Catholic bishop supports benefits for gay couples

Ch 6 ^

[sinkspur]

You can't tell me what you think about sex in your own words? I don't need to read the CCC; tell me what YOU think.

Is it a worldly sacrament, or a divine sacrament?

[Bohemund]

You think sick gay men should not be allowed to receive visits from their partners?

I think that the sick should be able to receive visits from their best friends, favorite teachers, drinking buddies or whomever they choose. I do not support the Church endorsing elevating sodomy partners over other, non-abominable relationships.

[Jorge]

From what I've heard about her "aids hospices" for the dying in New York, not one homosexual who died there, died unrepentant for his sin. That's true compassion--helping the sinner recognize his sin and confess it.

Yes, and of course the Bible tells us that ALL are sinners and need to confess and repent. Not just homosexuals.

[Antoninus]

I think she would allow the partner and offer the saving grace of Christ?

It would depend on whether the partner was repentant or not, wouldn't it? If he was not, my guess is that Mother would not have allowed it. For sure, the Jesuits I was referring guarded their neophytes zealously against those who would try to snatch away their nascent faith. And many of them are now Saints of the Catholic Church.

[Antoninus]

You can't tell me what you think about sex in your own words? I don't need to read the CCC; tell me what YOU think.

Sorry, pops, but I'm not interested in discussing sex with you. My opinion about it mirrors the CCC perfectly. You DO need to read it, apparently. Just blow the dust off first.

[Qwinn]

Still interested in a response to my last post.

BTW, for the record, since I refuse to continue validating the "sexual preference as identity" bit, I will no longer refer to people who like gay sex as "gay" or "homosexual".

To repeat my question: In a case where the family IS visiting the patient-who-likes-gay-sex, and they object to the presence of the patient's partner-who-likes-gay-sex, should the partner be admitted despite the family's objections?

You've tried to frame this as a case where the patient-who-lies-sex is all alone outside their partner. What about when the family IS there for them? And what if the family is there trying to get them to repent? Do you believe the family should have no right to deny the partner admittance?

Because that's what I -really- think is being fought over here.

Qwinn

[sinkspur]

It would depend on whether the partner was repentant or not, wouldn't it?

I don't know. I don't think the partner would be her focus. The dying man would be her focus.

[GOP_Thug_Mom]

Amen! Thank God for the Sacrament of Penance! I frequent it as often as I can, as I am most in need. But I cannot let the devil use my sinfulness against me.
When Christ defended the woman to those who wanted to stone her, He knew that she was penitent, thus deserving mercy. The lesson was then turned to all the self-righteous who were denying her that mercy. No one here has denied mercy to homosexuals. What is being challenged is the false pretense that they are fine the way they are.

[sinkspur]

Sorry, pops, but I'm not interested in discussing sex with you.

No surprise, pup. You'll get better at it as you get older.

[Antoninus]

I don't know. I don't think the partner would be her focus. The dying man would be her focus.

It's idiotic to continue with such an academic exercise. In your prayers tonight, ask her and see if you get a response.

[eastsider]

The dying man would be her focus.

The reality of the situation is that, in my experience, the people who are in her hospice were there as a last resort -- that is, they had neither money, family nor friends to fall back on. The only visitors I ever saw were other volunteers, and if there had been any personal visitors (I'm sure there were, just not when I was there), they would have been restricted to the public sitting room to avoid contraband, hanky-panky, etc.

[Torie]

I assume while sentient, a patient can choose whom he or see admits into the dying room. After that, perhaps a living will is indicated to indicate preferences, just to cut off intrusive officious intermedlar types at the pass. Denying someone their ability to travel their own chosen journey on this mortal coil if legal and in good conscience and spirit offends me. JMO.

[Antoninus]

No surprise, pup. You'll get better at it as you get older.

At what, discussing sex with old f@rt pseudo-deacons on the internet at 12:00 at night? Not bloodly likely.

[Jorge]

When Christ defended the woman to those who wanted to stone her, He knew that she was penitent, thus deserving mercy. The lesson was then turned to all the self-righteous who were denying her that mercy. No one here has denied mercy to homosexuals. What is being challenged is the false pretense that they are fine the way they are.

I disagree. There are those here who definitely deny any mercy toward homosexuals.
It's as if they don't realize that in God's eyes they are sinners too.

[Antoninus]

I disagree. There are those here who definitely deny any mercy toward homosexuals.

The primary act of mercy one can show toward a "homosexual" is to inform them that they are not trapped in "homosexuality"; that they can repent, change. That "gay" is not who they are and that the sodomite lifestyle is not how God calls anyone to live. Indeed, they are just as capable as the rest of us of heeding Christ's injunction: "Now go and sin no more."

[GOP_Thug_Mom]

sex is sacred, but not a sacrament. remember--there are only 7 sacraments.

sexual pleasure has definitely become a "sacrament" in our world.

The devil always takes what God has made for good and tries to distort it. That is what he has succeeded in doing to a great extent.

[Torie]

The primary act of mercy

Ya, just get the dying gay to renounce his life as errant and just decades full of endless sin, so that he might evade the hotcakes of hell at the last moments. Sounds highly merciful and caring to me. Actually it sounds highly abusive. I would not let you or your ilk anywhere near the dying room of such a person. JMO.

[Qwinn]

"Denying someone their ability to travel their own chosen journey on this mortal coil if legal and in good conscience and spirit offends me. JMO."

From anyone except blood family or spouse, I would agree completely with you.

Blood family/spouse is less clear to me, especially in the following situation:

The medical dangers of sodomy are very real, simply ignored by our unbelievably PC culture. Many men-who-like-gay-sex in the hospital are there because their partner-who-likes-gay-sex infected them with something.

Since sodomy is completely preventable, it would not be out of line, IMO, for the family of the AIDS victim, for example, to consider the partner the patient's murderer. Perhaps unintentional murderer, perhaps simply the enabler of assisted suicide, but the murderer nonetheless.

In such a case, would you deny the family the right to deny the admittance of the person they consider a murderer into the hospital room? I wouldn't. I wouldn't dare. They've got more than enough pain to deal with, without having the boyfriend coming in and railing at them for not "approving" of him and they're just bigots for thinking their sodomy had anything to do with his getting AIDS. Don't you think?

Same exact deal goes for the alcoholic dying of liver damage who wants the enabler who bought him most of the drinks from visiting the patient. If the family were outraged over this, I can't blame them.

While it IS a close call, because I do understand what you're getting at, in the end I do think the blood family should have the right to deny admittance to the person who they believe contributed to the illness or death, even over the objection of the patient.

Qwinn

[Torie]

Sodomy is medically risky, and not something I would suggest to anyone as prudent from that standpoint, but then love and sexual attraction works in mysterious ways. If I were gay, and my parents thought my lover were a murderer, for what I did of my own free will knowing the risks, it would break my heart to know my parents were abandoning me in that way. I would immediately execute a document to give my gay lover the right to control access to those who really cared about me, and my chosen journey, and in the hypothetical you suggest, that would not include my parents.

[Romulus]

I understand the compassion of Christ.

How nice for you. Would that you also understood that as the Truth, Christ has no tolerance for the gay agenda, including the thin edge of the wedge posing as compassion. There's no such thing as compassion grounded in a lie.