The disordered nature of the inclination should not be “sourced” to the Church, but to the body. The body is equipped for an evident purpose, but the individuals inclination is to use those very aspects of the body differently. This cannot be reconciled. Something is amiss.
Yes thank you for your (name removed by moderator)ut, but I prefer to hold discussions with individuals who don’t falsely accuse me of sins. Have a nice day.
From what I saw on the thread you seem to not completely agree with the Church you belong to. If I am correct than that is a sin. If I am wrong and you do actually believe Church teaching and I misinterpreted something you said, than that is not a sin. God bless.
And some people in this thread say that people with SSA should still feel “welcome” in a Catholic church even if they say to us, “but we think that people like you spread disease whereas it is irrelevant to talk about how heterosexuals also spread disease.”
Homosexual actions are not wrong merely because it spreads disease. Just looking at the consequences of an action does not determine the morality of the action. If that were true then the end justifies the means which is contrary to Church teaching. Homosexual action is wrong because it is a grave offense to Almighty God and his plan for human sexuality. Also, just because heterosexuals are doing bad stuff does not mean that homosexual acts are suddenly okay.
To be honest, I don’t know that much about pedophilia or about its cause or causes.
And if you are wrong and I do actually abide and agree with Church teachings, that would make publically accusing me falsely of a rather serious sin what?
Given the number of Catholic posters on this thread who have, in my view, wasted their time trying to correct the OP and a couple of others in their erroneous conclusions about homosexuality and Church teachings, anyone with SSA who reads this thread and comes to the conclusion that Catholics as a whole think they spread disease either a) wanted to come to that conclusion in the first place or b) didn’t actually read this thread.
For the sake of argument let us say that it is innate.
Fortunately for Lutherans, many issues like this are left to what they call the “bound conscience” of individual believers. For Luther, “bound conscience” meant having a conscience bound by scripture. But there are many Bible scholars who don’t think that anything in scripture actually has anything to say about modern gay people. So it all depends on how each Lutheran interprets scripture and in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, some believe that homosexual activity is a sin and some don’t. There is no official position on this issue. Lutherans don’t rely on “natural law” which is a philosophical construct invented by humans.
I was not sure what you were trying to imply in some of the stuff you said so if I falsely accused you I am sorry. Putting that laughing emoticon when someone said Church teaching was being undermined concerned me. I am sorry if I interpreted things wrong, if I did I made a mistake.
Surely it is disconcerting that there is Scriptural support for the Union of a man and a woman, but not for man and man, or woman and woman?
Then maybe you should have asked me for clarification before declaring judgment upon me. I used the
because its clear that Thor isn’t trying to undermine the faith. He/she is non-Catholic and approaches and comments on subjects such as this as a non-Catholic would- i.e. not everything he/she says is going to be in agreement with the teachings of the Church. I also used it because the poster who accused Thor of undermining the faith has earlier in this thread declared he wasn’t talking about morals (rather hard to accuse someone of undermining the faith in a discussion that the person doing the accusing has declared not to actually be about the faith) in regards to homosexuality being harmful; and if you review his posts you’ll find that he has all but publically declared that having SSA is sinful which isn’t what the Church actually teaches.LOL xD Yet they seem willing enough to rely on the Bible, which was also written by humans…the irony…
Again, I apologize when I first saw it I misread it and I thought you said his previous post. I thought you were the one that Catholic13 said I am reporting you to and then that was your response. Sorry for the accusation.Then maybe you should have asked me for clarification before declaring judgment upon me. I used the
How are modern homosexuals different?
No!
There’s some sort of moral difference between actions taken against a homosexual woman and actions taken against a heterosexual women?
