E
Edward_H
Guest
It’s perfection given one’s envelope of capacities.
Homosexual sex goes against one’s capacities…and our capacities aren’t just reproductive related.
- Status
Homosexual sex goes against one’s capacities…and our capacities aren’t just reproductive related.
N
NekoNecro
Guest
I really don’t want to get sucked into a “Gay sex is evil” debate, but in basic bullet points I’ll lay a few statements against these “capacities”, judging from the hundreds of arguments on this forum concerning homosexuality I’m sure your all familiar with the pro-gay research…
Homosexuality is a natural tendency that affects approximately 5-10% of mammals of any species, including humans. The cause is still hotly contested, but most have come to accept it to be primarily genetic. We allow disabled parents to retain children (I don’t think homosexuals are disabled) but it shows the church is willing to tolerate unorthodox lifestyles and parental faults.
Homosexual sex is not going to create new life, but neither is sex between a man and a woman without a womb. Unless the latter is also barred from marriage no fair block may be brought against the former. I myself would rather see the range of people eligible for marriage widened than narrowed (I disagree that sex actually needs to be part of a marriage, it’s a nice aspect but not essential).
Yes, I am one of those moral relativists you people seem to dread so much. I agree there are some “natural” laws all human society develops (Don’t kill, Don’t steal ect) but on Homosexuality I have to disagree that it is unnatural. Until the rise of Christianity, there was no negative view placed on homosexuality at all in Celtic, Classical, Native American, Indian or even Aztec society. Indeed, the opposition to homosexuality is an almost uniquely Hebrew feature (and even then you can find some pretty homoerotic stuff in the Tanakh).
Until Christianity swept across the globe, homosexuality was not viewed as evil (There is a wonderfully detailed account from Plutarch describing Homosexual marriages, thats right, marriages in the 4th century BC in Thebes, Greece). Certainly the passive partner in male or female parings would be the butt of jokes or in the case of Athens lowered to the status of a woman (in the case of very old gay men) but they weren’t seen as morally evil by a long shot.It seems absurd to many that God is silent on the matter of slavery but is up in arms and enraged by the idea of consensual homosexual relationships and women reading from the gospel or teaching men. It’s funny how we overlook that but fight to the death over a pair of lesbians raising a child.
Times do change, and what was once acceptable is no longer so, and what once was is no longer.
K
kozlosap
Guest
Neckonecro - I’ve enjoyed reading your very thoughtful posts and find myself agreeing with almost all of your points’ especially the last one! Welcome to these forums and please continue your postings - we all learn from each other. 
E
Edward_H
Guest
Even accepting your own numbers, something that affects low single digits % isn’t the natural order of things. Sorry.
Homosexual sex is an intrinsically imperfect act of sex because it goes against the capacities of its members.
N
NekoNecro
Guest
Neckonecro - I’ve enjoyed reading your very thoughtful posts and find myself agreeing with almost all of your points’ especially the last one! Welcome to these forums and please continue your postings - we all learn from each other.
Thank you Kozlosap! It’s a pleasure to be here, I’ve already learnt quite a lot in the past few hours and am eager for more.What?! You mean Red hair (2%) and Albinos(0.0001%) aren’t natural?!
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_hair
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albino
What about the left handed? (5%), there’s a lot of disordered monsters running around untamed. There’s more homosexuals than lefties and gingers and I don’t see anyone setting up an apostolic agency to guide them away from their sinful disorders.
E
Edward_H
Guest
So you don’t yet understand the difference between “accidents” and “essentials”.
What?! You mean Red hair (2%) and Albinos(0.0001%) aren’t natural?!
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_hair
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albino
What about the left handed? (5%), there’s a lot of disordered monsters running around untamed. There’s more homosexuals than lefties and gingers and I don’t see anyone setting up an apostolic agency to guide them away from their sinful disorder
N
NekoNecro
Guest
Oh I understand it in the theological sense that the Catholic Church uses it, I merely find that Biology and statistics have shown the present definitions of accidents and essentials to be incorrect and in need of revision. Quite like how Genesis was once interpreted as being absolutely literal but most Theologians nowadays view it as an allegorical representation of a longer period of time.
I honestly have no idea why homosexuals exist, but in all truth I don’t really care, the same way I have no interest if a person has blonde hair or green eyes. If it were unnatural they would have gone extinct during their continual purges from the Christian world by now during the 1900 odd years of active persecution, and would not have continually spontaneously appeared all over the world, from hedonistic Rome to Amish communities in the middle of nowhere…
And if they were an aberration against “Natural” law in the theological sense, why is it only the Hebrew cultural sphere that condemned it. To be a natural law, it has to be universal, and this was far from it.
J
JimG
Guest
Homosexual relationships are inherently disordered. It is a disservice to place children within such relationships.
Of course, one might say that a great many heterosexual relationships are also dysfunctional and disordered, but one should still not choose to place a child in one disordered relationship to save him from a different one.
But our society has traveled so far down this road that it refuses to see clearly. We seem to have entered into the reign of gay.
Of course, one might say that a great many heterosexual relationships are also dysfunctional and disordered, but one should still not choose to place a child in one disordered relationship to save him from a different one.
But our society has traveled so far down this road that it refuses to see clearly. We seem to have entered into the reign of gay.
R
Rau
Guest
In respect of the comments on gay sexual relations that you’ve made:
Natural / Unnatural is a difficult concept and different people think it means different things. I believe homosexuality is “naturally occurring”, in the sense that we don’t manufacture it in the lab. By the same token, it does not really conform with the human blueprint, does it? - the proclivity is somewhat at odds with the body. A man emitting his gametes together with another man looks in some sense to be a “broken” act, because, under no eventuality, despite the full health of the participants, despite even the (albeit fanciful) wishes of the participants, those gametes **can never **fulfil their reason to exist and be emitted.
…
Not sure what you mean by “accept”, but as to scientific understanding, **the cause it not known **and there is not a preponderance of evidence that says it is genetic.
I don’t consider fertility to be relevant to the debate. In respect of civil law, there is only one intrinsically sexual union that States ought to care about, and that is Marriage. The class of unions “Man + Woman” is uniquely significant to the State for its society building potential. I agree that States should be free to provide **legal frameworks **that meet the needs of arbitrary persons who wish to live together, share assets, care for each other on-going, etc. Of course, that relationship need not be sexual and the State need take no interest in whether it is or it is not. However, that is not Marriage, and common sense says that the institution should not be called Marriage nor thought to be equivalent to it.
I don’t know in what sense you consider yourself a moral relativist, but I suggest that is a freedom only God should exercise. He will hold us to the standard he sees fit in light of our talents and privileges, but the line between moral and immoral is fixed and we can’t rationally move it around to fit circumstances.
Natural / Unnatural is a difficult concept and different people think it means different things. I believe homosexuality is “naturally occurring”, in the sense that we don’t manufacture it in the lab. By the same token, it does not really conform with the human blueprint, does it? - the proclivity is somewhat at odds with the body. A man emitting his gametes together with another man looks in some sense to be a “broken” act, because, under no eventuality, despite the full health of the participants, despite even the (albeit fanciful) wishes of the participants, those gametes **can never **fulfil their reason to exist and be emitted.
…
P
Peter_Plato
Guest
Homosexuality is an epigenetic condition, which means there are typically environmental stressors or triggers that inhibit or suppress certain genetic traits, in this case, complete gender expression. That is not necessarily a desirable characteristic.
For example, obesity has been found to have been triggered by food scarcity by studies done in Northern Europe. We wouldn’t say that just because obesity is “genetic,” it is thereby a desirable trait. It would make much more sense to treat homosexual tendencies as indicators of possible environmental (social, physiological, chemical) issues. To say “it doesn’t matter to me” and treat a potentially problematic conditon as if it isn’t, is simply being short sighted.
This is not a reasoned position, nor is it good science. What it is is bad politics, period.
It is one thing to say we ought to treat individuals who carry certain epigenetic conditions with respect and dignity, it is another to say the condition ought to be promoted. Take autism, for example. It is clear that the right thing to do is to treat autistic individuals as having full human dignity, it is quite another to thereby claim that autism is a desirable human condition.
P
Peter_Plato
Guest
This is not true. There have been Church Fathers even before Augustine who treated Genesis as allegorical, so did many Jewish scholars. If anything there are likely more absolute literalists today than there have been throughout history. Could you support your position about the literal reading of Genesis in earlier times with some actual references? In particular, influential individuals or at least those who were likely to be representative of a large body of believers.
E
Edward_H
Guest
Homosexuals exist for the same reason that adulterers and pedaphiles and bestialists exist: disordered practices of sexuality.
E
edwest2
Guest
Sad. This is a modern invention. The capitulation of the American Psychiatric Association to radical gay activists and closeted gays within the organization. They threw out years of research and voted that what was a disorder yesterday was not a disorder after the vote. The next steps? Sexual Reassignment surgery, the overturning of sodomy laws.
amazon.com/Homosexuality-American-Psychiatry-Politics-Diagnosis/dp/0691028370
Transgender? All the LGBT community had to do was lobby the APA for years.
“Whereas previously a man who “self-identified” as a woman (or vice versa) could have been classified as mentally ill, now the DSM-5 uses the term “gender dysphoria,” which means it is only a mental illness if you’re troubled by this self-identification. Elated activists in the “LGBT” community had lobbied the APA for the change for years.”
Read more: ncregister.com/daily-news/psychiatrys-new-normal-transgendered-persons#ixzz30KnTeDFj
Pope Benedict:
“We are moving toward a dictatorship of relativism which does not recognize anything as for certain and which has as its highest goal one’s own ego and one’s own desires. The church must defend itself against threats such as “radical individualism” and “vague religious mysticism”. [emphasis added]”
Truth is truth. It doesn’t change. The world is quite black and white regardless of any who attempt to impose grayness on it.
Peace,
Ed
amazon.com/Homosexuality-American-Psychiatry-Politics-Diagnosis/dp/0691028370
Transgender? All the LGBT community had to do was lobby the APA for years.
“Whereas previously a man who “self-identified” as a woman (or vice versa) could have been classified as mentally ill, now the DSM-5 uses the term “gender dysphoria,” which means it is only a mental illness if you’re troubled by this self-identification. Elated activists in the “LGBT” community had lobbied the APA for the change for years.”
Read more: ncregister.com/daily-news/psychiatrys-new-normal-transgendered-persons#ixzz30KnTeDFj
Pope Benedict:
“We are moving toward a dictatorship of relativism which does not recognize anything as for certain and which has as its highest goal one’s own ego and one’s own desires. The church must defend itself against threats such as “radical individualism” and “vague religious mysticism”. [emphasis added]”
Truth is truth. It doesn’t change. The world is quite black and white regardless of any who attempt to impose grayness on it.
Peace,
Ed
J
Joie_de_Vivre
Guest
The APA ran into the issue that they couldn’t identify homosexuals from heterosexuals through the Rorschach, MMPI or TAT, see “The Adjustment of the Male Overt Homosexual”.
The only successful treatment is hormones and/or transitioning to some degree.
Indeed
R
Rau
Guest
While this process of voting rather than science seems unsatisfactory, do the consequences need to be so grave? Why wouldn’t scientists continue to study the mechanisms by which sexuality is formed and fixed? I believe there are restrictions placed on certain kinds of therapies now, but this historically appeared to have low success and even did harm. Those who suffer from their condition can seek medical assistance. What have we lost?
I take the view that homosexuality, transgenderism etc, do reflect some kind of medical /biological problem, but it does not concern me that we refrain from declaring it/them to be a mental illness.
N
Nacho45
Guest
It’s a sad day in Christendom when people attempt to rationalize away teachings provided from God to the Church. 
R
Rau
Guest
A vote taken prematurely, if that is what happened, prior to evidence of the actual cause being established, is unsatisfying. Bringing on the vote prematurely can manipulate the process of consensus. But given my view that treating the said conditions as a “mere psychological condition” is a bit dubious in the first place, it’s not the huge issue for me it seems to be for some others. Others want to equate “not mental illness” with “perfectly natural and normal”, and I don’t see how that follows.
N
NekoNecro
Guest
Alright, I’ll agree with you as soon as you also agree that we need to return to the standard required by the Irish parenting laws promoted during the 40-50’s (all promoted by the Church as the standard required of any good Catholic during this time).
Ya’know, single mothers have to have their children taken away because they don’t present the perfect imitation of the holy family, same as widows and widowers. The disabled, rape victims, parents who just don’t like one another, couples who miss mass. We’d be doing them a /terrible/ disservice not to take them away.
What relationship? Do orphans really form that much of a familial bond with the people who are paid to look after them, doing it for profit rather than actual love?
I honestly don’t even want to dignify this bit with a response. I can…assure you. The gays are not trying to take over the world, they just want to get on with their own lives. Most them are more concerned with what cushions they have on their couches than forming a new world order in the name of Satan.
J
Joie_de_Vivre
Guest
At the time there was increasing awareness that prior studies had issues due to both small size and that their sample was extremely skewed given that their major sources of patients were from prisons which skews it towards the debauched and from mental institutions where many came in originally for another reason which given they probably have another mental illness causes conflation.
By finding that there were gay people who couldn’t be told apart from heterosexuals by experts based on standard psychological tests it seriously undermined the concept that it was a mental illness.
- Status