Senior German Priest Calls Homosexuality a Sickness. A Report

[JMMJ]

Lots of Rejection by men and not having a father figure caused her to have identity issues and thus become gay.

Then how do you explain the many many people who grew up the exact same way and are straight, heterosexuals?

 

[Salibi]

Then why before 1973 was homosexuality labeled a mental disorder in the DSM. Many Muslims today in the Middle East also see it as such, I’ve talked to several.

Well this is… not a correct way to think. They were obviously wrong.

 

[Thorolfr]

jzea1992:

Then why before 1973 was homosexuality labeled a mental disorder in the DSM. Many Muslims today in the Middle East also see it as such, I’ve talked to several.

Well this is… not a correct way to think. They were obviously wrong.

And they’ve been wrong about quite a few things besides homosexuality over the years (and that’s not to deny that almost everyone could still benefit from seeing a psychologist or even a psychiatrists from time to time).

 

[SeraficLeo]

I should have been clearer. Everyone is “heterosexual.” No one has been or ever will be “born gay.” It’s impossible because man is naturally a gendered animal. People riot and protest the fact of existence: that is all that so-called homosexuality is and it is as old as fallen man.

 

[SeraficLeo]

A lot of people have been wrong about a lot of things. If you want to make that argument, fine: but as a point of fact everyone knows homosexuality in secular literature stopped being a mental disorder or character fault (lustful selfishness and childish rebellious behavior) because the secular American shrink society was attacked, manipulated and threatened.

Homosexuals are are sinners in need of God’s merciful love.

 

[Thorolfr]

I should have been clearer. Everyone is “heterosexual.” No one has been or ever will be “born gay.” It’s impossible because man is naturally a gendered animal. People riot and protest the fact of existence: that is all that so-called homosexuality is and it is as old as fallen man.

het·er·o·sex·u·al
adjective
(of a person) sexually attracted to people of the opposite sex.

Of course, everyone is not heterosexual since everyone is not sexually attracted to people of the opposite sex. It’s even possible to test a man in a lab, for example, and determine whether he is sexually aroused by visual sexual stimuli involving the opposite sex.

And I agree that no one is born gay in the sense that no one has a real sexuality when they’re born either gay or straight. Sexuality and sexual orientation is something that develops later. The consensus among most scientists seems to be that a person’s eventual sexual orientation is determined by a complex interplay between their genes and the environment (both in the womb and after birth) which means that genetic factors do have some influence. This is hardly surprising, however, since there is increasing evidence that many of our eventual characteristics, including many personality characteristics, result from such an interplay.

 

[Thorolfr]

Homosexuals are selfish, period. They are sinners in need of God’s love and message. They have caused enormous harm to society because of their selfishness. Enormous harm.

I don’t think that I’m especially selfish, certainly no more than most people. And I don’t know of any harm that I’ve caused to society. Most of my straight friends seem to think that I’m a pretty nice guy.

 

[CilladeRoma]

@SeraficLeo
“Homosexuals are selfish, period. They are sinners in need of God’s love and message. They have caused enormous harm to society because of their selfishness. Enormous harm.”

This is what you originally said in a reply. I see the you have edited it, but I feel the need to reply to this.

This is another perfect example of why gay people think the Church hates them.
Gay people are no more selfish than straight people. And all of us, every single one, is in need of God’s mercy.

 

[joyfulandactive]

This thread is covering a wide range of topics but I will just make an observation on showing physical affection. I am not American, I am a legal immigrant very happily to my American husband with a number of American born children.

As an immigrant I have noticed that many people in American society seem quite uncomfortable with physical affection and can actually be quite self-conscious about it. There is a type of hug in fact where the American person hold you parallel to themselves, barely making any physical contact and then gives you some stiff pats on your back. I have experienced this from people of all ages and both men and women. When I was new to the USA I thought it was the strangest thing because it was not remotely relaxed. The person involved is usually just as loving and kind as any other person. In my circle of immigrant friends and immediate family this is known as “an American hug”. I don’t reciprocate anymore I just go right on in and give them a “proper” hug, that is I make body contact and give them a good squeeze :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes:! I have never had any complaints, in fact people compliment me on being “a great hugger”.

In my husband’s family they dearly love each other but they are the worst huggers. There is quite a lot of awkward side hugging. I had to teach my husband how to accept hugs from our kids and how to hug back, especially our son. But when I think about it even now my husband does not randomly hug anyone except me. And it’s our son who will sometimes give his dad a random hug and say “I love you dad” (he is 13) but I have never EVER seen my husband give my son a random hug.

I think perhaps the heavy sexualization of American society is a result of people trying to connect because sexual contact is actually socially acceptable. Constant warm hugs and affection are actually seen as strange and suspect by many people.

I absolutely love Americans and find them generally cheerful, friendly and welcoming. If only they would hug more! I wonder if it comes from the the historical puritanical streak?