Jesus Wants Gays to Be Happy

[LovePatience]

Compassion leads some to try to show active homosexuals that their choices are mortal sins.

Nowhere on here have I seen evidence of this alleged prejudice, unless you mean that telling someone that having sex with someone of the same gender is a sin. The people on here who have spoken out about homosexual sex have also spoken out about premarital and extramarital sex, anal sex, contraceptives, abortion, and pornography. Where exactly are you deriving this allegation of prejudice?

There is a lack of compassion. Homosexuals have high suicide rates. Society has a role to play in this; many studies have shown that the rate of gay suicide goes up when they “come out” to a parent who is disapproving or when they live in a conservative area versus a liberal area. One example is the frequency of gay teen suicides in Michelle Bachmann’s area. If you see the posting of conservatives regarding gay suicides, you see that it is more aimed at making sure that no one who plays a role in triggering a gay suicide is unjustly called a homophobe or charged with a hate crime than in actual sympathy or even in concern for prevention of deaths.

According to the Cathechism,

2281 Suicide contradicts the natural inclination of the human being to preserve and perpetuate his life. It is gravely contrary to the just love of self. It likewise offends love of neighbor because it unjustly breaks the ties of solidarity with family, nation, and other human societies to which we continue to have obligations. Suicide is contrary to love for the living God.

2282 If suicide is committed with the intention of setting an example, especially to the young, it also takes on the gravity of scandal. Voluntary co-operation in suicide is contrary to the moral law.

Grave psychological disturbances, anguish, or grave fear of hardship, suffering, or torture can diminish the responsibility of the one committing suicide.

If we compare homosexuals and heterosexuals, it seems the “mortality” of the sin may be diminished in homosexuals because there is greater suffering/trial in leading that lifestyle than in leading a heterosexual lifestyle.

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. 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.

The question as to where the compassion is to show those hellbound non homosexuals their sins exists. Also, there is no teaching from Jesus that this sort of compassion is actually a form of compassion. In fact, Jesus said often that we should not judge. The only people that he judged were religious hypocrites - the prostitutes, adulterers, he protected from religious hypocrites. The only times he got angry was for the honor and respect due to God - there is no example of him getting angry due to sexual sins.

Its not that Jesus didn’t know that gay people existed. Matthew 19:12 refers to gay men.

 

[LovePatience]

That is not true. He converted to the Church after his most recent marriage. His former marriages have been resolved.

His wife, who was always a Catholic, slept with him while he was married to his ex-wife. Even if you ignore his annulments, that’s both premarital sex and adultery. But I am curious to how he got annulments. I thought he got an annulment of his second marriage due to prior bond but not his first, which means he is still married to his first wife. Would be happy to receive an explanation for this…

In 2009, Mr. Gingrich converted to Catholicism. It is not clear if he ever tried to have annulled his first marriage, which, if between two baptized Christians, would be considered valid by the Catholic Church. Mr. Gingrich’s spokesman, R. C. Hammond, could not be reached by telephone and did not reply to e-mails.

nytimes.com/2011/12/10/us/politics/on-religion-broad-mindedness-and-bigotry-among-voters.html

There are other examples. Rush Limbaugh, four marriages…

 

[LovePatience]

hancaquam.blogspot.com/2012/03/its-not-about-your-feelings-its-about.html

The issue about feelings vs. truth is not about Catholic doctrine. It is about personality type. According to the MBTI, some people are feelers and some people are predominantly thinkers; there is a rough correlation between personality type and vote with thinkers leaning republican and feelers leaning democrat. There was a study on this forum of the types of posters, most are thinkers since thinkers do not shy away from conflict and are more unemotional, so the negativity on this forum would be less of a reason to stay away, which is one reason why this forum does not represent mainstream Catholics since about 50% vs. 50% of the population is feeler vs. thinkers. politicaltypes.com/content/view/24/56/

Feelings are not antithetical to Catholicism as if the problems in life are caused by too much feelings. Thoughts and feelings should be integrated and work in unison. Sure, problems can be caused by acting on selfish feelings instead of acting on true moral guidelines; good can also be done by acting on feelings of compassion or sympathy instead of acting on logical temporal self-interest. Doing good is not always in one’s short-term self-interest. Also, evil can be done and done quite effectively by acting with a premeditated and thoughtful plan; more effectively can that evil plan be carried out and more damage can be done than by a person who merely acts on feelings, which are less sophisticated.

Furthermore, St. Ignatius’s spiritual exercises for discernment are largely based on discernment. I believe that his order, the Jesuits, played a role in directing many other orders, i.e. St. Josemaria Escriva and St. Teresa of Avila.

St. Ignatius learned about discerning God’s influence from the influence of others during his recovery of a battle wound in 1521. He would dream of doing knightly deeds but afterwards would feel sad and listless. On the other hand, he would dream of imitating the saints and would feel joyful and alive. It was through these daydreams that Ignatius came to see how God draws us toward a new way of life. Consider the primary thoughts that occupy you mind daily and how you feel afterwards.

In May 2002, America magazine published an article by William A. Barry, S.J. titled “How Do I Know It’s God.” See the full article for more on the life of St. Ignatius and how he came to the Rules for Discernment of Spirits in his Spiritual Exercises.

 

[Elizabeth502]

Matthew 19:12 refers to gay men.

No it doesn’t. It refers to celibacy, chosen and unchosen – the unchosen varieties in the ancient Mediterranean being those of impotence or castration; the chosen category being discussed in that passage means those who are capable of marriage (not impotent or castrated) but who choose to refrain from consummated convenantal heterosexual relationships out of commitment to The Kingdom and the discipline which that normally entails.

Homosexuals are not castrated or impotent heterosexuals.

 

[LovePatience]

No it doesn’t. It refers to celibacy, chosen and unchosen – the unchosen varieties in the ancient Mediterranean being those of impotence or castration; the chosen category being discussed in that passage means those who are capable of marriage (not impotent or castrated) but who choose to refrain from consummated convenantal heterosexual relationships out of commitment to The Kingdom and the discipline which that normally entails.

Homosexuals are not castrated or impotent heterosexuals.

Obviously, the passage doesn’t only refer to those who are castrated. I’d like to see your proof that “born that way” exclusively refers to impotence and excludes homosexuals.

Clement of Alexandria (Catholic theologian) said that “the true eunuch is not unable, but unwilling to have sex.”

 

[LovePatience]

No it doesn’t. It refers to celibacy, chosen and unchosen – the unchosen varieties in the ancient Mediterranean being those of impotence or castration; the chosen category being discussed in that passage means those who are capable of marriage (not impotent or castrated) but who choose to refrain from consummated convenantal heterosexual relationships out of commitment to The Kingdom and the discipline which that normally entails.

Homosexuals are not castrated or impotent heterosexuals.

Obviously, the passage doesn’t only refer to those who are castrated. I’d like to see your proof that “born that way” exclusively refers to impotence and excludes homosexuals.

Clement of Alexandria ( Church Father) said that “the true eunuch is not unable, but unwilling to have sex.”

 

[michelleds]

Obviously, the passage doesn’t only refer to those who are castrated. I’d like to see your proof that “born that way” exclusively refers to impotence and excludes homosexuals.

Clement of Alexandria ( Church Father) said that “the true eunuch is not unable, but unwilling to have sex.”

LovePatience, you have flooded this thread with a number of posts here in the last few hours, posts that are full of misapprehensions and misstatements. You assume, for instance, that the suicide rates of active homosexuals is related to others’ responses to their homosexuality. However, if you would actually review the research rather than the liberal media headlines, you would discover that the factors leading to suicide do NOT include how other people percieve oneself. For instance, the factors influencing teen suicide include mental illness in self or family; availability of guns in the home; and violence in the home.

The alleged “gay teen suicide epidemic” is, in fact, an urban legend in this way: the teens who are used as examples of this “epidemic” did not commit suicide BECAUSE of their “gayness”, but for other reasons. Likewise, while bullying is a great wrong in and of itself, bullying alone does not lead to an epidemic of teen suicides. Other factors such mental illness have a statistically far higher impact than any outside influence.

“born that way” is very much a modern concept, and would not have even been in the lexicon of a Jewish Rabbi in Jesus’ day in regards to homosexuality. to put that spin on the scripture is to do intellectual violence to the scriptures.

Again, I will tell you what I told stanczyk: you don’t know your own faith.

 

[LovePatience]

LovePatience, you have flooded this thread with a number of posts here in the last few hours, posts that are full of misapprehensions and misstatements. You assume, for instance, that the suicide rates of active homosexuals is related to others’ responses to their homosexuality. However, if you would actually review the research rather than the liberal media headlines, you would discover that the factors leading to suicide do NOT include how other people percieve oneself. For instance, the factors influencing teen suicide include mental illness in self or family; availability of guns in the home; and violence in the home.

The alleged “gay teen suicide epidemic” is, in fact, an urban legend in this way: the teens who are used as examples of this “epidemic” did not commit suicide BECAUSE of their “gayness”, but for other reasons. Likewise, while bullying is a great wrong in and of itself, bullying alone does not lead to an epidemic of teen suicides. Other factors such mental illness have a statistically far higher impact than any outside influence.

“born that way” is very much a modern concept, and would not have even been in the lexicon of a Jewish Rabbi in Jesus’ day in regards to homosexuality. to put that spin on the scripture is to do intellectual violence to the scriptures.

Again, I will tell you what I told stanczyk: you don’t know your own faith.

False. I’ve reviewed the research and what you are writing is propaganda to deny any responsibility of human beings on the lives of others so that guilt is reduced for morally wrong actions by imagining they have a smaller effect than they do. Denial may confuse some people, but it won’t work with God at Judgement Day. If you think otherwise, then show a citation to the papers you are referring to. Only 6% of scientists are Republicans, and this is a direct consequence of the disrespect many conservatives pay to science.

“born so” is directly from Matthew 19:12. It would be nice if you would actually read the Scripture before claiming it says something it doesn’t say.

This isn’t a question of liberal and conservative anyways. Its a question of truth. Please don’t politicize it unnecessarily.

 

[Elizabeth502]

“born so” is directly from Matthew 19:12. It would be nice if you would actually read the Scripture before claiming it says something it doesn’t say.

There was no concept of being “born a homosexual” in the ancient Mediterranean. There were only mysteries surrounding all kinds of inborn physical deformities and sexual incapacities, including those of a genital nature such as hermaphrodites and what biologists today would refer to as the intersexed. The response or adjustment to that, on the part of the person, was what the listeners to Jesus’ words understood as chosen sexual behavior. Given a far more primitive state of medicine, any physical condition of birth was generally regarded passively, so that both deformities of an inborn nature and mere impotence of unknown etiology restricted a man from marriage and sexual expression.

The proof that homosexuality was not considered a matter of biological determinism was that it was in fact a chosen option for thoroughly heterosexually “oriented” men as a sign of status and power among non-Jews such as the Greeks and Romans, and practiced among some pagans as well. The ancients did not regard homosexual acts as belonging to two different categories: those “inborn” and those chosen as a “lifestyle.” It was all chosen behavior.

I rarely cite non-Catholic sources. I do so below only because the excerpts simplify and collate other scholarly material.

The Greek word for eunuch is a compound word that means literally “bed holder,” or simply put, “a holder of the bed.” The historical understanding of a eunuch is a man who had been castrated or had his genitals mutilated in some manner that prevented him from becoming aroused around women. These men were commonly used as guards in royal harems, what would be known as a “bed guardian.”

Three of the standard theological and lexical works on the Old and New Testaments: The New International Dictionary of N.T. Theology, Kittel’s Theological Dictionary of the N.T., and The International Dictionary of O.T. Theology and Exegesis, all state the standard, historical understanding of the word eunuch is of a castrated man used as a harem guard. I glanced through a handful of other theological and lexical works and all of them also affirmed the typical understanding of the word. None of them, including a few other works I consulted, remotely suggested “homosexual” could be an alternative definition. In addition to the idea of a castrated harem guard, the word eunuch did expand in meaning to include high court officials who held prominent positions in a royal court, but may not necessarily be castrated. Again, none of these works implied the word could be used to describe a person disposed to homosexual persuasion. This is something of a novel, modern invention.

The author of the page discusses the context of some references by Clement of Alexandria – an important aside – and then summarizes, accurately, as follows. It’s from an article entitled, “Is the Word ‘Eunuch’ Really the Bible’s Way of Saying Homosexuals?”:

Returning to Christ’s words to the disciples in Matthew 19:12, nothing in the context of this first category of eunuchs, “a eunuch from birth,” suggests Jesus had in mind natural born homosexual orientation. Christ had in mind the Jewish understanding of eunuchs as described in Levitical law and through out the Old Testament: those who were born with the physical inability to engage in sexual intercourse. Those inabilities could be more than just sexual impotence, but could very well be crippling deformities like paralysis, Downs, or other mental retardation that prevents a person from participating in being married to a spouse.

Moreover, and most importantly, Jesus could not have in mind homosexuals when he told his disciples there are “eunuchs from birth,” because in the larger context of the entire revelation of scripture the participants in marriage are clearly limited to being only one male and one female. There are no other combinations permitted, nor are same-sex relationship, exempted from the divine ordinances established in Genesis for marriage - commands which are reiterated throughout the remainder of the Bible.

To ignore these clear commands, or even worse, reinterpret them according to a new paradigm, demonstrates a desperation to make the Bible affirm the non-affirmable. Perhaps that is why gay apologists have to appeal to liberal, neo-orthodox hermeneutics and biblical interpretation. What ever the case, this is still the historical and scriptural revisionism found in the writings of the myriads of heretical false teachers who have troubled the church since its founding in Acts.

fredsbibletalk.com/eunuchs.html

(It’s helpful, when posting to discussions about Catholic apologetics on discussion forums, not to rely for exegesis on the gaychristian101.com site.)

 

[FaithBuild18]

There was no concept of being “born a homosexual” in the ancient Mediterranean. There were only mysteries surrounding all kinds of inborn physical deformities and sexual incapacities, including those of a genital nature such as hermaphrodites and what biologists today would refer to as the intersexed. The response or adjustment to that, on the part of the person, was what the listeners to Jesus’ words understood as chosen sexual behavior. Given a far more primitive state of medicine, any physical condition of birth was generally regarded passively, so that both deformities of an inborn nature and mere impotence of unknown etiology restricted a man from marriage and sexual expression.

The proof that homosexuality was not considered a matter of biological determinism was that it was in fact a chosen option for thoroughly heterosexually “oriented” men as a sign of status and power among non-Jews such as the Greeks and Romans, and practiced among some pagans as well. The ancients did not regard homosexual acts as belonging to two different categories: those “inborn” and those chosen as a “lifestyle.” It was all chosen behavior.

I rarely cite non-Catholic sources. I do so below only because the excerpts simplify and collate other scholarly material.

The author of the page discusses the context of some references by Clement of Alexandria – an important aside – and then summarizes, accurately, as follows. It’s from an article entitled, “Is the Word ‘Eunuch’ Really the Bible’s Way of Saying Homosexuals?”:

fredsbibletalk.com/eunuchs.html

(It’s helpful, when posting to discussions about Catholic apologetics on discussion forums, not to rely for exegesis on the gaychristian101.com site.)

 

[Corki]

The evidence is that conservative Catholics generally do not get angry over other sins. Look at how many support Gingrich, three time divorcee. Last I heard, divorce was a sin, and he **is living **in adultery and mortal sin. There are “pet” sins.

His wife, who was always a Catholic, slept with him while he was married to his ex-wife. Even if you ignore his annulments, that’s both premarital sex and adultery.

Yes, but he is not **now **living in “adultery and mortal sin” as far as anyone knows. People can repent and can return to grace.

But I am curious to how he got annulments. I thought he got an annulment of his second marriage due to prior bond but not his first, which means he is still married to his first wife.

The annulment process usually starts with the first marriage and works forward. But it is really none of our business how he got annulments.

 

[LovePatience]

I rarely cite non-Catholic sources. I do so below only because the excerpts simplify and collate other scholarly material.

You cite a non-Catholic opinion piece to disregard the words of a Catholic Church father admired by St. Jerome that quite clearly states that some people considered eunuchs were in fact able to have sex with women but did not want to. This means that the category of “eunuchs” was not limited to those with physical deformities. Interesting.

How is it possible to consider this idea of eunuchs being those who do not desire women a “novel, modern interpretation” when it is given by a Church Father who lived from AD 150-215 who also quotes from people with the same understanding who lived prior to him? Last I heard, “modern” referred to current times, not almost 2000 years ago.

 

[fix]

Matthew 19:12 refers to gay men.

The term “gay” is a contrived political term.

 

[Elizabeth502]

You cite a non-Catholic opinion piece to disregard the words of a Catholic Church father admired by St. Jerome that quite clearly states that some people considered eunuchs were in fact able to have sex with women but did not want to. This means that the category of “eunuchs” was not limited to those with physical deformities.

I never said that the category of eunuchs was limited to those of physical deformities, nor does the author of the page I cited. As I mentioned, and as I will mention again, the definition of eunuch varied, but did not in any way mean people supposedly “born” with “same-sex attraction.” There was zero acceptance of such a notion in the ancient world – the very audience to which Mt 19:12 is addressed. Further, the author of the page in question makes the important point about the context of marriage (which could only be, and have been, between males and females) as a further limitation on this text from the gospel of Matthew.

There is zero authentic Catholic support for your positon. Zero. That includes the Fathers of the Church. Please stop trying to represent otherwise to those reading this discussion forum.

 

[Havard]

Good article.

I just want to follow up though, by saying that there is plenty of literature out there about how and why sodomy is wrong. I think we could use more literature to help us understand what we can all do to be supportive of those with SSA.

 

[michelleds]

False. I’ve reviewed the research and what you are writing is propaganda to deny any responsibility of human beings on the lives of others so that guilt is reduced for morally wrong actions by imagining they have a smaller effect than they do. Denial may confuse some people, but it won’t work with God at Judgement Day. If you think otherwise, then show a citation to the papers you are referring to.

The issue is that while the media wants to hog-tie teen suicide and teen bullying together, there is no quantitative support for such a position. I believe it goes without saying that bullying is bad and even one suicide, of any age, is bad. That’s not the point. The point is how our emotions are being twisted by the media spin.

NIMH (National Institute on Mental Health) www.nimh.nih.gov is very clear about the risk factors of suicide and bullying/harassment etc is not on the list.

Research shows that risk factors for suicide include:

depression and other mental disorders, or a substance-abuse disorder (often in combination with other mental disorders). More than 90 percent of people who die by suicide have these risk factors.
prior suicide attempt
family history of mental disorder or substance abuse
family history of suicide
family violence, including physical or sexual abuse
firearms in the home, the method used in more than half of suicides
incarceration
exposure to the suicidal behavior of others, such as family members, peers, or media figures.

The issue is the spin.

please read this article: livescience.com/8734-gay-…-epidemic.html

Relevant portions below.

what is the gay teen suicide rate? No one knows. “How could anyone hope to measure gay teen suicides accurately?” Best said. “Coroners, after all, do not record sexual orientation on death certificates.”

Without accurate numbers on how many gay teens there are, any estimate about their suicide rate is little more than a guess.

One researcher, Cornell University’s Ritch Savin-Williams, examined the two studies that had asserted the high gay teen suicide rate and found many methodological flaws.

There’s no doubt that many gay teens are harassed and bullied (a study published in the January 2010 issue of the Journal of Adolescent Health suggested gay and lesbian teens get bullied two to three times more than their heterosexual peers), and some of them may take their lives because of it. But there’s little evidence that gay teens have a dramatically higher rate of suicide than heterosexual teens.

And finally, do you and your ilk not find it the epitome of irony to come on to CAF, call us names, tell us we’re homophobic, judgmental, biased, prejudiced and just plain mean, AND THEN TELL US THAT ONLY GOD CAN JUDGE?!?

Again, there is a lot to be found in the Bible, the Didache, and the Chuch Fathers’ writings, not to mention several items out of the Vatican which flat out condemn homosexual acts. Yes, we are called to compassion for those with SSA, that does not mean that we should take a morally putrid stance and say, well, if you really want to/feel like you were born that way…you should just do what you want.

and BTW, I am a SSA/former lesbian (for 20+) years, so please spare me the “you don’t understand” bull.

 

[Elizabeth502]

^ You go girl!

 

[InSearchofGrace]

…
The issue is the spin.

please read this article: livescience.com/8734-gay-…-epidemic.html

Relevant portions below.

michelleds,

For some reason, the livescience link you provided is not connecting, so provided hereby is the link again:

Is There a Gay Teen Suicide Epidemic?

Here is another study that not only challenges LovePatience’s claim, but the alleged high gay teen suicide also had ironic consequence, i.e., gay teen suicide becoming as a potential correlate of their identity.

Young, Gay, and Suicidal: Dynamic Nominalism and the Process of Defining a Social Problem with Statistics

Abstract

Since 1989, widely circulating statistics on gay teen suicide in the United States have acted as catalysts for institutional reforms, scientific research, and the creation of an identity category “gay youth.” Yet these numbers originated not from a scientific research study but as a risk estimates developed by a social worker and published in a government document. Many people within the public took up these numbers as scientific facts, attributing their author the status of scientific researcher. In effect, the numbers became “black boxed,” often traveling without citation. Drawing on Ian Hacking’s “dynamic nominalist” perspective, this article utilizes interviews with the author of these statistics and other key claimants, along with textual analysis, to trace the origins, uptake, and effects of these figures. While making vital policy contributions, the numbers have led to some ironic consequences including the fostering of gay youth identification with suicide as a potential correlate of their identity and the potential antigay redeployment of decontextualized numbers. They have also led to a reaction in the form of “resilience” narratives.

And another:

The Extent of Homosexual Teen Suicide is Exaggerated

Trudy Hutchens argues in the following viewpoint that **gay activists overstate the number of teens who commit suicide because of distress over their sexual orientation. She maintains that many of those gay teens who do kill themselves do so for reasons other than their homosexuality. Although Hutchens states that any suicide is a tragedy, she contends that gay activists are exaggerating the number of homosexual teen suicides in order to gain sympathy and to promote the homosexual lifestyle as normal and healthy. ** …

Finally, this statement from LovePatience is laughable

This isn’t a question of liberal and conservative anyways. Its a question of truth. Please don’t politicize it unnecessarily.

effectively quashed by your declaration

and BTW, I am a SSA/former lesbian (for 20+) years, so please spare me the “you don’t understand” bull.

!!!

 

[stanczyk]

The question as to where the compassion is to show those hellbound non homosexuals their sins exists. Also, there is no teaching from Jesus that this sort of compassion is actually a form of compassion. In fact, Jesus said often that we should not judge. The only people that he judged were religious hypocrites - the prostitutes, adulterers, he protected from religious hypocrites. The only times he got angry was for the honor and respect due to God - there is no example of him getting angry due to sexual sins.

So true.

 

[stanczyk]

Homosexuals are not castrated or impotent heterosexuals.

Actually, you are wrong. Eunuchs were frequently homosexual in ancient times. To be more precise, in antiquity eunuchs were considered, along with virginal women, to be part of a “third sex.” It is anachronistic to try to apply modern notions of sexuality and gender to antiquity.