"Why Does God Allow Same-Sex Attraction?" What a Priest Said When He Was Asked This Question

  • Thread starter Thread starter mdgspencer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
HomeschoolDad said:
40.png
Regular_Atheist:
As you note, the media and the opinion shapers are trying to normalize homosexuality. It is no more complicated than that.
Click to expand...
There aren’t a whole lot of things in the world, that if you scratch the surface enough, either sex, money, or both, won’t bubble up to the surface in fairly short order. Normalizing homosexuality ticks both of these boxes. As I have said elsewhere, gay people have money to spend — very often, their disposable income is considerable — and advertisers are chasing their dollars. There is a very amoral streak to business in the modern secular world, as Dagny Taggart said in the film adaptation of Atlas Shrugged (much more digestible than that horribly overwritten novel!), “making money is what it’s all about”. If businesses could make more money by shutting out gay people, many of them would do that. If they can make more money by including gay people, they’ll do that instead. And gay people always have the prerogative of favoring businesses that favor them, and not favoring businesses that don’t favor them. Throw that in the pot of the modern Zeitgeist that “gay is cool”, “gay is glamorous”, “gay is where it’s at”, and you’re going to see the gay experience reflected positively in just about everything. So the modern media and advertising onslaught are both an attempt to normalize homosexuality, and a by-product of homosexuality being normalized in the contemporary secular world. It’s like a regenerative cycle that feeds on itself and grows as it feeds at the same time.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Swap the term ‘red headed’ for ‘gay’ and that post would make just as much sense.
Click to expand...
 
Freddy, seriously come on. Women have a vagina. Why would a straight couple commit sodomy? It literally doesn’t make sense. There is no reason other that absolute satanists or perverts that ignore that fact.
 
Last edited:
Our society truly is equivalent to Sodom and Gomorrah. This frankly disturbing and shocking.
 
Freddy said:
40.png
HomeschoolDad:
There aren’t a whole lot of things in the world, that if you scratch the surface enough, either sex, money, or both, won’t bubble up to the surface in fairly short order. Normalizing homosexuality ticks both of these boxes. As I have said elsewhere, gay people have money to spend — very often, their disposable income is considerable — and advertisers are chasing their dollars. There is a very amoral streak to business in the modern secular world, as Dagny Taggart said in the film adaptation of Atlas Shrugged ( much more digestible than that horribly overwritten novel!), “making money is what it’s all about”. If businesses could make more money by shutting out gay people, many of them would do that. If they can make more money by including gay people, they’ll do that instead. And gay people always have the prerogative of favoring businesses that favor them, and not favoring businesses that don’t favor them. Throw that in the pot of the modern Zeitgeist that “gay is cool”, “gay is glamorous”, “gay is where it’s at”, and you’re going to see the gay experience reflected positively in just about everything . So the modern media and advertising onslaught are both an attempt to normalize homosexuality, and a by-product of homosexuality being normalized in the contemporary secular world. It’s like a regenerative cycle that feeds on itself and grows as it feeds at the same time.
Click to expand...
Swap the term ‘red headed’ for ‘gay’ and that post would make just as much sense.
Click to expand...
That’s a unique observation, but you got my curiosity up, so I tried it. The difference is, while it is not evil either to be red-headed or to be involuntarily SSA, the only sin that can be committed in relation to being red-headed is either to be vain about one’s hair, or alternatively, to murmur against Almighty God for giving one that red hair. To consent to the promptings of SSA, and to perform the acts towards which it inclines, is mortally sinful. Big difference.
 
HomeschoolDad said:
40.png
Freddy:
40.png
HomeschoolDad:
There aren’t a whole lot of things in the world, that if you scratch the surface enough, either sex, money, or both, won’t bubble up to the surface in fairly short order. Normalizing homosexuality ticks both of these boxes. As I have said elsewhere, gay people have money to spend — very often, their disposable income is considerable — and advertisers are chasing their dollars. There is a very amoral streak to business in the modern secular world, as Dagny Taggart said in the film adaptation of Atlas Shrugged ( much more digestible than that horribly overwritten novel!), “making money is what it’s all about”. If businesses could make more money by shutting out gay people, many of them would do that. If they can make more money by including gay people, they’ll do that instead. And gay people always have the prerogative of favoring businesses that favor them, and not favoring businesses that don’t favor them. Throw that in the pot of the modern Zeitgeist that “gay is cool”, “gay is glamorous”, “gay is where it’s at”, and you’re going to see the gay experience reflected positively in just about everything . So the modern media and advertising onslaught are both an attempt to normalize homosexuality, and a by-product of homosexuality being normalized in the contemporary secular world. It’s like a regenerative cycle that feeds on itself and grows as it feeds at the same time.
Click to expand...
Swap the term ‘red headed’ for ‘gay’ and that post would make just as much sense.
Click to expand...
That’s a unique observation, but you got my curiosity up, so I tried it. The difference is, while it is not evil either to be red-headed or to be involuntarily SSA, the only sin that can be committed in relation to being red-headed is either to be vain about one’s hair, or alternatively, to murmur against Almighty God for giving one that red hair. To consent to the promptings of SSA, and to perform the acts towards which it inclines, is mortally sinful. Big difference.
Click to expand...
I think that businesses and advertising are as much concerned about what gay people do in their own bedrooms as I am. They are inclusive of gay people just as they are with red headed people because a proportion of our society is gay. Why would they exclude them? Because hey, we know what you girls get up to!

Try it with ‘unmarried couples’. Works just as well. And those guys having sex is just as immoral. Although we don’t seem to get so many threads on that…
 
That isn’t true @Freddy. Many people on this forum, including myself, are highly against pre-marital sex. Unlike them, however, the sodomites and their supporters are trying to force their evil ways on Christians and society and hence why it gets the attention it does.
 
WA_Catholic said:
That isn’t true @Freddy. Many people on this forum, including myself, are highly against pre-marital sex. Unlike them, however, the sodomites and their supporters are trying to force their evil ways on Christians and society and hence why it gets the attention it does.
Click to expand...
We shan’t be talking any further. I find your terminology to be demeaning and objectionable and an insult to the good reputation of this forum.
 
I am sorry you feel that way. I in no way meant to offend you or anyone @Freddy. If you do not want talk any further I understand but please know I mean no ill-will.
 
Freddy said:
I think that businesses and advertising are as much concerned about what gay people do in their own bedrooms as I am. They are inclusive of gay people just as they are with red headed people because a proportion of our society is gay. Why would they exclude them? Because hey, we know what you girls get up to!

Try it with ‘unmarried couples’. Works just as well. And those guys having sex is just as immoral. Although we don’t seem to get so many threads on that…
Click to expand...
No, according to traditional Catholic moral theology, sodomy is a worse sin than fornication.

Heterosexual couples in media and advertising are not participating in any obviously immoral behavior. It’s usually not even obvious whether they’re married or not. Nobody really cares. But when same-sex couples are portrayed, it would be reasonable to foresee “those two perform sodomy with each other, don’t they?”. (Yes, I am aware that not all homosexual couples have sex, just as not all heterosexual couples have sex. But that would be the exception to the rule.) And many people in our society regard that as a mortal sin and a crime against nature.
 
HomeschoolDad said:
40.png
Freddy:
I think that businesses and advertising are as much concerned about what gay people do in their own bedrooms as I am. They are inclusive of gay people just as they are with red headed people because a proportion of our society is gay. Why would they exclude them? Because hey, we know what you girls get up to!

Try it with ‘unmarried couples’. Works just as well. And those guys having sex is just as immoral. Although we don’t seem to get so many threads on that…
Click to expand...
No, according to traditional Catholic moral theology, sodomy is a worse sin than fornication.

Heterosexual couples in media and advertising are not participating in any obviously immoral behavior. It’s usually not even obvious whether they’re married or not. Nobody really cares. But when same-sex couples are portrayed, it would be reasonable to foresee “those two perform sodomy with each other, don’t they?”. (Yes, I am aware that not all couples have sex, just as not all heterosexual couples have sex. But that would be the exception to the rule.) And many people in our society regard that as a mortal sin and a crime against nature.
Click to expand...
If we include oral sex within the term sodomy then we’re well over 80% of heterosexual couples. So when same sex couples are portrayed then it’s a fair chance that ‘those two perform sodomy with each other, don’t they?’ In which case your argument doesn’t really stand.
 
Freddy said:
40.png
HomeschoolDad:
No, according to traditional Catholic moral theology, sodomy is a worse sin than fornication.
Heterosexual couples in media and advertising are not participating in any obviously immoral behavior. It’s usually not even obvious whether they’re married or not. Nobody really cares. But when same-sex couples are portrayed, it would be reasonable to foresee “those two perform sodomy with each other, don’t they?”. (Yes, I am aware that not all couples have sex, just as not all heterosexual couples have sex. But that would be the exception to the rule.) And many people in our society regard that as a mortal sin and a crime against nature.
Click to expand...
If we include oral sex within the term sodomy then we’re well over 80% of heterosexual couples. So when same sex couples are portrayed then it’s a fair chance that ‘those two perform sodomy with each other, don’t they?’ In which case your argument doesn’t really stand.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Out of a sense of basic Christian modesty, I do not wish to dissect the variations upon a theme where sodomy is involved, but let’s just say there are basically two kinds. The one to which you refer, if done as foreplay within an act of marital intercourse, without completion (especially where the male is involved), is commonly regarded as acceptable, though some would quibble. The “other one” is much more clear-cut — there is not much question as to who is being “active” and who is being “passive”, and there is a filth factor from which humans naturally tend to recoil (I guess they find a way to get past that, if they’ve got their cap set on it) — and is commonly regarded as an abomination, peccatum illud horribile, inter christianos non nominandum. I have heard arguments as to how this could also be a form of marital foreplay, but I think I’ll pass on that one, thank you very much, and I think the vast majority of faithful Catholic couples would agree with me on that. Either act, if done to completion as an end in itself, is mortally sinful.

But with homosexual couples, that’s all they can do. (Lesbians have fewer options, for obvious anatomical reasons, and to paraphrase Forrest Gump, “that’s all I’m going to say about that”.) They simply don’t have a way to perform the natural generative act, so they have to improvise. So your analogy, if I am understanding it correctly, of “but heterosexual couples do a lot of the same stuff”, doesn’t quite wash. But, to give your argument its due, yes, if heterosexual couples are performing these acts as an end in itself, that, too, is an abomination, and that, too, is mortally sinful.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
And, in all honesty, bearing in mind that the vast majority of married couples (or even unmarried fornicating couples) overwhelmingly perform acts — both natural and unnatural — that are deliberately and willfully prevented by artificial means from fulfilling their natural end, I for one don’t exactly jump for joy over their relationships either. I look at them, think “well, if they’re following the usual paradigm, they’re going to rig themselves up not to procreate for at least a year or two, then they’re going to ‘plan their family’, one kid, two kids, maybe three at most, spaced out ‘just so’, ordered like pizza or Chinese takeaway, then after that, when they’re ‘done’, one or the other of them is going to ‘get fixed’, congratulate themselves on having been ‘blessed by God’ with this bespoke family of theirs, and then move on to a lifetime of awesome, uninhibited, sterile sex on demand”… and then grit my teeth, smile, and wish them all the best.

I realize mine is a minority viewpoint, but in all brutal honesty, I really don’t care. (And I know some would say “you can’t know all of that unless you sit down and interview every such couple individually”, but I really don’t care about that either. I am now in my seventh decade of life, and I am perfectly capable of observing common trends of thought and behavior, and drawing upon decades of looking at people and listening to what they say about themselves.) I try to see things in the light of eternity, and in terms of “what God wants, not what I want”. Our Lady of Fatima said a hundred years ago that many marriages are not good and do not please Our Lord, a reality I would be aware of, even if Fatima were proved utterly false. I realize, from our discussions, that you do not share our Faith and aren’t going to see it my way, but I cannot say anything other than what I have said.
 
Last edited:
Adding on a piece of info, I as a catholic strsyed from the church, los and confused, I began having problems at an early age with sexuality, eventually figuring out that I might be trans, I was completely wrong, see at first I started mixing and matching toys, batman for barbies type of deal, then It escalated to wanting to become a woman, a brief backstory to this is that I had an emergrncy baptism, I was taken to mexico and my family was involved in satanic practices. I had numerous issues as a baby, to the point where doctors couldnt figure out what was happening to me, I kept having health problems left and right. After baptism I began laughing and smiling in the Priests arms. fast Forward to ag 13, I had never understood where it came from, but I kept having sexual problems, and Identity issues, until now age 30 I realized that it was a demon, the image of the demon Had breasts and a penis, Which is where the whole Trans thing came from, I realized after confession that in my personal story the thing kept trying go control me and disorganize my thoughts. I hung around gay people most of my life and never felt at all like it was for me. Disorganized sex, horrible violence, lust and drugs where constantly harrassing me in the inner circle. I was not born that way nor did it become a choice, It was a participation in the occult and pornography, that the demonic tried to persuade me into thinking it was okay. I personally after my own story, will never believe that anyone was born gay, I learned it, and was taught to believe it was okay. But everyone is going to have a different opinion than I. But this is my story…
 
Very interesting story (really), but, I want to ask, how did you find out it was a demon?
 
Because I was practicing alot of occult things, I remember from an earlier age during the myspace times, my friends were passing around Images of demonic things, I came across a specific image and After researching further, It was of a demon. Ihad forgotten coming acrosd the Image and later after researching found out the Name and denounced it during confession, through Gods Grace I had a wonderful confessor whom I found out as he told me that he was also an exorcist.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top