Homosexual Intercourse vs. Suicide

[vern_humphrey]

The crucial nature of your question is suspect, I think.

No, the crucial nature of the original question is suspect. That is why I ask, “Why do we want to compare homosexual intercourse with suicide?” What is our motive?

One does not ask one’s algebra teacher why it is that we must solve for X; we just do the formula to exercise our minds for future problems.

This is not an algebra class, and the OP is not our teacher.

 

[Other_Eric]

No, the crucial nature of the original question is suspect. That is why I ask, “Why do we want to compare homosexual intercourse with suicide?” What is our motive?

This is not an algebra class, and the OP is not our teacher.

One might as well ask why it is that one discusses any problems of a theological or philosophical nature when the conclusions to those arguments will always be abstract. The mental problem offered here is just another one of these. Its resolution promises to add clarity to the ways in which we might systematically assess the morality of any particular action.

That said, I agree with the OP: you may either choose to participate in this abstract discussion or you may choose to have no part of it. The option that is explicitly not open to you is one where you attempt to short circuit the discussion by caterwauling in post after post about how irrelevant you find the dialogue to be.

 

[cmudd]

One might as well ask why it is that one discusses any problems of a theological or philosophical nature when the conclusions to those arguments will always be abstract. The mental problem offered here is just another one of these. Its resolution promises to add clarity to the ways in which we might systematically assess the morality of any particular action.

That said, I agree with the OP: you may either choose to participate in this abstract discussion or you may choose to have no part of it. The option that is explicitly not open to you is one where you attempt to short circuit the discussion by caterwauling in post after post about how irrelevant you find the dialogue to be.

Thank you for your earlier contribution. That is exactly the critical assessment that I was looking for. I will get back to you in a bit on the finer points. Also, I think you hit the nail on the head with this post. I want to avoid getting off track on this one and Vern’s response suggests such a path.

Vern, I have no alterier motive here. I was looking for discussion on a very limited topic. Not a political discussionor even one on sin or grace. That is why I posted in the philosophy forum. Please feel free to add to the discussion, though.

 

[vern_humphrey]

One might as well ask why it is that one discusses any problems of a theological or philosophical nature when the conclusions to those arguments will always be abstract.

This is not a question with abstract roots. Both suicide and homosexual intercourse are concrete acts.

Is our purpose to make homosexual acts look especially bad? To condemn them more strongly than the Church has?

If not, what** is** the purpose of the question?

 

[kristie_m]

In attempting to distinguish same-sex sexual activity with suicide, I believe your attempted distinction between the entropic qualities of each act and the sinful qualities is ill defined. Sin, by its very nature leads towards both disorder and death. Moreover, to equate disorder with death as the end result of a spontaneous change brought on by increased entropy is to compare apples and oranges. A disorder is a somewhat mutable state, a process; death is neither.

A serious discussion of the entropic qualities of the same-sex sexual act and the suicidal act must establish a common terminal state for each. Given your explanation, this would have to be death. We would have to go still further and define whether we were talking of corporeal death or spiritual death. I take it to mean you are interested in the latter since we are discussing the relative gravity of each act and such a measure only makes sense in terms of morals.

Further, let’s not confuse the issue by trying to say that the gravity of an act is distinct from its potential to lose an individual his salvation. Gravity is the measure of just such a thing and it does not do to deny it as a way of distancing oneself from the implications of one’s argument.

In comparing the two activities, I will assume for the purposes of this discussion that we are talking of successfully executed instances of each act. Thus we may avoid the hair splitting that would result, for instance, from the individual who had unsuccessfully attempted suicide.

It seems to me that if you are going to base your entropic analysis around the potential for each individual to produce progeny, then it seems you are still attempting to compare things that cannot be compared. A same-sex sexual act may, by its singular nature, deny the possibility of progeny but it cannot do so in absolute terms as suicide can.

Viewed purely in terms of entropy, the homosexual act must be of lesser gravity than the suicidal act. I hasten to add, however, that this is a poor method by which to assess the spiritual effects of any two activities.

Yeah, what you said!

 

[cpayne]

Come to think about it, assessing morality in terms of its entropic tendencies could be taken two ways: (1) in terms of its consequences, a sort of utilitarian calculation, in which case gay sex and suicide are not really comparable; or (2) in terms of the natural teleology or fulfillment of an action’s inherent nature. If this is what is meant: A gay sexual act does not have the natural teleology of death, as the act of suicide does—so they still wouldn’t be comparable.

 

[Greg27]

I think this is a very strange argument. I think though, we need to examine entropy. Entropy is a concept associated with thermodynamics, in terms of how much useful work can be gained from energy. In its generalised form, the laws of thermodynamics say entropy is far more likely to increase over time in a mechanical system.

Clearly, sex and procreation involve the expenditure of energy and the creation of entropy. It doesn’t matter whether the couple in question are having heterosexual sex or homosexual sex. In the case of the heterosexual couple, where conception occurs, the embryo (and later the foetus) requires a lot of energy (name removed by moderator)ut from its environment to survive. The laws of thermodynamics may allow for the entropy to be reduced locally (a foetus is a more organised system than a brick for example) but overall, the life of the foetus will still contribute to the entropy of the universe, as will the sex of its parents and the sexual activities of the homosexual couple. Even if no homosexual sex ever occured, that would make little difference to the overall entropy of the universe. That is determined by much greater factors operating on timescales much longer than a fleeting human lifetime.

Personally, I don’t think a moral conclusion can be drawn trying to relate homosexuality, entropy, and suicide. The first issue is about a sexual orientation and certain sex acts. The second is a complex theory of physics which in itself, is amoral and has no clear relevance to moral issues. The third is that suicide is a deliberate act of ending one’s own life. I don’t see how the three are connected, or how a connection can be made. Even if ‘sin’ is invoked, ‘sin’ is a theological concept and also to a certain extent, a moral concept. But I don’t see how ‘sin’ can have any effect on the laws of physics, or how a concept drawn from physics and expressed in mathematical terms, has any relevance to ‘sin.’ I am inclined to think this is an example of the fallacy of trying to derive an ‘ought’ (moral obligation) from what is (blind natural laws).

 

[Newbie2]

In addition to the comments regarding the potential for repentance, I offer the following.

Since both acts are gravely disordered and have the potential for keeping one out of heaven, any distintion is one with no practical difference.

This is not a question with abstract roots. Both suicide and homosexual intercourse are concrete acts.

Is our purpose to make homosexual acts look especially bad? To condemn them more strongly than the Church has?

If not, whatis the purpose of the question?

[Edited]

Anyway, to the OP’s question…a suicide completely removes one from the gene pool…a homosexual act does not remove either partner from the possibility of future procreation.

 

[cmudd]

I think this is a very strange argument. I think though, we need to examine entropy. Entropy is a concept associated with thermodynamics, in terms of how much useful work can be gained from energy. In its generalised form, the laws of thermodynamics say entropy is far more likely to increase over time in a mechanical system.

Clearly, sex and procreation involve the expenditure of energy and the creation of entropy. It doesn’t matter whether the couple in question are having heterosexual sex or homosexual sex. In the case of the heterosexual couple, where conception occurs, the embryo (and later the foetus) requires a lot of energy (name removed by moderator)ut from its environment to survive. The laws of thermodynamics may allow for the entropy to be reduced locally (a foetus is a more organised system than a brick for example) but overall, the life of the foetus will still contribute to the entropy of the universe, as will the sex of its parents and the sexual activities of the homosexual couple. Even if no homosexual sex ever occured, that would make little difference to the overall entropy of the universe. That is determined by much greater factors operating on timescales much longer than a fleeting human lifetime.

Personally, I don’t think a moral conclusion can be drawn trying to relate homosexuality, entropy, and suicide. The first issue is about a sexual orientation and certain sex acts. The second is a complex theory of physics which in itself, is amoral and has no clear relevance to moral issues. The third is that suicide is a deliberate act of ending one’s own life. I don’t see how the three are connected, or how a connection can be made. Even if ‘sin’ is invoked, ‘sin’ is a theological concept and also to a certain extent, a moral concept. But I don’t see how ‘sin’ can have any effect on the laws of physics, or how a concept drawn from physics and expressed in mathematical terms, has any relevance to ‘sin.’ I am inclined to think this is an example of the fallacy of trying to derive an ‘ought’ (moral obligation) from what is (blind natural laws).

You must look up entropy in a dictionary of philosophy or even parse the term vis-a-vis its etymology. I was referring to an entity’s gradual and natural tendency toward disorder/death/degradation… While the term is most often associated with biology and other forms of natural science, it has a broader philosophical meaning. I was not referring to any theological arguments either.

Other Eric had a great post to which I must respond soon. If you can contribute, that would also be great. Let me put you on task, however. As a singular action or a singular behavior, which has a more entropic quality; the homosexual act/activity or suicide: which leads to a more disordered end? And, can an argument be made that they are comparable? Thanks for responding.

 

[NPC]

While both acts are viewed as sinful, we know that the person’s state of mind at the time of committing a sin can diminish or even remove the responsibility of the person who has committed the sin. In my opinion (I’m not a psychologist, but, like most people, I have lost family members and friends to suicide), the chances of one committing suicide while in their ‘right mind’ is very slim - it is normally a final and drastic attempt to end some deep pain or anguish. I accept that one could ask, then, that if homosexual acts are also the result of a psychological disorder, can a rule of ‘diminished responsibility’ not apply too? I would argue not, because one who engages in homosexual acts is not doing so out of anguish, but rather to bring them happiness - moreover, apart from the psychological homosexual disorder, the mind is rational. In other things, life is normal and because of this they are in more of a position to be able to contemplate that their homosexual actions are sinful. On the other hand, for the one who is on the brink of suicide the mind is consumed with irrational thoughts, to the point where they genuinely believe that they, their family, and even the whole world will be better off without them. I found this short description of a particular person’s episode of depression: “Each day I awoke deeply tired, a feeling as foreign to my natural self as being bored or indifferent to life…Then a gray, bleak preoccupation with death, dying , decaying, that everything was born but to die, best to die now and save the pain while waiting”. Unlike the active homosexual who, (although he may not want to) is capable of recognising that he is committing a sin, because his mind is not so overcome by its disordered state, the suicidal person is often totally consumed by thoughts of death and death is, to them at least, the only way out. I personally do not think that homosexual acts can be put on a par with suicide…of course no one can speculate on each case, but in general, given the more stable mindset of the one committing homosexual acts, I would suggest that their actions lead to a more disordered end… For them at leat, but for society in general, suicide probably has more wide-reaching effects.

 

[cpayne]

And, can an argument be made that they are comparable? Thanks for responding.

As has been pointed out several times in several different ways, the answer is no. Why am I starting to get the impression that this conversation will go on until someone responds with the answer the OP wants?

 

[sydcatholic80]

I would like to weigh into this debate.

I have known a friend who had extreme depression, and
bipolar. It was undiagnosed.

He attempted to take his life.

Having been through a small depression myself, I have compassion for what he went through.

It is not for us to say that all who commit suicide are dammed.
Do you know what is in the head of one who has a mental illness? They have no rational thought or control when they are in the grips of a battle with their emotions.

God sees into their heart and mind, and I am quite certain he forgives them for this sin.

I am not saying that all suicides are like this, but you cannot judge them all the same.

It is up to those who are around people in this situation to have compassion and care. I became aware of the signs in my friend, and was able to alert people to keep an eye on him so that he did not harm himself.

I think the greater sin is on one who sees but does not act to help.

As to comparing the sin of homosexuality with the sin of suicide, SIN IS SIN. Why are we creating gradiations? God abhors all sin. He does not see one sin as less than another.

This is similar to people comparing the sin of homosexuality with the sin of pre martial sex. Firstly, homosexuality is NOT a sin, but homosexual acts are. Secondly, the sin of homosexual intercourse is the same as the sin of pre marital sex. Both are fornication, outside the bounds of a valid marriage.

So many people are biggoted and try to persecute ALL homosexual people. Would it surprise you to know I am homosexual? I do have a strong faith, and follow the teaching of the church. I live a chaste celibate life. I participate in my church community and ministry. I live by the commandments, and work side by side with my fellow man and woman.

Please refrain with these sort of comparisons. SIN is SIN.

Hope this helps,

Josh

 

[cmudd]

Please refrain with these sort of comparisons. SIN is SIN.

Hope this helps,

Josh

Normally, I would not respond to this, but, in all honesty, I am surprised by this sort of request. I posted this in the philosophy forum so as to solicit the discourse of those interested in discussing the original topic; which was not a matter of sin or condemnation. It is also very presumptuous for you to ask us not to discuss something of this nature. We do not need you to castigate us for intelectual discourse asI was simply requesting this - I was not looking for any one particular answer. …just your own philosophical musings.

Please do not try to quash valid discourse because you find it unsettling.

Hope this helps.

 

[sydcatholic80]

Well while you are busy comparing Homosexual Intercourse vs Suicide, you had better throw in contraception use in heterosexual relationships, since acts under those conditions also deny the possibility of progeny.

Is using Contraception less or more sinful than suicide? Less or more sinful than homosexual sex?

What if the heterosexual couple are not even married? This makes the act equivalent to a homosexual act in that it is outside of a valid marriage, and that is closed to life.

Thoughts?

 

[truagape]

A serious question for serious-minded people… Please refrain from any invectives or “hijacking” of this thread.

Given the inherently sterile nature of the homosexual act, could one legitimately argue that the homosexual act is more entropic than suicide?

We can state that the homosexual act - in a singular instance - necessarily frustrates our natural design to be prolific. Each act not only eliminates the singular transmission of one life, but it eliminates the possibility of any future generations that may have proceeded from that one act; had it been performed in its proper context.

Could one argue that because the homosexual act frustrates the very act meant to propagate the species it is, as a singular act, more entropic than suicide, given that suicide is devoid of any sexual context?

I have been pondering this question for some time and need some outside commentary as I have hit something of a wall: Suicide could be seen as the ultimate entropic act as it totally precludes any hope of further progeny, but the homosexual act thwarts the only natural means by which we may transmit life. The transmission of life, from a certain biological perspective, is the primary objective of every living organism.

Therefore, which is more disordered: purposely inhibiting one’s ability to effectively implement one’s primary animal objective or speeding up the inevitable?

Thanks for your help!

Makes one wonder what idled thoughts may have occupied the minds of the Pharisees and the Sadducees during Jesus’s time. Thanks for the perspective!
Oh, and just out of curiosity, do you have vipers for parents?

 

[Jimdandy]

Entropy is an entity’s (man, society, culture, etc.) gradual and natural progression toward disorder/death. QUOTE

By that you have closed your own obscure line of questioning since suicide is death and cannot progress much further than that.

I see this as a thinly disguised judgmental trap.

A spade is a a spade.

The sad truth is that teenage suicide is rising yearly, as we live in this culture of death.

Abortion has killed millions of babies-legal destruction of our own kind.