Please set this guy right. It was in response to a post I made about a priest using the term 'Gay' .

" I am replying to your comments on the Catholic priest and his words on homosexual of both genders.

Just to inform you, you are prejudiced. Your words show this clearly, as I will gladly point out:

Long ago, the Jews were enslaved by the Egyptians. Being a Catholic, I’m sure you know this. The Egyptians looked at themselves as being the superior race, as they were the master and the Jews were dogs. They were beaten, starved, and killed because of who they were, because they were born differently than the Egyptians. This went on for some 400 years until Moses led the exodus. Racism, a prejudice, at it’s best.

Centuries later, these people were to again become the victims of racism. They suffered intensely during the Holocaust. Millions were killed without reason. The bodies were piled and burned. The survivors of this terrible genocide were living, breathing skeletons that were ridden with sickness and filth, all because of the difference in heritage, all because they were born with an unchangeable quality. It was because of this quality that millions of them died and their population went down to approximately 170,000.

The Chinese, the Irish, both suffered from racism also. They would move to America in hope of the opportunity for something better. Instead, all they found was hate and injustice.

The Native Americans too suffered. They were forced off their homeland and infected with disease. They too suffered from the iron fist of prejudice over something that they could not change or fix.

The African-Americans were victims of racism, too. For many years they were enslaved, treated as though their lives meant nothing. They were raped and murdered, forced to work, sold as though they were property, and were split apart from their loved ones many times.

Now homosexuals are treated the same way. They are beaten and killed and victims of unjust treatment everyday or their lives, all because of an inherent quality that cannot be changed. Science has proven that homosexuals are homosexual because they were born that way, not because they chose that was to live.

You are supporting discrimination based on sexual preference on the basis that homosexuals are sinners. But everyone has sinned at some point and therefore are sinners, including you. All sins are equal in god’s eyes. You are also a sinner, one of the people you don’t think should be allowed in church, which in turn makes you a hypocrite as well.

I hope you see the error of your ways. If you would like to reply to this, my email address is xxbingoboyxx@hotmail.com

Thank you for your time. "

-- (magiccarpetride_@hotmail.com), April 30, 2004

Answers

I would like to see the evidence that shows where scientists have proven that homosexuals were born that way.

-- Thomas (tcdzomba@catholic.org), April 30, 2004.

They play the "racist' card. Racism is clealry wrong, therefore, discrimination againg Homosexuals is wrong because its racism.

Racism is defined as discrimination based on what ethnic group on is Born into, and thier is no queatsion about race beign inherent and genetic. Black couples have black children, white couples have white children, Asian couples have asian children. its genetic.

It also has no bearign on the actal persons conduct. You can have an honest, hard working, intellegent, well meaning white man who lives by an ethical, moral standard. Likewiese, a Black man can live by the same standard. Furthe, asians can as well. So can hispanics.

Indeed, their are asaian, Black, white, and hispanic Catholcis, for instance. Their race never facotrs in to their church membership.

Likewise, their race dosn't effect how they conduct their lives. Be they promiscuous or chaste, be they theif or honest labourer, be they liars are trustworthy, their charecter and actiosn are ruled by their minds, and notby the ethnicity they happen to have as phsyical;y identifiable features.

Suppsoedl.y., in this argument with Homsoexuals, they are the same as blacks and native americans. This, of course, is a lie.

Homosexuals are NOT defined as a group based on some physical trait, and are rather distinguished by a behavioural inclination, not somethugn that is simpley a part of their physical makeup.

For instance, a black man can be gay. A balck man can be streight. He is still blakc. In this vein, a black man can have sex. He is physically capable of either Homosexual or heteosexual actions. His CHOICE of who to have sex with, as well as where and when to have sex, is not detemined by his raceinnately. Some blakc men may voluntarily restrict thi sexual escapadeds tot heir own race, but most these days won't, and will hav sex with viurtually ay race. Race is really not a large factor in things any more. Likewise, if the blakc man is wise and desires to dot he proper hing, he will resrict his sexual choices to sexual unions with one woman, whom he is lawfully wedded to. But I digress, and that is not my main point. The poin i, of course, that he has complete controle over who he ha sex with, and his sexual conduct is a choice.

Extendign this very basic concept of free will and choice to Homosexuals, thus makig them huamn and not slave to some overbearign passion, they, too, can controle their own desires, and shape their own destiny. Unless the Homosexual wishes to claim he has no choice in how he conducts his life, he must acknowledge that he does, indeed, choose who he has sex with, and under whatcercumstances.

The Homosexual cannot choose his race, he cannot be black or white on a whim. He can, owever, elect not to have sex with guy X, or to have sex with him.

Homosexuality is, and always will be, a baehaviour. Not a race. Thus, callign Homosexuality a sin is not aki to racism. Any ore than calling theft a sin is racist, or promiscuity a sin racist. ( Their are som peopel these days that caim to be "Polyamourous by nature", so thus, geneticlaly they are promiscuous and cant help it, therefore clalign promiscuity a sin is racism...at least in this warped logic.)

Homosexuals aren't a persecuted minority. Homosexuals are not a race, and it is not racism to call Homosexuality a sin. Homosexuality is a behaviour, not an aspect of self evident physical charecteistic.

So no, calling a behaviour a sin isnot racism, no matter how many times they ty to link it to racism.

Likewise, one must also note the reasonign behnd this link. it is not scientific, nor a sincere, well reasoned plea for "Tolerence an iversity", rather, those who make these claims wish to link disagreeance with Homosexuality to soemthign bad. Racism is near universally agreed upon as a bad thing, and thus the term racist carries with it, in our minds, a very dark image, and also brigns tot he fore many emotions.

Those without proper, ogical cases love to argue form emotion. Thus, they brign fourht the evil spectre of racism in order to generate feeligns of revoltion, and then apply the lable to you, sdo you will feel ashamed of your own stand. How can you be a racist? If you are oppsoed to Homosexuality, you are a racist! This has an effec ton many suseptabel minds, mainly young ones, that then, takign this line, even though its pur emoon without a likc of sence to it, and feel guilty of their opposition, a guilt which often leads to silence, and a silence whihc paves the way for Homosexuals to enter with gay prode days, and hate-crime legislation.

This, of course, is absurd, since gay are alreayd proitected form harm by existing laws, they need no specual treatment, and trying to force a group whose sole identifying feature if their sexual prefeence as a "race" dispite the fact that Homosdexualit is foudn in all races, and is not a race by definiiton, the laws become tedious and unnessisary burdens, that only serve to prevent one form taling a proper moral stand on the issue.

Rest assured, hi argument is notign but appeal to emotion, supported by a thin line of reasonign that makes one ashamed of their stand by linign it to soem great evil, even though it is nothign like racism in fact.

As to his other claim...

"Now homosexuals are treated the same way. They are beaten and killed and victims of unjust treatment everyday or their lives, all because of an inherent quality that cannot be changed. Science has proven that homosexuals are homosexual because they were born that way, not because they chose that was to live. "

This,of coruse, is a lie. Their is to date no direct evidence that Homosexuality is an innate quality. All the "Overwhelming scientific evidence' one finds on pro gay websites is, in fact, often old , discredited research, liek the Dean Hammer studies. ( One of whihc landed him on trial by an ethics board.)

To date the "Gay Brain" research has yeilded surprisingly few actual results, the suppsoed Gay Gene that was ocmmon among gay men on the X CHromosome proved to have no influenc eon seual identity, andocciured in streight men with equel frequency. The Hormonal studies revealed no real diffeence between a gay man and a strieght one on average. The Twin studies prived that identicle twins sometomes do NOT share sexual prefeence, and it hovered at a little less that 50%. Indeed, the overall estimate was, I beleive, 48% . 48% of twins had both twins gay, whereas 52% had only ne gay and the oher streight, forever endign the idea htta i is srictly genetic. ( For if oen had bown hair, inevitabely the other woudl hav brown hair.)

The overwhelming centific evidence suggests that Homoexuality is not an innate condition, and even those who stll beleive that it has soem genetic componant, who are a shrinking lot these days among real scientisist, only suggest a possible inclination that lends itsself to Homosexual expression, NOT that the whole condition of Homsoexuality is soemhow Innate and comes as apackage deal.

Most researchers beelive that envriornemt play a alrge role in the develpment of Homsoexual tendancies. Likewise, thouh on cannot pin down the exact modle, as weach persons psycology will be diffeent, their are common features that recur in Homosxual backgrounds, and few exist that had fully stable, normal childhoods. ( SOme do, however, but as stated, with psycology their are myriad factors at play.)

So np, their is no sicnetific evidence hat Homosexuality is an innate condition, that is a popular myth, conveneinced upn th populace to serve a poliitcal agenda, and not base in realisgic scnce.

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), April 30, 2004.

In spite of numerous "research" programs specifically intended to discover a genetic/physiological cause for sexual orientation, not a shred of valid evidence has yet been offered to substantiate such a claim. There is however ample evidence pointing to early childhood experiences as a determining factor in the development of sexual orientation.

Anyway, if a genetic or physiological cause were discovered, what would that prove? It would prove that homosexuals are not individually responsible for their condition, that they didn't consciously choose it, any more than heterosexuals consciously chose theirs - but that is already known and accepted. The Catholic Church is in complete agreement with that fact. And, even if such a connection were discovered, that certainly couldn't be taken as evidence that homosexuality is in any way "normal" or "healthy". Children are born with all kinds of genetic/physiological abnormalities. But in most such cases we respond by providing proper care, offering the afflicted person whatever treatment is available. What separates homosexuality from other psychosocial disorders is that persons suffering from it have been summarily discarded by psychological/psychiatric professionals, told "Sorry, but what is causing you all this anguish is normal, so we will not attempt to treat you. Live with it." Now these people have nowhere to turn for help. Nowhere but the Church, which offers them compassion and accceptance while helping them overcome associated behaviors which will otherwise likely result in their destruction, both temporal and eternal. But they resent the help that is offered because, after all, the professionals continue to tell them they are "normal", so why would they need such help? Of course, if it is "normal", why does it hurt so much? And why are so few homosexuals truly gay?

-- Pasul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), April 30, 2004.

The person who wrote you has a fundamental problem with some definitions.

Racism is wrong because your race has absolutly nothing to do with your behavior.

Homosexuality is a desire towards a certain type of behavior. If you don't have that desire, you are not homosexual. Be that as it may, we Catholics still do not condem anyone for the lusts they have. There are all kinds of temptations out there. We simply state the fact that homosexual sexual BEHAVIOR is inherently sinful. This has no similarity with race and logically cannot be linked.

In Christ,
Bill Nelson

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45-nospam@hotmail.com), April 30, 2004.

Can you expand on, "And why are so few homosexuals truly gay?"

Gloria

-- gloria (gloriacman@yahoo.com), April 30, 2004.

Multiple studies of twins ("twin studies") have shown that homosexuality - both as an orientation and life-style or actions, is NOT genetic. If it were, 100% of twins would show the trait or orientation but all do not. These studies - carried out in Europe, the US and New Zealand have shown data of identical twins (same DNA) being raised together and raised separately (different environment), as having 25 to 50% rates of homosexuality - not 100%.

In reality, the same-sex attraction SSA is a highly complex disorder which comes from many factors, not one. It is a disorder because of the unhealthy ideations and actions it leads to irrespective of what "society" thinks or does.

Finally, most actively gay people are hurt or killed by OTHER gay people, not roving mobs of "racist" heterosexuals. By far the highest percentage of assaults, rapes, and murder among active male homosexuals and lesbians are due to fellow homosexuals or lesbians. If the orientation and lifestyle was so "natural" and OK, then there wouldn't be such a higher than normal rate of violence among the community.

-- Joe (joestong@yahoo.com), April 30, 2004.

There is a very unpoliticaly correct little book called, 'A parents guide to preventing homosexuality' (or something close). Its a good book if you are parent concerned with this.

Additionally, the Catholic Medical Association has a paper in which they go through all the research and demonstrate that Same Sex Attraction is in no way a genetic or innate reality. This has been linked here in the past, perhaps Bill Nelson could link it again.

Finally, it is my personal opinion that the term homosexual is a real problem. One because there is only sexuality and disordered sexuality not homo and hetero. Two, because it has too many meanings so if you come out against homosexuality they accuse you of bigotry when in reality you oppose a behavior not a person. I prefer, and offer as a suggestion to all, that we use different, more accurate terms.

Same Sex Attraction (SSA) = the psycological disorder of being attracted to members of the same gender.

The gay lifestyle = the participation on an ongoing basis in the culture and identity of the gay community that has embraced this disorder as 'part of who they are'.

Sodomy = the act of (psuedo)sex between two members of the same gender.

Victims of SSA = people who experience SSA.

Just a thought. I find when I do this people really understand what I am saying and really notice the difference in the realities.

Dano

-- Dan Garon (boethius61@yahoo.com), April 30, 2004.

In asking "why are so few homosexuals truly gay?" I was referring to the real meaning of "gay" - happy.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), April 30, 2004.

i like you thoughts, dan,

words convey ALOT of meaning to people in society and i feel that your verbiage is quite more effective in describing the situation.

-- paul h (dontSendMeMail@notAnAddress.com), April 30, 2004.

Good thought, Dan.

Here is the link from the Catholic Medical Assocation that Dan referenced.

Here is another thread in which this topic was discussed: Homosexuality and Hope.

-- Emily (jesusfollower7@yahoo.com), April 30, 2004.

First, rest assured that you are not alone in receiving such e- mails. I have made extensive use of the "delete" key myself. There are, indeed, homosexuals who have been murdered simply because they ARE homosexuals..just as there have been people murdered because they were Jews. This is a fact. Does it mean though that it logically follows that homosexuals should be equated with persecuted Jews of 1930's Europe? No. Why not? Because one concerns isolated cases of individual crimes against individuals and another concerns an entire nation committing atrocities against an entire race of people. If 35 migrant workers were all horribly set upon by a group of town thugs in a rural area, as horrid as the event would be, it would not mean that "all migrant workers are persecuted and in need of protection." As far as sin and homosexuality...like any other sin, why do people do it? The pat answer is that it is their nature. I disagree. I think it's just like anything else sinful..it's more fun, feels better, whatever, fill in the blank..why would any one of us sin if it was repulsive to do so? Sin is like the Mardi Gras street..it's filled with what looks REALLY good to us..very hard to turn off that fun-filled avenue and take the other road. VERY HARD. The more society tells us it's OK and the more churches welcome the concept of homosexuality as NOT sinful, the more people will give in to that sin. I love a quote by C.S.Lewis..it goes something like this.."Everyone whom you will ever meet is an eternal being. Everyone.It's merely a question of where they will spend eternity." Homosexuality, adultery,idolatry,any state of mortal sin jeopardizes our eternal souls. The Church reaches out to all sinners and is careful not to succumb to the earthly societal pressures which are only concerned with the here and now.

-- lesley (martchas@hotmail.com), April 30, 2004.

lesley, your CS Lewis quote reminded me of another good one of his:

"A silly idea is current that good people do not know what temptation means. This is an obvious lie. Only those who try to resist temptation know how strong it is... A man who gives in to temptation after five minutes simply does not know what it would have been like an hour later. That is why bad people, in one sense, know very little about badness. They have lived a sheltered life by always giving in."

I think the lesson for this thread is that just because someone is tempted to do something that is wrong, that does not justify their actions. This applies to homosexual behavior just as much as it does to all other sins.

-- Emily (jesusfollower7@yahoo.com), April 30, 2004.

This may be the best thread I've ever read here. Dan says what I've been saying on other threads, but much more clearly of course. I know and have known quite a few "homosexuals." IMHO, none of them have SSA, although they say they do, or have "discovered" that they do. They have become enamored of the "gay lifestyle." Why did they become enamored? For the same reasons people turn to drugs, or alcohol, or whatever vice. They have had BAD things happen in their lives. The defenders of the "gay lifestyle" have alot of emotional investment in that way of life and thus resort to the canards of equating it to racism or pseudo-scientific evidence of genetic predestination. It is heartbreaking to consider the pain in their lives that made them run to this dangerous and sinful culture for comfort. As always we should pray for these lost souls.

-- Brian Crane (brian.crane@cranemills.com), May 01, 2004.

If this person uses an action to define race, aren't some murderers being repressed then? They have found evidence that some people kill because their brain is set up that way. So shouldn't they be allowed to kill then? I mean it is in their nature.

-- Scott (papasquat10@hotmail.com), May 02, 2004.

my reply to him was this

>Homosexuality is a sin. The catholic church teaches us to love one >another, but it also teaches us to reject sin. We don't reject the >person just the sin that they are commiting and we try to show them >the error of their ways. We must still love them as God would have >us love all sinners. > >As a catholic I cannot validate the word 'Gay' when used in the >context of a community. For me a person that calls himself Gay is >sinner that refuses to admit that he is in a state of sin. This is >why I was upset at the priests remarks on this subject. He should >of also said that Gay's are sinners. > >If you think that the catholic church promotes violence towards >sinners you are wrong. Someone that acts in such a way is also a >sinner in the eyes of God and will never enter his kingdom. > >If you want answers on this. I would suggest that you pray to God. >He will provide these answers to you. Don't look to science for >answers because by its very nature it changes frequently. The wisdom >of this world (mans wisdom) is foolishness. The wisdom from God >is truth and it does not change. > >Don't ask me for the answers you seek. Pray for those answers. If >you do not pray to God, then I'm afraid I can not help you. > >have a good day.

he then sent me this email.

1) Disallowing a sinner to take part in church does not show them love in any way, shape, or form. All it does is show them that the church is unmerciful and unforgiving.

2) If you think that the priest should've said that "gays" are sinners, then by the same principle he should have pointed out that everyone in the church were also sinners. Understand that by saying so, the individual would only have been embarassed and felt condemned and rejected, as would anyone.

3) I never accused the Catholic church of promoting or advocating violence towards homosexuals. I only used the violent examples of the past to prove a point.

4) I do not participate in prayer to any god, deity, or supreme being and the wisdom of man is the only wisdom that can be proven and is humble enough to change when proven wrong.

5) I was not asking you for any answers.

Thank you again for your time.

P.S.- If you choose to reply and continue this debate, please make it worth my time to read. If you choose not to put in enough effort as to include correctly written sentences and such, then it is not worthy to be read.

-- kev (magccarpetride_@hotmail.com), May 03, 2004.

It doesn't sound like your emailer truly cares for a dialogue, but I would respond with the following

The message of Jesus Christ and the Church is mercy and forgiveness for all of us regardless of our sinfulness, but to obtain that forgiveness, we have to repent. When we repent, we acknowledgement that what God calls sin is indeed sin, we reject our sinful lifestyle, we genuinely express our sorrow for sinning and we pursue God in holiness to the best of our ability. That applies to all of us regardless of what kinds of sins we've committed. That repentance is culminated through the new believer's baptism in water, which washes all of his sins away.

If a sinner hears the gospel, yet refuses to repent, he is rejecting Christ. Of course, someone who rejects Christ can't participate in the Church. How could one expect otherwise? Should such a person be allowed to attend Church and ask questions while seeking the Truth? Yes. But until that person has decided to repent and follow Jesus, he or she is not a member of Jesus' Church, therefore, he or she can not participate in the sacraments of the Church.

You want the Church to make exceptions for homosexuals because they were "born" that way. The fact is, we were ALL born sinners. We're all gluttons and gossips and adulterers and liars. Not one of us can enter into the Church without first going through repentance and baptism. Homosexuality is no different.

Dave

-- non-Catholic Christian (no@spam.com), May 03, 2004.

He isnt interested in daloufe, nly in forcing peopel to accet his veiwpoints.

My answers wou be as follows. My answers, as alwaysn , in {} Brackets.

he then sent me this email.

1) Disallowing a sinner to take part in church does not show them love in any way, shape, or form. All it does is show them that the church is unmerciful and unforgiving.

{I do not think that the chruc disallows sinners to take part in chruchm the chrucm nstead, inssits that sinners repent, and is based upon that principle. What the repondant relaly emans is that he thinks dsinners shoudl be freely permitted to sin and no comment shoudl be made concernin tose sins.WAhich is foolishness.}-Zarove

2) If you think that the priest should've said that "gays" are sinners, then by the same principle he should have pointed out that everyone in the church were also sinners. Understand that by saying so, the individual would only have been embarassed and felt condemned and rejected, as would anyone.

{I have yet to meet any clergy outside of the Liberal kidn that do not teach that we are all sinners, this includes priests.}-Zarove

3) I never accused the Catholic church of promoting or advocating violence towards homosexuals. I only used the violent examples of the past to prove a point.

{In short, he used an argument by outrage to force his point into an emotional realm, and by extension cause an emotional reaction, not a reaosned responce.}-Zarove

4) I do not participate in prayer to any god, deity, or supreme being and the wisdom of man is the only wisdom that can be proven and is humble enough to change when proven wrong.

{Then why do you concern yourself qith what our deity says? The chruch shoudl change its teahcigns abotu Homosexuality based on mans wisdom and ignore God's, because you personally dont beleiv ein God's existance? I am srry,t his is ridiculous. You, an atheist, are telling Christains how they shoudl beleive, based on your own claims that are completley unsubstantiated, and then you tell us you don't ven beleive in God? Isnt this rather absurd? The chruch shoudl change what it teaches based ont he mroal sandards held by society, becaus it is th isdom of man that we shoudl run a chruch by, even thogh its foudned on the principles of God. Rather or not you beelive in God, you shoudl see how patently absurd this is, especially since the whole debate is about what the chruch shoudl do. This is another case of a NonChristain telling a Christain what they shoudl beleive as Christains.}-Zarove

5) I was not asking you for any answers.

{No, you where askign him for obedience to your dictates and agenda, and atemptign to pressur ehim nto your ideology.}-Zarove

Thank you again for your time.

P.S.- If you choose to reply and continue this debate, please make it worth my time to read. If you choose not to put in enough effort as to include correctly written sentences and such, then it is not worthy to be read.

{what debate? its all settled. Homsoexuality is a morally acceptable behavikour. Homsoexuals where born gay as sicnece has proven. If we ask to see sicntific evidence hat proves Homosexuality is genetic that has NOT been discredited, we are bigoted and closed minded. The Hcurhc shoul change tand admit it qas wrong abotu omosexuality, and accpet Human wisdom as its base principle to fllow, because God's wisdom will not admit when its worng and you prsonally don beleiv in God.

Realistically, this is nothign more htan soemone tryign to force hteir opinion down semone elses throat, with nohtign but cheap emotnal tactics and a forceful demenour, this sin a dbate, tis talkign to a brick wall.}-Zarove

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), May 03, 2004.

Ha, ya this guy said the same thing to me about "correct sentences" because I misspelled two words. This athiest is as LIBERAL as they come and he desperetly needs our prayers. All I can think about is the day of judgment when ALL stand before God. What will these athiest say? How ashamed they will feel. I remember when I was an athiest and think about now, and what if I died. Ah, how dis- graceful, fearful, and shameful I would have felt and then, hell.

Regardless of what athiest's say, that terrible and wonderful day is coming. Let us make ourselves more pure and make disiples of Christ. Amen.

-- Jason (Enchanted fire5@aol.com), May 03, 2004.

Zarove

your posts are almost indecipherable - please sort out your typing errors!!!

-- please learn2spell (pedant@grammer4us.com), May 13, 2004.

Pleaselearn2spell, we have covered why my spellign is bad, however, my psts above arn;t that hard to make out. Make do and deal with it.

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), May 13, 2004.

Zarove

your posts are almost indecipherable - please sort out your typing errors!!!

Well , sometimes it's difficult and than I have to read his replies twice , but so what , I know what Zarove means !! __ Like for me: English is not my native language , but the crew here , knows what I'm writing or mean !! __ So plz , don't nail anybody for that !!

Salut & Cheers from a NON BELIEVER:

-- Laurent LUG (.@...), May 13, 2004.