How can a loving God create then condemn a homosexual being?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Senyorico
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
They aren’t necessarily condemned. Why would you believe that?
 
Would it not be a sin for a homosexual to participate in a same-sex romantic relationship?
 
Theology-wise, God does not condemn homosexuals for being homosexual. God only condemns homosexuals who engage in homosexual behaviour, so the issue of whether homosexuality is a choice or not is one that has absolutely no bearing on Catholic teaching. The choice here is the choice of acting on homosexual inclinations, not the choice of having them.
 
Last edited:
Senyorico said:
Would it not be a sin for a homosexual to participate in a same-sex romantic relationship?
Click to expand...
Yes, the sex acts are sinful in nature. That’s not the same thing as suggesting that homosexuals are “condemned” because of who they are.

Of course you know that sex acts between heterosexuals can also be sinful, and in this day and age of decline in marriage, often are.

None of us are condemned because of who we are. Rather, it is what we do that may lead to our condemnation.
 
I see, but why does the church/God prohibit homosexual relationship if it is a default setting for some?
 
The Church teaches that all sexual relationships outside of marriage are sinful, and marriage is only between a man and a woman. Homosexuals cannot be married (according to the Church) hence the relationship will remain extramarital and thus sinful.
 
But why would the act be a sin if it would be consensual and “natural” for them since (assuming) they are born to have that attraction?
 
Why did God limit marriage between man and woman if some people are born with homosexual attraction?
 
Senyorico said:
But why would the act be a sin if it would be consensual and “natural” for them since (assuming) they are born to have that attraction?
Click to expand...
The church teaches, and the Bible supports, that sex acts must be unitive AND procreative AND must occur within the bonds of a valid marriage between one man and one woman. That’s three criteria that need to be met.

Homosexual sex acts by their nature cannot be procreative. They are also not had between one woman and one man united by the bonds of valid marriage. I have often heard those who are homosexual say that their relations with their partners are unitive (the church disagrees), but even if they are, that is only one criteria out of the three required.

Note: Many heterosexuals, even some who are married, also fail to meet this high standard, and thus put their salvation at risk.
 
Last edited:
Why would it be immoral if it is not procreative? Is it based on natural moral law? Why limit marriage to heterosexual then if it is normal to have homosexual attraction for some people? Is the romantic relationship between homosexuals a sin excluding the sexual act?
 
Senyorico said:
Why would it be immoral if it is not procreative?
Click to expand...
Because the natural purpose of sex is procreation.
Senyorico said:
Is it based on natural moral law?
Click to expand...
Yes.
Senyorico said:
Why limit marriage to heterosexual then if it is normal to have homosexual attraction for some people?
Click to expand...
Why limit marriage to two people when there are those not attracted to anyone? Why not let them marry themselves?

It’s not a matter of limiting marriage. It’s what marriage is. It’s like asking why blue is limited to being blue. Marriage is a Sacrament of service, as the man and woman commit themselves to raising whatever children God bless them with.
Senyorico said:
Is the romantic relationship between homosexuals a sin excluding the sexual act?
Click to expand...
It would seem imprudent at best, like a married person having romantic feelings for someone who isn’t their spouse.
 
Loaded question. God doesn’t make people with the sin that cries out to heaven. People choose to have that sin in their disobedience twords God. It doesn’t help secular society has normalized this sin and is encouraging it.
 
Last edited:
Thanks a lot! But there has been a recent issue here in our country regarding an equality bill, if it is natural for some to be “gay” then why are we allowed to deprive them of some things given that they are gay “not by choice”.
 
Senyorico said:
if it is natural for some to be “gay” then why are we allowed to deprive them of some things given that they are gay “not by choice”.
Click to expand...
We have different definitions of “natural”. Catholics do not speak of nature or “normal” when saying an action is natural or unnatural. Natural refers to an action being ordered to its purpose: sex is naturally ordered to procreation, two members of the same sex will never conceive a child between themselves, so it is unnatural.

Picture this: I’m trying to fillet a fish with a marshmallow. What happens to the marshmallow and the fish? The marshmallow has no cutting edge, it was never made with one. Marshmallows were made to be delicious and eaten. So when I use the marshmallow to fillet the fish, I ruin the marshmallow (it gets contaminated by the fish), and if I keep trying, I destroy the marshmallow. The fish is also ruined, as it’s now covered in marshmallow.
Senyorico said:
why are we allowed to deprive them of some things given that they are gay “not by choice”.
Click to expand...
We’re not depriving them of anything. Who are we to change what marriage – which God created and defined – is? We have no right. If I walk up to you and demand you to grow gills, are you depriving me of anything by not doing so? Why not?

And further, why should we let them do something we know is intrinsically evil?
 
Last edited:
Senyorico said:
why are we allowed to deprive them of some things given that they are gay “not by choice”.
Click to expand...
It’s not about deprivation, although I acknowledge that some might experience it this way.

Marriage was given to us by God for a specific purpose. It is between one man and one woman, it is for the purpose of having and raising children, and it is for helping each other get to heaven. Because marriage is God given, no civil authority has the right to change it.

At the same time, it is up to civil authorities to decide what rights will be given to which members of society and by what criteria. There are ways in which a civil authority can extend rights to all its citizens without attempting to redefine that which they have no authority over.
 
What they try to point out is not only about marriage, for example some if not Catholic schools wouldn’t allow individuals to cross dress. If their gender expression is somehow natural since they are “born that way” then why discriminate them?
 
What sin is it that you’re referring to? And how is it backed by science?
 
Senyorico said:
If their gender expression is somehow natural since they are “born that way”
Click to expand...
Which it isn’t, and isn’t how natural works.
Senyorico said:
then why discriminate them?
Click to expand...
We cannot and will not redefine something we haven’t the right to do, especially to give way to something wrong. Just because you’re born with a feeling doesn’t mean you can act on it. Otherwise we’d have to allow sadists to hurt people as they please.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top