Irrefutable Proof against being born gay?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mr_bamber
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Wow “PassingThru”. That’s pretty harsh. The Catechism says to do none of those things. And based on Holy Scripture and Sacred Tradition, it is the truth and is not inconsistent. Live by it and be happy in this life and the next. Trying to twist it and find holes in scripture to justify a relativistic view on morals can only lead to oblivion. Just sayin’.
Hmmmm

I think you might need to go re-read the tread.

First, I have no issue with the official Church teaching. I did not mention it once. Second, I have not made any claims as to gay morality. Your views are your own. My first real objection is to the idea that people “choose” to be gay. This claim has nothing to do with religion, and I am arguing its merits.

But mainly, what you are missing is someone posted basically that gays should be killed, as it is in the bible. I reacted quite negatively to that kind of rhetoric. I think it is actually quite disturbing that I am the only one who objected. So, if you wish to think that I am harsh by rejecting such language, be my guest.
 
So, I assume you also:

Don’t eat clams, oysters, crabs, lobsters, or shrimp?
Prevent women who gave birth to a son from entering the church for 33 days?
Prevent women who gave birth to a daughter from entering the church for 66 days? (Girls are apparently doubly dirty)
Don’t trim the edges of your hair or beard? (That may be just priests, don’t remember)
Want to burn all priests daughters who engage in premarital sex?

Well, you get the idea. There are far more than this. So, you just said that to not agree to all of this is hypocritical. And yes, these I just listed and many others are “backward and misguided”. Or do you disagree?

Look, my point is that using a quote from Leviticus to rationalize your views on homosexuality is, to me, questionable. I think you are instructed to kill them, if I remember the passage correctly. I don’t think we get those instructions elsewhere in the bible. Someone correct me there if needed. I think people justify that little extra “hatred” with that wonderful instruction to kill. That is all.
If one is a Bible believer then one should do what God tells you to do. The sacrificial Laws were done away at the Cross but not all the other laws. So they should be followed IF one proclaims to be a Christian and believes the Scriptures to be the Word of God. That’s the point I’m making. As for confirmation of the Leviticus injunction, read Paul’s letter to the Romans from verse 18 of Chapter 1 and although he does not spell out the punishment in Leviticus, it leaves you in no doubt on the seriousness of the act.
 
“PassingThru”. My apologies. I was being uncharitable (and did not fully read the thread history). Violence against any person is not to be justified (except as defense of the innocent or in just war). The Catechism itself says the origin of same-sex attraction is not scientifically understood, and compassion should be extended to the special trial of homosexuals (while recognizing that homosexual acts are gravely disordered). People advocating killing gays are seriously wrong. They should love and pray for them and let God’s graces flow. Without love, the law and even good works are empty. God is love.
 
“PassingThru”. My apologies. I was being uncharitable (and did not fully read the thread history). Violence against any person is not to be justified (except as defense of the innocent or in just war). The Catechism itself says the origin of same-sex attraction is not scientifically understood, and compassion should be extended to the special trial of homosexuals (while recognizing that homosexual acts are gravely disordered). People advocating killing gays are seriously wrong. They should love and pray for them and let God’s graces flow. Without love, the law and even good works are empty. God is love.
“People” are not advocating killing gays. “People” are merely pointing out how God, who you say is love, advocated how to deal with them
 
“People” are not advocating killing gays. “People” are merely pointing out how God, who you say is love, advocated how to deal with them
bigot /ˈbɪgət/ [big-uht]
–noun
A person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.
A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices.
The correct use of the term requires the elements of obstinacy, irrationality, and animosity toward those of differing devotion.


See how easy this is? Get mad at Webster, not me. I didn’t say a word.
 
“PassingThru”. My apologies. I was being uncharitable (and did not fully read the thread history). Violence against any person is not to be justified (except as defense of the innocent or in just war). The Catechism itself says the origin of same-sex attraction is not scientifically understood, and compassion should be extended to the special trial of homosexuals (while recognizing that homosexual acts are gravely disordered). People advocating killing gays are seriously wrong. They should love and pray for them and let God’s graces flow. Without love, the law and even good works are empty. God is love.
No apologies needed. I have no disagreements whatsoever with your opinions. I figured you missed what had me so riled up.
 
bigot /ˈbɪgət/ [big-uht]
–noun
A person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.
A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices.
The correct use of the term requires the elements of obstinacy, irrationality, and animosity toward those of differing devotion.


See how easy this is? Get mad at Webster, not me. I didn’t say a word.
You’ve lost the plot PassingThru. What are you getting at by this definition? Calling names is not the best way to carry on a discussion. And what prompted you to go off the rails with this idiotic diatribe?
 
We are not “born gay.” Aren’t we are all pretty much non-sexual until we reach a certain age?

Regardless of whether homosexual or bisexual activity is seen in this animal or that, biology directs us toward heterosexuality–we are literally made for it (i.e., we have certain parts that have are made for procreative sex). This is not to say that one cannot have certain emotional, mental, and even physical characteristics that can lend themselves, along with environmental factors, toward developing same sex attraction. Still, for some the attraction does not feel like a choice, and the Catholic Church acknowledges this. However, a human’s sexuality can be much more fluid than the rigid dichotomy of gay or straight (take, for instance, same sex acts in prison by otherwise heterosexual men and women), and for some, indeed, it is a choice. The American Psychological Association (a LGBT-lifestyle-friendly organization) acknowledges that, though many feel they don’t have a choice, there is no proof of a gay gene or a particular factor that causes homosexuality:

“There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay, or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation.”
 
For example, scientific studies suggest some people are born with a hereditary disposition to alcoholism, but no one would argue someone ought to fulfill these inborn urges by becoming an alcoholic. Alcoholism is not an acceptable “lifestyle” any more than homosexuality is.
Yes, the problem is science cannot tell us what right and wrong are. This is issue not simply a matter of science or genetics. The problem goes to what is health and disease, what is right and what is wrong, which inclinations are ordered toward God and which are not. These are not questions of science or biology.

People want it to be exclusively a matter of genetics in an attempt to justify things.
 
You’ve lost the plot PassingThru. What are you getting at by this definition? Calling names is not the best way to carry on a discussion. And what prompted you to go off the rails with this idiotic diatribe?
OK, I see that you missed the context of that post. Call it an analogy. See, what I was doing was a play on your post. I posted an independent source, implying that I am saying, in this case, you are a bigot. But, I didn’t say it, and actually, I didn’t even mention you at all. So now, in my defense, I can back off and say “hey, I was just communicating what a bigot is, its not my fault you somehow take offense at that”.

And yes, I did get distracted and pulled into this debate willingly. It is not central to the OPs issue. But I somehow get the feeling you forget where this started. Someone posted that this discussion is not being very charitable to those in the gay community. YOU responded that the bible says we are to kill homosexuals. Granted, you are now playing the nice little game of I didn’t say it, God said it. Hence, my little play on you with my bigot definition. You apparently did not connect the dots there. No matter.

Look, you made your thoughts on how you look at homosexuals very clear. I thought it was offensive and not necessary. I can see now why no one else jumped in to point this out. It doesn’t go anywhere.
 
If one is a Bible believer then one should do what God tells you to do. The sacrificial Laws were done away at the Cross but not all the other laws. So they should be followed IF one proclaims to be a Christian and believes the Scriptures to be the Word of God. That’s the point I’m making. As for confirmation of the Leviticus injunction, read Paul’s letter to the Romans from verse 18 of Chapter 1 and although he does not spell out the punishment in Leviticus, it leaves you in no doubt on the seriousness of the act.
St Paul also told us to greet one another with a holy kiss. I keep turning up at Church, and keep not getting kissed. People pick and choose which Scripture to accept. God is not a Heavenly Bellboy.
 
In the field of moral theology, it is completely immaterial whether homosexuals are born that way or become that way after being born. The only important question is whether they CHOSE to be gay. If so, then homosexuality itself is a sin. If they do not chose to be homosexuals, it is not a sin.

However, for Catholics, this question is clearly, indisputably answered in the Catechism:[/QUO

camerong,

358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible.**
They do not choose their homosexual condition; for most of them it is a trial.**** This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

When the catechism states that they do not choose their homosexual condition this does not mean that they were born that way. Some priests on EWTN have said that their is a lot of evidence out their that says that something happens in their early upbringing or environment that causes them to identify and bond more with the opposite sex parent. So if this happens**** they did not choose their trial.****
 
When the catechism states that they do not choose their homosexual condition this does not mean that they were born that way. Some priests on EWTN have said that their is a lot of evidence out their that says that something happens in their early upbringing or environment that causes them to identify and bond more with the opposite sex parent.
Not just priests. Johnette Benkovic hosted just this week-- I think on The Abundant Life – a couple of excellent, learned guests on this very topic. They are also authors. It was an ex-lesbian (now happily married and a mother) and a psychologist of some sort, who has studied the starting point and emergence of homosexuality in the individual, and has found common environmental triggers. It was really a superb program, I thought. The guests were so intelligent, educated, well-read, experienced. I thought that the ex-lesbian was particularly credible and articulate - elucidating for the audience the illusion of orientation which is alternatively a reaction against, and adoption of, societal categories. I was fascinated that her personal experience and perspective confirmed some of my own conclusions from very separate readings (and encounters) than hers.
 
When the catechism states that they do not choose their homosexual condition this does not mean that they were born that way. Some priests on EWTN have said that their is a lot of evidence out their that says that something happens in their early upbringing or environment that causes them to identify and bond more with the opposite sex parent. So if this happens**** they did not choose their trial.****
There is evidence that bonding with the opposite sex parent leads to heterosexual orientation (The myth of Oedopus)

“Jesus answered: Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents; but that the works of God should be made manifest in him” (Jn 9:3)
 
I would like to suggest a good book out there that deals with the subject of homosexuality with care, sensitivity, and clarity . It’s called “Same-Sex Attraction” by John F. Harvey, OSFS, and Gerard V. Bradley. The issue of homosexuality is a complex one and this book addresses all the issues surrounding homesexuality and the homosexual movement.

Hope it’s helpful
 
The one that one of the guests on Abundant Life wrote (discussed above) is called Sexual Authenticity

I wish I could remember the other guest’s (author’s) name and book title.
 
We are not “born gay.” Aren’t we are all pretty much non-sexual until we reach a certain age?

Regardless of whether homosexual or bisexual activity is seen in this animal or that, biology directs us toward heterosexuality–we are literally made for it (i.e., we have certain parts that have are made for procreative sex). This is not to say that one cannot have certain emotional, mental, and even physical characteristics that can lend themselves, along with environmental factors, toward developing same sex attraction. Still, for some the attraction does not feel like a choice, and the Catholic Church acknowledges this. However, a human’s sexuality can be much more fluid than the rigid dichotomy of gay or straight (take, for instance, same sex acts in prison by otherwise heterosexual men and women), and for some, indeed, it is a choice. The American Psychological Association (a LGBT-lifestyle-friendly organization) acknowledges that, though many feel they don’t have a choice, there is no proof of a gay gene or a particular factor that causes homosexuality:

“There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay, or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation.”
Actually our sexual identity can happen very early, some even think in the womb no less. This is becoming a large issue with inter-sex children in that they develop a sexual identity and the parents then decide to pick one for them, it causes all kinds of issue later in life.

Trying to find a “Gay Gene” is impossible, because it does not exist, genetic trait is what most are talking about though. There are to many occurrences of homosexuality in social mammals and birds to not account for it having a biological source.
 
camerong;6263115:
In the field of moral theology, it is completely immaterial whether homosexuals are born that way or become that way after being born. The only important question is whether they CHOSE to be gay. If so, then homosexuality itself is a sin. If they do not chose to be homosexuals, it is not a sin.

However, for Catholics, this question is clearly, indisputably answered in the Catechism:[/QUO

camerong,

358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. They do not choose their homosexual condition; for most of them it is a trial. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

When the catechism states that they do not choose their homosexual condition this does not mean that they were born that way. Some priests on EWTN have said that their is a lot of evidence out their that says that something happens in their early upbringing or environment that causes them to identify and bond more with the opposite sex parent. So if this happens they did not choose their trial.
Can someone show me where they are getting this 2358 from? Both the Vatican and USCCB does not have this language.
[/quote]
 
onmyknees;6280852:
Can someone show me where they are getting this 2358 from? Both the Vatican and USCCB does not have this language.
Catechism of the Catholic Church
Part 3
Life in Christ
Section 2 The Ten Commandments
Chapter 2 “You shall love your neighbour as youself” (Unless he is homosexual)

2357 - (Homosexuality is forbidden)

2358 - (It’s a trial)

2359 - (Homosexuals are called to chastity)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top