Why homosexuality is morally unacceptable in 250 words or less . . .

  • Thread starter Thread starter Suslar
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Suslar

Guest
Need some assistance please. I am communicating with people on Facebook who are former Catholics (now mostly identifying as atheist, agnostic or simply “non-practicing”). They don’t understand why homosexuality is “disordered” or moral unacceptable. They would like reasons other than Biblical quotes.

Ok, so here’s your task. Respond to why homosexuality is morally unacceptable in 250 words or less.

Thanks!
 
Suslar said:
Need some assistance please. I am communicating with people on Facebook who are former Catholics (now mostly identifying as atheist, agnostic or simply “non-practicing”). They don’t understand why homosexuality is “disordered” or moral unacceptable. They would like reasons other than Biblical quotes.

Ok, so here’s your task. Respond to why homosexuality is morally unacceptable in 250 words or less.

Thanks!
Click to expand...
If defies natural law. It ignores the purposes of our sexual faculties laid down by the inherent order and purpose of the Universe (that was created by God btw). To twist or ignore these purposes is to ignore reality. It is unnatural in that it goes against the norm that is self-evident by virtue of the purposes for our sexual faculties, which are self evident as well. Upholding natural law is important for the same reasons that upholding natural rights are.

If your talking to atheists, agnostics, etc don’t expect a “win” of some sort. Especially if they deny the notion of natural rights, which America and many other countries are built on, there is a low chance you will get anywhere. This statement is self-explanatory and no further arguing is worthwhile. If they deny what is self-evident i.e reality there is little hope. How do you argue with someone that denies reality exists/is important?
 
Suslar said:
Need some assistance please. I am communicating with people on Facebook who are former Catholics (now mostly identifying as atheist, agnostic or simply “non-practicing”). They don’t understand why homosexuality is “disordered” or moral unacceptable. They would like reasons other than Biblical quotes.

Ok, so here’s your task. Respond to why homosexuality is morally unacceptable in 250 words or less.

Thanks!
Click to expand...
The centerpiece of Catholic evangelism does not need to be ‘Why homosexuality is morally objectionable in 250 characters or less,’ it needs to be the person of Jesus Christ himself.

All of these stupid debates will just distract from this, and its really only relevant if a believing Christian has homosexual urges and needs help to practice chastity, or if the government is trying to force us to marry them / do away with our social services because we don’t recognize their sham civil marriages.

You’re just going to **** everyone off and make us look like a bunch of homosexual-obsessed haters. Just control your urge to debate, and re-center the discussion rather than getting bogged down in ‘Why x group is bad: … .’
 
Homosexual practices involve frankly disgusting insertions.

[Is that sufficiently brief?]
 
The same reason why every other sexual perversion is morally unacceptable.

Because human beings are not just one of many types of bunches of chemicals which just happen to be in the universe. Human beings are uniquely important. It logically follows that the means of creating human beings is uniquely important, and not to be misused.
 
This is a variation on Nate13’s comment.

God created Man and Woman as complementary: they are incomplete without one another. Sex is intended for procreation but also for uniting husband and wife. Homosexuality does not unite male and female. It provides neither procreation nor human unity.
 
Without knowing the objections, the defenses being provided are analogous to shooting randomly in the air.

What are their objections to the tenet of homosexuality being morally unacceptable?
 
Suslar said:
Need some assistance please. I am communicating with people on Facebook who are former Catholics (now mostly identifying as atheist, agnostic or simply “non-practicing”). They don’t understand why homosexuality is “disordered” or moral unacceptable. They would like reasons other than Biblical quotes.

Ok, so here’s your task. Respond to why homosexuality is morally unacceptable in 250 words or less.

Thanks!
Click to expand...
How can I defend the Church’s teaching on homosexuality?
catholic.com/quickquestions/how-can-i-defend-the-churchs-teaching-on-homosexuality

Homosexuality

catholic.com/tracts/homosexuality
 
It’s contary to natural law. Plus, with more people accepting homosexual behavior, more people will be homosexual (which is also why it’s bad for homosexuals to adopt). Which means less kids will be born, which means a decreasing population, which harms society as a whole and causes problems like the western world is experiencing.
 
Nate13 said:
If defies natural law. It ignores the purposes of our sexual faculties laid down by the inherent order and purpose of the Universe (that was created by God btw). To twist or ignore these purposes is to ignore reality. It is unnatural in that it goes against the norm that is self-evident by virtue of the purposes for our sexual faculties, which are self evident as well. Upholding natural law is important for the same reasons that upholding natural rights are.

If your talking to atheists, agnostics, etc don’t expect a “win” of some sort. Especially if they deny the notion of natural rights, which America and many other countries are built on, there is a low chance you will get anywhere. This statement is self-explanatory and no further arguing is worthwhile. If they deny what is self-evident i.e reality there is little hope. How do you argue with someone that denies reality exists/is important?
Click to expand...
What he said.
 
It’s actually not morally unacceptable. Sorry about that. It’s homosexual acts that aren’t acceptable. If you have a tendency but don’t act out on it, then it’s not acceptable, albeit unnatural.
 
The problem is that you cannot “defend” the Church’s position: you can only explain it. And that is all you are asked to do, btw.

The premises from which these people derive their conclusions are very different from the Church’s. Take an atheist. Well, the Church’s position is based on the word of God, but an atheist does not believe in God, so the atheist will reject your argument.

So I try to explain and answer questions, but stay out of debates (I don’t always remember this, tho 😉 )
 
St_Francis said:
The problem is that you cannot “defend” the Church’s position: you can only explain it. And that is all you are asked to do, btw.

The premises from which these people derive their conclusions are very different from the Church’s. Take an atheist. Well, the Church’s position is based on the word of God, but an atheist does not believe in God, so the atheist will reject your argument.

So I try to explain and answer questions, but stay out of debates (I don’t always remember this, tho 😉 )
Click to expand...
All of the Church’s position is based on the word of God, yet some of it is still recognized as truth by atheists. An atheist can believe that murder is wrong without having the word of God and without using utilitarian reasoning.

The principles of natural rights and natural law in a secular sense actually came about during the enlightenment and do pull weight. Heck, the United Nations is pulling weight all over the World in the name of unalienable human rights and they are definitely not doing so for religious reasons. Natural law is a principle that atheists can learn to appreciate without a belief in God, however obviously a belief in God adds more weight to why upholding natural law is important.

There is a difference between saying that “yes natural law exists as set down by the natural order of the Universe”, and “yes natural law exists as set down by the natural order of the Universe, which God created with intent and purpose”
 
When faced with this type of question i tend to use a slightly different tract … rather than try to defend the Church directly as other have posted it is almost impossible to be heard by doing this.

I simply ask to they understand why the Church values the union of man and woman?

Do they understand the connection with God that is expressed with physical intimacy (yes sex) when two people in love, married are affirming both their life and potentially being gifted with a child?

Do they understand the foundation of the Church was started with a union between man and woman (Adam and Eve), and through the bible we can track this through the creation of family (Noah) , tribe (Abraham), nation (Moses), a national kingdom (David) and finally the universal kingdom of Jesus?

So the natural gift God gave us is the opportunity to be part of his family by following this natural order. So, as such as Catholics we don’t believe that you can achieve this connection without marriage being between man and woman. (And i always state marriage and can explain why we belief in sex only after marriage.)

I find that nine times out of ten this takes the “heat” out of a direct challenge and usually starts a conversation about what i believe. Most people think they understand Catholics but only understand what they think they know!!!

I am in no way suggesting people will flock to our beliefs but people i have discussed this with have always thanked me for explaining my beliefs and that they understand but may not agree. 🤷
 
Suslar said:
Need some assistance please. I am communicating with people on Facebook who are former Catholics (now mostly identifying as atheist, agnostic or simply “non-practicing”). They don’t understand why homosexuality is “disordered” or moral unacceptable. They would like reasons other than Biblical quotes.

Ok, so here’s your task. Respond to why homosexuality is morally unacceptable in 250 words or less.

Thanks!
Click to expand...
This will probably be no help, but it crossed my mind while reading your first post.

If, you are looking for something as to show why it is unnatural or disordered and they want something non Biblical, how often do ever see animals trying to mate with the same sex? They may try to “show” or display being the alpha male in certain situations, but rarely do they try to mate with the same sex.
 
The point of sex is procreation and unity. Acts between two people of the same sex can never beget offspring. There is no conjugation between two people of the same sex. e
 
Nate13 said:
All of the Church’s position is based on the word of God, yet some of it is still recognized as truth by atheists. An atheist can believe that murder is wrong without having the word of God and without using utilitarian reasoning.
Click to expand...
There are some atheists who understand about natural law, but they are few and far between. Most of them are too hung up on the idea that if both people are able to and give consent, then no one is harmed so it’s all right.

I’m not saying not to explain the Church’s position, but to avoid debate in which one side or the other will “win.”
The principles of natural rights and natural law in a secular sense actually came about during the enlightenment and do pull weight. Heck, the United Nations is pulling weight all over the World in the name of unalienable human rights and they are definitely not doing so for religious reasons. Natural law is a principle that atheists can learn to appreciate without a belief in God, however obviously a belief in God adds more weight to why upholding natural law is important.
Click to expand...
Human rights from the UN/“Enlightenment” point of view are based on the idea of least restricction, not on natural law anymore. The UN proposes that children should be permitted freedom of association! That woman need “reproductive rights”!
There is a difference between saying that “yes natural law exists as set down by the natural order of the Universe”, and “yes natural law exists as set down by the natural order of the Universe, which God created with intent and purpose”
Click to expand...
Yes, there is, but very few people these days understand natural law.
 
Bix said:
This will probably be no help, but it crossed my mind while reading your first post.

If, you are looking for something as to show why it is unnatural or disordered and they want something non Biblical, how often do ever see animals trying to mate with the same sex? They may try to “show” or display being the alpha male in certain situations, but rarely do they try to mate with the same sex.
Click to expand...
Nature and naturallaw are not really related, and the activist homosexuals have seized upon and publicized every possible instance of homosexuality in nature that they have found, so this line of argument has for them been nullified.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top