C.N.A. Report "German bishops commit to 'newly assessing' Catholic doctrine on homosexuality and sexual morality"

[Thorolfr]

Thorolfr:

Even assuming for the sake of argument that some people become gay because of something in their environment in the womb or growing up, that still does not make it a choice nor is there a known and obvious cause.

Do you mean
(A) the choice to have SSA? or
(B) the choice to act on SSA?

If you’ve read the post by thistle that I was responding to, I think it’s pretty obvious that I was saying that experiencing sexual attraction to others of the same sex is not a choice. I wasn’t talking about actions.

 

[SaintJude]

I know! Their Church is haemorrhaging members. It’s dying. Whatever they propose is not worth listening to but they have money…and money seems to talk (sigh)

 

[Pai_Nosso]

You have no proof that there is no gene. So it isn’t a myth. It just means they haven’t discovered one. The possibility exists that one could be found.

It is impossible for a “gay gene” to exist as gay people do not have children to pass the gene on to.
In fact a study has found that there is no such thing as a “gay gene”

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02585-6

Another common argument is that homosexual behaviour occurs in the animal kingdom, therefore it must be natural. We also see some animals practice cannibalism, that doesn’t mean it’s right for humans to practice cannibalism as well.

Homosexuality has been observed in the animal kingdom but what they don’t tell you is that these animals engage in heterosexual behaviour when the opportunity arises. There is no animal that passes on the opportunity to procreate. So a more accurate definition would be that some animals display bisexual tendencies.

Over the years Christians have been much too quiet in speaking out against the introduction of sinful practices in our society. With little opposition the LGBT agenda has been able to spread into our schools and media bringing with it an anti-Christian attitude that is becoming more acceptable.

 

[vsedriver]

It is impossible for a “gay gene” to exist as gay people do not have children to pass the gene on to.

uh, yes gay people do have biological children. But it is also possible that there is a mutation involved.

n fact a study has found that there is no such thing as a “gay gene”

not exactly…I quote the article “results may not be representative of the overall population — a limitation that the study authors acknowledge.”

Homosexuality has been observed in the animal kingdom

I agree with this. People are not animals so it is foolish to apply animal behavior to human behavior.

There is no question that homosexual behavior is morally wrong. But the source of the attraction has not been definitively established, and even if it was, it wouldn’t change the morality of the behavior.

Society has been anti -Christian since the 50s.

 

[Pai_Nosso]

Society has been anti -Christian since the 50s.

It doesn’t look that way.
65% of Americans identify as Christian in 2019.
In 1960 over 90% of Americans identified as Christian.
In 1985 it was 85% and in 2005 it was still above 70%

 

[on_the_hill]

Flaws can occur naturally, but they are still flaws and are not natural.

No matter how many times it’s explained, it still doesn’t make sense.

 

[Aquinas11]

Actually a recent study has pretty definitively determined that there is no gay gene. The study I posted looked at the full human genome and attempted to fit a regression to predict whether or not an individual was honosexual. At this point, the entire human genome has been mapped for years now, and so there is no chance that we’ll suddenly find a gay gene–there simply aren’t any more unknown genes left to study.

No the study is limited to
(1) those genes that are sequenced (genome is not fully mapped yet)
(2) of those genes in (1), only those genes for which homosexual behavior is identified
(you can’t compare the subjects DNA blindly to all genes, you have to have a basis to only use a subset of all human genes to the subjects DNA).

(1) and (2) are still ongoing so the study is confined and used a limited data set to compare with the subjects DNA.

 

[Rau]

Their Church is haemorrhaging members. It’s dying. Whatever they propose is not worth listening to but they have money…and money seems to talk (sigh)

I’m not sure how the “money talks” Phenomenon manifests in this context, but I suspect the fact that the church is a recipient of a tax (facilitated by the German government) helps their finances!

 

[thistle]

The “gay gene” is a strawman. You assert nothing could possibly go wrong in the formation of a human being that upsets the process/mechanism that determines to which sex one is attracted? You absolutely exclude that possibility? What is it then that saw me (male) experience an attraction to girls?

Nobody is born gay. What would be next? Someone is born a murderer or a thief. Everyone justifying such actions by claiming they were born that way.

 

[thistle]

Even assuming for the sake of argument that some people become gay because of something in their environment in the womb or growing up, that still does not make it a choice nor is there a known and obvious cause.

Did you not see my AND/OR?

 

[Rau]

Nobody is born gay. What would be next? Someone is born a murderer or a thief. Everyone justifying such actionsj by claiming they were born that way.

Murder and theft are acts Thistle and morally wrong. Inclinations or attractions are neither. No one here is saying the inclination itself justifies the act.

Why are people born to ordinarily have opposite sex attraction emerge? Why do you assert nothing can go wrong with that development Thistle?

 

[on_the_hill]

I’d prefer not to.
You explain it. How is something that is natural not natural?

 

[tafan2]

Yes, they have money. It is a clear case study as to why a separation of church and state is a good thing.
There is hardly any sacramental life left in the German church, yet they can influence the church throughout the world by throwing around their money which comes through the state. Indeed, a lack of active parish life just leaves that much more money left over.

I hate to say it, but in Germany, once this generation of prelates dies off, the lack of vocations to replace them might end up being a good thiing.

 

[AlNg]

However, the question of whether the teaching ban on practised homosexuality is still up-to-date was controversially discussed, as was the question of the permissibility of the use of artificial contraceptives in marriage and in unmarried couples.

So it is possible that the teaching against the use of artificial contraception can be changed?

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

No, it isn’t possible.

 

[AlNg]

No, it isn’t possible.

Why are the Catholic authorities in Germany discussing the question of the permissibility of the use of artificial contraceptives in marriage and in unmarried couples ? If the Catholic authorities in Germany know that this cannot be changed, why would they consider changing it?

 

[Rau]

Why are the Catholic authorities in Germany discussing the question of the permissibility of the use of artificial contraceptives in marriage and in unmarried couples ? If the Catholic authorities know that this cannot be changed, why would they consider changing it?

As a means to lobby the Pope? As a show of arrogance?

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

Why are the Catholic authorities in Germany discussing the question of the permissibility of the use of artificial contraceptives in marriage and in unmarried couples ? If the Catholic authorities in Germany know that this cannot be changed, why would they consider changing it?

Because they are acting on their own.

 

[AlNg]

As a show of arrogance?

Is it fair to charge people with arrogance when they are attempting to apply their best efforts to resolving some of the difficult theological or moral problems facing the world today?

As a means to lobby the Pope?

Why would the German Catholic authorities lobby the Holy Father on an issue that they know cannot be changed? Perhaps the German Catholic authorities do not agree with the bloggers here and instead perhaps they believe that the teaching on artificial birth control can be changed.

Because they are acting on their own.

Yes I know that. But you are sidestepping the obvious. If the German Catholic authorities are considering the question of whether or not to allow artificial birth control, it means, does it not, that these German Catholic authorities believe that this teaching can be changed.

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

If the German Catholic authorities are considering the question of whether or not to allow artificial birth control, it means that these German Catholic authorities believe that this teaching can be changed.

Then they are wrong.

But you are sidestepping the obvious.

You shouldn’t be saying this.