Redeeming Qualities in Same-Sex Relationships

[catholic1seeks]

The sin of contraception can be removed from a relationship. The same can not be said for a same sex marriage.

Wait. You did not really answer the question.

According to you, both a homosexual union/marriage and a heterosexual marriage with contraception include specific acts that are inherently sinful.

The former one has no good qualities in the relationship because of the sinful acts involved. Is this or is this not the same case for a heterosexual married couple who consistently engage in contraception? Is every aspect of their marriage immoral or wrong because of this sinful activity they engage in?

 

[estesbob]

Wait. You did not really answer the question.

According to you, both a homosexual union/marriage and a heterosexual marriage with contraception include specific acts that are inherently sinful.

The former one has no good qualities in the relationship because of the sinful acts involved. Is this or is this not the same case for a heterosexual married couple who consistently engage in contraception? Is every aspect of their marriage immoral or wrong because of this sinful activity they engage in?

A same sex relationship can never be valid-it is corrupt by its very nature. This is in no way comparable to people who are married and commit which would include everyone who is married . BTW.

 

[catholic1seeks]

A same sex relationship can never be valid-it is corrupt by its very nature. This is in no way comparable to people who are married and commit which would include everyone who is married . BTW.

So what makes a homosexual marriage sinful?

 

[pnewton]

So if a heterosexual (married) couple is consistently contracepting, can that relationship be good at all? Or does the inherent evil of contraception nullify the entire relationship?

To use an example of contraception, you must narrow the question down, to be a valid analogy. In this case, you can truthfully say that there is not redeeming qualities in the act of contraception.

 

[estesbob]

So what makes a homosexual marriage sinful?

Because it makes a mockery of the sacred sacrament of marriage and institutionalizes sinful behavior

 

[catholic1seeks]

To use an example of contraception, you must narrow the question down, to be a valid analogy. In this case, you can truthfully say that there is not redeeming qualities in the act of contraception.

Exactly.

Did you get a chance to look at the convo that led to me to say what I said?

 

[estesbob]

Exactly.

Did you get a chance to look at the convo that led to me to say what I said?

You’re missing the point. Contraception the problem with the married couple., not the relations homosexualIty the homosexual couple it is therelationship that is the problem. It can never be made licit no matter how hard they try

 

[Kurisu35712]

So what makes a homosexual marriage sinful?

I’m not sure if you missed my post or what, but I already explained why in a previous post. Compare a homosexual relationship and a close friendship between two people of the same sex. The only difference in actions in the two relationships is that the homosexual couple has sex, and the two friends do not.

Despite all other externally visible interactions being the same, the homosexual relationship is inherently sinful, as one of the main facets of the relationship is the sexual activity and lust between the couple. The fact that the relationship has a basis in sex which is disordered is what makes the relationship sinful. Not the fact that it is two men in a relationship, but that it is two men in a sexual relationship. That is a defining characteristic.

No one has said that two individuals in a same sex relationship are never beneficial to each other in any way, which is what you seem to be interpreting. But the fact that the couple is putting each other’s soul in danger makes the relationship dangerous for them and sinful.

 

[SilverLight]

I don’t think I can be Catholic anymore.

I wonder why I continue to look at this forum my self. I am Catholic and was raised as one and was never told that being gay was wrong. I don’t care what gay people do unless they are trying to harm someone physically.

 

[on_the_hill]

I wonder why I continue to look at this forum my self. I am Catholic and was raised as one and was never told that being gay was wrong. I don’t care what gay people do unless they are trying to harm someone physically.

The only person who ever told me gay was wrong was my dad. He hated the gays. He even hated that they stole the word gay. (True story).

He never knew any real life gays.

Then my cousin “came out” and my dad softened his stance. He hated lawyers just as much as the gays. That all changed when a different cousin went to law school.

It must be tough to lkeep changing your stance on absolutes when faced with reality.

 

[SilverLight]

The only person who ever told me gay was wrong was my dad. He hated the gays. He even hated that they stole the word gay. (True story).

He never knew any real life gays.

Then my cousin “came out” and my dad softened his stance. He hated lawyers just as much as the gays. That all changed when a different cousin went to law school.

It must be tough to lkeep changing your stance on absolutes when faced with reality.

My cousin came out and I was fine with it and my parents seem to be also. My cousin is still the same guy who taught me how to play Halo on the Xbox all those years ago. I never thought differently of him.

 

[Rau]

I don’t think I can be Catholic anymore.

Please explain what that statement means to you.

 

[Rau]

… I understood that many would accept homosexual activity as sinful, but there does not seem to be much openness to understanding what homosexual relationships are really like or what good they can bring to the persons in the relationship and the surrounding community.

I have no difficulty understanding your point here.

I can think of many things that can bring some (earthly) good to a person. Contraception, abortion, murder, lying, bank robbery. Yes, the consequences of these things might offer happiness, safety and security - which are goods. But would we say that that fact demonstrates a redeeming quality in the act? And even if you can see past the acts concerned to acknowledge that maybe some good flowed from these acts, does it enable you to conclude that - in light of these consequences - maybe we should be more tolerant of these acts? Hardly! We know our Catholic moral theology teaches (infallibly) that there are acts which themselves are intrinsically evil - and such acts include all those listed and more.

There are theories of morality that reject the idea of intrinsically evil acts and thus the morality or immorality of acts fall to Intentions and/or a weighing of consequences. Veritatis Splendor speaks of these theories and rejects them absolutely. I understand why those theories may be appealing to some.

 

[SilverLight]

To use an example of contraception, you must narrow the question down, to be a valid analogy. In this case, you can truthfully say that there is not redeeming qualities in the act of contraception.

However the pill Is taken by some women for medical reasons.

 

[john_ennis]

I have no difficulty understanding your point here.

I can think of many things that can bring some (earthly) good to a person. Contraception, abortion, murder, lying, bank robbery. Yes, the consequences of these things might offer happiness, safety and security - which are goods. But would we say that that fact demonstrates a redeeming quality in the act? And even if you can see past the acts concerned to acknowledge that maybe some good flowed from these acts, does it enable you to conclude that - in light of these consequences - maybe we should be more tolerant of these acts? Hardly! We know our Catholic moral theology teaches (infallibly) that there are acts which themselves are intrinsically evil - and such acts include all those listed and more.

There are theories of morality that reject the idea of intrinsically evil acts and thus the morality or immorality of acts fall to Intentions and/or a weighing of consequences. Veritatis Splendor speaks of these theories and rejects them absolutely. I understand why those theories may be appealing to some.

This really is a very complete answer to the thread. An act that is sinful by its nature can have positive side-effects.

 

[Rau]

However the pill Is taken by some women for medical reasons.

Your response reveals a misunderstanding of the meaning of contraception.

 

[john_ennis]

I don’t think I can be Catholic anymore.

catholic1seeks, You are getting answers from people who have pride and ignorance as part of our makeup. The best of us will still only explain Catholic teaching in a lame way.

If you are always seeking the truth, I’m sure you agree that you are seeking God. If that seems to take you toward or away from a given faith, that would seem secondary.

I don’t know about others, but I’m very aware that my responses to gay rights supporters who have loving reasons for their beliefs, often *feel * harsh. So the pride in me compensates by asserting things more vigorously.

You have been impressive in your even thinking–processing what’s being suggested rather than reacting. This seems to be a love and respect for Truth. God is truth.

 

[SilverLight]

Your response reveals a misunderstanding of the meaning of contraception.

No I’m just saying some women take the pill for medical reasons. I have told you nothing of my education therefore how can you make that judgment? I took health class and had the talk with my parents I know what contraception is.

 

[catholic1seeks]

Please explain what that statement means to you.

When I submitted that, and when I think this at times, I mean that I do not think it makes sense for me to be Catholic. The Faith is supposed to correspond to reality and lead to our fulfillment: God made us with us being happy in mind (even if this ultimately happens in eternity). However, I intensely feel at times – like when I wrote that post – that Catholicism does not incorporate me, that it does not really look at all of human reality, etc. I wonder why so many people on this Earth want to love and form families with members of the same sex when homosexual acts and (apparently to many on this forum, homosexual relationships, too) are so grave an evil. Our desires don’t justify what is authentically good and true, of course. But it really seems that the umbrella of humanity is much larger than the umbrella carried by the Church.

 

[catholic1seeks]

I’m not sure if you missed my post or what, but I already explained why in a previous post. Compare a homosexual relationship and a close friendship between two people of the same sex. The only difference in actions in the two relationships is that the homosexual couple has sex, and the two friends do not.

Despite all other externally visible interactions being the same, the homosexual relationship is inherently sinful, as one of the main facets of the relationship is the sexual activity and lust between the couple. The fact that the relationship has a basis in sex which is disordered is what makes the relationship sinful. Not the fact that it is two men in a relationship, but that it is two men in a sexual relationship. That is a defining characteristic.

No one has said that two individuals in a same sex relationship are never beneficial to each other in any way, which is what you seem to be interpreting. But the fact that the couple is putting each other’s soul in danger makes the relationship dangerous for them and sinful.

See, (romantic) relationships are not all about sex, and this subject is being frames as if the homosexual relationship is primarily a sexual one. Regardless, sexual activity is included, but how that makes the entire relationship **inherently **sinful is beyond me. Maybe we are not using “inherently” in the same sense. I think of it the way the Church uses it in her magisterial documents, whereby a sin is in and of itself sinful, regardless of the circumstances. Perhaps you mean it slightly different, as if the homosexual relationship is bound to be sinful as it contains sinful acts, or something. Once again, I have to bring in the example of the contracepting married couple. They are performing illicit, intrinsically (inherently) evil sexual acts that disorder the purpose of sex in traditional Catholic understanding. SO is their entire relationship inherently sinful? — And are there absolutely no good qualities that come forth from this relationship? I would say that there are good qualities. Genuine self-sacrifice, mutual love and encouragement, joy and happiness, commitment, genuine friendship, etc. are all things that can exist. And I say that such things as well as others would exist in a gay relationship. We therefore need not only focus on the sin when homosexual persons come to our churches, but we need to figure out how they are able to be embraced where they are in their lives.