Homosexual Orientation

[Jesus_lol]

[quote name='Socrates' date='09 July 2010 - 10:37 AM' timestamp='1278697046' post='2139938']
That remains completely unproven hypothesis, though many treat such hypotheses as settled fact.

I seriously doubt you've personally observed homosexual behavior in newborn infants.

Also, I should add, that as one who has a family member with Down's Syndrome, I find the comparison of DS to sexual perversion by some in this thread offensive.
[/quote]

And you treat the opposite hypotheses as settled fact, which afaik remains completely unproven as well.

cant say i have personally observed heterosexual behavior in newborn infants either.

I dont see why you would.


[quote name='Ice_nine' date='10 July 2010 - 12:54 AM' timestamp='1278748495' post='2140684']
Yeah but I don't see why homosexuality is touted as the worst sexual sin out there. Or why there's so much more emphasis on homosexuality than other sexual sins like fornication, masturbation, adultery. Surely these also cripple society, but is it just my imagination that those aren't talked about with the same antipathy that homosexuality is? Why is that? I mean i guess it's highly political, but aguing politics and setting up a counter-agenda doesn't do much to heal the human persons caught between the two sides.
[/quote]

This is because frankly a lot of people are very hypocritical. Many people who would decry homosexuality are perfectly content to watch lesbian pornography and engage in [mod]MIKolbe- graphic language[/mod]. They like to yell about "homos wrecking the institution of marriage" while simultaneously cheating on their wives/husbands and divorcing and remarrying several times over. They see no problem with their fornication because its a man with a woman "as God intended it"
Dont forget there is a large tendency for people to speakout strongly against tendencies they have and are in denial about. See the recent several Republican anti gay politicians being caught doing it with other guys.

Hypocrisy.

people smell of elderberries.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Ice_nine' date='10 July 2010 - 03:54 AM' timestamp='1278748495' post='2140684']
I guess that's where i thought an implication was. Don't know why gays is in quotes i guess.[/quote]
"Gay" is a political and politically-correct word first used by the homosexual lobby. "Homosexual" is a more correct term. Properly speaking, "gay" means "happy," which has nothing to do with sodomy. I regard the current use of the word "gay" as a perversion of our language.

[quote]Not really trying to twist what you say, but you gotta understand that there might be people lurking on here who are struggling with it and you need to look at what you say and hear the words from their POV. Sure you can say "that's not what I meant" but sometimes what you say and what people actually hear are two different things and i think with an issue as polarizing as this perhaps it might help to be a little sensitive as to bridge the gap of misunderstanding.
[/quote]
As a sinner who struggles with a variety of sins and inclinations to sin, I don't think my POV is that radically different. Priests have told me in the confessional point blank about the evil of sins I commit and the need to change. Believe me, watering things down out of a false "sensitivity" benefits nobody.
If people don't read what's actually written, but something entirely different, it's up to them to learn reading comprehension and logic.


[quote]Yeah but I don't see why homosexuality is touted as the worst sexual sin out there. Or why there's so much more emphasis on homosexuality than other sexual sins like fornication, masturbation, adultery. Surely these also cripple society, but is it just my imagination that those aren't talked about with the same antipathy that homosexuality is? Why is that? I mean i guess it's highly political, but aguing politics and setting up a counter-agenda doesn't do much to heal the human persons caught between the two sides.[/quote]
If you're really interested in why homosexuality is objectively worse than other sexual sins, you might want to check out what St. Thomas Aquinas has to say on the topic:
[url="http://www.ccel.org/a/aquinas/summa/SS/SS154.html#SSQ154A12THEP1"]Whether the unnatural vice is the greatest sin among the species of lust?[/url]

This, of course, does not excuse or downgrade other sexual sins. In fact, the current acceptance of homosexuality in society would not be possible if there wasn't already such a widespread acceptance and practice of "heterosexual" sin in our society.
Like you said, a lot of the reason is how homosexuality has become politicized, much of which is due to the aggressive efforts of the "gay rights" lobby. As the Pope has said, Christians have an obligation to oppose such things politically as homosexual "marriage" and "civil unions."
And for whatever reason, there simply aren't many people on phatmass defending sins like fornication, masturbation, and adultery. There have in fact, been a number of threads on here about the evils of pornography and masturbation, though they tend not to generate quite as much controversy.

[quote]
That's not really my problem. Maybe you say people don't wanna hear the truth, but I feel like no one is willing to hear the people who are actually affected by this. Some small group forces a problematic ideology so you pick it apart and expose it for what it is. There's nothing wrong with that, but I just think that saying things like "homosexual disorientation is a choice" and that "it can be prayed away although it is hard" and "well there are no proven studies that show genetic blah blah blah" . . . have you ever talked to people dealing with this? most of them try so hard to find the opposite sex attractive but can't so then they just end up hating themselves and feeling overwhelmed and hopeless. at least in my experience. And it seems almost pretentious to say the aforementioned things without having walked in their shoes and listening to them. You need to try to understand someone to help them and that starts with listening and not with just barking truth at them. I don't see how it's inconceivable to see how an individual, perhaps lurking around, might perceive some of these things as condemnation of him/herself.

It's two sides debating ideologies and whatnot. That debate is needed and I get it. But for the sake of those who are really dealing with internal and external forces that may or may not be in their control or partial-control, can't we take a bit of the edge off? Just in general maybe?

I'm sorry it's late and i'm all over the place. So if it's incoherent it's the sleep-deprivation. I don't intend to be rude. I don't know you and although we seem to disagree you seem to be a respectable person. It's just when I read some things said in this thread, and shift my vantage point to someone dealing with these feelings, i see a lot of potential hurt. I think we can fix that while also proclaiming the truth in full.[/quote]
Again, you're quoting some things no one has actually said on here.
And, while I appreciate your concerns, I'm not going to avoid stating moral truths on here, or water them down, just because they might upset some people.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Jesus_lol' date='10 July 2010 - 04:13 AM' timestamp='1278749608' post='2140687']
And you treat the opposite hypotheses as settled fact, which afaik remains completely unproven as well.

cant say i have personally observed heterosexual behavior in newborn infants either.

I dont see why you would.[/quote]
My point was that one doesn't observe any kind of sexual behavior in newborn infants. I was simply pointing out how her belief that people are born homosexual is not based in direct personal observation.
I think there's quite a bit of evidence homosexuality is not totally fixed at birth and unchangeable, but I don't have time for that whole argument now.


[quote]This is because frankly a lot of people are very hypocritical. Many people who would decry homosexuality are perfectly content to watch lesbian pornography and engage in heterosexual anal sex. They like to yell about "homos wrecking the institution of marriage" while simultaneously cheating on their wives/husbands and divorcing and remarrying several times over. They see no problem with their fornication because its a man with a woman "as God intended it"
Dont forget there is a large tendency for people to speakout strongly against tendencies they have and are in denial about. See the recent several Republican anti gay politicians being caught doing it with other guys.

Hypocrisy.


people smell of elderberries.
[/quote]
Fail.

If this is meant as blanket statement that people who speak out against homosexuality and the "gay rights" agenda are all hypocrites and do so to justify their own sins, you are wrong.

Yes, there are hypocrites out there, but not everyone who preaches morality is a hypocrite (except inasfar as we are all sinners). And using hypocrisy or charges of hypocrisy to "refute" moral arguments is a form of [i]ad hominem[/i] fallacy.
Eg:
a) Preacher Bob says homosexuality is a sin.
b) Preacher Bob cheats on his wife.
c) Therefore, Preacher Bob is wrong about homosexuality.

You haven't proven a thing about what Preacher Bob says about homosexuality, only the personal sinfulness and hypocrisy of Preacher Bob.

If you're going to make blanket generalizations, I think it would be more accurate to say that those who think homosexuality is wrong and immoral are more likely to also believe that things like adultery, fornication, and pornography are also immoral, while those who are totally okay with homosexual behavior are likely to also think there's nothing at all wrong with fornication, pornography/masturbation, or even adultery (so long as its consensual "swinging").

(Adendum: As I recall, that was just one Republican congressman (forget his name) who was allegedly caught several years ago "doing it with other guys," who was not actually known as being exceptionally vocal against "gays": he merely voted with his party against "gay marriage" and such. You're blowing that up to mean more than it does.
I'm sure there are also a number of liberal Democrats who personally despise homosexuality, but publicly follow their party's line on "gay rights" to get votes.)

Edited July 10, 2010 by Socrates

[kafka]

[quote name='Didymus' date='08 July 2010 - 03:46 PM' timestamp='1278618402' post='2139410']
I agree completely. There are disorders of God's creation in the world as a result of the fall.

Also, as a comment to Kafka's original post, if a person suffering from a same sex attraction is practicing chastity and living a holy life, how can any one of us turn that around and claim they choose to accept their disorientation? Once you deny that the disorder can be in some way out of the control of the person, then you are essentially saying that it is impossible for someone with a homosexual disorder to be chaste and still be disordered sexually.
[/quote]
very good point.

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='08 July 2010 - 08:34 PM' timestamp='1278635669' post='2139539']
That's all I was saying.

In my opinion there's nothing less Catholic about accepting that it is possible that some people are born predisposed to same sex attraction.
[/quote]
predisposed in what way? A human person is a tabula rasa when God creates the soul at conception. So it would have to be in the body. Yet as far as I know God does not assign particular sinful tendencies to the body of each human person. In general a person has concupiscence (sinful tendencies of the lower animal appetite) as a punishment for the Fall of Adam and these sinful tendencies may manifest themselves in various and multidinous ways as one matures. That is why discipline, correction and instruction is so important for young people. Otherwise one may fall into the trap of thinking and choosing a homosexual orientation because with the excuse that it is 'just the way I am', etc.

[Ice_nine]

[quote name='Socrates' date='10 July 2010 - 03:24 PM' timestamp='1278786248' post='2140821']
Again, you're quoting some things no one has actually said on here.
[/quote]


the quotes were approximations, hence the word [i]like[/i] was used. It was 4 am. Eyes were shutting.

[quote name='Socrates' date='10 July 2010 - 03:24 PM' timestamp='1278786248' post='2140821']
And, while I appreciate your concerns, I'm not going to avoid stating moral truths on here, or water them down, just because they might upset some people.[/quote]

I wasn't asking or suggesting you do either. But whatev.

[infinitelord1]

[quote name='CatherineM' date='08 July 2010 - 12:21 AM' timestamp='1278562891' post='2139226']
I have no doubt that some people are born with the inclination. I think of it like a birth defect.
[/quote]

Catherine M,

I agree with what some others have pointed out about this comment that you made. You really have no facts to back up your belief. I will say that you are entitled to this belief. However, when people say these things it may be damaging to an invididual who experiences same sex attraction. I think that the best position to take on the matter is a neutral one...and one that supports what we Catholics know as the image of God. A homosexual identity does not fall within this image. I would like to see people view people with same sex attraction as inviduals who are SSA+ yet capable of Opposite Sex Attraction.

You should read wikipedia's article about bisexuality. I personally do not agree with this label as well. However, it does point out some interesting things about bisexuality in the animal kingdom...and how animals do not think in terms of gay or straight...their behavior is actually bisexual if anything.

Yes I do think that sins of the father do have an effect on us today. And in this case I think think over the generations, that their sins have shaped the way we think about sexuallity today. It does not necessarily mean that it shaped us biologically.

Edited July 13, 2010 by infinitelord1

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='kafka' date='10 July 2010 - 04:50 PM' timestamp='1278798654' post='2140930']
very good point.


predisposed in what way? A human person is a tabula rasa when God creates the soul at conception. So it would have to be in the body. Yet as far as I know God does not assign particular sinful tendencies to the body of each human person. In general a person has concupiscence (sinful tendencies of the lower animal appetite) as a punishment for the Fall of Adam and these sinful tendencies may manifest themselves in various and multidinous ways as one matures. That is why discipline, correction and instruction is so important for young people. Otherwise one may fall into the trap of thinking and choosing a homosexual orientation because with the excuse that it is 'just the way I am', etc.
[/quote]
I agree with the idea that some people struggle with certain sins more than others. Some of these particular struggles may result from a biological defect, but they're still sins that can and must be overcome.
If I'm not mistaken, there's a genetic predisposition to alcoholism. This does not make drunkenness any less sinful for that person, it just presents a particular struggle that they will have to deal with.

[CatherineM]

[quote name='infinitelord1' date='12 July 2010 - 08:18 PM' timestamp='1278983894' post='2141884']
Catherine M,

I agree with what some others have pointed out about this comment that you made. You really have no facts to back up your belief. I will say that you are entitled to this belief. However, when people say these things it may be damaging to an invididual who experiences same sex attraction. I think that the best position to take on the matter is a neutral one...and one that supports what we Catholics know as the image of God. A homosexual identity does not fall within this image. I would like to see people view people with same sex attraction as inviduals who are SSA+ yet capable of Opposite Sex Attraction.

You should read wikipedia's article about bisexuality. I personally do not agree with this label as well. However, it does point out some interesting things about bisexuality in the animal kingdom...and how animals do not think in terms of gay or straight...their behavior is actually bisexual if anything.

Yes I do think that sins of the father do have an effect on us today. And in this case I think think over the generations, that their sins have shaped the way we think about sexuallity today. It does not necessarily mean that it shaped us biologically.
[/quote]
I could have been clearer. I must have been tired. I have no scientific basis because I don't think there has been any kind of breakthrough in that regard. I was trying to explain how I worked this stuff out in my head in order to deal with people with SSA in a charitable, Christian manner.

[MithLuin]

People, no one is asking anyone to condone sinful behaviour. The request is to recognize that the temptation to engage in homosexual activity is like any other temptation - a strong pull we experience towards something that is disordered.

I'm pretty sure we're all familiar with temptation. Sure, most of the people posting here have not experienced [i]homosexual[/i] temptation, but I'd be shocked if no one here had experienced [i]sexual[/i] temptation.

I'm not a gambler or an alcoholic; I don't 'get' why some people are so drawn towards those things. To me...a game of poker is just like any other game with friends, and a drink could be a soda instead and I'd enjoy it just as much.

But I'd be a liar and a hypocrite if I said I didn't understand compulsive behaviour. My relationship with this laptop I'm typing on and the internet in general is certainly an example of compulsion. I tell myself, "I should get up early and do XYZ," but instead I find myself typing away in this thread on Phatmass. Gee, how did that happen?

Now, typing this post is not exactly disordered or sinful in and of itself, but if I'm doing this instead of other things I ought to be doing, it can be just as damaging as being alcoholic or a chronic gambler (well, safer for my wallet and my liver, presumably).

Likewise, go ahead and pick the sin you've had to confess nearly every time you've gone to confession in the last few years. If you don't have a 'chronic' sin, this might be harder, but I think most adults feel a sense of [i]deja vu[/i] in the confessional - isn't this the same laundry list as last time?

This all comes back to concupiscence: "For the good that I want, I do not do, but I practice the very evil that I do not want." [i]Romans 7:19[/i] St. Paul knew right from wrong, and strongly desired to live wholly for God...and yet...he suffered from temptations and, yes, sin. 'Wanting to do what is wrong' is pretty messed up...and yet, it is also very much 'normal' to the human condition of fallen man. We're all in need of redemption and a Savior.

Many of us, thankfully, will never experience the particular disorder of sexually desiring a member of the same sex, or a child, or a farm animal. Lucky us. But the moment we think that makes us 'better' because we are free of that inherently disordered tendency....well, look at your own life, and you're going to find something else disordered there. It might not be as embarrassing or scandalous to admit to it, but mortal sin is mortal sin.

What was provacative about the opening post was not that it suggested that a homosexual orientation is inherently disordered. That is, AFAIK, in accordance with Catholic moral teaching. No, the post was inflammatory for suggesting that it's simply a choice, as if the person is to blame for experiencing concupiscence in the first place. We [i]all[/i] experience concupiscence - it's what you do with it that counts. And, thus, at the end of the day, the Church is only going to condemn homosexual sin (ie, behavior), [i]not[/i] a person who struggles with homosexual temptations.

You can certainly argue that modern society has a very skewed view of this entire issue, but some of the views presented in this thread are also skewed. The goal is to find the truth, not to just swing to the opposite end of the pendulum.

[kafka]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='12 July 2010 - 09:29 PM' timestamp='1278984596' post='2141892']
I agree with the idea that some people struggle with certain sins more than others. Some of these particular struggles may result from a biological defect, but they're still sins that can and must be overcome.
If I'm not mistaken, there's a genetic predisposition to alcoholism. This does not make drunkenness any less sinful for that person, it just presents a particular struggle that they will have to deal with.
[/quote]
Like I said I think concupiscence are general sinful tendencies in the body which as one matures also affect the soul since the body is united to the soul. The tendencies manifest themselves in many different ways, and may cause many different sins depending on one's own unique circumstance, as well as the evil influences of the world. The tendencies are a harm or disorder willed by God as a just punishment for the Fall. They are not sinful in and of themselves unless one fosters them by deliberately not seeking moral truth in order to live well. They are what the theologians call physical evils.

Another thing which may trigger concupiscence is past sinful behavior. So if one commits homosexual sins at one point in his life and then repents the concupiscence will be particular because of his previous sins, and may prove difficult to fight the tendencies for a time perhaps a long time if he does not build up enough spiritual strength.

One may struggle with particular sins at different phases or times in of one's life. If one struggles with one and the same sin one's entire life this would be a sign of a lack of maturation or ability to move on and adapt as well as a failure to cooperate with God's will, grace and providence. I do not think it is normal for one to struggle with one particular sin one's entire life.

I'm not sure about the genetic predisposition to alcoholism. That may be scientific theory.

[Jesus_lol]

[quote name='Socrates' date='10 July 2010 - 11:42 AM' timestamp='1278787353' post='2140826']
Fail.

If this is meant as blanket statement that people who speak out against homosexuality and the "gay rights" agenda are all hypocrites and do so to justify their own sins, you are wrong.

Yes, there are hypocrites out there, but not everyone who preaches morality is a hypocrite (except inasfar as we are all sinners). And using hypocrisy or charges of hypocrisy to "refute" moral arguments is a form of [i]ad hominem[/i] fallacy.
Eg:
a) Preacher Bob says homosexuality is a sin.
b) Preacher Bob cheats on his wife.
c) Therefore, Preacher Bob is wrong about homosexuality.

You haven't proven a thing about what Preacher Bob says about homosexuality, only the personal sinfulness and hypocrisy of Preacher Bob.

If you're going to make blanket generalizations, I think it would be more accurate to say that those who think homosexuality is wrong and immoral are more likely to also believe that things like adultery, fornication, and pornography are also immoral, while those who are totally okay with homosexual behavior are likely to also think there's nothing at all wrong with fornication, pornography/masturbation, or even adultery (so long as its consensual "swinging").

(Adendum: As I recall, that was just one Republican congressman (forget his name) who was allegedly caught several years ago "doing it with other guys," who was not actually known as being exceptionally vocal against "gays": he merely voted with his party against "gay marriage" and such. You're blowing that up to mean more than it does.
I'm sure there are also a number of liberal Democrats who personally despise homosexuality, but publicly follow their party's line on "gay rights" to get votes.)
[/quote]

gah. i was not saying that all who speak out against gays are gay themselves. or that it makes both their views wrong. If their stated opinions and actions are in conflict, then they are hypocrites. it does not matter if they are espousing "the right" opinions, if they go and do what they preach against, that makes them hypocrites. very, very simple.

indeed, this discrepancy between some views(ie your posted one on a preacher speaking out against gay marriage, then cheating on his wife) does not inherently validate or invalidate either of this hypothetical preachers views or actions. But it does invalidate the man himself as a person of good moral values, to be looked up to, etc.




[quote name='Socrates' date='09 July 2010 - 10:37 AM' timestamp='1278697046' post='2139938']
Also, I should add, that as one who has a family member with Down's Syndrome, I find the comparison of DS to sexual perversion by some in this thread offensive.
[/quote]

Also, I should add, that as one who has friends that are homosexuals, i find the comparison of homosexuality to paedophilia and bestiality by some in this thread offensive.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Jesus_lol' date='17 July 2010 - 11:24 PM' timestamp='1279423488' post='2144218']
gah. i was not saying that all who speak out against gays are gay themselves. or that it makes both their views wrong. If their stated opinions and actions are in conflict, then they are hypocrites. it does not matter if they are espousing "the right" opinions, if they go and do what they preach against, that makes them hypocrites. very, very simple.

indeed, this discrepancy between some views(ie your posted one on a preacher speaking out against gay marriage, then cheating on his wife) does not inherently validate or invalidate either of this hypothetical preachers views or actions. But it does invalidate the man himself as a person of good moral values, to be looked up to, etc.[/quote]
Your response to Ice-nine seemed to imply that the only reason people regard homosexuality as a particularly perverted or immoral form of sexual sin is hypocrisy.
"This is because frankly a lot of people are very hypocritical," followed by a rant against the alleged hypocrisy of those who oppose homosexual behavior.
However, the Church has always regarded sodomy as a particularly depraved form of sexual sin, for reasons having nothing to do with hypocrisy. (In fact, I linked to a work of St. Thomas Aquinas, who was known for his remarkable chastity, among other virtues.)

No one is defending hypocrisy, which is a source of grave scandal, and probably does more than anything else to drive people from Christianity. But that's largely irrelevant to anything that was being discussed on here.


[quote]Also, I should add, that as one who has friends that are homosexuals, i find the comparison of homosexuality to paedophilia and bestiality by some in this thread offensive.[/quote]
Homosexuality, like pedophilia and bestiality, is a form of sexual perversion, while Down's Syndrome is not.

Edited July 19, 2010 by Socrates