Changed my views on Homosexuality

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ellipses
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Some people actually need help, unlike this thread which is more of statment than an actual question. Besides the OP doesn’t seem to be very active.
 
Last edited:
Some people actually need help, unlike this thread which is more of statment than an actual question. Besides the OP doesn’t seem to be very active.
You make a good point.

But to anyone who needs this kind of help, public forums aren’t where you need to be. You need a real support group made out of real people whose faces you know.
 
Love is not wrong. Love is an act of the will. Love is choosing the good for the other.

Homosexual acts, chosen acts, are not good for the other and so is not love.

You can choose what is good and that is love.
Calling choosing what is bad love is like calling poison, medicine.
 
Last edited:
Uh oh, I think you are trying to create some “wiggle room” on this topic. 🙂
nope, I don’t need any wiggle room because I already know that what the church teaches and it doesn’t teach that human sexuality is only about making babies. I do see a lot of people who really, really want to back a Catholic into a corner and make them say that the Church teaches that human sexuality is only about making babies. But as I said before, that is another thread.
 
40.png
Vonsalza:
Makes no difference
what makes no difference? I have made several posts. It would help if you would quote what you are referring to so I can follow the dialog.
You can click the little “up” arrow next to the comment to see exactly what was being replied to.

It would help if you would better familiarize yourself with how the forum works.

And a lot of it I didn’t respond to. The rational critiques are easy enough to find but the latter post read largely like a testimony of faith. I simply didn’t see where I’d make any headway taking a rhetorical hammer to the glaring weak spots and critical conjunctions.
 
Last edited:
o change in teachings. People in under-developed countries are more likely to continue to accept what the Church says. The more affluent and educated West seems not to do that.
So it would seem that the underdeveloped societies would then have a MORE developed Catholicism, not an underdeveloped one
 
40.png
CD45:
o change in teachings. People in under-developed countries are more likely to continue to accept what the Church says. The more affluent and educated West seems not to do that.
So it would seem that the underdeveloped societies would then have a MORE developed Catholicism, not an underdeveloped one
I think the whole convention here is a misnomer.

The “Catholicism” isn’t more or less developed. It’s that secular ideas aren’t as present in under-developed societies. Less money generally means less education on the macroscopic social level.
 
No change in teachings. People in under-developed countries are more likely to continue to accept what the Church says. The more affluent and educated West seems not to do that.
The affluent and self-satisfied West seems not to want to agree which direction is up.
Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Amen, I say to you, it will be hard for one who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for one who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.” Matt. 19:22-23
In the under-developed nations, Catholicism will remain under-developed. Not sure what will happen to West. The local Catholic Church could end up like Antarctica—everybody knows where it is, but nobody goes there anymore.
"…when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on earth?” Luke 18:8

OP: Hugh Hefner might have been a great neighbor, but that wouldn’t give carte blanche to everything that went on in the Playboy Mansion. You don’t have to condemn everything about a person or an organization to hold onto the realization that in a particular case they are defending actions that are objectively wrong. You can recognize what is good and praiseworthy without making that which is unacceptable something that becomes acceptable by association.
 
Last edited:
Salutations,
Scientifically, HOMOSEXUALITY may be caused by an imbalance in hormones. They are just thinking, if in embryonic phase, the neural tube, before its closing, is exposed to the female hormone(estrogen) onto a brain that is a male brain could cause HOMOSEXUALITY (?) NEW IDEA!
Spiritual cause, not in alignment w Christianity,
is reincarnation. Past life=male. New life=female body but w a male thinking Spirit. We aren’t suppose to recall past lives but OOPS!
But, we are to be a female for lessons to understand female experiences.
Our body is a pattern. Shirts have head, arms and waist. Pants=waist and legs. Each oriface has a purpose. God’s plan is for procreation. Sensuality is for procreation communication!
Pope John Paul II said we are allowed to enjoy our romantic moments. After menapause, is being close, allowed? The answer is YES!
Homosexuality has existed forever! Sumarians (?). Greeks definitely. ROMANS, YEP! It continues. Here’s a thought, it began before Christ in pagan times. Sex is a god to many ppl. What changes already happened. God says NO!
He gives us SELF CONTROL. Our relationship w God is first. IF YOU LOVE ME KEEP MY COMMANDMENTS.
Can a human learn new behaviors? YES! Did we learn how to tie our shoes! YEP. Oh, sexual ideation is different! NO! We can train to work in clumsy space suits. That is hard!
This is harder because it’s feelings. When we meet unattractive ppl., we feel off. But, in time, their spirit comes through and ugly advances to pretty!
Choices! Instead of feeling defeated, chose to feel determined. Family is goal! NOT SEX!
We received a sexual explosion in 1960’s. Values got reversed. I FEEL GOOD or I DID GOOD!
IDK! Let the Holy Spirit lead you to God’s truth.
He loves all,but not our sin.
In Christ’s love
Tweedlealice
 
He gives us SELF CONTROL.
And that is where the church fails.
A considerable part of the population doesn’t have that self control.

Sure, after they’re 50 or so, they get it… and those older than 50 seem to be the ones who tend to dictate these things.
 
And that is where the church fails.
But how does the Church fail? Self control in this day and age is hard to have on various things like lust, greed, pride, etc. This is due to our society and its promotion of things that are ungodly. It’s probably hard for people to avoid temptation and sin if they see these temptations so often in a day.

Also humans fail. We are only human. We fall into sin because of our fallen nature sadly. No need to blame the church.
Sure, after they’re 50 or so, they get it… and those older than 50 seem to be the ones who tend to dictate these things.
Maybe those 50 year olds finally figure out self control as you said? Also there is nothing wrong with people who have lived half a life to teach these things. After all, wisdom about life is taught by those who lived most of it yes?

Also self control is something humans can accomplish and should accomplish considering God wants us to have control over our desires
 
Last edited:
Blessings
The church doesn’t fail Self-Control! We do.
Commandments and laws don’t change to make things easier for the sinner but pull the sinner out of sin.
Perseverance keeps the sinner in the church till he/she become OVERCOMERS.
Jesus didn’t say it would be easy but that it would be WORTH IT!
Holy Spirit speak to the hearts of Your children. Let them have that Epiphany moment!
In Christ’s Love
Tweedlealice
 
Sorry to hear you’ve abandoned the truth of the Catholic faith merely because it’s not easy to live out. I hope you come home someday.
That’s weird. I didn’t see where OP said he left the Catholic church because it wasn’t easy to live out. Did anybody else see that?

You make a broad assumption based on your pre-conceived notion of what a person you don’t know is all about. Not a very catholic way to do things. Is it because that is what is easy for you? Hmm…sounds like the pot calling the kettle black.
 
How does one avoid adultery for those under 50? Self-control.
The part of the population you describe choose to relinquish self-control. They have it but opt not to use it. That’s not the same as not having it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top