Posted on 08/17/2005 7:58:48 AM PDT by Dr._Joseph_Warren
Dykey gym teachers are so common as to be a cliche any more. We had at least two in my high school. I didn't care at the time, except I didn't much like the competition...
Whatever. Call it what you like, but that doesn't change the fact that, for some people, there will always be an urge to drink.
Similarly, dress it up however you want. Claim that homosexuals can be "cured." At the end of the day, all you have is a bisexual or a gay person living a lie.
you are comparing apples and oranges. Sexual fetish for an orgasm is not the same as alchohol.
Reprograming associations with orgasm is not the same as not drinking.
Every scripture in the history of the world - monotheism here - states that same sex acts are wrong. Period. So you are stating that for me to agree with every religion in the world is wrong. Your so-called arguments are completely inconsistent and illogical, emotion based.
You said: "Simply not my call to make. That judgment on the rightness of their love belongs to a Higher Authority, not me. Or you."
As someone else mentioned, love is not what is in question here. I love all kinds of people and animals that I don't interact sexually with. We're talking about sex acts, not love. You think homosexuals (since that's the topic at hand) love everyone they have anonymous 5 minute encounters with? People whose faces they never see, and names they never know?
How about if I just repeat what is in every scripture of the world? Is that wrong?
You are duplicitous.
I'm not the one who brought up alcoholism. Blame little jeremiah. I'm just trying to run with the poorly inflated ball he handed me.
Reprograming associations with orgasm is not the same as not drinking.
I would imagine it's even tougher to make homosexuals fool themselves into thinking they are "cured." That probably explains why supporters of such "cures" have to rely on flawed studies as evidence.
Good Post.
You wrote, "...Even if you discovered the spin on your own, it still duplicates the DNC spin."
Nope, one doesn't 'discover spin' on one's own. I brought up love because I was referring to a couple I know: very specific, anecdotal experience. It's the only word I know that correctly describes their relationship.
Try harder.
I take it you are speaking from first hand experience.
It does not change the fact that you anecdotal couple should be no where near children.
Anecdotal experinces do not change the fact the we are raising a generation in the schools. It is why GLSEN has their GSA dating clubs. They want to make more of your anecdotes by promoting homosexuals' access to children.
I brought up alcoholism because MM is saying that there is no such thing as a former homosexual, that the study is of no value because only those who were not happy with their homosexual orientation were included.
Since only alcoholics were are not happy with their alcohol habits voluntarily join AA, seek therapy, or quit on their own, such former alcoholics, by MM's logic, are still alcoholics and don't count.
The analogy isn't perfect but it was the point that the study doesn't count since only homosexuals who were not happy with their sexual status were included, that I was commenting on.
MM - just admit it. You support the "gay" agenda because all morality that is tangentally related with any kind of religion, God or scripture offends you personally.
That's the truth, but of course you won't admit it.
Oh, and BTW, that attitude isn't modern, it's as ancient as the hills.
No one is saying that no homosexuals love their sex partners. Or their mothers, or their brothers, or their dogs.
But that has nothing at all whatsoever to do with the discussion at hand.
little jeremiah's alcoholism analogy is spot on -it just requires further development and elaboration...
I suspect you would not consider Catholic teaching to be credible; however, as to the homosexual disorder the Catholic Church is probably at the forefront of publishing a sound all encompassing treatment on this issue -a treatment that encompasses all of both secular and Christian argument and fact without contradiction.
In a nutshell -the homosexual disorder potentially has several causes many unproven and or possibly unable to be proven. I would suggest that this being the case that some that suffer the homosexual disorder may not be easily cured if ever from the disorder. Not saying that God could not do it -saying that man alone may not be able to do it.
Regardless, the homosexual disorder and homosexual activity are always separate issues to consider. Homosexual activity is always a choice.
I would suggest that a cure preventing the participation in the activity may succeed to a much greater extent than the cure of the disorder itself...this cure would be similar to that of alcoholics...
If you are interested in the 'meat' that I base my position(s) on: -some links to documents and some excerpts:
Catholic documents and teaching on subject of homosexuality:
- The Truth and Meaning of Human Sexuality - Guidelines for Education within the Family
104. A particular problem that can appear during the process of sexual maturation is homosexuality, which is also spreading more and more in urbanized societies. This phenomenon must be presented with balanced judgement, in the light of the documents of the Church. Young people need to be helped to distinguish between the concepts of what is normal and abnormal, between subjective guilt and objective disorder, avoiding what would arouse hostility. On the other hand, the structural and complementary orientation of sexuality must be well clarified in relation to marriage, procreation and Christian chastity. "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". A distinction must be made between a tendency that can be innate and acts of homosexuality that "are intrinsically disordered" and contrary to Natural Law.Especially when the practice of homosexual acts has not become a habit, many cases can benefit from appropriate therapy. In any case, persons in this situation must be accepted with respect, dignity and delicacy, and all forms of unjust discrimination must be avoided. If parents notice the appearance of this tendency or of related behaviour in their children, during childhood or adolescence, they should seek help from expert qualified persons in order to obtain all possible assistance.
For most homosexual persons, this condition constitutes a trial. "They must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfil God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition". "Homosexual persons are called to chastity".
- Persona Humana - Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual Ethics
VIII 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. For according to the objective moral order, homosexual relations are acts which lack an essential and indispensable finality. In Sacred Scripture they are condemned as a serious depravity and even presented as the sad consequence of rejecting God. 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.
- Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons
10. It is deplorable that homosexual persons have been and are the object of violent malice in speech or in action. Such treatment deserves condemnation from the Church's pastors wherever it occurs. It reveals a kind of disregard for others which endangers the most fundamental principles of a healthy society. The intrinsic dignity of each person must always be respected in word, in action and in law.But the proper reaction to crimes committed against homosexual persons should not be to claim that the homosexual condition is not disordered. When such a claim is made and when homosexual activity is consequently condoned, or when civil legislation is introduced to protect behavior to which no one has any conceivable right, neither the Church nor society at large should be surprised when other distorted notions and practices gain ground, and irrational and violent reactions increase.
11. It has been argued that the homosexual orientation in certain cases is not the result of deliberate choice; and so the homosexual person would then have no choice but to behave in a homosexual fashion. Lacking freedom, such a person, even if engaged in homosexual activity, would not be culpable.
Here, the Church's wise moral tradition is necessary since it warns against generalizations in judging individual cases. In fact, circumstances may exist, or may have existed in the past, which would reduce or remove the culpability of the individual in a given instance; or other circumstances may increase it. What is at all costs to be avoided is the unfounded and demeaning assumption that the sexual behaviour of homosexual persons is always and totally compulsive and therefore inculpable. What is essential is that the fundamental liberty which characterizes the human person and gives him his dignity be recognized as belonging to the homosexual person as well. As in every conversion from evil, the abandonment of homosexual activity will require a profound collaboration of the individual with God's liberating grace.
- Some Considerations Concerning the Response to Legislative Proposals on Non-discrimination of Homosexual Persons
II. Applications10. "Sexual orientation" does not constitute a quality comparable to race, ethnic background, etc. in respect to non-discrimination. Unlike these, homosexual orientation is an objective disorder (cf. "Letter," No. 3) and evokes moral concern.
11. There are areas in which it is not unjust discrimination to take sexual orientation into account, for example, in the placement of children for adoption or foster care, in employment of teachers or athletic coaches, and in military recruitment.
13. Including "homosexual orientation" among the considerations on the basis of which it is illegal to discriminate can easily lead to regarding homosexuality as a positive source of human rights, for example, in respect to so-called affirmative action or preferential treatment in hiring practices. This is all the more deleterious since there is no right to homosexuality (cf. No. 10) which therefore should not form the basis for judicial claims. The passage from the recognition of homosexuality as a factor on which basis it is illegal to discriminate can easily lead, if not automatically, to the legislative protection and promotion of homosexuality. A person's homosexuality would be invoked in opposition to alleged discrimination, and thus the exercise of rights would be defended precisely via the affirmation of the homosexual condition instead of in terms of a violation of basic human rights.
- Third World Meeting of Families: Conclusions of the Pastoral Theological Congress
Mention should also be made of recent attempts to legalize adoptions by homosexual persons, and this must be strongly rejected. It is obvious that this is not the situation for authentic up-bringing and personalizing growth. “The bond between two men or two women cannot constitute a real family, nor much less can the right be attributed to a union of this kind to adopt children without a family”. With regard to foster care and adoption, the great principle to be applied is always the child’s higher interests which much prevail over other considerations.
- Fourth World Meeting of Families: Conclusions of the Pastoral Theological Congress
We reaffirm the rights and dignity of all children. They should never be neglected and abandoned on the streets. They should be protected, especially when threatened by exploitation through prostitution, pornography, child-labor, drug trafficking, homosexual adoption and immoral "sex education". A new threat to children is posed by the misuse of the Internet, when this intrudes into family life and undermines the rights and duties of parents.Children are the "crown of marriage", the real wealth of humanity. The natural place for their education is the family. It is here, in the community of life and love, that they are formed as members of Christ's Church. It is here that, honoring and loving their parents, they can enrich the lives of all members of the wider family.
- Considerations Regarding Proposals To Give Legal Recognition To Unions Between Homosexual Persons
4. There are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way similar or even remotely analogous to God's plan for marriage and family. Marriage is holy, while homosexual acts go against the natural moral law. Homosexual acts “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”.7. Homosexual unions are totally lacking in the biological and anthropological elements of marriage and family which would be the basis, on the level of reason, for granting them legal recognition. Such unions are not able to contribute in a proper way to the procreation and survival of the human race. The possibility of using recently discovered methods of artificial reproduction, beyond involving a grave lack of respect for human dignity, does nothing to alter this inadequacy.
Homosexual unions are also totally lacking in the conjugal dimension, which represents the human and ordered form of sexuality. Sexual relations are human when and insofar as they express and promote the mutual assistance of the sexes in marriage and are open to the transmission of new life.
As experience has shown, the absence of sexual complementarity in these unions creates obstacles in the normal development of children who would be placed in the care of such persons. They would be deprived of the experience of either fatherhood or motherhood. Allowing children to be adopted by persons living in such unions would actually mean doing violence to these children, in the sense that their condition of dependency would be used to place them in an environment that is not conducive to their full human development. This is gravely immoral and in open contradiction to the principle, recognized also in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, that the best interests of the child, as the weaker and more vulnerable party, are to be the paramount consideration in every case.
"Similarly, a gay person can stop having sex with their own gender, but the urge will still always be there."
Your comment is so ludicrous on its face that I can't believe you believe it yourself.
You are God to know the hearts of all people? There are so many former homosexuals who tell a different story. You are awfully full of yourself.
The study is of no value because its subjects were self-selecting. That's a basic requirement of any useful study- you need as neutral a cross-section of the group being studied as possible. Self-selection is a no-no.
Since only alcoholics were are not happy with their alcohol habits voluntarily join AA, seek therapy, or quit on their own, such former alcoholics, by MM's logic, are still alcoholics and don't count.
Would you give credence to a study regarding the efficacy of AA if the only participants in the study were current, content members of AA? Or would you prefer a study that sampled as wide a pool of former and current AA members as possible?
MM - just admit it. You support the "gay" agenda because all morality that is tangentally related with any kind of religion, God or scripture offends you personally.
Not really. The opposite of love is not hate, it's indifference. I'm indifferent when it comes to religiously-based morality just as I aim indifferent to Scientology-based morality. Those are not worldviews I subscribe to.
I'm saying you are duplicitous (yes, I know what the word means) because you are using words that sound pious and referring to Higher Authority and yet promoting and condoning behavior which every religion in the world has condemned.
If you want to bring in religion, then you have to deal with what the tenets of religion are. And all religion tells us that homosexual behavior is wrong, and we shouldn't allow those practicing and/or promoting it around innocent children.
So your duplicity is to trot out religious sounding platitudes and then take a stand which is in opposition all religion.
That's a perfect example of duplicity.
I would strongly object.
A sexual pervert who who believes that his perversion is a normality has absolutely no business teaching children.
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.