Is the Church unkind to “self-identified persons” other than “homosexual persons”?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jjr9
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jjr9

Guest
It seem clear that consensus here is that the Church is correct to accept the “homosexual person”
based on self-identification. Should the Church be even handed and show the same respect to all
types of “self-identified persons”?

Why is only the “homosexual person” recognized by the Church?

God bless
 
There is no such thing as a “homosexual person”. There are people who are sexually attracted to their own gender, but they are still just humans, not “special”. As such they are treated just like EVERYBODY ELSE, sinners in dire need of salvation.

Don’t pander to folk’s delusions and things become much more clear.
What would a “self-identified” person be exactly? Someone who thinks they are a horse?🤷
 
Glomung said:
There is no such thing as a “homosexual person”. There are people who are sexually attracted to their own gender, but they are still just humans, not “special”. As such they are treated just like EVERYBODY ELSE, sinners in dire need of salvation.

Don’t pander to folk’s delusions and things become much more clear.
What would a “self-identified” person be exactly? Someone who thinks they are a horse?🤷
Click to expand...
Well, an alcoholic or an addict might be an example. Their self-identification at 12 step meetings is well known. It doesn’t mean that alcoholism or addiction is the only thing that defines them, but it’s useful shorthand and there are similarities in experience.

There are specific ministries for people based on their particular needs and struggles. There’s nothing wrong with that.
 
Hi jjr,

I don’t fully understand the question. Would you mind further explaining?
 
Instead of using a PC term like self identification, why not just say an openly homosexual person…or admittedly gay…its much less ambiguous!
 
Being kind is concern for a person’s highest welfare, not giving in to whims. Good parents and teachers are aware of sacrificing a temporary indulgence for a better future.
 
TK421 said:
Hi jjr,

I don’t fully understand the question. Would you mind further explaining?
Click to expand...
Same here. I’m not sure what the OP means by the Church “recognizing” the “homosexual person.” :confused:
 
Joe_5859 said:
Same here. I’m not sure what the OP means by the Church “recognizing” the “homosexual person.” :confused:
Click to expand...
The OP has posted several threads on this in the past as well, and each time, there seems to be no satisfactory explanation.

-ACEGC
 
Perhaps you really don’t think the Church should be accepting of self-identified murderers, burglars, and members of ISIS? There is a very wide array of self-identified people to whom it would not actually be unkind to look at without approval. Nor do I think it unkind to think those who commit gay acts are wrong.
I agree though that Catholics should be kind to those who carry out homosexual acts, by, for example, praying for them and hoping for their repentance.
 
Glomung said:
There is no such thing as a “homosexual person”. There are people who are sexually attracted to their own gender, but they are still just humans, not “special”. As such they are treated just like EVERYBODY ELSE, sinners in dire need of salvation.

Don’t pander to folk’s delusions and things become much more clear.
What would a “self-identified” person be exactly? Someone who thinks they are a horse?🤷
Click to expand...
If there is no such thing as a “homosexual person,” then what is this document from the Vatican talking about?

LETTER TO THE BISHOPS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
ON THE PASTORAL CARE OF HOMOSEXUAL PERSONS

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19861001_homosexual-persons_en.html
 
I don’t see the Church as being unkind to anyone. Priests are always willing to hear the confession of any penitent and will offer helpful advice to avoid the sin, regardless of what they have done.
 
jjr9 said:
It seem clear that consensus here is that the Church is correct to accept the “homosexual person” based on self-identification.
Click to expand...
I think your observation is that the Church accepts, based on the testimony of millions and the findings of medical science, that millions of people experience a sexual attraction to persons of the same sex, and many of these experience none to persons of the same sex. Yes - I think this is the consensus, and not just here.
Should the Church be even handed and show the same respect to all types of “self-identified persons”? Why is only the “homosexual person” recognized by the Church?
Click to expand...
The Church also recognises those of us who are sexually attracted to the opposite sex. This, in fact, is the majority. If asked, I suspect the Church would also acknowledge that some folks do not experience sexual attraction at all.
 
Thank you for taking time to reply
Glomung said:
There is no such thing as a “homosexual person”. There are people who are sexually attracted to their own gender, but they are still just humans, not “special”. As such they are treated just like EVERYBODY ELSE, sinners in dire need of salvation.
Click to expand...
I agree with you unfortunately the Church claims that the “homosexual person” is real

The Church says in CCC 2357:

Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or
predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex.

I believe here the Church is defining two categories of “homosexual person” that the Church references later in CCC 2359.
I believe the Church is saying some “homosexual persons” have an exclusive SSA and some “homosexual persons” have a
predominant SSA. For me the predominant “homosexual person” is a bit irrational as this person would have SSA and OSA.

I have no idea what the Church has in mind by accepting the myth of the “homosexual person” if you find out please let me know.
I believe it comes from the “steam of corruption” and “gay lobby” that Pope Francis referenced at one point. I understand that Pope
Francis has also said “if someone is gay who am I to judge” and supports this section of the CCC. I hope at some point the Holy
Father will have time to sort this all out.
Glomung said:
Don’t pander to folk’s delusions and things become much more clear.
What would a “self-identified” person be exactly? Someone who thinks they are a horse?🤷
Click to expand...
I have already had this discussion in previous threads. I believe I am in the minority and along with the Church most
here accept the existence of “homosexual persons”. As far as I know self-identification is what brings a “homosexual
person” into existence. I believe that the “homosexual person” is the only type of “self-identified person” recognized by
the Church. I believe that the whole idea is absurd but if the Church starts down this path then how can the Church not
recognize all types of “self-identified persons” if that is the criteria.

God bless
 
jjr9 said:
…if the Church starts down this path then how can the Church not recognize all types of “self-identified persons” if that is the criteria.
Click to expand...
Do you mean, say, “asexual persons” - those experiencing no sexual attraction?

There are a great many personal afflictions experienced, but fortunately very few of them have become a social phenomenon, with people claiming a right to live out inclinations to immoral acts.
 
jjr9 said:
Thank you for taking time to reply

I agree with you unfortunately the Church claims that the “homosexual person” is real

The Church says in CCC 2357:

Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or
predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex.

I believe here the Church is defining two categories of “homosexual person” that the Church references later in CCC 2359.
I believe the Church is saying some “homosexual persons” have an exclusive SSA and some “homosexual persons” have a
predominant SSA. For me the predominant “homosexual person” is a bit irrational as this person would have SSA and OSA.

I have no idea what the Church has in mind by accepting the myth of the “homosexual person” if you find out please let me know.
I believe it comes from the “steam of corruption” and “gay lobby” that Pope Francis referenced at one point. I understand that Pope
Francis has also said “if someone is gay who am I to judge” and supports this section of the CCC. I hope at some point the Holy
Father will have time to sort this all out.

I have already had this discussion in previous threads. I believe I am in the minority and along with the Church most
here accept the existence of “homosexual persons”. As far as I know self-identification is what brings a “homosexual
person” into existence. I believe that the “homosexual person” is the only type of “self-identified person” recognized by
the Church. I believe that the whole idea is absurd but if the Church starts down this path then how can the Church not
recognize all types of “self-identified persons” if that is the criteria.

God bless
Click to expand...
I still don’t think I’m very clear on exactly what you’re trying to say, but I think you are overthinking things a bit. Gay people still exist even before they self-identify as such. How does identifying as homosexual bring them into existence? :confused:
 
jjr9 said:
… For me the predominant “homosexual person” is a bit irrational as this person would have SSA and OSA.
Click to expand...
And were every person’s experienced sexual attraction drawn from a set of 2 mutually exclusive alternatives - either entirely to the opposite, or entirely to the same, that would be a problem! But given that our understanding of sexual attractions is not thus, there is nothing irrational in it.
 
edward_george said:
The OP has posted several threads on this in the past as well, and each time, there seems to be no satisfactory explanation.

-ACEGC
Click to expand...
Actually, I think that is a touch unfair. The OP has amply explained his point across his 4 threads (I think) on this same topic. Every one of the OP’s posts on CAF have been on this topic, so do a search for his posts and you’ll find all the “explanation” you could want.

The OP’s mis-readings of the Church’s teaching have also been amply set out by other posters. However, the OP is treating CAF as a platform for “blogging”. He appears to hear nothing said to him, confronts none of the arguments put to him that demonstrate the errors in his position and merely repeats himself.
 
jjr9 said:
It seem clear that consensus here is that the Church is correct to accept the “homosexual person”
based on self-identification. Should the Church be even handed and show the same respect to all
types of “self-identified persons”?

Why is only the “homosexual person” recognized by the Church?

God bless
Click to expand...
Why don’t you send all your questions about gay people to the Majesterium and ask them?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top