RC Church approves of Unnatural Sexuality.....

[M.Dancer]

EAST AURORA, N.Y. -- She stood at the altar in a white gown and veil, but she was there for no earthly man. Lori Rose Cannizzaro was dedicating her virginity to Jesus.

The rite is available to virgins who agree to abstain from sex so they can dedicate their lives to Jesus Christ in what the association describes as a mystical marriage and a profound spiritual blessing. Each woman wears a band on her left ring finger.

...okay, celebacy is deviant and unnatural. Will the ceremony encorurage more deviant behavior. Does the ceremony take anything away from the ceremony for sexualy active couples?

http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/15709802.htm

[geoffrey]

Deleted. Didn't read enough of that article.

--

That's pretty crazy, I don't yet have an opinion, going to have to think on this one.

[M.Dancer]

Deleted. Didn't read enough of that article.

--

That's pretty crazy, I don't yet have an opinion, going to have to think on this one.

Dude!

If people started deleting comments because they weren't informed...internet forums across the globe would collapse..........what did you write?

[Leafless]

...okay, celebacy is deviant and unnatural. Will the ceremony encorurage more deviant behavior. Does the ceremony take anything away from the ceremony for sexualy active couples?

What this women is doing as nothing to do with celibacy being deviant and unnatural.

What she is, is the next thing to a Nun, except she is still a lay person.

If she wants to devote herself to God, that's her business and really does not hurt anyone.

[sharkman]

Devient? LOL! Instead of starting anti-Christian threads like this, why don't you just tell us why you hate Christians and get it off your chest.

[Shakeyhands]

Devient? LOL! Instead of starting anti-Christian threads like this, why don't you just tell us why you hate Christians and get it off your chest.

Anti Christian You'd better call and inform Fox news ASAP!!!!!!!!!!

[Argus]

...okay, celebacy is deviant and unnatural. Will the ceremony encorurage more deviant behavior. Does the ceremony take anything away from the ceremony for sexualy active couples?

Don't worry. I'm sure as Catholic numbers fall, and Muslim numbers rise, the question of gay marriage will no longer be an issue.

[Figleaf]

Why on Earth would Jesus care if this woman is a virgin?

[sharkman]

Why on Earth would Jesus care if this woman is a virgin?

Yes, and why should you or anyone care of her decision?

[bradco]

Why on Earth would Jesus care if this woman is a virgin?

Yes, and why should you or anyone care of her decision?

Care as an interesting discussion maybe. Tell her she shouldnt or cant make that decision, nobody should say that.

since you asked the question that way though I cant help but respond with:

Yes, and why should you or anyone care of someones decision to be gay and be married by a church that is willing to do so?

[M.Dancer]

...okay, celebacy is deviant and unnatural. Will the ceremony encorurage more deviant behavior. Does the ceremony take anything away from the ceremony for sexualy active couples?

What this women is doing as nothing to do with celibacy being deviant and unnatural.

What she is, is the next thing to a Nun, except she is still a lay person.

If she wants to devote herself to God, that's her business and really does not hurt anyone.

Congratulations!

Her sexuality is her business and it doesn't hurt anyone.....lets see if you can extend that open mindedness to everyone .,.........

[M.Dancer]

Devient? LOL! Instead of starting anti-Christian threads like this, why don't you just tell us why you hate Christians and get it off your chest.

Anti christian? Pray tell, explain.......

[Leafless]

...okay, celebacy is deviant and unnatural. Will the ceremony encorurage more deviant behavior. Does the ceremony take anything away from the ceremony for sexualy active couples?

What this women is doing as nothing to do with celibacy being deviant and unnatural.

What she is, is the next thing to a Nun, except she is still a lay person.

If she wants to devote herself to God, that's her business and really does not hurt anyone.

Congratulations!

Her sexuality is her business and it doesn't hurt anyone.....lets see if you can extend that open mindedness to everyone .,.........

This is not about sexuality but rather a total absence any kind of physical sexual relationships or sexual acts on her part.

Open mindedness pertaining to perverted sex in a law-abiding society should be limited to what all society considers 'normal sexuality'.

Legalizing perverted sex only advances moralistic decay and degradation of moral values which could and has the capacity to eventually incapacitate society.

[M.Dancer]

This is not about sexuality but rather a total absence any kind of physical sexual relationships or sexual acts on her part.

And what part of that isn't sexuality....? Or do you think sexuality is a verb?

[Leafless]

This is not about sexuality but rather a total absence any kind of physical sexual relationships or sexual acts on her part.

And what part of that isn't sexuality....? Or do you think sexuality is a verb?

The primary focus is pertaining to religion not sexuality.

I'am simply reaffirming 'sexuality' is not an issue.

[M.Dancer]

Okay since we have firmly established you don't know what your talking about, I will help you along.....

The woman is a virgin. Virginity is a state of sexuality, celebacy is a state of sexuality...she has enaged in a religious ceremony to recognise publicly her sexuality. Without the recognition of her sexual state, there is no need for the ceremony

Celebacy is not the norm, ergo, it is deviant. (you could say, unnatural)

Her deviance (from the norm) affects no one.

And this, is the point of the thread I started.........

[sharkman]

EAST AURORA, N.Y. -- She stood at the altar in a white gown and veil, but she was there for no earthly man. Lori Rose Cannizzaro was dedicating her virginity to Jesus.

The rite is available to virgins who agree to abstain from sex so they can dedicate their lives to Jesus Christ in what the association describes as a mystical marriage and a profound spiritual blessing. Each woman wears a band on her left ring finger.

...okay, celebacy is deviant and unnatural. Will the ceremony encorurage more deviant behavior. Does the ceremony take anything away from the ceremony for sexualy active couples?

http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/15709802.htm

In this first post of the thread, you pointedly asked if the ceremony will encourage more deviant behaviour, after claiming that celebacy is deviant.

In your post previous, you make a point that is lost on me. What are you trying to say? Post one says you are suspicious of celebacy and suggest it might encourage more deviant behaviour, the likes of which you don't bother to mention.

Again, I say, why should you care if a person wants to be celibate in a religious context? And to bradco, who wondered about someone caring about the church marrying gays: What this woman does is her own business, just like whatever you do in your bedroom. The church, however, is a religious institution that has always taught the dangers of homosexuality. It being forced to marry gays against its will would have nation wide implications that a single person doing something of their own free will would not.

[M.Dancer]

In this first post of the thread, you pointedly asked if the ceremony will encourage more deviant behaviour, after claiming that celebacy is deviant.

In your post previous, you make a point that is lost on me. What are you trying to say? Post one says you are suspicious of celebacy and suggest it might encourage more deviant behaviour, the likes of which you don't bother to mention.

Again, I say, why should you care if a person wants to be celibate in a religious context? And to bradco, who wondered about someone caring about the church marrying gays: What this woman does is her own business, just like whatever you do in your bedroom. The church, however, is a religious institution that has always taught the dangers of homosexuality.

It being forced to marry gays against its will would have nation wide implications that a single person doing something of their own free will would not.

I was mimicking the attitudes held by the opponents to same sex marriages. I never suggested it would encourage more deviant behavior (as if being celebate is an attractive option one would willing chose!!!!) I merely asked the question (for the dull, the answer is no)

It being forced to marry gays against its will would have nation wide implications that a single person doing something of their own free will would not.

No church is being forced to marry against it's will. Show me one if you can, I will show you dozens that do it willingly.......

And by the way, celebacy is deviant behavior.....or do you assume that the word deviant has some moral baggage attached to it? It means that it doesn't fall within the norm, and clearly, as far as humanity is concerned, celebacy is not the norm...in fact...if there is a celabacy gene, the numbers of consecrated virgins would indicate it has all but died out

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear M. Dancer,

You make a very good point in a very convoluted way. However, I think that there might be some confusion that has arisen from your misuse of the word 'deviant'.

Celebacy is not the norm, ergo, it is deviant. (you could say, unnatural)

Unusual might be a better word, but one cannot deviate from a path that they have never set foot on. One might consider a 'return to celibacy' as deviant (or unusual, or against the norm), but to still be standing in the starting blocks is about as 'non-deviant' as one can get!

Otherwise, a very good post, and I assume that this

Open mindedness pertaining to perverted sex in a law-abiding society should be limited to what all society considers 'normal sexuality'.

from Leafless is what you are trying to shed light upon. Good on ya.

[sharkman]

The oxford dictionary uses terms like queer, freaky, freakish, perverse, degenerate and depraved. As adjectives to describe deviant. Perhaps your dictionary is the problem.

As far as churches go in Canada this is where we are headed. Gays are demanding all churches marry them. As you may know, the Tories are working on legislation in this very area.

[M.Dancer]

The oxford dictionary uses terms like queer, freaky, freakish, perverse, degenerate and depraved. As adjectives to describe deviant. Perhaps your dictionary is the problem.

As far as churches go in Canada this is where we are headed. Gays are demanding all churches marry them. As you may know, the Tories are working on legislation in this very area.

Adjectives are not definitions

http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/d/d0179000.html

de·vi·ant Listen: [ dv-nt ]

adj.

Differing from a norm or from the accepted standards of a society.

n.

One that differs from a norm, especially a person whose behavior and attitudes differ from accepted social standards.

Oh...okay so no churches have been forced to marry like you said....so instead it's gays are demanding all churches marry them......

Yeah? is that a fact? And who pray tell told you that little gem? Please back that up.

[M.Dancer]

Dear M. Dancer,

You make a very good.........

Call me Morris........

From the Oxford.......

deviant

• adjective diverging from normal standards, especially in social or sexual behaviour.

• noun a deviant person.

— DERIVATIVES deviance noun deviancy noun.

From Webster's

deviant

One entry found for deviant.

Main Entry: de·vi·ant

Pronunciation: -&nt

Function: adjective

: deviating especially from an accepted norm <deviant behavior>

- deviant noun

Your spin is more philosphical than psychological......if a person has only ever had sex with monkeys...it would still be deviating from the norm........

[bradco]

The oxford dictionary uses terms like queer, freaky, freakish, perverse, degenerate and depraved. As adjectives to describe deviant. Perhaps your dictionary is the problem.

As far as churches go in Canada this is where we are headed. Gays are demanding all churches marry them. As you may know, the Tories are working on legislation in this very area.

No true small l liberal would approve of churches being forced to marry people they dont wish to. Notice how the original bill did nothing of the sorts. Right wingers are so jittery.

[sharkman]

No true small l liberal would approve of churches being forced to marry people they dont wish to. Notice how the original bill did nothing of the sorts. Right wingers are so jittery.

There have been many documented examples linked to on this board showing religious groups or people being forced to rent halls or warned about their charity tax status bradco. I'm not going to list them again. Look them up if you care to be informed. Being aware of the situation and voting accordingly is the right thing to do, whatever side of an issue you come down on.

[bradco]

No true small l liberal would approve of churches being forced to marry people they dont wish to. Notice how the original bill did nothing of the sorts. Right wingers are so jittery.

There have been many documented examples linked to on this board showing religious groups or people being forced to rent halls or warned about their charity tax status bradco. I'm not going to list them again. Look them up if you care to be informed. Being aware of the situation and voting accordingly is the right thing to do, whatever side of an issue you come down on.

Well Ive only been on this board about a month so I might not have caught all your documented examples. I vaguely remember the hall example but dont realy know the specifics. To me it depends on whether or not they choose to act as a business by renting it out. By choosing to act as a business you are taking on legal requirements, for example you cant discriminate. Forcing them to rent the hall to gay people wouldnt be an assault on their religous freedoms or institution. I would have less to do with their church and more to do with their business license. If a gay group owned a building and refused to rent it out to a Christian group you would be protesting against that. If they are not acting as a business then the courts will make the right decision, I have confidence in that.

Im unaware of the chairty tax status. Churches shouldnt have charity tax status. They are private institutions and should pay their taxes like a gay advocacy group would be expected to pay theirs. If they are doing some sort of charity work then I think that part is fine and should be considered to be fine.