Same sex attraction

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mikaele
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Mikaele

Guest
I was speaking with a friend about same sex attraction. We had a discussion about gay ‘marriage.’ I mentioned the Church’ teachings on marriage- and we spoke about the procreative and unitive elements of marriage. He said that although gay marriage isn’t procreative, neither is heterosexual marriage after a woman reaches menopause. He said that following the logical conclusion, we would come to the point where heterosexual couples would be barred from marriage after the women reaches menopause, and that any woman who reached menopause, would be unable to marry. He also said that the unitive element of marriage is also present in same sex relationships. Can someone help me out please?
 
He said this, ‘You could keep raising the age limit, women stop ovulation at various times in their life. The whole point I’m making is that if one were to apply the Catholic religion’s logic on sex to anyone other than homosexuals the conclusion would be ridiculous.’
 
Although it was never Church teaching, sometimes couples DID stop having relations when the woman reached menopause.

Thing is, a heterosexual couple must be open to life. From Scripture, we know that Sarah conceived Isaac when she was past menopause. God has the upper hand. You could say that it’s the principle of the thing. A couple who is told that one member is infertile is not forbidden to have relations, as God can work miracles.

A homosexual ‘couple’ can never be open to life, because the transmission of life is not possible in their ‘union’.
 
Noncelibate same sex attraction is address as a sinful action in Sacred Scripture. Has your friend found a “logical conclusion” for those statements?
 
Mikaele said:
He said this, ‘You could keep raising the age limit, women stop ovulation at various times in their life. The whole point I’m making is that if one were to apply the Catholic religion’s logic on sex to anyone other than homosexuals the conclusion would be ridiculous.’
Click to expand...
Your friend assumes s/he understands the Church’s “logic”.

In a sense, the Church does apply the same “logic” to other people than homosexuals. A heterosexual couple who does not intend to have children is not considered to be in a valid marriage, either, because they intend to suppress the procreative aspects of sexuality.
 
Mikaele said:
I was speaking with a friend about same sex attraction. We had a discussion about gay ‘marriage.’ I mentioned the Church’ teachings on marriage- and we spoke about the procreative and unitive elements of marriage. He said that although gay marriage isn’t procreative, neither is heterosexual marriage after a woman reaches menopause. ?
Click to expand...
your friend is simply wrong, and so are you if you buy into this. I am a 60 year old married woman and you are both full of baloney. How do you know anything about our marriage? Plenty of folks in the village gossiped that Abraham and Sarah were passed it, not to mention Hannah, Elizabeth and Zachary and other notable biblical old codgers. Hah hah, last laugh on them. Women do not become incapable of marital relations, nor do their husbands, after menopause, and there are cases on record, outside the bible, of older women conceiving.

there is nothing unitive about the jointure of the body parts commonly used in the male homosexual act. Unitive means potential procreative at the same time, that is, the union of the male and female body parts nature intended for that purpose. If you stick your finger into another person’s ear that does not make it a unitive act.
 
Mikaele said:
I was speaking with a friend about same sex attraction. We had a discussion about gay ‘marriage.’ I mentioned the Church’ teachings on marriage- and we spoke about the procreative and unitive elements of marriage. He said that although gay marriage isn’t procreative, neither is heterosexual marriage after a woman reaches menopause. He said that following the logical conclusion, we would come to the point where heterosexual couples would be barred from marriage after the women reaches menopause, and that any woman who reached menopause, would be unable to marry. He also said that the unitive element of marriage is also present in same sex relationships. Can someone help me out please?
Click to expand...
Having sex while sterile is still performing sex in the exact same way as a fertile couple would. The couple does not do anything of their own will which subtracts from the full meaning of sexuality.

Homosexual relations cannot even be properly called “sex”. No union of genitals or gametes is possible between two people of the same sex. It’s simple biology. Maybe you should ask your friend why all non-intercourse use of the genitals simulates heterosexual intercourse and why a man releases sperm during his orgasm, even if he’s doing it with another man.
 
He’s not a Christian- so quoting Divine Revelation is a waste of time. Philosophically, why does marriage have to have the unitive and procreative elements in it?
 
Mikaele said:
He’s not a Christian- so quoting Divine Revelation is a waste of time. Philosophically, why does marriage have to have the unitive and procreative elements in it?
Click to expand...
Technically it doesn’t. We can define marriage as anything we want. We can ascribe the word “marriage” to a farmer’s relationship with his cows if that becomes the new norm someday. Buts words in a language that society uses are supposed to refer to agreed-upon concepts. The gay-marriage debate is only about homosexual couples trying to get society to equate their relationships with heterosexual relationships. The fact is, traditional marriage is highly regarded and admired by most people. Same-sex couples want that societal recognition as well, so they want to ascribe the word marriage to their relationships, which would necessarily equate same-sex and hetero-sex relationships as being the same thing. If what we called “traditional marriage” had instead always been referred to as “civil unions”, homosexual activists would want their relationships to be called that instead.
 
Luke

Same-sex couples want that societal recognition as well, so they want to ascribe the word marriage to their relationships, which would necessarily equate same-sex and hetero-sex relationships as being the same thing.

Not to mention the right to adopt heterosexual children … for what purpose?
 
uxordepp said:
A homosexual ‘couple’ can never be open to life, because the transmission of life is not possible in their ‘union’.
Click to expand...
So God can cause a virgin to bear a child, but he’s not powerful enough to cause a homosexual couple to do so? How about a lesbian couple?

Things that make you go hmmmm.
 
Seeker2010 said:
So God can cause a virgin to bear a child, but he’s not powerful enough to cause a homosexual couple to do so? How about a lesbian couple?

Things that make you go hmmmm.
Click to expand...
Only if you choose to ignor natural law.
 
uxordepp said:
Although it was never Church teaching, sometimes couples DID stop having relations when the woman reached menopause.

Thing is, a heterosexual couple must be open to life. From Scripture, we know that Sarah conceived Isaac when she was past menopause. God has the upper hand. You could say that it’s the principle of the thing. A couple who is told that one member is infertile is not forbidden to have relations, as God can work miracles.

A homosexual ‘couple’ can never be open to life, because the transmission of life is not possible in their ‘union’.
Click to expand...
this “god can work miracles” argument obviously applies just as well to homosexual couples as heterosexual couples.
 
Rocinante

**presumably gay couples adopt for the same reasons that hetero couples adopt. **

Presumably hetero parents adopt assuming they will get a hetero child.

How does the homosexual couple adopt assuming they will get a homosexual child?

And would any heterosexual child be cheated of his birthright to be raised in a homosexual household, since he would not have heterosexual role models that would affirm his heterosexuality?
 
If he has that type of thinking then its not just menopause. Its also women who cannot conceive.

so maybe women who are unable to have kids just shouldn’t get married. :rolleyes:

Oh please, don’t you think we have enough people in this world yet?
Why not adopt some kids who NEED a home.
 
BlueShadow123 said:
If he has that type of thinking then its not just menopause. Its also women who cannot conceive.

so maybe women who are unable to have kids just shouldn’t get married. :rolleyes:

Oh please, don’t you think we have enough people in this world yet?
Why not adopt some kids who NEED a home.
Click to expand...
it’s not that he has that type of thinking. it is that the reasoning presented to him for why gays ought not marry leads to some ridiculous conclusions such as that women and men who are unable to have children should not marry.

gay couples of course often do adopt though the catholic church opposes this practice.

many of these children who you say need homes are in fact prevented from having homes because the church discriminates against homosexuals in its charity work to find homes for orphans.
 
Rocinante said:
this “god can work miracles” argument obviously applies just as well to homosexual couples as heterosexual couples.
Click to expand...
Let’s see it that’s true:
Originally Posted by uxordepp
Although it was never Church teaching, sometimes lesbian couples DID stop having relations when the women reached menopause.

Thing is, a homosexual couple must be open to life. -]From Scripture, we know that Sarah conceived Isaac when she was past menopause./-] God has the upper hand. You could say that it’s the principle of the thing. A couple who is told that one member is infertile is not forbidden to have relations, as God can work miracles.

-]A homosexual ‘couple’ can never be open to life, because the transmission of life is not possible in their ‘union’./-]

Okay, so it doesn’t apply just as well after all. 😉
 
Mikaele said:
He also said that the unitive element of marriage is also present in same sex relationships. Can someone help me out please?
Click to expand...
Obviously there is a ‘unitive element’ present in same sex relationships, but it would be begging the question to say that the unitive element of marriage is present. We Catholics (and the vast majority of mankind throughout history), of course, contend that it is not.
 
Rocinante said:
it’s not that he has that type of thinking. it is that the reasoning presented to him for why gays ought not marry leads to some ridiculous conclusions such as that women and men who are unable to have children should not marry.
Click to expand...
I know this. That is why I also responded in a sarcastic manner as to what he should have added to the list. Because its totally true. I couldn’t care less if a gay got married.
That is their business, not mine. And it will be legalized someday. I believe homosexuality is a sin but I don’t care if somebody is gay. That is their choice, not mine. And also too, is it really even a ‘choice’?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top