|
Published: January 29, 2010
Run Over by a Bus?
Gay Anger in Oakland
News release from Pacific Justice Institute
Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender activists are seeking to oust an elderly Prop. 8 supporter from a theater board whose eleven members must be approved by the City Council. The Oakland City Council is expected to vote on the issue.
 Lorenzo Hoopes, 96, has volunteered for decades with Paramount Theatre of the Arts and has been a member of its board of directors for twenty years.. Hoopes has a long career in public service and civic involvement, having served on the Oakland school board for 17 years and as the president of Oakland’s Latter Day Saints temple for many years.
Ordinarily, Hoopes’ reappointment to the theater board would be routine. But these are not normal circumstances, according to gay leaders, because Hoopes donated $26,000 to the Prop. 8 campaign to preserve traditional marriage. In a statement to the Oakland Tribune, gay activist Michael Colbruno said that, in light of the ongoing federal Prop. 8 trial across the bay, Hoopes’ reappointment is “so insulting. It’s so typical that the gay community in Oakland is being run over by a bus. If this were San Francisco, there would be 300 people in the streets.”
Gay activists may get their wish. Because of the intense opposition, city council president Jane Brunner expressed doubts that the Council would re-appoint Hoopes. One councilmember, Larry Reid, disagrees with Hoopes on Prop. 8 but felt he should be reappointed, stating, “This is America. No matter how controversial the issue is, someone like him should be appointed based on his ability to serve and based on his past contributions to the city.”
Fellow Paramount board members expressed support of Hoopes, but only on condition of anonymity for fear of the backlash from gay activists.
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 3:23 AM By Ray Marshall
"Congress shall make no law. . .abridging the freedom of speech," except in the case of homosexuals whose fear of being criticized trumps all else.
"Typical [male] homosexual behavior includes regular contact with fecal matter from oneself and from sexual partners, tragically reversing several centuries of learning about cleanliness, and thus several centuries of growing lifespan. Homosexual behavior makes no more sense than playing in the toilet.
All available evidence indicates that the lifespan of practicing homosexual persons is drastically shortened by their behavior. No reliable study indicates otherwise. The lifespan topic is taboo among homosexual advocates because the evidence is so damaging to their case."
Let's call a spade, a spade, shall we?
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 3:54 AM By Dave
As Hoopes himself said, "It's their prerogative." This is America, and if you come out as a commie, a racist, a pedophile, a polygamist or a Prop 8 supporter, you might not get that political appointment you were hoping for.
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 6:40 AM By Brian Mc
Flood OAKLAND CITY COUNCIL members with emails, letters, phone calls:
DEMANDING that Lorenzo Hoopes be reAPPOINTED to the Paramount Theatre of the Arts board of directors.
DO NOT let a few non-average sexual perverts unduly influence your city.
DO IT NOW!
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 6:51 AM By dbwheeler
How pathetic. What I'd like to know is why homosexuals have tagged themselves as 'gay'? A crankier, mean-spirited, vicious, humorless group of people I've yet to see. I say their code-name should be the 'nasties'. They stoop so low that even the wholesome, totally fun Boy scouts are not safe from their vile attacks.
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 7:04 AM By bud
The board should not consider removing the man from the board. To do so only emboldens people who are so willing to deny another the rights and considerations. This is pure discrimination and intimidation. This is America, nip the evil in the bud! Appoint him!
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 7:07 AM By John Andersen
Is anyone really surprised? Activists for homosexual causes have lost any sense of respect or decency when it comes to public discourse. And they seek to punish anyone in ANY WAY THEY CAN when they dare to disagree with their agenda. Shame on you!
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 8:06 AM By OneoftheSheep
Lorenzo Hoopes has every right to the pursuit of his happiness. The same sex attracted folks in Oakland must realize that our constitution protects God-fearing folks as well as the pagans.
Shame on theose same sex attracted men and women who seek their own bodily pleasures while denying rights to a 96 year old man to contribute to the well being of society.
This is America. If same sex attraction men and women wish to be respected for their vices(which are sinful and abhorrent to the majority), let us offer some respect to God-fearing and righteous men in this citizenry.
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 9:11 AM By Laurette Elsberry
As you can see, the "gay" movement is the most intolerant of all. It's "Be gay, or no way!".
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 9:28 AM By Ray
How many on the Oakland City Council donates to the anti-Prop 8 side and how much did they donate?
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 9:56 AM By John Zakharia
This conspiracy and gay agenda to remove Pro Family supporters also goes on in the Catholic Churches. In LA if one is against gay marriage he will be attacked and removed. It happened to me at Saint Monica's Church where they have a group called GLO (Gay Lesbian Outreach). When the Young Adults group discovered my position they had a lesbian accuse me of harassment. I hope we can also try to keep Catholic Young Adult groups orthodox
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 10:43 AM By Linda
Gaystapo sure describes the jerks who want to remove Mr Hoopes just because he doesn't agree with them.
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 1:13 PM By WOODY GUIDRY
I HEARD "GAY" for the first time right after WW2 when I was asked by a stranger, "How long have you been gay?" I had to ask what "gay" meant before I could say I had never been homosexual. The point is that this new description of SSA's was a comfortable word that they would accept in describing themselves, and it certainly was many cuts above the common terms used before then. Today, the tragedy is that even the new term is not generating much respect.
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 1:14 PM By Peter
One less bigot on the Council. Who cares . . .
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 3:35 PM By Mark from PA
Have a little compassion, Peter. The man is 96 years old. Kindness and consideration would be better.
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 4:41 PM By JLS
Peter, so what you're saying "one less bigot" reveals your true thoughts, that all the council members are bigots. I'm sure that the council is bigoted against Mormons and Catholics who follow their Doctrines. Wonder if Hoopes will sue them for religious persecution, and press federal criminal charges against them for violation of his civil rights. As for the crocodile tears from PA claiming the old man is worthlessly weak ... Let me tell you, PA, that old dude did not get that old and serve that long on public committees by insisting on tender loving care. That sort of thing you recommend is for the effeminate and the gay people.
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 5:05 PM By Richard Mc Candlish
Mark, I suspect that Peter is incapable of compassion; mean-spiritedness more likely. A civic leader, one who has, for years, had the betterment of Oakland at heart and done his best for the citizenry, and he can be thrown upon a heap like yesterdays garbage. Peter, I wonder what your reaction would be if the roles had been reversed and you had transgressed against, say, the poedophile community? Would you be so sanguine if a pervert wrote the same about you to this post?......We are all endowed with a certain spark by the Almighty, and were worthy to be saved from certain destruction by the Saviours sacrifice (even you, Peter). This also applies to Lorenzo Hoopes. Although his religion is very different from mine, I recognise that he carries this divine spark within him, and no-one deserves to be treated with contempt (nor do you, Peter).
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 7:28 PM By Andrea
JLS, it's a privilege, not a right, to be on the board. The board members serve at the political discretion of the city council. As Hoopes himself said, "It is their prerogative" to decline the appointment, if they so choose. If they think he's out of touch with the values of the City of Oakland, they can remove him.
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 8:39 PM By don
interesting in a site calling itself the california catholic daily almost every comment seems determine to trash the essential dignity of every human being in a rush to proclaim homosexuals the new nazis and worse. folks this is debate over public policy and individual rights and you are calling every gay a pervert disease ridden scum. why then should not gays return the favor.
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 9:33 PM By 1abqdad
So, unless you agree with the liberals, you are not allowed to be involved in volunteering??? Classic liberal hypocrisy!
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 10:08 PM By JLS
The city council has no legal standing to deny a person of his civil rights. That would be discrimination and could constitute a criminal offence. The city council is not sovereign. If they think that he, representing old people, is out of touch, then they should be removed and replaced by responsible people who respect others who disagree with them.
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 10:13 PM By JLS
don, it is the homosexuals who trash not only themselves, but society at large by deceit, and by hornswoggling society, also promote abortion. Homosexuality tends towards self hatred, and a society that buys into this then hates unborn babies and seeks to kill as many as they can get away with. Homosexuality is the consequence of sin, don, not necessarily their own sin as far as children go who display that tendency, but sin dumps on others and not only the sinner. In order to understand the menace of homosexuality, don, you have to study it and not simply limit yourself to the practice of it. You study needs to include what the Catholic Church says about it ... everything, and not simply a few selections that you can spin.
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 10:26 PM By Mark from PA
Where did I say the man was worthlessly weak, JLS? Kindness and consideration is for the effeminate and the gay people? Does it occur to you that you are insulting women and gay people by this statement? If you consider kindness to be a characteristic of gay people then I consider that a compliment. Blessing to you.
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 11:56 PM By Micah
Antigay bias is repugnant like anti-Semitism, racism, or any other ancient vestige of prejudice. Those who engage in repugnant behavior will be and should fully expect to be shunned by polite society. This individual contributed to a campaign that maliciously harmed gay persons, entire families, and their children. If fifty percent plus one is required to eviscerate the dignity of a marginalized minority, why should this bigot receive a reprieve from the “will of the people” when it comes to a government appointment. By the way, I hope that recreational marijuana ballot initiate passes in California – divine punishment for a state that has replaced constitutional republicanism with mob rule.
|
Posted Saturday, January 30, 2010 5:37 AM By Mark from PA
Well, Micah, I can imagine that many people who are anti-Semitic and racist don't much care for gay people either. Sadly some people just seem to have to have a group of people that they can put down and hate.
|
Posted Saturday, January 30, 2010 5:53 AM By JLS
PA, your idea of kindness is false; you associate it with indulging sin. Gay people are the perpetrators of malice upon themselves, society and God. Micah, homosexuals can't even reason things out, to wit your post. The whole reason there is more than one person on the council is the nature of what a council consists of. But your foolish idea is to have robots and slaves on the council who all dance to the tune of your choice. You don't even know what a republic is, and you go and claim it is some gay political notion. You don't even know what the Constitution says. BTW, marijuana has nothing to do with recreation ... totally different things; notice the root in recreation which is creation? Marijuana does not create anything, nor does it help people create anything ... but it is destructive, distorting one's senses, rendering them unbalanced, unstable, and effectively reducing the person to the condition of a mushroom on a log. There is no society that ever rose up based on the use of psychodelic drugs, but the growing use of these substances associate directly with the fall of societies.
|
Posted Saturday, January 30, 2010 8:05 AM By Richard Mc Candlish
No, Micah, he did not. Mr Hoopes voted his conscience-he apparently believes that marriage is an institution soley between a man and a woman. This position is outlined in the Bible from Deuteronomy to Romans. If you wish to cast aspersians upon everyone who voted for Prop 8, referring to them as those 'who engage in repugnant behavior will be and should fully expect to be shunned by polite society. This individual contributed to a campaign that maliciously harmed gay persons, entire families, and their children. If fifty percent plus one is required to eviscerate the dignity of a marginalized minority, why should this bigot receive a reprieve from the “will of the people” ', then perhaps you need to look in the mirror as one of those who are biased and prejudiced against those who advocate a Christian lifestyle, as one who individual contributed to a campaign that tried to 'maliciously harm (straight) persons, entire families, and their children'. You need to understand that we hold with Christian values, as taught by the Church and annunciated in the Bible, because we believe; because we know that Christ died for our sins, and that He called us to repent of our sins (of which homosexuality is mortal), and yes, He was inclusive, but not of those who stubbornly held to their sinful lives; we have read our history and can see clearly that this country, like it or not, was founded on Judeo-Christian tradition and teaching-that for the good of society as a whole, certain activities had always been interdicted-robbery, murder, poedophilia, prostitution all eat away at the foundations of society and are considered immoral under the Bibliac code. Homosexuality fell under this same category and had in every civilisation, until the present time, when the law of God was replaced with a spirit of 'Anything Goes'. Cannot you see how Bible-believing people have become afraid for the future of the United States, and for our futures as well?
|
Posted Saturday, January 30, 2010 8:17 AM By Richard Mc Candlish
Micah, you also allude to mob rule, as if Prop 8 supporters had engaged in this behaviour. In this, you are as most of your fellow homosexualists...you are blind to the transgressions of your own people. The violence that has been visited on those who contributed to Prop 8 by frustrated homosexuals puts paid that lie. You and your fellows need to look in a mirror, if you wish to find the perpetrators of mob law. As concerns divine punishment: If you and your ilk continue to war against the law of God, as found in the Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition, then you will bring divine retribution upon yourselves, if not in this world, then surely in the next. I urge you to repent your sins and embrace God-the merciful but also the eternal judge. Is a little momentary sinful pleasure worth an eternity of horrible punishment? If you deny yourself God's mercy, you have naught but yourself to blame.
|
Posted Saturday, January 30, 2010 8:25 AM By JLS
PA, what bubble zone do you live in that you fantasize that bigots do not include homosexuals?! See, this is one more of your professions of faith in the religion of homosexuality, that the home of purity is the homosexual community. The gay agitators have long tried to ally with Jews and Blacks ... what an insult to Jews and Blacks! Real Judaism and Black people are disgusted with homosexuality, as are all other peoples. The gay agenda people stand as the catch all army of perversion aimed at subjugating God, and have the devil as their father.
|
Posted Saturday, January 30, 2010 8:30 AM By JLS
PA, there you go displacing blame by distorting what I said. I said that your version of "kindness" is false. But you twisted what I said to refer to the object of your faux kindness. That, PA, is the result of your homosexual activism and lack of humility. It is an example of why homosexuality is known as perversion, or disorder, or confusion ... Until you humble yourself before God and admit that the Church is right in condemning homosexual behavior including advocacy and admit that the Church is obligated to teach people to renounce their homosexuality and embrace the truth and the real love of God instead of the cheap imitation they publicize, then you will continue in your confused perverse way of trying to interpret matters.
|
Posted Saturday, January 30, 2010 9:23 AM By Rick DeLano
The common cause between Micah and Mark is illuminative of what Mark, to his credit, has forthrightly admitted on the "BUMP+" thread.
Mark just doesn't agree with the idea that the Catholic Church's teaching is binding on matters where Mark doesn't happen to agree.
Another way of putting this same point, is that Mark protests against the Catholic Church, especially the Catholic Church's teachings on homosexuality.
Please pray that Mark is removed from any position where his protests against the Catholic Faith might, under false flag, be transmitted to the weak, the gullible, or the unformed.
While Mark's rejection of Catholic Truth is awesomely serious, can you imagine what lies in store for any pastor who would knowingly put such a one as Mark in a position to instruct youngsters, allegedly in the Catholic Faith?
Here would be one for Maguire and his canonical crew............
|
Posted Saturday, January 30, 2010 9:50 AM By Mike
I've always been curious as to why GLBT people are all lumped together. The "B" stands for bisexual, meaning the person enjoys sex with both men and women. If these people want marital rights too, does that mean they can marry at least one of each, or will they be "discriminated" against and forced to choose? Where does it end? Any right-minded person knows the answer - it doesn't.
|
Posted Saturday, January 30, 2010 11:14 AM By Micah
To Mr. Candlish: I would like to respond to the indictments which you have levied against me. While I don’t typically post my opinions on web pages, perhaps through engagement I might enlighten your world view. First you suggest that I should “look in the mirror as one of those who are biased and prejudiced against those who advocate a Christian lifestyle.” You go on to say that your Christian values are very important to you and I truly respect that. However whose Judeo-Christian values are we referring to? Like the protestant martyrs of old who were burnt alive at the stake for heresy, I reject certain teachings of the Catholic Church. That you would impose religious oppression on your fellow citizens demonstrates a profound lack of moral authority. Secondly you falsely accuse gay persons of seeking to harm “Bible-believing people.” The truth of the matter is that gay people have been trying to persuade anyone who will listen for decades that all they want are equal civil rights –emphasis on the words civil and equal. They have no interest in defining the philosophical or theological beliefs of their neighbors. What gay people would really prefer is to be free from government harassment which marginalizes them and eviscerates their dignity as human beings.
|
Posted Saturday, January 30, 2010 11:15 AM By Micah
Unfortunately Mr. Candlish, you are not interested in reasoned arguments and consider any government recognition of gay marriage to be a direct threat to whatever organized religion you happen to be affiliated with. You lack all empathy for gay people, their families, and children. The tragedy is that banning gay marriage is a direct threat to religious liberty because there are many denominations and congregations which are not only affirming of homosexuality, but also perform marriage ceremonies for gay couples. Thus our country has abandoned the tenants of the establishment clause by holding the likes of Catholics and Mormons above Episcopalians and Jews. You go on to say that you are afraid for yourself and the future of the United States. I would like to tell that you need not be afraid. When the mobs turn against you and demographic change has so diluted your political influence so as to make it impotent, rest assured that gay people and their allies will not seek vengeance. Having been despised ourselves, having suffered, and been subject to terrible alienation we are acutely aware of the distress that follows in the wake of hatred. I would not seek to do the same onto a fellow human being already knowing the consequences that result from malicious social marginalization.
|
Posted Saturday, January 30, 2010 11:15 AM By Micah
Third Mr. Candlish, you employ specious arguments that compare being gay to robbery, murder, pedophilia, and prostitution. Fourth you implore me to repent and say “If you and your ilk continue to war against the law of God, as found in the Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition, then you will bring divine retribution upon yourselves, if not in this world, then surely in the next.” Here is the thing which you would do well to understand. I would prefer to burn for an eternity in a lake of fire rather than acknowledge a God that dams gay person and would deny them the joys of companionship, love, family, and children in this life. As for next life, we will all meet our maker someday and you too will account for the many sins you have committed against gay people. I call into question your self professed Christian lifestyle, for you have no understanding of suffering. How can you expect to be Christ like when you remain unaware of suffering and thus unable to forgive those who trespass against you?
|
Posted Saturday, January 30, 2010 12:35 PM By Jill
Bravo Micah! Bravo!
|
Posted Saturday, January 30, 2010 12:58 PM By Mark from PA
Rick, the letter on Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons, written by Cardinal Ratzinger (Benedict XVI) in 1986 deplored violence against homosexual persons. It also stated, "But the proper reaction to crimes committed against homosexual persons should not be to claim that the homosexual condition is not disordered." It goes on to state that when such a claim is made and laws are supported with protect gay people and give them equality that people shouldn't be surprised when irrational and violent reactions increase. So it seems that according to this Church teaching, if gay people speak out in favor of equal rights and against discrimination directed towards them, then they are partly responsible for any violence directed towards them. It is obvious from reading this document that homosexual persons are seen as inferior beings. However, when this was written I was 30 years old. I never read this document until almost 20 years after it was written. When I was in high school I was taught that we were brothers and sisters in Christ. I was taught that we were all equal in God's eyes. I never heard a word about some people being disordered and inferior. This is something that was foreign to me. Some see gay people as intrinsically evil. But I was never taught this, to me it seems quite dehumanizing.
|
Posted Saturday, January 30, 2010 2:07 PM By Rick DeLano
Micah heartbreakingly affirms:
"I would prefer to burn for an eternity in a lake of fire rather than acknowledge a God that dams gay person and would deny them the joys of companionship, love, family, and children in this life"
Micah. God does not damn any person who does not damn Him first.
Your heartbreaking sentence above tells me thatnyou are at war not only with God but with nature itself.
No homosexual "marriage" can every bring a child into this world.
Any child in a homosexual household is a child who has been deprived of the good of being raised by its own mother, its own father, or both.
It breaks my heart to see that you would openly profes your desire to burn in hell, before you would bring your own will into conformity with what nature has plainly written into our very being, as male and as female.
Since you willfully intend not to do even this, Micah, it is not necessary to even speak of bringing your will into subjection to the Creator, who made us male and female, and against Whose righteous ordinance in this regard you are powerless.
In the face of this powerlessness to alter the Creator's decree that we are a species subsisting in two complementary genders, you have adopted the strategy of another well known dissident:
"Non serviam".
I will add you to my prayers for other heartbreaking victims of homosexual attraction, a disorder which is wreaking such havoc and division in our world as it shrieks against the truth about who we are, male and female.
|
Posted Saturday, January 30, 2010 5:07 PM By Rick DeLano
Mark: Gay people- that is to say, human persons who self-identify in terms of an homosexual orientation- are intrinsically disordered in that precise way.
They are not intrinsically evil.
Nothing is intrinsically evil, Mark. Even Satan himself was created good.
But God has decreed that His rational creatures- angels as well as men- shall have the freedom to reject Him.
We see in Micah a well-advanced, and in you a more subtle but, I am sorry to say, similarly evident consequence of that volitional rejection of Him Who is Truth itself.
But since neither of you is intrinsically evil, it is my hope that God's patient and persistent offer of grace will, ultimately, be accepted by you, by Micah, and by all who imagine themselves to be wiser than He Who created us male and female.
|
Posted Saturday, January 30, 2010 5:32 PM By Mark from PA
I was encouraged by a statement about the 1986 letter on Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons by an Archbishop. He rejected some of the language as unhelpful, even harmful. "I worried that the use of such language could provoke a new form of 'theology of contempt." "Throughout history it had created a mindset among some Christians that made it laudatory to commit acts of violence." "To say homosexuals are to be treated with respect even though they are objectively disordered is demeaning, a new form of double-talk." "I was convinced that we have to cease putting labels on people, especially perjorative ones."
|
Posted Saturday, January 30, 2010 8:41 PM By RR
Mark from PA: You always say that you never heard of something before or that you never learned it in school before. Don't you ever attempt to read and learn things on your own? Just because you didn't learn something in school doesn't mean it isn't true or that it doesn't exist. Just as some things you learned in school might not be true or even exist.
|
Posted Saturday, January 30, 2010 9:49 PM By Anne T.
Mike, your post of January 30 at 9:50 p.m. "hit the nail right on the head". Most or all of these people who advocate for "same-sex marriage" know that if so-called same-sex marriage is allowed there will be no limits. How could there be?? On what grounds could they limit it without the other screaming unfair discrimination?? Of course, with many of them, there is no limits without that kind of marriage now, and they really do not care what it does to society and children as long as they get their own selfish way. Many of them would love to have people be married to anyone and any amount of people they desire. It is like talking to a wall with them because they are so selfish they really do not care about anyone else , including the children of such situations many of whom have come out against "same-sex marriages" because of the horrible experiences they have had.
|
Posted Saturday, January 30, 2010 10:03 PM By Rick DeLano
Ahh, yes Mark, I seem to remember something about that Archbishop....what was his name again?? Oh that's right! It was Rembert Weakland, the disgraced former Archbishop of Milwaukee- you know, the one who paid his secret gay sex partner $450,000 in hush money? Yes, that's right, Mark, your idea of an "encouraging" prelate is the fellow who took $450,000 from the collection plate of his flock and used it to try and buy the silence of a gay hooker. Well, there we have it. I am sure you remember his name now, eh Mark? :-)
|
Posted Saturday, January 30, 2010 10:43 PM By Ben
Rick DeLano, the Church herself identifies some people as homosexual persons, and thus, identification as a homosexual person is not wrongdoing. The Church does NOT teach that the PERSON is intrinsically disordered. The Church teaches that "homosexual ACTS are intrinsically disordered" and that a more or less strong INCLINATION toward an intrinsic moral evil is objectively disordered. If you have such an inclination, and many people gay or straight may have such an inclination, then you have an objectively disordered inclination. And on your claim that "nothing is intrinsically evil", while you (the person) may not be intrinsically evil, there are many acts which are intrinsically evil, such as abortion, masturbation, fornication, adultery, rape, contraception, lying, calumny, theft, blasphemy, etc.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 5:17 AM By Mark from PA
Rick, the worst thing about that was giving that guy $450,000. That was very wrong. The Archbishop should have fessed up right then and there. His lawyers were wrong. The guy accused him of "date rape" 19 years later. Give us a break here. He was an adult. He could have said no right off the bat. He wasn't a "hooker" but he used his friendship with the Archbishop to get money out of him. That doesn't show a lot of character. Archbishop Weakland was wrong. He sinned. It doesn't matter whether it was a man or a woman. He took a vow of celibacy. This was a sin. He realized this and knew he had to renew his commitment to celibacy. Archbishop Weakland was naive and inexperienced. As educated as he was he had been living a celibate life and he messed up. So he sinned but that is what the Sacrament of Confession is for isn't it?
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 8:51 AM By RR
Mark from PA: How do you know Weakland had been living a celibate life? Were you in his bedroom or following him around and keeping tabs on him? The Sacrament of Confession is there for forgiveness, BUT you are to ammend your life, stop offending God, and not commit the sin anymore. If you continue to commit this sin, confess it, and not be sorry and have no intention to stop, then you are trying to fool God and are making a mockery of the sacrament of Confession and that is a sacrilige.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 9:00 AM By Mark from PA
I did not read Archbishop Weakland's book but a friend of mine made copies of some passages from this book. I was touched by some things that the Archbishop said. For example, "God's love and providential care for me became visible through the human care and concern of so many others. I sensed deeply the action of the Divine presence in the many letters, e-mail, and phone calls I received. I became convinced that my healing came about because others were acting as healers to me. The outpouring of love surprised me. Most of those who wrote just wanted to affirm my goodness and my worth in a moment when I doubted it. Many women in particular reached out to me at that time." He was humbled by the support that he received from many women. This is true Christian charity and compassion. It was surely hard for him because now people knew about his orientation. I suppose many people don't comprehend the fear that a person would have being gay and knowing that many people hate and despise gay people. In a way he was free, "There was nothing more to hide; no one could do anything more to me."
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 9:28 AM By Rick DeLano
I think you have it backwards, Mark. The worst thing about Archbishop Weakland's stunning scandal was his betrayal of his office, of his priesthood, and of the trust of the Catholic faithful who put the $450,000 into the collection plate in the first place.
Whether he has received the grace of the sacrament of reconciliation is between him and his confessor.
Whether he has truly repented of his awesome, public scandal is between him and God.
What he most certainly has done, however, is disgraced himself, his office, and the Catholic Church, and his continued, very public attempts at self-justification in the face of his monumental giving of scandal and betrayal of trust speak volumes.
But that is not really the point here, Mark. The point is that you would reject the authentic teaching of the Church, as put forward by Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) in his capacity as head of the CDF, in favor of the dissenting and false teaching of a disgraced prelate whose personal integrity has been shown to be of even lesser magnitude than his fidelity to the teachings of the magisterium.
It is good to know which you freely choose. It assists us in
forming a more complete and accurate prudential judgement concerning your rejection, protests, and dissent from the Catholic Faith and its Scriptural, apostolic, and magisterial pronouncements on the intrinsically disordered homosexual affliction.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 9:36 AM By Rick DeLano
Ben: We agree that the homosexual inclination is objectively disordered. We agree that homosexual acts are objectively disordered. We agree that both of these objective diosorders are definitively taught in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, #'s 2357 and 2358. Do we agree that homosexual "marriage" is an objectively disordered falsehood, one which denies the foundational truth that marriage is the union of the complementary genders of our species? I would be delighted to know that you affirm our Catholic Faith's authentic teaching in this regard as well, if you are willing.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 9:37 AM By Mike
I would like to try again. I asked yesterday why it was that GLBT people are all lumped together. I only had one response, and that was from someone who agreed with me. I would like to hear from the other side (GLBT) about bisexual people and their "marital rights." Can someone from the GLBT community give me an answer as to whether or not bisexual people should have the right to marry more than one partner since, after all, they were "born that way"?
This seems to be the elephant in the room that no one wants to acknowledge. Could it be that this would be the floodgate that opens marriage up to whatever someone believes it to be? In other words, marriage would have no meaning at all. Why do I have a feeling the silence on this will be deafening?
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 11:30 AM By Micah
Dear Mr. Mike: You asked a naive, but honest question and I will attempt to answer as best I can – don’t worry I am a professional. The modern scientific and medical literature suggests that human sexuality occurs on a continuum. Most persons are intrinsically of the heterosexual persuasion, however in every civilization throughout time there has been a minority that intrinsically exhibits homosexual inclinations and there are those who fall somewhere in between. The phrase GLBT is simply an acronym that is used to refer to sexual minorities in general. Bisexual persons are romantically and physically attracted to both sexes to some degree; however that does not imply that they are polygamist. They fall in love with and have relationships with one person at a time – either male or female. They are not asking to marry two people at once.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 11:32 AM By Micah
And to all the haters out there, especially you Mr. DeLano, it is quite telling that you addressed none of my substantive arguments in support of religious freedom and civil rights. Because my arguments are apparently unassailable you resort to simply accusing me of being in league with the devil. Quite frankly you sound like a stock character from The Crucible by Arthur Miller. You speak of natural law and of “conformity with what nature has plainly written into our very being, as male and as female.” Interestingly the Catholic Church once insisted that natural law and the divine order necessitated that the earth be at the center of the universe. It took 400 years for the Vatican to apologize to Galileo for imprisoning him. According to legend, when forced to recant the scientist said “And yet it moves.” That is to say the world revolves around the sun and likewise sooner or later you must acknowledge that the natural order is more complicated than you pretend it to be. Regardless of your indefensible proclamations on natural law, gay people will continue to be married, raise children, and live their lives in defiance of your bigotry and ignorance.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 12:24 PM By Ben
Rick DeLano, no state in the U.S. has "homosexual" marriage. A number of states allow two persons of the same sex to enter into a legally recognized civil relationship which the states CALL "marriage". Those two people can be heterosexual, homosexual or whatever, but they do not have to be sexually attracted to one another and they do not have to engage in any sex acts or even be inclined in any way towards engaging in sexual acts with one another. On that basis, I decline to pull out the broad brush and call the civil relationship objectively disordered. As I posted earlier, the Church teaches that a strong inclination toward an intrinsic moral evil is objectively disordered, but those civil relationships, even if they involve two persons of the same sex, do not necessitate or legalize any such thing. The two people can be celibate and have a chaste relationship and the state will CALL them "married". That is a word, not an objective disorder. Almost every word in the English language has multiple meanings. That too is not an objective disorder.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 12:32 PM By Gladys
Mike, "bisexual" means the person may be interested in someone of the opposite sex OR the same sex. It doesn't mean the person is interested in multiple partners simultaneously any more than a heterosexual or homosexual person may also be interested in multiple partners simultaneously. Under the law, anyone can marry multiple people -- just not simultaneously. That would be bigamy. It is a separate issue from being heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 1:37 PM By Mark from PA
Micah, thank you for your post of 11:30 AM. It is good that you informed people as many may not have been aware that human sexuality occurs on a continuum. This was explained to me by a priest. Until a few years ago I was not aware of it. Modern science is finding out much more about these things. They are discovering that the natural order is much more complicated than previously thought.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 3:51 PM By Mike
Dear Gladys,
"May be interested..."? I think the term "bisexual" does more than insinuate that someone "may be interested..." So what you're saying is that a bisexual person can be married, but to only one person at a time. No argument here. However, you are making your decision based on current law; the same law that, in most states, says marriage is between one man and one woman. That's a law that you, I'm guessing, and many others in the GLBT community have a disdain for. If you're not bisexual yourself, are you trying to impose your belief system on those that are bisexual, that they must be satisfied with one partner at a time? Or do you believe the law should be changed to accomodate bisexuals and their need to "have it both ways," so to speak? My guess is that the urges that someone of a bisexual nature might have change on a daily basis, and marriage is not something you can get out of that quickly. I appreciate you responding to my plea for someone to answer my question. Unfortunately, your response falls considerably short.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 5:57 PM By Micah
Dear Mr. Mark: I was glad to share this information. People need to know that GLBT persons are not deviant sex pervert monsters destined for hell. The hateful commentators on this site never stop to ponder what happens when little children actually believe and internalize the twisted beliefs and misinformation that they spew. This of course does terrible and profound damage to those children who happen to be gay. I would know.
As for you Mike, I assure you once again gay people are perfectly content to leave polygamy to its original practitioners – Mormons and Old Testament patriarchs.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 6:02 PM By Gladys
Mike, the number of persons it takes to "satisfy" someone is not identified by the words heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual, or by the law. Anyone, heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual might be satisfied with one person at a time or might not be. What the law says is how many people you can have as your legal spouse at any one moment, not how many sexual partners you can have at a time. In other words, adultery is legal in California. Many bisexual people are faithfully married to their one and only lifelong spouse, even if they do find other people of the same or opposite sex attractive. Meanwhile there are many married heterosexual persons who have multiple sexual partners throughout their marriage, sometimes with their spouse's consent and sometimes not. There are also married heterosexual persons who'd like to have multiple spouses at a time, but the law doesn't let them. It's not a bisexual thing. It's a people thing.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 6:19 PM By JLS
Ben, it is objectively disordered when people do faux marriages call them what you want ... because the purpose of marriage is to imitate the love of God and to produce babies. Doing something other than this defies God, and thus is objectively disordered.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 6:29 PM By JLS
Micah, I hate to break your heart, but the sun revolves around the earth. Also the earth revolves around the sun ... the point Micah is that you do not know where the center of the universe is located. Thus it is only your guess that the sun is the center. The Church teaches that Jesus is the center, and He came to us near Jerusalem, a city on planet Earth. Therefore, the most likely location of the center of the universe is Jerusalem or possibly Bethlehem, or perhaps Golgotha. Perhaps the center has been moved to the Vatican. Maybe the Vatican recanted only to appease the restless until science can find a way to get enough people to understand that creation is not infinite and that there is a center to the materiality of creation. It may be easier for many people to conceive of the solar system revolving around the sun, but that is only because they can see the sun and they can understand the relatively simple calculations involving a sun centered universe ... but there is no proof scientifically that the earth exclusively orbits the sun and not the other way around. Both are possible simultaneously, Micah. So before you begin basing your salvation in eternity on the limits of your or anyone's intellect, get humble before God and realize that He can arrange matters far beyond all humanity's capacity to understand.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 6:34 PM By JLS
PA, there you go again with your deceitful false doctrines that sexuality is a continuum. God created man and woman, not a continuum of humans ranging between one end of a scale and the other. BTW, how do you describe the ends of the scale of you doctrine of continuum? Such a continuum would be a handy device for claiming that the best clergy are the bisexuals since they are in the middle and have the best view of humanity. This false doctrine shows up in various times and places in history ... the current nonsense is that homosexuals are more sensitive to everyone and thus make the best clergy ... But Church doctrine has it that this is false.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 7:06 PM By Rick DeLano
Well, let's see here, Micah. It seems you were mighty quick to resort to what you apparently consider your strikeout pitch: the old SSM reliable, the "hater". Yawn. Now thank you for assuring us your "arguments are quite unassailable", but it is usually best if the observer comes to that conclusion on his or her own own. I am not immediately able to logically connect Galileo to SSM, but then again- your second best pitch seems to be: "Galileo was right therefore Prop 8 was wrong". The unassailability factor of this assertion, I must confess, does not strike me as being particularly high. Since you are very much better at asserting than you are at demonstrating, I invite your attention, strictly as a point of interest, to a recent scientific project from Oxford University, of some potential relevance to what you imagine Galileo "proved": "According to a new publication headed by Timothy Clifton, from the University of Oxford, UK, the controversial suggestion that the widely accepted Copernican Principle is wrong is investigated. Perhaps we do exist in a unique region of space where the average density is much lower than the rest of the Universe. The observations of distant supernovae suddenly wouldn't require dark energy to explain the nature of the expanding Universe. No exotic substances, no modifications to gravity and no extra dimensions required.
Clifton explains conditions that could explain supernova observations are that we live in an extremely rarefied region, right near the centre, and this void could be on a scale of the same order of magnitude as the observable Universe."
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 7:17 PM By Rick DeLano
Oh, I quite forgot to commend you, Micah, for your subtle but excellently telling admission regarding the natural law here in your final sentence above: "Regardless of your indefensible proclamations on natural law, gay people will continue to be married, raise children, and live their lives in defiance of your bigotry and ignorance." You are to be commended for confirming the truth of the natural law against which you shriek- gay couples will certainly not *bear* any of the children you assure us they will raise. It is interesting how the natural law establishes its undeniable claims, in the face even of Luciferian proclamations against its calm, serene, and unshakeable truths. Those children you insist will be raised by gays, will always have been deprived of at least one of their real parents, Micah. We know this because the natural law assures us that every single child, without any exception, is the product of exactly one man and exactly one woman. That, sir, is what can accurately be termed "completely unassailable".
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 7:39 PM By JLS
Without God, Gladys, people would rule the laws of nature, would change the results of evolution, and elect you as queen. With God, there are unchanging rules and what is known as wisdom. God has informed us that He is love, and that we are made in His image and likeness, and that he teaches us especially through His revelation handed down through Moses and the Apostles. Whatever contradicts God's revelation is simply not acceptable.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 7:40 PM By JLS
"People need to know that GLBT persons are not deviant sex pervert monsters destined for hell." Micah, this statement of yours is incorrect.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 7:47 PM By JLS
Hear ye, hear ye! To all dissenters from Church teaching on the issue of marriage: What is the basis for your beliefs? I ask you this because no matter what your skill of argument happens to be, you never provide the basic foundation to support your hypotheses.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 8:13 PM By Mark from PA
Micah, you say that you are a professional. Do you deal with such issues in your work? Perhaps people need to understand that you are speaking about scientific knowledge and not doctrine.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 8:35 PM By Rick DeLano
Perhaps Mark needs to understand that Faith, while superior to reason, can never be in contradiction to it.
Therefore, if Mark, or Micah, or anyone else proposes to be in a position to advance scientific evidence which stands in contradiction to the dogmas of Faith, it will be my great good pleasure to slice and dice any such evidence.
I mean, Mark, if science has now reached the point where observations from the WMAP have led U of Michigan physicist Yukio Tomozawa to post a mathematical proof on arXiv that the Universe *must*, as a mathematical certainty, possess a center, and if additional papers, including the Oxford U one I referred to above, have begun to advance a geocentric Universe as a solution to the terrible problems facing hot Big Bang inflationary models, all I can say is-- its a great time to have Faith, science seems to be finally catching up :-)
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 9:23 PM By Micah
I did not realize I was speaking with heliocentric deniers. IT IS FACT THAT THE SUN IS THE CENTER OF THE SOLAR SYSTEM! Do you people have access to PBS? Are you stuck in the 16th century? The more subtle point I was attempting to demonstrate was that the Catholic Church has a poor record on interpreting natural law. So much for the infallibility of the Magisterium. Oh and Mr. DeLano, if you believe that having natural born children is the last obstacle preventing gays from getting married – just so you know scientist are working on that. Once we understand the epigenetic factors which differentiate sperm from egg, we will be able to transform any cell into either male or female gametes. Thus a child could be born with the genetic material of any two persons. To JLS, the basis of my beliefs are the scientific method, love, and wait for it . . . secular humanism. All of you really should appreciate that others hold different beliefs about God and the nature of revelation than you do. You have no natural right to enforce your delusional beliefs on others. And yes Mark I am a professional – I will be more than willing to prescribe Xanax to these fanatics in the not too distant future when gay marriage has been legalized in every state in the union.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 12:53 AM By Rick DeLano
How remarkable, our Micah is. A real taste of the enlightened future, I think. Note the all caps. "Do you people have access to PBS?" Why, PBS would tell us all we ever need to know, in Micah's world of all-caps.
Now poor Micah is in for the shock of his life, and I hope that his champions here and elsewhere on the net are listening, because let's just cut to the chase and make this interesting.
Micah: You are a loud, illiterate, ill-informed yahoo. You are,also, apparently unaware of the fact that Dr. Einstein propounded a theory, early in the last century, to explain the failure of any scientific experiment ever conducted in the history of humanity, to establish absolute motion of the type presupposed in your all-caps shriek above. The theory is referred to as Special Relativity. Let us allow Einstein to state the matter, and let us sit back and watch you thrash: "The struggle, so violent in the early days of science, between the views of Ptolemy and Copernicus would then be quite meaningless. Either CS [coordinate system] could be used with equal justification. The two sentences, 'the sun is at rest and the earth moves', or 'the sun moves and the earth is at rest', would simply mean two different conventions concerning two different CS [coordinate systems]." Thank you, Micah, for stepping forward and providing us the opportunity to actually learn to distinguish between scientific experiment, and PBS-citing yahooism here. I assume you are in a position to refute Dr. Einstein, yes?
---"The Evolution of Physics: From Early Concepts to Relativity and Quanta, Albert Einstein and Leopold Infeld, New York, Simon and Schuster 1938, 1966 p.212
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 6:51 AM By Peter
Great post Micah. JLS (aka St. Sillasen) fancies himself bound for sainthood in a most expedient manner. Better to laugh him off.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 7:31 AM By JLS
Micah, the sun is a relative center. Science can make a center out of any location it chooses. If your source of information is PBS, then that explains why you are stalled in your science development. PBS is a govt propaganda operation, Micah.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 7:35 AM By JLS
And, Micah, as for your prescription of Xanax ... Dude, get off that stuff; it's bad for you. Try beer; it works for me. Yeah, beer with dindin and coffee for blasting infidels on blogsites in the a.m. And, no, I have no reason at all to respect false beliefs, such as you advocate. God is no respecter of men, and in union with God neither am I. God first, and then man. But Micah, you put man first and then God. Foolish the sight of a prince riding backwards on his steed.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 7:44 AM By JLS
Micah, what Rick DeLano says. But it is really very simple to understand: A. Science does not know the extent of the universe. B. Therefore, without this knowledge science does not know if there is a center. C. Reason suggests, however, that there is a limit, although as to what this limit consists in the way of time, dimension, or whatever is not understood. D. Thus, science can propose a center to be located anywhere. E. Science does not know if time is constant, nor if space is constant ... nor if there is a center of creation if it is constant. F. Science does not know whether material change is constant, hence cannot determine how old any material thing is other than in our close proximity ... say a few thousand years. G. Science found on PBS is money and power oriented, and not truth oriented and because of this, it is applied science and not pure science. H. Pure science can be speculated at by reason without special reference to God, yet this sort of thing artificially fragments reality, Micah. You need your Xanax because it helps you cope with your fragmented construct of reality. I need my beer because it helps me cope with you.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 7:47 AM By Mike
Gladys, and anyone else who is paying attention,
My point was simply this: Those that believe the marriage debate will finally be over when same-sex couples are allowed to marry are either A) delusional, B) not paying attention, or C) couldn't care less about the sancity of marriage. Once gays and lesbians are allowed to marry - trust me on this - there will be another disgruntled sub-culture coming out of the woodwork wanting their "marital rights" as well. And another one right behind them. And if you are a same sex couple, how do you possibly tell someone else, "no, sorry, we don't think you should have the right to marry?" Can't / won't.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 9:02 AM By Micah
Final word: Well I tried engagement for better or worse. It was my hope that if you saw your political enemies as human beings you might act accordingly in your dealings with other people’s lives when you choose to take away their rights. And to heliocentric deniers, Newtonian mechanics and Kepler’s laws of planetary motion remain quite capable of describing the motion of our star and planets over relatively short cosmic distances. And to JLS, alcohol consumed in excess will destroys your brain among other things.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 10:23 AM By Rick DeLano
And so Micah beats a well-advised retreat.
Sir, I apologize if the harshness of your attacks rendered me less than fully patient. It is important however for Catholics to understand the rapidity with which blustering attackers are deflated, once they are required to actually engage the scientific evidence which they assume themselves to be perfectly safe in bashing the Catholic Church with.
Word up, Micah.
It's not safe anymore.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 10:49 AM By Observation
The best part of this article comes in the title, "Gay Anger." Is it odd that so many people who call themselves "gay" are either angry or unhappy or just pretending?
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 12:14 PM By Canisius
Micah and Peter, go blather on an anti-Catholic website like the Huffinngton Post you are neither wanted or liked. Crush all Dissent from the Prince of Lies
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 12:42 PM By Sally
Observation, the voters of Alameda County are by and large not "gay", and yet only 38% of them supported Prop 8. I venture to say that the purported "anger" is not limited to persons who are "gay", and I further venture that many persons who call themselves "gay" are having a blast over this or are paying it no more than a nose blow in attention.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 12:49 PM By Ellen
Mike, perhaps you're unaware of this, but YOU are a member of a "disgruntled subculture coming out of the woodworks wanting their marital rights".
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 2:22 PM By The Truth Hurts
Paul McHugh who is a Roman Catholic and a professor of psychiatry at the Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, said that scientific research has not established any genetic causation for homosexual orientation. When asked if his paper might appear in "The American Journal of Psychiatry," he smiled and said, "No." Americans, he said, have become such victims of the "POLITICS OF DEVIANCE" that objective scholarship is brushed aside in favor of what is deemed to be politically correct. McHugh said, " I'm a Roman Catholic married to an Anglican woman and I see the church in a death spiral over sexuality issues. We are facing a new enterprise which proposes a permissive world--a pandemonium of permissiveness and hedonism that neglects the meaning of human beings. We need to teach the meaning of psychological and social domains in which we live. "Marriage is simply not the joining of two people in a sexual relationship. It is also about kinship. We need to teach others to remoralize ourselves. We need a message of coherent lives to face the permissive world we are in so we can stand against pornography, homosexuality and divorce." Is it also the politics of deviance to remain silent when homosexual activists spread error on a Catholic website? Is selective silence on a Catholic website the politically correct version of the false charity bus that daily runs over Christ's Full Truth?
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 2:28 PM By Observation
Dear Sally, "Having a blast" over the destruction of a man's reputation out of spite? You quite prove my point!
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 2:37 PM By Rick DeLano
Sally: Good news! Prop 8 was the high water mark for the pseudo-marriage SSM movement.
When we organized, literally at the last minute, overcame a Supreme Court botch job, a ballot language re-write from Moonbeam, and the implacable opposition of then Governor, the Attorney General, the Legislature, the eight major newspapers in the State, Hollywood, the New York Times, the mainstream media, and mountains of Gay Cash, we accomplished something truly remarkable.
We turned the tide. Everything has changed since Prop 8. Now the supposed "irreversible momentum" toward pseudo-marriage has been reversed in Maine, in New York, in New Jersey, and most importantly, at the national level, where opinion polls show support for pseudo-marriage having peaked around 2005 and falling steadily since. Even the pro-SSM Bay Area cannot ignore the terrible polliong numbers for SSM in California since Prop 8, which is why all the bluster about a 2010 initiative to undo Prop 8 has vanished in the wind, like our Micah.
Your neighbors have fully awoken to the necessity of defeating pseudo-marriage, and all across the country, they are organizing and defeating SSM initiatives. I wish to express my humble thanks to the brave involvement of the Catholic bishops in this fight. I believe they are coming to understand what is at stake now, as the SSM movement drops its pretenses of "civil rights" and "tolerance", and shows itself- notable in the Perry v. Schwarzenegger show trial- fpor what it truly is: the avowed enemy of religious freedom in the United States of America.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 3:56 PM By JLS
Sally, there are active homosexuals, inactive homos, and dupes and intellectual slaves of homos, which is what makes up the vote against decency in marriage.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 4:46 PM By Ron
JLS, no human person is correctly described by the slur "homo" or by such reductionist terms as "a homosexual" or "a heterosexual". None. Every human person is made in the image and likeness of God.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 5:25 PM By JLS
Yes, Ron, they are made that way ... well, Adam and Eve were, and then came the Fall. Cain, Abel and everyone else are created in the effects of the Fall. Only Jesus can recreate us in the full image and likeness of God. St Paul tells us to "be perfect even as God is perfect"; this means that we are not perfect in the image and likeness of God, and that we are obliged to make ourselves perfect. And of course "homo" etc does not correctly describe anyone at all; instead it refers to some people. God intends us each to have our own unique personality and be in union with Him ... Jesus provides us with this. Those homos and other obstinant sinners do not avail themselves of the means to achieve the image and likeness of God in their own personalities. Politically it is the homosexual activists and those they dupe who vote in the worthless bums who lead our nation. The light of Christ needs to be shined into every corner of humanity for its restoration and for the outing of the corrupt bums who struggle against this restoration into the image and likeness of God.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 5:28 PM By JLS
Yes, Micah, excessive consumption of alcohol will destroy a person's brain. Jesus advises us to drink a little bit. Even in Homer's tales of the Trojan War we find those ancient people discerning strong drink from watered down drink and the corresponding effects. It is not new knowledge.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 5:33 PM By JLS
Ellen, Christianity came from a subculture, and remain a subculture, in that it is first among those subject to the divine culture. If you prefer to go with the largest culture, that is your choice. Jesus teaches us that many are called but few chosen. He also teaches that the way is wide but the gate is narrow. You can go through life like a goat or like a sheep, either going wherever you want or following your shepherd. Jesus is the Good Shepherd, not the good goatherd.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 7:20 PM By lome
News : CHARLESTON, SC: Dr. Paul McHugh: "There Is No Gay Gene"
Posted by David Virtue on 2010/1/27 16:10:00 (1856 reads)
CHARLESTON, SC: Dr. Paul McHugh: "There Is No Gay Gene"
by Lydia Evans
January 26, 2010
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 9:04 PM By Mike
Dear Ellen,
Please, take a little more time to think about a comeback instead of just writing the first thing that comes into your mind. Your comment makes no sense whatsoever. I'm not part of a subculture. I'm part of the vast majority of people who believe that SSM is wrong. It will ALWAYS be wrong. Now I'm sure that in your way of thinking that makes me a bad person. If that's true, there sure are a lot of bad people in this country.
And to the person a few days ago who wrote that scientists are working on way that 2 women can have a baby together without a man's help, you would do well to remember the joke about the contest man wanted to have with God. The man said he could create life out of nothing by dirt. And when he reached for a handful of dirt to prove it, God said, "Uh, no, not so fast. Get your own dirt."
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 9:55 PM By Paul
Mike, everyone is part of a subculture. If you post on CCD, you're part of a subculture. And if you deny that you're part of a subculture, you're part of the subculture of subcultural denial. You're also part of the subculture of people who talk but don't know what they're saying.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 10:35 PM By JLS
Well, Paul, it sure sounds like we're stuck in subcultures. Evidently even the entire world is a subculture, or would that be a super culture? The thing is that the term "culture" can be used in its technical sense or in its general sense. Mike's point to Ellen is to get away from the idea that reality and truth are numbers games. You have to admit that his punch line joke is absolutely excellent, right? That actually punctuates the entire point, which is that God decides and we are obligated to follow His guidance. The Pope has just made a pitch about battling relativism, which opposes the Church and hence God. God has no relatives other than those He grants, and that happens through the Church. Ellen is declaring that she is not related to God, and Mike is trying to persuade her to rethink her situation.
|
© California Catholic Daily 2010. All Rights Reserved.
|