Church's views on bisexuality

[InSearchofGrace]

Wow. You’ve discovered the cause of homosexuality. Will you be publishing anytime soon? Don’t delay, because all those scientists and researchers who have done twin studies and measured hormone levels and pheremone levels and brain sizes and a host of other things will be earger to read your findings. Now that you’ve concluded that testosterone levels in the womb are the problem, simple monitoring of those leve;ls and adjusting them should solve the problem. So your studies have totally ruled out environmental factors then? That’ll give hope to the geneticists who are busy looking for the gay gene.IPredjudices? Biases? You have gone to great lengths to explain your theory about why the abnormality of homosexuality and bi-sexuality exist. You know, the testosterone levels in the uterus you told us about. You even said they were “reduced levels” and "misdirected. In other words, you have been describing something going wrong; something not normal. If you were describing something that was normal, you wouldn’t have been using adjectives such as “reduced” and “misdirected”. Now, despite our scientific experience, such as it is, you are describing something that is not normal. Just like the biblical scholars did. You call them “predjudiced” and “biased”, yet they have done exactly as you have - they have described behaviour which is not normal. Like a whole lot of other human behaviours, the Biblical scholars wrote that this form of behaviour is morally wrong. It is morally wrong because it is against what is considered as normative human behaviour and not in the best interests of human societies. It causes harm. That’s the part you don’t like, isn’t it? You want the moral edicts to be changed to accomodate this behaviour.

Oh, I do so hope you will publish real soon. The scientific community, geneticists in particular, will be waiting with bated breath. There’s just one problem though. Why is it that when twin studies are conducted, homosexuality does not occur 100% of the time, even amongst maternal (identical) twins? Maybe the testosterone levels wax and wane?

Even in communities where homosexuality is accepted, the mental health problems still exist. As this tells us -
Just as it is for the rest of us, it all depends upon how you behave.

Precisely.

I was just going down the list of what LGBT stands for. Each is associated with sexual behaviors outside the norm and the purpose of the body design, the next one with a higher degree of complexity and farther away, begging for understanding.

Lesbians and gays claim that they remember feeling that way at an early age, professing that they cannot force themselves to be attracted much less have sex with with the opposite sex. They insist it is not a choice in the continuing debate.

With bisexuals, (spv1g08 seems to have skipped my mention of this in my post), it is clear that they exercise choice and they do have control when they give in to the urge to have sex with a member of the same sex even. Otherwise, why are they able to function in that area with their opposite sexed partners or spouses?

The next sexual identity is transsexuality / transgenderism, which is even harder to understand. For the life of me, I don’t understand why there are doctors who would even collaborate with the madness of sex reassignment surgeries on those who claim they were born in the wrong body. It is obviously a mental condition and surgical solution that is really body mutilation is insisted and entertained!

As a united political body, lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgenders are able to push research to a crescendo to find explanations and justifications, extending to research on cure and management of AIDS. As a result, less research dollars go to programs to futher investigate other serious medical conditions such as cancer and heart disease.

To go back to bisexuality which is the subject of the OP, there is a fact of recent history that gets forgotten or buried. One big factor that the CDC has identified in why AIDS exploded as an epidemic in the West in the mid-80’s is bisexual behavior. Along with use of needles in a segment of the population, bisexual behavior is the reason it spread in the heterosexual community. ‘Progressive thinkers’ would just say it was a matter of unhealthy practice, i.e., they should have used condoms, and they look to condoms as the answer now. Education on how to have safe sex. As if the only things that should matter are sexual satisfaction and safety. The message of such thinkers is: let your sexual identification, ordered or disordered, dictate your behavior. Let it rule!
,

 

[EnglishTeacher]

I’m a guy. 19 years old. I’ve always been atrracted to women. Even through this ordeal i’ve been attracted to women. The situation is bothering me because i almost positive that i’m not attrated to guys. But i don’t know for sure. **Other than being able to tell if a guy is good looking, i feel no attrations towards men. ** It’s not like i started liking men and stopped liking women. The fact is that i like women but i’ve been experiencing some insecurites. I know i like women so i’m worried about being bisexual. Any advice or feedback would be apprectiated.

This thread has gotten really de-railed; but based on what you said, this is all much ado about nothing. Anyone with eyes can tell when someone else is good-looking or not, regardless of what sex the person is. That’s not same-sex attraction.

I’m no psychologist, but it sounds like your problem is with anxiety and/or OCD, not with bisexuality. Those are the issues that you might want to seek help with.

 

[spv1g08]

In response to comments by John21652 I am not referring to alternate sexualities as being abnormal but rather, but rather a natural variant. You may argue that those suffering disabilities such as Down Syndrome are themselves “variants”, which they are in their own right, but for a variant to be classed as abnormal it is necessary for their functioning as human beings to be impaired significantly. In the case of alternate sexualities the only “dysfunction” if you will is the fact they can not reproduce through conventional methods and have to adopt surrogacy. This is merely a issue of morals which were themselves laiden down as a series of social guidelines by which to stand within a society. They themselves were devised by humans who as we both know are prone to thoughts of prejudice and individual bias and probably largely influenced by early religious types in positions of authority. I don’t claim to be to be a historian or to possess advanced scientific knowledge. I am merely observant and well read around the subject.

In regards to the twin studies it is not necessary for either mono- or dizygotic twins to both turn out homosexual or bisexual etc for the chemical environment within the uterus is the dictator of how which individual or both turn out homo-, bisexual etc. The consumption of a larger portion of the testosterone and/ or additional hormones by one of the twins is enough to subside amounts available to the other twin. In that case the hormones will interact with genes but it is not to say that there are strictly gay genes. It is simply a case of which ones are activated in accordance with hormonal levels. I never said testosterone was an exclusive player in controlling if a child turns out gay or not, simply it is a significant contributing factor. That is where your naivity and ignorance as a non scientist comes in my friend for as a scientist you would have taken my comments as to imply a factorial component as opposed to a conclusive remark.

As for the remark about AIDs **InSearchofGrace **, HIV globally affects a larger proportion of females, predominantly heterosexuals, so I am sure any pressure by LGBTs can only have a benefit to the global population. HIV and in turn AIDs is a significant global issue and propelled research to help treat and/ or cure sufferers can only be as widely beneficial as say the issue of cancers.

 

[InSearchofGrace]

…
As for the remark about AIDs **InSearchofGrace **, HIV globally affects a larger proportion of females, predominantly heterosexuals, so I am sure any pressure by LGBTs can only have a benefit to the global population. HIV and in turn AIDs is a significant global issue and propelled research to help treat and/ or cure sufferers can only be as widely beneficial as say the issue of cancers.

Nothing in what you said disproves the factual spread of AIDS and HIV to the heterosexual community with the help of bisexual men. The CDC report confirmed it.

As for current data, you are right that it indicates that women are more vulnerable to HIV infection than men. This provides a stronger argument that active bisexuality of their sexual partners is dangerous to the health of women! You even state that they are mostly heterosexuals and they therefore don’t get it from women. If there were/are cases of HIV transmission among lesbians who do not have a drug habit, I have yet to see such report.

It is hard to forget the fright and long term anxiety of a woman I know, whose husband died of AIDS in the mid 90’s. She was not aware of her husband’s double life until he fell ill and she took care of him until his death. They had a son and thought she had the usual marital life, devoted and sexually exclusive.

Espousing that bisexuality is just a normal variant sexuality is irresponsible. It ignores the physical well being of both practitioner and the partner, and impoverishes the spirit of both.

You might argue that an open ‘honest’ bisexual life is the answer, or that as long as the partner or spouse of the bisexual partner knows, and precautions are undertaken, there is no deception, and therefore no harm. That’s a sorry relationship, enabling a lifestyle that is wrong on several levels.
,

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

snip

Even in communities where homosexuality is accepted, the mental health problems still exist. As this tells us -
Just as it is for the rest of us, it all depends upon how you behave.

There are actually studies that show that effeminate homosexuals basically have a female amygdala, however the research has not proven that all males with a basically female amygdala are gay, in fact that hasn’t even been researched. Indeed being able to understand women better than the average man would be extremely useful if one was interested in women. Also note how girls seem to go gaga over more feminine guys like Justin Bieber.

Indeed, the Bible teaches homosexual acts (sex) is morally wrong

Try asking someone who was born deaf about if they want to be fixed, the reactions usually range from indignation to disgust because they don’t feel broken.

He wont publish because there is no point in publishing someone else’s work.

I… What… Did… Did you just cite Conservapedia‽‽‽‽‽‽

What about those guys that when they try to think about the concept of engaging in sex with a female it induces nausea in some cases making them throw up? How about those unlucky guys who have fallen in love with a guy and they just can’t make the feelings go away no matter what they do?

Precisely.

I was just going down the list of what LGBT stands for. Each is associated with sexual behaviors outside the norm and the purpose of the body design, the next one with a higher degree of complexity and farther away, begging for understanding.

Lesbians and gays claim that they remember feeling that way at an early age, professing that they cannot force themselves to be attracted much less have sex with with the opposite sex. They insist it is not a choice in the continuing debate.

With bisexuals, (spv1g08 seems to have skipped my mention of this in my post), it is clear that they exercise choice and they do have control when they give in to the urge to have sex with a member of the same sex even. Otherwise, why are they able to function in that area with their opposite sexed partners or spouses?

The next sexual identity is transsexuality / transgenderism, which is even harder to understand. For the life of me, I don’t understand why there are doctors who would even collaborate with the madness of sex reassignment surgeries on those who claim they were born in the wrong body. It is obviously a mental condition and surgical solution that is really body mutilation is insisted and entertained!

As a united political body, lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgenders are able to push research to a crescendo to find explanations and justifications, extending to research on cure and management of AIDS. As a result, less research dollars go to programs to futher investigate other serious medical conditions such as cancer and heart disease.

To go back to bisexuality which is the subject of the OP, there is a fact of recent history that gets forgotten or buried. One big factor that the CDC has identified in why AIDS exploded as an epidemic in the West in the mid-80’s is bisexual behavior. Along with use of needles in a segment of the population, bisexual behavior is the reason it spread in the heterosexual community. ‘Progressive thinkers’ would just say it was a matter of unhealthy practice, i.e., they should have used condoms, and they look to condoms as the answer now. Education on how to have safe sex. As if the only things that should matter are sexual satisfaction and safety. The message of such thinkers is: let your sexual identification, ordered or disordered, dictate your behavior. Let it rule!
,

Lesbians can easily engage in sex with a man, the woman doesn’t even have to be alive much less attracted to the man. Gays can very likely get over most of the disgust of being touched by a woman sexually, after all morticians get over the disgust of slicing open a dead body, this however does not mean either gays or lesbians will ever like doing it.

I’d like to point out that there are females who are genetically XY, but due to being completely insensitive to androgen look think and act exactly like females from birth, so perhaps transgender is the result of the right amount of hormones for the wrong sex being present at the determination of the body’s sex or the brain’s sex.

This thread has gotten really de-railed; but based on what you said, this is all much ado about nothing. Anyone with eyes can tell when someone else is good-looking or not, regardless of what sex the person is. That’s not same-sex attraction.

I’m no psychologist, but it sounds like your problem is with anxiety and/or OCD, not with bisexuality. Those are the issues that you might want to seek help with.

The forum can’t stop talking about homosexuality for some reason, there’s generally 2-5 threads on the front page, at this point there might be over 9000 threads on it.

I concur with your findings. Most heterosexual males find a younger Harrison Ford attractive not because they are bisexual, but simply because it isn’t hard to recognize him as attractive.

 

[John21652]

In response to comments by John21652 I am not referring to alternate sexualities as being abnormal

You wrote the following - “…the child (as in a male) develops many brain structures more closely resembling that of a females…” and the cause you wrote about was "… reduced levels of and misdirected amounts of testosterone…" nIn other words, you were talking about abnormalities and their cause. After all, according to you, wrong testosterone levels result in males with brains nearly like females. That’s not normal.

but rather, but rather a natural variant.

A variant, properly described, usually only represents a slight deviation. A good example is the variation in hair colour between people. However, you yourself described a variation which is outside the norm and you used adjectives that described it so. Here, you are just contradicting yourself.

You may argue that those suffering disabilities such as Down Syndrome are themselves “variants”, which they are in their own right, but for a variant to be classed as abnormal it is necessary for their functioning as human beings to be impaired significantly.

Or maybe just for parts of their human functioning to be abnormal. You know, like someone who can’t talk. Or breed?

In the case of alternate sexualities the only “dysfunction” if you will is the fact they can not reproduce through conventional methods and have to adopt surrogacy

.You mean they can’t reproduce normally at all? Is that what you are telling us? Gee, the problem is worse than I thought…
Of course, you’ve used the word “dysfunction” to describe this problem and that is proper. The thing is, the old biblical scholars and the Church use the same word and yet you describe them as ‘biased’ and ‘bigoted’. Man, you sure are hard to follow.

This is merely a issue of morals which were themselves laiden down as a series of social guidelines by which to stand within a society. They themselves were devised by humans who as we both know are prone to thoughts of prejudice and individual bias

You mean the moral edicts which are for regulating behaviour and, specifically, for ridding us of abnormal and dysfunctional behaviours represent ‘predjudice’ and ‘bias’? Well, yeah, sort of. That’s what moral edicts are for; to regulate out of society behaviours which are bad, or dangerous, or abnormal. Kleptomaniacs even get locked up, so bad is our ‘bias’ and so too do child abusers. Gee, have you ever considered the social bias against drunk drivers? Man, they really cop it. However, you are forgetting one very important thing, which is that the Catholic/Christian moral edicts are based on objective criteria about what is right and what is wrong.

and probably largely influenced by early religious types in positions of authority.

That doesn’t explain the existence of moral codes in pre-Christian societies. Or even in societies that knew neither Judaism, Islam or Christianity. Some were far more harsh that what you are used to today.

I don’t claim to be to be a historian or to possess advanced scientific knowledge. I am merely observant and well read around the subject.

Does this mean you wont be able to publish your testosterone theory in a peer reviewed journal? And here I was getting all excited…

In regards to the twin studies it is not necessary for either mono- or dizygotic twins to both turn out homosexual or bisexual etc for the chemical environment within the uterus is the dictator of how which individual or both turn out homo-, bisexual etc. The consumption of a larger portion of the testosterone and/ or additional hormones by one of the twins is enough to subside amounts available to the other twin.

So, your theory now includes a testosterone greedy in-utero twin? Fascinating… I also have to ask, if you are reliant upon observation for your theories, as you have just told us, just where is it exactly you’ve been sticking your head to witness all this?

In that case the hormones will interact with genes but it is not to say that there are strictly gay genes. It is simply a case of which ones are activated in accordance with hormonal levels. I never said testosterone was an exclusive player in controlling if a child turns out gay or not, simply it is a significant contributing factor. That is where your naivity and ignorance as a non scientist comes in my friend for as a scientist you would have taken my comments as to imply a factorial component as opposed to a conclusive remark.

Your first sentence in post #38 told us “What I pose to you…”. That sounded quite authoritative. After that, in that first sentence, you were quite unequivocal about telling us exactly what the cause of homosexuality is. The cause, according to you, was “…reduced levels of and misdirected amounts of testosterone….” and you were so certain of this fact that you then stated in your second sentence that *"The child is either born with the brain of a bisexual or homosexual or heterosexual for that matter and there is no environmental factor that can change that. In other words, on any reasonable reading of what you “posed” was that testosterone is the one single cause of abnormal sexual proclivities.
Now you attempt to backpeddle and deny what it is you wrote.

As for the remark about AIDs **InSearchofGrace **

, HIV globally …Nothing will ever change the fact that abnormal, dysfunctional and immoral sexual behaviour is what has caused the global spread of AIDS. I’m surprised that such a widely read person as you describe yourself to be, has missed this obvious point.*

 

[Hadrianus]

There are actually studies that show that effeminate homosexuals basically have a female amygdala, however the research has not proven that all males with a basically female amygdala are gay, in fact that hasn’t even been researched. Indeed being able to understand women better than the average man would be extremely useful if one was interested in women. Also note how girls seem to go gaga over more feminine guys like Justin Bieber.

Indeed, the Bible teaches homosexual acts (sex) is morally wrong

Try asking someone who was born deaf about if they want to be fixed, the reactions usually range from indignation to disgust because they don’t feel broken.

He wont publish because there is no point in publishing someone else’s work.

I… What… Did… Did you just cite Conservapedia‽‽‽‽‽‽

What about those guys that when they try to think about the concept of engaging in sex with a female it induces nausea in some cases making them throw up? How about those unlucky guys who have fallen in love with a guy and they just can’t make the feelings go away no matter what they do?

Lesbians can easily engage in sex with a man, the woman doesn’t even have to be alive much less attracted to the man. Gays can very likely get over most of the disgust of being touched by a woman sexually, after all morticians get over the disgust of slicing open a dead body, this however does not mean either gays or lesbians will ever like doing it.

I’d like to point out that there are females who are genetically XY, but due to being completely insensitive to androgen look think and act exactly like females from birth, so perhaps transgender is the result of the right amount of hormones for the wrong sex being present at the determination of the body’s sex or the brain’s sex.

The forum can’t stop talking about homosexuality for some reason, there’s generally 2-5 threads on the front page, at this point there might be over 9000 threads on it.

I concur with your findings. Most heterosexual males find a younger Harrison Ford attractive not because they are bisexual, but simply because it isn’t hard to recognize him as attractive.

Dakota, I just counted; there are 8 front page threads on it at the moment, making it by far and away the most popular theme in moral theology. If a being from that newly discovered planet which might sustain life were to turn up here, I wonder what he (or she) would make of it? I really have no idea.

 

[Elizabeth502]

The forum can’t stop talking about homosexuality for some reason, there’s generally 2-5 threads on the front page, at this point there might be over 9000 threads on it.

But two to five threads is nothing, Dakota. Earlier this calendar year one-fourth of the first page of threads in Moral Theology were about homosexuality. And it seems that one out of every few new users opens a thread on it. We need an Asked and Answered icon.

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

Dakota, I just counted; there are 8 front page threads on it at the moment, making it by far and away the most popular theme in moral theology. If a being from that newly discovered planet which might sustain life were to turn up here, I wonder what he (or she) would make of it? I really have no idea.

Do we really want to know?

But two to five threads is nothing, Dakota. Earlier this calendar year one-fourth of the first page of threads in Moral Theology were about homosexuality. And it seems that one out of every few new users opens a thread on it. We need an Asked and Answered icon.

I… what… confused…


I think the problem is that the section in the English Catechism on it is clear as mud for example the term “disinterested”? Yes well that usage hasn’t been mainstream for over fifty years probably more. A major problem is that they stopped teaching Latin as mandatory and now it apparently doesn’t qualify as a foreign language, thus few people are learning it and therefore it misses the people who really need to know can’t find out (teens and early twenties are when they need to know this stuff if they are confused so they don’t make terrible mistakes).

 

[michelleds]

Do we really want to know?

I… what… confused…


I think the problem is that the section in the English Catechism on it is clear as mud for example the term “disinterested”? Yes well that usage hasn’t been mainstream for over fifty years probably more. A major problem is that they stopped teaching Latin as mandatory and now it apparently doesn’t qualify as a foreign language, thus few people are learning it and therefore it misses the people who really need to know can’t find out (teens and early twenties are when they need to know this stuff if they are confused so they don’t make terrible mistakes).

It’s not all that complicated.

1. homosexual inclination is objectively disordered
2. homosexual acts are acts of grave depravity, intrinsically disordered, and contrary to natural law
3. homosexual persons are called to chastity

The complications come to the surface when we want to justify to ourselves or others our sin or our nature. I could know nothing and understand from those 3 points that I should not engage in homosexual acts. I could likewise understand that I am called to chastity, that chastity is required. I understand that people have some lack of understanding of the word “disordered” in #1, but when read in context with sexual complementarity and gift of life, it becomes fairly clear.

As for “disinterested” in paragraph 2359, how is that confusing when read in context?

Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

It’s not all that complicated.

1. homosexual inclination is objectively disordered
2. homosexual acts are acts of grave depravity, intrinsically disordered, and contrary to natural law
3. homosexual persons are called to chastity

The complications come to the surface when we want to justify to ourselves or others our sin or our nature. I could know nothing and understand from those 3 points that I should not engage in homosexual acts. I could likewise understand that I am called to chastity, that chastity is required. I understand that people have some lack of understanding of the word “disordered” in #1, but when read in context with sexual complementarity and gift of life, it becomes fairly clear.

As for “disinterested” in paragraph 2359, how is that confusing when read in context?

disinterested and uninterested are synonyms these days which is going to confuse a young person, I have never heard or read of that usage of disinterested outside of the dictionary and the Catechisms.
Those are all “do nots”, what a person would hear is “don’t do this”, “don’t do that” and “while that isn’t a sin it’s a bad idea anyway” from others.

 

[michelleds]

disinterested and uninterested are synonyms these days which is going to confuse a young person, I have never heard or read of that usage of disinterested outside of the dictionary and the Catechisms.
Those are all “do nots”, what a person would hear is “don’t do this”, “don’t do that” and “while that isn’t a sin it’s a bad idea anyway” from others.

“disinterested” is one word in that paragraph, the rest of which makes sense of the word. and is that the concept that is really going to hang people us? why? why that word and not any of the others?

and I don’t understand what your last sentence means exactly. are you saying the Church says don’t do that, but something other than the Church would say it’s not a good idea?

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

“disinterested” is one word in that paragraph, the rest of which makes sense of the word. and is that the concept that is really going to hang people us? why? why that word and not any of the others?

and I don’t understand what your last sentence means exactly. are you saying the Church says don’t do that, but something other than the Church would say it’s not a good idea?

Please ignore everything I’ve said today, my brain has been mush the whole day,

 

[spv1g08]

Well you’re all going to hell for taking upon yourselves the right to cast god’s judgement for him. The bible clearly emphasises and promotes loving one another and merely taking passages and interpreting them to suit your prejudice and somewhat ignorant hatred for certain minorities is contrary to what the bible preaches. Simple as!