hurtful news

Well, in the first place, unless you're an actual member of the Catholic Church, this is hardly "hurtful" at all, just the opinion of someone who's at the head of an organization you don't belong to, don't like, and don't trust.

Additionally, if you read beyond the headline, you'll discover that what the Popa actually said was that the “family is threatened by growing efforts on the part of some to redefine the very institution of marriage, by relativism, by the culture of the ephemeral, by a lack of openness to life,” which isn't exactly the specific bashing of same-sex marriage that the headline screams. The reference to gay marriage was "confirmed" in a conservative Catholic blog via some nameless Vatican spokesperson who confirmed that "at least in part" the Pope had same-sex marriage in mind. So basically, you have a conservative-based reporting of a vague interpretation of a complex statement, which is being touted as the Pope calling same-sex marriage a threat to the family. Which is rather opposed to some of the other things that have come from Francis more directly, and not third- or fourth-hand.

The Catholic hierarchy doesn't have the greatest track record on acceptance of gays. No one is denying that. But it's a whole lot less overtly damning than many religions that get a fraction of the press. And there's also a big difference between what the hierarchy states, and what the average Catholic on the street has to say. My pastor and associate have been very accepting of me, my parish liturgist and music director met my boyfriend and is interested in taking us both out to dinner to get to know him better, and our diocese has a number of gay support groups of one size or another. Progress, albeit extremely slow progress, is being made--and realistically, the Church condemns birth control too, and no one is saying they feel "hurt" because the Church says you shouldn't take birth control pills. They just ignore the decree and pop the pills, and follow their own conscience, which is another basic principle of the Church.

I actually AM an active practicing Catholic, and what I find the most hurtful is that people constantly feel the need to discourage all hope among gay Catholics by painting even vague comments such as these in a bad light. If gay Catholics keep getting bashed over the head with the notion that their faith will reject them, and their only choice is to either be out or be Catholic, then WE are the ones being hurtful, and as thoughtless and cruel as the small group of conservative Catholics who object to us.

 

When was the last time a Catholic pastor radicalized parishoners and encouraged them to go out and murder apostates? When was the last time a government was forced to resign at the gunpoint of Catholic terrorists holding the head of government hostage? When was the last time a gay man was flogged brutally and publicly by a Catholic priest?

Point your religious disdain for gay persecutors where it belongs. No, the Catholic church isn't one-big-gay-happy-family; but I'd damn well rather sit in the pews knowing the vast majority of the people sitting next to me accept me for who I am -- a fellow child of God and member of the body of Christ -- than on my knees with a sword at my neck, or blown to bits on a bus by some murderous asshat seeking paradise with a harem of virgins.

 

I think that there are closeted gay Catholics out there who would be better served by hope than by skewed reporting by people with an axe to grind. And the Nazi reference is so over the top and insulting that it doesn't even warrant a reply.

 

You know, Tom, on the 70th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz, you'd maybe think twice about Nazi moral equivocation. In case you don't recall, the Nazi's were intent on wholesale extermination of whole segments of the population, Jews, gays, really anyone who was an apostate in the eyes of the Party. There are vast segments of the world population under the control of murderous regimes today who would gladly repeat that fate for gays. None of them are Catholic. Pick a fresh battle. You were hurt by the Church, fine I get it, I even empathize with you... I was hurt by the Sourthern Baptists... at what point are you taking responsibility for the course of your life SINCE then instead of blaming everything on the Pope? You're not a helpless victim unless you choose to be one.

 

Technically it is not gays he is calling a threat, he is calling same sex marriage a threat to
"traditional" marriage.

This is why the government needs to stop being a nanny state. Everyone wants to use it for what they think are the best purposes.

 

Umm, Georgian Orthodox church, in Tbilisi. Not Roman Catholic and not USA. Just because it says "priest" doesn't mean it's Catholic.

 

I'm not catholic.

It's still hurtful. The pope has influence and language like that encourages a lot of people (not just Catholics!) who are already inclined that way to continue view gays as a godless blob of enemies rather than fellow human beings who would just like equal rights.

 

As I've stated in this forum before, the better solution to the whole "marriage debate" is to get the government out of the marriage business entirely. It has been used as an excuse to discriminate based on race, gender and sexual orientation, and used as bait for economic discrimination against unmarried people by giving disparate treatment and perks to married vs single taxpayers, not to mention the disparaging treatment of unmarried or same-sex couples in the course of adoptions.

The state's interests are better served through a generic partnership structure that treats all partnerships identically. Leave the marriage business to the churches to sort themselves out.

 

Problem is, the headline is not what the Pope said. The story and headline are a pro-gay/anti-Catholic report based off of an anti-gay/conservative Catholic blog which reported an anonymous Vatican interpretation of a statement that did not directly reference gay marriage at all. Skewed reporting of skewed reporting of nothing substantial, but with an attention-grabbing headline that's sure to raise peoples' hackles.

Again, there are plenty of closeted Catholics who would be better served by being supported as Catholics by the gay community, than by being told by people with a chip on their shoulder that their faith is rejecting them, when in fact it's not nearly as black and white as it would seem.

---------- Post added 27th Jan 2015 at 08:47 AM ----------

The word "threatened" wasn't directed specifically towards gays in the speech, only in the interpretations and stories that came after. Bias doesn't only go in one direction.

 

:rolle: :eusa_naug

I don't think anyone would disagree that the tone in the past from Popes and continuing from the hierarchy today (the out of context remarks attributed to Pope Francis) are hurtful to gays generally, but gay Catholics particularly. The question I pose to the gay community, though, is do you want to sit around whining and feeling hurt because of what a paternalistic hierarchy spouts off about in contradiction of the Gospel, or do you want to address it head-on in a constructive manner.

The fact is the vast majority of Catholics agree with the equal treatment of gays generally, and accept gay marriage outside of the church. That's hardly grounds to condemn the entire faith as a abomination to gay sensibilities. Like it or not, the gay community is not monolithically atheist or anti-Catholic, it's not universally pro-choice, and God forbid, not every gay feels compelled to vote democratic on single-issue gay rights platforms. I used to be mildly amused at the tolerance espoused by the front-people of the "gay community" (the activists, the organizers, the spokespeople, the twinks gyrating in their underwear on floats in Pride parades, etc.) is suddenly silent when a gay person happens to be non-liberal or God forbid religious (gasp, perhaps even Catholic?!)

:eek:

 

The bold is the key to understanding the redefinition the pope is warning against. Nothing in there is specific to gays, in fact the culture of relativism, the ephemeral and lack of openness to life is far more pervasive in the heteronormative culture.


The redefinition of marriage has been underway much longer than the gay rights movement. Marriage is no longer viewed as an eternal institution by most; it's just easier when times get tough to call it quits and move on to someone else. That's not endemic to heterosexual marriage alone, nor is it caused by "weakening" the institution by recognizing same-sex marriages. It is a human failing and will continue as long as the culture promotes quick fixes and feel-good attitudes as paramount.

 

Oh, thanks for the name change BTW...

I've always gone deeper into the story than headlines for anything I'm interested in.

 

Agree with this 100%, I've always believed this.

 

So if I'm Catholic and politically conservative, perhaps I'm not abiding by the precepts of "gaydom" and am therefore straight?

It amazes me the lengths to which people will go to ensure that they remain excluded, hurt and victimized. I left the closet so I would be able to be who I am, period, and that includes being Catholic, among other things. If someone feels the need to try and push me into a new closet of political or religious beliefs because of their own personal biases, good luck. It's not going to happen. The notion that the world is against you because you're gay IS the closet, regardless of how openly gay you might be.