Theoketos Posted November 3, 2004 Share Posted November 3, 2004 Look at it this way: Homosexual desires are automatically lustful, because of many reasons, but most especially because it is intrinsically against procreation. Homosexuality is of the same source then as Lust: Concupiscence I am not sure whether certain people are biologically more susceptible to lust are not, I do not think the Church says this either but I am sure that all of us do suffer from concupiscence, it just manifests itself indifferent ways. However this fallen nature is not natural, because “In the beginning it was not so.” Then, we fell. But Christ Died and Redeemed us, and in our weakness His strength is perfected, and thus our true whole self in the Spirit is found to be fully alive in Christ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
track2004 Posted November 3, 2004 Share Posted November 3, 2004 Ok so this question came up the other week at RCIA and no one had a good answer: Can a homosexual person have a relationship, though not sexual yet more than friends, that does not violate the Catholic Church's beliefs on engaging in homosexuality? The reasoning is that the whole arguement against homosexual acts is a sexual act, and that without that, like in dating relationships, it would not be wrong. It would basically be an unmarried couple kind of relationship, but forever if that makes sense. Anyway, thoughts... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Aluigi Posted November 3, 2004 Share Posted November 3, 2004 NO, not a romantic relationship. #1- Temptation to sin #2- Same-sex relationships, not just sex, are intrinsically disordered Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JeffCR07 Posted November 3, 2004 Share Posted November 3, 2004 track 2004, Al is correct: homosexual romantic relationships, even if not actually sexual, are indeed disordered. This makes sense too. All too often we forget that any sort of romantic relationship is ordered towards marriage (that is, any romantic relationship has marriage as a future goal). Because romantic relationships are ordered towards marriage, and the Sacrament of marriage involves the consummation thereof, any romantic or "more than friends" relationship among homosexuals is not right. - Your Brother In Christ, Jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dairygirl4u2c Posted November 4, 2004 Author Share Posted November 4, 2004 (edited) I don't have time to respond fully yet but I will soon. There are two things I want to mention though. [quote]Are you saying that if homosexuality can possibly be genetic, then it is natural and okay by God in those persons? [/quote] I am not saying that it is natural because it can possibly be genetic. That would be an error if I ever did see one. I'm saying that it might be natural since it's genetic, and as such, we should allow it. Also for I think Jeff (I didn't read enough) and a few others. Even if I believed that marriage was made for a man and a woman, that would be my personal faith that I would not want to "impose" on others. This gets into my questions regarding abortion in that I hold recognizing when others do their own thing when I think it is reasonable (I think homosexuality marriage is reasonable) above insisting on how God might have intended or I might even say when he clearly intended it. I know you'll be flopped by me saying that but I'll just say that I think God intended for a democracy the way we have in America and that I am describing for those who do not believe. Example that's less controversial for something against what God clearly intended. Someone wants to eat dirt. I don't think laws should exist that says they can't eat dirt since that's not what God intended. I hold society recognizing their choice to eat dirt if they want if society is recognizing something else that is arguably arbitrary. (ie marriage) (and recognizing the fact that eating dirt is much more arbitrary) Of course I can see that some might say they have genetic predispositions to eat dirt etc etc. I dorealize it's all arbitrary. But these gays are sincere in insisting that it's genetic, so I tend to think that it is. Not much of a basis but God help me for allowing the benefit of the doubt. Anyway, post got long fast.. more later. Edited November 4, 2004 by dairygirl4u2c Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the lumberjack Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS MOTHER AND FATHER AND CLEAVE TO HIS [font="Impact"][color=red]WIFE[/color][/font].... not his "partner" or husband or gay boyfriend....one man, one woman. Tab A, Slot B...thats the ONLY way it works, right? RIGHT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasJis Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 [quote name='dairygirl4u2c' date='Nov 4 2004, 04:39 PM'] I'm saying that it might be natural since it's genetic, and as such, we should allow it. [/quote] Then what about other genetic characteristics that pre-dispose people to drink too much, eat too much, be depressed, have a short temper, etc. We all know that certain personality traits are genetic in origin. Who we are is a complex combination of genetics, the forming effects of environment, and the application of our own will. This is not disputed my any reasonable scientists. It is often argued the effects or genetics or environment or strength of will. The Church is saying that it is possible that genetics could cause the trait for homosexual tendencies, but with love, it says that society should foster and encourage an environment that turns away from physical manifestation, and that with prayer and God's grace, those people should strive to control their will to avoid the sin of homosexual acts. This is not different then people who are gentically predisposed to alcoholism, gambling addiction, etc., etc. If society does not recognize homosexuality as basically disordered, it will create an environment that overwhelms the average person's ability to control their will. Just as an 'over-sexed' society makes it very difficult for today's teens to control themselves in a chaste manner because they are constantly bombarded with 'everyone's doing it', 'it's natural', etc., etc. Why even have a marriage? Why not just have random sex with whover we want with no commitments? There's lot's of examples in nature of that. That's natural, isn't it? Or is it? Just because what's gravy for the goose is sauce for the gander doesn't make it a marinade for the beef. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dUSt Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 If there is a gay gene then their must also be a gene that makes me prefer black women over white women. It must have nothing to do with the fact that I grew up watching Lisa on Saved By the Bell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 Pedophiles are claiming their problem is gene-related now too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dUSt Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 [quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='Nov 4 2004, 08:09 PM'] Pedophiles are claiming their problem is gene-related now too. [/quote] Hmmm, well then that would make it natural, so therefore we should allow it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toledo_jesus Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 [quote name='dUSt' date='Nov 4 2004, 07:33 PM'] It must have nothing to do with the fact that I grew up watching Lisa on Saved By the Bell. [/quote] man, she was too high maintenance for my tastes. So was Jessie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marielapin Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 Dairygrl, The reason we say that it is impossible for the gay gene to exist is due to the rule of social Darwinism, which is: a theory in sociology that individuals or groups achieve advantage over others as the result of genetic or biological superiority aka survival of the fittest. This means that a gene that is physiologically inferior is less likely to be passed on because of premature death due to weakness or sickness, or inability to spread their genes. This can be easily applied to homosexuality. If there were a gene for homosexuality, how would it be passed on? If homosexuals do not procreate, they cannot spread their genes and therefore not produce homosexual offspring. Even if the "gene" were a mutation, the percentage of people who had it would not be anywhere near as high as the percentage claiming themselves to be gay, it would be less than a tenth of a percent, even if that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CreepyCrawler Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 good point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLAZEr Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 [quote name='dairygirl4u2c' date='Nov 2 2004, 03:37 PM'] The Catholic Church cannot prove that procreative is a necessary condition without faith. (this said perhaps the notion that change is possible is becoming less and less likely) [/quote] That's just absurd. Any person with a brain can look at sexual intercourse and it's role in human life and recognize that it has a necessary and natural pro-creative component. To frustrate the pro-createive component you need, by necessity, an unnatural act. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLAZEr Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 Is it possible that it IS genetic . . . and that it is a genetic abnormality, and aberration. For instance, my cousin has a genetic abnormality that causes his skin to fall off. Should he not be treated for this? I mean, it's genetic so it must be NATURAL right? Pshaw! Why is that when it comes to the penis . . . everyone starts thinking all screwed up . . . call it the sexual distortion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now