Bigot and Its Definition

I've noticed nowadays that so many people throw the word "bigot" around so often to the point that when an actual act of bigotry has been done, people question if the person is exaggerating the truth.

So here I am! Trying to fix up this problem of the word "bigotry" being used (even though most of humanity will probably not listen to me...). But for those of you who hear, please stay and listen!:

Bigotry, by definition, means:

A person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions. (Google)

A person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance. (Mirriam-Webster Dictionary)

So, the real definition of what makes a bigot a bigot is the fact that he/she is intolerant of others' viewpoints or otherwise hates and is very, very intolerant towards a particular group. So what many people call out as "bigotry" isn't really "bigotry". What the people's viewpoint of the word is this:

Bigotry means anyone who disagrees with this particular opinion.

That has clearly strayed away from the true meaning of it.

Take me in two different lights for example:

I am Ximena, and I am against gay marriage. (Opinion)

I am Ximena, and I am for gay marriage. (Opinion)

Now let's see both of me in the real definition of bigotry:

I am Ximena, and I am against gay marriage and I will never tolerate gays. I f***ing hate them! They are all going to hell and I will never help a gay no matter what! (Bigoted version)

I am Ximena, and I am for gay marriage and I will not tolerate the opinion of those who disagree with me. Their opinions are so f***ed up. They say I'm going to hell for promoting love?! MWAHAHAHA I'm going to show them what it means to be hated. (Bigoted version)

In both versions, both are examples of bigots. Both can transform into acts of bigotry.

Granted, there are cases of rebellion just to prove your loyalty to your opinion nevertheless. Like when Arizona said it was OK to refuse gays service and somebody decided to protest against that by putting up a sign saying "We hold the right to refuse service to legislators." (I agreed with them! I don't care that I'm against gay marriage, I'd still serve a gay couple just like I serve everybody else.) Or when a gay couple walks into a Catholic Church and asks to be married yet the priest says "No" because of his religious beliefs (I also agree with this because of my own personal beliefs).

These are examples of non-bigoted ways of proving that you are devoted to your opinion. Because having an opinion doesn't mean you are bigoted. What you do with your opinion can transform you from a person with an opinion to a person filled with hatred.

I've met bigoted people from both sides of this spectrum. One is so devoted to her own opinion that gay marriage is OK to the point she became completely intolerant of another's viewpoint and wanted to do all sorts of, ah, hateful things towards others who disagreed with her. On the other hand, I know another person who is completely against gay marriage and is so against gays to the point she believes all of them are going to hell. And she refuses to listen to my viewpoint that not all gays go to hell, just like not all straights go to heaven, and she refuses to even speak with a gay. She'd rather they all suffer in hell.

I have seen bigotry and I have seen opinions. Learn the difference between both and then we can all learn to listen to each other's opinions better. (But if there's actual bigotry going on, then we have the right to react immediately! But, please, learn the difference first before launching out the word "bigot".)

All right, thanks for reading and have a great day!

God bless,

Ximena

What Would the Catholic Church say about Asexual Marriage?

It is a common question of Catholic asexuals (and even some non-Catholic asexuals) to ask: "Well, what would the Catholic Church say about asexual marriage? But in reality, it's pretty much already set about asexual marriage, although you have to study Catholic Church teachings in order to see that.

Let me explain:

The Catechism of the Catholic Church itself says that one must willing to procreate, and love must be present in the marriage. If two people were forced into a marriage by their parents, they have the right to annul their marriage because this makes their marriage invalid. If the couple refuses to procreate, the marriage is invalid immediately.

In other words, since most asexuals in an asexual marriage refuse to procreate, then the marriage is invalid in the Catholic Church's eyes. So the Church will most likely say "No" to an asexual marriage unless they write a letter to their local Bishop/priest (whichever the Catholic Church decides to consider appropriate) promising to procreate. This does not mean the couple will be forced to have constant sex, but rather means that they will be willing to answer God's Call to procreate. The Catholic Church doesn't give a set of rules saying "You must have sex daily/weekly", but rather says to do so in order to procreate and nothing more.

Now, no matter what, the Catholic Church will always consider a marriage between two asexual men or two asexual women an invalid marriage. Because the Catholic Church says that the act of homosexuality (not the desire, but the act) is a sin. And even if they promised to not have sex, the Church will still treat it as they would treat gay marriage: that it must not be permitted under any circumstances whatsoever. So a marriage between two asexual men or two asexual women will always be considered invalid in the Church's eyes.

Now, when you read about the Catholic Church, you see that the Catholic Church will permit a heterosexual marriage when one can not procreate for medical reasons, because this is not willfully done. However, the Church still asks them to either devote their lives to working for God or for them to adopt kids to fulfill this loss of procreation. In this type of case, asexuals can also marry as well. But they must be willing to serve God or to otherwise adopt children to fulfill the lack of procreation.

But what about when an asexual and a sexual person marry one another? The same rules apply. However, I must state a few things:

I have read about a few marriages/relationships between asexuals and allosexuals (aka sexuals), and the asexual person has permitted the allosexual person to have sex outside of wedlock/relationship. Now, no matter what, the Catholic Church disbelieves in sex outside of wedlock. So this type of issue will always be invalid. This type of unfaithfulness will always make a marriage invalid in the Catholic Church's eyes, and the Church will be willing to annul the marriage because of the issue of one breaking the wedding vows by being in another sexual relationship, the other breaking the wedding vows by refusing the act of procreation.

Another issue the Catholic Church will be against is the act of masturbating in replacement of procreating. However, if the asexual still procreates regularly with his/her spouse, the Church will not consider the marriage invalid. It is when the asexual person completely refuses procreation and instead uses masturbating as a replacement that it will be considered an invalid marriage. But if the asexual person simply masturbates in his/her free time while complying with his/her marriage vows? Well, no doubt, the Catholic Church considers masturbating a sin (under all circumstances, no matter the sexual orientation of the person), but masturbating does not make a marriage invalid. What makes a marriage invalid in the Catholic Church is failure of keeping the marriage vows made or failure of compliance with Catholic Church teachings (e.g. A mixed marriage where one or both parents refuse to raise the children Catholic).

So, there you have it! I have used what I have studied of Catholic Church teachings to speak about asexual marriage, all using Catholic resources such as the Catechism of the Catholic Church's teachings and applying it to this. The only thing which is mine is the idea of a Bishop or priest having to approve the marriage, which I included because the Catholic Church already does this with mixed marriages. Why wouldn't they do something very similar  with asexual marriages if some asexuals are willing to comply with procreation? I do not believe the Catholic Church would be cruel enough to say "No" to all asexual marriages, only certain ones.

Anyway, you've seen me apply my Theological mind with sexual orientation (two of my most favorite topics!). I hope this clears up some misunderstandings and helps you all in your journeys!

God bless,

Ximena