Your views on homosexuality - no arguing please! - adjusted wording

[rose]

I was a little surprised by how many Christians on the boards are accepting of homosexuality. Maybe I didn't realize how many liberal people were on here. Rather than starting a raging debate lets just see what our demographics say. Do you think that we can accomplish this without getting crabby? I don't want to argue here I just want to see where you all stand. Feel free to answer anonymously. 

 

Update: I editted the wording. Hopefully this is more straight forward.

[Laura Corin]

Just as a note: you may get some people not wanting to answer because of the phraseology.  'Lifestyle' assumes that being Gay is a choice, like living in the countryside or keeping bees.  I answered anyway.

[Mergath]

You may also get some Christians who can't answer because, based on that other thread, there seem to be quite a few who believe personally that it is sinful, but that from a legal standpoint it is also perfectly fine because we don't live in a theocracy. (Thankfully.) So yeah, I don't know how accurate this will be. But have at it, I guess.

 

[sbgrace]

What does homosexual lifestyle mean in your poll? I don't like the wording.

 

Is it a gay person who accepts and loves themselves as gay but remains celibate?

Is it a gay person who has sex only within the context of a gay marriage/lifetime commitment?

Do you mean a gay person who is having sex with partners outside of marriage?

 

All of those exist.

 

Justin Lee's book Torn (Amazon link), which your library can probably get, is a wonderful read for Christians on any side of the issue. It's a grace filled, loving book.

[Daria]

Also, there are those who believe in the concept of sin, but not in Jesus.  The questions seem to imply that your choices are Christian or Atheist.  

 

I put that I'm a Christian who does not believe that a lifestyle is a sin, but that's not exactly what I believe.  It's just the closest of the options.  

[justasque]

I was a little surprised by how many Christians on the boards are accepting of homosexuality. Maybe I didn't realize how many liberal people were on here. Rather than starting a raging debate lets just see what our demographics say. Do you think that we can accomplish this without getting crabby? I don't want to argue here I just want to see where you all stand. Feel free to answer anonymously. 

<gently> Since anyone can have a child who turns out to be queer, even the most conservative of Christians is sometimes forced to dig deep into their beliefs as part of the decision as to how to love, support, and guide their child.  I wouldn't assume that someone who is accepting/supportive of queer folks is automatically a "liberal" regarding any other area of belief or politics.  

 

I am interested to see how your poll turns out.  However, like a PP, I think the wording is a bit problematic.  By "homosexual lifestyle" are you including folks who are in the "married, monogamous, raising two kids, living in the suburbs" kind of family?  Are you including those celibate by choice (for religious reasons)?  Are you including those who are queer but not sexually active (because they are young, or just don't have a partner for whatever reason)?

[regentrude]

I have a problem with the phrasing of the question. I do not believe homosexuality to be a "lifestyle", because I do not believe it to be a choice.

[Daria]

Also, there are those who believe in the concept of sin, but not in Jesus.  The questions seem to imply that your choices are Christian or Atheist.  

 

I put that I'm a Christian who does not believe that a lifestyle is a sin, but that's not exactly what I believe.  It's just the closest of the options.  

 

Just to be perfectly clear.  I absolutely believe that homosexuality is not sinful, that's not the part that doesn't align.  

[zoobie]

What's a homosexual lifestyle? I'm heterosexual, but my lifestyle isn't the same as other heterosexuals. Do you mean homosexual sexual relations?

[Crimson Wife]

Sinful? Yes.

 

Something that the government should be involved in policing? No.

 

Personally, I believe the government should get out of the marriage business entirely and just provide a legal framework for couples to commit to each other in a civil union.

 

An analogy is how the government provides birth certificates but not baptismal ones. One is a legal recognition by the government that provides certain legal rights to an individual. The other is a religious sacrament that should be left up to the individual houses of worship to decide eligibility for in accordance with the affiliated faiths.

[amo_mea_filiis.]

I don't like the poll wording, but voted anyway.

 

I'm not a Christian, and I couldn't give half a hoot as to what other consenting adults do in their lives.

[Mimm]

Maybe you can take "homosexual lifestyle" to mean an all of the above type of thing? Perhaps it should say homosexual acts. Some Christians believe that being homosexual isn't a sin, but acting on those desires is a sin.

[Mergath]

I don't like the poll wording, but voted anyway.

 

I'm not a Christian, and I couldn't give half a hoot as to what other consenting adults do in their lives.

 

:iagree:

[Joker]

I'm a Christian who doesn't think it's sinful. I'm also not at all a liberal. One can be accepting of homosexuality, or even gay themselves, and still be quite conservative.

[Joanne]

I don't like the wording and choices.

 

I am a former Christian who believes now and did as a Christian of 40 years that being homosexual is ok. It's a non issue; like being heterosexual.

 

You know what? I HATE the poll.

 

Really. Reducing romance, connection, adult holistic living to sex is absurd at best, and insulting at worst. Frankly, it belies a very predictable and scripted viewpoint - defining homosexuality by the actual sex act. Homosexuality is no more defined by sex than heterosexuality (or asexuality or bi or pan........)

 

It's a regressive poll.

 

[justasque]

I see you've changed the poll from "homosexual lifestyle" to "homosexual sex", which is an improvement, I think, in terms of getting a sense of the beliefs of WTM members.  

However, for some folks, it's not sex itself that's moral or immoral, but the context.  For example, Christians in particular often make a distinction between the morality of sex within a monogamous marriage (legal or spiritual/religious marriage) vs. sex outside of marriage; this distinction would apply regardless of the gender of those participating in the sex.  For those who believe this way, "homosexual sex" can be sinful or not, depending on who is doing it with who and whether or not they are married (to each other).

It also leaves out those Christians who are gay/queer and celibate (for whatever reason).  Some Christians and their churches do not view these folks as defacto sinners, feeling that it's the sex itself that is the sin, not the attraction or other aspects typical of queerness.  Others put them firmly into the immoral category regardless of their sexual activity or lack thereof, believing identifying as queer is equivalent to "living a homosexual lifestyle", especially if the queer person is gender-nonconforming in their dress, behavior, choice of career or hobbies, etc.

It's tricky, isn't it?

[Denise in Florida]

I voted Christian don't think it is a sin.

 

The current conflation of "Christian" "Republican" "Conservative" has done great harm to both Christianity and Conservative politics. 

 

[Lang Syne Boardie]

Now that the lifestyle wording has been addressed....

 

I'm having a hard time answering because of the term "liberal." What does that mean, in this context? "I had no idea there were so many liberal people here." What?

 

I am a Christian. I usually consider myself to be conservative (until I contrast myself against the political Christian right who, for reasons unknown, call themselves conservative, and then I'm a FLAMING liberal), but I'm not here to have an opinion on others' sexuality nor to police them about it.

 

Where's my box?

[zoobie]

This obsession with homosexual sex is fascinating to me. Heterosexuals have extra-Biblical sexual relations all of the time. There aren't people freaking out over heterosexuals who are getting married who plan to use birth control or engage in oral/anal or have sex for non-procreative purposes. Heterosexuals do the same types of sexual activities, but that's seen as oh it's not my business. Why is it so horrifying when people of the same sex do them?

[Mimm]

Now that the lifestyle wording has been addressed....

 

I'm having a hard time answering because of the term "liberal." What does that mean, in this context? "I had no idea there were so many liberal people here." What?

 

I am a Christian. I usually consider myself to be conservative (until I contrast myself against the political Christian right who, for reasons unknown, call themselves conservative, and then I'm a FLAMING liberal), but I'm not here to have an opinion on others' sexuality nor to police them about it.

 

Where's my box?

 

This is me. I don't fit anywhere. I usually keep that to myself because my social circle is extremely close minded.

[Crimson Wife]

This obsession with homosexual sex is fascinating to me. Heterosexuals have extra-Biblical sexual relations all of the time. There aren't people freaking out over heterosexuals who are getting married who plan to use birth control or engage in oral/anal or have sex for non-procreative purposes. Heterosexuals do the same types of sexual activities, but that's seen as oh it's not my business. Why is it so horrifying when people of the same sex do them?

 

Heterosexual relationships are not sinful in and of themselves, even if those in them may engage in sinful behaviors.

 

Now if you're asking why all the objections to goverment recognition of homosexual unions but not heterosexual "no fault" divorce & remarriage, then you've got a very good point. A man leaving his wife to marry his mistress *IS* in a sinful relationship. My church would not marry that couple due to the sin.

[rose]

OK, sorry everyone, I tried my best. I didn't want to offend anyone. All I wanted to know was where the board stood. I reported myself and asked for the thread to be deleted.

[justasque]

OK, sorry everyone, I tried my best. I didn't want to offend anyone. All I wanted to know was where the board stood. I reported myself and asked for the thread to be deleted.

 

Rose, I think you did a good job, and it's an interesting thread.  I don't think anyone was offended.  Polling is an art - putting a complex set of beliefs for a broad range of people into a few small categories is inherently hard.  That's why most polls here have an "Other - Explain" box.  I'm glad you made the effort and I hope the thread can continue.

[Mimm]

Heterosexual relationships are not sinful in and of themselves, even if those in them may engage in sinful behaviors.

 

Now if you're asking why all the objections to goverment recognition of homosexual unions but not heterosexual "no fault" divorce & remarriage, then you've got a very good point. A man leaving his wife to marry his mistress *IS* in a sinful relationship. My church would not marry that couple due to the sin.

 

But you don't have Christians lobbying to deny people who commit adultery any rights. You don't have them talking about it constantly and how this country is being ruined by people leaving their spouses for someone else. Christians and conservatives do seem a little preoccupied with homosexuality. That does strike me as a bit weird.

 

ETA: My own grandfather for instance is a Christian and a former pastor and recently posted on Facebook that homosexuals are "disgusting" and if anyone disagreed with him on this point, he didn't want to speak to us, ever. :huh: We aren't close.

[abcmommy]

I still do not like the wording.  I believe homosexual relationships are as loving and acceptable to the Lord as my own.  I am a christian.  The acts in the bedroom don't even come into question for me.  

[Heatherwith4]

I can't really answer due to the wording. Don't feel bad, though, op. I don't think there was any way you could have worded it that wouldn't have offended somebody.

[DesertBlossom]

But you don't have Christians lobbying to deny people who commit adultery any rights. You don't have them talking about it constantly and how this country is being ruined by people leaving their spouses for someone else. Christians and conservatives do seem a little preoccupied with homosexuality. That does strike me as a bit weird.

 

ETA: My own grandfather for instance is a Christian and a former pastor and recently posted on Facebook that homosexuals are "disgusting" and if anyone disagreed with him on this point, he didn't want to speak to us, ever. :huh: We aren't close.

I guess it depends on who you're listening to. I'm LDS and our church leaders are often talking about the importance of strengthening families, being faithful to one's spouse, not viewing p0rn, etc. We get reminded about all the other sins we're not supposed to be committing all the time. ;-) I personally think the biggest threat to marriage and family right now is not homosexual marriage, but rather selfishness, pride, infidelity, abuse, divorce for "irreconcilible differences," and all those other things heterosexuals are doing that weaken their marriages and families. The difference is, no one is trying to say those things are okay or justify them.

 

I don't think homosexual sex is any more "sinful" than premarital or extramarital sex. I believe that marriage is good for children and anything that takes away a child's chance at growing up in a loving, caring home with a mother and father is contrary to God's will.

 

LDS also believe that our marriages and family relationships can extend beyond this life and be eternal. Not only do we have a Heavenly Father, but we also have a Heavenly Mother. I don't know anything about the biology in Heaven, but I do believe that there's something sacred and divine about a man and woman coming together to create a family unit. It's more than just about falling in love or fulfilling one's sexual desires. As one LDS church leader said, marriage and family is about creating something larger than ourselves.

 

I find the whole topic of homosexual marriage very difficult. I don't know what's like to be attracted to the same sex and I don't know what I'd do if I did. I don't believe that gays should be denied rights or persecuted. I fervently believe in an individual's right to free agency, but I also believe that all of our actions have the potential to bring us closer to God or to distance us from Him. If someone asks me, I will say that we are blessed any time we follow God's laws, no matter how difficult they are. But I'm also not going to standing around condemning or criticizing others for their actions because I'm too busy working on myself, trying to be a good wife and mother and follower of Christ.

[Kathryn]

I'm Christian. I can't answer because as I said in the other thread, it doesn't affect me personally, so I don't worry about whether or not it's a sin. It's none of my business since I'm not gay.

[Truscifi]

I think sex is good or bad depending on the context and individuals involved. The genders of the people participating aren't really relevant to that.

 

I voted not Christian, perfectly fine.

[Crimson Wife]

But you don't have Christians lobbying to deny people who commit adultery any rights. You don't have them talking about it constantly and how this country is being ruined by people leaving their spouses for someone else. Christians and conservatives do seem a little preoccupied with homosexuality. That does strike me as a bit weird.

 

I would personally make a distinction between whether a relationship should be eligible for legal recognition by the government and the morality of such a relationship. I don't think the government should be the morality police.

 

The sexual revolution in general was a very bad thing for our country, but homosexuality is only a small portion of that given that only around 3-5% of the population is gay or lesbian. The majority of sexual sins are committed by heterosexuals.

[mommaduck]

Subbing to keep up.

[MercyA]

I didn't see the first version of the poll, Rose, but it is interesting to see where the board stands.  I hope the thread continues.  

 

I'm a Christian, and I believe that homosexual sex is sinful.  However, I had virtually no emotional reaction, positive or negative, to the Supreme Court decision.  It wasn't surprising, and I'm not dismayed or depressed about it.  I tend to be more outraged about the millions of lives lost through war in other countries and through other means in our own country.  (I fully recognize that people can be concerned about more than one issue at once. However, there does seem to be an obsession in our culture with this particular one. It strikes me as a bit odd.) 

[tm919]

The results look predictable to me, compared to the general population. 

 

There are plenty of studies available showing levels of support for SSM in different religious groups in the general population.

 

http://publicreligion.org/2015/04/attitudes-on-same-sex-marriage-by-religious-affiliation-and-denominational-family/#.Vdo4siWqqko

 

Although I suppose these stats also include those who don't think it's fine, but believe in equality anyway. 

Interesting, I said I was Christian and didn't think it was a sin (back when it said lifestyle, I ended up deleting my vote because I am not sure any of these really describe me). Actually, I identify as Catholic with many, many caveats which is really different from what the OP might have meant.

 

Personally I think we can all do with a world with more loving, stable, legally recognized relationships in them. I'm not at all picky who are in those relationships as long as they are consenting adults. Even if I were picky, it's none of my business.  Or I choose to make it none of my business.  :p

 

As a society, I think we have much bigger problems over which we should obsess now. 

[Aiden]

I am a Christian, and I believe that homosexual sex is sinful. I am conservative by almost any measure of conservatism, both in terms of my religious beliefs and in terms of my political beliefs.

 

However, I believe--as others have stated--that the government is not the morality police, and I have no problem whatsoever with the government granting recognition and rights to homosexual individuals who are engaged in a committed relationship. (I do wish it had been done legislatively rather than judicially, but that's beside the point.)

 

Many conservatives would say that my acceptance of legal marriage for homosexual couples is not conservative, as the OP implied. However, I justify my political position on same-sex marriage in terms of limited government and religious freedom--conservative buzz words if I ever heard one. I've thought through my conservative principles, and they've led me to part ways in some areas with those who would be labeled spokesmen for conservatism. That doesn't make me liberal, however, no matter what those conservative spokesmen would say.

[rose]

I didn't see the first version of the poll, Rose, but it is interesting to see where the board stands.  I hope the thread continues.  

 

I'm a Christian, and I believe that homosexual sex is sinful.  However, I had virtually no emotional reaction, positive or negative, to the Supreme Court decision.  It wasn't surprising, and I'm not dismayed or depressed about it.  I tend to be more outraged about the millions of lives lost through war in other countries and through other means in our own country.  (I fully recognize that people can be concerned about more than one issue at once. However, there does seem to be an obsession in our culture with this particular one. It strikes me as a bit odd.) 

:iagree: I really resonate with this. The fact that I was asking at all came about because I was simply surprised by how many Christians didn't consider it sinful in the other thread. It's definitely not an obsession of mine. I consider myself apolitical. The destruction of lives through war (even US led wars) and abortion chokes me up a whole lot more than this issue.

[SKL]

I am spiritual, raised as a Christian, not identifying as Christian or any other religion, but not atheist.  :)

 

I do not consider homosexuality a choice.

 

Homosexual sex may or not be a sin depending on the context.  Same is true of heterosexual sex IMO.

 

I do not believe homosexuality is incompatible with Christianity.  There are Christian homosexuals.

 

I would find it interesting to compare the results of this poll to similar polls addressed to Muslims, Jewish people, Hindus, Buddhists, and other faiths.  The Bible is not the only holy book that teaches against homosexual sex.

[AngelaNYC]

I'm Catholic and we have no problem with those who are attracted to the same sex. It's the sex part that's the problem for us. Any sex outside of sacramental marriage is a sin. So premarital sex, adultery, and homosexual sex are all sins. But I don't judge since I don't know what's in someone's heart.

[SparklyUnicorn]

I don't think it should be surprising at all. The movement to seek equality in marriage and elsewhere could not have depended entirely upon only gay people since as a group they aren't really large enough.  So lots of non gay folks have supported them.  Since a majority of people are Christian in this country, it would stand to reason there are plenty of Christian supporters.  I would also not assume that all gay people are not Christian. 

 

 

[MercyA]

:iagree: I really resonate with this. The fact that I was asking at all came about because I was simply surprised by how many Christians didn't consider it sinful in the other thread. It's definitely not an obsession of mine. I consider myself apolitical. The destruction of lives through war (even US led wars) and abortion chokes me up a whole lot more than this issue.

 

Thanks, Rose. I definitely didn't have you in mind when I said that some people tend to be obsessed with the issue. I really appreciated your perspective on it as shared in the other thread.

 

I think I've reached the point where I'd call myself apolitical as well, and I agree with you whole-heartedly on the issues you mentioned.

[Crimson Wife]

The sex lives of people is none of my business. It's a bit sickening how much time some spend obsessing over the private matters of people. It's almost as if they're some sort of perverted peeping toms who get extra satisfaction-points if they can demean those who don't live as they think their God wants them to.

Making a judgment about the morality of a specific action is not demeaning towards anyone in particular. We ALL fail to live up to God's standards at some point in time. To be human means struggling with sin and temptation.

 

Certain Christians may need reminders to love the sinner but that does not mean we should stop hating the sin.

[mommaduck]

Liberal as in open minded? Then I'm not surprised at the number of liberals here.

 

The sex lives of people is none of my business. It's a bit sickening how much time some spend obsessing over the private matters of people. It's almost as if they're some sort of perverted peeping toms who get extra satisfaction-points if they can demean those who don't live as they think their God wants them to.

 

That word...I don't think it means what they think it means...

 

Seriously, that word gets bandied about by so many that think that ANYONE that doesn't agree with them on ANY singular point is "liberal". It gets really, really old.

[Amy in NH]

"Liberalism is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality. The former principle is stressed in classical liberalism while the latter is more evident in social liberalism."  ~wiki

 

liberal

Also found in: Legal, Financial, Encyclopedia, Wikipedia.

lib·er·al  (lÄ­b′ər-É™l, lÄ­b′rÉ™l)

adj.

1.

a. Favoring reform, open to new ideas, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; not bound by traditional thinking; broad-minded. See Synonyms at broad-minded.

b. Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism.

c. Liberal Of, designating, or characteristic of a political party founded on or associated with principles of social and political liberalism, especially in Great Britain, Canada, and the United States.

2.

a. Tending to give freely; generous: a liberal benefactor.

b. Generous in amount; ample: a liberal serving of potatoes.

3. Not strict or literal; loose or approximate: a liberal translation.

4. Of, relating to, or based on the traditional arts and sciences of a college or university curriculum: a liberal education.

5.

a. Archaic Permissible or appropriate for a person of free birth; befitting a lady or gentleman.

b. Obsolete Morally unrestrained; licentious.

n.

1. A person with liberal ideas or opinions.

2. Liberal A member of a Liberal political party.

[Middle English, generous, from Old French, from Latin lÄ«berÄlis, from lÄ«ber, free; see leudh- in Indo-European roots.]

lib′er·al·ly adv.

lib′er·al·ness n.

Synonyms: liberal, freehanded, generous, munificent, openhanded
These adjectives mean willing or marked by a willingness to give unstintingly: a liberal backer of the arts; a freehanded host; a generous donation; a munificent gift; fond and openhanded grandparents.

Antonym: stingy

American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition. Copyright © 2011 by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. All rights reserved.

Liberal (ˈlɪbərəl; ˈlɪbrəl)

n

1. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) a member or supporter of a Liberal Party or Liberal Democrat party

adj

2. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) of or relating to a Liberal Party

liberal (ˈlɪbərəl; ˈlɪbrəl)

adj

1. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) relating to or having social and political views that favour progress and reform

2. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) relating to or having policies or views advocating individual freedom

3. giving and generous in temperament or behaviour

4. tolerant of other people

5. abundant; lavish: a liberal helping of cream.

6. not strict; free: a liberal translation.

7. (Education) of or relating to an education that aims to develop general cultural interests and intellectual ability

n

8. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) a person who has liberal ideas or opinions

[C14: from Latin lÄ«berÄlis of freedom, from lÄ«ber free]

ˈliberally adv ˈliberalness n

Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged © HarperCollins Publishers 1991, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2003

lib•er•al

(ˈlɪb ər əl, ˈlɪb rəl)

adj.

1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.

2. (often cap.) designating or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.

3. pertaining to, based on, or having views or policies advocating individual freedom of action and expression.

4. of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.

5. free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant.

6. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.; open-minded.

7. characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts.

8. given freely or abundantly; generous.

9. not strict or rigorous; free; not literal: a liberal interpretation of a rule.

10. of, pertaining to, or based on the liberal arts: a liberal education.

n.

11. a person of liberal principles or views.

12. (often cap.) a member of a liberal political party, esp. the Liberal Party in Great Britain.

[1325–75; Middle English < Latin lÄ«berÄlis of free men, generous =lÄ«ber free + -Älis -al¹]

 

~Free Dictionary

 

[mommaduck]

I started a new thread for that rabbit trail ;)

[Rosie_0801]

I'm Catholic and we have no problem with those who are attracted to the opposite sex.  It's the sex part that's the problem for us.  Any sex outside of sacramental marriage is a sin.  So premarital sex, adultery, and homosexual sex are all sins.  But I don't judge since I don't know what's in someone's heart.  

 

So gay people having sex within the bounds of marriage ceases to be a sin?

 

Or not because it would be a legal marriage, not a sacramental one?

 

Which would mean everyone not married by your church is fornicating?

 

 

Not picking. Just trying to iron the pov out in my head. 

[ktgrok]

So gay people having sex within the bounds of marriage ceases to be a sin?

 

Or not because it would be a legal marriage, not a sacramental one?

 

Which would mean everyone not married by your church is fornicating?

 

 

Not picking. Just trying to iron the pov out in my head. 

 

First marriages between a man and a woman who are NOT catholic are assumed to be sacramental unless proven otherwise (or unless they are not Christian...it's confusing). Even if they are not married in the Church. Catholics who marry outside the church are NOT considered married sacramentally, and would be considered to be fornicating. Same for people married after divorce, etc. So they do hold this for people other than those who are homosexual. 

 

Also, I find the churches stance requiring celibacy of gay people a tiny bit more tolerable given that the people calling for it (the clergy) are themselves celibate. So at least they aren't asking for something they aren't willing to do themselves. 

 

That said, for reasons stated in the other thread I have no issue with gay marriage, although I'd consider sex before marriage, for gay or straight people, to generally be sinful (with some caveats I'm not getting into here).

[SparklyUnicorn]

That word...I don't think it means what they think it means...

 

Seriously, that word gets bandied about by so many that think that ANYONE that doesn't agree with them on ANY singular point is "liberal". It gets really, really old.

 

Yep, I agree.

[justasque]

So gay people having sex within the bounds of marriage ceases to be a sin?

 

Or not because it would be a legal marriage, not a sacramental one?

 

Which would mean everyone not married by your church is fornicating?

 

 

Not picking. Just trying to iron the pov out in my head. 

 

For more on the official Catholic perspective, you might be interested in "Always Our Children: A Pastoral Message To Parents Of Homosexual Children And Suggestions For Pastoral Ministers", which was written in 1997 (almost twenty years ago!).  It is mainly directed towards parents of homosexual children, and to church ministerial staff (including priests).  At the end, it speaks to homosexuals themselves, saying:

 

To our homosexual brothers and sisters we offer a concluding word. This message has been an outstretched hand to your parents and families inviting them to accept God's grace present in their lives now and to trust in the unfailing mercy of Jesus our Lord. Now we stretch out our hands and invite you to do the same. We are called to become one body, one spirit in Christ. We need one another if we are to " . . . grow in every way into him who is the head, Christ, from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament, with the proper functioning of each part, brings about the body's growth and builds itself up in love" (Eph 4:15-16).  Though at times you may feel discouraged, hurt, or angry, do not walk away from your families, from the Christian community, from all those who love you. In you God's love is revealed. You are always our children.

Obviously, not every Catholic person is in agreement with the views expressed in this church document, especially as it is now almost two decades old. 

[zoobie]

First marriages between a man and a woman who are NOT catholic are assumed to be sacramental unless proven otherwise (or unless they are not Christian...it's confusing). Even if they are not married in the Church. Catholics who marry outside the church are NOT considered married sacramentally, and would be considered to be fornicating. Same for people married after divorce, etc. So they do hold this for people other than those who are homosexual.

 

Also, I find the churches stance requiring celibacy of gay people a tiny bit more tolerable given that the people calling for it (the clergy) are themselves celibate. So at least they aren't asking for something they aren't willing to do themselves.

 

That said, for reasons stated in the other thread I have no issue with gay marriage, although I'd consider sex before marriage, for gay or straight people, to generally be sinful (with some caveats I'm not getting into here).

The clergy are choosing of their own free will to be celibate. The homosexual people would have no real choice in celibacy.

[zoobie]

So gay people having sex within the bounds of marriage ceases to be a sin?

 

Or not because it would be a legal marriage, not a sacramental one?

 

Which would mean everyone not married by your church is fornicating?

 

 

Not picking. Just trying to iron the pov out in my head.

Those are the kinds of things I wonder. Do the people who hold this view go up to others and let them know how sinful they are? Do they advocate for legislating against allowing such legal marriages?

 

(Not people who have personal convictions and believe those convictions govern only their person.)

[ktgrok]

The clergy are choosing of their own free will to be celibate. The homosexual people would have no real choice in celibacy.

 

Oh, I agree. I did say "a tiny bit more tolerable". It's at least a bit better than a married person saying it.