What is the difference between pedophilia and homosexuality?

[Fitswimmer]

Fits, I understand where you are coming from. I struggle with same sex attractions, and I used to act on them, and recoil at the idea of the attractions being “intrinsically disordered.” However, ultimately they are. Sexuality is ordered in such a way as to be toward the opposite gender. It’s primary (although not only) function is for procreation. You can see this in the animal kingdom. For humans it is more complex than this, and certainly an infertile herterosexual couple is not disordered in their action, but it has to do with the fact that a homosexual sexual act is neither unitive NOR procreative. There can be strong emotions attached between the two individuals, but the “sexual act” is ultimately only about pleasure- and pleasure is not an ultimate good. This is the same reason the Catholic Church takes the strong stance against artificial contraception that she does. It makes the sexual act only about pleasure and divorces the possibility of procreation from the act. So while a homosexual is not a pedophile, and an acting pedophile commits a graver sin (IMO) than an acting homosexual, ultimately, at their core, both forms of sexual attractions are disordered.

I disagree with this-based on the couples I know. It’s not procreative, but there must be something unitive about it that’s kept these people together for over 20 years-longer than many Catholic marriages I might add…

Are we really so puritan that the mere idea of pleasure is disordered? Heaven forbid we find joy in anything…

 

[Eric_Olsen]

And Catholics actually wonder why homosexuals say that they hate them.

Well I’m sorry to hear that.

Please, please, please-I’m begging you. Think for a moment about how the words you’re saying (or typing) would sound to you if it were you they were directed act. Or your child, or someone else that you love.

Telling someone that they have a ‘disorder’ is not hatefull.

 

[savienu]

I disagree with this-based on the couples I know. It’s not procreative, but there must be something unitive about it that’s kept these people together for over 20 years-longer than many Catholic marriages I might add…

Are we really so puritan that the mere idea of pleasure is disordered? Heaven forbid we find joy in anything…

I didn’t say pleasure was disordered, I said it wasn’t the ultimate good. And I also said that the ACT ITSELF wasn’t unitive. I didn’t say that the couple couldn’t feel a strong emotional tie and feel “united.” I’m thinking especially of a sexual act among 2 women. They can’t be both getting pleasure at the same time. It’s impossible. One is pleasuring the other.

 

[Fitswimmer]

I didn’t say pleasure was disordered, I said it wasn’t the ultimate good. And I also said that the ACT ITSELF wasn’t unitive. I didn’t say that the couple couldn’t feel a strong emotional tie and feel “united.” I’m thinking especially of a sexual act among 2 women. They can’t be both getting pleasure at the same time. It’s impossible. One is pleasuring the other.

Without getting too technical-yes, they can. And without getting too technical, it isn’t always simultaneous for heterosexuals either…

There are a lot of things in life that aren’t the “ultimate good” but are also not disordered.

 

[fix]

Are we really so puritan that the mere idea of pleasure is disordered? Heaven forbid we find joy in anything…

Pleasure is not the problem it is the antecedent action that is the problem. Is pleasure “good” no matter how one causes such pleasure?

 

[Fitswimmer]

Pleasure is not the problem it is the antecedent action that is the problem. Is pleasure “good” no matter how one causes such pleasure?

Of course not, why does everyone here go to the extreme with everything??

 

[savienu]

Without getting too technical-yes, they can. And without getting too technical, it isn’t always simultaneous for heterosexuals either…

There are a lot of things in life that aren’t the “ultimate good” but are also not disordered.

Without getting too personal, I have a past of sexual impurity with other women. No, they can not. Not in the same way a man and woman can, not in a complete way as a man and woman can. It can be very intense and passionate, but their bodies can not unite. It is impossible.

And I didn’t say pleasure was disordered, which is what I was talking about when I mentioned the ultimate good. I mentioned homosexual desires. They are disordered for many reasons, not the least of which being that they can’t bring forth offspring, EVEN IF BOTH PARTIES ARE FERTILE!

 

[Fitswimmer]

Without getting too personal, I have a past of sexual impurity with other women. No, they can not. Not in the same way a man and woman can, not in a complete way as a man and woman can. It can be very intense and passionate, but their bodies can not unite. It is impossible.

And I didn’t say pleasure was disordered, which is what I was talking about when I mentioned the ultimate good. I mentioned homosexual desires. They are disordered for many reasons, not the least of which being that they can’t bring forth offspring, EVEN IF BOTH PARTIES ARE FERTILE!

They cannot in “the same way that a man and a woman can”. That is correct, and that’s about the only thing that is.

Everyone doesn’t have to bring forth offspring. Do you really all believe that our only purpose is to have children??

 

[fix]

Of course not, why does everyone here go to the extreme with everything??

There is nothing extreme about my point here. Pleasure is only good if the action that caused it is good.

 

[savienu]

They cannot in “the same way that a man and a woman can”. That is correct, and that’s about the only thing that is.

Everyone doesn’t have to bring forth offspring. Do you really all believe that our only purpose is to have children??

Two women’s sexual organs can not unite. Neither can 2 men’s. Is that more accurate for you?

Sex is for marriage. The primary purpose of marriage is bearing and raising children. Children are a great gift of marriage; they are the fruits of married love.

I know I’m not explaining this in as good a way as it was explained to me. I would recommend getting a hold of Christopher West’s “Good News about Sex and Marriage” or “Theology of the Body for Beginners.” He can explain this much better than I can. Karol Wotyla’s “Love and Responsibility” is excellent, too.

 

[Fitswimmer]

Two women’s sexual organs can not unite. Neither can 2 men’s. Is that more accurate for you?

Sex is for marriage. The primary purpose of marriage is bearing and raising children. Children are a great gift of marriage; they are the fruits of married love.

I know I’m not explaining this in as good a way as it was explained to me. I would recommend getting a hold of Christopher West’s “Good News about Sex and Marriage” or “Theology of the Body for Beginners.” He can explain this much better than I can. Karol Wotyla’s “Love and Responsibility” is excellent, too.

I’ve read Theology of the Body-don’t need the one with the training wheels.

I’m not a child worshipper. I don’t hate them or anything, but I don’t believe that they are the be all and end all of existence for everyone. I know more than one heterosexual couple who has chosen not to have children, and it was the right choice for them-and I know heterosexual couples who have LOTS of children and that’s the right thing for them. I also know fine young heterosexual people who were adopted and raised by homosexual couples.

Reducing people to their procreative abilities is really not my thing.

 

[savienu]

I’ve read Theology of the Body-don’t need the one with the training wheels.

I’m not a child worshipper. I don’t hate them or anything, but I don’t believe that they are the be all and end all of existence for everyone. I know more than one heterosexual couple who has chosen not to have children, and it was the right choice for them-and I know heterosexual couples who have LOTS of children and that’s the right thing for them. I also know fine young heterosexual people who were adopted and raised by homosexual couples.

Reducing people to their procreative abilities is really not my thing.

Aren’t you reducing people to their sexual abilities when you define yourself by who you are attracted to? People are more than their procreative abilities. People are also more than their sexual attractions. I would never tell anyone they must have children. I will say that if someone doesn’t want children, they should not be engaging in sexual intercourse- heterosexual or otherwise. We are more than our sexual desires, and our ultimate fulfillment is not in our sexuality or in our experiencing sexual pleasure. If you have read Theology of the Body than you know the Catholic position on this; anything else is counterfit.

 

[Fitswimmer]

Aren’t you reducing people to their sexual abilities when you define yourself by who you are attracted to? People are more than their procreative abilities. People are also more than their sexual attractions. I would never tell anyone they must have children. I will say that if someone doesn’t want children, they should not be engaging in sexual intercourse- heterosexual or otherwise. We are more than our sexual desires, and our ultimate fulfillment is not in our sexuality or in our experiencing sexual pleasure. If you have read Theology of the Body than you know the Catholic position on this; anything else is counterfit.

I wouldn’t have to define myself if homosexuals weren’t a demonized subculture. There would be no reason to speak out against discrimination. I only “came out” because I was driven out by gossip and hatred. There are still a great many people who know me but don’t know what my orientation is. I didn’t have it tattooed on me anywhere. They might suspect, but about 5 people in RL have been told-and 3 of them are Priests.

 

[savienu]

I wouldn’t have to define myself if homosexuals weren’t a demonized subculture. There would be no reason to speak out against discrimination. I only “came out” because I was driven out by gossip and hatred. There are still a great many people who know me but don’t know what my orientation is. I didn’t have it tattooed on me anywhere. They might suspect, but about 5 people in RL have been told-and 3 of them are Priests.

I agree with you there. I don’t understand why homosexuality is treated as the sin that trumps all other sins by so many of my fellow Christians. It breaks my heart. However, that still goes back to the original point on this thread: if homosexuality is an immutable, unchangeable orientation and thus deserving of special rights, what about pedophilia? I’m not saying they are the same thing, as I’ve said before they are not. But if one group can’t control their sexual desires and is therefore deserving of special protection under the law to act in a desire they so choose, where is the line drawn? If a 12 year old girl consents to sex with a 40 year old man, is that okay because both parties are consenting?

 

[Fitswimmer]

I agree with you there. I don’t understand why homosexuality is treated as the sin that trumps all other sins by so many of my fellow Christians. It breaks my heart. However, that still goes back to the original point on this thread: if homosexuality is an immutable, unchangeable orientation and thus deserving of special rights, what about pedophilia? I’m not saying they are the same thing, as I’ve said before they are not. But if one group can’t control their sexual desires and is therefore deserving of special protection under the law to act in a desire they so choose, where is the line drawn? If a 12 year old girl consents to sex with a 40 year old man, is that okay because both parties are consenting?

and I would say that if we are going to compare pedophilia with homosexuality, we would also have to compare it in the same way to heterosexuality.

As I’ve said before, pedophilia is a form of rape-it is sex driven by a desire to overpower another.

 

[savienu]

and I would say that if we are going to compare pedophilia with homosexuality, we would also have to compare it in the same way to heterosexuality.

As I’ve said before, pedophilia is a form of rape-it is sex driven by a desire to overpower another.

But my point is where is the line drawn? What constitutes “consent”? What if the girl is 16 and the man is 40?

Furthermore, the government has no business in the sexual affairs of its citizens unless it has a vested interest in something and is good for society. How is homosexuality good for society? Even if it’s neutral, can it really be said to be a good? What does it produce for society? Heterosexual married love produces new citizens. What does homosexual love produce? You’ve talked about fruits of the spirit, but you haven’t given any examples.

 

[Fitswimmer]

But my point is where is the line drawn? What constitutes “consent”? What if the girl is 16 and the man is 40?

Furthermore, the government has no business in the sexual affairs of its citizens unless it has a vested interest in something and is good for society. How is homosexuality good for society? Even if it’s neutral, can it really be said to be a good? What does it produce for society? Heterosexual married love produces new citizens. What does homosexual love produce? You’ve talked about fruits of the spirit, but you haven’t given any examples.

Not every heterosexual couple produces new citizens. Are they useless to society? Homosexuals work, they pay taxes, they volunteer and donate to charity-at least this one does. That’s good enough for heterosexuals that don’t have children, why not for us?

Consent-agreement, approval, or permission as to some act or purpose, given voluntarily by a competent person. (Black’s Law Dictionary)

I believe in your example, the 16 year old would not be considered competent to make such consent, and it would likely be easy to ascertain that even that consent was likely involuntary.

 

[steve975]

and I would say that if we are going to compare pedophilia with homosexuality, we would also have to compare it in the same way to heterosexuality.

As I’ve said before, pedophilia is a form of rape-it is sex driven by a desire to overpower another.

How about incest between two consenting adults? That is not driven by desire to overpower another, either.

 

[Fitswimmer]

How about incest between two consenting adults? That is not driven by desire to overpower another, either.

Or is it the dominant sibling asserting control over a weaker one by bonding that weaker sibling to them sexually?

 

[fix]

and I would say that if we are going to compare pedophilia with homosexuality, we would also have to compare it in the same way to heterosexuality.

As I’ve said before, pedophilia is a form of rape-it is sex driven by a desire to overpower another.

It is a disordered desire. Whether you choose to call it power or anything else the inclination is not rightly ordered. That is similar to same sex desire. It is not ordered as intended.

Why all the parsing?