I think now I have official time to do so I'll make my official response to this post, seeing as the effort I put in previously was lazy at best and half-arsed at worst.
In correction to my earlier post when I said I 'was in agreement with you', it probably should have read 'don't dispute the claims you make'. From a catholic perspective, your arguments are well educated and well argued, and I can't dispute any of the claims you make in the context of the Catholic interpretation of Christ's words on sexuality. Your opinions and stances are equally valid to mine, and though I might not inherently respect a homophobic opinion or person, you've at least backed yourself up strongly enough with evidence from your faith and history that can allow me to understand it, at any rate.
I disagree with your stances because of my own moral and ethical boundaries, which are in no way tied to Catholicism. I am not Catholic, thus, don't believe in the same things, and shouldn't have to be.
I think, additionally, that because I see homophobia as being an evil in line with racism and sexism that I view it much more harshly than I do the idiots on the left: l think that the violence perpetrated by homophobia is by far worse than the violence perpetrated by pro-gay rights groups (i.e. Matthew Shepherd), and albeit rarely, in Australia I've come across some shocking anti-gay violence, though mostly in rural areas. The country town I grew up in was a mostly secular place, but the levels of education and the inherent masculinity of the community meant that homosexuality was possibly the worst crime that could ever be perpetrated. Pretty cruel, considering the domestic violence rates were also phenomenally high.
Additionally, where I come from (possibly because urban Australia is the most tolerant place in the world) homophobia really isn't an issue, and thus protest from the 'homosexualists' (which I see as an inherently dirty word, though at least you're not trying to cover up your beliefs with empty, valueless words) is never particularly harsh or violent because there really is no opposition. The opposition in rural areas, however, as I mentioned above, is pretty vicious and disgusting: hence, I think, why opposition to homophobia is so rife in western nations: because we all know what has happened when people have been violently bigoted against other religions, genders, age groups and political orientation of any variety.
I'm glad you brought in the matter of Paul's vehemence against the pederasty of ancient Greek and Rome, and I see this as being an entirely different matter to homosexuality in that the balance of mental and physical power is so vastly out of whack that nobody in their right mind can compare homosexuality and pederasty/paedophilia in the same vein ethically. (Morally, however, is a matter for relevatism, which I'm not going to get into now, but in my view I think it's far, far worse, if only from some awful personal experiences.)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-05-21 04:18 am (UTC)In correction to my earlier post when I said I 'was in agreement with you', it probably should have read 'don't dispute the claims you make'. From a catholic perspective, your arguments are well educated and well argued, and I can't dispute any of the claims you make in the context of the Catholic interpretation of Christ's words on sexuality. Your opinions and stances are equally valid to mine, and though I might not inherently respect a homophobic opinion or person, you've at least backed yourself up strongly enough with evidence from your faith and history that can allow me to understand it, at any rate.
I disagree with your stances because of my own moral and ethical boundaries, which are in no way tied to Catholicism. I am not Catholic, thus, don't believe in the same things, and shouldn't have to be.
I think, additionally, that because I see homophobia as being an evil in line with racism and sexism that I view it much more harshly than I do the idiots on the left: l think that the violence perpetrated by homophobia is by far worse than the violence perpetrated by pro-gay rights groups (i.e. Matthew Shepherd), and albeit rarely, in Australia I've come across some shocking anti-gay violence, though mostly in rural areas. The country town I grew up in was a mostly secular place, but the levels of education and the inherent masculinity of the community meant that homosexuality was possibly the worst crime that could ever be perpetrated. Pretty cruel, considering the domestic violence rates were also phenomenally high.
Additionally, where I come from (possibly because urban Australia is the most tolerant place in the world) homophobia really isn't an issue, and thus protest from the 'homosexualists' (which I see as an inherently dirty word, though at least you're not trying to cover up your beliefs with empty, valueless words) is never particularly harsh or violent because there really is no opposition. The opposition in rural areas, however, as I mentioned above, is pretty vicious and disgusting: hence, I think, why opposition to homophobia is so rife in western nations: because we all know what has happened when people have been violently bigoted against other religions, genders, age groups and political orientation of any variety.
I'm glad you brought in the matter of Paul's vehemence against the pederasty of ancient Greek and Rome, and I see this as being an entirely different matter to homosexuality in that the balance of mental and physical power is so vastly out of whack that nobody in their right mind can compare homosexuality and pederasty/paedophilia in the same vein ethically. (Morally, however, is a matter for relevatism, which I'm not going to get into now, but in my view I think it's far, far worse, if only from some awful personal experiences.)