Hypo: You Are Gay

[CatherineM]

I understand the premise of your statement, but are you saying that adulterous inclinations are a new sexual orientation?

No. I was assuming that we would want gays to take the pill to help them avoid sexual sins. My point is that more heterosexuals commit sexual sins than those with SSA.

[veritasluxmea]

I'd better not. It was tongue-in-cheek and I've had a beer. It was 8ish hours ago now but you never know how long that stuff stays in your system.

Fair enough. ;) I don't have the guts to quote anyone but I will say I've seen some misunderstanding/confused ideas floating around. 

[Nihil Obstat]

We must remember that having same sex attraction is not a sin in and of itself, and like many other things, is a personal cross to bear.  God gives us our crosses and I wouldn't want to take the easy way out.

Same sex attraction is certainly not a sin. Certainly not. But the inclination is, in and of itself, objectively disordered. For that reason and that reason alone it is, IMO, categorically different from many other, less controversial temptations.

[Maggyie]

Well the alcoholism analogy is flawed obviously, just trying a thought experiment. Fidei and others who would relate this in terms of putting down the cross... Can you elaborate? I guess I've always been a bad Catholic in that I don't view suffering as a desirable thing. The thought of "offering it up" has always struck me as unsatisfactory. The image comes to mind of God enjoying all the offerings his miserable helpless children are making to him and it's just not a good image to me.

A person with a "Phobia" is not a synonym for "hater," or "person I disagree with" or "person who fails to celebrate Me."

A person with a phobia has a mental illness ranging from mild to devastating. The ADAA website is a good place to start for us to educate ourselves on why it's NEVER okay to use "-phobic" as a perjorative, a way to stigmatize others or shut down a discussion we personally find difficult or triggering.

http://www.adaa.org/understanding-anxiety

The more you know.

[franciscanheart]

:huh: Homophobia is a real word. We all know it's not a real phobia. We all know homophobia = prejudice.

[Nihil Obstat]

:huh: Homophobia is a real word. We all know it's not a real phobia. We all know homophobia = prejudice.

Is it homophobic, as Catholics, to say that homosexual attraction is intrinsically disordered?

[franciscanheart]

Is it homophobic, as Catholics, to say that homosexual attraction is intrinsically disordered?

Let's be clear: we are talking only about saying, "Homosexual attraction is intrinsically disordered."

That phrase specifically, in my opinion, is not homophobic. But then, I'm a faithful Catholic...

[Nihil Obstat]

Let's be clear: we are talking only about saying, "Homosexual attraction is intrinsically disordered."

That phrase specifically, in my opinion, is not homophobic. But then, I'm a faithful Catholic...

So where are people crossing the line, in your opinion?

[Aloysius]

I still can't see anything wrong with this thought experiment, basically "what if X Men the Last Stand happened in real life"... I think people are wrong to support the drug, I also think the drug itself is extremely implausible given the hypothetical scenario offered because sexuality doesn't work that way (ie you cannot just isolate "attraction" and reverse the polarity [of the neutron flow]... the attraction is an intertwined deep-seated aspect of the entire person not just some surface level desire like a desire for alcohol might be)... but as a hypothetical thought experiment it's interesting enough.  I have found it difficult expressing exactly what my problem is with it, I have settled on the idea that I do not think we should bio-engineer sexuality along our moral system... I think I'll even generally agree with John Ryan that doing so would be a "bestial affront to our human dignity" even though I disagree with him on the morality of homosexual activity (not to speak for him, but I believe I remember him saying it was not immoral in his opinion).  

 

I don't really go towards the idea of it being like laying down one's cross per se, though that is an interesting direction to take it in.  my problem with it is more fundamental, and I think the idea of supporting such a drug is wrong along the same lines as imagining that such a drug would even plausibly exist is wrong--imagining that such a drug could plausibly exist represents a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of sexuality IMO, and in the same way IF the drug could exist, supporting its use I believe would also represent that same fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of sexuality.  because of this, a marriage based on the use of that drug would be problematic in my opinion.  it remains difficult for me to fully articulate why this is... because one must affirm the fact that homosexual attraction is wrongly ordered while doing so, but even if it is wrongly ordered, the nature of the overall deep-seated sexuality of a person is, while intertwined with that misdirected sexual desire, still something much more complex and understanding it fully would help us to better affirm the dignity of persons with that sexuality.  

while attempting to disconnect the attraction as if it's just some surface level part of a person that a switch could be flipped to change them, as is often done in the insistence on using terms like "SSA" instead of "homosexuality", I think people actually inadvertently do the exact opposite of what they intend.  they completely miss the complexity of the person that they're trying to affirm by disconnecting that attraction from them.

 

in the end, humanity will all be redeemed through Christ, and in a complex and mysterious way, that means the redemption of all things, the complete destruction of the hegemony of sin, and for those attractions to sinful things that are intimately connected to such things as someone's fundamental sexuality, the complete redemption of the whole person.  sexuality is an intricately deep aspect of a human person, and that too will be redeemed in ways we cannot even possibly begin to imagine.

[Lilllabettt]

:huh: Homophobia is a real word. We all know it's not a real phobia. We all know homophobia = prejudice.

 

uh well "retarded" is also a real word. with an actual medical definition.

 

I think the point is homophobia is a "real word" that is disrespectful of people who have a condition that actually qualifies as a phobia. Cuz a phobia does not spring from ignorance or hatred or evil. It's not a shameful thing. Which I would argue homophobia is never referred to in a non-shaming way. 

 

Like person x's crushing anxiety about leaving the house is not in anyway related to person y's violent hatred of homosexuals. and its kind of rude to link them linguistically. 

[Lilllabettt]

:twitch:

 

is there something objectionable about being grouped with disabled people?

something objectionable about the suggestion of having a disability?

[franciscanheart]

uh well "retarded" is also a real word. with an actual medical definition.
 
I think the point is homophobia is a "real word" that is disrespectful of people who have a condition that actually qualifies as a phobia. Cuz a phobia does not spring from ignorance or hatred or evil. It's not a shameful thing. Which I would argue homophobia is never referred to in a non-shaming way. 
 
Like person x's crushing anxiety about leaving the house is not in anyway related to person y's violent hatred of homosexuals. and its kind of rude to link them linguistically.

Homophobia doesn't necessarily imply a violent hatred of homosexuals. Edited September 8, 2014 by franciscanheart

[Lilllabettt]

Homophobia doesn't necessarily imply a violent hatred of homosexuals.

 

 

right. just ignorance and prejudice.

people with phobias are not ignorant or prejudiced. They have an anxiety disorder. 

[Maggyie]

Franciscan your beliefs are not unusual in the LGBT community but you're incorrect. For instance the AP recently updated their stylebook to remove the use of the word homophobia outside its proper, medical context. It's an inaccurate term usually used as an insult which stigmatizes people who are already marginalized by mental illness. It's insensitive to use it as an insult or as a synonym for bigot or ignorant.

[Aloysius]

these semantics over the term "homophobia" I find to be rather pedantic... I find it dubious that people with phobias would be offended by the use of the term homophobia... and if they were offended, I'd say they're wrong to be offended.  the word "phobia" has a colloquial meaning in addition to a medical meaning... that colloquial meaning was appropriated and used in the word 'homophobia' to highlight the fact that inherent to the hatred of homosexuals there is a general fear associated with it as well, usually driven by the repressed closet homosexuals who tend to be the most vocal condemners and vitriolic/bigoted haters of homosexuals, as they're projecting their fear of giving in to their own homosexual desires into an outward hatred.  but even for people who are not themselves repressed/closeted, there is a general fear driving those who are truly ignorant or bigoted towards homosexuals... hence the colloquial usage of the term "phobia"... sorry, but people with psychological phobias don't get to claim the term "phobia" exclusively, it can be used colloquially or metaphorically in many contexts.