W
Wammy101
Guest
The what question?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
V
Valke2
Guest
who is legally able to enter into the marriage contract. The State has a vested interest in such a contract and you can’t leave it out of the process.The what question?
V
Valke2
Guest
as far as not being able to pick and choose the commandements, the explanation I’ve been given is that if Jesus didn’t change it, it remains in place. My personal opinion is that there’s nothing wrong with homosexuality. Homosexual relationships are generally just as screwed up as heterosexual relationships.
As someone posted somewhere, God gave 7 commandments regarding homosexuals and 605 regarding heterosexuals. That doesn’t mean God loves heterosexuals less. It is just that they need more supervision.
As someone posted somewhere, God gave 7 commandments regarding homosexuals and 605 regarding heterosexuals. That doesn’t mean God loves heterosexuals less. It is just that they need more supervision.
E
estesbob
Guest
I respect my wife enough not to have intercourse with her when she is having her period. I also respect her enough to place my penis in an area that was meant for defecation, not pro-creation. If you find descriptions of what honmosexual behavior entails offensive then I suggest you quit engaging in it.And menstrual blood is better?
I have a husband. Want me talking about yr wife like that?
Suggest we get past the various libels. Unless you want to find out, in detail, what white Christians believed about African Americans’ sexuality. They also believed, in the name of Jesus, that folks with darker skin pigmentation were less than human. Shame when bigots call on Christianity to justify their pettiness. Makes them and their faith look silly and small.
BTW-comparing the plight of a race that was ripped from their homes. bruatlly enslaved, raped, beaten, murdered and sold at whim to a group of people who’s only distinguishing characteristic is the manner in which they engage in sex is patently racist,
E
estesbob
Guest
Once something is called an abomination there is not a whole lot left to say, is there?As someone posted somewhere, God gave 7 commandments regarding homosexuals and 605 regarding heterosexuals. That doesn’t mean God loves heterosexuals less. It is just that they need more supervision.
E
estesbob
Guest
Please note I have corrected the typo in the original post. my correction is in BOLDI respect my wife enough not to have intercourse with her when she is having her period. I also respect her enough **NOT **to place my penis in an area that was meant for defecation, not pro-creation. If you find descriptions of what honmosexual behavior entails offensive then I suggest you quit engaging in it.
BTW-comparing the plight of a race that was ripped from their homes. bruatlly enslaved, raped, beaten, murdered and sold at whim to a group of people who’s only distinguishing characteristic is the manner in which they engage in sex is patently racist,
F
fix
Guest
Behavior is not equal to religious affliation or race. But, I agree where does it stop? What other unnatural unions ought we codify through law?If the government has the right to define marriage, we must then ask what parameters limit those decisions. Does it stop at gender? What happens if Bush and other right-wing nutjobs decide that only Christians can get married? Can a government decide that mixed marriages are illegal? Seriously, where does it stop?
Marriage has been around a long time. The government has a duty to protect the common good. Allowing things that violate the common good is wrong.The only solution is to get government out of the marriage business. It has no business getting involved in the first place. Marriage is typically a religious ceremony, and the civil aspects of marriage is nothing more than civil contracts that the government can later enforce, which it should do. But that’s it. The government should not be involved in deciding who can get married.
Legally able means a man and a women and a few other things like not being related, being of proper age, ect.The only question that should come up when someone wants to get married is this: Are they legally able to enter into contract? If the answer is yes, then they can get married. End of story.
G
gardenswithkids
Guest
I agree. I most certainly believe homosexuals are entitled to human dignity.Homosexuals have rights,and those should be equal to that of heterosexual people.
I suggest that homosexual acts are contrary to human dignity as it reduces human sexuality to something less than the life-giving union it should be. I also suggest that contraception is contrary to human dignity. No-questions-asked divorce and re-marriage is contrary to human dignity also.
Homosexual or hetero-sexual–we *all *have the right to human dignity. Sexual expression apart from a life-long, life-giving union falls beneath our dignity as humans. We have not only the right, but obligation to ourselves, to the ones love, and to future generations to keep our sexual activity connected to marriage and reproduction. To do otherwise is beneath our dignity.
V
Valke2
Guest
Why is a union that is not “life giving” contrary to human dignity. What about the woman who is too old to bear children. Is her union with her husband contrary to human dignity? Why is not the expression of love between two people a celebration of human dignity, no matter who the two people are?I agree. I most certainly believe homosexuals are entitled to human dignity.
I suggest that homosexual acts are contrary to human dignity as it reduces human sexuality to something less than the life-giving union it should be. I also suggest that contraception is contrary to human dignity. No-questions-asked divorce and re-marriage is contrary to human dignity also.
Homosexual or hetero-sexual–we *all *have the right to human dignity. Sexual expression apart from a life-long, life-giving union falls beneath our dignity as humans. We have not only the right, but obligation to ourselves, to the ones love, and to future generations to keep our sexual activity connected to marriage and reproduction. To do otherwise is beneath our dignity.
K
Karin
Guest
Sexual relations between men are clearly forbidden by the Torah. (Lev. 18:22). Such acts are condemned in the strongest possible terms, as abhorrent. The only other sexual sin that is described in such strong terms is the sin of remarrying a woman you had divorced after she had been married to another man. (See Deut. 24:4). The sin of sexual relations between men is punishable by death (Lev. 20:13), as are the sins of adultery and incest. *Why is a union that is not “life giving” contrary to human dignity. What about the woman who is too old to bear children. Is her union with her husband contrary to human dignity? Why is not the expression of love between two people a celebration of human dignity, no matter who the two people are?
It is important to note, however, that it is homosexual acts that are forbidden, not homosexual orientation. Judaism focuses on a person’s actions rather than a person’s desires. A man’s desire to have sex with another man is not a sin, so long as he does not act upon that desire.** In fact, it could be said that a man who feels such desires but does not act upon them is worthy of more merit in that regard than a man who does not feel such desires at all, just as one who refrains from pork because it is forbidden deserves more merit than one who refrains from pork because he doesn’t like the taste. *
*I have seen some modern Orthodox sources suggest that if homosexuality is truly something hardwired in the brain, as most gay activists suggest, then a man who acts upon that desire is not morally responsible for his actions, but I am not sure how wide-spread that opinion is. Essentially, it is equivalent to saying that a kleptomaniac would not be held morally responsible for stealing. **Interestingly, female homosexual relations are not forbidden by the Torah. There is very little discussion of female homosexuality in the Talmud. The few sources that mention lesbian relations say that they do not disqualify a woman from certain privileges of the priesthood, because it is “merely licentiousness.” There is a surprising lack of discussion of such issues as whether lesbianism would be grounds for divorcing a woman without her consent or without ketubah. Rambam asserted that lesbian practices are forbidden because it was a “practice of Egypt” and because it constituted rebelliousness. *
jewfaq.org/sex.htm#Homosexuality
G
gardenswithkids
Guest
The Bible shows several examples of women such as Sarah (Genesis 21; Abraham’s wife and Issac’s mother) and St. Elizabeth (Luke 1; St. John the Baptist’s mother). Both were thought to be old and barren, yet the Lord blessed them with a child in spite of their age. When human sexuality cooperates with God’s design, He is not restricted by such things as age if He desires to create a childWhat about the woman who is too old to bear children. Is her union with her husband contrary to human dignity?
The choice is life or death; no other choice. "… I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Choose life so that you and your descendants may live " Dueteronomy 30:19Why is a union that is not “life giving” contrary to human dignity. … Why is not the expression of love between two people a celebration of human dignity, no matter who the two people are?
If we are not open to life, then we open ourselves to death–both spiritually and physically. Inappropriate sexual expression opens human sexuality to death through sexuality transmitted desease and abortion–a death of very young humans at the earliest stages of developement. One seemingly ironic statistic: homosexual women report *higher *history of abortions than heterosexual women. AIDS claims the lives of many homosexual men, and such deaths could be avoided if they had embraced chastity rather than homosexuality. Death and desease are associated with inappropriate use of sex.
Physical desease and death reflect what can happen to us spiritually. Spiritual death is far worse than physical death. Life-giving sexual unions allow us and our descendents to live, both in the physical and the spiritual sense. Sexual expression that is closed to life opens us to death–both ourselves and the ones we claim to love. If two people truly love each other, they should not express their love in ways that harms each other. Chastity expresses love and celebrates the dignity of self and other.
V
Valke2
Guest
Sexual relations between men are clearly forbidden by the Torah. (Lev. 18:22). Such acts are condemned in the strongest possible terms, as abhorrent.
Yes. That’s true. But the concept of homosexual relationships was not one that was widley held in biblical times. Homosexual acts were generally, it is believed, part of pagan temple practice, which could explain the prohibition and the harshness of the language.
But if you are going to view Torah as the word of God dictated at Sinai, which is the traditional view, then “why” isn’t such an important question.
I have seen some modern Orthodox sources suggest that if homosexuality is truly something hardwired in the brain, as most gay activists suggest, then a man who acts upon that desire is not morally responsible for his actions, but I am not sure how wide-spread that opinion is.
K
Karin
Guest
your right the “why” does not matter but both JEws and Catholics argree that the homosexual “act” is wrong, sinfull or whatever other word you want to use.Yes. That’s true. But the concept of homosexual relationships was not one that was widley held in biblical times. Homosexual acts were generally, it is believed, part of pagan temple practice, which could explain the prohibition and the harshness of the language.
But if you are going to view Torah as the word of God dictated at Sinai, which is the traditional view, then “why” isn’t such an important question.
Not very widespread in the orthodox communities.
Conservative Judaism views the homosexual act as a breach of one of the commandments and reconizes that we all have a few broken commandments in the closet. The governing body is supposed to issue a ruling in December on whether it will recognize gay rabbis. The movement took a hit when it recognized the rights of women to become rabbis (meaning a lot of people left conservative judaism for othrodoxy over the issue). I imagine that if it gives the thumbs up to gay rabbis, it will take another hit.
V
Valke2
Guest
Death is also associated with childbirth, but we don’t view the act of procreation as opening us to death. The fact is death is a part of everything. Chasity is unnatural. More unnatural than homosexuality.The Bible shows several examples of women such as Sarah (Genesis 21; Abraham’s wife and Issac’s mother) and St. Elizabeth (Luke 1; St. John the Baptist’s mother). Both were thought to be old and barren, yet the Lord blessed them with a child in spite of their age. When human sexuality cooperates with God’s design, He is not restricted by such things as age if He desires to create a child
The choice is life or death; no other choice. "… I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Choose life so that you and your descendants may live " Dueteronomy 30:19
If we are not open to life, then we open ourselves to death–both spiritually and physically. Inappropriate sexual expression opens human sexuality to death through sexuality transmitted desease and abortion–a death of very young humans at the earliest stages of developement. One seemingly ironic statistic: homosexual women report *higher *history of abortions than heterosexual women. AIDS claims the lives of many homosexual men, and such deaths could be avoided if they had embraced chastity rather than homosexuality. Death and desease are associated with inappropriate use of sex.
Physical desease and death reflect what can happen to us spiritually. Spiritual death is far worse than physical death. Life-giving sexual unions allow us and our descendents to live, both in the physical and the spiritual sense. Sexual expression that is closed to life opens us to death–both ourselves and the ones we claim to love. If two people truly love each other, they should not express their love in ways that harms each other. Chastity expresses love and celebrates the dignity of self and other.
E
Exalt
Guest
Could I see the source on that, please?One seemingly ironic statistic: homosexual women report *higher *history of abortions than heterosexual women.
V
Valke2
Guest
I didn’t post that quote. I was responding to someone else who posted it.Could I see the source on that, please?
E
Exalt
Guest
Oops! I didn’t mean to make you the “original poster.”I didn’t post that quote. I was responding to someone else who posted it.
My bad.
V
Valke2
Guest
np. I don’t view the argument that AIDs is more prevelant among homosexuals as particulary persuasive or having anything to do with the gay marriage issue.
Stable relationships decrease the incidence of STD, if for no other reason than they reduce the amount of sexual partners. Further, AIDs will remain a STD whether or not homosexuals are married.
Would you prohibit marriages between blacks because there is an increased incidence of sickle cell anemia from the children of such marriages. Or Jews because children of such marriages are more likely to have Tay-Sachs than children of non-jews?
Stable relationships decrease the incidence of STD, if for no other reason than they reduce the amount of sexual partners. Further, AIDs will remain a STD whether or not homosexuals are married.
Would you prohibit marriages between blacks because there is an increased incidence of sickle cell anemia from the children of such marriages. Or Jews because children of such marriages are more likely to have Tay-Sachs than children of non-jews?
K
Karin
Guest
Valke2 - as a jew are you “for” homosexuals being “married”?np. I don’t view the argument that AIDs is more prevelant among homosexuals as particulary persuasive or having anything to do with the gay marriage issue.
Stable relationships decrease the incidence of STD, if for no other reason than they reduce the amount of sexual partners. Further, AIDs will remain a STD whether or not homosexuals are married.
Would you prohibit marriages between blacks because there is an increased incidence of sickle cell anemia from the children of such marriages. Or Jews because children of such marriages are more likely to have Tay-Sachs than children of non-jews?
If you are how do you reconcile this with what the Torah teaches?
T
TZiggy
Guest
I’ve just read thru this whole thread.
It looks like both sides have given it their all. It’s unfortunate those looking to sway Catholics to the “Pro-homosexual sex” side aren’t willing to intellectualize what they’ve been presented. Some sound fairly intelligent.
I guess we’ll all have to wait until judgement day to close this thread once and for all. The only addition I have for those who still feel this lifestyle is acceptable is:
You came to Catholic Answers forum to ask this question…why?
Surely you didn’t think you’d convert us. Maybe you should take heed to your doubts.
It looks like both sides have given it their all. It’s unfortunate those looking to sway Catholics to the “Pro-homosexual sex” side aren’t willing to intellectualize what they’ve been presented. Some sound fairly intelligent.
I guess we’ll all have to wait until judgement day to close this thread once and for all. The only addition I have for those who still feel this lifestyle is acceptable is:
You came to Catholic Answers forum to ask this question…why?
Surely you didn’t think you’d convert us. Maybe you should take heed to your doubts.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.