Gay marriage OK because homosexuals born that way and deserve to have romantic relationships too?

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

Celibacy is between you and God, not you and your neighbor.

This is what it boils down to, and you can take it however you like.

If you are gay person and you present yourself as a straight person then you wont have to worry for the most part.

If you are gay and you act flamboyant then you might not like peoples reaction, and that is their right to react that way, with respect. Especially if there are children nearby.

Now, I personally now an older man who acts a little flamboyant, but he is an active married Christian and raised some very respectable children. I live in a small very conservative town and everyone shows him respect.

Excuse me, but I have to wonder whether or not you have read the entirety of Pathia’s posts. There is also something else I think you should understand. Flamboyant, in your face homosexuals are not celibate!

You seem to be attacking Pathia, and this person is saying that celibacy is the rule that is followed in his/her life. And Pathia was explaining the possible reasons for homosexuals to want special rights…and that is because some people are persecuting them…even the ones who are celibate.
I also seem to recall a post that said that Pathia was against homosexual marriage, and that it should be voted against.

It would probably also be helpful to understand that Pathia is not a normal homosexual…either physically or spiritually. At least that is the impression that I have. If Pathia was what the leftist would have you believe about all homosexuals, he/she would not be celibate.

I, for one, am grateful for having been able to hear Pathia’s story. Sometimes I forget how bigoted people can be, because I know only one person like that (bigoted)…and I rarely see him.

Understand, I am totally and completely against active homosexual behavior…but we are called to treat all people with dignity. Trying to rape someone into straightness is not treating that person with dignity…which is why I can say with full truthfullness that the people who did that were not true Christians. There are lots of people in today’s world that do things in Christ’s name, but have no idea what it truly means to be a Christian.

 

[bbarrick8383]

Excuse me, but I have to wonder whether or not you have read the entirety of Pathia’s posts. There is also something else I think you should understand. Flamboyant, in your face homosexuals are not celibate!

You seem to be attacking Pathia, and this person is saying that celibacy is the rule that is followed in his/her life. And Pathia was explaining the possible reasons for homosexuals to want special rights…and that is because some people are persecuting them…even the ones who are celibate.
I also seem to recall a post that said that Pathia was against homosexual marriage, and that it should be voted against.

It would probably also be helpful to understand that Pathia is not a normal homosexual…either physically or spiritually. At least that is the impression that I have. If Pathia was what the leftist would have you believe about all homosexuals, he/she would not be celibate.

I, for one, am grateful for having been able to hear Pathia’s story. Sometimes I forget how bigoted people can be, because I know only one person like that (bigoted)…and I rarely see him.

Understand, I am totally and completely against active homosexual behavior…but we are called to treat all people with dignity. Trying to rape someone into straightness is not treating that person with dignity…which is why I can say with full truthfullness that the people who did that were not true Christians. There are lots of people in today’s world that do things in Christ’s name, but have no idea what it truly means to be a Christian.

I did not realize there was another person on this thread that claimed to be gay and got them mixed up here.

I was not attacking Pathia though, and I apologize to Pathia if you thought I was. After reading a post I did miss, all I have to say is that it is a shame what you went through. God has a special place for those people and a special place for you, I just hope I will join you there.

I do have a chip on my shoulder when it comes to this subject, but I would never attack anyone over it. Thanks Jesus N Cherie.

 

[Aramis]

It’s mentioned in the article that “The genetic scans showed a clustering of the same genetic pattern among the gay men on three chromosomes – chromosomes 7, 8, and 10. These common genetic patterns were shared by 60% of the gay men in the study.” This means that the rest of the men in this study, 40%, do NOT have this genetic pattern and are still gay. If it was genetical predisposition, they should ALL (or at least, let’s say, 90-95% of them) have it.

Another flaw I do see in this research is that it does NOT include a group of heterosexual men, in order to compare the genetic patterns in those same chromosomes in gay and straight men. You ALWAYS need a group to compare the results with, that’s one of the reasons for pharmaceutical companies to always have two groups of people whentesting a new drug - a placebo group, in order to compare the results with the group taking the real medication. What if it turns out that, let’s say, 50 or 60% of straight men have a similar pattern on these same chromosomes? How will they explain it then? They won’t be able to, that’s why they don’t have a group of straight men included in the research.
And the fact that this is the very same doctor who’s pevious research on the subject and methods are being questioned, is more that enough for me to not trust him… Just a matter of credibility.

The real question is what the rate of these clusters are in the hetero population. If it’s 10% in heteros, then it might mean something. If it’s 40+% in heteros, it’s meaningless

 

[drthomas_21]

Hola,

The real question; which should have been ask at the beginning, is that people actions are a direct results of their choices. We are not robots that must blindly follow directions. We choose who to be with, when, where and how – all are choices…

 

[CWBetts]

Hola,

The real question; which should have been ask at the beginning, is that people actions are a direct results of their choices. We are not robots that must blindly follow directions. We choose who to be with, when, where and how – all are choices…

Are you saying are actions are not dictated by nature, or are you saying that all choices are equally valid. If it is the foermer, I heartily agree; if it is the latter, I must disagree with equal intenisty.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

I believe the point was that even if you are born with homosexual tendencies…you still have a choice to act or not to act on these feelings in a sexual way. ANd homosexual tendencies does not give a person the right to commit sins. It doesn’t excuse acting on the temptation to sin, nor does it justify sinning. And sex outside of the sanctity of marriage is a mortal sin.

And the Church has no power to say that it is not a sin. God decided it is a sin, not the Church. ANd the Church obeys God’s laws.

Plain and simple.

I KNOW that it isn’t easy to feel…that longing for intimate love and companionship. I do not believe there is any difference in those feelings between heterosexuals or homosexuals. But just like there are heterosexuals who are COMMANDED to be celibate, so it is COMMANDED by God Himself for homosexuals to be celibate.

And we must remember that…even if it doesn’t FEEL like it while we are going through a trial…God will never give us more than His grace will provide help for.

Actually, He may just give extra graces for those who suffer from same sex attractions…because the feelings and desires are not of their own doing; whereas I am divorced…even if the divorce is due to his lewd behavior towards a child. God’s COMMAND to me is quite plain and simple…celibacy. And He gives me the grace to accomplish this. All that I have to do is cooperate with His grace and His will for my life.

 

[drthomas_21]

Are you saying are actions are not dictated by nature, or are you saying that all choices are equally valid. If it is the foermer, I heartily agree; if it is the latter, I must disagree with equal intenisty.

Hola,

Our nature can only influence our choices to the degree we allow. If I am very angry, I can follow my nature and commit a violent act, or I can choose a different path. In the end, it will always come down to a choice. There are a lot of things people want to do, but realize they are not the right choices, and do not do them.

David R Thomas sends…

 

[kathyw1025]

pathia:

Science has been searching for a gene that predisposes someone to homosexuality for over 100 years. Science can’t even find one that predisposes someone to heterosexuality. Yes, the jury may still be out - but, over 100 years of fairly intense searching? Shall we call the search over at 1,000 years?

JD

The human genome has not even been mapped for 50 years therefore, the search for a gay gene could not have been going on for 100 years

 

[JDaniel]

The human genome has not even been mapped for 50 years therefore, the search for a gay gene could not have been going on for 100 years

On that you are, of course, correct.

However, a gay friend of mine said, a long, long time ago, that “Science has been working for 100 years to find ‘something’ within our genes that causes this worthless predisposition.” And we did know about genetics since Mendel’s time and shortly after the beginning of the 20th century.

JD

 

[Kolbe300]

I pose the question - if there was a pill for homosexuality would there be lines in the doctor’s office?

Though I certainly can’t know it, I believe the lines to receive that pill would probably be pretty short. As a chaste homosexual who would love nothing more than to get married and raise a family, I’d be in that line for sure. However, for many homosexuals, especially the ones who have been attracted to members of the same sex since they were old enough to remember, taking that pill would feel completely unnatural to them. A person’s sexuality is a significant piece of the puzzle that makes them who they are. If I had a dime for every time someone has told me that my sexuality isn’t natural I’d be rich. The problem is, when referring to my nature (that is, the only thing I’ve ever known), the statment isn’t true. My sexuality, regardless of how it got there, is the only thing I’ve ever known. It feels as natural to me as does the need to eat and breathe. That being said, I know what God asks of me. The truth is, many people with SSA don’t feel the same way I do. The lines to receive that pill would be pretty short, for the similar reasons that the lines to receive a pill that makes you homosexual would be short. For people on both sides of the sexuality spectrum, swallowing that pill just wouldn’t feel natural.

Just my two cents!

Peace!

 

[Kolbe300]

Notice, the Catechism does not say that you have a disorder that must be treated and changed. It says you are called to celibacy.

Thank you for pointing that out. I believe it would be incredibly helpful if we did like the Catechism and focused on what God’s call is for those with SSA, rather than telling people to go get their “fixable” condition “cured”. Have some people had their sexuality miraculously changed? I’m sure some have. Nothing is impossible for God. That doesn’t however change the fact that “reparative therapy” is notoriously unsuccessful. What many call a “success” when it comes to such therapy is nothing more than a change in behavior, not sexuality. Don’t get me wrong, turning away from a sinful behavior is a good thing, however, you don’t “cure” a behavior. I could get married to a great woman tomorrow and raise a family. I could even call myself heterosexual because of it. Unfortunately, that wouldn’t make me “cured” and it certainly wouldn’t make me a heterosexual.

Personally, I think when the “go get cured” card is played, it can turn the very people we would like to draw closer, further away. God is infinitely capable of leading us to obedience. That is a “cure” worth fighting for.

Peace!

 

[bov]

Homosexuals were not born with their predisposition. It is a learned disorded behavior that was brought on by several social devlopmental problems. We must pray for them that they don’t act on their disorder sexual tendencies.

 

[Cathy]

Dr. Joseph Nicolosi and his colleagues at National Association for the Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (www.narth.com) have some excellent and helpful articles on their web site. I think you can get some good answers there. Dr. Nicolosi has worked with hundreds of men with same-sex attraction. He sees same-sex attraction as a drive to repair a man’s damaged sense of masculinity. This emotional need sometimes seems to the man to be a physical need, and so is sometimes expressed physically. When the man’s emotional needs are met, the physical attraction toward men is often lessened, and sometimes he begins to experience a natural desire for women.

In the case of women, same-sex attraction is more often felt as an emotional need rather than expressed physically. According to this site, the origin of same-sex attraction in women is more complex than for men. I highly recommend this Catholic-friendly web site.

P.S. This site does not insist therapy is necessary. It does insist, however, that it should be available to those who desire it.

 

[Maso]

Hi everyone. A friend of mine has come up with an argument for homosexual marriage that I can’t seem to defeat. He says that homosexuals should be allowed to marry because of** the fact that they were born that way** and also because they deserve to have romantic relationships too. He says it would be unjust to deprive them of equal rights just because they are attracted to the same sex. How do I counter this?

Okay… your friend’s argument is entirely contingent on the conjecture that homosexuals are in fact “born that way”…

My gut feeling about that is that probably some are born with genetic defects but most probably are not. That is to say, most are simply people lacking in moral discretions that they possibly feel overwhelmed by and will buy into the lie that they are in fact…“born that way”.

I wish I had a better answer than that…

 

[bov]

I have a hard time believing that God would create a person with homosexual gene’s and then condemn homosexuals for acting on the gene they believe God created in them. Yet we know that God condemns homosexual acts, which is most clear from scripture and tradition. This would not be a loving God. Thus I conclude that homosexuality is a choice not a gene.

 

[pathia]

I have a hard time believing that God would create a person with homosexual gene’s and then condemn homosexuals for acting on the gene they believe God created in them. Yet we know that God condemns homosexual acts, which is most clear from scripture and tradition. This would not be a loving God. Thus I conclude that homosexuality is a choice not a gene.

Very simple answer to this. We live in a fallen world. Why does any birth defect happen, wouldn’t a loving God stop that? This world is fallen, that is why.

 

[Blade_and_Blood]

I have a hard time believing that God would create a person with homosexual gene’s and then condemn homosexuals for acting on the gene they believe God created in them. Yet we know that God condemns homosexual acts, which is most clear from scripture and tradition. This would not be a loving God. Thus I conclude that homosexuality is a choice not a gene.

Homosexuality is only a choice to a small extent, whether they want to pursue it (to maybe get out of the US Miitary) or not to pursue it (in order to evade persecution). Otherwise, it doesn’t seem to be a choice, considering the amount of mistreatment that comes with it. There is no gay gene… that, I think, is a given–but an embryo can obtain too much (if a girl) or too little (if a boy) testosterone that it can mess with future orientation.

Keep in mind: Sex is different than gender.

I have a feeling God didn’t create people gay just to condemn them. Everyone has a purpose in life. You know that. Perhaps they are here for us to learn how to truly love our neighbor regardless of orientation.

Ironically Yours, Blade and Blood

 

[Jon_S]

Some people are born predisposed to alcoholism. I don’t buy the “born that way” argument.

 

[Blade_and_Blood]

Some people are born predisposed to alcoholism. I don’t buy the “born that way” argument.

Uhh… alcoholism is more of a “nurture” trait.

Sexual orientation, in general, is very complex and incredibly complicated to understand. Orientation revolves around environment, the person, the situation, influence, genetics, and more.

Sexual orientation is definitely a mess to understand because there’s so much to it.

You may not buy the “born that way” argument, but God Almighty knows I don’t by the “it’s purely choice” argument either.

 

[CWBetts]

Nurture and nature are indelibly intertwined. Its a bit of both…but it is still the choice of the individual whether or not they will act upon thier urges.