P
Publisher
Guest
Religious beliefs.By design they cannot have babies. Because of** original sin **and corruption some are sterile. The design and original intent are still the starting point.
Religious beliefs.By design they cannot have babies. Because of** original sin **and corruption some are sterile. The design and original intent are still the starting point.
Right on - that is why we have to back to designed intent.Coming from a psychological background there is not enough evidence either way to support either claim. So our views have to be based on beliefs. Otherwise what would they be based upon???
Show me where design and intent are religious beliefs.Religious beliefs.
Seems like we’ve come quite a distance…“even if we had evidence to support that children…”…which we do by the way…I wouldn’t say “perfect” by any stretch of the imagination, but then I don’t know any “perfect” children…other than my own of courseBesides, even if we had evidence to support that children raised in homosexual families were well adjusted perfect children, it would not chance my beliefs that gay marriage is still invalid.
Are you saying you do not have a religious belief that it was not God’s design and intent that a man and woman alone shoud be married and have children but due to original sin and corruption God’s “inent and design” were frustrated? So this isn’t a religious belief?Show me where design and intent are religious beliefs.
Yes indeed we do have this belief.Are you saying you do not have a religious belief that it was not God’s design and intent that a man and woman alone shoud be married and have children but due to original sin and corruption God’s “inent and design” were frustrated? So this isn’t a religious belief?
No, it is relativism based on the fact they reject absolute truth. Even if they are not absolute relativists they are relative relativists.It is only “relativism”, to use your word, when not based in your religious belief.
Oh, so you are a materialist? You only accept truth that you can touch or measure in a lab?Objective truth, which they can see and measure does not bear your religious belief out when it comes to your belief that homosexuality is disordered…it is a religious belief you hold…that is the starting point of your assertion not fact.
A psychologist cannot prove what is or is not moral through surveys or studies. They can measure parameters and choose subjective endpoints to compare, but that does not determine good or evil.Coming from a psychological background there is not enough evidence either way to support either claim. So our views have to be based on beliefs. Otherwise what would they be based upon???
Intent and design from a purely secular standpoint I agree is difficult for religious people. I too hold religious beliefs. My intent was not to remove religious beliefs from your views, but simply to point out that civil law which approves/disapproves of same sex unions be used and not others religious beliefs.Yes indeed we do have this belief.
But remove religion from the debate for one minute and answer the question.
You are dodging the question. From a simple observation of a male and a female what can we conclude design and intent?Intent and design from a purely secular standpoint I agree is difficult for religious people. I too hold religious beliefs. My intent was not to remove religious beliefs from your views, but simply to point out that civil law which approves/disapproves of same sex unions be used and not others religious beliefs.
My religious belief, based also on modern psychological evidence is that same sex unions are not ‘evil’…they do not go against the “natural order”. Yes, they are different…but different isn’t evil.
If two people of the same sex wish to establish an “alternative family” with children in a stable, loving environment, they should be allowed to do so. It does not hurt society in any way shape or form…it does go against manys religious belief, but we should not establish government to enforce religious belief.
I have not doubt that some homosexual behavior was condemned in scripture, but so was some heterosexula behavior. There is not condemnation at all for loving same sex relationships based on mutual love, respect and compassion. The only way those who hold these religious beliefs which claim “God condemns” homosexuality, is to state that there are no gay relationships based on mutual love, respect and compassion…this however is simply not true.If believe that God said nothing about Homosexuality then read Leviticus 20 : 13
Or if you prefer read Romans 1 : 27
I don’t believe it has anything to do with it…God loves gay people. Gay people who embrace the same sexual ethic of mutual respect and love between two people should have the same rights and priveleges as straight people.That there is a biological need and ability to procreate. What does this have to do with gays being allowed to marry or God loving homosexuals?
For your information, the Catholic church is the most tolerant of gays out of all religions. My cousin is gay and Baptist people took his boyfriend (only 17 yrs. old), in front of the whole church and said to pray the gayness out of him. He became suicidal after that, but talking to me, a Roman Catholic, I gave him his life back. Poor kid. How dare the Baptists embarrass a child like that.God loves everyone, and will accept you as you are. He loves us ALL.
There was a comment about how Catholics claim to love gays, but hate them being gay. This is completely contradictory. You cannot accept homosexuality if you hate it.
Remember that homosexuals are regular people, like you and me! You should never judge people on their race, religion, sex, or sexual preferences, etc. I have seen homosexuality being bashed in Catholic Churches way to often to believe that most Catholics are accepting of gay/lesbian people.
I have noticed an awful, awful lot of judging coming from the CC. So judgemental, it is hard to see the love that is there in the CC, though I know love is there somewhere. Don’t the priests say that Jesus came to teach us love, and not judging?
If someone truly loves someone else, no matter what the gender, then no one has the right to take it away from them. No one. Love is love…who is anyone to say that you cannot love another human being?
If those children do become neurotic, they will have plenty of company with the children of many heterosexual marriages. I feel that children are by far best off with one father and one mother. What we can’t ignore, however, is that some kids are in fact being raised by same sex couples (whether we like it or not). I believe the best thing we can do is to be supportive of those children. We can do that by acting charitably towards them AND their parents. By assuming those children will become neurotic are we helping the situation at all?Nonsense! Those children will probably turn into neurotics!
You really cannot make this statement unless you are a homosexual who is incapable of friendship without erotic connotations. This is a blanket statement that is usually not true at all. Those are the kind of blanket statements that do much more damage than good.“Homosexual love” is neither conjugal love nor can it stay on the level of love of friendship without erotic connotations.
Again, how do you know that homosexuality is focused on sexual intercourse? Is heterosexuality focused on intercourse? More often than not, it seems that those who believe homosexuality is only about sex are heterosexuals. As someone who had dealt with a homosexual orientation my entire life, I can tell you for a FACT that it encompasses much, much more than a desire for sex. Probably without even realizing it, a statment like yours above accuses even those who live by the Church’s teachings of being incapable of having healthy friendships with those of the same sex and of being completely focused on sexual intercourse. Both statements are untrue. Many on the board get frustrated when non-Catholics come in and say, “The Church teaches this or that…” when we know it isn’t true. This is the same kind of thing. You make a declaration I know not to be true about something you CAN’T know is true unless you are experiencing it yourself. Does that make sense?Since homosexuality is focused on sexual intercourse, it thereby destroys the possibility of true friendship between people of the same sex, turning friends into objects of desire or competitors in the market of passions.
You are right, some people wear their sexuality like a costume. I came to realize how much of a problem this is for people on a different thread. I was asked numerous times why I would identify myself as homosexual if I wansn’t living the lifestyle. People assume that someone who says, “I am homosexual” is practicing the lifestyle. This isn’t always true, so we should be careful. I say this out of respect especially for the very young people who are coming to terms with themselves and who are identifying themselves as gay when they haven’t even come close to living the “gay lifestyle”. When speaking about sexuality, the only way I can answer the question truthfully is to say that I am homosexual. That is my orientation, it is not who I am but I can’t pretend it isn’t there. When I identify myself as homosexual I am NOT identifying myself by my own sin. Being gay is not the sin, we have to remember that. Even someone who leaves the “homosexual lifestyle” more often than not STILL has a homosexual orientation. As much as you are confused by why people identify themselves by their sin, I am confused why people assume sinfulness when someone identifies their sexuality truthfully.One thing I noticed is that anyone who practiced one of the major disordered or “sinful” lifestyles identified themselves by their own sin. It was almost as if they became enslaved by it, known by it, lived by it, unable to find their true personhood and dignity.
For the young teenager dealing with it, it is frighteningly true. I know this from personal experience!Those who are struggling with same-sex attraction talk about how they are different, special or all alone in the world, but that is far from the truth.
God loves every human all the time. That is not the issue here.I don’t believe it has anything to do with it…God loves gay people. Gay people who embrace the same sexual ethic of mutual respect and love between two people should have the same rights and priveleges as straight people.
Biologically the “pieces and parts fit”…I have no arguement with that.You are dodging the question. From a simple observation of a male and a female what can we conclude design and intent?