How Did Sodomy Become “Pride”?

Fatima Perspectives ^ | July 18, 2019 | Chris Ferrara

[ebb tide]

Even the Catholic hierarchy, with a few noble exceptions, such as this one, observe the required conformity; or worse, in the case of such hugely embarrassing figures as Cardinal Dolan of New York, bestow their blessings upon an objective intrinsic evil. Infinitely worse still, no less than the current occupant of the Chair of Peter has signaled his approval of “gay” relations, however ambiguously, including his approval of a synodal document that declares that “homosexual unions” provide “precious support in the life of the partners.”

[ebb tide]

Ping

[HighSierra5]

Chair of “Peter”? What the?

[Lurker]

Maybe if the RCC had purged itself of men who sodomized children a few decades ago they wouldn’t be having this problem.

But they didn’t.

So.....

L

[Lurker]

“Chair of “Peter”? What the?”

Well Jesus was a carpenter. He made a chair for Peter. It’s right there in the...oh wait...

L

[Kirkwood]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chair_of_Saint_Peter

[b4me]

“How Did Sodomy Become “Pride”?”

they choose commiting a sin according to the bible, thinking of only their selfish pleasure not truth of what they are doing,hence they are full of themselves = pride.

don’t need any big article or schooled explanation to see it.

lovers of themselves - they know best, no need for God nor Jesus in accord with the bible. If they claim to believe in God at all - it’s like Mayor Petey B - a god he concocted maybe with bits of truth but much twisting or deleting of truth to make his god suitable to his liking and lifestyle, takes sin of pride to do that.

[deadrock]

The “pride” comes from their part in destroying the western world.

[Paladin2]

Nice, saved me an expensive trip...

[IronJack]

I’ve wondered that myself. What’s to be “proud” of in letting a man insert things into your rectum? You can take pride in winning a race or writing a symphony or raising a good child. You don’t get to be proud of being a sexual deviant.

“Pride” is just fags whistling past the graveyard.

[ebb tide]

As usual, it appears you didn’t read the article before putting your foot in your mouth.

Neither Clinton nor Obama are Catholics.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Lurker will respond to you in the AM. He goes to bed early. :-)

J/K Lurker you're one of my favorites here.

Here's a pic of my BFF to keep you up though:

[YogicCowboy]

It is Hubris.

[Uncle Miltie]

The love that just won’t shut up.

[elcid1970]

Faggies think they own the rest of us.

[rdcbn]

And they soon will if things keep going the way they are.

Towards the end of the Obama Administration, a notion that rejecting the sexual advances of a transgender person was a racist and hate crime was being pushed and the ground work was being laid to pass laws to criminalize it.

Brilliant in a way and somehow the sudden, very public invention and elevation is the trans gender movement seems to be an important part of some larger plan

Why else would it be so blown out of proportion by the political, media and academic elites.

Since transgender is currently such a tiny population segment there is very little public opposition or visa Phil its to passing very dangerous legislation on their behalf under the radar screen because the public perception is that it is inconsequential.

However, central to the trans movement it that trans is all about how you as an individual identify at a given time .....

[The people have spoken]

Pride is one of the seven deadly sins.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Well Lurker, you are exactly right.

Here's the heck of it. I am old enough to remember when the "language" around this perverse sin began to change in common church-talk.

At first it was "sodomy". The emphasis was on the vileness of the sin. The objective wickedness of the act. The repentance model was called for.

Then -- I remember this --- it morphed into "homosexuality," with the emphasis on deviant desire as a sickness. The subjective pathos of the person who has to deal with this unbidden orientation. The "therapeutic" aspect is what was emphasized here.

Then, the topic was "LGBT," with the emphasis on oppressed persons and communities who had historically been under-valued, under-accepted and under-loved. The whole focus slipped towards how to root out "homophobia" and how to be more fully inclusive and accepting of this oppressed "community": and this is presented, not just as a new pastoral approach, but as a requirement of justice.

Actually, there are legitimate aspects of all three views, IF, IF, IF you carefully try to disentangle one thing from another, and are alert to put together fragments of the truth

We ARE dealing with abominable sin, AND an un-chosen abnormality which is an affliction which calls for healing care, AND persons who deserve to be treated without slander and wounding stereotypes. (Not shouting "gay is great," but still having an open heart to the individual person, who was made by God to be loved, and to love.)

Then there's something further. Something manifesting true diabolical disorientation.

The fourth approach, which is from the pit of hell: Gay Pride. (1) Gay (2) Pride. "Gay". "Pride". Lord have mercy. This has no merits. This is two focking sins in one. The source of such sins, is hell: and if they run their course, their destination is hell. As a little sample in advance, they even make hell on earth.

"Love must be sincere. HATE what is evil; CLING to what is good." - Romans 12:9

Rant over.

Let's pray for each other.

[Lurker]

Homosexuality used to be the love that dared not speak its name. It’s become the love that wont shut the **** up.

L

[Toespi]

They will not stop until the BIBLE is re-written, including marriage is also between one man and one man or one woman and one woman. Most certainly they will want Christ and his disciples to specifically be recognized as homosexual or transgender.