Are we too critical of homosexuals?

  • Thread starter Thread starter czeaiter
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
czeaiter said:
We often criticize homosexuals, particularly those who are supposedly “married”. We tell them not to receive The Eucharist etc.

But what about divorcees who remarry?
Click to expand...
The Church tells them to refrain from receiving Holy Communion, at least until their previous attempts at marriage are examined to see whether or not the remarried persons are in fact committing bigamy.

What is your point, exactly? (And who do you mean by “we”?)
QwertyGirl said:
Lesbians give birth, naturally, all the time. I am not sure of the point you are trying to make.
Click to expand...
Yes, but not according to natural law, which is to say a family arrangement in which a child’s biological mother and father are married to each other and committed to loving each other exclusively and welcoming children as the fruit of their union. (And yes, the Church believes that IVF is also wrong for married heterosexual couples.)
 
Last edited:
PetraG said:
Yes, but not according to natural law, which is to say a family arrangement in which a child’s biological mother and father are married to each other and committed to loving each other exclusively and welcoming children as the fruit of their union. (And yes, the Church believes that IVF is also wrong for married heterosexual couples.)
Click to expand...
I was only replying to the concern that if the whole world was gay, it would mean the end of the human race. Clearly, it wouldn’t, as gay people have babies all the time.

Of course this doesn’t align with Catholic ideals, but we weren’t discussing those (nor would I debate them, here, as they don’t align with my values.)
 
Last edited:
I think we need to go back to basics. Here’s what the Catechism says.

Same-sex Attraction

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between
women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction
toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms
through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis
remains largely unexplained.

2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual
tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered,
constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect,
compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard
should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and,
if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties
they may encounter from their condition.

Homosexuals and Chastity

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery
that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship,
by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely
approach Christian perfection.
 
Those who bear the burden of same sex attraction were not even on the nation’s radar screens until the “pride” movement forced them into our consciousness.

I note here that:
“Pride goeth before the fall”
Click to expand...
 
melonhead said:
. Why would it be wrong to assume someone is straight, given that 95-98% of the population is that way?
Click to expand...
I didn’t say it would be wrong, it’s just an uncomfortable situation to be in if people constantly assumed they were straight. So obviously they would tell you they’re gay to avoid conversations regarding their dating life.
melonhead said:
Yet a good deal of research suggests those actions ( especially addictions) are largely genetically predisposed. Born that way, in other words. So the question is: at what point is something the way someone is vs an action?
Click to expand...
Something that is not genetic isn’t an action. It’s not that hard. If you’re doing something, it’s an action. Having sex is an action. Attraction isn’t. The latter occurs involuntarily.
HomeschoolDad said:
Personally, I think it would be over-sharing for a celibate gay person to go around telling everyone “what they are” and how they bear a cross, how they fight against it, and so on, but on the other hand it could give others so afflicted hope that they, too, could have this affliction and live a good, decent holy life. If I were in this situation, I think I’d just tell people “I’m a confirmed bachelor”, “I’m too set in my ways to be married”, or something like that, but to each his own.
Click to expand...
Straight Catholics constantly talk about how they lust and watch porn, so I don’t think it’s weirder for a gay Catholic to be open about their struggles. I don’t know what I’d do if I was gay. I think my family would abandon me. So I would probably be like you too.
 
QwertyGirl said:
Homosexual cannot have a biological natural birth ? Right or wrong …

So please explain how if everyone on this planet became homosexual births would occur?

It’s not a difficult question to answer and has nothing to do with God so please keep him out of it.
Click to expand...
Yes, and in each and every one of these cases, the lesbian mother needed a male to be involved in some fashion, whether in the way nature intended, or some other way.

There is some scientific research into trying to “tease” a sperm cell out of a woman’s stem cells (bone marrow, etc.). I hope this never comes to pass. Not only could it possibly have “Frankenstein” results no one can foresee, but it would be the ultimate attempt to make men totally useless.
Lea101 said:
Personally, I think it would be over-sharing for a celibate gay person to go around telling everyone “what they are” and how they bear a cross, how they fight against it, and so on, but on the other hand it could give others so afflicted hope that they, too, could have this affliction and live a good, decent holy life. If I were in this situation, I think I’d just tell people “I’m a confirmed bachelor”, “I’m too set in my ways to be married”, or something like that, but to each his own.
Click to expand...
Just to clarify, I am not gay. I was just speaking of what I would do if, hypothetically, I were. For what it’s worth, my family is fairly liberal about real-life issues. I have had at least two cousins who were practicing gay people. I take great pride in their temporal successes — one, a successful entrepreneur, the other (deceased), a highly regarded public servant.

Being irreversibly and exclusively SSA is not the worst thing in the world. For all we know, there could have been saints of the Church who were SSA but just didn’t say anything about it.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Lea101 said:
Do I think in general, Christians are too critical? Yes. I think more people tolerate other sins more than homosexuality.

Recently came across a video of a Christian conservative saying that people shouldn’t communicate with gay people because that’s condoning their sin. Another one said gay people cannot be a Christian.

Someone in my family once “joked” about how they would kick me out or kill me if I was a lesbian, but said they would take me in if I get pregnant before marriage.

So yeah I think there are people who are more critical about homosexuality, but mainly because of their personal repulsion to gay people and the acts. Not because they simply see it as wrong.

We shouldn’t tolerate certain grave sins more than others. Without repentence, these sins make you end up in the same place anyway.
Click to expand...
I think you hit the nail on the head here.

In what I’ve seen, there can be a disproportionate focus on homosexuality, likely due to personal revulsion by some people, but in the Catholic pew I don’t see/hear about it that much. Online yes, but mostly along the lines of what we’ve seen here.

Among Some other “Christians”, I’ve seen much worse. And I do use “Christian” in quotation regarding them, because what kind of Christian calls for stoning homosexuals, or supports life imprisonment for same sex couples. Not any Christian who looks to Christ for guidance.
 
My mistake. As far as I know, mammalian species that stop having babies are in a pretty bad way. I don’t see that happening to us quite yet, although a societal crisis from having such a very large number of the old compared to the young is quite possible.

A society that has the attitude that children shouldn’t mind when the adults in their lives deliberately decide the children shouldn’t care whether they are raised by their biological parents or by someone else, however, is a society that has made family into a commodity. (The fact that so many people don’t differentiate between their pets and their children is a symptom, in my opinion. People actually talk about pets and children as if they’re two sorts of the same thing.)

The attitude that divorce is OK and the attitude that children are mostly a “quality of life” decision for a married couple and the attitude that marriage has nothing to do with sexual orientation are definitely interrelated.
 
Last edited:
Sin is sin and I have an abundance of repented and forgiven sin. I am divorced and remarried. I entered both marriages with the intention of them being for life. To say I am living is sin is false because there is forgiveness of sin. Some things are just out of our control and not the result of our desires or will. “But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.” (KJV+ Mat 5:32).

I have committed adultery by remarrying but I am not remarrying daily and not committing adultery daily. I have repented of my first failed marriage and everything that went with remarrying. I have absolutely no intention of doing it again.

[Acrive practicing] Homosexuals however do not repent of their sin, they are not obedient to Christ, “… Behold, thou art made whole: sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee.” (KJV+ John 5:14)

For me a[n active] homosexual can’t be a Christian anymore than a dog can be a sheep. Not only do they refuse to repent from sin, they boast of their sin and celebrate their sin. They have sin parties and sin gatherings. They protest righteousness for the government imposed public acceptance of sin.

There is no comparison between a remarried divorcee and a[n active] homosexual.

A better comparison would be with prostitutes or players, those that wake up every morning with the intention of sinning. [All can repent if they chose to and obstain from continued sin, many do not.]

Peace.

{I updated my post because I was not clear on homosexuals, repentance and their activity and for that please forgive me. I don’t hate anyone or do I want to treat anyone unfairly. There is a difference between active and inactive homosexuals just as there is a difference between active and inactive sinners of any kind.}
 
Last edited:
You’re saying you are treating a woman not your wife as your wife and that’s a single action that happened when you exchanged public vows? I’m sorry, I’m confused about the distinction you’re making, I guess?
 
Last edited:
I can believe we focus on homosexuals more than we should. The homosexuals only damage is to themselves, while environmental damage hurts the church of 3500 AD advocacy is not common except Pope Francis saying a few things that get mocked or ignored.
 
The Church is really only major entity preaching sexual morality. Meanwhile, every school in the country teaches children to recycle, reduce their energy consumption, etc.

Also, no one is really pro-pollution, but the wider culture is very openly pro-sexual immortality.
 
Last edited:
It’s happened three times. Four if you include a co-worker who’s second or third sentence upon meeting you is “my daughter’s a lesbian.” It’s very odd.
 
So could we also say that having a desire to shoot up heroin isn’t an action, but doing it is? The action isn’t genetic, but the desire may well be.

Good point about straight Catholics discussing their struggles. On the one hand, you’re right: someone who struggles with SSA and is open about it shouldn’t be mocked, but assisted in their strive for heaven. The flip side is that when the pastor mentions porn being a sin, no one labels him “straight-porn-ophobic” or anything like that.
 
It’s a legitimate word.

Antipathy towards gay people is a real thing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top