Homosexuality, infertility

[CatholicSoxFan]

A common argument we use against the morality of homosexuality is that is separates sex from reproduction. Now a common reply from people who affirm the morality of homosexuality is to give a counterexample of heterosexuals who are infertile. They tend to use counterexamples like these to support an accusation extravaganza (you know, you just say homosexuality is wrong because you’re a bigot, argument X that you used is just an excuse, it’s all a conspiracy, you probably also staged 9/11, etc.)
How do we make an argument against the morality of homosexuality that doesn’t have counterexamples of other things that fulfill all of our criteria for homosexuality being wrong, but that we don’t also condemn as wrong.
Also, how do we answer the infertility objection in general?

 

[speakttruth]

It makes no difference if they couldn’t get pregnant, God made them male and female and the bodies are complimentary to each other, they don’t have to have a child to fulfill the marriage act (intercourse)if they were not blessed with a child they are still in union that can only be between a man and women. Two males cannot recreate this act and two females cannot recreate this act. They can not create anything. They cannot give and receive from one another. It is a selfish act self gratification of sexual perversity and shouldn’t be done out of marriage of heterosexuals as well. The people who are heterosexuals that are married are still doing what God intended and you never know if you can become pregnant that is not the sole purpose of the relationship to procreate. There are a lot of good articles on this site from the apologetics about why homosexuality is wrong. Hope this helps.
GB

 

[Mumbles140]

A common argument we use against the morality of homosexuality is that is separates sex from reproduction. Now a common reply from people who affirm the morality of homosexuality is to give a counterexample of heterosexuals who are infertile. They tend to use counterexamples like these to support an accusation extravaganza (you know, you just say homosexuality is wrong because you’re a bigot, argument X that you used is just an excuse, it’s all a conspiracy, you probably also staged 9/11, etc.)
How do we make an argument against the morality of homosexuality that doesn’t have counterexamples of other things that fulfill all of our criteria for homosexuality being wrong, but that we don’t also condemn as wrong.
Also, how do we answer the infertility objection in general?

I can’t play tennis because the string is broken on my racquet. Hopefully I can get it restrung soon and resume playing.

I can’t play tennis because I don’t own a tennis racquet - I own a basketball. I could use the basketball like a racquet to ‘go through the motions’.

Which one sounds like the tennis player? Which one wants to play tennis but doesn’t have the appropriate equipment?

If you believe in God, you believe that we were created for specific purposes, and that is design was not accidental, incomplete, or faulty. Men and women were specifically giving complementary sexual organs, and that is for procreation.

God equipped every man and woman with the appropriate anatomy, although for innumerable reasons, the specific organs may not be fully functional for everyone. Does that negate the fact that we were created differently? Does having the same end result (inability to create a child) mean the acts are the same?

I’m a 29 year old couch potato and he is the 2013 NBA MVP. But neither of us has won the NBA Championship, so I guess that means we’re the same, right?

 

[SuperLuigi]

A common argument we use against the morality of homosexuality is that is separates sex from reproduction. Now a common reply from people who affirm the morality of homosexuality is to give a counterexample of heterosexuals who are infertile. They tend to use counterexamples like these to support an accusation extravaganza (you know, you just say homosexuality is wrong because you’re a bigot, argument X that you used is just an excuse, it’s all a conspiracy, you probably also staged 9/11, etc.)

How do we make an argument against the morality of homosexuality that doesn’t have counterexamples of other things that fulfill all of our criteria for homosexuality being wrong, but that we don’t also condemn as wrong.

 

[Cricket2]

A common argument we use against the morality of homosexuality is that is separates sex from reproduction. Now a common reply from people who affirm the morality of homosexuality is to give a counterexample of heterosexuals who are infertile. They tend to use counterexamples like these to support an accusation extravaganza (you know, you just say homosexuality is wrong because you’re a bigot, argument X that you used is just an excuse, it’s all a conspiracy, you probably also staged 9/11, etc.)
How do we make an argument against the morality of homosexuality that doesn’t have counterexamples of other things that fulfill all of our criteria for homosexuality being wrong, but that we don’t also condemn as wrong.
Also, how do we answer the infertility objection in general?

The infertility objection is nonsense and has nothing to do with homosexuality. It is a useless argument and a form of distraction.

Homosexuality may be a conscious choice by some, but I have come to believe that many don’t do this. There are too many biophysical, physiological aspects to SSA. People need to remember that being a homosexual is not a sin. The sexual act outside of marriage is the sin. We do better to stop trying to “cure” people of this condition and being a bit more accepting of the fact that this may well be something they can do nothing about.

It has been shown that birth control pills cause trans-gender conditions, that the presence of other chemicals in plastics and our environment can mess up the hormonal balances of people and animals, and that people are simply born with two genders. We need to become a bit more intelligent about this issue and less emotional and panicked.
I suggest people give it a rest and worry about something more important, unless they are willing to listen to those who are homosexual or transgendered and to be their friends in an unconditional manner.

We are not called to persecute people. And frankly, most of the blabber about SSA, and/or transgender issues on the CAF seems more of a persecution effort than anything else. I don’t understand how people are attracted to the same sex, but I refuse to mistreat anyone who does have SSA or is transgendered. I will leave the judgement to God.

 

[JimG]

It makes no difference if they couldn’t get pregnant, God made them male and female and the bodies are complimentary to each other, they don’t have to have a child to fulfill the marriage act (intercourse)if they were not blessed with a child they are still in union that can only be between a man and women. Two males cannot recreate this act and two females cannot recreate this act. They can not create anything. They cannot give and receive from one another. It is a selfish act self gratification of sexual perversity and shouldn’t be done out of marriage of heterosexuals as well. The people who are heterosexuals that are married are still doing what God intended and you never know if you can become pregnant that is not the sole purpose of the relationship to procreate. There are a lot of good articles on this site from the apologetics about why homosexuality is wrong. Hope this helps.
GB

I agree. The key is the sexual complementarity of men and women. A conjugal relationship is possible, even if not fertile. For same sex couples, a conjugal relationship is impossible.

 

[speakttruth]

The infertility objection is nonsense and has nothing to do with homosexuality. It is a useless argument and a form of distraction.

Homosexuality may be a conscious choice by some, but I have come to believe that many don’t do this. There are too many biophysical, physiological aspects to SSA. People need to remember that being a homosexual is not a sin. The sexual act outside of marriage is the sin. We do better to stop trying to “cure” people of this condition and being a bit more accepting of the fact that this may well be something they can do nothing about.

It has been shown that birth control pills cause trans-gender conditions, that the presence of other chemicals in plastics and our environment can mess up the hormonal balances of people and animals, and that people are simply born with two genders. We need to become a bit more intelligent about this issue and less emotional and panicked.
I suggest people give it a rest and worry about something more important, unless they are willing to listen to those who are homosexual or transgendered and to be their friends in an unconditional manner.

We are not called to persecute people. And frankly, most of the blabber about SSA, and/or transgender issues on the CAF seems more of a persecution effort than anything else. I don’t understand how people are attracted to the same sex, but I refuse to mistreat anyone who does have SSA or is transgendered. I will leave the judgement to God.

No one is born with these problems, but even if they were it wouldn’t matter because it’s a feeling that they have and feelings can be controlled. We may feel like we want to kill someone, but we don’t act out on those feelings because we know it’s wrong. Never should anyone condemn or mistreat anyone, that would be evil, but we are allowed to judge bad behavior and if we are living a holy life ourselves it is a must and living an active homosexual life is wrong and we must try and reach out to these people to help them live a chaste life if and when we can.

I prefer to call them people with Same sex attraction who have this inclination is not a sin in itself, but the acting out is. When referring to a person as a homosexual it leaves the notion that they are acting out and not living chastely. Seeing that most of the consequences of this particular sexual sin, you can find out more of how it is an extremely dangerous lifestyle compared to heterosexuals unchaste lifestyles, on the CDC. More over so is the transgender life, if they want to change their anatomy they are left with sterilization. They should be helped to avoid this situation because this is a very serious emotional sickness and down the road many have regretted mutilating their bodies besides all the hormones that have to take in order for the sex change for the rest of their lives. Inform the ignorant people that accept this as tolerance and ask them if they would want that lifestyle for their children knowing the dangers and consequences of a lifestyle that could eventually kill them.

Because of this sick society we have now, the people who don’t have this problem who accept people with these problems are behaving with false compassion not real compassion and are hurting more people than helping them.

Bottom line if you love someone you should tell them the truth of why it’s wrong, emotionally, physically as well as spiritually and that you can never condone this lifestyle, but you still love them and want to bring them to Christ to heal their pain. That is our job as faithful servants to God. Bring them to Christ.
GB

 

[Cricket2]

No one is born with these problems, but even if they were it wouldn’t matter because it’s a feeling that they have and feelings can be controlled. We may feel like we want to kill someone, but we don’t act out on those feelings because we know it’s wrong. Never should anyone condemn or mistreat anyone, that would be evil, but we are allowed to judge bad behavior and if we are living a holy life ourselves it is a must and living an active homosexual life is wrong and we must try and reach out to these people to help them live a chaste life if and when we can.

I prefer to call them people with Same sex attraction who have this inclination is not a sin in itself, but the acting out is. When referring to a person as a homosexual it leaves the notion that they are acting out and not living chastely. Seeing that most of the consequences of this particular sexual sin, you can find out more of how it is an extremely dangerous lifestyle compared to heterosexuals unchaste lifestyles, on the CDC. More over so is the transgender life, if they want to change their anatomy they are left with sterilization. They should be helped to avoid this situation because this is a very serious emotional sickness and down the road many have regretted mutilating their bodies besides all the hormones that have to take in order for the sex change for the rest of their lives. Inform the ignorant people that accept this as tolerance and ask them if they would want that lifestyle for their children knowing the dangers and consequences of a lifestyle that could eventually kill them.

Because of this sick society we have now, the people who don’t have this problem who accept people with these problems are behaving with false compassion not real compassion and are hurting more people than helping them.

Bottom line if you love someone you should tell them the truth of why it’s wrong, emotionally, physically as well as spiritually and that you can never condone this lifestyle, but you still love them and want to bring them to Christ to heal their pain. That is our job as faithful servants to God. Bring them to Christ.
GB

People are born this way. There are proven differences in brain structure and function, and obviously those with two sets of genitalia. Then there are those for whom it is not possible to tell "what sex they are. It is a known fact that birth control pills will cause deformities in the genitals and transgendered development.

Sure, there are people who make a choice to be homosexual, but there are plenty others who do not and who are influenced by things outside of their control. To say they are not born this way, or adversely affected by medications, environment or congenital disorders is simply too easy. That approach helps no one.

As a heterosexual female I practice chastity because I am single. I think this is what most people need to understand. There are plenty of heterosexuals out there who find no problem with pointing fingers at those who are “gay”, but find no problem with sleeping with whom ever they want. There sin is the same as the homosexual who does not practice chastity.

 

[JimG]

Infertility is not an impediment to marriage, nor does it invalidate a marriage. But permanent and antecedent impotence does. The couple must be able to complete the marital act (even if they choose not to, as in a Josephite marriage). Sexual complementarity is the key.

 

[speakttruth]

People are born this way. There are proven differences in brain structure and function, and obviously those with two sets of genitalia. Then there are those for whom it is not possible to tell "what sex they are. It is a known fact that birth control pills will cause deformities in the genitals and transgendered development.

Sure, there are people who make a choice to be homosexual, but there are plenty others who do not and who are influenced by things outside of their control. To say they are not born this way, or adversely affected by medications, environment or congenital disorders is simply too easy. That approach helps no one.

As a heterosexual female I practice chastity because I am single. I think this is what most people need to understand. There are plenty of heterosexuals out there who find no problem with pointing fingers at those who are “gay”, but find no problem with sleeping with whom ever they want. There sin is the same as the homosexual who does not practice chastity.

Sorry but you are wrong. If the homosexual community actually found a gene or anything else to excuse this behavior as wrong to cause ssa you would have heard it all over the planet. They have done numerous studies and have not proven that they were born this way. People who talk like this are part of the problem with pushing this propaganda. The identical twin studies have proven that if it was caused by this lie you suggest then why in the studies have only one of them turned out that way when they found these cases? They both had the same mother who could have all these problems you suggest. If it was true both would be gay. They have not proven they have different brain structures either. Most of the people who pushed this falsity have been proven false. Whose pointing fingers? Sex outside of marriage is wrong period. Since we aren’t animals we can actually practice self control.

Regardless of how a person comes to this problem of Same sex attraction it shouldn’t be promoted as a good thing or a normal way to live. We should help people realize that they are more than their sexuality. Calling themselves gay defines who they want to have sex with nothing more. That is not who they are but what they want to do sexually, which should be a private thing and we don’t need it pushed in our faces by all this propaganda which really wants to take advantage of these poor misguided souls, emotionally and what you see now a billion dollar potential industry. Please find out the facts, most of all these problems with ssa and transgendered are related to factors of their childhood traumas and a more sensitive child and if you want to call that a predisposition as a genetic factor of being more sensitive than a normal that could be the case. But it is really a perfect storm of factors
of their growth and development and environmental factors. Many males have been sexually abused and so have the women. Abandonment or perceived , many things over a long period of years. So no simple cure, but through Jesus all wounds are healed. When you make false statements of opinions and not proven facts, remember how many more people you are hurting not helping. Ps: I am happy that you are practicing chastity. Just focus on that and helping people do the same.
Gods help us!

 

[Mumbles140]

Regardless of how a person comes to this problem of Same sex attraction it shouldn’t be promoted as a good thing or a normal way to live.

This made me think of an analogy: some people are genetically predisposed towards alcoholism. Some people, because of certain experiences in their lives, turn to alcoholism. Either way, I doubt the majority of alcoholics ‘freely choose’ to be that way. Support is given, love is given, but we don’t tout the alcoholic lifestyle as OK, or write it off as “some people are just wired that way.”

So why not the case with same-sex attraction? Support should be given, love should be given, accepting a person as they are is one thing, but pride parades, legal battles to recognize their false institutions of marriage, and the targeting of those opposed to their cause just makes me wonder what happened to moral fortitude in our society.

 

[speakttruth]

This made me think of an analogy: some people are genetically predisposed towards alcoholism. Some people, because of certain experiences in their lives, turn to alcoholism. Either way, I doubt the majority of alcoholics ‘freely choose’ to be that way. Support is given, love is given, but we don’t tout the alcoholic lifestyle as OK, or write it off as “some people are just wired that way.”

So why not the case with same-sex attraction? Support should be given, love should be given, accepting a person as they are is one thing, but pride parades, legal battles to recognize their false institutions of marriage, and the targeting of those opposed to their cause just makes me wonder what happened to moral fortitude in our society.

I couldn’t agree more, excellent post!

 

[Thinking10]

Use secular arguments that are based in natural law. Otherwise, the argument may devolve in who can and cannot eat shellfish or misinterpretations of what a slave is in the Bible.

 

[speakttruth]

SuperLuigi;12006997:

I agree, that whole article, “The Secular Case Against Gay Marriage” is well done. I posted some text from it below. The paragraph is a great summary of why homosexual relationships should not be considered equal to marriage.

"The biggest danger homosexual civil marriage presents is the enshrining into law the notion that sexual love, regardless of its fecundity, is the sole criterion for marriage. If the state must recognize a marriage of two men simply because they love one another, upon what basis can it deny marital recognition to a group of two men and three women, for example, or a sterile brother and sister who claim to love each other? Homosexual activists protest that they only want all couples treated equally. But why is sexual love between two people more worthy of state sanction than love between three, or five? When the purpose of marriage is procreation, the answer is obvious. If sexual love becomes the primary purpose, the restriction of marriage to couples loses its logical basis, leading to marital chaos.

"

Edit: Here are two more paragraphs from the page SuperLuigi linked to.

"I do not claim that all of these other types of couples restricted from marrying are equivalent to homosexual couples. I only bring them up to illustrate that marriage is heavily regulated, and for good reason. When a state recognizes a marriage, it bestows upon the couple certain benefits which are costly to both the state and other individuals. Collecting a deceased spouse’s social security, claiming an extra tax exemption for a spouse, and having the right to be covered under a spouse’s health insurance policy are just a few examples of the costly benefits associated with marriage. In a sense, a married couple receives a subsidy. Why? Because a marriage between two unrelated heterosexuals is likely to result in a family with children, and propagation of society is a compelling state interest. For this reason, states have, in varying degrees, restricted from marriage couples unlikely to produce children.

Granted, these restrictions are not absolute. A small minority of married couples are infertile. However, excluding sterile couples from marriage, in all but the most obvious cases such as those of blood relatives, would be costly. Few people who are sterile know it, and fertility tests are too expensive and burdensome to mandate. One might argue that the exclusion of blood relatives from marriage is only necessary to prevent the conception of genetically defective children, but blood relatives cannot marry even if they undergo sterilization. Some couples who marry plan not to have children, but without mind-reading technology, excluding them is impossible. Elderly couples can marry, but such cases are so rare that it is simply not worth the effort to restrict them. The marriage laws, therefore, ensure, albeit imperfectly, that the vast majority of couples who do get the benefits of marriage are those who bear children. "

great article thanks