What the Pope said is not approval of sexual relationships outside of marriage, defined as husband and wife, male and female. What the Pope did say is that orientation is not a barrier to a holy life if one is chaste and celibate.
Here are other church, which is what we are talking about here, voices on the subject:
Bishop Michael Sheridan, Diocese of Colorado Springs:
This has been the position of the church all along. The way I read his remarks is that a priest can be homosexual and a priest if he leads a holy and chaste life. It doesn't put a moral value on being homosexual, any more than it says heterosexuals are good or evil. It is what you are. But if a heterosexual acts outside a marriage, that is wrong. The pope is distinguishing between the person and the act.
He is reiterating the documents of the church regarding the dignity of every human being. The church has issued several documents regarding ministry to homosexual persons and consistently has said every person possesses inherent dignity.
Karna Swanson, director of communications, Catholic Archdiocese of Denver:
I think the important part of the message is to understand that the clear teachings of the church says that homosexual inclination is not sinful and that the church has always expected priests to live lives of celibate chastity. What the pope said does not contradict that at all. He is underlining that every person who has an inclination, if they are eagerly seeking God and seeking to live according to the teachings of the church, then he is on a good path.
Yawn- Related to MORON- Webster Synonyms
AIRHEAD, BIRDBRAIN, BLOCKHEAD, BONEHEAD, BUBBLEHEAD, CHOWDERHEAD, CHUCKLEHEAD, CLODPOLL (or CLODPOLE), CLOT [British], CLUCK, CLUNK, CRETIN, CUDDY (or CUDDIE) [British dialect], DEADHEAD, DIM BULB [slang], DIMWIT, DIP, DODO, DOLT, DONKEY, DOOFUS [slang], DOPE, DORK [slang], DULLARD, DUMBBELL, DUMBHEAD, DUM-DUM, DUMMKOPF, DUMMY, DUNCE, DUNDERHEAD, FATHEAD, GANDER, GOLEM, GOOF, GOON, HALF-WIT, HAMMERHEAD, HARDHEAD, IGNORAMUS, IMBECILE, JACKASS, KNOW-NOTHING, KNUCKLEHEAD, LAMEBRAIN, LOGGERHEAD [chiefly dialect], LOON, LUMP, LUNKHEAD, MEATHEAD, MOME [archaic], IDIOT, MUG [chiefly British], MUTT, NATURAL, NIMROD [slang], NINCOMPOOP, NINNY, NINNYHAMMER, NIT [chiefly British], NITWIT, NODDY, NOODLE, NUMSKULL (or NUMBSKULL), OAF, PINHEAD, PRAT [British], RATBAG [chiefly Australian], SAPHEAD, SCHLUB (also SHLUB) [slang], SCHNOOK [slang], SIMPLETON, STOCK, STUPE, STUPID, THICKHEAD, TURKEY, WOODENHEAD, YAHOO, YO-YO
this is what I think of you and your post, siggie. LMAO! again!
Well gosh darn G, you certainly and quickly associated with my non-directional comment about obsession, no doubt appropriately. However, I must point out (which I often need do with the less intelligent posters) that your observation on the most frequent poster depends on which page you look. For example, if you were to click on "news" you would find the frequency rating as follows: Mr. Nirom, gurudori, TejonTech, OldCrank and bringing up the bottom of the top five "siggie". If you were to go to the "columns" home page, you would find a different order. Let me also point out, my comments are short, sweet and to the point (they also vary). Your comments are excessively verbose, flamboyant, irrational, often poorly written and ONLY about your gayness. Glad, as always, to have been of assistance.
I should also point out for the hard of reading, I did not post "boring" as reported. I simply yawned.
Relationships are hard work...and some times things just can't be fixed...none of us should be using these sad defeats that are so difficult for those involved as a banner against the other side in this larger debate.
Colorado's first gay divorce finalized in El Paso County
The Associated Press- • Modified: July 30, 2013 at 11:06 am • Published: July 30, 2013 • 0
DENVER — Supporters of Colorado's new civil unions law say the first state ruling of its kind declaring a same-sex divorce final sets a precedent for gay couples married in other states who want to legally terminate their relationships in Colorado without uprooting their lives.
Juli Yim and Lorelei Jones wed in Massachusetts in 2009, where same-sex marriage is legal. Yim said that relationship went sour and she found a new partner in Colorado.
Colorado is one of several states that treat gay and straight couples the same in almost every respect through civil unions or domestic partnerships. Gay couples are not allowed to marry in Colorado, but can get divorced there under state statute.
Some states' gay marriage laws require in-state residency to dissolve a relationship. Gay-rights advocates contend the requirement is more than an inconvenience because it can put lives on hold for those who have moved to different states.
Denver lawyer Kyle Martelon said there is some confusion on how gay couples can get divorced, and the issues are different in other states.
"A lot of people kind of think if they went on vacation to Iowa or Massachusetts or New York and got married and came back to their state, that when they break up they can just go their separate ways," Martelon said. "It's not like that."
Colorado's civil union law, which took effect May 1, provides legal protections including division of property, financial responsibility between former spouses, parental visitation and child support to splitting couples, provided one involved individual has lived in Colorado for more than 90 days.
The new law prohibits anyone who is married or in a civil union in another state from entering a civil union in Colorado with someone other than their legally recognized spouse.
Yim and Suzie Calvin have been friends since high school and plan to marry next May 1, most likely in another state unless Colorado's ban on gay marriage is overturned, which is unlikely to happen soon. Yim's divorce became final Monday in El Paso County, the Fort Collins Coloradoan reported Tuesday (http://tinyurl.com/nzqoxwd).
Yim's was among seven dissolution cases filed during the first two months the new law was in effect. The other six are pending.
Wow Tejon Tech Accurately heard and wrote what the Pope said.
Wow, siggie. I would have to agree with you on this one: that you and TT are both OBSESSED with the comment board ( being #1 & #2), especially when you commented, “Boring” a few comments ago to this story.
If you are so bored, are you also compelled to have to reply to things I post? I guess that is being OBSESSED TO THE MAX! LMAO AT YOU! guru
Obsession is often associated with mental illness.
Lot's of misinterpretation going on in the news. It is what the church all around teaches, believes, and acts out. Along the lines of what Bishop Sheridan said, here is a good summary and explanation:
What Pope Francis really said about gays -- and no, it's not new
By Fr. Jonathan Morris
Published July 29, 2013
Pope Francis doesn’t do interviews. Or at least that’s what we thought. He said that about himself just one week ago on the way to Rio de Janeiro for World Youth Day.
Then World Youth Day happened. And it happened in a big way.
According to official reports from City Hall, 3.2 million young people gathered on Copacabana Beach to see him, pray with him, and hear his proposal about the meaning of life.
The Bible and the Catholic Church have never taught that it is a “sin” to be homosexual.
His closing message to them was simple: Go back to your homes, and serve others without fear.
Hours later, perhaps taking to heart his own closing message about fearless service, Pope Francis offered an 80 minute, unscripted question-and-answer session with the international press corps.
In its entirely, the press conference on the pope’s plane traveling from Brazil back to the Vatican was fascinating. (For more, please look at my Twitter reports.)
But, unfortunately, if you were reading the headlines from some media outlets, you would have learned just one thing. As the Huffington Post put it: “Breakthrough: Pope OK with Gays.”
This is the worst coverage of a religious story I have seen to date.
Let’s begin with the fact that the pope has always been “OK” with homosexuals. In fact, by the demands of his own religion he is required to be much more than just “OK.” The Christian faith teaches that every person is endowed by God with an inviolable dignity and therefore deserves our unconditional respect and love.
A section of an Associated Press report also got the story very wrong. Summarizing the pope’s comments on homosexuals in the priesthood, the AP reported: “Francis was much more conciliatory [than Pope Benedict], saying gay clergymen should be forgiven and their sins forgotten.”
Pope Francis didn’t say that, and the report is wrong on so many levels.
First of all, it suggests that being gay itself, is a sin. What Pope Francis really said, in response to a reporter’s question about homosexual priests who are living a celibate life was this: “If someone is gay and he searches for the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge?”
Pope Francis simply and compassionately reiterated Biblical teaching. The Bible and the Catholic Church have never taught that it is a “sin” to be homosexual. They teach it is a sin to have homosexual sex because it goes against the laws of God’s nature, specifically his plan for human sexuality.
When Pope Francis says “who am I to judge” he is saying—and I think we need to hear more of this from religious leaders—that active homosexuals deserve the same kindness, love, and mercy that all of us sinners would hope to receive from God and from others.
We don’t make judgments about anyone’s personal worth—God has already done that when he created us out of love.
I would hope next time Pope Francis offers to meet with the press, they would take to heart his message about fearless service and report to their readers what he actually said, rather than what they wish they had heard.
Pat Robertson On Transgender Community: 'I Don't Think There's Any Sin Associated With That' The Huffington Post | By Cavan Sieczkowski 07/29/2013
This is certainly one of Pat Robertson's most shocking statements yet. Pat Robertson has said a lot of shocking things, but his latest comment about the transgender community might be the most surprising yet.
The 83-year-old televangelist sat down on Sunday for the "Bring It Online" advice portion of his Christian Broadcasting Network show, "The 700 Club." A viewer named David wrote in asking how he should refer to two transgender females who work in his office and have legally changed their genders. Instead of criticizing the trans individuals, Robertson approached the situation in a seemingly level-headed manner.
"I think there are men who are in a woman's body," he said. "It's very rare. But it's true -- or women that are in men's bodies -- and that they want a sex change. That is a very permanent thing, believe me, when you have certain body parts amputated and when you have shot up with various kinds of hormones. It's a radical procedure. I don't think there's any sin associated with that. I don't condemn somebody for doing that."
He went on to say he would "question the validity" of someone who just says, "Well I'm really a woman" because you "don't count somebody as female unless they really are, or male unless they really are."
When his co-host said the viewer doesn't know the intentions or medical history of his co-workers, Robertson rebutted, "It's not for you to decide or to judge."
The remarks from Robertson -- who has ranted about gays, Muslims and demons in Goodwill sweaters -- were applauded by various blogs.
ThinkProgress called his statement a "refreshing change of pace." Back 2 Stonewall joked that the comments might push anti-gay American Family Association host Bryan Fischer even "deeper into the end of the insanity pool." America Blog called it a "huge deal."
"Robertson’s statement is, at its core, sympathetic," wrote America Blog's John Aravosis. "And regardless of how flawed the rest of his quote is ... these are the kind of positive statements that help a movement move forward, especially one that is less known to the public than, for example, being gay. Say what you will about Robertson, but this quote is very helpful."
Local Reaction to Pope's Comments on Gays
Jul 29, 2013 10:37 PM by Annie Snead
Pope Francis continues to make headlines, while wrapping up his first overseas visit to Brazil. The Pope told reporters on the way back from Brazil quote "If a person is gay and seeks God and has good will, who am i to judge them?"
We're getting local reaction. We spoke with Bishop Michael Sheridan of Colorado Springs who says this has been the teaching of the Catholic Church all along.
"That's been the consistent teaching of the Catholic Church, maybe it's being heard by some people for the first time I don't know," said Bishop Sheridan.
He says the comments are nothing new, and that the catholic church has always made the distinction between same sex attraction, and homosexual actions.
"Every human being has inherent dignity, every human being - homosexual, heterosexual, male, female, and has to be treated accordingly, with love and respect, and given all human rights," he said.
For Charles Irwin with Colorado Springs Pride, the Pope's comments were a surprise.
He says many times equality and certain faith based organizations don't go hand in hand,but believes the comments are bringing the two sides closer together.
"I do want to see how the words are going to be backed up by actions, that's what's really important especially here in Colorado Springs with the many faith based organizations we have," Irwin said.
He says they're just looking for equality, and if that's what the Pope meant, then that's a great thing.
"There's that little sticking point about what you think and the actions that you do..is the Pope saying that if I am a gay man and I have an intimate relationship with a man...am I a sinner? That's really what i want to see," he said.
Bishop Sheridan believes that is where the church draws the line.
"What we've always distinguished between is the person's attraction, say same sex attraction or homosexuality and then homosexual actions," he said.
Please consider signing and sharing my change.org petition regarding the city council’s blatant disregard for the will of the people.
if i took all you had away from you oldcrank you would not survive one night in the streets.we lost our jobs our home, lost it all when the economy fell apart yet we try with all our might to get back on our feet, how dare you cast stones in an area you clearly know nothing about. your ignorance is truly stamp on your forehead.
New Hampshire just signed an MMJ law into effect....
This means all six New England states now allow MMJ.
Full normalization is on the way nationwide.
Unless TejonTech is also for the ban of recreational alcohol than they are hypocrite as alcohol empirically causes way more damage to the public's health and safety.
But even if that is the case, this is a move AGAINST the Free Market, Limited Government and the Will of the People and those that support it can't claim to love Liberty.
Dear Mayor Bach,
The purpose of this letter is to express concern about the recent comments you made regarding cannabis and its effects on the community. It is our position that... your statements either reflect an uneducated understanding of the facts, a prejudiced disposition that clouds your objectivity, or perhaps both. We find your viewpoints to not only be inaccurate and offensive but dangerous as well, being that they seem to indicate a purposiveness to ignore the will of The People.
Now. You have brought up three major points of contention and we’ll do our best to address them.
Your first point of contention is that somehow allowing recreational sales of cannabis is going to negatively impact public safety. Now to be a detriment to public safety many would say cannabis use would have to cause injury to either the health or property of the people in the community; let’s ponder that for a moment.
What statistics can you or Police Chief Pete Carey provide that supports such a concern? Can you show us data illustrating the correlation between Cannabis use and Spousal Abuse, Sexual Assault or even Vehicular Homicide for that matter? Based up your contention, one might be under the impression that you have data to back up such claims. However, we suspect such evidence fails to exist, or that if such evidence exists it is likely to not be nearly as compelling as the data that shows the relationship between such events and alcohol. To that end we invite both you and/or C.S.P.D. Chief Pete Carey to present actual facts and figures that support your supposition that Cannabis is a threat to public safety.
You also seem to have resorted to the same tactics that liberals have in their push for Gun Control with your claims that you’re willing to compromise your constituents Constitutional rights with the justification that you’re only doing so because you’re concerned about the safety of the children. To be fair, we're concerned about the safety of the children as well. Since A64 will help dissolve the black market while increasing production standards therefore leading to less crime and safer product, therefore we feel honoring the will and intent of the voters is consistent with wanting to protect our kids. Since Amendment 64 does not legalize the possession or consumption of cannabis by minors there is little logic behind using that as a justification to ignore the will of the people.
Perhaps you and Chief Carey would care to ban the sale of recreational alcohol. A recent study** performed by a team of psychiatrists at University of California at San Diego indicates that teenage drinking leads to significantly damaged white matter, which manifests itself in compromised spatial cognition and as the study states “there's a direct correlation between taking up binge drinking and declining intellectual performance.”
But once again, I suspect that the push by the Mayor and or Police Chief to ban recreational alcohol sales, that are in establishments with similar age limits as to what A64 calls for, in respect to public health is unlikely to take place anytime soon. In other words, why not shut down Cheer's and The Mansion to make sure no teenagers get hurt (or hurt anyone else) drinking and driving this summer?
You, along with reactionaries such as Joe Raso, president and CEO of Colorado Springs Regional Business Alliance, also seem inclined to postulate that allowing recreational sales in Colorado Springs is going to negatively affect the job market, especially as it pertains to the potential labor pool for defense contractors. To those with cognitive reasoning skills this position may seem illogical. Are we really supposed to believe that a Systems Analyst with Lockheed Martin is going to decide to compromise their Security Clearance, and therefore their $200k/yr, job just so they can now smoke cannabis recreationally? If they’re inclined to consume cannabis you can be assured that they are doing so already. It again is illogical to anticipate that legalization of a substance, that is statistically less of a negative impact on Public Health and Safety than the legal and readily available substance alcohol, is going to lead to a boom of people looking to give up their established high paying careers in Defense (funded by US tax dollars paid by tax payers such as ourselves by the way) just so they can smoke a joint.
Once again, we don't see that happening. Have companies like Comcast, Trizetto, United Health Care, and other large conglomerates located in Denver talked about downsizing and/or relocating their staff because of the ease of availability of Cannabis? The law doesn’t force employers to accommodate cannabis use so those that don’t allow it will continue to not allow it and those that work for those companies will continue to not use cannabis as a condition of their employment. There’s not a single thing there that will change. Once again it seems as you never fail to make the most of an opportunity to display a lack of forward thinking vision.
In conclusion, we feel you are being spitefully contrary to the will of the people and voters, while being on the wrong side of history, and frankly common decency. There are those who see someone who promotes "limited government" but supports intrusive government interference when it suits as being a hypocrite, but alas we are hoping for the best case scenario which is merely ignorance.
Meanwhile, to compare our industry to that of adult bookstores is frankly insulting. Not only do we employ thousands of people with fairly decent paying jobs in EPC, we contribute to significantly to the local economy the tax base as we spend at Lowes, Costco, Agricultural Supply Houses, Grainger and hire HVAC, Electrical and Plumbing contractors. We pay our sales tax and fees, but most importantly we help sick people improve their quality of li.
We'll concede that not everyone with a Red Card needs MMJ to get through their day. But there are a whole of your constituents that suffer from cancer, lupus, multiple sclerosis, hashimoto, opiate addictions (many legally prescribed by MD's for legitimate pains), degenerative bone diseases, PTSD, etc. who do. And they, like we, take offense at being placed in the same category as Adult Bookstores, merely because you seem to think providing an improved quality to those that Western Medical science has failed is a degenerative activity.
To this end we feel it's appropriate to request an apology for these statements. To express your willingness to ignore the vote of the people, while likening us to pornographers and hypocritically turning a blind eye the amount of damage caused to our Armed Forces by liquor serving establishments, shows a disappointing lack of respect for a large portion of the community which you claim to serve. Hopefully this lack of respect is due to merely misunderstanding the facts, which perhaps a review of said facts will correct.
While you ponder the crafting of such an apology, perhaps after much research and consideration, we suggest you stay mindful of who it is you’re supposed to serve. The people asked for a Strong Mayor, not a dictator. Should you continue to play the role of a dictator you best believe that come voting day, you will be disposed of like one.
You can be sure of that.
We The People
“The effect of cannabis on IQ is really confined to adolescent users,” says lead author Madeline Meier, a postdoctoral researcher at Duke University. “Our hypothesis is that we see this IQ decline in adolescence because the adolescent brain is still developing and if you introduce cannabis, it might interrupt these critical developmental processes.”
“Research suggests that teenage binge drinking has an intellectual price. The latest comes from psychiatrist Susan Tapert of the University of California at San Diego. Her team evaluated middle schoolers who hadn't started drinking, and then tracked them for several years. Those who began to drink heavily showed visible damage to their brain's white matter—the tissue that relays information. And that's not all.”
It is hateful to think mj should not be legal?
What is hateful are liberals who are so angry about the Zimmerman verdict that the family he rescued from a burring car is afraid of the blowback if they publicly thank him.
Animus and insane emotional angst is a liberal trait...so just stop saying everyone who is not pro perversion and drugs is hateful.
Once again 'happily, few brain cells' shows his/her/its ignorance. The "summer of love" occurred in the late 60's, not the 50's. Few is obviously jealous from being born in the decade of nothing. The 50's produced Buddy Holly and the start of rock and roll. Top that nimrod.
7/23/13 Colorado Springs, still afraid of a plant, makes an ordinance to oppose its sale or growth within city limits, proving that they are more concerned about the military industrial complex and the concerns their soldiers won't be able to control themselves faced with legal pot stores than they are with the actual will of the people who live here. by choice and permanently. At least for now, keeping my options open.
A well written article. Keep Colorado Springs Lame indeed. Slowly the stores with personality are all going away. But the public gets what they want; cookie cutter chain stores or buy it online. Just wait until an IKEA moves in. Suburgatory.
All content © Copyright 2013, The Colorado Springs Independent
Website powered by Foundation