Discussion:
Cafeteria Catholics and Cafeteria Goans
(too old to reply)
Nasci Caldeira
2005-05-03 01:41:25 UTC
Permalink
From: Santosh Helekar <chimbelcho at sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: [Goanet] Cafeteria Catholics (Reply to Santosh)
Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 15:20:18 -0700 (PDT)
If "marriage reveals the truth" of the true human
nature, then why are people who choose to remain
unmarried for life considered to be sick?
Who says that unmarried men are sick?
I am sorry. I made a typing error, and left out a
"NOT" from the above-quoted sentence of mine. My
"If "marriage reveals the truth" of the true human
nature, then why are people who choose to remain
unmarried for life NOT considered to be sick?"
I said this because Fr. Ivo uses this line of
reasoning to claim that homosexuality is a sickness.
Nasci:
Why should persons who choose to remain 'unmarried' be considered sick? They
have the choice and their free will to choose. "marriage reveals the truth'
in that male and female interact and populate and prolong the species, in
excercising their natural right. If a single male or female forgoes their
urge, for whatever reason, they are not sick! Of course not!

The homosexual groups deny that they are 'homosexuals' by choice; instead
they say they are 'born' that way, and that they can't help it. Unmarried
man choose to remain unmarried. They are not born that way. They have the
option of 'choice' any time.

But if say an unmarried man wants to marry 'You Santosh', (presuming that
you are male), then we have a real problem. Your family will also have to
deal with that. I,m sure that you will chase the 'bloke' away; after telling
him that he is sick and weird, and has to go get treated! Would't you do
that Santosh? Or how else would U deal with matters like this?

And in case U decide to 'go with him' and forgo your family, (presuming U R
married) would U consider this union as a "marriage'' or a "conjugal Union"
or a partnership for 'weird' sex?? Would U not seek treatment, for yourself,
in such an event?

Santosh:
But what Nasci has written in a series of posts in
this thread is quite entertaining. I hope he continues
to entertain us. I will try to do my best to encourage
him.
Nasci: I hope to continue to entertain you and enlighten you at the same
time! I will also 'Pray' to a Christian God, for your conversion to an
enlightened Christian Scientist. Santosh, I hear you are a good Scientist;
but I feel there is just that "little something" missing! It is called
"Faith in God".
Cheers,
Nasci Caldeira
Melbourne
Mervyn Lobo
2005-05-03 01:41:51 UTC
Permalink
The facts only reveal our human frailty. We are
sinners. We need God's
redemption. The bishops find it difficult to cope up
with the problem. It is also money racket.
Paedophilia is a crime. We have to learn the
measures that are to be taken in order to put our
own house in order.
God is great!
Fr. Ivo da C.Souza,
Let me try and make this clearer.
Paedophiles, masquerading as priests in the catholic
church, are secure in the knowledge that should they
be reported, the Vatican is not going to do anything.
The supposed authority on morals contends it does not
know how to deal with such problems in its ranks.

Mervyn3.0





______________________________________________________________________
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Santosh Helekar
2005-05-03 05:00:56 UTC
Permalink
--- "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
We cannot just dance at the tune of the American
Psychiatric Association.
Mere assertions and innuendo have no value in a real
discussion. The American Psychiatric Association is a
professional organization that issues recommendations
and guidelines for psychiatrists and mental health
professionals around the world, after thorough review
of all scholarly research in any given area. It
publishes a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual on
mental illness, which informs and guides the practice
of psychiatry all over the world.

It is unlikely that the Catholic Church and its
hierarchy know more about human psychology and mental
illness than the distinguished professionals who sit
on the expert panels of the American Psychiatric
Association. Almost all psychiatric and other mental
health organizations in other countries are in
agreement with the American Psychiatric Association on
the subject of homosexuality.

Cheers,

Santosh
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-04 03:00:40 UTC
Permalink
Dear Dr.Santosh,
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-04 03:05:31 UTC
Permalink
Our discussion so far has been regarding homosexuality, not about the norms
and policies of different dioceses in relation to the deviant priests. I leave
it to the competent authorities...

Ivo da C.Souza


--------Original Message -------
I am not too knowledgeable to discuss this issue from a theological,
sociological or from a medical perspective. Of course I could lagao bhathi
like some of the posts.
Mervyn Lobo
2005-05-01 07:37:08 UTC
Permalink
I have a quick answer: there should not be
"homosexual Catholic priests", but if there are,
as the media are publicizing, then homosexuality
does not cease to be "an aberration", "abnormal".
Fr. Ivo da C. Souza,
Here in N. America, its estimated that 4 out of every
1,000 priests are homosexual. Many of them joined the
priesthood because they did not want to disclose to
their family that they were gay. I used to go to a
church in Washington, D.C. that had a gay priest. I
have no problems with gay priest if they keep their
vows of celibacy.
Let the competent people investigate the causes and
help them, with love and compassion. Let us also
study why there is such a wild propaganda, which
will not help the sick priests nor the Church of
God. What are the background factors for such an
aberration? Can we do something for them? It is
important to save them...as much as poor human
efforts are concerned...
There is a bigger problem than gay priests in the R.C.
Church. The church also has known paedophiles who
still are priests. Every time parishioners report such
paedophiles to the church authorities, the authorities
keep mum or, in the worst case scenario, transfer the
priests to another parish. In other words, the
paedophiles have new kids to prey on.
It is our task, yours and mine!
Yes, I agree, it's both our tasks to keep the church
in order. Unfortunately, for the past 10 years, the
Vatican has been extremely slow in addressing the
problem of gays and paedophiles in its ranks.

Mervyn3.0



______________________________________________________________________
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-01 18:27:57 UTC
Permalink
Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being is complete in male and
female. Biologically, psychologically, spiritually, emotionally we experience
this truth based on human nature itself, not on "antiquated religious dogma".
Marriage reveals the truth of this tenet. Nobody can change the fact. When
there is an aberration in this light, we have to admit that it is an
aberration. The fact that some scientists have been "homosexuals" and yet
contributed to the progress of science, technology and society does not dilute
the fact nor legitimize it. There are alcoholics, who in fact consider
alcoholism a sickness, yet they have to struggle against this "disease" and
are contributing to the progress of the society--though we have to accept that
alcoholism hampers their human growth to a great extent. This comparison has
to be taken as a comparison only--namely, a sick person may be an intellectual
genius, yet he does not cease to be psychologically 'sick', if he is a
homosexual or an alcoholic...

Homosexuality is anti-society, anti-marriage, anti-family... There cannot
be "gay marriages", it is a contradiction in terms. Our anatomy vouches for
it. The family needs a father and a mother. Children and young people need a
Papa and a Mama, not two papas, or two mamas...
This is not "religious dogma", it is order of nature, which nobody can change.
The fact that homosexuality exists among leaders and intellectuals does not
change the natural order. It is an aberration, it is abnormality. Our society
is suffering already from the consequences of all kinds of aberrations, one of
these is homosexual, 'same-sex' union... Enough is enough...
Let us teach our young people the 'facts of life' in a correct way, let us
help those who have this craze, with love and compassion, without condemning
them, but rejecting homosexuality...

Ivo da C.Souza
jose colaco
2005-05-01 20:10:29 UTC
Permalink
From: "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
< Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being is complete in male and
female>
< Nobody can change the fact.>
< Our anatomy vouches for it>
< Let us teach our young people the 'facts of life' in a correct way>



Thank you Fr. Ivo for your excellent posts on the Cafeteria matter. However
the above is noted with some degree of surprise.

The following is NOT in support of any particular lifestyle - inherited,
imposed, learnt or chosen. It is to emphasise the point that blanket
statements are unwise - however well-intentioned they might be.

Before we aspire to teach our young people the 'facts of life' in a correct
way, we may wish to ascertain the 'facts of life'.

I wonder what scientific references there are to support the generalisation
that every "Human being is complete in male and female"

Are there NO exceptions?

If so...how many?
How many individuals are feminized by abuse (at a very young age) itself,
and How many have a genetic prediliction to developing it.

Furthermore, are ALL who look male, male wrt to the hormones and the effects
of the hormones?


please see:->


http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/001180.htm

Androgen insensitivity syndrome (AIS) is when a person has one X and one Y
sex chromosome (making them genetically male), but is resistant to androgens
(male hormones). As a result, the individual has some or all of the physical
characteristics of a woman, despite having the genetic makeup of a man.

The syndrome is divided into two main categories: complete and incomplete.
Complete AIS results in someone who looks outwardly female. In the
incomplete AIS syndrome, the degree of sexual ambiguity varies widely from
individual to individual.

Partial Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome

also known as:
PAIS
Reifenstein Syndrome
Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome, Partial
Gilbert-Dreyfus Syndrome
Incomplete Testicular Feminization
Lubs Syndrome
Rosewater Syndrome
Type I Familial Incomplete Male Pseudohermaphroditism


jc

PS: Our views on the abuse & the criminal coverup + silence by the Real
Cafeteria Catholics : -> at:

http://www.colaco.net/3/church-lurch.htm

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-01 20:10:56 UTC
Permalink
I do not deny the facts. I have affirmed that homosexuality is wrong. Yet the
priests have to be helped. The problem boils down to what I have said: Let us
do something for them...

Ivo da C.Souza


--------Original Message -------
Fr. Ivo da C. Souza,

Here in N. America, its estimated that 4 out of every
1,000 priests are homosexual. Many of them joined the
priesthood because they did not want to disclose to
their family that they were gay. I used to go to a
church in Washington, D.C. that had a gay priest. I
have no problems with gay priest if they keep their
vows of celibacy.

Mervyn3.0
Santosh Helekar
2005-05-02 05:15:03 UTC
Permalink
--- "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
Post by Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being is
complete in male and female. Biologically,
psychologically, spiritually, emotionally we
experience this truth based on human nature itself,
not on "antiquated religious dogma". Marriage reveals
the truth of this tenet. Nobody can change the fact.
The above post makes a lot of categorical assertions
without providing any scientific or sociological
justification to support them. It is very obvious that
this is a strongly held religious view, despite claims
to the contrary. Some of the assertions are not even
internally consistent within the same religious
doctrine. For instance, nobody would deny that
enforced celibacy is not consistent with human nature,
and yet its practice is regarded with such high esteem
by the adherents of this doctrine. If "marriage
reveals the truth" of the true human nature, then why
are people who choose to remain unmarried for life
considered to be sick?

In any case, I would like to emphatically state that
there is absolutely no scientific, clinical or
sociological basis for any of the assertions made in
the above post. Indeed, these assertions go against
the public service recommendations of all major
scientific and medical organizations, as well as
against the practices of most international
humanitarian agencies, including some religious ones.

This is indeed a clear example of how strict adherence
to religious dogma brings one in conflict with
science, as well as with humanitarian ethics developed
by painstaking scientific and sociological research.

I provide below some public service FAQs from the
American Psychological Association, which directly
refute the various claims made in the above-referenced
post.

http://www.apa.org/pubinfo/answers.html

IS HOMOSEXUALITY A MENTAL ILLNESS OR EMOTIONAL
PROBLEM?
No. Psychologists, psychiatrists and other mental
health professionals agree that homosexuality is not
an illness, mental disorder or an emotional problem.
Over 35 years of objective, well-designed scientific
research has shown that homosexuality, in and itself,
is not associated with mental disorders or emotional
or social problems. Homosexuality was once thought to
be a mental illness because mental health
professionals and society had biased information. In
the past the studies of gay, lesbian and bisexual
people involved only those in therapy, thus biasing
the resulting conclusions. When researchers examined
data about these people who were not in therapy, the
idea that homosexuality was a mental illness was
quickly found to be untrue.

In 1973 the American Psychiatric Association confirmed
the importance of the new, better designed research
and removed homosexuality from the official manual
that lists mental and emotional disorders. Two years
later, the American Psychological Association passed a
resolution supporting the removal. For more than 25
years, both associations have urged all mental health
professionals to help dispel the stigma of mental
illness that some people still associate with
homosexual orientation.

CAN THERAPY CHANGE SEXUAL ORIENTATION?
No. Even though most homosexuals live successful,
happy lives, some homosexual or bisexual people may
seek to change their sexual orientation through
therapy, sometimes pressured by the influence of
family members or religious groups to try and do so.
The reality is that homosexuality is not an illness.
It does not require treatment and is not changeable.

However, not all gay, lesbian, and bisexual people who
seek assistance from a mental health professional want
to change their sexual orientation. Gay, lesbian, and
bisexual people may seek psychological help with the
coming out process or for strategies to deal with
prejudice, but most go into therapy for the same
reasons and life issues that bring straight people to
mental health professionals.

CAN LESBIANS, GAY MEN, AND BISEXUALS BE GOOD PARENTS?
Yes. Studies comparing groups of children raised by
homosexual and by heterosexual parents find no
developmental differences between the two groups of
children in four critical areas: their intelligence,
psychological adjustment, social adjustment, and
popularity with friends. It is also important to
realize that a parent's sexual orientation does not
dictate his or her children's.

Another myth about homosexuality is the mistaken
belief that gay men have more of a tendency than
heterosexual men to sexually molest children. There is
no evidence to suggest that homosexuals are more
likely than heterosexuals to molest children.

WHY IS IT IMPORTANT FOR SOCIETY TO BE BETTER EDUCATED
ABOUT HOMOSEXUALITY?
Educating all people about sexual orientation and
homosexuality is likely to diminish anti-gay
prejudice. Accurate information about homosexuality is
especially important to young people who are first
discovering and seeking to understand their
sexuality?whether homosexual, bisexual, or
heterosexual. Fears that access to such information
will make more people gay have no validity?information
about homosexuality does not make someone gay or
straight.

Cheers,

Santosh
Mervyn Lobo
2005-05-02 05:16:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
I do not deny the facts. I have affirmed that
homosexuality is wrong. Yet the
priests have to be helped. The problem boils down to
what I have said: Let us do something for them...
Fr. Ivo da C.Souza,
Parishioners have been doing their level best to help
these priests. At first they were not reporting the
paedophiles to the civic authorities but, instead,
reporting them to the church authorities in the hopes
that the church would take the proper action.

Instead of doing the right thing, the church decided
not to take any action. They still follow this course
of action, and I am talking about at the highest level
of authority.

It's only after victims started suing the paedophiles
that the church authorities started to take notice.
They took notice only after some parishes had to sell
ALL their land and buildings in order to pay for the
damages. Here in Toronto, almost every other week,
there is a second collection for "the Bishops needs."
"The Bishops needs" is usually code for payments to
abuse victims. There used to be a time when the second
collection was to finance the missionaries. Now it is
used to finance those who have left the church.

So, in short, I agree with you, we need to do
something to help these priests. We could start with
the church admitting that it has a problem. Then it
has to weed out these paedophiles.

Mervyn3.0




______________________________________________________________________
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Nasci Caldeira
2005-05-02 05:17:43 UTC
Permalink
Hi all,

Well said, Fr. Ivo;
Santosh Helekar, please take note!
We as a society do not condemn these aberrations, but we do not accept these
as normal; hence the need to help these sick persons. This type of help
should not be construed as acceptance of something against the 'human
nature/order', but rather 'sympathetic, compassionate help' just as with
other illnesses.

It is the 'order of nature'; like Fr Ivo says; it's not antiquated religious
dogma; religion is only accepting the truth! For heaven's sake, Santosh, you
and scientists and agnostics like you have a lot to learn, in this field.
Santosh, I think you yourself is in dire need of neuro surgery; better this
way then banging your 'science only' saturated head on a rock. Science does
not and cannot disprove what Fr Ivo and countless others have said before.
Your education is seriously flawed!

Nasci Caldeira
Melbourne.
From: "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
Subject: [Goanet]Re: Cafeteria Catholics
Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 13:39:46 -0400
Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being is complete in male and
female. Biologically, psychologically, spiritually, emotionally we
experience
this truth based on human nature itself, not on "antiquated religious
dogma".
Marriage reveals the truth of this tenet. Nobody can change the fact. When
there is an aberration in this light, we have to admit that it is an
aberration. The fact that some scientists have been "homosexuals" and yet
contributed to the progress of science, technology and society does not
dilute
the fact nor legitimize it. There are alcoholics, who in fact consider
alcoholism a sickness, yet they have to struggle against this "disease" and
are contributing to the progress of the society--though we have to accept
that
alcoholism hampers their human growth to a great extent. This comparison
has
to be taken as a comparison only--namely, a sick person may be an
intellectual
genius, yet he does not cease to be psychologically 'sick', if he is a
homosexual or an alcoholic...
Homosexuality is anti-society, anti-marriage, anti-family... There cannot
be "gay marriages", it is a contradiction in terms. Our anatomy vouches for
it. The family needs a father and a mother. Children and young people need
a
Papa and a Mama, not two papas, or two mamas...
This is not "religious dogma", it is order of nature, which nobody can
change.
The fact that homosexuality exists among leaders and intellectuals does not
change the natural order. It is an aberration, it is abnormality. Our
society
is suffering already from the consequences of all kinds of aberrations, one
of
these is homosexual, 'same-sex' union... Enough is enough...
Let us teach our young people the 'facts of life' in a correct way, let us
help those who have this craze, with love and compassion, without
condemning
them, but rejecting homosexuality...
Ivo da C.Souza
Marlon Menezes
2005-05-02 10:35:02 UTC
Permalink
What Fr. Ivo is stating is just opinion. Currently
there is no definitive scientific evidence that
indicates that homo-sexuality is socio-cultural or is
endemic to a certain fraction of the human population.


The simplistic opinions of the church that has been
wrong on so many issues cannot be reliably relied upon
on an issue that requires scientific analysis. Hence
for now, this issue is an open question that is still
to be resolved - though some fundamentalists would
find the continuance of this ambiguity unacceptable.

Nasci has trivialized other religions such as hinduism
as being based on myths, but then went on to claim
that christian concepts such as the virgin birth, the
christian trinity (as opposed to the hindu version),
and Jesus's ascention to "heaven" were all factual.
Perhaps Nasci can do something for christianity that
no Pope before him has succeeded in doing - provide us
with the evidence! The problem with fundamentalists is
that their fuzzy minds seem to confuse their personal
beliefs and opinions as fact.

Marlon
Post by Nasci Caldeira
Hi all,
Well said, Fr. Ivo;
Santosh Helekar, please take note!
We as a society do not condemn these aberrations,
but we do not accept these
as normal; hence the need to help these sick
persons. This type of help
should not be construed as acceptance of something
against the 'human
nature/order', but rather 'sympathetic,
compassionate help' just as with
other illnesses.
It is the 'order of nature'; like Fr Ivo says; it's
not antiquated religious
dogma; religion is only accepting the truth! For
heaven's sake, Santosh, you
and scientists and agnostics like you have a lot to
learn, in this field.
Santosh, I think you yourself is in dire need of
neuro surgery; better this
way then banging your 'science only' saturated head
on a rock. Science does
not and cannot disprove what Fr Ivo and countless
others have said before.
Your education is seriously flawed!
Nasci Caldeira
Melbourne.
From: "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
Subject: [Goanet]Re: Cafeteria Catholics
Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 13:39:46 -0400
Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being
is complete in male and
female. Biologically, psychologically, spiritually,
emotionally we
experience
this truth based on human nature itself, not on
"antiquated religious
dogma".
Gabe Menezes
2005-05-02 15:00:04 UTC
Permalink
I find it difficult to fault Homosexuals and gays, as long as they do
not impose their sexuality on others. This is something we have to
accommodate and not be insensitive to. Any family can have offspring
that turn out this way. What would the opinion of our Conservatives on
hermaphrodites be? Kill them off?

Cheers,

Gabe Menezes.
London, England
Venantius J Pinto
2005-05-02 17:22:28 UTC
Permalink
Reasonably said Gabe. I did not much to say so far but wish to say a bit on
the points you raise. I personally feel that no one should impose their
sexuality or sense of it onto others- whether they be hetero or homosexual.
But it is regarded as freedom to be able to do so. Sapiens and transient
beings all! But by nature or nurture, each group will tend to extend their
sexuality and along with it its/their biases.

To my mind a significant fear of homosexuality extends from the uncertainty
of individivual sexuality. But it is true that individuals from one
persuasian will test the sexuality of the other. This is a valid concern,
but one that most do not have to fear unless one tends to be or get into
situations with a set of rules and concerns that the the others are
oblivious to. Many heteros get bent out of shape (unnerved) at the
experience of being gazed at by one from the non-hetero inclination. Some
find it interesting to watch programs with gay characters on television, in
the home coccon; but are terrified when they encounter the excess or the
exuberance and occassionaly, the in your face expression of the
homosexuality in the open -- somewhere. In some cases such an encounter may
translate into homophobia-or manifest itself in other subtle or violents
ways. This is what many (not all) herterosexuals are scared of -- being the
object of desire -- for another group of sexual inclined beings. Followed
by the thoughts that homesexuality conjures. I guess this comes closest to
what women mean when they mention - unwelcome interest from some Don Juan
(or attar pattar).

A tangential thought that your question to conservatives reminded me of; in
the past as too is now common, though less, offspring that were so inclined
were simply married off. At least in India.

venantius

________________________
Post by Gabe Menezes
I find it difficult to fault Homosexuals and gays, as long as they do
not impose their sexuality on others. This is something we have to
accommodate and not be insensitive to. Any family can have offspring
that turn out this way. What would the opinion of our Conservatives on
hermaphrodites be? Kill them off?
Cheers,
Gabe Menezes.
London, England
664 West 163 Street, #57
New York, NY 10032-4527
USA

PH/Fax: +1 212.928.3955
Gabe Menezes
2005-05-02 15:00:04 UTC
Permalink
I find it difficult to fault Homosexuals and gays, as long as they do
not impose their sexuality on others. This is something we have to
accommodate and not be insensitive to. Any family can have offspring
that turn out this way. What would the opinion of our Conservatives on
hermaphrodites be? Kill them off?

Cheers,

Gabe Menezes.
London, England
Venantius J Pinto
2005-05-02 17:22:28 UTC
Permalink
Reasonably said Gabe. I did not much to say so far but wish to say a bit on
the points you raise. I personally feel that no one should impose their
sexuality or sense of it onto others- whether they be hetero or homosexual.
But it is regarded as freedom to be able to do so. Sapiens and transient
beings all! But by nature or nurture, each group will tend to extend their
sexuality and along with it its/their biases.

To my mind a significant fear of homosexuality extends from the uncertainty
of individivual sexuality. But it is true that individuals from one
persuasian will test the sexuality of the other. This is a valid concern,
but one that most do not have to fear unless one tends to be or get into
situations with a set of rules and concerns that the the others are
oblivious to. Many heteros get bent out of shape (unnerved) at the
experience of being gazed at by one from the non-hetero inclination. Some
find it interesting to watch programs with gay characters on television, in
the home coccon; but are terrified when they encounter the excess or the
exuberance and occassionaly, the in your face expression of the
homosexuality in the open -- somewhere. In some cases such an encounter may
translate into homophobia-or manifest itself in other subtle or violents
ways. This is what many (not all) herterosexuals are scared of -- being the
object of desire -- for another group of sexual inclined beings. Followed
by the thoughts that homesexuality conjures. I guess this comes closest to
what women mean when they mention - unwelcome interest from some Don Juan
(or attar pattar).

A tangential thought that your question to conservatives reminded me of; in
the past as too is now common, though less, offspring that were so inclined
were simply married off. At least in India.

venantius

________________________
Post by Gabe Menezes
I find it difficult to fault Homosexuals and gays, as long as they do
not impose their sexuality on others. This is something we have to
accommodate and not be insensitive to. Any family can have offspring
that turn out this way. What would the opinion of our Conservatives on
hermaphrodites be? Kill them off?
Cheers,
Gabe Menezes.
London, England
664 West 163 Street, #57
New York, NY 10032-4527
USA

PH/Fax: +1 212.928.3955
Gabe Menezes
2005-05-02 15:00:04 UTC
Permalink
I find it difficult to fault Homosexuals and gays, as long as they do
not impose their sexuality on others. This is something we have to
accommodate and not be insensitive to. Any family can have offspring
that turn out this way. What would the opinion of our Conservatives on
hermaphrodites be? Kill them off?

Cheers,

Gabe Menezes.
London, England
Venantius J Pinto
2005-05-02 17:22:28 UTC
Permalink
Reasonably said Gabe. I did not much to say so far but wish to say a bit on
the points you raise. I personally feel that no one should impose their
sexuality or sense of it onto others- whether they be hetero or homosexual.
But it is regarded as freedom to be able to do so. Sapiens and transient
beings all! But by nature or nurture, each group will tend to extend their
sexuality and along with it its/their biases.

To my mind a significant fear of homosexuality extends from the uncertainty
of individivual sexuality. But it is true that individuals from one
persuasian will test the sexuality of the other. This is a valid concern,
but one that most do not have to fear unless one tends to be or get into
situations with a set of rules and concerns that the the others are
oblivious to. Many heteros get bent out of shape (unnerved) at the
experience of being gazed at by one from the non-hetero inclination. Some
find it interesting to watch programs with gay characters on television, in
the home coccon; but are terrified when they encounter the excess or the
exuberance and occassionaly, the in your face expression of the
homosexuality in the open -- somewhere. In some cases such an encounter may
translate into homophobia-or manifest itself in other subtle or violents
ways. This is what many (not all) herterosexuals are scared of -- being the
object of desire -- for another group of sexual inclined beings. Followed
by the thoughts that homesexuality conjures. I guess this comes closest to
what women mean when they mention - unwelcome interest from some Don Juan
(or attar pattar).

A tangential thought that your question to conservatives reminded me of; in
the past as too is now common, though less, offspring that were so inclined
were simply married off. At least in India.

venantius

________________________
Post by Gabe Menezes
I find it difficult to fault Homosexuals and gays, as long as they do
not impose their sexuality on others. This is something we have to
accommodate and not be insensitive to. Any family can have offspring
that turn out this way. What would the opinion of our Conservatives on
hermaphrodites be? Kill them off?
Cheers,
Gabe Menezes.
London, England
664 West 163 Street, #57
New York, NY 10032-4527
USA

PH/Fax: +1 212.928.3955
Gabe Menezes
2005-05-02 15:00:04 UTC
Permalink
I find it difficult to fault Homosexuals and gays, as long as they do
not impose their sexuality on others. This is something we have to
accommodate and not be insensitive to. Any family can have offspring
that turn out this way. What would the opinion of our Conservatives on
hermaphrodites be? Kill them off?

Cheers,

Gabe Menezes.
London, England
Venantius J Pinto
2005-05-02 17:22:28 UTC
Permalink
Reasonably said Gabe. I did not much to say so far but wish to say a bit on
the points you raise. I personally feel that no one should impose their
sexuality or sense of it onto others- whether they be hetero or homosexual.
But it is regarded as freedom to be able to do so. Sapiens and transient
beings all! But by nature or nurture, each group will tend to extend their
sexuality and along with it its/their biases.

To my mind a significant fear of homosexuality extends from the uncertainty
of individivual sexuality. But it is true that individuals from one
persuasian will test the sexuality of the other. This is a valid concern,
but one that most do not have to fear unless one tends to be or get into
situations with a set of rules and concerns that the the others are
oblivious to. Many heteros get bent out of shape (unnerved) at the
experience of being gazed at by one from the non-hetero inclination. Some
find it interesting to watch programs with gay characters on television, in
the home coccon; but are terrified when they encounter the excess or the
exuberance and occassionaly, the in your face expression of the
homosexuality in the open -- somewhere. In some cases such an encounter may
translate into homophobia-or manifest itself in other subtle or violents
ways. This is what many (not all) herterosexuals are scared of -- being the
object of desire -- for another group of sexual inclined beings. Followed
by the thoughts that homesexuality conjures. I guess this comes closest to
what women mean when they mention - unwelcome interest from some Don Juan
(or attar pattar).

A tangential thought that your question to conservatives reminded me of; in
the past as too is now common, though less, offspring that were so inclined
were simply married off. At least in India.

venantius

________________________
Post by Gabe Menezes
I find it difficult to fault Homosexuals and gays, as long as they do
not impose their sexuality on others. This is something we have to
accommodate and not be insensitive to. Any family can have offspring
that turn out this way. What would the opinion of our Conservatives on
hermaphrodites be? Kill them off?
Cheers,
Gabe Menezes.
London, England
664 West 163 Street, #57
New York, NY 10032-4527
USA

PH/Fax: +1 212.928.3955
gilbertlaw
2005-05-02 10:37:21 UTC
Permalink
Hi all,
Partial knowledge is dangerous.
But too much knowledge may be dangerous too!
My knowledge of homosexuality from a medical, psychological or humanist perspective in very limited.

My only input into this dialogue is to make two points:
1. What Fr. Ivo is describing are normal situations. What Dr. Colaco is describing are abnormal/ pathological/ medical situations.

2. Just because a rule cannot be applied in 100% of all (normal or abnormal) situations, does it mean we should not have rules/ norms / policies etc.? Simple examples seat belts, motorcycle helmets, vaccinations or screening tests etc
Regards
From: "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being is complete in male and
female. Nobody can change the fact. Our anatomy vouches for it.
Let us teach our young people the 'facts of life' in a correct way
Thank you Fr. Ivo for your excellent posts on the Cafeteria matter. However
the above is noted with some degree of surprise.
The following is NOT in support of any particular lifestyle - inherited,
imposed, learnt or chosen. It is to emphasise the point that blanket
statements are unwise - however well-intentioned they might be.
Before we aspire to teach our young people the 'facts of life' in a correct
way, we may wish to ascertain the 'facts of life'.
I wonder what scientific references there are to support the generalisation
that every "Human being is complete in male and female"
Are there NO exceptions?
If so...how many?
How many individuals are feminized by abuse (at a very young age) itself,
and How many have a genetic prediliction to developing it.
Furthermore, are ALL who look male, male wrt to the hormones and the effects
of the hormones?
Androgen insensitivity syndrome (AIS) is when a person has one X and one Y
sex chromosome (making them genetically male), but is resistant to androgens
(male hormones). As a result, the individual has some or all of the physical
characteristics of a woman, despite having the genetic makeup of a man.
The syndrome is divided into two main categories: complete and incomplete.
Complete AIS results in someone who looks outwardly female. In the
incomplete AIS syndrome, the degree of sexual ambiguity varies widely from
individual to individual.
PAIS
Reifenstein Syndrome
Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome, Partial
Gilbert-Dreyfus Syndrome
Incomplete Testicular Feminization
Lubs Syndrome
Rosewater Syndrome
Type I Familial Incomplete Male Pseudohermaphroditism
Santosh Helekar
2005-05-02 14:45:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by gilbertlaw
My only input into this dialogue is to make two
1. What Fr. Ivo is describing are normal situations.
What Dr. Colaco is describing are abnormal/
pathological/ medical situations.
Gilbert,

Do you agree with Fr. Ivo that homosexuality is a
sickness which needs to be treated?

Or do you agree with the recommendations of the
American Psychiatric Association, American
Psychological Association and other medical,
scientific and public welfare organizations that say
that it is not a sickness, and it cannot be treated?

Cheers,

Santosh
jose colaco
2005-05-02 20:20:28 UTC
Permalink
From: <gilbertlaw at adelphia.net>

<My knowledge of homosexuality from a medical, psychological or humanist
perspective in very limited.

My only input into this dialogue is to make two points:
1. What Fr. Ivo is describing are normal situations.? What Dr. Colaco is
describing are abnormal/ pathological/ medical situations.

2. Just because a rule cannot be applied in 100% of all (normal or abnormal)
situations, does it mean we should not have rules/ norms / policies etc.?
Simple examples seat belts, motorcycle helmets, vaccinations or screening
tests etc >


Earlier: "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>

<Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being is complete in male and
female. Nobody can change the fact.? Our anatomy vouches for it. Let us
teach our young people the 'facts of life' in a correct way>

===

Dear Gilbert,

This will be my final public contribution on this matter. I will be happy
continuing private off-list discussions on the topic.

I recommend that we pay close attention to Kevin Saldanha's statement:
"every biological population is made up of a bell curve of
individuals.....the 5% will be CONSIDERED deviants from that normal
population BUT ARE STILL VERY MUCH A PART OF A NATURAL BIOLOGICAL
POPULATION.

Please understand that I seriously contest Fr. Ivo's position that "Human
being is complete in male and female". I also have to think again about the
following from Fr. Ivo "Our society is suffering already from the
consequences of all kinds of aberrations, one of these is homosexual,
'same-sex' union... Enough is enough..." + "Children and young people need a
Papa and a Mama, not two papas, or two mamas..."



Here are some of my queries:

1. What consequences is society suferring from because of aberrations?

2. When homosexuals ask for "same-sex" union, WHAT is it that are they
asking for, & WHY?

3. What number of Children and young people in this world have ONLY one papa
or one mama?

4. Is the care of children with the Two Mamas any worse than with one mama?

5. Why are millions of children enslaved into child labour, child
prostitution, child marriages, begging ? Is it because of Two Mamas?

and finally .....these two queries

6. Just because the 'homosexuals" are different from us (like the blind,
deaf, mentally challenged, promiscuous, Down's, extremely brilliant,
extremely un-brilliant, unable to sing a verse, wheel chair bound, poor,
very wealthy etc ), should we be descriminating against their rights? Do we
NOT (after much struggle) provide Wheel-Chair access to the physically
disabled? Do we NOT adjustments for the Hearing Impaired and Bllind?

7. Is it normal to have CELIBACY imposed on an individual - as a requirement
to serve as a priest? If so...ON what NORMAL human or even Religious basis?



good wishes

jc

Please note that the above post is NOT an endorsement of the ABUSE which was
perpetrated by those Monsters, NOR of the actions of the higher Monsters who
just watched and kept quiet, NOR of the REAL Cafeteria Catholics who kept Oh
So Silent about this horrendous abuse by a minority of priests ......

The actions of ALL of the above brought untold suffering to a lot of people
.... including the vast number of priests who are GOOD

Hear Me!

_________________________________________________________________
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar ? get it now!
http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/
Nasci Caldeira
2005-05-02 20:21:07 UTC
Permalink
From: Santosh Helekar <chimbelcho at sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: [Goanet] Cafeteria Catholics
Date: Sun, 1 May 2005 16:09:17 -0700 (PDT)
"The above post makes a lot of categorical assertions
without providing any scientific or sociological
justification to support them. It is very obvious that
this is a strongly held religious view, despite claims
to the contrary."
Nasci's response: It is not only a 'religious view'; the majority in the
world supports the view; except scientific and satanic fundamentalists like
you!

Santosh:
" Some of the assertions are not even
internally consistent within the same religious
doctrine. For instance, nobody would deny that
enforced celibacy is not consistent with human nature,
and yet its practice is regarded with such high esteem
by the adherents of this doctrine."
Nasci's reply:
Ceibacy is enforced only on those who have willingly and knowingly become
priests, after going thru years and years of theological and other
tuition.(Personally I am in favour of the Church allowing those priests who
wish to marry, to marry; and for married men also to be able to be
priests.That way the natural urges of priests will be fulfilled, perhaps
without temptation towards homosexuality and or paedoplilia!) Besides,
celibacy is not a 'doctrine' per se; it is a practice; and inspite of all,
if a priest cannot remain celibate, then he has the option to leave the
priesthood, like a few priests have done. You see, there is no enforcement
like your satanic eyes see it.

Santosh:
If "marriage
reveals the truth" of the true human nature, then why
are people who choose to remain unmarried for life
considered to be sick?
Nasci:
Who says that unmarried men are sick? This is your perverted thought! Do not
equalise unmarried men with homosexuals! Your education is seriously
faulted!

Santosh:
"In any case, I would like to emphatically state that
there is absolutely no scientific, clinical or
sociological basis for any of the assertions made in
the above post. Indeed, these assertions go against
the public service recommendations of all major
scientific and medical organizations, as well as
against the practices of most international
humanitarian agencies, including some religious ones."
Nasci:
Scientific and medical organisations are they really competent to pronounce
judgement on sociological cum psyschiatric issues? Society has to rule on
that.
Have they investigated the fact that some or all homosexuals may also be
schizophrenic? and or may be really psycho form a very young age. They could
be sick from the womb. But they are sick.
Cheers,
Nasci Caldeira.
Melbourne.
Nasci Caldeira
2005-05-02 20:22:02 UTC
Permalink
Nasci's response:

Marlon,
Religion is always a matter of faith in what is taught and thought! It is
not imposed on anybody; if some one has no faith; then he is not a religious
person. It is not Physics/ Chemistry! Santosh's proofs are not required
here! Simple as that.

When I wrote about Hinduism earlier; I did not compare it to Christianity;
that's what you are trying to do in this post, and bringing in the
comparisons; those are your words, Marlon!

I discussed what I know of as Hinduism by itself; That it does not qualify
as a religion because it is casteist, racist and blasphemous; putting
animals and unbelievable characters and myths born out of 'ganza taking?
above the Human Being! In all other religions the doctrine and or faith is
based on Humans as prophets and or god; also in Bhudism; though they do not
believe in an external God; they do believe in that "God is in you, the
human person" and it is upto the person to 'realise' God!

The Christian beliefs in the Virgin Mary and The Holy Trinity are all based
on God the Father whom nobody knows and humans.( not animals and other
fictitious caharacters).

Hindus alone believe that some humans are above and superior to others
solely because of their birth; and they also blaspheme when they bring God
down to the level of cow, elephant and snakes etc. I am not saying this;
this is there for all to see and witness as hindu practices.

All the same, I do not condemn or dislike the Hindu, for that; I have a lot
of good hindu friends; What I object to is that they have no right to say
that we (Christians and or muslims, and Bhudists) were converted from a
"Hindu religion". To be born in India or lived in India does not mean that
we were Hindu religion followers; it is just that we were (H) Indu, Indians
and nothing more.

I hope I have been able to make myself clear, on my views and beliefs; OK?

I think it is time for you Marlon to go and take your Christian religious
vows again and to start with, 'go for a general Reconciliation' to the
confessional; and you will be saved! I do not like to see you going to Hell,
just because Santosh is telling you otherwise. It is never too late.

I am saying this to you, because I do not have to be a Pope or a Goan Bamon
to help you save yourself, and to try and spread the "Good News" as in the
Gospels. "I am the way, the truth and the Life"; You should believe again in
all this! Better than other false gods! Amen. No bad wishes, Marlon. Just
good friendly advise!

Cheers!
Nasci Caldeira
Melbourne.
From: Marlon Menezes <marlon at goacom.co >Reply-To: goanet at goanet.org
To: goanet at goanet.org
Subject: RE: [Goanet]Re: Cafeteria Catholics
Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 01:22:24 -0700 (PDT)
What Fr. Ivo is stating is just opinion. Currently
there is no definitive scientific evidence that
indicates that homo-sexuality is socio-cultural or is
endemic to a certain fraction of the human population.
The simplistic opinions of the church that has been
wrong on so many issues cannot be reliably relied upon
on an issue that requires scientific analysis. Hence
for now, this issue is an open question that is still
to be resolved - though some fundamentalists would
find the continuance of this ambiguity unacceptable.
Nasci has trivialized other religions such as hinduism
as being based on myths, but then went on to claim
that christian concepts such as the virgin birth, the
christian trinity (as opposed to the hindu version),
and Jesus's ascention to "heaven" were all factual.
Perhaps Nasci can do something for christianity that
no Pope before him has succeeded in doing - provide us
with the evidence! The problem with fundamentalists is
that their fuzzy minds seem to confuse their personal
beliefs and opinions as fact.
Marlon
Post by Nasci Caldeira
Hi all,
Well said, Fr. Ivo;
Santosh Helekar, please take note!
We as a society do not condemn these aberrations,
but we do not accept these
as normal; hence the need to help these sick
persons. This type of help
should not be construed as acceptance of something
against the 'human
nature/order', but rather 'sympathetic,
compassionate help' just as with
other illnesses.
It is the 'order of nature'; like Fr Ivo says; it's
not antiquated religious
dogma; religion is only accepting the truth! For
heaven's sake, Santosh, you
and scientists and agnostics like you have a lot to
learn, in this field.
Santosh, I think you yourself is in dire need of
neuro surgery; better this
way then banging your 'science only' saturated head
on a rock. Science does
not and cannot disprove what Fr Ivo and countless
others have said before.
Your education is seriously flawed!
Nasci Caldeira
Melbourne.
From: "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
Subject: [Goanet]Re: Cafeteria Catholics
Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 13:39:46 -0400
Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being
is complete in male and
female. Biologically, psychologically, spiritually,
emotionally we
experience
this truth based on human nature itself, not on
"antiquated religious
dogma".
Nasci Caldeira
2005-05-02 20:22:38 UTC
Permalink
Santosh!
If it cannot be treated, it cannot; it is inherited ; the person is born
with it; But does these things make it normal?? it remains abnormal like an
'autistic' child is abnormal; some how we have to treat or just cope with
this. More importantly, Santosh; if your Science cannot cure; who knows God
can and will, if u have enough faith! Try it. Start believing in God.
Nasci Caldeira
Melbourne.
From: Santosh Helekar <chimbelcho at sbcglobal.net>
Post by gilbertlaw
My only input into this dialogue is to make two
1. What Fr. Ivo is describing are normal situations.
What Dr. Colaco is describing are abnormal/
pathological/ medical situations.
Gilbert,
Do you agree with Fr. Ivo that homosexuality is a
sickness which needs to be treated?
Or do you agree with the recommendations of the
American Psychiatric Association, American
Psychological Association and other medical,
scientific and public welfare organizations that say
that it is not a sickness, and it cannot be treated?
Santosh Helekar
2005-05-02 23:50:27 UTC
Permalink
If "marriage reveals the truth" of the true human
nature, then why are people who choose to remain
unmarried for life considered to be sick?
Who says that unmarried men are sick?
I am sorry. I made a typing error, and left out a
"NOT" from the above-quoted sentence of mine. My
statement should have read:

"If "marriage reveals the truth" of the true human
nature, then why are people who choose to remain
unmarried for life NOT considered to be sick?"

I said this because Fr. Ivo uses this line of
reasoning to claim that homosexuality is a sickness.

But what Nasci has written in a series of posts in
this thread is quite entertaining. I hope he continues
to entertain us. I will try to do my best to encourage
him.

Cheers,

Santosh
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-03 01:05:03 UTC
Permalink
Dr.Santosh Helekar asks: If "marriage reveals the truth" of the true human
nature, then why are people who choose to remain unmarried for life considered
to be sick?

People choose to remain unmarried for different reasons, for example for the
love of science, of profession, teaching, religious reasons (celibacy for the
sake of the Kingdom of God and for a better commitment to the people). When
this is a deliberate choice, people who choose to remain unmarried for life
are not considered to be sick.

Yet, marriage reveals that man and woman complete themselves in love and in
family. "Gay marriages" are not normal. This is the truth about Man. Science
cannot answer all the questions. God's Revelation comes to our rescue.

Ivo da C.Souza



--------Original Message -------
--- "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
Post by Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being is
complete in male and female. Biologically,
psychologically, spiritually, emotionally we
experience this truth based on human nature itself,
not on "antiquated religious dogma". Marriage reveals
the truth of this tenet. Nobody can change the fact.
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-03 01:06:25 UTC
Permalink
The facts only reveal our human frailty. We are sinners. We need God's
redemption. The bishops find it difficult to cope up with the problem. It is
also money racket. Paedophilia is a crime. We have to learn the measures that
are to be taken in order to put our own house in order.
God is great!

Ivo da C.Souza

Fr. Ivo da C.Souza,

Parishioners have been doing their level best to help
these priests. At first they were not reporting the
paedophiles to the civic authorities but, instead,
reporting them to the church authorities in the hopes
that the church would take the proper action.

Mervyn3.0
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-03 01:40:03 UTC
Permalink
If homosexuality cannot be treated and healed, yet it has to be taken as such,
surely not as a normal condition. The homosexual has to be understood with
love and compassion, but not be considered as normal like all others. He needs
help, his case has to be investigated with care. There are different kinds of
homosexuality and several etiological factors. This has to be taken into
account. We cannot just dance at the tune of the American Psychiatric
Association. In a lighter vein, I would say: We have to avoid pan-
americanism...

Ivo da C.Souza


--------Original Message -------
Post by gilbertlaw
My only input into this dialogue is to make two
1. What Fr. Ivo is describing are normal situations.
What Dr. Colaco is describing are abnormal/
pathological/ medical situations.
Gilbert,

Do you agree with Fr. Ivo that homosexuality is a
sickness which needs to be treated?

Or do you agree with the recommendations of the
American Psychiatric Association, American
Psychological Association and other medical,
scientific and public welfare organizations that say
that it is not a sickness, and it cannot be treated?

Cheers,

Santosh
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-03 01:40:29 UTC
Permalink
We do not find fault with the homosexuals ("gay"), but surely with
homosexuality. We have to help them. They will surely create a new environemnt
for our youth and will influence them. Doors will be opened to our children to
do what they like. Surely we do not want our children to behave in this
manner. We do not want our society to go in this direction. We can be
sensitive to them, but try to do something for them. An alcoholic should try
all the means. We cannot say that because the father was an alcoholic, the son
also has to be an alcoholic. He has to try all the means not to become
alcoholic. What can the homosexual do? We want kill the homosexuals, but also
will not allow the society to become society of homosexuals...

Ivo da C.Souza


--------Original Message -------
I find it difficult to fault Homosexuals and gays, as long as they do
not impose their sexuality on others. This is something we have to
accommodate and not be insensitive to. Any family can have offspring
that turn out this way. What would the opinion of our Conservatives on
hermaphrodites be? Kill them off?

Cheers,

Gabe Menezes.
London, England
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-03 01:40:56 UTC
Permalink
All are opinions. We are still groping. Science is also groping. One opinion
may be better than the other. Time will tell us. When we speak of
the "simplistic opinions of the Church", how well rooted are our opinions?
Could you mention wrong "opinions of the Church"?
The Church does not give a moral verdict without a previous scientific
investigation.

Christian truths have their own logic. They are substantiated in their
own way. Virginal conception of Jesus has its foundation in the Gospel
Tradition (cf.Lk 1:34f; Mt 1:18). The dogma of Trinity comes from Christian
Revelation. Ascension to heaven is the dogma of Resurrection of Jesus--Jesus
ascended to heaven, that is, he took part in the power of God. Jesus is God-
man. This is the realm of faith, of Christian Revelation. Science has its
limits. Let us avoid scientism...

What I am stating is jsut opinion. What the scientists are trying to find
is also opinion. Science has still to go more miles. Scientific analysis has
not come to an end. If "this issue is an open question that is still to be
resolved", then let us not come to the conclusion that scientifically
homosexuality is acceptable. What are the grounds? What prevails is that God
has created male and female (cf.Gn 1:26f). It is the process of pro-creation
that is in our human nature, in the natural order of creation. This is the
truth about Man... Science cannot change it.


--------Original Message -------
What Fr. Ivo is stating is just opinion. Currently
there is no definitive scientific evidence that
indicates that homo-sexuality is socio-cultural or is
endemic to a certain fraction of the human population.

Marlon
Nasci Caldeira
2005-05-03 01:41:25 UTC
Permalink
From: Santosh Helekar <chimbelcho at sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: [Goanet] Cafeteria Catholics (Reply to Santosh)
Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 15:20:18 -0700 (PDT)
If "marriage reveals the truth" of the true human
nature, then why are people who choose to remain
unmarried for life considered to be sick?
Who says that unmarried men are sick?
I am sorry. I made a typing error, and left out a
"NOT" from the above-quoted sentence of mine. My
"If "marriage reveals the truth" of the true human
nature, then why are people who choose to remain
unmarried for life NOT considered to be sick?"
I said this because Fr. Ivo uses this line of
reasoning to claim that homosexuality is a sickness.
Nasci:
Why should persons who choose to remain 'unmarried' be considered sick? They
have the choice and their free will to choose. "marriage reveals the truth'
in that male and female interact and populate and prolong the species, in
excercising their natural right. If a single male or female forgoes their
urge, for whatever reason, they are not sick! Of course not!

The homosexual groups deny that they are 'homosexuals' by choice; instead
they say they are 'born' that way, and that they can't help it. Unmarried
man choose to remain unmarried. They are not born that way. They have the
option of 'choice' any time.

But if say an unmarried man wants to marry 'You Santosh', (presuming that
you are male), then we have a real problem. Your family will also have to
deal with that. I,m sure that you will chase the 'bloke' away; after telling
him that he is sick and weird, and has to go get treated! Would't you do
that Santosh? Or how else would U deal with matters like this?

And in case U decide to 'go with him' and forgo your family, (presuming U R
married) would U consider this union as a "marriage'' or a "conjugal Union"
or a partnership for 'weird' sex?? Would U not seek treatment, for yourself,
in such an event?

Santosh:
But what Nasci has written in a series of posts in
this thread is quite entertaining. I hope he continues
to entertain us. I will try to do my best to encourage
him.
Nasci: I hope to continue to entertain you and enlighten you at the same
time! I will also 'Pray' to a Christian God, for your conversion to an
enlightened Christian Scientist. Santosh, I hear you are a good Scientist;
but I feel there is just that "little something" missing! It is called
"Faith in God".
Cheers,
Nasci Caldeira
Melbourne
Mervyn Lobo
2005-05-03 01:41:51 UTC
Permalink
The facts only reveal our human frailty. We are
sinners. We need God's
redemption. The bishops find it difficult to cope up
with the problem. It is also money racket.
Paedophilia is a crime. We have to learn the
measures that are to be taken in order to put our
own house in order.
God is great!
Fr. Ivo da C.Souza,
Let me try and make this clearer.
Paedophiles, masquerading as priests in the catholic
church, are secure in the knowledge that should they
be reported, the Vatican is not going to do anything.
The supposed authority on morals contends it does not
know how to deal with such problems in its ranks.

Mervyn3.0





______________________________________________________________________
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Santosh Helekar
2005-05-03 05:00:56 UTC
Permalink
--- "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
We cannot just dance at the tune of the American
Psychiatric Association.
Mere assertions and innuendo have no value in a real
discussion. The American Psychiatric Association is a
professional organization that issues recommendations
and guidelines for psychiatrists and mental health
professionals around the world, after thorough review
of all scholarly research in any given area. It
publishes a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual on
mental illness, which informs and guides the practice
of psychiatry all over the world.

It is unlikely that the Catholic Church and its
hierarchy know more about human psychology and mental
illness than the distinguished professionals who sit
on the expert panels of the American Psychiatric
Association. Almost all psychiatric and other mental
health organizations in other countries are in
agreement with the American Psychiatric Association on
the subject of homosexuality.

Cheers,

Santosh
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-04 03:00:40 UTC
Permalink
Dear Dr.Santosh,
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-04 03:05:31 UTC
Permalink
Our discussion so far has been regarding homosexuality, not about the norms
and policies of different dioceses in relation to the deviant priests. I leave
it to the competent authorities...

Ivo da C.Souza


--------Original Message -------
I am not too knowledgeable to discuss this issue from a theological,
sociological or from a medical perspective. Of course I could lagao bhathi
like some of the posts.
Mervyn Lobo
2005-05-01 07:37:08 UTC
Permalink
I have a quick answer: there should not be
"homosexual Catholic priests", but if there are,
as the media are publicizing, then homosexuality
does not cease to be "an aberration", "abnormal".
Fr. Ivo da C. Souza,
Here in N. America, its estimated that 4 out of every
1,000 priests are homosexual. Many of them joined the
priesthood because they did not want to disclose to
their family that they were gay. I used to go to a
church in Washington, D.C. that had a gay priest. I
have no problems with gay priest if they keep their
vows of celibacy.
Let the competent people investigate the causes and
help them, with love and compassion. Let us also
study why there is such a wild propaganda, which
will not help the sick priests nor the Church of
God. What are the background factors for such an
aberration? Can we do something for them? It is
important to save them...as much as poor human
efforts are concerned...
There is a bigger problem than gay priests in the R.C.
Church. The church also has known paedophiles who
still are priests. Every time parishioners report such
paedophiles to the church authorities, the authorities
keep mum or, in the worst case scenario, transfer the
priests to another parish. In other words, the
paedophiles have new kids to prey on.
It is our task, yours and mine!
Yes, I agree, it's both our tasks to keep the church
in order. Unfortunately, for the past 10 years, the
Vatican has been extremely slow in addressing the
problem of gays and paedophiles in its ranks.

Mervyn3.0



______________________________________________________________________
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-01 18:27:57 UTC
Permalink
Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being is complete in male and
female. Biologically, psychologically, spiritually, emotionally we experience
this truth based on human nature itself, not on "antiquated religious dogma".
Marriage reveals the truth of this tenet. Nobody can change the fact. When
there is an aberration in this light, we have to admit that it is an
aberration. The fact that some scientists have been "homosexuals" and yet
contributed to the progress of science, technology and society does not dilute
the fact nor legitimize it. There are alcoholics, who in fact consider
alcoholism a sickness, yet they have to struggle against this "disease" and
are contributing to the progress of the society--though we have to accept that
alcoholism hampers their human growth to a great extent. This comparison has
to be taken as a comparison only--namely, a sick person may be an intellectual
genius, yet he does not cease to be psychologically 'sick', if he is a
homosexual or an alcoholic...

Homosexuality is anti-society, anti-marriage, anti-family... There cannot
be "gay marriages", it is a contradiction in terms. Our anatomy vouches for
it. The family needs a father and a mother. Children and young people need a
Papa and a Mama, not two papas, or two mamas...
This is not "religious dogma", it is order of nature, which nobody can change.
The fact that homosexuality exists among leaders and intellectuals does not
change the natural order. It is an aberration, it is abnormality. Our society
is suffering already from the consequences of all kinds of aberrations, one of
these is homosexual, 'same-sex' union... Enough is enough...
Let us teach our young people the 'facts of life' in a correct way, let us
help those who have this craze, with love and compassion, without condemning
them, but rejecting homosexuality...

Ivo da C.Souza
jose colaco
2005-05-01 20:10:29 UTC
Permalink
From: "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
< Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being is complete in male and
female>
< Nobody can change the fact.>
< Our anatomy vouches for it>
< Let us teach our young people the 'facts of life' in a correct way>



Thank you Fr. Ivo for your excellent posts on the Cafeteria matter. However
the above is noted with some degree of surprise.

The following is NOT in support of any particular lifestyle - inherited,
imposed, learnt or chosen. It is to emphasise the point that blanket
statements are unwise - however well-intentioned they might be.

Before we aspire to teach our young people the 'facts of life' in a correct
way, we may wish to ascertain the 'facts of life'.

I wonder what scientific references there are to support the generalisation
that every "Human being is complete in male and female"

Are there NO exceptions?

If so...how many?
How many individuals are feminized by abuse (at a very young age) itself,
and How many have a genetic prediliction to developing it.

Furthermore, are ALL who look male, male wrt to the hormones and the effects
of the hormones?


please see:->


http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/001180.htm

Androgen insensitivity syndrome (AIS) is when a person has one X and one Y
sex chromosome (making them genetically male), but is resistant to androgens
(male hormones). As a result, the individual has some or all of the physical
characteristics of a woman, despite having the genetic makeup of a man.

The syndrome is divided into two main categories: complete and incomplete.
Complete AIS results in someone who looks outwardly female. In the
incomplete AIS syndrome, the degree of sexual ambiguity varies widely from
individual to individual.

Partial Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome

also known as:
PAIS
Reifenstein Syndrome
Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome, Partial
Gilbert-Dreyfus Syndrome
Incomplete Testicular Feminization
Lubs Syndrome
Rosewater Syndrome
Type I Familial Incomplete Male Pseudohermaphroditism


jc

PS: Our views on the abuse & the criminal coverup + silence by the Real
Cafeteria Catholics : -> at:

http://www.colaco.net/3/church-lurch.htm

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-01 20:10:56 UTC
Permalink
I do not deny the facts. I have affirmed that homosexuality is wrong. Yet the
priests have to be helped. The problem boils down to what I have said: Let us
do something for them...

Ivo da C.Souza


--------Original Message -------
Fr. Ivo da C. Souza,

Here in N. America, its estimated that 4 out of every
1,000 priests are homosexual. Many of them joined the
priesthood because they did not want to disclose to
their family that they were gay. I used to go to a
church in Washington, D.C. that had a gay priest. I
have no problems with gay priest if they keep their
vows of celibacy.

Mervyn3.0
Santosh Helekar
2005-05-02 05:15:03 UTC
Permalink
--- "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
Post by Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being is
complete in male and female. Biologically,
psychologically, spiritually, emotionally we
experience this truth based on human nature itself,
not on "antiquated religious dogma". Marriage reveals
the truth of this tenet. Nobody can change the fact.
The above post makes a lot of categorical assertions
without providing any scientific or sociological
justification to support them. It is very obvious that
this is a strongly held religious view, despite claims
to the contrary. Some of the assertions are not even
internally consistent within the same religious
doctrine. For instance, nobody would deny that
enforced celibacy is not consistent with human nature,
and yet its practice is regarded with such high esteem
by the adherents of this doctrine. If "marriage
reveals the truth" of the true human nature, then why
are people who choose to remain unmarried for life
considered to be sick?

In any case, I would like to emphatically state that
there is absolutely no scientific, clinical or
sociological basis for any of the assertions made in
the above post. Indeed, these assertions go against
the public service recommendations of all major
scientific and medical organizations, as well as
against the practices of most international
humanitarian agencies, including some religious ones.

This is indeed a clear example of how strict adherence
to religious dogma brings one in conflict with
science, as well as with humanitarian ethics developed
by painstaking scientific and sociological research.

I provide below some public service FAQs from the
American Psychological Association, which directly
refute the various claims made in the above-referenced
post.

http://www.apa.org/pubinfo/answers.html

IS HOMOSEXUALITY A MENTAL ILLNESS OR EMOTIONAL
PROBLEM?
No. Psychologists, psychiatrists and other mental
health professionals agree that homosexuality is not
an illness, mental disorder or an emotional problem.
Over 35 years of objective, well-designed scientific
research has shown that homosexuality, in and itself,
is not associated with mental disorders or emotional
or social problems. Homosexuality was once thought to
be a mental illness because mental health
professionals and society had biased information. In
the past the studies of gay, lesbian and bisexual
people involved only those in therapy, thus biasing
the resulting conclusions. When researchers examined
data about these people who were not in therapy, the
idea that homosexuality was a mental illness was
quickly found to be untrue.

In 1973 the American Psychiatric Association confirmed
the importance of the new, better designed research
and removed homosexuality from the official manual
that lists mental and emotional disorders. Two years
later, the American Psychological Association passed a
resolution supporting the removal. For more than 25
years, both associations have urged all mental health
professionals to help dispel the stigma of mental
illness that some people still associate with
homosexual orientation.

CAN THERAPY CHANGE SEXUAL ORIENTATION?
No. Even though most homosexuals live successful,
happy lives, some homosexual or bisexual people may
seek to change their sexual orientation through
therapy, sometimes pressured by the influence of
family members or religious groups to try and do so.
The reality is that homosexuality is not an illness.
It does not require treatment and is not changeable.

However, not all gay, lesbian, and bisexual people who
seek assistance from a mental health professional want
to change their sexual orientation. Gay, lesbian, and
bisexual people may seek psychological help with the
coming out process or for strategies to deal with
prejudice, but most go into therapy for the same
reasons and life issues that bring straight people to
mental health professionals.

CAN LESBIANS, GAY MEN, AND BISEXUALS BE GOOD PARENTS?
Yes. Studies comparing groups of children raised by
homosexual and by heterosexual parents find no
developmental differences between the two groups of
children in four critical areas: their intelligence,
psychological adjustment, social adjustment, and
popularity with friends. It is also important to
realize that a parent's sexual orientation does not
dictate his or her children's.

Another myth about homosexuality is the mistaken
belief that gay men have more of a tendency than
heterosexual men to sexually molest children. There is
no evidence to suggest that homosexuals are more
likely than heterosexuals to molest children.

WHY IS IT IMPORTANT FOR SOCIETY TO BE BETTER EDUCATED
ABOUT HOMOSEXUALITY?
Educating all people about sexual orientation and
homosexuality is likely to diminish anti-gay
prejudice. Accurate information about homosexuality is
especially important to young people who are first
discovering and seeking to understand their
sexuality?whether homosexual, bisexual, or
heterosexual. Fears that access to such information
will make more people gay have no validity?information
about homosexuality does not make someone gay or
straight.

Cheers,

Santosh
Mervyn Lobo
2005-05-02 05:16:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
I do not deny the facts. I have affirmed that
homosexuality is wrong. Yet the
priests have to be helped. The problem boils down to
what I have said: Let us do something for them...
Fr. Ivo da C.Souza,
Parishioners have been doing their level best to help
these priests. At first they were not reporting the
paedophiles to the civic authorities but, instead,
reporting them to the church authorities in the hopes
that the church would take the proper action.

Instead of doing the right thing, the church decided
not to take any action. They still follow this course
of action, and I am talking about at the highest level
of authority.

It's only after victims started suing the paedophiles
that the church authorities started to take notice.
They took notice only after some parishes had to sell
ALL their land and buildings in order to pay for the
damages. Here in Toronto, almost every other week,
there is a second collection for "the Bishops needs."
"The Bishops needs" is usually code for payments to
abuse victims. There used to be a time when the second
collection was to finance the missionaries. Now it is
used to finance those who have left the church.

So, in short, I agree with you, we need to do
something to help these priests. We could start with
the church admitting that it has a problem. Then it
has to weed out these paedophiles.

Mervyn3.0




______________________________________________________________________
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Nasci Caldeira
2005-05-02 05:17:43 UTC
Permalink
Hi all,

Well said, Fr. Ivo;
Santosh Helekar, please take note!
We as a society do not condemn these aberrations, but we do not accept these
as normal; hence the need to help these sick persons. This type of help
should not be construed as acceptance of something against the 'human
nature/order', but rather 'sympathetic, compassionate help' just as with
other illnesses.

It is the 'order of nature'; like Fr Ivo says; it's not antiquated religious
dogma; religion is only accepting the truth! For heaven's sake, Santosh, you
and scientists and agnostics like you have a lot to learn, in this field.
Santosh, I think you yourself is in dire need of neuro surgery; better this
way then banging your 'science only' saturated head on a rock. Science does
not and cannot disprove what Fr Ivo and countless others have said before.
Your education is seriously flawed!

Nasci Caldeira
Melbourne.
From: "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
Subject: [Goanet]Re: Cafeteria Catholics
Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 13:39:46 -0400
Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being is complete in male and
female. Biologically, psychologically, spiritually, emotionally we
experience
this truth based on human nature itself, not on "antiquated religious
dogma".
Marriage reveals the truth of this tenet. Nobody can change the fact. When
there is an aberration in this light, we have to admit that it is an
aberration. The fact that some scientists have been "homosexuals" and yet
contributed to the progress of science, technology and society does not
dilute
the fact nor legitimize it. There are alcoholics, who in fact consider
alcoholism a sickness, yet they have to struggle against this "disease" and
are contributing to the progress of the society--though we have to accept
that
alcoholism hampers their human growth to a great extent. This comparison
has
to be taken as a comparison only--namely, a sick person may be an
intellectual
genius, yet he does not cease to be psychologically 'sick', if he is a
homosexual or an alcoholic...
Homosexuality is anti-society, anti-marriage, anti-family... There cannot
be "gay marriages", it is a contradiction in terms. Our anatomy vouches for
it. The family needs a father and a mother. Children and young people need
a
Papa and a Mama, not two papas, or two mamas...
This is not "religious dogma", it is order of nature, which nobody can
change.
The fact that homosexuality exists among leaders and intellectuals does not
change the natural order. It is an aberration, it is abnormality. Our
society
is suffering already from the consequences of all kinds of aberrations, one
of
these is homosexual, 'same-sex' union... Enough is enough...
Let us teach our young people the 'facts of life' in a correct way, let us
help those who have this craze, with love and compassion, without
condemning
them, but rejecting homosexuality...
Ivo da C.Souza
Marlon Menezes
2005-05-02 10:35:02 UTC
Permalink
What Fr. Ivo is stating is just opinion. Currently
there is no definitive scientific evidence that
indicates that homo-sexuality is socio-cultural or is
endemic to a certain fraction of the human population.


The simplistic opinions of the church that has been
wrong on so many issues cannot be reliably relied upon
on an issue that requires scientific analysis. Hence
for now, this issue is an open question that is still
to be resolved - though some fundamentalists would
find the continuance of this ambiguity unacceptable.

Nasci has trivialized other religions such as hinduism
as being based on myths, but then went on to claim
that christian concepts such as the virgin birth, the
christian trinity (as opposed to the hindu version),
and Jesus's ascention to "heaven" were all factual.
Perhaps Nasci can do something for christianity that
no Pope before him has succeeded in doing - provide us
with the evidence! The problem with fundamentalists is
that their fuzzy minds seem to confuse their personal
beliefs and opinions as fact.

Marlon
Post by Nasci Caldeira
Hi all,
Well said, Fr. Ivo;
Santosh Helekar, please take note!
We as a society do not condemn these aberrations,
but we do not accept these
as normal; hence the need to help these sick
persons. This type of help
should not be construed as acceptance of something
against the 'human
nature/order', but rather 'sympathetic,
compassionate help' just as with
other illnesses.
It is the 'order of nature'; like Fr Ivo says; it's
not antiquated religious
dogma; religion is only accepting the truth! For
heaven's sake, Santosh, you
and scientists and agnostics like you have a lot to
learn, in this field.
Santosh, I think you yourself is in dire need of
neuro surgery; better this
way then banging your 'science only' saturated head
on a rock. Science does
not and cannot disprove what Fr Ivo and countless
others have said before.
Your education is seriously flawed!
Nasci Caldeira
Melbourne.
From: "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
Subject: [Goanet]Re: Cafeteria Catholics
Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 13:39:46 -0400
Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being
is complete in male and
female. Biologically, psychologically, spiritually,
emotionally we
experience
this truth based on human nature itself, not on
"antiquated religious
dogma".
gilbertlaw
2005-05-02 10:37:21 UTC
Permalink
Hi all,
Partial knowledge is dangerous.
But too much knowledge may be dangerous too!
My knowledge of homosexuality from a medical, psychological or humanist perspective in very limited.

My only input into this dialogue is to make two points:
1. What Fr. Ivo is describing are normal situations. What Dr. Colaco is describing are abnormal/ pathological/ medical situations.

2. Just because a rule cannot be applied in 100% of all (normal or abnormal) situations, does it mean we should not have rules/ norms / policies etc.? Simple examples seat belts, motorcycle helmets, vaccinations or screening tests etc
Regards
From: "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being is complete in male and
female. Nobody can change the fact. Our anatomy vouches for it.
Let us teach our young people the 'facts of life' in a correct way
Thank you Fr. Ivo for your excellent posts on the Cafeteria matter. However
the above is noted with some degree of surprise.
The following is NOT in support of any particular lifestyle - inherited,
imposed, learnt or chosen. It is to emphasise the point that blanket
statements are unwise - however well-intentioned they might be.
Before we aspire to teach our young people the 'facts of life' in a correct
way, we may wish to ascertain the 'facts of life'.
I wonder what scientific references there are to support the generalisation
that every "Human being is complete in male and female"
Are there NO exceptions?
If so...how many?
How many individuals are feminized by abuse (at a very young age) itself,
and How many have a genetic prediliction to developing it.
Furthermore, are ALL who look male, male wrt to the hormones and the effects
of the hormones?
Androgen insensitivity syndrome (AIS) is when a person has one X and one Y
sex chromosome (making them genetically male), but is resistant to androgens
(male hormones). As a result, the individual has some or all of the physical
characteristics of a woman, despite having the genetic makeup of a man.
The syndrome is divided into two main categories: complete and incomplete.
Complete AIS results in someone who looks outwardly female. In the
incomplete AIS syndrome, the degree of sexual ambiguity varies widely from
individual to individual.
PAIS
Reifenstein Syndrome
Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome, Partial
Gilbert-Dreyfus Syndrome
Incomplete Testicular Feminization
Lubs Syndrome
Rosewater Syndrome
Type I Familial Incomplete Male Pseudohermaphroditism
Santosh Helekar
2005-05-02 14:45:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by gilbertlaw
My only input into this dialogue is to make two
1. What Fr. Ivo is describing are normal situations.
What Dr. Colaco is describing are abnormal/
pathological/ medical situations.
Gilbert,

Do you agree with Fr. Ivo that homosexuality is a
sickness which needs to be treated?

Or do you agree with the recommendations of the
American Psychiatric Association, American
Psychological Association and other medical,
scientific and public welfare organizations that say
that it is not a sickness, and it cannot be treated?

Cheers,

Santosh
jose colaco
2005-05-02 20:20:28 UTC
Permalink
From: <gilbertlaw at adelphia.net>

<My knowledge of homosexuality from a medical, psychological or humanist
perspective in very limited.

My only input into this dialogue is to make two points:
1. What Fr. Ivo is describing are normal situations.? What Dr. Colaco is
describing are abnormal/ pathological/ medical situations.

2. Just because a rule cannot be applied in 100% of all (normal or abnormal)
situations, does it mean we should not have rules/ norms / policies etc.?
Simple examples seat belts, motorcycle helmets, vaccinations or screening
tests etc >


Earlier: "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>

<Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being is complete in male and
female. Nobody can change the fact.? Our anatomy vouches for it. Let us
teach our young people the 'facts of life' in a correct way>

===

Dear Gilbert,

This will be my final public contribution on this matter. I will be happy
continuing private off-list discussions on the topic.

I recommend that we pay close attention to Kevin Saldanha's statement:
"every biological population is made up of a bell curve of
individuals.....the 5% will be CONSIDERED deviants from that normal
population BUT ARE STILL VERY MUCH A PART OF A NATURAL BIOLOGICAL
POPULATION.

Please understand that I seriously contest Fr. Ivo's position that "Human
being is complete in male and female". I also have to think again about the
following from Fr. Ivo "Our society is suffering already from the
consequences of all kinds of aberrations, one of these is homosexual,
'same-sex' union... Enough is enough..." + "Children and young people need a
Papa and a Mama, not two papas, or two mamas..."



Here are some of my queries:

1. What consequences is society suferring from because of aberrations?

2. When homosexuals ask for "same-sex" union, WHAT is it that are they
asking for, & WHY?

3. What number of Children and young people in this world have ONLY one papa
or one mama?

4. Is the care of children with the Two Mamas any worse than with one mama?

5. Why are millions of children enslaved into child labour, child
prostitution, child marriages, begging ? Is it because of Two Mamas?

and finally .....these two queries

6. Just because the 'homosexuals" are different from us (like the blind,
deaf, mentally challenged, promiscuous, Down's, extremely brilliant,
extremely un-brilliant, unable to sing a verse, wheel chair bound, poor,
very wealthy etc ), should we be descriminating against their rights? Do we
NOT (after much struggle) provide Wheel-Chair access to the physically
disabled? Do we NOT adjustments for the Hearing Impaired and Bllind?

7. Is it normal to have CELIBACY imposed on an individual - as a requirement
to serve as a priest? If so...ON what NORMAL human or even Religious basis?



good wishes

jc

Please note that the above post is NOT an endorsement of the ABUSE which was
perpetrated by those Monsters, NOR of the actions of the higher Monsters who
just watched and kept quiet, NOR of the REAL Cafeteria Catholics who kept Oh
So Silent about this horrendous abuse by a minority of priests ......

The actions of ALL of the above brought untold suffering to a lot of people
.... including the vast number of priests who are GOOD

Hear Me!

_________________________________________________________________
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar ? get it now!
http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/
Nasci Caldeira
2005-05-02 20:21:07 UTC
Permalink
From: Santosh Helekar <chimbelcho at sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: [Goanet] Cafeteria Catholics
Date: Sun, 1 May 2005 16:09:17 -0700 (PDT)
"The above post makes a lot of categorical assertions
without providing any scientific or sociological
justification to support them. It is very obvious that
this is a strongly held religious view, despite claims
to the contrary."
Nasci's response: It is not only a 'religious view'; the majority in the
world supports the view; except scientific and satanic fundamentalists like
you!

Santosh:
" Some of the assertions are not even
internally consistent within the same religious
doctrine. For instance, nobody would deny that
enforced celibacy is not consistent with human nature,
and yet its practice is regarded with such high esteem
by the adherents of this doctrine."
Nasci's reply:
Ceibacy is enforced only on those who have willingly and knowingly become
priests, after going thru years and years of theological and other
tuition.(Personally I am in favour of the Church allowing those priests who
wish to marry, to marry; and for married men also to be able to be
priests.That way the natural urges of priests will be fulfilled, perhaps
without temptation towards homosexuality and or paedoplilia!) Besides,
celibacy is not a 'doctrine' per se; it is a practice; and inspite of all,
if a priest cannot remain celibate, then he has the option to leave the
priesthood, like a few priests have done. You see, there is no enforcement
like your satanic eyes see it.

Santosh:
If "marriage
reveals the truth" of the true human nature, then why
are people who choose to remain unmarried for life
considered to be sick?
Nasci:
Who says that unmarried men are sick? This is your perverted thought! Do not
equalise unmarried men with homosexuals! Your education is seriously
faulted!

Santosh:
"In any case, I would like to emphatically state that
there is absolutely no scientific, clinical or
sociological basis for any of the assertions made in
the above post. Indeed, these assertions go against
the public service recommendations of all major
scientific and medical organizations, as well as
against the practices of most international
humanitarian agencies, including some religious ones."
Nasci:
Scientific and medical organisations are they really competent to pronounce
judgement on sociological cum psyschiatric issues? Society has to rule on
that.
Have they investigated the fact that some or all homosexuals may also be
schizophrenic? and or may be really psycho form a very young age. They could
be sick from the womb. But they are sick.
Cheers,
Nasci Caldeira.
Melbourne.
Nasci Caldeira
2005-05-02 20:22:02 UTC
Permalink
Nasci's response:

Marlon,
Religion is always a matter of faith in what is taught and thought! It is
not imposed on anybody; if some one has no faith; then he is not a religious
person. It is not Physics/ Chemistry! Santosh's proofs are not required
here! Simple as that.

When I wrote about Hinduism earlier; I did not compare it to Christianity;
that's what you are trying to do in this post, and bringing in the
comparisons; those are your words, Marlon!

I discussed what I know of as Hinduism by itself; That it does not qualify
as a religion because it is casteist, racist and blasphemous; putting
animals and unbelievable characters and myths born out of 'ganza taking?
above the Human Being! In all other religions the doctrine and or faith is
based on Humans as prophets and or god; also in Bhudism; though they do not
believe in an external God; they do believe in that "God is in you, the
human person" and it is upto the person to 'realise' God!

The Christian beliefs in the Virgin Mary and The Holy Trinity are all based
on God the Father whom nobody knows and humans.( not animals and other
fictitious caharacters).

Hindus alone believe that some humans are above and superior to others
solely because of their birth; and they also blaspheme when they bring God
down to the level of cow, elephant and snakes etc. I am not saying this;
this is there for all to see and witness as hindu practices.

All the same, I do not condemn or dislike the Hindu, for that; I have a lot
of good hindu friends; What I object to is that they have no right to say
that we (Christians and or muslims, and Bhudists) were converted from a
"Hindu religion". To be born in India or lived in India does not mean that
we were Hindu religion followers; it is just that we were (H) Indu, Indians
and nothing more.

I hope I have been able to make myself clear, on my views and beliefs; OK?

I think it is time for you Marlon to go and take your Christian religious
vows again and to start with, 'go for a general Reconciliation' to the
confessional; and you will be saved! I do not like to see you going to Hell,
just because Santosh is telling you otherwise. It is never too late.

I am saying this to you, because I do not have to be a Pope or a Goan Bamon
to help you save yourself, and to try and spread the "Good News" as in the
Gospels. "I am the way, the truth and the Life"; You should believe again in
all this! Better than other false gods! Amen. No bad wishes, Marlon. Just
good friendly advise!

Cheers!
Nasci Caldeira
Melbourne.
From: Marlon Menezes <marlon at goacom.co >Reply-To: goanet at goanet.org
To: goanet at goanet.org
Subject: RE: [Goanet]Re: Cafeteria Catholics
Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 01:22:24 -0700 (PDT)
What Fr. Ivo is stating is just opinion. Currently
there is no definitive scientific evidence that
indicates that homo-sexuality is socio-cultural or is
endemic to a certain fraction of the human population.
The simplistic opinions of the church that has been
wrong on so many issues cannot be reliably relied upon
on an issue that requires scientific analysis. Hence
for now, this issue is an open question that is still
to be resolved - though some fundamentalists would
find the continuance of this ambiguity unacceptable.
Nasci has trivialized other religions such as hinduism
as being based on myths, but then went on to claim
that christian concepts such as the virgin birth, the
christian trinity (as opposed to the hindu version),
and Jesus's ascention to "heaven" were all factual.
Perhaps Nasci can do something for christianity that
no Pope before him has succeeded in doing - provide us
with the evidence! The problem with fundamentalists is
that their fuzzy minds seem to confuse their personal
beliefs and opinions as fact.
Marlon
Post by Nasci Caldeira
Hi all,
Well said, Fr. Ivo;
Santosh Helekar, please take note!
We as a society do not condemn these aberrations,
but we do not accept these
as normal; hence the need to help these sick
persons. This type of help
should not be construed as acceptance of something
against the 'human
nature/order', but rather 'sympathetic,
compassionate help' just as with
other illnesses.
It is the 'order of nature'; like Fr Ivo says; it's
not antiquated religious
dogma; religion is only accepting the truth! For
heaven's sake, Santosh, you
and scientists and agnostics like you have a lot to
learn, in this field.
Santosh, I think you yourself is in dire need of
neuro surgery; better this
way then banging your 'science only' saturated head
on a rock. Science does
not and cannot disprove what Fr Ivo and countless
others have said before.
Your education is seriously flawed!
Nasci Caldeira
Melbourne.
From: "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
Subject: [Goanet]Re: Cafeteria Catholics
Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 13:39:46 -0400
Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being
is complete in male and
female. Biologically, psychologically, spiritually,
emotionally we
experience
this truth based on human nature itself, not on
"antiquated religious
dogma".
Nasci Caldeira
2005-05-02 20:22:38 UTC
Permalink
Santosh!
If it cannot be treated, it cannot; it is inherited ; the person is born
with it; But does these things make it normal?? it remains abnormal like an
'autistic' child is abnormal; some how we have to treat or just cope with
this. More importantly, Santosh; if your Science cannot cure; who knows God
can and will, if u have enough faith! Try it. Start believing in God.
Nasci Caldeira
Melbourne.
From: Santosh Helekar <chimbelcho at sbcglobal.net>
Post by gilbertlaw
My only input into this dialogue is to make two
1. What Fr. Ivo is describing are normal situations.
What Dr. Colaco is describing are abnormal/
pathological/ medical situations.
Gilbert,
Do you agree with Fr. Ivo that homosexuality is a
sickness which needs to be treated?
Or do you agree with the recommendations of the
American Psychiatric Association, American
Psychological Association and other medical,
scientific and public welfare organizations that say
that it is not a sickness, and it cannot be treated?
Santosh Helekar
2005-05-02 23:50:27 UTC
Permalink
If "marriage reveals the truth" of the true human
nature, then why are people who choose to remain
unmarried for life considered to be sick?
Who says that unmarried men are sick?
I am sorry. I made a typing error, and left out a
"NOT" from the above-quoted sentence of mine. My
statement should have read:

"If "marriage reveals the truth" of the true human
nature, then why are people who choose to remain
unmarried for life NOT considered to be sick?"

I said this because Fr. Ivo uses this line of
reasoning to claim that homosexuality is a sickness.

But what Nasci has written in a series of posts in
this thread is quite entertaining. I hope he continues
to entertain us. I will try to do my best to encourage
him.

Cheers,

Santosh
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-03 01:05:03 UTC
Permalink
Dr.Santosh Helekar asks: If "marriage reveals the truth" of the true human
nature, then why are people who choose to remain unmarried for life considered
to be sick?

People choose to remain unmarried for different reasons, for example for the
love of science, of profession, teaching, religious reasons (celibacy for the
sake of the Kingdom of God and for a better commitment to the people). When
this is a deliberate choice, people who choose to remain unmarried for life
are not considered to be sick.

Yet, marriage reveals that man and woman complete themselves in love and in
family. "Gay marriages" are not normal. This is the truth about Man. Science
cannot answer all the questions. God's Revelation comes to our rescue.

Ivo da C.Souza



--------Original Message -------
--- "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
Post by Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being is
complete in male and female. Biologically,
psychologically, spiritually, emotionally we
experience this truth based on human nature itself,
not on "antiquated religious dogma". Marriage reveals
the truth of this tenet. Nobody can change the fact.
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-03 01:06:25 UTC
Permalink
The facts only reveal our human frailty. We are sinners. We need God's
redemption. The bishops find it difficult to cope up with the problem. It is
also money racket. Paedophilia is a crime. We have to learn the measures that
are to be taken in order to put our own house in order.
God is great!

Ivo da C.Souza

Fr. Ivo da C.Souza,

Parishioners have been doing their level best to help
these priests. At first they were not reporting the
paedophiles to the civic authorities but, instead,
reporting them to the church authorities in the hopes
that the church would take the proper action.

Mervyn3.0
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-03 01:40:03 UTC
Permalink
If homosexuality cannot be treated and healed, yet it has to be taken as such,
surely not as a normal condition. The homosexual has to be understood with
love and compassion, but not be considered as normal like all others. He needs
help, his case has to be investigated with care. There are different kinds of
homosexuality and several etiological factors. This has to be taken into
account. We cannot just dance at the tune of the American Psychiatric
Association. In a lighter vein, I would say: We have to avoid pan-
americanism...

Ivo da C.Souza


--------Original Message -------
Post by gilbertlaw
My only input into this dialogue is to make two
1. What Fr. Ivo is describing are normal situations.
What Dr. Colaco is describing are abnormal/
pathological/ medical situations.
Gilbert,

Do you agree with Fr. Ivo that homosexuality is a
sickness which needs to be treated?

Or do you agree with the recommendations of the
American Psychiatric Association, American
Psychological Association and other medical,
scientific and public welfare organizations that say
that it is not a sickness, and it cannot be treated?

Cheers,

Santosh
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-03 01:40:29 UTC
Permalink
We do not find fault with the homosexuals ("gay"), but surely with
homosexuality. We have to help them. They will surely create a new environemnt
for our youth and will influence them. Doors will be opened to our children to
do what they like. Surely we do not want our children to behave in this
manner. We do not want our society to go in this direction. We can be
sensitive to them, but try to do something for them. An alcoholic should try
all the means. We cannot say that because the father was an alcoholic, the son
also has to be an alcoholic. He has to try all the means not to become
alcoholic. What can the homosexual do? We want kill the homosexuals, but also
will not allow the society to become society of homosexuals...

Ivo da C.Souza


--------Original Message -------
I find it difficult to fault Homosexuals and gays, as long as they do
not impose their sexuality on others. This is something we have to
accommodate and not be insensitive to. Any family can have offspring
that turn out this way. What would the opinion of our Conservatives on
hermaphrodites be? Kill them off?

Cheers,

Gabe Menezes.
London, England
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-03 01:40:56 UTC
Permalink
All are opinions. We are still groping. Science is also groping. One opinion
may be better than the other. Time will tell us. When we speak of
the "simplistic opinions of the Church", how well rooted are our opinions?
Could you mention wrong "opinions of the Church"?
The Church does not give a moral verdict without a previous scientific
investigation.

Christian truths have their own logic. They are substantiated in their
own way. Virginal conception of Jesus has its foundation in the Gospel
Tradition (cf.Lk 1:34f; Mt 1:18). The dogma of Trinity comes from Christian
Revelation. Ascension to heaven is the dogma of Resurrection of Jesus--Jesus
ascended to heaven, that is, he took part in the power of God. Jesus is God-
man. This is the realm of faith, of Christian Revelation. Science has its
limits. Let us avoid scientism...

What I am stating is jsut opinion. What the scientists are trying to find
is also opinion. Science has still to go more miles. Scientific analysis has
not come to an end. If "this issue is an open question that is still to be
resolved", then let us not come to the conclusion that scientifically
homosexuality is acceptable. What are the grounds? What prevails is that God
has created male and female (cf.Gn 1:26f). It is the process of pro-creation
that is in our human nature, in the natural order of creation. This is the
truth about Man... Science cannot change it.


--------Original Message -------
What Fr. Ivo is stating is just opinion. Currently
there is no definitive scientific evidence that
indicates that homo-sexuality is socio-cultural or is
endemic to a certain fraction of the human population.

Marlon
Nasci Caldeira
2005-05-03 01:41:25 UTC
Permalink
From: Santosh Helekar <chimbelcho at sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: [Goanet] Cafeteria Catholics (Reply to Santosh)
Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 15:20:18 -0700 (PDT)
If "marriage reveals the truth" of the true human
nature, then why are people who choose to remain
unmarried for life considered to be sick?
Who says that unmarried men are sick?
I am sorry. I made a typing error, and left out a
"NOT" from the above-quoted sentence of mine. My
"If "marriage reveals the truth" of the true human
nature, then why are people who choose to remain
unmarried for life NOT considered to be sick?"
I said this because Fr. Ivo uses this line of
reasoning to claim that homosexuality is a sickness.
Nasci:
Why should persons who choose to remain 'unmarried' be considered sick? They
have the choice and their free will to choose. "marriage reveals the truth'
in that male and female interact and populate and prolong the species, in
excercising their natural right. If a single male or female forgoes their
urge, for whatever reason, they are not sick! Of course not!

The homosexual groups deny that they are 'homosexuals' by choice; instead
they say they are 'born' that way, and that they can't help it. Unmarried
man choose to remain unmarried. They are not born that way. They have the
option of 'choice' any time.

But if say an unmarried man wants to marry 'You Santosh', (presuming that
you are male), then we have a real problem. Your family will also have to
deal with that. I,m sure that you will chase the 'bloke' away; after telling
him that he is sick and weird, and has to go get treated! Would't you do
that Santosh? Or how else would U deal with matters like this?

And in case U decide to 'go with him' and forgo your family, (presuming U R
married) would U consider this union as a "marriage'' or a "conjugal Union"
or a partnership for 'weird' sex?? Would U not seek treatment, for yourself,
in such an event?

Santosh:
But what Nasci has written in a series of posts in
this thread is quite entertaining. I hope he continues
to entertain us. I will try to do my best to encourage
him.
Nasci: I hope to continue to entertain you and enlighten you at the same
time! I will also 'Pray' to a Christian God, for your conversion to an
enlightened Christian Scientist. Santosh, I hear you are a good Scientist;
but I feel there is just that "little something" missing! It is called
"Faith in God".
Cheers,
Nasci Caldeira
Melbourne
Mervyn Lobo
2005-05-03 01:41:51 UTC
Permalink
The facts only reveal our human frailty. We are
sinners. We need God's
redemption. The bishops find it difficult to cope up
with the problem. It is also money racket.
Paedophilia is a crime. We have to learn the
measures that are to be taken in order to put our
own house in order.
God is great!
Fr. Ivo da C.Souza,
Let me try and make this clearer.
Paedophiles, masquerading as priests in the catholic
church, are secure in the knowledge that should they
be reported, the Vatican is not going to do anything.
The supposed authority on morals contends it does not
know how to deal with such problems in its ranks.

Mervyn3.0





______________________________________________________________________
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Santosh Helekar
2005-05-03 05:00:56 UTC
Permalink
--- "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
We cannot just dance at the tune of the American
Psychiatric Association.
Mere assertions and innuendo have no value in a real
discussion. The American Psychiatric Association is a
professional organization that issues recommendations
and guidelines for psychiatrists and mental health
professionals around the world, after thorough review
of all scholarly research in any given area. It
publishes a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual on
mental illness, which informs and guides the practice
of psychiatry all over the world.

It is unlikely that the Catholic Church and its
hierarchy know more about human psychology and mental
illness than the distinguished professionals who sit
on the expert panels of the American Psychiatric
Association. Almost all psychiatric and other mental
health organizations in other countries are in
agreement with the American Psychiatric Association on
the subject of homosexuality.

Cheers,

Santosh
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-04 03:00:40 UTC
Permalink
Dear Dr.Santosh,
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-04 03:05:31 UTC
Permalink
Our discussion so far has been regarding homosexuality, not about the norms
and policies of different dioceses in relation to the deviant priests. I leave
it to the competent authorities...

Ivo da C.Souza


--------Original Message -------
I am not too knowledgeable to discuss this issue from a theological,
sociological or from a medical perspective. Of course I could lagao bhathi
like some of the posts.
Mervyn Lobo
2005-05-01 07:37:08 UTC
Permalink
I have a quick answer: there should not be
"homosexual Catholic priests", but if there are,
as the media are publicizing, then homosexuality
does not cease to be "an aberration", "abnormal".
Fr. Ivo da C. Souza,
Here in N. America, its estimated that 4 out of every
1,000 priests are homosexual. Many of them joined the
priesthood because they did not want to disclose to
their family that they were gay. I used to go to a
church in Washington, D.C. that had a gay priest. I
have no problems with gay priest if they keep their
vows of celibacy.
Let the competent people investigate the causes and
help them, with love and compassion. Let us also
study why there is such a wild propaganda, which
will not help the sick priests nor the Church of
God. What are the background factors for such an
aberration? Can we do something for them? It is
important to save them...as much as poor human
efforts are concerned...
There is a bigger problem than gay priests in the R.C.
Church. The church also has known paedophiles who
still are priests. Every time parishioners report such
paedophiles to the church authorities, the authorities
keep mum or, in the worst case scenario, transfer the
priests to another parish. In other words, the
paedophiles have new kids to prey on.
It is our task, yours and mine!
Yes, I agree, it's both our tasks to keep the church
in order. Unfortunately, for the past 10 years, the
Vatican has been extremely slow in addressing the
problem of gays and paedophiles in its ranks.

Mervyn3.0



______________________________________________________________________
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-01 18:27:57 UTC
Permalink
Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being is complete in male and
female. Biologically, psychologically, spiritually, emotionally we experience
this truth based on human nature itself, not on "antiquated religious dogma".
Marriage reveals the truth of this tenet. Nobody can change the fact. When
there is an aberration in this light, we have to admit that it is an
aberration. The fact that some scientists have been "homosexuals" and yet
contributed to the progress of science, technology and society does not dilute
the fact nor legitimize it. There are alcoholics, who in fact consider
alcoholism a sickness, yet they have to struggle against this "disease" and
are contributing to the progress of the society--though we have to accept that
alcoholism hampers their human growth to a great extent. This comparison has
to be taken as a comparison only--namely, a sick person may be an intellectual
genius, yet he does not cease to be psychologically 'sick', if he is a
homosexual or an alcoholic...

Homosexuality is anti-society, anti-marriage, anti-family... There cannot
be "gay marriages", it is a contradiction in terms. Our anatomy vouches for
it. The family needs a father and a mother. Children and young people need a
Papa and a Mama, not two papas, or two mamas...
This is not "religious dogma", it is order of nature, which nobody can change.
The fact that homosexuality exists among leaders and intellectuals does not
change the natural order. It is an aberration, it is abnormality. Our society
is suffering already from the consequences of all kinds of aberrations, one of
these is homosexual, 'same-sex' union... Enough is enough...
Let us teach our young people the 'facts of life' in a correct way, let us
help those who have this craze, with love and compassion, without condemning
them, but rejecting homosexuality...

Ivo da C.Souza
jose colaco
2005-05-01 20:10:29 UTC
Permalink
From: "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
< Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being is complete in male and
female>
< Nobody can change the fact.>
< Our anatomy vouches for it>
< Let us teach our young people the 'facts of life' in a correct way>



Thank you Fr. Ivo for your excellent posts on the Cafeteria matter. However
the above is noted with some degree of surprise.

The following is NOT in support of any particular lifestyle - inherited,
imposed, learnt or chosen. It is to emphasise the point that blanket
statements are unwise - however well-intentioned they might be.

Before we aspire to teach our young people the 'facts of life' in a correct
way, we may wish to ascertain the 'facts of life'.

I wonder what scientific references there are to support the generalisation
that every "Human being is complete in male and female"

Are there NO exceptions?

If so...how many?
How many individuals are feminized by abuse (at a very young age) itself,
and How many have a genetic prediliction to developing it.

Furthermore, are ALL who look male, male wrt to the hormones and the effects
of the hormones?


please see:->


http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/001180.htm

Androgen insensitivity syndrome (AIS) is when a person has one X and one Y
sex chromosome (making them genetically male), but is resistant to androgens
(male hormones). As a result, the individual has some or all of the physical
characteristics of a woman, despite having the genetic makeup of a man.

The syndrome is divided into two main categories: complete and incomplete.
Complete AIS results in someone who looks outwardly female. In the
incomplete AIS syndrome, the degree of sexual ambiguity varies widely from
individual to individual.

Partial Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome

also known as:
PAIS
Reifenstein Syndrome
Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome, Partial
Gilbert-Dreyfus Syndrome
Incomplete Testicular Feminization
Lubs Syndrome
Rosewater Syndrome
Type I Familial Incomplete Male Pseudohermaphroditism


jc

PS: Our views on the abuse & the criminal coverup + silence by the Real
Cafeteria Catholics : -> at:

http://www.colaco.net/3/church-lurch.htm

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-01 20:10:56 UTC
Permalink
I do not deny the facts. I have affirmed that homosexuality is wrong. Yet the
priests have to be helped. The problem boils down to what I have said: Let us
do something for them...

Ivo da C.Souza


--------Original Message -------
Fr. Ivo da C. Souza,

Here in N. America, its estimated that 4 out of every
1,000 priests are homosexual. Many of them joined the
priesthood because they did not want to disclose to
their family that they were gay. I used to go to a
church in Washington, D.C. that had a gay priest. I
have no problems with gay priest if they keep their
vows of celibacy.

Mervyn3.0
Santosh Helekar
2005-05-02 05:15:03 UTC
Permalink
--- "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
Post by Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being is
complete in male and female. Biologically,
psychologically, spiritually, emotionally we
experience this truth based on human nature itself,
not on "antiquated religious dogma". Marriage reveals
the truth of this tenet. Nobody can change the fact.
The above post makes a lot of categorical assertions
without providing any scientific or sociological
justification to support them. It is very obvious that
this is a strongly held religious view, despite claims
to the contrary. Some of the assertions are not even
internally consistent within the same religious
doctrine. For instance, nobody would deny that
enforced celibacy is not consistent with human nature,
and yet its practice is regarded with such high esteem
by the adherents of this doctrine. If "marriage
reveals the truth" of the true human nature, then why
are people who choose to remain unmarried for life
considered to be sick?

In any case, I would like to emphatically state that
there is absolutely no scientific, clinical or
sociological basis for any of the assertions made in
the above post. Indeed, these assertions go against
the public service recommendations of all major
scientific and medical organizations, as well as
against the practices of most international
humanitarian agencies, including some religious ones.

This is indeed a clear example of how strict adherence
to religious dogma brings one in conflict with
science, as well as with humanitarian ethics developed
by painstaking scientific and sociological research.

I provide below some public service FAQs from the
American Psychological Association, which directly
refute the various claims made in the above-referenced
post.

http://www.apa.org/pubinfo/answers.html

IS HOMOSEXUALITY A MENTAL ILLNESS OR EMOTIONAL
PROBLEM?
No. Psychologists, psychiatrists and other mental
health professionals agree that homosexuality is not
an illness, mental disorder or an emotional problem.
Over 35 years of objective, well-designed scientific
research has shown that homosexuality, in and itself,
is not associated with mental disorders or emotional
or social problems. Homosexuality was once thought to
be a mental illness because mental health
professionals and society had biased information. In
the past the studies of gay, lesbian and bisexual
people involved only those in therapy, thus biasing
the resulting conclusions. When researchers examined
data about these people who were not in therapy, the
idea that homosexuality was a mental illness was
quickly found to be untrue.

In 1973 the American Psychiatric Association confirmed
the importance of the new, better designed research
and removed homosexuality from the official manual
that lists mental and emotional disorders. Two years
later, the American Psychological Association passed a
resolution supporting the removal. For more than 25
years, both associations have urged all mental health
professionals to help dispel the stigma of mental
illness that some people still associate with
homosexual orientation.

CAN THERAPY CHANGE SEXUAL ORIENTATION?
No. Even though most homosexuals live successful,
happy lives, some homosexual or bisexual people may
seek to change their sexual orientation through
therapy, sometimes pressured by the influence of
family members or religious groups to try and do so.
The reality is that homosexuality is not an illness.
It does not require treatment and is not changeable.

However, not all gay, lesbian, and bisexual people who
seek assistance from a mental health professional want
to change their sexual orientation. Gay, lesbian, and
bisexual people may seek psychological help with the
coming out process or for strategies to deal with
prejudice, but most go into therapy for the same
reasons and life issues that bring straight people to
mental health professionals.

CAN LESBIANS, GAY MEN, AND BISEXUALS BE GOOD PARENTS?
Yes. Studies comparing groups of children raised by
homosexual and by heterosexual parents find no
developmental differences between the two groups of
children in four critical areas: their intelligence,
psychological adjustment, social adjustment, and
popularity with friends. It is also important to
realize that a parent's sexual orientation does not
dictate his or her children's.

Another myth about homosexuality is the mistaken
belief that gay men have more of a tendency than
heterosexual men to sexually molest children. There is
no evidence to suggest that homosexuals are more
likely than heterosexuals to molest children.

WHY IS IT IMPORTANT FOR SOCIETY TO BE BETTER EDUCATED
ABOUT HOMOSEXUALITY?
Educating all people about sexual orientation and
homosexuality is likely to diminish anti-gay
prejudice. Accurate information about homosexuality is
especially important to young people who are first
discovering and seeking to understand their
sexuality?whether homosexual, bisexual, or
heterosexual. Fears that access to such information
will make more people gay have no validity?information
about homosexuality does not make someone gay or
straight.

Cheers,

Santosh
Mervyn Lobo
2005-05-02 05:16:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
I do not deny the facts. I have affirmed that
homosexuality is wrong. Yet the
priests have to be helped. The problem boils down to
what I have said: Let us do something for them...
Fr. Ivo da C.Souza,
Parishioners have been doing their level best to help
these priests. At first they were not reporting the
paedophiles to the civic authorities but, instead,
reporting them to the church authorities in the hopes
that the church would take the proper action.

Instead of doing the right thing, the church decided
not to take any action. They still follow this course
of action, and I am talking about at the highest level
of authority.

It's only after victims started suing the paedophiles
that the church authorities started to take notice.
They took notice only after some parishes had to sell
ALL their land and buildings in order to pay for the
damages. Here in Toronto, almost every other week,
there is a second collection for "the Bishops needs."
"The Bishops needs" is usually code for payments to
abuse victims. There used to be a time when the second
collection was to finance the missionaries. Now it is
used to finance those who have left the church.

So, in short, I agree with you, we need to do
something to help these priests. We could start with
the church admitting that it has a problem. Then it
has to weed out these paedophiles.

Mervyn3.0




______________________________________________________________________
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Nasci Caldeira
2005-05-02 05:17:43 UTC
Permalink
Hi all,

Well said, Fr. Ivo;
Santosh Helekar, please take note!
We as a society do not condemn these aberrations, but we do not accept these
as normal; hence the need to help these sick persons. This type of help
should not be construed as acceptance of something against the 'human
nature/order', but rather 'sympathetic, compassionate help' just as with
other illnesses.

It is the 'order of nature'; like Fr Ivo says; it's not antiquated religious
dogma; religion is only accepting the truth! For heaven's sake, Santosh, you
and scientists and agnostics like you have a lot to learn, in this field.
Santosh, I think you yourself is in dire need of neuro surgery; better this
way then banging your 'science only' saturated head on a rock. Science does
not and cannot disprove what Fr Ivo and countless others have said before.
Your education is seriously flawed!

Nasci Caldeira
Melbourne.
From: "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
Subject: [Goanet]Re: Cafeteria Catholics
Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 13:39:46 -0400
Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being is complete in male and
female. Biologically, psychologically, spiritually, emotionally we
experience
this truth based on human nature itself, not on "antiquated religious
dogma".
Marriage reveals the truth of this tenet. Nobody can change the fact. When
there is an aberration in this light, we have to admit that it is an
aberration. The fact that some scientists have been "homosexuals" and yet
contributed to the progress of science, technology and society does not
dilute
the fact nor legitimize it. There are alcoholics, who in fact consider
alcoholism a sickness, yet they have to struggle against this "disease" and
are contributing to the progress of the society--though we have to accept
that
alcoholism hampers their human growth to a great extent. This comparison
has
to be taken as a comparison only--namely, a sick person may be an
intellectual
genius, yet he does not cease to be psychologically 'sick', if he is a
homosexual or an alcoholic...
Homosexuality is anti-society, anti-marriage, anti-family... There cannot
be "gay marriages", it is a contradiction in terms. Our anatomy vouches for
it. The family needs a father and a mother. Children and young people need
a
Papa and a Mama, not two papas, or two mamas...
This is not "religious dogma", it is order of nature, which nobody can
change.
The fact that homosexuality exists among leaders and intellectuals does not
change the natural order. It is an aberration, it is abnormality. Our
society
is suffering already from the consequences of all kinds of aberrations, one
of
these is homosexual, 'same-sex' union... Enough is enough...
Let us teach our young people the 'facts of life' in a correct way, let us
help those who have this craze, with love and compassion, without
condemning
them, but rejecting homosexuality...
Ivo da C.Souza
Marlon Menezes
2005-05-02 10:35:02 UTC
Permalink
What Fr. Ivo is stating is just opinion. Currently
there is no definitive scientific evidence that
indicates that homo-sexuality is socio-cultural or is
endemic to a certain fraction of the human population.


The simplistic opinions of the church that has been
wrong on so many issues cannot be reliably relied upon
on an issue that requires scientific analysis. Hence
for now, this issue is an open question that is still
to be resolved - though some fundamentalists would
find the continuance of this ambiguity unacceptable.

Nasci has trivialized other religions such as hinduism
as being based on myths, but then went on to claim
that christian concepts such as the virgin birth, the
christian trinity (as opposed to the hindu version),
and Jesus's ascention to "heaven" were all factual.
Perhaps Nasci can do something for christianity that
no Pope before him has succeeded in doing - provide us
with the evidence! The problem with fundamentalists is
that their fuzzy minds seem to confuse their personal
beliefs and opinions as fact.

Marlon
Post by Nasci Caldeira
Hi all,
Well said, Fr. Ivo;
Santosh Helekar, please take note!
We as a society do not condemn these aberrations,
but we do not accept these
as normal; hence the need to help these sick
persons. This type of help
should not be construed as acceptance of something
against the 'human
nature/order', but rather 'sympathetic,
compassionate help' just as with
other illnesses.
It is the 'order of nature'; like Fr Ivo says; it's
not antiquated religious
dogma; religion is only accepting the truth! For
heaven's sake, Santosh, you
and scientists and agnostics like you have a lot to
learn, in this field.
Santosh, I think you yourself is in dire need of
neuro surgery; better this
way then banging your 'science only' saturated head
on a rock. Science does
not and cannot disprove what Fr Ivo and countless
others have said before.
Your education is seriously flawed!
Nasci Caldeira
Melbourne.
From: "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
Subject: [Goanet]Re: Cafeteria Catholics
Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 13:39:46 -0400
Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being
is complete in male and
female. Biologically, psychologically, spiritually,
emotionally we
experience
this truth based on human nature itself, not on
"antiquated religious
dogma".
gilbertlaw
2005-05-02 10:37:21 UTC
Permalink
Hi all,
Partial knowledge is dangerous.
But too much knowledge may be dangerous too!
My knowledge of homosexuality from a medical, psychological or humanist perspective in very limited.

My only input into this dialogue is to make two points:
1. What Fr. Ivo is describing are normal situations. What Dr. Colaco is describing are abnormal/ pathological/ medical situations.

2. Just because a rule cannot be applied in 100% of all (normal or abnormal) situations, does it mean we should not have rules/ norms / policies etc.? Simple examples seat belts, motorcycle helmets, vaccinations or screening tests etc
Regards
From: "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being is complete in male and
female. Nobody can change the fact. Our anatomy vouches for it.
Let us teach our young people the 'facts of life' in a correct way
Thank you Fr. Ivo for your excellent posts on the Cafeteria matter. However
the above is noted with some degree of surprise.
The following is NOT in support of any particular lifestyle - inherited,
imposed, learnt or chosen. It is to emphasise the point that blanket
statements are unwise - however well-intentioned they might be.
Before we aspire to teach our young people the 'facts of life' in a correct
way, we may wish to ascertain the 'facts of life'.
I wonder what scientific references there are to support the generalisation
that every "Human being is complete in male and female"
Are there NO exceptions?
If so...how many?
How many individuals are feminized by abuse (at a very young age) itself,
and How many have a genetic prediliction to developing it.
Furthermore, are ALL who look male, male wrt to the hormones and the effects
of the hormones?
Androgen insensitivity syndrome (AIS) is when a person has one X and one Y
sex chromosome (making them genetically male), but is resistant to androgens
(male hormones). As a result, the individual has some or all of the physical
characteristics of a woman, despite having the genetic makeup of a man.
The syndrome is divided into two main categories: complete and incomplete.
Complete AIS results in someone who looks outwardly female. In the
incomplete AIS syndrome, the degree of sexual ambiguity varies widely from
individual to individual.
PAIS
Reifenstein Syndrome
Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome, Partial
Gilbert-Dreyfus Syndrome
Incomplete Testicular Feminization
Lubs Syndrome
Rosewater Syndrome
Type I Familial Incomplete Male Pseudohermaphroditism
Santosh Helekar
2005-05-02 14:45:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by gilbertlaw
My only input into this dialogue is to make two
1. What Fr. Ivo is describing are normal situations.
What Dr. Colaco is describing are abnormal/
pathological/ medical situations.
Gilbert,

Do you agree with Fr. Ivo that homosexuality is a
sickness which needs to be treated?

Or do you agree with the recommendations of the
American Psychiatric Association, American
Psychological Association and other medical,
scientific and public welfare organizations that say
that it is not a sickness, and it cannot be treated?

Cheers,

Santosh
jose colaco
2005-05-02 20:20:28 UTC
Permalink
From: <gilbertlaw at adelphia.net>

<My knowledge of homosexuality from a medical, psychological or humanist
perspective in very limited.

My only input into this dialogue is to make two points:
1. What Fr. Ivo is describing are normal situations.? What Dr. Colaco is
describing are abnormal/ pathological/ medical situations.

2. Just because a rule cannot be applied in 100% of all (normal or abnormal)
situations, does it mean we should not have rules/ norms / policies etc.?
Simple examples seat belts, motorcycle helmets, vaccinations or screening
tests etc >


Earlier: "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>

<Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being is complete in male and
female. Nobody can change the fact.? Our anatomy vouches for it. Let us
teach our young people the 'facts of life' in a correct way>

===

Dear Gilbert,

This will be my final public contribution on this matter. I will be happy
continuing private off-list discussions on the topic.

I recommend that we pay close attention to Kevin Saldanha's statement:
"every biological population is made up of a bell curve of
individuals.....the 5% will be CONSIDERED deviants from that normal
population BUT ARE STILL VERY MUCH A PART OF A NATURAL BIOLOGICAL
POPULATION.

Please understand that I seriously contest Fr. Ivo's position that "Human
being is complete in male and female". I also have to think again about the
following from Fr. Ivo "Our society is suffering already from the
consequences of all kinds of aberrations, one of these is homosexual,
'same-sex' union... Enough is enough..." + "Children and young people need a
Papa and a Mama, not two papas, or two mamas..."



Here are some of my queries:

1. What consequences is society suferring from because of aberrations?

2. When homosexuals ask for "same-sex" union, WHAT is it that are they
asking for, & WHY?

3. What number of Children and young people in this world have ONLY one papa
or one mama?

4. Is the care of children with the Two Mamas any worse than with one mama?

5. Why are millions of children enslaved into child labour, child
prostitution, child marriages, begging ? Is it because of Two Mamas?

and finally .....these two queries

6. Just because the 'homosexuals" are different from us (like the blind,
deaf, mentally challenged, promiscuous, Down's, extremely brilliant,
extremely un-brilliant, unable to sing a verse, wheel chair bound, poor,
very wealthy etc ), should we be descriminating against their rights? Do we
NOT (after much struggle) provide Wheel-Chair access to the physically
disabled? Do we NOT adjustments for the Hearing Impaired and Bllind?

7. Is it normal to have CELIBACY imposed on an individual - as a requirement
to serve as a priest? If so...ON what NORMAL human or even Religious basis?



good wishes

jc

Please note that the above post is NOT an endorsement of the ABUSE which was
perpetrated by those Monsters, NOR of the actions of the higher Monsters who
just watched and kept quiet, NOR of the REAL Cafeteria Catholics who kept Oh
So Silent about this horrendous abuse by a minority of priests ......

The actions of ALL of the above brought untold suffering to a lot of people
.... including the vast number of priests who are GOOD

Hear Me!

_________________________________________________________________
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar ? get it now!
http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/
Nasci Caldeira
2005-05-02 20:21:07 UTC
Permalink
From: Santosh Helekar <chimbelcho at sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: [Goanet] Cafeteria Catholics
Date: Sun, 1 May 2005 16:09:17 -0700 (PDT)
"The above post makes a lot of categorical assertions
without providing any scientific or sociological
justification to support them. It is very obvious that
this is a strongly held religious view, despite claims
to the contrary."
Nasci's response: It is not only a 'religious view'; the majority in the
world supports the view; except scientific and satanic fundamentalists like
you!

Santosh:
" Some of the assertions are not even
internally consistent within the same religious
doctrine. For instance, nobody would deny that
enforced celibacy is not consistent with human nature,
and yet its practice is regarded with such high esteem
by the adherents of this doctrine."
Nasci's reply:
Ceibacy is enforced only on those who have willingly and knowingly become
priests, after going thru years and years of theological and other
tuition.(Personally I am in favour of the Church allowing those priests who
wish to marry, to marry; and for married men also to be able to be
priests.That way the natural urges of priests will be fulfilled, perhaps
without temptation towards homosexuality and or paedoplilia!) Besides,
celibacy is not a 'doctrine' per se; it is a practice; and inspite of all,
if a priest cannot remain celibate, then he has the option to leave the
priesthood, like a few priests have done. You see, there is no enforcement
like your satanic eyes see it.

Santosh:
If "marriage
reveals the truth" of the true human nature, then why
are people who choose to remain unmarried for life
considered to be sick?
Nasci:
Who says that unmarried men are sick? This is your perverted thought! Do not
equalise unmarried men with homosexuals! Your education is seriously
faulted!

Santosh:
"In any case, I would like to emphatically state that
there is absolutely no scientific, clinical or
sociological basis for any of the assertions made in
the above post. Indeed, these assertions go against
the public service recommendations of all major
scientific and medical organizations, as well as
against the practices of most international
humanitarian agencies, including some religious ones."
Nasci:
Scientific and medical organisations are they really competent to pronounce
judgement on sociological cum psyschiatric issues? Society has to rule on
that.
Have they investigated the fact that some or all homosexuals may also be
schizophrenic? and or may be really psycho form a very young age. They could
be sick from the womb. But they are sick.
Cheers,
Nasci Caldeira.
Melbourne.
Nasci Caldeira
2005-05-02 20:22:02 UTC
Permalink
Nasci's response:

Marlon,
Religion is always a matter of faith in what is taught and thought! It is
not imposed on anybody; if some one has no faith; then he is not a religious
person. It is not Physics/ Chemistry! Santosh's proofs are not required
here! Simple as that.

When I wrote about Hinduism earlier; I did not compare it to Christianity;
that's what you are trying to do in this post, and bringing in the
comparisons; those are your words, Marlon!

I discussed what I know of as Hinduism by itself; That it does not qualify
as a religion because it is casteist, racist and blasphemous; putting
animals and unbelievable characters and myths born out of 'ganza taking?
above the Human Being! In all other religions the doctrine and or faith is
based on Humans as prophets and or god; also in Bhudism; though they do not
believe in an external God; they do believe in that "God is in you, the
human person" and it is upto the person to 'realise' God!

The Christian beliefs in the Virgin Mary and The Holy Trinity are all based
on God the Father whom nobody knows and humans.( not animals and other
fictitious caharacters).

Hindus alone believe that some humans are above and superior to others
solely because of their birth; and they also blaspheme when they bring God
down to the level of cow, elephant and snakes etc. I am not saying this;
this is there for all to see and witness as hindu practices.

All the same, I do not condemn or dislike the Hindu, for that; I have a lot
of good hindu friends; What I object to is that they have no right to say
that we (Christians and or muslims, and Bhudists) were converted from a
"Hindu religion". To be born in India or lived in India does not mean that
we were Hindu religion followers; it is just that we were (H) Indu, Indians
and nothing more.

I hope I have been able to make myself clear, on my views and beliefs; OK?

I think it is time for you Marlon to go and take your Christian religious
vows again and to start with, 'go for a general Reconciliation' to the
confessional; and you will be saved! I do not like to see you going to Hell,
just because Santosh is telling you otherwise. It is never too late.

I am saying this to you, because I do not have to be a Pope or a Goan Bamon
to help you save yourself, and to try and spread the "Good News" as in the
Gospels. "I am the way, the truth and the Life"; You should believe again in
all this! Better than other false gods! Amen. No bad wishes, Marlon. Just
good friendly advise!

Cheers!
Nasci Caldeira
Melbourne.
From: Marlon Menezes <marlon at goacom.co >Reply-To: goanet at goanet.org
To: goanet at goanet.org
Subject: RE: [Goanet]Re: Cafeteria Catholics
Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 01:22:24 -0700 (PDT)
What Fr. Ivo is stating is just opinion. Currently
there is no definitive scientific evidence that
indicates that homo-sexuality is socio-cultural or is
endemic to a certain fraction of the human population.
The simplistic opinions of the church that has been
wrong on so many issues cannot be reliably relied upon
on an issue that requires scientific analysis. Hence
for now, this issue is an open question that is still
to be resolved - though some fundamentalists would
find the continuance of this ambiguity unacceptable.
Nasci has trivialized other religions such as hinduism
as being based on myths, but then went on to claim
that christian concepts such as the virgin birth, the
christian trinity (as opposed to the hindu version),
and Jesus's ascention to "heaven" were all factual.
Perhaps Nasci can do something for christianity that
no Pope before him has succeeded in doing - provide us
with the evidence! The problem with fundamentalists is
that their fuzzy minds seem to confuse their personal
beliefs and opinions as fact.
Marlon
Post by Nasci Caldeira
Hi all,
Well said, Fr. Ivo;
Santosh Helekar, please take note!
We as a society do not condemn these aberrations,
but we do not accept these
as normal; hence the need to help these sick
persons. This type of help
should not be construed as acceptance of something
against the 'human
nature/order', but rather 'sympathetic,
compassionate help' just as with
other illnesses.
It is the 'order of nature'; like Fr Ivo says; it's
not antiquated religious
dogma; religion is only accepting the truth! For
heaven's sake, Santosh, you
and scientists and agnostics like you have a lot to
learn, in this field.
Santosh, I think you yourself is in dire need of
neuro surgery; better this
way then banging your 'science only' saturated head
on a rock. Science does
not and cannot disprove what Fr Ivo and countless
others have said before.
Your education is seriously flawed!
Nasci Caldeira
Melbourne.
From: "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
Subject: [Goanet]Re: Cafeteria Catholics
Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 13:39:46 -0400
Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being
is complete in male and
female. Biologically, psychologically, spiritually,
emotionally we
experience
this truth based on human nature itself, not on
"antiquated religious
dogma".
Nasci Caldeira
2005-05-02 20:22:38 UTC
Permalink
Santosh!
If it cannot be treated, it cannot; it is inherited ; the person is born
with it; But does these things make it normal?? it remains abnormal like an
'autistic' child is abnormal; some how we have to treat or just cope with
this. More importantly, Santosh; if your Science cannot cure; who knows God
can and will, if u have enough faith! Try it. Start believing in God.
Nasci Caldeira
Melbourne.
From: Santosh Helekar <chimbelcho at sbcglobal.net>
Post by gilbertlaw
My only input into this dialogue is to make two
1. What Fr. Ivo is describing are normal situations.
What Dr. Colaco is describing are abnormal/
pathological/ medical situations.
Gilbert,
Do you agree with Fr. Ivo that homosexuality is a
sickness which needs to be treated?
Or do you agree with the recommendations of the
American Psychiatric Association, American
Psychological Association and other medical,
scientific and public welfare organizations that say
that it is not a sickness, and it cannot be treated?
Santosh Helekar
2005-05-02 23:50:27 UTC
Permalink
If "marriage reveals the truth" of the true human
nature, then why are people who choose to remain
unmarried for life considered to be sick?
Who says that unmarried men are sick?
I am sorry. I made a typing error, and left out a
"NOT" from the above-quoted sentence of mine. My
statement should have read:

"If "marriage reveals the truth" of the true human
nature, then why are people who choose to remain
unmarried for life NOT considered to be sick?"

I said this because Fr. Ivo uses this line of
reasoning to claim that homosexuality is a sickness.

But what Nasci has written in a series of posts in
this thread is quite entertaining. I hope he continues
to entertain us. I will try to do my best to encourage
him.

Cheers,

Santosh
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-03 01:05:03 UTC
Permalink
Dr.Santosh Helekar asks: If "marriage reveals the truth" of the true human
nature, then why are people who choose to remain unmarried for life considered
to be sick?

People choose to remain unmarried for different reasons, for example for the
love of science, of profession, teaching, religious reasons (celibacy for the
sake of the Kingdom of God and for a better commitment to the people). When
this is a deliberate choice, people who choose to remain unmarried for life
are not considered to be sick.

Yet, marriage reveals that man and woman complete themselves in love and in
family. "Gay marriages" are not normal. This is the truth about Man. Science
cannot answer all the questions. God's Revelation comes to our rescue.

Ivo da C.Souza



--------Original Message -------
--- "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
Post by Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being is
complete in male and female. Biologically,
psychologically, spiritually, emotionally we
experience this truth based on human nature itself,
not on "antiquated religious dogma". Marriage reveals
the truth of this tenet. Nobody can change the fact.
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-03 01:06:25 UTC
Permalink
The facts only reveal our human frailty. We are sinners. We need God's
redemption. The bishops find it difficult to cope up with the problem. It is
also money racket. Paedophilia is a crime. We have to learn the measures that
are to be taken in order to put our own house in order.
God is great!

Ivo da C.Souza

Fr. Ivo da C.Souza,

Parishioners have been doing their level best to help
these priests. At first they were not reporting the
paedophiles to the civic authorities but, instead,
reporting them to the church authorities in the hopes
that the church would take the proper action.

Mervyn3.0
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-03 01:40:03 UTC
Permalink
If homosexuality cannot be treated and healed, yet it has to be taken as such,
surely not as a normal condition. The homosexual has to be understood with
love and compassion, but not be considered as normal like all others. He needs
help, his case has to be investigated with care. There are different kinds of
homosexuality and several etiological factors. This has to be taken into
account. We cannot just dance at the tune of the American Psychiatric
Association. In a lighter vein, I would say: We have to avoid pan-
americanism...

Ivo da C.Souza


--------Original Message -------
Post by gilbertlaw
My only input into this dialogue is to make two
1. What Fr. Ivo is describing are normal situations.
What Dr. Colaco is describing are abnormal/
pathological/ medical situations.
Gilbert,

Do you agree with Fr. Ivo that homosexuality is a
sickness which needs to be treated?

Or do you agree with the recommendations of the
American Psychiatric Association, American
Psychological Association and other medical,
scientific and public welfare organizations that say
that it is not a sickness, and it cannot be treated?

Cheers,

Santosh
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-03 01:40:29 UTC
Permalink
We do not find fault with the homosexuals ("gay"), but surely with
homosexuality. We have to help them. They will surely create a new environemnt
for our youth and will influence them. Doors will be opened to our children to
do what they like. Surely we do not want our children to behave in this
manner. We do not want our society to go in this direction. We can be
sensitive to them, but try to do something for them. An alcoholic should try
all the means. We cannot say that because the father was an alcoholic, the son
also has to be an alcoholic. He has to try all the means not to become
alcoholic. What can the homosexual do? We want kill the homosexuals, but also
will not allow the society to become society of homosexuals...

Ivo da C.Souza


--------Original Message -------
I find it difficult to fault Homosexuals and gays, as long as they do
not impose their sexuality on others. This is something we have to
accommodate and not be insensitive to. Any family can have offspring
that turn out this way. What would the opinion of our Conservatives on
hermaphrodites be? Kill them off?

Cheers,

Gabe Menezes.
London, England
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-03 01:40:56 UTC
Permalink
All are opinions. We are still groping. Science is also groping. One opinion
may be better than the other. Time will tell us. When we speak of
the "simplistic opinions of the Church", how well rooted are our opinions?
Could you mention wrong "opinions of the Church"?
The Church does not give a moral verdict without a previous scientific
investigation.

Christian truths have their own logic. They are substantiated in their
own way. Virginal conception of Jesus has its foundation in the Gospel
Tradition (cf.Lk 1:34f; Mt 1:18). The dogma of Trinity comes from Christian
Revelation. Ascension to heaven is the dogma of Resurrection of Jesus--Jesus
ascended to heaven, that is, he took part in the power of God. Jesus is God-
man. This is the realm of faith, of Christian Revelation. Science has its
limits. Let us avoid scientism...

What I am stating is jsut opinion. What the scientists are trying to find
is also opinion. Science has still to go more miles. Scientific analysis has
not come to an end. If "this issue is an open question that is still to be
resolved", then let us not come to the conclusion that scientifically
homosexuality is acceptable. What are the grounds? What prevails is that God
has created male and female (cf.Gn 1:26f). It is the process of pro-creation
that is in our human nature, in the natural order of creation. This is the
truth about Man... Science cannot change it.


--------Original Message -------
What Fr. Ivo is stating is just opinion. Currently
there is no definitive scientific evidence that
indicates that homo-sexuality is socio-cultural or is
endemic to a certain fraction of the human population.

Marlon
Nasci Caldeira
2005-05-03 01:41:25 UTC
Permalink
From: Santosh Helekar <chimbelcho at sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: [Goanet] Cafeteria Catholics (Reply to Santosh)
Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 15:20:18 -0700 (PDT)
If "marriage reveals the truth" of the true human
nature, then why are people who choose to remain
unmarried for life considered to be sick?
Who says that unmarried men are sick?
I am sorry. I made a typing error, and left out a
"NOT" from the above-quoted sentence of mine. My
"If "marriage reveals the truth" of the true human
nature, then why are people who choose to remain
unmarried for life NOT considered to be sick?"
I said this because Fr. Ivo uses this line of
reasoning to claim that homosexuality is a sickness.
Nasci:
Why should persons who choose to remain 'unmarried' be considered sick? They
have the choice and their free will to choose. "marriage reveals the truth'
in that male and female interact and populate and prolong the species, in
excercising their natural right. If a single male or female forgoes their
urge, for whatever reason, they are not sick! Of course not!

The homosexual groups deny that they are 'homosexuals' by choice; instead
they say they are 'born' that way, and that they can't help it. Unmarried
man choose to remain unmarried. They are not born that way. They have the
option of 'choice' any time.

But if say an unmarried man wants to marry 'You Santosh', (presuming that
you are male), then we have a real problem. Your family will also have to
deal with that. I,m sure that you will chase the 'bloke' away; after telling
him that he is sick and weird, and has to go get treated! Would't you do
that Santosh? Or how else would U deal with matters like this?

And in case U decide to 'go with him' and forgo your family, (presuming U R
married) would U consider this union as a "marriage'' or a "conjugal Union"
or a partnership for 'weird' sex?? Would U not seek treatment, for yourself,
in such an event?

Santosh:
But what Nasci has written in a series of posts in
this thread is quite entertaining. I hope he continues
to entertain us. I will try to do my best to encourage
him.
Nasci: I hope to continue to entertain you and enlighten you at the same
time! I will also 'Pray' to a Christian God, for your conversion to an
enlightened Christian Scientist. Santosh, I hear you are a good Scientist;
but I feel there is just that "little something" missing! It is called
"Faith in God".
Cheers,
Nasci Caldeira
Melbourne
Mervyn Lobo
2005-05-03 01:41:51 UTC
Permalink
The facts only reveal our human frailty. We are
sinners. We need God's
redemption. The bishops find it difficult to cope up
with the problem. It is also money racket.
Paedophilia is a crime. We have to learn the
measures that are to be taken in order to put our
own house in order.
God is great!
Fr. Ivo da C.Souza,
Let me try and make this clearer.
Paedophiles, masquerading as priests in the catholic
church, are secure in the knowledge that should they
be reported, the Vatican is not going to do anything.
The supposed authority on morals contends it does not
know how to deal with such problems in its ranks.

Mervyn3.0





______________________________________________________________________
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Santosh Helekar
2005-05-03 05:00:56 UTC
Permalink
--- "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
We cannot just dance at the tune of the American
Psychiatric Association.
Mere assertions and innuendo have no value in a real
discussion. The American Psychiatric Association is a
professional organization that issues recommendations
and guidelines for psychiatrists and mental health
professionals around the world, after thorough review
of all scholarly research in any given area. It
publishes a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual on
mental illness, which informs and guides the practice
of psychiatry all over the world.

It is unlikely that the Catholic Church and its
hierarchy know more about human psychology and mental
illness than the distinguished professionals who sit
on the expert panels of the American Psychiatric
Association. Almost all psychiatric and other mental
health organizations in other countries are in
agreement with the American Psychiatric Association on
the subject of homosexuality.

Cheers,

Santosh
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-04 03:00:40 UTC
Permalink
Dear Dr.Santosh,
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-04 03:05:31 UTC
Permalink
Our discussion so far has been regarding homosexuality, not about the norms
and policies of different dioceses in relation to the deviant priests. I leave
it to the competent authorities...

Ivo da C.Souza


--------Original Message -------
I am not too knowledgeable to discuss this issue from a theological,
sociological or from a medical perspective. Of course I could lagao bhathi
like some of the posts.
Mervyn Lobo
2005-05-01 07:37:08 UTC
Permalink
I have a quick answer: there should not be
"homosexual Catholic priests", but if there are,
as the media are publicizing, then homosexuality
does not cease to be "an aberration", "abnormal".
Fr. Ivo da C. Souza,
Here in N. America, its estimated that 4 out of every
1,000 priests are homosexual. Many of them joined the
priesthood because they did not want to disclose to
their family that they were gay. I used to go to a
church in Washington, D.C. that had a gay priest. I
have no problems with gay priest if they keep their
vows of celibacy.
Let the competent people investigate the causes and
help them, with love and compassion. Let us also
study why there is such a wild propaganda, which
will not help the sick priests nor the Church of
God. What are the background factors for such an
aberration? Can we do something for them? It is
important to save them...as much as poor human
efforts are concerned...
There is a bigger problem than gay priests in the R.C.
Church. The church also has known paedophiles who
still are priests. Every time parishioners report such
paedophiles to the church authorities, the authorities
keep mum or, in the worst case scenario, transfer the
priests to another parish. In other words, the
paedophiles have new kids to prey on.
It is our task, yours and mine!
Yes, I agree, it's both our tasks to keep the church
in order. Unfortunately, for the past 10 years, the
Vatican has been extremely slow in addressing the
problem of gays and paedophiles in its ranks.

Mervyn3.0



______________________________________________________________________
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-01 18:27:57 UTC
Permalink
Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being is complete in male and
female. Biologically, psychologically, spiritually, emotionally we experience
this truth based on human nature itself, not on "antiquated religious dogma".
Marriage reveals the truth of this tenet. Nobody can change the fact. When
there is an aberration in this light, we have to admit that it is an
aberration. The fact that some scientists have been "homosexuals" and yet
contributed to the progress of science, technology and society does not dilute
the fact nor legitimize it. There are alcoholics, who in fact consider
alcoholism a sickness, yet they have to struggle against this "disease" and
are contributing to the progress of the society--though we have to accept that
alcoholism hampers their human growth to a great extent. This comparison has
to be taken as a comparison only--namely, a sick person may be an intellectual
genius, yet he does not cease to be psychologically 'sick', if he is a
homosexual or an alcoholic...

Homosexuality is anti-society, anti-marriage, anti-family... There cannot
be "gay marriages", it is a contradiction in terms. Our anatomy vouches for
it. The family needs a father and a mother. Children and young people need a
Papa and a Mama, not two papas, or two mamas...
This is not "religious dogma", it is order of nature, which nobody can change.
The fact that homosexuality exists among leaders and intellectuals does not
change the natural order. It is an aberration, it is abnormality. Our society
is suffering already from the consequences of all kinds of aberrations, one of
these is homosexual, 'same-sex' union... Enough is enough...
Let us teach our young people the 'facts of life' in a correct way, let us
help those who have this craze, with love and compassion, without condemning
them, but rejecting homosexuality...

Ivo da C.Souza
jose colaco
2005-05-01 20:10:29 UTC
Permalink
From: "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
< Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being is complete in male and
female>
< Nobody can change the fact.>
< Our anatomy vouches for it>
< Let us teach our young people the 'facts of life' in a correct way>



Thank you Fr. Ivo for your excellent posts on the Cafeteria matter. However
the above is noted with some degree of surprise.

The following is NOT in support of any particular lifestyle - inherited,
imposed, learnt or chosen. It is to emphasise the point that blanket
statements are unwise - however well-intentioned they might be.

Before we aspire to teach our young people the 'facts of life' in a correct
way, we may wish to ascertain the 'facts of life'.

I wonder what scientific references there are to support the generalisation
that every "Human being is complete in male and female"

Are there NO exceptions?

If so...how many?
How many individuals are feminized by abuse (at a very young age) itself,
and How many have a genetic prediliction to developing it.

Furthermore, are ALL who look male, male wrt to the hormones and the effects
of the hormones?


please see:->


http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/001180.htm

Androgen insensitivity syndrome (AIS) is when a person has one X and one Y
sex chromosome (making them genetically male), but is resistant to androgens
(male hormones). As a result, the individual has some or all of the physical
characteristics of a woman, despite having the genetic makeup of a man.

The syndrome is divided into two main categories: complete and incomplete.
Complete AIS results in someone who looks outwardly female. In the
incomplete AIS syndrome, the degree of sexual ambiguity varies widely from
individual to individual.

Partial Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome

also known as:
PAIS
Reifenstein Syndrome
Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome, Partial
Gilbert-Dreyfus Syndrome
Incomplete Testicular Feminization
Lubs Syndrome
Rosewater Syndrome
Type I Familial Incomplete Male Pseudohermaphroditism


jc

PS: Our views on the abuse & the criminal coverup + silence by the Real
Cafeteria Catholics : -> at:

http://www.colaco.net/3/church-lurch.htm

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-01 20:10:56 UTC
Permalink
I do not deny the facts. I have affirmed that homosexuality is wrong. Yet the
priests have to be helped. The problem boils down to what I have said: Let us
do something for them...

Ivo da C.Souza


--------Original Message -------
Fr. Ivo da C. Souza,

Here in N. America, its estimated that 4 out of every
1,000 priests are homosexual. Many of them joined the
priesthood because they did not want to disclose to
their family that they were gay. I used to go to a
church in Washington, D.C. that had a gay priest. I
have no problems with gay priest if they keep their
vows of celibacy.

Mervyn3.0
Santosh Helekar
2005-05-02 05:15:03 UTC
Permalink
--- "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
Post by Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being is
complete in male and female. Biologically,
psychologically, spiritually, emotionally we
experience this truth based on human nature itself,
not on "antiquated religious dogma". Marriage reveals
the truth of this tenet. Nobody can change the fact.
The above post makes a lot of categorical assertions
without providing any scientific or sociological
justification to support them. It is very obvious that
this is a strongly held religious view, despite claims
to the contrary. Some of the assertions are not even
internally consistent within the same religious
doctrine. For instance, nobody would deny that
enforced celibacy is not consistent with human nature,
and yet its practice is regarded with such high esteem
by the adherents of this doctrine. If "marriage
reveals the truth" of the true human nature, then why
are people who choose to remain unmarried for life
considered to be sick?

In any case, I would like to emphatically state that
there is absolutely no scientific, clinical or
sociological basis for any of the assertions made in
the above post. Indeed, these assertions go against
the public service recommendations of all major
scientific and medical organizations, as well as
against the practices of most international
humanitarian agencies, including some religious ones.

This is indeed a clear example of how strict adherence
to religious dogma brings one in conflict with
science, as well as with humanitarian ethics developed
by painstaking scientific and sociological research.

I provide below some public service FAQs from the
American Psychological Association, which directly
refute the various claims made in the above-referenced
post.

http://www.apa.org/pubinfo/answers.html

IS HOMOSEXUALITY A MENTAL ILLNESS OR EMOTIONAL
PROBLEM?
No. Psychologists, psychiatrists and other mental
health professionals agree that homosexuality is not
an illness, mental disorder or an emotional problem.
Over 35 years of objective, well-designed scientific
research has shown that homosexuality, in and itself,
is not associated with mental disorders or emotional
or social problems. Homosexuality was once thought to
be a mental illness because mental health
professionals and society had biased information. In
the past the studies of gay, lesbian and bisexual
people involved only those in therapy, thus biasing
the resulting conclusions. When researchers examined
data about these people who were not in therapy, the
idea that homosexuality was a mental illness was
quickly found to be untrue.

In 1973 the American Psychiatric Association confirmed
the importance of the new, better designed research
and removed homosexuality from the official manual
that lists mental and emotional disorders. Two years
later, the American Psychological Association passed a
resolution supporting the removal. For more than 25
years, both associations have urged all mental health
professionals to help dispel the stigma of mental
illness that some people still associate with
homosexual orientation.

CAN THERAPY CHANGE SEXUAL ORIENTATION?
No. Even though most homosexuals live successful,
happy lives, some homosexual or bisexual people may
seek to change their sexual orientation through
therapy, sometimes pressured by the influence of
family members or religious groups to try and do so.
The reality is that homosexuality is not an illness.
It does not require treatment and is not changeable.

However, not all gay, lesbian, and bisexual people who
seek assistance from a mental health professional want
to change their sexual orientation. Gay, lesbian, and
bisexual people may seek psychological help with the
coming out process or for strategies to deal with
prejudice, but most go into therapy for the same
reasons and life issues that bring straight people to
mental health professionals.

CAN LESBIANS, GAY MEN, AND BISEXUALS BE GOOD PARENTS?
Yes. Studies comparing groups of children raised by
homosexual and by heterosexual parents find no
developmental differences between the two groups of
children in four critical areas: their intelligence,
psychological adjustment, social adjustment, and
popularity with friends. It is also important to
realize that a parent's sexual orientation does not
dictate his or her children's.

Another myth about homosexuality is the mistaken
belief that gay men have more of a tendency than
heterosexual men to sexually molest children. There is
no evidence to suggest that homosexuals are more
likely than heterosexuals to molest children.

WHY IS IT IMPORTANT FOR SOCIETY TO BE BETTER EDUCATED
ABOUT HOMOSEXUALITY?
Educating all people about sexual orientation and
homosexuality is likely to diminish anti-gay
prejudice. Accurate information about homosexuality is
especially important to young people who are first
discovering and seeking to understand their
sexuality?whether homosexual, bisexual, or
heterosexual. Fears that access to such information
will make more people gay have no validity?information
about homosexuality does not make someone gay or
straight.

Cheers,

Santosh
Mervyn Lobo
2005-05-02 05:16:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
I do not deny the facts. I have affirmed that
homosexuality is wrong. Yet the
priests have to be helped. The problem boils down to
what I have said: Let us do something for them...
Fr. Ivo da C.Souza,
Parishioners have been doing their level best to help
these priests. At first they were not reporting the
paedophiles to the civic authorities but, instead,
reporting them to the church authorities in the hopes
that the church would take the proper action.

Instead of doing the right thing, the church decided
not to take any action. They still follow this course
of action, and I am talking about at the highest level
of authority.

It's only after victims started suing the paedophiles
that the church authorities started to take notice.
They took notice only after some parishes had to sell
ALL their land and buildings in order to pay for the
damages. Here in Toronto, almost every other week,
there is a second collection for "the Bishops needs."
"The Bishops needs" is usually code for payments to
abuse victims. There used to be a time when the second
collection was to finance the missionaries. Now it is
used to finance those who have left the church.

So, in short, I agree with you, we need to do
something to help these priests. We could start with
the church admitting that it has a problem. Then it
has to weed out these paedophiles.

Mervyn3.0




______________________________________________________________________
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Nasci Caldeira
2005-05-02 05:17:43 UTC
Permalink
Hi all,

Well said, Fr. Ivo;
Santosh Helekar, please take note!
We as a society do not condemn these aberrations, but we do not accept these
as normal; hence the need to help these sick persons. This type of help
should not be construed as acceptance of something against the 'human
nature/order', but rather 'sympathetic, compassionate help' just as with
other illnesses.

It is the 'order of nature'; like Fr Ivo says; it's not antiquated religious
dogma; religion is only accepting the truth! For heaven's sake, Santosh, you
and scientists and agnostics like you have a lot to learn, in this field.
Santosh, I think you yourself is in dire need of neuro surgery; better this
way then banging your 'science only' saturated head on a rock. Science does
not and cannot disprove what Fr Ivo and countless others have said before.
Your education is seriously flawed!

Nasci Caldeira
Melbourne.
From: "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
Subject: [Goanet]Re: Cafeteria Catholics
Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 13:39:46 -0400
Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being is complete in male and
female. Biologically, psychologically, spiritually, emotionally we
experience
this truth based on human nature itself, not on "antiquated religious
dogma".
Marriage reveals the truth of this tenet. Nobody can change the fact. When
there is an aberration in this light, we have to admit that it is an
aberration. The fact that some scientists have been "homosexuals" and yet
contributed to the progress of science, technology and society does not
dilute
the fact nor legitimize it. There are alcoholics, who in fact consider
alcoholism a sickness, yet they have to struggle against this "disease" and
are contributing to the progress of the society--though we have to accept
that
alcoholism hampers their human growth to a great extent. This comparison
has
to be taken as a comparison only--namely, a sick person may be an
intellectual
genius, yet he does not cease to be psychologically 'sick', if he is a
homosexual or an alcoholic...
Homosexuality is anti-society, anti-marriage, anti-family... There cannot
be "gay marriages", it is a contradiction in terms. Our anatomy vouches for
it. The family needs a father and a mother. Children and young people need
a
Papa and a Mama, not two papas, or two mamas...
This is not "religious dogma", it is order of nature, which nobody can
change.
The fact that homosexuality exists among leaders and intellectuals does not
change the natural order. It is an aberration, it is abnormality. Our
society
is suffering already from the consequences of all kinds of aberrations, one
of
these is homosexual, 'same-sex' union... Enough is enough...
Let us teach our young people the 'facts of life' in a correct way, let us
help those who have this craze, with love and compassion, without
condemning
them, but rejecting homosexuality...
Ivo da C.Souza
Marlon Menezes
2005-05-02 10:35:02 UTC
Permalink
What Fr. Ivo is stating is just opinion. Currently
there is no definitive scientific evidence that
indicates that homo-sexuality is socio-cultural or is
endemic to a certain fraction of the human population.


The simplistic opinions of the church that has been
wrong on so many issues cannot be reliably relied upon
on an issue that requires scientific analysis. Hence
for now, this issue is an open question that is still
to be resolved - though some fundamentalists would
find the continuance of this ambiguity unacceptable.

Nasci has trivialized other religions such as hinduism
as being based on myths, but then went on to claim
that christian concepts such as the virgin birth, the
christian trinity (as opposed to the hindu version),
and Jesus's ascention to "heaven" were all factual.
Perhaps Nasci can do something for christianity that
no Pope before him has succeeded in doing - provide us
with the evidence! The problem with fundamentalists is
that their fuzzy minds seem to confuse their personal
beliefs and opinions as fact.

Marlon
Post by Nasci Caldeira
Hi all,
Well said, Fr. Ivo;
Santosh Helekar, please take note!
We as a society do not condemn these aberrations,
but we do not accept these
as normal; hence the need to help these sick
persons. This type of help
should not be construed as acceptance of something
against the 'human
nature/order', but rather 'sympathetic,
compassionate help' just as with
other illnesses.
It is the 'order of nature'; like Fr Ivo says; it's
not antiquated religious
dogma; religion is only accepting the truth! For
heaven's sake, Santosh, you
and scientists and agnostics like you have a lot to
learn, in this field.
Santosh, I think you yourself is in dire need of
neuro surgery; better this
way then banging your 'science only' saturated head
on a rock. Science does
not and cannot disprove what Fr Ivo and countless
others have said before.
Your education is seriously flawed!
Nasci Caldeira
Melbourne.
From: "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
Subject: [Goanet]Re: Cafeteria Catholics
Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 13:39:46 -0400
Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being
is complete in male and
female. Biologically, psychologically, spiritually,
emotionally we
experience
this truth based on human nature itself, not on
"antiquated religious
dogma".
gilbertlaw
2005-05-02 10:37:21 UTC
Permalink
Hi all,
Partial knowledge is dangerous.
But too much knowledge may be dangerous too!
My knowledge of homosexuality from a medical, psychological or humanist perspective in very limited.

My only input into this dialogue is to make two points:
1. What Fr. Ivo is describing are normal situations. What Dr. Colaco is describing are abnormal/ pathological/ medical situations.

2. Just because a rule cannot be applied in 100% of all (normal or abnormal) situations, does it mean we should not have rules/ norms / policies etc.? Simple examples seat belts, motorcycle helmets, vaccinations or screening tests etc
Regards
From: "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being is complete in male and
female. Nobody can change the fact. Our anatomy vouches for it.
Let us teach our young people the 'facts of life' in a correct way
Thank you Fr. Ivo for your excellent posts on the Cafeteria matter. However
the above is noted with some degree of surprise.
The following is NOT in support of any particular lifestyle - inherited,
imposed, learnt or chosen. It is to emphasise the point that blanket
statements are unwise - however well-intentioned they might be.
Before we aspire to teach our young people the 'facts of life' in a correct
way, we may wish to ascertain the 'facts of life'.
I wonder what scientific references there are to support the generalisation
that every "Human being is complete in male and female"
Are there NO exceptions?
If so...how many?
How many individuals are feminized by abuse (at a very young age) itself,
and How many have a genetic prediliction to developing it.
Furthermore, are ALL who look male, male wrt to the hormones and the effects
of the hormones?
Androgen insensitivity syndrome (AIS) is when a person has one X and one Y
sex chromosome (making them genetically male), but is resistant to androgens
(male hormones). As a result, the individual has some or all of the physical
characteristics of a woman, despite having the genetic makeup of a man.
The syndrome is divided into two main categories: complete and incomplete.
Complete AIS results in someone who looks outwardly female. In the
incomplete AIS syndrome, the degree of sexual ambiguity varies widely from
individual to individual.
PAIS
Reifenstein Syndrome
Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome, Partial
Gilbert-Dreyfus Syndrome
Incomplete Testicular Feminization
Lubs Syndrome
Rosewater Syndrome
Type I Familial Incomplete Male Pseudohermaphroditism
Santosh Helekar
2005-05-02 14:45:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by gilbertlaw
My only input into this dialogue is to make two
1. What Fr. Ivo is describing are normal situations.
What Dr. Colaco is describing are abnormal/
pathological/ medical situations.
Gilbert,

Do you agree with Fr. Ivo that homosexuality is a
sickness which needs to be treated?

Or do you agree with the recommendations of the
American Psychiatric Association, American
Psychological Association and other medical,
scientific and public welfare organizations that say
that it is not a sickness, and it cannot be treated?

Cheers,

Santosh
jose colaco
2005-05-02 20:20:28 UTC
Permalink
From: <gilbertlaw at adelphia.net>

<My knowledge of homosexuality from a medical, psychological or humanist
perspective in very limited.

My only input into this dialogue is to make two points:
1. What Fr. Ivo is describing are normal situations.? What Dr. Colaco is
describing are abnormal/ pathological/ medical situations.

2. Just because a rule cannot be applied in 100% of all (normal or abnormal)
situations, does it mean we should not have rules/ norms / policies etc.?
Simple examples seat belts, motorcycle helmets, vaccinations or screening
tests etc >


Earlier: "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>

<Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being is complete in male and
female. Nobody can change the fact.? Our anatomy vouches for it. Let us
teach our young people the 'facts of life' in a correct way>

===

Dear Gilbert,

This will be my final public contribution on this matter. I will be happy
continuing private off-list discussions on the topic.

I recommend that we pay close attention to Kevin Saldanha's statement:
"every biological population is made up of a bell curve of
individuals.....the 5% will be CONSIDERED deviants from that normal
population BUT ARE STILL VERY MUCH A PART OF A NATURAL BIOLOGICAL
POPULATION.

Please understand that I seriously contest Fr. Ivo's position that "Human
being is complete in male and female". I also have to think again about the
following from Fr. Ivo "Our society is suffering already from the
consequences of all kinds of aberrations, one of these is homosexual,
'same-sex' union... Enough is enough..." + "Children and young people need a
Papa and a Mama, not two papas, or two mamas..."



Here are some of my queries:

1. What consequences is society suferring from because of aberrations?

2. When homosexuals ask for "same-sex" union, WHAT is it that are they
asking for, & WHY?

3. What number of Children and young people in this world have ONLY one papa
or one mama?

4. Is the care of children with the Two Mamas any worse than with one mama?

5. Why are millions of children enslaved into child labour, child
prostitution, child marriages, begging ? Is it because of Two Mamas?

and finally .....these two queries

6. Just because the 'homosexuals" are different from us (like the blind,
deaf, mentally challenged, promiscuous, Down's, extremely brilliant,
extremely un-brilliant, unable to sing a verse, wheel chair bound, poor,
very wealthy etc ), should we be descriminating against their rights? Do we
NOT (after much struggle) provide Wheel-Chair access to the physically
disabled? Do we NOT adjustments for the Hearing Impaired and Bllind?

7. Is it normal to have CELIBACY imposed on an individual - as a requirement
to serve as a priest? If so...ON what NORMAL human or even Religious basis?



good wishes

jc

Please note that the above post is NOT an endorsement of the ABUSE which was
perpetrated by those Monsters, NOR of the actions of the higher Monsters who
just watched and kept quiet, NOR of the REAL Cafeteria Catholics who kept Oh
So Silent about this horrendous abuse by a minority of priests ......

The actions of ALL of the above brought untold suffering to a lot of people
.... including the vast number of priests who are GOOD

Hear Me!

_________________________________________________________________
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar ? get it now!
http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/
Nasci Caldeira
2005-05-02 20:21:07 UTC
Permalink
From: Santosh Helekar <chimbelcho at sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: [Goanet] Cafeteria Catholics
Date: Sun, 1 May 2005 16:09:17 -0700 (PDT)
"The above post makes a lot of categorical assertions
without providing any scientific or sociological
justification to support them. It is very obvious that
this is a strongly held religious view, despite claims
to the contrary."
Nasci's response: It is not only a 'religious view'; the majority in the
world supports the view; except scientific and satanic fundamentalists like
you!

Santosh:
" Some of the assertions are not even
internally consistent within the same religious
doctrine. For instance, nobody would deny that
enforced celibacy is not consistent with human nature,
and yet its practice is regarded with such high esteem
by the adherents of this doctrine."
Nasci's reply:
Ceibacy is enforced only on those who have willingly and knowingly become
priests, after going thru years and years of theological and other
tuition.(Personally I am in favour of the Church allowing those priests who
wish to marry, to marry; and for married men also to be able to be
priests.That way the natural urges of priests will be fulfilled, perhaps
without temptation towards homosexuality and or paedoplilia!) Besides,
celibacy is not a 'doctrine' per se; it is a practice; and inspite of all,
if a priest cannot remain celibate, then he has the option to leave the
priesthood, like a few priests have done. You see, there is no enforcement
like your satanic eyes see it.

Santosh:
If "marriage
reveals the truth" of the true human nature, then why
are people who choose to remain unmarried for life
considered to be sick?
Nasci:
Who says that unmarried men are sick? This is your perverted thought! Do not
equalise unmarried men with homosexuals! Your education is seriously
faulted!

Santosh:
"In any case, I would like to emphatically state that
there is absolutely no scientific, clinical or
sociological basis for any of the assertions made in
the above post. Indeed, these assertions go against
the public service recommendations of all major
scientific and medical organizations, as well as
against the practices of most international
humanitarian agencies, including some religious ones."
Nasci:
Scientific and medical organisations are they really competent to pronounce
judgement on sociological cum psyschiatric issues? Society has to rule on
that.
Have they investigated the fact that some or all homosexuals may also be
schizophrenic? and or may be really psycho form a very young age. They could
be sick from the womb. But they are sick.
Cheers,
Nasci Caldeira.
Melbourne.
Nasci Caldeira
2005-05-02 20:22:02 UTC
Permalink
Nasci's response:

Marlon,
Religion is always a matter of faith in what is taught and thought! It is
not imposed on anybody; if some one has no faith; then he is not a religious
person. It is not Physics/ Chemistry! Santosh's proofs are not required
here! Simple as that.

When I wrote about Hinduism earlier; I did not compare it to Christianity;
that's what you are trying to do in this post, and bringing in the
comparisons; those are your words, Marlon!

I discussed what I know of as Hinduism by itself; That it does not qualify
as a religion because it is casteist, racist and blasphemous; putting
animals and unbelievable characters and myths born out of 'ganza taking?
above the Human Being! In all other religions the doctrine and or faith is
based on Humans as prophets and or god; also in Bhudism; though they do not
believe in an external God; they do believe in that "God is in you, the
human person" and it is upto the person to 'realise' God!

The Christian beliefs in the Virgin Mary and The Holy Trinity are all based
on God the Father whom nobody knows and humans.( not animals and other
fictitious caharacters).

Hindus alone believe that some humans are above and superior to others
solely because of their birth; and they also blaspheme when they bring God
down to the level of cow, elephant and snakes etc. I am not saying this;
this is there for all to see and witness as hindu practices.

All the same, I do not condemn or dislike the Hindu, for that; I have a lot
of good hindu friends; What I object to is that they have no right to say
that we (Christians and or muslims, and Bhudists) were converted from a
"Hindu religion". To be born in India or lived in India does not mean that
we were Hindu religion followers; it is just that we were (H) Indu, Indians
and nothing more.

I hope I have been able to make myself clear, on my views and beliefs; OK?

I think it is time for you Marlon to go and take your Christian religious
vows again and to start with, 'go for a general Reconciliation' to the
confessional; and you will be saved! I do not like to see you going to Hell,
just because Santosh is telling you otherwise. It is never too late.

I am saying this to you, because I do not have to be a Pope or a Goan Bamon
to help you save yourself, and to try and spread the "Good News" as in the
Gospels. "I am the way, the truth and the Life"; You should believe again in
all this! Better than other false gods! Amen. No bad wishes, Marlon. Just
good friendly advise!

Cheers!
Nasci Caldeira
Melbourne.
From: Marlon Menezes <marlon at goacom.co >Reply-To: goanet at goanet.org
To: goanet at goanet.org
Subject: RE: [Goanet]Re: Cafeteria Catholics
Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 01:22:24 -0700 (PDT)
What Fr. Ivo is stating is just opinion. Currently
there is no definitive scientific evidence that
indicates that homo-sexuality is socio-cultural or is
endemic to a certain fraction of the human population.
The simplistic opinions of the church that has been
wrong on so many issues cannot be reliably relied upon
on an issue that requires scientific analysis. Hence
for now, this issue is an open question that is still
to be resolved - though some fundamentalists would
find the continuance of this ambiguity unacceptable.
Nasci has trivialized other religions such as hinduism
as being based on myths, but then went on to claim
that christian concepts such as the virgin birth, the
christian trinity (as opposed to the hindu version),
and Jesus's ascention to "heaven" were all factual.
Perhaps Nasci can do something for christianity that
no Pope before him has succeeded in doing - provide us
with the evidence! The problem with fundamentalists is
that their fuzzy minds seem to confuse their personal
beliefs and opinions as fact.
Marlon
Post by Nasci Caldeira
Hi all,
Well said, Fr. Ivo;
Santosh Helekar, please take note!
We as a society do not condemn these aberrations,
but we do not accept these
as normal; hence the need to help these sick
persons. This type of help
should not be construed as acceptance of something
against the 'human
nature/order', but rather 'sympathetic,
compassionate help' just as with
other illnesses.
It is the 'order of nature'; like Fr Ivo says; it's
not antiquated religious
dogma; religion is only accepting the truth! For
heaven's sake, Santosh, you
and scientists and agnostics like you have a lot to
learn, in this field.
Santosh, I think you yourself is in dire need of
neuro surgery; better this
way then banging your 'science only' saturated head
on a rock. Science does
not and cannot disprove what Fr Ivo and countless
others have said before.
Your education is seriously flawed!
Nasci Caldeira
Melbourne.
From: "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
Subject: [Goanet]Re: Cafeteria Catholics
Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 13:39:46 -0400
Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being
is complete in male and
female. Biologically, psychologically, spiritually,
emotionally we
experience
this truth based on human nature itself, not on
"antiquated religious
dogma".
Nasci Caldeira
2005-05-02 20:22:38 UTC
Permalink
Santosh!
If it cannot be treated, it cannot; it is inherited ; the person is born
with it; But does these things make it normal?? it remains abnormal like an
'autistic' child is abnormal; some how we have to treat or just cope with
this. More importantly, Santosh; if your Science cannot cure; who knows God
can and will, if u have enough faith! Try it. Start believing in God.
Nasci Caldeira
Melbourne.
From: Santosh Helekar <chimbelcho at sbcglobal.net>
Post by gilbertlaw
My only input into this dialogue is to make two
1. What Fr. Ivo is describing are normal situations.
What Dr. Colaco is describing are abnormal/
pathological/ medical situations.
Gilbert,
Do you agree with Fr. Ivo that homosexuality is a
sickness which needs to be treated?
Or do you agree with the recommendations of the
American Psychiatric Association, American
Psychological Association and other medical,
scientific and public welfare organizations that say
that it is not a sickness, and it cannot be treated?
Santosh Helekar
2005-05-02 23:50:27 UTC
Permalink
If "marriage reveals the truth" of the true human
nature, then why are people who choose to remain
unmarried for life considered to be sick?
Who says that unmarried men are sick?
I am sorry. I made a typing error, and left out a
"NOT" from the above-quoted sentence of mine. My
statement should have read:

"If "marriage reveals the truth" of the true human
nature, then why are people who choose to remain
unmarried for life NOT considered to be sick?"

I said this because Fr. Ivo uses this line of
reasoning to claim that homosexuality is a sickness.

But what Nasci has written in a series of posts in
this thread is quite entertaining. I hope he continues
to entertain us. I will try to do my best to encourage
him.

Cheers,

Santosh
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-03 01:05:03 UTC
Permalink
Dr.Santosh Helekar asks: If "marriage reveals the truth" of the true human
nature, then why are people who choose to remain unmarried for life considered
to be sick?

People choose to remain unmarried for different reasons, for example for the
love of science, of profession, teaching, religious reasons (celibacy for the
sake of the Kingdom of God and for a better commitment to the people). When
this is a deliberate choice, people who choose to remain unmarried for life
are not considered to be sick.

Yet, marriage reveals that man and woman complete themselves in love and in
family. "Gay marriages" are not normal. This is the truth about Man. Science
cannot answer all the questions. God's Revelation comes to our rescue.

Ivo da C.Souza



--------Original Message -------
--- "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
Post by Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
Homosexuality is against human nature. Human being is
complete in male and female. Biologically,
psychologically, spiritually, emotionally we
experience this truth based on human nature itself,
not on "antiquated religious dogma". Marriage reveals
the truth of this tenet. Nobody can change the fact.
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-03 01:06:25 UTC
Permalink
The facts only reveal our human frailty. We are sinners. We need God's
redemption. The bishops find it difficult to cope up with the problem. It is
also money racket. Paedophilia is a crime. We have to learn the measures that
are to be taken in order to put our own house in order.
God is great!

Ivo da C.Souza

Fr. Ivo da C.Souza,

Parishioners have been doing their level best to help
these priests. At first they were not reporting the
paedophiles to the civic authorities but, instead,
reporting them to the church authorities in the hopes
that the church would take the proper action.

Mervyn3.0
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-03 01:40:03 UTC
Permalink
If homosexuality cannot be treated and healed, yet it has to be taken as such,
surely not as a normal condition. The homosexual has to be understood with
love and compassion, but not be considered as normal like all others. He needs
help, his case has to be investigated with care. There are different kinds of
homosexuality and several etiological factors. This has to be taken into
account. We cannot just dance at the tune of the American Psychiatric
Association. In a lighter vein, I would say: We have to avoid pan-
americanism...

Ivo da C.Souza


--------Original Message -------
Post by gilbertlaw
My only input into this dialogue is to make two
1. What Fr. Ivo is describing are normal situations.
What Dr. Colaco is describing are abnormal/
pathological/ medical situations.
Gilbert,

Do you agree with Fr. Ivo that homosexuality is a
sickness which needs to be treated?

Or do you agree with the recommendations of the
American Psychiatric Association, American
Psychological Association and other medical,
scientific and public welfare organizations that say
that it is not a sickness, and it cannot be treated?

Cheers,

Santosh
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-03 01:40:29 UTC
Permalink
We do not find fault with the homosexuals ("gay"), but surely with
homosexuality. We have to help them. They will surely create a new environemnt
for our youth and will influence them. Doors will be opened to our children to
do what they like. Surely we do not want our children to behave in this
manner. We do not want our society to go in this direction. We can be
sensitive to them, but try to do something for them. An alcoholic should try
all the means. We cannot say that because the father was an alcoholic, the son
also has to be an alcoholic. He has to try all the means not to become
alcoholic. What can the homosexual do? We want kill the homosexuals, but also
will not allow the society to become society of homosexuals...

Ivo da C.Souza


--------Original Message -------
I find it difficult to fault Homosexuals and gays, as long as they do
not impose their sexuality on others. This is something we have to
accommodate and not be insensitive to. Any family can have offspring
that turn out this way. What would the opinion of our Conservatives on
hermaphrodites be? Kill them off?

Cheers,

Gabe Menezes.
London, England
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-03 01:40:56 UTC
Permalink
All are opinions. We are still groping. Science is also groping. One opinion
may be better than the other. Time will tell us. When we speak of
the "simplistic opinions of the Church", how well rooted are our opinions?
Could you mention wrong "opinions of the Church"?
The Church does not give a moral verdict without a previous scientific
investigation.

Christian truths have their own logic. They are substantiated in their
own way. Virginal conception of Jesus has its foundation in the Gospel
Tradition (cf.Lk 1:34f; Mt 1:18). The dogma of Trinity comes from Christian
Revelation. Ascension to heaven is the dogma of Resurrection of Jesus--Jesus
ascended to heaven, that is, he took part in the power of God. Jesus is God-
man. This is the realm of faith, of Christian Revelation. Science has its
limits. Let us avoid scientism...

What I am stating is jsut opinion. What the scientists are trying to find
is also opinion. Science has still to go more miles. Scientific analysis has
not come to an end. If "this issue is an open question that is still to be
resolved", then let us not come to the conclusion that scientifically
homosexuality is acceptable. What are the grounds? What prevails is that God
has created male and female (cf.Gn 1:26f). It is the process of pro-creation
that is in our human nature, in the natural order of creation. This is the
truth about Man... Science cannot change it.


--------Original Message -------
What Fr. Ivo is stating is just opinion. Currently
there is no definitive scientific evidence that
indicates that homo-sexuality is socio-cultural or is
endemic to a certain fraction of the human population.

Marlon
Nasci Caldeira
2005-05-03 01:41:25 UTC
Permalink
From: Santosh Helekar <chimbelcho at sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: [Goanet] Cafeteria Catholics (Reply to Santosh)
Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 15:20:18 -0700 (PDT)
If "marriage reveals the truth" of the true human
nature, then why are people who choose to remain
unmarried for life considered to be sick?
Who says that unmarried men are sick?
I am sorry. I made a typing error, and left out a
"NOT" from the above-quoted sentence of mine. My
"If "marriage reveals the truth" of the true human
nature, then why are people who choose to remain
unmarried for life NOT considered to be sick?"
I said this because Fr. Ivo uses this line of
reasoning to claim that homosexuality is a sickness.
Nasci:
Why should persons who choose to remain 'unmarried' be considered sick? They
have the choice and their free will to choose. "marriage reveals the truth'
in that male and female interact and populate and prolong the species, in
excercising their natural right. If a single male or female forgoes their
urge, for whatever reason, they are not sick! Of course not!

The homosexual groups deny that they are 'homosexuals' by choice; instead
they say they are 'born' that way, and that they can't help it. Unmarried
man choose to remain unmarried. They are not born that way. They have the
option of 'choice' any time.

But if say an unmarried man wants to marry 'You Santosh', (presuming that
you are male), then we have a real problem. Your family will also have to
deal with that. I,m sure that you will chase the 'bloke' away; after telling
him that he is sick and weird, and has to go get treated! Would't you do
that Santosh? Or how else would U deal with matters like this?

And in case U decide to 'go with him' and forgo your family, (presuming U R
married) would U consider this union as a "marriage'' or a "conjugal Union"
or a partnership for 'weird' sex?? Would U not seek treatment, for yourself,
in such an event?

Santosh:
But what Nasci has written in a series of posts in
this thread is quite entertaining. I hope he continues
to entertain us. I will try to do my best to encourage
him.
Nasci: I hope to continue to entertain you and enlighten you at the same
time! I will also 'Pray' to a Christian God, for your conversion to an
enlightened Christian Scientist. Santosh, I hear you are a good Scientist;
but I feel there is just that "little something" missing! It is called
"Faith in God".
Cheers,
Nasci Caldeira
Melbourne
Mervyn Lobo
2005-05-03 01:41:51 UTC
Permalink
The facts only reveal our human frailty. We are
sinners. We need God's
redemption. The bishops find it difficult to cope up
with the problem. It is also money racket.
Paedophilia is a crime. We have to learn the
measures that are to be taken in order to put our
own house in order.
God is great!
Fr. Ivo da C.Souza,
Let me try and make this clearer.
Paedophiles, masquerading as priests in the catholic
church, are secure in the knowledge that should they
be reported, the Vatican is not going to do anything.
The supposed authority on morals contends it does not
know how to deal with such problems in its ranks.

Mervyn3.0





______________________________________________________________________
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Santosh Helekar
2005-05-03 05:00:56 UTC
Permalink
--- "Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza" <icsouza at sancharnet.in>
We cannot just dance at the tune of the American
Psychiatric Association.
Mere assertions and innuendo have no value in a real
discussion. The American Psychiatric Association is a
professional organization that issues recommendations
and guidelines for psychiatrists and mental health
professionals around the world, after thorough review
of all scholarly research in any given area. It
publishes a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual on
mental illness, which informs and guides the practice
of psychiatry all over the world.

It is unlikely that the Catholic Church and its
hierarchy know more about human psychology and mental
illness than the distinguished professionals who sit
on the expert panels of the American Psychiatric
Association. Almost all psychiatric and other mental
health organizations in other countries are in
agreement with the American Psychiatric Association on
the subject of homosexuality.

Cheers,

Santosh
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-04 03:00:40 UTC
Permalink
Dear Dr.Santosh,
Fr. Ivo Da C. Souza
2005-05-04 03:05:31 UTC
Permalink
Our discussion so far has been regarding homosexuality, not about the norms
and policies of different dioceses in relation to the deviant priests. I leave
it to the competent authorities...

Ivo da C.Souza


--------Original Message -------
I am not too knowledgeable to discuss this issue from a theological,
sociological or from a medical perspective. Of course I could lagao bhathi
like some of the posts.

Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...