>Bear with me

I see what you did there.
Did you?

Forget him, ask an Irish Catholic anything.

>>2437862

Yes. It was on purpose.

Opinions on abortion and gay marriage?

(You're obligated by Church doctrine to say that you're against both.)

Off topic but that bear and the pun just made me daww for some strange ass reason.

>>2437949

I believe abortion is illegal, since an evil law is no law at all, but I do not believe the liberal or conservative, or otherwise political, garbage about abortion being an anti-Church sacrament, a Satanic sacrifice, a pagan ritual, or otherwise some evil which it is not, since, sacraments, sacrifices, and rituals each have their own forms: a sacrament is a sacred sign of God usually performed by Christians, a sacrifice (even a human sacrifice) is a religious offering (ex: Aztec), and a ritual requires words and practices that have a sacred meaning behind them. Abortions might be performed by some religions as sacrifice or ritual, or even an imitation of a sacrament, but it is not any of those in itself. And to exaggerate an evil just to show how evil it is is called lying, which is a moral sin and intrinsic evil.

(con)

>>2437949

I believe gays shouldn't marry, nor have sex for that matter, since it is unnatural, because there are only two compatible and natural genders in the human race, it is human and natural to reproduce within moral limits, which are also human and natural, and the argument from animals ("animals do it, so should we, since we're animals") is fallacious because we are animals endowed with human reason, whereas other animals rely on instinct, however intelligent and self-aware (if at all) they might be, and because other animals engage in activities which for them are amoral but which for us are immoral, due to our having reason and they not having reason: examples being dolphin rape and female spiders eating the male spiders after reproduction.

>>2437949

The Church teaches that abortion is a mortal sin and intrinsic evil because human life begins at conception (ex: the Immaculate Conception), and that gay marriage is not a marriage at all because marriage is between one man and one woman (other forms of pseudo-marriage are polygamy and bestiality).

Just how in agreement with the Roman Catholic Church are you?

For instance, do you accept the infallibility of the pope?

OP, would you be kind enough to explain to me the difference between fairytales and the bible? Why do you believe in a god, but not in unicorns?

>>2438130

What's your opinion on sex with non-fertile women? If I can't reproduce with them, is it immoral to sleep with them? What do you think of condoms and the availability of other birth control methods?

>Vatican II
Enjoy your communist infiltrated church.

>>2438136
The Immaculate Conception is not a Biblical idea, and is only espoused by the Catholic church. And it's contradictory; in the Hail Mary prayer, they say "full of grace". Grace would be unnecessary for her if she were without sin.

>>2438157

Yes, I believe the dogma that Pope is infallible under the conditions that he speaks as the Pastor of the Church to the whole Church on matters of faith and morals, whereby not every word he says or writes is infallible, which is sometimes clarified whenever a Pope explains he's speaking as a theologian or his work is not a part of the Magisterium (ex: Pope Benedict XVI in his book series Jesus of Nazareth employs these clarifications)

OP, has your faith made your life better on anyway? Have you ever doubt about your believes?

File: 1336934949861.png-(53 KB, 384x221, 1310268010731.png)

Hi OP, former Catholic here, I fucking hate you in ways you can't even begin to imagine.
You fuckers almost pushed me to suicide with your insane bullshit you call morality. 6 months in a Catholic-run gay correctional camp and 6 years in a Catholic school is a hell I wouldn't wish on anyone. It will leave you dead inside, because that's their goal, to turn you into a mind slave for the Pope. Fuck you OP, fuck you for even espousing this. I hope all 1 billion of you die in a horrible fire.
Your shit ruined my life, and I'm going to get revenge, sweet revenge.

>>2438305
Get over it.

sunglasses.gif

>>2438173

Fairy tales are like parables: fictional stories. They were used with the intent to explain a lesson or satire other tales, never with the intent to describe historical events or persons - unlike the Bible which, even in its allegorical stories (ex: creation stories), describes historical events and people.

>>2438197

Sex with a sterile spouse doesn't impede the adoption of children, who have a right to one father and one mother, so long as it is within marriage.

Artificial birth control, because it impedes reproduction, is immoral. Natural birth control, because it is according to human sexuality, is moral.

>>2438305
I'm black, and ever since I was five, people (of all colors) have tried to convince me that I'm not as good as them, when in many cases, I was flat-out better. I live with this stuff, and if you can't live with it, move to the wilderness, or something.

Who is your favorite Catholic philosopher?

Hint: There is a correct answer

>>2438325
>Natural birth control, because it is according to human sexuality, is moral.

Cleopatra purportedly used a diaphragm made of a lemon peel, with crocodile dung as spermicide.

All natural ingredients. Is this ok?

I get the impression that more things are a sin to the Catholic Church than not. Do Catholics ever get this impression? Is it true? Am I horribly uninformed?

Do you believe in exorcisms?

Op fucks boys

Enjoy sitting on the popes cock

Following the church in 2012 is like following the Rebulican party and calling yourself conservative, or the Democrat party and calling yourself liberal. Watered down, meaningless institutions.

Call me when you start retaking Europe from the muslims in the next crusade.

>>2438304

Yes on both counts. Faith has led me to a better understanding of morals, and I have had doubts about doctrines and dogmas. From an atheist perspective, that faith has led me somewhere is random, maybe even a coincidence. From a theist perspective, that faith has led me somewhere is providential and divine. But from a Catholic perspective, that faith has led me somewhere is the work of Divine Love. I've been led down avenues of doubt and paths of renewed conviction. Only by God's grace have I become a better person than I was before my conversion.

Anything can appear to make your life better. But it's not the superficiality that counts, it's the objective reality that counts. So, for example, someone who has sex with a dog might think their life is better because they've "found love" in a dog. But objectively, bestiality is evil, so, their life is not better at all.

Roman catholics a shit.

I can't believe the Catholic hatred. Protestants are so much worse than Catholics.

>>2437849
Is your name Ryan?

>>2438428
Lots of historical Catholicism is fucking awesome but it's pretty useless now. It's quite obviously better than Protestantism if the choice is one of the two.

The Church teaches that oral sex and mutual masturbation are sinful, even within marriage. Do you believe this?

>>2438334

Saint Augustine of Hippo.

>>2438351

I meant natural as in human nature, like the menstrual cycle. Sorry for not being clear on that.

>>2438352

For every sin, there is a virtue that counts it. Otherwise, it could not a sin, it would just be a moral or amoral act, since evil is known by good (ex: we know adultery is a sin because of the virtue of chastity).

>>2438371

Yes. They are rituals (not sacraments) by which the Church expels the devil from someone. Like Confession, exorcisms are strictly confidential, for the sake of the penitent (Confession) or demoniac (exorcism). So if a priest or anyone gives you an account of an exorcism, it's fake.

>>2438438

No.

>>2438479

Sexual acts that impede either pleasure (ex: rape) or reproduction (ex: oral sex), or impede both, are immoral. Sex is for both pleasure and reproduction, never one without the other, since it is an intimate activity that is a part of human sexuality, coupled with love and free will, survival and family.

If God hates masturbation, then why are there so many health benefits associated with it? Shouldn't God bless men who don't masturbate rather than punishing them with an increased likelihood of prostate cancer?

>>2438212

Enjoy your conspiracy theories about an Ecumenical Council.

>>2438216

The Bible doesn't have ideas, it has stories and teachings which presume faith on part of the reader, which is why Catholics interpret the Bible according to Tradition and the Magisterium and why some people consider Jesus to be Socialist, an Aryan, a Protestant, a Catholic, an atheist, etc.

Mary is both full of grace and free from all sin, hence her title All-Holy (since holiness is conquest over sin by God's grace). The Immaculate Conception is an unique and singular grace.

>>2438570

Good can come from evil (a greedy man can become rich). Evil can result from good (a father can sacrifice his life to save his son). But that doesn't mean good is evil or evil is good. It means that a superficial understanding of good and evil is unrealistic. That masturbation has health benefits has to do with the way human sex organs work - not the way they're used. God has His reasons for such, and since He understands everything from eternity and outside of time, I won't assume to know more than Him.

OP, what about all the contradictions in the Bible? How can you still believe in the faith with those?

>>2438352

Clarification: The Church emphasizes on the avoidance of evil more than the encouragement of good at times because man is inclined to sin and error. He can forget the gravity of sin or lose the sense of sin, such as pornography desensitizing a man to the evil of pornography. Evil always seems less evil and almost normal when it is committed, but it is never the less evil than it really is (and the conscience can attest to that when it sends guilty feelings - like wake up calls - to the person guilty of evil)

>>2438824

Contradictions in detail are but absence and misunderstanding in detail. The biblical writers didn't write everything down (ex: the stories about Jesus don't add up to the number of years He lived), and we can misunderstand what they say (such as the infamous "God ordered them to pee on the wall" incident in the biblical scholar community). This is why proper translations and interpretations are necessary.

I do laugh when some Catholics try to piece together what happened at the Resurrection, since the accounts of the Resurrection aren't meant to pay a picture of what happened but are meant to show that Jesus is the High Priest and Messiah and is Man (Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke and Acts of the Apostles) and that Jesus is God and is the Son of God (Gospel of John).

>>2438947

aren't meant to paint a picture*

>>2438521
>Sex is for both pleasure and reproduction, never one without the other
Can you elaborate more?

Do you realy believe in transubstantiation?
How do you deal with the fact that if you dont believe in it you arent allowed to call yourself catholic?
I mean wtf. You have to believe that the eucharistia ACTUALLY and materialy transforms into real human blood and human flesh. Thats sick!

>>2439001

Sure thing. Sex has two ends: pleasure and reproduction. Both ends must be met for sex to be moral. If not, than the sexual act is evil. Sex is naturally about pleasure and reproduction, so it's not like a spouse has to fret over his intentions during sex so long as he did nothing to impede either his spouse's pleasure or the possibility of children.

I hope that helps.

>>2439072
Ok. Also, what do you think about drugs in general? What about psychotropics in particular?

>implying Jesus ever claimed he was more "God" than anyone else was
>implying Jesus ever taught belief in a "Trinity"
>implying Jesus wouldn't be an Orthodox Rabbi if he was around today

Face it, if the Son of Man came back today, you wouldn't even come close to recognising him.

>>2439010

Yes, I believe in the dogma that the bread and wine change into the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, Who is present under the appearance of bread and wine.

At Baptism, you make promises, such as the promise to believe what the Church does. At Confirmation, you renew your baptismal promises. When you dip your fingers into the holy water font, you remember your baptismal promises. When you participate in Mass, you show you keep to your baptismal promises. A promise is a solemn declaration and is binding on the person who makes it, unless the promise is evil or unless the person revokes the promise. If a person wants to be Catholic but not keep his baptismal promises, than he's a hypocrite. If he doesn't like the promises - such as if he doesn't believe in Transubstantiation anymore - than he should revoke them. And if he revokes them, he's no longer a Catholic, since baptismal promises are naturally Catholic.

What seems to be cannibalism is the fulfillment of God's promise of New Manna, New Pasch, and New Todah. But I can understand the disgust, since cannibalism is evil.

>>2439130

Drug abuse is a mortal sin. Drugs in themselves, like all medicine, are good. It's the difference between taking marijuana for medical purposes and abusing marijuana - even if for medical purposes - as recreation, such as to get high.

>>2439174
just logically, wouldnt that mean you couldnt get drunk from the wine you get? What if you drink the wine and you get alcohol tested. Wouldnt that prove that it didnt turn to blood?

>>2439214
So I can only take drugs if a doctor tells me to do so?

>>2439167

Jesus applied the Jewish Names and Attributes for God to Himself, such as saying He was I AM and saying He could forgive sins.

Jesus commanded the Church to baptize in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Over time, doctrine has developed, due, in part, to counter heresies.

The "historical Jesus" would be a combination of a Jewish-Gentile Pharisee-Essenes Rabbi-Magician Messiah-Prophet Priest-Heretic in legion with and opposed to Rome.

>>2439216

You can get drunk on the wine because it keeps its appearance. Appearance doesn't just meant what you see, it means what you see, smell, taste, touch, feel, hear and get effected by something. Because of this, it takes faith - not belief without proof but understanding based on evidence - to believe in Transubstantiation.

>>2439232

No, you should keep to what is healthy. You don't need a prescription for coffee, unless coffee does your body harm somehow. As an example.

I was raised Catholic. I attended three separate private schools from first grade to high school. My entire family's Catholic, my sister's a theology / philosophy Ph.D student, my only friend is Catholic, they're all somewhat serious about it.

I have some pretty serious issues with Catholic moral guidelines and ethics, including the refusal to ordain female priests, the acceptance of 'natural family planning' over condoms although statistically they accomplish the same thing, and so on, and the patently bizarre and painful explanations which priests, philosophers and other apologists give for these things.

The biggest issue I have is with the Catholic stance on homosexuality, however. From my perspective, in the best-case scenario, gay church members are tolerated, but continually told that they will die alone, will never be able to form a meaningful relationship, they will never form a family, experience love, or any of that; it is reserved for heterosexuals. The only valid explanations given for this usually come to antiquated notions of sexuality devised at a time when procreation was an absolute given as it was required for farm help and such, and a vague definition of monogamous love by a bunch of old guys in Rome. (It's been shown that American nuns have more support for same-sex marriage, and they've been censured for some reason, showing that the Vatican considers women a threat to their administration.)

>>2439407
That's the best-case. It gets a lot worse from there. There are pray-the-gay-away concentration suicide camps, which every competent psychologist correctly identifies as a form of emotional abuse. There's well-documented discrimination and hostility toward single adults in Catholic communities, even if they aren't gay. My own middle-school choir teacher was _run out of town_ after he was outed, no joke. What disturbs me most, however, is the millions upon millions of dollars direct from pew donations being poured into lobbyist groups designed to deny homosexuals basic civil rights. One such group, NOM, gave $100,000 to an 'outreach coordinator' to literally bully kids into speaking poorly of their adoptive parents on YouTube.

For these reasons I can't in good conscience support the Church. I understand that they do a lot of charitable good in the world, and I respect Catholics and their faith, but I can't be a part of it and live with myself.

>>2439415
I talked to a priest about all of this during Confession. He referred me to a site called CourageRC.org, which was the same thinly-disguised self-hatred bursting at the seams. The maintainers of the site include a 75-year-old guy who was happily married to a same-sex partner until the partner died of cancer. The papers linked include 'The Health Risks of Gay Sex', a blatantly biased article masquerading as a peer-reviewed scholarly article written by some M.D. with pretty wild and unsubstantiated claims, citing books from forty years ago as evidence that monogamous same-sex relationships do not exist. I checked some other websites about this topic, e.g. OnceCatholic.org, a site for ex-Catholics thinking about returning, and discrimination against gays seemed to be the #1 reason people left according to their message boards.

>>2439407

Female priests aren't allowed because God commanded male priests. There are many reasons for this, such as divine representation and gender neutrality, fulfillment of messianic prophecies, role of men and women in the Church and in humanity, and so forth.

I don't like statistics, such as the ones about 78% of Catholic believe this or don't believe that, or the ones about condoms working 90% of the time, or how NFP works 78% of the time. I don't think statistics should dictate either morals or truths.

Your beef with the Church on homosexuality seems to come from three misconceptions: Historical, doctrinal, and religious.

Historically, homosexuality has been opposed because it was seen as immoral, because it was unnatural, not just because it didn't procreate.

Doctrinally, the Church has declared what love is and why certain acts offend love - such as homosexuality. This is best seen in the encyclical Deus Cartias Est.

Religiously, Catholics promise to believe what the Church does and nuns vow to obey the Church. The nuns who oppose the Vatican, than, are hypocrites, just as the Catholics who don't keep their promises are hypocrites.

"Old guys in Rome" is a broad assumption, since there are young people in Rome, not all old people are dumb, and just because something is old, doesn't mean it's out of date. Sex is old, human nature is old, and the Earth is old, but neither of them are out of date.

File: 1336943130665.jpg-(29 KB, 383x329, 1202339761051.jpg)

>I don't think statistics should dictate either morals or truths.
>I don't think statistics should dictate either morals or truths.
>I don't think statistics should dictate either morals or truths.
>I don't think statistics should dictate either morals or truths.
>I don't think statistics should dictate either morals or truths.

>>2439605
Why let facts get in the way of philosophical treatises written hundreds of years ago?

>>2439643

Because they don't follow God's logic.

It's a logic beyond any human comprehension. Only a truly omniscient being could understand the subtleties of His perfect logic.

That is why we need to have faith, because we are too inferior to understand the true nature of our existence.

Bueller?

Bueller?

BUELLER!!!!

>>2439459

If you have a problem with a Catholic movement or community, report it to the Vatican with tangible evidence. Don't make the same mistake that the Legion of Christ victims made by not reporting the abuse going on in the Legion.

>>2439560
I've seen high-ranking Catholic officials go a lot further than claim that homosexuality is 'offensive to love'. Some archbishops are making public statements of the form 'legalizing same-sex marriage in New York will destroy society'. Absolutely no backup for the claim, no rationale that I'm capable of following aside from 'God told me so', constant mention of wanton hedonism which just isn't as common among homosexuals as it was in the 70's and 80's, back when gay marriage was unthinkable.

You'd think people would be happy about something that promotes stable relationships. But then again, statistics (such as those showing that states which recognize gay marriage tend to have better living conditions and more stable relationships for gays) are untrustworthy and can't be used to make ethical decisions, same-sex attraction is evil because it's 'unnatural' or 'disordered' or whatever loosely-defined term CourageRC.org wants to use this week, and there's absolutely no way in hell that any of this doctrine is encouraging Americans to treat homosexuals like second-class citizens at best and bully them literally to death at worst.

Catholics are almost as bad as jews.

Prove me wrong.

>>2439696
The bishop of the diocese was actually one of the people involved in the firing of the gay teacher. He later became the Archbishop of Denver and was similarly involved in getting a child kicked out of a Catholic school because she had two mommies. That combined with widespread sex abuse cover-up scandals and unfounded attacks on nun groups, and it's easy to see why I have absolutely no trust or faith in the Vatican hierarchy.

>>2439732

Strawman.

>>2439752

Hasty generalization.

>>2439755

Broad assumptions.

If you guys are going to be against the Church, at least don't let fallacies dictate your reasons why.

if you believe in god, why do you worship him

>>2439830

Because that's a false dilemma and because it's a misconception that faith is belief without proof.

>>2439790
Don't ask me to actually pull up the relevant articles. I'm not sure anyone really reported on my teacher anyway, it was all very hush-hush. I've talked to him and the people involved to confirm this.

I'm confused. I thought archbishops were pretty influential people in the church hierarchy, they aren't strawmen.

In any case, since my family's predominantly Catholic I'm feeling pressured to keep quiet about my opposition to all of this. I was more-or-less forced into Confirmation (and I wasn't the only one) and I feel absolutely anxious, nervous, and somewhat guilty whenever stepping into a church, like I'm an unwanted outsider, an invader. I've been giving a lot of thought to converting to the Anglican church, which is compatible in many respects with Catholicism but not as crazy.

>>2439732
Are Cultural Marxists really that blind? Gay marriage will destroy society, along with all the other shit your lot has done.

Look at divorce rates, abortion, single-mothers, pre-marital sex and so on. All of these are recent, and have only come about after a single shift in public consciousness towards the far-left.

If you think your ideas don't harm society, then you're clearly delusional. What may seem harmless and isolated, often has a far greater, more detrimental tricke-down effect on society. Particularly when these kinds of things are implemented through various laws and encouraged through the media.

Gay marriage will be the nail in the coffin for marriage. Marriage will fail to offer any benefit. In fact modern society now views marring age as a bad thing! Who wants to get married? You'll probably get divorced, lose your stuff etc.

Tell your story about the delusional priest to the millions of kids raised in father-less homes, or the millions of souls being aborted in the name of women's rights.

>>2439908
What in the blue fuck does gay marriage have to do with anything you've listed, sir

>>2439908
Divorce rates and abortion rates have actually shrunk in the last decade. Usually the social conservatives have been reduced to whining about vague notions of 'moral decay'.

>>2439865

"Strawman" referred to your descriptions of what the Church believes.

Bishops are not like bosses. They care for people, they don't control people.

I think you're mistaking religious education for coercion of the will. That's a common mistake that kids make, at least as regards having to go to school for public or private education.

How do you explain that Jesus who you so love hated the gentiles and called them pigs and dogs.Jesus also said that he was only send to the lost sheep of israel and that you only can be his disciple if you keep the whole law and that you have to be better at keeping the law of moses than the pharisees to enter heaven.

>>2439968
Compare that to BEFORE you came in and fucked everything up. It doesn't look so good now, does it? Care to tell me about divorce and abortion pre-1960's? Any decrease in divorce is likely due to only the more committed getting married, and a huge increase in cohabitation and single-parents. Did you consider that?

>>2440007
When I was 18, my mother cornered me in the basement and yelled at me, asking whether I actually agreed with Church teaching and would go through confirmation. It was more-or-less made clear that I'd be basically disowned if I didn't go along with it. If that's not coercion I'm not sure what is.

>>2440091

If it was, than the sacrament is invalid, e.g., you weren't confirmed.

Also, I would recommend contacting the local authorities if your family is abusing you.

File: 1336947037563.png-(33 KB, 591x689, promiscuity.png)

>>2440007
>"Strawman" referred to your descriptions of what the Church believes.
'Disordered' and 'unnatural' are among the most common explanations of why same-sex marriage is banned, and why the Church is pouring money into attack-ad campaigns to ban it in various states in America, one of two major religious groups to do so (the other being Church of LDS). Whenever I ask anyone knowledgeable to elaborate, they really can't seem to give much of an explanation beyond that. You yourself really haven't described anything beyond both genders being 'naturally compatible' and restricting procreation to 'moral limits'.

Of course most people just resort to quoting Leviticus and Romans. Many Christians interpret those passages as describing hedonism. Christians in general seem to have a serious problem distinguishing hedonism from non-promiscuous same-sex relationships. Statistically it just doesn't happen as much as people would like to think.

>>2440024

Most Jews didn't hate the Gentiles. The derogatory terms "dog" and "pig" are the same as "Gentile", namely, they describe non-Jews, who were likened to non-kosher food, especially when the similarity fit the doctrine being taught: E.g. dogs returning to their vomit fits the teaching that the evil return to their ways, and pigs trampling pearls fits the teaching that some would not understand Jesus' doctrines.

Jesus fulfilled the Law, so it doesn't have to be kept anymore. He said it had to be kept, and the Pharisees obeyed, until the Law was fulfilled, implying it would be fulfilled by Him. But those parts of the Law which are also a part of the Moral Law are still kept, because we follow the Moral Law.

Jesus asked for Christians to not be hypocrites like the Pharisees, who merely worshiped God externally, not internally. As an example: They would wash their hands but not clean their hearts. Hence the beatitude "Blessed are the clean of heart, etc."

>>2440210

That homosexuality is unnatural and disordered is an axiom, e.g., a self-evident truth. You might know three other axioms: 1) That all men are created equal
2) That all men are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights
3) That among these inalienable rights are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness

>Most Jews didn't hate the Gentiles.
I didnt say anything about most of the jews but ok. this only says that Jesus was a radical insane gentilehating jew who insulted and hated them so much that he even refused to TALK to the gentiles. Bear in mind that our forefathers were gentiles and whenever you read the gospels just imagine that those gentiles who jesus calls pigs and dogs are your living relatives at that time.

>>2440377

The strawmen keep on piling up.

>>2440316
Those three axioms are what I most often use when defending marriage equality. Ironic that you'd bring them up.

How exactly is it self-evident? As far as I can tell, it's only been understood to be true in the past because 2% of a small world population can be safely ignored, while 2% of 7 billion and counting cannot.

It's much like transgendered individuals, and there are campaigns from the Catholic hierarchy to deny them rights and protections as well, along with flawed papers on CourageRC to attempt to back up their rationale, suggesting that they're perfectly healthy and are attempting to mutilate their bodies for no valid reason. I've personally seen the end-results of this: a friend of mine was fired from her job explicitly for being transgender, with a signed written statement from the employer saying as much. It's legal to do so in this state, because Jesus said so, or something.

>>2440262

>Jesus fulfilled the Law, so it doesn't have to be kept anymore. He said it had to be kept, and the Pharisees obeyed, until the Law was fulfilled, implying it would be fulfilled by Him. But those parts of the Law which are also a part of the Moral Law are still kept, because we follow the Moral Law.

What?! Where the hell did you get this from? Jesus said to his disciples that you have to keep the thora as long as the earth exists and that not even a single letter of the law should be changed. So go get circumcised, stop eating pork and shellfish, sacrafice animals for sins, stone children to death for disobeying parents and kill homosexuals and adulterers because this is what the law commands you to do.

>>2440405
Matthew 15
21 And Jesus went away from there and withdrew to the district of Tyre and Sidon. 22 And behold, a Canaanite woman from that region came out and cried, "Have mercy on me, O Lord, Son of David; my daughter is severely possessed by a demon." 23 But he did not answer her a word. And his disciples came and begged him, saying, "Send her away, for she is crying after us." 24 He answered, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." 25 But she came and knelt before him, saying, "Lord, help me." 26 And he answered, "It is not fair to take the children's bread and throw it to the dogs."

>>2440447

Appeal to novelty and appeal to popularity are both fallacies.

I'm going to keep calling you guys out on your fallacies from now, because I've never seen people use so many fallacies in such a short span of time.

Homosexuality and transgender are not opposed because they are minorities. That is just as much a fallacy as the argument that "If X was done to Y minority group, there would be so much hatred and support from the population and media".

If you haven't done so already, I suggest you learn about the Moral Law and its history, with eyes for the truth and not with the eyes of John Boswell. If you have done so already, I suggest you check out the Summa of Thomas Aquinas, which is a compendium of ancient philosophy from before the time of Christ to the time of Aquinas.

>>2440508

Cherry picking is a form of lying.

"Hi, we are the Roman Catholics. We used to commit atrocities, conquer countries and manipulate commoners and countries into giving us money. However, we can forget about all of that and all of the "translations" of the bible we have made. We are fine now, forget about our past."

Yea, that's why I am not a Catholic anymore. Most Catholic's do not even practice their religion, they just get their kids baptized and crap because of stupid traditions but they never actually believe any of it.

I'm calling troll, no one on here is this stupid/ignorant.

>2438130
>implying gay sex is unnatural

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals

If it's unnatural, why the fuck is the whole animal kingdom doing it?

>>2440550

Putting words into people's mouths won't help your case, I'm afraid.

Neither will holding a grudge against the Church for past sins.

Nor will blaming the Church for things it never did, like the various Protestant translations of the Bible.

>>2440597

I answered that here: >>2438130

>>2440597
Because this is a troll thread. OP knows about appeal to novelty/popularity yet apparantly he's never heard of the naturalistic fallacy, which is babbys first fallacy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalistic_fallacy

>>2440516
My sister's life work is based on Thomistic studies. That's not really my academic realm of expertise, I deal in facts and figures, algorithms and proofs, not abstract philosophy based in arbitrary axioms. I'm not making a fallacious argument here: the Church is asserting that LGBT individuals are inherently immoral in their actions, and that they have the ability to change who they are (without facts or evidence to back this up, and large amounts of studies and statistics to the contrary) or that they can only live ethically by restraining themselves from living as the rest of humanity does and dealing with their problems by more-or-less blatantly ignoring them (which I find to be pretty cruel to say the least).

No amount of Catholic doctrine is going to convince me that denying rights, protections and privileges to one specific group of people (right to marry, right to reasonable legal protection at work/school from targeted harassment, right to become priests or serve in the military, etc.) is somehow right and just. I cannot and will not support it, and I cannot and will not associate myself with a group that supports it. It'd be like supporting Planned Parenthood. I understand their arguments for why they feel abortion is necessary, but I disagree entirely with their conclusions.

>>2440630
You're replying as if this is a serious thread and that he actually believes what he is typing. Stop doing that.

>>2440614

If animals naturally do it and it's no sin, there's no reason for humans to do it and for it to be sinful.

Before your bullshit beliefs started taking over the world, homosexuality was normal in a large number of human cultures. Then your church came along and destroyed anything it deemed "unnatural" and set human knowledge back a thousand years.

>>2440628

"Unnatural and disordered" is not the naturalistic fallacy. There is a difference between saying something is moral because it's natural - the argument from animals - and saying something is moral because it's both natural and ordered - the argument that marriage is between one man and one woman.

>>2440630

The Church has the right to declare evil as evil and good as good.

That homosexual acts are an intrinsic evil means they can never conform to nature nor be ordered to good nor can they ever be committed under any circumstances, which means they are also irrational and against the human person.

Ironically, you're saying the Church is irrational and against the human person for telling homosexuals this. You further believe the Church is wrong about believing in the axiom that homosexuality is evil, unnatural and disordered. I can't prove axioms to you, because they are self-evident.

But you have yet to prove the axiom is not true.

But as you have implied, you will never do that. You are just like Stephen Hawking: He doesn't believe in philosophy and there's no way to prove to him that philosophy is good, and you don't believe homosexuality is evil and there's no way to prove to you that the axiom is true.

>>2440691

Argument from popularity is a fallacy.

So is the argument against religion about "setting back society a 1000 years".

>>2440701
Stephen Hawking isn't pouring millions and millions of dollars into political campaigns to ban philosophy and demonize religious people.

I've always wondered what exactly the problem is with same-sex marriage, even as a kid. It seems I won't be getting much of an answer here aside from 'because we said so'. We'll just have to agree to disagree I suppose.

>>2440819

Than I win the argument, since you haven't proven your claims yet and still used strawman in that post to back up your claim.

what exactly do religious folk mean when they say being gay physically changes you? and where in the bible does it say this?

Because I do not fucking understand. I mean even if you say they dress flamboyantly I'd say not every gay person does, and the only one I could think of is stretching out the asshole, but even heterosexual couples do that soooooooooo.......

Why is sodomy such a big deal anyway?

why is the pope such an important person?

I thought no one man was super close to god, but I have no fucking clue because Ive never gone to church

>>2440916

That would be a materialist argument, and materialism has been debunked for thousands of years, ever since it was discovered that material - like the body - isn't the only real thing that exist in the world. There are other things - like reason, morals, and logic - which are immaterial realities.

>>2440916

In the Bible, it is stated that those who practice homosexual acts (termed "homosexuals", from the Greek homo- for same and -sexual for sex act) will not inherit the Kingdom of God, so long as they aren't repent - which is presumed on the readers' part, since the reader would know Catholic doctrine, since the Bible was made by and for Catholics.

>>2440847
Do I need to enumerate the ways the Catholic Church is spending money through lobbyist groups to block same-sex marriage throughout the country? I honestly don't understand why you keep referring to strawmen.

There's really no argument to be had here. You follow a religion that says it's evil, disordered and unnatural and can be 'fixed', and you base this all on an axiom which you claim is self-evident, by definition, something which humans can naturally discover on their own just through the human condition. You admit that you can't really explain or elaborate on it beyond that, although you point out a few old works of Catholic philosophy which build on that basic notion.

I'm a human, and personally never really saw it as self-evident, not as a kid, not now. I grew up in the conservative Midwest in a devoutly Catholic household with Catholic classmates and teachers and they weren't really able to convince me of that. There's also significant evidence that suggests some genetic component to one's orientation, which implies that it's not possible to 'become straight'. This is further supported by the absolutely miserable results of ex-gay therapy camps, which tend to have higher suicide rates than successful conversion rates, as shown by follow-through studies.

It's my word against yours, basically. We won't agree on this. Personally, I'm not going to follow a faith which hates me. I'm not going to convince myself I'm an abomination. If I'm going to deny myself a family or a future it's going to be a conscious decision of self-restraint, not some faux morality imposed against my will by others. I understand where you're coming from and respect your stance on this matter, but there's no argument to be had here.

>>2440975
Why would someone want the kingdom of god though? what kind of merits do you get for that?

>>2440928

The Pope is Christ's Vicar and the visible head of the Church, which is both invisible (in Heaven) and visible (on Earth), and who's invisible head is Christ; and just as the heavenly Church is greater than the earthly Church in terms of holiness and closeness to Christ, so too Christ is greater than the Pope, by virtue of His Divinity

>>2440847

You can never disprove an axiom from within a system built on it. If any conclusio contradicts the axiom, then at least one of the premises that lead to the conclusio is wrong. You define "homosexuality is bad" as true, then expect that people disprove "homosexuality is bad" from within the system that is built on the very foundation that homosexuality is bad. It is an impossible task. Thus, you are full of shit.

>>2441002

Eternal and absolute happiness, a fruit of the Beatific Vision.

>>2441033

Think outside the box. You can't disprove that Islam is false by appealing to Islamic faith, but you can by historical and other tangible evidence. The same goes for the axiom. After all, science marches on and philosophy develops over time.

>>2441046
But how can a soul accept eternal peace and happiness, knowing that a religion has killed people for simply not believing

And why would a soul be happy knowing that they're destined to be with someone who tells them to fear and love them, and that the first chance of doing something wrong they'll be banished forever from his side

>>2441125

Because that's a misconception about religion, and because the end of morality is man's happiness and God is Happiness Itself.

>>2441137
what? what does that even mean?

pootblox

>>2441125

Also because to fear and love God is to love your neighbor. Fearing God means loving Him so much that one fears to sin, and thus does not sin against his neighbor but loves him.

>>2440939

Would you mind pointing out the fine difference between reason and logic.

Morality is not materialistic in the sense that I can take it and shove it down your throat, but as different cultures have different morals, it is not immaterial in the sense that it exists and is, piece by piece, discovered by humans. It is fabricated.

If you knew anything about logic, you would never say that logic is immaterial, either. Any logic is nothing but a system that allows to transform different statements into each other and, given a number of preconditions, evaluate certain statements to conform or not conform the axioms, Logic is fabricated.

what do you guys think of protestants and christians?

Do you hate them for separating from the church?

>>2441158

God is Spirit and God is All-Good: He has every perfection, including self-sufficiency, and therefore also complete happiness, whereby, because He has no parts or pieces but is so simple that His Attributes are Himself, God is Happiness Itself.

>>2441076

>refuses to think outside strict constraints, built around axioms that were simply declared true without questioning the axioms themselves
>encourages others to think outside the box

>>2441165

Learn philosophy, kid.

>>2441167

Some Catholics hate them. I don't. The Church loves them.

>>2441160
but he'll smite me down for not believing, or test my loyalties constantly. And he expects me to accept bad shit happening in my life because I'm supposed to have "faith"?

all that for the one time reward of eternal peace

>>2441194
i still don't even understand wtf you are saying

thats my complaint with all you religious folk, someone non religious asks you a questions and you people start tossing out mumbo jumbo

>>2441209

>don't know shit about formal systems
>YOU BETTER LEARN SOME PHILOSOPHY, KID