How can I explain that homosexuality is wrong to a gay man?

[Bruised_Reed]

T

Telling a person “you’re wrong!” is not the most winsome way to bring someone closer to the Truth.

Do you see now?

 

[Pug]

What’s the point of all this? If she is physically a woman “living as a man” (whatever that means) who sleeps with men then she is a transvestite heterosexual. That’s not relevant to our conversation so why bring it up?

I think maybe the poster was talking about someone who has male genitalia when born, so everyone figures the person is a boy, and the person is raised accordingly. But, if you do an ultrasound of the abdomen, there will be a uterus and ovaries, and the person is XX genetically. So the person is female according to genetics and the functioning reproductive organs, they just happen to have had a defect of body formation while in the womb. This problem may only first show itself when the person hits puberty and their hormones kick in. I haven’t read enough on this rare problem to say for sure.

If doctors detect this anomaly early enough, they sometimes do plastic surgery on the exterior of the person so that it matches what they are on the inside.

Maybe someone could give you a link on this issue. There are a variety of ways this genetic strangeness can happen.

 

[Georgess]

Have not read all the posts and hope this will help me to also get the plenary indulgence today -( world day of sick) for helping those with difficult situations .

Homosexuality destroys the basic Father dignity which every male is called to live as his basic right(as St. Paul reminds ) and in the process of trying to get the father love / relationship, they seduce others , to be used , in the false or distorted guise of love ( after all, is not the real definition of love - that what is best for one , for here and hereafter !), thus destroying the fatherly dignity and image , in others as well .

The cure for homosexuality , by receiving the abundant and abiding Father Love , is in our Church , in The Eucharist , where our Lord , calling the disciples ‘children’ at The Last Supper, share His own Blood and Body, in the sacrifice and courage that embody Father Love ,and in Resurrection , giving the power to overcome satanic holds !

Taking in the cleansing waters of The Word , esp. the war events in O.T , fasting , use of other sacramentals and yes , tithing and charitable giving too , to bring in the deeper awareness , that we and all we have , all belong to The Father - these all have to help to cure something that has to be dealt with at the heart level , from where all impurities come ; thank God, The Church has taken a more truthful approach to the issue , instead of misguided pity that only serve to bring in worse problems !

Our Lady of Lourdes , pray for us !

 

[Georgess]

Any relationship between adultery and homosexuality also might be an area that The Church can explore furthur ; in our times when the women’s fashions make it difficult for men to avoid the sin of lust and thus of adultery , by the rule that two become one , in marriage , is it not logical to think that somehow , in such situations, not just the husband’s dignity, even his identity , to some level , also become violated !

Hope the message of 9/11 and the dress codes of Islam , will all wake us up , before it is too late ( and yes, the modest attire of our Bl. Mother, in her apparitions too !)

 

[vern_humphrey]

Homosexuality is a disordered condition. It results from an error in gender differentiation, It is not a choice made by the aflicted one.
It is un-natural to expect a creature with a disordered gender differentiation to behave as if the differentiation was normal.
It is also un-natural to demand of these unfortunates, that they do not form relationships appropriate to them, and comfort each-other within that relationship, in a manner appropriate.
AND only they, and GOD can judge what is appropriate.

And God established His Church to guide men in what is moral and just. The Church, through its Magisterium, says homosexual acts are inherently disordered.

This is, provided that the OT caveat is complied with, namely, that in personal relationships, they keep to themselves, and do not deliberately interface in an inappropriate manner with those not afflicted.
The curse they bear is sufficient without ignorant people judging them inappropriately.

And the “ignorant people” you speak of? That would be the Catholic Church?

 

[fix]

Homosexuality is a disordered condition. It results from an error in gender differentiation, It is not a choice made by the aflicted one.
It is un-natural to expect a creature with a disordered gender differentiation to behave as if the differentiation was normal.
It is also un-natural to demand of these unfortunates, that they do not form relationships appropriate to them, and comfort each-other within that relationship, in a manner appropriate.

I am wondering why you single out this one condition and claim it is unnatural to attempt to correct or propose that the behavior not be acted on? Which other conditions do you apply this reasoning to?

AND only they, and GOD can judge what is appropriate.
This is, provided that the OT caveat is complied with, namely, that in personal relationships, they keep to themselves, and do not deliberately interface in an inappropriate manner with those not afflicted.
The curse they bear is sufficient without ignorant people judging them inappropriately.

If only God may judge how is that you claim that?

 

[vern_humphrey]

I am wondering why you single out this one condition and claim it is unnatural to attempt to correct or propose that the behavior not be acted on? Which other conditions do you apply this reasoning to?

Or to put it another way, how is same-sex attraction difrerent from any other strong attraction – such as to alcohol, drugs, rage and violence, or hetrosexual acts?

Look at the case of the Episcopal “gay” bishop. The defenders of his ordination say, “It’s a loving relationship.”

The gentleman was married and left his wife and children for his male lover. Does anyone believe he wouild be defended if he left his wife and children for a female lover?

 

[fix]

Or to put it another way, how is same-sex attraction difrerent from any other strong attraction – such as to alcohol, drugs, rage and violence, or hetrosexual acts?

Look at the case of the Episcopal “gay” bishop. The defenders of his ordination say, “It’s a loving relationship.”

The gentleman was married and left his wife and children for his male lover. Does anyone believe he wouild be defended if he left his wife and children for a female lover?

Good illustration. I am pretty convinced folks view same sex attraction as similiar to eye color or being left handed. Simply a variation of normal. The topics you mentioned all involve physically bad behavior or emotional pain. It seems the view is as long as their is consent, no physical or emotional abuse, and one claims they have a desire or are content doing such and such then the actions are acceptable.

I think such reasoning leaves out some important criteria, but others will tell me that is simply my private view.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Good illustration. I am pretty convinced folks view same sex attraction as similiar to eye color or being left handed. Simply a variation of normal. The topics you mentioned all involve physically bad behavior or emotional pain. It seems the view is as long as their is consent, no physical or emotional abuse, and one claims they have a desire or are content doing such and such then the actions are acceptable.

I think such reasoning leaves out some important criteria, but others will tell me that is simply my private view.

I think they do not view same sex attraction as similar to eye color. The proof is they do not regard SSA as we regard drug addiction, violent temper, or hyper-sexuality among heterosexuals. They want us to regard it differently.

No one would defend somelone’s right to beat someone else senseless, to cheat on his wife, or to take drugs. Quite the contrary – we would say to such people, “It doesn’t matter how strong your desire is to beat someone, cheat on your wife, or take drugs, to act on those desires is wrong.”

 

[fix]

I think they do not view same sex attraction as similar to eye color. The proof is they do not regard SSA as we regard drug addiction, violent temper, or hyper-sexuality among heterosexuals. They want us to regard it differently.

No one would defend somelone’s right to beat someone else senseless, to cheat on his wife, or to take drugs. Quite the contrary – we would say to such people, “It doesn’t matter how strong your desire is to beat someone, cheat on your wife, or take drugs, to act on those desires is wrong.”

I think we are talking past each other. My contention is many people mistakenly believe same sex attraction should be viewed as normal, but slightly different. They recoil when we compare it to wife beating, or alcoholism. They want it viewed as acceptable because no one is “hurt”.

In order to see it as a significant negative deviation from a God-given norm one must first accept what the norm is.

 

[catsrus]

originally posted by vern humphrey
he gentleman was married and left his wife and children for his male lover. Does anyone believe he wouild be defended if he left his wife and children for a female lover?

Very good point and no, of course not.
Also, just as an aside, this so called “bishop” is no gentleman. Just some seriously deluded man.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Very good point and no, of course not.
Also, just as an aside, this so called “bishop” is no gentleman. Just some seriously deluded man.

Sadly, he is not the only deluded person in this sorry affair – as his ordination and the defense of his ordination show.

Catholics have been accused of rejoicing over this disaster that has overtaken the Episcopal Church, but even though I’ve helped former Episcopalians through RCIA, I take no pleasure in contemplating what has happened to their former church.

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

And God established His Church to guide men in what is moral and just. The Church, through its Magisterium, says homosexual acts are inherently disordered.

Hi Vern,
I think that none of us will deny that for a normal person, gay behaviour is disordered. However, this is a relative matter. Gay behavior for gays is perfectly natural. It only seems to be disordered by straight standards, and such judgement is inappropriate, as would be any attempt to force a gay to lead a straight life, or form a relationship with a straight person.
That the intimate actions of gay persons is disordered does not per se mean it is sinful. Is the flailing of an epileptic, fitting sinful? It is certainly disordered.

And the “ignorant people” you speak of? That would be the Catholic Church?

I believe that at the time of this judgement, the church was unaware of the biological basis of male and female psyche, and further were unaware of errors in gender differentiation. This is a form of ignorance, though it is not as such culpable.
What is culpable ignorance is the stonewall refusal to accept a true, that which is blatently obvious, and well proven.
There are none so blind as them who will not see.

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

I am wondering why you single out this one condition and claim it is unnatural to attempt to correct or propose that the behavior not be acted on? Which other conditions do you apply this reasoning to?

If only God may judge how is that you claim that?

Because Our Lord, as reported in the Gospels, tells us so.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Hi Vern,
I think that none of us will deny that for a normal person, gay behaviour is disordered.

You seem to be saying the Church’s position is, “It’s wrong for straights to have homosexual relations, but okay for gays.”

That’s not what the Church says. From the Catechism:

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. **Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.” 142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved. **
2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

(my emphasis.)

However, this is a relative matter. Gay behavior for gays is perfectly natural.

Just as binge drinking is perfectly “natural” for an alcoholic, taking drugs for a drug addict, or violence for a person with a high temper. That doesn’t make them right.

It only seems to be disordered by straight standards, and such judgement is inappropriate, as would be any attempt to force a gay to lead a straight life, or form a relationship with a straight person.

No, homosexual acts are disordered by Catholic standards.

That the intimate actions of gay persons is disordered does not per se mean it is sinful. Is the flailing of an epileptic, fitting sinful? It is certainly disordered.

Homosexuality is not epilepsy.

I believe that at the time of this judgement, the church was unaware of the biological basis of male and female psyche, and further were unaware of errors in gender differentiation. This is a form of ignorance, though it is not as such culpable.

The actual words I quoted above were written by Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI.) He wrote them after long study and prayer.

What is culpable ignorance is the stonewall refusal to accept a true, that which is blatently obvious, and well proven.
There are none so blind as them who will not see.

Attack the Church and the Pope all you want. The Magisterium has spoken.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Because Our Lord, as reported in the Gospels, tells us so.

Can you give me the specific verse where Our Lord says homosexual relations are morally acceptable?

 

[fathertom]

If it comes to a debate, how to I convince him that homosexuality is wrong?

Drop your pants, find the nearest woman, and start having sex with her. Trust me, it works. One of my friends was gay and I converted him.

 

[fix]

Because Our Lord, as reported in the Gospels, tells us so.

Why do you believe the Gospel?

 

[fix]

I believe that at the time of this judgement, the church was unaware of the biological basis of male and female psyche, and further were unaware of errors in gender differentiation. This is a form of ignorance, though it is not as such culpable.
What is culpable ignorance is the stonewall refusal to accept a true, that which is blatently obvious, and well proven.
There are none so blind as them who will not see.

So, the authority in moral issues is science? If science claims it is “normal” that some are cannibals would that justify breaking the natural moral law?

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

You seem to be saying the Church’s position is, “It’s wrong for straights to have homosexual relations, but okay for gays.”

That’s not what the Church says. From the Catechism:

(my emphasis.)

That is not what I was saying. My meaning was: it is normal to take up a pen and write with your right hand. However, to a person with a laterally disordered brain, ie left-handed, sinister if you like, it is normal for that perso to use the left.

Just as binge drinking is perfectly “natural” for an alcoholic, taking drugs for a drug addict, or violence for a person with a high temper. That doesn’t make them right.

Come on Vern, you do not have to stoop to that level of ridicule: it only ridicules you.
It was not all that long ago that left-handers were burned at the stake. Left-handedness is no less a disorder than SSA.

No, homosexual acts are disordered by Catholic standards.

I have accepted that.

Homosexuality is not epilepsy.

That is not what I was claiming. I was merely stating the obvious, that disorderedness was not necessarily sinful.

The actual words I quoted above were written by Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI.) He wrote them after long study and prayer.

I accept that this is his honest and prayerful opinion, and I impute no wrong against him.

Attack the Church and the Pope all you want. The Magisterium has spoken.

I am not attacking the Church, nor either the Pope.
I am suggesting that the judgement they have come to was based on incomplete evidence, as much of this knowledge is relatively new.
My assertion is that; provided that the disordered behaviour, resulting from their disordered psyches, is kept within the bounds of the inner society of those with likewise disordered psyches, then no harm is done, so if there be sin, then it is venial.
But the bottom line is;
provided no harm is done, judgement should be left to GOD.