Institutionalizing Sexually Disordered Relationships as Good?

  • Thread starter Thread starter joshrp
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

joshrp

Guest
Hi,

In my view, the purpose of all government is to promote the general welfare for us and for posterity as it says in the Preamble to the United States Constitution. My whole argument against homosexual “marriage” is that it is innately destructive to the persons involved in it, and to anyone they associate with, such as children they adopt. We should not institutionalize laws that destroy the well being of people. Homosexual behavior destroys the human beings engaged in it. It destroys their souls, it destroys their minds, it destroys their bodies even. Homosexuality destroys personal relationships because it warps ones view of the reciprocal relationship between man and woman, and reduces the persons involved in a relationship to mere objects of sexual pleasure and personal gratification. Homosexual marriage and adoption “rights” are destructive to society. It is not that homosexuals are destroying society. We already destroyed the institution of marriage long before homosexuality became and epidemic of epic proportions. Homosexuality is merely the culmination of a barrage of victories in the cause for the institutionalization of psychosexual diseases. We have become psychotic sex freaks pretty much. It didn’t begin with homosexuality, but this is where it ends. We have reached the end of the line. We have become totally psychotic sex maniacs as a society, and we have a choice either to keep our pants on until we really understand what it means for a man to leave his parents and cleave to his wife and the two shall become one flesh, or we can all turn into a heap of liquid flesh culminating in the transmission of the STD called psychosexual insanity.

Society is psychotic, and we are insittutionalizing psychosis, especially in what we defend as sexual behavior. We have a psychotic fear of human life and reproduction. It’s just a total psyhosis that society is engaged in perpetuating.

It is not just sex that we are psychotic in, but that is the culmination of our collective psychosis. God created man male and female in His own image. The first mention of man in the Bible is this. We need to stop railing against immorality, because it is not immorality that is the problem. It is total psychotic insanity. I started reading Frank Sheed’s book “Theology and Sanity” and over the course of the day I thought about this stuff.

Joshua
 
I agree with you.

I also think the increase in the current fad that is homosexuality is the desire not to be responsible to other people (ie offspring) and materialism (ie less mouths to feed).
All to do with the ME generation.

I also believe these selfish desires aren’t going to change any time soon.
 
chris62 said:
I agree with you.

I also think the increase in the current fad that is homosexuality is the desire not to be responsible to other people (ie offspring) and materialism (ie less mouths to feed).
All to do with the ME generation.

I also believe these selfish desires aren’t going to change any time soon.
Click to expand...
People think they have a “right” to adopt children, like they are pets.
 
chris62 said:
I agree with you.

I also think the increase in the current fad that is homosexuality is the desire not to be responsible to other people (ie offspring) and materialism (ie less mouths to feed).
All to do with the ME generation.

I also believe these selfish desires aren’t going to change any time soon.
Click to expand...
Have you ever considered that they might not realize it is wrong, that they might think they are expressing love? In our society the odds are rather high that no one cogently articulated what is wrong with it.

fad? Homosexuality is endemic to humanity however the expression changes based on the society
joshrp said:
People think they have a “right” to adopt children, like they are pets.
Click to expand...
Wanting children is a rather normal want so if they can’t have children naturally they will try to get children some other way to fill that “need”.
 
Dakota says: Have you ever considered that they might not realize it is wrong, that they might think they are expressing love?

Oh please.
 
chris62 said:
Dakota says: Have you ever considered that they might not realize it is wrong, that they might think they are expressing love?

Oh please.
Click to expand...
I agree with this sentiment. It’s bad enough that people are trying to fuse an ancient code of morality with 21st century armchair psychology and sociology. Let’s not patronize homosexuals by telling them they don’t know any better. I can assure you that they know exactly what they’re doing, and have been fully briefed as to what some people think is wrong with it.
 
I am watching this thread with great interest to learn what the moderators think of these sort of statements.
 
As Catholics, it is correct to judge homosexual acts as objectively wrong, but it is not correct to judge the people themselves and to assume that they commit subjective sins. I think it is particularly unkind to consider them to be psychotic, as suggested.

I agree with what Dakota says: Have you ever considered that they might not realize it is wrong, that they might think they are expressing love?

Homosexuals deserve love, prayers, and if you like pity, from Catholics. They do not deserve derision and judgement. Let God judge them when it’s their turn; let us love them until then, and where possible present the gospel of Christ as best we can, which may include expressing disaproval of their lifestyle if done lovingly.

Let’s always remember what Jesus taught us in Matthew 7: 1-5 “Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye."
 
chris62 said:
Dakota says: Have you ever considered that they might not realize it is wrong, that they might think they are expressing love?

Oh please.
Click to expand...
Eating Playdoh should be self evident as wrong yet how often do we need to tell Kindergarteners that?

Instead of shouting “God hates [censored]” we should show them love and compassion by helping them to understand it is wrong.
 
The way I understand it, the problem with judging other people is that it requires an incredible amount of hubris—this sinful lack of humility that enables one to think that if he were in the shoes of another, he would conduct himself totally differently, when God knows—and other rational humans know—you too would probably think and act in nearly the exact same way were you dealt the exact same cards.

This inability to empathize is rampant on threads about homosexuals on this website.
 
Dakota_Roberts said:
Have you ever considered that they might not realize it is wrong, that they might think they are expressing love? In our society the odds are rather high that no one cogently articulated what is wrong with it.
Click to expand...
This is probably true; most Catholics are ignorant of the basis for the Church’s social teachings, most Protestants are deeply confused voluntarists, and most Muslims are in the pocket of the Democratic establishment anyway. (And of course, most atheists/agnostics/deists are liberals). Who else would explain it to them?

That said, I have personally articulated the basis for the Church’s stance on gay “marriage” on a number of occasions. The result is almost universally a painfully long blank stare; after 10 seconds or so they call me a bigot and the discussion is over.

Which is evidence in support of my hypothesis that most modern liberals are basically autistic, clinically averse to abstraction, and unable to grasp anything transcendental.
 
chris62 said:
Dakota says: Have you ever considered that they might not realize it is wrong, that they might think they are expressing love?

Oh please.
Click to expand...
Dakotas statement i believe is worded wrong. YES they don’t realize that homosexuality is wrong. But perhaps they ARE expressing love. this whole statement of they think they are expressing love implies that because somebody is a homosexual that they are incapable of love. How quick we all are to throw stones.
 
Hokomai said:
I am watching this thread with great interest to learn what the moderators think of these sort of statements.
Click to expand...
From a secular point of view, the statements that have been made can’t be justified. But I don’t think the statements are abusive. And to some degree they are consistent with Catholic teaching.
 
I see Australia, Canada and the USA in the list of locations for those participating in this thread. Josh mentioned the role of secular goverment, specificallly the US government, in the original post.
joshrp said:
In my view, the purpose of all government is to promote the general welfare for us and for posterity as it says in the Preamble to the United States Constitution.
Click to expand...
As both citizens of (more or less) democratic governments and as Catcholics, we are governed first and foremost by the rules of Christ.

Tell us, then, what is your opinion: Is it lawful to pay the census tax to Caesar or not?” Knowing their malice, Jesus said, “Why are you testing me, you hypocrites? Show me the coin that pays the census tax.” Then they handed him the Roman coin. He said to them, “Whose image is this and whose inscription?” They replied, “Caesar’s.” At that he said to them, “Then repay to Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God what belongs to God.” (Matthew 22:17-21)

In asking Jesus about paying the census tax, the Pharisees (Jews) and Herodians (Romans) try to trap Jesus. They are effectively asking, “Are you for Rome or Israel?” Jesus is in big trouble if he answers either way. If he is says it is lawful to pay the tax, the Pharisees bring charges against him for breaking the mosaic law against paying tribute to a man who claims to be God, the Roman emperor, and he goes on trial before the Sanhedrin. If he says it is unlawfu, Herod comes after him for crime against Rome.

Jesus’ answer to the question, "Are you for Rome or for Israel?"is sublime. He says, “I am for God.”

Rendering unto God means righly submitting to his authority on matters of faith and morals. Rendering unto Ceasar means rightly submitting to the authority of secular government when that authority is legitimate. When matters of faith and morals, where God has legitimate authority, are taken up by secular goverments, their decisions must always be enlightened and guided by God’s teaching, primarliy and authoritatively given through his Holy Church. To be blunt, when secular govermnets make laws about marriage, they should be guided by Church teaching - the teaching of God.

But they don’t do that. Secular governments take on the legitimate role of God in matters which are legitimately under God’s authority when they make decisions counter to the teaching of God on matters of faith and morals. Its a mix up of roles.

The Church does not tell the government how to build roads and how to defend the nation but renders unto Ceasar that role which is rightly Ceasars. The government should not tell people what constitutes marriage; that right belongs to God. but it is a mix of up of roles and the government, and the poeple who work in government, render unto themselves what is rightly God’s. They play God.

Homesexual marriage hurts society mainly because it messes with a sacrament. It is government taking on the role of God. I would love for one politician, on either side, to say, “As your next president, every single decision I make will be enlightened and guided by God’s teaching.” I would vote for that guy in a heartbeat.

-Tim-
 
Society as a whole is becoming more and more psychotic each day. This is not about one person, or a group of people, it is about a dynamic, from the top down. There is essentially little or no cognitive creativity and truthful reasoning going on in the world today, except for a few patches here and there, and I’d say much of it occurs in Catholic circles, especially here at CAF. I don’t know exactly the root of this problem, but essentially the problem is psychotic moral insanity, not lack of morals. The cultural paradigm, not necessarily every individual, is based on psychotic reasoning. We are all affected. We have to identify that the paradigm of today’s culture is completely irrational. It is not based on any concept of reality or truthfulness. The paradigm today says that anyone who claims that truth is knowable is a fascist tyrant. And this is what I am railing against, in the context of modern sexual philosophy, that today’s cultural paradigm as a whole is completely psychotic, and as long as any person accepts this paradigm, they become psychotic as well.
 
Dale_M said:
From a secular point of view, the statements that have been made can’t be justified. But I don’t think the statements are abusive. And to some degree they are consistent with Catholic teaching.
Click to expand...
I am sure that similarly consistent statements couched in the same way could be made about Jews, Protestants, SSPX members, bishops and clergy. But they would be quickly removed from CAF. Homosexuals seem to have a particularly unprotected status. Those attacking might like to consider how a homosexual interested in the church would feel after reading this thread.
 
jps23430 said:
Dakota’s statement i believe is worded wrong. YES they don’t realize that homosexuality is wrong. But perhaps they ARE expressing love. this whole statement of they think they are expressing love implies that because somebody is a homosexual that they are incapable of love. How quick we all are to throw stones.
Click to expand...
Yes they might love each other, but homosexual acts are not a valid expression of their love, it is possible for them to love each other chastely.
 
Hokomai said:
I am sure that similarly consistent statements couched in the same way could be made about Jews, Protestants, SSPX members, bishops and clergy. But they would be quickly removed from CAF. Homosexuals seem to have a particularly unprotected status. Those attacking might like to consider how a homosexual interested in the church would feel after reading this thread.
Click to expand...
I don’t think I even mentioned the word “homosexual” in reference to a person. I said “homosexuality” or homosexual behavior as far as I can tell. I refuse to identify anyone as a homosexual, because God does not create anyone to be a homosexual. I refered to homosexuality as a cultural phenomenon, a sexual aesthetic, which is the culmination of a degrading of the meaning of human sexuality.

Perhaps I can change the tone of this thread. Can anyone provide me links to articles or official church documents on this subject. I have a tendency to get hyper intellectual and totally neglect the pastoral aspect of evangelization. So I apologize. Please offer me some charitable but firm material on this subject of sexual ethics. I am not just talking about homosexuality. I am talking about sexually disordered relationships in general.
 
With the greatest respect, I’d suggest going to an airport bookshop and reading some books about influencing people before you embark on any evangalisation based on any good books about church teaching. If you say (as you did in your first post) that homosexuality “reduces the persons involved in a relationship to mere objects of sexual pleasure and personal gratification” you can be certain that no amount of additional Church teaching will assist you in persuading one of these mere objects that you are right. Maybe you could visit a hospice and join the partners of homosexuals dying in supporting them and work up a new line of argument based on what you see these mere objects doing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top