Resurrexi Posted July 4, 2009 Share Posted July 4, 2009 Two persons of the same sex passionately kissing is always wrong, while a man and a woman passionately kissing is often completely acceptable. Additionally, I would think that many people view two persons of the same sex passionately kissing as more scandalous than an unmarried man and woman passionately kissing (which, as I stated before, might be a mortal sin, a venial sin, or no sin at all, depending on what one's definition of passionate kissing is). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T-Bone _ Posted July 4, 2009 Share Posted July 4, 2009 [quote name='Resurrexi' post='1910391' date='Jul 4 2009, 02:51 AM']Additionally, I would think that many people view two persons of the same sex passionately kissing as more scandalous than an unmarried man and woman passionately kissing (which, as I stated before, might be a mortal sin, a venial sin, or no sin at all, depending on what one's definition of passionate kissing is).[/quote] So it's worse because gays are "icky"? Great reasoning there... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resurrexi Posted July 4, 2009 Share Posted July 4, 2009 Whether or not an action gives scandal often has much to do with what people perceive as scandalous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenchild17 Posted July 4, 2009 Share Posted July 4, 2009 (edited) [quote name='Resurrexi' post='1910391' date='Jul 4 2009, 03:51 AM']Two persons of the same sex passionately kissing is always wrong, while a man and a woman passionately kissing is often completely acceptable.[/quote] I agree with this, although I may question whether it is appropriate or not for a couple to be kissing passionately in public, married or otherwise. [quote name='Resurrexi' post='1910391' date='Jul 4 2009, 03:51 AM']Additionally, I would think that many people view two persons of the same sex passionately kissing as more scandalous than an unmarried man and woman passionately kissing (which, as I stated before, might be a mortal sin, a venial sin, or no sin at all, depending on what one's definition of passionate kissing is).[/quote] I don't agree with this at all, at least not from a Catholic standpoint (maybe the general public does feel this way). What makes a homosexual couple passionately kissing worse than an unmarried single couple passionately kissing? If both couples are in a position where it is a sin, what makes one worse than the other? Edited July 4, 2009 by goldenchild17 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OraProMe Posted July 4, 2009 Author Share Posted July 4, 2009 [quote name='Resurrexi' post='1910386' date='Jul 4 2009, 04:43 AM']I will give a hypothetical situation in which a devout Catholic being seen in public with an unmarried man and woman who are passionately kissing could give scandal. *The onlookers know that the devout Catholic is a very conscientious Catholic who is extremely knowledgeable about Christian morality. *The onlookers know that the couple is not married. *The man and woman are kissing so passionately that it is clear to the onlookers that the kissing is a sin of grave matter. *The devout Catholic seems to approve of the immodest kissing.[/quote] How does one "seem to approve"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resurrexi Posted July 4, 2009 Share Posted July 4, 2009 (edited) [quote name='goldenchild17' post='1910397' date='Jul 4 2009, 04:06 AM']What makes a homosexual couple passionately kissing worse than an unmarried single couple passionately kissing? If both couples are in a position where it is a sin, what makes one worse than the other?[/quote] A violation of the sixth commandment with a priest has a malice that mere fornication does not have, namely, the malice of sacrilege. A married man passionately kissing a woman who is not his wife has an added malice that two unmarried persons passionately kissing does not have, namely, the malice of adultery. In a like manner, passionate kissing between two persons of the same sex has an added malice that an unmarried man and woman passionately kissing does not have, namely, the malice of a homosexual act. Edited July 4, 2009 by Resurrexi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varg Posted July 4, 2009 Share Posted July 4, 2009 [quote name='Resurrexi' post='1910386' date='Jul 4 2009, 04:43 AM']I will give a hypothetical situation in which a devout Catholic being seen in public with an unmarried man and woman who are passionately kissing could give scandal. *The onlookers know that the devout Catholic is a very conscientious Catholic who is extremely knowledgeable about Christian morality. *The onlookers know that the couple is not married. *The man and woman are kissing so passionately that it is clear to the onlookers that the kissing is a sin of grave matter. *The devout Catholic seems to approve of the immodest kissing.[/quote]Doesn't men he/she (the Catholic) approves, it just mens he/she doesn't want to get involved in [i]someone else's[/i] business, which is completely understandable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resurrexi Posted July 4, 2009 Share Posted July 4, 2009 [quote name='Varg' post='1910400' date='Jul 4 2009, 04:20 AM']Doesn't men he/she (the Catholic) approves, it just mens he/she doesn't want to get involved in [i]someone else's[/i] business, which is completely understandable.[/quote] There is often an obligation of fraternal correction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OraProMe Posted July 4, 2009 Author Share Posted July 4, 2009 [quote name='Resurrexi' post='1910401' date='Jul 4 2009, 05:22 AM']There is often an obligation of fraternal correction.[/quote] Fraternal correction doesn't mean bringing up the topic constantly, trying to constantly change someones opinion or arguing for the sake of arguing. I don't think you really know what fraternal correction is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varg Posted July 4, 2009 Share Posted July 4, 2009 [quote name='Resurrexi' post='1910401' date='Jul 4 2009, 04:22 AM']There is often an obligation of fraternal correction.[/quote]By that you mean stopping the lovers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resurrexi Posted July 4, 2009 Share Posted July 4, 2009 I don't feel the need to explain to you what fraternal correction is. There are plenty of Catholic websites and books that can explain it better than I. Do a search for "fraternal correction". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resurrexi Posted July 4, 2009 Share Posted July 4, 2009 [quote name='OraProMe' post='1910402' date='Jul 4 2009, 04:26 AM']Fraternal correction doesn't mean bringing up the topic constantly, trying to constantly change someones opinion or arguing for the sake of arguing. I don't think you really know what fraternal correction is.[/quote] I know exactly what fraternal correction is. I just re-read the section about it in a moral theology book I have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resurrexi Posted July 4, 2009 Share Posted July 4, 2009 By the way, Ora, there are many other ways in which it could appear that one is approving of the action of another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenchild17 Posted July 4, 2009 Share Posted July 4, 2009 [quote name='Resurrexi' post='1910399' date='Jul 4 2009, 04:18 AM']A violation of the sixth commandment with a priest has a malice that mere fornication does not have, namely, the malice of sacrilege. A married man passionately kissing a woman who is not his wife has an added malice that two unmarried persons passionately kissing does not have, namely, the malice of adultery. In a like manner, passionate kissing between two persons of the same sex has an added malice that an unmarried man and woman passionately kissing does not have, namely, the malice of a homosexual act.[/quote] I could follow this as possibly logical (though the last line doesn't necessarily follow for me), but is this just your opinion or do you base this line of reason on any moral theology? If so could you post it? I think you could provide proof for sacrilege for the case of a priest because he is married to the Church etc. and I think you could do the same for the married man, because there is the wife to take into consideration. But unless you have a moral theology reference for an added sacrilege for homosexual kissing I don't think I can agree because there isn't necessarily anyone else involved like there is in the case of the priest (the Church whom he is married to) and the married man (the wife he is married to). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OraProMe Posted July 4, 2009 Author Share Posted July 4, 2009 It's just fraternal implies equality, respect and charity. I'm not trying to be offensive at all but from what I have seen your attempts at "fraternal correction" usually come off as a little condecending and "holier-than-thou". Again, no offence intended. Just an observation. 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