Some thoughts...

Resa77 · March 2012

Yeah, I guess you could call it that. But couldn't you call any chaste boyfriend/girlfriend relationship "friendship?" I know I wouldn't want my FI, before we were engaged, to refer to our relationship as just "friendship."

Eliz77 · March 2012

I have a couple thoughts on this whole thread...

First off, I have had friends who do the same thing on FB, posting several posts that seem just designed to get the readers riled up regarding different religious views (and don't get me started about the political posts!). I believe I was blessed to have grown up with parents who preached tolerance and acceptance towards all people, regardless of culture, race, religion, sexual orientation or anything that may be different than mine.

However, what has been a real learning experience for me is also tolerating/accepting that there will be those who do not feel as I do (as in, aren't as accepting/tolerant about people living differently than they do). I struggle with this, I really do. I don't understand how Catholics can say Jesus loves us all, God created us all equally, and then call someone a sinner based on who they love, or actions that they feel is right for them, even when I believe is not right for me.

Homosexuality is a topic that hits home for me, because in my field of work, I do know several same-sex couples. I understand the Churches view that marriage is for the purpose of re-creation. I also know couples who have adopted children, who couldn't be more loved or more well adjusted then if they had opposite sex parents. So, for me, when people criticize their way of family life, I just smile and think about this couple who rescued two sibiling from their drug addicted mother who's excuse was,"Well, I'm Catholic, can't take BC or have abortions." and put her own desires above the healths of her unborn children (FIVE kids all born addicted to heroin, all with various degrees of learning and/or behavioral disablities. She's in prison now so hopefully there will be no more kids).

But to those who feel my friends are sinners, that's fine. You are entitled to your opinions. I personally do not believe they belong in the same space with, say, Catholic priests who molest little boys. To each our own. I just wish there was more room for tolerance, for accepting different lifestyles. Then again, at one point it was illegal for interracial/interreligious marriages, so I imagine that one day same-sex marriages will be more widely accepted.

Disclaimer...this is all just my humble opinion. I am in no way trying to start an arguement for/against homosexuality being a sin. I respect some people may feel as I do, and others may not. I just wanted to share my thoughts on the topics since this is a forum after all!

lalaith50 · March 2012

Resa- in this context, to me, "chastity" would refer to avoiding anything sexual, including kissing.

There are some (I think always Christian,) couples who would engage in courting this way- but with a deliberate end goal of marriage. For a SS couple, obviously according to the CC they would never be able to get married, so they could be friends, even with a close (but non-sexual) relationship, but if they were, for example Catholics wanting to live "chastely," I'm not sure why they would even think it a good idea to engage in activities like kissing.

(Sorry, I'm rambling here, and I feel like I've kind of lost the direction of how this point relates to the original question! :-P )

newlyseliski · March 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_some-thoughts?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:615Discussion:4dd73fe3-3892-43de-937a-86720026175aPost:e5660433-9033-4c18-93ad-792a54bb4607">Re: Some thoughts...</a>:
[QUOTE]Yeah, I guess you could call it that. But couldn't you call any chaste boyfriend/girlfriend relationship "friendship?" I know I wouldn't want my FI, before we were engaged, to refer to our relationship as just "friendship."
Posted by Resa77[/QUOTE]

<div>Well... at that point, you were essentially discerning together whether called to the vocation of marriage. An essential component of marriage is sex... sex within marriage is meant to be free, total, faithful and fruitful... several components of which are missing in homosexual acts by their very nature. For those who choose not to act on their homosexual inclinations, I'm sure that friendship with and support from others who are struggling with the same things are essential... but since they would understand marriage to be impossible, friendship is really the only option for the same reason that premarital cohabitation for a heterosexual couple could lead to sin by proximity of temptation... not to mention scandal... even if the couple intends to remain chaste and not give in to temptation.</div>

Resa77 · March 2012

No prob, Lala! I see what you're saying. I guess I don't think "chaste" means "no kissing unless you might get married." I just don't really see what wrong with 2 gay men being in a romantic relationship where they kiss, hold hands, go on dates, call each other "sweetie," and whatever straight couples do. If they're not having sex in any capacity, I don't see a huge moral issue with it. Does that make sense?

I'm not trying to say there is no way there's anything wrong with it. I'm just saying I don't see what's wrong with it. I'm seeking knowledge, and I find you ladies to be knowledgeable

lalaith50 · March 2012

Well... most of us probably know from experience that kissing leads to VERY strong feelings and desires to do other things, which for us trying to be good Catholics, is strong incentive to get married! Why stir up those feelings when natural law does not allow you to get married?

mica178 · March 2012

H has a dear friend who is an evangelical Christian and gay. He has never kissed anyone because no one in his religion is supposed to kiss until after marriage. He has a dear "friend," with whom he has a completely platonic relationship, but that person is his partner for traveling or movies or eating out. As we age, so many of our peers end up married and with families, it's hard for a person to be completely single. I think it is very possible to be chaste and gay but have a partner of sorts.

I feel for the guy. He did try psychotherapy to see if he could "change," but he never felt any heterosexual urges. He tried dating a woman, but he never felt attracted to her, so he didn't feel right pursuing marriage.

monkeysip · March 2012

I would argue that it is wrong for heterosexual couples to date like that.

Catholics don't "date" like in the modern sense, they have courtships in which they discern marriage. That doesn't mean you have to marry the first person you date, but dating should always have the end goal of marriage, when you discern that that is your vocation and you find the right person.

There are technically only two formal vocations: marriage and the religious life. It is acceptable to be neither married nor religious, but being "single" is not a specific vocation. I would argue that it is wrong to date just for the sake of dating, if you know that marriage is not your vocation.

So by that same reasoning, I don't believe in homosexual chaste dating. Of course homosexuals can have close friends of whichever sex. But it shouldn't be romantic. Not only would that not be fitting for their vocation, but also it would be a near occasion of sin, which is, of course, a sin in itself.

ChicagoRach · March 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_some-thoughts?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:615Discussion:4dd73fe3-3892-43de-937a-86720026175aPost:16335278-ca71-4170-8f8d-6cfee68f1bd5">Re: Some thoughts...</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Some thoughts... : I think part of this is because of the current political push for societal approval of homosexual acts and relationships, it has put many on the defensive....<strong>watching Christians be persecuted for upholding the truth about marriage</strong>, etc and fearing that the worst is yet to come will naturally lead people to speak more vociferously about this issue if they feel attacked. ETA not saying this negates the need for charity, and in fact probably makes it even more necessary but I think this explains some of that perception.
Posted by caitriona87[/QUOTE]

Please remember that this is "truth" as you (and the Catholic Church) perceive it. It is not everyone's "truth" and those who do not share your beliefs should not be expected to live their lives in accordance with them.

ootmother2 · March 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_some-thoughts?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural Wedding BoardsForum:615Discussion:4dd73fe3-3892-43de-937a-86720026175aPost:f1758aa4-30e1-48fa-8855-2d75f196c41f">Re: Some thoughts...</a>:
[QUOTE]H has a dear friend who is an evangelical Christian and gay. He has never kissed anyone because no one in his religion is supposed to kiss until after marriage. He has a dear "friend," with whom he has a completely platonic relationship, but that person is his partner for traveling or movies or eating out. As we age, so many of our peers end up married and with families, it's hard for a person to be completely single. I think it is very possible to be chaste and gay but have a partner of sorts. I feel for the guy. He did try psychotherapy to see if he could "change," but he never felt any heterosexual urges. He tried dating a woman, but he never felt attracted to her, so he didn't feel right pursuing marriage.
Posted by mica178[/QUOTE]

I get that mica. I had an uncle who lived with the same man for about 30 years after being engaged to a woman for 3 or 4 years.. I remember when they came to visit when I was a kid, my mom put them in the upstairs guest room so they would have their privacy away from 5 kids.

Years later, when I was a teenager, I did wonder if they were gay but of course I would never ask. I went to visit them in San Francisco when I was in college and found that they lived in a lovely house, each with their own bedroom. I think that gave me the nerve to ask my uncle about his friend Ward. He gave a huge laugh and said "No, I'm a deacon of the church and we're not allowed to have sex outside of marriage and Ward and I aren't married"

He was a wonderful man and I sill miss him. He took me to a New Years Eve party in Paris in 2002 and I got to meet all his friends from when he lived there. He passed away that summer and I'm very glad I had that special time with him.

monkeysip · March 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_some-thoughts?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:615Discussion:4dd73fe3-3892-43de-937a-86720026175aPost:83b61751-0d4f-45e1-be87-29c31eaa59dc">Re: Some thoughts...</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Some thoughts... : Please remember that this is "truth" as you (and the Catholic Church) perceive it. It is not everyone's "truth" and those who do not share your beliefs should not be expected to live their lives in accordance with them.
Posted by ChicagoRach[/QUOTE]

I don't believe that the law should reflect the beliefs of a particular religion. I do, however, believe that the law should reflect morality (natural law). If it doesn't, then it only reflects the arbitrary whim of whomever is in power. And I do believe that gay marriage goes against natural law, not just christian law.

ootmother2 · March 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_some-thoughts?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural Wedding BoardsForum:615Discussion:4dd73fe3-3892-43de-937a-86720026175aPost:9adbeffe-405d-44f1-85df-dc4d355c1dd3">Re: Some thoughts...</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Some thoughts... : I don't believe that the law should reflect the beliefs of a particular religion. I do, however, believe that the law should reflect morality (natural law). If it doesn't, then it only reflects the arbitrary whim of whomever is in power. And I do believe that gay marriage goes against natural law, not just christian law.
Posted by monkeysip[/QUOTE]

I understand this totally but it doesn't go against civil law and gay marriage laws are changing with each election. That's the problem with all these debates. Separation of church and state and all that good stuff.

mica178 · March 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_some-thoughts?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:615Discussion:4dd73fe3-3892-43de-937a-86720026175aPost:53f3cbd0-1f62-4524-a26e-32fffd590302">Re: Some thoughts...</a>:
[QUOTE]I would argue that it is wrong for heterosexual couples to date like that. Catholics don't "date" like in the modern sense, they have courtships in which they discern marriage. That doesn't mean you have to marry the first person you date, but dating should always have the end goal of marriage, when you discern that that is your vocation and you find the right person. There are technically only two formal vocations: marriage and the religious life. It is acceptable to be neither married nor religious, but being "single" is not a specific vocation. <strong>I would argue that it is wrong to date just for the sake of dating, if you know that marriage is not your vocation.</strong> So by that same reasoning, I don't believe in homosexual chaste dating. Of course homosexuals can have close friends of whichever sex. But it shouldn't be romantic. Not only would that not be fitting for their vocation, but also it would be a near occasion of sin, which is, of course, a sin in itself.
Posted by monkeysip[/QUOTE]

How do you define dating?

My grandmother has had the same "boyfriend" for twenty years. They eat almost 100% of their meals together, they spend every holiday together, and they have traveled the world together. They don't have sex, and they don't live together, but they live on the same block, and when they travel, I think they share a room but have separate beds. They never married because obviously kids aren't a possibility at this point, and both have children from their prior marriage (both are widowed), so neither wanted to affect inheritances. I look at my grandmother's "boyfriend" as a grandfather-like figure, and he was in our wedding photos as such.

It's chaste companionship. How is there a problem with that? Before she met him, my grandmother was a lonely woman. Meeting my "Uncle" made her a much happier, more energetic person who is actively involved in her church and with her family.

Eliz77 · March 2012

mica178, I see absolutely nothing wrong with your Grandmother's relationship. In fact, most of us can only hope to find a companion like that, who shares the same interests, values and beliefs. Good for her! I had an Aunt in a same sex relationship, although they had their own rooms in both their everyday home and vacation home. They shared many similar interests and hobbies and did everything together. When my Aunt was diagnosed and then dying from cancer, her companion never left her side, even retired from her job to take care of her. They may not ever have been able to have kids, but they were happy and lived a full-fulling life regardless.

I think the main argument here is whether sexual relationships carried on not to procreate is wrong. Obviously the Catholic Church says so, therefore it's easy to single out homosexuality because obviously same sex couples cannot procreate. Homosexual acts exist in all societies and even in just about all animals that have been studied, so it's not just a conscious act that can be "cured." IMO, there is no reason to think there is something wrong unless you believe sex only exists for precreation. Gay marriages are legal is some states, and being gay certainly is not illegal.

I don't know...I guess I feel there are more deplorable acts to be concerned with than what two men or women do in their own homes.

lalaith50 · March 2012

Um... Eliz, everyone managed to ignore your first post which had nothing to do with the original discussion, and I'm surprised you would keep posting, especially since you claimed in your first post that you weren't trying to "start something." If you've read everything else so far, especially the original topic, this thread is NOT to debate homosexuality, but since this is the Catholic Board, we are discussing under the *assumption* that homosexual actions are wrong, and we were originally discussing how to relate to those in various kinds of relationships.

And, this thread has almost *nothing* to do with procreating. There are many other reasons that homosexuality is wrong. If you just want to keep saying that you don't think homosexuality is wrong, perhaps you should start another thread to debate that?

ChicagoRach- similar thing. This is the Catholic Board, and your comment has nothing to do with the discussion. *I* don't go over to the GLBT board telling them I think they're sinners, so it would be nice if people didn't wander over here from wherever (or make up new screen names...) and jump into our discussions and randomly tell us that they don't agree with the Catholic Church's official opinion.

Mica- I had to crack up at your Grandma example. I have a Grandma JUST like that... she has a long time "boyfriend." But the reason I laughed was b/c I wondered how on earth you would know if they have sex? I absolutely do not want to think about my Gma that way, and I would probably just about die if it ever came up in conversation!

(I have no reason to think they don't, which is why I'm surprised you know yours does.)

agapecarrie · March 2012

Just to clarify....people can get married even if they are infertile (by reason of health, age, etc).

In order to be "fruitful", one cannot take direct action to sterilize the marital act. This allows for spiritual fruitfulness. What we do with the body is what we do with the soul. They cannot be separated.

newlyseliski · March 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_some-thoughts?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:615Discussion:4dd73fe3-3892-43de-937a-86720026175aPost:660ac49e-d1f0-4bb7-ac28-62ba78fda1cf">Some thoughts...</a>:
[QUOTE]In reading posts that turn into arguments all over FB, I've seen a lot of things I don't like. Obviously, I am deeply offended by the amount of disrespect and bitter hatred against the Church. But one thing that has caught me off guard is how upset I've become over the way some Catholics have responded. There seems to be as much venom in their comments! I think it's REALLY hard to maintain a good balance between being firm on Church teachings, not waivering or watering down, while still treating EVERYONE with great dignity, respect, and love. This is something I'm personally trying to find a balance in right now. I think this is a very important time in which to be super balanced on this. What are all your thoughts? This is seriously something I've been thinking about a lot and I could sure use some more insight into the issue!
Posted by Resa77[/QUOTE]<div>
</div><div>Since I also strayed from the original topic of discussion, I figured that I'd attempt to bring it back on track since I have no patience to deal with an irrelevant debate on relationships, homosexuality and moral relativism in a charitable manner at the moment. I advise all of you to read the books I recommended as well as JPII's encyclical "Love and Responsibility."</div><div>
</div><div>As far as facebook discussions go... I occasionally feel feisty and post something to make a point and remind many of my acquaintance that there is still someone who disagrees with them... which is really the wrong reason to post something in the first place. For the most part, discussions that I've participated in on posts on my own wall have remained pretty civil... the only vitriol from Catholics that I've encountered was actually from a friend that isn't exactly a fan of most hot-button Church teachings. In my last discussion with her, she was at least willing to acknowledge that I had the more difficult position to defend based on the countercultural nature of it. Are you speaking of incivility from Catholics in defense of or against Church teaching? I've definitely seen both... although proportionally a lot more from Catholics attacking Church teaching. I think that there is a lot of good dialogue within the Church, but it can go afoul when (clicky>)<font color="#3366ff"> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://gkupsidedown.blogspot.com/2012/03/attack-of-isms.html">the "isms" come</a></font> in and obscure clarity.</div><div>
</div><div>At this point, I don't think that there is a lot to be gained from internet discussions in general (this one included) as there is no in-person relationship or interaction to build on. Everyone is likely entrenched in their own viewpoint and will metaphorically lob rhetorical grenades over a wall rather than actually face the person they are attempting to interact with. Again, there is some good discussion online, but facebook and the knot are not really the greatest forums for it... </div><div>
</div><div>The benefit of online discussion is that writing down your thoughts hypothetically gives you time to formulate your position correctly and civilly than saying them aloud on the spur of the moment would... in a perfect world.</div><div>
</div>

Eliz77 · March 2012

lalith50-I'm not the only one who discussed same sex relationships on this thread. I posted two times because I had some thoughts on posts prior to mine. I don't think that needs to be taken as argumentive. I am Catholic and read/post this board on occassion. I had some thoughts while reading this thread, and felt like sharing. Really didn't think it required a new thread.

professorscience · March 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_some-thoughts?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:615Discussion:4dd73fe3-3892-43de-937a-86720026175aPost:83b61751-0d4f-45e1-be87-29c31eaa59dc">Re: Some thoughts...</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Some thoughts... : Please remember that this is "truth" as you (and the Catholic Church) perceive it. It is not everyone's "truth" and those who do not share your beliefs should not be expected to live their lives in accordance with them.
Posted by ChicagoRach[/QUOTE]

<div>Please remember that for us (and many other Christians), protecting something that was established by Christ is extremely important.</div><div>
</div><div>Now, I agree with you that everyone everywhere has a right to their personal beliefs and to do whatever they want within the confines of the law (thanks to that wonderful blessing of free will). For me, that includes God's law, not just the laws of the state.</div><div>
</div><div>Re: the original topic. It is so hard to be loving sometimes.</div>

professorscience · March 2012

Oh, and Mica, I love your story. H's grandmother has a friend she calls her "church husband." They are both widowed and sit together at mass every week. I'm pretty sure that's the extent of the time they spend together, but apparently they are so close that people have mistakenly referred to them as husband and wife.

Resa77 · March 2012

Mica, I also have a grandma with a boyfriend! They call each other "dear" and hold hands and my Mom caught them kissing once (awkward for her!). They have been dating for about 14 years, give or take. They have no intention of ever getting married. My grandmother told me Mom she doesn't want to marry him because she doesn't want to have sex (again, awkward for my poor mother). They are friends and companions, but there definitely is a romantic element. They go to daily Mass together. Her BF is a lector and usher, and Eucharistic Minister when needed. They're VERY religious people.

TeaForMe · March 2012

I, too, have a fresh thought on the *original* topic. I heard a lecture (or part of it) on NPR today about our combative/argumentative culture and how it's seen as good and/or necessary to have these hard-core arguments about everything ... that we feel we're not learning anything if there's not a controversy. Anyway, the quote I loved was that there's a difference between *making* an argument and *having* an argument. Whereas making an argument means you show there is another side and support your stance, having an argument implies "winning" and doing/saying what it takes to get the last word. I think when we are discussing our faith and church teachings, it would be a good idea to remember this - make an argument, don't have one.

Riss91 · March 2012

This is something that has been really bothering me lately. It's especially difficult since my husband is a journalist and often reports about controversial subject matter. I get to see him verbally abused for explaining one side of an argument. He receives death threats, his integrity is always questioned. People really can be quite mean and hateful, especially when they are hiding behind a computer screen.

We have honestly considered moving - like out of the country. Personally, I feel like this country has lost touch with its purpose. We aren't a land of the free. We are a land of the free-to-only-have-a-viewpoint-that-is-consistent-with-the-mainstream. Most of our population doesn't think through anything, they just hop on the bandwagon of their FB stream or favorite TV anchor (Jon Stewart/Bill O'Reilly). It has become acceptable to target and harass certain groups while others are "sacred". Respect is completely lost. Considering another viewpoint and coming up with your personal stance based on your own research is exceptionally rare.

It's all about the pride/ego factor. Fighting just to knock someone down. Argument without a purpose.

TeaForMe · March 2012

The woman who was speaking, Deborah Tannen, has written a book about this topic called, "The Argument Culture: Stopping America's War of Words." I think I'm going to look into it.

She also mentioned that our culture believes there are always two sides to every story when sometimes there is not (the example she gave was the holocaust - that holocaust deniers do not have a case/side that needs to be given attention or equal attention). And even if there are 2 sides, they don't necessarily need to be given equal attention or credence. I'm bummed I only got to hear 1/2 of the talk because I liked what I heard.

Ciardasully · March 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_some-thoughts?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:615Discussion:4dd73fe3-3892-43de-937a-86720026175aPost:239d9855-a605-42af-aa9b-bbf5f849dd49">Re: Some thoughts...</a>:
[QUOTE]This is something that has been really bothering me lately. It's especially difficult since my husband is a journalist and often reports about controversial subject matter. I get to see him verbally abused for explaining one side of an argument. He receives death threats, his integrity is always questioned. People really can be quite mean and hateful, especially when they are hiding behind a computer screen. We have honestly considered moving - like out of the country. Personally, I feel like this country has lost touch with its purpose. We aren't a land of the free. We are a land of the free-to-only-have-a-viewpoint-that-is-consistent-with-the-mainstream. Most of our population doesn't think through anything, they just hop on the bandwagon of their FB stream or favorite TV anchor (Jon Stewart/Bill O'Reilly). It has become acceptable to target and harass certain groups while others are "sacred". Respect is completely lost. Considering another viewpoint and coming up with your personal stance based on your own research is exceptionally rare. It's all about the pride/ego factor. Fighting just to knock someone down. Argument without a purpose.
Posted by Riss91[/QUOTE]

Riss, what you just said is what is scaring me right now. Our religion is under attack in this country and you can't even say your opinion without people telling you are being hateful. There are people I know who laud themselves on being tolerant and respectful who go on and on about how Catholics are hateful. I know not all people who disagree are that hateful but a lot are. And for your husband to get death threats is just not acceptable.

I personal am fine with what people do on their own. But the government should not be forcing the Catholic Church to go against it's values.

I am sorry, I know this was off topic but I have been fuming about this today.

lalaith50 · March 2012

TeaForMe- very interesting. Are you saying you agree with her idea that sometimes one side doesn't need attention?

(I had a friend, who, while not a holocaust-denier himself, found it very problematic when the holocaust-denier's opinion was brushed under the rug. I think it tied into free speech or something.)

Anyhow, TeaForMe, I'm not sure if this is what you're saying, but my initial reaction to such a belief (that there could be a side that doesn't need to be heard,) is that is my fear of where our country is headed for those who oppose homosexuality or eventually abortion or even BC. I'm dreading the day when it becomes illegal (not if, but when,) to speak negatively - to publicly speak out against- homosexuality. That's what will happen if someone (the culture? the government?) decides that one side is so wrong that they should not be heard.

I won't say either that I agree with the holocaust deniers (I certainly don't.) But I absolutely believe that they should be able to state their facts for their line of reasoning, and let me decide. At least I should have the option to decide. Because if they can't state their facts, then what is going to stop me and my religion from being forbidden to speak out against the dangers inherent in homosexual sex or the sad statistics about homosexualt relationships? (those are just examples; the issue would be when you can't say *anything* negative about something, whether it's a fact or personal opinion or religious belief or whatever.)

But anyhow, I totally agree with the distinction between making and winning an argument! (I'm not sure I love the wording "having" an arguement. Doesn't everyone "have" an arguement when they "make" an argument? That wording needs too much explanation to go along with it. I'd prefer the simpler and more obviously apparent "winning.")

professorscience · March 2012

Lala, I think the distinction between "having" and "winning" is that many of the arguments referenced here don't ever have a "winner." I get what you're saying, but I've seen lots of arguments where people will just fight for the sake of fighting and accusing another person of being wrong.

newlyseliski · March 2012

@Riss... I can't imagine being in the position your husband is... I'd curl up in fetal position and hide in a corner somewhere. I just can't comprehend how he manages it every day!

@TeaForMe, Prof & Lala... word.

TeaForMe · March 2012

Lala,

Shoot - I really wish I had been able to listen to the whole lecture because I don't know that I can really speak intelligently to this question. But, I guess what I took it to mean is this. In our culture we think we can debate anything and that *anything* can be proven wrong. Even hard facts. Is the sky blue? Well, maybe and maybe not? Sometimes there is only one side, in the case of facts, but our society is too relativistic that nothing is absolute truth.

In the case of *opinions*, that is a different matter. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and those can be debated. Also, while facts are facts, what a person does with those facts (to form opinions, etc) is a different story. I think what you are saying about not being able to say "church teaching say..." To me, that is a fact.

In the holocaust example, she said she had a colleague who had written a book about the holocaust (or some topic relating to it) and a TV program wanted to have her and a holocaust denier on their program to have a debate. The woman refused because she didn't want to give the denier a platform to spread something that wasn't true nor had anything to do with her book. She would gladly discuss her book, though. I think it related back to the speaker's thought that we don't have to have an argument to spread knowledge. But in our culture, that's how we do it.

Again, I didn't get to listen to the whole thing so I could be totally off.

lv2011 · March 2012

After reading through all this, I wonder what each of us would do in a highly heated debate on any number of Catholic v. Secular issues. Would we raise our voices and yell back? Would we back down? Or would we calmly try to explain that though we disagree, we respect the other person(s) regardless of their opinion? I think this is something just about everybody should step back and consider. Whom do we help by being overly combative? When we lose our respect for the opinions and God-given free thought of others, we lose our status as a developed society.

In all my viewing of political/ religious arguments, I've NEVER heard any party say, "I respectfully disagree."

I wish more Catholics, and people in general, remembered that one of the key tenents of our faith is "judge not, lest ye be judged," and acted accordingly. The Golden Rule seems to have become nonexistant.

Some thoughts...

Re: Some thoughts...

Choose Another Board

Search Boards