Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: one_less who wrote (10291)	4/22/2002 4:10:45 PM
From: Poet	Respond to of 21057

The education and training that I have seen is about promoting an acceptance and advocacy for gay and alternative lifestyles into the mainstream than simply an awareness or tolerance. That's interesting. I've never seen public school programs advocating gay and alternate lifestyles, only acceptance and lack of hatred. Some straight people have issues that lie beneath all of this. If they raise an issue or question the foundations of the agenda they are termed hateful. Yes, I agree that some people have "issues" about homosexuals. And that's OK. I think it's the way that concerns and questions are voiced that often determines the reception they get from folks. As E said earlier today, voicing one's opinion that certain acts are personally offensive is very different from using a moralistic brush. How in the heck were these people sexualized, to be sure of a sexual identity to such an extent, so early. It raises a concern for me about traditional straight boys who may not have formed a sexual identity yet. If they say they want to marry their playground playmate are they going to be encouraged to accept an identity as homosexuals by the new system? One thing here: Not only have I not seen any educational program promote homosexuality, but there have been some recent statements by homosexual parents (Rosie O'Donnell among them) that they would not wish homosexuality on their kids. And neither would I. Gays are a marginalized, often disapproved of, minority. It's a tough life, one which I wouldn't wish on anyone, but neither would I encourage people to crank up their public disapproval and judgement of it. We must realize that out free speech is actually being heard by people, often people who are in pain.

To: one_less who wrote (10291)	4/22/2002 4:50:16 PM
From: J. C. Dithers	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

Linked to your points, Jewel, is the recruitment of Catholic priests at very young ages. In my youth, you could choose to enter a seminary high school as young as 14 or so, for the purpose of beginning your vocation to become a priest. As I have mentioned here before, while attending a Catholic prep school (not seminary school), the subject of a calling to the priesthood came up often. The Catholic Brothers would discuss the subject in class, what it meant, what it would take. Sometimes a kid would choose to do that. (Or was it the kid?) Even as a lad myself, I could sense something wrong going on in terms of the kinds of kids that seemed attracted to the priestly vocation. They seemed, to me, to be kids who were not well adjusted socially; guys we might have called "weirdos" in the quaint and gentle lingo of typical high-schoolers. I cannot remember what I knew about homosexuality at that age, but it sure wasn't much. So I would have never associated "sexual-orientation" with what I saw going on. Somehow, who knows beginning when, the priesthood has become a heavily gay profession. Those on the inside, or former priests, speak of 50% gayness or higher. I think it is quite likely that many of the young boys who entered the seminary schools were struggling, among other things. with who they were sexually. And perhaps their experiences in the cloistered seminary schools (the ones I knew were boarding schools) pushed them toward homosexuality. And perhaps that it is one reason why the priesthood is what it is today. To my knowledge, seminary high schools were gradually phased out, and no longer exist today. In the Boston area, seminary studies can only begin somewhere during the college years. I could not agree more with you that the "education" being forced upon adolescents in sex-ed classes often goes beyond mere tolerance, and gives every appearance of promoting a positive image for the gay lifestyle.

To: one_less who wrote (10291)	4/22/2002 6:28:27 PM
From: Win Smith	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 21057

You'll be happy to know that elements of the Catholic hierarchy agree with your analysis As Cardinal Edward Egan headed to the Vatican for a summit on sexual abuse, his stand-in at St. Patrick's Cathedral gave a homily blaming the scandal on homosexuality and an "immoral country." Monsignor Eugene Clark, an outspoken clergyman of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of New York, called homosexuality a "disorder" and said gay men should not be allowed to become priests, the Daily News reported in Monday's editions. "The tendency to homosexuality is a disorder, not a sin," Clark said in his 15-minute sermon Sunday. "But the practice of homosexuality is truly sinful." Clark also said the United States is "probably the most immoral country certainly in the Western Hemisphere" and blamed American society for being "very protective" of homosexuality. story.news.yahoo.com There was some mixed backpedaling later today, though: story.news.yahoo.com Catholic League President William Donohue said he would be surprised if Egan disagreed with Clark's statements, which he called long overdue. "This MTV world of sexual titillation has everything to do with the corruption, whether that's in the church or out of the church," Donohue said. Clark's Sunday sermon echoed, in part, the Vatican (news - web sites)'s first public statement about the scandal. The pope's chief spokesman told The New York Times last month that the church needed to prevent gays from becoming priests. Marianne Duddy, executive director of the gay Catholic advocacy group Dignity/USA, called Clark's homily "very irresponsible." "I think that most Catholics see this for what it is — an attempt to deflect attention away from the horrible mishandling of the situation by church officials and the decades of coverup that have been engaged in," she said. Personally, I think Ms. Duddy's point is pertinent.