J
Joie_de_Vivre
Guest
Homicide is also perfectly justifiable in the correct circumstances.
- Status
C
Corki
Guest
’
They weren’t meant to. I used those terms to counter the argument that homosexuality was no worse than adultery, not to define the criminal code around these acts. The terms being pulled out were from the CCC, not civil law codes.
Faulty logic.
First of all masturbation is not intrinsically disordered. It’s not even **always **sinful. It is the misuse of a perfectly normal sexual faculty.
Second, just because an action is inherently disordered, it doesn’t mean it is automatically more grave. Gravity and order are two different criteria. A sin, for example can be mortal or venial, regardless of whether it is inherently disordered.
B
Brendan_64
Guest
What we see here is, in my opinion, an attempt to try to establish the viewpoint that homosexual sexual relationships and heterosexual relationships as being equivalent. An attempt to establish the view that homosexuality is as natural as heterosexuality and that the only moral issue is the fact that homosexual sexual relationships take place outside marriage. If that was the case, then the the logical solution would be ‘gay marriage’.
The Church of course does not view homosexual sexual relationships and homosexual sexual relationships as being equivalent, the Church views homosexual relationship as being intrinsically disordered, and as such will never accept ‘gay marriage’.
The Church of course does not view homosexual sexual relationships and homosexual sexual relationships as being equivalent, the Church views homosexual relationship as being intrinsically disordered, and as such will never accept ‘gay marriage’.
O
One_point
Guest
Surely you fail to understand the logic of natural law. You are comparing the taking of human life to sex? You’ve already started on a wrong premise. taking human life is on a whole other class, sex another. You will not find St. Thomas Aquinas comparing them, you will find him comparing sins of a LIKE nature…sexual sins like masturbation, fornication, adultery, sodomy between a husband and wife, homosexuality and bestiality together, they generally oppose the same virtue (chastity), and what he is comparing is how far they deviate from God’s design as it is inscribed in nature and discovered by human reason (natural law): That is the basis of how sins that are all grave and serious and mortal if freely and knowingly committed can be considered objectively-speaking to be more or less worse relative to each other. If you think of the design of God as a straight line from top to bottom of a paper, sins against natural law would be represented by lines beginning at the same point and ending at the same point, but curving out from the line. There are many curved lines next to the straight line on either side, some curving much further out from the straight line than others…that’s what “graver” means. Things that are intrinsically disordered do not follow the design of nature, contradict it, therefore are objectively worse deviations from the natural order than those that are less contrary BY DESIGN to the right order of things.
To bring in a totally different order of wrong, like life, is to miss the point. First, murder is a violation of a much more fundamental human right than sexual sin, it is a much greater affront, it nears blasphemy! The audacity of usurping God’s rights over life and death of men for yourself! Of over-rulling God’s decree of granting life to the person…who died and made you God? On the order of nature, no evil beats the unjustified destruction of human life, besides direct offenses against God, surely the church’s repeated opposition to abortion should tell you that. Even the ten commandments that are natural law order sins according to separate categories, you have sins against God, sins against life, rightful authority (parents), against other God-given rights, like Property, honor (no false witness and ruining people’s reputation because humans are dependent on society for livelihood and happiness) etc. To grab a sin from the sexual category and compare it to those of Blasphemy and sacrilege for example makes no sense. Where is the sense of proportion? Harming human beings IS contrary to natural law, so ask which sins represent greatest harm to the victims? Which ones deny more basic and necessary GOD-GIVEN rights to human beings as they are revealed in nature? Unwarranted destruction of human life is something else all together.
C
Catolico65
Guest
These constant threads about the innocuity of homosexuality are nothing less than a thinly veiled attempt to sway public opinion.
What people need to know is the Catholic Church was founded by Christ and as such is not going to change God’s Word on this matter, which is that homosexuality is depraved, unnatural and worse than many sins by the examples and laws that are part of our history.
Nonetheless, these threads aren’t to be taken lightly because many of those whose faith and understanding of CC teaching are weak can be misled and as as such the truly faithful need to point out true Church teaching as opposed to the many false ones, as are witnessed in this very thread and others in fact. Paz.
What people need to know is the Catholic Church was founded by Christ and as such is not going to change God’s Word on this matter, which is that homosexuality is depraved, unnatural and worse than many sins by the examples and laws that are part of our history.
Nonetheless, these threads aren’t to be taken lightly because many of those whose faith and understanding of CC teaching are weak can be misled and as as such the truly faithful need to point out true Church teaching as opposed to the many false ones, as are witnessed in this very thread and others in fact. Paz.
K
kozlosap
Guest
When will the new CCC be published so we all know for sure which sin is worse, being gay or judgmental and not valuing all humans according to your list of hateful attitudes? I think Papa Francis would be very sad for those not even pretending to live out the Gospels and Corporal Works of Mercy as set forth by The Lord.
H
hu324b
Guest
People are going to die today because of this law and many people will be over joyed about it.I won’t be.The hate is already festering and consuming some people and when it reaches a certain point people will be killed because it is now a law in Uganda. Not to mention how easy it will be to accuse an inocent person they don’t like by calling them gay.Priests have been named on the list as sympathizers.Will this be the work of the Holy Spirit or the devil?I can’t justify it but I guess some can.
C
Corki
Guest
People aren’t dying because of the law. Evil people will always find a way to do evil and there is no doubt that some will jump on a chance to go overboard. But that’s not the fault of the law itself. The law will protect many more people. We rejoice in a good law,** in spite of the possibility of poor enforcement,** not because of it.
J
Joie_de_Vivre
Guest
Yeah, um about that
Catechism said:
source
The Latin version also happens to use the same word to describe masturbation and homosexual acts as disordered.
W
weller2
Guest
What does verse 11 have to do with Catolico65’s novel interpretation of Mosaic law, which asserts that:
M
markomalley
Guest
I’ve said as much. On this thread.
W
weller2
Guest
Indeed, where? A murderer can be granted absolution via confession and subsequently receive communion, while a divorced person living in a new relationship cannot be given absolution and receive communion (which amounts to a de facto excommunication).
C
Catolico65
Guest
Why is it the gay lobby always wishes to pretend if the Old Testament never existed??When will the new CCC be published so we all know for sure which sin is worse, being gay or judgmental and not valuing all humans according to your list of hateful attitudes? I think Papa Francis would be very sad for those not even pretending to live out the Gospels and Corporal Works of Mercy as set forth by The Lord.
as if there were any doubt:
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. 18Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place"
We Catholic have the Law to help us discern what God’s intentions are, and it is clear he hates homosexuality. Of course people can be forgiven if they ask, but that is quite difficult now that so many say it is natural or worse ordained by God.
Btw, I had homosexual thoughts and if I didn’t think there was anything wrong with them I would have never had Christ heal me of them. People who continue to promote the lie that homosexuality is innate are causing others to sin and despair, may God have mercy on their vain souls.
M
markomalley
Guest
You might want to check into that some more.
S. Th. II-II-154-11:
As stated above (A6,9) wherever there occurs a special kind of deformity whereby the venereal act is rendered unbecoming, there is a determinate species of lust. This may occur in two ways: First, through being contrary to right reason, and this is common to all lustful vices; secondly, because, in addition, it is contrary to the natural order of the venereal act as becoming to the human race: and this is called “the unnatural vice.” This may happen in several ways. First, by procuring pollution, without any copulation, for the sake of venereal pleasure: this pertains to the sin of “uncleanness” which some call “effeminacy.” Secondly, by copulation with a thing of undue species, and this is called “bestiality.” Thirdly, by copulation with an undue sex, male with male, or female with female, as the Apostle states (Romans 1:27): and this is called the “vice of sodomy.” Fourthly, by not observing the natural manner of copulation, either as to undue means, or as to other monstrous and bestial manners of copulation.
Then, A12 says:
**Therefore, since by the unnatural vices man transgresses that which has been determined by nature with regard to the use of venereal actions, it follows that in this matter this sin is gravest of all. **After it comes incest, which, as stated above (Article 9), is contrary to the natural respect which we owe persons related to us.
For a modern day reference, see the catechism:
2352 By masturbation is to be understood the deliberate stimulation of the genital organs in order to derive sexual pleasure. “Both the Magisterium of the Church, in the course of a constant tradition, and the moral sense of the faithful have been in no doubt and have firmly maintained that masturbation is an intrinsically and gravely disordered action.”
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
I was not starting with any such premise that the taking of a human life was equivalent in any way to a sexual sin. I did assume that the taking of a human life is more serious than masturbation, or any other sexual sin. Do you disagree with that premise? I then took a comparison that others have made (not me). That comparison was between homosexuality and adultery. The statement was that homosexuality is worse than adultery. And the basis for this statement was because homosexuality is intrinsically disordered, and adultery, while sinful, is at least in accord with nature. So if someone can prove that one thing is more serious than another solely because one is intrinsically disordered and the other is not, then I showed that masturbation must be more serious than murder. Of course we all agree that murder is not less serious than masturbation. Therefore the argument for why homosexuality is worse than adultery is flawed, which is all I ever claimed.
Now it may be that homosexuality is more serious than adultery, but the arguments for that point in this thread have not shown it.
Is the list you made here of sexual sins ordered from least serious to most serious? Or is it ordered from least deviant from natural law to most deviant? You have made the claim that Aquinas implies that the two orderings are the same, since the ordering according to how deviant they are from natural law is “* the basis of how sins that are all grave and serious and mortal if freely and knowingly committed can be considered objectively-speaking to be more or less worse relative to each other*”, If what you say is true, then why is masturbation placed so near the front of the list? Is it because it is the least serious? Or is it because it is the least disordered? I think we can all agree that masturbation is the least serious of the sins you have listed. But is it really less disordered than fornication and adultery, both of which are more in accord with nature? All this shows that ordering according to how natural something is and ordering according to how seriously wrong something is, are two different things.
C
Catolico65
Guest
I have to ask, does anyone think the OT is relevant anymore???
R
Rau
Guest
There are threads started that seek to claim homosexual relations are innocuous - but this isn’t one of them. Some of the thread participants may wish to state that - but the OP has said the reverse.
The OP (Godisgood77) does not question what is moral, but rather the decision to legislate against certain specific behaviours. The question does seem worth thinking about, given the reality of our ‘mixed’ societies operating under a single civil law and given that homosexual relations are not universally condemned. This should be able to be discussed quite apart from whether or not homosexual relations contradict Catholic teaching. After all - that much is well understood anyway, and the OP is onboard with that too.
S
SMGS127
Guest
In fact, I just read through the entire thread, and only one poster made me unsure of how they felt about homosexual conduct, and even then I believe they acknowledge that it is contrary to natural law. I think we deserve the respect as Catholics to be able to debate how we best defend moral law in our Earthly lives without being accused of turning our backs on natural law.
I agree with you.
G
GraceSofia
Guest
I don’t believe that I’ve mentioned criminalisation in this thread, have I?
In response to this:
Weller2 then made this ridiculous, hyperbolical nonsense accusation, which I was not going to dignify with a response, but I will since it seems he successfully muddied the waters. Note that I did not say anything about prison or execution, but he said:
He is the one who made the hysterical, fear-mongering leap to executing people.
This is a straw man argument:
(If anyone wants to reviews where the Catechism talks about “intrinsically disordered” it is HERE, but I’m not interested in carrying on after the bad faith shown in this thread).
W
weller2
Guest
AHEM. Criminalization of homosexuality is the topic of the thread and you were arguing along the lines that a person’s homosexuality impacts those around them. That’s a standard argument for criminalising something – society usually doesn’t criminalise things which only hurt the perpetrator.
I was attempting to demonstrate that the proposed cure is actually worse than the disease itself. For another example of this phenomenon, see the drug policy.
NB - Uganda is starting to executing people as we speak.
- Status