What if a "Gay Gene" exists?

[Vatican2Rocks]

How interesting that you trust a “college level class” more than you trust the Church.

Wait a minute. Sarah and Abraham did procreate.

More to the point, God made male for female and female for male. That is the order God created. A homosexual inclination is contrary to the order God created – thus it is a disorder.

To act on a homosexual inclination is a perversion of God’s established order and, of course, gravely sinful.

You chose to name yourself “Vatican2Rocks!”, so listen to Vatican II: And this infallibility with which the Divine Redeemer willed His Church to be endowed in defining doctrine of faith and morals, extends as far as the deposit of Revelation extends, which must be religiously guarded and faithfully expounded.

The Divine Redeemer willed the Church to be endowed with infallibility in defining doctrine of faith and morals. The Church has taught infallibly from the time of the Apostles, that homosexual actions are gravely immoral.

Submit yourself to the infallible doctrine of the Catholic Church,

after a long marriage of no issue they finally procreated. did all those years of no procreation between them make their marriage invalid?

abraham in fact had four wives. only one child was the child of the promise. all the other children were not to lead to the promised one.

i have the use of right reason. i use scripture, the catechism, church documents as well as current knowledge to form my opinions. i don’t have to believe the way you do and can still be a faithful catholic. i don’t think this matter will make me a bad catholic. contrary to your coercive thinking.

 

[Vatican2Rocks]

They don’t have to, but they can.

This is not true. As long as a person freely and willingly enters into the obligations of marriage, the marriage is valid, no matter what that person considers his “orientation” to be.

well its repugnant to them just as it would be repugnant to me. i don’t have to marry someone i am not sexually attracted to and I won’t. if you try to force someone to then the marriage is invalid automatically.

 

[David_Alexander]

Doesn’t the marriage have to have the potential to be consummated?

This is such a complex issue.

First and foremost we should aim to love freely and indiscriminately.

Anything that exists is in a sense natural. The word ‘natural’ is a bit misleading. But I feel we should all aim for righteousness, and that surely means putting sexuality a little lower down our order of priorities. If we make God the centre of our lives, the rest will follow.

That said, if someone really cannot hold back regarding homosexuality, then it is up to them to reconciliate themselves with God, rather than for us to judge them.

This does, however, raise the problem of compassion. If we care for the suffering of a gay brother or sister, then can a solution be found that allows them to be happy in romantic love, while also being welcomed fully by the Church?

I am not suggesting the Church re-writes the Bible, or endorses gay marriage, but rather I am asking genuinely if there is a way we can better accommodate our gay brothers and sisters rather than by simply condemning them to a life of celibacy which is a very different kind of affliction to blindess or deafness.

 

[Vatican2Rocks]

How interesting that you trust a “college level class” more than you trust the Church.

Wait a minute. Sarah and Abraham did procreate.

More to the point, God made male for female and female for male. That is the order God created. A homosexual inclination is contrary to the order God created – thus it is a disorder.

To act on a homosexual inclination is a perversion of God’s established order and, of course, gravely sinful.

You chose to name yourself “Vatican2Rocks!”, so listen to Vatican II: And this infallibility with which the Divine Redeemer willed His Church to be endowed in defining doctrine of faith and morals, extends as far as the deposit of Revelation extends, which must be religiously guarded and faithfully expounded.

The Divine Redeemer willed the Church to be endowed with infallibility in defining doctrine of faith and morals. The Church has taught infallibly from the time of the Apostles, that homosexual actions are gravely immoral.

Submit yourself to the infallible doctrine of the Catholic Church,

God made gays too. get over it. if God made it then its not sinful. so you are the one who is in the wrong. it is not a sin to be born gay.

 

[thewanderer]

but there is no prohibition against disabled people marrying or down syndrome people marrying. so its unjust, and illogical, to say that because gay people are disordered or disabled they can’t get married to each other.

This would be true if the Church’s reasons for not allowing homosexual marriage was simply because it were a disorder rather than because of the specific disorder and the specific nature of what is being prohibited. However, since this is not the case your argument does not stand.

 

[Vatican2Rocks]

This would be true if the Church’s reasons for not allowing homosexual marriage was simply because it were a disorder rather than because of the specific disorder and the specific nature of what is being prohibited. However, since this is not the case your argument does not stand.

the church does not have to allow homosexual marriage in their own church. however, they cannot prohibit it on a secular level because the secular level does not acknowledge sacramental marriage and the church does not grant sacramental marriage to secular marriages nor marriages of other faiths. so the point is moot and my argument does stand after all.

 

[thewanderer]

God made gays too. get over it.

God made people with mental and physical disabilities and defects from birth also, as well as those with a predisposition to alcoholism, its in their genes. By your argument, they must be natural and good. So all those who are predisposed to alcoholism should act upon this predisposition, and it would be unjust, unfair, and illogical to tell them, or even suggest, that it would be better if they did not act upon this predisposition.

I do not deny that there are homosexuals who have no choice in their sexual orientation, and that they have often received horrific treatment because of this. Such treatment is unnacceptable. They are all created by God, as you note. However, since it is not true to claim that simply because a person has a certain tendancy embedded in their genes that tendancy is good for them (note above example of alcoholism) this does not mean that it is necessarily a good tendancy to act upon.

 

[thewanderer]

the church does not have to allow homosexual marriage in their own church. however, they cannot prohibit it on a secular level because the secular level does not acknowledge sacramental marriage and the church does not grant sacramental marriage to secular marriages nor marriages of other faiths. so the point is moot.

Wait a minute… why are you trying to all of a sudden turn this into a debate about secular law??? That is not the topic of the thread. It is also not what you were previously arguing about as before you were arguing against the Church’s understanding of marriage as such. I responded based on the topic at hand. Please do not try to belittle my response by pointing out that it does not answer some other topic that you decided to bring into this thread.

We are already getting quite sidetracked from the original topic of this thread and I’m sure the OP would appreciate it if we do not hijack his thread. If you wish to continue to discuss your objections either with the Church’s teachings on homosexuality or the idea that hoomosexual marriages should be illegal, please start another thread specifically for that purpose instead of hijacking this one.

 

[Vatican2Rocks]

Wait a minute… why are you trying to all of a sudden turn this into a debate about secular law??? That is not the topic of the thread. It is also not what you were previously arguing about as before you were arguing against the Church’s understanding of marriage as such. I responded based on the topic at hand. Please do not try to belittle my response by pointing out that it does not answer some other topic that you decided to bring into this thread.

We are already getting quite sidetracked from the original topic of this thread and I’m sure the OP would appreciate it if we do not hijack his thread. If you wish to continue to discuss your objections either with the Church’s teachings on homosexuality or the idea that hoomosexual marriages should be illegal, please start another thread specifically for that purpose instead of hijacking this one.

i did not make the argument that gays should marry heterosexuals in the catholic church. wasserfall did. I used canon law to rebutt her.

IS it not true that the catholic church does not grant sacramental marriage outside of the church yet acknowledges marriages of other faiths not their own and even those of no faith?

my comment about secular marriage is not hijacking the thread. it is clarifying the church’s position on sacramental marriage and secular marriage. and so i have rebutted you too.

I know i am right.

and since you brought it up, i have no problem with homosexual marriage and it won’t ruin my life. if anything it will reinforce marriage as a good.

 

[Seira]

That said, if someone really cannot hold back regarding homosexuality, then it is up to them to reconciliate themselves with God, rather than for us to judge them.

This does, however, raise the problem of compassion. If we care for the suffering of a gay brother or sister, then can a solution be found that allows them to be happy in romantic love, while also being welcomed fully by the Church?

I am not suggesting the Church re-writes the Bible, or endorses gay marriage, but rather I am asking genuinely if there is a way we can better accommodate our gay brothers and sisters rather than by simply condemning them to a life of celibacy which is a very different kind of affliction to blindess or deafness.

This.

 

[po18guy]

Does that change how we have to look at homosexuals?

The way it would appear to me is that if homosexuality is genetic, then it is not chosen or caused by outside factors. Would that mean that God has made someone gay? And if so, does that mean we have to acknowledge that homosexuality is natural, since how could we question the intentions of God if he chooses to make people gay?

Edit: I don’t intend to make all my posts here about homosexuality. Just an issue that has raised a lot of questions concerning my faith.

Not one bit. Many individuals are thought to have a genetic predisposition toward alcoholism. Does any of us think it is good if they follow that gene and become alcoholic?

Even if it is genetic, why do they possess a reproductive system that functions perfectly with the opposite sex?

 

[thewanderer]

i did not make the argument that gays should marry heterosexuals in the catholic church. wasserfall did. I used canon law to rebutt her.

IS it not true that the catholic church does not grant sacramental marriage outside of the church yet acknowledges marriages of other faiths not their own and even those of no faith?

my comment about secular marriage is not hijacking the thread. it is clarifying the church’s position on sacramental marriage and secular marriage. and so i have rebutted you too.

I know i am right.

and since you brought it up, i have no problem with homosexual marriage and it won’t ruin my life. if anything it will reinforce marriage as a good.

I find it interesting that you claim to have rebutted me without addressing my main point. The Church’s position on homosexual marriage stems from the Church’s understanding of sexuality. If you do not fully understand this teaching, then you are never going to be able to address the question as to whether or not the church should allow such marriages. It is not a question of sacramental vs. secular. I know you are not going to leave it at this, so I am just giving you fair warning that I will not respond to you again on this thread about this. If you wish to discuss it please start a new thread. The OP is clearly looking for an understanding of whether or not the idea that a “Gay Gene” exists will have to change the fact that the Church views homosexuality as a disorder. The answer is no, of course not, because the fact that someone is predisposed and even has a specific gene for some tendancy does not mean that said tendancy is good or to be encouraged. And yes, bringing up a discussion on the role of the church in secular law is very much so outside of this particular discussion.

 

[L_piperatus]

I seem to remember that men with XYY trisomy are prone to have aggressive personalities. Yet, we don’t give them a pass to commit violent crimes just because they have a genetic predisposition to aggression. I think the same logic will apply if we ever discover a genetic defect that predisposes someone to same-sex attraction. Since acting on a SS attraction would be wrong, the Church will stand by its teaching that people should not act on SS urges, regardless of whether they are genetically predisposed or not.

 

[Vatican2Rocks]

How interesting that you trust a “college level class” more than you trust the Church.

Wait a minute. Sarah and Abraham did procreate.

More to the point, God made male for female and female for male. That is the order God created. A homosexual inclination is contrary to the order God created – thus it is a disorder.

To act on a homosexual inclination is a perversion of God’s established order and, of course, gravely sinful.

its only a sin because they are not allowed to get married. if they were married, there would be no sin. just as for married heterosexual couples.

 

[eva77]

A scenario comes to my mind…A child is born with both genitals,the doctors recommend that the female gene is more dominant,and suggests an operation to remove the less dominant male gene so that the child would grow up normal. So the female child grows up,and the formally less dorminant gene suddenly awakens, voila!!! We have a young lady who is attracted to other girls…my question is, do we condemn,ostracize and abhor the lesbian/gay for her/his sexuality choice.???

My two pence is this…i have been priveledged enough to be blessed with an open mind,and i believe that with our world being sad and as terrible as it is,if you enjoy a little happiness with your choice of sexuality(of course not at the detriment of others) then carry on.
Please don’t tell me,their souls will burn eternally for the pleasures of the flesh,am aware of that. All i say is you are gay, so what?? There are worse people out there. Let’s deal with that.
I treat them just like any other person,like all humans who are sinners,and should be prayed for. Cast the first stone???

 

[Vatican2Rocks]

I find it interesting that you claim to have rebutted me without addressing my main point. The Church’s position on homosexual marriage stems from the Church’s understanding of sexuality. If you do not fully understand this teaching, then you are never going to be able to address the question as to whether or not the church should allow such marriages. It is not a question of sacramental vs. secular. I know you are not going to leave it at this, so I am just giving you fair warning that I will not respond to you again on this thread about this. If you wish to discuss it please start a new thread. The OP is clearly looking for an understanding of whether or not the idea that a “Gay Gene” exists will have to change the fact that the Church views homosexuality as a disorder. The answer is no, of course not, because the fact that someone is predisposed and even has a specific gene for some tendancy does not mean that said tendancy is good or to be encouraged. And yes, bringing up a discussion on the role of the church in secular law is very much so outside of this particular discussion.

I have good understanding on chastity which is the basis of the teaching of the church on sexuality. if you are not married and are having sex outside of marriage then you are sinning. no one is allowed to have sex outside of marriage whether you are straight or homosexual. it doesn’t matter. if you’re not married, you can’t have sex. because homosexuals are not permitted to marry they are considered to be sinning if they have gay sex. but if they were married, they wouldn’t be sinning.

i also understand human biology and how to make a baby and so do homosexuals. so that is not a good argument for why gay marriage is prohibited.

as far as human sexuality goes, i don’t think homosexuals should be encouraged to have sex with heterosexuals that just would not be natural. i am sure as a straight man you don’t want to have sex with a gay man. it would be unnatural. but for two gays its natural.

as far as secular marriage goes, you are just threatened by the difference between secular marriage and sacramental marriage and are probably against secular gay marriage not just sacramental marriage for the gays. i am sure my arguments are strong and right ordered and fully reconcilable with the church and society.

its ok with me if you don’t write back. i really don’t think you can rebutt me anyway. I know my reasoning is a lock for the win.

 

[thewanderer]

I have good understanding on chastity which is the basis of the teaching of the church on sexuality. if you are not married and are having sex outside of marriage then you are sinning. no one is allowed to have sex outside of marriage whether you are straight or homosexual. it doesn’t matter. if you’re not married, you can’t have sex. because homosexuals are not permitted to marry they are considered to be sinning if they have gay sex. but if they were married, they wouldn’t be sinning.

i also understand human biology and how to make a baby and so do homosexuals. so that is not a good argument for why gay marriage is prohibited.

as far as human sexuality goes, i don’t think homosexuals should be encouraged to have sex with heterosexuals that just would not be natural. i am sure as a straight man you don’t want to have sex with a gay man. it would be unnatural. but for two gays its natural.

as far as secular marriage goes, you are just threatened by the difference between secular marriage and sacramental marriage and are probably against secular gay marriage not just sacramental marriage for the gays. i am sure my arguments are strong and right ordered and fully reconcilable with the church and society.

its ok with me if you don’t write back. i really don’t think you can rebutt me anyway.

I have created a new thread for debating this topic if you wish

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=9303720#post9303720

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

I would like to point out that in the Catechism when the Church says “disordered” it is talking about morally disordered not psychologically disordered. Indeed the Church uses the word inordinata (not ordered) to refer to homosexual acts, masturbation, fornication and divorce.

 

[bilop]

God made gays too. get over it. if God made it then its not sinful. so you are the one who is in the wrong. it is not a sin to be born gay.

God made adulterers too.

What if we find a genetic basis for the inability to remain faithful to one’s spouse? Does adultery then become moral?

God Bless

 

[bilop]

its only a sin because they are not allowed to get married. if they were married, there would be no sin. just as for married heterosexual couples.

No, it would still be a sin.

Anal or oral sex to completion is sinful for married heterosexuals, b/c it does not have the potential for procreation.

Any sex act between “married” homosexuals would be objectively sinful b/c it could never match one of the two tests of licit sex (uniative and procreative).