can homosexuals love each other?

[Guest Rick777]

There are many different, idk, "levels" of eternal damnation. I once read somewhere that the souls who most knew God suffered the most. I'll try and find a link.

[photosynthesis]

[quote name='rkwright' date='Jan 29 2006, 02:43 AM']so pre-martial sex is only a sin if you don't marry the person??? that is never the way I've heard it taught. 

Homosexual acts may be intrinsically disordered (as are impure acts) but Aquinas puts simple fornication as a mortal sin for a good 7-8 reasons.  Mortal sin is mortal sin regardless of intrinsic values.
[right][snapback]869085[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
i think you're misinterpreting what I said.

I was alluding to the fact that homosexual acts are wrong by the VERY NATURE of the act. There's nothing you can do to make homosexual sex a holy thing.

However, heterosexual sex is God's design. It's holy and natural. Fornication is not wrong by its nature, because it is natural for a man and a woman to have sex. They are wrong because of the context by which the act happens... i.e. the couple is not married

correct me if i'm wrong

[photosynthesis]

[quote name='rkwright' date='Jan 29 2006, 02:52 AM']there is an issue over the gravity of the mortal sin, but if the punishment is eternal damnation, I'm not sure that the murderer is going to have it any worse in hell?  I mean hell is hell, once you're there it doesn't really matter right?

EDIT: I don't mean to hijack this at all... if I'm completely wrong here and the Church teaches otherwise show me where.  I'm always willing to learn
[right][snapback]869098[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
this is a very interesting question... are there "circles" of hell? are some people punished more than others?

and on the flip side, are there "circles" of heaven where some people are more rewarded than others?

I think this would be a good discussion thread that you could post. in fact, i might post one right now

[Guest Rick777]

I do believe that there are different levels, circles, states, or what have you of heaven and hell.Many saints have talked about this subject before....now if I can only find some qoutes.

[photosynthesis]

ok, i posted a thread about heaven + hell in the debate table, so if you want to debate that, you can go here:

[url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=46765&hl="]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=46765&hl=[/url]

[Guest Rick777]

hey you really did it!

[rkwright]

[quote name='photosynthesis' date='Jan 29 2006, 02:05 AM']ok, i posted a thread about heaven + hell in the debate table, so if you want to debate that, you can go here:

[url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=46765&hl="]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=46765&hl=[/url]
[right][snapback]869115[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

haha thanks!

Maybe I misread your earlier post or it didn't come out right... after your later post I see what you meant.

Either way... my point way earlier was that they are still people and still capable of love in the most general sense, though in the act I tend to agree with myles. I'll cary on the which is the worser mortal sin in the other thread

[Guest Rick777]

*follows rkwright*

[Quietfire]

This is a rather simplistic explaination but I think it is appropriate.

James, the apostle whom Jesus loved........




dunt say nutting there bout sex.

[Paphnutius]

[quote name='rkwright' date='Jan 29 2006, 12:52 AM']there is an issue over the gravity of the mortal sin, but if the punishment is eternal damnation, I'm not sure that the murderer is going to have it any worse in hell?  I mean hell is hell, once you're there it doesn't really matter right?[/quote]Just a quick answer:

Yes, mortal sins do differ in gravity as well based on number and nature.

[ironmonk]

[quote name='rkwright' date='Jan 29 2006, 02:52 AM']there is an issue over the gravity of the mortal sin, but if the punishment is eternal damnation, I'm not sure that the murderer is going to have it any worse in hell?  I mean hell is hell, once you're there it doesn't really matter right?

EDIT: I don't mean to hijack this at all... if I'm completely wrong here and the Church teaches otherwise show me where.  I'm always willing to learn
[right][snapback]869098[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Think of penance. Although two different sins are both mortal, some are worse than others. Remember in Scripture where Christ was asked what commandments were greatest and He said that they were in order?

[b]St. Matt 22:36 [/b]
"Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest?"
[b]37 [/b]He said to him, "[color=red]You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.[/color]
[b]38 [/b][color=red]This is the greatest and the first commandment.[/color]
[b]39 [/b][color=red]The second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself.[/color]
[b]40 [/b][color=red]The whole law and the prophets depend on these two commandments[/color]."

If one commandment is above another, then breaking it is more severe.


All about sin:
[url="http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt3sect1chpt1art8.htm"]http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt3sect1chpt1art8.htm[/url]

[url="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14004b.htm"]http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14004b.htm[/url]


God Bless,
ironmonk

[photosynthesis]

thanks ironmonk!

[Desert Walker]

I think a point that has to be made here is that true Christian love can be received and given by anyone and to anyone regardless of sexual orientation. I'm pretty sure that's true.

That said here's a few points about sexual intercourse:

1. Sexual intercourse can only be true sexual intercourse if it takes place between a sacramentally committed and bonded man and woman with the intention of giving birth to another human person. This is what JPII basically says about sexual intercourse in Theology of the Body.

2. Therefore the attempt to engage in sexual intercourse beyond the above stated conditions is absolutely impossible.

3. The reason 2 is true is that true sexual intercourse can actually be defined and anything outside of that definition cannot validly be, or even be thought as, sexual intercourse.

4. Therefore, sexual intercourse between two men or two women is an impossible fantasy. There's no such thing as a triangle with four sides.

5. Given the above, if sexual intercourse is attempted between two members of the same sex it is frustrated by created reality itself.

6. If sexual intercourse is attempted by two members of the same sex to express a deeper love (in the Christian sense of the word) then true love is actually destroyed between these two people (at least according to St. Aelred of Rivaulx and JPII).

The destruction of true love results from an attempt at homosexual intercourse because the only thing which is gained by such activity is the giving and taking of genital pleasure. This is a meaningless exercise without the possibility of the creation of new life as a result of it.

The basic point I'm trying to make is that if genital pleasure is not connected with the responsibility of bringing another human being into existence it is dangerous.

Why is it dangerous under this condition? Because it feels good to our bodies and anything that feels good physically is addictive because of original sin. And an addiction is something that exists within the self, and ONLY the self. When someone becomes addicted to sexual pleasure, then other people are meaningful only in as much as they are able to supply the self's addiction with more and more sexual pleasure.

I am convinced, and I say this with the utmost concern and love for anyone who experiences homosexuality, that "sexual intercourse" between two men and two women (because of the reasons I have stated above) has the direct result on any such two people of binding them in a co-dependent addiction, not just to genital pleasure, but to a kind of interpersonal fantasy of fulfillment, which cannot make room for the freeing love offered by Christ to every person.

Edited January 30, 2006 by Desert Walker

[Sirklawd]

[quote name='Desert Walker' date='Jan 30 2006, 01:04 PM']I think a point that has to be made here is that true Christian love can be received and given by anyone and to anyone regardless of sexual orientation.  I'm pretty sure that's true.

That said here's a few points about sexual intercourse:

1.  Sexual intercourse can only be true sexual intercourse if it takes place between a sacramentally committed and bonded man and woman with the intention of giving birth to another human person.  This is what JPII basically says about sexual intercourse in Theology of the Body.

2.  Therefore the attempt to engage in sexual intercourse beyond the above stated conditions is absolutely impossible.

3.  The reason 2 is true is that true sexual intercourse can actually be defined and anything outside of that definition cannot validly be, or even be thought as, sexual intercourse.

4.  Therefore, sexual intercourse between two men or two women is an impossible fantasy.  There's no such thing as a triangle with four sides.

5.  Given the above, if sexual intercourse is attempted between two members of the same sex it is frustrated by created reality itself.

6.  If sexual intercourse is attempted by two members of the same sex to express a deeper love (in the Christian sense of the word) then true love is actually destroyed between these two people (at least according to St. Aelred of Rivaulx and JPII).

The destruction of true love results from an attempt at homosexual intercourse because the only thing which is gained by such activity is the giving and taking of genital pleasure.  This is a meaningless exercise without the possibility of the creation of new life as a result of it.

The basic point I'm trying to make is that if genital pleasure is not connected with the responsibility of bringing another human being into existence it is dangerous.

Why is it dangerous under this condition?  Because it feels good to our bodies and anything that feels good physically is addictive because of original sin.  And an addiction is something that exists within the self, and ONLY the self.  When someone becomes addicted to sexual pleasure, then other people are meaningful only in as much as they are able to supply the self's addiction with more and more sexual pleasure.

I am convinced, and I say this with the utmost concern and love for anyone who experiences homosexuality, that "sexual intercourse" between two men and two women (because of the reasons I have stated above) has the direct result on any such two people of binding them in a co-dependent addiction, not just to genital pleasure, but to a kind of interpersonal fantasy of fulfillment, which cannot make room for the freeing love offered by Christ to every person.
[right][snapback]870187[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

and that was an AWESOME post. geez.. not much to say after that.

Edited January 30, 2006 by Sirklawd

[jmjtina]

the terms of "sex" "love" and "lust" is erroneously used synomously.