Would you criminalize homosexual act if you had the chance?

[buffalo]

I would probably put it in the same legal category as prostitution - crimes against human sexuality.

Most of those were at one time illegal in the United States. For example, it used to be illegal to have a business operate on a Sunday (exceptions were allowed, e.g., emergency services, steel mills which had equipment that could not be easily shut down, etc.). I think it would do a world of good to bring some of those laws back, for example, no regular business on Sunday or no profanity.

I like the Sunday day of rest myself. In my neighborhood Sunday is a day of motor noise. I would like a sign to put on my lawn - I respect Sunday as a day of worship and rest.

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

Why not treat it like any other** mental disorder**? Do you throw depressed people in jail?

Because it’s not?

There are many unenforceable laws on the books right now. Laws set the standard. How many times have you said to your kids? - it is against the law. It is about setting boundaries.

No one cares about laws that are against the law

Cigarettes are unhealthy and the best you can hope for is this…on a package of Condoms…based on what is said about Cigarettes…

.

** SURGEON GENERAL’S WARNING: Homosexuality Causes Disease And will not lead to Pregnancy.

SURGEON GENERAL’S WARNING: Quitting Homosexuality Now Greatly Reduces Serious Risks to Your Health. **

1. According to both popular culture and my dictionary homosexuality does not inherently involve any actions, further more sodomy does not inherently cause disease (unlike inhalation of cigarette smoke) whether it is between two men, two women, a man an a woman or other.
2. Sodomy does not inherently pose non-trivial serious risks

 

[TimeEntrance]

English is not my native language, you might find some errors and I apologize for that.

I need clear answer, if you had the chance would you make homosexual acts illegal like in some countries, would you make someone go to jail or might even get killed if he/she had homosexual sex?

No.

I have gay and lesbian family members. Some heterosexual conduct is morally worse anyways.

Like: Like a group of teenage boys having sex with one girl and then publicly humiliating her about it. That in itself may not be illegal but it’s still immoral. If you record someone without their permission and make the recording public that is probably illegal and will get you in trouble with the law.

 

[josh987654321]

“Would you criminalize homosexual act if you had the chance?”

No.

You wouldn’t criminalize it, because if you did, you would have to criminalize other sexual activities that are also considered Immoral and for those into polygamy, their sexual activities are not considered immoral according to them, which is how some homosexuals will see their activities.

You would have to criminalize or penalize adulterer’s, polygmous acts, pre-marital sex and many more, so over in America where they removed the sodomy laws, I would have agreed with that.

The sexual activity between two or more consenting adults only affects themselves, therefore it is not required to be criminalized, but I don’t think It shouldn’t be recognised as a marriage either as that I think will affect societies view of that kind of activity.

To criminalize homosexual activities would be extremism.

Thank you for reading
Josh

 

[InJesusItrust]

Because it’s not?

Yes it is. Removing it from the list for political reasons is not scientific.

 

[RPRPsych]

Yes it is. Removing it from the list for political reasons is not scientific.

Actually true; the APA’s decision to delete homosexuality as a diagnostic category (in 1973) was a rather stormy decision, made under duress from gay rights and social (“anti-psychiatry”) activists who applied various sorts of pressure.

The WHO has still not caved completely, and retains a category of “ego-dystonic homosexuality” (code F66.1) used when a person is unhappy with his same-sex attraction, though it repeats the old lie that “sexual orientation, by itself, is not a disorder.”

Because of the enormous influence of the APA (and the companies that bankroll it), many psychiatrists have swallowed its decision, lock, stock and barrel. Those of us who think otherwise are in a minority.

 

[migueltojose]

…if you had the chance would you make homosexual acts illegal like in some countries, would you make someone go to jail or might even get killed if he/she had homosexual sex?

No… I would consider criminalizing those that would criminalize.
Too many laws and too many “do gooders” making them…
Government should not be involved. We should govern ourselves more.
Educate. Evangelize. Enlighten. That is the key.
Free will must be served.
The ten commandments should be adhered to willfully and enforced socially except for the obvious ones covered by law… murder, stealing, etc…
Sigmatize. Ostracise.
Social norms with upper and lower limits should be encouraged. Behavior outside of the “normal limits” (aye, there’s the rub) should have social consequences significant enough to support the social norm…
That’s why I still believe in remaining “in the closet”… it made a lot of sense then (when it was the norm) and still does… in my opinion…

 

[WildCatholic]

I’d make a fine of $100 or so if you got caught, doing, um, ya know…

Same with adultery.

Divorce not legal unless there is a threat to someone’s wellbeing.

Contraception not legal a la Humanae Vitae.

I say make the fines worse. Maybe jail time, heck lets stone them Okay, in all seriousness, I don’t know how to feel about this. While i’d like to criminalize homosexuality and other acts, I understand that it shouldn’t. Also how would you enforce it. Would the local cop do a bedroom inspection. Maybe we could get the Spanish Inquisition to come. Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

Yes it is. Removing it from the list for political reasons is not scientific.

This presumes that it was a mental disorder to begin with…

I would like to know why some people here are totally fine with hypocritically criminalizing only some types of sodomy.

 

[Gaerteuth]

No.

Being discriminatory against a group of people and then calling it a “value” is nothing more than idiocy leading to theocracy.

If America suddenly started banning things based on the Catholic definition of sin, then we’d be exactly like Saudi Arabia, just with Catholicism.

You see, people like me don’t have “values”. We have principles that are based off of human empathy, not garbage and bigotry.

 

[duneman]

English is not my native language, you might find some errors and I apologize for that.

I need clear answer, if you had the chance would you make homosexual acts illegal like in some countries, would you make someone go to jail or might even get killed if he/she had homosexual sex?

God already did !!

 

[jonathan_hili]

No, as it would neither benefit the salvation of the souls nor the betterment of society. Just criminalising immoral activity rarely helps deal with the problems involved.

Homosexual actions, in particular, should be shown greater levity because those who commit them probably feel compelled by their very being or as a form of intimacy with another. This is very different from stealing or using illicit drugs.

Having said this, that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t maintain the rightness of heterosexual activity and marriage.

 

[jonathan_hili]

So your claim is private behavior has no ramifications to the greater whole?

That’s not what Catholic1954 said, Buffalo, but that what is done in private isn’t the business of governments or other citizens to intervene or legislate on. Where such actions have public consequences, then limits can be set, e.g. teaching about homosexual activity or public demonstrations of it.

 

[CopticChristian]

No.

Being discriminatory against a group of people and then calling it a “value” is nothing more than idiocy leading to theocracy.

Amen. We do not discriminate against a group of people. We believe that there are sins against Chastity. Prostitutes, Rapists, Incestors, Homosexuals, Pornographers, Adulterers and Masturbators are people that sin against Chastity…we are an equal opportunity group that takes offense to behavior that is immoral. We do not believe in a Theocracy. I suggest you read Veritatis Splendor where that is explained. Protestants believe in a Theocracy. I suggest you take your paradigm to a Protestant website where your arguments would be understood.

If America suddenly started banning things based on the Catholic definition of sin, then we’d be exactly like Saudi Arabia, just with Catholicism.

We are not going to criminalize anything. We believe that there are sins against Chastity. Prostitutes, Rapists, Incestors, Homosexuals, Pornographers, Adulterers and Masturbators are people that sin against Chastity…we reserve the right to condemn these actions and let the disease process that Homosexuals active in their behavior will cause for themselves. We pray they change but change comes when change is wanted.

You see, people like me don’t have “values”. We have principles that are based off of human empathy, not garbage and bigotry.

How do you determine these values?

How do you explain the determination of these principles?

Garbage is food that has been thrown away. How does this relate?

Bigotry is what you percieve. Condemnation of sinful acts is what Catholics percieve.

 

[WildCatholic]

No.

Being discriminatory against a group of people and then calling it a “value” is nothing more than idiocy leading to theocracy.

If America suddenly started banning things based on the Catholic definition of sin, then we’d be exactly like Saudi Arabia, just with Catholicism.

You see, people like me don’t have “values”. We have principles that are based off of human empathy, not garbage and bigotry.

And (in all seriousness) what would be wrong with that? I’d love to live in a country like that. Heck because Christianity is more tolerant, it might work better than a muslim theocracy

 

[Linux]

To make homoerotic sexual relations illegal just because they are sinful, would mean we ought to make most sinful activities illegal (those who lead to mortal sin anyway).

So we would to make illegal also:

• fornication
• adultery
• getting drunk (privately)
• cursing
• not going to Church on Sunday
  …etc…

Although I think these actions are wrong, still they are often a private matter, and people should have the right to choose.

God gave us freedom and we ought to have the right to exercise such freedom, as long as it is not normal source of public scandal (like sex in public), they do not lead to danger to other people (like driving drunk) and they do not involve coercion (like rape or pedophilia).

To make all such ‘private acts’ illegal would mean also running an oppressive police state.

To make ONLY homoerotic sexual activities illegal would be discrimination.

 

[Slavonic]

We are not going to criminalize anything. We believe that there are sins against Chastity. Prostitutes, Rapists, Incestors, Homosexuals, Pornographers, Adulterers and Masturbators are people that sin against Chastity…

The violent sexual assault of a woman is a sin against chastity! Are you really telling us the problem with a rapist is that he is unchaste.

Bigotry is what you percieve. Condemnation of sinful acts is what Catholics percieve.

What is interesting is how selective this condemnation is. Until there’s a thread on this forum on the topic of banning masturbators from the Boy Scouts, my point stands.

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

Amen. We do not discriminate against a group of people. We believe that there are sins against Chastity. Prostitutes, Rapists, Incestors, Homosexuals, Pornographers, Adulterers and Masturbators are people that sin against Chastity…we are an equal opportunity group that takes offense to behavior that is immoral. We do not believe in a Theocracy. I suggest you read Veritatis Splendor where that is explained. Protestants believe in a Theocracy. I suggest you take your paradigm to a Protestant website where your arguments would be understood.

We are not going to criminalize anything. We believe that there are sins against Chastity. Prostitutes, Rapists, Incestors, Homosexuals, Pornographers, Adulterers and Masturbators are people that sin against Chastity…we reserve the right to condemn these actions and let the disease process that Homosexuals active in their behavior will cause for themselves. We pray they change but change comes when change is wanted.

How do you determine these values?

How do you explain the determination of these principles?

Garbage is food that has been thrown away. How does this relate?

Bigotry is what you percieve. Condemnation of sinful acts is what Catholics percieve.

I would like to point out that there are four things under the vocation to chastity which the Church says is disordered:

2351 Lust is disordered desire for or inordinate enjoyment of sexual pleasure. Sexual pleasure is morally disordered when sought for itself, isolated from its procreative and unitive purposes. (2528)

2352 By masturbation is to be understood the deliberate stimulation of the genital organs in order to derive sexual pleasure. “Both the Magisterium of the Church, in the course of a constant tradition, and the moral sense of the faithful have been in no doubt and have firmly maintained that masturbation is an intrinsically and gravely disordered action.”138 “The deliberate use of the sexual faculty, for whatever reason, outside of marriage is essentially contrary to its purpose.” For here sexual pleasure is sought outside of “the sexual relationship which is demanded by the moral order and in which the total meaning of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love is achieved.”139 (1735)
To form an equitable judgment about the subjects’ moral responsibility and to guide pastoral action, one must take into account the affective immaturity, force of acquired habit, conditions of anxiety, or other psychological or social factors that can lessen, if not even reduce to a minimum, moral culpability.

Chastity and homosexuality
2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.”142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved. (2333)
2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.
2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection. (2347)

2384 Divorce is a grave offense against the natural law. It claims to break the contract, to which the spouses freely consented, to live with each other till death. Divorce does injury to the covenant of salvation, of which sacramental marriage is the sign. Contracting a new union, even if it is recognized by civil law, adds to the gravity of the rupture: the remarried spouse is then in a situation of public and permanent adultery: (1650)
If a husband, separated from his wife, approaches another woman, he is an adulterer because he makes that woman commit adultery; and the woman who lives with him is an adulteress, because she has drawn another’s husband to herself.178
2385 Divorce is immoral also because it introduces disorder into the family and into society. This disorder brings grave harm to the deserted spouse, to children traumatized by the separation of their parents and often torn between them, and because of its contagious effect which makes it truly a plague on society.
2386 It can happen that one of the spouses is the innocent victim of a divorce decreed by civil law; this spouse therefore has not contravened the moral law. There is a considerable difference between a spouse who has sincerely tried to be faithful to the sacrament of marriage and is unjustly abandoned, and one who through his own grave fault destroys a canonically valid marriage.179 (1640)

There are ones that can be legitimately compared.

 

[CopticChristian]

Slavonic:
Your monikor says Catholic…

The violent sexual assault of a woman is a sin against chastity! Are you really telling us the problem with a rapist is that he is unchaste.

I plan to get a copy of the Byzantine Catechism, I had one, cannot find it, I will hopefully have a copy in a few weeks…however the Universal Catechism applies as seen here…

Offenses against chastity

2351 Lust is disordered desire for or inordinate enjoyment of sexual pleasure. Sexual pleasure is morally disordered when sought for itself, isolated from its procreative and unitive purposes.

2352 By masturbation is to be understood the deliberate stimulation of the genital organs in order to derive sexual pleasure.

2353 Fornication is carnal union between an unmarried man and an unmarried woman.

2354 Pornography consists in removing real or simulated sexual acts from the intimacy of the partners, in order to display them deliberately to third parties.

2355 Prostitution does injury to the dignity of the person who engages in it, reducing the person to an instrument of sexual pleasure.

2356 Rape is the forcible violation of the sexual intimacy of another person. It does injury to justice and charity. Rape deeply wounds the respect, freedom, and physical and moral integrity to which every person has a right. It causes grave damage that can mark the victim for life. It is always an intrinsically evil act. Graver still is the rape of children committed by parents (incest) or those responsible for the education of the children entrusted to them.

Chastity and homosexuality

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex.
. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."142 They are contrary to the natural law.
Under no circumstances can they be approved.

So, is a rapist chaste or unchaste?

What is interesting is how selective this condemnation is. Until there’s a thread on this forum on the topic of banning masturbators from the Boy Scouts, my point stands.

Absolutely not, The Church and Catholics are equal opportunity people that condemn all acts against Chastity, not selectively, and what I suggest is that when the Masturbators (M) join…

LGBTM to try to silence NARTH in California
LGBTM want to have their sins approved
LGBTM demand that their sins be approved by the Boy Scouts

then your point is your point.

 

[CopticChristian]

I would like to point out that there are four things under the vocation to chastity which the Church says is disordered:

There are ones that can be legitimately compared.

and since these thoughts were addressed to…

Originally Posted by **Gaerteuth **

Understanding that as I pointed out to Slavonic, there are other sins against Chastity, what is it you are addressing here?