As I have posted before in opposition to John H., that the person is to be loved, but homosexual acts are immoral and need to be labeled as such, and John has engaged in what I call intimidation (not dialog) I refer you all to the following.
Gen. Peter Pace, when he was on the Joint Chiefs of Staff said "I believe homosexual acts between two individuals are immoral and that we should not condone immoral acts, including adultery."
I commented here
Gen. Pace did not stay on the Joint Chiefs for another term due to pressure from the homosexual lobby. President Bush recently honored Pace.
Elaine Donnelly of the Center for Military Readiness says the award is richly deserved, but "Now we have two homosexual activist groups [Service Members Legal Defense Network and PFLAG] going nuclear, using nasty epithets aimed at the general ... The reaction of these two groups, in my opinion, is disrespectful to millions of people who do not share their views," chides Donnelly. "These groups claim to advocate tolerance, but the attitude of the [LGBT individuals] ... take intolerance to an extreme."
So much for Tolerance. It's a strange time when one cannot question the morality of specific acts that have throughout history been considered immoral, the same acts that seem to obstinantly persist throughout history, the same acts that are now proclaimed not only legal but "sanctified". I don't think so.
A common trait of this intimidation is to misrepresent what was actually said, as John H. has done and as the SLDN did on their web site: Gen. Pace clearly said that homosexual acts are immoral, yet the SLDN posts on their Web site that he "infamously called lesbians and gays 'immoral.'"
There is a huge difference between calling homosexual sex or adultery immoral and calling the people that commit these acts immoral. Perhaps the reason John H. and I cannot dialog is because he works for a group that is so intent on promoting their agenda, on forcing their morality on others, that they cannot accurately report the facts, going so far as to misrepresent what the Saints and Doctors of the Church actually said, e.g. St. Peter Damian.
37 comments :
Jay, as you know, Mr. Hosty has repeatedly engaged in calumny against both of us, accusing us publically of supporting hate. In one recent Blog article, Mr. Hosty referred to my Blog as "anti-Gay" - even though he admits in this same article that he wasn't sure he could come to such a conclusion.
I defended Mr. Hosty from an inappropriate label at the comments section of one discussion thread here at Defend the Faith (as did you), but he has repeatedly labelled me a "bigot."
Like you, I separate the homosexual person from the homosexual act:
http://lasalettejourney.
blogspot.com/2005/02/homosexuality-and-catholic-doctrine.html
And yet, Mr. Hosty has continued to insist that I am a "bigot."
Intimidation is the word for it alright. Sadly, such an attitude frustrates authentic dialogue and only builds walls. Rather than promoting peace and communion, such an attitude is destructive toward the common good.
It will be rather obvious to all who come here that John Hosty isn't interested in real dialogue but only in manipulation and distortions of reality.
Paul Melanson wrote this just recently...
"Authentic Christians have always and everywhere accepted a "healthy pluralism." At the same time, such Christians have also understood that they have an obligation to acknowledge their beliefs and to preach the moral message given to them by the Lord Jesus. The follower of the Lord Jesus possesses a qualified certainty regarding the tenets of Natural Law and other truths which are revealed by God and help guide the conduct of man. Consequently, the authentic Christian understands that Christian ethical principles inform human society.
The authentic Christian will reject the sophism of those who declare that anyone who does not buy into the Dictatorship of Relativism (a pluralism of opinions which rejects any and all absolute truth or even its possibility) is a "fanatic" or a "fundamentalist." On the contrary, the authentic Christian will defend the truth in a positive manner. And while respecting persons and living out charity, such a Christian will proclaim the truth without fear.
This is the mind of Christ. As Pope John Paul II taught us in his Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor, No. 95:
"The Church's teaching, and in particular her firmness in defending the universal and permanent validity of the precepts prohibiting intrinsically evil acts, is not infrequently seen as the sign of an intolerable intransigence, particularly with regard to the enormously complex and conflict-filled situations present in the moral life of individuals and of society today; this intransigence is said to be in contrast with the Church's motherhood. The Church, one hears, is lacking in understanding and compassion. But the Church's motherhood can never in fact be separated from her teaching mission, which she must always carry out as the faithful Bride of Christ, who is the Truth in person. "As Teacher, she never tires of proclaiming the moral norm... The Church is in no way the author or the arbiter of this norm. In obedience to the truth which is Christ, whose image is reflected in the nature and dignity of the human person, the Church interprets the moral norm and proposes it to all people of good will, without concealing its demands of radicalness and perfection".
In fact, genuine understanding and compassion must mean love for the person, for his true good, for his authentic freedom. And this does not result, certainly, from concealing or weakening moral truth, but rather from proposing it in its most profound meaning as an outpouring of God's eternal Wisdom, which we have received in Christ, and as a service to man, to the growth of his freedom and to the attainment of his happiness.
Still, a clear and forceful presentation of moral truth can never be separated from a profound and heartfelt respect, born of that patient and trusting love which man always needs along his moral journey, a journey frequently wearisome on account of difficulties, weakness and painful situations. The Church can never renounce the "the principle of truth and consistency, whereby she does not agree to call good evil and evil good"; she must always be careful not to break the bruised reed or to quench the dimly burning wick (cf. Is 42:3). As Paul VI wrote: "While it is an outstanding manifestation of charity towards souls to omit nothing from the saving doctrine of Christ, this must always be joined with tolerance and charity, as Christ himself showed by his conversations and dealings with men. Having come not to judge the world but to save it, he was uncompromisingly stern towards sin, but patient and rich in mercy towards sinners."
I have always presented the Church's teaching regarding homosexuality in a spirit of truth welded with charity, see here for example. However, homosexual activist John Hosty from Salem, Massachusetts has repeatedly referred to me as a "bigot" at the comments section of this Blog post.
I have never responded to Mr. Hosty's angry and accusatory comments. And I have no intention of doing so. I forgive them because I know where the hatred and lack of peace comes from. So filled with anger and hatred is Mr. Hosty that he has just left another comment at this Blog (which I have decided to keep but not to publish) in which he accuses me of having hatred in my heart while asserting that, "Christ never intended for you to be so wrapped up in fear that life becomes a burden rather than the blessing it should be....With all the wonders we have been given why would you want to waste so much time on this constant doom and gloom."
By this Mr. Hosty no doubt means that my adherence to the Church's Magisterial teaching regarding the sinfulness of homosexual acts constitutes "fear" (I'm surprised he didn't use the code-word "homophobia") and that reminding others of the sinfulness of homosexual acts constitutes "doom and gloom."
I don't see it that way. The Commandments of the Lord Jesus do not represent "doom and gloom" unless you are firmly committed toward rejecting them. Yes, Hell is doom and gloom. But fidelity to the Good News of Jesus Christ is not an attitude of fear and negativity. It is an attitude of hope. An attitude of love. We keep His Commandments because we love Him (John 14:15). And we are not ashamed of sharing His Good News with others nor will we cower in fear before those who seek to silence us with their intolerance.
The Dictatorship of Relativism would paint authentic Christians as "bigots." Click on the link above [ the title to this post] and ask yourself who the real bigots are."
The title to his post takes one to this article link:
http://www.catholicexchange.
com/2008/06/04/112780/
He has done the same on the Opine Editorials in which I'm taking an hiatus from.
join the club...
at least I know I'm in good company.
Jay have you checked out the Courage website? for open homosexuals who want to live a chaste life. They are having their annual conference here in Boston this August and Cardinal O'Malley is celebrating Mass.
Speaking of PFLAG/FFLAG, St. Camillus de Lellis Parish in Fitchburg has really promoted these groups in the past. Read here:
www.pflagworcester.org/
recommededresources.htm
And The Catolic Free Press published the meetings in the calendar. Meanwhile, an MMP Cenacle which Paul attends will not be listed in the CFP.
How is that for bizarre?
"As I have posted before in opposition to John H., that the person is to be loved"
How do you show that love Jay? I challenge you to guide your people into a more productive dialog rather than to abandon the discussion while people hurl every form of insult they can think of, the latest being that I am somehow mentally ill.
This is not love at all, it's hateful and demeaning. I'll not reciprocate here and give you the opportunity to use my actions to justify what you've allowed to happen.
"So much for Tolerance."
How smug. You have never been in the least bit tolerant, yet when we stand up to your intolerance you point at it like it is the original problem. You seem either unwilling or incapable of seeing your own faults. Were it not for the outrageous injustices handed to GLBT people (even those who SEEM gay but aren't) you would not have the situation you do now.
"A common trait of this intimidation is to misrepresent what was actually said, as John H."
From the Merriam-Webster dictionary:
Main Entry: in·tim·i·date
Pronunciation: \in-ˈti-mə-ˌdāt\
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): in·tim·i·dat·ed; in·tim·i·dat·ing
Etymology: Medieval Latin intimidatus, past participle of intimidare, from Latin in- + timidus timid
Date: 1646
: to make timid or fearful : frighten; especially : to compel or deter by or as if by threats (tried to intimidate a witness)
The definition of the word does not seem to fit your usage of it. Perhaps what you mean to say is that you think I am dishonest in what I say, but dishonesty does not lead to fear, which is necessary for the definition of intimidation.
I asked you before Jay if you were intimidated by my defending myself on your blog but you had no reply. I can only assume from the lack of honesty that transpires here that you are simply using the word without meaning hoping no one will call you out and question it. There has never been any intimidation done that I have any part of, and I never will. My message is one of peace; we can all live together respectfully. It is up to you to come to the table rather than make unfounded fear based statements.
"There is a huge difference between calling homosexual sex or adultery immoral and calling the people that commit these acts immoral."
Without even having to look back too distantly in our conversations I can find where I was asked if I were a pediphile, a member of NAMBLA, I was assumed uneducated, poor, and told I was mentally ill. This is not in response to my actions, these were attacks against my person. You've got a lot of work to do if you are going to live up to what you write.
"Perhaps the reason John H. and I cannot dialog is because he works for a group that is so intent on promoting their agenda, on forcing their morality on others, that they cannot accurately report the facts..."
You can't dialog with me because you see GLBT people as evil, not their actions. That's why you allow this free for all that keeps happening when I post with you. I think it amuses you. Funny thing about the comment I quoted above: it seems to apply to you. When you have to resort to ad hominem attacks then it shows the basis of your platform is too weak to support itself on its own.
I'll keep asking this question until I get an answer: How do we as neighbors live in peace while we maintain our individual beliefs and freedoms?
It's a question worth answering, have the courage to address it. Respect and dignity can be given to you, but unless it is recgonized and reciprocated it has little value. Here it is not only ignored, the effort is twisted into the exact opposite, being called attacks on your person or religion. Were that true I'd have said similar things about you that you've said of me.
In the end the fact remains I have all my freedoms and I have the love for life Christ has given me. You can either see that and rejoyce with me, or you can continue to paint me as some type of demonic apparition bent on somehow destroying your values.
Nothing could be further from the truth, and I will continue to pray you see that. Your pain at the thought of my freedoms is unnecessarry, I only want to help you see that. We are all God's children regardless or how little you think of me.
May you all continue to think about your actions and remember you have God to answer to, not me.
John,
To answer your question: How do we as neighbors live in peace while we maintain our individual beliefs and freedoms?
stop the re-definition of marriage, stop the homosexual indoctination of children in public schools, work for civil unions for individuals not groups, and shut down KnowThyNeighbor, which is the ultimate intimidation web site.
It would also be helpful if Catholics who resist the grim doctrine that homosexality is simply a matter of fate and the dehumanizing idea that one's core identity is determined by one's sexual desires would not be referred to as "bigots." We are immeasurably more than our sexual desires.
Since the teaching of the Church regarding homosexuality is not going to change, despite relentless advocacy to the contrary, and since the popular wisdom is not likely to change, both sides have all the more reason to consult Natural Law as a framework with which to build dialogue.
Didn't the Bishop of Worcester already hint at this?
Typo:
Read homosexuality above.
In answer to my question you responded:
"stop the re-definition of marriage, stop the homosexual indoctination of children in public schools, work for civil unions for individuals not groups, and shut down KnowThyNeighbor, which is the ultimate intimidation web site."
None of these things are within my power to control. It would be the equivalent of me asking you to set social policy for the church. Try again, only this time cite some things you and I can do in order to live together peacefully.
Like I said, I'm willing to accept the fact that you are not going to change your beliefs for me, and likewise I am similarly immovable on my positions. You say that sinners are to be treated with love while still denouncing the sin, what does that look like in action when you are talking about GLBT people?
Paul Melanson writes:
"We are immeasurably more than our sexual desires."
So true Paul. It will be nice to see that thought put into more than just words on a computer screen. The accomplishments I have made in my lifetime, the generousity I have shown, all my good deeds; they seem to be nothing when I talk here. Here I am defined first by my sexuality, then demonized so that nothing I say should be listened to, and that is not only a shame, it's dishonest.
I am a follower of Christ whether people here choose to acknowledge that or not matters little to me. However the vitriol that has been slung around is both viscious and un-Christian. I will continue to turn the other cheek and hold you accountable for your personal actions, hoping that you will learn how to love that which you oppose as Christ would have you.
We need not be enemies or combatants simply because we have different views on certain subjects. we find a way to live in peace with others whom we have opposing viwpoints with, so why not this?
Responding to Paul who wrote, "We are immeasurably more than our sexual desires.." John Hosty has responded:
"So true Paul. It will be nice to see that thought put into more than just words on a computer screen. The accomplishments I have made in my lifetime, the generousity I have shown, all my good deeds; they seem to be nothing when I talk here. Here I am defined first by my sexuality, then demonized so that nothing I say should be listened to, and that is not only a shame, it's dishonest..."
First of all, John misses Paul's point. He is the one who defines himself by his sexuality while demanding that others accept his lifestyle choice. As faithful Christians, this we cannot do.
Then he claims that he is demonized. Again, untrue. What John cannot see is that he routinely demonizes others who won't buy into his agenda, calling them bigots and supporters of hate.
And when someone finally gets a bit impatient with John (after he has issued myriad insults and threats - "You're support of hate has been noted" etc) and puts him in his place, he whines.
I suggest John Hosty should reflect very carefully on what Paul has written about hypocrisy and extending the same courtesy to others which we demand from them.
Until he does this, there can be no dialogue with him.
Just as Paul Melanson has insisted upon respecting homosexual persons while rejecting homosexual acts as gravely sinful, so too Jay has written: "As I have posted before in opposition to John H., the person is to be loved but homosexual acts are immoral and need to be labelled as such.."
John Hosty' response? He left this at his Blog:
"As a side note Jay Guillette is a proud supporter of massresistance..com, a hate group listed with the Southern Poverty Law Center, which was a group formed to help combat the Klu Klux Klan. My friends over at MassresistanceWatch have formed their own similar group that keeps an eye on their dishonesties while doing so with a little humor at Massresistance's expense.
My real question is whether or not we have our own Fred Phelps type group here in Massachusetts, and are people like Jay Guilette responsible for it? Read on for your self at the links provided and see what you think.
Paul Melanson is another person who supports hate..."
Later, John Hosty labelled Paul "anti-Gay" and once again referred to him as a supporter of hate.
You cannot have real and charitable dialogue as long as you maintain these tactics John. They have already destroyed your credibility.
Living In Truth
Eleven Church Teachings on Homosexuality
http://couragerc.net/PIPElevenChurchTeachings.html
///5. The Church Calls No One "A Homosexual"
"Today, the Church... refuses to consider the person as a "heterosexual "or a "homosexual," and insists that every person has a fundamental identity: the creature of God, and by grace, His child and heir to eternal life." CDF, no.16
The Church won't put a label on anyone. To say someone is "gay" or "lesbian" or a "homosexual" is to define a whole person by just one aspect. It can lock up a person's identity and block further emotional growth. That's just the sort of labeling which gives rise to prejudice and discrimination. The Church stands against any behavior it calls immoral, but always teaches support and respect for the person. Labeling limits and disrespects people.///
John Hosty labels himself Renee. He identifies himself as "gay" in everything he does. Once again, Paul gets right to the crux of the problem: "We are immeasurably more than our sexual desires.." But John doesn't seem to be able to move beyond identifying himself as "gay" and instead makes homosexuality the basis for his life and work.
Renee, read the following Blogger profile written by John Hosty:
About Me
My partner Ray and I have been together since August 21, 1994. I got involved with the gay advocacy group KnowThyNeighbor.org after reading in the Boston Herald that my neighbors down the street were some of the original signers of the anti-gay marriage petition. Since then I have made it a point to come out to all my friends and talk about why equality is so important. To my surprise some of them did not know why seperate but equal is not good enough. They now understand that only full marriage equality is going to promote to society the idea that ALL people are in fact equal. Once people realize this, change begins to take place, and the violence begins to subside. Being gay is not a crime folks, and it should not be treated as such. There are many things we could spend our time on, and I choose fighting the ignorance, hatred and oppression directed at the gay community.
I only post this to illustrate the fact that John Hosty identifies himself primarily as a homosexual person. Read his profile carefully and note how the entire paragraph deals with homosexuality.
I'll say it again. Paul has gotten to the heart of the matter. Where do we go from here? John Hosty identifies himself solely in terms of his homosexuality. He thrusts it into the face of others and then complains, "Here I am defined first by my sexuality, then demonized.."
But no one here has demonized John. Rather, he has emonized those who disagree with him. If John wants to be seen as something more than homosexual [and this he most assuredly is, as a child of God], then he must first cease identifying himself as "gay." And if he would like civil dialogue, he has only to respect those who disagree with him, rather than labelling us "bigots" and "supporters of hate."
John and I have converse before on another blog... It is frustrating.
I keep just reflecting on an article...
Taken from Rev. Gabriel B O’Donnell, OP Columbia Magazine publication of the Knights of Columbus/ January 2007 p. 24
“The Church does not condemn homosexuals or homosexuality. Every person, created in the image and likeness of God, possesses a dignity and worth that demands respect and compassion from one’s brothers and sisters in the human family. While the origins of same-sex attraction are not yet scientifically clear, most of those who are oriented do no choose this sexual attraction. A man or woman cannot be blamed or condemned merely because he or she experiences such an attraction….
The Church must condemn homosexual acts because they are contrary to God’s plan expressed in natural law and in divine revelation. The complementarity of man and woman as male and female is inherent in God’s creative design for human race. “Precisely because man and woman are different, yet complimentary, they can come together in union that is open to the possibility of life.”
Most important was this paragraph.
“Same-sex attraction is a source of great suffering for many men and women who call themselves ‘gay.’ Often misunderstood and rejected by their families and friends, they fear they will not be able to live normal, productive lives. As they retreat into enclaves of like-minded persons, the homosexual subculture provides an apparent safe haven, but it does not really solve the problem.”
"None of these things are within my power to control. It would be the equivalent of me asking you to set social policy for the church. Try again, only this time cite some things you and I can do in order to live together peacefully."
Her again is Hosty's ignorance.
He asks for reasons and gets a response, then he walks away from it with a cavalier and blasphemous analogy to church doctrine.
Here's the deal Hosty - your questions are meaningless if you can't see how hypocritical you are.
You are always asking how this affects us and we tell you and you say not good enough
So where does that leave us ? Guess where that leaves us Hosty??????????????
AT THE BALLOT BOX!!!!
WHERE WE ALL GET TO HAVE OUR OWN OPINIONS!!!!!!!!!
FREE COUNTRY TO THINK FREELY!!!
BUT NO - WHAT HAPPENED?
YOU AND YOUR INTIMIDATORS STEPPED ON THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS TO GET YOUR WAY
So please GO AWAY, HAVE YOUR OPINION, BUT DON'T BE SO SURPRISED WHEN PEOPLE LIKE DTF AND MYSELF CALL YOU OUT ON IT.
Renee, I'm sure the Knights of Columbus article is very inspiring. However, let's be careful not to impose demands solely on Christians. John Hosty has violated the rules of authentic dialogue on a regular basis. He too has a responsibility.
You will no doubt say, "Yes, but we Christians are called to be more, to be something better." And you would be right. But this does not excuse John Hosty from his egregious conduct.
Even pagans and dissidents should practice good manners and should refrain from falsehoods.
It is more than intimidation. Is is a corruptive influence.
Maggie Gallagher wrote about it.
Believe them. They mean it.
I've written about this subject, too.
An axiom to grind.
The first axiom of individuals who take a stance like John is that to disagree with them, on just about any issue, is an act of bigotry.
They are blind to their intolerance -- which itself takes the form of bigotry.
This particular axiom is used to dismiss all manner of reasoned arguments. It is used to elevate emotivism over rational judgement. Even if an argument is netural regarding sexual orientation, it is denounced as anti-gay.
Gay is a socio-political construct and, as such, is the foundation of a form of identity politics. And, as with all brans of identity politics, it corrupts public discourse. Indeed, that is its primary vehicle for imposing changes upon society.
Tragicaly, this is a recurring theme in human history. Gay identity politics is not the first of its kind.
Human beings need to relearn the hard lessons over and over again.
Christians must be prepared to stand and defend the common goog. For the individual Christian, that may mean openly resisting, and defying, the totalitarian impulses of identity politics that is on the ascendancy in the West today.
For a pluralistic and just society, the cost of resistance to identity politics does not outweigh the cost of submission.
Heh, typo: the common good, not the common goog.
Marie... there really are two issues, one you are dealing with an individual, but they can't trample all over you.
good article on what John Hosty is attempting
"A first-person account of manning the barricades against political correctness."
http://www.mercatornet.com/articles/correctly_squelched/
"While I abhor discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and agree that same-sex marriage could be a powerful message of the wrongs of that, I oppose same-sex marriage because of its impact on children’s rights. In choosing between adults and children, I believe we should give priority to children. I argue that children need and have a right to both a mother and a father, preferably their own biological parents, unless the "best interests" of a particular child require otherwise, as in many adoptions. Marriage limited to the union of a man and a woman establishes that right; same-sex marriage eliminates that right for all children (which is why I oppose the redefinition of marriage), but support civil unions (which do not have that impact)."
"The Ryerson protestors sought to "deal" with me by labelling me. I was described as guilty of a hate crime; the new Ernst Zundel (who, like him, should be deported – they were grateful that I came from Australia and could be sent back there); a neo-Nazi; and a member of the Klu Klux Klan. My views had no place in the university, they claimed. This approach eliminated the need to deal with the substance of my arguments. It sent a very powerful warning to all those who might happen to share my views."
Renee, she also wrote this:
"I’ve received very large amounts of hate mail, been the subject of an on-line protest petition and needed security precautions when speaking in public, all because I believe all children – including those who are gay as adults - need a mother and a father which opposite-sex marriage gives them and same-sex marriage takes away."
Margaret Somerville seems unable to take personal responsibility for her own actions, so she'd rather simplify things by saying all this is all somehow because of her beliefs in regards to children.
Most same sex marriages do not involve children, mine included. Her beliefs don't give her a reason or right to deny a marriage between two people in love.
Were she here to ask a question to I'd be curious how she defends her stance when there are no children concerned. Should we deny all single parents custody of their children for the children's benefit? My suspicion is the answer would be no, and that would be because this is not about children, it's about denying liberties to whom you disagree with.
That is oppression.
Instead of denying the charge that you are bigots perhaps you could explain why you feel it is untrue? I use the word "bigot" in it's proper context. If the shoe fits...
I'll never ask for your silence, I think it is important for people to hear what you have to say. Only by hearing your words forst hand will people learn.
"I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."-Voltaire
Intelligent people are able to sort through all the emotion and ad hominem attacks, seeing the arguments on both sides for their actual value. I'm happy to have oppenent's voices heard as well as my own.
The Church has no place making laws that oppress the unwilling, and protection from this sort of action is promised by the Bill of Rights.
The bottom line is that I am a caring, loving person. I want us all to get along, and if there was something I was doing that harmed someone else, I would want stop.
However, you can't come to me with unfounded charges and expect me to give up my liberties simply because you want me to. Understand that you do not have any control over me, you can elicit my co-operation just like you would any other neighbor.
We can have a discussion about what we CAN do to live together in peace, or you can continue the attacks. I'll check back when I can; the choice is yours.
Until then I leave you all with blessings and prayers for peace in the name of Christ.
Mr. Hosty, we have no desire to limit your liberty. We simply reject your definition of liberty, your erroneous idea of what constitutes liberty.
It was Pope Leo XIII, in his Encyclical Letter Libertas Humana, who reminded us that: "It is manifest that the eternal law of God is the sole standard and rule of human liberty, not only in each individual man,but also in the community and civil society which men constitute when united. Therefore, the true liberty of human society does not consist in every man doing what he please, for this would simply end in turmoil and confusion, and bring on the overthrow of the state; but rather in this, that through the injunctions of the civil law all may more easily conform to the prescriptions of the eternal law . . . the binding force of the human laws is in this, that they are to be regarded as applications of the eternal law, and incapable of sanctioning anything which is not contained in the eternal law, as in the principle of all law . . . where a law is enacted contrary to reason, or to the eternal law, or to some ordinance of God, obedience is unlawful, lest while obeying man we become disobedient to God."
When you say "liberty" you actually mean "license," or the throwing off of all responsibility. By liberty, you mean a carte blanche to do as you feel. Your concept of "liberty" is, thereby, incompatible with virtue and destroys community.
In the words of John Milton, "None can love freedom heartily but good men; the rest love not freedom but license." (Tenure of Kings and Magistrates).
I do not expect you to acknowledge these truths. Indeed, an authentic dialogue with you is impossible since (as JayG has noted) you want to continuously redefine things.
In other words, you're not interested in real or meaningful dialogue. You want to define all the terms, set the tone, and provide all the ground rules.
To put it simply: you expect us to disregard the perennial wisdom of the ages and to simply kow tow to all of your demands.
Paul, it is people like you that are the problem. You put words in my mouth when you tell me what I do not want meaningful dialog. I have said from the beginning that we should have dialog about how we can live together as respectful neighbors while maintaining our rights to disagree on matters important to us.
I work and live in a very diverse and progressive enviornment, yet all of us give the other the respect afforded by an individual's actions, not who they inherently are. You seem incapable and unwilling to see that, so you merely twist the truth and blame me, saying I am the one who does not want meaningful dialog. Here is my proof:
"In the words of John Milton, "None can love freedom heartily but good men; the rest love not freedom but license."
This shows what you think of GLBT people as a whole, it gives no lattitude to see us as individuals worthy of individual judgment. To you men who are gay simply cannot be good men.
I can't blame you because you are a product of your upbringing and leadership. When you have a Cardinal like O'Maley who can pass out T-shirts that reference the failed drive to end gay marriage whic hsay on them, "All evil needs in order to be triumphant is for good men to do nothing" I suppose I can't expect much from his flock.
I ask you, are all Catholics the same? Should "Joe Public" have one opinion that encompasses all Catholics and whenever the subject comes up that is the one track mind point of view that people should think?
Stop with the ad hominem attacks. Argue my points instead if you are on solid ground and defeat my points with logic instead of emotion and misinformation.
Your religious opinions matter little when setting social policy, and I am protected by the Constitution from the tyranny of laws made in such fashion. We will have our equality, not at your expense, and you are living in a world where you are forced to deal with GLBT people, like it or not. How you conduct yourself tells of your character, not mine.
I'm shocked we have a direct dialog Paul, thusfar you have been too homophobic for that. Perhaps you are trying to grow as you need to and I should give credit for the baby steps you now take in trying to understand this problem.
Mr. Hosty, you just wrote: "Stop with the ad hominem attacks. Argue my points instead if you are on solid ground and defeat my points with logic instead of emotion and misinformation."
Please produce some evidence that I have engaged in ad hominem attacks against you. My last comment was a refutation of your definition of liberty. How does this constitute an "ad hominem attack"?
Isn't it more accurate to say that it is YOU who engages in ad hominem attacks. For example, you wrote: "...it is people like you that are the problem," "you merely twist the truth," "you are a product of your upbringing and leadership," "When you have a Cardinal like O'Maley who can pass out T-shirts that reference the failed drive to end gay marriage whic say on them, 'All evil needs in order to be triumphant is for good men to do nothing' I suppose I can't expect much from his flock," "Your religious opinions matter little when setting social policy," "you are living in a world where you are forced to deal with GLBT people, like it or not. How you conduct yourself tells of your character, not mine," "I'm shocked we have a direct dialog Paul, thusfar you have been too homophobic for that" and "Perhaps you are trying to grow as you need to.."
Mr. Hosty, you wrote: "Argue my points instead if you are on solid ground and defeat my points with logic instead of emotion and misinformation."
I was under the impression I was doing just that. If you disagree with Pope Leo XIII, rather than attacking my character, please show me where His Holiness is wrong.
He cannot show you where Pope Leo XIII is wrong because the Pope was not wrong. This is why John Hosty is so upset and throwing a tantrum. Whenever his ideas are challenged, his rhetoric becomes harsh and impatient.
John Hosty has quoted from John Stuart Mill at his Blog. The same Mill who wrote, "Liberty consists in doing what one desires" (On Liberty, p. 118).
But Leo XIII correctly refutes this when he says: "..the true liberty of human society does not consist in every man doing what he please, for this would simply end in turmoil and confusion, and bring on the overthrow of the state; but rather in this, that through the injunctions of the civil law all may more easily conform to the prescriptions of the eternal law.."
John Hosty knows that Leo XIII is right. To deny this would be to legitimize anarchy. If John Hosty really believed that "Liberty consists in doing what one desires," he would have to allow the murder of Matthew Shephard because his killers desired to kill him. Weren't they simply following Mill's injunction?
And he would have to allow the murder of the Jewish People by the Nazis. After all, they too were simply following their own desires.
Mill's thought is intellectually bankrupt. Hosty knows this deep-down hence his rage at you Paul.
An ad hominem attack is one that concentrates on the person rather than the argument, thereby using the person to dismiss what they have to say. You can look for yourself and see whether your comments focus on the subject at hand, or me.
Ansley says, "John Hosty is so upset and throwing a tantrum."
This is an example of an ad hominem attack.
So when are we going to discuss how we live together peacefully as neighbors who simply disagree?
As far as what the Pope has to say, it has little bearing on what our laws provide for us in this secular nation. One religion has no ability to inject itself into our laws. This is protected against by the Constitution itself.
So far I have been given little reason based on logic as to why I should curtail my freedoms. If you can come forward with some thoughts it might make for more productive debate.
I found this blog post through la salette journey and thought I should leave a message of hope. It seems pretty obvious that this homosexual person is lacking peace and cannot even consider the views of others because he is so burdened with sin and in need of healing.
The following article (I hope) will be accepted as a message of hope. There is hope and healing for those who suffer from the pathology of same-sex attraction.
The article:
Exodus Offers 'A New Day' for Hundreds Impacted by Homosexuality
By Lillian Kwon
Christian Post Reporter
Tue, Jul. 15 2008 07:58 AM EDT
There is a tremendous hunger among young people for the message Exodus International preaches – that freedom from homosexuality through the power of Jesus Christ is possible, according to the ministry's head.
Exodus International, which claims to be the world's largest Christian referral and information network dealing with homosexual issues, is holding its annual Freedom Conference in Asheville, N.C., beginning Tuesday. For 33 years, Exodus has seen thousands of people seek answers at its conference as they, or loved ones, struggle with same-sex feelings.
Over 700 people, including many from outside the United States, are expected to attend this year's Freedom event. Part of this year's speaker line-up is evangelist Anne Graham Lotz, daughter of Billy Graham.
"We are always trying to bring in respected Christian leaders to our conference," commented Alan Chambers, president of Exodus International, to The Christian Post. "It's also a chance to introduce them to an often overlooked ministry group-people who struggle with unwanted same-sex attraction."
The ministry's annual conference caters to a wide range of groups, from men and women, youth and parents, to married couples where a spouse has homosexual attraction. Forty percent of this year's conference attendees are men and women personally struggling and 14 percent are youths.
And this year's event comes just months after the California high court ruling that legalized same-sex "marriage," and months before California voters head to the polls in November to decide whether to overturn the court decision and protect traditional marriage.
"While the culture wars over the issue of homosexuality are hotter than ever with the marriage issue, Exodus is growing and more people are seeking help," Chambers said.
The Exodus International network has grown by 71 percent in five years, Chambers noted. The ministry has over 120 local ministries in the country and Canada is also linked with other Exodus world regions outside of North America, totaling over 150 ministries in 17 countries, according to the Exodus Web site.
But with growth, Exodus continues to meet protesters especially around this time of year when it holds its Freedom Conference. A group of local gay rights advocates, who are calling themselves Equality Asheville, plan to sponsor a series of events titled "You're Fine Just the Way You Are," according to Asheville's Citizen-Times.
Noel Nickel, who's organizing the competing events, wants to give people the "whole spectrum."
“I think (Exodus’) intentions are harmful, because it’s cloaked in the message of love,” Nickel said, as reported by the local newspaper. “We’re trying to make sure that there is a full spectrum of educational aspects."
Jaye Thomas, who turned away from homosexuality with support from Exodus, acknowledged that Exodus "is no stranger to opposition."
"But neither was Jesus," he said. "Exodus is not in the business of converting anyone. We just offer a hand to walk beside people who want freedom from the bondage of sexual addiction.”
Many have found "freedom" from homosexual feelings through Exodus. But in addition to serving those personally struggling, Exodus has also helped family members and pastors learn how to love their loved ones or congregants who are struggling with gay or lesbian attraction.
"There is a right to choose one’s passage in life," Chambers, who left homosexuality more than 14 years ago, told the Citizen-Times. "I didn’t choose those feelings [of same-sex attraction], but when I was old enough, I did choose my behavior."
This year's Freedom Conference on July 15-20 is themed "A New Day" and 41 percent of conference participants are reportedly attending for the first time.
Ted, Hosty is deeply Catholophobic. As Jay said, he constantly misrepresents what the Church teaches and is so intent on promoting his satanic "queer gospel" that he will harass Catholics and other Christians who adhere to the teachings of Christianity.
Hosty is an anti-Catholic bigot who should be reported to the authorities for engaging in hate crimes against Christians (harassment specifically). Besides harassing Christian websites and Blogs, he has published personal information about Christians on the internet in an attempt to silence and intimidate.
Most violent people start off as Hosty has. Often the harassment becomes violent.
Hosty's anti-Catholicism has been extensively documented at this Blog and at other Christian sites. Instead of simply posting his own ideas at his own idiotic Blog, he feels compelled to visit countless Christian sites in an effort to coerce and intimidate others to accept his own sick and skewed view of the world and his sick, fanatical queer agenda.
Like all fanatics, Hosty doesn't see himself as a fanatic. For him, everyone else has the problem. In his sick and twisted mind, he cannot possibly conceive of being in error nor can he ever grant another the possibility of being right.
Let's pray that his Catholophobia doesn't erupt into physical violence. We have already suffered enough emotional abuse from this fanatic.
"As I have posted before in opposition to John H., that the person is to be loved..."
What form of action does that love take? Is this a fair example of that love?:
"Catholophobic"
"satanic"
"idiotic"
"fanatical"
"queer"
"sick"
"twisted"
I'm sure this is all meant in a loving Christ like fashion, right?
All I have ever done here is try to talk to you people about what it is like to be gay growing up Catholic and ask you what we can do to bridge the gap between us.
Your hate is so intense all I can do is keep trying since I feel too bad for you to turn my back to save my own feelings. Here's some food for thought:
Hillel the Elder (c 110 BCE-10 CE) was asked what is the most important law: He said:
"What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow: this is the whole Law; the rest is the explanation; go and learn. "
A few years later Jesus of Nazareth was asked the same question and he said:
"Therefore, whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets. "
It really is just that simple.
http://honorofgod.org/blog3/2008/08/12/promiscuity-
can-lead-to-demonic-possession-says-leading-exorcist/
I think Mr. Hosty has a point. We shouldn't lower ourselves to his level by name calling. It confuses people as to who is the bad guys here.
Mr. Yetter writes, "I think Mr. Hosty has a point. We shouldn't lower ourselves to his level by name calling. It confuses people as to who is the bad guys here."
In reality, it is Mr. Hosty who has lowered himself at this forum. I believe he has hurled various insults himself: "bigots," "homophobic," etc.
If a couple of persons issued somewhat harsh rhetoric in return (I'm not one of them), he only has himself to blame. I believe it was Harry Truman who said, "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen."
If you want to mix it up in a public forum and you don't hesitate to hurl insults or strong rhetoric, you shouldn't be surprised when you receive a little bit of it yourself.
Isn't this something normal adults learned on a playground in grade school? If I poked little Johnny in the eye, there was a distinct possibility that I would be poked back.
Jesus said "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." This message also applies to Mr. John Hosty. Not just practicing Christians.
John, if I couldn't stand the heat, you're right, I'd leave the kitchen. The fact is I can stand the heat, so I will be here for the long haul to paraphrase William (where is he now?). ;)
It does you no good to pretend you do not see the outrageous insults hurled at me which I quote, people can read them for themselves and see I tell the truth. Moreso what it does is furthers in people's minds how dishonestly you are approaching this issue, and you incriminate the circle of friends which you speak for.
You are right about one thing though, we need to treat each other the way we expect and want to be treated. This is what I quoted from the Bible from Hillel the Elder, which is even before Christ's time.
I have said before I am here not to convince you to give me anything, you have nothing to offer me that I would want. I will remind you that in the state of Massachusetts GLBT people enjoy full equality. I don't need to entertain your opinions of my life choices any more than you need to listen to mine about your choices. We act voluntarily in what seems an attempt to understand that which escapes us. Perhaps God has crossed our paths for a reason? Let His will be done, I have faith He is not asleep at the wheel and letting life spin out of control. Change is good and is a natural part of life. So is addressing injustice, like discrimination.
I am here to save you from your hatred and fear of GLBT people, and to put you back on the path of love Christ wants us all on. We are called to love each other as we love ourselves above other commandments. This is one of two great commandments we were given from Christ's own lips. For this reason I will not abandon who I see as my brothers and sisters in their time of spiritual confusion.
We live Christ's calling through unconditional love of our neighbors despite their differences. That love comes in the form of patience that they will learn to love you back once they realize there is nothing to fear.
My patience comes from faith. Faith that my fellow man who speaks like you do against me without knowing me will one day look at me and realize we are not so different. One day my patience with you and others may pay off by having that unconditional love paid back equally with love and respect.
I have a great faith that God would not have put me on this Earth the way I am without purpose. I believe that purpose is to be a stark example to closed minded individuals that people can be both gay and good.
As always I will pray for your continued quest to find the peace that escapes you, leaving behind the emptiness that causes you to spin hateful propaganda against strangers. Unlike you I can still see your inherent goodness that dwells in all hearts. Pity that you see only what scares you in me.
Living in fear and lothing of your neighbor in spite of God's that we love each other as neighbors must make the blessing of life feel like a curse. I suppose this is the price one must pay for turning away from the path of peace. remember it is never too late to turn back.
John Hosty has shown nothing but hatred and contempt toward Christians at this forum as he tries to intimidate us into silence.
His hatred has destroyed any credibility he may have once enjoyed.
Ignore him.
William, ignore me all you want but you cannot ignore Christ's teachings and still expect to call yourself Christian.
Let's put Christianity into more simple terms, which are the root of the religion:
What is the Greatest Commandment?
"Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind." (Matthew 22:37,38)
What is the second Greatest Commandment?
"Love your neighbor as yourself." (Matthew 22:39)
What is the Golden Rule?
"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." (Matthew 7:12)
When an issue is approached with love miracles aare possible. It is no stretch of the imagination to think that we will one day be mindful and respectful neighbors.
May He, the Prince of Peace, guide me to be patient and wait for you to learn what you need.
Pax Christi
Post a Comment