Your opinion on homosexual relationships

  • Thread starter Thread starter AtomicBinary
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Fair enough, but that doesn’t mean that a more positive approach isn’t possible.
Your point being? That my inability to reconcile isn’t universal? That Wesley Hill is a better person and a better Christian than I? I never denied either. I was speaking on my own behalf alone.
 
I agree that OP needs to narrow the question. IMO homosexuality is as natural as breathing. Sexuality itself is a sliding scale spectrum.
Please tell me you’re not saying that the sexual acts that people are prone to commit when left to their own “natural” devices should be considered moral. No one needs to tell you how far out into the wilderness the “spectrum” of sexual behaviors goes, right?

No, nobody needs to feel positive about having an inclination that they cannot express in any moral way. Everyone has something, but some of us have impulses that are much more difficult to control and much more difficult to live with. This is particularly true in a culture that hardly knows how to have deep adult relationships of mutual care that don’t involve sex.
 
Your point being? That my inability to reconcile isn’t universal? **That Wesley Hill is a better person and a better Christian than I?
**
Well definitely not that last one. I made no claim about you or anyone else being better or worse than anyone else.

Also, this may be evident already, but in case it isn’t let me say that I have nothing against you sharing your views. I shared a snippet from Dr. Hill’s views because I find them interesting and they hadn’t already been shared here.
 
Church teaching can be found in the catechism of the Catholic Church. The church separates homosexual tendencies from actions. Being in a relationship would be an action.
We are to charitably minister to those who are disordered.
Come on.

We are to charitably to minister to those who have disordered inclinations.

The people themselves aren’t disordered.
 
Come on.

We are to charitably to minister to those who have disordered inclinations.

The people themselves aren’t disordered.
True.

Like people who struggle with gluttony. Their relationship to food is disordered not them.

We all have disordered inclinations as we are all sinners with the exception of Mary.
 
Clearly, its possible and not too problematic for men and women to lead a celibate life. We have the Church and the Sacraments which convey Sanctifying Grace.
Frequently straight people find that their way is going to be celibate.
If a straight individual can be celibate, then a homosexual person Can also choose to be celibate. 🤷
 
Come on.

We are to charitably to minister to those who have disordered inclinations.

The people themselves aren’t disordered.
I assumed basic theology was assumed. And of course hate the sin love the sinner is implied. But let’s explore for a second the parameters the LGBT movement has framed. They insist that not just an orientation but rather THE defining characteristic of their being. They liken it to race, in the Ssm debate and in the idea of gender identity. They increasingly make it harder to separate the disorder from the being.

Of course they aren’t right and defining oneself by a sinful will is not ever going to be a good thing, but in public discourse they are the ones driving and shaping the language of the debate. We sure aren’t.
 
I assuming the bolded sentence is talking about the homosexual orientation. Even so, that strikes me as an overly-positive sentiment, if you don’t mind my saying so.
I am talking about both the orientation and the act. I don’t know how that is seen as an “overly-positive” statement.
 
Nope.
A straight Catholic can choose to be celibate. (= among other options)
A gay Catholic must be celibate. (= only option)

:dts:
No, that’s not true.

All unmarried people must be celibate.

Nobody is permitted to indulge in disordered sexual behavior of any kind.

There are men and women who have same sex attraction who are happily married.
 
Please tell me you’re not saying that the sexual acts that people are prone to commit when left to their own “natural” devices should be considered moral. No one needs to tell you how far out into the wilderness the “spectrum” of sexual behaviors goes, right?

No, nobody needs to feel positive about having an inclination that they cannot express in any moral way. Everyone has something, but some of us have impulses that are much more difficult to control and much more difficult to live with. This is particularly true in a culture that hardly knows how to have deep adult relationships of mutual care that don’t involve sex.
I am saying that. I am not seeing how having sex between two (or more) consenting adults being the same gender is immoral. It is of no business of mine what consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes.

As an aside why is there such a focus on this? Like the primary complaint seems to be on masculine x masculine relationships compared to feminine x feminine relationships. Why is it that there is a heavy focus on what does on in privacy the hot topic to Christians?
 
No, that’s not true.

All unmarried people must be celibate.

Nobody is permitted to indulge in disordered sexual behavior of any kind.

There are men and women who have same sex attraction who are happily married.
In my humble opinion the bolded part bothers me. See I can understand some sexual acts as being too kinky for some. I can also understand certain acts are illegal because of lack of consent. What I cannot fathom is the problem people have with homosexual acts. How is it “disordered”? Also unmarried people must be celibate, why? So natural impulses, one can say God given impulses, are to be forced down? That sounds horrible.
 
I am saying that. I am not seeing how having sex between two (or more) consenting adults being the same gender is immoral. It is of no business of mine what consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes.

As an aside why is there such a focus on this? Like the primary complaint seems to be on masculine x masculine relationships compared to feminine x feminine relationships. Why is it that there is a heavy focus on what does on in privacy the hot topic to Christians?
Is consent the only thing that matters?

Is **any **behavior morally acceptable as long as I feel like doing it and nobody around me is directly affected?
 
No, that’s not true.

All unmarried people must be celibate.
And how does it contradict what I said? All unmarried people must be celibate. But gay people must be unmarried forever, whereas straight people have an option to get married someday.
 
Is consent the only thing that matters?

Is **any **behavior morally acceptable as long as I feel like doing it and nobody around me is directly affected?
In my mind, it’s up to each person to decide what’s morally acceptable for themselves. But I would certainly come to your defense if you were engaged in something that didn’t impact anyone else and you started getting grief for it - even if it was a choice I couldn’t or wouldn’t make for myself.

MYOB is a lost art form, in my opinion.
 
Is consent the only thing that matters?

Is **any **behavior morally acceptable as long as I feel like doing it and nobody around me is directly affected?
Consent is an important matter. I would say what kind of behavior? If it is self harmful then no. Like cutting or burning oneself. If something like masturbation then go right on ahead. An ye harm none Do what ye will. Or “Do not make sexual advances unless you are given the mating signal.”
 
I am saying that. I am not seeing how having sex between two (or more) consenting adults being the same gender is immoral. It is of no business of mine what consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes.

As an aside why is there such a focus on this? Like the primary complaint seems to be on masculine x masculine relationships compared to feminine x feminine relationships. Why is it that there is a heavy focus on what does on in privacy the hot topic to Christians?
Because the LGBT community has abandoned privacy entirely. It used to be “Whatever goes on behind closed doors is no one’s business.” Now, It’s “out and proud.” And even “bathroom bills.”

Ed
 
Because the LGBT community has abandoned privacy entirely. It used to be “Whatever goes on behind closed doors is no one’s business.” Now, It’s “out and proud.” And even “bathroom bills.”

Ed
Well “Out and Proud” is become of being marginalized for so long. Think about how in some states here in the US sodomy was illegal or still is illegal. How insane is that. Being out and proud means not hiding in the closet. To say I am LGBTQA+ and not afraid to say it. As for bathroom bills, well that is on the conservative end of paranoia.
 
I am saying that. I am not seeing how having sex between two (or more) consenting adults being the same gender is immoral. It is of no business of mine what consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes.

As an aside why is there such a focus on this? Like the primary complaint seems to be on masculine x masculine relationships compared to feminine x feminine relationships. Why is it that there is a heavy focus on what does on in privacy the hot topic to Christians?
Because the matter isn’t private. You’ve (generally speaking) made it public and “in the face”. 🤷
Because here we are with a thread started on the subject.
And over-representation in entertainment and news media.

And opinions erroneous to Catholic moral theology.

And you think Catholics are prying into people’s bedrooms?
Take a breath and look around.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top