Why we need to stand up against Anti-Gay sentiment

[jjr9]

Case closed.

By the way you never had a case. What you did have was a diversion so you could
rationalize your avoidance of the the truth that exclusive SSA is a myth. Satan is
always happy to help with avoidance if we let him in. Satan is a convincing liar.

In Matthew 18:6-7 Jesus says:
6d “Whoever causes one of these little ones* who believe in me to sin, it would be
better for him to have a great millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in
the depths of the sea. 7* Woe to the world because of things that cause sin! Such
things must come, but woe to the one through whom they come!

If the mythical “homosexual person” is not a corruption for children I don’t know
what could be.

God bless

 

[at9009]

I
that doesn’t exist, the “homosexual person”, is just cruel and unhelpful for the salvation of that
persons soul.

God bless

You haven’t really provided any good explanation or reasoning for why you think s Homosexual person cannot exist. You make that assertion as if it’s true then go from therre and try to use reverse logic to reach your point.

It would be like saying a person cannot be completely blind because that’s not good for them and unhelpful. Don’t teach them braille because complete blindness is a myth because some can see woth corrective lens. There can’t possibly be a spectrum of blindness. This circular logic is the same you are trying to apply and you are failing to ever address anyone’s valid counter points. Instead you just rehash your thesis statement. If you want to actually have a conversation please try to address people’s points and maybe not hijack threads to just spout out talking points when you should addressed what other people have said.

 

[jjr9]

You haven’t really provided any good explanation or reasoning for why you think s Homosexual person cannot exist. You make that assertion as if it’s true then go from therre and try to use reverse logic to reach your point.

If you know how to prove that something doesn’t exist please let me know.

It would be like saying a person cannot be completely blind because that’s not good for them and unhelpful. Don’t teach them braille because complete blindness is a myth because some can see woth corrective lens. There can’t possibly be a spectrum of blindness. This circular logic is the same you are trying to apply and you are failing to ever address anyone’s valid counter points. Instead you just rehash your thesis statement. If you want to actually have a conversation please try to address people’s points and maybe not hijack threads to just spout out talking points when you should addressed what other people have said.

I would be happy to have a conversation with you. If you have tangible proof of exclusive SSA or reference to exclusive
SSA in the Sacred Deposit of Faith please share this and I will concede the point. I am looking but I have not found any
I believe it does not exist. The larger point is that the Magisterium should not present what is false to be true.

God bless

 

[Thorolfr]

If you know how to prove that something doesn’t exist please let me know.

I would be happy to have a conversation with you. If you have tangible proof of exclusive SSA or reference to exclusive
SSA in the Sacred Deposit of Faith please share this and I will concede the point. I am looking but I have not found any
I believe it does not exist. The larger point is that the Magisterium should not present what is false to be true.

God bless

So the only things that exist in the world are those that are referred to in the Sacred Deposit of Faith? Is this an inexhaustible body of knowledge about existence?

 

[jjr9]

So the only things that exist in the world are those that are referred to in the Sacred Deposit of Faith?

As far as I know everything that exists can be demonstrated by tangible proof or you can
only accept it by faith. I have no faith that the “homosexual person” is anything more than a myth.

Do you have any tangible proof or reference in the Sacred Deposit of Faith for the “homosexual person”?

Is this an inexhaustible body of knowledge about existence?

I believe that on questions of morality and faith the Sacred Deposit of Faith is inexhaustible.

God bless

 

[Thorolfr]

I believe that on questions of morality and faith the Sacred Deposit of Faith is inexhaustible.

God bless

According to Catholic teaching, having homosexual inclinations is not a sin, but only acting on them. So being a “homosexual person” (i.e. having homosexual inclinations) is not a matter of morality or faith. There is nothing immoral about having homosexual inclinations or being a “homosexual person”, especially since having such inclinations is not a choice.

 

[Rau]

According to Catholic teaching, having homosexual inclinations is not a sin, but only acting on them. So being a “homosexual person” (i.e. having homosexual inclinations) is not a matter of morality or faith. There is nothing immoral about having homosexual inclinations or being a “homosexual person”, especially since having such inclinations is not a choice.

That’s right. Morality attaches to (chosen) “acts” (where that term is to be understood generally).

 

[jjr9]

According to Catholic teaching, having homosexual inclinations is not a sin, but only acting on them.

OK

So being a “homosexual person” (i.e. having homosexual inclinations) is not a matter of morality or faith.

Your definition of the “homosexual person” is not the one the Magisterium uses my concern is that the
Magisterium claims a group of people have an exclusive SSA.

There is nothing immoral about having homosexual inclinations

In this Church document vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_cons_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_en.html it says:

1. Although he was made by God in a state of holiness, from the very onset of his history man abused
   his liberty, at the urging of the Evil One. Man set himself against God and sought to attain his goal apart
   from God. Although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, but their senseless minds were
   darkened and they served the creature rather than the Creator.(3) What divine revelation makes known to
   us agrees with experience. Examining his heart, man finds that he has inclinations toward evil too, and is
   engulfed by manifold ills which cannot come from his good Creator.

Do you think SSA is from our “good Creator”? I do not

I believe accepting SSA to the point that one believes themselves incapable of OSA is immoral.

especially since having such inclinations is not a choice.

I think the Church does not agree with this.

2358(CCC) originally said:
“They do not choose their homosexual condition; for most of them it is a trial”
The present version says:
“This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial”

God bless

 

[Thorolfr]

I think the Church does not agree with this (“especially since having such inclinations is not a choice.”)

2358(CCC) originally said:
“They do not choose their homosexual condition; for most of them it is a trial”
The present version says:
“This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial”

God bless

Am I missing something here? I said that having homosexual inclinations “is not a choice” and the Catechism says, “They do not choose their homosexual condition.”

Aren’t we both saying the same thing? It certainly looks to me as if the Church agrees with what I said.

 

[Rau]

Am I missing something here? I said that having homosexual inclinations “is not a choice” and the Catechism says, “They do not choose their homosexual condition.”

Aren’t we both saying the same thing? It certainly looks to me as if the Church agrees with what I said.

He deduces because a previous CCC said “they do not choose”, and the current one does not say that, then the Church must have decided that they DO choose. Of course that is a logically flawed conclusion. I pointed out earlier how “they do not choose” can be ambiguous. “Choosing” something, and “choosing to embrace it” are different. A man may not have chosen his sexual attraction to the same sex (it simply arose), but he may choose to embrace it. Some men certainly do choose to embrace it.

 

[JB_Brother_4446]

What I’m saying is that the church cannot offer a response similar to many on this thread, which is simply to say gay relationships are bad – and leave it at that. One time, maybe a year or more ago, I opened a thread asking if we can affirm any “good” or “redeeming” qualities in same-sex relationships. Many people firmly said “NO!” – that since gay acts are objectively sinful, we cannot support any apparent good in such a relationship – even including goods such as mutual support, self-sacrifice, and affection.

Now, with appreciation of Francis’ approach (as evidenced in his apostolic exhortation), it seems that we must affirm the goods in non-ideal living situations, and build from there. This is a much more attractive means to a fuller life in truth and sanctity. Simply rejecting an act and saying evil over and over again becomes numb to those gay persons who feel as though they have found authentic love in their relationships.

My belief on SSA is this:

“If your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to be maimed than to enter in hell with your whole body intact.”

Although we should not judge a person incorrectly, we must not excuse the harsh realities of sin. SSA is a temptation and an inclination to sin.

 

[LittleFlower378]

According to Fr. John Hardon every single person has the homosexual tendancy as a result of original sin. Some more than others. But what we can never do is act on it. There are also tendancies to all sorts of sins. One of the major tendancies is to the sin of lust which homosexuality falls under.

Listen to Fr. Hardons audio compilation of this. Listen to them all but it falls under talk 010
therealpresence.org/archives/MP3/RP0023000.htm

 

[LittleFlower378]

No there are no redeeming qualities in a same sex relationship just as there are no redeeming qualities in an adulterous relationship. It can bring both people to hell.

However there can be redeeming qualities im friendship, but if your friend is causing you to sin cut him/her out.

 

[jjr9]

Am I missing something here? I said that having homosexual inclinations “is not a choice” and the Catechism says, “They do not choose their homosexual condition.”

Aren’t we both saying the same thing? It certainly looks to me as if the Church agrees with what I said.

You are missing the fact that the Magisterium rejected this language, the Catechism does not say,“They do not choose
their homosexual condition.” this is an error the Magisterium corrected hopefully the Magisterium will correct it’s error
of accepting exclusive SSA as true and return to historical Church teaching that SSA is a temptation not brought
on by a “psychological genesis” that “remains largely unexplained” but a separation from the Lord and SS behavior
is sinful.

God bless

 

[LittleFlower378]

God gives the grace necessary to all people with same sex attraction to conquor their inordinate desire. God is that good. Nonsense to those that say they don’t have their free will and cannot overcome the temptation.

 

[Thorolfr]

God gives the grace necessary to all people with same sex attraction to conquor their inordinate desire.

Most gay people do not have sexual desires that are any more “inordinate” (“unusually or disproportionately large; excessive”) than those of straight people. They just happen to be directed at people of their own sex rather than people of the opposite sex.

 

[davidv]

Most gay people do not have sexual desires that are any more “inordinate” (“unusually or disproportionately large; excessive”) than those of straight people. They just happen to be directed at people of their own sex rather than people of the opposite sex.

That is the inordinate part.

 

[at9009]

God gives the grace necessary to all people with same sex attraction to conquor their inordinate desire. God is that good. Nonsense to those that say they don’t have their free will and cannot overcome the temptation.

Just to clarify you mean to resist same sex sexual temptations not to completely eliminate same sex attraction (for many that trial is a lifelong thing)? Because the attraction represents one’s cross and God does not ever promise to remove all of our crosses this side of Heaven. He does promise that we will not be tempted beyond what we can bear and He will offer an escape route.

 

[LittleFlower378]

Just to clarify you mean to resist same sex sexual temptations not to completely eliminate same sex attraction (for many that trial is a lifelong thing)? Because the attraction represents one’s cross and God does not ever promise to remove all of our crosses this side of Heaven. He does promise that we will not be tempted beyond what we can bear and He will offer an escape route.

Right, thanks for clarifying.

 

[at9009]

Right, thanks for clarifying.

Cool. I believed that is what you originally meant just some might have misunderstood you. Have a great day.