Does anyone here, that believes in God, actually think that God accepts gay marriage?

[EasterJoy]

Well, on this we can agree.

I do know that growing up I cringed when I heard people being made fun of for their homosexual tendencies.

Now, it’s becoming less acceptable to do that. And I give that a

Yes! To avoid normalizing homosexual behaviors by ostracizing people tempted to indulge in them is like avoiding religious relativism by staging pogroms. The “cure” can be a far worse sin than the original malady it believes it is opposing, and without judging those whose hearts we cannot know, I would guess it usually is.

 

[Arlotus]

My feeling is that gay marriage, like gay relationships, have to be looked at from a much larger perspective than we tend to, which appears to me to be mostly cultural and therefore relative. If being gay is part of one’s fundamental being and structure, what choice does one have except to be gay. This is simple teleology. For me, there is a natural and fundamental orientation in every human being, as in all of life, to form relationship. If one is naturally gay, then the ensuing human love relationship will likely be gay

Scripture and tradition have been been regarded as the basis of Christian belief. Tradition tends to evolve, or devolve, and I think the question of being gay in this day and age is quite a bit different from former times. Certainly the have been moral attitudes in the Christian churches against being gay, but I tend to see those attitudes as outmoded cultural belief systems.

 

[PRmerger]

If being gay is part of one’s fundamental being and structure, what choice does one have except to be gay.

What if having the desire to have sex with children is part of one’s fundamental being and structure? Do you believe that society should permit this?

 

[Arlotus]

What if having the desire to have sex with children is part of one’s fundamental being and structure? Do you believe that society should permit this?

No, that would be illegal first of all, and I think one could quite easily see that it is not between two people who have the capacity to make an informed decision.

Love between two people appears to be quite fundamental. And, there have always been people who have been drawn to people of the same sex. It could be viewed as a fact of life, rather than anything else.

I realize that there have been taboos against it in the Christian as well as other traditions.

 

[PRmerger]

No, that would be illegal first of all,

But the point is that it could be made legal, should your argument be applied consistently.

and I think one could quite easily see that it is not between two people who have the capacity to make an informed decision.

So it is consent that is the arbiter of whether something is moral or not?

Love between two people appears to be quite fundamental. And, there have always been people who have been drawn to people of the same sex. It could be viewed as a fact of life, rather than anything else.

There have always been people drawn to sex with children as well.

Iealize that there have been taboos against it in the Christian as well as other traditions.

As there should be.

 

[Arlotus]

But the point is that it could be made legal, should your argument be applied consistently.

So it is consent that is the arbiter of whether something is moral or not?

There have always been people drawn to sex with children as well.

As there should be.

The arbiter as to the truth of relationships is whether such conform to the structure of creation. The male / female dichotomy is at the root of this reality of ours, and we each have this dichotomy to varying degrees, whether we are currently male or female. Everyone has a right and duty to be true to himself or herself. You may not be comfortable with a certain aspect of life, in this case, gay relationships, but that may say more about you than what you ascribe to those who feel they have little choice in the matter.

I personally am not gay.

 

[PRmerger]

The arbiter as to the truth of relationships is whether such conform to the structure of creation. The male / female dichotomy is at the root of this reality of ours, and we each have this dichotomy to varying degrees, whether we are currently male or female. ** Everyone has a right and duty to be true to himself or herself. You may not be comfortable with a certain aspect of life, in this case, gay relationships, but that may say more about you than what you ascribe to those who feel they have little choice in the matter.
**

Look at the bolded section you have written and see how that applies to a pedophile.

He would tell you that above in bold (substituting man-boy-love for “gay relationship”), and you would respond, how?

 

[Arlotus]

Look at the bolded section you have written and see how that applies to a pedophile.

He would tell you that above in bold (substituting man-boy-love for “gay relationship”), and you would respond, how?

Why don’t you tell me how you would respond, and tell me how you decide if something is, as you put it, moral or not.

You appear to have already gone down the road and decided that being gay is somehow immoral. I think you could go back and declutter your attitudes, and look at relationships from a ‘higher’ perspective. There is nothing long term, enduring, and fundamentally loving in pedophilia. You could argue there is, I suppose, but I think that would be big stretch.

 

[PRmerger]

Why don’t you tell me how you would respond, and tell me how you decide if something is, as you put it, moral or not.

I will, of course.

But as I posed the question to you first, it is customary that you respond to my question.

 

[PRmerger]

You appear to have already gone down the road and decided that being gay is somehow immoral. I think you could go back and declutter your attitudes, and look at relationships from a ‘higher’ perspective. There is nothing long term, enduring, and fundamentally loving in pedophilia. You could argue there is, I suppose, but I think that would be big stretch.

I hope you see that you are reserving for yourself the right to decide what is loving or not, while denying me (and the Catholic Church) this right.

I hope you realize that this is a great breach of justice for you to permit yourself something while removing this right from me.

 

[Arlotus]

I hope you see that you are reserving for yourself the right to decide what is loving or not, while denying me (and the Catholic Church) this right.

I hope you realize that this is a great breach of justice for you to permit yourself something while removing this right from me.

I am not denying you any rghts. I think you are projecting here. You have come on loud and clear that being gay somehow not moral. Is that not correct?

 

[Arlotus]

I will, of course.

But as I posed the question to you first, it is customary that you respond to my question.

I already did - maybe not in a hard and fast way - but I did mention that such fundamental questions have to be assessed on whether a certain thing conforms to th fundamental structures of reality. If someone is gay at their core, then I think you are flogging a dead horse to assert otherwise. Teleology. Fundamental Orientation. I tend to think more from a fuinctional POV than from a top down process. Form follows purpose and all that.

Anyway, does God care? Yes.

 

[PRmerger]

I think you are projecting here. You have come on loud and clear that being gay somehow not moral. Is that not correct?

Yes.

Let me amend a bit: being gay is having a disordered desire. Acting on this desire is immoral.

 

[EasterJoy]

My feeling is that gay marriage, like gay relationships, have to be looked at from a much larger perspective than we tend to, which appears to me to be mostly cultural and therefore relative. If being gay is part of one’s fundamental being and structure, what choice does one have except to be gay. This is simple teleology. For me, there is a natural and fundamental orientation in every human being, as in all of life, to form relationship. If one is naturally gay, then the ensuing human love relationship will likely be gay

Scripture and tradition have been been regarded as the basis of Christian belief. Tradition tends to evolve, or devolve, and I think the question of being gay in this day and age is quite a bit different from former times. Certainly the have been moral attitudes in the Christian churches against being gay, but I tend to see those attitudes as outmoded cultural belief systems.

Where did you get the idea that Tradition “evolves”? Where did you get the idea that if society sees reality one way and “the Christian churches” see reality another way, that it must be society that is right and the Christians that are wrong? Has no one ever taught you about the World, the Flesh, and the Devil?

I am not denying you any rghts. I think you are projecting here. You have come on loud and clear that being gay somehow not moral. Is that not correct?

No, having a biological predisposition towards certain temptations is not immoral. It is also, however, not carte blanche to indulge in that which is immoral. If it were, we may as well just pitch moral law out the window (including, I might add, the habit of forbearance).

 

[PRmerger]

I already did - maybe not in a hard and fast way - but I did mention that such fundamental questions have to be assessed on whether a certain thing conforms to th fundamental structures of reality. If someone is gay at their core, then I think you are flogging a dead horse to assert otherwise. Teleology. Fundamental Orientation. I tend to think more from a fuinctional POV than from a top down process. Form follows purpose and all that.

So a man may tell you that he is, at his core, attracted to children.

Using your logic above, we would have to permit this in our society because he has no choice. It’s just the way he was made.

 

[PRmerger]

Why don’t you tell me how you would respond, and tell me how you decide if something is, as you put it, moral or not.

I would tell this person, “Your sexual attraction is disordered. It is not the way you were destined to be. God loves you, and it is only through your cooperation with Him that you will find peace and a joy that surpasses understanding, as you change your desires from disordered to ordered.”

 

[Arlotus]

I would tell this person, “Your sexual attraction is disordered. It is not the way you were destined to be. God loves you, and it is only through your cooperation with Him that you will find peace and a joy that surpasses understanding, as you change your desires from disordered to ordered.”

Can you tell me on what critieria it is ‘disordered’ ?

You say it is not the way you were destined to be. But supposing you find someone that actually is that way. Are they forever destined to not be able to have a love relationship as in marriage relationship?

 

[Arlotus]

Where did you get the idea that Tradition “evolves”? Where did you get the idea that if society sees reality one way and “the Christian churches” see reality another way, that it must be society that is right and the Christians that are wrong? Has no one ever taught you about the World, the Flesh, and the Devil?

No, having a biological predisposition towards certain temptations is not immoral. It is also, however, not carte blanche to indulge in that which is immoral. If it were, we may as well just pitch moral law out the window (including, I might add, the habit of forbearance).

I think if you look at the meaning of ‘tradition’ as used in Catholic theology, you will see that tradtion is not a once and for all reality. It is emergent. Balancing fundamental, eternal truth with the becoming aspects of life has always been a great challenge, and will continue to be.

In your latter paragraph above, I believe you are begging the question as to whether expressing love for a gay person is immoral. Like many things, it all depends… Many heterosexual relationships engage in immoral acts.

Anyway, I think we are just going to have to agree to disagree. I do note Pope Francis’ recent comments on homosexuality.

 

[PRmerger]

But supposing you find someone that actually is that way. Are they forever destined to not be able to have a love relationship as in marriage relationship?

I am confused about this question. Are you asking this regarding people who are sexually attracted to children?

 

[EasterJoy]

I think if you look at the meaning of ‘tradition’ as used in Catholic theology, you will see that tradtion is not a once and for all reality. It is emergent. Balancing fundamental, eternal truth with the becoming aspects of life has always been a great challenge, and will continue to be.

In your latter paragraph above, I believe you are begging the question as to whether expressing love for a gay person is immoral. Like many things, it all depends… Many heterosexual relationships engage in immoral acts.

Anyway, I think we are just going to have to agree to disagree. I do note Pope Francis’ recent comments on homosexuality.

I hope you do not mean “agree to disagree” in the sense that we have not come to a conclusion about what the Church teaches or what our faith tells us we must believe.

OK, so you do realize that Pope Francis does not now and never has seen the attempt to give legitimacy to same-sex marriage as a morally-acceptable course. I least we have that. People with deep-seated homosexual tendencies deserve to be treated with dignity and without judgment, because resisting these impulses poses a trial to them. With that noted, let us move on…

Even you read the New Testament in a cursory way, it will not be long before you run into thoughts about teachers who come along claiming to be able to change moral law. To say that the view is a dim one would be a gross understatement.

I think if you consider Tradition instead of tradition, you realize that the Church has the legitimate authority to teach morals in a way that is binding. Homosexual acts are forbidden, and homosexual marriage is impossible. This is a matter of natural law, and therefore Catholics who have a hand in making law are duty-bound to the service of justice to make laws that reflect this unchanging moral truth.