Homosexuality, cancer, and mental illness

[Jermosh]

I agree that diseases in and of themselves say nothing about morals but there are certain behaviors that might put someone more at risk for STD’s HIV, anal cancer, etc. If that’s the case shouldn’t the public be informed of that? Just my thoughts.

I don’t like to drop arguments just because someone doesn’t like it. I like to see what other posters out there have to say.

-L

The risks are known and people who care are informed. These risks is publical known knowledge that can be found in any sexual education center or pamplet. I remember learning about this in SexEd in Highschool for instance like 23yrs ago.

 

[OraLabora]

Pseudo-science in the support of morality does no favors to morality, it just makes us look ridiculous.

There’s also an underlying assumption here that all homosexual men engage in sodomy, which is false, just as it is false to assume that heterosexuals never engage in sodomy.

The disordered nature of same-sex activity is rooted in the Natural Law, regardless of whether those engaging in it contract a fatal disease or not. While some activities are at higher risk than others, the fact that anal cancer is caused by HPV is more or less irrelevant in the condemnation of same-sex activity, as HPV is an STD that can cause cancers in heterosexuals as well: it is implicated in both cervical and penile cancer and moreover as noted above heterosexuals also do engage in sodomy.

The plain fact of the matter here is that most sexual activity that occurs outside a monogamous heterosexual relationship carries with it a risk factor for contracting diseases that in some cases like HIV or HPV, can potentially be fatal. And the risks escalate the more partners one has.

 

[jrgiancola]

Homosexuality is not in the DSM-4 because homosexuals are born and created by God to be homosexuals. The sooner you people realize this, the easier it will be to grant them the same rights as heterosexuals. Could anyone of you heterosexual people “make yourself” homosexual if you were forced to do so? Certainly not. Well, neither can a homosexual make himself a heterosexual. If they were permitted to marry and accepted in society as equals, they would not be forced to have “extramarital” sex and would not be forced to live in an “underground culture” that tends towards promiscuity and alcohol/drug abuse. Often when minority groups are chastised, hated, and denied full acceptance into society, these groups form their own subculture, the behavior in which tends to be self-denigrating, almost an unconscious belief that they do indeed deserve to be chastised, hated and denied full acceptance in society. Look at most Native American tribes, African-American culture, etc. And don’t tell me about “loving the sinner and hating the sin.” People who say that tend to really NOT love the sinner at all; they just use that line to rationalize their bigotry.

 

[hellopeople]

Homosexuality is not in the DSM-4 because homosexuals are born and created by God to be homosexuals. The sooner you people realize this, the easier it will be to grant them the same rights as heterosexuals. Could anyone of you heterosexual people “make yourself” homosexual if you were forced to do so? Certainly not. Well, neither can a homosexual make himself a heterosexual. If they were permitted to marry and accepted in society as equals, they would not be forced to have “extramarital” sex and would not be forced to live in an “underground culture” that tends towards promiscuity and alcohol/drug abuse. Often when minority groups are chastised, hated, and denied full acceptance into society, these groups form their own subculture, the behavior in which tends to be self-denigrating, almost an unconscious belief that they do indeed deserve to be chastised, hated and denied full acceptance in society. Look at most Native American tribes, African-American culture, etc. And don’t tell me about “loving the sinner and hating the sin.” People who say that tend to really NOT love the sinner at all; they just use that line to rationalize their bigotry.

I agree with a lot of this, especially the last part about loving the sinner and hating the sin. But, you have to realize that to most of the people on this board, 2 men or 2 women cannot be married, it is disordered, and no matter what it is extramarital sex. You also have to realize though that gay people are not nearly as persecuted as they were even 25 years ago. Homosexuality is pretty well accepted by a lot of people in society so they don’t need to be apart of any underground and deviant culture.

 

[distracted]

Then for heaven’s sake, don’t read the thread. Disease, including anal cancer, is not disgusting. It’s a fact of living in a fallen world, and a chance for the body of Christ to reach out to those in need.

no one said any kind of cancer was disgusting… get real…

 

[fix]

Homosexuality is not in the DSM-4 because homosexuals are born and created by God to be homosexuals. The sooner you people realize this, the easier it will be to grant them the same rights as heterosexuals. Could anyone of you heterosexual people “make yourself” homosexual if you were forced to do so? Certainly not. Well, neither can a homosexual make himself a heterosexual. If they were permitted to marry and accepted in society as equals, they would not be forced to have “extramarital” sex and would not be forced to live in an “underground culture” that tends towards promiscuity and alcohol/drug abuse. Often when minority groups are chastised, hated, and denied full acceptance into society, these groups form their own subculture, the behavior in which tends to be self-denigrating, almost an unconscious belief that they do indeed deserve to be chastised, hated and denied full acceptance in society. Look at most Native American tribes, African-American culture, etc. And don’t tell me about “loving the sinner and hating the sin.” People who say that tend to really NOT love the sinner at all; they just use that line to rationalize their bigotry.

Strange reasoning. Which congenital inclinations do you consider morally licit to act upon?

 

[distracted]

Homosexuality is not in the DSM-4 because homosexuals are born and created by God to be homosexuals. The sooner you people realize this, the easier it will be to grant them the same rights as heterosexuals. Could anyone of you heterosexual people “make yourself” homosexual if you were forced to do so? Certainly not. Well, neither can a homosexual make himself a heterosexual. If they were permitted to marry and accepted in society as equals, they would not be forced to have “extramarital” sex and would not be forced to live in an “underground culture” that tends towards promiscuity and alcohol/drug abuse. Often when minority groups are chastised, hated, and denied full acceptance into society, these groups form their own subculture, the behavior in which tends to be self-denigrating, almost an unconscious belief that they do indeed deserve to be chastised, hated and denied full acceptance in society. Look at most Native American tribes, African-American culture, etc. And don’t tell me about “loving the sinner and hating the sin.” People who say that tend to really NOT love the sinner at all; they just use that line to rationalize their bigotry.

you cannot be a true Roman Catholic if you disbelieve anything the Church teaches… obviously the Church teaches that homosexual practices are mortally sinful…

 

[hellopeople]

you cannot be a true Roman Catholic if you disbelieve anything the Church teaches.

That would probably cut the 1 billion Catholics into 50 million or less REAL FAST. And would probably even cut the number of priests and bishops in half as well.

 

[OraLabora]

you cannot be a true Roman Catholic if you disbelieve anything the Church teaches… obviously the Church teaches that homosexual practices are mortally sinful…

Obviously the Church teaches no such thing. Like most serious sins, she says that same-sex activity is gravely disordered.

The two elements needed for it to be mortal are full knowledge and full consent.

This sin, is no different than others in this regard (e.g. masturbation). Whether the two other conditions exist is a matter for the penitent and his or her confessor.

 

[jrgiancola]

I AM a true Catholic even though I disagree with the RCC’s position on this issue. Unless a doctrine is pronounced ex cathedra, we are not bound to consider it infallible. The RCC has made “non-ex cathedra” errors in the past, such as when it considered heresy Galileo’s finding that the sun is the center of the solar system. I trust the RCC so much, it’s the only true church in my opinion, that in the future, I expect it to ratify gay marriages (probably not in my lifetime though). Ours is the only church willing to grant science its due and reconcile scientific reality with church dogma. Once gays are permitted to marry, any marital acts would be considered moral in the same way that heterosexual marital acts are considered moral. Adultery, rape, incest, pedophilia, bestiality, etc. would remain just as immoral whether the person is gay or straight.

Yes, homosexuality is more accepted now than ever in the past. However, there still is no true equality of citizenship and “tolerance” is not the same as “acceptance.”

No group in history has been subjected to the horrors that have been inflicted by this world on gay people. From the time of Moses, they have been pariahs. The Inquisition murdered them in the name of God; they were gassed in Hitler’s concentration camps; they have been shunned, hated, ex-communicated, beaten, murdered, raped, fired from jobs, castrated, considered damned to hell by most churches, ridiculed and only God knows what else, not just for a few centuries as early Christians were, not for a few centuries as African-Americans were, but literally for millennia. No one can make me believe that God intended it to be this way, or that God approved of this “mans inhumanity to man.”

In my profession, I’ve worked with at least 700 homosexual men and woman; my experiences have confirmed to me that most of them are born this way. Science, I feel sure, will one day prove this fact. Once it is proven that God made them this way, then they can no longer be condemned since God does not make mistakes with creation.

 

[NoNameMe78]

First: I am NOT Homosexual. I am NOT Mentally Ill. I say that because sometimes people think if a person has a point of view on something, or stands up for it they are it. This is NOT the case.
Mental illness is a hormonal imbalance. People do NOT elect to have Mental Illness. Mental illness is NOT the fault of the person who has it. Mental Illness, I believe, is NOT a sin. Some Mentally ill people are hard to put up with - their medicine does not work or they forget to take it. They cannot help themselves. The Mental Health System needs an overhaul. The Mental Health system really needs to address the growing problem of Mental Illness and try to actually help those chronic Mentally Ill people.
Homosexuality, in the bible mentioned man & wife, (male & female). I do NOT believe people who are homosexual have a deficit of any kind. Homosexual, I believe, is a perference; this is more natural to them than hetrosexual.

 

[OraLabora]

I do NOT believe people who are homosexual have a deficit of any kind. Homosexual, I believe, is a perference; this is more natural to them than hetrosexual.

That is your belief. You may be right, or you may be wrong, but at this point since there is no scientific proof, yours is no more than an opinion.

A scientist may start out with that “belief” to test it as a hypothesis.

But at the moment it is an opinion or theory that is unproved, just as are the theories that it is genetic, or in-utero hormone imbalance, or nurture, that are unproved.

The great danger of holding your opinion (not saying it applies to you) is that this can tend to close minds and lead to condemnation that is perhaps not merited.

One should keep an open mind about the possible etiology (or etiologies as there may be several variants) of same-sex attraction, because this can have grave implications on the level of culpability of those engaging in activities perceived as sinful.

At best at the moment can say it is evidence of a fallen world.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

Homosexuality is not a sin. Homosexual acts are sinful.

That being said, their temptation to engage in sexual activity outside a heterosexual marriage is no stronger than the temptation of single heterosexuals to fornicate.

Oh, really? Perhaps this tidbit of information may help. In a heterosexual person, the desire for sexual activity is a natural, normal and good thing, especially when it is acted upon in the marriage bed with one’s spouse. For the homosexual person, the desire for sexual activity the outgrowth of other serious issues that pervert that natural, normal and good thing because its object is disordered. In other words, homosexuality is not about sex, per se, but about the issues that pervert the desire.

Speaking out of personal experience as a person suffering SSA (although I am healing slowly…too slowly for my taste, to be honest), I can tell you that it’s about low-self esteem, depression, a feeling of inferiority relative to members of the same sex. In my case, I also have this idea (which I intellectually know is false) that sex is dirty that I have not been able to overcome.

Sex outside of marriage is a sin even if one suggests that homosexuality is a mental illness. The debate lies in whether or not it reduces culpability.

Is homosexuality a mental illness? I don’t know. The field of psychology is so convoluted these days that its hard to figure out what is “normal.”

I’m no psychologist, but I think the best definition of normal would be something someone said in a movie once (points for the person who can quote the reference): “Normal is what other people are and you aren’t.”

 

[hellopeople]

Oh, really? Perhaps this tidbit of information may help. In a heterosexual person, the desire for sexual activity is a natural, normal and good thing, especially when it is acted upon in the marriage bed with one’s spouse. For the homosexual person, the desire for sexual activity the outgrowth of other serious issues that pervert that natural, normal and good thing because its object is disordered. In other words, homosexuality is not about sex, per se, but about the issues that pervert the desire.

Speaking out of personal experience as a person suffering SSA (although I am healing slowly…too slowly for my taste, to be honest), I can tell you that it’s about low-self esteem, depression, a feeling of inferiority relative to members of the same sex. In my case, I also have this idea (which I intellectually know is false) that sex is dirty that I have not been able to overcome.

I’m no psychologist, but I think the best definition of normal would be something someone said in a movie once (points for the person who can quote the reference): “Normal is what other people are and you aren’t.”

Honestly, I feel horrible for anyone that says they “suffer from SSA”…HORRIBLE that the church condemns it and horrible that they will likely always consider themself a sinner and low because of their sexual preference…also the fact that if they try to marry a woman it will just be a lie, or they can basically be forced to live celibately. I feel sorry for you. You are in my prayers.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

Honestly, I feel horrible for anyone that says they “suffer from SSA”…HORRIBLE that the church condemns it and horrible that they will likely always consider themself a sinner and low because of their sexual preference…also the fact that if they try to marry a woman it will just be a lie, or they can basically be forced to live celibately. I feel sorry for you. You are in my prayers.

Well, considering everyone is a sinner, considering myself a sinner is no great revelation or thought that is disturbing. The Church doesn’t condemn SSA, it condemns people acting on it, a difference that is usually overlooked by people within and without the Church.

The part about marriage or celibacy is indeed a problem for me because I cannot stand loneliness and I can tolerate solitude in short bursts. On the other hand, if I can stop feeling so worthless and undesirable as a person and inferior to most men, I can probably deal with things a little easier.

Unfortunately, a review of the story of my life (dead-end job at 38, obese) doesn’t hold promise for future results.

 

[hellopeople]

Well, considering everyone is a sinner, considering myself a sinner is no great revelation or thought that is disturbing. The Church doesn’t condemn SSA, it condemns people acting on it, a difference that is usually overlooked by people within and without the Church.

The part about marriage or celibacy is indeed a problem for me because I cannot stand loneliness and I can tolerate solitude in short bursts. On the other hand, if I can stop feeling so worthless and undesirable as a person and inferior to most men, I can probably deal with things a little easier.

Unfortunately, a review of the story of my life (dead-end job at 38, obese) doesn’t hold promise for future results.

You are in my prayers, buddy. I don’t say that often on this board to be honest. Hopefully you will find happiness.

 

[djeter]

Well, considering everyone is a sinner, considering myself a sinner is no great revelation or thought that is disturbing. The Church doesn’t condemn SSA, it condemns people acting on it, a difference that is usually overlooked by people within and without the Church.

The part about marriage or celibacy is indeed a problem for me because I cannot stand loneliness and I can tolerate solitude in short bursts. On the other hand, if I can stop feeling so worthless and undesirable as a person and inferior to most men, I can probably deal with things a little easier.

Unfortunately, a review of the story of my life (dead-end job at 38, obese) doesn’t hold promise for future results.

Take heart. I’m 62 and celebrate my dead-end job – particularly in this economy.

My obesity is another story however. Think of Paul’s lament: “I do the things I don’t want to do but the things I want to do those I don’t do”, (Romans 7) and substitute “eat” for “do.” Perhaps we should add our own beatitude: “Blessed are those who are thin and hungry.” For they don’t have to struggle with our world.

It all simply shows we are on the cutting edge of struggling with sin. And there is great promise in learning to use our faith to conquer the despair that the battle with sin and the demons of obesity engender.

So, au contraire, I think you have immense promise.

A post on depression is here:

payingattentiontothesky.com/2010/03/04/reading-selections-from-depression%e2%80%99s-upside-by-jonah-lehrer/

and the paradox of the homosexualists here:

payingattentiontothesky.com/2009/12/10/a-homosexualist-paradox/

dj

 

[djeter]

And you can act on SSA with positive results: where do you think the inspiration for the great nudes in Art come from or ballet for that matter? An appreciation for the male or female form by members of the same sex is part of that motivation to accomplish something profound in these fields.

Which is why St Thomas told us evil was a privation of the good. It usurps the good and transforms it: the love of a man for a woman and pornography illustrates that perfectly. SSA is to the gay lifestyle as John Paul’s theology of the body is to porn. Without the good to distort evil doesn’t exist.

dj

Sin As A Sort Of Illusion“

Because the divine goodness could not be adequately represented by one creature alone, God produced many and diverse creatures that what was wanting in one in the representation of the divine goodness might be supplied by another. For goodness, which in God is simple and uniform, in creatures is manifold and divided. Thus the whole universe together participates in the divine goodness more perfectly and represents it better than any single creature whatever.” (Summa Theologica 1a, question 47 article 1)

In more Thomistic language, God engages in this explosive and irrepressible creativity because he is determine to show, as fully as possible, some of the intensity of his own beauty. No one creature could ever demonstrate the splendor of God; indeed, no million or trillion creatures could do so, but God never tires of trying. God is like a concentration of pure light that — in creation — passes through a prism and is then reflected and refracted in a fantastic array of hues. Each creature is a piece of a mosaic designed to depict the fullness of the divine glory, a thread woven into a tapestry reflective of God’s beauty….

The basic energy of the created realm is a relationship of love, God continually pours out the gift of being, and the world is at every moment a sheer receptivity, an openness toward that gift…Indeed, at the heart of the spiritual life, for Aquinas, is the struggle to see authentically who we are, in relation the God who perpetually offers us “newness of being.” When we realize, in imitation of Christ, that we are “nothing” in the presences of the creating God, we become “everything,” a full reflection of the divine glory. Sin is thus a sort of illusion, a stubborn clinging to the falsehood, an insistence that we stand over and against God, the supreme being. Let go of yourself, implies Thomas, in an ecstatic acceptance of creatureliness, and you will find the security that you so long for. In the face of your greatest fears, give yourself away.

When we grasp the reality of creation, we see that the divisions between the “sacred” and the “profane,” between the “holy” and the “secular” are, for the most part, arbitrary and misleading. All reality is sacred, from the angels to subatomic particles, because all things are equally close to the creator God who dwells in every aspect of being. The sacramental imagination, which sees the divine lurking in every corner of the real, is fed and strengthened by the Thomistic doctrine of creation.

Even the profoundest expressions of evil cannot shake our confidence in this intoxicating vision. Though psychologically overwhelming, evil should never be spiritually debilitating, since we appreciate it against the ever greater background of God’s gift of being. With eyes cleansed and purified by the revelation contained in Christ Jesus, we can see the divine beauty everywhere in creation; we can appreciate the light and harmony that are sacraments of the perfect luminosity and orderliness of the creator God.

That from Fr. Robert Barron and More here

payingattentiontothesky.com/2009/06/11/understanding-sin-1-from-thomas-aquinas-spiritual-master-by-fr-robert-barron/

dj

 

[musicality]

Oh, really? Perhaps this tidbit of information may help. In a heterosexual person, the desire for sexual activity is a natural, normal and good thing, especially when it is acted upon in the marriage bed with one’s spouse. For the homosexual person, the desire for sexual activity the outgrowth of other serious issues that pervert that natural, normal and good thing because its object is disordered. In other words, homosexuality is not about sex, per se, but about the issues that pervert the desire.

Speaking out of personal experience as a person suffering SSA (although I am healing slowly…too slowly for my taste, to be honest), I can tell you that it’s about low-self esteem, depression, a feeling of inferiority relative to members of the same sex. In my case, I also have this idea (which I intellectually know is false) that sex is dirty that I have not been able to overcome.

I’m no psychologist, but I think the best definition of normal would be something someone said in a movie once (points for the person who can quote the reference): “Normal is what other people are and you aren’t.”

After reading your post, I’m not sure where we are disagreeing…
I agree with what you posted, so maybe there was some sort of miscommunication?

 

[Greg27]

I personally would treat this claim with a lot of care and skepticism. I would inquire as to who did this study and on what basis and check their credentials. It sounds pseudoscientific to me, in the sense no peer reviewed article or study made by independent researchers has been used to verify this source. If this sort of thing were made by anyone in a university science course in this manner the assignment would be failed (because the claim was not supported by authority).

The claim may well be true (unprotected anal sex, especially with multiple partners, can be a dangerous risk to health, just as unprotected heterosexual sex can be) and also a risk factor in contracting AIDS and STDs. Such has been well known for some decades.

Even so, I would take care in using this to endorse certain agendas of views about the morality of gay sex. AIDS and cancer are terrible diseases that kill millions around the world each year, often causing victims to die agonising deaths, including children and people of all ages and sexes and sexual orientations. In my view the churches would be better allocating their resources to ensure medical and pastoral care is extended compassionately to all people suffering these conditions rather than harshly judging and attributing moral blame on a certain minority because of their sexual orientation. We may not view homosexual sex to be right but that in my view is no reason to burden people who suffer these terrible diseases to further stigma and guilt on top of what is already heaped at the hands of religious fundamentalists and conservatives.

As for homosexuality being a mental disorder, it was previously thought it was a type of mental and sexual disorder because heterosexual orientation was believed to be normative. However this idea has lost credibiliy in most scientific circles at least because there is little objective evidence to now suggest homosexuality is akin to severe depression or schitzophrenia. It is a question though of why homosexual behaviour exists (and also why humans tend to be monagamous and pair bond for life when most mammals and other animals do not). The reason given by evolution appears to be because human children take a long time to mature and need stable family units to develop properly. Interestingly this has been used by some theologians and natural lawyers (rightly in my view) to argue stable relationships and families are a good thing.

Appeals to the sinfulness or disordered nature of homosexual activity are based mostly not on evidence but appeals to the Bible or to Christian tradition. Protestants tend to appeal to scripture while Catholics appeal to the longstanding tradition of condemning homosexual acts, though interestingly the church has developed a more positive emphasis on heterosexual married sex in the past century (i.e. John Paul’s the theology of the body). In my view moral teachings on any ethical matter need to consider the individual experience of people and the evidence of the sciences, rather than imposing unchanging norms from ‘above.’ I think there is now enough evidence from science to make us question some of the traditional teachings on sexual morality and also our interpretation of what the Bible says and what the natural law is. I still think marriage is the normative context for sexual relations between adults, and the Bible can’t be ignored, and I think the idea of there being an objective natural law is correct. But I think if we are going to appeal to nature we need to take account of what happens in nature, including the fact evolution occurs and also that sexual behaviour in animals often departs very strongly from patterns we as humans regard as moral. Homosexual acts occur between animals quite frequently and God does not strike such animals dead from heaven with a thunderbolt, so in my view the appeal to nature as traditionally understood cannot be sustained.

I think ultimately we need to try and understand human sexuality by understanding genetics better (homosexuality seems to have a strong heritable element) and why such behaviour may have evolved in social animals like humans. I think a better scientific understanding, rather than unthinking condemnation, will help us better understand the morality of human sexual behaviour and also formulate positive norms and guidelines for human sexuality, whether heterosexual or not.