Can Homosexuality Be Proved Wrong From Natural Law

[Abu]

inocente
I’ll admit that it’s hard to remove bias (in the scientific sense) in research being conducted within a society that displays negative attitudes to homosexuality.
larkin31
argument meant only to smear gays.

Wrong on all counts.

1. There is tremendous care and concern for those inflicted with the disorder, and it is only because of this that the opportunities for reparative therapy have been enabled with outstanding results. Those helped have chosen to help themselves by receiving such therapy. No one is “trying to show” a case – the results are factual.
2. It is only because of the rigorous scientific methods employed that the facts have been established as against the confusion and negative attitudes within the APA which resulted in an about face in 2008, while still unwilling to recognise the work done by Fr Harvey, Dr Satinover, Dr Spitzer and many others in healing the disorder. Those negative ideas showed up in several claims of a “gay gene”, all without scientific evidence (Post #706).
3. On June 18, 2007 the *Insurance Journal *reported, “The three companies that insure the majority of Protestant churches in America say they typically receive upward of 260 reports each year of young people under 18 being sexually abused by clergy, church staff, volunteers or congregation members.”

“In the general population, the majority of abusers are regressed heterosexual men who sexually abuse girls. Women are also found to be among those sexual abusers. While it’s difficult to obtain accurate statistics on childhood sexual abuse, the characteristic patterns of repeat child sex offenders have been well described. The profiles of child molesters never include normal adults who become erotically attracted to children as a result of abstinence (Fred Berlin, “Compulsive Sexual Behaviors” in Addiction and Compulsive Behaviors [Boston: NCBC, 1998]; Patrick J. Carnes, “Sexual Compulsion: Challenge for Church Leaders” in Addiction and Compulsion; Dale O’Leary, “Homosexuality and Abuse”).” [freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2505620/posts]](A “Celibacy Problem”? Catholic-Bashing, NAMBLA and the Dalai Lama])

Celibacy not linked to pedophilia – homosexuality linked to sexual abuse
Factually, “Many psychologists and psychiatrists have shown that there is no link between celibacy and pedophilia,” but have found a “relationship between homosexuality and pedophilia.”
The Catholic League president additionally mentioned the psychologist Leslie Lothstein, who noted that in his work with abusive priests, “only a small minority were true pedophiles.”
Donohue defended his view of the scandal as a “homosexual crisis” by citing the data of Dr. Richard Fitzgibbons, a psychiatrist who has worked with abusive clergy. Dr. Fitzgibbons says that his own clinical practice confirms the opinion of “many psychologists and psychiatrists” who have found “no link between celibacy and pedophilia.”
Rather, the psychiatrist’s findings showed a “relationship between homosexuality and pedophilia.” “Every priest whom I treated who was involved with children sexually,” Fitzgibbons said, “had previously been involved in adult homosexual relationships.”
catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=37507

Dr Philip Jenkins writes (March, 2002): “Literally every denomination and faith tradition has its share of abuse cases, and some of the worst involve non-Catholics. Every mainline Protestant denomination has had scandals aplenty, as have Pentecostals, Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Jews, Buddhists, Hare Krishnas – and the list goes on. One Canadian Anglican (Episcopal) diocese is currently on the verge of bankruptcy as a result of massive lawsuits caused by decades of systematic abuse, yet the Anglican church does not demand celibacy of its clergy.”

“My research of cases over the past 20 years indicates no evidence whatever that Catholic or other celibate clergy are any more likely to be involved in misconduct or abuse than clergy of any other denomination – or indeed, than nonclergy. However determined news media may be to see this affair as a crisis of celibacy, the charge is just unsupported.”
[catholiceducation.org/articles/religion/re0534.html]](http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/religion/re0534.html])

The Diagnostic And Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition (American Psychiatric Association, 1994) notes that the majority of cases of abuse by Catholic priests involves hebephilia, which often involves sexual activity by homosexual priests “with young seminarians or 16- or 17-year-old boys … While such homosexual activities with minors are criminal offenses – and immoral – they are certainly not examples of pedophilia or child molestation.”
[freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2505620/posts]](A “Celibacy Problem”? Catholic-Bashing, NAMBLA and the Dalai Lama])

 

[Soulewolf]

when you’re done gay bashing and wish to have an actual conversation, tell me and i’ll be happy to oblige.

we arent here to announce that homosexuality is wrong, we are here to discover if homosexuality is wrong from a basis of logic and if it is, exactally what the logic proof is that proves it.

If there was absolute knowledge that there was no gay gene then we wouldent be having this conversation. The same for absolute knowledge on the gay gene. Yes studies give evidence supporting one way or another, but as of now there are no definitive studies. so posting this study or that study doesnt prove you right

 

[Abu]

larkin31
Do you believe that both the Onan and the Sodom and Gomorrah events literally occurred as described?

All faithful Catholics accept the meaning of the acts of God which are described in the Sacred Scriptures given to us as the Word of God, as Fr John Echert explains.

What is the real sin of Sodom and Gomorah?
**Question from on May-04-2009: **
What is the real sin of Sodom and Gomorrah? Why did the church stick to literary interpretation that is causing great suffering and divisions in family on issue of sexual orientation at the expense of historical interpretation?
Answer by Fr. John Echert on May-04-2009, EWTN:
The sin of these two cities was clearly homosexual activity and attempts to cast it otherwise are untenable. Not only is this perversion condemned in the Old Testament but more than once Saint Paul lists this sin among those which will exclude someone from Heaven. Sympathy for someone afflicted with this inclination must not extend to acceptance of the activity or fall short of urging someone in such a lifestyle to be freed from it.

On the sin of Onan, the Sacred Scriptures are clear.
**Answer by Fr. John Echert on May-03-2008, EWTN: **
The sin is NOT that of adultery, which is to take the wife of another man. In fact, it was expected and eventually required that if a man died without a son to continue his posterity, his brother was to take his wife after his death as his own and raise up a family by her. So the sin was not in taking his deceased brothers wife but in spilling his seed on the ground. This action is explicit in the text–spilled his seed on the ground–and is the most obvious cause for which he was put to death by God Himself. This is an important text which supports the moral teaching of the Church–and nature–that contraception is mortally sinful.

Answer by Fr. John Echert on May-15-2008, EWTN:
For under Mosaic Law the refusal of a brother to take his dead brother’s widow for his own was not punishable by death but by publicly shaming the brother by the widow. Mosaic Law was typically more severe than this earlier period during which Onan lived and so our assumption should be that the sin of Onan was more serious than a failure to raise up a child by the widow. It was a sin against nature, to include a form of birth control and masturbation too.

Answer by Fr. John Echert on March-01-2009, EWTN::
Pope Pius XI, quoting St. Augustine, the foremost Traditional source of marriage doctrine, dogmatically declared that this is indeed the proper interpretation of this Biblical teaching.

For anyone who is labouring under false ideas, and thinks they are being rejected, the remedy is Christ who taught: “If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed. And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free.” (Jn 8:31-32).

 

[Abu]

Researchers Peter Bearman and Hannah Brückner, from Columbia and Yale respectively, studied data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, and found even lower concordance rates of only 6.7% for male and 5.3% for female identical twins. In fact, their study neatly refuted several of the biological theories for the origin of homosexuality, finding social experiences in childhood to be far more significant.

If it was not clear in the 1990’s, it certainly is now—no one is “born gay.”
[Peter S. Bearman and Hannah Brückner, “Opposite-Sex Twins and Adolescent Same-Sex Attraction,” *American Journal of Sociology Vol. 107, No. 5, (March 2002), 1179-1205].

Further, man is capable by his own activity of acquiring what is lacking and developing what is already possessed to fulfill his nature. So man can know his incompleteness; he can see what he is now and discover the direction of fulfillment by scrutiny of his own nature in body, mind and spirit – to achieve himself fully. As a free agent, he has an obligation to achieve himself fully, and this bond of obligation is the natural law. All that is knowable about man through psychology, history or any of the sciences is relevant to the natural law, is part of the natural law. The natural law is outside of man’s control because created by God in man’s nature.
[See Fr Paul M Quay, S.J., in *Why Humanae Vitae Was Right, Ignatius 1993, p 21-4]

The natural law says that if you want things to prosper, you have to use them in accord with their nature. If you want to grow good tomatoes, you have to treat tomato plants in accord with their nature. You have to give them sunshine and water and fertilizer and a good soil. It is something that man can discover by the basis of his own reason.

Homosexual activity “lacks those very elements which could make it a natural sign of the union of persons. This is why the most that can be achieved in a homosexual act is mutual masturbation.” (Michael Palachuk, Why Is Homosexual Activity Morally Wrong? Referenced in The Truth About Homosexuality, Section: The Argument from Natural Law, Fr John A Harvey, Ignatius 1996, p 133-4).

 

[inocente]

Abu - I’m not sure how the references to non-Catholics is relevant, except that abuse is universal. The issue for me is that I haven’t found any evidence for the claims “These studies confirm that the link between homosexuality and the sexual abuse of minors in the general population is overwhelming; that the link between – priestly sexual abuse and homosexuality is overwhelming, and that no link has been found between celibacy and pedophilia.”

Regarding whether sexual orientation is genetically based, it almost certainly isn’t. The simplest argument against is that homosexuals don’t tend to pass on their genes.

These are just observations. My only argument would be that it is one really big leap to then say that sexual orientation is a treatable malady (unless I wanted to question whether Natural Law can be proved but thankfully that is off-topic).

 

[larkin31]

Abu, are you allowed to simply keep posting cut and pastes from other sources off-topic like this? Your posts aren’t even any longer on the topic of “proof from Natural Law.” Now you simply keep repeating, in language I am certain is pasted from elsewhere, long tracts that smear gays and exonerate priests. You won’t even discuss the logic that you are attempting to use here; you simply try to stifle through the use of lengthy, multiple postings.

 

[Abu]

inocente
it is one really big leap to then say that sexual orientation is a treatable malady

Strange, that you should so casually dismiss the working evidence – but then denial is a characteristic of those who will not to accept facts, including ignoring the evidence against the canard that celibacy is linked to pedophlia, rather than the homosexual disorder being the cause of abuse. The success of reparative treatment is allied to the psychological social experiences identified.

Now from larkin31, in the face of the evidence, we have the repeated canard of labelling the evidence as designed to “smear gays and exonerate priests”, without a skerrick of fact – Catholics are used to such fantasies. Are the killing of Onan and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah by God part of this imagined “smear”?

“The natural law is the law of human being alone—not other animals, not birds, not rocks, not trees, not planets. The natural law arises from our particular nature. It is natural insofar as it is rooted in our nature, and moral insofar as our nature defines what is good and evil for us.” (Dr Benjamin Wiker). No one can change the natural moral law.

 

[larkin31]

Strange, that you should so casually dismiss the working evidence – but then denial is a characteristic of those who will not to accept facts, including ignoring the evidence against the canard that celibacy is linked to pedophlia, rather than the homosexual disorder being the cause of abuse. The success of reparative treatment is allied to the psychological social experiences identified.

Now from larkin31, in the face of the evidence, we have the repeated canard of labelling the evidence as designed to “smear gays and exonerate priests”, without a skerrick of fact – Catholics are used to such fantasies. Are the killing of Onan and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah by God part of this imagined “smear”?

Yes.

Onan was neither gay nor masturbating. Nor was he killed simply because he ejaculated outside the vagina. He was killed for disobedience. God has a way about that in the OT.

And I asked you, do you take those two episodes as having literally happened as described?

 

[Abu]

larkin31
The question is “Are the killing of Onan and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah by God part of this imagined ‘smear’?”

Your prejudice is to condemn God as “smearing” everyone who acts so wrongly, while the condemnation by God so severely expresses the parallel seen clearly both for the death of Onan by God for contraception, and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah because of the homosexual activity therein.

Your attempt to twist Onan’s crime away from contraception is false as you now know from post #719 through Fr John Echert: “For under Mosaic Law the refusal of a brother to take his dead brother’s widow for his own was not punishable by death but by publicly shaming the brother by the widow. Mosaic Law was typically more severe than this earlier period during which Onan lived and so our assumption should be that the sin of Onan was more serious than a failure to raise up a child by the widow. It was a sin against nature, to include a form of birth control and masturbation too.” BTW, Fr John Echert has the Licentiate in Sacred Scripture (S.S.L.) degree from the Pontifical Biblical Institute, Rome with additional graduate studies at the Ecole Biblique, Jerusalem, and teaches Sacred Scripture.

This meaning for Christ’s Church is clearly conveyed as in post #719, to which faithful Catholics assent – I am one.

Those with the homosexual disorder are called to be chaste just as those without this disorder are to be chaste.

 

[HauntedJame]

Strange, that you should so casually dismiss the working evidence – but then denial is a characteristic of those who will not to accept facts, including ignoring the evidence against the canard that celibacy is linked to pedophlia, rather than the homosexual disorder being the cause of abuse. The success of reparative treatment is allied to the psychological social experiences identified.

Now from larkin31, in the face of the evidence, we have the repeated canard of labelling the evidence as designed to “smear gays and exonerate priests”, without a skerrick of fact – Catholics are used to such fantasies. Are the killing of Onan and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah by God part of this imagined “smear”?

“The natural law is the law of human being alone—not other animals, not birds, not rocks, not trees, not planets. The natural law arises from our particular nature. It is natural insofar as it is rooted in our nature, and moral insofar as our nature defines what is good and evil for us.” (Dr Benjamin Wiker). No one can change the natural moral law.

Homosexuals generally don’t go around abusing people. Just so you know. Sexuality doesn’t make a person “good” or “evil”, and when someone gets abused it can just as easily be a straight man or woman doing it. Thought you might like to know it.

The killing of Onan was, as larkin said, to do with disobedience.

Sodom and Gomorrah is often debated by theologists, about what the true meaning of it is. One of the theories that it isn’t about homosexuality or heterosexuality, but rape. But there are many theories out there.

 

[Abu]

HauntedJame
The research and the results of therapy have been a God-send to those so afflicted and many are doing a great work of real love in their care and concern. We do not tolerate discrimination against people. We practice faith, hope and charity in truth.

Your ideas on the meaning of Sacred Scripture re Onan and Sodom and Gomorrah are false. That’s why Christ gave us His Church to show us the Way, Truth and Life and She declared which writings are the Word of God (the Bible). Neither can Tom, Dick nor Harry (or Harriet) take upon themselves to interpret His Word – only His Church can do that.

You have the correct meaning by a renowned Catholic Scripture scholar. The myriad of self-interpretations of the Bible have produced some 42,000 denominations none of which teach the same. That’s not Christ’s Church.

 

[inocente]

Strange, that you should so casually dismiss the working evidence

You have presented ad hoc evidence while I’m looking for scientific evidence. For example, Catholic homosexuals may want to be cured if they feel guilty, but the only way to really know is to do a long-term study that includes control subjects. That kind of study could also be used to determine the most effective treatment technique. It is standard science. I can’t find any such studies, and it seems that the vast majority of professionals think that the results would be negative anyway, i.e. sexual orientation is not an affliction.

[to HauntedJame] Your ideas on the meaning of Sacred Scripture re Onan and Sodom and Gomorrah are false. That’s why Christ gave us His Church to show us the Way, Truth and Life and She declared which writings are the Word of God (the Bible). Neither can Tom, Dick nor Harry (or Harriet) take upon themselves to interpret His Word – only His Church can do that.

We should be a little bit careful with Genesis. The verses on Onan can be interpreted in many ways summarized here. The story of Sodom and Gomorrah also has a number of interpretations. Some verses hint that the story may be metaphorical, e.g. Gen 19:8 where Lot says “Look, I have two daughters who have never slept with a man. Let me bring them out to you, and you can do what you like with them."

Jesus isn’t using a sexual interpretation in Mat 10:11-16.

That’s not Christ’s Church.

That’s starting to get offensive - remember there’s a Baptist around somewhere. I raise you Romans 14 and forgive my brother.

 

[MindOverMatter2]

Homosexuals generally don’t go around abusing people. Just so you know. Sexuality doesn’t make a person “good” or “evil”, and when someone gets abused it can just as easily be a straight man or woman doing it.

Homosexual attraction is not a sin. But Homosexual “acts” are evil in so far as evil is defined as that which prevents us from perfectly fulfilling our nature. It is evil because it does not fulfil the fact that we are men and women. The natural end to being a man or a women is heterosexuality. Attractions to the same sex, or to animals, or to inanimate objects, or to small children, are all disorders because they do not fulfil the good of our objective nature.

 

[HauntedJame]

Homosexual attraction is not a sin. But Homosexual “acts” are evil in so far as evil is defined as that which prevents us from perfectly fulfilling our nature. It is evil because it does not fulfil the fact that we are men and women. The natural end to being a man or a women is heterosexuality. Attractions to the same sex, or to animals, or to inanimate objects, or to small children, are all disorders because they do not fulfil the good of our objective nature.

Wow, it’s like hearing Richard von Krafft-Ebing calling through from the 1860s…

Who said it was natural? Are you saying anyone that isn’t heterosexual are unnautral and therefore wrong? What about asexuality? And how can you put pedophoilia next to homosexuality and expect others to accept that in God’s eyes they are the same?

 

[larkin31]

Homosexuals generally don’t go around abusing people. Just so you know. Sexuality doesn’t make a person “good” or “evil”, and when someone gets abused it can just as easily be a straight man or woman doing it. Thought you might like to know it.

Hetero parents are the greatest (in the worst way) abusers in this country. By far. Sadly, the biggest threat (in terms of abuse) to children is their parents.

And I am a parent.

 

[larkin31]

Homosexual attraction is not a sin. But Homosexual “acts” are evil in so far as evil is defined as that which prevents us from perfectly fulfilling our nature.

It’s a good thing–but a form of hypocrisy–that this standard is not applied to other behaviors. Could you imagine? Virtually every action but eating, breathing, passing waste, and making babies would be sinful.

 

[MindOverMatter2]

It’s a good thing–but a form of hypocrisy–that this standard is not applied to other behaviors. Could you imagine? Virtually every action but eating, breathing, passing waste, and making babies would be sinful.

Explain.

 

[MindOverMatter2]

Wow, it’s like hearing Richard von Krafft-Ebing calling through from the 1860s…

Who said it was natural? Are you saying anyone that isn’t heterosexual are unnautral and therefore wrong? What about asexuality? And how can you put pedophoilia next to homosexuality and expect others to accept that in God’s eyes they are the same?

Heterosexuality is the objective intrinsic natural end of being a man or a women. This evident in the fact that human beings, minus some kind of disorder, take the form of either being a man or a women.

 

[larkin31]

…And how can you put pedophoilia next to homosexuality and expect others to accept that in God’s eyes they are the same?

It’s a smear tactic. One suggests, without actually stating it directly, that the two sins are equivalent. A form of “sin by association.” Usually incest or bestiality or marrying a plant gets mentioned too (see the military and gays thread for THAT one).

 

[larkin31]

Heterosexuality is the objective intrinsic natural end …

That’s an empty, overly-reductive statement.