Do conservative Christian teachings on homosexuality cause hatred and violence against the LGBT community?

[Rau]

Gay people aren’t usually spoken about with any respect on this forum. They are often spoken about simply as ‘homosexual PERSONS’ in the legalistic language of the Catechism or disordered. Rarely are the lived experiences of gay people given any credence. Gay people will say that the Bible has been used to reinforce discrimination and often violence but the retort is often that it shouldn’t, but of course that does not mean that it doesn’t happen. Face it folks it does.

I am at a loss to get your point here. Are you disputing what someone else has posted? If there is a lack of respect for persons in a post - call it out.

And the Catechism never refers to any person as “disordered”.

Where have “lived experiences” been diminished or ignored?

Who is denying that (unjust) discrimination has not occurred?

 

[PatrickKennedy]

I am at a loss to get your point here. Are you disputing what someone else has posted? If there is a lack of respect for persons in a post - call it out.

And the Catechism never refers to any person as “disordered”.

Where have “lived experiences” been diminished or ignored?

Who is denying that (unjust) discrimination has not occurred?

Several points. I refer to the forum not this thread and I said the catechism refers to ‘homosexual persons’. I invite you to take a look at some of the many hundreds of posts on this and related issues in order to prove me 100% correct

 

[Rau]

Several points. I refer to the forum not this thread and I said the catechism refers to ‘homosexual persons’. I invite you to take a look at some of the many hundreds of posts on this and related issues in order to prove me 100% correct

I didn’t mention this thread.

The Catechism does refer to homosexual persons. Is the term unacceptable to you? You also said the catechism refers to persons as disordered. It does not.

Thanks for the invitation, but the normal protocol is for the person making an assertion to provide the evidence in support.

 

[PatrickKennedy]

I didn’t mention this thread.

The Catechism does refer to homosexual persons. Is the term unacceptable to you? You also said the catechism refers to persons as disordered. It does not.

Thanks for the invitation, but the normal protocol is for the person making an assertion to provide the evidence in support.

If you could do me the courtesy of not telling me what you think I wrote rather than what I did write I would be very grateful. The language of the catechism is not unacceptable to me. What I find puzzling is that some people ape that language as though they themselves were a professor of divinity at the Angelicum. If you don’t want to look on the forum that’s fine. But that doesn’t make me wrong.

 

[Rau]

… If you don’t want to look on the forum that’s fine. But that doesn’t make me wrong.

If you don’t want to provide evidence to support your assertions, that’s fine, but you will understand if your claim is quickly dismissed.

 

[Rau]

If you could do me the courtesy of not telling me what you think I wrote rather than what I did write I would be very grateful.

Here you go - in your own words:, exactly as you wrote it:

PatrickKennedy:

**They are often spoken about **simply as ‘homosexual PERSONS’ in the legalistic language of the Catechism or disordered."

(bolding is mine)

The Catechism does not speak of homosexual persons, or of any persons, as disordered.

 

[PatrickKennedy]

Here you go - in your own words:, exactly as you wrote it: (bolding is mine)

The Catechism does not speak of homosexual persons, or of any persons, as disordered.

Yes “OR” disordered. Don’t you understand subjunctives.

 

[Rau]

Yes “OR” disordered. Don’t you understand subjunctives.

And “what” is disordered in your sentence? Read it again:

"They are often spoken about

…simply as ‘homosexual PERSONS’ in the legalistic language of the Catechism

…or disordered."

Where does the catechism speak of any person as disordered? It does not.

 

[PatrickKennedy]

And “what” is disordered in your sentence? Read it again:

"They are often spoken about

…simply as ‘homosexual PERSONS’ in the legalistic language of the Catechism

…or disordered."

Where does the catechism speak of any person as disordered? It does not.

You are arguing on your own here. I won’t have any more dialogue with you please don’t reply. PLEASE

 

[David_Fortin]

In my experience, homosexuals are most often victimized by other homosexuals. These assaults are usually very violent,and fueled by pure rage. I believe that homosexual rage is primarily rooted in self loathing, and isolation.

Christians unfortunately get the blamed for fueling anti-homosexual assaults, because they are the most vocal in condemning the lifestyle.

 

[PatrickKennedy]

In my experience, homosexuals are most often victimized by other homosexuals. These assaults are usually very violent,and fueled by pure rage. I believe that homosexual rage is primarily rooted in self loathing, and isolation.

Christians unfortunately get the blamed for fueling anti-homosexual assaults, because they are the most vocal in condemning the lifestyle.

Are you able to tell us what your experience is?

 

[David_Fortin]

Hi Patrick! I’m an 18 year LEO veteran. I worked 8 years in the prison, and jail systems, and just over 10 years as a police officer, and Sheriff’s deputy, with various agencies.

 

[at9009]

You are arguing on your own here. I won’t have any more dialogue with you please don’t reply. PLEASE

The fact that you are unwilling to address a fair criticism does not reflect well on you. The catechism and Catholic teaching goes out of its way to reflect that it is not calling the person disordered. In this particular case, the homosexual inclination as in having sexual attraction to the same sex is disordered. NOT the person who experiences the attraction. That is a pretty big difference and it something that should not be skipped over.

Rau in this case is right and you are wrong. The attractions NOT the person is disordered. Your previous posts seem to equate the person to disordered which is not in line with Catholic teaching.

 

[o_mlly]

The fact that you are unwilling to address a fair criticism does not reflect well on you. The catechism and Catholic teaching goes out of its way to reflect that it is not calling the person disordered. In this particular case, the homosexual inclination as in having sexual attraction to the same sex is disordered. NOT the person who experiences the attraction. That is a pretty big difference and it something that should not be skipped over.

Rau in this case is right and you are wrong. The attractions NOT the person is disordered. Your previous posts seem to equate the person to disordered which is not in line with Catholic teaching.

We are all disordered due to the absence of original holiness. While original sin has not totally corrupted human nature, we are wounded in our will, intellect, and appetitive senses – concupiscence – and in our passions in the face of an impeding danger – irascibility. Each person manifests their particular disorder through personal sin. Through Christ’s life, death and resurrection, we are atoned but the disorder remains and we are all called to battle our weaknesses through the grace merited for us by Christ.

CCC#405 Although it is proper to each individual, original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam’s descendants. It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it, subject to ignorance, suffering and the dominion of death, and inclined to sin - an inclination to evil that is called concupiscence". Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle.

 

[at9009]

We are all disordered due to the absence of original holiness. While original sin has not totally corrupted human nature, we are wounded in our will, intellect, and appetitive senses – concupiscence – and in our passions in the face of an impeding danger – irascibility. Each person manifests their particular disorder through personal sin. Through Christ’s life, death and resurrection, we are atoned but the disorder remains and we are all called to battle our weaknesses through the grace merited for us by Christ.

CCC#405 Although it is proper to each individual, original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam’s descendants. It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it, subject to ignorance, suffering and the dominion of death, and inclined to sin - an inclination to evil that is called concupiscence". Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle.

The thing is the person is not disordered but we all have disorders inclinations. The inclinations are disordered whether it be a sexual attraction to the same sex, a propensity to anger, propensity to gossiping, lying, or a temptation to drink to excess. The inclinations due to our fallen nature are indeed disordered but the person themselves is not disordered. The focus is always on acts that are disordered not a state of temptation. If one begins to treat the person as inherently disordered for having a particular set of temptation (which is often used in this case and some treat people with same sex attractions as especially broken) it can easily slide into a self-loathing, self-hatred arena which in some Christian circles is often encouraged.

Instead the Catechism focused on the actions (and desires for certain actions) as disordered. It respects the inherent dignity of a individual person and reflects that temptations are not a core part of our identity or character of us as a person. Rather it is a reflection of the fall and manifestation of our own personal concupiscence. It may seem like splitting hairs but I do think it is an important distinction to make the person is not disordered but they can posses temptations or inclinations that are disordered.

 

[Strydersroom]

I have a very good idea why these teachings do indeed create an atmosphere of hatred and discrimination. One may believe that homosexual Acts are disordered and a mortal sin, however when you encounter anyone in real life who happens to be gay you have no idea about their personal life Behind Closed Doors. Therefore comma they might be living a very platonic and chaste life. To assume anything else is quite simply no one’s business whether they are straight or gay. But by automatically assuming that they are actually involved in any acts which you may find immoral in your opinion, one is already basically judging them and therefore already harboring Prejudice or hatred based on that assumption in my opinion.

 

[o_mlly]

The thing is the person is not disordered but we all have disorders inclinations. The inclinations are disordered whether it be a sexual attraction to the same sex, a propensity to anger, propensity to gossiping, lying, or a temptation to drink to excess. The inclinations due to our fallen nature are indeed disordered but the person themselves is not disordered. …

Read the Catechism: "… human nature has not been totally corrupted … " The sure inference of the above is that** human nature has been partially corrupted**. That which is corrupted is disordered. Disordered acts can only proceed from a disordered nature. Ordered acts can proceed from a disordered nature iff God initiates the ordered or good act.

 

[Rau]

I have a very good idea why these teachings do indeed create an atmosphere of hatred and discrimination. One may believe that homosexual Acts are disordered and a mortal sin, however when you encounter anyone in real life who happens to be gay you have no idea about their personal life Behind Closed Doors. Therefore comma they might be living a very platonic and chaste life. To assume anything else is quite simply no one’s business whether they are straight or gay. But by automatically assuming that they are actually involved in any acts which you may find immoral in your opinion, one is already basically judging them and therefore already harboring Prejudice or hatred based on that assumption in my opinion.

That is very true. But assuming a person whom you know to experience attractions to the opposite sex is unchaste is uncharitable. The Catechism (I don’t have the reference to hand) speaks about assuming the best of people, not the worst.

It is only ignorance or rejection of the Catholic teachings that can be associated with hate and (unjust) discrimination.

 

[Rau]

Read the Catechism: "… human nature has not been totally corrupted … " The sure inference of the above is that** human nature has been partially corrupted**. That which is corrupted is disordered. Disordered acts can only proceed from a disordered nature. Ordered acts can proceed from a disordered nature iff God initiates the ordered or good act.

If you want to take the view that we’re all disordered, then the person suffering same sex attraction is not singled out all.

 

[o_mlly]

If you want to take the view that we’re all disordered, then the person suffering same sex attraction is not singled out all.

Exactly. The promiscuous, the pathological liar, the kleptomaniac, the proud, etc. are, as we all are, disordered.

I hastened to add that the view is not one I want but the truth taught by the Church.