Priest denies communion to 'gay' supporters

[PaulDA]

Don't forget, the people who wore those armbands weren't saying:
"Please accept 'gays' as people, we are all sinners",
they were saying:
"Homosexuality is normal and the church should accept homosexual marriage and homosexual sexual acts at being just as normal and ordained by God as heterosexual acts and marriage."
And no Christian church should agree with that.

Paul, you were doing so well, and you even had me convinced that communion could be held back on the grounds that it's not something to be used for protests. Then you have to go and say something like that. What makes you think that the armbands meant the second thing you quoted and not the first one?

The reason I think it was the second thing is because there is an insidious movement in this country to try and make homosexuality appear normal and to be accepted as normal by the church.
The church must NEVER accept homosexuality as normal, and must always speak out against it as a sin.
These people who protest are saying 'homosexuality is ok, accept it'.
Please don't think they are just saying 'we all sin, let them in.'
They are not. Homosexuals and any other sinners are welcome in church. It's when any sinner tries to justify what they are doing and tries to shove it down the church's throat that is wrong.

[danny316]

The reason I think it was the second thing is because there is an indisdious movement in this country to try and make homosexuality appear normal and to be accepted as normal by the church.

Prove it. I've noticed many people say this and can't name a single person or organization in this so-called "movement".  

[bloop]

GLAAD seems to do something like this from where I'm sitting.  Thing is, I'm not militantly against churches having the option of marrying same-sex couples, but I think they represent at least that legal side of the movement.  Unless I'm mistaken, the ACLU is similar in that regard as well.  

But, I think you may have a point, however, in that these groups seem to be advocating those churches that already consider homosexual relationships normal.  I'm sure there is a fringe group somewhere, but I haven't heard of one that wants to shove mandatory marriage ceremonies for all denominations.  Perhaps someone else can point us in that direction.  

Imagine the greatest lunatic fringe group you possible can, and you probably have a real-life realization of that group somewhere.  It's funny how that works.

[MJanke]

NAMBLA

[bloop]

NAMBLA

I didn't want to go there, but there you go, Danny.  Perfect example of a lunatic fringe group that seems to be for the legalization and sanction of all things deviant.

[adriftconscious]

I'm going to jump in here and put in my two cents worth. Now, I'm not convinced that being homosexual is in and of itself a sin. I firmly believe that the true problem arises when lust comes in. I also believe that homosexual acts are a sin. now that you know my personal stances on the underlying issues, I can proceed.

As far as the preist denying this particular sacrament goes, my feeling is this: I believe that the Lord's Supper is to be a time of reverence and reflection. Whatever their stated intention and meaning behind that intention, those wearing the armbands and ribbons had to know that it would create a distraction. I believe that does an incredible disservice to those partaking of communion. I have no problem with a gay saying "I'm gay and I still want to partake in the Lord's Supper." They have problems, I have problems, I can look past that. And I also think that they should be honest about their sexuality. I DON'T however think that they should ahve been wearing those ribbons. Communion is a time when we truly are all equal before Christ, humbly taking the sacrament and reflecting on his sacrifice for us. Bringing an agenda of any kind whatsoever blemishes it.

I think they could have handled the situation differently, though. I'm not sure if they did, but they could have gone to the priest before communion or before mass and asked him whether or not he could deliver the Lord's Supper to these gays. If he responded no, I think they should have respected that-- whether it was right or wrong-- and arranged a time to discuss it further with him at a later date. By dropping it in his lap during mass and forcing him to make a decision then and there only served to make it into a scene when it could have been handled peacfully.

I guess that's my humble opinion on the matter-- if I'm way off base, corect me by all means, but please be gentle. I'm only 18, I've got a long time to live and I don't want to be maimed for life.

[Dan]

Yeesh, and I thought I had called Paul's bluff so well too.

I'm doing a bit of research on the groups mentioned to make sure they do specifically want to change church doctrine regarding whether or not the actual act of homosexual sex is wrong. So far I haven't found anything to that effect, but I'm still just getting started. I'll be back in this thread in a few days with whatever I manage to turn up.

[PaulDA]

NAMBLA

Despicable groups like this are part of the problem.
It seems homosexuals can get away with any weird thing they want to.
For instance, Mayor Bloomberg in NY is going to march in the 'gay, lesbian, bi-sexual and trans gender' parade. These parades historically have many hald nude  people and overtly sexual goings on that would NEVER be allowed in a 'straight' parade.
As a matter of fact, NAMBLA also marches in that parade! For anyone who doesn't know what they are, NAMBLA is the 'North American Man Boys Lovers Association'
and consists of a bunch of deviant male sexual predators who advocate sex between grown men and young boys.
And Mayor Bloomberg is going to march in a parade with these people???
And please, DON'T tell me 'Jesus associated with sinners'.
It's NOT the same thing.
Jesus would never march in a parade where the sin is glorified, as it is in this parade.
Do you think Mayor Bloomberg would march in a regular parade where some men were advocating sex between men and young girls? Never!!
There is a double standard here.  

[Brenden]

Is mayor Bloomberg a christian?

[Guest]

Is mayor Bloomberg a christian?

What does that have to do with it?

[PaulDA]

^That was me.
And let me reiterate: Whether Mayor Bloomberg is a Christian or not, he would NOT march in any other parade where sexual goings on were perpetrated in the parade, and where a group marched that supported adult/child sex.

[danny316]

These parades historically have many hald nude  people and overtly sexual goings on that would NEVER be allowed in a 'straight' parade.

Really? That sounds a bit too out-there to actually be believable. Laws concerning indecent exposure would apply to nude people, and it'd be very difficult to have sex of any kind while marching in a parade. If it is possible to do that and march at the same time, then gosh, we need to get them a TV show! That's a talent if I've ever heard one.

[PaulDA]

Really? That sounds a bit too out-there to actually be believable. Laws concerning indecent exposure would apply to nude people, and it'd be very difficult to have sex of any kind while marching in a parade. If it is possible to do that and march at the same time, then gosh, we need to get them a TV show! That's a talent if I've ever heard one.

The transsexauals routinely bare their 'breasts' and many of the homosexuals are dressed in sad masocistic outfits, clearly designed for kinky sex.
Plus, as I stated, NAMBLA marches in the parade unhindered!!!
That in itself is enough for the Mayor to stay away.

[Brenden]

What does that have to do with it?

If he isn't a christian, why would I expect him not to be a hypocrite in that area? Non-christians aren't held to christianity's moral law.

Of course, there's an irony here somewhere, I'm sure of it.

[PaulDA]

If he isn't a christian, why would I expect him not to be a hypocrite in that area? Non-christians aren't held to christianity's moral law.

Of course, there's an irony here somewhere, I'm sure of it.

This makes no sense because he, or any other politician would not march in a parade where straight people did the same outrageous things, so it has nothing to do with him being a Christian.

[Brenden]

If he isn't a christian, why would I expect him not to be a hypocrite in that area? Non-christians aren't held to christianity's moral law.

Of course, there's an irony here somewhere, I'm sure of it.

This makes no sense because he, or any other politician would not march in a parade where straight people did the same outrageous things, so it has nothing to do with him being a Christian.

It does in that what do I expect from a non-christian but hypocrisy like that? It's just in my perception of it, it doesn't bother me as much as it would if a christian did the same thing.

[PaulDA]

If he isn't a christian, why would I expect him not to be a hypocrite in that area? Non-christians aren't held to christianity's moral law.

Of course, there's an irony here somewhere, I'm sure of it.

This makes no sense because he, or any other politician would not march in a parade where straight people did the same outrageous things, so it has nothing to do with him being a Christian.

It does in that what do I expect from a non-christian but hypocrisy like that? It's just in my perception of it, it doesn't bother me as much as it would if a christian did the same thing.

Oh, I see your point now. He, and other politicians, would be hippocrites to march in the gay parade with perverted things going on, but not march in an other type of parade with even less objectionable things going on.

[Brenden]

If he isn't a christian, why would I expect him not to be a hypocrite in that area? Non-christians aren't held to christianity's moral law.

Of course, there's an irony here somewhere, I'm sure of it.

This makes no sense because he, or any other politician would not march in a parade where straight people did the same outrageous things, so it has nothing to do with him being a Christian.

It does in that what do I expect from a non-christian but hypocrisy like that? It's just in my perception of it, it doesn't bother me as much as it would if a christian did the same thing.

Oh, I see your point now. He, and other politicians, would be hipoctites to march in the gay parade with perverted things going on, but not march in an other type of parade with even less objectionable things going on.

Something like that, yeah, if you march in a gay parade, be sure to march in a straight parade as well, if you're really for equality.

[bloop]

Something like that, yeah, if you march in a gay parade, be sure to march in a straight parade as well, if you're really for equality.

To be fair, you can't expect anyone to march in an event that doesn't exist.  Wouldn't a parade that would be inclusive of somewhere around 95% of the population be pointless anyway.  I mean, while we're at it, we might as well have an "I brush my teeth" parade.

[Brenden]

To be fair, you can't expect anyone to march in an event that doesn't exist.  Wouldn't a parade that would be inclusive of somewhere around 95% of the population be pointless anyway.  I mean, while we're at it, we might as well have an "I brush my teeth" parade.

Yeah, I just mean hypothetically, it would be a ridiculous idea.

A friend remarked awhile ago that in American culture we've leard to ignore parades and marches because there' been so many.

[bloop]

We have parades for strange things, too.  Say, even if you believe that there's nothing wrong with homosexuality, it's not exactly an accomplishment.  Why doesn't MENSA have a parade just to make us all feel inadequate?  You know, take turns solving gigantic Rubik's decahedrons on a float composed of crossword puzzles or something?

[danny316]

Sorry I've let this thread slide, I've been busy and I haven't looked up as much info about GLAAD or NAMBLA as I would like to before commenting on them. I have to admit though, NAMBLA has a few continuity errors on their website - they comment on how relationships should not be judged on age differences, but then they say that they're only defending the "boy" part of their title for boys ages 12 to 18? Anyway, I'll see if I can find some more accurate information on them.