Father Hall Responds

[donnie_baseball]

Darwin observed same sex COITUS (wow that word sucks) in nature, probably happened since the beginning of time. But im not sure what that has to do with anything. Its meaningless. Pretty sure humans arent dying out any time soon.

I said evolution, not extinction, professor. DARWIN observed that? There's actually a LGBT agenda to disprove Darwin, in that his theory implies that homosexuality is anomalous, and non-procreative. You can't make this stuff up.

https://alumni.stanford.edu/get/page/magazine/article/?article_id=35878

 

[TrueBlue1989]

Saying gays are welcome as long as they do not live a gay lifestyle is hardly acceptance. Who says gay is not part of natural order? It is common in the animal kingdom. It was embraced by the most advanced of the ancient civilizations. And is has been common among men and women throughout the history of the world, even while being damned, even while being gay was dangerous, illegal etc.

The church would still say the Sun revolved around the Earth it science didn't clearly disprove that. 2000 years of church teaching to me holds as much weight as 2000 years of any other religion. And let's face it, if our parents were from Teheran, we would be debating Islam.

Being gay is by definition against nature. Think about it, if the vast majority of society decided 300 years ago to embrace homosexuality, where would humanity be today?

An argument that homosexuality is commonplace in the animal kingdom is 1) false and 2) links homosexuals with animals which is offensive to many. This analogy highlights how poor the pro gay marriage argument is.

Homosexuality was NEVER broadly embraced by the most advanced civilizations. I am amazed at the sweeping statements made with no historical support. Homosexuality was embraced by the elites of Greece but not writ large in its society. No advanced Asian civilization embraced homosexuality. No Indian, African or Middle Eastern advanced civilization broadly embraced homosexuality. Neither the Romans nor Brits broadly embrace homosexuality. Did certain elites, certainly, but no advanced civilization broadly embraced it.

Ignorance re Catholic history is shocking. The Catholic Church established the first universities. Do you realize the importance of the Catholic Church on the development of science? I will site but two priests that change history and there are literally hundreds over 2000 years. Copernicus discovered that the earth circulated around the sun not the opposite. Mendel is the father of genetics. To state that the Catholic Church is anti-science is either to display profound ignorance or to lie. No religion or even any University can claim to have contributed more to math or science than the Catholic Church. Fact. I encourage people to read JP II's Faith and Reason.

If you don't like the 2000 year span then look to human society. Traditional marriage has been broadly embraced by human society for 5000 years. Have the Japanese been misled by the Catholic Church, too?

On my side of the argument I have essentially recorded human history (broadly speaking) and the vast majority of countries in the world today in support of traditional marriage. The other side has the recent and current support of elites and some opinion polls. I will let the readers decide the better argument. Again, I respect all opinions and would that others would as well.

 

[Shuathelete]

Its just all so meaningless in the grand scheme of things. That person chews gum, that person skateboards, that person touches butts, big deal. When youre dead and gone nothing will matter, noone will care, and noone will judge.

And embracing homosxuality doesnt mean people stop having kids. If anything we need to cut down the surplus inventory of humans (donnie i lobbed this one up for you). Who knows maybe its natures way of keeping population at a reasonable level since its original tactic (disease) isnt as powerful as it once was.

I want to know yalls thoughts on bisexuality. For the sake of example, if an unmarried guy has kids and decides to see what its like on the other side, is it a big deal?

 

[TrueBlue1989]

Its just all so meaningless in the grand scheme of things. That person chews gum, that person skateboards, that person touches butts, big deal. When youre dead and gone nothing will matter, noone will care, and noone will judge.

And embracing homosxuality doesnt mean people stop having kids. If anything we need to cut down the surplus inventory of humans (donnie i lobbed this one up for you). Who knows maybe its natures way of keeping population at a reasonable level since its original tactic (disease) isnt as powerful as it once was.

I want to know yalls thoughts on bisexuality. For the sake of example, if an unmarried guy has kids and decides to see what its like on the other side, is it a big deal?

I give up. Certain posts on this topic are literally moronic. No one makes an argument. I really hope that certain posters are not graduates.

 

[Seton75]

If science didn't prove it, so would everyone (say that). Talk about deflection. You do know that during the Dark Ages, the monastaries HOUSED the scientific texts. I'm a scientist, and subscribe to Darwin's theories. But we have enemies of religion constantly brandishing Darwin as an argument against a creator. My point about evolution and genetics is that we have no definitive proof, either way, about the genetic nature of homosexuality. It was classified as mental illness until the 1960s or 70s.

On your second sentence, we are in agreement; anyone who seeks something greater than him/herself in the Universe has my respect.

My last sentence meant to say that 2000 years of teaching is not a justification for believing anything. Do you admire true believers of fundamental Christianity and the Creation Museum or fundamentalist Muslims? They are true believers as much as my Mom was. I admired my Mom for her devotion and the message of Jesus is the best message. Some others make me scratch my head.

Yes, it was classified as an illness. And we had amazingly repressive laws against homosexuality. And we used to bleed people to get them well. And shock therapy was still not uncommon in the mid 20th century. Science and human thought progress. Our founding fathers were probably a bunch of racist, homophobic, chauvinists. And being that way was not given a second thought. But now it is. I prefer now.

 

[Shuathelete]

TrueBlue does it suck making big deals out of things that arent big deals?

 

[batts]

Being gay is by definition against nature. Think about it, if the vast majority of society decided 300 years ago to embrace homosexuality, where would humanity be today?

An argument that homosexuality is commonplace in the animal kingdom is 1) false and 2) links homosexuals with animals which is offensive to many. This analogy highlights how poor the pro gay marriage argument is.

Homosexuality was NEVER broadly embraced by the most advanced civilizations. I am amazed at the sweeping statements made with no historical support. Homosexuality was embraced by the elites of Greece but not writ large in its society. No advanced Asian civilization embraced homosexuality. No Indian, African or Middle Eastern advanced civilization broadly embraced homosexuality. Neither the Romans nor Brits broadly embrace homosexuality. Did certain elites, certainly, but no advanced civilization broadly embraced it.

Ignorance re Catholic history is shocking. The Catholic Church established the first universities. Do you realize the importance of the Catholic Church on the development of science? I will site but two priests that change history and there are literally hundreds over 2000 years. Copernicus discovered that the earth circulated around the sun not the opposite. Mendel is the father of genetics. To state that the Catholic Church is anti-science is either to display profound ignorance or to lie. No religion or even any University can claim to have contributed more to math or science than the Catholic Church. Fact. I encourage people to read JP II's Faith and Reason.

If you don't like the 2000 year span then look to human society. Traditional marriage has been broadly embraced by human society for 5000 years. Have the Japanese been misled by the Catholic Church, too?

On my side of the argument I have essentially recorded human history (broadly speaking) and the vast majority of countries in the world today in support of traditional marriage. The other side has the recent and current support of elites and some opinion polls. I will let the readers decide the better argument. Again, I respect all opinions and would that others would as well.

The Catholic Church is basing its views on homosexuality, masturbation, and pre-marital sex on the teachings of a 13th Century scholar, St. Thomas Acquinas. Acquinas espoused that the exclusive purpose of sex under the Natural Law is to propagate the species, and therefore those who engage in pre-marital and gay sex are sinful. I think that the vast majority of us will acknowledge that there are other purposes to sex aside from propagation. Acquinas's view of the role of sex in the natural law is therefore fundamentally flawed and false.

 

[donnie_baseball]

The Catholic Church is basing its views on homosexuality, masturbation, and pre-marital sex on the teachings of a 13th Century scholar, St. Thomas Acquinas. Acquinas espoused that the exclusive purpose of sex under the Natural Law is to propagate the species, and therefore those who engage in pre-marital and gay sex are sinful. I think that the vast majority of us will acknowledge that there are other purposes to sex aside from propagation. Acquinas's view of the role of sex in the natural law is therefore fundamentally flawed and false.

Aquinas is one of the greatest scholars of all time (and also the name of a residence hall on SHU campus). I don't think his truths are any less true today. His teachings on the natural law are wholly correct -- you can disingenuously say they are flawed and false, but that just puts you in denial. The "vast majority" would have to agree that we are all sinners, not that the truth is whatever we decide it is, to fit our purposes.

 

[Bobbie Solo]

I want to know yalls thoughts on bisexuality. For the sake of example, if an unmarried guy has kids and decides to see what its like on the other side, is it a big deal?

Of course it's not. Sexuality is a spectrum for some people, and everyone is different. What business is it of mine what turns somebody else on? As long as everyone is consenting, go nuts. Life is short, you gotta do what makes you happy.

To me, the people (and this thread is a perfect example) that are so obsessed with gays and what they do...there's something curious about that. If you're hetero, why do you care so much about what that community does? If you're not into it, leave it alone. But instead you see these longwinded diatribes and thought-out debates about a lifestyle they supposedly have no interest in. Thou doth protest too much.

 

[donnie_baseball]

My last sentence meant to say that 2000 years of teaching is not a justification for believing anything. Do you admire true believers of fundamental Christianity and the Creation Museum or fundamentalist Muslims? They are true believers as much as my Mom was. I admired my Mom for her devotion and the message of Jesus is the best message. Some others make me scratch my head.

No, I don't admire zealots. I should have said someone who "earnestly" seeks. We are all humans, none of us is perfect. The message of Jesus is the best message; I don't appreciate how the fundy's distort it, and I don't appreciate the crowd who twists it into a "I'm OK, you're OK" message, either.

I'm sure many people had the same reasons for attending SHU, and the same experience, coming of age, as you did. Most parents of that generation (HallLine69, too) were devout, so it is sad, to me, to hear that it wasn't continued.

 

[donnie_baseball]

TrueBlue does it suck making big deals out of things that arent big deals?

Kevin Willard called. He said take your own advice.

 

[TrueBlue1989]

The Catholic Church is basing its views on homosexuality, masturbation, and pre-marital sex on the teachings of a 13th Century scholar, St. Thomas Acquinas. Acquinas espoused that the exclusive purpose of sex under the Natural Law is to propagate the species, and therefore those who engage in pre-marital and gay sex are sinful. I think that the vast majority of us will acknowledge that there are other purposes to sex aside from propagation. Acquinas's view of the role of sex in the natural law is therefore fundamentally flawed and false.

Ok one more post. You are grossly misstating the Church's position. The Church was against homosexual activity and extramarital sex well before Aquinas, in fact hundreds of years. The Church does teach that Catholics are to have families but only to the extent reasonable to that family (the family decides not the Church). Natural family planning (i.e. not intending procreation) is TAUGHT by the Church and therefore is not prohibited.

I am not close to a Theologian but I will take my chances that Aquinas' argument is more cogent than yours. He is widely considered one of the greatest thinkers in human history.

 

[batts]

Aquinas is one of the greatest scholars of all time (and also the name of a residence hall on SHU campus). I don't think his truths are any less true today. His teachings on the natural law are wholly correct -- you can disingenuously say they are flawed and false, but that just puts you in denial. The "vast majority" would have to agree that we are all sinners, not that the truth is whatever we decide it is, to fit our purposes.

Donnie, your post reminds me of Gilbert Gottfiried's joke about Pee Wee Herman's arrest in a movie theater: "If masturbation was a crime (substitute "sin"), I would be sentenced to the electric chair (substitute "eternal damnation")."

 

[batts]

Ok one more post. You are grossly misstating the Church's position. The Church was against homosexual activity and extramarital sex well before Aquinas, in fact hundreds of years. The Church does teach that Catholics are to have families but only to the extent reasonable to that family (the family decides not the Church). Natural family planning (i.e. not intending procreation) is TAUGHT by the Church and therefore is not prohibited.

I am not close to a Theologian but I will take my chances that Aquinas' argument is more cogent than yours. He is widely considered one of the greatest thinkers in human history.

Acquinas's views were a product of his times (13th Century). Some of his teachings are no longer valid after 800 years of development.

 

[Bobbie Solo]

You just proved my point. You can't articulate any reasoned argument and can only name call. Based on your "reasoning", our President was a bigot 3 years ago as was the majority of Americans. Is asking you to state your case bigotry? I love the so-called diversity police in today's society, not only is someone who disagrees with another person wrong but he is evil as well.

I'm curious but if someone opposes a 3 person marriage, is he a bigot? Can a brother and sister marry? If not, why not?

- Obama was clearly lying & has not had a problem with gay marriage for a long time, if ever. He was simply waiting for the opportune time to "change his mind".

- It's pretty obvious how you really feel about gay people from the tone of your posts. You clearly detest their sexuality & lifestyle. Yeah , you're not coming out & stating it, but you come off pretty angry & mean-spirited about the whole subject as a result. What's behind your otherwise well-written posts is obvious

- I don't personally have a problem with 3 people getting down however they want. And do you really want to make yourself look even uglier by bringing the subject down to the abhorrent incest argument?

You guys all seem really angry about this topic. And it will never, ever affect you in any real way. You keep saying you just want to have a healthy debate. Well, for the top countries in the world the debate has been over for quite some time. But keep pointing your fingers & referencing some silly made-up book of stories from thousands of years ago while the rest of the modern world moves on & leaves you in the dust. All the major modern societies have accepted gay people as equals, part. on the issue of gay marriage, or are in the process like we are. You really want to cast your lot with the societies that haven't?

 

[donnie_baseball]

Donnie, your post reminds me of Gilbert Gottfiried's joke about Pee Wee Herman's arrest in a movie theater: "If masturbation was a crime (substitute "sin"), I would be sentenced to the electric chair (substitute "eternal damnation")."

Funny, but my point was that we're all sinners, and we all have some level of denial. Denying the universal truths -- and that's why Aquinas is still relevant -- doesn't change that.

 

[donnie_baseball]

Deleted before it got deleted.

 

[Seton75]

Being gay is by definition against nature. Think about it, if the vast majority of society decided 300 years ago to embrace homosexuality, where would humanity be today?

An argument that homosexuality is commonplace in the animal kingdom is 1) false and 2) links homosexuals with animals which is offensive to many. This analogy highlights how poor the pro gay marriage argument is.

Homosexuality was NEVER broadly embraced by the most advanced civilizations. I am amazed at the sweeping statements made with no historical support. Homosexuality was embraced by the elites of Greece but not writ large in its society. No advanced Asian civilization embraced homosexuality. No Indian, African or Middle Eastern advanced civilization broadly embraced homosexuality. Neither the Romans nor Brits broadly embrace homosexuality. Did certain elites, certainly, but no advanced civilization broadly embraced it.

Ignorance re Catholic history is shocking. The Catholic Church established the first universities. Do you realize the importance of the Catholic Church on the development of science? I will site but two priests that change history and there are literally hundreds over 2000 years. Copernicus discovered that the earth circulated around the sun not the opposite. Mendel is the father of genetics. To state that the Catholic Church is anti-science is either to display profound ignorance or to lie. No religion or even any University can claim to have contributed more to math or science than the Catholic Church. Fact. I encourage people to read JP II's Faith and Reason.

If you don't like the 2000 year span then look to human society. Traditional marriage has been broadly embraced by human society for 5000 years. Have the Japanese been misled by the Catholic Church, too?

On my side of the argument I have essentially recorded human history (broadly speaking) and the vast majority of countries in the world today in support of traditional marriage. The other side has the recent and current support of elites and some opinion polls. I will let the readers decide the better argument. Again, I respect all opinions and would that others would as well.

If everyone became priests a 100 years ago, we would also be extinct. But all of us don't become priests and all are not born homosexual. And Copernicus was praised by the church for his findings? Or did he get a different reception?

I wonder if the civil rights revolution was happening today, how many critics would blame it all on "elites". And go back in time and your statement that " Traditional marriage has been broadly embraced by human society for 5000 years." could be replaced by "Separation of the races has been broadly embraced by human society for 5000 years." I heard separate but equal praised nightly at my family dinner table as a kid. My Dad was a product of his time, a wonderful man, and as dead wrong as can be. He was not alone. It happens.

 

[HALL85]

What I don't get is the public and media attacking of the church, it's members and their beliefs. As long as they are not imposing them on society (the state) or harming others doesn't it go the same way as those that want to change those laws? Gets back to separation of church and state.

If their beliefs are so out of touch then wouldn't the church just eventually disappear? Solo should look in the mirror...he comes off as a very angry individual in his posts.

 

[donnie_baseball]

I haven't seen a single person object to the civil rights of anyone.

Somehow, what's going on now, and what happened in the mid 20th century just don't seem the same. At all. Here in NJ, gays now have the "right" to "marry." People who respect the sacrament didn't want it called marriage. That has been defeated, and life goes on. Please tell me what rights they do not have, at this point. In New Jersey, at least, "The Strife is O'er."

As far as Derrick Gordon goes, I don't care, as long as he can do the school work, and play basketball. I assume the rest of the team is heterosexual, but I don't much want the details of their private lives, either.

 

[donnie_baseball]

What I don't get is the public and media attacking of the church, it's members and their beliefs. As long as they are not imposing them on society (the state) or harming others doesn't it go the same way as those that want to change those laws? Gets back to separation of church and state.

If their beliefs are so out of touch then wouldn't the church just eventually disappear? Solo should look in the mirror...he comes off as a very angry individual in his posts.

Agree. And Solo is an anti-social creep. He was stunned by a theist who is clearly brighter and can express himself intelligently, so he resorts to labelling him "angry" and "ugly."

 

[batts]

I have nothing against the Church. I respect the Church and its followers' beliefs. The Church does a lot of good that goes unrecognized. I merely disagree with some of its views.

 

[Shuathelete]

Kevin Willard called. He said take your own advice.

Only our Administration is dumb enough to listen to Kevin Willard.

 

[Pirata]

I was just sent this. Father Hall has come out as gay.

Some relevance in the article regarding the BB program.

http://www.outsports.com/2015/5/26/8663051/gay-priest-seton-hall-warren-hall

 

[Muggsy Blue]

So?

 

[Section112]

There are lots of priests that are gay and more will come out I am certain. As long as they are doing a good job who cares.

 

[Seton75]

There are lots of priests that are gay and more will come out I am certain. As long as they are doing a good job who cares.

Exactly. And this is not new, whether they come out of not.

 

[Seton75]

If their beliefs are so out of touch then wouldn't the church just eventually disappear?

How would you like a buck for every person who ignored the church on contraception or pre-marital sex. 62 % or Ireland vote for gay marriage. The sad fact is the Catholics stopped following the edicts of the Church quite a while ago. The Church and the members of the Church have a major disagreement with things sexual. And this is not new.

 

[HALL85]

How would you like a buck for every person who ignored the church on contraception or pre-marital sex. 62 % or Ireland vote for gay marriage. The sad fact is the Catholics stopped following the edicts of the Church quite a while ago. The Church and the members of the Church have a major disagreement with things sexual. And this is not new.

i would guess that the number of practicing Catholics in Ireland has decreased precipitously. I remember traveling in Montreal a few years ago and noticed a large number of shuttered churches. It is happening in many areas.

 

[Seton75]

i would guess that the number of practicing Catholics in Ireland has decreased precipitously. I remember traveling in Montreal a few years ago and noticed a large number of shuttered churches. It is happening in many areas.

As you said, "If their beliefs are so out of touch then wouldn't the church just eventually disappear?" And a great many parishioners completely ignore the Church on major teachings and have been for decades.

I am sure Ireland is nothing like it was re % of Catholics. But that too makes your point re disappearing. It will not disappear, but it is certainly shrinking. I am not rooting for it to disappear btw.

 

[chickenbox]

There are lots of priests that are gay and more will come out I am certain. As long as they are doing a good job who cares.

Hmm I can think of a few