If man is born a sinner, than man can be born gay

  • Thread starter Thread starter TruthBearer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Last thing, I find it more than a little odd that the same people that bang us over the head with the idea that gender is a “social construct” profess an ironclad belief in that sexual orientation is immutably rooted in biology.
 
True, it’s the acting on the attraction which counts. Although lustful thoughts can be sinful, a heterosexual is just as likely to commit sin here as a homosexual.
Yes, but isn’t God giving a bigger burden to the person born as a homosexual than to a person born straight. A straight person can lead a pure life, then marry & enjoy sex without sin. A homosexual must be pure and then sin by marrying & after marrying a same sex partner. It doesn’t seem fair to the people born that way…that’s why I don’t believe they are born that way, except people born with both organs which is an abnormality!
 
Yes, but isn’t God giving a bigger burden to the person born as a homosexual than to a person born straight. A straight person can lead a pure life, then marry & enjoy sex without sin. A homosexual must be pure and then sin by marrying & after marrying a same sex partner. It doesn’t seem fair to the people born that way…that’s why I don’t believe they are born that way, except people born with both organs which is an abnormality!
You say that you don’t think that people are born gay because if they were, it wouldn’t seem very fair. But according to Gilbert Herdt, PhD, Executive Director of the National Centers on Sexuality at San Francisco State University, and Martha K. McClintock, PhD, David Lee Shillinglaw Distinguished Service Professor in Psychology at the University of Chicago, stated in their study “The Magical Age of 10,” published in the Dec. 2000 issue of Archives of Sexual Behavior:
Accumulating studies from the United States over the past decade suggest that the development of sexual attraction may commence in middle childhood and achieve individual subjective recognition sometime around the age of 10. As these studies have shown, first same-sex attraction for males and females typically occurs at the mean age of 9.6 for boys and between the ages of 10 and 10.5 for girls.
So do you think that it’s fair to a 10 year old to turn out gay (however that happened) and then be told that he/she must be celibate for the rest of their life? Can a 10 year old be responsible for turning out gay?
 
no one is born guilty of actual sin. all are born in to original sin but original sin is not the same as actual sin.

actual sin is a free choice by an individual human.

as you can see, there is much more involved than merely being born human.

where do preferences like love of art or music or engineering or mathematics originate? they all involve thought preferences just as do sexual desires.

no one is forced to think about engaging in sexual activity. while we do not have total control of all thoughts that might occur to us, we do have total control about whether any thoughts are welcomed or resisted. the difference between temptations and sins are the consent or rejection of the sinful thoughts by a person using their free will.
 
no one is forced to think about engaging in sexual activity. while we do not have total control of all thoughts that might occur to us, we do have total control about whether any thoughts are welcomed or resisted. the difference between temptations and sins are the consent or rejection of the sinful thoughts by a person using their free will.
We might not have total control of our thoughts or our sexual attractions, but some people are lucky to not have many thoughts, preferences or sexual attractions that conflict with the faith in which they were raised. Others, on the other hand, do, and it doesn’t seem very fair that some have it very easy while others (through no fault of their own) have a very difficult time because their sexual attractions and desires conflict with their faith. 🤷
 
Non sequitur?

Being born in the absence of sanctifying grace, and therefore possessing a disordered nature, does not imply that one is hard-wired from the beginning to perform certain sins.

There may be *other *reasons for that last point, but I couldn’t see it being original sin.
But I think the key part of the conversation is, would it matter if one were hard wired to perform a certain sin? It wouldn’t make it right. And it wouldn’t make it unavoidable.

We do know that there is a hereditary component to alcoholism. One can be more predisposed than another. But it does not make it right for him to be an alcoholic. We are called to rise above these challenges.

I know you don’t disagree, at least I assume you don’t. I was just clarifying what I believe to be the point of the conversation.
 
Thorolfr - In time, I predict the moral teaching and position of the church will shift in this regard. Many places are changing their views on same sex marriage, and it is likely that the catholic church will follow suit as it did with slavery.

Just consider how it is finally legal for same-sex couples to celebrate the sacrament of marriage in the United States. Imagine a country banning any of the other sacraments for Catholics. The idea is absurd.

In fact, I think homosexuality will be accepted before divorce.
 
Even if the Catholic Church is open to the Idea, which I seriously doubt, the Church still sees homosexual acts as a sin. That will never change.
Read the Catechism on homosexuality. It is pretty easy on admitting that the origins of homosexuality are not quite known.
 
No, it doesn’t pose any trouble. Science, medicine and Church teaching are all in alignment that there are many conditions the are present from birth. In that regard, homosexuality is no different than a child born blind or with a birth defect.
If homosexuality is biological in some way, what would be the cause of this?

There is an interesting discussion going on in the philosophy thread on how original sin did not disrupt human’s biological order – only the integration and mastery a person is able to have over his body. It seems that the origin many people look to for homosexuality – the Fall/Original sin – is misplaced, as is any inclination to sin due to biological factors.
 
My friend, there are studies that show that – contrary to your *“People are homosexual because circumstances in their life have lead them that way mentally” – *homosexuality does indeed have biological correlations, suggested by birth order, brain structural studies, twin studies, and prenatal hormonal studies.
 
Please give a reference to this statement.

also,

Please define “. . .is open to . . .”.

Have some nice coffee with the cake.
CCC 2357 “Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained.”

Pretty sure the Church does not want another Galileo affair. It is leaving the origins of homosexuality open to the scientists.
 
The Op suggests that a person can claim the defence that they were born that way.

Well the pedophile can claim they were born that way too.
And the rapist who enjoys ‘rough’ sex.
And the greedy person who was born that way and so enjoys taking other people’s stuff.
And the drug addict - etc. etc.
And the liar - etc. etc.

Who am I to judge?
 
The Op suggests that a person can claim the defence that they were born that way.

Well the pedophile can claim they were born that way too.
And the rapist who enjoys ‘rough’ sex.
And the greedy person who was born that way and so enjoys taking other people’s stuff.
And the drug addict - etc. etc.
And the liar - etc. etc.

Who am I to judge?
Being born with biological tendencies to act a certain way does not excuse the sin; it does not give an allowance to do whatever. It would reasonable to conclude that such desires and tendencies would lower culpability compared to someone who did the equivalent act on a whim, out of sheer will.

However, when it comes to homosexual orientation, the homosexual “condition,” “inclination,” or “tendency,” we face something very significant. Human persons are not defined primarily by their sexuality; nevertheless, humans are sexual beings, and our sexuality determines a large part of how we interact and relate to others as well as form relationships. We can look at acts of pedophilia, rape, greed, drug addiction and the like and see that they really are not that comparable to homosexuality – with the exception of the assumption that both are inherently sinful. But if we ignore that for a second and get rid of any slippery slope argument, we see that homosexuality is very different in that it is equivalent to heterosexuality MINUS the ability to procreate. That is it. Gay couples want to love each other mutually, and their homosexual orientation is not just about sexual activity – no more than a straight couple’s sexuality. It is a means and mode of loving and expressing and sharing that love a couple both want to give each other. Whereas those other acts you mention are extremely harmful to another and treat others as objects, gay people want to love in a familial way as much as straight people do.
 
Read the Catechism on homosexuality. It is pretty easy on admitting that the origins of homosexuality are not quite known.
That doesn’t mean the Church is open to it, it means the Church doesn’t know. I think you want the Catholic Church to accept homosexuality as normal when you should know that She can’t.
 
That doesn’t mean the Church is open to it, it means the Church doesn’t know. I think you want the Catholic Church to accept homosexuality as normal when you should know that She can’t.
It is hard to predict the Church’s position on this in the future. Remember for centuries the Church supported slavery, burning witches, etc. But now it is against those things.

Hearing the Pope say things like “Who am I to judge” when asked about homosexuality, is an indication of a potential shift. Although he seems to stick with the oppositional position against same sex marriage, we may be witnessing a Holy See change.

religionnews.com/2015/02/16/gay-catholics-find-new-tone-pope-francis-bishops/
 
Gay couples want to love each other mutually, and their homosexual orientation is not just about sexual activity – no more than a straight couple’s sexuality. It is a means and mode of loving and expressing and sharing that love a couple both want to give each other.
To most people who are against homosexuality, being gay is only about sex. They can hardly bring themselves to admit that there are any redeeming qualities at all to same-sex relationships. That’s why the statement in the midterm report of the Synod on the Family placed there by Cardinal Erdo which said that same-sex unions can also exemplify “mutual aid to the point of sacrifice (that) constitutes a precious support in the life of the partners” was squelched by conservatives and removed from the final report. 🤷
 
My roommate in the Military was gay, I’ve worked with many gay people in the past and still in fact do…
…Everyone of them was as interested in having sex with their “same sex” as a heterosexual is with having sex.

The only thing abnormal about a homosexual is that they are same sex attracted…
…Aside from THAT one thing they are generally no different than a heterosexual.
…Point being: they aren’t sitting around playing checkers with each other.
To most people who are against homosexuality, being gay is only about sex. They can hardly bring themselves to admit that there are any redeeming qualities at all to same-sex relationships. That’s why the statement in the midterm report of the Synod on the Family placed there by Cardinal Erdo which said that same-sex unions can also exemplify “mutual aid to the point of sacrifice (that) constitutes a precious support in the life of the partners” was squelched by conservatives and removed from the final report. 🤷
 
To most people who are against homosexuality, being gay is only about sex. They can hardly bring themselves to admit that there are any redeeming qualities at all to same-sex relationships. That’s why the statement in the midterm report of the Synod on the Family placed there by Cardinal Erdo which said that same-sex unions can also exemplify “mutual aid to the point of sacrifice (that) constitutes a precious support in the life of the partners” was squelched by conservatives and removed from the final report. 🤷
Or maybe that line was removed for the two more obvious reasons 1) it was not part of the Synod discussion that the midterm report was supposed to be a summary of and 2) it created confusion in the wording since it seems a very different description than the disinterested friendships mentioned in the Catechism.
 
It is hard to predict the Church’s position on this in the future. Remember for centuries the Church supported slavery, burning witches, etc. But now it is against those things.

Hearing the Pope say things like “Who am I to judge” when asked about homosexuality, is an indication of a potential shift. Although he seems to stick with the oppositional position against same sex marriage, we may be witnessing a Holy See change.

religionnews.com/2015/02/16/gay-catholics-find-new-tone-pope-francis-bishops/
The Church will not change it’s position on homosexual relations because it’s position comes straight from the Word of God, and in both the Old and New Testaments, and there is no way to interpret the passages for anything other than what they say. They are very clear, but people would like to pretend they don’t exist. Sexuality is not just a cultural development, like slavery and witch burning, which people can correct as they mature as a society and realize it’s evil, it is the very foundation upon which our species exists and survives, and homosexual marriages are not capable of perpetuating the human species. Sex has two purposes, human intimacy( the unitive), which allows for bonding and strong family structures to develop to protect the offspring and the family, and perpetuation of the species; so “marriages” between members of the same sex are not biologically possible. All marriages need to be consummated sexually, and that is not possible with members of the same sex. And it has been so since the beginning of the human species. Anything else is a disordered use of the sexual function of the human body.

However, it is the act, not the person, that is being judged as being sinful. People are persistent in trying to misunderstand this. They hear only what they want to hear. They purposefully misunderstand this in order to promote their agenda. The Pope cannot judge these people–only God is their judge. That is what the Pope means, because it is consistent with Church teaching. We do not judge people, whether Pope or not. We cannot read minds or hearts to ascertain any mitigating circumstances or understanding of the person, so our judgment cannot be truly just. We are called to judge someTHINGS as right or wrong according to what God has decreed, but God judges people. So the Pope is correct in saying “Who am I to judge?” He is not wavering on the issue, he is stating the position of the Church. And that is why you perceive this as him being oppositional to his statement. You have presumed something, and your presumption was in error.

You will never see a change in the position of the Pope or the teaching Magisterium on same sex marriage, despite anyone’s trying to read into what the Pope is saying. The Church, however, has compassion on people struggling with this, they are not to be condemned or discriminated against, but are afforded human dignity, because they are created by God. We are to love them as God loves them, and this applies to all sinners, of which we all can claim to be.
Any sex outside of the bonds of marriage between a man and woman is sinful. The homosexual acts are not considered any worse than adultery (which breaks the marriage covenant, which symbolizes the covenant between God and His people), fornication (sex between two unmarried people) and bestiality. However, right now people are trying to naturalize and normalize homosexual relations, and that is causing it to be the object of more attention.

I hope you can appreciate more the actual position of the Church on the issue.
 
Having a tendency towards stealing is not a sin either. Everyone is attracted to some kind of sin sometime in their life. The more we dwell on it the more we desire it. That goes for materialism, power, fame, jealousy, hatred, etc., etc., etc. God Bless, Memaw
Yes I agree.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top