Choosing to be homosexual

  • Thread starter Thread starter CrossofChrist
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

CrossofChrist

Guest
If someone were to choose to have homosexual tendencies, would that be mortally sinful?(BTW, I know most people don’t choose to be gay.)

Here is some relevant information:

Although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder. (Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons)

A person therefore sins mortally not only when his action comes from direct contempt for love of God and neighbor, but also when he consciously and freely, for whatever reason, chooses something which is seriously disordered. For in this choice, as has been said above, there is already included contempt for the Divine commandment: the person turns himself away from God and loses charity. Now according to Christian tradition and the Church’s teaching, and as right reason also recognizes, the moral order of sexuality involves such high values of human life that every direct violation of this order is objectively serious. (Persona Humana)

I’m thinking it would be sinful, but I’m wondering what you guys think. It seems to me that the first letter makes the assumption that the person didn’t choose to be homosexual, while the second one includes among sinful actions freely choosing to be a homosexual, the inclination itself being objectively (1st quote) or seriously (2nd quote) disordered.

Did I get that right? Or is Persona Humana talking about choosing to act out on homosexual inclinations and not choosing the inclination itself?
 
Acting on any homosexual inclination is a mortal sin. Same-sex attraction in itself is not mortally sinful, though it is a disordered sexual attraction.

It is a CURABLE thing.
 
CrossofChrist said:
If someone were to choose to have homosexual tendencies, would that be mortally sinful?(BTW, I know most people don’t choose to be gay.)
Click to expand...
This makes no sense. The point of the word “tendency” is that you don’t choose it, so this question is impossible to answer.
 
discernment(name removed by moderator)r said:
Same-sex attraction in itself is not mortally sinful, though it is a disordered sexual attraction.
Click to expand...
But “a person therefore sins mortally…when he consciously and freely, for whatever reason, chooses something which is seriously disordered.” Wouldn’t SSA fall under something that is “seriously disordered” if freely chosen?
 
A disorder can be cured. If one accepts that it is a disorder, and manages to live a chaste life, not acting on ssa’s, then it is not mortally sinful. I would say they need to be actively working on overcoming these things in order for it to not be sinful.
 
patsa said:
This makes no sense. The point of the word “tendency” is that you don’t choose it, so this question is impossible to answer.
Click to expand...
What if someone wants to have that tendency but doesn’t have it, even if they wouldn’t act out on it?
 
discernment(name removed by moderator)r said:
A disorder can be cured. If one accepts that it is a disorder, and manages to live a chaste life, not acting on ssa’s, then it is not mortally sinful. I would say they need to be actively working on overcoming these things in order for it to not be sinful.
Click to expand...
I know same sex attraction is a disorder. I know one is required to live a chaste life and not act on their same sex attraction. What I was specifically asking was this:

Do you mean to say that people who are attracted to people of the same sex can be cured into being attracted to people of the opposite sex?

^That is what I don’t agree with, but I wasn’t sure if that’s what you meant.
 
CrossofChrist said:
What if someone wants to have that tendency but doesn’t have it, even if they wouldn’t act out on it?
Click to expand...
So you’re asking “would it be a sin for someone to want to be homosexual but would still plan to be chaste if they were?”

That’s a bizarre question lol. I have no idea. 😊
 
CrossofChrist said:
What if someone wants to have that tendency but doesn’t have it, even if they wouldn’t act out on it?
Click to expand...
It’s probably not a sin to want to be disordered, because one could want to be disordered for a good reason (e.g. to struggle more in this life out of love for Christ). If someone wished to be capable of physically lusting after members of the same sex for its own purpose though, it’d probably be a sin though (since you’re striving to have the capability to sin for an evil intention), but the same would be sinful in doing towards members of the opposite sex too.

However, clearly being gay isn’t a sin, only acting on your same-sex attractions. So wanting to be gay cannot be a sin, since you’d be wanting something that isn’t sinful. If you had no attractions to members of the same sex but wished to gain them for the purpose of being able to date a member of your gender you wanted to date, then that would be sinful, but the sin would not be in wanting to be gay; the sin would be in longing for a same-sex physical relationship.
 
discernment(name removed by moderator)r said:
A disorder can be cured. If one accepts that it is a disorder, and manages to live a chaste life, not acting on ssa’s, then it is not mortally sinful. I would say they need to be actively working on overcoming these things in order for it to not be sinful.
Click to expand...
A disorder can be cured?

That is news to me.

Some can be cured but being curable is not what defines a disorder.
 
I think that people need to recognize the truth, learn the sinfulness and disgusting nature of homosexuality, and slowly reintegrate themselves to a normal state. All with compassion and love, of course.

Cardinal Fernando Sebastián said something interesting on this topic. He likened it to high blood pressure, and said it was curable. I agree.
 
CrossofChrist said:
What if someone wants to have that tendency but doesn’t have it, even if they wouldn’t act out on it?
Click to expand...
As someone has pointed out, you don’t “choose” to have a tendency. However, if someone did not have a sinful tendency (or was not aware of having a sinful tendency), it would be sinful to attempt to cultivate such a tendency. And that sort of thing does go on, eg. when you hear people say that they “want to experiment.”
 
SMGS127 said:
How do you reconcile the two statements you just made, where you called actively gay people disgusting and then suggested we needed to “cure” them with compassion and love?
Click to expand...
He/she said that homosexuality is disgusting, not that gay people are disgusting.

He/she also did not suggest that they ought to be “cured” (though you put that term in quotes) but that they ought to reintegrate.

Neither of those comments are inconsistent with showing love and compassion to those with homosexual tendencies. Someone who blasphemes has done something disgusting and undignified, though he is still a dignified and valuable human being, who ought to avoid blasphemy in the future.
 
Please, allow me to clarify. I 100% respect the person as an individual made in the likeness of God. Though I find the sin, or rather, attraction (depending on whether or not the sin is acted upon), to be revolting, I love the person as a child of God. They need to be reintegrated with love, mercy, and compassion…
 
polytropos said:
He/she said that homosexuality is disgusting, not that gay people are disgusting.

He/she also did not suggest that they ought to be “cured” (though you put that term in quotes) but that they ought to reintegrate.
Click to expand...
Read post #2 and post #5 to get context of why I put it in quotes. Though fair enough at your first point, I still don’t see how calling someone’s relationship “disgusting” is treating them with “love and compassion” though.
polytropos said:
Neither of those comments are inconsistent with showing love and compassion to those with homosexual tendencies. Someone who blasphemes has done something disgusting and undignified, though he is still a dignified and valuable human being, who ought to avoid blasphemy in the future.
Click to expand...
Except one who blasphemes almost certainly does it out of malice, whereas one who commits homosexuality does it out of love usually.

Maybe we could talk about heresy, since I know many heretics who do so out of love of neighbor (not realizing the inherent contradiction), but I wouldn’t call their act “disgusting” either. I’d call it sinful and wrong, but “disgusting” to me implies bad intentions.
 
discernment(name removed by moderator)r said:
Please, allow me to clarify. I 100% respect the person as an individual made in the likeness of God. Though I find the sin, or rather, attraction (depending on whether or not the sin is acted upon), to be revolting, I love the person as a child of God. They need to be reintegrated with love, mercy, and compassion…
Click to expand...
I believe you. I wasn’t trying to snap at you. I was just trying to get you to understand that suggesting that someone’s same-sex relationship is “disgusting” will in no way make them think you want to treat them with love and compassion. They mean well for and love their partner, even if they are sinning in their actions. In the same way, a husband using a condom means well for his wife (so as to not cause her health risks from a pregnancy), even as he is committing mortal sin. I can’t call that act “disgusting,” even if it is a mortal sin and something he should repent from (and ask forgiveness for) in the future.
 
SMGS127 said:
Read post #2 and post #5 to get context of why I put it in quotes. Though fair enough at your first point, I still don’t see how calling someone’s relationship “disgusting” is treating them with “love and compassion” though.

Except one who blasphemes almost certainly does it out of malice, whereas one who commits homosexuality does it out of love usually.

Maybe we could talk about heresy, since I know many heretics who do so out of love of neighbor (not realizing the inherent contradiction), but I wouldn’t call their act “disgusting” either. I’d call it sinful and wrong, but “disgusting” to me implies bad intentions.
Click to expand...
How dare you say that I my opinion is of malice. I can hate the sin all I want (shouldn’t all Christians hate sin in general?), and I do. It is gravely immoral. Does that mean that I do not love the person? Not at all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top