Race is 19th century pseudo-science, not reality. I don't think all the evidence is in yet on homosexuality, but I do know it (or something like it) is much more prevalent in nature than the 19th century Victorians would admit.
However: My church, too, teaches that active homosexuality is a sin. Love the sinner, and hate the sin, is about all we have left, here, I think. I used to watch Ellen's sitcom, and quit over the same thing that bothers many others here. I've also had gay friends who were otherwise good people. If she had to choose a serious sin to practice, maybe homosexuality is better than murder? Others can still make their choices around homosexuals, while murders take away all choices. Which is the “lesser of two evils” here?
Ciao Old Student,
Thank you for your response. Yes love the sinner, hate the sin, but in this case the woman is TEACHING. Her Lesbian marriage is meant to encourage and inspire and so therefore, it goes beyond her being a mere sinner: she is teaching / preaching, though discreetly (therefore one might say underhandedly) that gay marriage is okay.
What is prevelant in nature is beside the point. Choose any crime or perversion and if nature is your doctrine, then I can justify it. In fact, I can go far beyond it.
As Rabbi Prager wrote
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0377/is_n112/ai_14466341
Man, is polymorphous, utterly wild (far more so than animal sexuality). Historically men have had sex with women and with men; with little girls and young boys; with a single partner and in large groups; with total strangers and immediate family members; and with a variety of domesticated animals. They have achieved orgasm with inanimate objects such as leather, shoes, and other pieces of clothing, through urinating and defecating on each other; by dressing in women’s garments; by watching other human beings being tortured; by fondling children of either sex; by listening to a woman’s disembodied voice (e.g., “phone sex”); and, of course, by looking at pictures of bodies or parts of bodies. There is little, animate or inanimate, that has not excited some men to orgasm.
As you see all this surpasses even the wildest Bonobo monkey. So, so much for nature! That’s a bottomless pit that can justify any wrong, never mind sexual perversion. Man is - or rather can be - crueler and more malicious than any animal!
I too love the sinner and hate the sin and having spent half my life as a sort of junkyard dog, I know both very well, but - I repeat - here we are in front of what in other times would be a heretic, a teacher of wrong, horrendously wrong morals, a teacher in a position of power and prestige and therefore despite her apparent innocence and likeability, she must be opposed and one must - IMO - not fall into the trap of some apparent good ole girl normality or show biz likeability.
Because of her thousands of girls, in a period of doubt and uncertainty, will think that a life with Mary is the same as one with Bob. That’s like saying a paved parking lot is the same as coffee-dark top soil by the river. That children and families are the same as silence and barreness.
She could have carried on discreetly, but she chose to teach, to set an important example.
It all we are is animals, then sure thing, go ahead, do it till you die, eat, drink, and be merry for tomorrow we die. But if we are more than mere animals, then it matters. We don’t do it just because the monkeys do. And maybe monkeys are quite bright, but I’m writing a post about monkeys, they don’t write posts about us.
Homosexual intercourse is a vice, like being an alcoholic. Some people are born or otherwise develop a disordered relationship to booze, others with a disordered relationship to tail. Saying that homosexuality is okay is like saying that alcoholism is okay — but other than opposing these vices through public discourse, there is little that can be done to stop people from engaging in them. In the end it is up to the person with the disordered relationship to decide which acts he or she will or will not commit.
Divorce is something else. Divorce is enshrined in law, encouraged by society, and has become part of our culture — yet it causes far, far more misery, suffering, and destruction than do consensual sexual perversions or drug abuse. Divorce is murder — the murder of a family — and nothing good comes of it. In cases of physical or mental abuse and/or cruelty, I can of course understand a man or woman physically leaving his or her spouse to live a separate life but to divorce them — to pretend that a valid sacramental marriage never existed — is a lie and a sin. "Until death us do part" means until DEATH — no matter what.
And remarriage does nothing but add polygamy to the sin.
Note that I said "valid, sacramental marriage". A "marriage" that takes place outside the sacrament of the Church (or at least outside the intention to participate in the sacrament) is no more valid than a gay wedding. The ironic fact of our society is that most "married" people in our country are likely not truly married at all. Marriage is a covenant between a man and a woman in which they ask God to unite them into a single person, a single being, and in which they swear that they have become that being. Obviously, such an entity could never be broken by a mere piece of legal-sized paper: "What God has joined, let no man put asunder". But what passes for marriage these days is more like a consumer transaction than a covenant — a spouse is a "purchase" made for the sake of convenience and ultimately as disposble as a refrigerator or washing machine when it fails to suit the "buyer's" desires.
In my opinion, homosexuality is nowhere near as bad for people and for society as is divorce and remarriage. I am the father to a son, and I'd much rather have him grow up to be a screaming bender than the kind of "man" who would break a vow before God and dump his woman and children like garbage. At least homos don't usually drag poor little kids into their misery.
“...maybe homosexuality is better than murder? Others can still make their choices around homosexuals, while murders take away all choices. Which is the “lesser of two evils” here?”
What does that have to do with this thread? We’re talking about the mainstreaming of homosexuality/lesbianism.
Race is 19th century pseudo-science, not reality. I don't think all the evidence is in yet on Adultery, but I do know it (or something like it) is much more prevalent in nature than the 19th century Victorians would admit. However: My church, too, teaches that active Adultery is a sin. Love the sinner, and hate the sin, is about all we have left, here, I think. I used to watch Ellen's sitcom, and quit over the same thing that bothers many others here. I've also had adulterous friends who were otherwise good people. If she had to choose a serious sin to practice, maybe adultery is better than murder? Others can still make their choices around adulterers, while murders take away all choices. Which is the “lesser of two evils” here?
Things get interesting when we compare sexual sins.
Should we celebrate the adulterous lifestyle? Are some "born" that way? Should we organize a "Cheating Pride" parade? If so I think DC would be the right venue.