The Third Way: Homosexuality And The Catholic Church

[CrossCuT]

"Star Stuff" is a poetic name for the elements.

[arfink]

I think you are speaking from a spiritual perspective. There is nothing literally/physically hyrbrid about humans from a biological standpoint. Do you mean hybrid in the sense that we have physical bodies and a soul?

 

No. I mean we are literally a hybrid of animal and God. That's what it means to have a body and a soul.

 

When I use the word literally I am speaking of reality. Reality includes much more than the empirical world.
 

Edited April 30, 2014 by arfink

[CrossCuT]

So youre saying the soul has determination in homosexuality?  So because humans are hybrids with a soul, then? Could you explain further.

[arfink]

So youre saying the soul has determination in homosexuality?  So because humans are hybrids with a soul, then? Could you explain further.

 

No, I'm not exactly saying that. I'm acknowledging that animals are often non-monogamous or engage in homosexual acts, and that as humans, our animal part can be attracted to this, but because we are made to be like God we are both called and given the means to resist this and behave as we were created to be. If we ignore the God part of our nature we are behaving as less than human, just as if we ignored the human part of our nature completely we would be behaving wrongly too.

 

The fact that we have a soul does not cause our animal parts to stop functioning or for our bodily desires to shut off. We're not a soul trapped in a body. Our body and soul are meant to be together and cannot be completely separated. Death only temporarily breaks this bond, and God intends to put it back together at the end of time.

 

So, TL;DR: it can be helpful to realize that we can have animal desires which, by virtue of our calling to be like God, we need to reject.

[Lilllabettt]

Do you have any articles, papers, or studies you can link to support your claims Lilll? Id be very curious to read them. As of right now, my understanding is that it is still on the stove as to what is really behind homosexuality but I think you are going in the right direction. I, personally, try to be as open on this topic as possible in order to understand precisely what the main body of knowledge on the subject currently is. If we are to use any model to help people, we need to understand as much as possible. That is something I strive to do.

 

The idea that this is purely psychological could be argued for, but you have to remember that everything is based in chemical and biological processes which I am sure you know. I have mentioned this before, but there was a great article that looked into behavioral changes in mice depending on the level of care they received from their mother.

 

The behavior itself is something we can see and study and I think a lot of time people forget that this isnt just some fleeting magical happenstance., All outward characteristics whether it is a physical trait or a behavior can be traced to your base chemical processes. And in the case of the mice, researchers found a connection in their epigenome.

 

What genes are turned on or turned off? Or up or down regulated? They all have an effect. Nothing is just a mysterious physiological behavior...it all has a cause that can be pin pointed (at some point). Obviously not all things are that easy since humans are complex specimens to examine, but thats why we have model organism etc etc.

 

So, there are no rigorous human subject experiments that I am aware of. Internal review boards would never approve that kind of experimental protocol. That conditioning can altar arousal patterns is well documented, although again there is a dearth of research dealing with human subjects. The closest I can think of is research with bonobos. 

 

I think you may be confused about the field of psychology. Psychology is a biologically based social science. For a long time cognitive processes were ignored because there was no way to peer into the brain. Empirical measures were limited to observable behavior - thus behaviorism. Now we have fMRI and neuroscience. We can observe the links between behavior and cognition. We can see how behavior changes the brain and vice versa. 

 

Currently the 'mainline' thinking is that there is a sensitive period of neural differentiation. Although the brain itself remains flexible and plastic over the course of a life time, neural pathways are much less so. Particularly the pathways between the prefrontal cortex and brain structures that support anxiety, fear and arousal functions- the limbic system (amygdala, hippocampus, etc.) After a certain point the experiential learning that has produced these pathways is consolidated, or fused. If someone has had these pathways radically potentiated - say by early life traumatic stress - that potentiation is irreversible.  Physicians can address symptoms by prescribing a course of treatment that will help patients improve prefrontal function, and allow them to exert more cognitive control over the limbic system.  Most people receive this in the form of Cognitive Behavior Therapy. The underlying issue - maladaptive reactivity in the limbic system- is deemed untreatable. No cure. Which is frustrating for health care providers because it means accepting that their patients will never recover normal reaction patterns. 

 

Recently there have been some exciting advancements in reconsolidation (unlearning of a response to stimuli), beginning with an experimental accident involving mice. In the few years since the publication of that research there's been a lot of debate on this subject. Google reconsolidation and the journal Neuroscience and you will see a ton there. What do I know, but I think there's a lot of promise there. We may be able to treat people with psychological conditions previously thought irreversible (learned helplessness, pedophilia, etc.)

 

tl/dr: psychology is biologically based science. Neuroscience, basically, informs psychology.  The brain changes behavior and behavior can alter the function and structure of the brain.

[CrossCuT]

So, there are no rigorous human subject experiments that I am aware of. Internal review boards would never approve that kind of experimental protocol. That conditioning can altar arousal patterns is well documented, although again there is a dearth of research dealing with human subjects. The closest I can think of is research with bonobos. 

 

I think you may be confused about the field of psychology. Psychology is a biologically based social science. For a long time cognitive processes were ignored because there was no way to peer into the brain. Empirical measures were limited to observable behavior - thus behaviorism. Now we have fMRI and neuroscience. We can observe the links between behavior and cognition. We can see how behavior changes the brain and vice versa. 

 

Currently the 'mainline' thinking is that there is a sensitive period of neural differentiation. Although the brain itself remains flexible and plastic over the course of a life time, neural pathways are much less so. Particularly the pathways between the prefrontal cortex and brain structures that support anxiety, fear and arousal functions- the limbic system (amygdala, hippocampus, etc.) After a certain point the experiential learning that has produced these pathways is consolidated, or fused. If someone has had these pathways radically potentiated - say by early life traumatic stress - that potentiation is irreversible.  Physicians can address symptoms by prescribing a course of treatment that will help patients improve prefrontal function, and allow them to exert more cognitive control over the limbic system.  Most people receive this in the form of Cognitive Behavior Therapy. The underlying issue - maladaptive reactivity in the limbic system- is deemed untreatable. No cure. Which is frustrating for health care providers because it means accepting that their patients will never recover normal reaction patterns. 

 

Recently there have been some exciting advancements in reconsolidation (unlearning of a response to stimuli), beginning with an experimental accident involving mice. In the few years since the publication of that research there's been a lot of debate on this subject. Google reconsolidation and the journal Neuroscience and you will see a ton there. What do I know, but I think there's a lot of promise there. We may be able to treat people with psychological conditions previously thought irreversible (learned helplessness, pedophilia, etc.)

 

tl/dr: psychology is biologically based science. Neuroscience, basically, informs psychology.  The brain changes behavior and behavior can alter the function and structure of the brain.

 

Thanks Lilll! I do admit that my psychology knowledge is limited to one undergrad class...in which my teacher was more concerned about wombats than anything else...but she was really nice!

 

I will definitely read up on the stuff you suggested because it seems like this topic is approached more tangibly from a psychological/behavioral perspective; which I have little experience with. However I think we may have been essentially saying the same thing. I guess my point (And I dont know how much of a point it is) was that any neurological change happens because of biochemical pathway regulation. So this fusion you mentioned has biochemical fingerprints. Id be curious to see what the fingerprints are in a homosexual vs heterosexual; what proteins are expressed differently that result in these differences. But I agree that human testing is probably not viable just because of ethical reasons.

 

Since biochemistry is my background I suppose I naturally approach the issue from that perspective and less from a neurological one. Because at the end of the day, neurological changes are still changes in gene expression or up/down regulation of some protein at the very least. For example, if someone maybe had a down regulated expression of some of the Na/K pumps in their brain tissue and they were unable to pump Na out of the cell as effectively, then the strength of depolarization of axon membrane potentials would be altered. That could mean their cognitive functions are different etc. I dont know how real life that example is, but basically something like that is what Im getting at.

[Lilllabettt]

 

Since biochemistry is my background I suppose I naturally approach the issue from that perspective and less from a neurological one. Because at the end of the day, neurological changes are still changes in gene expression or up/down regulation of some protein at the very least. For example, if someone maybe had a down regulated expression of some of the Na/K pumps in their brain tissue and they were unable to pump Na out of the cell as effectively, then the strength of depolarization of axon membrane potentials would be altered. That could mean their cognitive functions are different etc. I dont know how real life that example is, but basically something like that is what Im getting at.

 

 

yeah, I  guess my point is that cellular change (i.e., biology), behavior and cognition are all linked.  

brain and behavior are a two way street.

Na/K pumps regulate neural activity, right. Neural activity changes behavior and can alter cognition.

What's less intuitive but no less true is that cognitive activity can change the brain. Behavior can change the brain. On a cellular level. 

 

Cool study. Two groups of naive subjects. One group was taught to practice a tune on the piano. Another group was taught to practice the same tune but only by moving their fingers and using their imagination to "practice" - no real piano. fMRI brain scans showed that the two groups had both experienced structural change in the same brain area as a result of their "learning."

 

here's a pop article describing it: http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1580438,00.html

[Vitamin]

So there are no rigorous human subject experiments that I am aware of. Internal review boards would never approve that kind of experimental protocol. That conditioning can altar arousal patterns is well documented, although again there is a dearth of research dealing with human subjects. The closest I can think of is research with bonobos.

I think you may be confused about the field of psychology. Psychology is a biologically based social science. For a long time cognitive processes were ignored because there was no way to peer into the brain. Empirical measures were limited to observable behavior - thus behaviorism. Now we have fMRI and neuroscience. We can observe the links between behavior and cognition. We can see how behavior changes the brain and vice versa.

Currently the 'mainline' thinking is that there is a sensitive period of neural differentiation. Although the brain itself remains flexible and plastic over the course of a life time, neural pathways are much less so. Particularly the pathways between the prefrontal cortex and brain structures that support anxiety, fear and arousal functions- the limbic system (amygdala, hippocampus, etc.) After a certain point the experiential learning that has produced these pathways is consolidated, or fused. If someone has had these pathways radically potentiated - say by early life traumatic stress - that potentiation is irreversible. Physicians can address symptoms by prescribing a course of treatment that will help patients improve prefrontal function, and allow them to exert more cognitive control over the limbic system. Most people receive this in the form of Cognitive Behavior Therapy. The underlying issue - maladaptive reactivity in the limbic system- is deemed untreatable. No cure. Which is frustrating for health care providers because it means accepting that their patients will never recover normal reaction patterns.

Recently there have been some exciting advancements in reconsolidation (unlearning of a response to stimuli), beginning with an experimental accident involving mice. In the few years since the publication of that research there's been a lot of debate on this subject. Google reconsolidation and the journal Neuroscience and you will see a ton there. What do I know, but I think there's a lot of promise there. We may be able to treat people with psychological conditions previously thought irreversible (learned helplessness, pedophilia, etc.)

tl/dr: psychology is biologically based science. Neuroscience, basically, informs psychology. The brain changes behavior and behavior can alter the function and structure of the brain.

This sort of thing might be interesting if we were talking about foot fetishes but what makes you think homosexuality is the same thing as a foot fetish? Lol.

I know all of you want to call it "SSA", but anybody's gender attraction is not a fetish, its an orientation. Get over it. Is it possible to change sexual orientation? Considering we're all just a composite of chemicals and neurons, yes it is, but this won't be how you do it. Don't be ridiculous.

[Lilllabettt]

This sort of thing might be interesting if we were talking about foot fetishes but what makes you think homosexuality is the same thing as a foot fetish? Lol.

I know all of you want to call it "SSA", but anybody's gender attraction is not a fetish, its an orientation. Get over it. Is it possible to change sexual orientation? Considering we're all just a composite of chemicals and neurons, yes it is, but this won't be how you do it. Don't be ridiculous.

 

 

Vitamin, I really take umbrage at your comparison of deep-seated psychological conditions that cause life long suffering with foot-fetish.

 

If you knew someone who has survived childhood sexual abuse you might be comforted to know that research is beginning to challenge the long-held view that these kinds of things are hard-wired.  

 

Or if you knew someone who has an attachment disorder. There is NO cure available for that and many professionals refuse to treat it because it is considered intractable.

 

The mind-brain-behavior link is leading medicine to the brink of a mental health revolution.

Some sacred cows may be killed in the process. Collateral damage. Forgive me if I don't weep.

[GregorMendel]

Physicians can address symptoms by prescribing a course of treatment that will help patients improve prefrontal function, and allow them to exert more cognitive control over the limbic system. Most people receive this in the form of Cognitive Behavior Therapy. The underlying issue - maladaptive reactivity in the limbic system- is deemed untreatable. No cure. Which is frustrating for health care providers because it means accepting that their patients will never recover normal reaction patterns.

Recently there have been some exciting advancements in reconsolidation (unlearning of a response to stimuli), beginning with an experimental accident involving mice. In the few years since the publication of that research there's been a lot of debate on this subject. Google reconsolidation and the journal Neuroscience and you will see a ton there. What do I know, but I think there's a lot of promise there. We may be able to treat people with psychological conditions previously thought irreversible (learned helplessness, pedophilia, etc.)

tl/dr: psychology is biologically based science. Neuroscience, basically, informs psychology. The brain changes behavior and behavior can alter the function and structure of the brain.

Once again, all together now,

http://www.psych.org/File%20Library/Learn/Archives/ps2013_Homosexuality.pdf

[Lilllabettt]

Once again, all together now,

http://www.psych.org/File%20Library/Learn/Archives/ps2013_Homosexuality.pdf

 

 

Aren't you in medical school?

[Vitamin]

Vitamin, I really take umbrage at your comparison of deep-seated psychological conditions that cause life long suffering with foot-fetish.

If you knew someone who has survived childhood sexual abuse you might be comforted to know that research is beginning to challenge the long-held view that these kinds of things are hard-wired.

Or if you knew someone who has an attachment disorder. There is NO cure available for that and many professionals refuse to treat it because it is considered intractable.

The mind-brain-behavior link is leading medicine to the brink of a mental health revolution.
Some sacred cows may be killed in the process. Collateral damage. Forgive me if I don't weep.

I take umbrage at comparing homosexuality to "deep-seated psychological conditions that cause life long suffering" so we're even. You're the one that brought this up in a gay thread. You can expect it to be evaluated along those lines. I'm not going to tell you to create your own thread since I'm not a mod but I will tell you to deal with people evaluating your post along gay topic lines. You chose to post it here.

Science breaks sacred cows on a regular basis. Unfortunately for you, your scared cow that homosexuality is a disorder that needs to be cured was broken by science in 1986 when it was removed from the DSM. Try and get with the times, nobody is researching how to "treat" homosexuality anymore.

As for whether or not these sort of experiments have any potential to help with attachment disorder, well I have no idea. I don't think I have attachment disorder, but I have in the past struggled with depression. I would say my sexual orientation existed on a much deeper level than my depression so possibly. Although, I still don't fully understand how we got to talking about attachment disorder in a gay thread.

[GregorMendel]

Yes, and thats exactly the point. Standard of care prohibits the treatments youre proposing for homosexual patients in any way, shape or form, and to equate such characteristics with "psychological conditions" like those stated above by invoking physician-directed care of "reconsolidation" is precisely what the APA objects to.

[CrossCuT]

Just to clear, I am interested in understanding the basis or "cause" of homosexuality however I do not support the idea that we can/should change their sexuality. 

 

Thank you for posting that article GregorMedel! I wasnt aware of the official statement.

[Lilllabettt]

sigh.

 

so I believe if you read the thread I have already discussed at length the ethical implications of what is currently possible. Kindly read.

 

Many people who experience same sex attraction would choose not to experience it, if that choice was practical, ethical, and possible.

For many reasons - unjust social persecution, for example. But also because they have the perfectly natural human longing to have children with the person they love most. 

I do not think the day is too far coming when making that choice will become a practical and ethical possibility. Parents may be able to choose it for their children, or adults may be able to choose it for themselves. Whether through gene therapy, neural reconsolidation, or however medicine advances.  I don't feel nervous saying it is inevitable.

And then doctors will have to decide whether to treat or not treat. In the same way they decide whether to treat or not treat deaf patients.

Many people in the deaf community feared the development of cochlear implants - they felt it would "exterminate" them, stigmatize those who chose to remain deaf, destroy their culture.  We can fear these things or we can rejoice in the new opportunities they offer people. 

When that day comes it will not be enough for you to quote a press release from the APA.

And in the meantime, I hope you become the kind of doctor who realizes that he and his professional association are not the arbiter of what constitutes dysfunction in a patient's life.