Scriptures and Homosexuality

[billcu1]

Whether people are born with a predisposition to be gay or not gay is irrelevant. The follow through on homosexual actions is still morally wrong and against the natural law. Being born with a predisposition to alcoholism doesn’t make drinking to excess, even if it doesn’t impact work, okay. Neither does the fact that people are born with club feet make having club feet natural to the human essence.

Edit: My apologies for the original wording, which incorrectly implied that same sex attraction, without any action, was itself morally wrong. It is not. God loves us, and desires us to strive to perfect ourselves according to our essence, even when we struggle and fall.

It’s all basically ‘confusion’. What “causes it”? Curiosity might ask. Genes some say? Well we still have all our reptilian and other genes all turned off. Two of the same sex of humanity don’t come together to create.

 

[billcu1]

I totally agree it is morally wrong and against natural law the Bible is the word of God and we as Catholics have to uphold the word of God to the fullest extent

Sexual acts. Promiscuity of either sex there’s the sin. But Homosexuals are welcome in the Church.

 

[billcu1]

There is no scientific evidence of being born gay or a homosexual

No but they’re liable to come up with it. Through some political motivations and political groups. But that doesn’t mean it’s science. The DSM had homosexuality once. Politics removed it.

 

[clem456]

The Church observes and proclaims what God reveals.
What is revealed is that man is male and female. The Church teaches what God reveals. Scripture proclaims it.

The genius of JP2 is this: he observes that God speaks through the human body. The way we are made has meaning and significance. JP2 even refers to the primordial sacrament.

Roman’s 1: Notice that when Paul goes off on a raging rant against the sins of the people, this rant revolves around deception. If we turn our heads from what is evident, the result is always disaster.
He lists a lot of sins here, but this is the where the rubber hits the road:

The wrath* of God* is indeed being revealed from heaven against every impiety and wickednessp of those who suppress the truth by their wickedness.
19
For what can be known about God is evident to them, because God made it evident to them.q
20
**Ever since the creation of the world, his invisible attributes of eternal power and divinity have been able to be understood and perceived in what he has made.r As a result, they have no excuse;
**21
for although they knew God they did not accord him glory as God or give him thanks. Instead, they became vain in their reasoning, and their senseless minds were darkened.s
22
While claiming to be wise,t they became fools
…
They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and revered and worshiped the creature rather than the creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.w
26
Therefore, God handed them over…

 

[Rau]

No evidence of this. No scientific proof. Without facts, anything can be said or believed.

Would it help you to meet a person congenitally blind? Is it your belief that God actively chose for that child to be blind?

Persons (men, say) report they find men sexually attractive and not women. Are they lying? If not, where does the experience come from? The answer is - we don’t know.

The experience of attraction is not condemned, only homosexual conduct. Should a person endeavour to refrain from this behaviour, but fail on occasion, their circumstances might lessen culpability. To reject the Church teaching and to embrace the behaviour would seem to be to embrace sin.

 

[Rau]

…But someone could also make a valid point by saying that our understanding of homosexuality has changed: It is not just something people DO but something people are and experience within themselves.

Such would not be a valid point. It is only the “doing” that is at issue. The motivation for the act does not change the act to a good one. We are male and female as our biology dictates. That sets a frameworks for how our sexuality is to be exercised.

 

[on_the_hill]

No evidence of this. No scientific proof. Without facts, anything can be said or believed.

You mean like the existence of God?

 

[on_the_hill]

Does that B mean Bisexual or Bestiality ? What’s the Q and T ?

Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Questioning

Some add an A for Allies or Allied, meaning straight people who are advocates for LGBTQ people.

 

[billcu1]

You mean like the existence of God?

I think that is “self evident”.

 

[on_the_hill]

I think that is “self evident”.

I would agree that it is self-evident that there’s no scientific proof for the existence of God.

 

[Rau]

It may not follow the natural law in order to get pregnant, but it follows the natural law regarding a person’s physical, mental, and emotional feelings and inclination.

The feelings are surely reality. The acts - which by their nature see men exchanging sperm - are surely dissonant, and inconsistent with the nature of men and their sexual capacity.

 

[Lea101]

Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Questioning

Some add an A for Allies or Allied, meaning straight people who are advocates for LGBTQ people.

I thought the A was for asexuals, and Q was queer. Although queer is viewed as a slur so maybe not

 

[mattp0625]

And?

There is no scientific evidence any gods exist, or that one specific God is the correct one. But I assume you do believe it is so…without any scientific evidence to back it up.

Many theists say they feel or know it’s true that a God exists–and that it is *obvious *to them without a doubt.

Well, gay people feel and know they are homosexual. It is obvious to them without a doubt.

.

Science does not prove morality, faith or God. It can’t even prove the usage of fish oil.

CS Lewis proved absolute good and moral code and God using philosophy

History proves the existence of Jesus and the apostles

Miracles and other mystical events also prove God.

 

[billcu1]

Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Questioning

Some add an A for Allies or Allied, meaning straight people who are advocates for LGBTQ people.

I think for us as Catholics, being “allies” would be a sin. It’s not a people thing but the actions we would be allied too.

 

[billcu1]

The feelings are surely reality. The acts - which by their nature see men exchanging sperm - are surely dissonant, and inconsistent with the nature of men and their sexual capacity.

If feelings are reality. They sure don’t mean anything. Feelings aren’t good or bad they just are. One can have good feeling about bad things. And vice versa. It’s all that confusion we have. Moses said it right as for Bestiality, it is “confusion”.

 

[billcu1]

And?

There is no scientific evidence any gods exist, or that one specific God is the correct one. But I assume you do believe it is so…without any scientific evidence to back it up.

Many theists say they feel or know it’s true that a God exists–and that it is *obvious *to them without a doubt.

Well, gay people feel and know they are homosexual. It is obvious to them without a doubt.

.

I don’t know how you can “feel” that God exists. I don’t know what is meant by “know”.

 

[billcu1]

It may not follow the natural law in order to get pregnant, but it follows the natural law regarding a person’s physical, mental, and emotional feelings and inclination.

.

Emotions and feelings. Are a/the problem. In anything. They cannot be trusted and mean nothing.

 

[sirach2v4]

I totally agree it is morally wrong and against natural law the Bible is the word of God and we as Catholics have to uphold the word of God to the fullest extent

That is true, as long as we all know what that is, instead of just assuming what it is. “the fullest extent” is a term we hear on TV or otherwise in some legal context of judging others. When judging others is evil in itself – Satan is called “the accuser.”

A previous post pointed to the Church position rather specifically

vatican.va/roman_curia/co…ersons_en.html

which includes the following:

*11. It has been argued that the homosexual orientation in certain cases is not the result of deliberate choice; and so the homosexual person would then have no choice but to behave in a homosexual fashion. Lacking freedom, such a person, even if engaged in homosexual activity, would not be culpable.

Here, the Church’s wise moral tradition is necessary since it warns against generalizations in judging individual cases. **In fact, circumstances may exist, or may have existed in the past, which would reduce or remove the culpability of the individual *in a given instance; or other circumstances may increase it. [but this document does not elaborate on this important point] What is at all costs to be avoided is the unfounded and demeaning assumption that the sexual behaviour of homosexual persons is always and totally compulsive and therefore inculpable. [Certainly the thinking and orientation of a person with SSA is virtually compulsive, is it not?] What is essential is that the fundamental liberty which characterizes the human person and gives him his dignity be recognized as belonging to the homosexual person as well. As in every conversion from evil, the abandonment of homosexual activity will require a profound collaboration of the individual with God’s liberating grace.

The “upholding to the fullest extent” also includes that last underlined part, about the dignity of the person with SSA. It is the absence of this recognition that so often is the basis of discrimination and hate crimes.

But, even “to the fullest extent” thus defined does not go far enough to explain how a person with SSA should live – as a hermit? in isolation? without human bonds? without friendship? under constant surveillance? There’s a whole lot for the Church to admit to.

 

[ChaosGamma]

It may not follow the natural law in order to get pregnant, but it follows the natural law regarding a person’s physical, mental, and emotional feelings and inclination.

.

By that logic, if a man happens to feel any kind of deviant sexual attraction, then it would be wrong for him not to act on those urges.

For all the talk about science and reason, Jacobins sure do put a lot of stock in irrational feelings as a guide for our personal actions and government legislation.

 

[ChaosGamma]

Would it help you to meet a person congenitally blind? Is it your belief that God actively chose for that child to be blind?

Persons (men, say) report they find men sexually attractive and not women. Are they lying? If not, where does the experience come from? The answer is - we don’t know.

Genesis 3.