Comments for Homosexuality, Civil Rights, and Natural Law

 at http://www.thecatholicthing.org , comment 1 to 28 out of 20 comments http://www.thecatholicthing.org Sat, 25 May 2013 00:00:10 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/homosexuality-civil-rights-and-natural-law.html#comment-7981 Louise has a good point about very early childhood. It also may be worth noting that memories can be fabricated: one experiment showed that falsified pictures of a scene (I believe it was a picnic) could be mixed in with real pictures and people would convince r themselves they remembered it that way. How much of what we remember is actually stuff we only heard about from other people? - Mr. Grump, I think there is an answer to your question in the Gospels. People asked Jesus about the blind man, "Who sinned, this man or his parents?" Jesus replied (I paraphrase), "Neither; it was so the glory of God could be revealed through him." - This brings me to the comment I have about this post. I have abandoned chasing after this red herring of nature/nurture as concerns homosexuality. There is some evidence for a genetic predisposition to alcoholism, but we expect them to moderate their behavior, don't we? One could also say that by being born female, I could expect to encounter certain difficulties, challenges, adversities...but not all of them are injustice. I try to save my ire for the real thing. - On psychological disorders: armchair physician/scientist here...nevertheless, I wish everybody would read up on the myriad fascinating ways the incredibly complex human being can go awry. Moral implications aside, homosexuality is arguably not even the worst or strangest. When you know that some people wake up one day, like any other, and see a foreign, creepy, dead limb in bed with them -- which is really their own -- and are so repulsed that they try to throw it out (and themselves in the process), it becomes rather clear that the urge two males or two females have to mate with one another must at least be the kin of other body-image disorders. The term 'self-loathing' gets thrown around a lot in the context of homosexuality, but wouldn't you say it's pretty self-loathing not to be able to look at one's body and accept the physical realities about it, the way it is obviously designed to work or not work, and abuse it? Of course, psychological disorders are no less "real" than physical ones, and call for compassion. - I know this beast: your post was moving. I will do what you asked, and do the best I can. - enness Sun, 04 Sep 2011 16:56:24 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/homosexuality-civil-rights-and-natural-law.html#comment-7965 To Mr. Kainz - thank you for your response, and I appreciate your temperance. Love the post by "I Know..." the truth will set us free... - Chris in Maryland Sat, 03 Sep 2011 05:09:29 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/homosexuality-civil-rights-and-natural-law.html#comment-7959 Chris, really good and important point. If we are not precise we open the door to misinterpretaton. However, I think Grump needs no such ambiguity to assert his beliefs. Grump, like me, I think your only hope is for you to decrease and to let Him increase. May God grace you with the light of the Holy Spirit, Achilles - Achilles Fri, 02 Sep 2011 12:18:38 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/homosexuality-civil-rights-and-natural-law.html#comment-7958 Michael, Louise et al: On the language, since Jesus expects us as Catholics to be "on offense" (i.e., Jesus wants the Church storming the gates of hell - not Hell storming the gates of the Church - as one reader reminded us last month), we should be shedding, and not fretting about the language the radical homosexual political lobby has invented, and start engaging the issue using our language system (this is the only way persuasion will work). Real "homo-phobia" imprisons non-assenting "progressives" who've been cowed by their own political alliance, and social conservatives who aren't really willing to fight for what they profess to believe in (in the case of Christians -the commandments of Jesus). - Chris in Maryland Fri, 02 Sep 2011 12:05:34 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/homosexuality-civil-rights-and-natural-law.html#comment-7957 @Chris in Maryland: Just before the statement you quoted, the Catechism says, "Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex." "Relations" seems to imply acts. One could argue psychologically that physical same-sex attraction is also intrinsically disordered, although not necessarily sinful. But I agree that "homosexual acts" would help avoid possible ambiguity on this issue. - Howard Kainz Fri, 02 Sep 2011 10:53:30 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/homosexuality-civil-rights-and-natural-law.html#comment-7956 "I think so many of us normal folks just didn't take them seriously but clearly that's changing and with scholars like Professors Hainz, Arkes and George leading the push-back we wont let the gates of hell prevail." Dear Michael, What you say is certainly true. Of course it is deliberate. Such diabolical warfare doesn't just happen as if it were spontaneous generation. And this is why I have said that the FIRST TIME--long, long ago-- a Catholic, whether hierarchy, priest or lay person, conceded the language and accepted the legitimacy of their terms of debate, he conceded the battle. At that moment, it was well on its way to being lost, if not already lost, because he threw away his most powerful weapon, truth. A thing must be called by its true name if it is to be successfully challenged in the public square. I fully concur that the gates of hell will not prevail--ultimately, but none of us may live long enough to experience "ultimately". We have lost so much ground, so much time, so many troops who have been deceived. We can be thankful that at last the battle has been joined seriously, thanks to the Professors Hainz, Arkes and George, and other less prominent voices, who wage war in the kitchens, at the lunch counters and coffee machines and maybe during half-time at the local football game. We look back at our history and are thankful that the battles over various heresies were won, but we seldom recall that those battles were waged for hundreds of years in some cases. Indeed, the battle against Protestant heresies has been going on for just about 500 years. Many a Christian who finally pushed back never lived to see progress, let alone, victory. Thank you so much, Michael, and all others who have contributed so thoughtfully to this discussion and to TCT for providing a forum. - Louise Fri, 02 Sep 2011 10:13:40 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/homosexuality-civil-rights-and-natural-law.html#comment-7955 Please allow someone from the front line to chime in here: For 20 years, I wrestled with SSA, and only by the grace of God and the strength of faith that He has given me, have I learned how to better that beast. In spite of Grump's patent blasphemy, the question he is asking is, in fact, THE question for those of us who are thus afflicted. Almost 30 years ago, as a confused 17 year old, I snuck into a church one night and tearfully poured my heart out to our Lord asking Him THIS VERY QUESTION. Receiving no immediate answer, I stumbled into darkness for the next two decades. This trip ended when our Lord let my world violently collapse in on itself. Stripped of every physical and emotional attachment, the saga ends with my being shown the truth of SSA: it is nothing but a call of the Sirens. At which time I finally received an answer to my question and yours, Grump, and you won't be happy with it: it is not an “error”; it is a mystery. (check out 2 Corinthians 12:7-10) Let me end by saying: It is only because of my faith (through which our Blessed Mother taught me how to implement my own “fiat”) that I came through, loving our Church more than ever. I now feel blessed to carry this cross, for it has given me a greater capacity to love all of our brethren. However, I also know the weight of this cross, and it is no easy burden, particularly when we (for whatever reason) refuse to see that special Someone who wants to help us carry it. So, yes, do stand up for the truth about “gay marriage”, but, while you’re doing that, please say a prayer for us. We need your strength AND your compassion. - I know this beast Fri, 02 Sep 2011 10:03:30 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/homosexuality-civil-rights-and-natural-law.html#comment-7954 To Grump, Mr. Kainz, Brad Miner, et al about Grumps Comment on "Intrinsically Disordered." Grump’s comments on 1 September pulled the discussion down a dead end, but I’m afraid the wrong turn was made in Mr. K’s article, due to imprecise statement of the Catholic position. Here’s where things seemed to go wrong: Mr. K stated “the Catholic Church maintains… [that] homosexuality is an “intrinsically disordered” condition.…” THIS SEEMS TO ME AN INCORRECT STATEMENT OF THE CATHOLIC POSITION. It appears that the Catechism restricts its language to homosexual acts, not so-called “homosexuality,” (whatever “homosexuality” happens to mean to whomever decides to employ the word). The Catechism of the Catholic Church 2357 states this: “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered. 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.” This statement by the Church is not opining on how people are created, but Grump does opine as such, since Mr. K’s imprecise statement allowed that response. So Grump holds that homosexuals are “born that way.” The Church is agnostic on the “born that way issue.” So Grump is simply arguing his point with some Catholics who may share/ assert Grump’s “belief” that people with SSA are “born that way issue.” A final note: interesting that The Catechism also does not discriminate against one intrinsically disordered sexual act versus others. It assigns homosexual acts to a wide group of other intrinsically disordered sexual acts, all of which violate God’s law. - Chris in Maryland Fri, 02 Sep 2011 07:56:11 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/homosexuality-civil-rights-and-natural-law.html#comment-7952 Louise, I too am of a generation, from a different country though, that has no experience or knowledge of homosexuality nor do I understand the the pressing need to proclaim, to demand approval, to self-identify as a homosexual before anyone even knows your name and I support the rest of your comment. Why on earth would I want to know you're a homosexual when I dont? Why foist this revelation on me? Am I now as a closeted adulterer (only kidding!) entitled to come out of the closet and continue, unabashed, with my lifestyle in public and propound there's nothing wrong with it? (I wonder what women, in general, and my wife in particular would say about that!) But Howard Kaine is correct as well when he says the quest to "naturalize" homosexuality is deliberate, well documented and has been going on for many years. I think so many of us normal folks just didn't take them seriously but clearly that's changing and with scholars like Professors Hainz, Arkes and George leading the push-back we wont let the gates of hell prevail. I would just add that appropriating and twisting language to achieve one's end is nothing new but I do agree that it is very frustrating even hearing the terms "same-sex marriage" and "gay" which on their face are respectively oxymoronic and contradictory. - Michael Fri, 02 Sep 2011 07:54:18 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/homosexuality-civil-rights-and-natural-law.html#comment-7950 Male, homosexual, HIV rates anyone? We do understand, don't we, that a man who has had a sexual episode with another man within the last five years, is prohibited from donating his blood at a blood bank. You see, when a blood bank or a hospital has its reputation or its liability on the line, regulations become very forceful and very clear. - Manfred Fri, 02 Sep 2011 06:49:17 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/homosexuality-civil-rights-and-natural-law.html#comment-7947 "If I use the phrase, "homosexual marriage," as you suggest, this also involves a change of meanings," Well, that does put us in a quandary, doesn't it. We can't use the word "gay" and we can't use the word "marriage" because both words singly and together constitute a lie and a double lie and lie upon lie upon lie. I think there is message here that goes beyond the fact that "We are presently involved in the "newspeak" of Brave New World." I think the message is that we have passed through the gates that bear the sign, "Abandon hope, all ye who enter here." I think it's time to change the subject before we all go mad--lit reminds me of that scene in Phantom of the Opera where we are in a round room whose walls are mirrors and we are unable to distinguish the real from the reflection. Scary. - Louise Thu, 01 Sep 2011 17:25:05 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/homosexuality-civil-rights-and-natural-law.html#comment-7945 @Louise: I think the word, "gay," started to be used in that connotation in the 60s. If I use the phrase, "homosexual marriage," as you suggest, this also involves a change of meanings, i.e., the common meaning of "marriage" from time immemorial. We are presently involved in the "newspeak" of Brave New World. - Howard Kainz Thu, 01 Sep 2011 16:49:09 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/homosexuality-civil-rights-and-natural-law.html#comment-7944 Thnak you Brad. and thank the rest of our real Catholics who have ahd the courage to defy soi-dissant enlightnened of our world who like the most cunning of creatures tells us that we surely will not die if we tell those who suffer this addlction to give in to the personal serpents. But just think, without Grump, we wouldn't be able to laugh ourselves to sleep with such locutions as "form the lips of ...themselves." I coulnd't resist that. Oh, yes I could, but I CHOSE not to. Thanks again, fellow Catholics for standing up, even in situations in which our weak kneed syblings have gone over to endording their offsprings' aberrations and threaen to ex-communicate os if cleave to the Teachings of Holy Mother Church and admonish them to pray for God's help. I am, by the way, a dreadful sinner myself, keep several confessors busy. - Thomas C. Coleman, Jr. Thu, 01 Sep 2011 16:44:53 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/homosexuality-civil-rights-and-natural-law.html#comment-7943 "I continue to search for truth" What was it that C.S. Lewis said about searching for truth, Mr. Grump? Something along the lines of "many people search for truth, and, when they find it, they keep right on going as if nothing had ever happened." - Louise Thu, 01 Sep 2011 15:22:56 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/homosexuality-civil-rights-and-natural-law.html#comment-7942 So, Grump, what do you make of Martinkus' assertion that because some trait is naturally acquired that it ipso facto is morally neutral? Sociopaths can say they're 'born that way.' So can kleptomaniacs. Secularists can make a case that homosexual behaviors correlate with a number of negative consequences (e.g., shorter life spans for homosexual males). Statistics at the CDC bear this out. As for your examples of God's limitations, I encourage you to read (or reread if you already have done so) Peter Kreeft's many books dealing with Christian apologetics. - Beth Thu, 01 Sep 2011 14:30:31 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/homosexuality-civil-rights-and-natural-law.html#comment-7940 Mr. Miner was right in chastening me. I realize that I've been a thorn in his flesh for awhile and my comments are not mean mean-spiritedly but rather to provide a minority viewpoint that provokes more discussion. Of course, there is no such thing as an "avowed agnostic" -- an oxymoron if there ever was one. I continue to search for truth and, like Jacob, have been wrestling with God for more years than I care to remember. So far I've wriggled out of his holds but I think that some day he just might be able to pin me to the floor. Lastly, in elaborating on my comment questioning God's perfection, two examples of His limitations come to mind: He can never see His own equal, nor can he erase the past. Having limits then -- the inability to alter some things -- implies something less than perfection. - Grump Thu, 01 Sep 2011 12:01:32 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/homosexuality-civil-rights-and-natural-law.html#comment-7938 While my wife was watching MTV music awards the other night; I laughed out loud when Lady Gaga gave a message to the LGB and Trans-sexuals that "you were born that way". My wife chided me for quite some time about my intolerance> And it continued on for quite some time again when I said "But you have to admit her statement was really funny". - JamesD Thu, 01 Sep 2011 09:09:48 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/homosexuality-civil-rights-and-natural-law.html#comment-7937 "Re: the use of "gay," One of the secondary meanings of "gay" has been "lascivious," "promiscuous." " Thank you, Professor Kainz for your reply. A quesion: who first attached that label to homosexuals--and when? Did they adopt it themselves as a code word for identification, a verbal wink and nod? was it given to them by heterosexual men for perceived (or actual or observed) promiscuous behavior? I grew up with the definition of "gay" as lighthearted, happy, carefree. I well remember the play by Cornelius Otis Skinner, "Our Hearts Were Young and Gay." My husband played The Admiral in his high-school senior-class production of the play. There was not even a repressed snicker or giggle to be heard. I love the word "gay" and all it implies and I continue to use it to describe accurately a certain joyful lightheartedness. (I don't give up good words easily, no matter how they have been defiled.) So who defiled it? Is all slang a lie as the use of "gay" is a lie, a euphemism to deny truth? I think of slang as being a distillation of truth, such as the slang phrase "hang up"--two words to describe the whole Freudian psychology. But "gay" is not truth; it is an avoidance of truth, a denial of truth. Therefore, I believe that the use of the word "gay" when "homosexual" is meant is to be complicit in the lie, and therefore, as Dennis said, a sell-out. Love-- more precisely, charity--demands truth, not complicity in a lie. " 'gay marriage' is just a reference to an agenda of activists." If the agenda is a harmful one resulting in social confusion and chaos and more wounded men, women, and children, why use the term? Why concede the point, as if it's no big deal, especially when souls are at stake? As is the case with feminism, if you concede a term, they will claim the whole paragraph, and truth has lost ground. Thank you again for your reply, and thank you to TCT for allowing us to ask our questions and voice our concerns. - Louise Thu, 01 Sep 2011 08:49:55 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/homosexuality-civil-rights-and-natural-law.html#comment-7936 Mr. Grump, I have heard it said (rightly or wrongly) that people say that they are "born this way" because they can't remember themselves before say three or four years old, and if there were environmental or familial influences that caused a mis-identification of sexuality within those years, they would not have remembered it and assumed that they were "born this way." They say, "I've been this way for as long as I can remember." Well, they can't remember back very far. You can tell that I am a complete amateur in trying to work through these ideas and may well be completely naive and off base, but there is a certain logic to that idea. (A person of good sense (unlike myself) would not even try to contribute to the discussion.) Regarding physiognomy, etc. We once knew a young man who bore all of the physical and nonphysical characteristics of a heterosexual man. One day, he declared himself to be a homosexual. Slowly, everything about him changed: his walk, his voice, hie general demeanor and appearance, and he took on all the characteristics describe by Mr. Grump. Many people remarked on it. Human beings are very complex creatures. (Mr. Miner, feel free not to print this if you don't think it appropriate in any way. My feelings won't be hurt.) - Louise Thu, 01 Sep 2011 07:26:28 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/homosexuality-civil-rights-and-natural-law.html#comment-7935 Kudos to Brad Miner. Someone needed to say what he said. To label every attitude as a psychological disorder is a rejection of free will and the effort and energy needed to overcome our weaknesses. It is a cop out. Everyone has his Achilles’ heel. Recognize it; deal with it, quit complaining, and stop looking for sympathy, social acceptability and preference. - senex Thu, 01 Sep 2011 07:07:54 +0100