Gay Cancer

[Aloysius]

no, I say that you have a point to make, but that it's not thoroughly enough defined and clarified based on an understanding not only of what words the Church uses, but why she uses them.

[hyperdulia again]

Denzel Washington!

[Jaime]

[quote name='hyperdulia again' post='1402442' date='Oct 14 2007, 06:01 PM']Denzel Washington![/quote]

Sandra Bullock!


(Oh carp wrong thread)

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1402339' date='Oct 14 2007, 03:19 PM']Homosexual desires are intrisically disordered, i.e., disordered [i]per se[/i], because the object of the desire in question is unnatural ([i]contra naturam[/i]).[/quote]
Thank you.

[Jaime]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1402484' date='Oct 14 2007, 07:39 PM']Thank you.[/quote]

Its not a majority vote Cmom

He's still wrong.

[Jaime]

and he still owes me and the Holy Father an apology

[photosynthesis]

this thread is getting way off topic.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='hot stuff' post='1402487' date='Oct 14 2007, 08:46 PM']Its not a majority vote Cmom

He's still wrong.[/quote]
Sorry, but that is what I was taught as well. Being a theologian, he explains it better.

[hyperdulia again]

Paul Newman!

[Cam42]

I have just finished reading through this thread and seriously, I am confused. I know that it has been a long while since I have posted here, but I have not stopped studying the faith nor have I stopped coming to a greater understanding of what the faith has to offer.

With that being said, I really don't get the names being listed....perhaps it is a homosexual thing, but it really isn't doing anything to help the situation.

Also, hot stuff is totally correct.

When a thing is intrinsic, it is so by it's very nature.

When a thing is objective it is so by the efforts or actions of the thing in which it is intended to accomplish.

So, when hot stuff makes the distinction, he is making a very valid one. When he talks about symantics, he is talking about a very clear one. He has supported his position by using the Roman Catholic Church's position, supported by the Catechism (which, contrary to Appy's view, is more than a reference book), various documents and valid and sound reasoning.

What does the Church teach?

[quote name='CCC 2357']Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that [b]"homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."[/b] They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.[/quote]

and

[quote name='Persona Humana 8']At the present time there are those who, basing themselves on observations in the psychological order, have begun to judge indulgently, and even to excuse completely, homosexual relations between certain people. This they do in opposition to the constant teaching of the Magisterium and to the moral sense of the Christian people.

A distinction is drawn, and it seems with some reason, between homosexuals whose tendency comes from a false education, from a lack of normal sexual development, from habit, from bad example, or from other similar causes, and is transitory or at least not incurable; and homosexuals who are definitively such because of some kind of innate instinct or a pathological constitution judged to be incurable.

In regard to this second category of subjects, some people conclude that their tendency is so natural that it justifies in their case homosexual relations within a sincere communion of life and love analogous to marriage, in so far as such homosexuals feel incapable of enduring a solitary life.

In the pastoral field, these homosexuals must certainly be treated with understanding and sustained in the hope of overcoming their personal difficulties and their inability to fit into society. Their culpability will be judged with prudence. But no pastoral method can be employed which would give moral justification to these acts on the grounds that they would be consonant with the condition of such people. [b]For according to the objective moral order, homosexual relations are acts which lack an essential and indispensable finality.[/b] In Sacred Scripture they are condemned as a serious depravity and even presented as the sad consequence of rejecting God. [b]This judgment of Scripture does not of course permit us to conclude that all those who suffer from this anomaly are personally responsible for it, but it does attest to the fact that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered and can in no case be approved of.[/b][/quote]

What does this say? It says that the the objective moral order, homosexual relations are acts. That is the proper use of what objective means. Secondly, it says that those acts are intrinsically disordered. But it also says that we cannot objectively judge those who suffer from that anomaly.

This is supported by Scripture:

Rom 1:24-27 "That is why God left them to their filthy enjoyments and the practices with which they dishonor their own bodies since they have given up Divine truth for a lie and have worshipped and served creatures instead of the Creator, Who is blessed forever. Amen! That is why God has abandoned them to degrading passions; why their women have turned from natural intercourse to unnatural practices and why their menfolk have given up natural intercourse to be consumed with passion for each other, men doing shameless things with men and getting an appropriate reward for their perversion"

See also what St. Paul says of "masculorum concubitores" in I Cor 6:10; I Tim 1:10.

This doesn't mean that we have carte blanche to destroy charity. On the contrary, this demands that we are very careful with our use of terms.

hot stuff has done nothing but support the Magisterium and the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church.

Finally, I would like to say this. And I mean this with all charity and honesty....Nothing is gained by publicly entering into modified "poisioning the well" fallacies. It is totally irrelevant as to why a former "Church Scholar" is no longer a "Church Scholar." It has no bearing on the conversation.

Al, keep on the path that you are on, you are close to seeing what hot stuff is trying to get at, and your positioning is very close.

[Cam42]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1402647' date='Oct 14 2007, 08:53 PM']Sorry, but that is what I was taught as well. Being a theologian, he explains it better.[/quote]

The last time I checked, so is hot stuff.

[kateri05]

CAM IS BACK!!!!


i like cam.


i think

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='hot stuff' post='1402487' date='Oct 14 2007, 05:46 PM']Its not a majority vote Cmom

He's still wrong.[/quote]
Wonders never cease.

[Apotheoun]

Homosexual desires are disordered [i]per se[/i] (i.e., they are intrinsically disordered), because they are directed toward that which is evil in all cases (contra naturam). Now, the fact that hot stuff is incapable of distinguishing between desires that are contra naturam and desires that are contra rationem is of course sad, but with the poor state of Catholic education in the United States over the last forty years it is not all that surprising.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='hot stuff' post='1402534' date='Oct 14 2007, 07:25 PM']and he still owes me and the Holy Father an apology[/quote]
I am always amazed by your constant desire for apologies.

I will apologize to you, when you apologize to Jesus Christ for misrepresenting the teaching of His Church.