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

[SilverLight]

I’ve never heard it said that it is Church teaching that non-Catholic married couples are living in sin. To say that same-sex marriage is a fiction is one thing, but the reality is same-sex marriage is now legally recognized in the United States.

This is true yes indeed it is now seen as legal.

 

[edwest2]

I’m making a distinction between the attraction, or inclination, and sexual activity. This is an all-important distinction, of course, and is made by the Roman Catholic and a number of other churches. All single persons are called to celibacy and since same sex “marriage” is a fiction, there can be no sexual relations between people of the same sex, regardless of whether or not someone is “born homosexual.”

You might notice I refuse to use the term, “gay.” That is because it is a word that has been co-opted by the homosexual community to make sodomy seem like a happy, carefree, thing. I also only acknowledge the rainbow as a sign of God’s covenant with Noah and his descendants, nothing else.

Each one of us chooses to act or not to act on a certain inclination, sexual or otherwise.

Take alcoholism. There appears to be some genetic link but this is still early stage research. Now, of course, a person who may be prone to alcohol dependence should stay away from alcohol. It’s still a choice. I’m making no direct or indirect association with the topic and alcohol dependence.

sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/03/150324132226.htm

Ed

 

[Thomas_White]

Each one of us chooses to act or not to act on a certain inclination, sexual or otherwise.

Take alcoholism. There appears to be some genetic link but this is still early stage research. Now, of course, a person who may be prone to alcohol dependence should stay away from alcohol. It’s still a choice. I’m making no direct or indirect association with the topic and alcohol dependence.

sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/03/150324132226.htm

Ed

Yes. Even if there proves to be a genetic link, it remains the misuse of what also has a good purpose that is sinful. This is true whether it be sexual morality, the chemicals in a contraceptive pill or alcohol. These are not things that are inherently evil in themselves. It is their misuse that is sinful. And we all know the teachings of the Church concerning not sexual orientation but homosexual activity.

 

[Faithdancer]

I’ve never heard it said that it is Church teaching that non-Catholic married couples are living in sin. To say that same-sex marriage is a fiction is one thing, but the reality is same-sex marriage is now legally recognized in the United States.

That is a misuse of the word, “marriage.” But I generally use the term “holy matrimony” to refer to the real thing.

 

[Memaw]

I believe some people can be born gay. Do I have evidence? No but I know there are a few people in my family that are. This is what I and a few others I know believe from witnessing things. I have no proof to say what I believe can be called correct though. You believe what you want and I will believe what I want. I do not judge you for anything you believe in. Now please have a nice day.

Just because you “believe” it doesn’t make it so. God doesn’t call something we are “born” with a sin against nature. God Bless, Memaw

 

[HelenRose]

If man is born a sinner, than it is possible for a man to be born gay…

Your thoughts???

My thought is if a person is “born” with same sex attraction he or she is no more no less born a sinner than any one else. It is just as sinful for a married man and woman to use artificial contraception while engaging in sex as it is for to people of the same sex to engage in sex. And for the same reason. The sexual act must be open to life.

 

[NovusFidem]

I’ve never heard it said that it is Church teaching that non-Catholic married couples are living in sin. To say that same-sex marriage is a fiction is one thing, but the reality is same-sex marriage is now legally recognized in the United States.

You are right on that, but a distinction should be made as to what the Church considers “marriage” and what the State considers “marriage”, just so others don’t confuse this.

Silly logic to make this easy: When the Church says apple, it means “round red fruit”. When the State says apple, it means simply “fruit”.

The Church considers marriage by other religions as valid, as it fulfills the precept of marriage:

Can. 1055 §1. The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life and which is ordered by its nature to the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring, has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament between the baptized.

§2. For this reason, a valid matrimonial contract cannot exist between the baptized without it being by that fact a sacrament.

The State definition of marriage, however, does not fall under this definition. So, while non-Catholic marriage is not sinful, SS marriage (or, more precisely, what happen within it) still is.

For the Church, marriage is not simply “fruit” = union of two persons. It is “round red fruit” = union of a man and woman ordered towards a certain goal.

In a nutshell: the State recognizing SS marriage does not mean the Church considers those unions as valid sacramental marriages.

I blame society for all this confusion

 

[Memaw]

This is true yes indeed it is now seen as legal.

Being made “legal” does NOT make it right. No more than making abortion legal made it right. Look where that’s led to. God have Mercy on us as a nation. we cannot tramp on God’s laws and get by with it. We will have to pay the price some day. God Bless, Memaw

 

[NovusFidem]

Just because you “believe” it doesn’t make it so. God doesn’t call something we are “born” with a sin against nature. God Bless, Memaw

The Church’s position is that the SS inclination is disordered, but not a sin by itself.

You can compare this SS attraction with anger - both can and probably have biological origin (too little testosterone on man and too much on woman for SS attraction, and too much testosterone on man for anger issues, for example). It is not a sin to feel your pressure rising when anger is coming, but it is a sin to act on that anger (both in thought and action). Same for the attraction - just because I prefer the same gender as mine, doesn’t mean I have to pursue a SS relationship, or indulge thoughts of SS relations (which, by the way, is sinful even when those are heterosexual relations we think about).

So, yeah. A person can claim to “have been born that way”, as this inclination by itself, while disordered, is not a sin. We all have inclination to sin, according to the CCC:

§405 Although it is proper to each individual, original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam’s descendants. It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it, subject to ignorance, suffering and the dominion of death, and inclined to sin - an inclination to evil that is called concupiscence". Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace,** erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle**.

We may not have a SS inclination, but we all have our own sinful tendencies. That is in our nature, so “gay” people might just as well be born that way.

It just makes their path a bit clearer than ours, you know - if marriage is not a possible vocation for them, it is one vocation less for them to discern! (yes, I’m joking here)

 

[edwest2]

You are right on that, but a distinction should be made as to what the Church considers “marriage” and what the State considers “marriage”, just so others don’t confuse this.

Silly logic to make this easy: When the Church says apple, it means “round red fruit”. When the State says apple, it means simply “fruit”.

The Church considers marriage by other religions as valid, as it fulfills the precept of marriage:

The State definition of marriage, however, does not fall under this definition. So, while non-Catholic marriage is not sinful, SS marriage (or, more precisely, what happen within it) still is.

For the Church, marriage is not simply “fruit” = union of two persons. It is “round red fruit” = union of a man and woman ordered towards a certain goal.

In a nutshell: the State recognizing SS marriage does not mean the Church considers those unions as valid sacramental marriages.

I blame society for all this confusion

I blame the media for spreading this to the masses. This was all carefully planned and orchestrated. It did not happen by chance.

Ed

 

[edwest2]

Being made “legal” does NOT make it right. No more than making abortion legal made it right. Look where that’s led to. God have Mercy on us as a nation. we cannot tramp on God’s laws and get by with it. We will have to pay the price some day. God Bless, Memaw

Or “No-Fault Divorce” as opposed to divorce for cause in each case.

Ed

 

[Thomas_White]

You are right on that, but a distinction should be made as to what the Church considers “marriage” and what the State considers “marriage”, just so others don’t confuse this.

My point was a bit technical and was in reply to another comment. And I guess when I do respond that way to a comment it is often misunderstood, particularly when it is taken or quoted out of context relative to the original comment. Anyway, my point was that Church teaching is that homosexual activity is in any event sinful, legal marriage or not, and that point really should be understandable if my reply is taken in context to the original comment. I will try to do better as this misunderstanding seems to often occur.

Suffice it to say, I am a cradle Catholic and now seventy years old. I guess I tend to think that is automatically understood, but of course it really isn’t. I do not question Church doctrine but see no harm in freely discussing ideas.

 

[NovusFidem]

My point was a bit technical and was in reply to another comment. And I guess when I do respond that way to a comment it is often misunderstood, particularly when it is taken or quoted out of context relative to the original comment. Anyway, my point was that Church teaching is that homosexual activity is in any event sinful, legal marriage or not, and that point really should be understandable if my reply is taken in context to the original comment. I will try to do better as this misunderstanding seems to often occur.

Suffice it to say, I am a cradle Catholic and now seventy years old. I guess I tend to think that is automatically understood, but of course it really isn’t. I do not question Church doctrine but see no harm in freely discussing ideas.

Don’t worry, I actually understood your point! As I said, I just wanted to make the distinction clear so **others **wouldn’t confuse it

 

[Elizium23]

I’m making a distinction between the attraction, or inclination, and sexual activity. This is an all-important distinction, of course, and is made by the Roman Catholic and a number of other churches. All single persons are called to celibacy and since same sex “marriage” is a fiction, there can be no sexual relations between people of the same sex, regardless of whether or not someone is “born homosexual.”

All people, whether single, married, religious or in Holy Orders, are called to chastity. Only some are called to celibacy.

Celibacy = being unmarried
Chastity = using sex only for its intended purposes

 

[SilverLight]

My thought is if a person is “born” with same sex attraction he or she is no more no less born a sinner than any one else. It is just as sinful for a married man and woman to use artificial contraception while engaging in sex as it is for to people of the same sex to engage in sex. And for the same reason. The sexual act must be open to life.

I personally have no problem if someone uses contraception though that is their choice and it is being safe.

 

[SilverLight]

Being made “legal” does NOT make it right. No more than making abortion legal made it right. Look where that’s led to. God have Mercy on us as a nation. we cannot tramp on God’s laws and get by with it. We will have to pay the price some day. God Bless, Memaw

No one said it made it right however not everyone believes in the same thing and they are entitled to live how they choose. It may not be right according to what yours or others views are but that is fine. Making people feel bad for how they choose to live seems wrong to me personally.

 

[Memaw]

No one said it made it right however not everyone believes in the same thing and they are entitled to live how they choose. It may not be right according to what yours or others views are but that is fine. Making people feel bad for how they choose to live seems wrong to me personally.

We are NOT entitled to live how we choose. If I choose to steal your car are you OK with that? WE are to live according to God’s laws and not our own. “Doing our own thing” is getting us into all kinds of trouble. We are ALL supposed to believe according to God’s laws and the teachings of Jesus Christ. That’s real freedom, not the slavery of sin. God Bless, Memaw

 

[SilverLight]

We are NOT entitled to live how we choose. If I choose to steal your car are you OK with that? WE are to live according to God’s laws and not our own. “Doing our own thing” is getting us into all kinds of trouble. We are ALL supposed to believe according to God’s laws and the teachings of Jesus Christ. That’s real freedom, not the slavery of sin. God Bless, Memaw

That is your view and that is fine. Have a nice day.

 

[Memaw]

That is your view and that is fine. Have a nice day.

Yes and my views are in accord with the teachings of the Catholic Church. God Bless, Memaw

 

[Thorolfr]

We are NOT entitled to live how we choose. If I choose to steal your car are you OK with that? WE are to live according to God’s laws and not our own.

So should those who don’t live according to the teachings of the Catholic Church be treated like someone who steals a car? Should Protestants and Buddhists and people of other faiths all be charged with a crime and put in jail?