homosexuality

[BlaineTog]

I just read up a bit on why sex is for heterosexual couples and I have to disagree. God created humans to go both ways. A male will feel pleasure in his prostate if there is pressure against it. Also…why is the main center for sexual pleasure on a woman…on the outside where another female can easily stimulate it with already given anatomy? I am just wondering…if God didn’t really want this to happen…why would he create humans with the ability to please the same sex?

dafalax and others beat me to the punch, but the fact of the matter is that just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should. Just because something feels good doesn’t make it good.

Catholic Sexual theology is complicated, but it is pretty tough to argue around. I’d suggest reading up on it. The basic tenant is sex is a joining action between two people in which they become one. However, this joining action is incomplete if the two people aren’t married, blocked if they use contraception, incoherent if there is only one person (ie masturbation), and impossible if they are of different genders, in the same way that it is impossible to plug two electrical sockets into each other, and in each of these scenarios, the sexual act is sinful partially because it damages your soul (and the soul of your partner) to crush it against theirs like that, because it’s a deep lie (the act itself necessarily purports to join, and yet there is no joining), and because it’s disobedience to God’s law.

Now, that’s a really brief explanation, and I’d suggest reading something from a professional about this.

May the baby you save be Gay, and you know the song Jesus loves the little children. Well…Jesus also loves the little homos.

This is true but misleading. God loved Adam and Even even though they sinned against him. He loved the men who crucified Jesus. He loved Judas Iscariot. Not to say that it is sinful to be homosexually oriented, only that “God loves that person” doesn’t make everything that person does equally cherished by God.

(Oh, and not to knock you, but if you think you’re a good person, you’re not. None of us are, none of us except the Saints, and they never go on about how much they help others).

 

[dp5284]

I’m just wondering why it’s wrong. I know this subject has been beaten to death.

I am a Catholic just not a complete one, I also have my own opinions. I don’t think one belief can actually been 100% correct. Jesus was a man with ideas…some pretty brilliant ones. He was a man.

We can both argue. Right or wrong. Affliction or somebody’s genetic code.

It’s all opinions. Why is there a need to correct somebody’s life if they are happy the way that they live. If it harms nobody…not even themselves (we’ll say in this life), why try and fix what isn’t broken?

I’ll never understand your point of view. You will never understand my point of view. Both sides are too stubborn.

Opinions. We’ll only know the truth when we pass on. I just know that I’m in love and I see nothing wrong with it. She makes me happy in a world where 4 years ago I didn’t want to exist in. If that’s wrong…then I don’t know.

You won’t change my opinion and I won’t change yours.

 

[BlaineTog]

I’m just wondering why it’s wrong. I know this subject has been beaten to death.

And I tried to explain it to you. Would you care to comment on my explanation?

Jesus was a man with ideas…some pretty brilliant ones.

Actually, most of them were pretty boring and trite. By and large, what Jesus said as far as practical morality goes was what pretty much everyone else was already saying. The Golden Rule, for example, is almost word-for-word identical to one of the sayings of Confucius (though admittedly with a different emphasis).

He was a man.

And God. If you don’t believe that, you are in no way a Catholic. It’s completelly absurd to claim otherwise.

We can both argue. Right or wrong. Affliction or somebody’s genetic code.

You can have genetic afflictions. Diabetes, for example.

It’s all opinions.

That is a logical impossibility. If it’s all opinion, then it’s an opinion that all is opinion, in which case it could be incorrect that all is opinion since opinions by their very nature can be true or false when they try to make claims about the real world.

Why is there a need to correct somebody’s life if they are happy the way that they live. If it harms nobody…not even themselves (we’ll say in this life), why try and fix what isn’t broken?

First, because happiness isn’t everything. Second, because happiness in this life isn’t everything. Third, because you’re making the assumption that homosexuality doesn’t hurt you when that’s the very matter at hand.

I’ll never understand your point of view.

Not with an attitude like that!

You will never understand my point of view.

Speak for yourself, please. I understand your point of view just fine. If it feels good and it isn’t immediately obvious that what you’re doing is bad and/or you refuse to try to understand why what you’re doing might be bad, do it.

Opinions. We’ll only know the truth when we pass on.

Only if you wanted the truth before you did. Saying “no” to truth is the definition of condemning yourself to Hell, and I see no reason why those in Hell should get to know anything special.

*I just know that I’m in love and I see nothing wrong with it. *

I understand this. We’re trying to explain to you what’s wrong.

She makes me happy in a world where 4 years ago I didn’t want to exist in. If that’s wrong…then I don’t know.

As we pointed out, just because something makes you happy doesn’t make it ok. It also doesn’t make it wrong, but you can’t use how happy something makes you as a proof for its moral correctness.

You won’t change my opinion and I won’t change yours.

Oh I don’t know about that. Hope is a virtue.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

And I tried to explain it to you. Would you care to comment on my explanation?..

I think you made a classic mistake, you called her a :

… and impossible if they are of different genders, in the same way that it is impossible to plug two electrical sockets into each other, and in each of these scenarios, the sexual act is sinful partially because it damages your soul (and the soul of your partner) to crush it against theirs like that, because it’s a deep lie (the act itself necessarily purports to join, and yet there is no joining), and because it’s disobedience to God’s law.
…

and said her actions were impossible which is a creditability issue, now you ask her to listen to you. Good intentions but bad choices

 

[Bennie_P]

It is always the “new” people that make these posts. Why is that? Do they not see the “SEARCH” function at the top? Do they think they are actually the very first person to ask about this?

Strategy of the movement…

The way to benumb raw sensitivities about homosexuality is to have a lot of people talk a great deal about the subject in a neutral or supportive way. Open and frank talk makes the subject seem less furtive, alien, and sinful, more above-board. Constant talk builds the impression that the public opinion is at least divided on the subject, and that a sizable segment accepts or even practices homosexuality.
Even rancorous debates between opponents and defenders serve the purpose of desensitization so long as “respectable” gays are front and center to make their own pitch. The main thing is to talk about gayness until the issue becomes thoroughly tiresome.
And when we say talk about homosexuality, we mean just that. In the early stages of any campaign to reach straight America, the masses should not be shocked and repelled by premature exposure to homosexual behavior itself. Instead, the imagery of sex should be downplayed and gay rights should bereduced to an abstract social question as much as possible. First let the camel get his nose inside the tent – and only later his unsightly derriere!

More …
THE OVERHAULING OF STRAIGHT AMERICAhttp://www.abidingtruth.com/_docs/resources/8142838.pdf

They bait, we bite

British occultist and Satanist, Aleister Crowley sums it up: “do what thou wilt, shall be the whole of the law.”But “do what thou wilt” is no law at all! Crowley’s maxim is in reality a negation of all natural and spiritual law; it only promotes chaos and a left-wing regressive descent into oblivion and non-existence. His maxim reflects a complete lack of concern and respect for the dignity of his fellow man and a contempt for life. Read the book which sums up what lies in the heart of the gay tights movement.

 

[Kaninchen]

Read the book which sums up what lies in the heart of the gay tights movement.

Terrifying, truly terrifying, people should rise up against the terrible threat of gay tights.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

Strategy of the movement…

More …
THE OVERHAULING OF STRAIGHT AMERICA

They bait, we bite

Only immoral people bait or bite. The article is terrible and 21 years old. How about addressing the Church teaching which is “disordered” and the moral aspects of “disordered” issues which is not as clear as salvation/non-salvation. Catholics have an obligation to assist the ill formed conscious which is not name calling or manipulation once that occurs our obligation is fulfilled. I hope you will assist dp5284 and others with proper teachings. Thank you

 

[BlaineTog]

I think you made a classic mistake, you called her a :

and said her actions were impossible which is a creditability issue, now you ask her to listen to you. Good intentions but bad choices

I’m confused. What did I do wrong?