Apple CEO Tim Cook comes out: 'I'm proud to be gay'

[meltzerboy]

With all due respect Kinsey is no longer considered a valid source for anything to do with sexuality, other than his own perversities.

While the Catholic Church rightly does not claim temptation is a sin, it still recognizes homosexual desires as a disorder.

And the meaning of the term “disorder” as used by the Church is not clearly defined, IIRC.

With regard to Kinsey, there are certain pioneers in psychology we still respect even though we may disagree with some of their research methods or theories. Sigmund Freud is another; so are B.F. Skinner, Pavlov, Piaget, and so on.

 

[BrassAnkles]

And the meaning of the term “disorder” as used by the Church is not clearly defined, IIRC.

With regard to Kinsey, there are certain pioneers in psychology we still respect even though we may disagree with some of their research methods or theories. Sigmund Freud is another; so are B.F. Skinner, Pavlov, Piaget, and so on.

The issue is bias. Kinsey’s results were fraught with bias. One just has to look at his personal life and his uncontrolled sexual appetites where he paid people for sex, etc.

If Kinsey were a physicist and we were discussing a theory that has nothing to do with sexuality, we might be able to overlook this weakness. As it is Kinsey’s actions undermine all of his work.

 

[NeedsMercy]

It’s a disorder in the eyes of truth. Your rejection of this has no bearing on it at all.

When you started this discussion, you equated homosexuality with blindness, a physical disorder of the human body. That’s the point that I was arguing. If you want to change the parameters of your discussion every time you comment, just say so, or stay on topic.

You don’t have to take my word for it, you might have granite for breakfast tomorrow just to see for yourself. Alternatively, you can just open your eyes and take a look at the design of a female and male human bodies.

So you **are **just making stuff up willy-nilly then? You might be interested to know that there is a disorder that **is **listed in DSM: pica. Should you feel the need to ingest granite tomorrow morning, you could have a chemical imbalance. I’d see a doctor if I were you.

Whether you like it or not, not all that occurs in nature is God’s design. If you don’t believe me, believe all the pedophiles and psychopaths that have existed in this world.

Comparing gays to pedophiles and psychopaths??? Nice. I said nothing whatsoever about “God’s design” whatever that is. I said that God made people gay. Period.

Sure. Just as he made the “naturally and beautifully” psychopathic people too? Except he didn’t create their homosexuality, pedophilia, and psychopathy, contrary to the false gospel of your liberal ideology.

Again with the comparison to pedophilia and psychopathy? But, yes, now that you mention it, God did make the pedophiles and psychopaths. All of them. To say otherwise is heresy.

I’d rather embrace the One Truth Faith, based on love, acceptance and mercy, rather than one which spouts twisted, anti-diluvian values with no basis in real spirituality.

 

[OraLabora]

You can find nowhere in the Catechism that speaks of homosexuality as an orientation. If you want to interpret this to your benefit, by all means do it.

Then pray tell what is the difference between “orientation” and “exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex”. Because that sounds to me like you’re the one splitting hairs. “Attraction toward” sounds very much like a synonym for “oriented toward”, hence orientation. So I don’t think I’m “interpreting this to my benefit”. I have no benefit to gain from any interpretation of homosexuality since I don’t have that inclination. But in the interest of fairness, I do think we can safely take our cue from the Church on how to deal with the issue in public, and I don’t think anything in the Church’s statement contradicts the notion of a deep-seated, unchosen orientation. Or if you prefer “predominant sexual attraction…”. To me it makes little difference to say “predominant sexual attraction” or “innate orientation” in how we relate to homosexual persons. The Church calls us to charity in that regard, no matter how you want to split hairs on the wording.

Nonetheless, however you want to split hairs homosexuality is considered a psychological sexual disorder like bestiality and pedophilia.

Can you point to any documentation to back up this assertion? The Church herself doesn’t even go so far, she instead says that “it’s psychological genesis remains largely unexplained.”

Do you have a point in trying to present personal opinion as fact?

**It is false logic to assume that because because people do not choose their homosexual desires they must be innate/biological. ** In fact there are no studies that can do anything but show a suggested link between homosexuality and a biological cause, unlike real genetic science.

But that does not mean that a link won’t be found. It just means a link hasn’t been found yet. The brain remains one of the last great frontiers of medicine.

BTW, I had SSA and guess what I don’t have them anymore. In fact studies show that SSA is temporary for most people. In my case Jesus Christ healed me. I recommend you know Him.

I don’t want to put down your personal experience which I’m sure is very real. But surely you can appreciate that in scientific terms your situation is anecdotal and not the case for a vast majority of homosexuals? If it was as easy as knowing Jesus, there would be no more Catholic homosexuals. Yet there are very many who have huge struggles with their temptations.

 

[NeedsMercy]

While homosexuality is not a choice it should not be inferred to be innate either. I did not want to have homosexual thoughts, yet I did. Guess what, Jesus took them from me.

Many people have had this experience and many more have had their sexual orientation change without any external influence.

Therefore, while people certainly don’t choose to be homosexual this in no way means the condition has to be permanent. This is a very important distinction.

Perhaps it would help if you try viewing sexual orientation as being on a continuum, like a bell curve. Some people are strictly gay; some are strictly straight—the two ends of the curve. Everyone else falls in the middle, for example, those who have only had gay thoughts infrequently, those who have homosexual thoughts often, those who have only had one homosexual encounter, bisexuals, etc. You may have tipped just a skosh to the side of the “strictly straight” end, so it may not have been all that traumatic to dispose of any of your gay feelings. There may be many people who fall into your category, thus increasing the numbers of those who have successfully “prayed the gay away”. Not that I’m saying this last is impossible, just that we have to start looking at sexual orientation more realistically.

 

[NeedsMercy]

That article is just silly, and not a very reliable indicator of what sexual orientation is. Voyeurism is not a “sexual orientation”. It is a fetish. Sexual orientation refers to the spectrum of sexual attraction ranging from fully same-sex to fully opposite-sex attraction. Most folks are somewhere on that spectrum, with most being nearer the opposite-sex attraction end of the spectrum.

Both a homosexual or a heterosexual may engage in fetishistic behaviour. Fetishes are more common in men, of either orientation. But one thing a fetish is not, is a “sexual orientation”. A more reliable medical/psychological source of information would be much better than an article on that website. I know from my own experience in areas in which I have technical competencies that journalists are very reliable sources of misinformation, and journalists with a bias, no matter how orthodox the bias, are often even worse sources of misinformation.

:

 

[SuperLuigi]

, but I think it’s good that Tim Cook is proud of his sexual proclivity since so many gay people,

I wonder about being proud along personal identity lines sometimes.

young and old, are ashamed and live their lives in fear and self-loathing even today.

Shame and fear are one thing, but some people LOVE to be self-loathing. :yup:

 

[BrassAnkles]

Can you point to any documentation to back up this assertion? The Church herself doesn’t even go so far, she instead says that “it’s psychological genesis remains largely unexplained.”

I never said the church made the comparison, I did. I repeat, the Church states homosexuality is a psychological disorder in the Catechism and other documents.

But that does not mean that a link won’t be found. It just means a link hasn’t been found yet. The brain remains one of the last great frontiers of medicine.

With all due respect you just got finished criticizing me for supposedly trying to present personal opinion as fact and now would have us believe other’s personal opinion, ie anecdotal data and inconclusive studies, which only establishes a bias.

I don’t want to put down your personal experience which I’m sure is very real. But surely you can appreciate that in scientific terms your situation is anecdotal and not the case for a vast majority of homosexuals? If it was as easy as knowing Jesus, there would be no more Catholic homosexuals. Yet there are very many who have huge struggles with their temptations.

You want to minimize my personal experiences while at the same time elevate other’s personal experiences as more relevant than mine, to the point of even selling non science as real science.

As far as assuming that Jesus Christ is not the real answer for homosexuality given that there are Catholics who are homosexuals or struggle with said is false logic, to say the least.

I will say that people get the results they ask for and as such when people don’t ask Jesus to rid them of homosexual thoughts because there is nothing wrong with them the results are entirely predictable. Same as well for those who ask Christ for help but refuse to neither repent of their sins nor much less forgive others.

“When you stand to pray, forgive anyone against whom you have a grievance, so that your heavenly Father may in turn forgive you your transgressions.”

 

[NeedsMercy]

Leviticus 18 : 22, and 20 : 13

Are you also in favor of capital punishment for homosexuals? Or merely incarceration?

 

[BrassAnkles]

Perhaps it would help if you try viewing sexual orientation as being on a continuum, like a bell curve. Some people are strictly gay; some are strictly straight—the two ends of the curve. Everyone else falls in the middle, for example, those who have only had gay thoughts infrequently, those who have homosexual thoughts often, those who have only had one homosexual encounter, bisexuals, etc. You may have tipped just a skosh to the side of the “strictly straight” end, so it may not have been all that traumatic to dispose of any of your gay feelings. There may be many people who fall into your category, thus increasing the numbers of those who have successfully “prayed the gay away”. Not that I’m saying this last is impossible, just that we have to start looking at sexual orientation more realistically.

I see no point in postulating about sexual deviations from the norm when we have the Bible and science.

I can’t understand why you and others would do this, especially Christians. I think it is worthwhile to note that telling persons with SSA that they can’t help it and were made this way, even in a positive manner, is detrimental to the person because they may never seek Christ to heal them.

 

[NeedsMercy]

A medical decision that was arrived at by a vote at a convention. Perhaps they can vote to make cancer not a disease.

Whether SSA is inate is debatable. However engaging in homosexual behavior is always a choice.

God created all sexual orientations.

No-he put people in his world and gave them free will. Sometimes we misuse this free will.

Let me get this straight (pun very intended): God created natural, beautiful heterosexuals, but absolutely NO natural, beautiful homosexuals?

 

[BrassAnkles]

God created all sexual orientations.

Not true. God allowed sexual deviations from the norm. There is a difference.

 

[estesbob]

God created all sexual orientations.

Let me get this straight (pun very intended): God created natural, beautiful heterosexuals, but absolutely NO natural, beautiful homosexuals?

He created natural beautiful people. . Those people have a free will and can choose to engage in licit sexual behavior or sinful sexual behavior .

 

[NeedsMercy]

I see no point in postulating about sexual deviations from the norm when we have the Bible and science.

I can’t understand why you and others would do this, especially Christians. I think it is worthwhile to note that telling persons with SSA that they can’t help it and were made this way, even in a positive manner, is detrimental to the person because they may never seek Christ to heal them.

These are not deviations from the norm: they ARE the norm! And what exactly is **science **telling us about sexual orientation? Please be specific here.

You don’t understand why I and others would do…what? Express realistic opinions about sexual orientation? First, I have as much right as any other poster to comment. Secondly, my giving an opinion can’t be “detrimental” to a gay person because they have nothing of which to be “healed”. They’re not sick!

 

[OraLabora]

I never said the church made the comparison, I did. I repeat, the Church states homosexuality is a psychological disorder in the Catechism and other documents.

With all due respect you just got finished criticizing me for supposedly trying to present personal opinion as fact and now would have us believe other’s personal opinion, ie anecdotal data and inconclusive studies, which only establishes a bias.

You want to minimize my personal experiences while at the same time elevate other’s personal experiences as more relevant than mine, to the point of even selling non science as real science.

As far as assuming that Jesus Christ is not the real answer for homosexuality given that there are Catholics who are homosexuals or struggle with said is false logic, to say the least.

I will say that people get the results they ask for and as such when people don’t ask Jesus to rid them of homosexual thoughts because there is nothing wrong with them the results are entirely predictable. Same as well for those who ask Christ for help but refuse to neither repent of their sins nor much less forgive others.

“When you stand to pray, forgive anyone against whom you have a grievance, so that your heavenly Father may in turn forgive you your transgressions.”

I am a scientist by training and profession. My stating that a link may be found is not a personal opinion, it is keeping an open scientific mind. I didn’t say there was a link nor do I affirm there isn’t. I said one may be found as we deepen our knowledge of the brain, just as we eventually proved the heliocentric model of the solar system once we had the tools, knowledge and data to do so.

Again I am not trying to denigrate your personal experience ; but it is anecdotal and not consistent with the overwhelming data trend on sexual orientation. When enough data is accumulated to suggest a trend, it is no longer a sum of anecdotes but something we can begin to make predictions with. Clearly the data suggests that curing homosexuality is extremely difficult if not impossible.

 

[NeedsMercy]

Not true actually, and there is absolutely no verifiable scientific evidence that can prove otherwise, completely unlike other genetic defects like sickle cell anemia.

Ummm, God made all people. Some people are gay. It follows that God made gay people. Are you saying that there is a group of people that God did not create?

I know more about molecular biology than you think. I know about sickle cell disease and sickle cell trait. Tell me, where exactly did I bring genetics into the discussion?

Furthermore, taking someone’s word for something over the Bible and the catechism is not what Christ asks of us.

Don’t know what you’re talking about here…

Finally, as someone who has had homosexual thoughts and sex and struggled with identity issues well meaning persons like yourself who label people as homosexuals, whether they self identify their this way or not, causes them a great deal of damage, just so you know. Therefore, I recommend instead of telling people it is “ok”, and “not your fault” that they are “homosexual” to instead tell them to turn to Christ to heal them. There is absolutely no need to make excuses for any condition we have because Christ is not intimidated by our sins nor condemns us as long as we are allowing Him to improve us.

I have many gay friends. They would be the last to accuse me of labelling people. I haven’t caused them “damage”, just so YOU know. And if you’re going to make accusations, I never used the term “ok” or the phrase “not your fault”. If there’s anyone making “excuses” it would be a person who still feels homosexual leanings and tries to deny it by calling it a “condition”.

 

[One_point]

When you started this discussion, you equated homosexuality with blindness, a physical disorder of the human body. That’s the point that I was arguing. If you want to change the parameters of your discussion every time you comment, just say so, or stay on topic.

You are the one who introduced medicine, where did you see me refer to a medical condition? If you don’t know
about catholic terms like disorder which are philosophical, better ask than engage strawmen. BOTH blindness and homosexuality are disorders. If it bothers you that one is a physical disorder and one is not, that’s not my problem.

So you **are **just making stuff up willy-nilly then? You might be interested to know that there is a disorder that **is **listed in DSM: pica. Should you feel the need to ingest granite tomorrow morning, you could have a chemical imbalance. I’d see a doctor if I were you.

Your flippant responses are proof you have no real arguments. Thank you for proving the point that eating granite is a disorder. It appears sense still prevails in some quarters of those erudite psychologists. Now, if only they were consistent

Comparing gays to pedophiles and psychopaths??? Nice. I said nothing whatsoever about “God’s design” whatever that is. I said that God made people gay. Period.

I see some offence, pedophiles and psychopaths too low on your hierarchy scale to be compared to homosexuals? Perhaps this lot actually chose their own conditions, unlike the precious gay people?

Still, you made the ridiculous claim that homosexuality was made by God, apparently because there are gay people on CAF Why do you drop your own principles when it comes to the conditions you despise? Is it because perhaps you doubt that there ARE pedophiles and psychopaths in this world, or do they have to be on CAF

Again with the comparison to pedophilia and psychopathy? But, yes, now that you mention it, God did make the pedophiles and psychopaths. All of them. To say otherwise is heresy.

Nice straw man. God made people, he did not make pedophilia, homosexuality, psychopathy, bestiality or any other unchosen disordered predisposition. To say he did IS heresy. Interesting you use the term “heresy” when it suits you, though. Where do you tuck in the rest of your catholic faith when it comes to “disorder”?

I’d rather embrace the One Truth Faith, based on love, acceptance and mercy, rather than one which spouts twisted, anti-diluvian values with no basis in real spirituality.

Which one is that one true faith? The catholic faith or your liberal ideology? At least be consistent. Should you decide on the former, you might want to acquaint yourself with what the Bible and the catechism have to say about homosexuality. Of course it might help if you don’t approach them as "spouting twisted, anti-diluvian values with no basis in real spirituality."

 

[SunnyslopeIII]

God created all sexual orientations.

Are you saying that pedophilia is okay because God created pedophiles?

 

[One_point]

Ummm, God made all people. Some people are gay. It follows that God made gay people. Are you saying that there is a group of people that God did not create?

Falsehood. God did not make anyone gay, any more than he made anyone selfish, lazy, angry, envious, lustful or murderous. Those conditions are consequences of the fall of creation from grace. God permits them because he made free will too, and allows its consequences to play out to completion while drawing good out of it all even though he didn’t cause it all. Homosexuals are not the only people who have predispositions that God never intended for them, we all do and there is lots of it in us all around. Its called original sin. Look it up in the catechism

 

[One_point]

God created all sexual orientations.

No he did not. God made only one sexual orientation, “From the beginning, he made them male and female” and declared that “a man shall leave his parents and cleave to his wife and the two shall be one flesh”. Where do you see a man leaving his parents to cleave to his husband? Perhaps we are talking of different scriptures which is fine. I am just confused because you call yourself catholic.

Let me get this straight (pun very intended): God created natural, beautiful heterosexuals, but absolutely NO natural, beautiful homosexuals?

God made natural and beautiful people who happen to be homosexual. He did not make any beautifully, naturally homosexual person. Because there is no such thing as a naturally homosexual person. All human beings are naturally heterosexual and that is why homosexuality is disordered.