Wow, finally caught up! What an interesting thread!
So the topic is “the disorder of homosexuality.” It has been explained that the Church’s position in using the term “disorder” is not the psychological use of the word. However, both approaches have been discussed.
When the Church calls homosexuality a disorder, it is in a metaphysical sense. According to the Church, Humans are meant to pair-bond in heterosexual relationships and to reproduce. Fair enough. The success of the Church over the years makes it clear that some policies produce effective reproductive strategies for the population. Banning homosexual relations might be an element of those successful reproductive strategies. I think there is room for some debate there.
Either way, I agree with the idea that the Church is not likely to change it’s views on homosexuality any time soon. It might be worth debating about, but supporters of “gay liberation” should of course be realistic with respect to the Church.
Perhaps a more important focus for gay folks is to ask for charity and compassion for their condition? I say that because I believe I have seen a lot of hatred expressed towards gays, in the general public, and yes, on this forum. I know, I know, hatred isn’t allowed here and nobody sees any hatred going on, only the Truth. Well, call it something other than hatred if you like, but I have certainly seen too much prejudice and false assumptions and outright anger directed towards people who appear to support the dreaded “gay agenda.” Reducing prejudice and reminding our fellows to be charitable towards gays seems like a reasonable and realistic position, doesn’t it?
The psychological use of the term “disorder,” is a little more interesting to me. I’ve seen misconceptions on this thread which I hope I can try to clear up. Earlier, there was a discussion of whether or not homosexuality is “genetic.” Many people seem to have an idea that our genes or DNA are deterministic - that if we have a certain gene, then we will behave a certain way. As if there were a simple genetic test for every condition. The Human body is far more complex than that.
DNA, genes, and chromosomes contain the instructions for manufacturing complex molecules called proteins. Proteins have a variety of uses in our bodies. They carry out simple tasks like joining two atoms to form a molecule and they can make structural elements like scaffolding for our bodies. The important point here is that the same DNA code can produce different types of proteins under different conditions. So, a certain strand of DNA might make a person turn out one way under one set of developmental conditions but the very same strand of DNA could make a person turn out an entirely different way under different developmental conditions. Our bodies aren’t completely determined by our genes. The instructions for our genes to follow are influenced by environmental conditions, especially when we’re in the womb.
This idea is called “epigentics” and it’s a fairly new field in biology. It has to do with the many variations which genes produce in our bodies. There are genes, and there are instructions for what the genes are supposed to produce. You might be a heterosexual who shares the same gene with a homosexual person, but you might have different instructions for how that gene is expressed. So it doesn’t mean much to say something is “genetic” or not. It’s all very complicated, which is why we’re only now uncovering this field with the use of powerful computers.
It seems plausible that homosexuality, among other variations of Human existence, is an epigenetic phenomena. In that sense, homosexuality is more like left-handedness than it is a psychological disorder. People don’t choose to be left handed, nor do we choose our sexual orientation. Yet both occur quite commonly and could have some population survival advantages and are thus encoded for.
I hope the idea of epigentic cause for homosexuality can help lead those folks sill reading this thread to a little bit more understanding of the many variations of Human existence.
