B
- Status
E
etspiri2sanctus
Guest
You’re right, some cafeteria catholics think they can pick and choose.
Homosexuals and heterosexuals receive the love of God. Even if they sin, they still receive it. The problem is, sometimes we don’t give that love back by following His teachings.
E
etspiri2sanctus
Guest
Thistle, St. Paul was talking about active homosexuals, not the fact that one may be drawn to same sex attraction. Being and acting are two different things.
E
edwest2
Guest
Can you point me to a reference where Catholics are taking a supportive view? That would be contrary to Church teaching.
Whether or not “civil partnerships” exist, we cannot believe in or accept the phenomenon. This, of course, does not prevent them from occurring.
Peace,
Ed
C
Christopher68
Guest
You are absolutely right in that regardless of what you, me, or anyone on this forum thinks about civil unions, there is no denying that they occur.
I am a bit mystified by the interest many people take in something that does not involve them, but rather two other people.
E
edwest2
Guest
You misunderstand the purpose of human community. We agree upon laws in order to order society. We simply do not go off and do whatever we like in violation of social norms. The purpose of self-discipline is to order our passions toward the good and to prevent ourselves from participating in the bad. Common descriptions of good and bad behaviors are given to our children.
Here, what is recognized by society at large as bad or wrong behaviors should not be tolerated. That is why there is a big media push to openly live some behaviors without social consequence. The Church has listed the detrimental effects, including on the young.
The practice of radical individualism causes a breakdown in social order and can lead to anarchy. Such anarchy has been pushed along by legal abortion, no-fault divorce and recently, gay civil partnerships. The basis for gay behavior is not known fully but it does not appear that those who engage in it are born that way. It is not possible to establish a social norm and simply decide to go against it and not expect consequences. These consequences, by the way, should never include bashing in any form.
For Catholics, we each bear our crosses. For heterosexuals, I bear my opposite sex attraction cross that places me in danger of punishment should I persist in anything other than marriage or celibacy and holiness.
Holiness is not optional. It is not enough to say, I can’t. It is much easier to say I won’t. I get that. Our lives here are temporal. All the Church is saying today is that too many are living as if God does not exist. In the end, it might be said that some of us, including me, sometimes think, Who is God to take away what makes me happy? while losing the loving guidelines He has given us for this life.
Peace,
Ed
A
alacoque
Guest
Christopher: Re your last comment: This is dangerous thinking, I believe…and we are deluding ourselves if we take this ‘out’. By the criteria in that statement, the crucifixion and the abomination on Calvary would ‘not be my concern’ if I were passing by or standing in some nameless crowd ‘just watching’ the event. It wouldn’t have ‘involved’ me…It wasn’t my ‘choice’ to do any of what was being done to Jesus; I wasn’t pounding the nails, nor did I scourge, taunt, or spit on him.
My point is - and both morality and reality hold: Whatever involves offense against God is my concern. It may not be my direct fault and I may not bear the culpability of the actual, personal sin involved, but sin, the offending of almighty God and the rejection of his commandments and love are always and everywhere my concern. I offer reparation, for all sin, to the Sacred Heart of Jesus and beg pardon for all sinners, including myself.
Because we are all ‘one body’ and because whatever we do to anyone, we do to Christ, we are all to be involved and concerned in the struggle against sin. None of us can stand ‘outside the crowd’ and claim we’re not involved.
God bless …
B
BlueShadow123
Guest
You’re wrong. Just because somebody is homosexual means nothing. They are born that way.
Now if they are having gay sex, thats one thing, but being homosexual does not mean damnation. God cannot damn somebody IF they are born that way.
S
StBernadette64
Guest
That’s right, blueshadow. You can have someone attracted to the same sex but not act on that attraction by having gay sex. A homosexual living a celibate and chaste life is very real. That’s why there’s the Courage group for homosexuals (not gays actively and unrepentantly committing sodomy) who wish to live according to God’s will for them.
couragerc.net/
couragerc.net/
P
PatriceA
Guest
I think I’m still a little confused by what you mean “believe in civil partnerships.” Do you mean civil partnerships and civil marriages recognized by the government will be recognized as valid within the Catholic Church? I sincerely doubt that will happen.
C
Christopher68
Guest
Thank you for your thouhgtful reply. I understand the point you are making. However, in the analogy you offered, there are two very different responses, at least from my perspective. If I saw an innocent person beaten to death, I hope and pray I would have the courage to intervene. That is a vastly different situation than what consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home.Christopher: Re your last comment: This is dangerous thinking, I believe…and we are deluding ourselves if we take this ‘out’. By the criteria in that statement, the crucifixion and the abomination on Calvary would ‘not be my concern’ if I were passing by or standing in some nameless crowd ‘just watching’ the event. It wouldn’t have ‘involved’ me…It wasn’t my ‘choice’ to do any of what was being done to Jesus; I wasn’t pounding the nails, nor did I scourge, taunt, or spit on him.
My point is - and both morality and reality hold: Whatever involves offense against God is my concern. It may not be my direct fault and I may not bear the culpability of the actual, personal sin involved, but sin, the offending of almighty God and the rejection of his commandments and love are always and everywhere my concern. I offer reparation, for all sin, to the Sacred Heart of Jesus and beg pardon for all sinners, including myself.
Because we are all ‘one body’ and because whatever we do to anyone, we do to Christ, we are all to be involved and concerned in the struggle against sin. None of us can stand ‘outside the crowd’ and claim we’re not involved.
God bless …
E
edwest2
Guest
Please provide scientific evidence that they are born this way.
Respectfully,
Ed
B
BlueShadow123
Guest
I used to think it was choice. But personally, I think most scientific evidence points to it being hormones in the womb. Some might choose in the unconscience mind, due to upbringing, hence they do not ‘think’ they chose it, and technically by free will, they did not. It could be genetic, but I think most signs and scientific studies point to hormones.
Other than that, there is no 100% proof, but after debating enough people about this subject, I guess I just finally admit that they are born gay. Or at least, more than likely.
I don’t have the proof you are looking for however. Go ask a gay person, I am not the person to ask. And just a heads up, I’m not debating this anymore, so please don’t even try.
If you really want to know more about this I suggest you take some psychology classes at a college level. I know quite a few people who have/are and have definitely mentioned it talking about how likely it is that somebody is ‘born’ gay based on studies, ect…
B
BlueShadow123
Guest
youtube.com/watch?v=b1u-7jW7opc
youtube.com/watch?v=EPffj8k7iLk&feature=related
youtube.com/watch?v=r7aUlWjPZVw
youtube.com/watch?v=jnxYQOyLvlY&feature=related
Parts taken from documentaries and national geographic
scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=study-says-brains-of-gay
pnas.org/content/105/27/9403
scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=having-older-brothers-inc
pnas.org/content/102/20/7356.abstract
pnas.org/content/103/27/10456.abstract
scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=bisexual-species
sciencemag.org/content/318/5858/1882.abstract
beheco.oxfordjournals.org/content/18/1/21.abstract
livescience.com/animals/080516-gay-animals.html
trans-health.com/displayarticle.php?aid=49
washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/22/AR2005052200785.html
apsa.org/Portals/1/docs/About%20APsaa/PositionPaperGayMarriage.pdf
newscientist.com/article/dn14146-gay-brains-structured-like-those-of-the-opposite-sex.html
newscientist.com/article/mg19826613.900-gay-brains-are-hardwired-at-birth.html
newscientist.com/search?doSearch=true&query=gay+sex
seedmagazine.com/content/article/the_gay_animal_kingdom/
-American Academy of Psychiatry on Same-Sex Marriage
-American Academy of Psychoanalysis
-American Academy of Pediatrics
-American Academy of Psychology
-American Academy of Child Psychiatry
Identical Twin studies demonstrate statistical likelihood of inborn (genetic and/or intrauterine) causes:
J.M. Bailey and R.C. Pillard, “A genetic study of male sexual orientation,” Archives of General Psychiatry, vol. 48:1089-1096, December 1991.
Bailey, J. M. and D. S. Benishay (1993), “Familial Aggregation of Female Sexual Orientation,” American Journal of Psychiatry 150(2): 272-277.
Simon LeVay, “A difference in hypothalamic structure between heterosexual and homosexual men,” Science, vol. 253:1034-1037, 1991.
W. Byne and B. Parsons, “Human sexual orientation,” Archives of General Psychiatry, vol. 50:228-239, March 1993.
fMRI studies demonstrate mirror neuron activity consistent with sexual preference:
Ponsetia, J., Bosinkia, H.A., Wolff, S., Peller, M., Jansen, O., Mehdorn, H.M., Büchel, & Siebner, H.R. (2006). A functional endophenotype for sexual orientation in humans. NeuroImage, 33, 825-833.
Mouras, H., Stoléru, S., Moulier, V., Pélégrini-Issac, M., Rouxel, R., Grandjean, B., Glutron, D., & Bittoun, J. (In Press). Activation of mirror-neuron system by erotic video clips predicts degree of induced erection: an fMRI study. NeuroImage.
E
edwest2
Guest
So the answer is there is no answer? That’s not good enough to force a new social order on the world. I’ve already done the research.
Peace,
Ed
B
BlueShadow123
Guest
youtube.com/watch?v=b1u-7jW7opc
youtube.com/watch?v=EPffj8k7iLk&feature=related
youtube.com/watch?v=r7aUlWjPZVw
youtube.com/watch?v=jnxYQOyLvlY&feature=related
Parts taken from documentaries and national geographic
scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=study-says-brains-of-gay
pnas.org/content/105/27/9403
scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=having-older-brothers-inc
pnas.org/content/102/20/7356.abstract
pnas.org/content/103/27/10456.abstract
scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=bisexual-species
sciencemag.org/content/318/5858/1882.abstract
beheco.oxfordjournals.org/content/18/1/21.abstract
livescience.com/animals/080516-gay-animals.html
trans-health.com/displayarticle.php?aid=49
washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/22/AR2005052200785.html
apsa.org/Portals/1/docs/About%20APsaa/PositionPaperGayMarriage.pdf
newscientist.com/article/dn14146-gay-brains-structured-like-those-of-the-opposite-sex.html
newscientist.com/article/mg19826613.900-gay-brains-are-hardwired-at-birth.html
newscientist.com/search?doSearch=true&query=gay+sex
seedmagazine.com/content/article/the_gay_animal_kingdom/
-American Academy of Psychiatry on Same-Sex Marriage
-American Academy of Psychoanalysis
-American Academy of Pediatrics
-American Academy of Psychology
-American Academy of Child Psychiatry
Identical Twin studies demonstrate statistical likelihood of inborn (genetic and/or intrauterine) causes:
J.M. Bailey and R.C. Pillard, “A genetic study of male sexual orientation,” Archives of General Psychiatry, vol. 48:1089-1096, December 1991.
Bailey, J. M. and D. S. Benishay (1993), “Familial Aggregation of Female Sexual Orientation,” American Journal of Psychiatry 150(2): 272-277.
Simon LeVay, “A difference in hypothalamic structure between heterosexual and homosexual men,” Science, vol. 253:1034-1037, 1991.
W. Byne and B. Parsons, “Human sexual orientation,” Archives of General Psychiatry, vol. 50:228-239, March 1993.
fMRI studies demonstrate mirror neuron activity consistent with sexual preference:
Ponsetia, J., Bosinkia, H.A., Wolff, S., Peller, M., Jansen, O., Mehdorn, H.M., Büchel, & Siebner, H.R. (2006). A functional endophenotype for sexual orientation in humans. NeuroImage, 33, 825-833.
Mouras, H., Stoléru, S., Moulier, V., Pélégrini-Issac, M., Rouxel, R., Grandjean, B., Glutron, D., & Bittoun, J. (In Press). Activation of mirror-neuron system by erotic video clips predicts degree of induced erection: an fMRI study. NeuroImage.
V
voglhund
Guest
When I read posts on the subject of homosexuality I can’t believe that I sense such hostility. It’s as if people haven’t taken the time to read the various church documents on the subject. I recommend reading 1987 document on the Patoral Care of Homosexual Persons for starters. The Church doesn’t have an official position on nature vs. nurture. The Church continues to affirm the worth and dignity of the homosexual person. The Church continues to teach that the desire for homosexual activity is essentially disordered and that acting on those sexual desires is grave matter. Whether or not a person is in a state of mortal sin is a more complicated matter; ask anyone who has studied moral theology. If you were to read the various church documents on this matter you will find that the Church gives very clear directions on how to address this matter.
None of us can determine the state of another person’s soul and consign him/her to heaven or hell. The Catholic homosexuals I have known throughout the years are clear on the Church’s teaching and clear about what Scripture says. If you want to help the homosexual person then read what the Church teaches and approach them with respect and compassion. If you’re not sure what that looks like check out the Courage website.
As for whether or not a Catholic can support secular civil partnerships or even civil marriage, you would need to debate/discuss the Church’s moral teaching on homosexuality, the Church’s teachings on social justice, and the important role of the individual conscience.
Cindy
None of us can determine the state of another person’s soul and consign him/her to heaven or hell. The Catholic homosexuals I have known throughout the years are clear on the Church’s teaching and clear about what Scripture says. If you want to help the homosexual person then read what the Church teaches and approach them with respect and compassion. If you’re not sure what that looks like check out the Courage website.
As for whether or not a Catholic can support secular civil partnerships or even civil marriage, you would need to debate/discuss the Church’s moral teaching on homosexuality, the Church’s teachings on social justice, and the important role of the individual conscience.
Cindy
A
alacoque
Guest
Christopher: If you’ll permit me one more response to the above: I refer you to the/my larger point - which is the salient and pertinent issue at hand: i.e.
- We are not talking about ‘an innocent person’ - we are talking about the Son of God - which is precisely what makes us ALL responsible and involved. He suffered, died and was buried for ALL of us and our sins.
- In the sense of #1 above, the over-arching point (and it applies to ALL sin and offense against Love, Himself) is that it doesn’t matter if the sin involves others we do not see or the obvious and blatant abuse of our Savior. Any wrongdoing, any and all sin, is an offense against love, charity and God, our creator. Because of that fact we are all bound and commanded to reject it, to do all we can to make reparation to God for it, to pray for the sinners and to object in our hearts and with our lips to that and all sin.
As the Church/Catechism makes clear, the condition of being homosexuality – having a same-sex attraction by itself – is not in the least sinful. The sin is in the BEHAVIOR. This is no different than any sin for any of us. To be tempted or to have a weakness in some area is not sinful; to act on it IS.
God be with you, friend. I think we agree more than we disagree…and your love of God is evident. Merry Christmas!
C
Christopher68
Guest
Once again I appreciate the courteous tone of your post.Christopher: If you’ll permit me one more response to the above: I refer you to the/my larger point - which is the salient and pertinent issue at hand: i.e.
If we know sin exists - in general and/or in specific - we are called to the same responses. We are not off the hook regarding the responses to sin that are required of us, simply because we are not personally involved. Actually, we ARE personally involved in ALL sin because of our fallen nature and our concupiscence. As I said previously, we are not all guilty of a given “personal” sin, but we are guilty in our humanity of being part of a sinful world. This should not even have to be a requirement. our love for God should move us to condemn and sorrow over ALL sin, whether committed by us or by others, apart from us. The universal community of humanity requires it.
- We are not talking about ‘an innocent person’ - we are talking about the Son of God - which is precisely what makes us ALL responsible and involved. He suffered, died and was buried for ALL of us and our sins.
- In the sense of #1 above, the over-arching point (and it applies to ALL sin and offense against Love, Himself) is that it doesn’t matter if the sin involves others we do not see or the obvious and blatant abuse of our Savior. Any wrongdoing, any and all sin, is an offense against love, charity and God, our creator. Because of that fact we are all bound and commanded to reject it, to do all we can to make reparation to God for it, to pray for the sinners and to object in our hearts and with our lips to that and all sin.
As the Church/Catechism makes clear, the condition of being homosexuality – having a same-sex attraction by itself – is not in the least sinful. The sin is in the BEHAVIOR. This is no different than any sin for any of us. To be tempted or to have a weakness in some area is not sinful; to act on it IS.
God be with you, friend. I think we agree more than we disagree…and your love of God is evident. Merry Christmas!
I again understand the general point of your post, but I still have difficulty understanding the application of it in regard to specific situations. For example, let’s say you are neighbors with a couple who is believed to be in a homosexual relationship. If you address this with them in conversation and they politely decline to discuss it, then what? Are you in favor of laws to arrest and punish them for suspected homosexual behavior? And how would that be proven without a gross violation of their civil liberties? And in regard to civil partnerships, there is nothing legally preventing any two people from having an attorney draw up legal documentation detailing their wishes regarding visitation rights, inheritance, etc. I understand that in a broader context, there is a concern about society somehow validating homosexual behavior. However, I am very uneasy with moral decisions being made simply by whoever has the most political power, as I have never looked to politicians for moral guidance, nor do I admire the behavior that many of them routinely exhibit.
And a Merry Christmas to you as well!
C
Christopher68
Guest
BlueShadow,
Thank you for providing these links. I don’t have time to view them at present, but I am bookmarking this page and will revisit later.
- Status