A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
I think your being too optimistic.
- Status
The_Reginator
Active member
pessimistic.
M
markomalley
Guest
Not exactly accurate.
In the CCC, it says:2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.
In Persona Humana VIII, it says:In the pastoral field, these homosexuals must certainly be treated with understanding and sustained in the hope of overcoming their personal difficulties and their inability to fit into society. Their culpability will be judged with prudence. But no pastoral method can be employed which would give moral justification to these acts on the grounds that they would be consonant with the condition of such people. For according to the objective moral order, homosexual relations are acts which lack an essential and indispensable finality. In Sacred Scripture they are condemned as a serious depravity and even presented as the sad consequence of rejecting God.[18] This judgment of Scripture does not of course permit us to conclude that all those who suffer from this anomaly are personally responsible for it, but it does attest to the fact that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered and can in no case be approved of.
In Homosexualitatis problema, it says:9. The movement within the Church, which takes the form of pressure groups of various names and sizes, attempts to give the impression that it represents all homosexual persons who are Catholics. As a matter of fact, its membership is by and large restricted to those who either ignore the teaching of the Church or seek somehow to undermine it. It brings together under the aegis of Catholicism homosexual persons who have no intention of abandoning their homosexual behaviour. One tactic used is to protest that any and all criticism of or reservations about homosexual people, their activity and lifestyle, are simply diverse forms of unjust discrimination.
There is an effort in some countries to manipulate the Church by gaining the often well-intentioned support of her pastors with a view to changing civil-statutes and laws. This is done in order to conform to these pressure groups’ concept that homosexuality is at least a completely harmless, if not an entirely good, thing. Even when the practice of homosexuality may seriously threaten the lives and well-being of a large number of people, its advocates remain undeterred and refuse to consider the magnitude of the risks involved.
The Church can never be so callous. It is true that her clear position cannot be revised by pressure from civil legislation or the trend of the moment. But she is really concerned about the many who are not represented by the pro-homosexual movement and about those who may have been tempted to believe its deceitful propaganda. She is also aware that the view that homosexual activity is equivalent to, or as acceptable as, the sexual expression of conjugal love has a direct impact on society’s understanding of the nature and rights of the family and puts them in jeopardy.
You could also take a look at the 1992 and 2003 documents also published by the CDF on the subject. The bottom line is that we accept all human beings and are to treat any human being with dignity. However, we are never to tolerate the conduct, we are never to leave any doubt that the condition is objectively disordered and that acting on that condition is always, under all circumstances, grave matter (i.e., inherently disordered, it cannot be made to be morally justifiable as it is disordered in of itself)
T
Tighty_Whitey
Guest
I really don’t see any linkage between these two camps other than they both fall under the same “deconstructionist” umbrella. I will also add that the overpopulation argument is astoundingly stupid, IMHO. Peace, g.
E
Erich
Guest
An automatically updated daily calculation by the United States Census Bureau estimates the current figure to be 6,886,600,000.
The total land area of the State of Texas is not quite 262,000 square miles.
One could fit the entire population of the world in an area the size of Texas at a population density of less than 26,300 persons per square mile.
To put this in perspective, the population density of Queens (one of NYC’s five boroughs) is 21,116 persons per square mile. It should be noted that Queens is considered one of the more *suburban *boroughs of New York City.
The world does *not *have an overpopulation problem.
E
Elijah_Baley
Guest
The Church does not have the authority to accept these things, nor does She have the ability.
D
Dysmas1
Guest
Post #23
E
Elijah_Baley
Guest
Contraception and birth control, matters of morals on which the Church has decreed infallibly, are not addressed in Post #23.
D
Dysmas1
Guest
I wasn’t referring to BC or overpopulation. I was referring to the main topic of this thread as stated in the title, homosexuality, obviously.
But I see where you are coming from now. Your right.
T
tqualey
Guest
- Status