Confusing the Subject: Re: Gays in Sports/SHU

[400SOAVE]

First of all, I'm not gay. (Not that there's anything wrong with that.) ... Seinfeld fans will get the joke.

As we all know, there's a huge national debate about practically everything concerning gay rights.

Now it's happening at SHU.

I believe, however, that the issue of gays/lesbians on the team roster is a completely different discussion from what the Catholic church and a Catholic university stands for and what it should be forced to support.

Gays and lesbians on the team, in the research lab or in the Board room is a non-issue. Well, it should be a non-issue. It should all be about competence and performance.

Look at the roster of practically every woman's college and pro basketball team. There are lesbians all over the place. The SHU women's team has obviously had many lesbians on the team. Some of them dress in men's clothes. And, really, who cares?

No one can say that any lesbian on SHU's sports teams has faced discrimination.

Perhaps I'm wrong, but there has never been a problem at SHU. At least there has never been a public issue that I've read about in college and the WNBA.

Now, I know women and men are different. Perhaps men in general are less willing to share a locker room with a gay man?

This issue if different from the Catholic church being FORCED to support a certain lifestyle that it doesn't believe in. SHU is not discriminating against anybody seeking a job or advancing in the job, correct?

The main point is that many people are melding two different issues withing the debate.

Finally, it does not help the cause of gay rights when advocates are more aggressive and intolerant than people who don't support their choices.

 

[TheBluePirate]

Please start, 400, by thinking most seriously about the word "choices" - this is the fundamental matter. If it's a choice, it gets looked at one way. If it is how a person is created, it's utterly something different. The more we have learned, listened, and witnessed, it's rarely a choice. There is no way someone can realize when they are seven or ten that they are "different" and realize that they are "hated" and furthermore, that it's a "choice". People using the word "choice" are liable to continue to contribute - wittingly or unwittingly - to the painful, disgusting stigmatization.

Let's do a thought experiment: if a person has no choice, they are a creation of God, if that is so, this is a natural condition, which actually meets the Thomistic definitions from 800 years ago, and thus, all such people MUST now to be understood as receiving the same understanding and love as all the rest. This is exactly how doctrine can evolve - and actually, doctrine has evolved over time.

Anyone who says doctrine has never evolved is (a) a liar (b) ignorant and confused and in grips of the old term - "heresy". Consider the single ex cathedra declaration - the immaculate conception. It is utter bullshit to say that the magisterium of the church can pull a "it was always true" declaration after 2000 years - no - the dogma evolved. So does doctrine - frankly - Mr C-Man himself knows that almost all - if not all - of the 95 theses posted by Luther on the church door are now accepted by the Roman Church. Doctrine evolved and it evolves.

So when he quotes a disgusting verse, he rightfully has another even more loathsome verse thrust in his face. If he claims - all verses are literally true, he is a fundamentalist heretic. Otherwise, he had better open up his mind and realized how things can and should evolved.

This is why (a) we can take the magnificent light of Thomas Aquinas BUT (b) understand how it damn well can evolve - to embrace and include ALL others. The matter of what is natural is thoroughly central to break this doctrinal cruelty of the Catholic Church. Go forth and re-read Fides et Ratio if you are confused.

Frankly - I listened carefully to Father Hall at the WBB banquet - the man expressed a wonderful understanding of the perception of the divine in a way that all people there - of various diverse backgrounds - could feel that his invocation was true. For the archdiocese to treat this man in such an ill manner should be a badge of pride in the annals of combating the heretical Jesus Riding on Dinosaurs with an AK-47 in hand - alert to all you who think this is a joke - it is not.

And - to those who do not want theology on the board - sorry - we are at an everlasting crossroads: perpetuating human cruelty or driving towards a deeper embrace of all humanity - with humility. I am completely unapologetic for my stand. By the way - ha ha - I am an older man - but my heart is as young as a child's.

 

[400SOAVE]

Blue, what you wrote was interesting but it has nothing to do with the topic I started on this thread.

 

[TheBluePirate]

Understand your desire to separate the topics and issues, but if you use the word choice, then you will defeat the purpose, in my view.