Melkite
Member
Gender: 
Posts: 4,166
|
|
« Reply #20 on: November 12, 2009, 05:17:PM » |
|
This article makes it seem as if Mormons now sanction homosexuality. All they did was say that equal treatment should be given to those with homosexual tendencies. Do Catholics say anything different?
Haha, officially, no. If you ask some on FE, you're gonna hear quite a few yesses. That's not fair, though. The point is that the law is an unnecessary acknoledgment of the homosexual lifestyle. It should be a non-issue. Homosexuality is wrong, therefore it should not be practised, let alone acknowledged with the unnecessary "equal treatment" laws. So I like to sleep with married women. So I talk about it at work incessantly to the point where it makes my coworkers uncomfortable and unproductive. One of the women I've slept with happens to be the boss's wife. I can't help it. It's just the way I am. You can't fire me because of my sexual preferences. There should be a law saying adulterers can't be fired for such. See what I mean? Why should you be fired for that? It has nothing to do with your efficiency of labor. If your boss finds out and hates you because of it, that's his right, but it doesn't have anything to do with how well you work. It's apples and oranges. Likewise, the fact that homosexuality is wrong and should never be practiced does not translate into it being ok to fire a homosexual because he is homosexual. Hire or fire based on how efficiently they work, not on who they want to boink. The latter is irrelevant. There's no reason why homosexuals *shouldn't* be protected from termination on the basis of who they find attractive. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
IrishCowboy
Member
Gender:
Location: USA
Personality type: choleric-sanguine
Posts: 397
|
|
« Reply #21 on: November 12, 2009, 05:20:PM » |
|
Why should you be fired for that? It has nothing to do with your efficiency of labor. If your boss finds out and hates you because of it, that's his right, but it doesn't have anything to do with how well you work. It's apples and oranges. Likewise, the fact that homosexuality is wrong and should never be practiced does not translate into it being ok to fire a homosexual because he is homosexual. Hire or fire based on how efficiently they work, not on who they want to boink. The latter is irrelevant. There's no reason why homosexuals *shouldn't* be protected from termination on the basis of who they find attractive.
I said it was an unnecessary acknowledgment of the homosexual lifestyle. That happens to be true. Take issue with my analogy if you like. You're missing the point. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Quod facimus in vita resonat in aeternam.
|
|
|
INPEFESS
Please remember me in your rosary intentions.
Member
Gender:
Personality type: Mostly melancholic
Posts: 10,836
† "If anyone love Me, he will keep My word." †
|
|
« Reply #22 on: November 12, 2009, 05:32:PM » |
|
Why should you be fired for that? It has nothing to do with your efficiency of labor. If your boss finds out and hates you because of it, that's his right, but it doesn't have anything to do with how well you work. It's apples and oranges. Likewise, the fact that homosexuality is wrong and should never be practiced does not translate into it being ok to fire a homosexual because he is homosexual. Hire or fire based on how efficiently they work, not on who they want to boink. The latter is irrelevant. There's no reason why homosexuals *shouldn't* be protected from termination on the basis of who they find attractive.
I said it was an unnecessary acknowledgment of the homosexual lifestyle. That happens to be true. Take issue with my analogy if you like. You're missing the point. IrishCowboy, I think I see your point. Please don't think that I approve of homosexual practices in the least; I assure you that I do not. However, as it relates to the article, all I think it is saying is that one cannot be discriminated against because they have a sexual attraction to other males. I do not discriminate against them either, but I do condemn their repugnant sin. If I'm missing the point, please explain it in a way that shows how it protects the homosexual lifestyle. I'm interested in hearing what you have to say. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I n N omine P atris, E t F ilii, E t S piritus S ancti "The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative magisterium" (Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, no. 9, June 29, 1896). “Wherefore, brethren, labour the more, that by good works you may make sure your calling and election. For doing these things, you shall not sin at any time” (2 Peter 1:10).
|
|
|
alaric
Lone Wolf
Member
Gender:
Posts: 6,975
|
|
« Reply #23 on: November 12, 2009, 08:46:PM » |
|
This article makes it seem as if Mormons now sanction homosexuality. All they did was say that equal treatment should be given to those with homosexual tendencies. Do Catholics say anything different?
Haha, officially, no. If you ask some on FE, you're gonna hear quite a few yesses. That's not fair, though. The point is that the law is an unnecessary acknoledgment of the homosexual lifestyle. It should be a non-issue. Homosexuality is wrong, therefore it should not be practised, let alone acknowledged with the unnecessary "equal treatment" laws. So I like to sleep with married women. So I talk about it at work incessantly to the point where it makes my coworkers uncomfortable and unproductive. One of the women I've slept with happens to be the boss's wife. I can't help it. It's just the way I am. You can't fire me because of my sexual preferences. There should be a law saying adulterers can't be fired for such. See what I mean? That's a good analogy, i've used something similiar to it in discussions about the whole "I can't help myself" excuse from the homo agenda before. As for the the Church of Latter "Gay" Saints........The queer mafia has been at them for awhile, it was only a matter of time before they appeased them. It seems no Christian denominations will openly defy them like the Muslims. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
To defend oneself, one must also be ready to die. There is little such readiness in a society raised in the cult of material well-being. Nothing is left, then, but concessions, attempts to gain time, and betrayal.
--- Alexander Solzhenitsyn
"Wrong is wrong even if everybody is doing it, and right is right even if nobody is doing it."
-St. Augustine Doctor of the Church
In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
George Orwell
There is no limit to investigating the truth; until you discover it.
- Cicero
|
|
|
INPEFESS
Please remember me in your rosary intentions.
Member
Gender:
Personality type: Mostly melancholic
Posts: 10,836
† "If anyone love Me, he will keep My word." †
|
|
« Reply #24 on: November 12, 2009, 09:11:PM » |
|
This article makes it seem as if Mormons now sanction homosexuality. All they did was say that equal treatment should be given to those with homosexual tendencies. Do Catholics say anything different?
Haha, officially, no. If you ask some on FE, you're gonna hear quite a few yesses. That's not fair, though. The point is that the law is an unnecessary acknoledgment of the homosexual lifestyle. It should be a non-issue. Homosexuality is wrong, therefore it should not be practised, let alone acknowledged with the unnecessary "equal treatment" laws. So I like to sleep with married women. So I talk about it at work incessantly to the point where it makes my coworkers uncomfortable and unproductive. One of the women I've slept with happens to be the boss's wife. I can't help it. It's just the way I am. You can't fire me because of my sexual preferences. There should be a law saying adulterers can't be fired for such. See what I mean? That's a good analogy, i've used something similiar to it in discussions about the whole "I can't help myself" excuse from the homo agenda before. As for the the Church of Latter "Gay" Saints........The queer mafia has been at them for awhile, it was only a matter of time before they appeased them. It seems no Christian denominations will openly defy them like the Muslims. You really think this says more than simply condemning discrimination against people who are sexually prone towards the same sex? I understand that the majority of those who are sexually prone towards the same sex are also engaging in homosexual practices, but the article doesn't say that Mormons are sanctioning the actions themselves; rather, they are condemning discrimation against homosexuals (which, in the strictest sense of the word, means: 1 : of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex) Do you really think they are "selling out"? If so, why do you think they are appeasing the masses rather than simply condemning what they say they are condemning? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I n N omine P atris, E t F ilii, E t S piritus S ancti "The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative magisterium" (Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, no. 9, June 29, 1896). “Wherefore, brethren, labour the more, that by good works you may make sure your calling and election. For doing these things, you shall not sin at any time” (2 Peter 1:10).
|
|
|
|
|
IrishCowboy
Member
Gender:
Location: USA
Personality type: choleric-sanguine
Posts: 397
|
|
« Reply #25 on: November 12, 2009, 11:09:PM » |
|
IrishCowboy,
I think I see your point. Please don't think that I approve of homosexual practices in the least; I assure you that I do not. However, as it relates to the article, all I think it is saying is that one cannot be discriminated against because they have a sexual attraction to other males. I do not discriminate against them either, but I do condemn their repugnant sin.
If I'm missing the point, please explain it in a way that shows how it protects the homosexual lifestyle. I'm interested in hearing what you have to say.
I didn't say you were missing the point. I said Melkite was missing the point is that the only reason laws like this are passed is because the gay movement has a very loud voice and want their lifestyle acknowledged. All this law will do is make it impossible to fire gay people for any reason. Once their homosexuality is out in the open, people will be afraid to fire them, even for legitimate reasons. I've worked for big companies before, and seen incompetent "minority" management continue to hold their positions when I'm quite certain they should have been canned. I always suspected it was because the company was afraid to do it, perhaps because they didn't want to get sued or they just wanted to meet their minority hiring goals. The same will likely happen with gays in the Salt Lake City workforce. It's a victory for them. Sure there's no reason gays *shouldn't* be protected under the law, same as everyone else, but not simply because they're gay. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Quod facimus in vita resonat in aeternam.
|
|
|
Petertherock
Greatest of all sinners
Member
Gender:
Location: Falmouth, ME
Posts: 9,976
|
|
« Reply #26 on: November 12, 2009, 11:11:PM » |
|
Maine like most states is an at will work state. The boss can fire you if he doesn't like the way you look.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Darryl
Ut In Omnibus Glorificetur Deus
"Even if Catholics faithful to Tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ." -St. Athanasius
|
|
|
INPEFESS
Please remember me in your rosary intentions.
Member
Gender:
Personality type: Mostly melancholic
Posts: 10,836
† "If anyone love Me, he will keep My word." †
|
|
« Reply #27 on: November 13, 2009, 03:32:PM » |
|
IrishCowboy,
I think I see your point. Please don't think that I approve of homosexual practices in the least; I assure you that I do not. However, as it relates to the article, all I think it is saying is that one cannot be discriminated against because they have a sexual attraction to other males. I do not discriminate against them either, but I do condemn their repugnant sin.
If I'm missing the point, please explain it in a way that shows how it protects the homosexual lifestyle. I'm interested in hearing what you have to say.
I didn't say you were missing the point. I said Melkite was missing the point is that the only reason laws like this are passed is because the gay movement has a very loud voice and want their lifestyle acknowledged. All this law will do is make it impossible to fire gay people for any reason. Once their homosexuality is out in the open, people will be afraid to fire them, even for legitimate reasons. I've worked for big companies before, and seen incompetent "minority" management continue to hold their positions when I'm quite certain they should have been canned. I always suspected it was because the company was afraid to do it, perhaps because they didn't want to get sued or they just wanted to meet their minority hiring goals. The same will likely happen with gays in the Salt Lake City workforce. It's a victory for them. Sure there's no reason gays *shouldn't* be protected under the law, same as everyone else, but not simply because they're gay. Ok, I think you make a good point, especially here: Once their homosexuality is out in the open, people will be afraid to fire them, even for legitimate reasons.
I agree with that. I see now what you were saying. Thank you. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I n N omine P atris, E t F ilii, E t S piritus S ancti "The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative magisterium" (Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, no. 9, June 29, 1896). “Wherefore, brethren, labour the more, that by good works you may make sure your calling and election. For doing these things, you shall not sin at any time” (2 Peter 1:10).
|
|
|
INPEFESS
Please remember me in your rosary intentions.
Member
Gender:
Personality type: Mostly melancholic
Posts: 10,836
† "If anyone love Me, he will keep My word." †
|
|
« Reply #28 on: November 13, 2009, 03:34:PM » |
|
"Petertherock
Greatest of all sinners" Ok, fine then, you can have it. But when it comes to humility I am the greatest. ;) |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I n N omine P atris, E t F ilii, E t S piritus S ancti "The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative magisterium" (Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, no. 9, June 29, 1896). “Wherefore, brethren, labour the more, that by good works you may make sure your calling and election. For doing these things, you shall not sin at any time” (2 Peter 1:10).
|
|
|
|
