Why is it so hard to debate gay marriage?

[Bennie_P]

Where is the curse in finding your own gender attractive? And just because they haven’t found a genetic cause yet doesn’t mean there isn’t one. Look how long it took to find the alcoholism gene.

There is no alcoholism “gene”.

There are many factors that goes into the possiblities of alcoholism may run in families, but all families have been affected by alcoholism, some more then others. A lot more research needs to go into this area, though scientist see promise in these studies nothing is conclusive. some of the research points toward race as having a factor toward who may be alcoholic, to me that is some dangerous research.

Alcoholism, which affects nearly 14 million Americans and can cause many social and health problems costing society an estimated $185 billion annually, is what scientists call a “complex” disease, meaning that many genes as well as environmental factors play a role in whether a person develops the disease.
While there is not one single “gene that causes alcoholism” the statistical link between this gene and the risk for alcoholism is powerful, said Howard J. Edenberg, Ph.D., Chancellor’s Professor at the IU School of Medicine. Edenberg was the lead researcher for the study, which appears in the April issue of the American Journal of Human Genetics.
“Statistically, this is very strong evidence that this gene affects the risk of alcoholism,” said Edenberg, professor of biochemistry and molecular biology and of medical and molecular genetics.

 

[Abira]

There is no alcoholism gene.

Medically I have to agree with that, there is a gene which predisposes you to suffering from alcoholism but not one which causes it outright. We still have free will to drink soft drinks instead though some find the lure of alcohol greater than others. This is why the church accepts that the origins of ssa are not yet known and so only judges the actionsof an indivual…not their predispositions.

of course you will find hundreds of studies for this and others against if you wish to argue otherwise either way. It’s how science works through studies and data.

 

[whatevergirl]

Where is the curse in finding your own gender attractive? And just because they haven’t found a genetic cause yet doesn’t mean there isn’t one. Look how long it took to find the alcoholism gene.

we definitely live in a society now that never wants to take the blame…or worse yet, admit sin. So, we pass off bad choices, as syndromes…genetic defects…diseases…etc…

I just don’t liken cancer to alcoholism. (for example)

I know many will disagree with me…but I’m just not into blaming my bad choices, on my genes. I think an alcoholic can recover probably faster…if he/she were to accept responsibility for it, and not blame his/her genes for the ‘disorder.’ That just makes it all the easier to justify our lifestyle choices.

Just my thoughts.

 

[whatevergirl]

sorry, I didn’t mean to go O.T.

 

[edwest2]

Before: “The devil made me do it.”

Now: “My genes predisposed me to do it.”

Give me a break.

God bless,
Ed

 

[whatevergirl]

Before: “The devil made me do it.”

Now: “My genes predisposed me to do it.”

Give me a break.

God bless,
Ed

agreed.

 

[Tracyms1974]

I think it’s hard to debate gay marriage because so many people dislike the Catholic Church. All we are is this big monolith in the middle of society handing out “do’s” and “dont’s.” It’s a shame. You wouldn’t believe the people I’ve tried to talk to about NFP, for example. The whole concept falls on deaf ears. For whatever reason, people think that they should have the right to do whatever they want, whenever they want, however often they want to when it comes to sex. This may tie into the gay issue, too. Let’s face it: Gay people conceivably could have sex every day three times a day and not even think about getting pregnant. Who wouldn’t sign up for this deal? NFP is a sacrifice. You work around God’s schedule, He doesn’t work around yours. There’s not much to be said for individuals who aren’t willing to take up any Cross whatsoever in their lives. I think it makes them babyish and self-centered.

Tracy

 

[Abira]

agreed.

well your personal opinions…and scientifically validated opinions no doubt… put aside, i’d hope you’d keep an open mind for when this theory is proven beyond doubt. as it is it’s a relatively new field.

in the meantime do some research before bashing goofyjim’s point.

 

[whatevergirl]

well your personal opinions…and scientifically validated opinions no doubt… put aside, i’d hope you’d keep an open mind for when this theory is proven beyond doubt. as it is it’s a relatively new field.

in the meantime do some research before bashing goofyjim’s point.

I stated an opinion. I didn’t ‘bash anyone.’

 

[Abira]

I stated an opinion. I didn’t ‘bash anyone.’

well state an informed opinion then. what studies do you base it on as the latest scientific opinion is moving away from yours.

it’san important point as science can help us understand a lot of things and more importantly address many things in a better tailored way.

predisposition does not remove guilt or free will, it is as it says on the tin, a predisposition. I think the last poster…edwest? thinks that it is somehow passing the buck… which i don’t think it is…and if people use it as an excuse then that’s their own business comlpetely seperate from the science involved.

 

[Bennie_P]

well your personal opinions…and scientifically validated opinions no doubt… put aside, i’d hope you’d keep an open mind for when this theory is proven beyond doubt. as it is it’s a relatively new field.

in the meantime do some research before bashing goofyjim’s point.

Bashing is a coded word, personally I have debated this issue with goofyjim before and I have respect for him and his opinions.He said there is a gene and I turned around said there isn’t, I don’t see how that is bashing. I would be the last person to “bash” goofyjim.

 

[edwest2]

Too many people are making science a god. I do not and will not change my beliefs based on some expert opinion by some scientist. That said, the Catholic Church has stated “truth cannot contradict truth,” and is not inimicable to science but I think too many people are too anxious, in a few cases, even desperate, to find something, anything, to support their lifestyle.

I think it’s useful to point out that too many people live with an unhealthy and unrealistic belief in the future. Even living in The Modern present, too many people seem to think that when the clock chimed in the 21st Century that suddenly, knowledge, truth and enlightenment filled everyone’s heads. The fact is, it didn’t.

A few are looking to science to prop up their naturalistic and nihilistic belief systems. You are a bag of chemicals and your actions and reactions are preprogrammed by your genes. In essence, you don’t exst and are not directly responsible for any of your actions.

God bless,
Ed

 

[Abira]

Too many people are making science a god. I do not and will not change my beliefs based on some expert opinion by some scientist. That said, the Catholic Church has stated “truth cannot contradict truth,” and is not inimicable to science but I think too many people are too anxious, in a few cases, even desperate, to find something, anything, to support their lifestyle.

I think it’s useful to point out that too many people live with an unhealthy and unrealistic belief in the future. Even living in The Modern present, too many people seem to think that when the clock chimed in the 21st Century that suddenly, knowledge, truth and enlightenment filled everyone’s heads. The fact is, it didn’t.

A few are looking to science to prop up their naturalistic and nihilistic belief systems. You are a bag of chemicals and your actions and reactions are preprogrammed by your genes. In essence, you don’t exst and are not directly responsible for any of your actions.

God bless,
Ed

lol, I actually agree very much with you Ed,

people have replaced the soul with chemical reactions… however the science within us can never be fully explained and is still a chicken or egg debate ie… are we chemically imbalanced thereby causing depression(or whatever) or are we depressed and causing a chemical imblance.

Whatever the case we can still learn from this, and when science shows us something undeniably we should not close ourselves off the the truth around us of any kind, be it religious truth or scientific truth because they are one and the same.

people will always try and pervert facts and truth but that doesn’t mean we should be hostile to new scientific developments when gthey appear at first glance to threaten us.

 

[edwest2]

I watch scientific developments and check on them daily. The point is, when man’s truth becomes an object of worship, that’s when I have a problem. And I’ve encountered too many people on too many forums that “insist” I accept some scientific truth even when it has not been proven to my satisfaction.

God bless,
Ed

 

[Abira]

I watch scientific developments and check on them daily. The point is, when man’s truth becomes an object of worship, that’s when I have a problem. And I’ve encountered too many people on too many forums that “insist” I accept some scientific truth even when it has not been proven to my satisfaction.

God bless,
Ed

I don’t think anyone here ‘worships’ science, and secondly your levels of satisfaction obvioulsy differ from someone elses so we’ll call it truce lol

 

[KarenNC]

**I’m don’t accept the vast majority of your arguments or listed situations as valid. Maybe the first one.
*]As for the second situation I don’t know what you mean by “those who cannot participate in sexual acts” - sterile couples? If that’s what you mean then you’re wrong. The Church would allow them to marry. **

I mean people who are physically incapable of intercourse. The Catholic Church does not allow a sacremental marriage to such. It is not necessarily an impediment to civil marriage.

***]And as for the next situation - the church recognizes inter faith marriages to a certain extent so this also isn’t against my religion. **
correction accepted

*]The government doesn’t know whether or not they are going to participate in contraception and isn’t condoning this practice by marrying them.

The government takes no stand on whether they do or do not, should or should not. The point is that it is irrelevant to a civil marriage.

***]I don’t know if this is true or not - I mean for one thing I don’t know the level of consanguinity that the Church allows for, and for another don’t many of the States prohibit anyone from marrying his cousin?
**

My point was that there are states that specifically allow first cousins to marry if they are over a certain age or medically found to be sterile. Other states allow first cousin marriages (all allow second cousin marriages) . The specifics vary by state.
marriage.about.com/cs/marriagelicenses/a/cousin.htm
As to levels of consanguinity in the Catholic Church
vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_P3Y.HTM#EP

An interesting comparison of canon law and the law of one particular state (Illinois) is at jgray.org/docs/IL_marriage.html

By the way why did you answer every contention I had but skipped the one about it homosexual marriages being in direct conflict with the foundation of Western Civilization? Maybe you should go back and answer it…

Give me a more specific example of what you mean by “in direct conflict with the foundation of Western Civilization.” Which foundation in particular and at what time? The Greek culture? The Roman one? The Jewish one that had polygyny and marriage of half-siblings?

 

[KarenNC]

You wouldn’t believe the people I’ve tried to talk to about NFP, for example. The whole concept falls on deaf ears. For whatever reason, people think that they should have the right to do whatever they want, whenever they want, however often they want to when it comes to sex. This may tie into the gay issue, too. Let’s face it: Gay people conceivably could have sex every day three times a day and not even think about getting pregnant. Who wouldn’t sign up for this deal? NFP is a sacrifice. You work around God’s schedule, He doesn’t work around yours. There’s not much to be said for individuals who aren’t willing to take up any Cross whatsoever in their lives. I think it makes them babyish and self-centered.

Are you seriously suggesting that people are homosexual because the Catholic version of avoiding pregnancy is too much trouble???

 

[Bennie_P]

By the way why did you answer every contention I had but skipped the one about it homosexual marriages being in direct conflict with the foundation of Western Civilization? Maybe you should go back and answer it…

Give me a more specific example of what you mean by “in direct conflict with the foundation of Western Civilization.” Which foundation in particular and at what time? The Greek culture? The Roman one? The Jewish one that had polygyny and marriage of half-siblings?

I think the poster meant the foundation built upon on the fall of the pagan world as it was reconstructed into the modern world. The foundation built upon the Christian Church. which became the unifying force in which "Art and literature, law, education, and politics were preserved in the teachings of the Church, in an environment that, otherwise, would have probably seen their loss. The Church founded many cathedrals, universities, monasteries and seminaries, some of which continue to exist today."

With the rise of Christianity

in the midst of the Roman world, much of Rome’s tradition and culture were absorbed by the new religion, and transformed into something new, which would serve as the basis for the development of Western civilisation after the fall of Rome. Also, Roman culture mixed with the pre-existing Germanic, Slavic, and Celtic cultures, which slowly became integrated into Western culture starting, mainly, with their acceptance of Christianity.
After the fall of Rome much of Greco-Roman art, literature, science and even technology were lost. Europe fell into political anarchy, with many warring kingdoms and principalities, and evolved into feudalism. However, much of the basis of the post-Rome world had been set before the fall of the Empire, mainly through the integrating and reshaping of Roman ideas through Christian thought. The Greek and Roman paganism had been completely replaced by Christianity around the 4th and 5th centuries, since it became the official State religion following the baptism of emperor Constantine I. Roman Catholic Christianity served as a unifying force in Western Europe, and in some respects replaced or competed with the secular authorities. Art and literature, law, education, and politics were preserved in the teachings of the Church, in an environment that, otherwise, would have probably seen their loss. The Church founded many cathedrals, universities, monasteries and seminaries, some of which continue to exist today.

Otherwise through the good and bad the Church is the foundation of everything good about Western Civilization. Something no one or group of pagan gods could accomplish. The same Church that teaches that SSM is an atttack on the family, the Church and modern civilization.

 

[childofmary1143]

well your personal opinions…and scientifically validated opinions no doubt… put aside, i’d hope you’d keep an open mind for when this theory is proven beyond doubt. as it is it’s a relatively new field.

in the meantime do some research before bashing goofyjim’s point.

What scientific theories are you taking about? Are you saying that there is a scientific theory about gay “marriage”?

 

[goofyjim]

There is no alcoholism “gene”.

There are many factors that goes into the possiblities of alcoholism may run in families, but all families have been affected by alcoholism, some more then others. A lot more research needs to go into this area, though scientist see promise in these studies nothing is conclusive. some of the research points toward race as having a factor toward who may be alcoholic, to me that is some dangerous research.

I did not excuse behavior. There is a gene that predisposes one towards alcoholism. It does not excuse one from becoming an alcoholic. So there might very well be some biological or genetic cause of same sex attraction. Imagine if they found it. It would lift the burden of those with it forcing themselves into a heterosexual marriage where both partners might end up unhappy. I consider same sex attraction, not behavior, a blessing. I know I haven’t lied to anyone. I have sinned but gone to confession. But since the attraction itself is not a sin, I don’t have to spend 24 hours a day in the confessional.