Posted on 04/25/2002 10:00:49 AM PDT by Incorrigible
Actually, guarding against depression is only one consideration. The patient must be terminally ill with no reasonable chance for recovery. More than one opinion is required. And so forth.
Still, it is clear that we require much more than mutual consent for certain behaviors, particularly those which are harmful.
The State has no basis for dictating to terminally ill patients how long they must suffer.
The state does, however, have a duty to protect those who cannot protect themselves. Oregon has opened the door to a list of possible horrors, as we've seen in the Netherlands, where doctors have been know to decide "for" comatose patient. Some patients feel pressured into ending their lives so as not to trouble family members or others.
Odd, isn't it, how far afield these discussion go.
Given the documented health detriments of homosexual behavior, our society not only has the right to refuse to normalize, embrace, or celebrate it, but a duty to do so.
REAL Catholics are concerned that priests take a vow of 'celibacy' - whether straight or homosexual - and have no business breaking that vow while pontificating at 'sinners' from a pulpit.
REAL Catholics are concerned that priests take a vow of 'celibacy' - whether straight or homosexual - and have no business breaking that vow while pontificating at 'sinners' from a pulpit.
Try the DSM I or the DSM II for starters then try Freud, Charles Socarides, Gregory Dickson and of course Joseph Nicolosi if you want some current info.
IF you define homosexuality as a sexual attraction to your own sex, and if a priest by that definition is and remains celibate, then how can you argue that he should be defrocked. He has committed no sin.
No--zero tolerance should be based on ACTS OF WILL--not thoughts. If ANY priest commits a CRIME (sexual acts with a minor of EITHER sex) then they should be turned in to the civil authorities for adjudication. Where the church has fallen down is that they have tried to handle these matters internally and secretly.
I would have thought that the hypocrisy of blaming anyone other than those individuals who commit the crimes, and the individuals charged with supervising them who instead cover for them and thus make further crimes possible, was self-evident.
Actually, I think "God's word" talks about "men who lay with men", which says "sexually active" to me (Sodom/Gomorrah).
I don't know what causes the homosexual tendency, but I simply don't believe that one with that tendency who RESISTS TEMPTATION and DOESN'T "lay with another man" is any more an "abomination" than any other Christian.
When you knowingly go against God, there should be consequences. That includes all the other sins. I'd like to think that the Bible should be enough for anyone. If you need to defend Gays as priests that's your business, I'm sure in the name of tolerance you'd like to make sure nobody is victimized. Unfortunately, Tolerance coupled with treachery is what got the Catholic Church a huge black eye with this gay priest / pedophile scandal.
Ah, but you make my point. A priest who KNOWS that for whatever reason, his sexual orientation is toward other males, but admits the weakness, asks for forgiveness, and RESISTS the temptation to act, has done all God asks of him. I've got no use for active queers (priests or not), and any priest who molests a juvenile of EITHER sex (and ANY religion) needs to be IMMEDIATELY turned in to the civil authorities for investigation/prosecution.
The problem for the church is priests who succumb to their urges, and the people in the church hierarchy who cover up for them. The church keeps trying to "handle things internally", and it won't wash. The church MUST institute a zero tolerance policy that ANY priest who might have commited such a crime HAS to be turned over to civil authority--if the church ALSO has some internal structure/procedures to take ADDITIONAL action (defrocking, whatever) AFTER the civil jurisdiction has taken action, that is fine, but those internal procedures CANNOT replace the absolute requirement for them to "turn the bastards in".
If the bishops don't institute such a zero tolerance policy, it will destroy the organized Catholic church. The church heirarchy has already suffered so much damage already that it may be irreversible, but they STILL waffle.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.