Should homosexual behaviour be criminalised?

[Prodigal_Son]

Homosexuality was criminalized for well over 150 years in the US and look what it has gotten us! Locking up a homosexual in jail is like locking up a sex fiend up in a brothel with an unlimited credit card.

This comment is disturbing. Homosexuals do not want to be raped. Nor do they want to be in jail.

 

[JamesTheJust]

I’m divided on this issue. According to most of the posts on this thread, it is a pious practice to believe that homosexuality should be criminalized,but I’ve always believed the contrary. (Please note: I do believe that homosexual “marriage” should NEVER EVER be legalized). Homosexuality is a real temptation, and one of the hardest impulses to suppress and control. It is similar to masturbation in this effect. Should masturbation be criminalized? What about fornication? Please correct me if I’m wrong, but this has been my line of thinking up to this point.

 

[JamesTheJust]

I third.

I agree as well.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

A few questions:

Is there any logical reason to ban homosexual behavior, but not fornication?

When we talk about homosexual behavior, what are we talking about? Should it be legal for straight couples to engage in anal sex, but not for gay couples? There are few precedents for such laws – the laws always banned sodomy, not homosexual sex. Which means, by most historical definitions of “sodomy”, that anyone who had oral sex – straight or gay – would be breaking the law.

In other words, 50%-75% of the country would be in jail.

Sodomy laws were always selectively enforced – since the late 1800s, mostly against homosexuals. Selectively enforced laws are bad laws.

So I recommend we not make sodomy illegal again.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

One other note: In his letters, Paul told homosexually inclined Christians to stop having gay sex. He did not say that the brethren should put them behind bars, or punish them.

 

[MarcusAndreas]

St. Thomas Aquinas argued that the only things that should be outlawed are those things directly harmful to people and property. Murder and theft. Prostitution was an example of something to be tolerated. So sodomy should be perfectly legal.

You people who think sodomy should be criminalized are incredibly short-sighted and comically naive in your trust of government.

 

[TEPO]

I don’t think homosexuals should be punished through State law. Justice is always served in the end by God -whether it be purgatory or hell. A double punishment isn’t really justice at all.

 

[CutlerB]

1. This is way outside the faculties of the secular state.
2. It’s incredibly unenforceable
3. It would overturn decades of legal precedent
4. It would make us ask, “What can the government not do to control my life?”

1. It used not to be.
2. Is it? That used to work too, without this fear of the government knocking on one’s door.
3. As did the decriminalisation.
4. See 1 and 2.

 

[MarcusAndreas]

Can we all just read some Aquinas and get along here?

This idea that the government is a magical moral arbiter that has to criminalize every little thing is absolutely puerile. You don’t like sodomy. I don’t either. It’s immoral. That doesn’t mean we have to go crying to Holy Mother State to make it a crime. It is not an act of violence against people or property, let it be.

 

[Captain_America]

My son is gay. All I want is for him to find peace and happiness. He is Catholic and has received his First Holy Communion, was confirmed, and is the godfather to his little brother. He no longer goes to church, and I can understand why. It’s sad that the Catholic Church can’t accept all people, as God does.

You’re mistaken. He’s certainly accepted into the church.

If he’s an active sodomite, you might check the Bible again and see the prohibitions against sodomy. I think it’s all very clear there.

I’m tempted to steal property. But it’s not to be done, so I don’t do it.

 

[J_Peterson]

You’re mistaken. He’s certainly accepted into the church.

If he’s an active sodomite, you might check the Bible again and see the prohibitions against sodomy. I think it’s all very clear there.

I’m tempted to steal property. But it’s not to be done, so I don’t do it.

She never said that he was from Sodom? Where did you get the idea that he is from an ancient city that was destroyed long ago?

 

[kozlosap]

So, in the USA, our gay and transgender brothers and sisters would self identify and wear rainbow patches on their sleeves? Oh yes, I can certainly look in the Gospels and find where our dear Lord would advocate locking those who don’t fit in our perfect little world up in prison. Sad, just plain sad.

 

[triumphguy]

You’re mistaken. He’s certainly accepted into the church.

If he’s an active sodomite, you might check the Bible again and see the prohibitions against sodomy. I think it’s all very clear there.

I’m tempted to steal property. But it’s not to be done, so I don’t do it.

What a deeply offensive statement to make.

You might want to check the bible about judging others.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

Or to phrase it differently: “Was it good that homosexual behaviour used to be a criminal offence?”

The USA tried that. The law was eventually revoked because of the Fourth Amendment.

There still exists laws on the books of some states for homosexual sex, but not enforced. Since Texas was specifically mentioned in an earlier message I’ll provide clarity. Texas does have laws on the book against same sex sexual activity, but in 2003 the USA Supreme court declared these laws unconstitutional in Lawrence v. Texas.

 

[Mulligan2]

St. Thomas Aquinas argued that the only things that should be outlawed are those things directly harmful to people and property. Murder and theft. Prostitution was an example of something to be tolerated. So sodomy should be perfectly legal.

You people who think sodomy should be criminalized are incredibly short-sighted and comically naive in your trust of government.

Good post.

Many people envision a proposed law or government program operating exactly how they “wish” it would be run. That is so far from reality that it’s not even funny.

 

[livingwordunity]

Or to phrase it differently: “Was it good that homosexual behaviour used to be a criminal offence?”

Does the Church have a position on this? What is yours and why?

Sodomy, not being homosexual, was the criminal offense if we are talking about American laws. According to the law, a heterosexual could be charged with it. So, it was not a law that singled out homosexuals unless one wants to admit that sodomy is the only option for homosexuals who want to attempt sexual contact while sodomy is not as common among heterosexuals.

 

[fpt]

We are on a catholic forum what means that each catholic lay person:

Has to purify its own thoughts, who can be indirectly or directly** touched by the heresies and / or by the ideologies concerning the human nature** with all the corollaries, and concerning** the functions and the roles of the State with all corollaries (the civil law of State, the penal law of State, or both of them).**

Thus, each catholic lay person has to refuse these heresies ---- the puritanism, the neo-puritanism, the fideism, the quietism, the jansenism, the neo-jansenism, the catharism, the neo-catharism, the moralism, the judgmentalism, the externalism, the rigorism, the anti-personalism, the anti-phenomenologism, the pharisianism or pharisaism, the evangelical fundamentalisms, the mormonism, the victorianism, the neo-victorianism, all the protestantisms…etc ----
and
these ideologies ----** the communism of State, the socialism of State, the nazism of State, the fascism of State, the totalitarism of State, the tyranism of State, the clanism of State…etc ----**

in order to identify in link with the global teaching of the catholic church:

what should stay in the sphere of morality and not enter of the other spheres;

what should enter and stay, only, in the sphere of the civil law, and not enter of the penal sphere;

what should enter in the sphere of the penal law and also enter in the civil spheres (both for public sanctions --jail or money for the State – and money for the victims --“penal victim and civil victim” --);

For doing this job, each one needs to purify its own soul with all corollaries, and to do a analysis of the catholic doctrine in the details and with all the subtleties, for discerning: the fact of identifying the good spheres, in the catholic sense.

The chariarization of State, even “in the christian way”, is morally wrong, socially unfair, and legally dangerous for the human nature because the nature of catholicism is very different. Otherwise, it is not a catholic way. The theory of the tolerance of law of state concerning the private sins is the rule.

My understanding of the catholic social doctrine about homosexuality:

The State has no power to redefine the marriage (a natural institution and a natural contract): no right, no authority and no power of changing the natural acception of what is the true marriage wanted by God (natural moral law in the classical acception in all societies, the universality of marriage by the universal anthropology – man and woman --);
Thus, the civil law of State does not have to recognize the “marriage” for the same sex persons (a pseudo-marriage, a pseudo couple, a false couple, a pair of sodomites, a pair of lesbians, yes the word couple is wrong, only the word “pair” is the good one, in the real and objective philosophy.);

The promotion of homosexuality in school (the primary school, the secondary school, the Grammar school) should be banned by the civil law of State; The homo-education and the homosexuality do not have to be normalized and banalized by the public school and by the governement;

The promotion of homosexuality at the College (at the University) should be avoided, should not be promoted as a normality;

The objection of conscience about that has to be garanteed by the laws of State: the refusal for the catholic structures to be an actor of the adoption in favor of the pair of the same sex persons, the refusal of natural and religious catholic wedding for those pairs, the acceptance of some “discriminations” in link with the sexual orientation, the wrong moral personal behaviors…etc;
**
The penal laws of State do not have to criminalize the homosexual acts of the same sex persons, who are consenting adults, in their bedroom, at home, in private place. It is not the business of State of visiting the sodomical beds.**

 

[Prodigal_Son]

You’re mistaken. He’s certainly accepted into the church.

If he’s an active sodomite, you might check the Bible again and see the prohibitions against sodomy. I think it’s all very clear there.

I’m tempted to steal property. But it’s not to be done, so I don’t do it.

But you would have a lot harder time not stealing property if stealing property were socially acceptable – even socially encouraged!

I would say you ought to imagine walking a mile in a homosexual person’s shoes before you judge. I do not dispute the severity of the sin, mind you. But I think ALL people want to sin in various ways, and often they are restrained from doing so not by the moral law, but because of social disapproval. That is a bad motivation.

 

[CutlerB]

Can we all just read some Aquinas and get along here?

This idea that the government is a magical moral arbiter that has to criminalize every little thing is absolutely puerile. You don’t like sodomy. I don’t either. It’s immoral. That doesn’t mean we have to go crying to Holy Mother State to make it a crime. It is not an act of violence against people or property, let it be.

Thanks for so kindly misrepresenting my intention. I don’t cry to the state. I wanted to hear people’s views, I did not ask for an argument for the case.

 

[MarcusAndreas]

Thanks for so kindly misrepresenting my intention. I don’t cry to the state. I wanted to hear people’s views, I did not ask for an argument for the case.

I wasn’t addressing you. My apologies. There are some people here, however…