Pope Francis and Gay People

[Richard Tarleton]

Don't be ridiculous. The discussions that caused so much trouble were all on the subject of marriage.

QED

I shall take a time out, I think.

[ahinton]

Progress of a sort it certainly seems to be, but there's a long way to go yet when homosexual acts are still to be regarded by the Roman Catholic Church as "sinful" whereas homosexuality itself need not so be regarded provided that those who are homosexual are seeking God (whatever that means); the worst aspect of this might be its lack of general credibility, in that the Pope appears to be suggesting that being homosexual might in and of itself be OK but indulging in consensual homosexual acts isn't - which seems to me to represent at best some kind of struggle with logic which I hope that the Pope will be able to work through appropriately in due course, so let's give him time to do that if indeed he will.

[Mr Pee]

Amateur, you frequently quote the house rules when it suits you, whilst conveniently ignoring them when you wish to make insulting and personalised comments, sometimes thinly disguised as jokes, against those with whom you disagree.

Your raising of this subject so soon after a thread on similar lines was closed is, IMV, deliberately provocative. I am sure there are plenty of messageboards for the gay community where you can discuss these issues to your heart's content. But raising it here, at this time, is unnecessary and ill-judged. This is not a major policy change, or a change in the doctrine of the Catholic Church, and your reference to John le Carre is not relevant in the slightest. Talk about clutching at straws....

Give it a rest, for goodness sake.

[Flosshilde]

I am really pissed off about the homophobia displayed here by a number of posters - including some I would not have expected it from. I will not keep quiet because it might upset one or two board members.

[french frank]

I think it has been agreed that we wouldn't raise lesbian and gay issue unless there was some new development.

My own intention in saying that did relate, specifically, to gay marriage, not gay issues generally. I saw the headline on the news site and assumed there would be a new thread: I was quite reconciled to the fact. On the other hand, I don't regard it as 'homophobia' if some members get fed up with what (to them) might appear as a disproportionate amount of time and space devoted to gay issues. I got fed up with the endless procession of 'immigration' stories at one point, every time there was a story in the tabloid press.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I am sure there are plenty of messageboards for the gay community where you can discuss these issues to your heart's content.

But how, then, would I (for example) "discuss these issues"?

[Mr Pee]

I am really pissed off about the homophobia displayed here by a number of posters - including some I would not have expected it from. I will not keep quiet because it might upset one or two board members.

Homophobia? Seriously?

Just because some- in fact, by the look of it, quite a few of us- think that this thread is ill-timed and unnecessary does not make us homophobic. The very fact that you are prepared to throw that word around so easily says a lot more about your own hang-ups and prejudices than it does about the rest of us.

The only thing that upsets me about your not keeping quiet is that you have posted such inflammatory garbage.

[Flosshilde]

Homophobia? Seriously?

Yes, seriously, because there seems to be an attempt by some not to have any discussion about lesbian & gay issues.

[jean]

My own intention in saying that did relate, specifically, to gay marriage, not gay issues generally.

I had assumed that.

...quite a few of us...

Three, I make it.

(There's a discussion on these matters on the Radio 4 news at the moment. That's pretty mainstream, don't you think?)

[Mary Chambers]

But how, then, would I (for example) "discuss these issues"?

Or I. Is Mr Pee assuming that everyone who has opinions about equality for gay people is gay? There is no reason to assume that.

[eighthobstruction]

This thread is about reaction to the seeming attitude and doctrinal change in the Catholic church to homosexuals (as seemingly announced by the Pope today)....please stay on topic (excepting the odd humourous or helpful adlib)

I am starting a NEW thread about "What we may post about"....

[Tapiola]

My own intention in saying that did relate, specifically, to gay marriage, not gay issues generally. I saw the headline on the news site and assumed there would be a new thread: I was quite reconciled to the fact. On the other hand, I don't regard it as 'homophobia' if some members get fed up with what (to them) might appear as a disproportionate amount of time and space devoted to gay issues. I got fed up with the endless procession of 'immigration' stories at one point, every time there was a story in the tabloid press.

ff, your message could (and should) be used now and in the future as a classic example of sanity, common sense and insight.

Yes, I am a most-time lurker here these days but have been very struck by the high and tedious levels of goading, baiting, histrionics, "acting the diva", acting the faux-outraged, shooting at ducks in a barrel, etc. from some of the usual, and some surprising, suspects. This applies to many, many threads currently and in the recent past, not just this one, the Mozart one, the Siegfried one, the gay marriage one, take your pick...

Perhaps it's the heat. :erm:

[MrGongGong]

Or I. Is Mr Pee assuming that everyone who has opinions about equality for gay people is gay? There is no reason to assume that.

Indeed Mary

[jean]

It's on Newsnight (BBC2) now.

[ahinton]

The input of such as Mr Pee inclines me to I wonder if we shold be careful about discussing violas here too...