Quote Originally Posted by BrotherBrian View Post
Hi Columcille,

I'm new here, but wanted to ask you, what term would you find acceptable for someone who was celibate, Christian, and yet never had any sexual attraction to members of the opposite gender, and always have had sexual attraction exclusively to members of the same gender? Thanks for your thoughts!
To answer your question, I would not call them anything but what you just described. Celibate and Christian. The deeper aspects of our iden***y is more than just our fleshly bodies. Better the person not reflect on "orientation" and focus more on practicing relational aspects and virtues with and toward the Lord.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p3s1c1a7.htm

I think the above link describes a little about the human and divine virtues. Cardinal and theological virtues. Prudence, Justice, For***ude, and Temperance along with Faith, Hope, and Charity (love of an agape sort).

Trinity,
I've seen the video of the lesbians going into a Christian church and throwing out condoms and yelling Jesus is Gay and kissing. There was even one caught on camera of a ****sexual actually hitting a lady who was a Christian. I have not seen the violence you are suggestion by mainstream Christian groups. Even when there are rougue professing Christians, the Christian churches in America will state their condemnation of such acts. I have not condoned any verbal or physical abuse of the ****sexual. I think because my position shows for***ude, that you mistake that to be something of a vice. You stated the following Trinity:
According to your cons***ution the state and religion should be separate
There is no cons***utional "seperation of Church and State." The United States Cons***ution does not endorse any religion, but does not say to the politicians who are elected and have in their campaign maintained their religious integrity to keep their moral views as held by their religion to sit at the door when they sit down to vote what is before them or to be silent when they is presenting their case before the rest of the Congress. I think it rather an unfair advantage of the Christian to always have to compromise his integrity when he become a politican, but the other folks to advance their own cause. After so much expecting the conservative to give up so much, there comes a time that the conservative has nothing left, and so they must redefine conservativism. You can replace "conservative" and "conservativism" and replace it with whatever you want... compromise of this nature that seeks to moralize the once immoral is a heresy that God does not take lightly, and I sincerely hope you are not part of the same address to the church of Laodicea or of Sardis.