Can someone point me to a rigorous proof as to why homosexuality is wrong?

[Sonic]

homosexuality is genetic. Homosexuals were accepted 500 years ago, they then no longer pass on thier DNA, then homosexuality would be extinct. BUT it wasnt so homosexuals had children and continued to propegate there genetic blueprint…

Homosexuality is not genetic… actions are not genetic…

In some people, same-sex attractions may be caused by genetics, but in most cases it’s not.

The following article should prove very enlightening to you:

prolife.ath.cx:8000/plae116

 

[Bennie_P]

homosexuality is genetic. Homosexuals were accepted 500 years ago, they then no longer pass on thier DNA, then homosexuality would be extinct. BUT it wasnt so homosexuals had children and continued to propegate there genetic blueprint…

If people say homosexuality is unnatural. How come on the discovery channel (on a documentary about sex customs of animals) they featured a male, male, female goose couple. And also gay chimpanzees. This is apart of nature and something that is found naturally in nature is therefore natural is it not?

People who have discovery in Aus might have seen it in the last couple of weeks.

The discovery channel plays to the audience and the people who put their their money into pockets. Besides are we animals or Human Beings? If we are just animals then it is justifiable to eleminate undersirables from the pack, that for myself I cannot buy into.

You are spreading “gay rights” propaganda that cannot be proven, proganda that has been repeated over and over to those that want to justify their bad choices and it is based on bad science or in reality no science.

Thwarted in its goal to legitimize homosexual conduct as a fundamental right, the “gay” movement turned to the only other basis on which it could claim constitutional protection: minority status as a “suspect class.” The Supreme Court recognizes minority status only for those groups which 1) have suffered a history of discrimination, 2) are powerless to help themselves and 3) are defined by immutable characteristics.

This is the secret to understanding why the “gay” movement now denies that homosexuality is behavior-based and instead insists that homosexuality is innate and unchangeable.** It is not science. It is a legal and political strategy. **

The problem is that they can’t prove it.

There exists no truly objective means of determining whether a person is innately homosexual. One cannot take a blood test or DNA test to prove that he or she is “gay.” We must depend entirely upon a person’s claim that his or her homosexuality is innate. The taint of political self-interest alone makes such evidence wholly untrustworthy. Self-declared homosexuals can’t even prove that they really believe that their homosexuality is innate. Instead, they argue that homosexuality must be innate because no one would choose to be “gay” and incur the resulting social stigma. This argument is invalid, since many people choose lifestyles that others condemn. Moreover, there are many homosexuals who freely admit that their lifestyle is a voluntary preference.

On the question of choice, it must be noted that all sex but rape is voluntary and thus every sexual act involves a conscious choice. A person’s inclination toward a form of sexual conduct may not, for any number of reasons, be consciously chosen, but the mere existence of desire does not justify the act. To accept otherwise would be to validate adultery and pedophilia. Society has the right to require people to suppress harmful desires, even if it is difficult for them to do so.

Simple logic - if I convience myself I was “born” that way then I not responsible for my behvior.

 

[DebChris]

It’s still my belief that the argument against homosexuality comes from religion only. It is set up as a construct to condemn those who are probably that way from birth and make them feel guilty for anything outside the norm. I know fully well I will draw alot of criticism for this view but I am entitled to my opinion. A true heterosexually married couple is not going to feel threatened by what two men do in their own bedroom. They will continue to have children and perpetuate the species while there will always be homosexual people throughout the generations as there always has been.

Homosexuality was accepted by the ancient Greeks. Yet, Alexander the Great was angry when a young boy was given to him as a gift (Parellel Lives). Why?

 

[Bennie_P]

Most of my arguments for why homosexuality stems from Catholic doctrine which uses biblical evidence, however when arguing with atheistics and agnostics this is difficult because they do not agree with scriptures, is their a good secular perspective on this issue?

Thanks in advance.

God Bless

another way to debunk their arguments is to use the words of 'Gay" activist themselves …

“Homosexuality is not ‘normal.’ On the contrary it is a challenge to the norm … Nature exists whether academics like it or not. And in nature, procreation is the single relentless rule. That is the norm. Our sexual bodies were designed for reproduction … No one is born gay. The idea is ridiculous … homosexuality is an adaptation, not an inborn trait.”
Lesbian author and activist Camille Paglia “Vamps and Tramps” P 70 - 72

 

[Nepenthe]

Hm. I am not so sure why people are so quick to assume that the ‘primary purpose’ (talk about a priori presumption) is reproduction. It is certainly a function of sexual behavior, but why need there be a primary one at all? Indeed, I think the Catholic Church gives equal time to the ‘unitive’ aspect of sexuality.

Among humans and our closest genetic relatives among the anthropoid apes, sex serves at least as much as a function of social bonding, alliance and affection, and that includes same-sex behavior, whether mild or mock-activity, occasional sex, or lifelong pairing.

There are many working models of the small social unit (ie the ‘household’ or family). If one would condemn any households that are not entirely stable and prohibit them, then well…we may all be consigned to loneliness, whether we are gay, straight, any race or religion or combination of these.

And as to gay couples ‘not needing’ the benefits of union? How could anyone say that a couple who has lived together for decades, through thick and thin, whether or not they were financially well-off, should be denied next-of-kin status, particularly when one of them is hospitalized or dying? It breaks my heart, and breaks the hearts of their families and friends when this happens. Can you even imagine how it must feel to be automatically disqualified from being considered family of someone you have loved and has loved you all of your lives, let alone being acknowledged as a true and stable home?

 

[buffalo]

homosexuality is genetic. Homosexuals were accepted 500 years ago, they then no longer pass on thier DNA, then homosexuality would be extinct. BUT it wasnt so homosexuals had children and continued to propegate there genetic blueprint…

If people say homosexuality is unnatural. How come on the discovery channel (on a documentary about sex customs of animals) they featured a male, male, female goose couple. And also gay chimpanzees. This is apart of nature and something that is found naturally in nature is therefore natural is it not?

People who have discovery in Aus might have seen it in the last couple of weeks.

Question to Pathia
What “are” you and why does it affect weather you get married or not? Why don’t you go tell everyone to jump in a lake and marry the person you love?

Not at all. Using animals as an example is not a justification.

Nature and natural law are different.

First off, the way a male and female are made show us the correct way to reproduce. We are born male or female.

 

[ljprevo]

Humm, lets see what area that homosexuality is wrong.

• biblically
• morally
• socially
• biologically

 

[buffalo]

Humm, lets see what area that homosexuality is wrong.

• biblically
• morally
• socially
• biologically

…and logically!

 

[ljprevo]

…and logically!

Never thought of that, thanks

 

[Newbie2]

homosexuality is genetic. Homosexuals were accepted 500 years ago, they then no longer pass on thier DNA, then homosexuality would be extinct. BUT it wasnt so homosexuals had children and continued to propegate there genetic blueprint…

 

[Bennie_P]

Hm. I am not so sure why people are so quick to assume that the ‘primary purpose’ (talk about a priori presumption) is reproduction. It is certainly a function of sexual behavior, but why need there be a primary one at all? Indeed, I think the Catholic Church gives equal time to the ‘unitive’ aspect of sexuality.

Among humans and our closest genetic relatives among the anthropoid apes, sex serves at least as much as a function of social bonding, alliance and affection, and that includes same-sex behavior, whether mild or mock-activity, occasional sex, or lifelong pairing.

There are many working models of the small social unit (ie the ‘household’ or family). If one would condemn any households that are not entirely stable and prohibit them, then well…we may all be consigned to loneliness, whether we are gay, straight, any race or religion or combination of these.

And as to gay couples ‘not needing’ the benefits of union? How could anyone say that a couple who has lived together for decades, through thick and thin, whether or not they were financially well-off, should be denied next-of-kin status, particularly when one of them is hospitalized or dying? It breaks my heart, and breaks the hearts of their families and friends when this happens. Can you even imagine how it must feel to be automatically disqualified from being considered family of someone you have loved and has loved you all of your lives, let alone being acknowledged as a true and stable home?

If those that choose a homosexual lifestyle suffers from loneliness it is of their own chosing. They cannot expect society as a whole to accept such a destructiive lifestyle in order that one will not be ‘lonely’. If one chooses that lifestyle despite the evidence of the destruction it does to ones health, physically, mentally and spiritually, what gives one the right to put the blame on society, family, and or the church? for one’s lonliness?

I remember going to a wake of an aides victim in 1990. The mother and sister were the ones that took care of the young man during his last dying days. His “gay” freinds never offered to help out the family with his daily care or even visit him, though they were welcomed to do so, but they wanted to attend the funeral service to show how much they “cared.” and celebrate his “gay” lifstyle. When it came down to the last hours of his life it was his natural family that took care of him, not his “gay” family.

 

[fix]

Hm. I am not so sure why people are so quick to assume that the ‘primary purpose’ (talk about a priori presumption) is reproduction. It is certainly a function of sexual behavior, but why need there be a primary one at all? Indeed, I think the Catholic Church gives equal time to the ‘unitive’ aspect of sexuality.

This is what She teaches:

Finally, this love is fecund. It is not confined wholly to the loving interchange of husband and wife; it also contrives to go beyond this to bring new life into being. “Marriage and conjugal love are by their nature ordained toward the procreation and education of children. Children are really the supreme gift of marriage and contribute in the highest degree to their parents’ welfare.” (8)

Vatican

This does not make the unitive aspect lesser. It, also, does not mean by replacing a husband and wife with two “husbands” the unitive aspect magically “kicks in” and the other aspect becomes void. Both procreative and unitive exist in every authentic marriage act.

 

[ralphinal]

Another post pointed out that it is hard, if not impossible, to prove the negative. Ask why is it correct or right? Any answer that begins with “I feel…” is automatically out. Any answer that is not based in acceptable scientific study is out. Any answer that does not agree with what you want is out. That is how we are treated when we say it is wrong. This applies to abortion, too.

Having a homosexual attraction is not a sin. Acting on it is. From a faith stand point, we are not allowed sexual relations with someone that we are not married to. Therefore, all homosexual unions are wrong as a matter of faith. There have been some great scientific and sociological posts in this thread as well. I, however, would get them to explain why it is a correct lifestyle and then begin from that conversation. Do so in charity…

 

[buffalo]

Another post pointed out that it is hard, if not impossible, to prove the negative. Ask why is it correct or right? Any answer that begins with “I feel…” is automatically out. Any answer that is not based in acceptable scientific study is out. Any answer that does not agree with what you want is out. That is how we are treated when we say it is wrong. This applies to abortion, too.

Having a homosexual attraction is not a sin. Acting on it is. From a faith stand point, we are not allowed sexual relations with someone that we are not married to. Therefore, all homosexual unions are wrong as a matter of faith. There have been some great scientific and sociological posts in this thread as well. I, however, would get them to explain why it is a correct lifestyle and then begin from that conversation. Do so in charity…

You won’t get any takers. If you start down this path they will ultimately have to concede that pedophilia and other deviancy is OK too.

 

[ralphinal]

Oh, no, not the slippery slope!! Please not that! Simply put, certain things are not acceptable as behaviors. Not according to God’s law or natural law. What man wants to say is not the deciding factor.

 

[Exalt]

So much hate…

 

[Bennie_P]

So much hate…

Is it hate to wish someone a full and fruitful life and to die a happy death? Or is it love to wish someone to be allowed to live out a lie and watch them die three - four decades too young, totally alone and dying from a disease or diseases caused from unnatural sexual relationships?

Homosexuality and Lesbianism are being hailed by many as a normal healthy life styles. Many laudatory and complimentary things are being reported and circulated about these individuals.

• Having used IV drugs and less than 25 years of age … 16%3 (of the homosexual community) … 1.5% (of the general community) … 11 times the prevalence
• Engaged in prostitution … 24% (of the homosexual community) … 0.66% … (of the general community) … 36 times the prevalence
• For transvestites, the figure is 45% engaged in prostitution
• Having a lifetime STDs prevalence … 70% (of the homosexual community) … 4% (of the general community) … 18 times the prevalence
• Percentage alcoholism … 27% (of the homosexual community) … 11% (of the general community) … 2.5 times the prevalence
• Median number of partners … 38 per year
• Having a brief or no knowledge of partners … 90%
• Involved in whipping, sadism or masochism … 21% (of the homosexual community) Sadism and ‘anti-violence’ (1997 Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras, page 99) are somewhat incongruous.
• Of those with HIV, having anogenital warts … 92%
• Of those not having HIV and having anogenital warts … 76%
• Acquired multiple wart virus subtypes, within 17 months … 75% (of the homosexual community)
• Having anal pre-cancer … 18.0% (of the homosexual community) … 0.03% (of the general community) … 650 times the prevalence
• Having HIV ( < 25 years 10%, > 25 years 24% ) … 21.8% (of the homosexual community)
• Average age of death from AIDS … 35.7 years
  Expected average life span … 45 years (of the homosexual community) … 70 years (of the general community)

 

[pathia]

Question to Pathia
What “are” you and why does it affect weather you get married or not?

Intersexed. Genetically, physiologically and physically speaking I am neither male nor female.

First off, the way a male and female are made show us the correct way to reproduce. We are born male or female.

Not true, I am living proof that ‘mistakes’ happen, though I really don’t like to think of myself as a mistake, it’s rather depressing.

 

[ljprevo]

So much hate…

I was just talking with my wife about this and was waiting for the 1st person to start the “hate” game.

You are dang straight here, yes I “HATE” the sin. Do I hate the sinner? No, not all.

However the liberals try and slant this that if you hate the “sin” you must hate the “sinner” because that is “what they are”

We are then accused of being haters, which to be is a bunch of bologna!

They use that justfication to push the lifestyle.

 

[Bennie_P]

Intersexed. Genetically, physiologically and physically speaking I am neither male nor female.

Not true, I am living proof that ‘mistakes’ happen, though I really don’t like to think of myself as a mistake, it’s rather depressing.

But how does your situation justify homosexual behavior? Which unlike your situation is a choice. Are you saying that those that claim to be homosexual are a mistake?

IMH, may I suggest, that you don’t allow yourself to be used as a pawn for other’s misguided choices and agenda.