I'm hearing a lot of ignorant crap on Catholic radio these days.

[Valjean]

God doesn't make people homosexual - hereditary or social environment do that.

Doesn't God determine everything, including our heredity and sexual orientation? If God disapproved of homosexuals He's certainly capable of not making them. He manages to exclude people with two heads, visual acuity in the infrared and sexual attractions to Komodo dragons. So why'd He give homosexuals a pass?

God approves of people of homosexual disposition (orientation) - but warns that homosexual behaviour (like all forms of sexual activity other than straight sex within monogamous marriage) will damage (or even destroy) the human soul.

Why did God give us an apparently harmless drive we're forbidden to fulfill? Damage the soul? That strikes me as facile rationalizing to justify suppressing a behavior that you, personally, find yucky.

Cannibalism is fairly widespread in the animal kingdom. Male tigers sometimes kill their own offspring.
Should these behaviours, too, be copied by human beings ?

The reference to homosexual animals was to illustrate that this behaviour is widespread and natural, not that we might imitate a behaviour we have no natural drive to do.

Paedophilia - like all sexual deviations - is at epidemic proportions throughout the Western world.

Reporting of pedophilia is at epidemic proportions. It makes good copy.
I suspect it was even more widespread in the past, in cultures where it wasn't so demonized as it is in our own.

Some of it has, horrifyingly, seeped into Christian denominations (not ONLY the RCC !).
Why this tsunami of decadence and deviation ?

Partly because doomed, decadent civilisations generate such things.
Partly too, because of contraception - even when used within marriage, it is sexually deviant; hence contrary to the doctrine of the Church.

Decadence changes over time and between cultures. I suspect religious sticks-in-the-mud have always bemoaned the fact that theirs is the most depraved of times.

 

[Valjean]

Your post is the standard liberal tripe - "things were always terrible, but now people are reporting them more."

Well, no - since in many Western towns, parents used to let their children roam and play freely (and with no ill-effect) but now don't dare to.

But not because the perceived danger is actually greater, it's just publicized more. Helicopter parenting and 24/7 surveillance is just a trend, in certain social circles of frightened people. It's psychologically damaging to the child.

 

[Catholicus]

But not because the perceived danger is actually greater, it's just publicized more. Helicopter parenting and 24/7 surveillance is just a trend, in certain social circles of frightened people. It's psychologically damaging to the child.

No - in times gone by, the danger wasn't there.

Parents can over-react to the perceived threat; but they'd be foolish and reckless if they didn't react at all.

 

[Catholicus]

Doesn't God determine everything, including our heredity and sexual orientation? If God disapproved of homosexuals He's certainly capable of not making them. He manages to exclude people with two heads, visual acuity in the infrared and sexual attractions to Komodo dragons. So why'd He give homosexuals a pass?
Why did God give us an apparently harmless drive we're forbidden to fulfill? Damage the soul? That strikes me as facile rationalizing to justify suppressing a behavior that you, personally, find yucky.

The reference to homosexual animals was to illustrate that this behaviour is widespread and natural, not that we might imitate a behaviour we have no natural drive to do.
Reporting of pedophilia is at epidemic proportions. It makes good copy.
I suspect it was even more widespread in the past, in cultures where it wasn't so demonized as it is in our own.
Decadence changes over time and between cultures. I suspect religious sticks-in-the-mud have always bemoaned the fact that theirs is the most depraved of times.

Yes, but some times are more depraved than others - old customs, principles and restraints have broken down, new ones haven't yet emerged.

The Roman Empire was such a time. As Augustus Caesar, Tacitus the historian, Juvenal the satirist and other (non-religious) Romans observed - because of the decline of belief in the old gods of Rome - people were behaving very badly.

The 1820's were also such a time - and for the same reason; the decline of old religious beliefs (as British Parliamentarians, though cynical and worldly, declared at the time).

Their solution was to introduce modern policing, pioneered by Sir Robert Peel and others.

This has kept society going (it would collapse if the police went on strike) - but that doesn't deal prevent three kinds of wrongdoing

- discreet crimes, where perps are likely to get away with it (e.g. paedophilia in domestic environments)
- crimes by the high-ranking who DO get away with it (e.g. a US President's perjury in the 1990's)
- wrongdoing that isn't criminal (e.g the fleecing of the public by commercial interests, unfaithfulness to sexual partners etc etc).

So our society is now collapsing under a welter of misbehaviour. Here in Britain - where the money for adequate policing is running out - the country has begun a descent into lawless anarchy. (Others than myself have said that).

With regard to homosexual orientation - it's only partly screened-out by nature, whereas two-headedness is entirely screened-out.

God doesn't micro-manage nature - and homosexual orientation (unlike homosexual behaviour) isn't immoral in anyone's book.

 

[Catholicus]

That is a statement with no evidence to back it up.

The world's two largest religions, Islam and Christianity, do agree with me; that's a large number of people.

As for birth rates, consult any article on demography.

Hence the saying: "Contraception has abolished Atheism."

 

[JJ50]

Yes, but some times are more depraved than others - old customs, principles and restraints have broken down, new ones haven't yet emerged.

The Roman Empire was such a time. As Augustus Caesar, Tacitus the historian, Juvenal the satirist and other (non-religious) Romans observed - because of the decline of belief in the old gods of Rome - people were behaving very badly.

The 1820's were also such a time - and for the same reason; the decline of old religious beliefs (as British Parliamentarians, though cynical and worldly, declared at the time).

Their solution was to introduce modern policing, pioneered by Sir Robert Peel and others.

This has kept society going (it would collapse if the police went on strike) - but that doesn't deal prevent three kinds of wrongdoing

- discreet crimes, where perps are likely to get away with it (e.g. paedophilia in domestic environments)
- crimes by the high-ranking who DO get away with it (e.g. a US President's perjury in the 1990's)
- wrongdoing that isn't criminal (e.g the fleecing of the public by commercial interests, unfaithfulness to sexual partners etc etc).

So our society is now collapsing under a welter of misbehaviour. Here in Britain - where the money for adequate policing is running out - the country has begun a descent into lawless anarchy. (Others than myself have said that).

With regard to homosexual orientation - it's only partly screened-out by nature, whereas two-headedness is entirely screened-out.

God doesn't micro-manage nature - and homosexual orientation (unlike homosexual behaviour) isn't immoral in anyone's book.

There is nothing wrong with being a homosexual and having a gay sexual relationship.

 

[Catholicus]

There's no evidence that child abuse is on the rise or that "alternative" family structures have to do with it. You're just making crap up.

That I'm NOT doing.

It's proven fact that children flourish best - and are safest - in traditional, monogamously heterosexual families.

 

[Valjean]

No - in times gone by, the danger wasn't there.

Parents can over-react to the perceived threat; but they'd be foolish and reckless if they didn't react at all.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...america/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.4454ecd94d1b
"It's Not Safe Like the Old Days!" Correct. It Is Safer - Let Grow
The world is safer than ever before, so why all the fear?
Chill Out, American Parents, Our Kids Are Safer Than Ever

 

[Catholicus]

Topic drift, or dodge? I pointed out that the more a prerson
shouts about sin and perversion the more we know
they are talking about themselves.

You, most naturally disagree; I said you can keep
up the denial, but nobody here but you will
disagree.

So you claim that "worldwide" people disagree with
me, then go off on the birth rate of "secularists".

Or where did you go totally off topic? Just after
the word "forum", or did you never say anything at
all on how the forumistas here will see it my way-

That simple psych insight tells us that those
who obsesses and rave about sin are talking
about themselves?

Well, everyone's a sinner. But not everyone is afflicted with a sexual deviation such as homosexuality. And many people of homosexual orientation practise chastity.

Again, you are clinging desperately to your character-assassination ploy; of pretending that everyone who says that homosexual behaviour is sinful is a repressed or suppressed homosexual.

That is largely untrue - traditional Muslims and Christians regard homosexual behaviour (if unrepented) as a road straight to Hell. They do so because of their devoutly and sincerely-held beliefs.

Go to, say, Mecca or Lagos and challenge them about their "denial" (!) if you disagree with what I say.

Moreover, many aggressively homophobic people with no religious beliefs are viscerally sickened, appalled and disgusted by even the thought of homosexual behaviour.

I don't obsess about homosexual behaviour - merely debate the matter if it has been introduced by someone else (in this case, by the person who began the thread).

And if you think it's me who is "raving" or homophobic - well, you have obviously led a sheltered life.

As for being "shouty" about sin and perversion - that's you.

 

[Catholicus]

There is nothing wrong with being a homosexual and having a gay sexual relationship.

All the world's major religions disagree with you.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Pornography corrupts people - making it likelier they will commit acts of violence.

Got a single piece of evidence to back up that claim? No? Maybe you shouldn't make stuff up and pass it off as fact, then. Bearing false witness and all that.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

All the world's major religions disagree with you.

Might wanna check your catechism there, bud. The Catholic Church's official position is that there's nothing wrong with being gay.

 

[Audie]

Well, everyone's a sinner. But not everyone is afflicted with a sexual deviation such as homosexuality. And many people of homosexual orientation practise chastity.

Again, you are clinging desperately to your character-assassination ploy; of pretending that everyone who says that homosexual behaviour is sinful is a repressed or suppressed homosexual.

That is largely untrue - traditional Muslims and Christians regard homosexual behaviour (if unrepented) as a road straight to Hell. They do so because of their devoutly and sincerely-held beliefs.

Go to, say, Mecca or Lagos and challenge them about their "denial" (!) if you disagree with what I say.

Moreover, many aggressively homophobic people with no religious beliefs are viscerally sickened, appalled and disgusted by even the thought of homosexual behaviour.

I don't obsess about homosexual behaviour - merely debate the matter if it has been introduced by someone else (in this case, by the person who began the thread).

And if you think it's me who is "raving" or homophobic - well, you have obviously led a sheltered life.

As for being "shouty" about sin and perversion - that's you.

Just noting a truism, such as are betimes
not true. Who knows if it is true of you; do you?

As long as it is let live in peace, and no raving
about them awful others (or closet self) why
should I care if your object d'amour is a fresh
Case tractor or a kardashian? Why do you go
posting about such things?

Going by your flight of fantasy about me
and wildly off the mark hyperbolic language
such as "desperate ploy" and "assasinate",
"everyone who says", etc, I will kinda guess
realistic analysis aint your gig so much as
is making up whatever suits.

You got one thing right though- the regresdive
barbarism of those abrahamic traditionalists
you mentioned.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

That I'm NOT doing.

It's proven fact that children flourish best - and are safest - in traditional, monogamously heterosexual families.

No, it isn't. You're just continuing to make things up. Lying for Jesus?

The science is clear: Children raised by same-sex parents are at no disadvantage

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Moreover, many aggressively homophobic people with no religious beliefs are viscerally sickened, appalled and disgusted by even the thought of homosexual behaviour.

Because they were programmed to think that way by Abrahamic social mores. The Abrahamic religions practically invented homophobia. There's nothing "natural" about being disgusted by homosexuality.

 

[Audie]

All the world's major religions disagree with you.

We know they are relics of a cruel, ignorant and barbaric
past.

No need to keep reminding us.

More helpful really to try to at least catch
up with the 18th century.

 

[Catholicus]

Got a single piece of evidence to back up that claim? No? Maybe you shouldn't make stuff up and pass it off as fact, then. Bearing false witness and all that.

Pornography is by its very nature and purpose, corrupt and corrupting.

And self-evidently so.

What is self-evident is neither invented nor in need of supporting evidence.

It is those who deny the self-evident, who are bearing false witness.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I don't think this stuff on Catholic radio is "new." Rather it is the old line.

The liberal line in Catholicism is actually worse that society at large, and the church is doing its best to fight the scandal it is creating.

You could say that the standard present line of the Catholic church goes something like this: Homosexuality is "intrinsically disordered" but same sex attraction is not a sin. It does not become a sin until someone acts upon it. The age old position of the Christian Church (both Protestant and Catholic) regarding lust goes back to what Jesus said in the gospel, that lusting in your heart is adultery. Thus porn and masturbation are sins according to the Catholic Church.

All the rest of the stuff like it leading to a life of crime, is only the bizarre beliefs of a few weirdos that get a lot of press. Remember that the media really is out against the Catholic Church, and loves to get a hold of the lunatic fringe stuff.

No I'm not Catholic, I'm Jewish, so I don't have a dog in this race.

 

[Glaurung]

Got a single piece of evidence to back up that claim? No? Maybe you shouldn't make stuff up and pass it off as fact, then. Bearing false witness and all that.

While I won't go so far as to claim that it makes people violent, I think it's pretty obvious that constant exposure to graphic material results in desensitization to that type of material. The long term result is a blunted sexuality dependent on unreal and increasingly extreme imagery. Telling your wife or girlfriend that you're incapable of getting it up without porn can't be good for a relationship. And yes, it's not hard to find accounts of exactly that.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Pornography is by its very nature and purpose, corrupt and corrupting.

And self-evidently so.

What is self-evident is neither invented nor in need of supporting evidence.

It is those who deny the self-evident, who are bearing false witness.

so no evidence for a made up, nonsense claim. Understood.