Why are people gay?

[BarbaraTherese]

What is under discussion here is “grave matter” alongside any other matter of morality at all that will constitute grave matter. For mortal sin, two other very important conditions must be present at the time of comitting an offence of grave matter. Some matters that are grave seem to call on our passions more than others and our passionate condemnation of them.

There are many matters in The Gospel that claim our focus, attention and action besides issues of morality…and in fact when addressing moral issues to do so in the spirit of such focus, attention and action or risk being far more guilty ourselves than any under the issue in question.

I think the jury is still out on the actual cause of homosexuality - there are only theories. Some research seems reliable while others are under question.

The endless debate over nature/nurture.

Be that as it may, I do feel endless compassion for people of such sexual leanings as they must live, under Church teaching, a life of celibate chastity in the single state whether they feel a call to this or whether they do not. I live such a life and by virtue of call and vocation (not connected to sexual leanings) and in the early years it was very very difficult for me, who do feel such a call.

Homosexuality is an extremely complex area indeed, not as to cause but also as to moral implications…and to those of us who may feel consoled and content as we live out what The Church does teach without being in a major way challenged - we think - homosexuality calls primarily on our compassion, understanding and hope with prayer.

Homosexuality is a social issue also and if we have fears for society in this connection “you are the salt of the earth - and if the salt looses its taste?”…perhaps it is ourselves we must call into question. All things taken into account, we are all in desperate need of the Mercy of God. Things on earth here are sure in a mess and in many areas…and we are or should be “the salt of the earth” but is it loosing its taste … and why?

The only thing that is going to sever a relationship with God and His Kingdom as it is quickened into our times and societies through us, is mortal sin…grave matter alone is not mortal sin. Undoubtedly, if one involves oneself in grave matter, the very real risk is that of mortal sin. And we do need to clarify for society what is grave matter…and also what is mortal sin. Very complex areas!

Blessings…Barb

 

[Edward_Henry]

Hi JimR-OCDS,

Just a heads up. Beware of Pseudoscientific claims. When they do not have proof for their claims, they carefully cover themselves by using key words that allows them to make irresponsible claims without providing evidence.

They usually use words such as *“new study suggests …”, 'Scientist suspects…" “New research believes” “A condition may affect” *

You attempted to provide evidence by quoting two sources:

Born gay? How biology may drive orientation

By Sandi Doughton

Seattle Times science reporter

MARK HARRISON / THE SEATTLE TIMES

and…

Male hormone levels in womb may affect sexual orientation, study says

March 29, 2000
Web posted at: 2:10 p.m. EST (1910 GMT)

SAN FRANCISCO (CNN)

How much scientific responsibility does it take to come up with a statement such as *“may.” *? ie.: *"This may be true or it may be false." * Yet such irresponsible *pseudo scientific *claims without evidence deceive many who do not pickup on these manipulative key words. Keep an eye on those, and you will not be deceived by unsupported relativistic claims.

God bless.

 

[BarbaraTherese]

Hi JimR-OCDS,

Just a heads up. Beware of Pseudoscientific claims. When they do not have proof for their claims, they carefully cover themselves by using key words that allows them to make irresponsible claims without providing evidence.

They usually use words such as *“new study suggests *…”, 'Scientist suspects…" “New research believes” “A condition may affect”

You attempted to provide evidence by quoting two sources:

and…

How much scientific responsibility does it take to come up with a statement such as *“may.” *? ie.: "This may be true or it may be false." Yet such irresponsible *pseudo scientific *claims without evidence deceive many who do not pickup on these manipulative key words. Keep an eye on those, and you will not be deceived by unsupported relativistic claims.

God bless.

Very respectfully worded and considerate post giving jolly good example …and important information. Thank you!

 

[Chris258]

This is an interesting topic for me. I don’t really ponder extensively on why or how I seem to have sexual attraction toward only males, but I do go on occasional explorations of the subject from both scientific and Christian theological arenas.

I can only move forward in God’s grace, doing all I can to not hinder his cleansing of my will. The daily struggle against homosexual desire is not, on any practical level, different from the daily struggle against lust. In fact, I often pray and hope for the day when lust’s power over me is completely broken (I’ve been growing by large steps over the last couple of months, and I don’t think this is in small part due to my current state of swimming the Tiber. There is something about coming home that has given me an unprecedented strength in resisting lustful temptation.)

If the power of lust is broken, I would be so much more free to express affection to my male friends without being so wary of myself. My affection would be a gift to them and not just some petty way of getting emotional sustenance (there are those times of weakness, yes). I’m blessed that my friends (who are mostly Protestant ) are not so afraid of closeness that they recoil whenever I offer them signs of affection, thinking our masculinity is called into question.

If there’s something I’d like to see change in American society, it’s probably the general idea that any sort of close physical contact between two males must be sexual in nature. This has had a weakening effect on the depth of the average male friendship, I think. Interestingly, I’ve read many people asserting that this loss of physical affection in male friendships is due precisely to the societal validation of homosexual relationships.

I believe that you cannot provide even one peer-reviewed study to back your claim of a biological basis for same sex attractive disorder. There aren’t any. Lots of supposes and wish we coulds, but not one.

While it is absolutely preposterous that sexuality is completely biologically determined (or even that it is “fixed” at any point at time), there is plenty of evidence showing that there is some biological factor in sexuality.

narth.com/docs/nothardwired.html

Dr. Francis Collins (the Christian director of the Human Genome Project) affirms that homosexuality is not something “hard-wired” into us, but he does recognize the presence of biological factors.

“Dr. Collins succinctly reviewed the research on homosexuality and offers the following: ‘An area of particularly strong public interest is the genetic basis of homosexuality. Evidence from twin studies does in fact support the conclusion that heritable factors play a role in male homosexuality. However, the likelihood that the identical twin of a homosexual male will also be gay is about 20% (compared with 2-4 percent of males in the general population), indicating that sexual orientation is genetically influenced but not hardwired by DNA, and that whatever genes are involved represent predispositions, not predeterminations.’”

The article linked provides examples of other peer-reviewed twin studies performed by other researchers.

 

[Molly2000z]

Having principles doesn’t mean anything to you? Standing up for what you believe in is a bad thing? One should give in? How about the state of Massachusetts gets its act together and changs the law that forced Catholic Charities to go against its long held principles, principles that have been proven to be better for children since it has been shown that children “are best raised by a mother and father”?

(BTW - your definition of family is skewed. A family cannot have two moms or two dads. Children are conceived of a man and a woman. All the modern definitions of family as anything else are phony attempts to lend credence to the disordered lifestyles we are asked to accept as normal.)

It’s shocking that they stopped helping children without homes, however.
If they were truly opposed to the law they should have stayed on and fought.
There are PLENTY of good Catholic lawyers who feel the same way they do
It was a bad decision and poorly handled by their administration.
There had to be another reason.
Were they worried that some scandal of their own would be exposed if they went to court?

 

[DavidW]

I can only move forward in God’s grace, doing all I can to not hinder his cleansing of my will. The daily struggle against homosexual desire is not, on any practical level, different from the daily struggle against lust. In fact, I often pray and hope for the day when lust’s power over me is completely broken (I’ve been growing by large steps over the last couple of months, and I don’t think this is in small part due to my current state of swimming the Tiber. There is something about coming home that has given me an unprecedented strength in resisting lustful temptation.)

If the power of lust is broken, I would be so much more free to express affection to my male friends without being so wary of myself. My affection would be a gift to them and not just some petty way of getting emotional sustenance (there are those times of weakness, yes). I’m blessed that my friends (who are mostly Protestant ) are not so afraid of closeness that they recoil whenever I offer them signs of affection, thinking our masculinity is called into question.

See, this is why I say my sin is probably at least as great or even greater than Gay folks, and why I do not choose to condemn people that have that orientation.

I am 50 years old and have been agnostic my whole life. I’ve lived a secular life the whole time and I decided sin as defined in the bible was irrelevant, that what mattered was whether I thought what I was doing hurt anyone and was right or wrong based on my subjective judgment.

My sexual behavior has been gravely sinful. Many, many other of my behaviors have been gravely sinful. And since I decided to convert and started trying to eliminate sin from my life I learned something I didn’t know; its HARD for me to stop these behaviors. I’ve had to pray for God to help me just to be willing to change them.

And most of my sinful behaviors (as identified so far anyway) are supported by society as normal - I haven’t carried guilt over them.

So I am in absolutely no position to judge anyone else in their behavior and I am very sympathetic to having the desire to commit what we define as sinful acts.

I know this. I am planning to make a promise to God, and since I have decided that God really does exist I need to be ready to keep that promise. That promise is going to be that I will obey the teaching of and be in communion with Him through the Catholic church. That is going to be very hard for me as a heterosexual male that is committing to chastity.

 

[Chris258]

I know this. I am planning to make a promise to God, and since I have decided that God really does exist I need to be ready to keep that promise. That promise is going to be that I will obey the teaching of and be in communion with Him through the Catholic church. That is going to be very hard for me as a heterosexual male that is committing to chastity.

May the grace of our Lord move us both toward the purity he desires for us.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Edward Henry,
I’m aware of the terms, “may cause,” or
“suggest,” when reading scientific articles in the media. The use the same sort of linguistics when reporting on various foods, and what they “may” do to us.

However, the articles give some evidence that leans toward homosexuality being a function of human biology.

I would also say, knowing some homosexuals since early childhood, the biology factor is more evident than that they choose to be gay, as some have stated in this forum as being an absolute fact, which prompted me to disagree and post the articles I posted.

Jim

 

[marymol]

Book of Genesis tells us that man was made to rule and reign and when man invited in someone else to rule, that nature itself rebelled !

www.creationevidence .org - have recollections of how scientists at this site has shown a number of times how fame seeking scentists , often manipulate and contrive data to promote their agendas of a Godless culuture !

Since man is more than an animal ( as much as the serpent has tried to tell us otherwise from the dawn of creation !) and God’s Spirit has been poured out for those who wish to recieve same , would think that any man who want the dignity of being in the image of The Father need to hope and plead for same even if circumstances have made it difficult and anticipate that such struggles can help others from being freed from the control of whatever agents that are not God inteneded !

Just watched how Cal. has already spent 440 million dollars this year in firefighting …( compared to 40 million , few years ago !)and all those chemicals being dumpd into the environement too !

'And nature rebelled ’ we read …

Have Mercy !

 

[BarbaraTherese]

May the grace of our Lord move us both toward the purity he desires for us.

Thank you to both of you for sharing your story!..

 

[Ridgerunner]

I pretend to no expertise in the subject. I will say, though, that I have no expectation in my lifetime of any resolution concerning the causes of homosexuality. When it was removed from the DSM and declared, in effect, a “variant of normal”, that pretty well put an end to any meaningful research on the subject. Certainly, liberal and gay groups have a motivation to fund research, and a certain amount of bias can be expected when that is the case.

It’s a bit difficult for me to conclude that finger length is persuasive, let alone decisive.

I have raised thousands of animals in my lifetime and, while I have certainly seen acts that one might think of as “SSA” , never have I seen an animal that was exclusively or even preferentially “homosexual”. Since animals’ hormonal surges are largely determined by scent, I expect it will be possible for someone to selectively breed sheep who will have a “backward” scent trigger, just as it was possible to breed dogs you can hold in a teacup or cats with no hair. In fact, it should be easier, since animals are frequently “turned on” by the scent cast by a member of the same sex, but always end up with the opposite sex. Block out the ability to discern the homonal scent cast of the opposite sex, and you have it done. So, I don’t think the sheep guy is going to prove anything other than that, no matter what he claims he has done.

As far as is known, human sexual activity is not scent-determined, as is the case with all animals except (I have read) dolphins.

So what is it? I don’t think it is reasonable to conclude that boys who have early attraction to “girly” things are inherently homosexual. Actually, I believe most activity of that sort (certainly cross dressing) is considered “fetishistic”; a sort of unnatural focus on certain indicia of sexuality rather than the proper object itself. Most definitely, not all homosexual men are “swishy” and not all homosexual women are “butch”. Not all men with bulging muscles and body hair like a bear are straight, and not all effiminate-seeming men are gay. Some homosexuals “perform” as pseudo-females; some always as males. I don’t know that any of those things tell us anything.

It does seem there is some element of compulsiveness to male homosexuality, as their numbers of partners are usually quite extensive and not especially selective except as to youth, appearance, etc. “Swingers’ clubs” to the contrary notwithstanding, there is really nothing in the heterosexual world quite like the bath house scene in the homosexual world.

But nobody really knows anything much about any of it, because it really can’t be studied. It’s a “variant of normal”, so “abnormality” is excluded from the start in any “respectable” study.

So is “choice”. An earlier poster suggested that perhaps criminals could claim a “genetic” rather than a “wilful act” causation. That has already happened. I do recall that years ago, Australia accepted the ‘XYY" defense in violent crimes. I do not know that it is still the case there. But what seems always to be precluded in studies and discussions is the element of “will”. I do not personally see anything attractive in homosexual acts, any more than I do in collecting womens’ shoes. But that does not mean that others do not think them so, for whatever reasons they do. I have read that homosexuals generally score high on the narcissistic scale. It is certainly possible that it is, in some, a fetishistic thing, directed toward those most like oneself. If one can get excited by shoes, getting excited by physiognomy like one’s own is hardly precluded. It’s possible that some (the “biker” types) are driven by some kind of aggression and desire to demean the sexual object in the same sort of way a rapist does.

With female homosexuals, things seem very different. Never have I heard of a “lesbian bath house”. I have seen enough of lesbian fighting over “mates” to think of them in a way different from, e.g., male homosexuals who seem to be extravagantly involved in casual sex. Are male and female homosexuality at all similar in their causation and dynamics? From my perspective, they do not seem so.

It strikes me, as a person with no psychological training, that homosexuality might not be “one thing” at all, but perhaps many. But again, I do not expect it to be studied with any real seriousness in my lifetime. More’s the pity, too, because the more we think of it as “inherent”, “hard wired”, “genetic”, the more we will be inclined to relegate young people into the “gay” world; a world that, from what I have read and seen, is anything but “gay”.

 

[Mark_Robert]

Sexuality is a powerful biological force that is innate, that is instilled from birth. I became powerfully heterosexual (yes I like the ladies ) at the onset of puberty at age 12 LONG before I understood what was happening. My point is, sexuality and it’s orientation is not a choice but rather a biological orientation. Some people are attracted to the opposite sex, others to the same sex. This isn’t a choice especially when being homosexual still carries such a heavy social stigma. Gay people suffer a lot of bias because of their orientation, so why would they choose something that would cause social suffering? The answer is, they were born gay and they can no more choose their sexual orientation than they can choose what gender they became at conception.

 

[Chris258]

Sexuality is a powerful biological force that is innate, that is instilled from birth. I became powerfully heterosexual (yes I like the ladies ) at the onset of puberty at age 12 LONG before I understood what was happening. My point is, sexuality and it’s orientation is not a choice but rather a biological orientation. Some people are attracted to the opposite sex, others to the same sex. This isn’t a choice especially when being homosexual still carries such a heavy social stigma. Gay people suffer a lot of bias because of their orientation, so why would they choose something that would cause social suffering? The answer is, they were born gay and they can no more choose their sexual orientation than they can choose what gender they became at conception.

I would agree that sexuality undeniably has uncontrollable genetic factors underlying it.

However, I would hesitate to say that our sexuality is “instilled from birth”. What genetic factors are present are signs of predisposition, not predetermination.

 

[Ridgerunner]

The answer is, they were born gay and they can no more choose their sexual orientation than they can choose what gender they became at conception.

That’s a conclusion to which some adhere. But it is not a self-proving proposition. There are many variations on the theme of disordered sexual orientation and behavior; too many, it seems to me, to admit of one causation, particularly when that alleged cause is unproved and deterministic in a realm in which choices can be, and are, otherwise very commonly exercised. It further seems to me that academic acceptance of the proposition that homosexuality is a simple unity, and a variant of normal sexuality, precludes any serious analysis of the subject. Positing, as an absolute, that one is born homosexual, precludes consideration, both by society and the individual, the element of personal decision. It is assumed, for example, that one can accept or reject preoccupation with pornography. But when it comes to homosexuality, no human choice in the matter is allowed.

 

[bstcy]

My opinion… the acts are wrong, the condition isn’t.

I should know… I’ve lived a homosexual life and still battle such temptations.

As for why I’m gay? I don’t have a clue… but I do know it’s a cross that I’m meant to carry in life. Yes I wish it could’ve been different but I’m thankful that it brings me to trust in the Lord more.

Am I perfect? Absolutely not! But I realize my first TRUE love is Jesus Christ… because He first loved me… Can any mortal man change that love? NO! Do I want them to? NO!

I choose to live a chaste life (there’s a big difference between celibate = to never have sex, and chaste = to remain pure in current state of life) only because it brings honor to Christ even though it about KILLS me physically which is great because mortification for the glory of God is far better than the riches of this world.

However, it’s just as wrong for a heterosexual to have sex outside of marriage so there is no fence to straddle unless you’re double-minded.

That’s one of the reasons why I’m drawn to the Catholic Church… they retain the Love of Christ and the understanding that homosexuals are humans and they have burdens to bear that they have no control over and that they too have a right to kneel at the foot of the Cross in hopes of becoming free.

 

[Ridgerunner]

As for why I’m gay? I don’t have a clue. I think generally that’s the situation. I don’t think anyone knows, and I think we’re a long, long way from knowing. .

However, it’s just as wrong for a heterosexual to have sex outside of marriage so there is no fence to straddle unless you’re double-minded. ** Agreed in general. However, I will say that in particular circumstances it may be more seriously sinful for a Catholic to have heterosexual sex outside marriage, or less so, depending on the circumstances, degree of compulsiveness, etc. But when one is talking about mortal sin, one has to question whether the degree matters very much. **

That’s one of the reasons why I’m drawn to the Catholic Church… they retain the Love of Christ and the understanding that homosexuals are humans and they have burdens to bear that they have no control over and that they too have a right to kneel at the foot of the Cross in hopes of becoming free. ** Frankly, I doubt a single one of us does not have a cross to bear. One is taught that the weight of one’s cross bears a direct relationship to the level of sanctity to which God intends to raise a particular soul. Why it is this for this person and that for that person is something known only to God.**

 

[BarbaraTherese]

degree of compulsiveness, etc. But when one is talking about mortal sin, one has to question whether the degree matters very much.

Mortal Sin to be mortal sin must have three conditions present at the time the offence. Grave matter is one of those conditions - another appears below. To see the third, go to:
scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s1c1a8.htm#1859

[1860](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/1860.htm’) … The promptings of feelings and passions can also diminish the voluntary and free character of the offense, as can external pressures or pathological disorders. Sin committed through malice, by deliberate choice of evil, is the gravest.

 

[runandsew]

Actually science is proving more and more that there is a biological link to homosexuality.

However, until science proves it one way or another, you’re statement isn’t valid, but based on a prejudice.

Jim

I have heard that there is a biological link to homosexuality too, I have also heard that there is a biological link to alcoholism.

But do we celebrate being alcoholics?

I think that these biological links cause us to have a proclivity to sin.

I would say that if one is not attracted to the opposite sex, then they should not marry, and if they are attracted to their own sex, then they should maybe have close friendships, but not take to the sexual level.
Didn’t St. Paul state that not everyone is called to be married?

 

[JimR-OCDS]

runandsew

But do we celebrate being alcoholics?

Of course not. Alcoholics cause great harm to themselves and especially to their family.

I know gay couples. All are very successful and don’t cause harm to anyone, if they are not promiscuous.

Jim

 

[savedsinner]

runandsew

Of course not. Alcoholics cause great harm to themselves and especially to their family.

I know gay couples. All are very successful and don’t cause harm to anyone, if they are not promiscuous.

Jim

What about themselves.
Do you think that they are at risk of harming their eternal souls?

I have yet to find any passage in the bible which states that homosexual behavior is ok or that fornication is ok, in fact I find quite the opposite,
I find the bible stating that fornicators will not enter heaven.
Maybe you disagree with what the bible teaches quite clearly, but what if you are wrong, isn’t that putting them in harms way?