Homosexuality

[Seeker2010]

It is unnatural.

Because you said so, huh? Seems to be a lot of that going around.

 

[edwest2]

Wasn’t that the prevailing sentiment in Germany in the 1930’s?

I am seeing a lot of pre-World War II ideas presented here. There was a group of people that did not believe in anything who made their living by stealing other people’s goods. Another group that did not want to wear clothes. Among the items seized by the German invaders was pornography.

God bless,
Ed

 

[Seeker2010]

This is where I differ with you. God did send us an instruction manual, just some choose to use their “machinery” in a manner not recommended by the manufacturer.

Well, my comment vis-a-vis an instruction manual from God really has little or nothing to do with how people use their machinery. My point is that if the creator of the universe wanted us to have a book, there would be no ambiguity about where it came from. There would be no other holy books, with different messages, that also claim to be from God. There would be no room for doubt.

Anyone with a brain would know some forms of sex are not natural and come with consequences. Just like I don’t need a doctor to tell me obesity is bad for me. The difference between us today and when Moses and Jesus were here on Earth is that technology has made some forms of deviate sex safer.

ALL forms of sex come with the potential of consequences. But you are right, modern technology has made sexual practices that were once the equivalent of playing russian roulette no longer risky. If they’re not risky, but are pleasurable, there’s no reason not to partake.

You are also kidding yourself that pleasure should be the only motive behind sex. There is an emotional attachment that can not be denied, unless of course you have debased your feelings to that of an animal.

I never said that pleasure was the ONLY motive for sex, only that sex solely for pleasure was a legitimate reason, thereby voiding the claim that sex that is impossible to be procreative is not natural. Sex can lead to an emotional attachment, or it can be the result of an emotional attachment, but it’s not mandatory to be pleasurable.

 

[NE_Catholic]

Well, my comment vis-a-vis an instruction manual from God really has little or nothing to do with how people use their machinery. My point is that if the creator of the universe wanted us to have a book, there would be no ambiguity about where it came from. There would be no other holy books, with different messages, that also claim to be from God. There would be no room for doubt.

there is no room for doubt. Unnatural acts are just that, unnatural. You can spin, spin, spin, but they are unnatural. You can look at everything else scientifically excepts this, why?

ALL forms of sex come with the potential of consequences. But you are right, modern technology has made sexual practices that were once the equivalent of playing russian roulette no longer risky. If they’re not risky, but are pleasurable, there’s no reason not to partake.

Pleasurable to one person, mostly. If you chose a hedonistic lifestyle, don’t try to justify it on “pleasure”. It is self-centered and far more “risky” than a natural relationship.

I never said that pleasure was the ONLY motive for sex, only that sex solely for pleasure was a legitimate reason, thereby voiding the claim that sex that is impossible to be procreative is not natural. Sex can lead to an emotional attachment, or it can be the result of an emotional attachment, but it’s not mandatory to be pleasurable.

Sex for pleasure only is appealing to base instints. Much like gambling, drugs and other vices.

 

[NE_Catholic]

Because you said so, huh? Seems to be a lot of that going around.

scientifically, it is.

 

[Seeker2010]

Unnatural acts are just that, unnatural.

You have said nothing here. Unnatural acts are indeed unnatural. Roses are roses, and I don’t care how much lipstick you put on it, a pig is still a pig. What you have failed to do is define unnatural, and no matter how you spin it, you can’t label homosexual sex unnatural unless you label all non-procreative sex unnatural.

Pleasurable to one person, mostly. If you chose a hedonistic lifestyle, don’t try to justify it on “pleasure”. It is self-centered and far more “risky” than a natural relationship.

Why would you assume that consensual adults doing whatever is only pleasurable for one person? You’re assuming facts that are not in evidence. Regardless, I’m not discussing this or that ‘lifestyle’, merely opining that any given sexual event can be done solely for pleasure without being ‘unnatural’, regardless of whether between husband and wife, or whomever.

Sex for pleasure only is appealing to base instints.

Even if I grant you this point, which I really don’t, base instincts are natural. Ergo your argument is moot.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Hi everyone,

First, I want to say that I do not have anything personal against homosexuals. I’m posting this to get Catholic advice. I’ve been getting a lot of heat lately because of my stance on homosexuality. People keep saying all sorts of things, but I think it’s just not supposed to be, because 2 people of the same gender can’t reproduce. All of nature takes a male and a female to reproduce. I’m not in favor of gay marriage or relationships. People keep telling me I’m being ugly and that I’m wrong for that because they can’t help it. But honestly, I don’t think it’s right. People have called me a hyprocrite because I’m so Catholic but I hate homosexuals…but I really don’t hate them. I still think they are people and deserve respect, but I don’t agree with their lifestyle. It’s kind of like someone having premarital sex…I don’t agree with them, but I won’t hate them because they sin. I mean, I’m no better. I sin too. I don’t see anything wrong with what I think, but these people are bringing me down. I’m just wondering, am I not loving others as I should with this? Any advice is appreciated

Thanks
Jeanne

How do you act out these beliefs?

Do you harass every gay person you meet while screaming “REPENT” (or some other Christian slogan) or simply say “I think homosexual acts are a sin” whenever the topic comes up?

Or are your actions somewhere in between?

 

[NE_Catholic]

You have said nothing here. Unnatural acts are indeed unnatural. Roses are roses, and I don’t care how much lipstick you put on it, a pig is still a pig. What you have failed to do is define unnatural, and no matter how you spin it, you can’t label homosexual sex unnatural unless you label all non-procreative sex unnatural.

yeah! You admitted it! Congrats.

Why would you assume that consensual adults doing whatever is only pleasurable for one person? You’re assuming facts that are not in evidence. Regardless, I’m not discussing this or that ‘lifestyle’, merely opining that any given sexual event can be done solely for pleasure without being ‘unnatural’, regardless of whether between husband and wife, or whomever.

whatever

Even if I grant you this point, which I really don’t, base instincts are natural. Ergo your argument is moot.

Natural for animals, not humans.

 

[Seeker2010]

whatever

Your argument, summarized in one word. Congrats, indeed.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

point of order
I am only refering to anal sex. I
Not only can I not understand the “reciever”, I can not understand the “giver”. Subjecting yourself to waste for minimal contact. It’s not natural from a scientific view point. How it probably started was humiliation, not pleasure. I imagine many a disease was passed this way, seeing it is an unnatural place to put one’s privates.

why all the other deviations? Would you not agree anal sex is not natural from a scientific viewpoint?

Actually while MALE homosexuals are much more likely to contract STDs than heterosexuals, FEMALE homosexuals are less likely to get STDs than heterosexuals.

This is because of the fluid transfer (sperm). Lesbians are not generally pumping large amounts of their fluid into each other’s bodies, the way that male homosexuals and heterosexuals generally are.

You can make a plausible argument that homosexual sex is actually healthier than hetero sex for women. Since there is no risk of pregnancy and less risk of catching a venereal disease.

 

[NE_Catholic]

Your argument, summarized in one word. Congrats, indeed.

arguement for anal sex is unnatural? You agreed with me.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Does that also apply to lesbians?

It seems to me that so much is made of the so-called depravity of sodomy (meaning anal sex, conveniently ignoring the fact that oral sex is also technically sodomy), the skeeviness of male on male sex, the weirdness of gay pride parades, etc, etc. It’s like only men are homosexuals.

Good point.

While the Bible clearly condemns male on male sex (being one of the many offenses people should be executed for) it says nothing about female/female sex.

I think its because the writers of the Old Testament subscribed to the patriarchal idea that it can’t really be sex if a man isn’t involved. There are definitely a lot of misogynists today who feel the same way.

 

[Seeker2010]

arguement for anal sex is unnatural? You agreed with me.

No, I didn’t. I agreed with the statement ‘unnatural acts are unnatural’, but that’s akin to saying ‘pigs are pigs’. It’s a circular statement that means nothing. A circle is circular. Well, duh.

You have not defined natural vs. unnatural, you have not related why anal sex rises to the level of unnatural, nor have you explained why, even if it’s unnatural, it necessarily follows that it’s ‘wrong’. A car is unnatural. As are the computers you and I are using to further our discussion. That doesn’t make them ‘wrong’.

 

[NE_Catholic]

No, I didn’t. I agreed with the statement ‘unnatural acts are unnatural’, but that’s akin to saying ‘pigs are pigs’. It’s a circular statement that means nothing. A circle is circular. Well, duh.

You have not defined natural vs. unnatural, you have not related why anal sex rises to the level of unnatural, nor have you explained why, even if it’s unnatural, it necessarily follows that it’s ‘wrong’. A car is unnatural. As are the computers you and I are using to further our discussion. That doesn’t make them ‘wrong’.

circular arguement?
I’ve stayed on point:
your butt is a one way check valve with the purpose to discharge excrement. Any sexual action there is not natural. Being attracted to pain is also unnatural. To put ones privates in there is not only unsanitary, but not natural.
Why can’t you stay on point? SCIENTIFICALLY it is unnatural.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Hey, people!!!

I have stopped reading this thread because the TMI factor was really high Seeker has been judicious in his/her descriptions (at least up to the point I stopped reading), and I really think that the *opponents *of homosexual activity should not get disgustingly graphic, kind of messes up their argument, no?

No it doesn’t.

Arguing but being unwilling to discuss details often signals that the arguer is trying to hide something. Or that they privately admit to themselves that their argument is weak and are trying to rely mostly on rhetoric.

It can also signal the fact that the arguer doesn’t know the details, in which case they should probably not be arguing about something they don’t really know or understand.

 

[Seeker2010]

Any sexual action there is not natural.

How are you defining ‘natural’? Certainly, anal sex will not make babies, but that does not mean it is not pleasurable for some people. Sex toys are not ‘natural’, nor will they make babies, but I don’t see you arguing they shouldn’t be used.

Sex is not just for babies.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

why are you equating “risk” with “natural”? It is unnatural.

So what?

Natural isn’t the same as good, and not natural (or unnatural as its often called) is definitely not the same as bad.

Cooking our food isn’t natural, technology and all our other tools (including the wheel) are not natural, repressing the desire to breed is not natural, and sacrificing yourself for the sake of others isn’t natural.

All of the best things about human society and civilization are unnatural.

 

[NE_Catholic]

How are you defining ‘natural’? Certainly, anal sex will not make babies, but that does not mean it is not pleasurable for some people. Sex toys are not ‘natural’, nor will they make babies, but I don’t see you arguing they shouldn’t be used.

Sex is not just for babies.

last time.
read my post
pleasure is subjective not scientific

stick to analytic scientific thought.
conclusion: not natural

 

[St_Francis]

No, I didn’t. I agreed with the statement ‘unnatural acts are unnatural’, but that’s akin to saying ‘pigs are pigs’. It’s a circular statement that means nothing. A circle is circular. Well, duh.

You have not defined natural vs. unnatural, you have not related why anal sex rises to the level of unnatural, nor have you explained why, even if it’s unnatural, it necessarily follows that it’s ‘wrong’. A car is unnatural. As are the computers you and I are using to further our discussion. That doesn’t make them ‘wrong’.

Even from a purely evolutionary point of view, homosexual activity is unnatural. If a colony of rats is exclusively homosexual, then there will be no baby rats, and that line of rats will die out.

There is a lot wrong not only with homosexual activity, but with the entire voluntarily-infertile sexual activity ethos arouund us. This has led to a lot of social breakdown. Can we honestly say that society is healthier now than it was a few decades ago? No. While we have made some improvements, most evident in the area of racial civil rights and some of the changes made for women, for the most part, every indicator shows massive amounts of unhappiness, from suicide rates to depression rates to prison rates to substance abuse rates to… … … We have more stuff, and even that was based on the lie of credit cards, that’s it. Despite the civil rights advancements, even the black community in the US is worse off than they were in the 40s and 50s.

 

[NE_Catholic]

So what?

Natural isn’t the same as good, and not natural (or unnatural as its often called) is definitely not the same as bad.

Cooking our food isn’t natural, technology and all our other tools (including the wheel) are not natural, repressing the desire to breed is not natural, and sacrificing yourself for the sake of others isn’t natural.

All of the best things about human society and civilization are unnatural.

all strawmans

we are talking about one unnatural act, not what separates us from the animals