Sexual diversity, God's design, and the Catholic explanation

  • Thread starter Thread starter catholic1seeks
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Adam and Eve, whoever they were, were perfect human beings as regards mind and body wellbeing, because any deviation from that is a flaw resulting from original sin.

“Sexual diversity” so called, is a defect, because it prevents the natural potential of sexual behavior which is to generate bodies for new human life.

Therefore, “sexual diversity” would not have been part of “God’s plan,” any more than death, birth defects or any of 20,000 body problems our current embodiment is heir to. Which doesn’t mean God can’t make use of it, as He does of other conditions, but requires human cooperation rather than angry dissent (now the norm).

IMNAAHO.

ICXC NIKA
 
JD1789 said:
Where are you getting this idea that Adam was perfect?
Click to expand...
In genesis, God kept saying everything was good. After God made Adam He said:

And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good.

Genesis 1:31

Its reasonable to ascertain that Adam was the perfect genetic man. Then Adam decided he wanted to be a god, took things over and everything started falling apart.
 
Harry123 said:
In genesis, God kept saying everything was good. After God made Adam He said:

And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good.

Genesis 1:31

Its reasonable to ascertain that Adam was the perfect genetic man. Then Adam decided he wanted to be a god, took things over and everything started falling apart.
Click to expand...
Good is not perfect. I would say you are equivocating. The animals were not perfect, but were also good. Perfect genetics would be a question of science. We have an idea of what humans were like at their earliest existence. They were probably not as smart as us, not as tall, fast, strong, or rational. Science seems to suggest we have become better genetically as the diversity in our genetic pools increase. We see this in dog breeds, as an example. A pure-bred animal with less genetic diversity has worse health than many mixed-breed animals.

Is it possible that you are using a non-scientific book in order to make scientific assertions?
 
JD1789 said:
We have an idea of what humans were like at their earliest existence. They were probably not as smart as us, not as tall, fast, strong, or rational. Science seems to suggest we have become better genetically as the diversity in our genetic pools increase.
Click to expand...
The idea that the first humans were less intelligent than us is an evolutionary concept. There is no science to back it up:

theguardian.com/science/2014/apr/30/neanderthals-not-less-intelligent-humans-scientists

Homosexuality flies in the face of evolution. Shouldn’t the homosexuality flaw been evolved out rather quickly seeing how homosexuals can’t reproduce? Instead, we see all around us that homosexuality is increasing, not decreasing. Our genetics are getting worse, not evolving and becoming better. Practically all scientific studies show that conditions such as depression, autism, bi-polar disorder are increasing, not decreasing.

Its very easy to see why the world has so many genetic problems which are getting worse and worse when you throw out the evolutionary model and read the genesis account. This is a much better explanation to give to someone who is homosexual or transgender as it explains why they are the way they are. If they don’t understand why they are the way they are, aren’t they more likely to just accept their situation as normal?
 
Sexual diversity? Over 99.9% of human beings are born genetically male or female. An intersex condition is a rare genetic defect. Male or female are the default categories for human beings. As to sexual practices and sexual preferences, those are all over the map, but those are preferences and learned behaviors, not biological categories.:

The Church doesn’t necessarily take a literal view of Genesis. It does take a literal view of biology–human beings are male and female.
 
Harry123 said:
The idea that the first humans were less intelligent than us is an evolutionary concept. There is no science to back it up:

theguardian.com/science/2014/apr/30/neanderthals-not-less-intelligent-humans-scientists

Homosexuality flies in the face of evolution. Shouldn’t the homosexuality flaw been evolved out rather quickly seeing how homosexuals can’t reproduce? Instead, we see all around us that homosexuality is increasing, not decreasing. Our genetics are getting worse, not evolving and becoming better. Practically all scientific studies show that conditions such as depression, autism, bi-polar disorder are increasing, not decreasing.

Its very easy to see why the world has so many genetic problems which are getting worse and worse when you throw out the evolutionary model and read the genesis account. This is a much better explanation to give to someone who is homosexual or transgender as it explains why they are the way they are. If they don’t understand why they are the way they are, aren’t they more likely to just accept their situation as normal?
Click to expand...
That is an opinion piece about Neanderthals, which aren’t even humans. Maybe the incidence of diagnosis is increasing, but so is population and knowledge of the condition. Depression couldn’t be diagnosed 200s ago because we didn’t know how to identify it. We also would have to completely ignore any environmental factors in order to use this as evidence that it is caused by a decaying of good genetics.

An objective look at Olympic records would show an improvement across the board in world records over the years. We could also look at actual genetic research. We have the complete human genome mapped out. We can look at different combinations. To say our genetics are getting worse across the board is to misunderstand the science of genetics entirely. We are learning so much about genes and how even different combinations of genes cause different traits and abilities.

What we shouldn’t do is tell those who experience same-sex attraction that we are using Genesis as a basis for science.
 
We seem to forget that the old serpent is behind all these changes in the behaviors of men and women. Men and women are weak in these vast temptations the devil throws at them. The weakness of men and women are revealed in how easily they sin. The Apostle Paul had written than no temptation is stronger than what you can handle. It seems to tell us even more how weak we really are in the face of these temptations when it is in our power to resist them but we will not utilize that power to our benefit. How can men and women come to understand how they were created by God to resist temptation? It is by the power of the Holy Spirit when we come to be taught how we can receive the mercy of God into our lives. We can come to know how to defeat sin when we come to understand that we have the power to trample over scorpions and demons. Only God and His incredible grace will be able to uplift us from all our weaknesses. It is incredible that only few of us ever learn to become saints in this life when it is in every human being to become one. In fact it is this failure on our part to become saints when we have all this potential to become one that we need to address to overcome our present situation. We need to go to the One who is able to reveal to us how great we can become but we need to grow to follow after His design and not something else that is contrary to His will.
 
Harry123 said:
Its not really “we”. Its Jesus’ church. When Jesus gave the keys to Peter, He called it “my church”. The Pope just does what the Holy Spirit guides him to do. He can’t take Jesus’ church and start making up his own rules. All the “standards, ideals, and morality” you see in the church is straight from God. God knows whats best as he can see the bigger picture which we can’t. I know it can seem like the church is ganging up on gay people, but that’s really not the case at all in the bigger picture of things.

I know its not always easy, especially if we know someone who is gay who is also a good person, but we must fight against the temptation of trying to make up our own rules and laws about what is right and wrong. Even if we think we know best, we’d probably only end up making things worse.
Click to expand...
I have to say I agree with this. I’m reading all the other posts…
 
DaddyGirl said:
If Adam was so perfect, why was he so quick to rebel and sin and cause the entire fall of humanity, thereby causing God to send his son to earth to be tortured and killed.

I think the poster was referring to the fact that Adam lived for over 900 years so that he and his followers who also lived longer lives than anyone else in the history of mankind had a better genetic makeup than we have today. Adam was freer from the many types of diseases and illness that we now face because these diseases and illnesses had not yet appeared. This is the result of a better physical makeup but you are right concerning his spiritual makeup for he was quick to sin and not only quick to sin but he could not accept responsibility to what he had done when he sinned. I think we have better spiritual people today than Adam ever was because these saints are living the life that Adam was called to do. In this manner the saints are more perfected than Adam (in the spiritual sense).
Click to expand...
 
Harry123 said:
The idea that the first humans were less intelligent than us is an evolutionary concept. There is no science to back it up:

theguardian.com/science/2014/apr/30/neanderthals-not-less-intelligent-humans-scientists

Homosexuality flies in the face of evolution. Shouldn’t the homosexuality flaw been evolved out rather quickly seeing how homosexuals can’t reproduce? Instead, we see all around us that homosexuality is increasing, not decreasing. Our genetics are getting worse, not evolving and becoming better. Practically all scientific studies show that conditions such as depression, autism, bi-polar disorder are increasing, not decreasing.

Its very easy to see why the world has so many genetic problems which are getting worse and worse when you throw out the evolutionary model and read the genesis account. This is a much better explanation to give to someone who is homosexual or transgender as it explains why they are the way they are. If they don’t understand why they are the way they are, aren’t they more likely to just accept their situation as normal?
Click to expand...
That is an opinion piece about Neanderthals, which aren’t even humans. Maybe the incidence of diagnosis is increasing, but so is population and knowledge of the condition. Depression couldn’t be diagnosed 200s ago because we didn’t know how to identify it. We also would have to completely ignore any environmental factors in order to use this as evidence that it is caused by a decaying of good genetics.

An objective look at Olympic records would show an improvement across the board in world records over the years. We could also look at actual genetic research. We have the complete human genome mapped out. We can look at different combinations. To say our genetics are getting worse across the board is to misunderstand the science of genetics entirely. We are learning so much about genes and how even different combinations of genes cause different traits and abilities.

What we shouldn’t do is tell those who experience same-sex attraction that we are using Genesis as a basis for science.
 
JimG said:
Sexual diversity? Over 99.9% of human beings are born genetically male or female. An intersex condition is a rare genetic defect. Male or female are the default categories for human beings. As to sexual practices and sexual preferences, those are all over the map, but those are preferences and learned behaviors, not biological categories.:

The Church doesn’t necessarily take a literal view of Genesis. It does take a literal view of biology–human beings are male and female.
Click to expand...
There is a diversity of colors used in the painting in front of me, but most of the canvas is covered in blue and green.

By diversity, I mean not percentages. I mean number of types.
 
The Olympics in their modern form have existed only since 1896 (six generations).

This is far too short a time frame for genetic changes in human life to take hold, either way.

ICXC NIKA
 
Anything which disrupts the proper working of humans is a flaw. From Down’s syndrome to to a proclivity to a certain type of sin to cancer to mental illness, these are flaws in the functioning of the human who has one or more of them. And they are all crosses. We are to accept them, overcome them if necessary, and grow in holiness by doing so.
catholic1seeks said:
In my phone - but a couple of general remarks:
  1. I choose not to get my science from the Bible. I accept evolutionary theory, and I see no reason to interpret the first parts of Genesis literalistically. You do not have to accept this view to respond, but please note I work with those assumptions, and it seems the teaching church generally has moved that way, too.
  2. Homosexual attraction has to have some foundation in one’s biology - no matter how fundamental or in what sense it is “genetic” or not. Sexuality is a physical, biological reality that incorporates brain chemistry, hormones, brain structure, etc. Humans are biological entities. When I say that homosexual orientation or intersex is a biological consequence, I don’t mean there is a single gene that switches gay “on or off.” If there were no biological reality that allowed for homosexuality (in particular), then social or environmental factors would have no effect, anyway.
  3. I may be appealing to exceptions and rare situations, but that is precisely the point. The traditional Catholic umbrella of reality does not seem to very well account for the variances.
  4. Nitpicking at the little details like in what sense homosexual attraction is “genetic” or in what sense the Fall is literal distracts from the basic point: the church’s understanding of reality, as of now, does not seem to adequately explain such sexual diversity.
However we want to define the Fall of man and its effects, the reality is that humanity has only ever been one way: in a world that has (or at least the potential for) sexual variance. The time of innocence did not last long for humanity (just an original pair!)

And considering God’s omniscience, He knew our first parents would sin. And he knew so many people would not experience the ideal of man loving woman and woman loving man.

Put another way, I could just ask the CAF audience at this point: In your understanding, in what sense is such sexual diversity (that does not fit in the norm of man/woman in sexual Union and complementarity) part of God’s plan or not part of God’s plan? And if not part of God’s plan, why do these things exist? If part of the Fall, how?
Click to expand...
 
There is only sexual complementarity, not diversity. Diversity indicates shades of gray, which clouds and confuses. Faces, fingerprints and souls are diverse. Genders, “gender identity” and disordered sexual practices are not.

Diversity in our age has been considered to be perversity throughout human history.
 
GEddie said:
The Olympics in their modern form have existed only since 1896 (six generations).

This is far too short a time frame for genetic changes in human life to take hold, either way.

ICXC NIKA
Click to expand...
Yes an no. It’s possible that changes in myostatin levels could generally change in that amount of time. As could a communities have increased erythropoietin over a few generations due to their environment. It’s not an example so much proving my point, but disproving the idea of genetic regression. Genetics aren’t that simple.
 
JD1789 said:
An objective look at Olympic records would show an improvement across the board in world records over the years.
Click to expand...
Far more people take part in sports now than they did 100 years ago. Just look at football and baseball. Far more people playing these now than 100 years ago. The more people you have taking part in any sport naturally means you are going to have a higher and higher quality at the very top.

An improvement in Olympic records is inevitable with more and more children taking up sports and giving things a go. If we had the same number of participants taking part in Olympic sports now as 100 years ago, the quality of sportsmen/women qualifying for the Olympic games would look quiet ordinary.
 
JD1789 said:
That is an opinion piece about Neanderthals, which aren’t even humans.
Click to expand...
Neanderthals were simply an ethnic group of humans like the Inuits, the Chinese or the Aboriginals are today. Neanderthals were humans. How else could they breed with humans? We even have neanderthal DNA in our blood in the same way you most likely have Chinese DNA in your blood too even if you are american or european. Even scientists admit neanderthals were human beings.

Just listen to this beautiful flute Neanderthals made and played:

youtube.com/watch?v=sHy9FOblt7Y

Here is more info on it: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divje_Babe_Flute

Only intelligent human beings can make and play flutes.
 
Harry123 said:
Neanderthals were simply an ethnic group of humans like the Inuits, the Chinese or the Aboriginals are today. Neanderthals were humans. How else could they breed with humans? We even have neanderthal DNA in our blood in the same way you most likely have Chinese DNA in your blood too even if you are american or european. Even scientists admit neanderthals were human beings.
Click to expand...
They were a different subspecies. I guess I should say they weren’t the modern humans we have today. It is off point regardless and leads us no closer to the claim that genetics are regressing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top