Homosexual Behaviors Animals as an Argument for It Being "OK" In Humans - Need Help Refuting

  • Thread starter Thread starter 3DOCTORS
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
3

3DOCTORS

Guest
Friend of mine who thinks it’s unjust to deny homosexual civil unions because “God made them that way” has tried the animal kingdom argument and I know I’ve heard of some good rebuttals to that one.

I wonder if others know where good Catholic material addressing this issue may be found. I’ll track down my mislaid sources too but in the meantime just wonder what others have found helpful in this area.:confused:
 
Well one argument could be that humans are much more than just an animal. We have much higher intelligence and a higher level of understanding of this. Comparing us to a simple animal is degrading and therefore can’t really be an argument. Marriage should stay between a man and a woman like the bible professed.
 
3DOCTORS said:
Friend of mine who thinks it’s unjust to deny homosexual civil unions because “God made them that way” has tried the animal kingdom argument and I know I’ve heard of some good rebuttals to that one.

I wonder if others know where good Catholic material addressing this issue may be found. I’ll track down my mislaid sources too but in the meantime just wonder what others have found helpful in this area.:confused:
Click to expand...
This sounds like a misdirected attack on, and misunderstanding of, natural law and natural rights. But this debate has never really been about morality, but about the definition of marriage. Anyway, unless you’re really oversimplifying this person’s argument, it doesn’t sound very well thought out, so simply questioning the assumptions would probably be enough to at least make him or her reconsider. You could come up with many examples to reduce your opponent’s argument to absurdity - e.g. some male animal species kill young that are not their own; does that make it morally right for humans?

Also, the science behind homosexuality is far from conclusive. We have no idea whether it’s hereditary, cultural, environmental (i.e. chemical, hormonal), or overbearing mothers. Just because a number of people live a certain way is not a good reason to give that lifestyle an elevated status.
 
Let’s have the 4 or 5 bleeding heart pro homosexual catholics on here who were in full support of the repeal of “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” help you answer that question.

I for one, will be very interested in what they have to say; if they show up to give you an answer.
 
There are many things that occur in the animal kingdom, that would not be Godly, moral, or appropriate by human standards… We are humans, made in the image of God, animals are not.

A farmer buys one bull to mate with many cows… To most of the human world for a man to have many wives is not appropriate and is against the law.

Female cats will mate with many male cats and produce kittens from many different fathers when she gives birth to her litter… >> It is a perversion for a woman to mate with many males in one night… Some do and it is a sin… Just as perverted as two members of the same sex having sexual relations.

We could go on and on talking about things that happen in the animal kingdom and it will not justify humans taking on some animal behavior. Again only humans are made in the image of God…
 
Theology of the Body is a good place. John Paul II taught that marriage is to give love and not use others. The marriage act is for procreation and that is why when we marry we vow to be open to life. Of course God made the marriage act pleasurable for couples as part of giving love to each other.
 
Some animals eat their own children. Does that mean we should? Should the violent mating rituals of the animal and in particular the insect kingdom be perfectly acceptable human practices? Since when should animal behavior determine human morality? :confused: It’s really not much of an argument.
 
Last year Discovery or History has a program on about a native tribe of people who lived on a Pacific Island and the television show brought them to the U.S. to tour America.

On the island, this native tribe lived communally, the men hunted, the woman scouted for vegatable type food, they shared everything together as a group. Children and family are sacred to these people. The men wear a hollow reed and a string and the women wear a grass skirt.

Of course the televison producers, in New York introduced the tribe of 5 men, to two openly homosexual partnered men, at a party.

The tribal leader and his 4 male relatives had no idea what a homosexual was until they asked one of the gay partnerd men how many children he had. He answered “None, we’re gay.”

To which, a television producer had to explain to the tribe what homosexually was. At first, the tribe was dead silent and then they conversed amoung themselves in their native language and then the Chief of the tribe asked, 'But, how can you reproduce?"

One of the homosexuals explained that the world is “horribly overpopulated” and it doesn’t need more starving children in it.

vimeo.com/7669781
 
As men and women with a fallen human nature we may have an attraction to some things that are immoral or that are not in the best interest of ourselves or others. Some of us have an inordinate desire to eat (God made me that way but I need to fight against my natural tendencies) or become easily addicted to certain substances, or crave power or security or approval.

As another poster stated, some animals eat their young. We can’t say that is moral behavior for humans.

Homosexuals have a sexual tendency that is ‘disordered’, like all of us, they are called to live chastely, Sadly, like all of us, this can only be done with God’s help and not all of us have yet turned to God in our lives.
 
Animals do not have human cognition. They operate on instinct.

Peace,
Ed
 
Kontrak said:
Some animals eat their own children. Does that mean we should? Should the violent mating rituals of the animal and in particular the insect kingdom be perfectly acceptable human practices? Since when should animal behavior determine human morality? :confused: It’s really not much of an argument.
Click to expand...
Ducks procreate largely by raping female ducks:(… something that makes a walk in the park in spring fairly awkward. 😊 I learned this when I got yelled at for pegging a male duck in the back with a pine cone when it attacked a female and was violently forcing her head under water to make her submit.:mad:

I’d say ducks probably aren’t the best models for human reproduction either then…
 
3DOCTORS said:
Friend of mine who thinks it’s unjust to deny homosexual civil unions because “God made them that way” has tried the animal kingdom argument and I know I’ve heard of some good rebuttals to that one.

I wonder if others know where good Catholic material addressing this issue may be found. I’ll track down my mislaid sources too but in the meantime just wonder what others have found helpful in this area.:confused:
Click to expand...
Also, animals have been known to eat their young. Animals also kill each other fighting for the females. Some also eat their own feces.

I don’t know if they’ll accept a Catholic source, but what I have mentioned are good reasons why we shouldn’t be using animal behavior to justify our own.
 
Thanks for all the good replies. I especially liked the one posted by InSearchOfGrace, which led me to the NARTH site, a good site that addresses much more than just this one question re same-sex issues.👍
 
Humans are rational animals and so enlightened by reason can choose to be moral or sadly, immoral. Animals are not really capable of murder or homosexual behavior in the moral sense of these terms just as a rock isn’t really murdering anyone when it falls from a height and kills someone.
 
Some animals “rape” other animals.

Male Lions when they take over a pride after killing or chasing off the former alpha male, will then kill the cubs to force the mother lion into a state of fertility.

Mice mothers will eat their own young when under stress.

Animals of many species will kill those of their number that are crippled, weak or different.

And so on and so fourth… people really don’t want to go justifying some form of human behaviour as natural by using the “it happens in other animals” rubbish.
 
edwest2 said:
Animals do not have human cognition. They operate on instinct.

Peace,
Ed
Click to expand...
Excellent observation. Not sure how many missed what you just stated.

Animals are not self-aware, nor do they possess the cognitive thought process to declare I am, I exist, therefore I am.

Humans on the other hand (“if be known as the superior Animal”) for lets say the argumentative sake; are the only creature who knows how to kill out of spite and pride.

Animals do not know that they know what is good over evil.

Homosexuals will always say til the end of time that they were born that way.
What they won’t say is that they themselves made the psychological decision to choose their own sexual behavioral identity.
…
From the moment of my birth, through my young childhood I knew no real tangible sexual identity until puberty. From the onset of my puberty until my early adulthood I knew nothing but the decision of apprehending a Heterosexual identity. After a momentous morally laden shattering event at the age of 23, I lost my entire sexual identity. For thirty years I have searched within my brokenness to apprehend my lost identity within. In conclusion; in these thirty years that have transpired with both physical and psychological deficiencies and finding NO personal interest or meaning in sex, I have chosen an Asexual lifestyle as a way of seeking peace in God. My sexual identity or lack of is my choosing.

Men nor Women are not born Homosexual period. Sexual identity is a psycho-behavioral choosing. But more than this Heterosexuality is far more than just a norm in psycho-sexual identity, it was designed and ordained by God Himself that Man and Women would become One in the Natural order of human design.
 
3DOCTORS said:
Friend of mine who thinks it’s unjust to deny homosexual civil unions because “God made them that way” has tried the animal kingdom argument and I know I’ve heard of some good rebuttals to that one.

I wonder if others know where good Catholic material addressing this issue may be found. I’ll track down my mislaid sources too but in the meantime just wonder what others have found helpful in this area.:confused:
Click to expand...
I think the core basis of the animal kingdom argument is the proof that homosexuality is a natural phenomenon, when people accuse homosexuals of being unnatural and against nature. Of course SSA occurs naturally, this is something which the CC recognises as well as the scientific community. The animal kingdom argument seeks to prove that, nothing more. If this person is using that argument to justify unions however, then they’re being wrong - because very few animals remain faithful to each other, as other readers have pointed out.

So basically I think the analogy works if you want to prove to someone that SSA occurs naturally, but not if you want to convince someone that same-sex unions are natural.
 
3DOCTORS said:
Friend of mine who thinks it’s unjust to deny homosexual civil unions because “God made them that way” has tried the animal kingdom argument and I know I’ve heard of some good rebuttals to that one.

I wonder if others know where good Catholic material addressing this issue may be found. I’ll track down my mislaid sources too but in the meantime just wonder what others have found helpful in this area.:confused:
Click to expand...
You should have asked him. “So what are you saying, that homosexuals are animals?”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top