Archbishop of Detroit endorses program to "help" gays remain chaste.

[rageaholic]

Link

I don't know whether to laugh or to cry.  On one hand it's funny how desperate the church is getting to control people's sexuals organs, but on the other hand it's disturbing that these unhealthy and outdated views about sex are being endorsed.  And of course, you got people in the comments saying that it's not discriminatory since the church encourages all to be chaste until marriage.  Never mind that.

1.  Their stance on Same Sex Marriage discourages gays from getting married. 
2.  The rigid and outdated views on human sexuality are harmful whether it's discriminatory or not. 

[Old Viking]

A misquote.  He said, "If we'd all grab our torches and pitchforks, the gay would be chased."

[Ultimate Paragon]

So, in other words, there's nothing wrong with being gay, only with having gay sex.  I wonder: do these people even understand their own logic?

[Rime]

This is their idea of a "compromise." On one hand it makes them look better than Fundamentalist Protestants who think that anyone who has a same-sex attraction should be publicly humiliated, given a swift and fair trial and then stoned to death regardless.  On the other hand, they're still trying their damnedest to frustrate everyone's sex life. 

[ironbite]

It's amazing how much the Church thinks it needs to be in somebody's bedroom.

Ironbite-but then again when you think about it's origins it makes sense.

[Ghoti]

That's the single most sexually frustrated thing I've ever read that wasn't on a MRA/MGTOW site.

[Sylvana]

Well if you think about it, this is not really all that crazy or strange.
The christian religion requires women to remain virgins until marriage, and is strongly against sex outside of marriage. Included in that is a specific rule against male homosexual sex.

While it may seem like they are just trying to oppress gays and get all up in their faces, we must also remember how often churches focus on abstinence only programs for unmarried people. If anything this shows that they are at least trying to welcome people into thier church while still remaining as faithful to the texts as possible given that it is a massive contradictory mess.

[Sigmaleph]

"Remaining faithful to the text" is a weak excuse. There's a billion things condemned in the Bible that the Church ignores.

The Church could give up, adapt to the times, and let the whole anti-gay thing be yet another addition into the Hall of Stupid Things the Church Used to Do but Doesn't Anymore. They won't, because a)they don't want to and b) society is still too divided and they'd lose support of their biggest fans, who'd probably start a schism or something. (There are some Catholics who think there hasn't been a legitimate Pope since Vatican II)

My point being, what stops the Church from giving up on this is not a magical contract forcing them to uphold the literal words of the Bible. It's partly political necessity, and mostly that they don't really like gay people.

[RavynousHunter]

A schism amongst Christians?  That there's serious problem, not like modern Christianity doesn't already more closely resemble a Rorschach test than an actual, established religion.  Seriously, the Vatican should either evolve or die, either way works for me, just so long as something is done sooner rather than later.  They've had, like, 2,000 years in the sun, maybe its time for them to move the fuck over for something else.

Almost makes me wonder what would've happened had Emperor Constantine (I think it was him, at least) hadn't seen that "in this sign, you will conquer" hallucination, or at least dismissed it as the hallucination it was, instead of taking it at face value like a damned moron.

[dpareja]

Almost makes me wonder what would've happened had Emperor Constantine (I think it was him, at least) hadn't seen that "in this sign, you will conquer" hallucination, or at least dismissed it as the hallucination it was, instead of taking it at face value like a damned moron.

It was indeed Constantine I.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_hoc_signo_vinces

[rageaholic]

Well if you think about it, this is not really all that crazy or strange.
The christian religion requires women to remain virgins until marriage, and is strongly against sex outside of marriage. Included in that is a specific rule against male homosexual sex.

While it may seem like they are just trying to oppress gays and get all up in their faces, we must also remember how often churches focus on abstinence only programs for unmarried people. If anything this shows that they are at least trying to welcome people into thier church while still remaining as faithful to the texts as possible given that it is a massive contradictory mess.

It's not, but there's an underlying problem with the church being so anal (no pun intended, seriously!) about sex.  To me, it sounds like a controlling, abusive relationship in which the abuser (the church) acts as if they're doing a favor to people when they're really trying to exert more control over their parishioners.  At least that's how I see it (but I'm cynical that way).