About the Americans thing, nationality is a special case to me, where you live/were born control this, not what you believe, supporting the catholic church is an entirely different thing than being American, really as long as you are actively working against bad things your government either by voting against them or protesting them I am not going to hold your nationality against you.
Many people were raised Catholic to the point that it's as integral to them as where they were born. There's many Catholics working to change the Catholic church from the inside, but I guess those people don't deserve your respect since they're not just condemning the whole organization instead of trying to improve it.
Prejudice is a wonderful thing, especially when you veil it in self-righteousness. Oh wait, where have I seen that before?
Being in the catholic church is a choice, unless you can claim that you would killed or harmed by living in your community while not being a member of the catholic church, I don't feel there is any excuse to be a part of it that doesn't involve inherently agreeing with it.
Changing what is essentially a hierachical private organization from the ground up is almost impossible. The best option if you really believe in the catholic faith but disagree with the church would be to leave and form a new church to accomodate your belief system.
EDIT: I don't join say Greenpeace even though most of my basic beliefs are the same as theirs, I don't do that because I disagree with how they carry out actions based on those beliefs. To me these things are the exact same, private hierachical organizations based on beliefs.
NATIK on
0
Options
Nova_CI have the needThe need for speedRegistered Userregular
edited April 2011
Honestly, guys, I just simply cannot grasp the idea that everyone who belongs to a group is responsible for that group's actions, especially when we're talking about a group that's worldwide and has over a billion members. Much of the Catholic faith is fractured.
Do you believe all muslims are responsible for the actions of terrorists? You can't deny that much of the muslim authority calls for these actions and is encouraging them. Does that justify the reaction America has had to muslims? Can I go to a random mosque and accuse them of being murderers?
Nova_C on
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
Honestly, guys, I just simply cannot grasp the idea that everyone who belongs to a group is responsible for that group's actions, especially when we're talking about a group that's worldwide and has over a billion members. Much of the Catholic faith is fractured.
Do you believe all muslims are responsible for the actions of terrorists? You can't deny that much of the muslim authority calls for these actions and is encouraging them. Does that justify the reaction America has had to muslims? Can I go to a random mosque and accuse them of being murderers?
Your analogy only works if you're actually comparing the Vatican heirarchy to suicide bombers.
Islam doesn't have the organized structure of Catholicism. If a muslim supports a mosque or Imam that supports terrorism I hold them responsible too, but they aren't responsible for muslim actions as a whole.
A catholic isn't responsible for the actions of another catholic either, but I will hold him responsible for the actions of a church leadership that he is actively supporting.
I tried to make this clear but I am not sure I did, I don't mind someone being of the catholic faith, that's entirely their own problem, where it becomes everyones problem is when they support the catholic church and by extension the actions of said church.
EDIT: To continue with the Greenpeace example too, if I share their beliefs but stay out of the organization and don't support it, I can never be responsible for the organizations actions but if I support it, I share responsiblity for its actions.
Honestly, guys, I just simply cannot grasp the idea that everyone who belongs to a group is responsible for that group's actions, especially when we're talking about a group that's worldwide and has over a billion members. Much of the Catholic faith is fractured.
Do you believe all muslims are responsible for the actions of terrorists? You can't deny that much of the muslim authority calls for these actions and is encouraging them. Does that justify the reaction America has had to muslims? Can I go to a random mosque and accuse them of being murderers?
Your analogy only works if you're actually comparing the Vatican heirarchy to suicide bombers.
And someone compared the entirety of the Catholic Church to the KKK.
See: The post I quoted.
Either way, when a poll shows that three quarters of the members of a religion support LGBT rights, you kinda lose the point of "CATHOLICISM HATES GAYS".
And then you get to start making distinctions between lay members and mid-upper leadership.
MechMantis on
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
Honestly, guys, I just simply cannot grasp the idea that everyone who belongs to a group is responsible for that group's actions, especially when we're talking about a group that's worldwide and has over a billion members. Much of the Catholic faith is fractured.
Do you believe all muslims are responsible for the actions of terrorists? You can't deny that much of the muslim authority calls for these actions and is encouraging them. Does that justify the reaction America has had to muslims? Can I go to a random mosque and accuse them of being murderers?
Your analogy only works if you're actually comparing the Vatican heirarchy to suicide bombers.
And someone compared the entirety of the Catholic Church to the KKK.
See: The post I quoted.
Either way, when a poll shows that three quarters of the members of a religion support LGBT rights, you kinda lose the point of "CATHOLICISM HATES GAYS".
And then you get to start making distinctions between lay members and mid-upper leadership.
I think the implication was that saying you are Catholic but don't support the negative aspects supported by the Vatican is like saying you're a Klansman but don't support all the racism and bigotry they stand for.
The Vatican IS Catholicism. It's the only thing that sets it apart from being, say, Anglicanism or Episcopalianism or really any other Protestant denomination. You quite literally are not Catholic without ascribing to the recognition of the Vatican's authority.
So, saying that you're trying to change the misogynism and homophobia within Catholic dogma is fairly analogous to saying that you're going stay in the KKK to help make them more open to diversity.
Honestly, guys, I just simply cannot grasp the idea that everyone who belongs to a group is responsible for that group's actions, especially when we're talking about a group that's worldwide and has over a billion members. Much of the Catholic faith is fractured.
Do you believe all muslims are responsible for the actions of terrorists? You can't deny that much of the muslim authority calls for these actions and is encouraging them. Does that justify the reaction America has had to muslims? Can I go to a random mosque and accuse them of being murderers?
Your analogy only works if you're actually comparing the Vatican heirarchy to suicide bombers.
And someone compared the entirety of the Catholic Church to the KKK.
See: The post I quoted.
Either way, when a poll shows that three quarters of the members of a religion support LGBT rights, you kinda lose the point of "CATHOLICISM HATES GAYS".
And then you get to start making distinctions between lay members and mid-upper leadership.
If they really feel that way and the church refuse to change, I think they should leave it and make a new church that actually shares their general beliefs, changing the hierachical structure of the church from within takes forever, however the loss of power behind the catholic churches actions and immidiate gain of power of this/these new churches would be massive and just that IMMIDIATE!
Don't tell me they can't do that, tons of catholic offshoots have sprung up throughout the centuries since the church formed.
NATIK on
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
Either way, when a poll shows that three quarters of the members of a religion support LGBT rights, you kinda lose the point of "CATHOLICISM HATES GAYS".
All that really supports is the idea that Catholics are more concerned with religious identification than what that identification actually stands for, a la,
"I may be pro-choice, pro-gay rights, support the use of birth control, and wish the clergy was more open to female fellowship, but fuck you if you think I'm not Catholic."
It's the Gay Rights thread, and The Vatican has some chocie positions on the matter, so . . . yes?
Atomika on
0
Options
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
edited April 2011
I'd hold anyone who gives the Catholic church money accountable for the Catholic view on homosexuality (and other things) just as I hold anyone who gives the Mormon church money accountable for that church's view and its involvement in Prop 8.
I'd hold anyone who gives the Catholic church money accountable for the Catholic view on homosexuality (and other things) just as I hold anyone who gives the Mormon church money accountable for that church's view and its involvement in Prop 8.
I'd hold anyone who gives the Catholic church money accountable for the Catholic view on homosexuality (and other things) just as I hold anyone who gives the Mormon church money accountable for that church's view and its involvement in Prop 8.
Money as part of "I should really donate $100 to the church/this issue could use support/<insert random church seasonal fund-raising drive>" or as part of "offertory dish comes around and I toss $5 in"?
I'd hold anyone who gives the Catholic church money accountable for the Catholic view on homosexuality (and other things) just as I hold anyone who gives the Mormon church money accountable for that church's view and its involvement in Prop 8.
Money as part of "I should really donate $100 to the church/this issue could use support/<insert random church seasonal fund-raising drive>" or as part of "offertory dish comes around and I toss $5 in"?
What's the difference? At the end of the day, any amount of money is still helping to forward whatever views that church espouses.
Inside this spoiler is Catholic stuff. I did not intend for this to happen, but honestly, I have a large number of family members who identify as and are practicing Catholics.
You can understand, I think, my consternation when they're being compared to Klansmen.
I do not identify as Catholic, as a note, and never said a word about A: being one, or B: changing it from the inside.
Even though that's actually possible. See: quite a few saints.
The Vatican is only Catholicism when the Pope issues an Ex Cathedra teaching. Otherwise there wouldn't be the hundreds of orders of monks with radically different views of being a Catholic.
The Church is a bunch of kids in the same room with the same beliefs but different views on what those beliefs mean and how they work.
Basically, the Pope is the father in the room who lets everyone do what they want, within reason. However, there are times when he just puts his foot down and says "NO. This is how it is, anyone who disagrees can leave" That would be the Ex Cathedra teaching, IE: Papal Infallibility.
Hell, there's a bit of a controversy going on RE: The Eucharistic Prayers used in the US, they aren't approved by the Vatican for use as they aren't 100% faithful translations of the original Latin prayers. Most US Dioces just tell em to screw off, the 100% faithful translations are horrible. And they are terrible.
Furthermore: Who the hell are you guys to say what's a Catholic and what's not? Are you guys all the Pope? If you aren't, you can't really be making that judgement. You've already shown ignorance as to how the Catholic Church, while it has a leadership unit, isn't a single iron clad entity. It's fractured. Even in the US.
To say that all Catholics MUST fit X or Y thing is silly. Especially when you have no idea what's going on.
To bring this back on topic: As far as I know there have been zero, none, zip Ex Cathedra teachings on LGBT rights. Correct me if I'm wrong.
However, to my best knowledge, you do not have to have a specific position on LGBT rights to be a Catholic. Because there have been no Papal Infallible orders.
MechMantis on
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
I'd hold anyone who gives the Catholic church money accountable for the Catholic view on homosexuality (and other things) just as I hold anyone who gives the Mormon church money accountable for that church's view and its involvement in Prop 8.
Money as part of "I should really donate $100 to the church/this issue could use support/<insert random church seasonal fund-raising drive>" or as part of "offertory dish comes around and I toss $5 in"?
That's always a tricky question with religious charity.
On one hand, fundraising in churches is often very focused, like "Help us raise money to build this afterschool program/homeless shelter/women's home," but on the other, what are the negative aspects being supported and propagated by those institutions?
Like for instance, churches play a huge role in offering free/cheap therapy for things like substance abuse and marital problems. Then they go on to instill their own dogmatic ideologies into the program, which is just horrific, and the reason why things like AA often do more psychological damage than good.
Gotta think in the holistic, long-term sense.
Atomika on
0
Options
ElldrenIs a woman dammitceterum censeoRegistered Userregular
Either way, when a poll shows that three quarters of the members of a religion support LGBT rights, you kinda lose the point of "CATHOLICISM HATES GAYS".
All that really supports is the idea that Catholics are more concerned with religious identification than what that identification actually stands for, a la,
"I may be pro-choice, pro-gay rights, support the use of birth control, and wish the clergy was more open to female fellowship, but fuck you if you think I'm not Catholic."
I'd hold anyone who gives the Catholic church money accountable for the Catholic view on homosexuality (and other things) just as I hold anyone who gives the Mormon church money accountable for that church's view and its involvement in Prop 8.
Money as part of "I should really donate $100 to the church/this issue could use support/<insert random church seasonal fund-raising drive>" or as part of "offertory dish comes around and I toss $5 in"?
That's always a tricky question with religious charity.
On one hand, fundraising in churches is often very focused, like "Help us raise money to build this afterschool program/homeless shelter/women's home," but on the other, what are the negative aspects being supported and propagated by those institutions?
Like for instance, churches play a huge role in offering free/cheap therapy for things like substance abuse and marital problems. Then they go on to instill their own dogmatic ideologies into the program, which is just horrific, and the reason why things like AA often do more psychological damage than good.
He's on his way to being recognized as a saint, and should have been quite some time ago. There's far more people like Father Baker than there are horrible people who just want to convert others through free programs.
Okay really, no more, I'm out of here. I caused enough of a derailment.
MechMantis on
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
edited April 2011
@ MechMantis
I'm pretty tired of Catholics and their "Catholicism is whatever I want it to be" moral gymnastics. You, not being Catholic, are not subject to that criticism, natch.
Either way, when a poll shows that three quarters of the members of a religion support LGBT rights, you kinda lose the point of "CATHOLICISM HATES GAYS".
All that really supports is the idea that Catholics are more concerned with religious identification than what that identification actually stands for, a la,
"I may be pro-choice, pro-gay rights, support the use of birth control, and wish the clergy was more open to female fellowship, but fuck you if you think I'm not Catholic."
Yep.
Because none of that shit defines being Catholic
Other than the fact that the stated position of the Vatican is one of anti-abortion, no birth control of any kind, homosexuality is a moral evil, and women can't be priests.
Marathon on
0
Options
AegisFear My DanceOvershot Toronto, Landed in OttawaRegistered Userregular
I'd hold anyone who gives the Catholic church money accountable for the Catholic view on homosexuality (and other things) just as I hold anyone who gives the Mormon church money accountable for that church's view and its involvement in Prop 8.
Money as part of "I should really donate $100 to the church/this issue could use support/<insert random church seasonal fund-raising drive>" or as part of "offertory dish comes around and I toss $5 in"?
What's the difference? At the end of the day, any amount of money is still helping to forward whatever views that church espouses.
The former could be rightly argued as facilitating Church views and programs that one would find reprehensible (with some wiggle room, depending on the fund-raising drive in question) while the latter is almost always directed towards the individual church's operating expenses. I don't think one could fairly connect an individual's involvement in the maintenance of their local church with an overarching suggestion that they support the non-local Church's positions on various matters.
I don't think one could fairly connect an individual's involvement in the maintenance of their local church with an overarching suggestion that they support the non-local Church's positions on various matters.
That's like saying just because McDonalds has a corporate policy of supporting pedophilia, you don't want to hurt your local economy by boycotting them.
Regardless of the strength of your local church's solidarity with Vatican viewpoints, they are still more or less a "franchise" of that establishment, and follow suit on basic policy issues. Your support of that vis a vis tithing may be a miniscule drop in a very big bucket, but it's support nevertheless.
Well, I would assume that for most people religion is a lot more complicated than fast food.
I honestly think most people who ascribe to a mainstream line of theology put more thought into what they're doing for lunch than the logical fallacies and incongruities that constitute their professed faith.
If it's "complicated," as you say, it because it has to be. There's no simple, streamlined way to rationalize something so resistant to rationality.
Atomika on
0
Options
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
edited April 2011
I thought the idea was that a lot of Catholics are born into it (like most of my family) and put less thought into what the religion actually believes than into the idea that they're part of a community/the word "Catholic" is part of their identity. Seems like for those people religion would actually be less complicated than their lunch, since it's barely religion at that point.
I thought the idea was that a lot of Catholics are born into it (like most of my family) and put less thought into what the religion actually believes than into the idea that they're part of a community/the word "Catholic" is part of their identity. Seems like for those people religion would actually be less complicated than their lunch, since it's barely religion at that point.
True, but the religious aspect, no matter how downplayed, is requisite. I know of very few athiest/agnostics who left Catholicism but remain active in the Catholic community.
And feel free to exchange "Catholicism" for "Judaism" or "Baptist" or whatever.
Atomika on
0
Options
Nova_CI have the needThe need for speedRegistered Userregular
I'm pretty tired of Catholics and their "Catholicism is whatever I want it to be" moral gymnastics. You, not being Catholic, are not subject to that criticism, natch.
But you, as a non-Catholic (I assume) can tell them what they are. Okay, I see we're all being rational here.
Nova_C on
0
Options
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
I'm pretty tired of Catholics and their "Catholicism is whatever I want it to be" moral gymnastics. You, not being Catholic, are not subject to that criticism, natch.
But you, as a non-Catholic (I assume) can tell them what they are. Okay, I see we're all being rational here.
Err, it's the Vatican that defines Catholicism. This isn't Scientology; non-Catholics are privy to the Holy See's pronouncements.
I'm pretty tired of Catholics and their "Catholicism is whatever I want it to be" moral gymnastics. You, not being Catholic, are not subject to that criticism, natch.
But you, as a non-Catholic (I assume) can tell them what they are. Okay, I see we're all being rational here.
I was raised Catholic for pretty much my entire childhood. And once I got old enough to start thinking about what I personally valued and developed my own opinions on the topics of homosexuals, birth control, and that it's bad to facilitate pedophiles. I decided I could no longer consider myself a member of the Catholic church because my views were in direct opposition to those of the church.
I'm pretty tired of Catholics and their "Catholicism is whatever I want it to be" moral gymnastics. You, not being Catholic, are not subject to that criticism, natch.
But you, as a non-Catholic (I assume) can tell them what they are. Okay, I see we're all being rational here.
I'm not black, but if I'm some ginger dude walks up to me insisting that he's black, I'm pretty sure I can tell him what's what.
Thanatos on
0
Options
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
I'm pretty tired of Catholics and their "Catholicism is whatever I want it to be" moral gymnastics. You, not being Catholic, are not subject to that criticism, natch.
But you, as a non-Catholic (I assume) can tell them what they are. Okay, I see we're all being rational here.
I'm not black, but if I'm some ginger dude walks up to me insisting that he's black, I'm pretty sure I can tell him what's what.
It could, if that was what was going on here. But instead we've got the old "No True Religious Person" discussion going on and needless blabbing about nothing to do with gays.
Gay rights from a Catholic perspective would be "It depends". Frankly, growing up many places you'd be hard pressed to figure out if the Church even HAD a stance on gays. There's many areas where it never comes up.
So this is the Gay Rights thread and not the What Makes A Person Catholic thread.
I think it can weather a discussion about gay rights from a Catholic perspective, yes?
By "gay rights" do we mean, whether the Church should sanctify same-sex marriage, whether civil authorities should permit secular marriages, whether homosexual Catholics should be excommunicated, whether homosexual desire as opposed to activity is a sin, whether it is appropriate for civil authorities to impose criminal punishment on persons for homosexual sex, or some combination of the above?
You're not having "a discussion about gay rights from a Catholic perspective". You're having a discussion about how Catholics who don't support some undefined 'gay rights' out to GTFO of their church and if they don't, they're either fake Catholics or secret 'phobes.
BTW, I am deeply amused at the disbelief that Church doctrine or policy can ever be changed by its members. Vatican II anyone?
mythago on
Three lines of plaintext:
obsolete signature form
replaced by JPEGs.
0
Options
The_SpaniardIt's never lupinesIrvine, CaliforniaRegistered Userregular
So this dude spent an afternoon of his life spamming the Bioware forums with threads that basically read "Why isn't my white, straight, male privilege being properly respected?" in long-form forum speak?
Way to make the rest of us look like assholes, dude.
I had a boss that was that guy personified. Back when I worked for a certain company, I had a boss that had a hardon for nude and companion mods to bundle for our website. Any time we needed to fill some content it seemed like that was his one track mind go too. So at one point while he was putting the latest one together I mentioned, "Hey you know not all our customers are straight white males, we have some female and gay customers too, not to mention gay employees in this office. Why not when we do one of these compilations we include your dozen female nude mods and companions for whatever game you picked for the day and then we toss on one or two guys for every one else. It won't harm anything or anyone to include them seeing as it is basically a big zip file of crap that people decide on what they want to use before they even install it and everyone is catered to and happy. Honestly I think it would even be a good way to garner some good will from the GLB community by showing them that we are non-exclusionary and don't leave them out." He replied with, "No, we aren't going to be doing that. I'm not gay and I'm not going to be including any gay stuff in our compilations. If you want to do it on your own time then you do it (he didn't know I was gay btw), but it's not gonna happen here and I don't want to hear another word about it."
BTW, I am deeply amused at the disbelief that Church doctrine or policy can ever be changed by its members. Vatican II anyone?
You mean the gathering instigated by two successive popes, run by bishops, and with laypeople only tangentially involved? Yeah, I don't think that's a stellar example. Benedict XVI certainly abhors gays, and he's not likely to accept any doctrinal shift in that area.
Posts
Being in the catholic church is a choice, unless you can claim that you would killed or harmed by living in your community while not being a member of the catholic church, I don't feel there is any excuse to be a part of it that doesn't involve inherently agreeing with it.
Changing what is essentially a hierachical private organization from the ground up is almost impossible. The best option if you really believe in the catholic faith but disagree with the church would be to leave and form a new church to accomodate your belief system.
EDIT: I don't join say Greenpeace even though most of my basic beliefs are the same as theirs, I don't do that because I disagree with how they carry out actions based on those beliefs. To me these things are the exact same, private hierachical organizations based on beliefs.
Do you believe all muslims are responsible for the actions of terrorists? You can't deny that much of the muslim authority calls for these actions and is encouraging them. Does that justify the reaction America has had to muslims? Can I go to a random mosque and accuse them of being murderers?
Your analogy only works if you're actually comparing the Vatican heirarchy to suicide bombers.
A catholic isn't responsible for the actions of another catholic either, but I will hold him responsible for the actions of a church leadership that he is actively supporting.
I tried to make this clear but I am not sure I did, I don't mind someone being of the catholic faith, that's entirely their own problem, where it becomes everyones problem is when they support the catholic church and by extension the actions of said church.
EDIT: To continue with the Greenpeace example too, if I share their beliefs but stay out of the organization and don't support it, I can never be responsible for the organizations actions but if I support it, I share responsiblity for its actions.
And someone compared the entirety of the Catholic Church to the KKK.
See: The post I quoted.
Either way, when a poll shows that three quarters of the members of a religion support LGBT rights, you kinda lose the point of "CATHOLICISM HATES GAYS".
And then you get to start making distinctions between lay members and mid-upper leadership.
I think the implication was that saying you are Catholic but don't support the negative aspects supported by the Vatican is like saying you're a Klansman but don't support all the racism and bigotry they stand for.
The Vatican IS Catholicism. It's the only thing that sets it apart from being, say, Anglicanism or Episcopalianism or really any other Protestant denomination. You quite literally are not Catholic without ascribing to the recognition of the Vatican's authority.
So, saying that you're trying to change the misogynism and homophobia within Catholic dogma is fairly analogous to saying that you're going stay in the KKK to help make them more open to diversity.
If they really feel that way and the church refuse to change, I think they should leave it and make a new church that actually shares their general beliefs, changing the hierachical structure of the church from within takes forever, however the loss of power behind the catholic churches actions and immidiate gain of power of this/these new churches would be massive and just that IMMIDIATE!
Don't tell me they can't do that, tons of catholic offshoots have sprung up throughout the centuries since the church formed.
All that really supports is the idea that Catholics are more concerned with religious identification than what that identification actually stands for, a la,
"I may be pro-choice, pro-gay rights, support the use of birth control, and wish the clergy was more open to female fellowship, but fuck you if you think I'm not Catholic."
It's the Gay Rights thread, and The Vatican has some chocie positions on the matter, so . . . yes?
That's not an unreasonable position.
who cares what chocie positions they made? I want to talk about the gays and their rights not some stuffy religion.
Money as part of "I should really donate $100 to the church/this issue could use support/<insert random church seasonal fund-raising drive>" or as part of "offertory dish comes around and I toss $5 in"?
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
What's the difference? At the end of the day, any amount of money is still helping to forward whatever views that church espouses.
You can understand, I think, my consternation when they're being compared to Klansmen.
I do not identify as Catholic, as a note, and never said a word about A: being one, or B: changing it from the inside.
Even though that's actually possible. See: quite a few saints.
The Church is a bunch of kids in the same room with the same beliefs but different views on what those beliefs mean and how they work.
Basically, the Pope is the father in the room who lets everyone do what they want, within reason. However, there are times when he just puts his foot down and says "NO. This is how it is, anyone who disagrees can leave" That would be the Ex Cathedra teaching, IE: Papal Infallibility.
Hell, there's a bit of a controversy going on RE: The Eucharistic Prayers used in the US, they aren't approved by the Vatican for use as they aren't 100% faithful translations of the original Latin prayers. Most US Dioces just tell em to screw off, the 100% faithful translations are horrible. And they are terrible.
Furthermore: Who the hell are you guys to say what's a Catholic and what's not? Are you guys all the Pope? If you aren't, you can't really be making that judgement. You've already shown ignorance as to how the Catholic Church, while it has a leadership unit, isn't a single iron clad entity. It's fractured. Even in the US.
To say that all Catholics MUST fit X or Y thing is silly. Especially when you have no idea what's going on.
To bring this back on topic: As far as I know there have been zero, none, zip Ex Cathedra teachings on LGBT rights. Correct me if I'm wrong.
However, to my best knowledge, you do not have to have a specific position on LGBT rights to be a Catholic. Because there have been no Papal Infallible orders.
That's always a tricky question with religious charity.
On one hand, fundraising in churches is often very focused, like "Help us raise money to build this afterschool program/homeless shelter/women's home," but on the other, what are the negative aspects being supported and propagated by those institutions?
Like for instance, churches play a huge role in offering free/cheap therapy for things like substance abuse and marital problems. Then they go on to instill their own dogmatic ideologies into the program, which is just horrific, and the reason why things like AA often do more psychological damage than good.
Gotta think in the holistic, long-term sense.
Yep.
Because none of that shit defines being Catholic
And then there's also people like Father Nelson Baker.
He's on his way to being recognized as a saint, and should have been quite some time ago. There's far more people like Father Baker than there are horrible people who just want to convert others through free programs.
Okay really, no more, I'm out of here. I caused enough of a derailment.
I'm pretty tired of Catholics and their "Catholicism is whatever I want it to be" moral gymnastics. You, not being Catholic, are not subject to that criticism, natch.
Other than the fact that the stated position of the Vatican is one of anti-abortion, no birth control of any kind, homosexuality is a moral evil, and women can't be priests.
The former could be rightly argued as facilitating Church views and programs that one would find reprehensible (with some wiggle room, depending on the fund-raising drive in question) while the latter is almost always directed towards the individual church's operating expenses. I don't think one could fairly connect an individual's involvement in the maintenance of their local church with an overarching suggestion that they support the non-local Church's positions on various matters.
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
That's like saying just because McDonalds has a corporate policy of supporting pedophilia, you don't want to hurt your local economy by boycotting them.
How so?
Regardless of the strength of your local church's solidarity with Vatican viewpoints, they are still more or less a "franchise" of that establishment, and follow suit on basic policy issues. Your support of that vis a vis tithing may be a miniscule drop in a very big bucket, but it's support nevertheless.
I honestly think most people who ascribe to a mainstream line of theology put more thought into what they're doing for lunch than the logical fallacies and incongruities that constitute their professed faith.
If it's "complicated," as you say, it because it has to be. There's no simple, streamlined way to rationalize something so resistant to rationality.
True, but the religious aspect, no matter how downplayed, is requisite. I know of very few athiest/agnostics who left Catholicism but remain active in the Catholic community.
And feel free to exchange "Catholicism" for "Judaism" or "Baptist" or whatever.
But you, as a non-Catholic (I assume) can tell them what they are. Okay, I see we're all being rational here.
Err, it's the Vatican that defines Catholicism. This isn't Scientology; non-Catholics are privy to the Holy See's pronouncements.
I was raised Catholic for pretty much my entire childhood. And once I got old enough to start thinking about what I personally valued and developed my own opinions on the topics of homosexuals, birth control, and that it's bad to facilitate pedophiles. I decided I could no longer consider myself a member of the Catholic church because my views were in direct opposition to those of the church.
3DS: 1607-3034-6970
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTkV-eoZsTE
I think it can weather a discussion about gay rights from a Catholic perspective, yes?
Gay rights from a Catholic perspective would be "It depends". Frankly, growing up many places you'd be hard pressed to figure out if the Church even HAD a stance on gays. There's many areas where it never comes up.
By "gay rights" do we mean, whether the Church should sanctify same-sex marriage, whether civil authorities should permit secular marriages, whether homosexual Catholics should be excommunicated, whether homosexual desire as opposed to activity is a sin, whether it is appropriate for civil authorities to impose criminal punishment on persons for homosexual sex, or some combination of the above?
You're not having "a discussion about gay rights from a Catholic perspective". You're having a discussion about how Catholics who don't support some undefined 'gay rights' out to GTFO of their church and if they don't, they're either fake Catholics or secret 'phobes.
BTW, I am deeply amused at the disbelief that Church doctrine or policy can ever be changed by its members. Vatican II anyone?
obsolete signature form
replaced by JPEGs.
I had a boss that was that guy personified. Back when I worked for a certain company, I had a boss that had a hardon for nude and companion mods to bundle for our website. Any time we needed to fill some content it seemed like that was his one track mind go too. So at one point while he was putting the latest one together I mentioned, "Hey you know not all our customers are straight white males, we have some female and gay customers too, not to mention gay employees in this office. Why not when we do one of these compilations we include your dozen female nude mods and companions for whatever game you picked for the day and then we toss on one or two guys for every one else. It won't harm anything or anyone to include them seeing as it is basically a big zip file of crap that people decide on what they want to use before they even install it and everyone is catered to and happy. Honestly I think it would even be a good way to garner some good will from the GLB community by showing them that we are non-exclusionary and don't leave them out." He replied with, "No, we aren't going to be doing that. I'm not gay and I'm not going to be including any gay stuff in our compilations. If you want to do it on your own time then you do it (he didn't know I was gay btw), but it's not gonna happen here and I don't want to hear another word about it."
Sound familiar at all?