AmericanPapist Comments
What a painful photo. But the movement to defend use of body parts "because it's how we are made" grows in strength throughout the Western world. We are ALL basically disordered in some way, are we not? I feel sad that the Church/modern media seems focused on homosexuals, isolating them as wrongly-wired ... when most everyone has sexual appetites and interests they must "order" in service to something bigger ... Christian anthropolgy offers the hope that we can "order" ourselves, including our body parts, to our will. And if you offer that will to God's will, the wonders of life, here and eternal, become possible.
Before the homosexual lobby began agitating the issue in such a public manner, the Church WAS more focused on disordered heterosexual inclinations...and unfortunately, in one sense, the squeaky wheel adage applies here. Adulterers and those who engage in premarital sex aren't out "campaigning" for acceptance of their disorders, although those who dissent from church teaching on these topics are certainly taking advantage of flying below the radar at this point.
"We are ALL basically disordered in some way, are we not?"
I would not put it that way. We are all basically damaged, but "disordered" suggests a deeper, more fundamental problem.
Here's the thing the ever-so-powerful gay lobby doesn't seem to get -- if homosexuality is genetically or biochemically determined prior to birth, what happens when someone develops a test to identify (or treatment to cure) nascent Minelli-lovers? I mean, > 90% of Down Syndrome children are aborted...would it be an unbelievable mental stretch for the same thing to cross the minds of red-blooded, football-loving dads considering the prospect of a high-heeled son? In the eyes of the gay lobby it would be a gay holocaust, with the gay population almost completely decimated within a generation.
...and yet, they're STILL all about "choice".
Silly rabbits.
I'm afraid it will be far too late when they realize that they should have been on the pro-life bus all along.
Lets see, homosexuals don't tend to reproduce, not that they can't but simply, because of their desires, they don't tend to. If homosexuality is genetic and the manifest trait directly correlates to a tendency to not reproduce then it is obviously a trait that selects against its own propagation. Homosexuality therefore is a mutation in the population selects itself out.
So the question is, do homosexuals really want to be regarded as mutants?
Ryan: Excellent point! I had never thought of that - but I can just imagine the outrage if people began aborting babies because they had the "gay gene". Wow. Just...wow.
Celibatarian brings up an interesting point. It's not one you can bring up on debate with one of these people, because you'd be losing them by essentially saying they're inferior (which is how it can easily be interpreted), but it's interesting nonetheless.
And the picture: how disturbing. It brings to mind big governments and the like.
I'm not sure which distortion is the more appalling, calling it genetic or calling it a "lifestyle option." Truthfully, it is a way of death.
What about all other "wired" behaviors? Are we to give everyone carte blanche to do whatever they want because they are "wired" that way?
Only the homosexual lobby would think this lame argument valid. Only the homosexual lobby thinks this would not backfire.
Aside from the abortion gay genocide cited above, think about how a society structured around this oppressive idea of genetic determinism would self-destruct. Anytime you have a society under the thumb of an irresponsible elite, you either get violent uprising or a violent fall.
In the event of the uprising, the irresponsible elite get completely wiped out.
In the event of a fall, the whole civilization disappears into dust.
Adulterers and those who engage in premarital sex aren't out "campaigning" for acceptance of their disorders,
No, they are out campaigning for the Republican nomination for President!
No, they are out campaigning for the Republican nomination for President!
Oh, ZING!
I fail to see how the GOP is agitating for change of the Church's sexual moral teaching.
But it was a good zinger....
That said, twin studies have conclusively proven that homosexuality is NOT a pre-determined genetic trait (because in alot of cases one identical twin was NOT gay while the other was...if it were automatically, 100% a genetic thing, there'd never be a non-gay twin - and that's not the case..)
Indeed genes themselves have been proven to be overrated in predicting human actions and proclivities.
When the Church says dis-ordered it's not making a VALUE judgment about the person with these desires. No disability or handicap makes a person less loved in the eyes of God or less capable of responding to grace to be holy.
Nor does the Church preach hatred of homosexuals. But for some reason active homosexuals REACT to people disagreeing with them or begging to differ with one of their assertions AS THOUGH this were a personal ad hominem attack or personal assault on the core of their being.
It's possible to disagree with someone without HATING them. Precisely because so many Homosexuals DON'T grasp this fundamental distinction is one reason why their condition is considered a DIS-order of the mind. No one claims they're intrinsically oozing with horribleness or are devoid of values, virtues, skills, intelligence, or other redeeming qualities.
No one claims they're intrinsically oozing with horribleness or are devoid of values, virtues, skills, intelligence, or other redeeming qualities
You really can'tmake the trythful claim that there are not a considerable number of people with a really animus towards homosexuals. Many "pro-family" groups have supported laws to jail homosexuals, others supporting using denial of employment and other economic sanctions against gays.
Ah, the clarion call of the sainted victim. The victim is sacrosanct and untouchable. We are not allowed to talk about the victim. We are not allowed to criticize the victim We are not allowed to hold unfavorable opinions of the victim.
And because gays are victimized, they are sainted.
Of course we also make laws jailing and denying employment to pedophiles as well.
And if homosexuality is arguably genetic, I think we safely assume pedophiliac tendencies are too.
katie,
I know this may annoy you (I don't mean it to), but could you provide examples of people (besides Freddy-boy Phelps) who hate and/or have tried to jail those inclined to have homosexual desires?
BTW, to everyone: evolution and the homosexual activists are at odds: if humans evolve for survival, etc., then why would people evolve desires which, when consented to, lead to AIDS and death? Either evolution doesn't happen (and SSA is not an action ordained by nature), or the evolutionists must fall back on the "survival of the fittest" mantra, which I don't think those who have SSA would like.
David --
Oh, you don't annoy me as much as some others. I stated that "Many 'pro-family' groups have supported laws to jail homosexuals" and you asked me for examples. The Family Research Council, the Traditional Values Coalition, and the American Family Association would be three.
Are you referring to laws against sodomy which were abolished by judicial fiat? It is the act which would be punishable and that would have to be proven just like anything else the law deems a crime. Just being so inclined was not covered under the law. And yes, it should be regarded as a criminal activity. I haven't read anything about the former penalties, but I can't imagine that they were very severe.
LvB --
Well, you have proven my point that there are those who support laws to jail people for homosexuality. Thanks for resolving this question.
So you, Katherine, don't see a distinction between homosexuality and homosexual acts? That is, a person who engages in no such acts is not a homosexual? Or did LvB's point pass right over your head?
Franklin --
So your position is that homosexuality is something innate and not a choice?
As I understand the terms (I realize this is a gross oversimplification):
If I am a "sodomite," it means I did the deed.
If I am a "homosexual," it means I want to do the deed.
If I am "gay," it is who I am.
"Gay" is an ethos, a myth, a belief structure, an identity. As Dr. David Kubiak has pointed out, "gay" is more of a political orientation than a sexual one.
"Homosexuality" refers more to desires than to identity. We do not jail folks for kleptomania, but for theft. Neither is kleptomania a genuine part of a person's identity.
It, and homosexuality, are conditions, sets of disordered desires. Possibly (probably) there are genetic - as well as spiritual, cultural, personal, and hormonal - influences on all desires. Actually, the source of a temptation is irrelevant. Resisting that temptation is to be commended. Giving way to it is to be corrected.
Add me to the list of those in favor of (briefly) jailing sodomites - but not all homosexuals.
Commenting by HaloScan
