Originally posted by Devil King
Neither of your examples illustrate a descision to deny their own humanity in favor of some calling.Being a vet doesn't imply a life of denied human sexuality; supposedly a gift from god. Being a doctor doesn't deny a wanting for a life devoid of family-propogation. I just don't see the logic in claiming that the family is sacred while enforcing celibacy and no chance of having one is supported by the very clergy that tells others to consider it? Have you ever thought that you might just need to come out of the closet?
I don't think celibacy is in any way at odds with the ideal of family- it is simply a different path.
Also, i don't think celibacy is something which only homosexual people who want to hide from the truth are willing to commit to.
Furthermore, your statement was pretty abusive and prejudicial- however, that is absolutely fine. I accept that if your not willing to give something up for the benefit of others then thats just who you are.
Originally posted by Robtard
I'm late to the party, but are people saying "masturbation is wrong, being natural doesn't make it right" and using pedophilia/naturalness as a counter?
From a Christian's standpoint, we are to put off or overcome the natural man. Natural man is carnal and mostly selfish. Masturbation is every bit a natural thing. Natural man is an enemy of God.
Besides, I like sex much better than bates. A nice set of bewbz is also much much much more preferable than my own hands. ✅
butt plugs 1234
Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
I don't think celibacy is in any way at odds with the ideal of family- it is simply a different path.Also, i don't think celibacy is something which only homosexual people who want to hide from the truth are willing to commit to.
Furthermore, your statement was pretty abusive and prejudicial- however, that is absolutely fine. I accept that if your not willing to give something up for the benefit of others then thats just who you are.
No, what you accept is the supposed moral superiority of your desicion. But the subject doesn't have to be given up to fulfill some measure of benefit to others. You suppose that because the Pope says you should be denied a family or physical love to serve your fellow man. But that's absurd. I don't see a logical execution of the idea of Christ becoming man to experience human existence and excrutiating death for the soul of those human beings, denying himself the possiblity of love and relationship with his fellow human being.
And no, I'm not saying that because I buy in to some Davinci code conspiracy. I simply don't buy into the idea of god becoming man to experience and die for us, if he wasn't here to be a full human being. And there is something basically and fundamentally inhuman about denying the sexuality of a human being, priest, Pope or otherwise.
Originally posted by Devil King
No, what you accept is the supposed moral superiority of your desicion.
Its not "morally superior" in any sense, however, it is a sacrifice priests in the West are expected to make as a symbol of their devotion to God.
Originally posted by Devil King
You suppose that because the Pope says you should be denied a family or physical love to serve your fellow man. But that's absurd I don't see a logical execution of the idea of Christ becoming man to experience human existence and excrutiating death for the soul of those human beings, denying himself the possiblity of love and relationship with his fellow human being.
I'm not sure if thats an argument about Jesus having sex while he was on Earth...I don't know why your bringing that up here anyway. Perhaps a more concrete example of the point your trying to make (which I believe is: you don't need to be celibate to serve God) would be the first Pope, Saint Peter?
Originally posted by Devil King
And no, I'm not saying that because I buy in to some Davinci code conspiracy. I simply don't buy into the idea of god becoming man to experience and die for us, if he wasn't here to be a full human being. And there is something basically and fundamentally inhuman about denying the sexuality of a human being, priest, Pope or otherwise.
Priest's do not deny they sexuality- they are fully aware of it, however they are willing to put that side of life aside to fully dedicate themselves to something else.
Matthew 19:12 is an example of where Jesus condones the practice of renouncing sex.
Paul encouraged men to become celibate. Peter was not celibate. It is a discipline that has evolved in the Church and to be honest, I don't know how long it will last. It is not really all that relevant in the grand scheme of things...
And for the poster above, where was it stated I had never had sex?
Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
Its not "morally superior" in any sense, however, it is a sacrifice priests in the West are expected to make as a symbol of their devotion to God.I'm not sure if thats an argument about Jesus having sex while he was on Earth...I don't know why your bringing that up here anyway. Perhaps a more concrete example of the point your trying to make (which I believe is: you don't need to be celibate to serve God) would be the first Pope, Saint Peter?
Priest's do not deny they sexuality- they are fully aware of it, however they are willing to put that side of life aside to fully dedicate themselves to something else.
Matthew 19:12 is an example of where Jesus condones the practice of renouncing sex.
Paul encouraged men to become celibate. Peter was not celibate. It is a discipline that has evolved in the Church and to be honest, I don't know how long it will last. It is not really all that relevant in the grand scheme of things...
And for the poster above, where was it stated I had never had sex?
Exactly, you think that denying a major aspect of your humanity is going to somehow bring you closer to god. Well, that's absurd. The Pope is absurd, be it this one or Peter, for thinking that denying your humanity makes you more godly. From what I've seen, all it does is offer an escape to paedophiles, homosexuals and perverts. While at the same time duping some very good people in to believing that they have to live their lives seperate from the rest of humanity in order to serve it.
If someone is fully aware of an aspect of their humanity, but refuse to accept it while casting it off as a virtue of the flesh they must deny themselves in order to serve god, then they are denying.
Originally posted by Devil King
Exactly, you think that denying a major aspect of your humanity is going to somehow bring you closer to god. Well, that's absurd. The Pope is absurd, be it this one or Peter, for thinking that denying your humanity makes you more godly. From what I've seen, all it does is offer an escape to paedophiles, homosexuals and perverts. While at the same time duping some very good people in to believing that they have to live their lives seperate from the rest of humanity in order to serve it.
I'm afraid I do not believe that I am mistaken in the assertion that self-sacrifice will bring me closer to God. Whatever that sacrifice may be.
Originally posted by Devil King
If someone is fully aware of an aspect of their humanity, but refuse to accept it while casting it off as a virtue of the flesh they must deny themselves in order to serve god, then they are denying.
They are not denying their urges, just not fulfilling them.
Also, in light of your contempt. I remind you that you believe religious people should stay out of secular matters. Well I think that extends to not Catholics keeping their noses out of Catholic affairs.
Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
I'm afraid I do not believe that I am mistaken in the assertion that self-sacrifice will bring me closer to God. Whatever that sacrifice may be.They are not denying their urges, just not fulfilling them.
Also, in light of your contempt. I remind you that you believe religious people should stay out of secular matters. Well I think that extends to not Catholics keeping their noses out of Catholic affairs.
And I am affraid I am not incorrect in that denying yourself a family or relationship is not going to bring you any closer to god.
I don't think god particularly embraces a man with blue balls any more than he does a man who has had sex.
Ah, but you see, I'm not asking you to change your beliefs or even trying to make your beliefs illegal. I'm simply expressing an opinion developed after 18 years of being a Catholic and 13 years of Catholic school.
Originally posted by Devil King
And I am affraid I am not incorrect in that denying yourself a family or relationship is not going to bring you any closer to god.I don't think god particularly embraces a man with blue balls any more than he does a man who has had sex.
Ah, but you see, I'm not asking you to change your beliefs or even trying to make your beliefs illegal. I'm simply expressing an opinion developed after 18 years of being a Catholic and 13 years of Catholic school.
Your more than welcome to your belief, it differs from mine and thats fine.
Originally posted by Devil King
So we're going to have a religion forum where no one talks about religion?
We're not discussing it though...I said I think celibacy is OK. You said it isn't.
You then decided to tell me what I believe and why I believe it.
You even said I was gay...no where did you present an opportunity for reasoned discussion, you were just bashing me really.
If you want to have a reasoned discussion about celibacy in the priesthood then fine, lets have it. Just leave the patronizing "you believe because the Pope says" out of it- and also if I am gay that is something I would be able to deal with personally, I don't need you to tell me that I am gay or am not.
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
So did you stop being Catholic the same day you were first able to buy cigarettes?
No, I stopped being catholic the day I realized it was a hypociritcal and dismantling man-made religion used by humans to control the behavior, pocketbooks and superstitions of other humans. And over time, I was able to completely reconcile that conclusion in regards to most other religions.