Homosexuals in the Catholic Church

[SkepticThinker]

Couples can bound and have intimacy in other ways besides having sex. It would actually help a lot of marrages these days by having a relationship like this. It must be true love, because it certaintly wouldn't be about the sex lol.

Of course there are other ways to bond and experience intimacy between couples. That doesn't mean sex isn't one of them.

It sounds like you're saying that after their child-bearing years are over, couples should live in what amounts to a friendship type of relationship, void of any kind of sexual intimacy. Is that what you are saying?

What about couples who are married after their child-bearing years have passed? Are they supposed to live together in a relationship that is effectively just a friendship?

 

[chlotilde]

Why do you believe this?

because I believe all behaviors are natural and we are essentially born with all of them, but we learn to be discriminating over time through the umpteen billion environmental inputs we receive each day. so when it comes to sexuality we choose from what we have learned over time what turns us on.

 

[Christ's Lamb]

Of course there are other ways to bond and experience intimacy between couples. That doesn't mean sex isn't one of them.

It sounds like you're saying that after their child-bearing years are over, couples should live in what amounts to a friendship type of relationship, void of any kind of sexual intimacy. Is that what you are saying?

What about couples who are married after their child-bearing years have passed? Are they supposed to live together in a relationship that is effectively just a friendship?

Yes, they shouldn't have sex after their childbearing years. Living this way is the proper way of living in a relationship. I think America has lost this belief, thus causing many failed marriages. It seems like every time I look around these days, I see someone I know personally is getting a diverse these days. People simply don't know what is and is not proper behavior today.

It defenetly will be hard living like this, but it will be well worth it both in this world and the next. Nobody said Christianity is easy, the New Testament actually says it will be hard.

 

[ZooGirl02]

I am a devout, faithful, and orthodox Roman Catholic who suffers from same sex attraction. I also have opposite sex attraction. I find the Catholic Church's teaching on homosexuality to be completely correct.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Yes, they shouldn't have sex after their childbearing years. Living this way is the proper way of living in a relationship. I think America has lost this belief, thus causing many failed marriages. It seems like every time I look around these days, I see someone I know personally is getting a diverse these days. People simply don't know what is and is not proper behavior today.

It defenetly will be hard living like this, but it will be well worth it both in this world and the next. Nobody said Christianity is easy, the New Testament actually says it will be hard.

So if you're beyond your child bearing years, it sounds like I guess you should just give up then, or marry a friend. It all sounds very depressing and unfulfilling to me. That's really supposed to be the point of this life?

You apparently think that if more couples stopped having sexual relationships they'd have happier marriages, but I fail to see how that is the case and I fail to see that most marriages are breaking up because couples are having too much sex. I'm just not sure where you come up with that.

Where do I find these instructions on proper marriage?

 

[SkepticThinker]

I am a devout, faithful, and orthodox Roman Catholic who suffers from same sex attraction. I also have opposite sex attraction. I find the Catholic Church's teaching on homosexuality to be completely correct.

What teachings are we talking about? Homosexuality is a disorder?

 

[SkepticThinker]

because I believe all behaviors are natural and we are essentially born with all of them, but we learn to be discriminating over time through the umpteen billion environmental inputs we receive each day. so when it comes to sexuality we choose from what we have learned over time what turns us on.

This is just your personal belief? What are the reasons you hold this belief?

 

[Christ's Lamb]

So if you're beyond your child bearing years, it sounds like I guess you should just give up then, or marry a friend. It all sounds very depressing and unfulfilling to me. That's really supposed to be the point of this life?

You apparently think that if more couples stopped having sexual relationships they'd have happier marriages, but I fail to see how that is the case and I fail to see that most marriages are breaking up because couples are having too much sex. I'm just not sure where you come up with that.

Where do I find these instructions on proper marriage?

No, the point of life is something that goes beyond just sexually relationships. I suppose if a women over childbearing age wanted a child, they could try. I'm not saying that Sex should not be about pleasure, it should be, between a married man and his wife, but not JUST for pleasure, it should be open for childbearing.

I would help couples not because their not having sex, but that when they do have sex, it is open for both pleasure and childbearing. The problem these days, most couples have sex just for pleasure only by using contraception. All sex should be open to both. If they really love each other, they should be open for childbearing, thus a child would be a product of their love.

I guess you could look up "Catholic Social Teaching" on sex.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I guess you could look up "Catholic Social Teaching" on sex.

Where did your instructions come from?

 

[SkepticThinker]

No, the point of life is something that goes beyond just sexually relationships. I suppose if a women over childbearing age wanted a child, they could try. I'm not saying that Sex should not be about pleasure, it should be, between a married man and his wife, but not JUST for pleasure, it should be open for childbearing.

You seem to have changed your tune a bit here. It's making a bit more sense now.

I would help couples not because their not having sex, but that when they do have sex, it is open for both pleasure and childbearing. The problem these days, most couples have sex just for pleasure only by using contraception. All sex should be open to both. If they really love each other, they should be open for childbearing, thus a child would be a product of their love.

Why is it a problem for marriage if couples have sex for pleasure?

What if they really love each other but can't have children? Or don't want children? Or can't afford children? Or aren't able to raise children? Does it mean they love each other less than couples who have children every time they have sex?

What if somebody wants to be more than just a baby making machine?

 

[Christ's Lamb]

You seem to have changed your tune a bit here. It's making a bit more sense now.


Why is it a problem for marriage if couples have sex for pleasure?

What if they really love each other but can't have children? Or don't want children? Or can't afford children? Or aren't able to raise children? Does it mean they love each other less than couples who have children every time they have sex?

What if somebody wants to be more than just a baby making machine?

The problem with having sex soley for pleasure is it can be addictive. It becomes solely about the person feeling the pleasure, and not about love for the other person or anything else, just for the one persons pleasure. The other partner becomes just an object that is used to satisfy ones sexual pleasure.

That's why when a man and a women have sex, it should be about both parties pleasure, because of the love they feel for one another, and it should be open to having children so their love can produce something for the whole world to see thes couples love for each other.

 

[chlotilde]

This is just your personal belief? What are the reasons you hold this belief?

disclaimer...this in no way constitutes the views of the Catholic Church, however, I don't believe it is contrary to what they may say (and I may end up arguing a catholic over that, which would be ugly, but thank goodness the Church is ambiguous in certain areas)

So yes, it is my personal belief, based on what I have studied. But…I am a scientist who views a harmonious dichotomy (ahh, the paradox) in what we know and what can be possible as concerns human behavior.

So I like to study the social behaviors of animals and humans (from a hard science perspective which is a purely materialistic view) and see correlations in behavior and assume the differences between me and any other animal is because I believe “that is not what God wants”. I view what my dog does, and he can “hump” even inanimate objects and get “satisfaction” (note, yes I have done that too), because the stimulation comes from only in their mind. Humans are no different when one considers masturbation. Screw talk of pheromones or hormones or whatever it is people materialistically like to point to as to their reason for whatever sex they say they are attracted….because as long as masturbation exists…then the sex of whoever is with you is negligible. Sex is a “in my mind” and a “in my body” event.

 

[chlotilde]

Sex is a “in my mind” and a “in my body” event.

pretty selfish, really. When...if, the only thing one considers is their touchy feely feelings. Can I get turned on sexually by 2 women kissing...sure sometimes, but that does not mean I want to be a lesbian.


and...this is not the view of what a Catholic definition of sexual relations is, because sex is about allowing a procreative event if that is God's will.

 

[ZooGirl02]

What teachings are we talking about? Homosexuality is a disorder?

I don't believe that the Catholic Church teaches that homosexuality is a disorder. However, the Catholic Church does teach that being attracted to the same sex is disordered. There is a difference. It is only saying that the attraction is not normal I think.

 

[LuisDantas]

I don't believe that the Catholic Church teaches that homosexuality is a disorder. However, the Catholic Church does teach that being attracted to the same sex is disordered. There is a difference.

Would you be so kind as to explain what that difference is?

 

[Bunyip]

I'm a culturally Catholic gay atheist. I get along better with the local Catholic community than the gay community. Catholic people tend to be easy going. Also the local pastor is excellent.

Gay people I don't get along with as well. I'm uninclined to support the culture of victimhood and get pretty judgemental about promiscuity and closets.

Gay people would probably be more welcome in most religious communities if they didn't feel such a need to justify so much icky behavior.

Tom

What do you mean by 'icky behaviour'? Could you give an example please?

 

[ZooGirl02]

Would you be so kind as to explain what that difference is?

Well the way I understand is that the Church is not saying that those who have homosexuality have a disorder, such as a mental illness or something. The Church is only saying that the attraction in and of itself is disordered. Does that make sense?

 

[Bunyip]

Well the way I understand is that the Church is not saying that those who have homosexuality have a disorder, such as a mental illness or something. The Church is only saying that the attraction in and of itself is disordered. Does that make sense?

With the best will possible and no offence meant. No.
How can it be a disorder and not a disorder?

 

[LuisDantas]

Sorry, ZooGirl, but I fear it is not clear to me either.

 

[chlotilde]

With the best will possible and no offence meant. No.
How can it be a disorder and not a disorder?

Because one usage is as a noun, and the other usage is as a verb.