Why are catholics against pride month?

catholics believe that god wants people to have heterosexual marriages for the purpose of raising children OR practice chastity. both lifelong chastity and gay sex are violations of the natural law of procreation so i don't understand why catholics think chastity is good but gay sex is bad. catholics decided to reject natural law and replace it with what exactly?

Attached: Speaker-designate_Marco_Rubio_with_a_blank_book_titled_100_Innovative_Ideas_For_Florida's_Future.jpg (1780x1488, 1.46M)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=k8H2f088vDs
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

wtf is natural law

If you are okay with sodomy and proud of it for some reason, you do you. Weird thing to be proud of. Do you have a problem that they aren’t actively celebrating your sex life? Seems pretty self-centered frankly. Not everything is about you.

men are men, women are women, and faggots bring physical and mental disease to the community. thats pretty much all.

i'm not okay with sodomy at all. i'm a stoic and i follow natural law which dictates that sex is for procreation and gay sex does not lead to procreation so even if gays consider it pleasurable it's still a violation of nature. from a natural law point of view however i don't see how gay sex is worse than voluntary chastity as the end result is no children.

Attached: 1391634669677.jpg (719x536, 132.96K)

yes but more importantly every person is capable of understanding natural law except for maybe actual retards. natural law isn't the commandment of gods it's an abstraction that we access because the gods work according to rationalistic behavior.

Attached: 1545219495550-IMG_8202.jpg (1241x1204, 351.63K)

A Dominican priest explains the Catholic position, and I agree.

youtube.com/watch?v=k8H2f088vDs

Attached: hqdefault-2.jpg (336x188, 24.57K)

Failure to fulfill one’s biological directives is unfortunate, but at least it doesn’t make a mockery of them like sodomy does. I would say abstaining from sex or brining oneself to reproduce even if not necessarily enjoying it is better. Your homie Marcus Aurelius just didn’t really care for sex in the first place, but that didn’t stop him.

nature itself is natural law. but some faggots heard that male hyennas buttfuck eachother from time to time so now being a shit eating faggot is considered natural. communities that follow human natural law will live like humans, and communities that dont will live life like male hyennas buttfucking one another. thats how it goes, choose your path wisely.

I will procreate after the Vaxxtard die off.

Attached: false_dichotomy_2x.png (626x588, 59.92K)

To be fair, female hyenas essentially have penises, and hyenas are not known for their understanding of anatomy or understanding of anything for that matter. Could be an honest mistake.

You are supposed to marry young, and be monogamous. Catholicism is all about family. The imagery is literally everywhere in ritual. God the father, God the son, and Mary Mother of God. This lines up with the best way of rearing children.

I’m assuming you are calling for procreation with a variety of women, like the R-Select nigs?

it's gay shit

did I say hyennas? I was thinking about lions. sorry, my mistake.

Because fags are disgusting child molesting disease carriers.
Hell, I'm not even Catholic. I'm an atheists and I hate fags.
Why do fags believe Christians are the only people who think they're disgusting prolapsed pieces of shit?

this video just says don't hate the sinner but the sin. it does not explain why a sexless life is somehow good. clearly faggotry is harmful to children but how is encouraging children to grow up and NEVER have sex for any reason not also harmful to children? you're depriving those children from the joy of being parents. you're depriving those children from actually growing up to be adults. i'm a volcel and i do not see myself as an adult as i am not a parent and i'm not responsible for anyone else's wellbeing. be fruitful and multiply is following natural law. protecting the existence of sexless clergy is not following natural law so how is that somehow better than faggotry?

Attached: 1637749616801.jpg (391x326, 18.12K)

>I would say abstaining from sex or brining oneself to reproduce even if not necessarily enjoying it is better. Your homie Marcus Aurelius just didn’t really care for sex in the first place, but that didn’t stop him.
yes exactly. he wasn't driven by sex but he recognized that natural law requires procreation. catholic priests and nuns can't do that so why is that not a violation of natural law the way faggotry is?

Attached: A0004582_0.jpg (1200x1600, 140.11K)

What are you talking about? Most Catholics today are pretty liberal on doctrine and are in favor of homosexuals.

Attached: Catholicism.jpg (1280x720, 220.29K)

>Why do fags believe Christians are the only people who think they're disgusting prolapsed pieces of shit?
i specified catholics because they believe in priestly celibacy which is a violation of nature. sex is not inherently bad.

Attached: ariadne_hi_res.jpg (299x432, 23.73K)

Protestantism, since it has eliminated asceticism and its central point, the meritoriousness of celibacy, has already given up the inmost kernel of Christianity, and so far is to be regarded as a falling away from it. This has become apparent in our own day by the gradual transition of Protestantism into shallow rationalism, which ultimately degenerates into the doctrine of a loving father, who has made the world, in order that things may go on very pleasantly in it (in which case, then, he must certainly have failed), and who, if one only conforms to his will in certain respects, will also afterwards provide a still more beautiful world (with regard to which it is only a pity that it has such a fatal entrance).

That may be a good religion for comfortable, married, and enlightened Protestant pastors; but it is no Christianity. Christianity is the doctrine of the deep guilt of the human race through its existence alone, and the longing of the heart for deliverance from it, which, however, can only be attained by the greatest sacrifices and by the denial of one's own self, thus by an entire reversal of human nature.

Luther may have been perfectly right from the practical point of view, i.e., with reference to the Church scandal of his time, which he wished to remove, but not so from the theoretical point of view. The more sublime a doctrine is, the more it is exposed to abuse at the hands of human nature, which, on the whole, is of a low and evil disposition: hence the abuses of Catholicism are so much more numerous and so much greater than those of Protestantism.

In religions, as in philosophy, optimism is a fundamental error which obstructs the path of all truth. From all this it seems to me that Catholicism is a shamefully abused, but Protestantism a degenerate Christianity; thus, that Christianity in general has met the fate which befalls all that is noble, sublime, and great whenever it has to dwell among men.

A homosexual sexual act is a behavior not an identity, nobody is saying anyone is compelled to have a sexless life.

Pride parades are just an excuse for fags to be nasty in front of little children. I can't believe people fell for it for so long.

Attached: NYC-Pride-March_Photo-by-Christopher-Gagliardi-4-1024x683.jpg (1024x683, 161.52K)

>the meritoriousness of celibacy,
why is celibacy always a good? maybe it's better than being a sex addict though but it's still a violation of natural law.
>Christianity is the doctrine of the deep guilt of the human race through its existence alone, and the longing of the heart for deliverance from it, which, however, can only be attained by the greatest sacrifices and by the denial of one's own self, thus by an entire reversal of human nature.
exactly. christianity is fundamentally opposed to natural law and so that's why celibacy has to be protected.

Attached: b1sCP3Zl.jpg (460x640, 99.78K)

Priests’ bride is “the Church” and nuns are “brides of Christ”. I agree that having clergy be celibate is dumb and don’t find this reasoning compelling either.

>nobody is saying anyone is compelled to have a sexless life.
yes they are because the radtrad catholics who oppose pride month are perfectly happy with the existence of priestly celibacy. they literally do not see how in BOTH instances faggotry and celibacy, if everyone does it, leads to the extinction of humans.

Attached: bari-2015-2016-nike-kits-8.jpg (990x628, 216.73K)

especially since people that espouse that are firmly against polygamy. like how can christ be married to millions of nuns at the same time? it seems like priestly celibacy is just defended just because it's traditional, not for any rational reason.

Attached: bgiSKOhl.jpg (472x640, 96.54K)

All regular people everywhere are against pride and pride month.
ALL.
Basically brain waves read like seeing an infected maggot pile when they see homosexual activity between men.
That's what's up.
And we've had quite enough of you.

Attached: NotBadYesBadRoofAccessPanel.jpg (700x581, 91.23K)

>And we've had quite enough of you.
what i've had enough of is catholics going after faggots while also condoning the practice of letting the genes of the best and brightest die off through celibacy. i have a more of a reason to be against faggotry than catholics do.

Attached: bKzf2bCl.jpg (460x640, 96.16K)