T
tjm190
Guest
If we assume that at least some of the tax breaks given to married couples are to incentive them to raise/have children, then biology is relevant.
- Status
S
surritter
Guest
It has nothing at all to do with biology? So what are the two individuals doing – playing checkers? Geeeez.
Here’s the reality – sexuality has two NATURAL purposes (notice this has nothing to do with religion):
- Expression of love
- Procreation
Z
Zatzat
Guest
Now I’m confused.
I thought the Catholic Church accepted that homosexuals exist and that they are called to chaste living?
If that’s the case, then how could a Catholic claim that homosexuals aren’t part of Gods plan?
Z
Zatzat
Guest
Homosexuals can express love through sex, just as heterosexuals.
You forgot a third reason for sex…
Pleasure.
Expressing love and experiencing pleasure…just like infertile heterosexuals or heterosexuals that choose to remain childless. So, there ya go…
S
surritter
Guest
You seem to be confusing the term “homosexual tendency” with “homosexual acts.” Persons with homosexual tendencies are certainly part of God’s family, despite the aberration they suffer from (which may be chosen or not; that’s irrelevant to this discussion).Now I’m confused.
I thought the Catholic Church accepted that homosexuals exist and that they are called to chaste living?
If that’s the case, then how could a Catholic claim that homosexuals aren’t part of Gods plan?
But God obviously did not design two people of the same sex to go together in the sexual act. Thus, those individuals are indeed called to chaste living. And by definition, chaste living means that homosexual “marriage” is not part of their picture, right?
An aside: by your logic, if I have an inkling to perform sexual acts with any creature – even an animal – you would have me think that this is part of God’s plan. But because of our fallen nature, we often suffer from things (chosen or handed to us) which we must overcome in order to fulfill God’s true plan, which is revealed in nature and the message of Jesus.
K
kage_ar
Guest
No disorder, no illness, no deformity, no sickness, no sin is part of God’s plan. They are all result of original sin.Now I’m confused.
I thought the Catholic Church accepted that homosexuals exist and that they are called to chaste living?
If that’s the case, then how could a Catholic claim that homosexuals aren’t part of Gods plan?
One accepts people who have many disorders and deformities and illnesses as precious creations, that does not make the disorder a good thing. It is a sad cross to bear.
S
surritter
Guest
No need for the snark; that’s merely a sign of someone who is losing composure in the face of truth.
True, pleasure is the impetus which usually draws people together. But it is not what we would refer to as an end regarding the sex act. The two ends which I mentioned before (and hey we can include pleasure if you’d like) have a design that make them inextricably linked. So to willfully partake of one of these ends when its partner is designed out of the equation is the problem.
And you mention that homosexuals can express love through sex, but again, that shuts out the part where such as expression is – BY DESIGN – connected with the procreative element.
Honestly, do you really think it’s a coincidence that the sexual act is somehow related to babies?
S
StillWondering
Guest
There are a lot of good advice here already about what to say and how to handle it yourself. I just want to re-emphasize that depending on the maturity level of the person your friend with, even if you are the most charming speaker, you can still “sound” arrogant and judgmental. And it might be the case that no matter how kind you are, you might not be able to change your friend’s mind. This is just bad case scenarios. People, generally, take time to change.
Think about after the potential marriage in the spirit of “plan for the worst, hope for the best.” If you can’t change her mind, you can still stay in contact. She shared her life, so she may feel she can connect with you more later. So you could also talk to her later if you can’t convince her now. Give it time when other choices are not possible. Remember, the marriage is not a valid marriage and if she has not been living chastely before, her sexual life has not changed. Also, never forget to talk to Christ about this.
Think about after the potential marriage in the spirit of “plan for the worst, hope for the best.” If you can’t change her mind, you can still stay in contact. She shared her life, so she may feel she can connect with you more later. So you could also talk to her later if you can’t convince her now. Give it time when other choices are not possible. Remember, the marriage is not a valid marriage and if she has not been living chastely before, her sexual life has not changed. Also, never forget to talk to Christ about this.
K
KKendra
Guest
Thank you to all of you who kindly replied my post and gave me advise as to how approach my friend on this issue. It’s interesting to see the variety of ideas, and I think I got a good idea of how to respond. I wasn’t expecting to find so many people advising me on doing nothing, on accepting her choices, and what’s worse, comparing her “marriage” to that of a man and a woman as if it was the same thing. Interesting to see that people who approve homosexuality, come to a Catholic forum, knowing the stands of the Church on it. I wonder why…
Anyway, thanks to all of you. I will post later my friend’s reply to my email.
Anyway, thanks to all of you. I will post later my friend’s reply to my email.
P
PassingThru
Guest
Eh, so what did you want people to say? Did you not want to know that, most likely, if you approach her with the same ideas you originally posted, your friend will strongly reject you? If you use quotes around her “marriage” and feel she needs to be “corrected” she will ask you to leave? What do you want to hear?
S
Smber2c
Guest
I was going to write are response of how would answer her, but this sums it up.
I would emphasise the “Offer the explain when, then end the letter” because whatever explaination of Catholic thought that you could provide in a letter would be very simple and subject to being read in a very negative hurful tone. Less words are better than more at that point in such a letter.
For most people getting such a letter would either end the relationship or elicit a “how dare you” letter. I don’t know this person, but those seem the 2 most likely response (non-responses) you would get - hopefully instead she’ll respond asking to talk.
P
Podo2005
Guest
It is possible to tell someone what they are doing is wrong without sounding arrogant…you just need to know how to do it… pray about it, ask the Holy Spirit to help you…
P
Podo2005
Guest
Catholics don’t approve of homosexuality because homosexuality is a disorder (and homosexual acts are gravely sinful)(Read the Catechism of the Catholic Church #2357, Genesis 19:1-29 Romans 1:24-27, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10,1 Timothy 1:10) That being said the Church also teaches that we should be respectful, sensitive & compassionate to those who struggle with this disorder (CCC#2358), but that does NOT mean we should go around saying that homosexuality/ homosexual acts are ok, “good” or “natural” because that is a lie. It would be a grave sin for us catholics to lead those who struggle with this disorder into error/deadly sin…(read Matthew 18:6)…
B
baylee
Guest
Please post your email as well as your friend’s reply (that is if she replies).
B
Betterave
Guest
No, objectively sinful. But it’s true that the reason it’s objectively sinful is not “just because the church believes it,” so you’re partly right, in a wrong-headed kind of way!
H
hellopeople
Guest
So how is it objectively sinful?
S
surritter
Guest
Because it distorts the nature of the sex act.
Perhaps an analogy will help. Consider another bodily function, that of eating. Like sex, food also has two inseparable aspects: the pleasure of enjoying the taste, and also the nutritional value to the body. Isn’t it wrong for a young lady (or man) to eat a wonderful meal but then throw it up? Most people see the problem with that – she has intentionally circumvented one aspect of God’s design for what a meal should be.
So it is with sex. This is why Catholics see masturbation, homosexual acts, and artificial contraception as objectively sinful. Not because we’re prudes or because we insist on population growth, but because these actions divorce the practical aspect from the pleasurable aspect, and that is contrary to nature’s design.
And the term “objectively” merely indicates that we are talking about the nature of these acts, apart from the guilt of an individual person. Any personal guilt hinges on other things such as their knowledge of the act and how much consent they have when engaging in the act. But that’s a separate discussion about the subjective nature of those acts.
O
OraLabora
Guest
Please don’t.
Why betray her trust as well? I’m sure she replied to you expecting that her words were a private communication between the two of you.
This whole thread of Catholic busybodies trying to interfere with someone’s sex life, disordered or not, makes me physically sick.
Whatever happened to “let he who is without sin cast the first stone”???
Pharisees!!!
H
hellopeople
Guest
Great point.
B
baylee
Guest
Once again, a good point. I know I didn’t ask her to not post her friend’s email, but my post was really meant to focus on KKendra’s email. In other words, if she’s willing to post/divulge her friend’s email, she should offer up what she said to her. What’s fair is fair.
As for your call of “Pharisees”, I’m seeing way too much of that lately on these forums and I have no interest in being that kind of Catholic…even if that means I’m not being the “right kind of Catholic” in their eyes. The attitude in here is very much like the Pharisees…can’t you see them calling themselves the “true Jews”?
- Status