Maybe Gay People Should Just Reclaim All The Artwork At The Vatican

[ruggerson]

that they made over the centuries, including the FRIGGING CEILING ON THE SISTINE CHAPEL and everything else by Michelangelo, and let the old bastards who run the joint hire some hetero artists who are not "intrinsically evil" to try and recreate it all.

Just a thought for a Friday afternoon.

[femme.democratique]

1. I like that idea, quite appropriate methinks!

[LittleClarkie]

2. Ol' Michelangelo one a dem der queers, you say

Who knew.

That would explain all the near nekkid folk in his art.

[hector459]

80. But Michael never asked to marry a gay. So his art can remain.

Just think. If that artwork were in the WH it would have to be drapped and covered.

[dhinojosa]

3. Brilliant!!!!! recommending.....

because it's a rocking idea!!

[bloom]

4. I love that suggestion.... eom

[Cuban_Liberal]

5. Will they return the money the were paid?

With interest, of course...

[ruggerson]

7. Dunno about you

but I think there's something astonishingly disgusting about a bunch of guys who last week were just convocating under a world renowned treasure done by the most famous artist of all time and this week come out and condemn that artist and hundreds of millions of other innocent people as "intrinsically evil."

The horror of it is truly ghastly.

[Cuban_Liberal]

9. I fail to see it as relevant.

Care to explain its relevance to me, or is the opening post just a content-free bash at the Catholic Church?

[dsc]

12. Of course it is relevent

If I am intrinsicly evil, then anything I produce would be evil as well. Thus the Church shouldn't accept it. BTW, as I recall my art history the Sistine Chapel was a labor of love, not money.

[Cuban_Liberal]

14. Oh, please

That's the most feebly attenuated argument I have ever heard.

:eyes:

[dsc]

17. Just what does intrinicly evil mean then?

If I am intrinsicly evil then anything I do would be evil, would it not?

[Occulus]

117. Actually, it's a fairly STRONG argument

seeing as how the church is into all that "inherited sin" business. Sins of the father, and all that jazz.

You can't say the music I write or the painting I paint is beautiful, but I, the creator, am intrinsically evil as a person (having myself done neither you nor another any wrong whatever), and still expect me to freely grant you the right to enjoy what I've made. Note: money need be of no consideration for this to be true.

If the church doesn't like gay people, it is morally obliged to not enjoy the fruits of our labors. If it cannot, it is intrinsically hypocritical.

Gee, there's a shock.

[ruggerson]

16. Maybe you fail to see it's relevance

because you have all your civil rights.

Some people don't. And the *institution* known as the Catholic Church is foursquare in favor of discrimination.

Note that I separate the institution from individual Catholics, many of whom are incredible people who object vehemently to the bigoted doctrine of their church.

[Cuban_Liberal]

21. I'm gay and Catholic.

How does the Chcrh advocate discrimination against gays, and how do you define 'discrimination'?

[ruggerson]

24. I define discrimination

where you have one set of rules for one people and a second set for another.

Clearly there are two sets of rules that the institution known as the Catholic Church has.

People of the opposite sex who fall in love with each other can partake of holy matrimony and marry and be fully accepted in their union.

People of the same sex who fall in love cannot and are eternally cast out and labeled "evil."

[Cuban_Liberal]

26. We're not 'eternally cast out'.

Whoever told you that doesn't understand jack shit about the Church's position on homosexuality, but seeing as how it was likely here at DU, that doesn't surprise me....

[ruggerson]

30. Are you trying to defend the Church's position on homosexuality?

because "intrinsically evil" doesn't seem to me to leave much wiggle room.

[Cuban_Liberal]

32. I say what I say.

We are NOT 'eternally cast out' under Catholic teaching.

[ruggerson]

37. You asked me how the church discriminates

I gave you an answer. One amongst many. I then added the thought about eternal damnation as an addendum.

You chose to address that but did not address my response.

And my question to you is: do you think the Church DOESN'T advocate discrimination against gay folks?

[Cuban_Liberal]

39. No, I don't think it does.

I don't consider marriage a 'right'.

[ruggerson]

41. Do you think the pursuit of happiness is a human right?

[Cuban_Liberal]

44. That's pretty broad.

Wha does that phrase mean--- exactly?

[ruggerson]

51. It's pretty self explanatory

it means do human beings have the basic right to do that which gives them inner happiness and fulfillment? (the caveat, of course being, that in so doing they do no harm to anyone else).

And, if you don't think of marriage as a right, then what about in a civil sense, with the 450 or so legal rights that come WITH civil marriage in the U.S.? Inheritance laws, hospital visitation, privacy, medical decisions, etc. - these are all privileges that the state must give you, in your book? You're not free unless the state decides you are?

[Cuban_Liberal]

54. Does the Catholic Church oppose tHose?

Does it? Does it oppose changing inheritance laws, or laws giving a health-care POA to someoneother than a spouse, sibling, parent, etc.?

[ruggerson]

63. Yep

it opposes civil union laws and have given much money in the States to oppose civil unions. Civil unions provide all the things we are discussing without the label of "marriage."

The church also agitates against non discrimination laws when they come up. They were highly instrumental in campaigns in both Cincinatti and Maine, for example, in efforts to repeal anti discrimination statutes which protected gays and lesbians.

You think this is appropriate behaviour for a church?

[Cuban_Liberal]

64. I think it's their right, yes.

It's also my right to oppose them,when I choose to do so.

[ruggerson]

76. But you asked how they support discrimination

And I gave you line and verse of many ways they do support discrimination.

are you now willing to admit that they do?

No one is arguing that they don't have the RIGHT to support discrimination. But the first step is acknowledging that this is indeed what they do.

[Zenlitened]

86. And here the conversation comes to an end, it seems.

That's unfortunate, to me, because I find it fascinating. I'm absolutely unable to find a logical consistency in arguments defending -- avidly defending -- the catholic church on this issue. I simply cannot fathom an outcome to this discussion that would help me understand that position. It's mind-boggling.

[ruggerson]

88. Obviously, I agree with you

and I think a bit of "magical thinking", not rational thought process, is needed. If one grows up in the church and reveres the traditions and the *emotions* that you get from your faith, imagine the conflict with the hard nosed reality of dealing with one's homosexuality.

It's the old reason vs. faith argument. Only for gay Catholics, the struggle is all internalized.

[ruggerson]

89. #88 is meant to be a reply to you, Zen n/t

[Zenlitened]

94. Yep. Got it. Looks like the board software has just run out of room...

... to indent responses any further.

I think you've made some interesting points. Thanks for your contributions to the discussion. :) :hi:

[dsc]

70. They most certainly do

They have routinely agitated against giving any benefit of marriage to same sex couples and have routinely worked against both laws decriminalizing sodomy and mandating equal rights in employment and housing.

[benevolent dictator]

114. 450? try over 1000

marriage through the church isn't a right, but marriage through the government is. I don't care if the church recognizes same sex marriage but the government ought to, because it's the government that provides those legal rights, not the church.

[dsc]

46. even if you don't

what about basic civil rights laws, which the Catholic church has a history of opposing when it comes to gays and lesbians?

[Cuban_Liberal]

49. Such as?

Please give some examples...

[dsc]

57. Here is a link to several

http://www.soulforce.org/dc1102/dc_ourcase.shtml

Items 1,2,4,5,7,9,and 10 have nothing to do with gay marriage.

[Name removed]

60. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dsc]

68. Whether she does or doesn't

and if they take vouchers (ie my tax money then she does) the church is clearly discriminating against her (which is what you asked for an example of). The simple fact is even if you take that example out I still had several others.

[Occulus]

120. If the Catholic school uses a penny of my tax dollars at any point,

and the GLBT community there has employment protections, yes. Emphatically.

So much as a cent.

If they take public funds, they ought to be prepared to employ the public. Anything less should be rigidly illegal.

[gollygee]

55. 1,400 legal rights accompany marriage

http://www.religioustolerance.org/mar_bene.htm

Here are the first few:

joint parenting;
joint adoption;
joint foster care, custody, and visitation (including non-biological parents);
status as next-of-kin for hospital visits and medical decisions where one partner is too ill to be competent;
joint insurance policies for home, auto and health;
dissolution and divorce protections such as community property and child support;
immigration and residency for partners from other countries;
inheritance automatically in the absence of a will;

ETC.

[Donailin]

65. apparently, you don't think sexual intimacy a right either?

keep digging for Rome, CL. This is interesting.

[Cuban_Liberal]

66. I'm out of this anti-Catholic echo chamber.

Fuck it!

[Zenlitened]

73. It sounds more like an anti-gay echo chamber to me. - n/t

[ruggerson]

84. No one is anti Catholic

If the Catholic Church is trying to destroy you and your family, do you think fighting back is "anti Catholic"?

Your logic astounds me.

[Donailin]

90. Run, runaway! Brave SirCuban!

this is the third time you've abandoned a debate wrt to Catholicism you know you're losing when I take you to task.

I'm sensing a pattern.

Look, Cuban, this is the deal: The Church is not Rome, the structure that represents it is in Rome, but Rome is not the Church. WE are the Church; those of us who love Christ,keep his commandments and know that the Gospel is the truth that gives life and meaning to our relationship with our Creator. Christ spent his ministry not only healing and teaching, but railing against the lawmakers, the powerbrokers who "heave heavy burdens on the shoulders of men and then refuse to lift a finger to help them". The lawmakers who "forsake God's love for tradition." The lawmakers, the Scribes, the Pharisees, the Saducees and the Rabbi's who shut the Kindom of Heaven against men, and who don't enter themselves. The Popes and Priests who make sacrifices for all to see but neglect the weightier matters such a faith, justice and mercy. The Clergy who strain gnats and swallow camels as they did with the sexual abuse of children and then blame the faithful for making a mountain out of a molehill while they make a mountain out of a molehill in rgard to gay marriage.

I'm a cradle Catholic who has spent much of her life pondering and contemplating Christ and what it means to be faithful and to have that abundant life that Christ offered here and now -- the Kindom of Heaven. And while I believe that Catholicism is as close as a religion can get in the matters of sacramental faith in the most exacting way possible, I also know that Rome is wrong in the matter of morals. Cardinal Ratzinger says that moral relativism is wrong, but Christ says otherwise. The only person who had no log in his eye to take the splinter out of his brothers eye chose to bear his brothers sins on his shoulders as though they were his own. "Do not judge and you will not be judged". The only way that is possible is to recognize that we cannot possibly ever determine the guilt or innocence of anothers conscience unless we can know their perspective in it's entirety. Everything is relative! And if that were possible, we would all discover that we ARE all culpable in each others guilt and innocence. And we would ALL be merciful towards one another. The man who is caught stealing food from the grocer is considered a thief by the religious minded merchant, but the merchant doesn't know that the man was deprived his wages by his employer. The merchant has the man arrested, the man's children go hungry and neglected. Who has committed the greater sin? Everything is relative. These are the moral matters that the Church ignores, the pay lip service but their hearts are far from God.

Those who declared themselves righteous were condemned by Christ because of their hypocrisy. They knew better, but decided that it was more profitable to lord it over others in order to make themselves look upright in the first place, neglecting the weightier matters of God's law.. Christ railed against the religious lawmakers of his time, and were he here today, it would be Rome that he would turn the tables on and admonish. The hypocrisy of the Church's teaching wrt Homosexuality is breathtaking. And they know it, shutting out the faithful and never entering themselves. Rome depends on folks like you to defend their glory, and they hope that you never open your eyes
and see what Jesus saw. Defend the hierarchy at the expense of Christ's sacrifice. That's not Catholicism, that's clericism.

[Name removed]

99. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Zenlitened]

100. I think that's the first unambiguous insult in this thread, isn't it?

I can't figure you out at all. :shrug:

Edited to withdraw subject line, based on removal of word 'idiot' in previous post

[Name removed]

101. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ruggerson]

103. But you did ask me about discrimination

And I spent time showing you how the Catholic Church both discriminates and agitates for discrimination to be written into civil law.

Now, do you think we have the right to fight them doing this?

[Cuban_Liberal]

104. Excuse me--- no tag teams.

I don't have ten people here helping ME, so I'll just let y'all enjoy the echo chamnber.

[Zenlitened]

106. I assure you I'm not a part of a tag-team.

I'll withdraw from the discussion here, and not interfere further, because I think some very interesting questions have been posed, and I'm interested to see where this might go.

[ruggerson]

107. I haven't tag teamed with anyone

I have been in a discussion with solely you on this matter.

And you asked me about discrimination and I provided you numerous examples of how the church advocates discrimination.

So, what do you suggest we do about it?

And don't tell me: "don't be Catholic", because the Church injects itself into national, political dialogues concerning non Catholics, such as it's most recent condemnation of Spanish *civil* law. For a woman, a person who uses birth control, a gay person, etc, the Church has an impact on their personal lives, whether they be Catholic or not.

[Donailin]

113. Intellectually dishonest

not sure if that's a sin, but that's what you are being. You cannot on the one hand, make a public defense of the Church and then bail out when taken to task, and then OTOH blame us for engaging you in a debate that you yourself chose to engage in.

[donco6]

143. That should tell you something. eom

[Zenlitened]

105. Well, I think I do understand written English.

I've been using the language for many years now.

What I don't understand is the position you've attempted to map out. I just cannot find any logical consistency to it at all. There is such a vast perceptual divide here, between what you advocate and what others portray, that I can't make sense of it at all.

[arwalden]

129. This Is A Perfect Example Of Being A CAFETERIA CATHOLIC

They pick and choose what they want to believe or believe-in. They ignore much of that which seems archaic or unfair. They compartmentalize the different aspects of their faith and use the good to justify (or excuse) the existence of the bad. They try to mollify the legitimate concerns that others have in the church policies, leaders, bigotry, hate, scandals and COVER-UPS by responding with "but it's not happening in MY parish".

Step up to the Catholic BUFFET... All-You-Can-Eat...

[Donailin]

109. You run away from the content of the debate when it becomes

necessary for you to recognize that you're defending the indefensible. My 'gotcha posts' always have content in context, which you completely ignore. Ignorance is not a sin, btw. Only willful ignorance is.

You are right to be angry because you are asked to carry an impossible burden by the church you love. But your anger is misdirected.

I'm going to help you out here anyway, because the Holy Spirit does work within the Church despite the heirarchy, and sometimes even makes it into the CCC.

On morality and formed conscience:

CCC 1778 "Conscience is a judgment of reason whereby the human person recognizes the moral quality of a concrete act that he is going to perform, is in the process of performing, or has already completed. In all he says and does, man is obliged to follow faithfully what he knows to be just and right. It is by the judgment of his conscience that man perceives and recognizes the prescriptions of the divine law:


Conscience is a law of the mind; yet would not grant that it is nothing more; I mean that it was not a dictate, nor conveyed the notion of responsibility, of duty, of a threat and a promise. . . . is a messenger of him, who, both in nature and in grace, speaks to us behind a veil, and teaches and rules us by his representatives. Conscience is the aboriginal Vicar of Christ.50

1779 It is important for every person to be sufficiently present to himself in order to hear and follow the voice of his conscience. This requirement of interiority is all the more necessary as life often distracts us from any reflection, self-examination or introspection:


Return to your conscience, question it. . . . Turn inward, brethren, and in everything you do, see God as your witness.51

1780 The dignity of the human person implies and requires uprightness of moral conscience. Conscience includes the perception of the principles of morality (synderesis); their application in the given circumstances by practical discernment of reasons and goods; and finally judgment about concrete acts yet to be performed or already performed. The truth about the moral good, stated in the law of reason, is recognized practically and concretely by the prudent judgment of conscience. We call that man prudent who chooses in conformity with this judgment.


and fnally:


CCC 1800: A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience.

If your conscience tells you that being homosexual (and thus being afforded the right by your Creator to enjoin in a monogomous intimate relationship that fulfills and completes your expression of humanity)is nor more a sin than having brown eyes, than you have to admit that the Catholic Church as it teaches in the matters of homosexuality in the 21 century is wrong.

[readmoreoften]

111. Now there's a 'gotcha' post!

No discussion or parsing of the issues here!

Thank you, Donailin. It's good to argue doctrine from within the doctrine. If CL really is gay, then he is completely misdirecting his rage against the wrong crew. Sad and strange. Hopefully, he will rise above this.

[Donailin]

115. I hope so too

because anything that involves human beings, you can be sure that there will be a brokenness in it. Even in the church.
The peace of Christ is often witheld by those who are supposed to give us as evidenced in this thread, but that doesn't mean that the peace doesn't exist. Peace very often comes from the least expected places.

[Donailin]

110. Your psuedo orthodoxy is not only

comic, but rather juvenile. You project onto me your inability to debate issue at hand WITH facts or actual texts.

And I'm playing horseshit?

I don't think so, CL. That shit don't fly here. Perhaps you recognize when your clock is on the verge of getting cleaned.

[saltpoint]

116. But where does the Church stand on echo chambers?

You suggest "fucking" it, by which you seem to be referring, grammatically at least, to an echo chamber(s).

I wasn't all that hip in high school, but by this point in my life, I know at least SOMETHING about that subject, and I've never heard of anyone having carnal relations with an echo chamber.

Is this some sort of zen koan or something?
_____

The points raised in this post which suggested that the Catholic Church discriminates against gay men and lesbians were, IMO, completely valid. It most certainly does, and on a repeated basis.

On what grounds, other than exclusional and discriminatory grounds, would a lesbian teacher be dismissed from teaching in a Catholic school?

The point on the art -- Michaelangelo's and others' -- is extraordinarily well taken. Whether he ever married another gay man or not, his spirit permeates the ceiling of the Cistine Chapel and the Pope's condemnation today of the Spanish legislature for allowing men to marry men and women to marry women must be considered in the light of the Church's long-standing subliminal association with gay painters and sculptors. Michelangelo's male figures are decidedly erotic, that is, homoerotic from the artist's perspective.

If the Church has a problem with that, then it's the Church's problem.

[ruggerson]

119. thank you, very well said n/t

[DistressedAmerican]

127. Sorry To See You Go. You Need To Think About These Things!

Why defend an instisution that does not support you? I do not get your thinking at all!

[Misunderestimator]

137. Golly, why is it that you consider every valid criticism anti-catholic?

It's fucking amazing that you would argue over the simple truth that Michaelangelo was gay... his work is all over catholic buildings... and the pope is a hypocrite.

[Misunderestimator]

135. What a surprise. You don't consider marriage a "right."

Well, I do... And all of the gay people I know do... it's really odd that you don't.

[foreigncorrespondent]

102. No, they don't, BUT...

...if you are in a relationship which includes queer sex, then you are essentially an outcast from the church.

Everything your beloved rather conservative leader says about queers will include you, and the love of your life.

I truly feel for you Cuban_Liberal! To be queer and so caught up in a church that shits all over the very person you were born to be. One day you will wake up, then you will be hurt as hell. Remember, those of us here at DU you have fought with over the last few days for us having the audacity to say anything negative about your dear Pontiff, will be the ones helping you pick up those broken pieces.

[Donailin]

61. Please. The Church's position on homsexuality is that

if you're gay, you commit a mortal sin if you sexually express your orientation. IOW, you are not allowed to have any sexual intimacy true to your nature. EVER. That can seem like an eternity to most gay persons, even if not to you. To do so means you have separated yourself from God, "cast out" from communion with God. To wit:

"All sin is an offense against God and a rejection of his perfect love and justice. Yet, Jesus makes a distinction between two types of sins. We call the most serious and grave sins, mortal sins. Mortal sins destroy the grace of God in the heart of the sinner. By their very grave nature, a mortal sin cuts our relationship off from God and turns man away from his creator" (CCC)

and:

(CCC 2357) Homosexuality refers to the Distinction between two types of sins to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved. "

Get yourself a CCC and brush up on exactly what it is you defend.

[dsc]

29. You are kidding, right?

How many civil rights bills for gays does the Catholic church have to oppose before you will admit they advocate discrimination. They opposed, among others, the recently passed one in Illinois and the recently failed one in Washington State.

[arwalden]

132. My First Thought As Well... But Sadly, The Evidence Says Otherwise

Welcome To The Catholic Buffet! Pick and choose what you want... unlimited refills on holy water.

[Zenlitened]

42. "How does the Chcrh advocate discrimination against gays"

I think you forgot the :sarcasm: smilie.

:rofl:

[readmoreoften]

50. An openly self-hated gay person.

Usually, we're not so 'out and proud' about how little we deserve. You must struggle terribly. I hope you find peace.

We're here for you.

[Cuban_Liberal]

52. Thank you, Dr.Freud.

I'm out and proud. Care to make your next pop-culture diagnosis?

:eyes:

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Zenlitened]

59. That's my thought as well. That this line of argument is just meant...

... to rile people up.

It just doesn't make any sense to me otherwise.

[Cuban_Liberal]

62. Think whatever the hell you want.

I happen to be partnered happily for 3 years. I'm not denied any rights, insofar as I'm aware.

[Donailin]

67. At least recognize that in the eyes of the Church that you so rigorously

defend, you are separated from God this very moment, in a state of grave sin and you are ineligible to receive communion until you confess your sin to God, to your confessor and leave your sig. other immediately.

[Zenlitened]

81. Technically, is it possible to be gay AND catholic?

I thought there were some "sins" that meant a person is automatically out of the church, even in they haven't been formally excommunicated?

[Donailin]

92. only if you beleive that the Church is Rome

instead of the body of Christ which includes everyone who keeps the commandment "love one another as I have loved you"

[DistressedAmerican]

130. Do You Go To Church With Your Partner? Are You Out There?

If so, how is it received?

[donco6]

144. Uh. Marriage?

You're just being intentionally obtuse.

[tuvor]

96. Uh, didn't the last pope just refer to homosexuality as an "evil"?

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Cuban_Liberal]

22. I'm not.

Care to explain how what I've done is threadjacking, and back up your lame-ass accusation with some substance?

[readmoreoften]

38. No, not on this particular thread. I take that back.

On the other one. I posted a response on the 'religious wars' thread about the perspectives of some gay DUers about the pope and you ran a 20 post long battle about the person thanking me.

Your post wasn't threadjacking this time, but I have to say some retort about 'is he going to give the money back' is strange. Michaelangelo did not become exorbitantly rich off the sistine chapel. The church did. Even from an economic liberal point of view, your post made no sense.

I think your post was rather uncivil regarding the spirit of the thread and your calling my observation 'lame-ass' just continues to point that you have a chip on your shoulder.

Since both people I've seen you take issue with are gay, I'm just wondering if that has something to do with your beef. :shrug:

[Zenlitened]

43. Maybe you could explain why you hate gays and lesbians so much.

:shrug:

[Cuban_Liberal]

47. I don't.

Maybe you could explain why you'd ask such a patently absurd question.

[Zenlitened]

53. It's a response to seeing so many patently absurd statements.

How does the Chcrh advocate discrimination against gays, and how do you define 'discrimination'?

That is about the most outlandish statement I have ever seen posted here. And unless you meant it simply to get a reaction out of people, I'm utterly at a loss to explain how someone who claims to be gay could say such a thing. It boggles my mind.

[Cuban_Liberal]

58. It's actually a serious question.

People throw around these accustaions, and expect them to be accepted without challenge, and when they ARE challenged to provide examples, they crab-walk away muttering about how *I* am somehow at fault for not intrinsically understanding something. THAT is what's mind boggling.

[Zenlitened]

71. No one is asking you to 'intrinsically' understand something.

It's simply a fact that the catholic church stands in opposition to to any progressive definition of fairness and dignity for gays and lesbians.

I imagine you're going to ask me to 'prove' that statement, as if it's incumbent upon me to demonstrate afresh an issue that has been discussed and reported on ad infinitum. Kind of like the ID proponent who demands a complete explanation of evolutionary theory, when in fact all the information is out there and any reasonable person who follows the news knows the background.

Now you reveal that you don't believe marriage is a right, a view I'm surprised to see expressed on a progressive discussion board -- by someone who claims to be gay, no less. It makes no sense to me. Nor does your unyielding defense of an institution that has labeled you evil and immoral and disordered and every other variation of the slur.

I don't know. Maybe you're trying to provoke someone into shouting "freeper! freeper!" to the point of getting themselves banned. Maybe you're laughing in your sleeve throughout this whole exchange, and all the similar exchanges that have preceded it. Either of those scenarios at least has a logical consistency. The position you've staked out yet again tonight has none, as far I can see.

[dsc]

74. there are more than a few gays who actually don't believe marriage is for

gays. My aunt and her partner refuse to get married even when they were in Canada due to the feeling it was a patriarcial institution that they wanted no part of.

[Zenlitened]

75. I don't imagine they advocate denying all gays and lesbians...

... the right to marry though, do they?

[dsc]

77. my aunt, no

but there are some gays who do. I saw a poll in the Gay and Lesbian Review which shows 17% of gays and lesbians feel there should be no legal recognition of same sex relationships. Stunning.

[readmoreoften]

78. Some of it is internalized homophobia

Other times it is just such a disgust at straight culture that people don't even want to be apart of it. Some gays see seeking 'recognition' as seeking approval. I definitely know GLBT people in the later camp.

[Zenlitened]

79. The only explanation that makes sense to me would be that...

... any poll can be freeped. :shrug:

The whole concept of gay-hating gays is just utterly baffling to me.

[dsc]

82. No real polls can't be freeped

This was a real, scientificly conducted poll. Not those online psuedo polls.

[Zenlitened]

87. I understand. I'm just envisioning someone agreeing to take a poll...

... seemingly in good faith (if you'll pardon the pun! :D ) but then giving all sorts of contrarian answers just to mess it up.

Maybe I'm grasping at straws. I'm just having a hard time trying to fathom how a gay or lesbian person can be against the right to marry.

Indifferent, uninterested, bored by the whole idea -- that I can grasp. But AGAINST allowing people who wish to marry the right to do so... it makes my head hurt trying to understand! :D

[dsc]

124. zealotry can be hard to understand

They basicly believe they know what is best for all gays and lesbians.

[Misunderestimator]

139. Wow... and we seem to have our own little poster child for that 17%

right here... Stunning.

[theHandpuppet]

125. Well, the point is to have a CHOICE

Which we do not.

[dsc]

146. I certainly agree with that notion

but not every LGBT person does. Think back to 1993 and gays in the military. You have to have known some gays who were so anti military that they felt gays shouldn't be in it at all.

[WillowTree]

91. I'm so sorry, Cuban_Liberal...

....for the way you've been treated on this thread. You shouldn't have to defend or justify your beliefs to anyone, any more than you ought to have to defend or justify your orientation. The intolerance that you've been shown tonight is heartbreaking.

Peace to you. Have a super weekend, OK?

[ruggerson]

98. How has he been shown intolerance?

I keep hearing how it's now intolerant to oppose bigotry, and I have yet to have someone explain it to me logically.

And actually, I thought the entire discussion was amazingly civil.

[saltpoint]

118. Fairly civil, yes, and the points raised about the Church --

-- and gay art and sculpture are very important, and I for one feel the point is extraordinarily relevant.

It does not make one anti-Catholic for opposing anti-gay and lesbian positions some Catholics take.

Matt Fox had his ass booted out by the new Pope some few years ago for breaching Church doctrine, including not incidentally, Fox's pro-gay & lesbian positions.

That's worse than discrimination -- that's cowardly silencing of informed expression.

[Name removed]

131. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Zenlitened]

108. But aren't we all here on DU to discuss, debate and... when necessary...

... defend our beliefs? Anyone of us might find ourselves called upon to explain our positions in the face of doubt or incomprehension. That doesn't mean we're the victims of intolerance. It just means we've made some pretty bold statements in the hurly-burly of a political discussion board, and have to manage the consequences.

[readmoreoften]

112. Victim of other gays? OH PLEASE. n/t

[BBradley]

122. Now that is ridiculous.

Of course he has to defend his beliefs. Otherwise he shouldn't be posting them.

Why are beliefs any different from another opinion? If you post an opinion, especially on a board where debate is a major part of the atmosphere, then you're opening yourself up to disagreement and questioning.

If you can't take the heat get out of the god damned kitchen.

[theHandpuppet]

126. Oh please

Someone please pass me the Pepto.

[Misunderestimator]

140. LOL... Poor thing, came here to flame a perfectly good thread...

We SHOULD feel sorry for him... :eyes:

[ruggerson]

142. The convoluted logic is a bit much, no?

;-)

[donco6]

145. You've gotta be kidding.

This guy defends the Catholic Church's position on homosexuality, and WE'RE the bad guys?

Jeez.

[miss_kitty]

148. What intolerance?

I think you have that about backwards...or you forgot the :sarcasm: smilie. He came into this thread and started on with the same old same old.

[readmoreoften]

48. That was blunter. n/t

[Donailin]

69. not to nitpick but it's disordered not evil

but nevertheless, a grave sin to be confessed or go straight to hell should one die at any given moment. :eyes:

[Donailin]

27. actually, it's intrinisically disordered

not evil. CCC 2357 (second edition)

[readmoreoften]

45. Actually, it's intrinsically oriented to a moral evil.

It was PJP who said that gays were part of the new 'ideology of evil' but I suspect that the pen was guided by Ratzinger's hand.

[Donailin]

93. no doubt. n/t

[miss_kitty]

8. well they're dead

so that's a moot point. And the Church has had centuries of use and probably more than made their money and the interest back on the works.

On Edit. I find it repulsive that The Church would claim that homosexuality, which is part of nature and is in no way a choice, anymore than ethnicity, is evil. And I am always puzzled to see you and your SO go to the mat for them. But to each his own...

[Cuban_Liberal]

10. 'Ownership'

A concept worth studying...

[miss_kitty]

15. whatever

BTW, I edited my first response to you.

[Cuban_Liberal]

19. You're puzzled?

'Going to the mat' for the Church is a vastly oversimplified and dismissive characterization of what he and I post. But we're evil Catholics, so I guess we shouldn't expect any better...

[miss_kitty]

25. hey! nice assumption you make about me...

i was raised by a Catholic mom and had much CCD training and I am baptised as a Catholic. Please show me where I have stated or implied Catholicism is evil. And you two, as you are, now defend this man-made institution while they call your nature, the way you were born, an 'abomination' I would be just as surprised to see a Jew be a Nazi, that's all...

And even if "'Going to the mat' for the Church is a vastly oversimplified and dismissive characterization" (dismissive it's not) it IS what you guys do.

[Cuban_Liberal]

31. No, it ISN'T what we do.

W try to inject facts about what the Church does and DOESN'T teach into emotional argumenta woefuly devoid of the same. If injecting factual evidence into arguments is 'going to the mat' for something, then we obviously don't understand English in the same manner.

[miss_kitty]

83. well you seem to have missed one important fact:

The Catholic Church has declared the way you and your partner were born to be an abomination. Not emotional here. Just a fact. You and your SO have to apologise for being queer, before you can enter the Kingdom of God.

I find it repugnant that you and all other gay people are not treated as equals to heterosexuals in the eyes of the Catholic Church, when the truth is, in God's eyes, I am sure you are equal.

But then that's not my cross to bear.

So as far as 'going to the mat'-when all the facts (I have seen) you present are in defense of Catholicism-you are in my Humble O, 'going to the mat' for people who don't want you in their clubhouse. Unless you change what is intrinsically you

[Misunderestimator]

141. No, no, honey, You are evil homosexuals...

That's what your pope tells us anyway... :shrug:

[Dave Sund]

20. What's interesting

Is that the Catholic Church actually believes that homosexuality is not a choice, but claims that acting on it is a sin. Which is a terrible argument, in and of itself.

[Donailin]

36. Don't forget masturbation. That's disordered too.

I considered starting a thread on that, but figured the temptation for wisecracks might jeapordize the longevity of the thread. :D

Masturbation is one of the first things any parochial student under age 10 or so will learn is immoral and "intrinsically disordered" -- the Church likes to fuck up peoples sexual psyche as soon as possible. You know, guilt fills collection baskets faster than mercy.

[Solly Mack]

128. I am so stealing this line

"guilt fills collection baskets faster than mercy"

OK?

:)

[miss_kitty]

6. Get the Keenes to paint the ceiling with the wide eye moppets

actually, I think only the former Mrs K has the right to paint the official Keene wide eye moppet shit now. Oh hell, she's divorced! Another sinner.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

13. And maybe they can trade Michelangelo's "Pieta"

for a really big "Precious Moments" figurine.

[applegrove]

11. Brilliant. I think it is not only the Sistine Chapel but also the Pieta

needs to go. Also a few popes need to be dug up. And that Leanardo painting at the end of the Sistene Chapel.

I personally would love the Pieta. I just love that piece of art.

I will write to the Vatican right away and ask for it.

[Donailin]

23. Hullo! Amajority of the old bastards are gay people claiming the art.

Do you realize the numbers of (self-hating) gay clergy? If you were a Catholic, and you are gay, and you were born before 1955, you became a priest since according to the church it's a life of celibacy for your "intriniscially disordered" state. What else was one to do before coming out of the closet was an option?

[walldude]

35. Stand up and fight so that future generations

would have it easier than they did... It's what gays are doing now, and still being villified for it.

[Donailin]

40. I already did today, I will tomorrow and

every day until Rome gets it right.

[walldude]

72. Well then I've got your back

until there is no more need to fight :toast:

[Donailin]

97. Five more

You can do it!

Here's a huge congrats on your 1000th post (even if it is premature)

:toast:

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[miss_kitty]

33. Gotta go

:popcorn:

[Placebo]

34. I had the same thought a while ago!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=3431589&mesg_id=3431589 :)

Great minds think alike, eh?

[kineneb]

85. this will annoy some- but aren't there a lot of closeted gays

in the Catholic hierarchy? This has always been a low-level issue that the church never wanted to face. After all wouldn't single gender monasteries/convents attract those who felt more comfortable around someone of their own gender.

Just go read Chaucer or the Deccammeron from the 14th century, there are lots of stories in both about priests and monks of dubious religiosity. Read the books anyway- they have some very funny stories.

[Deja Q]

95. Nonsense. All the Sistene Chapel needs is a fresh coat of white paint.

[saltpoint]

121. Ruggerson, I am responding as a deep admirer of --

-- Michelangelo's art, which comes with an awareness of his likely homosexuality.

He was an artist whose spirit can still be felt in La Pieta and in The David and so forth. To paraphrase the man himself, "I chipped away the rock to find the angel in the stone, and set him free."

The David, to name just one of Michelangelo's angels, is arguably the most recognizable homoerotic icon in the world, and has been for many centuries now.

Your original post -- unless I missed the point of it -- made the sure-footed observation that a contemporary Church teaching against homosexuality runs counter to the Church's own presentational personality, since a gay man's paintings adorn the ceiling beneath which the College of Cardinals meet to select new pontiffs, to cite just one example.

The irony of that juxtaposition borders on -- or crosses outright -- hypocrisy. I say so because you can no more separate Michelangelo from his paintings and sculpture than separate Jagger from "Jumpin Jack Flash."

It is not anti-Catholic to oppose discriminatory and exclusional speech or action. Ever.

For what it's worth, I thought your observation was totally right-on.

[lonestarnot]

123. Wooohhoooo nominating!

[Misunderestimator]

133. What a BRILLIANT thought! Thanks for putting THAT in perspective.

:thumbsup: And we can take away a lot of their sacred music as well.

[Misunderestimator]

134. You enter a thread thinking it couldn't possibly be a flame war...

...and what do you find... the usual suspects. :eyes:

[arwalden]

136. So... Did You Learn Your Lesson?

:eyes:

LOL... You silly Lezbian, you! After all this time, I'd think that you would have figured out that the behavior you've referred to is to be expected. Always.

xo, Allen

[Misunderestimator]

138. No... I never do... I still manage to hold out hope for reason...

silly, silly me... :hi:

[miss_kitty]

147. I am not "the usual suspects" in a flame war

I thought some people might find that refreshing!

:hi:

Edit: typo