Gay rights activists protest N. California mall

[bellasbane]

How exactly is someone not same-sex inclined when they take part in same-sex activities?

A person does not need to have a predominant or exclusive same sex attraction in order to take part in same-sex activities.

1. They may be paid to do so
2. It may be their only source of intimacy
3. They may be experimenting because society says they should.

I’m sure there are other reasons.

 

[epan]

Yeah, I’d like to hear the response on this one.

I think this phenomenon is documented in prisons. My understanding of history is that the idea of sexual orientation, as it is often referred to today, would have been an unknown concept, say in Greek or Roman times. It was all just sex, and social status and context was perhaps more significant than gender for sexual pleasure in same sex relations.

One thing which has changed, is that primogeniture is no longer a driving societal impulse. If a man does not produce male heirs, it is no big deal. This entire historic outlook coincided more closely with the Catholic view of procreation and marriage. Even many of Shakespeare’s sonnets were clearly written to a man who rebuffed the sonneteer’s advances. If you read the text closely, there is clear explication of the idea of wasted sexual procreative capacity. This was once far more deeply woven into the social fabric of our society in many ways.

(No, I did not say that Shakespeare was gay. If you believe that the sonnets are actually autobiographical, then he was attracted to males. If you believe that they are fiction, then he was not. But he did write about it, quite clearly, and he plays with gender confusion throughout some of his plays, such as As You Like It.)

 

[fix]

Isn’t it amazing:

The advocates of homosexuality in here will go to great lengths to redirect topics, rephrase questions to their liking, and simply ignore any stated facts or questions that are detrimental to their point of view.

And they do it with such ease and lack of self-awareness of their own contradictions that it almost seems to be a subconscious reflex.

Unbelievable.:hypno:

Yes, it is about redirection and a false fairness doctrine where each time the sinfulness of homosexual acts is mentioned one is obligated to mention every sexual sin or else some feel singled out. Politics not theology.

 

[Lochias]

I think this phenomenon is documented in prisons. My understanding of history is that the idea of sexual orientation, as it is often referred to today, would have been an unknown concept, say in Greek or Roman times. It was all just sex, and social status and context was perhaps more significant than gender for sexual pleasure in same sex relations.

One thing which has changed, is that primogeniture is no longer a driving societal impulse. If a man does not produce male heirs, it is no big deal. This entire historic outlook coincided more closely with the Catholic view of procreation and marriage. Even many of Shakespeare’s sonnets were clearly written a a man who rebuffed the sonneteer’s advances. If you read the text closely, there is clear explication of the idea of wasted sexual procreative capacity. This was once far more deeply woven into the social fabric of our society in many ways.

I can grant all of that on a first-read basis; I’ll need to study more before I form a more solid opinion.

However, I still don’t think there can intrinsically be such a thing as willing homosexual sex between non-homosexual partners. There would have to be a least a small inclination towards a member of the same sex before someone would be willing to participate in such.

 

[epan]

Isn’t it amazing:

The advocates of homosexuality in here will go to great lengths to redirect topics, rephrase questions to their liking, and simply ignore any stated facts or questions that are detrimental to their point of view.

And they do it with such ease and lack of self-awareness of their own contradictions that it almost seems to be a subconscious reflex.

Unbelievable.:hypno:

Don’t you think this depends more on the individual, than on particular point of view? I think that accusation can be applied fairly to some people, regardless of their beliefs.

 

[Cor_Cordis]

I believe masturbation is classified in exactly the same way as homosexuality.

Adultery is certainly a grave evil (being one of the big 10) and is often compounded by ABC. In which case it may actually be worse then homosexuality.

2352 By masturbation is to be understood the deliberate stimulation of the genital organs in order to derive sexual pleasure. "Both the Magisterium of the Church, in the course of a constant tradition, and the moral sense of the faithful have been in no doubt and have firmly maintained that masturbation is an intrinsically and gravely disordered action."138 “The deliberate use of the sexual faculty, for whatever reason, outside of marriage is essentially contrary to its purpose.” For here sexual pleasure is sought outside of "the sexual relationship which is demanded by the moral order and in which the total meaning of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love is achieved."139

It is allowed as part of the act of love within marriage.

 

[epan]

I can grant all of that on a first-read basis; I’ll need to study more before I form a more solid opinion.

However, I still don’t think there can intrinsically be such a thing as willing homosexual sex between non-homosexual partners. There would have to be a least a small inclination towards a member of the same sex before someone would be willing to participate in such.

I can’t pretend to answer that question, except that I have heard of “punks” in prison, who will find a protector who is stronger then they are, in order to prevent falling prey to rape. This is an unusual case, compared to most of our experiences. But it does illustrate an example of why someone might seduce a same sex partner, with intent, while not actually being attracted to that person sexually. Though, there is clearly an element of coercion, as this would be done for individual survival.

I imagine that there are many male prostitutes who are heterosexual, but find that men are more likely to pay for sex.

So, a couple of examples do come to mind off the top of my head.

I am not interested in having sex with another male. I will admit to having admired a beautiful male physique from time to time. I don’t think that this admiration would rise to the level of lust, but it does give me some insight into how a male might be attracted to another male. It may be just a matter of degree. I don’t quite know.

A professor of Pediatrics once made the observation to me that pedophiles suffer, too. This does not excuse their acting on the impulse to abuse children. But I had not considered that angle before that time. I can have compassion for someone, while disapproving of the behavior, and that makes me better able to help someone with such an impulse to find help, I hope. Suffering exists in many ways, which are not always apparent.

It also gave me a sense of gratitude that I don’t suffer from that particular affliction. Imagine the difficulty that a person goes through, who honestly is of an opposite psychological gender than the physical body? How difficult would that be? Even the Church in 2002 stated that gender reassignment surgery, while not something to be advocated, might be a more humane option than the suffering of a transgendered person. I don’t want to derail this thread. But I did want to make the point that there is a lot of suffering, historically, in the homosexual population. By that population, I mean the people who honestly claim to fall in love with people of the same gender.

 

[Cor_Cordis]

A person does not need to have a predominant or exclusive same sex attraction in order to take part in same-sex activities.

1. They may be paid to do so
2. It may be their only source of intimacy
3. They may be experimenting because society says they should.

I’m sure there are other reasons.

I didn’t say “predominant” or “exclusive”.

I said inclination.

If one takes part in a same-sex activity, rest assure, there IS a same-sex inclination at work.

But tell me, if same-sex attraction is genetic, do these people in question only have a “half” gene biological influence?

Or do they have no genetic predisposition at all, and they’re simply acting on environmental influences?

 

[bellasbane]

I believe the CCC has something to say about adultery and masturbation. By that I mean sexual activity of any sort outside of marriage.

So, it really is not necessary to go to the trouble of making a matrix to define sexuality based on the CCC definition.

Of course, much of the heated debate is a result of differing definitions coming from all directions. So, in that sense, your point is well taken.

In the interest of full disclosure, my biological dad died by the age of 41 from alcoholism. I believe, and my mom believes, that he was tormented by his inability to reconcile his homosexual attractions with his beliefs as a devout Catholic. I have no idea whether he ever acted on those inclinations, but I am quite convinced that his sexual orientation was primarily homosexual.

How this issue is handled, and what is said, can make a big difference. This is one reason that I have a strong interest in this topic. It has great emotional resonance for me, the difficulties that a gay person may encounter in life. I saw it first hand, and lost my dad at the age of 11, as a result. Throughout my adolescence and early adulthood I harbored great anger, much of it toward the Church.

There are many cases, even today, of tragic suicides, out of despair over this issue. There are also famous historic examples of tragic loss. Alan Turing comes to mind, who personally saved many lives with his cracking of the German Enigma code machine. He was also the founder of one of the most important theoretical foundations of Computer Science. He invented the mathematics which describes a deterministic machine (a computer). Imagine what he might have accomplished to benefit humanity in the last half of his life.

I’m sorry for not responding to you sooner and for what happened to your dad. I lost my dad at a young age too, but it wasn’t for any reason other than he got sick. He was a pretty happy guy and wanted to live.

I started studying the impact of sexual identity formation for exactly this reason - because the emotional pain people with same sex attractions experience in our society. I must say, things are a lot better than they were even 10 years ago when I first started reviewing the research. At least gay men and lesbians no longer have to fear the kind of physical threats they once experienced.

My concern now is what we’ve been calling the new “normal”. I have had to council kids who wonder whether something is wrong with them for not having any inclination to “experiment” with same sex partners in dating situations. They are getting the message that a person’s sexuality isn’t something they are inherently aware about. This is total bull and has no scientific basis. Yet it is the message they are receiving.

 

[iamrefreshed]

I By that population, I mean the people who honestly claim to fall in love with people of the same gender.

Love is a choice.

 

[Cor_Cordis]

A person does not need to have a predominant or exclusive same sex attraction in order to take part in same-sex activities.

1. They may be paid to do so
2. It may be their only source of intimacy
3. They may be experimenting because society says they should.

I’m sure there are other reasons.

Tell me

why is it that masturbation and homosexuality is nonexistent in some cultures?

Are these people free of that elusive gay gene?

Are they free of the masturbation gene?

Does masturbation require a genetic influence?

If not, why does homosexuality?

 

[Lochias]

I can’t pretend to answer that question, except that I have heard of “punks” in prison, who will find a protector who is stronger then they are, in order to prevent falling prey to rape. This is an unusual case, compared to most of our experiences. But it does illustrate an example of why someone might seduce a same sex partner, with intent, while not actually being attracted to that person sexually. Though, there is clearly an element of coercion, as this would be done for individual survival.

I imagine that there are many male prostitutes who are heterosexual, but find that men are more likely to pay for sex.

So, a couple of examples do come to mind off the top of my head.

I am not interested in having sex with another male. I will admit to having admired a beautiful male physique from time to time. I don’t think that this admiration would rise to the level of lust, but it does give me some insight into how a male might be attracted to another male. It may be just a matter of degree. I don’t quite know.

A professor of Pediatrics once made the observation to me that pedophiles suffer, too. This does not excuse their acting on the impulse to abuse children. But I had not considered that angle before that time. I can have compassion for someone, while disapproving of the behavior, and that makes me better able to help someone with such an impulse to find help, I hope. Suffering exists in many ways, which are not always apparent.

It also gave me a sense of gratitude that I don’t suffer from that particular affliction. Imagine the difficulty that a person goes through, who honestly is of an opposite psychological gender than the physical body? How difficult would that be? Even the Church in 2002 stated that gender reassignment surgery, while not something to be advocated, might be a more humane option than the suffering of a transgendered person. I don’t want to derail this thread. But I did want to make the point that there is a lot of suffering, historically, in the homosexual population. By that population, I mean the people who honestly claim to fall in love with people of the same gender.

I’ll do some studying on this. The bolded paragraph, in the meantime, is definitely something to keep in mind, and the Church advocates compassion and empathy for people who identify as homosexual as much as for anyone else. It can’t ever be said to be an easy cross to bear. I wish those folks knew just how much their suffering is worth, especially if they can find peace amidst their suffering, and do so for the right reasons.

I have no doubt that someone who can shoulder that cross, and still find life beautiful and worth living in their sacrifice and obedience, has a high place waiting in Heaven and is ten times holier than I could ever dream of being.

 

[Cor_Cordis]

More Catholics need to read Dr. Fitzgibbons.

He’s one of the leading experts on Same-Sex attraction. And he’s had decades of clinical experience to substantiate his findings. He’s also a devout Catholic:

Same-Sex Attractions in Youth and Their Right to Informed Consent

 

[Cor_Cordis]

Dr. Fitzgibbons:

The Origins and Therapy of Same-Sex Attraction Disorder (SSAD)

 

[epan]

I didn’t say “predominant” or “exclusive”.

I said inclination.

If one takes part in a same-sex activity, rest assure, there IS a same-sex inclination at work.

But tell me, if same-sex attraction is genetic, do these people in question only have a “half” gene biological influence?

Or do they have no genetic predisposition at all, and they’re simply acting on environmental influences?

What do you mean by a “half” gene biological influence?

Someone like Meltzerboy on here, has far more expertise in the area of “nature vs. nurture.”

To the best of my knowledge, there are some good studies which show that same sex attraction tends to run in families, along sometimes identifiable lines. However, there are also studies which show identical twins, raised in different environments can come out with differing sexual orientations. And… there are also good studies which show that homosexuality tends to be more frequent among identical twins, than among non-twin siblings in the same families, and between fraternal twins…

Don’t hold me too hard to these recitations, as I am recalling them from some years back in training, and it is not my field. I am sure that there is plenty of new research.

The bottom line, is that nobody is certain at this time, what the etiology of sexual attraction or orientation is. Anyone who claims to, is suspect in my mind. It is a complex issue.

One thing, which I think is generally agreed upon, is that sexual orientation, as we understand it today, is not volitional. One does not choose to be heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual. One may choose which impulses to act on, and how to conduct one’s life to increase opportunities, or to reduce lust, or the chance of meeting a partner, etc… but the actual core orientation is not considered at this time to be a matter of personal choice.

 

[Cor_Cordis]

What do you mean by a “half” gene biological influence?

I was being facetious.

 

[epan]

More Catholics need to read Dr. Fitzgibbons.

He’s one of the leading experts on Same-Sex attraction. And he’s had decades of clinical experience to substantiate his findings. He’s also a devout Catholic:

Same-Sex Attractions in Youth and Their Right to Informed Consent

He may be a fine medical practitioner, and he no doubt has some strong opinions and theories, which work well for him in his practice.

If he can actually prove the origin of sexual orientation, then I am guessing that we will be hearing about his receiving a Nobel Prize in Medicine. Seriously. Accept his expertise for what it is. But be suspicious of anyone who claims to have all the answers on this topic.

 

[bellasbane]

I didn’t say “predominant” or “exclusive”.

I said inclination.

If one takes part in a same-sex activity, rest assure, there IS a same-sex inclination at work.

But tell me, if same-sex attraction is genetic, do these people in question only have a “half” gene biological influence?

Or do they have no genetic predisposition at all, and they’re simply acting on environmental influences?

Same sex attraction seems to be biologically determined, or at least it is an inherent disposition, but that doesn’t mean it is genetically determined. It is certainly robust against environmental pressure. Just think how hard society has tried to stamp it out without any success. Even today, most people with same sex attraction would gladly trade it for opposite sex attraction in order to better fit into society.

I believe the desire for intimacy is strong enough to overpower a person’s inherent sexuality. For example, victims of sexual abuse often get very confused about their sexuality. If the abuser is of the opposite sex, they may develop an aversion to the opposite sex and seek out same sex partners in order to satisfy the need for an intimate relationship. If the abuser is the same sex, they may be confused if they received intimacy and pleasure from the encounter and so come to associate that with the gender of the abuser.

It is not as simple as you would like it to be. That’s why you have to remember that every person is a beloved child of God and it is not our place to judge or condemn them.

 

[Cor_Cordis]

To the best of my knowledge, there are some good studies which show that same sex attraction tends to run in families, along sometimes identifiable lines. However, there are also studies which show identical twins, raised in different environments can come out with differing sexual orientations. And… there are also good studies which show that homosexuality tends to be more frequent among identical twins, than among non-twin siblings in the same families, and between fraternal twins…

Dr Fitzgibbons believes it is predominantly (if not exclusively) “nurture”.

 

[Cor_Cordis]

He may be a fine medical practitioner, and he no doubt has some strong opinions and theories, which work well for him in his practice.

If he can actually prove the origin of sexual orientation, then I am guessing that we will be hearing about his receiving a Nobel Prize in Medicine. Seriously. Accept his expertise for what it is. But be suspicious of anyone who claims to have all the answers on this topic.

Let me know when science has actually discovered the elusive gay gene(s).

And no, he’ll never receive a Nobel Prize. These days, that’s reserved for liberal-progressives who accomplish basically nothing other than fostering popular agendas. Like Al Gore and Obama.

Be suspicious of theories that claim biological evidence, where none has been found.