Monday, November 17, 2008

Take It Like A Man

I'm so done with the homosexualist activists who won't take the rejection of California's Prop 8 "like a man," as it were. Whiners. I mean, if I have to accept that Obama beat McCain, why can't they accept the fact that they were beaten in a fair fight (really, an UNfair fight when you consider how much opponents of 8 outspent the supporters) by those who just might not see the world the same way they do?

All this rage is buried in the fiction that denial of marriage to homosexuals is somehow a denial of civil rights. But the explanation is simple: Marriage between two people of the same sex simply does not exist, even if they go through all the motions (see also: "ordination" of "women priests"). It is no more real than a man wanting to marry a 12-year-old, a man marrying an animal, or a man marrying two women (yet). What they really want is government to force sanction of their immoral lifestyle upon those like me who disagree. Nothing like a little postmodern one-way tolerance.

Besides, let's say for a moment that the premise of same-sex marriage is real. I'm sure that disrupting churches, vandalizing churches and temples, and assaulting and harassing those who voted for Prop 8 will really draw nationwide support to their cause. That's not what Martin Luther King advocated in his civil rights campaign, and I think those from his era should denounce this immature homosexualist behavior, especially given how it's been directed at blacks who dared support Prop 8.

In line with my previous post, I'm not writing this out of rage. I do know homosexuals, and I hold nothing against them personally. But for me to sit back and say nothing means I have no problem with what's going on ("Qui tacet consentiret" - "He who is silent gives consent").

12 comments:

Monstah said...

Did you sit back and remain silent while Catholic priests were raping little boys?

There is a BIG world of difference between a bigot and a traditionalist, you know. Oh no. Wait. You don't know.


If you post back please just resubmit my last paragraph. That is pretty much the end line for me.

Seana said...

This has been a disappointing visit.

You can't really say you have nothing against gays if you call their lifestyle immoral.

Marriage between two people of the same sex simply does not exist, even if they go through all the motions

It does here. We also have women priests.

It is no more real than a man wanting to marry a 12-year-old, a man marrying an animal, or a man marrying two women

The issue here has always been consent. The 12-year-old and the animal cannot consent. The two women... well, I tend to disagree with it because I feel that it relegates women to the status of "possession". The circumstances under which I might agree with something like this are quite narrow. However, the Bible has no problem with polygamy, so there aren't religious or moral reasons to be against it, just cultural and ethical ones.

No-one is asking you to approve of marriage rights for gays, but it's the government's job to take care of *all* its citizens, not just the majority. The majority should never be entitled to make choices like this for any other segment of society. Things like Prop 8 should never even make it to a ballot. This seems more like bullying than democracy.

I was here last week to see how your move went and discovered the B. Hussein post, which was more than "childish". It was that horrible tactic to make people afraid that Obama was a Muslim who would sell the country out to terrorists. I was very disappointed to see you partake in that. Your concession only seems to say that it's wrong to call Obama a "denigrating" thing, but that's his name, not an insult. I don't think that if he *were* a Muslim, that *that* would be an insult, either.

I will feel much better once I have finally posted this and made my own stand. I have tried to make myself believe that we just see things differently, but it's more than that. I have said before that your delivery doesn't win you any converts. It's the way you express your views, so high and mighty, so right. Of course, this is your blog and you can say what you want in it, but qui tacet consentiret, after all.

You have enough people who agree with you that you shouldn't miss me. And I'm tired of coming here to discover that I might as well support pedophilia or bestiality or baby-killing or whatever.

Since you moderate your comments, you can allow this to be posted or not as you see fit. For the record, none of this is said lightly.

I don't want anyone coming here to think that I agree with you. Please remove the link to my blog.

kim (weltek) said...

There's a way to disagree and share your voice without using hateful, ignorant ideas and language. What is the purpose of being so inflamatory and dramatic?Do you think using this language earns you a higher spot in heaven? Do you think more people "listen" and stand in arms with you when you speak this way? Think again.

Cygnus said...

Monstah: First of all, you couldn't be more wrong in your premise; the vast majority of incidents in those scandals involved teenage boys. Still illegal, still wrong, and still a blemish, but hardly what you call "raping little boys." And yes, what Cardinal Law did to aid and abet the perpetrators was despicable. The Church has dealt and is dealing with this: what more do you want?

Of course, a lot of this wouldn't have happened if the seminaries weren't so quick to recruit homosexuals (the "Pink Palace," anyone?).

Finally, you don't know me well enough to call me a bigot.

Seana: As you wish. I'm sorry that you don't want to just agree to disagree on this, but if I have to choose between jettisoning my convictions or my friendships, my convictions will win out every time. It was nice knowing you.

There are no "women priests," at least not in the Catholic Church. Ordination of women is simply a liturgical impossibility, even if you go through the motions.

As to your point about polygamy:

After sin entered the world, the original design for marriage suffered some setbacks, and God began a process of re-educating and reforming his people. For a time there was polygamy. Moses conceded to divorce among his followers because of their "hardness of heart," but Jesus clearly declares that "from the beginning it was not so" (Matt. 19:8). He refers to Genesis 2 as he restores marriage to its original dignity: one man, one woman, becoming "one" (Matt. 19:4–5). He leaves no doubt that this union of husband and wife is exclusive and indissoluble: "What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder" (Matt. 19:6). Source.

How many times must we who believe traditional marriage to be what it is have to defend ourselves from those who want to change it? I'd rather have the voters of California decide than some judge in Connecticut. And again, the homosexualists know they can't win at the ballot box, so they use the courts. That's why Prop. 8 had to be on the ballot, and even though they had the greater might, they lost.

Of course I think I'm right; it's called conviction. Who posts to a blog and doesn't think he or she is right? It's my opinion, and you're free to agree or disagree with it. But don't tell me I'm not free to express it. (Hmmm, where have I heard that before?)

Kim: There's no way I could possibly express my opinion to satisfy you because you think my opinion is inflammatory. Since my shutting up seems to be the only acceptable response, thank you, I won't.

Cygnus said...

Interestingly, this just arrived in my e-mail: a review of a book I need to get my hands on, called The Tyranny of Nice. I find it relevant to what's going on here.

Marilena said...

seana, let me make a few things clear. have you ever heard of the saying, love the sinner, but hate the sin? hating the sin is precisely what cygnus is reffering to. the sin of homosexuality.

the Holy Bible calls homosexuality an abomination. and it is. does God not factor into our lives anymore? what happened to sodom and gomorrah? do you recall what happened there? what did God do to sodom and gommorah?

while catholics are not to support homosexuality, we are supposed to pray for the conversion of people that commit sins. just because we pray for them, does not mean we condone their behavior because we don't. we follow God as ruler rather than man. He matters to us, and what He says matters to us. we follow what the church teaches because it is God's will for us to do so.

we respect the persons dignity, but we cannot condone an act that God sees as an abomination.
when it comes to abortion, that is also an abomination before God because it is a willfull act that kills an unborn child, and life is precious in the eyes of God.

if you look at what the Church teaches about homosexuality, then you'd realize where we are coming from. we love honor and respect God before man, and we honor and worship Him, and follow what He has set out for us. we also are obedient to the Church because that is what God wants of us.

homosexuality will never be acceptable in the eyes of God, or the Church. that is the way it is. but do not think God weak. Far from it!! He can convert anyone. and that means anyone! He also hears our prayers for conversion of sinners as well. so anyone on earth no matter how steeped in sin they are can convert. anyone. Jesus said to saint faustina, the greater the sinner, the more right he has to God's mercy! recall this as well, that Christ did not come to save the just, He came to save the unjust. and yes, that means homosexuals as well.

Joe of St. Thérèse said...

exactly, they need to zip it

Cygnus said...

Encouragement for those of us who are sick and tired of homosexualists to stop being silent about it comes from Giancomo Cardinal Biffi of Italy:

In 'Sheep and Shepherds', Cardinal Biffi notes that the Biblical condemnation of homosexuality is explicit and Christians are not "allowed, if we want to be faithful to the word of God, the pusillanimity of passing over it in silence out of concern of appearing 'politically incorrect.'"

The Cardinal's book is replete with references to the Sacred Scriptures, with which he makes his case that the societal acceptance of and spread of homosexuality is both "the proof and the result of the exclusion of God from collective attention and social life, and of the refusal to give him due praise."

In a chapter on The Challenge of Chastity, Cardinal Biffi writes:

"The exclusion of the Creator leads to the complete derailment of reason:

"'They became vain in their reasoning, and their senseless minds were darkened. While claiming to be wise, they became fools' (Romans 1:21-22).

"As a result of this intellectual blindness, both theory and behavior have fallen into complete dissoluteness:

"'Therefore, God handed them over to impurity through the lusts of their hearts for the mutual degradation of their bodies' (Romans 1:24)

"And in order to prevent any misunderstanding or any convenient interpretation, the Apostle continues with a striking analysis, formulated in perfectly explicit terms:

"'Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God handed them over to their undiscerning mind to do what is improper' (Romans 1:26-28).

"In fact, Saint Paul is careful to observe that extreme abjection occurs when 'they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them' (Romans 1:32)."

The Cardinal acknowledges the modern day pressures on Christians to remain silent on the subject; however, he notes that these quotes are "a page of the inspired Book that no human authority can force us to censor."


HT: the indispensable LifeSiteNews.com.

Dingus said...

Cyg, this is jimbo from OT.

If gays and lesbians and any other person on the planet doesn't see Christ's love shining through you something is wrong.

If there is a way to support Prop 8 and still do that, fine. If there is NO way to support Prop 8 and love your neighbor...maybe you shouldn't support it.

There are a lot of immoral things that are legal, aren't there? So that argument is poor even if one deems it immoral. The question is where does this put society at risk? Who does it harm?

And don't you kinda sorta want homosexuals to get closer to God? I do. That's ALL I want actually (if their lifestyle is wrong that's for the Spirit to convict, eh?) Why prevent a union that actually is BASED on Godly principles?

Until the church has a fraction of the secular divorce rate, and our children are raised in loving homes, and we set an example for the rest of the world in this arena it is impossible to support Prop 8 without looking like hypocrites. Do you realize how much hurt this brings for the defense of Christian dogma?? I know you can't just contradict your truth in the hope someone will listen to the gospel, but that's a little closer to Christ's message than shoving theology down people's throats and expecting them to love it.

As for the Bible, I see the act condemned...particularly in lustful settings (as hetero acts can also be sinful) but I don't see anywhere that the Bible says it is sinful for someone to be attracted to the same sex.

I also see in the Bible that without love, all understanding, knowledge, charity and eloquence are worthless. So just make REAL sure that you love people (in a way that shows) while imposing your religion and quoting scripture. You seem to devote a LOT more words to what you disagree with about them than what you love in them.

Better yet, find one to become friends with. Not just acquaintences, but close enough where you can have deep conversation. It gets a lot more difficult to treat them like lepers when you know them as people.

If we don't wake up as a church I fear some heavy judgement. Even Christ COMPLIMENTED the Pharisees on their knowledge of the Law--and their ability to teach it. But He railed on them becuase they missed the real message. Let's make sure we aren't falling into the same trap.

DingusIsTaken said...

Okay, it is an abomination...so is porn, and Vegas, and a lot of the stuff that goes on in my head.

But where do you see ANY Scriptural support for legislating Christian ideology?

I think the loving, Christian way to handle Prop 8 is to not vote on it. Doesn't condone nor condemn.

Cygnus said...

"Based on Godly principles"? Whose translation are YOU reading? I guess you didn't see my comment above for all the Scriptural citations condemning homosexuality.

I suppose also in your translation, Jesus told the woman caught in adultery, "Go and keep shtupping whoever you want." No, he said "Go and sin no more." But that's the message homosexualists want to hear from the Church: "We love you, which means keep on sinning and destroying yourselves."

Go back my original post. Don't tell ME I have to be nice when I'm sitting at my keyboard just writing words; my words hurt no one. Rather, tell that to the homosexualists who are assaulting those who disagree with them, disrupting church services, and mailing white powder to the Mormons. It's time to start calling spades spades.

Jimbo, just like Kim, you're telling me in as many words to shut up. I'm sorry to disappoint you.

No, I didn't have a vote in Prop. 8, but you're telling me that if I did, I should abstain? You can accept that we're in an era of postmodern, post-Christian relativism, but I do not. Politics is nothing but one group telling another what to do (secular humanism is every bit as much a religion as Catholicism, BTW). One group wins, one group loses. Then we fight another day. That's democracy.

Where do I find Scriptural support for legislating Christian ideology? The Ten Commandments spring to mind; I take it you've heard of them. And I suppose Jesus shouldn't have messed with that moneychangers in the Temple bit . . . or at least focus-grouped it first.

Yes, we are ALL sinners, and like many of us, homosexuals that I know are confused, hurt, and as the Catechism of the Catholic Church says, "intrinsically disordered." Jesus can heal that, just as He can those who are active in other modes of fornication (there's a word you don't hear much anymore!). But the key is turning away from sin, not persisting in it (let alone having it condoned or sanctioned), as St. Paul discusses in Romans.

I think you confuse opposition on my part with condemnation. I condemn no one, but as Marilena stated above, I will condemn the act.

beetlebabee said...

You know, I think one of the most beautiful things of this election for me was the sifting that happened among the voters. So many of us got together irrespective of creed, religion, sex or color and fought tooth and nail for families.

I am so thankful this marriage amendment in California passed, and for the wide based support it found among the hearts of so many.

Our critics are fierce, that’s for sure. I’ve been blogging about the marriage issue in all it’s facets since October, I’m just a newbie to the issue, but boy is it interesting seeing how we got ourselves in this mess, and how homosexuality has crept up while we were looking the other way.

Amazing.

http://beetlebabee.wordpress.com/2008/11/06/pride-predjudice-prop8-rage/