Is Homosexuality Genetic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter MugenOne
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Corki said:
This is getting off topic but:

As Buffalo said, there are plenty of threads on Galileo. He was punished for disobediance primarily.

As for the second link, it led to a story that could not be read with out a membership. It appeared from the viewable snippet to have been an apology by Brazilian bishops for actions by local priests. Hardly an apology by the Church for or because of Church teaching.
Click to expand...
Really?
Here’s an excerpt from the document published by the Church on march 5 1616

““The view that the sun stands motionless at the center of the universe is foolish, philosophically false, and utterly heretical, because contrary to the Holy Scripture.””
Indeed, the church has apologized for its mistakes as she will probably apologize for the condemnation of homosexuality sometimes in the future.

I give you an useful link abs-cbnnews.com/views-and-analysis/08/08/08/catholic-apologies-moral-and-doctrinal-failures%E2%80%94raul-fabella
 
yngve said:
Really?
Here’s an excerpt from the document published by the Church on march 5 1616

““The view that the sun stands motionless at the center of the universe is foolish, philosophically false, and utterly heretical, because contrary to the Holy Scripture.””
Indeed, the church has apologized for its mistakes as she will probably apologize for the condemnation of homosexuality sometimes in the future.

I give you an useful link abs-cbnnews.com/views-and-analysis/08/08/08/catholic-apologies-moral-and-doctrinal-failures%E2%80%94raul-fabella
Click to expand...
The Pope apologized for the way people were treated by some in the Church. There has never been an apology for any teaching on faith and morals. And you have not produced one yet.
 
fix said:
The Pope apologized for the way people were treated by some in the Church. There has never been an apology for any teaching on faith and morals. And you have not produced one yet.
Click to expand...
Maybe something is wrong with my logic but:
  1. The Church stated in the middle ages that the sun was in the centre of the Universe.
  2. (1) is a matter of faith and morals
  3. Through the 1616 act, the Church condemned Galileo for stating otherwise
  4. The Church has today changed its views (i.e doesn’t believe that the earth is in the centre of the Universe)
So, hasn’t the church changed it’s views on an issue of faith and morality, admitting that the previous view was wrong?
 
fix said:
The Pope apologized for the way people were treated by some in the Church. There has never been an apology for any teaching on faith and morals. And you have not produced one yet.
Click to expand...
The even larger problem is that you actually make a distinction between those things.
 
thewalrus said:
The even larger problem is that you actually make a distinction between those things.
Click to expand...
No, the larger problem is moral relativsim and hedonism.

We all sin, but that does not mean we cannot know what truth is.
 
fix said:
No, the larger problem is moral relativsim and hedonism.

We all sin, but that does not mean we cannot know what truth is.
Click to expand...
There should be no difference between faith and morals and how you treat people. The fact that you made that distinction is quite telling of the invalid basis of your argument. If you want to follow the example of Christ, you should not concern yourself with concepts and theories that represent your fear. You should concern yourself with the Other.
 
thewalrus said:
The even larger problem is that you actually make a distinction between those things.
Click to expand...
Let’s see if I can follow your reasoning. The church was wrong about the earth be in the center of the universe. Therefore the church is wrong about homosexual behavior being sinful.

I would like you to explain the logic of that to me.
 
thewalrus said:
There should be no difference between faith and morals and how you treat people.
Click to expand...
Really? Then who is sinless?
The fact that you made that distinction is quite telling of the invalid basis of your argument. If you want to follow the example of Christ, you should not concern yourself with concepts and theories that represent your fear. You should concern yourself with the Other.
Click to expand...
I concern myself with the truth. That we can know the Truth and still sin does not mean the Truth is invalid. It means humans are weak.
 
estesbob said:
Let’s see if I can follow your reasoning. The church was wrong about the earth be in the center of the universe. Therefore the church is wrong about homosexual behavior being sinful.

I would like you to explain the logic of that to me.
Click to expand...
I can’t explain the logic of that at all but that has more to do with the fact that that has nothing to do with what I’m saying.

I’m speaking of the relationship between theoria and praxis. You consider the latter unimportant. I consider it more important than the former. But just for clarity, I do believe the example you gave is a great example of mistakes the Church has made.
 
fix said:
Really? Then who is sinless?

I concern myself with the truth. That we can know the Truth and still sin does not mean the Truth is invalid. It means humans are weak.
Click to expand...
Of course humans are weak but the Truth lies in its embodiment, not its theory. You’re settling with your theory which does not exhibit faith towards the Other. Christian praxis should be about the Other.
 
estesbob said:
Let’s see if I can follow your reasoning. The church was wrong about the earth be in the center of the universe. Therefore the church is wrong about homosexual behavior being sinful.

I would like you to explain the logic of that to me.
Click to expand...
Yes, First let’s admit that the church WAS wrong about the fact that the earth was in the centre of the Universe.

This is a case when the church WAS wrong about something concerning faith and morals. How’s that for infallibility?

So, if the church was wrong before, she may still be wrong today about certain morality issues. So she might be wrong about homosexuality.
 
yngve said:
Maybe something is wrong with my logic but:
  1. The Church stated in the middle ages that the sun was in the centre of the Universe.
  2. (1) is a matter of faith and morals
  3. Through the 1616 act, the Church condemned Galileo for stating otherwise
  4. The Church has today changed its views (i.e doesn’t believe that the earth is in the centre of the Universe)
So, hasn’t the church changed it’s views on an issue of faith and morality, admitting that the previous view was wrong?
Click to expand...
We now know that Galileo was wrong. The sun is not the center of the universe.
 
yngve said:
Really?
Here’s an excerpt from the document published by the Church on march 5 1616

““The view that the sun stands motionless at the center of the universe is foolish, philosophically false, and utterly heretical, because contrary to the Holy Scripture.””
Indeed, the church has apologized for its mistakes as she will probably apologize for the condemnation of homosexuality sometimes in the future.

I give you an useful link abs-cbnnews.com/views-and-analysis/08/08/08/catholic-apologies-moral-and-doctrinal-failures%E2%80%94raul-fabella
Click to expand...
Where the Church strays from faith and morals to science, it could possibly err. What you suggest is that apologizing for being wrong about science means the Church will “probably” apologize for her moral teaching.

And again, the Church does not condemn homosexuality, only the acts.
 
yngve said:
Heliocentrism means that the sun in in the centre of the solar system not in the centre of the Universe.
Click to expand...
And even in my lifetime, the science shifted from the sun being the center to the sun in revolution around something (or nothing) in the center. So, what? Science changes.
 
Corki said:
Where the Church strays from faith and morals to science, it could possibly err. What you suggest is that apologizing for being wrong about science means the Church will “probably” apologize for her moral teaching.

And again, the Church does not condemn homosexuality, only the acts.
Click to expand...
Making someone believe that the Earth was in the centre on the Universe without any scientific proof is a matter of faith.

And while speaking of homosexuality as seen wrong by the Church, I always refer to homosexual behaviour, not homosexual tendencies.
 
yngve said:
Yes, First let’s admit that the church WAS wrong about the fact that the earth was in the centre of the Universe. And so was Galileo

This is a case when the church WAS wrong about something concerning faith and morals. How’s that for infallibility? No, this is a case when the Church was wrong about something concerning science. The Church claims no infallibility regarding science.

So, if the church was wrong before, she may still be wrong today about certain morality issues. So she might be wrong about homosexuality.
Click to expand...
non sequitur
 
thewalrus said:
I can’t explain the logic of that at all but that has more to do with the fact that that has nothing to do with what I’m saying.

I’m speaking of the relationship between theoria and praxis. You consider the latter unimportant. I consider it more important than the former. But just for clarity, I do believe the example you gave is a great example of mistakes the Church has made.
Click to expand...
Whenever I hear people talk about examples of churches made then invaribly talk about Galileo and/or the Inquisition-neither of which has anything whatsoever to do the moral teachings of the Church. As has been mentioned the Galileo incident is much more complex than people would like to admit. Although the church did teach tha tthe earth was the a center of the universe they were not all that opposed to opposing theories. For instance Copenicus, who first advanced the heliocentric theory of the universe, was a Catholic priest. He published his papers with no problems from the church whatsoever. Galileo had written a paper supporting the heliocentric theory . 20 years before his trial an not only not been chastised but had received an award for his paper. The paper that got him in trouble was issued with the full support of the church , the only caveat being that he had to present both sides of the issue. He presented the theory that the Earth is a center of the universe through their rantings of a character he called Simplitico, a character whose description appeared to be describing the Pope.

As far as this thread goes we need to note that the church has no stance whatsoever as to whether same-sex attraction is genetic or not. The church says that homosexual behavior is a grievous sin regardless. That is why I’m always asking what relevance the allegation that church made scientific mistakes in the past has to do with homosexual behavior being sinful/
 
Corki said:
non sequitur
Click to expand...
No, it was wrong about something concerning Faith. The Church thought, based on the Bible and not on scientific evidence, that the Earth was in the centre of the Universe. Everyone who refused to believe that was treated as a heretic.

So it wasn’t a matter of science but a matter of faith on with the church was wrong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top