Being gay is in your genes

[Rau]

How can you miss my numerous references to Romans I as a cause for SSA?? That is not charitable.

As far as denying that there are people who suffer from SSA and strive to be good Christians you of course cannot find one post of mine that claims nor infers that thus this statement is pure propaganda and nothing else. That is not charitable.

I did not miss them. I can also point to numerous posts where OldCatholicGuy made superhuman efforts to explain the Romans text to you but you believed your insight superior and would not so much as think about what was put to you.

I recall literally 4 posts of mine where I asked you whether those good Catholics suffering the anguish of persistent SSA, but who pray daily and strive to live a chaste life are sinning. And on each and every occasion you would not answer. On each occasion, you avoided or obfuscated.

 

[Rau]

Is there a tendency on the part of Catholic homosexuals to think, “If only I was heterosexual, then I could find the love of my life and be happy enjoying licit sex in Holy Matrimony?” …

James - I agree with post.

 

[Rau]

Please cite to me where it says that all homosexual attraction is caused by rebellion against God.
…
So then you claim that rebellion is only ONE possible cause for SSA. And yet you talk as if everyone who experiences SSA is a rebel against God and needs to have their temptations converted.

What is it? Am I a rebel against God? Was I when I was 10?

To be fair, he has a few “causes”:

• Arrogance/rebellion against God;
• Sexual abuse as a child;
• Being duped by the “gay lobby” while impressionable.

Of course, Church teaching does not promote any of these. This needs to be understood as his views. I tend to favour the Church’s position -

“Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained.”

 

[SMGS127]

With all due respect I must have referenced the report more than a hundred times in this forum since October. Not so conspicuously is I can’t remember one person in the “innate” crown that actually read it before criticizing it. Rather they summarize criticisms from the gay lobby websites. It is therefore quite clear based on this evidence that those in the innate crowd are not interested in the truth, so I see little point.

I actually read your website and gave my own opinion on it. If it happens to agree with other gay people’s opinions, I’m not surprised. Your singular source is, at best, extremely shaky, and he makes all sorts of illogical conclusions. I’ve asked you before to find just one other source, and you have refused me. Scientists do not cling onto one source for dear life even when that one source is contradicted by all others. That is not a proper research method.

But seriously, can you stop accusing me and others of representing the so-called “gay lobby?” We all oppose gay marriage and think same-sex behavior is sinful. I don’t think that sounds like a gay lobby.

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

Your opinions are noted.

I asked you a question in that post, I’d like an answer.

With all due respect I must have referenced the report more than a hundred times in this forum since October. Not so conspicuously is I can’t remember one person in the “innate” crown that actually read it before criticizing it. Rather they summarize criticisms from the gay lobby websites. It is therefore quite clear based on this evidence that those in the innate crowd are not interested in the truth, so I see little point.

I read the entire summary before criticizing it.

I actually read your website and gave my own opinion on it. If it happens to agree with other gay people’s opinions, I’m not surprised. Your singular source is, at best, extremely shaky, and he makes all sorts of illogical conclusions. I’ve asked you before to find just one other source, and you have refused me. Scientists do not cling onto one source for dear life even when that one source is contradicted by all others. That is not a proper research method.

But seriously, can you stop accusing me and others of representing the so-called “gay lobby?” We all oppose gay marriage and think same-sex behavior is sinful. I don’t think that sounds like a gay lobby.

I’ve seen the Masters and Johnson study on it cited as having a 65% cure rate, but the reality is they never listed a cure rate the known failure rate was given as 35% and not expected to exceed 45% over the next five years. Additionally there is strong evidence that the success stories are in fact composites of multiple studies.

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

With all due respect when you and others claim homosexual desires are innate, ie ordained by God as natural this by logical inference infers either God “sets us up to fail” or that God created homosexuality to be good. Of course are erroneous.

Worse is that when confused Christians tell others suffering from SSa that they can do nothing about it because it is God’s will. Not only is that tragic it could be dangerous for one’s soul.

AFAIK no one is claiming that God actively created some people to be attracted to the same sex. Furthermore even if God did that it would not mean that God sets us up for failure as suffering is good for the soul.

 

[Rau]

For the record I have excluded children from Romans I for obvious and logical reasons. Yet again another reason why I find it hard to take some posters seriously when they cannot bother to read my posts nor references.

You need to exclude **every **“individual”, not just the children! In the Romans text, Paul is talking in social rather than individual terms. He is describing the collapse of a culture as a whole, not particular individuals who transgress. The presence of SSA in some is not an indication that those individuals have turned from God more than others, and St Paul does not suggest otherwise.

 

[Rau]

Oh ye of little faith.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lourdes_Medical_Bureau

BTW, according to Jesus little faith yields little results. …

I do not doubt the 67 miracles associated so far with the shrine at Lourdes. They are supported by medical diagnosis of an actual condition and medical verification of a cure - under a process put in place by the Church so that there would be a proper foundation on which to recognise and believe in these miracles. Regrettably, we have none of this foundation in respect of your experience.

So, how should we understand your “cure”? Is it simply a matter of your faith saving you? Of course, it is possible! Perhaps your faith, in turning to God, was greater than all those who are faithful and chaste but continue to endure SSA? Greater than so many others who suffer a grave affliction and pray for God’s support in their lives but have not been cured? Or perhaps you are indeed in some sense in the company of the 67 who enjoyed the intercession of Our Lady of Lourdes. Or perhaps there is another explanation?

It is perfectly proper and commendable to encourage people to pray for help in their lives, to partake of the sacraments, to come closer to God. But to suggest that one’s SSA arises as punishment for one’s arrogance (or in the case of children - as a consequence of sex abuse, or being misled by the gay lobby) and that turning to God will eliminate the unwelcome attractions is not taught by the Church and is of your own invention. And in the absence of a miracle - is wrong.

 

[Rau]

What you infer from this statement is that persistent homosexual desires as temptations are normal, but that is unsubstantiated.

I quoted the Catechism to you, and pointed out that it condemns "homosexual acts" as contrary to the natural law. I simply corrected your erroneous statement about what the Church teaches.

Reading the Catechism statements, I infer nothing at all about which temptations are “normal”. I am unclear what merit comes from classifying temptations as “normal” and “abnormal” - perhaps you can elaborate?

 

[pnewton]

Reading the Catechism statements, I infer nothing at all about which temptations are “normal”. I am unclear what merit comes from classifying temptations as “normal” and “abnormal” - perhaps you can elaborate?

I think you have a point, but I would like to look at the consequences of this.

For one thing, there are those that treat homosexual sin in a class by itself. I even know one person that said it was worse than murder. The emotional and political component lead this sinned to be viewed uniquely, and that is wrong.

On the other hand, those who have this temptation will see it as something unique in that it is “just the way they were born”, that it is innate, and somehow this should grant them special treatment as a protected class or it is used as an excuse that this sin should not be a sin. Just mention that those with homosexual temptation have the same right to marry and have children (with someone of the opposite sex) and notice the response of how impossible this is, unnatural or cruel, as if their temptation is so much worse that only they can never be expected to overcome it.

On this last note, it was only last week that the reason for the continuance of a “gay gene” was that homosexual people were actually able to marry and have families, but I never would suggest that the gay agenda was logical or consistent.

 

[Catolico65]

I have. Please cite to me where it says that all homosexual attraction is caused by rebellion against God.

Now you’re really confusing me.

So then you claim that rebellion is only ONE possible cause for SSA. And yet you talk as if everyone who experiences SSA is a rebel against God and needs to have their temptations converted.

What is it? Am I a rebel against God? Was I when I was 10?

I have clearly explained what I believe causes SSA in adults based on Scripture and what happens in children based on my personal experience and observations. Furthermore,** I have explained this numerous times, including this thread more than once**. I am inclined to believe therefore that this information is inconvenient for some unfortunately.

 

[Catolico65]

I actually read your website and gave my own opinion on it. If it happens to agree with other gay people’s opinions, I’m not surprised. Your singular source is, at best, extremely shaky, and he makes all sorts of illogical conclusions. I’ve asked you before to find just one other source, and you have refused me. Scientists do not cling onto one source for dear life even when that one source is contradicted by all others. That is not a proper research method.

But seriously, can you stop accusing me and others of representing the so-called “gay lobby?” We all oppose gay marriage and think same-sex behavior is sinful. I don’t think that sounds like a gay lobby.

I doubt you read the report because you speak of one source when in fact the report cites many sources, 10,000 in fact. Furthermore, Dr Whitehead has a doctorate in statistical analysis, so he is much more qualified than lay persons for putting data together. For example, it is a statistical fact that of the thousands of people that were interviewed regarding SSA, the MAJORITY reported they were temporary. This is not open for interpretation or dispute, these are based on statistically complied results.

 

[Catolico65]

I did not miss them. I can also point to numerous posts where OldCatholicGuy made superhuman efforts to explain the Romans text to you but you believed your insight superior and would not so much as think about what was put to you.

I recall literally 4 posts of mine where I asked you whether those good Catholics suffering the anguish of persistent SSA, but who pray daily and strive to live a chaste life are sinning. And on each and every occasion you would not answer. On each occasion, you avoided or obfuscated.

With all due respect I have to deal with a lot of people on these threads and their constant propaganda so forgive me if I don’t answer every post.

At any rate you drawing conclusions based on pure supposition that would hurt my reputation as a Christian is not charitable.

 

[Catolico65]

To be fair, he has a few “causes”:

• Arrogance/rebellion against God;
• Sexual abuse as a child;
• Being duped by the “gay lobby” while impressionable.

Of course, Church teaching does not promote any of these. This needs to be understood as his views. I tend to favour the Church’s position -

“Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained.”

Romans I is clear. Still there are other passages in the Bible as well such as in the OT:

Regarding other causes, it is psychology 101 that children are impressionable.

 

[Catolico65]

I asked you a question in that post, I’d like an answer.

I read the entire summary before criticizing it.

I’ve seen the Masters and Johnson study on it cited as having a 65% cure rate, but the reality is they never listed a cure rate the known failure rate was given as 35% and not expected to exceed 45% over the next five years. Additionally there is strong evidence that the success stories are in fact composites of multiple studies.

With all due respect I don’t believe you are looking for answers. At any rate I have challenged you before on claims you have made and you ignored them.

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

With all due respect I don’t believe you are looking for answers. At any rate I have challenged you before on claims you have made and you ignored them.

I am looking for answers.

You have told me I am wrong on several occasions without actually saying why they were wrong.

 

[Rau]

I think you have a point, but I would like to look at the consequences of this.

For one thing, there are those that treat homosexual sin in a class by itself. I even know one person that said it was worse than murder. The emotional and political component lead this sinned to be viewed uniquely, and that is wrong.

On the other hand, those who have this temptation will see it as something unique in that it is “just the way they were born”, that it is innate, and somehow this should grant them special treatment as a protected class or it is used as an excuse that this sin should not be a sin. Just mention that those with homosexual temptation have the same right to marry and have children (with someone of the opposite sex) and notice the response of how impossible this is, unnatural or cruel, as if their temptation is so much worse that only they can never be expected to overcome it.

On this last note, it was only last week that the reason for the continuance of a “gay gene” was that homosexual people were actually able to marry and have families, but I never would suggest that the gay agenda was logical or consistent.

I think it is often remarked that the burden of homosexuality on a person who wants to live a moral life is heavy because, unlike the single heterosexual, they cannot see a future wherein their need for companionship can be met. As the catechism says, they deserve our compassion. The situation does give rise to the thinking and the excuse-making that you’ve outlined, but it is only that.

 

[Catolico65]

I am looking for answers.

You have told me I am wrong on several occasions without actually saying why they were wrong.

It is good you are looking for answers, Christ appreciates that. It is His will and not our own and since we have no fear of death or the real consequences of our sins we can use this knowledge to seek Him without reservations(assuming we are repentant).

My advice to you is to question any thing and everything the gay lobby promotes, because they hate Christ and children. The Catholic Church dogma and the Bible are your guide. Peace.

 

[Catolico65]

I
For one thing, there are those that treat homosexual sin in a class by itself. I even know one person that said it was worse than murder. The emotional and political component lead this sinned to be viewed uniquely, and that is wrong.

I believe we should always try to understand God’s point of view as opposed to depending on our own opinions. Given Scripture, God reserves a special ire for homosexuality. Why is that? Because He “makes” people that way so He can punish Him(as many would seem to propose). No, I believe supports that it is because homosexuality destroys a society from within, where adult homosexuals with voracious sexual appetites start recruiting children, such as the Romans and Greeks did, thus causing children to be sin. We know God abhors this according to Jesus own words not to mention the OT. The fact is homosexual sex cannot fulfill, but only creates spiritual desolation that of course compels it’s practitioners to indoctrinate others.

On the other hand, those who have this temptation will see it as something unique in that it is “just the way they were born”, that it is innate, and somehow this should grant them special treatment as a protected class or it is used as an excuse that this sin should not be a sin. Just mention that those with homosexual temptation have the same right to marry and have children (with someone of the opposite sex) and notice the response of how impossible this is, unnatural or cruel, as if their temptation is so much worse that only they can never be expected to overcome it.

It is worse than that, those with a logical and introspective mind will have to either reject homosexuality as innate or accept as ordained by God. The latter has happened by the millions in the last few years and is easily witnessed by going to the plethora of protestant forums that support homosexuality as natural.

 

[Lokadottir]

The twin thing could be a result of the fact that humans are generally bisexual with a preference one way or another with a few individuals being entirely straight or entirely gay. (Actually thats a gross oversimplification)