How can people say homosexuality doesn't hurt anyone

[Zoltan_Cobalt]

Yes, thank you. Now perhaps you’ll answer my question? Or did you realize that actually answering my question correctly (which would be that it’s the sexual act itself, such as anal sex, and not the gender of the actors that is the factor in the likelihood of STD transfer) you’d have to invalidate part of your argument?

Ok, let’s see…you asked:

Homosexual acts, or sexual acts that are more common among male homosexuals?

That in itself was a little obtuse but I answered it as I thought fit. If you knew the answer why did you ask it?

Anyway please clarify the question and I will either agree with your answer of show you why you are wrong.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

Ok, let’s see…you asked:

That in itself was a little obtuse but I answered it as I thought fit. If you knew the answer why did you ask it?

Anyway please clarify the question and I will either agree with your answer of show you why you are wrong.

You’re assuming that it’s the sexual orientation of the actors that increase the risk of spreading STDs and not the act itself. The fact that the spreading of STDs among lesbians is lower than among heterosexuals and homosexual men should be an indicator to you that the acts themselves are the cause of the higher risk of spreading STDs than the sexual orientation of the actors. If the spreading of STDs was because of homosexuality, then we’d see both homosexual men and women having a higher rate of STD transfer than heterosexuals.

 

[Thorolfr]

Where did the Pope say we must welcome their sin with respect and sensitivity?

Do you think it would sound respectful and sensitive to tell a person with SSA, "You are welcome in our church even though we think that people like you are disgusting and depraved and spread disease. But please, come in and feel welcome!

 

[Zoltan_Cobalt]

So your thoughts on this aren’t actually based in Church teachings (the actor of an immoral act is responsible for the act, not the victim of it). Good to know.

Come on oldcatholicguy, we have discussed things before. You know that I argue from a secular view…for the sake of all the non-Catholics involved in the discussion.

I don’t need an organized religion or a Magisterium to convince me that homosexuality is harmful.

 

[Zoltan_Cobalt]

Do you think it would sound respectful and sensitive to tell a person with SSA, "You are welcome in our church even though we think that people like you are disgusting and depraved and spread disease. But please, come in and feel welcome!

I would leave out “disgusting” …that would be unkind.

 

[Catholic13]

Do you think it would sound respectful and sensitive to tell a person with SSA, "You are welcome in our church even though we think that people like you are disgusting and depraved and spread disease. But please, come in and feel welcome!

Who in this thread has said they are disgusting and depraved?

 

[Ositokc]

Come on oldcatholicguy, we have discussed things before. You know that I argue from a secular view…for the sake of all the non-Catholics involved in the discussion.

I don’t need an organized religion or a Magisterium to convince me that homosexuality is harmful.

So how about trying to convince myself, and the millions like me who do not believe homosexuality is harmful? Could you please elaborate exactly how it is harmful?

I don’t need an organized religion or a Magisterium to convince me that your and Catholic13’s ridiculous and hateful claims are actually what is doing the harm here.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

Come on oldcatholicguy, we have discussed things before. You know that I argue from a secular view…for the sake of all the non-Catholics involved in the discussion.

I don’t need an organized religion or a Magisterium to convince me that homosexuality is harmful.

Well first, homosexuality being harmful or not has nothing to do with your apparent claim that homosexuals are responsible for any immoral acts inflicted upon them simply because they are homosexual. Second, you’re assuming that non-Catholics agree with you on your “it’s the victim’s fault” stance in this matter.

 

[Thorolfr]

Who in this thread has said they are disgusting and depraved?

Those sentiments drip off of every post you make…

 

[Zoltan_Cobalt]

You’re assuming that it’s the sexual orientation of the actors that increase the risk of spreading STDs and not the act itself. The fact that the spreading of STDs among lesbians is lower than among heterosexuals and homosexual men should be an indicator to you that the acts themselves are the cause of the higher risk of spreading STDs than the sexual orientation of the actors.

OK, we have “the act” and we have “the actors”. The act is simply unnatural. So the actors are engaging in an unnatural act. Since these actors ONLY engage in that particular unnatural act…the act and the actors cannot be separated. The act, as well as the actors, increase the risk of spreading STDs

If the spreading of STDs was because of homosexuality, then we’d see both homosexual men and women having a higher rate of STD transfer than heterosexuals.

Possibly.

But lesbians are not nearly as promiscuous as male homosexuals. Therefore it is understandable that they would have a lower rate of STD transfer.

 

[Ositokc]

It seems the biggest fail of this thread is that from its very inception it is
trying to prove something derogatory and hateful.

It’s endgame: trying to make a sweeping hateful generalization about homosexuality, in the guise of being righteous or actually good. This is what hurts society and the world at large.

Trying to justify that hate in the name of God. Now that’s truly disgusting.

 

[kenmiller]

Another example of an argument with no evidential basis.

Why can’t we just use the Church’s defense of Her teaching again? Is that not sufficient? Why do people feel the need to go above and beyond Her teaching into pseudoscience and ridiculous threads like this?

Personally, I will stick to the Church’s teaching on the subject.

The church teaching is that homosexuality spreads disease ???

 

[Catholic13]

Those sentiments drip off of every post you make…

I don’t have bad feelings toward homosexuals, not at all. However I do have a problem with those homosexuals who try to twist scripture and undermine Catholic teaching.

I’ll be waiting for to quote anything at all from the bible or Catholic teaching that says we must accept their sin. But I’m not expecting anything besides this. youtube.com/watch?v=K8E_zMLCRNg

 

[Ositokc]

I don’t have bad feelings toward homosexuals, not at all. However I do have a problem with those homosexuals who try to twist scripture and undermine Catholic teaching.

I’ll be waiting for to quote anything at all from the bible or Catholic teaching that says we must accept their sin. But I’m not expecting anything besides this. youtube.com/watch?v=K8E_zMLCRNg

And I have a bigger problem with those “Catholics” like yourself who try to twist scripture and undermine basic human dignity and common sense.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

OK, we have “the act” and we have “the actors”. The act is simply unnatural. So the actors are engaging in an unnatural act. Since these actors ONLY engage in that particular unnatural act…the act and the actors cannot be separated. The act, as well as the actors, increase the risk of spreading STDs

Possibly.

But lesbians are not nearly as promiscuous as male homosexuals. Therefore it is understandable that they would have a lower rate of STD transfer.

If the actors can’t be separated from the act then it would follow that heterosexual usage of anal and/or oral sex does not increase the risk of spreading STDs and that celibate homosexuals somehow spread STDs without actually engaging in sexual acts.

As for homosexual men being more promiscuous than homosexual women, the same is true for heterosexual men and women. Or are you claiming that promiscuous heterosexual men don’t increase the risk of spreading STDs because they are heterosexual?

 

[oldcatholicguy]

And I have a bigger problem with those “Catholics” like yourself who try to twist scripture and undermine basic human dignity and common sense.

Well if it helps, his silence on the matter of being Catholic is harmful means that he agrees with my claim to that effect.

 

[Zoltan_Cobalt]

So how about trying to convince myself, and the millions like me who do not believe homosexuality is harmful? Could you please elaborate exactly how it is harmful?

You still have not found anything from the CDC to prove me wrong…have you?

If you had accessed the CDC website and looked under “EPIDEMIC IN GAY COMMUNITY” you would have convinced yourself that homosexuality is not only harmful but downright dangerous.

Do your homework and get back to me.

 

[Zoltan_Cobalt]

It seems the biggest fail of this thread is that from its very inception it is
trying to prove something derogatory and hateful.

It’s endgame: trying to make a sweeping hateful generalization about homosexuality, in the guise of being righteous or actually good. This is what hurts society and the world at large.

Trying to justify that hate in the name of God. Now that’s truly disgusting.

Why don’t we turn it around and ask what good has homosexuality done for society?

 

[Bruised_Reed]

OK, we have “the act” and we have “the actors”. The act is simply unnatural. So the actors are engaging in an unnatural act. Since these actors ONLY engage in that particular unnatural act…the act and the actors cannot be separated. The act, as well as the actors, increase the risk of spreading STDs

Possibly.

But lesbians are not nearly as promiscuous as male homosexuals. Therefore it is understandable that they would have a lower rate of STD transfer.

Nope. From here:

(…) Anatomical differences place women at greater risk than men of contracting sexually transmitted infections, and age-related physiological changes in the cervix make risk of infection even higher for adolescent women. Further, the presence of any STI, both those with visible, open sores and those that are invisible and asymptomatic, increases a woman’s risk of contracting HIV. The great disparity in infection rates among women, as well as between men and women, calls attention to the need for new methods of protection, new prevention strategies and further education and information about STIs.

 

[BrassAnkles]

“I/me” statements refer to statements made out of pride in which the speaker takes the central role/active actor. You’re whole “God saved me” comment is really a “I let God save me because I’m such a nice person” comment.

In Mark I a leper was healed and he went about proclaiming what Jesus did for him so we can be assured he talked in the first person.

Also, in the Pauline Epistles St. Paul frequently speaks in the first person about his experiences and what God has done for him and he is one of the most humble apostles.

I recommend you rethink your understanding of pride and use the Bible as your guide.