Censorship and closed minds do not always prevail!

<p>Sarahsmom42 - I wasn't implying anything. I was simply stating an observation in response to your comment about separation of Church and State. If anyone thinks that this doctrine is currently thriving and respected as it should be in our country and government, then one need look no further than the push for "Faith Based Initiatives" which has a transparent agenda of imposing a particular set of values on others through a rather invidious process using government to legitimize it. This is way off topic now, I'm going for a bike ride :) .</p>

<p>Soozie,</p>

<pre><code>You don't seem to understand that the church believes that even though people may be BORN gay, they do not have to live a homosexual lifestyle that includes having sex with those of the same sex. They do not recognize gay marriage, so all gay sex in their minds is a sin. Catholic priests discourage their parishners/students from going to movies and reading books and watching plays that depict the gay lifestyle as normal, acceptable, wise or legitimate.

You can tell a new driver to obey the laws of the road but if you then proseed to speed, roll thru stop signs and pass on the left, you will not have much credibility with the new driver? The church feels the same about the topic of living a homosexual lifestyle. They welcome homosexuals, but discourage them from having sex. They also discourage people who are hetrosexual from having premarital sex. It's nothing new or astonishing.
Why doesn't the church teach acceptance? The church teaches it's followers that you can love someone without condoning their behavior.
</code></pre>

<p>Well, that last point that you can love someone without condoning their behavior is what I have been saying similarly on this thread that you can read about someone or watch a play about someone without condoning the behavior of the characters. </p>

<p>Thank you, however, for explaining the church's position and it is interesting.</p>

<p>Well I'm Catholic and I've been to Catholic school since second grade and I've never been discouraged from going to plays, watching movies, or reading any books at all....Our Catholic school took large groups to see national touring shows and other various plays around the city and they sometimes depect homosexual liefstyles and we even have a priest or two come with us...While it isn't encouraged it isn't discouraged either....I guess things have changed.
"The church does not impose, it proposes" is one of the most important things I learned in school. My favorite theology teacher and a priest emphasized this.</p>

<p>Susan, </p>

<p>I think what's clear is that some churches, and I emphasize some because not all do this, want to control their parishioners in many aspects of their lives. For some reason, the church may not trust them to be able to read books, see movies, attend plays which deal with subject matter that the church deems inappropriate. Perhaps they feel that an experience like this will challenge their beliefs? I honestly don't know, and have never been able to figure out what it is that makes them so afraid. </p>

<p>If the church truly does "love someone without condoning their behavior", and if the parishioners are secure in their faith, I fail to see why it is a problem to be exposed to a book, movie or play which happens to have a homosexual character in it. If they believe this, and happen to have homosexuals as parishioners, how do they reconcile that? This makes no sense to me. It's funny but I've never seen nor heard of them making such a big deal over any book, movie or play that happens to have murder or theft or adultery, or similar issues, in it. Anyway, as I said from the beginning, they're free to censor what they choose, but that doesn't make it right. </p>

<p>Bruce, I agree with you that not all churches deal with issues like we've been discussing here in this thread. One of my Ds favorite teachers in h/s was a former Catholic priest who, like the priests at your school, often took them to see theatrical performances that he felt would enlighten and challenge them. He's one of the most open individuals I know. Fear does not exist in his world. A dear family friend Father Mychal Judge, was also someone who felt strongly on this issue. He worked tirelessly with a group called Dignity, a Catholic LGBT organization. The group advocates for change within the Catholic church in their teachings on homosexuality. He was also the Chaplain for the NYFD. Father Mike was killed on 9/11, but the group he worked so hard for, continues. </p>

<p>One other comment I'd like to make, a general comment, is that there is no such thing as a 'homosexual lifestyle', any more than there is a heterosexual lifestyle. It's not a lifestyle, nor is it a choice. It just is. It's life. Period.</p>

<p>BruceWayne,</p>

<p>The teachers at my nephew's school sound similar to yours. It kind of depends on when and where you went to a Catholic school. </p>

<p>Alwaysamom, it is possible to abstain from having homosexual sex and participating in activities which would encourage this behavior, is it not? This is what the church refers to as choosing to "live homosexual lifestyle." </p>

<p>I am not the church, I simply stated what I was taught through out my schooling AND I NO LONGER GO TO THE CHURCH, but there are plenty of people who are Catholic and have no problem with homosexuality. I don't recall ever watching any movies or plays at my school that involved murder. We did "You're A Good Man, Charlie Brown and other plays which you probably don't consider legitimate, but some of us reallly enjoyed. If you don't like the teachings of the church, why can't you just go to another church. They are not obligated to massage their faith to please you.</p>

<p>alwaysamom </p>

<p>I agree with all that you wrote in post #105. </p>

<p>During this interesting thread discussion, I also was thinking of all the movies, plays and books that depict crimes like murder, and then also issues such as adultery or premarital sex and I haven't heard of such pieces being disallowed. It seems like this piece hit a raw nerve. Like you, I don't see how viewing books, movies, plays, or works of art will cause someone to change their religious beliefs. I know I certainly can read or view other beliefs and never feel that my own are at risk or that I am being convinced or challenged to change my beliefs. I see it as watching or reading characters who are different than me. If I see a movie with murder, I don't want to go out and murder someone. With religion, I see it as exposure, not forcing any belief on anyone. </p>

<p>And as I said before, I do wonder, like you do, the message they are sending to their own parishoners who may be gay, by disallowing parishoners to be exposed to a play depicting homosexual characters. </p>

<p>I also agree that homosexuality is not a choice or a lifestyle but is part of who a person is. For clarification, when I have used "lifestyle" in some of my posts about La Cage, I was referring to homosexuals in the play who are gay and that the play depicts the relationship of the gay characters....their life together in their relationship. I was referring to a play depicting the lives of characters who are gay. This is their life, as you say. They did not choose their orientation. </p>

<p>So, I'll be hopeful that as Sarahsmom mentions that the church teaches to love others even if you don't condone their behavior, that they will allow followers to view works about others even if the church doesn't approve of the actions, beliefs, or orientation of those depicted and hopefully can preach acceptance. It is hard to preach love and acceptance at the same time as closing off exposure to those who differ from ourselves. Understanding others is not the same as condoning or agreeing or believing the same.</p>

<p>sarahsmom.....</p>

<p>
[quote]
it is possible to abstain from having homosexual sex and participating in activities which would encourage this behavior, is it not? This is what the church refers to as choosing to "live homosexual lifestyle."

[/quote]
</p>

<p>In my view, being homosexual involves more than having sex. I am heterosexual and even if I abstain from sex, I am still heterosexual. There are gay people who are not having sex and they are still gay.</p>

<p>Yes, this is why homosexuals are welcomed by the Catholic church, but they are encouraged to abstain from having sex, just as non-married hetros are.</p>

<p>One more thing.. Church is about getting spiritually fed. If you don't like the food at one church, you can always go to another.
No one ever said that viewing a movie or play would cause someone to change their religious beliefs! The Catholic church DOES NOT AND NEVER WILL support gay sex or gay marriage. It believes that gay sex is literally a product of the devil. Why can't you just leave it alone?! Find a church where you can be spiritually fed and FORGET ABOUT IT!</p>

<p>Doesn't that, however, really beg the issue. What if the homosexual couple is married, in those state's that permit it, or are partners in a "civil union" in those states that term it as such. Can they have sex then or must they abstain while married heteros need not? All this dancing around on the head of a pin! The reality is that in most western organized religions, traditional dogma views homosexuality as wrongful and very often to the extent that doctrine has been "softened" to "welcome" those who are homosexual, it is not because there is a new acceptance of homosexuality but because there is a desire and purpose to "save" them. If there is acceptance of homosexuals as full people, then that must include all aspects of human relationships and there should be no problem with being exposed to art and literature that explores the human condition of homosexual life. But in reality, there is the fear of "contagion" or "contamination" which is why you must guard against plays such as that at issue in this thread.</p>

<p>Fortunately, some elements of organized religion recognize the fundamental flaw in this approach and you now have increasing numbers of gay clergy or straight clergy that recognize the need to accept gays as fully as you would accept heteros.</p>

<p>(Cross posted with Sarahsmom's)</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>Well, thank you for finally expressing your true feelings! Fortunately, not all Catholics feel like this, not even all Catholic priests. I wonder if you would have said what I quoted above to Father Mychal Judge had you known him.</p>

<p>Alwaysamom,
When did I say that I subscribed to that teaching or that these were MY feelings? Why don't you have Father Judge give us a statement that says that the church blesses gay sex/marriage? I'd like to see that. In the mean time, I'll call my Uncle Mark, a priest and ask him. Isn't this fun? I know I'm enjoying it. Not.</p>

<p>Please....if you have been reading the thread...Father Judge is dead. He died in the attack on Sept. 11.</p>

<p>Sarahsmoms, I think there can be respectful discussion of various viewpoints. If you don't enjoy the discussion, you don't have to get engaged in it. It is a choice. I don't think it needs to be an argument. Our views vary. People are trying to understand your views because you have chosen to participate. If it is not enjoyable to participate, you do not have to. I surely welcome your input, however! I hope the tone of disagreement can be polite discourse.</p>

<p>Well, if I missed that fact I'm sorry, maybe Alwaysamom has something he wrote to back up her statements. In the mean time, I'm sure that my uncle would not have a problem giving us some kind of official doctrine to back up what I've said. I'll get back to you. In the mean time, maybe she should stop trying to alienate people who actually SUPPORT gay marriage.</p>

<p>
[quote]
It's funny but I've never seen nor heard of them making such a big deal over any book, movie or play that happens to have murder or theft or adultery, or similar issues in it.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Murder, theft, adultery are sins in the Catholic church, I believe. So is acting on homosexual sexual preference in a sexual manner. I do not believe the church would condone any book, movie, play, etc. which treats lightly killing, theft or adultery. So why should they be forced to condone a play which treats the "sin" of homosexual sexual activity lightly?</p>

<p>
[quote]
Why can't you just leave it alone?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Good question.</p>

<p>The request to "leave it alone" or for posters to keep their views to themselves seems to ironically align with the original issue of the Bishop saying, in essence, to those who wanted to put on the play: "we don't want exposure to what we don't agree with!"</p>

<p>Sarahsmom, I do not see people trying to alienate you. I see thoughtful articulate posters who are respectfully discussing their point of view and inquiring about yours and discussing the differences in perspectives and opinions. There is a way to have polite discourse even if people disagree. </p>

<p>I honestly do not understand your point of view which doesn't mean I wish to alienate you. I welcome learning about how others think and feel, even if they differ from my own point of view. </p>

<p>I am not sure I understand you when you say you support gay marriage but by the same token you come across on another thread on CC (not this one) saying a cross dresser or bisexual man is a pervert. I'm not sure I understand. The point of a discussion is to discuss points of view, clarify one's own (if misunderstood) and attempt to discuss. You don't HAVE to engage in the discussion, however. It is a choice. And it need not be a "fight."</p>

<p>I hope you do read the posts carefully because AlwaysAMom made a point about Father Judge that was hard to miss, at least to me, and it seems pretty hurtful to have to read that perhaps he should come here and give a statement! I think one way to discuss it would have been to ask for clarification of the views of this Father of the church. Even if you thought he was alive.</p>

<p>I think some people may see it as an attack on their religious beliefs. Which it is.</p>

<p>"Leave it alone" means allowing religious freedom.</p>

<p>Gays naturally may be offended that some view their homosexual sexual activity as a "sin" or as a "perversion." However, that is the teaching of the church, I believe. There is no attack on any individual human being. There is, however, condemnation of homosexual sexual activity and plays, etc. depicting such, as there is condemnation of plays, books or movies which condone or glorify murder, theft, adultery, etc.</p>

<p>A lot of the posters here, including myself, think that the church involved in the original post is surely allowed religious freedom to believe what they wish to believe and to teach what they wish to teach! These same posters, including myself, also believe that it was the church's right to allow or not allow artistic works to be presented under their roof! </p>

<p>That doesn't mean others agree with that decision to ban the production and that is what is being discussed....not their right or freedom to do so. It is not even about whether you agree with gay marriage or anything else. Everyone is entitled to their beliefs and values, etc. The original issue was whether EXPOSURE to portrayals in books and plays, etc. should be censored if those depicted in the pieces hold different beliefs, values, orientations, (not sure where the line is drawn), etc.</p>

<p>I also find it enriching to learn about other religions and points of view, rather than closing my mind off...I want to hear what others have to say on these issues.</p>

<p>Soozie, in reference to "the other thread", I NEVER said that just because someone is a cross dresser or bisexual that they were perverted. The guy I dated WAS a pervert but it had nothing to do with his being bi or a crossdresser! He was all three and he was also a liar. He completely misled me about who is was and I was not interested in having a relationship with someone who misled me, lied to me about who he was AND was a serious pervert. HE WAS TRYING TO FIND THREESOMES AND WAS USING MY PHOTOGRAPH TO FIND INTERESTED CANDIDATES! YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT A CREEP OR WHAT A PERVERT HE WAS.</p>