Re: Sin?

From: RFaussette@aol.com
Date: Wed Jul 09 2003 - 09:15:07 EDT

  • Next message: Debbie Mann: "RE: PROSPERITY"

    In a message dated 7/8/03 10:29:39 PM Eastern Daylight Time, gmurphy@raex.com
    writes:

    > The argument is quite simple. If the ONLY thing wrong with homosexual
    > behavior
    > is that it does not lead to offspring, then there is nothing wrong with it
    > as long as
    > the person who engages in such behavior also has heterosexual intercourse in
    > order to
    > have offspring. I do not agree with the conclusion because I don't agree
    > with the major
    > premise. But the argument itself is very clear.
    >
    > Shalom,
    > George
    >
    >
    >

    For the record, that is not the ONLY thing wrong with homosexual behavior,
    but that is the major thing. Homosexuality dilutes the traditional family
    structure. Homosexual sub-culture spread by the media teaches our children to
    abandon the Levitical prohibitions and organized homosexuals attack the traditional
    established churches because they say the churches are the reason for hatred
    against homosexuals. Not so. George does not look at the real world in fornt
    of him when he responds to me. I have seen the homosexual sub-culture first
    hand in NYC and it is not pretty.
    The catholic church pedophilia scandal is caused by homosexuals, not
    pedophiles. I volunteered in a catholic parish for 8 years and have seen the damage
    homosexuals are doing to the religious orders, particularly here in America.
    Many homosexuals become priests for the "life style" (that term specifically
    given to me by a 75 year old Carmelite monk - who should know) - the parishioners
    fawn over them, constantly give them gifts, but I can't respect a priest who
    becomes a priest for the comfortable life style in which he can practice his
    homosexuality in comfort because its simply not religious.

    George says, that according to my argument it's OK to be a homosexual as
    long as you procreate heterosexually, but my position is that if you can control
    your sex drive, you are doing what Jesus did, which is to discipline the
    body. Discipline and mastery over the body IS the essence of personal religion and
    the self sacrifice. George says cheating is OK. I suggest cheating is OK
    rhetorically, but cheating to satisfy the body's sex drive is still not religion.
    To me, george is arguing that the sex drive should rule. I am arguing that
    religious self discipline should rule. My quote regarding the Jews of eastern
    europe was a historical example of the kind of displacement that occurs when one
    community observes the Levitical prohibitions and another does not.
    George has repeatedly ignoreed my point that you either succumb to the sex
    drive or succumb to religion (as in Judaism and Christianity or even
    zoroastrianism)
    but you can't do both...
    That argument is crystal clear.

    rich faussette



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Jul 09 2003 - 09:15:29 EDT