And there is much, much ,much ,much, more to our persona than our sexual attractions. . If you choose to define yourself by who you are sexually attracted to that is your choice but I personally put sexual attraction far far down my list of what makes me what I am.
Now your contradicting yourself, You were asserting that it was possible to be attracted to someone without desiring sex. Now your saying they are sexually attracted, which is desiring sex by definition.
What does this have to do with western cultures propensity to murder children?
That’s a given. I am not fighting you on that. I don’t particularly think that the porn or fornication should be legal. Men certainly don’t need the temptation. We don’t need to make women sexual objects and fornication outside wedlock is of zero value. It feels good and that’s about it. There are a whole lot of problems with a strongly secular society.
Ok, but now I don’t know what you are refering to with this one. If you would use quote button, it would make this infinitely more understandable. I have a lot of conversations between our exchanges.
Hating anyone is impermissible. You don’t get to pick and choose, thus I find your tolerance of one orientation, but not others to be quite hypocritical.
Yet you offer the same argument.
Pedophiles, necrophiles, zoophiles, Incestuous couples and the FLDS plural marriage folks all make the very same claim.
What would that be? So far you haven’t been able to name one difference between the two major orientations, other than sexuality. Apply some logic to this. If there is more to being gay than sex, then it must be some quality that is not sexual in nature or shared by non-gay people. Otherwise, the only thing left is sex. If being gay is really only about sex, and the manner of sex is a choice we have a syllogism like this…
It’s about potential, the possibility for a committed relationship, to share your life with someone.
This is a quality shared by all people. As I pointed out, *If there is more to being gay than sex, then it must be some quality that is not sexual in nature or shared by non-gay people. Otherwise, the only thing left is sex. * Since the qualities you mention above are shared by all of humanity, they are not something about being gay, that is more than sex. Do you have an example that avoids the logical problem with your claim? Some quality unique to gay people and not about sex?
The crucial difference is all that is felt towards a person of the same gender instead of towards the opposite gender, so it is in fact different.
Not unless one acts upon that attraction.I do not , for instance, become an adulterer if i find my self attracted to my neightbors wife.
While romance and love frequently have love in them it is not an essential characteristic of them. Indeed romance is only a piece of love, whilst romance is frequently an expression of eros the erotic love, romance can also be an expression of agape the selfless love.
See, if just one testimony like yours comes up, it means that the answer is “yes.” If just one person has done it, then it can be done. I loved reading your story. I think the world does not have any idea just how important fathering really is, and what happens when it is missing.Having been a happy, oblivious, and unconcernedly self-identified “homosexual” before the last year, I can say very confidently that a homosexual can become a heterosexual. Believe me when I say that it is possible. All you need is a strong man as a friend who can be a witness, and who is solidly heterosexual. The sort of good bond that is formed therein tends to banish all sorts of things that crop up in the degenerate personality which is formed by homosexual identification.
I was absolutely obsessed with men and all the things that come with such an attitude. At first I found this particular person very attractive, but as I was becoming Catholic at that point I knew I had to control my fantasies and thoughts. He became a very dear and trusted fellow to talk to, over time. Things developed in such a way that I was able to reveal my terrible fears about my identity, and especially the disordered lusts I’ve been having. Stoic personality unfased, he asked me if I was particularly attracted more to older men (to make up for a weak father). He made sure to question the strength of my mother’s influence in my personal development, to ask God for light on how this all might have developed.
By this manly, regular, normal, and good-nature’d man’s influence (always upright and trying to be virtuous according to his state in life), I slowly came to realise how silly my whole self-identification is. He made jokes here and there about women, about attractiveness and sexual identity, always making sure to insert God into the broader picture. Over time, I actually found myself thinking “I would like to make love to this woman” or “I wonder how it would be in marriage with that woman?”, because of his influence. He never really said anything, or broached the subject of homosexuality, but by his unwavering and masculine presence he was just a good example.
You don’t need arguments, debates, scripture-quotes, angry rants, arguments, or Gay Camps. What you need is a strong older male figure who just wants to be your friend, and who is so comfortable in his true, God-given heterosexual identity, that he destroys your disorder merely by his being there. After I told him about my unwilling sexuality, we literally never talked about it again… but gradually he turned me, somehow. It’s inexplicable, and fascinating, and grace-filled.
Now, I still find men very attractive from the habit of an adult lifetime… but I actually notice women, whereas before I had dismissed the female form out of spite. This is all very odd, on reflection. Maybe in a few years I’ll have affective maturity…
Usually bisexual people are not sexually attracted on an equal basis (50-50) to both sexes. If the attraction to the same sex is minimal, it would be easier for one to focus on the attraction to the opposite sex. If the reverse is the case, opposite-sex attraction to the exclusion of same-sex attraction would be more difficult, but not impossible in any individual situation.
Sexual attraction is about sex, and your claim is that being gay is about more than sex. If you claim that it is not sexual attraction than it cannot be homosexual by definition. If there is more to being gay than sex, then it must be some quality that is not sexual in nature or shared by non-gay people. Otherwise, the only thing left is sex. Do you have another example for us to examine, or do you care to admit the conclusion?
If you mean same-sex attraction rather than homosexual behavior, most clinical psychologists–notwithstanding Michele Bachmann’s clinical psychologist-husband–believe it is very difficult, if not impossible, to change one’s same-sex attraction, just as it would be to change one’s opposite-sex attraction. And those who claim they have completely eliminated their SSA are thought to be voluntarily suppressing it rather than changing it. However, that doesn’t mean gay people cannot change their behavior, either by remaining chaste or seeking a heterosexual relationship. And by doing the latter, they may learn to love an individual person of the opposite sex in both a sexual and emotional way, even while they still retain their initial attraction toward those of the same sex. Not that this effort is at all easy, but it can be accomplished. This is the consensus opinion among the psychological community. Of course, there is also anecdotal evidence, some of it on this forum, to the contrary regarding a total change of SSA as well as behavior. Sexuality (including both attraction and behavior) is, after all, a very complex matter, and psychologists really don’t know enough about it.
I personally think all of us are bisexual. Lust does not have gender barriers and neither does love.
Amen, through God and courage anything is possible!
I was at the Conference it was awesome. So many courageous men and women that want to live a holy life.
Oh I agree. No one is ever going to be on the extreme end of sexual attraction (only attracted to one gender and no appreciation of the other), or if any, rarely. Most people are somewhere inbetween. Or in a state of denial. But I’m cautious about saying that as saying “you’re in denial” is an unfair thing to say in a debate.
Depends how you interpret the Bible. Jesus said something along the lines of if you lust after someone else’s wife, you are committing adultery with her in your mind. Or is it only a certain kind of lust that counts? Is it only… imaginings… that count?
lemon and Lime, you need to do some practice with logic. You equate attraction with appreciation to make your argument. As attraction and appreciation are two entirely different concepts, then your conclusion is going to be hogwash.
Just open up the nearest dictionary and look up the word ‘Lust’. It refers to an inordinate, or obsessive desire for something. It is far more than just appreciation, or attractiveness of something. Once you understand the meaning of the word ‘lust’, and let’s face it, it isn’t a complicated word, you will understand that there is only one way to interpret the bible and the Catechism as well.
If I allow my attraction turn to lust then i have indeed sinned.
I suspect that there is no answer is possible because the conclusion is true. It’s just about sex.
