Changed my views on Homosexuality

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ellipses
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Prodigal_Son said:
A gay person does not become disordered even by acting on his or her inclinations. Again, gay people are no more disordered in themselves than straight people. But the attraction to the same sex is a disordered affection – just like the desire to steal or rape or deceive or destroy are disordered affections.
Click to expand...
So what is a ‘gay person’ if not a person defined by their sexual inclinations?

The trouble is that we do define people by their sexual inclinations rather than viewing people as people who have a sexual inclination (disordered or otherwise).

It does not help that our society seems to put sexual activity on a pedestal and holds it up as an expression of liberty and freedom. It doesn’t help that society bases the identity of a person on who they are attracted to sexually.

As a result, opposing certain behaviour is viewed as opposing the person for who they are. And in the current climate that gets you branded as biggoted which closes down the discourse.
 
Last edited:
QwertyGirl said:
It is a love like no other love. Obviously, there are many different kinds of love. I realize some people disagree with this and say that love is love. But that is not my experience.

I will say that my experience tells me that love is binary. Either you love or you don’t. There is no “sort of Love” or “love a little.”
Click to expand...
I agree with both your statements.

Bonds are characterized by and formed within the environments particular to them. For example a particular bond is formed between soldiers in combat. They also have a love that is like no other. The environment of combat is riddled with sacrifice of life for the ‘other’. An environment that is riddled with threats to life overcome by mutual sacrifice forms a powerful bond and a love that cements the relationships. The marital bond is formed and characterized by the maternal environment and love particular to the marital bond grows in the mutual sacrifices necessary for preserving each other and that environment.
As you said though, in any relationship there is love or there is not. A soldier can be acting entirely out of some sense of duty that has nothing to do and never will with love for the other soldier. Same with the married couple. Even if there is love it can grow cold and ineffectual, or if there is not, by some event or circumstance love can appear and then grow. But like you said it’s binary.
 
Last edited:
FiveLinden said:
The purpose of sex is to procreate.

Sex purely for pleasure is a perversion.

Sodomy is only ever just for pleasure, therefore it is a perversion.

This doesn’t mean you can’t like a gay person. It just means they are sinning, as you likely are in some other way.

i think this is an exact description of the Catholic position. I do not want any Catholic to think that I am arguing against that position, given the teaching of the Church. The Church teaches that sex outside of marriage, or that is not open to reproduction, in each act, is evil. I feel that this is not in line with human understanding of love. I think it limits the potential of the grace of God. Love is good. I appreciate that tis is not the view of the Church. But it is my view. And it is the view of million (billions?) of others. The Church needs response that will persuade. The arguments in this thread do not persuade.
Click to expand...
I find this very important and am trying to think of a good response. The arguments in this thread are not persuasive to nonbelievers, or to those who are not disciplined enough to educate themselves morally. You see people holding up the sign “Love is Love” well who can argue with that. On the naive surface, this is a perfectly reasonable statement. But nothing is simple. There are layers upon layers and a deeper meaning that needs to be dissected to truly understand.
I think that most people simply are not inclined to be persuaded because they worship false idols and do not want to do the work…do not want to know the truth. They are happy living in sin, or more accurately, they think that they are.
The question is how do we educate people who do not want to know the truth? Pray that the Holy Spirit will grace them.
 
Even when I was an atheist I never understood this view. There is nothing normal about two guys wanting to have relations with each other. Goes completely against natural order
 
I don’t believe sexual activity has to have anything to do with love. That doesn’t make me immoral or amoral. It just makes me different than you. I believe God created sex so it could be used separately from love. It is a versatile thing, by design. Please don’t assume that because someone doesn’t subscribe to your moral code they are too lazy to learn about what you think is right.
 
Last edited:
yeah but not the same way as theists.

And even then it’s not uniform. A lot of atheists are fine with the idea that homosexuality is normal.
 
Last edited:
Most do, but not in the same way as Catholics. They come to different conclusions about it.
 
Prodigal_Son said:
You seem to think that “being a gay” is a sin.
Click to expand...
I did not say that. But if you feel unhappy when called a gay person, then you may try to live like a straight person and may become one. What counts is not your self-image but your action.
 
Why would you believe something that is untrue?

That’s a cop out to mean “anything goes”.

Added: “Anything goes” as long as one “believes” that their version of truth is truth.
 
Last edited:
Not a cop out. And not an anything goes. I believe there are times when sexual activity is not ok:
  1. When it is imposed on someone else without their consent (including people who aren’t able to give consent, for whatever reason)
  2. When it brings an unwanted life into the world
  3. When it is done in a way that knowingly passes disease to another person
  4. When it is done by taking advantage of another
In other words, it is wrong when it is done in an irresponsible manner and/or without consideration for the other party.

So you see, I don’t believe anything goes. My views are not a cop-out. They are just different from yours.
 
But another person might not care about consent. Then what? Do you respect that person’s beliefs as equally valid?

Added: I’m not saying you’re a cop out. I’m saying not having truth as a standard is a cop out — when truth becomes whatever anyone sincerely believes in their heart.
 
Last edited:
If you see someone give the homeless a can of catfood instead of a bag of bread in that same grocery bag, I guess they’re doing nothing wrong because no harm, no foul.

Acting in an undignified manner is hurting and harming each other. Bringing shame to others and participating in that shame is hurting and harming each other.

I assume we can at least agree with that. But I suppose that’s as far as we’ll get for now.
 
Last edited:
Arbovirus said:
Added: I’m not saying you’re a cop out. I’m saying not having truth as a standard is a cop out — when truth becomes whatever anyone sincerely believes in their heart.
Click to expand...
I realize Catholics believe they have the truth. Other people believe they don’t necessarily have it, at least not on everything all the time. What you claim to be truth, I may claim to be wishful thinking. You won’t convince me of your truth, and I won’t convince you of my viewpoint. I don’t ever say I have the truth, because I am very open to saying there are things we just don’t know and won’t ever know.

Ultimately, I believe that we are born with a conscience that will keep us straight, as long as it doesn’t get polluted along the way. Pollution, in this world, in inevitable though. So we have to work with what we have. I
 
Last edited:
Arbovirus said:
Acting in an undignified manner is hurting and harming each other. Bringing shame to others and participating in that shame is hurting and harming each other.

I assume we can at least agree with that. But I suppose that’s as far as we’ll get for now.
Click to expand...
Of course I agree with that. That is why I said as long as they aren’t harming others (and I should have included themselves, too). What we disagree on is what constitutes undignified behavior, and what brings shame.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top