Posted on 09/24/2005 1:33:27 PM PDT by NYer
Do you consider heterosexuality to be "innate" or did you have to make a conscious choice at any time in your life to BE heterosexual? Do you have to think about it and make the choice again on a day to day basis?
"The Vatican ban doesn't go far enough.
They should also ban any "heterosexual" priest who even comtemplates sex with a woman."
Are you expecting there to be many left? You seem to be venturing into the realms of suggesting that Priests should not be human, and any who experience normal human weakness should be eliminated. I'm not majorly up on Catholic theology, but I thought the idea was that people are tested by temptation and, by not acting on their temptations, come through that test.
"Fine, call it what you want."
Rule number 1 in the revolutionary's handbook is, if you want to change the way people think, first change the words they use.
It's very important what we call it.
"They don't have a place in the Catholic Church."
Sure they do -- as laymen.
" I'm not majorly up on Catholic theology, but I thought the idea was that people are tested by temptation and, by not acting on their temptations, come through that test."
Yes, temptation is not a sin. Sin comes in with consenting to the temptation.
Yes, of course heterosexuality is inate in the sense that it's a process inherent to our species' reproduction.
If you have opted to, in your own thinking, equate heterosexuality with homosexuality in some blender-neutral it's-all-the-same-and-equal argument, you should then include other sexual behaviors, whatever and how many you can.
I've yet to see a male give birth from out of his rectum, mouth or stomach and/or intestines and women cannot impregnate other women (or males) by any "natural" means (without assistance by technology and utensils).
On a purely biological sense alone, heterosexuality IS reproduction, a reproductive imperative of a species.
In biology, the imperative to species is that they: grow to reproductive age, reproduce and raise another generation to include at least one female who then grows to reproduction age and reproduces (if there's fitness present -- fitness is defined as successfully reproducing and the greater the number of female offspring who then grow to reproduce to produce other females is a mark of greater fitness), and while sexual acts for us humans (and some ape species) can and is sometimes inclusive of emotionally sustaining/rewarding acts sexually, the basis for and about sexuality is inherently biological.
Homosexuality has no other basis other than sensual gratification based in...you know what, I really do not want to have this discussion.
I've read it all before, heard it all before and it remains unproven that homosexuality is anything more than behavioral. If and when you can return here with biological, empirically proven theses to substantiate some alternative biological process that renders homosexuality "inherent" to humans, please do and provide the sources.
Most people with compulsions are all convinced that their compulsions are "inherent" and "normal" and beyond their control (so they ~must be~ "normal") and the like. Schizophrenics truly believe that the audio/visual delusions they experience are 'real' just as you hear a phone ring, a schizophrenic will hear Napolean or someone other talking to them, if not see them...the list is a long one but the issue here is perception and perception about obsessive-compulsive behaviors. "Inate" charateristics are biologically determined aspects to and about a species.
For those people who persist in proliferating the idea that "homosexuality is inate," they can never substantiate those claims beyond it's what's been taught to them, or that because their own homosexuality convinces them so, or that they sympathize with homosexuals to such an extent that they have become convinced by the stories they hear, etc.
IF there was biological substantiation for the behavior, we would all, I am more than sure, know about it. But there isn't, there is mere social insistence that the concept is "true" but within the context of biology, unless proven by empirical process, a hypothesis is mere idea only. To arrive at a thesis, you must evidence a testing and proving process based upon a biological model.
I think that statement you're dealing with (I agree with you here) is someone just being resentful and throwing play dough upon a wall, waiting for something to stick.
~;-D
And, last thing is, as to my own "beliefs," as a Christian, I accept and believe what God tells me and everyone else through his word, the Bible. God says that homosexuality is an abomination. I believe that God is Good in an ultimate sense. He allows men/women free will, the freedom to chose and thus, the difficulties begin.
You can live a life by faith relying upon what God tells and explains even when it makes little reasonable sense to this world we live in, or, you can opt to reject what God says and instructs because it's not trendy, unpopular, even ridiculous when compared with your undergraduate instructor in Adolescent Psychology, who will ridicule you anyway if you refer to the Bible as moral choice reference, whatever.
God would not determine His creation to be "abominable." He says that homosexuality is "abominable." Therefore, I conclude that abominations are not from God, that God advises us to avoid them at all costs and that we still have freedom of will to do what we want to about it.
The moral choice here is what has been abandoned by popular culture and unfortunately, seeped through to popular public education and what is trendy at present is that the individual should explore, act upon and "celebrate" whatever and whoever it is they imagine themselves to be. It leaves little room for boundaries, and worse, the functional understanding that a human being has moral choice, has the ability and capacity to chose.
The only reason that homosexuality was ceased being deemed an illness by medicine is that medicine could prove no effective, consistent cure for the illness, and because of that, based upon the way medicine reasons, without a cure, you cannot contend with the illness. Thus, they walked away from contending with the problem as illness and explore now how to make a person comfortable with their condition, encouraging them to "be comfortable" and to adapt to their problem without the expectation that a cure is possible.
And that has led to the exploitation of the issue through to the present assumption that to suggest a cure is abnormal, which is outrageous in assumption and yet popularly pursued. Medicine is an empirical process, also, and not within the area of religious belief, faith, and all.
And, that latter area is what is ignored too sadly by many about this issue. Within the context of Christianity, and even Judaism, the Old Testament, God has made it very, very clear that homosexuality is about as bad a thing as can be in human behavior. He's not even confusing about it, just as clear as can be...thus, to encourage and engage in homosexuality within a Christian context is vile and offensive of the very worst sort to God.
Not a quality that should exist in the Priesthood, for starters, as also within others, but the issue here is the Catholic Priesthood.
I am more concerned with those huge non-financial costs than anything else, but the billion is significant because, after all, money is how the world "keeps score" and it gives the forces of evil aid and comfort to have run up that score. In actuality, though, the money is just money and doesn't really matter.
"Such a ban would have serious consequences...."
Yes, it would have serious consequences. Homosexuals in seminaries have been driving young men away from priesthood. Banning homosexuals and removing this obstacle to vocations will give us a surge in numbers for new priests.
"Can the Church afford to lose 30-50% of new priests?"
Could the nation of Israel have survived if they were just an ordinary people?
How is it that the celibate priesthood of the Roman Catholic Rite has not only survived, but grown exponentially faster and larger than the other Rites?
How is it that Japan, Korea, Cambodia, and China can have surviving and thriving Catholic Communities for decades and even centuries without the presence of a Roman Catholic priest to regularly give the Sacraments?
To exemplify God's Power, read Judges Chapters 6 & 7, but especially 7 to see how God demonstrates His power over His enemies.
http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/judges/judges7.htm
Another excellent point!
There wasn't. I have asked that repeatedly. And asked his twin. He knew he felt different from a young age.
The bottom line on all of this mess, regardless of how one "feels" about gay priests, whether they can help it or not, blah, blah, blah.....is this:
We can't AFFORD them anymore!!
Dioceses are declaring bankruptcy, one diocese has even been told by a court that it must liquidate it's assets (churches, schools, other property) to pay the freakin' abuse settlements.
From a purely management point of view, we, the Catholic laity, who DO foot the bill for all this, canNOT afford it any longer. The gay priesthood has got to go.
Where is this 30-35% nonsense ?
And besides, how many good Christian men have entered seminaries to love and serve the Lord, found instead a sodomite bathhouse with crosses, and left in disgust ?
A Church without moral authority, that holds to no principle but popularity and expediency will end up like the Episcopalians. A Church that stands firm on the word of God will never have any shortage of priests.
What the NY Times obviously wants is to turn the Catholic Church into the Episcopalians.
Amen.
Re "innate"
You are mixing hard science with developmental psychology.
Many gays have strong mothers and absent fathers...or decide they are "Gay" because they feel like outsiders and then are seduced into a gay lifestyle.
Sexuality is malleable, and if a culture starts a boy having sex with men, he may be bisexual. If he longs for a father figure, and then is seduced into a warm, loving gay relationship because he is lonely, he will be gay. And if a child starts taking alcohol and marijuana at age 11, with peer pressure saying getting high is good, the rate of addiction is much higher than if he merely puffed a joint in college...
But there is also in born tendencies...
In all populations, one percent of men are gay...many quite effeminite. Many cultures have ways for them to stay integrated into society without letting them be considered "normal"...here in the PHilippines, gay men as hairdressers etc are ridiculed, but not ostracized, since they are free in these professions...but bisexual men are usually married...and this group is discouraged from acting on their impulses...they have a choice...
Because gays assume this second group is "Gay" they condemn those trying to cure the first group...and because Evangelicals assume the first group have a choice, they condemn those who are fully gay...
Unless you separate those who have no choice, and those who have both impulses, but are free to choose heterosexuality, you will keep getting arguments....
Theoretically, a man who is merely tempted but able to stay pure because he is the second group will be a good priest...but a man who says he is "gay" has already made the decision to follow a gay lifestyle...and should be eliminated from the priesthood...
Alas, many gays who don't want to be gay pray a lot and join monasteries or the priesthood to cope with their temptations...similarly, they marry a woman not out of love but to be "cured"....in both cases, the decisions are made from fear, not love...
Well, that's actually an interesting point. I wonder what they did have in mind. Maybe they're trying to find a way to express something like "chaste people with a disordered sex drive" without using verboten words like "chaste" or "disordered."
Any other guesses?
You're certainly right about this: that the NYT would never call a perverted sex drive a "disorder."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.