Moral Beginnings

[Sacred_Heart_1]

Wow, do you live in a monastery?

No he’s an Androgenous Immortal.

 

[Sacred_Heart_1]

If those were the only two choices, then i agree that gay marriage would be the lesser of two evils. However, chastity or marriage to the opposite sex is an option.

Typical Christian. Seeing the evil in people…“lesser of two evils”…and then thinking your better by introducing chastity (which you don’t practise).

 

[Sacred_Heart_1]

No - I am happily married to one woman and I desire no other.

I think that it is important to point out that the question I was asked is, “Do you lust after women?” (present tense). If the question were asked, have you ever lusted after women (past tense)…the answer would most certainly have been different. Certainly in my younger days and my time away from the Church, I committed many sins and lusting was surely among them.
But the question asked was in the present tense, and so I answered honestly…no I do not.

Contrary to popular belief it IS possible to live in the world, see other women, even be aware of their beauty, and still not “lust” after them.
In truth, I have too much respect for women to go “lusting after them”.

Peace
James

The art of deception. Knowing that you lusted after women before and you lust after your wife, you chose to lie to me in order to practise the Christian art of “I’m so pure”.

Completely denying the logic and reasoning that the question was intended to probe whether you lust or not.

No bother. I knew you would lie to me. It is an expectation that most people on these forums will hide away their sins and act “I’m so White and Holy”.

 

[Sacred_Heart_1]

I agree. The question is now: What is the purpose of living?

The purpose of life is Truth. To become the Truth. No other purpose. The Spirit and the Truth is the life of the Body. I must become that life. I must become the Truth.

The life within Jesus is the Spirit of Truth, the source of life. I eat his flesh and blood to receive that source of life. I become the Truth through him. The purpose of life is to become the Spirit/Truth (one and the same thing). That’s eternal life. When we receive the presence of the Word of God within our mouth then we receive the Truth and we become that Truth.

 

[jochoa]

The purpose of life is Truth. To become the Truth. No other purpose. The Spirit and the Truth is the life of the Body. I must become that life. I must become the Truth.

The life within Jesus is the Spirit of Truth, the source of life. I eat his flesh and blood to receive that source of life. I become the Truth through him. The purpose of life is to become the Spirit/Truth (one and the same thing). That’s eternal life. When we receive the presence of the Word of God within our mouth then we receive the Truth and we become that Truth.

Excellent understandings! Now the questions become: is Jesus homosexual? Is Jesus a prostitute?

Since both answers are no, then it is impossible to become the Spirit/Truth as either an active prostitute or homosexual. Therefore, in some way, both lack morality.

 

[Sacred_Heart_1]

Excellent understandings! Now the questions become: is Jesus homosexual? Is Jesus a prostitute?

Since both answers are no, then it is impossible to become the Spirit/Truth as either an active prostitute or homosexual. Therefore, in some way, both lack morality.

Jesus did say that prostitutes get into heaven before someone else. I think that is in scripture some where.

He also said that sinners are the children of Wisdom and Wisdom always goes to her children. It is through Wisdom that the Truth is known. We go through Wisdom as we go through this creation. And it is within the Light of Wisdom that we see the Light of Truth. If sinners are the children of Wisdom then they are also the children of the Truth.

Too quick to judge a sinner. Not realizing that the same, sin, that dwells in a prostitute also dwells within you.

 

[JRKH]

You’re not attracted to women at all?

Attracted in what way?

Lust and sexuality go hand in hand. You can’t have one without the other.

This would require some discussion to define what you mean by “lust” and what I mean by “lust”…This is important in determining whether sin has been committed.

I’m supposed to believe that you are the “bless’d virgin”?

Of course not. While God has blessed me in many ways (though I am a sinner) I am certainly no virgin.

I mean, you’re an androgenous being because heterosexuals feel lust within a sexual existance?

I don’t even know what you mean here. I do sense a lot of anger though…

You’ve never felt lust in your life? I think you’re lying.

You did not ask me if I ever lusted…you asked if I do lust. Two different questions. So please don’t get angry with me for answering what you asked instead of what you meant to ask…

So you have committed adultry in your heart, a sin as grave as homosexuality itself.

Yes - I have, in the past, committed adultery in my heart. But I do not commit this sin now.

I don’t know where heterosexuals get off saying homosexuality is a sin because lust is involved within both; and lust is the sin, common to both.

Yes both things are sinful…No argument…

Do you, as a heterosexual, say your lust is more pure than a homosexuals?

No - I do not say that lust heterosexual lust is more pure than homosexual lust.

It’s equal ground. It’s an equal sin. The lust in one is as impure as the lust in the other. What are you going to say to God about your sin of lust: “…But I was heterosexual.”

You are arguing with yourself my friend. I have never said that one is less sinful than the other.

Do you think he is going to judge one sexuality harsher than the other when the sin is the same?

Of course not…

The art of deception. Knowing that you lusted after women before and you lust after your wife, you chose to lie to me in order to practice the Christian art of “I’m so pure”.

I did not lie to you. As I explained before, I answered the question you asked, no more and no less.

Completely denying the logic and reasoning that the question was intended to probe whether you lust or not.

I do not lust. Not after my wife and not after other women. That is the truth…It’s entirely up to you whether you believe me or not…

No bother. I knew you would lie to me. It is an expectation that most people on these forums will hide away their sins and act “I’m so White and Holy”.

Well - it’s too bad that you take this position . I have not lied to you. Yet you insist that I did…Why? I don’t understand.

Peace
James

 

[jochoa]

Jesus did say that prostitutes get into heaven before someone else. I think that is in scripture some where.

He also said that sinners are the children of Wisdom and Wisdom always goes to her children. It is through Wisdom that the Truth is known. We go through Wisdom as we go through this creation. And it is within the Light of Wisdom that we see the Light of Truth. If sinners are the children of Wisdom then they are also the children of the Truth.

Too quick to judge a sinner. Not realizing that the same, sin, that dwells in a prostitute also dwells within you.

Please consider a few points:

1. I am the greatest sinner of all. I am constantly trying to learn to love more like Jesus everyday. And the closer I get, the greater my sins are. Sins which are greater than the prostitute and homosexual. So please keep me in your prayers, especially when praying, “…lead all souls to heaven, especially, jochoa, who is in most need of thy mercy.”
2. I was only using your standards of the purpose of living. And given your understanding of the purpose of life is to become one with the life of Jesus, then it is easy to recognize that if a person is not one with the life of Jesus, s/he is not fulfilling the purpose of life. Therefore, in some way s/he is living immorally. If you feel it is too easy to determine quality of morality, given your own declaration of the purpose of living, I encourage trying to find greater definition to your understanding of the purpose of life.
3. We are all children of God, therefore, we are all children of the Truth. However, according to your purpose for life (which I personally like), we must grow from being children of the Truth to being the Truth. Therefore, if there is no growth towards being the Truth, then in some way, we are living immorally.

Also, would you please share the Scripture regarding the prostitute? I would definitely enjoy reading the verses directly.

 

[Qoeleth]

Where are the moral beginnings? In a prostitute that has many partners and sells her body for sex (OR) In a homosexual within a monogamous relationship for life?

I see the homosexual as being far worse. The prostitute does what she does for money- and therefore her act has a rational (if wrong) motivation. The prostitute may just be poor, desperate, or confused.

Whereas the homosexual is doing something fundamentally perverse, for no reason other than perversity itself.

We know the Jesus ate with prostitutes. However, no where is it recorded that he associated with ‘gays’.

 

[Sacred_Heart_1]

Attracted in what way?

This would require some discussion to define what you mean by “lust” and what I mean by “lust”…This is important in determining whether sin has been committed.

Of course not. While God has blessed me in many ways (though I am a sinner) I am certainly no virgin.

I don’t even know what you mean here. I do sense a lot of anger though…

You did not ask me if I ever lusted…you asked if I do lust. Two different questions. So please don’t get angry with me for answering what you asked instead of what you meant to ask…

Yes - I have, in the past, committed adultery in my heart. But I do not commit this sin now.

Yes both things are sinful…No argument…

No - I do not say that lust heterosexual lust is more pure than homosexual lust.

You are arguing with yourself my friend. I have never said that one is less sinful than the other.

Of course not…

I did not lie to you. As I explained before, I answered the question you asked, no more and no less.

I do not lust. Not after my wife and not after other women. That is the truth…It’s entirely up to you whether you believe me or not…

Well - it’s too bad that you take this position . I have not lied to you. Yet you insist that I did…Why? I don’t understand.

Peace
James

You seem to be in denial alot about the subject of lust, probably in order to purify your image before me, so that I can’t see your sin. You beat around the bush when I ask you about your own lust, making it seem that it is a thing in the past; and therefore no longer an issue you can be held to. I’m not that stupid though, you may be in denial but I know what lust is. You can lust after your wife in the way that you find her sexually attractive; and therefore, you still do commit adultry in your heart. If your eye roves to other women besides your wife, which it does because finding a woman attractive is an issue of lust. I highly doubt that you don’t notice a pair of breasts or nice legs on a women. A slight movement of the eye is an issue of lust; and I don’t believe you that you don’t ever do it because you are obviously a sexual being since you are married to a wife. You commit adultry continually in your heart just like me and everyone else. I’m just willing to admit it. I know what it is to be a man with a sexuality; and you’re no different than I. You notice a woman with your eye and you notice with lust. You may not be perverted about it or may be perverted about it but I do know that you pretend your lust does not exist because of your denial in words.

 

[Sacred_Heart_1]

Please consider a few points:

1. I am the greatest sinner of all. I am constantly trying to learn to love more like Jesus everyday. And the closer I get, the greater my sins are. Sins which are greater than the prostitute and homosexual. So please keep me in your prayers, especially when praying, “…lead all souls to heaven, especially, jochoa, who is in most need of thy mercy.”
2. I was only using your standards of the purpose of living. And given your understanding of the purpose of life is to become one with the life of Jesus, then it is easy to recognize that if a person is not one with the life of Jesus, s/he is not fulfilling the purpose of life. Therefore, in some way s/he is living immorally. If you feel it is too easy to determine quality of morality, given your own declaration of the purpose of living, I encourage trying to find greater definition to your understanding of the purpose of life.
3. We are all children of God, therefore, we are all children of the Truth. However, according to your purpose for life (which I personally like), we must grow from being children of the Truth to being the Truth. Therefore, if there is no growth towards being the Truth, then in some way, we are living immorally.

Also, would you please share the Scripture regarding the prostitute? I would definitely enjoy reading the verses directly.

Mat 21:31: Jesus *said to them, "Truly I say to you that the tax collectors and prostitutes will get into the kingdom of God before you.

Are you like the Pharisees? The Pharissees used to ritually cleanse themselves and separate themselves from sinners, thinking they were the sinless ones. Alot of Christians are like that. They think just because of their faith they are separate from the world and therefore, act like they are. They sit upon a bitter judgment seat, judging peoples that are different from them, not out of righteousness but out of unrighteous thought.

A prostitute and a homosexual could be great lovers of Christ; and besides that they are people, people deserving love and understanding. To sit and judge them of their sin is quite hypocritical; as one does not judge one’s self of one’s own sin also.

If one sinner is allowed to lead his life of sin then how come another sinner is not allowed to lead is life of sin (homosexuality)?

 

[Sacred_Heart_1]

I see the homosexual as being far worse. The prostitute does what she does for money- and therefore her act has a rational (if wrong) motivation. The prostitute may just be poor, desperate, or confused.

Whereas the homosexual is doing something fundamentally perverse, for no reason other than perversity itself.

We know the Jesus ate with prostitutes. However, no where is it recorded that he associated with ‘gays’.

Heterosexuals do perverse things too. Anal sex and oral sex. But that is cleaner to you than a homosexuals anal sex and oral sex, isn’t it?

You see you can’t say that all lust within sexuality is sin because then you would be guilty of sin that is equal to a homosexual’s sin.

 

[JRKH]

I am going to ignore you continuing attacks on me personally and get to the meat of the problem between us…Hopefully, someday, you might actually be able to believe me.

I’m not that stupid though, you may be in denial but I know what lust is

Perhaps it is best if we start by defining the term “Lust”. The Catechism defines lust as:
2351 Lust is disordered desire for or inordinate enjoyment of sexual pleasure. Sexual pleasure is morally disordered when sought for itself, isolated from its procreative and unitive purposes.
Note the words bolded in the above. They are important. Desire does not = lust, nor does enjoyment = lust.

You can lust after your wife in the way that you find her sexually attractive; and therefore, you still do commit adultery in your heart.

Finding ones wife “sexually attractive” is not lust. Look at the definition above.

If your eye roves to other women besides your wife, which it does because finding a woman attractive is an issue of lust.

Noting that another woman is attractive is not (necessarily) an issue of lust. Noting that another woman is attractive is not the same thing as desiring that woman.
Again - note the definition of lust given by the Church herself…

I highly doubt that you don’t notice a pair of breasts or nice legs on a women. A slight movement of the eye is an issue of lust; and I don’t believe you that you don’t ever do it because you are obviously a sexual being since you are married to a wife. You commit adultery continually in your heart just like me and everyone else. I’m just willing to admit it. I know what it is to be a man with a sexuality; and you’re no different than I. You notice a woman with your eye and you notice with lust. You may not be perverted about it or may be perverted about it but I do know that you pretend your lust does not exist because of your denial in words.

I strongly suggest that you pray on this matter of what is or is not lust. Read and reread the Church’s definition. You are defining lust too broadly, making every glance, every observation of the eye into lust. That is not lust…
Lust exists in the heart. It is a disordered desire…
I do not desire my wife in a disordered way and I do not desire other women sexually so therefore any “attractiveness” that I note in them is not sexually related and therefore not lust.

Finally - I am going to share with you something that you evidently do not know about me.
My wife is Late Stage Alzheimer’s. She cannot walk or talk or bathe herself or feed herself or get to the bathroom. I, and the people who help me, bathe her, feed her, change her, hug her, move her and love her. For all of that, she remains the Love of my life. Obviously, given her condition, we are no longer sexual and therefore, I do not lust after her…What I desire is that she be happy…period.
As for other women…as I said earlier. I am happily married. I have no desire ofr any other woman. I have not desired any other woman since I met and became involved with my wife. Do I note the attractiveness of other women? of course. Do I desire them? No.
The definition given in the Catechism bears me out in this. I do not lust in my heart.

So - I leave it up to you…in your mind and in your heart…based on what I have shred here with you…whether your treatment of me here, with it’s many accusations, has been fair or Christian.

Peace
James

 

[Sacred_Heart_1]

I am going to ignore you continuing attacks on me personally and get to the meat of the problem between us…Hopefully, someday, you might actually be able to believe me.

Perhaps it is best if we start by defining the term “Lust”. The Catechism defines lust as:
2351 Lust is disordered desire for or inordinate enjoyment of sexual pleasure. Sexual pleasure is morally disordered when sought for itself, isolated from its procreative and unitive purposes.
Note the words bolded in the above. They are important. Desire does not = lust, nor does enjoyment = lust.

Finding ones wife “sexually attractive” is not lust. Look at the definition above.

Noting that another woman is attractive is not (necessarily) an issue of lust. Noting that another woman is attractive is not the same thing as desiring that woman.
Again - note the definition of lust given by the Church herself…

I strongly suggest that you pray on this matter of what is or is not lust. Read and reread the Church’s definition. You are defining lust too broadly, making every glance, every observation of the eye into lust. That is not lust…
Lust exists in the heart. It is a disordered desire…
I do not desire my wife in a disordered way and I do not desire other women sexually so therefore any “attractiveness” that I note in them is not sexually related and therefore not lust.

Finally - I am going to share with you something that you evidently do not know about me.
My wife is Late Stage Alzheimer’s. She cannot walk or talk or bathe herself or feed herself or get to the bathroom. I, and the people who help me, bathe her, feed her, change her, hug her, move her and love her. For all of that, she remains the Love of my life. Obviously, given her condition, we are no longer sexual and therefore, I do not lust after her…What I desire is that she be happy…period.
As for other women…as I said earlier. I am happily married. I have no desire ofr any other woman. I have not desired any other woman since I met and became involved with my wife. Do I note the attractiveness of other women? of course. Do I desire them? No.
The definition given in the Catechism bears me out in this. I do not lust in my heart.

So - I leave it up to you…in your mind and in your heart…based on what I have shred here with you…whether your treatment of me here, with it’s many accusations, has been fair or Christian.

Peace
James

I am truly sorry about your wife. However, your attraction toward other women is your desire. The way you look upon a woman and the way Jesus looks upon a woman is completely different. You notice through a sexual nature, Jesus notices through a divine nature. You can’t tell me you have a divine nature, solely, when you have expressed to me that over your course of life you have had a sexual existence.

It is the way you look at someone that divulges a lustful eye. You have seen a woman as sexual during your life. Concupiscence does not end during one’s lifetime after one has chosen to be sexual in their existence. Sexual desire or the lust is part of attraction. When you notice a woman’s curves you are doing it out of that desire. Your eye notices and therefore you lust. Your denial of your concupiscence is a lack of your own self-understanding.

 

[jochoa]

Mat 21:31: Jesus *said to them, "Truly I say to you that the tax collectors and prostitutes will get into the kingdom of God before you.

Are you like the Pharisees? The Pharissees used to ritually cleanse themselves and separate themselves from sinners, thinking they were the sinless ones. Alot of Christians are like that. They think just because of their faith they are separate from the world and therefore, act like they are. They sit upon a bitter judgment seat, judging peoples that are different from them, not out of righteousness but out of unrighteous thought.

A prostitute and a homosexual could be great lovers of Christ; and besides that they are people, people deserving love and understanding. To sit and judge them of their sin is quite hypocritical; as one does not judge one’s self of one’s own sin also.

If one sinner is allowed to lead his life of sin then how come another sinner is not allowed to lead is life of sin (homosexuality)?

Thank you very much for sharing Scripture with me! It is a very helpful passage.

Please consider the following points:
First, I have not shared my understanding of the purpose of life. And according to my understanding of the purpose of life, it is impossible for me to determine/judge the righteousness of any other person’s actions. I do my best to try to love as God loves, while knowing that I am the worst and most undeserving person of heaven, which means I know all others are far greater people than me.
Second, what is your intention of asking the question, “Where is the morality in various lifestyles?” Are you seeking to understand how to determine morality within yourself or others?

Thank you for the discussion! It is very interesting!

 

[JRKH]

I am truly sorry about your wife.

Thank you. For all that we go through on a daily basis, she is still the best thing that ever happened to me this side of heaven.
My main reason for sharing with you is so that perhaps, in future you will consider that another person’s circumstances are quite different from what you think they are. Perhaps you will be less likely to make assumptions about another person and the validity of the the answers they give.

However, your attraction toward other women is your desire.

I think perhaps some clarification is in order. You seem to be equating looking at someone and noting that they are attractive is the same thing as desiring that person. I do not accept that these two things are equal. What I said is that I can and do look at other women and find them attractive. There is a subtle but distinct difference between attractive, and attraction
I can look at a friend’s wife and note that she is pretty, is slim and fit, dresses well, has a nice smile, good personality etc. and be happy for my friend to have been blessed by God with such a wife without desiring her to be mine instead of his. The same holds true for a perfect stranger.

The way you look upon a woman and the way Jesus looks upon a woman is completely different. You notice through a sexual nature, Jesus notices through a divine nature. You can’t tell me you have a divine nature, solely, when you have expressed to me that over your course of life you have had a sexual existence.

What you say here might be true, but it simply does not equate to Lust as defined by the Church.

It is the way you look at someone that divulges a lustful eye. You have seen a woman as sexual during your life. Concupiscence does not end during one’s lifetime after one has chosen to be sexual in their existence. Sexual desire or the lust is part of attraction. When you notice a woman’s curves you are doing it out of that desire. Your eye notices and therefore you lust.

Again - I disagree. In order for something to be lust, there needs to be a “Disordered desire”. The Church says that it is, “morally disordered when sought for itself, isolated from its procreative and unitive purposes”.
Since I do not look at women in this way - as sexual objects that I wish to have carnal knowledge of - I have not lusted.
If you can show me in Catholic Church teaching where simply looking at a woman and noting that she is pretty constitutes lust…I’ll be happy to acknowledge it, apologize to you and work to overcome the inappropriate behavior.

Your denial of your concupiscence is a lack of your own self-understanding.

Perhaps.
Or possibly you are expanding the definition of lust inappropriately - to the point where simply looking at a woman and noting that she IS a woman would constitute lust.

Please do consider carefully the definition provided by the Catholic Church in the Catechism. I honestly think that you are being too hard on yourself in this and consequently being too hard on others.

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

Mat 21:31: Jesus *said to them, "Truly I say to you that the tax collectors and prostitutes will get into the kingdom of God before you.

Are you like the Pharisees? The Pharissees used to ritually cleanse themselves and separate themselves from sinners, thinking they were the sinless ones. Alot of Christians are like that. They think just because of their faith they are separate from the world and therefore, act like they are. They sit upon a bitter judgment seat, judging peoples that are different from them, not out of righteousness but out of unrighteous thought.

Does a person have to be perfected before they are allowed to share the teaching of the Church?
Certainly there are people who express a “holier than thou” attitude. There are also people who reject sound teaching because they find the teacher to be imperfect in their person or they find the manner in which the truth is delivered to be unpalatable. Both of these errors stem from pride which, like lust, is a sin.

A prostitute and a homosexual could be great lovers of Christ; and besides that they are people, people deserving love and understanding. To sit and judge them of their sin is quite hypocritical; as one does not judge one’s self of one’s own sin also.

Indeed. All of us being sinners are deserving of love and understanding. But what does that mean?
How do we best “love and understand” another person.
We cannot accept the sin of prostitution…we cannot accept the sin of homosexual acts. To do so is to go against the teaching of Christ and His Church. To do so is not Love for it does not seek the highest good for the other person.
So tell me please - - I am truly interested…How do you suggest we love and understand such people and still be loyal to Christ?

If one sinner is allowed to lead his life of sin then how come another sinner is not allowed to lead is life of sin (homosexuality)?

I don’t understand this. Who is being “allowed” to live a life of sin?

Peace
James

 

[Qoeleth]

Heterosexuals do perverse things too. Anal sex and oral sex. But that is cleaner to you than a homosexuals anal sex and oral sex, isn’t it?

You see you can’t say that all lust within sexuality is sin because then you would be guilty of sin that is equal to a homosexual’s sin.

Well, I would say all lust IS sin. However, heterosexual lust is redeemed through marriage and procreation (cf. Augustine). That is why all humans (except Jesus) are “conceived in sin.”

 

[themonk86]

Introducing morality into any situation is a good thing. Even if it is in the midst of corruption and evil. The good makes the evil good. The presence of goodness enlightens the world. The presence of goodness; as in a monogamous relationship between homosexuals enlightens homosexuality.

Umm maybe according to you, but not according to the Catholic Church. I refer you to the Catechism of the Catholic Church paragraph 2357:

“…Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared tat “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.” 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.”

Would you rather have utter perversion between homosexuals or would you rather have loving relationships between them? The moral beginning is there in the act of marriage, a monogamous life between gays. It starts there. There will always be homosexuals. It is a natural human condition to want to be gay. It doesn’t go against nature. It can begin when a child is born…

No, I would rather have the homosexuals stop having a homosexual relationship and heed the call to chastity as the Catholic Church teaches. Once again I refer you to the Catechism to the Catholic Church paragraph 2359. Homosexuals cannot have a valid marriage in the eyes of the Church so it doesn’t matter if they are monogamous or not, by their acts they are committing a grave sin and living a lie. Also it is not a natural human condition to want to be gay and that has never been definitively proven. Your assuming on that part and it does go against nature. No homosexual couple could ever have a child if it wasn’t for the use or science or adoption. There is no complementarity between two homosexual persons. And as far as what the Church teaches about marriage read paragraphs 1603-1605 of the Catechism. Also because of Original Sin we will always have murderers, rapists, and thieves but that doesn’t mean we should accept their sinful behaviors and make them legal. The fact is is that homosexual acts are gravely sinful and just like other sinful acts the person should work towards holiness not his own sinful desires because they want an excuse to sin.

Monagomy is a moral act regardless if it committed by a heterosexual or a homosexual. You act like homosexuals can do no good and that is just plain ignorance.

Monogamy should be celebrated between married heterosexual couples. What I think you fail to grasp is what the Church teaches about homosexual acts. I never said that homosexuals are evil people or that they can’t do anything wrong. On the contrary they can be holy people if the follow what the Church teaches. What I’m saying is that homosexual acts are gravely wrong just like pornography or masturbation is. For example, I would tell my friend that he was performing a grave sin and needed to stop if he told me he was masturbating to a homemade pornographic film of his wife. Now just because he’s only masturbating to his wife, and in a sense being monogamous, doesn’t make it moral. It’s still sinful! Now for you to mis-understand my reply and call me ignorant just shows me how much your not seeing what other posters and myself are saying. I hope you will read the parts of the Catechism I told you about and/or look on catholic.com to see what the Church teaches about homosexuality.

 

[Robertanthony]

Mat 21:31: Jesus *said to them, "Truly I say to you that the tax collectors and prostitutes will get into the kingdom of God before you.

Are you like the Pharisees? The Pharissees used to ritually cleanse themselves and separate themselves from sinners, thinking they were the sinless ones. Alot of Christians are like that. They think just because of their faith they are separate from the world and therefore, act like they are. They sit upon a bitter judgment seat, judging peoples that are different from them, not out of righteousness but out of unrighteous thought.

A prostitute and a homosexual could be great lovers of Christ; and besides that they are people, people deserving love and understanding. To sit and judge them of their sin is quite hypocritical; as one does not judge one’s self of one’s own sin also.

If one sinner is allowed to lead his life of sin then how come another sinner is not allowed to lead his life of sin (homosexuality)?

Heterosexuals who aren’t married are expected to remain chaste because no sexual activity can take place outside of a consecrated union of a man and woman without it being sinful. Sex in God’s plan was to be between a woman and a man in a loving relationship, a consecrated union, and the purpose was procreative and unitive. Anyone who has any kind of sexual activity outside of what God ordained deviates from God’s plan/will = sins. Nobody gets a free pass. I’ll let God be the judge for the person’s culpability for his sins as God alone can make that judgement as he knows everyone through and through/perfectly.