The disorder of homosexuality

[Dakota_Roberts]

Well, the same was true of the lepers in Jewish society.But they were nonetheless diseased. Today we treat persons with Hansen’s disease much more kindly, but we try to cure the disease, not pretend it does not exist.

One of those is a disease, one isn’t.

Eventually we will understand how homosexuality comes about and we can do much them for now it is mostly restricted to palliative care.

 

[CopticChristian]

One of those is a disease, one isn’t.

Eventually we will understand how homosexuality comes about and we can do much them for now it is mostly restricted to palliative care.

Dakota and Robby,

I am not pro gay, do not believe that there are gay rights however…that means but…

Hansens disease is caused by a TB like organism

Palliative care is for those that are suffering and usually implies terminal disease…

So based on the Catechism, based on the Bishops letter concerning homosexuals…I have no idea how much homosexuals suffer. I have no clue what they go through. There cannot be a homogeneous mindset for homosexuals. Some may be tormented, some may be depressed, and some may find this is the way it is and suffer like everyone else…I don’t know…

Charity would dictate not suggesting as you have suggested for Hansen’s and the notion of Palliation…

Would it be correct to say that this is something to rethink?

 

[Viviphilia]

I think you’re getting closer to understanding my point and I appreciate your comment that you also don’t appreciate some of the overtly ‘out there’ displays by gay activists…note the recent visit to the White House where two homosexual activists made a big show of flipping off a portrait of Ronald Reagan…gosh doesn’t that raise the level of discourse?

However what makes you think I or any of the others on this forum want to “condemn” lesbian relationships? OK once more, if I see two females (or males) walking together or if they live together or attend company functions together, one may make assumptions about their relationship but unless THEY make it an issue I believe that 99.99% of the time no one is going to raise an eyebrow or care what they do in their private life. So the theory that I want lesbians or gays (males) to “hide” is ridiculous. It’s not a matter of hiding or not participating in daily life, work, shopping, eating out, attending events etc but a matter of not making sexual activities an issue.

FWIW I have the exact feeling about male female couples. I don’t want to know about anyone else’s private lives, truly I don’t CARE what they do in bed. I don’t even think about it.

Specifically I am opposed to forcing a gay agenda on children through mandatory classes, textbook material, requirements to read homosexual promoting books. Why should there be a “Day of Silence” at schools to support homosexuals? Why is this even part of the curriculum. You think there would be more interest in improving reading, math and science rather than all of this extraneous stuff that really is up to the parents (sex ed, sexual mores and values).

I am frankly disgusted when homosexuals make a big whoop de do about being homosexual. “Hi I’m Mayor X and I’m the first openly gay mayor in the country!” Why does this matter? Does being homosexual make him a better mayor?

I really don’t know where children are being told their sexual orientation is perverse but again why are they sharing it with those who have no business knowing? Also FWIW no one condones schoolyard bullying but let’s face it presumed homosexuals are hardly the only victims…fat kids, short kids, tall kids, kids with pimples, kids with glasses…if you are perceived different then unfortunately you may be bullied. Again this is a sad part of human nature. I guess the odd thing is that I remember long before gay was ‘out there’ most adults were aware it existed and frankly the majority couldn’t have cared less. Most peoplewere and are happy to live and let live. The Phelps gang is uniformly condemned for their hateful words and demonstrations. Don’t claim that because some Americans don’t want to be cheerleaders for a gay agenda, do not believe same sex marriage is equivalent to man woman marriage, and want to have freedom to NOT participate in someone’s private life that we must hate them. We don’t.

Lisa

Lisa,

I’m glad we’ve gotten to the point where many in society genuinely do not care about homosexuality. However, I can’t help but remember in the 1980s and even the 90s, when gays were widely hated. I think many homosexuals would disagree that society in the past, “couldn’t have cared less.” Homosexuals have come a long way. And as with any “revolution” they need to be careful not to give cause for a counter-revolution. That is why I try my best to be respectful to Catholics, even when I am not respected. I’m opposed to hatred and ignorance, not differences in thoughtful morality.

• V

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

Dakota and Robby,

I am not pro gay, do not believe that there are gay rights however…that means but…

Hansens disease is caused by a TB like organism

Palliative care is for those that are suffering and usually implies terminal disease…

So based on the Catechism, based on the Bishops letter concerning homosexuals…I have no idea how much homosexuals suffer. I have no clue what they go through. There cannot be a homogeneous mindset for homosexuals. Some may be tormented, some may be depressed, and some may find this is the way it is and suffer like everyone else…I don’t know…

Charity would dictate not suggesting as you have suggested for Hansen’s and the notion of Palliation…

Would it be correct to say that this is something to rethink?

I fully understand Hansen’s Disease is a disease and is treatable with drugs today, which it obviously should be treated with.

Isn’t hospice care reserved for terminal diseases?

When the suffering is enough to make some beg for death I think it qualifies as very painful at least emotionally for them. I was using palliative care like how it is used in regards to chronic illnesses, same sex attraction isn’t exactly going anywhere for the vast majority of people. Of course there isn’t a homogenous mindset.

 

[PRmerger]

To what is the hand ordered?

The hand is ordered to serve that which the brain tells it.

To the degree that it does not do that (such as in multiple sclerosis, or myasthenia gravis, or cerebral vascular accidents, or delirium tremens, or parkinsons…) it is disordered.

 

[PRmerger]

You’re kind of mixing things up with the above statement (bolded). The term “disordered” is not specifically a biological reference whereas reproduction is a biological function. I stated that homosexuality is abnormal from a biological perspective…does not allow reproduction and has detrimental health consequences. The Church’s teaching is also based on natural law and because of that the teaching does mirror the biological conclusion.

That something is naturally occuring is merely a statement. It is neither a positive or negative. Nature produces both good and bad things.

Lisa

 

[PRmerger]

That depends on what you mean by normal; and it is not a question of what is normally experienced; it is about what is essential to a things nature. Being black or white, right handed or left handed is not an impediment to my functionality as a human being, it does not impede my nature. However having SSA would impede my ability to fully express my self as a man or a women. This is self evident. That’s what makes it an essential disorder, because it goes against the essential nature of men and women insofar as it stops them from fully expressing their potential as such, and encourages us to act against our essential nature.

Egg-zactly!! :clapping:

 

[Stephen168]

The hand is ordered to serve that which the brain tells it.

To the degree that it does not do that (such as in multiple sclerosis, or myasthenia gravis, or cerebral vascular accidents, or delirium tremens, or parkinsons…) it is disordered.

So there is no difference between the purpose of a left hand or a right hand contrary to what Viviphilia suggests.

 

[epan]

Very interesting. I had never known why SF was such a magnet for homosexuals. There are certain professions that have a larger share of homosexuals than the general population. I know the stereotype is hairdressers and fashion designers but at horse shows particularly certain breeds and disciplines the majority of professionals are homosexual. It may be that a subculture develops where homosexuals feel unthreatened just as in SF.

I’ve have heard this happened in certain seminaries, that attracted those with SSA tendencies and unfortunately kindled a subculture that attracted more and more with SSA. I have heard in the mid 20th Century the priesthood was also known as a place where a man could remain single and not inspire a lot of questions from well meaning friends and relatives.

Lisa

When one considers the difficulties that gay people have faced socially and legally, over the years, it is not surprising that safe communities by virtue of number would congregate. In a way, it is similar to religious communities coming together, or any other minority seeking security in numbers. SF, Hollywood, Greenwich Village, in the US are examples. It is common for large cities everywhere to have “gay” sections of town.

 

[PRmerger]

That is why I try my best to be respectful to Catholics, even when I am not respected.

That is, of course, a very good paradigm to follow.

And I try my best to be respectful to Humanists, even when I am not respected.

I’m opposed to hatred and ignorance,

This is very Catholic of you to say, Viv!

not differences in thoughtful morality.

• V

Well, of course, in your mind you get to be the determining factor in what constitutes “thoughtful morality”, right?

That is, you wouldn’t be as tolerant to, say, a person proclaiming on this thread, “My moral conscience tells me that white folks are superior to colored folks”, eh?

 

[LisaA]

Lisa,

I’m glad we’ve gotten to the point where many in society genuinely do not care about homosexuality. However, I can’t help but remember in the 1980s and even the 90s, when gays were widely hated. I think many homosexuals would disagree that society in the past, “couldn’t have cared less.” Homosexuals have come a long way. And as with any “revolution” they need to be careful not to give cause for a counter-revolution. That is why I try my best to be respectful to Catholics, even when I am not respected. I’m opposed to hatred and ignorance, not differences in thoughtful morality.

• V

I really beg to differ about overt hatred of homosexuals simply for being homosexuals. I think there were isolated incidents where homosexuals were targeted and attacked. No excuse for that. But I believe the majority lived in peace and without incident in the past and now. We all know many past “in the closet” homosexuals—Liberace, Herbert Hoover, Rock Hudson. Oh people knew they were homosexual but quite honestly no one cared or at least no one made an issue of it. That’s why I am still a fan of DADT with respect to both military and civilian life.

I think in the 80s there was a reaction to homosexuals when AIDS became the modern day Plague. There was a lot of concern that it was easily transmittable and would soon make its way into the heterosexual community. Like any group carrying a deadly disease, homosexuals did face a lot of hostility. OTOH I don’t think they were so much hated for being homosexual as for the fear of contagion. Once we learned more about AIDS, how it is transmitted and also how it can be treated this hostility diminished.

I appreciate your awareness that going too far, making too many demands might well spark a counter revolution so to speak. I certainly wish more homosexuals had this perception because I think it would benefit both sides of this issue.

Lisa

 

[PRmerger]

So there is no difference between the purpose of a left hand or a right hand contrary to what Viviphilia suggests.

Correct!

 

[Viviphilia]

A little off topic but I completely disagree with your conclusion. Yes there are more right handed than left handed people. Just because there is more of a particular trait doesn’t mean those who don’t share it are abnormal. There are more people with black hair than red hair. Does that mean red haired people are 'abnormal?" What an odd line of reasoning.

Hi again Lisa,

Did you say it was off topic when homosexuality was compared to pedophilia or incest? Why would you now say that it is off topic to compare homosexuality to left-handedness? Is it because you view homosexuality (not homosexual sex, just homosexuality itself) as a criminal thing, rather than just another variation of Human behavior? Left handedness certainly is on topic, since it is just about as disordered as homosexuality, which is to say not really disordered at all.

This might be a case of eisegesis. I don’t recall saying that left handedness is abnormal, I merely said that people are normally right handed. I think it’s fairly normal for people to be left handed. If any handedness is abnormal, it would be ambidexterity, which occurs in only 1% of the population. But I wouldn’t like to call ambidexterity abnormal due to the stigma of the term. With respect to hair, I would consider albinism an abnormal case, red hair, not so much. As far as sexuality goes, pedophilia and incest are very rare if I’m not mistaken. Whereas homosexuality could occur in as much as 10% of the population, similar to the rates of left-handedness.

I think you are trying rather desperately to equate a rather minor characteristic that does not compromise the life, health or survival of an individual or species with homosexuality which is a far more challenging condition.

I think a lot of lesbians might feel that their sexuality is a “rather minor characteristic that does not compromise the life, health or survival” of them or their partner.

It’s a little unfair to be so dramatic about a phenomena which has only recently come out of status as morally taboo. One could just as easily say that it is not homosexuality itself, but rather society’s attitudes towards that condition which have caused so much crisis. I suppose we’ll know more as homosexuality becomes more normalized.

You really overstate the case by calling this a stigma. When? Where?

I didn’t call left handedness a stigma. As CopticChristian confirmed, that is a historical view, not a modern view. And I believe I cited a source. Here it is again.

Handedness - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I’m not an expert on that topic so I merely used the words used in the wikipedia article.

Regards,

• V

 

[PRmerger]

I imagine the torture comes from having a core part of their identity and nature constantly branded as “neurotic,” “perverse,” “deviant,” and “sinful.”

And by this reasoning we ought to stop declaring pedophilia as deviant and sinful. That way pedophiles don’t need to feel the torture.

:nope:

 

[PRmerger]

As far as sexuality goes, pedophilia and incest are very rare if I’m not mistaken. Whereas homosexuality could occur in as much as 10% of the population, similar to the rates of left-handedness.

Perhaps.

But perhaps this is due to the removal of the stigma that’s (rightfully) been attached to deviant sexual behavior.

 

[Viviphilia]

Those aren’t normal and I believe that is her point. Just because something isn’t normal doesn’t means it’s bad.

Not exactly. “Normal” doesn’t imply only one way. There can be more than one behavior in the set of “normal.” When I think of normal and abnormal, I think of epigenetic variance and genetic mutation. Epigentic effects normally create a lot of different phenotypes based on the same set of genes. However, when a gene actually becomes damaged in an individual, it is usually bad, and that is what I think of as abnormal.

A more real world example is hair. Most people have, I think, black hair? But certainly we wouldn’t accept that as normal and all other hair color as abnormal. In European populations, normal consists of several variants, including brown, blond and red. These make up a fair portion of the population. Much more rare is hair color of albinos, which lacks pigment. In this case, the hair color is white, but only because the normal pigmentation gene is broken. If there were some genetic mutation in an individual which caused baldness, or no hair at all, that would be abnormal. Population rates for such people are expectedly very low.

Since homosexuality makes up something like, arguably, 10% of the population, I’d say that means it is a normal variant. And in addition, the lack of a broken gene suggests that variance may be programmed into our genome, suggesting an epigenetic cause. There might even be some species survival value for homosexuality which is not understood.

 

[Viviphilia]

I have read too many articles in my life and when I read I notice things you may not notice…

Perhaps!

If I may be forgiven for an important tangent - one of the more important papers I’ve read belongs to the current project of John P. A. Ioannidis:

Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
John P. A. Ioannidis
PLoS Med 2(8) August 30, 2005

Assuming for the moment that you have read many more papers than me,* it follows that many more conclusions you’ve reached would be more influenced by bias than mine.* Try to keep that in mind.

I’m very well aware of the requirement for scientists to be skeptical of published research findings. But rather than throw everything out the window, I make weak conclusions. That is why I have done my best to refrain from stating certainty about an epigentic cause of sex variance. It appears likely for a variety of reasons, but I am still reasonably hesitant.

I’m also aware of the upheaval Ioannidis is causing in psychiatry research. I have a feeling you’ll appreciate this:

Excess Significance Bias in the Literature on Brain Volume Abnormalities
John P. A. Ioannidis, MD, DSc
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2011;68(8):773-780

I would not base any opinion on this other than to say that it is being looked at…

It’s not just “being looked at” in some mysterious sense. Assuming the findings are true, the study strengthens the hypothesis that homosexuality is an epigenetic effect.

 

[Viviphilia]

The hand is ordered to serve that which the brain tells it.

When I try to write with my left hand, it tends to disobey my brain and turns out quite poorly. So my left hand is disordered because I’m right handed?

 

[Viviphilia]

So there is no difference between the purpose of a left hand or a right hand contrary to what Viviphilia suggests.

I’m not sure I understand what you mean by “purpose of a left hand or right hand.”

Nor do I understand your question, “To what is the hand ordered?”

If you’d like to elaborate, feel free.

 

[Viviphilia]

Well, of course, in your mind you get to be the determining factor in what constitutes “thoughtful morality”, right?

That is, you wouldn’t be as tolerant to, say, a person proclaiming on this thread, “My moral conscience tells me that white folks are superior to colored folks”, eh?

I’m sorry but I don’t understand your questions, or why you are injecting a provocative racial comment into this discussion. Instead of focusing on me, perhaps you should focus on the thread topic.