Talk:DignityUSA

This article was nominated for deletion on 17 November 2013 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

Christianity: Catholicism Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Catholic Church portal This article is supported by WikiProject Catholicism (assessed as Low-importance).

LGBTQ+ studies

This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies articles

Organizations

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 August 2020 and 10 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Shellie4.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:31, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

sister org

There's probably content enough for an article about Dignity Canada (that's a note to self or anyone who beats me to it.) — coel acan — 00:28, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

View

I don't dispute the basic facts of the article. However, I would like to point out that the Catholic Church, in my understanding and in teachings I have seen, makes a clear dsictinction between homosexual orientation (almost certainly not a choice and therefore not a sin) and homosexual actions (which the Church deems sinful). The Church teaches, clearly, that all human beings are children of God, deserving of love and respect, and with an essential, innate human dignity. The Churh follows Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ taught love. He also taught clearly against sin, but always within a context of love (as I understand Him). I am a Catholic and my dad is a Catholic priest (formerly Episcopailan - he was married well before he converted). I do not see anything factual in the article, per se, with which I necessarily disagree. The tone of it, however, strikes me as unloving and harsh. One person's view. Take care. Rmcghee 15:28, 14 August 2007 (UTC)RMcGhee 8/14/07[reply]

History

I removed the following sentence from the second graf of the History section: It is important to note that "Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual Catholic" is known as oxymoron, because a Catholic by definition does not participate in heresies against the Church. Besides the POVishness, the assertion struck me as possibly being a misleading simplification of how the RCC actually defines the status of non-obedient Catholics, gay or otherwise. Throbert McGee 06:23, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

None of this "in their own words" nonsense

Please learn how encyclopedia entries are to be written. They describe how things actually exist (objective fact), not how certain people claim they exist (subjective opinion). Introducing the group "in their own words" introduces obvious bias and is obviously unprofessional (and suggests that the author of that paragraph is himself a member of the group).

Reflecting on what someone decided to quote from them (without citation, too): Calling them a political activist group would be fine, because that is what they are; quoting their claim to "be a group that strives for justice" (or whatever) is not, because granting marriage legalities and adoption privileges to same-sex couples, etc., is in fact (or "very well may be") contrary to justice (cf. "Considerations Regarding Proposals To Give Legal Recognition To Unions Between Homosexual Persons" from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, a teaching body of the Catholic Church). My main point here is that there is no consensus within Wikipedia of what "justice" here means or is. The article itself contains no summary of justice preceding the statement, so it's also unprofessional (i.e., don't introduce the idea of "justice" in an encyclopedia article until it's clear what "justice" is). -- Newagelink (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:12, 26 January 2011 (UTC).[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on DignityUSA. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151017032241/http://www.glhalloffame.org/index.pl?page=inductees&todo=year to http://www.glhalloffame.org/index.pl?page=inductees&todo=year

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:39, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]