A
AveMaria12
Guest
What should I say to this. I’m talking to some one who approves gay rights via face book right now. She is not a Christian and does not find the bible authoritative.
- Status
If she sees no authority in the Bible, nothing you quote would change her mind.
She sounds like someone who only cares if it directly bothers her and as long as it goes on in secret than she doesn’t care.
The adopted children should be more important than the people who wish to adopt.
Have a look at this page.
catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0097.html
She sounds like someone who only cares if it directly bothers her and as long as it goes on in secret than she doesn’t care.
The adopted children should be more important than the people who wish to adopt.
Have a look at this page.
catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0097.html
A
april32010
Guest
natural law. and that is how i approach this.leading off with scripture with a non-believer is a non starter. a student pro-life leader at university of maryland ,college park is a atheist ,vegetarian peta member. she came to her pro–life views thru natural law.
R
Regular_Atheist
Guest
What’s natural law? All the definitions I’ve seen are entirely subjective and depend on the person’s interpretation of things, apart from buffalo’s definition which states that God gave everyone morals or something.
So, can someone tell me, once and for all, what natural law is?
P
PJD1987
Guest
newadvent.org/cathen/09076a.htmWhat’s natural law? All the definitions I’ve seen are entirely subjective and depend on the person’s interpretation of things, apart from buffalo’s definition which states that God gave everyone morals or something.
So, can someone tell me, once and for all, what natural law is?
The link above may be a good place to start.
God bless.
-Paul
J
jsaldar
Guest
It seems like the fight against homosexuality, gay marriage, etc… is lost. Homosexuality has been around since before biblical times and hasn’t changed since. You can’t change people’s opinions. Some people just feed off of becoming an opposition to Roman Catholic teachings. Just state your point and what you believe and that’s all.
C
chrisb
Guest
—In English this term is frequently employed as equivalent to the laws of nature, meaning the order which governs the activities of the material universe. Among the Roman jurists natural law designated those instincts and emotions common to man and the lower animals, such as the instinct of self-preservation and love of offspring. In its strictly ethical application—the sense in which this article treats it—the natural law is the rule of conduct which is prescribed to us by the Creator in the constitution of the nature with which He has endowed us.What’s natural law? All the definitions I’ve seen are entirely subjective and depend on the person’s interpretation of things, apart from buffalo’s definition which states that God gave everyone morals or something.
So, can someone tell me, once and for all, what natural law is?
Read in greater detail here: oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=Natural_Law
It’s actually an interesting term and one that was the foundation of all Western Thought on Law and Behavior until it started to be changed in modern times.
C
Catherine_S
Guest
*Maybe you could pass on to her a little information on the very serious health **issues resulting from this lifestyle! *
.
On The Unhealthy Homosexual Lifestyle
Medical* researchers** have known for many years that the “homosexual lifestyle” is a very disease-ridden lifestyle. *
(The fact that the dominant liberal media are downplaying and/or ignoring and/or censoring the following* crucial** information *
*should give you a clue as to just how biased, untrustworthy, corrupt, and **potentially detrimental *they can be.)
http://home60515.com/4.html
L
livingwordunity
Guest
Natural law can be seen in biology.
Man only has one sex organ, the penis. Woman only has one sex organ, the vagina.
A penis is not made to fit with another penis. A vagina is not made to fit with another vagina.
But a penis and vagina fit together, and when fertile, a baby results. This isn’t something that we decided. It’s just how it is.
We call this Natural Law not because we made it that way but because men and women were born with a body that is made for procreation with the opposite sex.
I figured this out when I first realized that what I have is different than what the opposite sex has.
D
Dakota_Roberts
Guest
Homosexuality, id est exclusive sexual attraction to the same sex, is not the same as living the “homosexual lifestyle”, some homosexuals desire monogamy which isn’t exactly the most disease ridden thing.
The Church shuns both sodomia perfecta and sodomia imperfecta not just sodomia perfecta. The former is inherently sterile sexual acts between members of the same sex (all intercourse) and the latter is inherently sterile sexual acts between members of the opposite sex (all not vaginal intercourse). Sodomy is intrinsically morally wrong because it divorces reproduction and sex which is directed away from order id est disordered because the primary purpose of the latter is the former.
B
buffalo
Guest
L
livingwordunity
Guest
Excellent article. It shows how the “gay” agenda is as clever and tricky as the devil. I saved the document for a reference.
D
Deo_Volente
Guest
Grace & Peace!
Natural Law only makes sense if biology informs, but does not absolutely determine, proper being and/or behavior.
Under the Mercy,
Mark
All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!
I have difficulty with Natural Law arguments which seem to confuse Natural Law with a form of biological determinism: my body is X, therefore I must be or behave (or think or desire) in an X way. If one takes into account genetics and epigenetics, Natural Law conceived in this way acquires a sort of fatalistic imperative–if what we physically are constitutes an absolute mandate on how we should be or behave, then any way of being or behaving contrary to one’s biology or genetics represents immorality. And suddenly, the facts of our biological makeup assume a certain fatalistic quality.
Natural Law only makes sense if biology informs, but does not absolutely determine, proper being and/or behavior.
Under the Mercy,
Mark
All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!
T
thistle
Guest
I also bookmarked this article. Very good.
S
SgtSchultz
Guest
I don’t like that article. It’s factually inaccurate in some areas. (Multiculturalism and homosexuality are not linked in the sense that support for one is support for another, though both are usually supported by the same people. Multiculturalism, of the kind practised by relativists, states that all cultures are equal and good, except for Western culture, which is always bad and wrong. Support for homosexual lifestyles isn’t a pre-requisite for a supporter of multiculturalism. A belief in the ideals of the Sexual Revolution is.) Also, the language is much too paranoid and confrontational. Finally, it’s written by religious for religious. That won’t convince the non-religious.
Here’s a better article. It’s written by non-religious, one of whom is a self-identified homosexual. They argue why gay “marriage” does not make sense:
catholiceducation.org/articles/sexuality/ho0064.html
Yet, these are the claims made by proponent of same-sex “marriage”. They say they are born that way and have no choice in the matter. They define someone’s entire being based on their sexual attractions. “I’m born gay ergo I must have sex with the same sex and society must celebrate this. I have no choice and to say otherwise is discrimination.” Talk about fatalism!
Anyway, arguing with random strangers on Facebook is not a good idea. Don’t get your name out there or people will abuse your posts and compromise your identity. Better to argue semi-anonymously on forums such as this.
M
Maso
Guest
How does one predicate “Civil Rights” on the basis of sexual deviaton…?
The logic fails.
And… when laws are codified on the basis of a falacy… there will be bad laws, and that is detremental.
Consider… If I were to press the law makers for a definition of the term “sexual orientation”… eventually it would come down to homosexuality ( among other things ) is a “sexual orientation”.
Hummm…
But isn’t homosexuality inherantly and by definition in fact a sexual dis-orientation…???
If these lawmakers can explain to me how a sexual orientation can be a sexual dis-orientation… then I will explain to you how one ( 1 ) can equal zero ( 0 ).
The logic fails.
And… when laws are codified on the basis of a falacy… there will be bad laws, and that is detremental.
Consider… If I were to press the law makers for a definition of the term “sexual orientation”… eventually it would come down to homosexuality ( among other things ) is a “sexual orientation”.
Hummm…
But isn’t homosexuality inherantly and by definition in fact a sexual dis-orientation…???
If these lawmakers can explain to me how a sexual orientation can be a sexual dis-orientation… then I will explain to you how one ( 1 ) can equal zero ( 0 ).
Code:
1 = 0 ...?!
Go figure...
D
Dakota_Roberts
Guest
I can’t understand your logic, the typographical errors are impeding my comprehension of what you are trying to say.
S
SaintPatrick333
Guest
For starters how about the earliest reports of aids (before we knew it was aids) was found in practicing homosexual men in america? Homosexual relations are physically harmful to ones body and often times deadly. That should show how abnormal such physical unions are, regardless of ones belief in God. That’s science folks.
B
buffalo
Guest
Since I as a tax and insurance payer do not want to pay a premium for risky behaviors, a risk pool is created?
A
AveMaria12
Guest
She’s a close friend of mine. We are taking it in a very friendly, play-debate format, though I do wish to convince her.
Thanks. I’ve tried the Natural Law. I think I will convince her of the solidity of Natural Law.
In Christo.
- Status