Can a Homosexual become a Heterosexual?

[nickybr38]

I completely understand all the arguments against homosexual marriage (abortion, birth control, the death penalty, yada, yada, yada) based on the immorality of the act. I get it, I really do. All I’m advocating is the givernment has to operate not on what is moral, but on what is RIGHT. The two aren’t always the same. Now THAT is a topic for another thread.

Hasn’t happened in 2000 years and isn’t likely to happen in the next 2000.

I think, I hate to say it, but I truly think you are assessing this more with your heart then your head (not saying you’re not intellectual but in this case you are taking the emotional route).

The Church has very valid reasons as to why she rejects female priests AND homosexual marriage. We can take what statements have been made and decide to trust that the Holy Spirit is guiding the Church in truth or we can look at it all and decide we know better then the Church Christ established. Simple as that.

It’s nice to look at homosexual couples and only see the love they have for each other. It’s nice to see them and think: What’s wrong with love? Why can’t they be free to love each other?

I contend that love is used to excuse all kinds of immoral behavior. Men cheat on their wives because they ‘fall in love’ with someone else.

Women leave their children because they’ve found ‘love’ and they have to pursue that.

People choose to have multiple partners because they’re in ‘love’ and what’s wrong with love after all?

What IS marriage? Really? For as long as time it has been defined as the bonding of one man and one woman. It’s not JUST about love… today’s modern interpretation tries to make it JUST about love and that’s why we have so many divorces (when your marriage is based on love alone you’ll leave when the love feeling fades).

I really feel we should stop basing our actions on emotion (including love) and start thinking things through a bit more. That would solve a lot of the dysfunction that society is now exhibiting.

Sorry, that was a lot of rambling just to say: I trust the Church to make the right decision on these issues. The Church HAS made mistakes in the past (very few in the space of 2000 years I might add) but she has learned from those mistakes and the Holy Spirit has not abandoned her.

 

[Hadrianus]

I have a friend who is a mother of a gay son. They tried everything, conversion therapy, etc. He changed for “a while” but admitted that deep down in side, no matter how hard he prayed, he still had the SSA. His family did everything to exclude this child from their life when it might appear they were “condoning” his lifestyle. I know all of these people and if one of you says he “didn’t sincerely try to change” I’ll drive to where you are and throw a glass of cold water into your face. He tried with all his heart, I was there with him the entire way. The program was nothing short of hell on earth for him. Not once could his family agree that they might be wrong and should try some other tactic to have a relationship with their son. End of story, father dies of brain cancer, son feels so guilty (and has a bad genetic disorder which caused him lots of additional pain) and takes a hand full of pain killers one night. Tragic ending to the story, mother realizes she should have loved her son, accepted him and tried other avenues to help him keep Christ in his life. I truly believe SSA is genetic, I saw this guy TRY with everything he had and it didn’t work. I saw this guy cry every single night looking for help and he’s dead now. This was a great Catholic family I grew up with and trust me, the mother was not dominant and the father not emasculated. He was the “Man” of the house and you knew it. He was a police officer and he didn’t any flack from his family. A good strong father, a mother who stayed home daily and cooked 3 meals a day for all 5 kids. So no, I don’t feel like the jerk of the year, I feel like a good Catholic who feels the need to say, “ease up on these people, we’re hating people we don’t understand nor have the training to understand” We need to accept people for who they are and try to help them live good Catholic lives and pray for their souls. Because I believe that’s what Catholicism is really about. This woman is looking for excuses as to why her situation is what it is, reality is, we may never know the reason but we can’t blame “families” for what happens. Things just happy and all we can do is PRAY for guidance and for the souls of our families. I’m sorry if you feel I’m a jerk, this wound I have is still very new and fresh. Within months. I went along with all this BS and I do have feelings of having been responsible for this persons death. I could have mentioned other possibilities and options, but instead I pushed for this conversion junk. It doesn’t work, it never will. If somebody is truly GAY and not Bi or Experimenting, then I do not believe in my heart they can change. We need to pray and maybe push to a chaste life until we all fully understand. The catholic church is slow to change because they are careful, but I believe in my heart they will come up with a good way to handle these situations which is less painful to the individuals involved. And God did make man in his own image, so I do believe we were made by God and he makes no mistakes.

As this tragic story illustrates, it is very dangerous to force someone to undergo conversion therapy. If an individual wishes to try it of his own free will that’s another matter, though at the same time people who practice this therapy must be totally honest and admit that the actual probability of changing a male homosexual into a heterosexual is low. Female sexuality seems to be more fluid, and sometimes lesbians can become happily heterosexual, but with males it is much rarer.

We don’t know the causes of homosexual orientation in either men or women, and precisely because we don’t know the causes, it is not something that we can treat with any certainty of outcome. In the case of female homosexuality the transition to heterosexuality when it does occur seems to do so without conversion therapy. Very occasionally this can happen with men too. It is sometimes claimed that conversion therapy does succeed with about 20% of cases, but rigorous verification of this is still lacking. Even if true, that means that with 80% it is not going to work. On balance, the risks of psychological damage are high, which is why extreme caution is necessary.

 

[untruestory]

Some can, some can’t. I have a simple argument, but it’s worth considering.
There are devout practicing Catholics that aren’t sexually active and are secure and content with that lifestyle. (there was a recent link to a blog on FB that had a very inspirational message by a homosexual Catholic) If it were possible for all to become straight it would happen for those people. The fact it does not is half the proof I need to believe that. The second is that there are many incurable mental and sexual issues or “diseases”. I used to believe that I MUST be meant for marriage because ever since I was a young boy I’ve wanted a family. I’m a good looking guy. I’m sociable. I’ve dated a lot. I’ve recently come to the conclusion that simply because I’ve always had a desire is not a logical means to reason that it was meant to be fulfilled. I also have a desire to have sex with nearly any attractive woman I meet but that’s not God’s will either. Serial killers often have strong desires to hurt and murder from a very young age and God doesn’t want that either. As we often say: “We all have our crosses to bear.”
I’m no moral, theological, or philosophical genius. Just my two cents

 

[speakttruth]

Hasn’t happened in 2000 years and isn’t likely to happen in the next 2000.

I think, I hate to say it, but I truly think you are assessing this more with your heart then your head (not saying you’re not intellectual but in this case you are taking the emotional route).

The Church has very valid reasons as to why she rejects female priests AND homosexual marriage. We can take what statements have been made and decide to trust that the Holy Spirit is guiding the Church in truth or we can look at it all and decide we know better then the Church Christ established. Simple as that.

It’s nice to look at homosexual couples and only see the love they have for each other. It’s nice to see them and think: What’s wrong with love? Why can’t they be free to love each other?

I contend that love is used to excuse all kinds of immoral behavior. Men cheat on their wives because they ‘fall in love’ with someone else.

Women leave their children because they’ve found ‘love’ and they have to pursue that.

People choose to have multiple partners because they’re in ‘love’ and what’s wrong with love after all?

What IS marriage? Really? For as long as time it has been defined as the bonding of one man and one woman. It’s not JUST about love… today’s modern interpretation tries to make it JUST about love and that’s why we have so many divorces (when your marriage is based on love alone you’ll leave when the love feeling fades).

I really feel we should stop basing our actions on emotion (including love) and start thinking things through a bit more. That would solve a lot of the dysfunction that society is now exhibiting.

Sorry, that was a lot of rambling just to say: I trust the Church to make the right decision on these issues. The Church HAS made mistakes in the past (very few in the space of 2000 years I might add) but she has learned from those mistakes and the Holy Spirit has not abandoned her.

 

[speakttruth]

I thought this was a good post from one of our priests on this site below my comments.

What I have learned in my conversion that if you pick and choose what you want to believe in the Catholic faith, then you are not in good standing. We don’t have to understand everything she teaches, but we are to believe it. Either you believe it all or none of it.
Since you hope for a change in the church teachings, you don’t believe what she is teaching. So if that is the case then would you be the large percent of the Catholics who did not follow or know there faith that would vote for SSM? Half the Catholics voted for Roe verses Wade. As far as the Giverment, I like that, the church has always been involved in her laws. There is nothing in the Constitutions that says we have Separation from Church and State. Totally made up. The fact is the Giverment is supposed protect our religious rights, not take them away. They are supposed to foster marriage and protect children for the better of the human race and society. They don’t care about children, they care more about animals. They are not doing what is Right, look at all the immoral laws that go against the teaching of the Church. Although before I was converted back to my faith I never believed in SSM, but I was ignorant on abortion about in case of rape or the health of the mother among other sins. I now know the truth that their is no reason to kill the child in the womb.
They can try and save the mother in any other way and if it results in the death of the child then that is all they are supposed to do. You cannot kill the baby for the purpose to save the mother. So I had to be educated to understand some of these teachings. If you have been informed and know the reasons and still believe and are voting for these so called rights, then you are not following your faith and are in deep spiritual danger. The government didn’t need to protect homosexuals, they are not a different race, they needed to protect anyone that was being abused. This was always the case, this a farce that the homosexual agenda is pushing to shut us up. So now we as Catholics are not being protected to speak the truth. Where is the Government to protect my rights? We have all the Cafeteria Catholics, I used to be one of them, in office, that have gone down the tubes and are ruining this country for votes and you are helping them if you agree with them instead of your church.
God help us all.

The Church is not saying that people with same sex attraction cannot experience the emotional high that comes from the desire to be one with another (what our culture calls “falling in love”). Such an experience can be an effective instigator of a deeper love that draws the person out of the self and into an unselfish desire for the good of the other. This latter development is the only thing that can keep a man and woman faithful to each other until death. The “falling in love” mechanism without such development remains a self-centered infatuation that leads nowhere and eventually dies. We have seen this played out ad nauseum in Hollywood.

The key to understanding the sentence you quote is “complementarity.” Their very bodies are not complementary and require much adaption by using organs in a manner for which they are not designed. This seems to be the elephant in the room. To ignore this is to also ignore that such a configuration cannot produce new life which is an essential element in marriage and the maintaining of the human race. This is what the Church calls disordered.

What is really significant here though, is the hope that such persons who bare this cross will come to the experience of the only love that can truly satisfy all persons, regardless of their sexual attractions. It is through His cross that we know who we are and are truly complete. But I don’t expect most atheists to understand this.

Fr. Vincent Serpa, O.P.

THANK YOU, Steven for a balanced and calmly considered post:

My point has been - and remains - that there is a separation between what the Catholic Church must preach and what the givernment is Constitutionally bound to do. I hope there will one day be a revelation in the Catholic Church that homosexual marriage can be sanctified, just like I hope one day there will be female priests. I don’t project that will happen anytime in MY lifetime, of course, but I’m patient.

I completely understand all the arguments against homosexual marriage (abortion, birth control, the death penalty, yada, yada, yada) based on the immorality of the act. I get it, I really do. All I’m advocating is the givernment has to operate not on what is moral, but on what is RIGHT. The two aren’t always the same. Now THAT is a topic for another thread.

In today’s society it is RIGHT to protect homosexual couples the same way heterosexual couples are protected. The commitment they make to preserve the union (i.e.: one spouse giving up their career based on the commitment to the marriage then getting fair recognition of that sacrifice should there be a divorce), the legal recognition of their relationship (rights to inheritance, making medical decisions, etc), and the protection of the children they are raising together benefits society. This is the only reason why the givernment is involved in creating laws that recognize the special status of personhood known as “married”. You can call it “civil union” all you want, but it doesn’t change the purpose of having the relationship protected in society.

 

[chepner3]

First, the issue of emotionalism. I stand by my point of view that love is a verb, not a noun. One acts loving in relationship even when the emotion isn’t there to back it up. Twenty-five plus years of marriage has taught me that much. I act lovingly toward my husband even in those moments when my emotions are telling me to bite off his head. This is the difference between real love and the Hollywood love in movies.

In short, my point of view is one that I have long considered, even prayed about, and isn’t one derived of emotion.

I also believe one of the reasons homosexual unions are more likely to break-up after a long period of time is because society doesn’t support them staying together. My experience during weddings often fills me with awe when I realize that there is an entire room filled with people who will become that couple’s support system through the rest of their marriage. There are literally dozens, sometimes hundreds, of people who will be cheering the couple on to remain together and love one another even during the rocky times. Homosexual couples, without the marriage ceremony, don’t often have that experience and don’t have avenues to create a broad support system during the life of their bonding.

As to body parts being dissimilar, I have to laugh. I must have missed receiving the rule book that says my feet can only be used for walking but not for dancing. That my voice can only be used for speaking love, but not to shout. That my hands must never touch the floor (ah, that is the province of the feet) so certain yoga moves are barred. I understand when people (mostly men) pale at the thought of the dynamics of the homosexual sex act. Of course it is a disturbing thought to anyone who isn’t aroused by such things; just like how children blanch at the idea of their own parents in heterosexual embrace.

But to the more serious topic of “Cafeteria Catholic”. I never said there was a separation of Church and State in the Constitution. Yes, the givernment is there to protect my rights. Just as the givernment must protect the rights of people from other faiths, agnostics and atheists. What I wrote was that the givernment shouldn’t make laws based on one moral code, i.e.: what Rome says (or heaven forbid, what Sharia law says). Instead it makes laws based on what is right and just. Since the only reason givernments continue to define legal marriage is to protect its citizens in case of divorce, illness or death, there is no reason to disenfranchise citizens who are in families with two adults of the same gender. Of course, I prefer that the US givernment got out of the ‘business of marriage’ altogether, but I suspect I’ll see female priests first.

As to my beliefs about priests marrying, female priests, abortion, contraception, etc. I have spoken to many learned priest who also pray for a day when there can be female priests, etc. Such a hope doesn’t make one less Catholic. I don’t have to AGREE with every decree from Rome to have faith in the one Holy Catholic Church. I can go to the voting booth with a clear conscious that I want a givernment that does right by all citizens, not just Catholic ones, while also living IN my accordance to what my faith tells me what I must do. I might not get an abortion, but I have no right to stop another woman from seeking a private medical procedure that is carefully considered between her and her doctor. There are so many Catholics all over the world who struggle with less protective governments. I am so blessed to have access to a secret ballot, for instance.

 

[Leegal]

I also believe one of the reasons homosexual unions are more likely to break-up after a long period of time is because society doesn’t support them staying together. My experience during weddings often fills me with awe when I realize that there is an entire room filled with people who will become that couple’s support system through the rest of their marriage. There are literally dozens, sometimes hundreds, of people who will be cheering the couple on to remain together and love one another even during the rocky times. Homosexual couples, without the marriage ceremony, don’t often have that experience and don’t have avenues to create a broad support system during the life of their bonding.

Actually, the homosexual unions of friends that I have known have lasted no more or less longer than male/female marriages. At least there’s no evidence to the fact that they are more likely to break up. While there may be promiscuity, men and women can be promiscuous too. My homosexual friends tend to be monogamous. I don’t think that there’s enough evidence to know that homosexual unions don’t last as long – not by the ones I have seen. I know many at 20 and 30 years and still counting so that argument holds no water with me. Are Catholics called to chastity instead? Yes. However, the argument for or against a union of homosexuals has nothing to do with whether it can last or not – nor would anyone consider that because, if so, 1/2 hetereos should not marry by that argument and the 50% divorce rate

As to my beliefs about priests marrying, female priests, abortion, contraception, etc. I have spoken to many learned priest who also pray for a day when there can be female priests, etc. Such a hope doesn’t make one less Catholic. I don’t have to AGREE with every decree from Rome to have faith in the one Holy Catholic Church. I can go to the voting booth with a clear conscious that I want a givernment that does right by all citizens, not just Catholic ones, while also living IN my accordance to what my faith tells me what I must do. I might not get an abortion, but I have no right to stop another woman from seeking a private medical procedure that is carefully considered between her and her doctor. There are so many Catholics all over the world who struggle with less protective governments. I am so blessed to have access to a secret ballot, for instance.

I know that the Church will never change their position on female priests, abortion and contraception – ever. You may see married priests – it’s not an infallible teaching and with a stroke of a pen Pope Benedict XVI could change it tomorrow – but the Pope has said he will not.

As to the rest – there will be no women priests, abortion or ABC. I am a women; I don’t think women should be priests. And the Church can never change their position on abortion as it violates the Commandments so there’s no argument that will allow the Church to change that position. Abortion and the prohibition on contraception are infallible teachings, binding and cannot be changed.

P.S. Roe is bad law too – it violates the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.