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

[hartep]

I am not persuaded that various scriptural references to homosexual practices are relevant to discussions of homosexual identity and practice in the current time. Each scriptural reference fits within the historical context that the writer was immersed in, and I do not find that any of those contexts replicates our contemporary situation.

Beyond issues of scripture, however, a key notion at work in some of the current official Catholic stance on homosexuality and other issues is the very strange notion that Every sexual act must be open to conception. I have never seen any convincing reasons to support this idea. If one throws out this idea, all kinds of new perspectives on sexuality become possible. For one, it voids many of the arguments against the use of contraception. Abandoning of the rather bizarre notion that contraception is an evil would give an impressive set of tools to deal with abortion, which is indeed an evil. But also, throwing aside the notion of every sexual act open to abortion opens a door to an understanding of how the fact of homosexuality need not be understood as, per se, unnatural or perverse, and to an understanding that homosexuality can have legitimate sexual expression and how gay marriage might be good. Needless to say, such an approach still requires one to ask about what kind of sexual behavior are appropriate to Christians. But it does reframe the dialogue.

 

[pureDzire]

Pardon me…I am just tuning in to this thread, so if I say something that has already been said 30 pages ago, please understand. I have just read a post that said, “the tendencies are not a sin, it’s when you act out on them”.

Perhaps I might approach this matter from the standpoint of culpability and what the Church teaches on Homosexuality. For a sin to be considered “serious”, ( I hope I am not mis-using the term)
one must give full consent to it, knowing that it is a sin considered serious and doing it anyway. But, if persons who have truly prayed and tried everything possible not to be homosexual, but find that they still are, how serious a sin can it be considered if they can not not be, and need to be loved in relationships or suffer dire psychological damage? Would such a thing still be considered a serious sin when there is obviously no true consent of the will? Would it not be a venial matter? Do forgive my intrusion, if this point has already been made. Thank you…

 

[thewalrus]

Read Romans 1, it’s not okay with God. Also, in the new testament the Lord speaks of perversions. This isn’t anything I made up, the Lord says it. I have much compassion for the homosexual struggler as I am one, and I offer him my prayers and affirmation of him as a person.

In response to the other question, it is true, we don’t “choose” the feelings. It’s very complicated on how they came about. Yes, and some people have them who grew up in perfectly normal, loving environments. Satan is the ruler of this world, so things are not perfect. That’s why there’s birth defects, disease, etc. including and I emphasize “including” problems occurring in the womb where the brain is flooded with male or female hormones of the opposite sex of the baby, and just maybe this had an effect on how the child feels about himself and effect his future attractions, I don’t know. All I know is we don’t have to act on the feelings. I have chosen not to act on them because I know it would hurt me and also be against God’s will.

From my own personal experience, many books I’ve read on the subject, others testimonys, conferences I’ve attended, and support groups, and especially what the Lord has reavealed to me, many have been hurt deeply in their lives not just by parents, but by many people in many different situations which affects them. Either they choose unhealthy heterosexual or get involved in homosexual relationships to try to restore what has been broken. Just like the woman who had an emotionally absent, alcoholic father may, and I emphasize “may”, because people handle things differently, dates one alcoholic man after another to try and restore the broken relationship she had with her father. There are many books written on this subject that prove this is definitely true, that we are affected by our parenting on some level, but to different degrees. Thank you for listening.

Like I said before, Romans 1 is not a lock for your position. If you struggle with homosexuality, I think you should begin working towards accepting yourself and realizing God accepts you as well. It would do wonders for your mental and physical health.

 

[Bennie_P]

Ahh, court14, thank you!!!

Is that the same court that gave us Roe V Wade?

 

[buffalo]

Hypothetical: What if every child you have is a burden because you cannot support that child, society and the government have to support the child. Therefore, what right do you have to constantly increase the burden on those that are not yourself, just because you want tons of kids?

I have the right and the responsibilities that go with it. I also have God’s command. Economically, an increasing population keeps the economy growing providing opportunities, consumers, and taxpayers as well as money to support the elderly. It has been estimated that the 40m abortions have hurt our economy to the tune of over 1 trillion dollars. Some European countries are now paying parents to have children. They see the looming crisis. See we have gone away from God’s way. A women that breast feeds will have between 4 and 12 children during her lifetime. So I have accepted whatever God gifted me with.

 

[buffalo]

I agree. But OTOH noone has the right to tell me how many children I have to have, as though a single person is therefore committing some crime against God.

Fundamental Catholic teaching is that you be open to life.

 

[ladybri77]

Pardon me…I am just tuning in to this thread, so if I say something that has already been said 30 pages ago, please understand. I have just read a post that said, “the tendencies are not a sin, it’s when you act out on them”.

Perhaps I might approach this matter from the standpoint of culpability and what the Church teaches on Homosexuality. For a sin to be considered “serious”, ( I hope I am not mis-using the term)
one must give full consent to it, knowing that it is a sin considered serious and doing it anyway. But, if persons who have truly prayed and tried everything possible not to be homosexual, but find that they still are, how serious a sin can it be considered if they can not not be, and need to be loved in relationships or suffer dire psychological damage? Would such a thing still be considered a serious sin when there is obviously no true consent of the will? Would it not be a venial matter? Do forgive my intrusion, if this point has already been made. Thank you…

There is no such thing as someone suffering dire psychological damage from not being in an intimate relationship with someone. Look at those people who choose to be celibate outside of marriage. THey do not suffer these consequences. They channel their affections in healthy ways through hobbies, service to others, friends, etc. But if we have prayed and chose to act out anyway, and if we are truly sorry for what we did and vow not to do it again, we will be forgiven, and forgiven again if it happens again if truly sorry. Whatever choice we make is always consent of the will. We do not get out of it by saying we had no control when we do have choices for our behavior.

 

[Bennie_P]

Oh my, just when I think Bennie couldn’t go one step further, he comes through! Hey Bennie, want me to start a thread on how homosexuals like to eat children?

It is well known (and logical) that homosexuals with a desire for young children purposefully seek employment that will bring them into proximity with the greatest number of children possible. The most “promising” jobs of this nature include clergymen working in youth ministry, Boy Scout leaders and schoolteachers.
This is primarily why homosexual teachers have been involved in more than eighty percent of all recorded cases of teacher/pupil sex. And it may also explain why homosexuals are trying so hard to force the Boy Scouts of America to accept practicing homosexuals as leaders. Some homosexuals may see such acceptance as one more step toward achieving general social recognition and approval for homosexual activity, and nothing more. For homosexual child molesters, however, such recognition by the Boy Scouts would provide more ready access to children they can abuse.
A nationwide survey of school principals showed that they received 13 times as many complaints about homosexuals sexually molesting students than they did about heterosexuals molesting students.24
Other studies have shown that homosexual teachers are from 90 to 100 times more likely to molest students than heterosexual teachers.25
**Supporting quotes by active homosexuals **
As further evidence of the strong connection between active homosexuality and child molestation, many homosexual leaders have openly admitted that there is a natural link between a homosexual orientation and child sexual abuse.
Many homosexual organizations and leaders not only admit to, but support, the sexual abuse of children by homosexuals.
***An editorial in the San Francisco Sentinel, a member of the National Lesbian & Gay Journalist’s Association, claimed that ***
The love between men and boys is at the foundation of homosexuality. For the gay community to imply that boy-love is not homosexual love is ridiculous. We must not be seduced into believing misinformation from the press and the government. Child molesting does occur, but there are also positive sexual relations. And we need to support the men and the boys in those relationships.26 The notorious North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA), one of several organized pedophile groups, almost always has a photo of a pre-teen boy on the cover of its NAMBLA Bulletin, as well as many others in its pages.

 

[Corki]

I am not persuaded that various scriptural references to homosexual practices are relevant to discussions of homosexual identity and practice in the current time. Each scriptural reference fits within the historical context that the writer was immersed in, and I do not find that any of those contexts replicates our contemporary situation.

Beyond issues of scripture, however, a key notion at work in some of the current official Catholic stance on homosexuality and other issues is the very strange notion that Every sexual act must be open to conception. I have never seen any convincing reasons to support this idea. If one throws out this idea, all kinds of new perspectives on sexuality become possible. For one, it voids many of the arguments against the use of contraception. Abandoning of the rather bizarre notion that contraception is an evil would give an impressive set of tools to deal with abortion, which is indeed an evil. But also, throwing aside the notion of every sexual act open to abortion opens a door to an understanding of how the fact of homosexuality need not be understood as, per se, unnatural or perverse, and to an understanding that homosexuality can have legitimate sexual expression and how gay marriage might be good. Needless to say, such an approach still requires one to ask about what kind of sexual behavior are appropriate to Christians. But it does reframe the dialogue.

What is the benefit of “reframing the dialogue” in a completely Godless way? Hasn’t that already been done by the secular gay activist movement?

It is OT, but your comment about contraception as a tool to deal with abortion is out of step with the facts. Many more women have abortions as a result of failed contraception than have abortions because they belied contraception use to be sinful.

 

[michaelcollins]

Thank you for just proving my point. By leaving “marriage” up to the church, that will maintain it’s sanctity. By making all legal matters between two people who love each other and want to be with each other for the rest of their lives called “civil unions”, we end this whole dispute! Everyone will get equal rights, and if a certain church doesn’t mind marrying gays, they do that. The whole point of the anti-Prop 8 campaign is to get equal rights for gays!

What if my church teaches it is morally wrong and that it is morally wrong for me to support moral wrongs?

It does not happen in a vacuum. What if I believe that same sex marriages lead to more of the same because they have led in society to the very adoptions you referance? What if I believe these should be limited not promoted?

One of the problems with yours and like arguments of the live and let live ilk is that it requires me to comprimise on my morals, what does it require of the other side? They have civil unions- what benefit from marriage is it you refer to? Legally discrimination laws protect them what exactly do you referance?

 

[pathia]

One of the problems with yours and like arguments of the live and let live ilk is that it requires me to comprimise on my morals, what does it require of the other side? They have civil unions- what benefit from marriage is it you refer to? Legally discrimination laws protect them what exactly do you referance?

We do not have civil unions. Only a tiny number of states do. Very few states have anti-discrimination law that covers sexual orientation. Most states it is completely legal to fire people for being gay. I have been, repeatedly, fired for being so with no repercussions, except to spread the word and hope people don’t go to those businesses.

 

[thewalrus]

The opinion of one judge is obvious an opion by an activist judege.
Cameron states in his own words there is limited studies and evn the source you link states it limitations.

With the use of the word impossible, the "gay agenda marches right along with flase assumptions.

One study that illustrates the problem of homosexuality as relates to abuse to children come straight from the Churches own sex abuse scandal. Please take to read the study. usccb.org/nrb/johnjaystudy/

Another link you might enjoy for the enrichment of your mind

**American Psychological Association lost it crediabilty when it took up the gay agenda and declassified homosexual behavior as not having any relationships to psycological disorders, they of course still try put a line, which they don’t know to wheere draw it between homosexual behavior and pedephilia… lets see it is homsexual behavior when a man has sex with 16 year old, but pedephilia when the boy is under the age of ??? were is the invisable line between morality and immorality **

Poor Bennie. Look man, the opinion of one judge means he’s activist? What does that even mean??

And what in the world does a study that documents child abuse by CATHOLIC PRIESTS have to say about there being a disproportionate amount of child sex abuse among homosexuals? You’re killing me, Bennie.

lol and to ice that wonderful cake, you discount the entire American Psychological Association because they disagree with you? The declassified homosexual behavior BECAUSE IT’S NOT A PATHOLOGY. Yay Bennie!

 

[thewalrus]

One of the problems with yours and like arguments of the live and let live ilk is that it requires me to comprimise on my morals, what does it require of the other side?

You make a great point. How could they be so narrow-minded to not base all their decisions around you?

 

[buffalo]

Poor Bennie. Look man, the opinion of one judge means he’s activist? What does that even mean??

And what in the world does a study that documents child abuse by CATHOLIC PRIESTS have to say about there being a disproportionate amount of child sex abuse among homosexuals? You’re killing me, Bennie.

lol and to ice that wonderful cake, you discount the entire American Psychological Association because they disagree with you? The declassified homosexual behavior BECAUSE IT’S NOT A PATHOLOGY. Yay Bennie!

If you study it you will see that there were very very few pedophiles. Most of the abuse was adult male to post-pubescent male. You will also see reports to authorities as well as convictions.

What do we call adult male to post pubescent male children?

 

[court14]

Is that the same court that gave us Roe V Wade?

Maybe or maybe not. Which ever offends you most?

Do you have any objective peer review studies? The group you cited has a leader who is blatantly dishonest.

 

[thewalrus]

If you study it you will see that there were very very few pedophiles. Most of the abuse was adult male to post-pubescent male. You will also see reports to authorities as well as convictions.

What do we call adult male to post pubescent male children?

What does this have to do with anything? It’s a study about Catholic priests committing sex abuse. That proves nothing.

 

[buffalo]

What does this have to do with anything? It’s a study about Catholic priests committing sex abuse. That proves nothing.

with boys - I guess it means nothing. The press has ignored the facts and so will you.

 

[pathia]

If you study it you will see that there were very very few pedophiles. Most of the abuse was adult male to post-pubescent male. You will also see reports to authorities as well as convictions.

What do we call adult male to post pubescent male children?

Ephibophilia, I may be mangling the spelling though. It is not pedophilia. Pedophilia involves pre-pubescent children. Ephibophilia involves teenagers that would have already been married 100-200years ago already, often to the same age of men (and women now, given all those teacher+student scandals) that now a days are thrown in jail for having sex with them.

 

[thewalrus]

with boys - I guess it means nothing. The press has ignored the facts and so will you.

lol nope, no, I have no problem at all with the facts, at least in regards to my argument. I find it a disturbing study, and very sad. A person does not have to be homosexual to commit sexual abuse with boys. That might be news to you.

 

[pureDzire]

There is no such thing as someone suffering dire psychological damage from not being in an intimate relationship with someone. Look at those people who choose to be celibate outside of marriage. THey do not suffer these consequences. They channel their affections in healthy ways through hobbies, service to others, friends, etc. But if we have prayed and chose to act out anyway, and if we are truly sorry for what we did and vow not to do it again, we will be forgiven, and forgiven again if it happens again if truly sorry. Whatever choice we make is always consent of the will. We do not get out of it by saying we had no control when we do have choices for our behavior.

Bless You for your perspective. I just worry for people who feel dis-connected because of this issue within themselves and suffer truly the fear of eternal loss without feeling the strength to resist their inclinations that God has given you. Even Priests struggle with Celibacy, and they have the Graces and Calling of Chastity to support them. Could it be a matter of the Grace of Faith and not Chastity that would be more likely to help? Perhaps we might pray that Faith may be given in these matters?