fairy-tails, and cruel, and powerless "gods".
There are plenty faithful, and religious people who warrant respect, because they do not go around shoving it in your face, or forcing it on other people, religion should and can be criticized, like anything else. It is something that can bring structure, and a goal towards somebodies live, but at the same time it can make those people incredibly ignorant and close minded, and stuck.
Also, if you are not having sex because some book is telling you too, have fun with that bud, I will lust away, and have a bloody good time doing it too.
Just to clarify, I'm an atheist and am not giving a religious point of view - each to their own.
I genuinely don't care if someone's gay or bi - we see this in nature (although rare) in other animals. I do not approve of the trans community and if you want to call me "transphobic," so be it - it is gender dysphoria and potential body mutilation for those who are radical enough to go through surgery. If you have a penis, you're a man. If you have a vagina, you're a woman. I don't care if you want me to call you him/her/they just because it's your belief - I'm going to call you what you actually are because I value my opinion more as well as basic biology. Sure, you can say gender is different to sex because it's a "social construct," but this is a thing that has been MADE UP - sex and gender are the same, but people have twisted the definition to support something that simply isn't true - reason being the definition of gender is different now to what it was many years before.
I find it especially disgusting that adults are glamourising and normalising children in drag, sexualising their unnatural behaviour for entertainment. It is creepy, disturbing and sickening.
Like I said earlier, I'm cool with gay/bi people (note that I only view straight/gay/bi as viable sexualities/"identities"), what I am not okay with is how SOME of the LGBT-etc community integrate their sexuality into their personality - shoving it into people's faces and giving gays a bad image. You don't need to wear bras, mesh shirts, short shorts and rainbow clothes to be gay - just act like a normal human being.
Whether you want to believe it or not, Pride Month was made for commercialisation, where companies take advantage of people's sexuality. It seems people are only allowed to be proud if they're minority, and if you're a proud straight/white/male then you're homophobic/racist/sexist. If you're up for gay pride, then you should be willing to accept straight pride else you're a hypocrite.
You should not be proud of something you have no control over.
![[Image: APT5aue.jpg]](https://i.imgur.com/APT5aue.jpg)
Only got the rainbow in the profile picture for the time of year, obviously gonna disappear afterwards. I agree that making it your personality is obnoxious but it happens with everything. Know someone who thinks metal is a personality trait as tries to live like a metal artist. People take everything too far.
From the great Ben Shapiro:
(Jun 15, 2019, 02:54 PM)Cole_ Wrote: [ -> ]From the great Ben Shapiro:
Ahhh Ben Shapiro, the only person who can use playground arguments and think he sounds like he knows what he’s talking about. He takes a childish standpoint and prefers to insult and demonise his opponents by taking their viewpoints to the extremes. He uses enough straw men to fund a scarecrow shop.
His argument with the “If I call you a moose are you a moose?” is ridiculous because he’s simply projecting. He isn’t a debater he rants at the person without giving them a chance to speak. He gives this illusion of dominating the “debate” by doing this but all he ends up doing is talking louder than his opponent.
I personally wouldn't use preferred pronouns because I don't believe that others have the right to dictate the language I use. Biology isn't a social science and that is the view I hold. I'll use the pronoun that best coincides with the persona the individual is displaying, unless other information is provided to me.
If you're gay, no problem.
If you're straight, no problem.
If you think you're a woman when you are a man, no problem.
It becomes and issue when you start trying to force language and behaviour upon other people. My views are my views, if it's so distressing to you that you feel the need to seek me out and speak to me about it then save both our times and do something more productive. You can't convince me that Biology is a social science.
Octagon, i love who i want and i do as i wish, can you kindly piss off with your God, thanks
Attack the argument, not the person.
Im not attacking anyone rather then defending myself from such statements.
This aside - Arguments wont help in a religious discussion. Its like argueing with a child.
(Jun 15, 2019, 04:40 PM)Luvbunny Wrote: [ -> ]Im not attacking anyone rather then defending myself from such statements.
This aside - Arguments wont help in a religious discussion. Its like argueing with a child.
You just said your not attacking the person, but the argument, and then state that debating with someone who is religious is like doing so with a child, thus attacking them again.
(Jun 15, 2019, 05:02 PM)BlackDog Wrote: [ -> ] (Jun 15, 2019, 04:40 PM)Luvbunny Wrote: [ -> ]Im not attacking anyone rather then defending myself from such statements.
This aside - Arguments wont help in a religious discussion. Its like argueing with a child.
You just said your not attacking the person, but the argument, and then state that debating with someone who is religious is like doing so with a child, thus attacking them again.
Luvbunny, if you have nothing to contribute to the discussion rather than "religion bad", don't say anything. No one is attacking you and thus you have no reason to "defend" yourself from any statements. This is a discussion, thanks.
Also, coming straight from the subforum rules:
Quote:Rules for this sub-forum
[*]Discussions must not be created with the purpose to stir up arguments or incite hate.
[*]Discussions must be about a serious and mature topic.
[*]All replies must be serious and contribute to the discussion.
[*]Jokes, puns, and off-topic comments are not permitted.