A gay Mormon married a woman.... curious about the morality aspect on this

In fairness, it doesn’t mean that he believes he was born the way at all. There are plenty of people who consider themselves gay and don’t believe homosexuality is innate. Besides, by your logic, a person who considers themselves ‘liberal’ because they are psychologically inclined to believe in left-wing ideals would be making a statement about their political affiliations being innate. To give another analogy, I identify as an atheist, but that doesn’t mean I believe that atheism is innate or unchangeable.

Long story short, someone can easily identify as something and not consider it to be innate. To many people, the definition of the word ‘gay’ is someone who is attracted to members of the same-sex, regardless of whether it’s innate or learned. So, yeah, because someone calls themselves gay doesn’t mean they think homosexuality is innate.

Agreed :thumbsup:

Helen,

This is probably one of the few honest answers that anyone can provide. Be wary of those that with vehemence state that it is this way or that. No one knows, but we do know that people can and do change. We do know that no one is born Homosexual as this has never been proven.

Dex,

I don’t know how sexuality becomes fixed in a person.

No one knows and this is fact. This is honest of you.

I don’t believe that, for the majority of cases, that it is possible for a person to modify themselves to such an extent that they experience sexual desires that are opposite to the ones they experienced previously.]

How is it you can state that your belief of the majority of cases is as you say?

You know all the data about the Majority?

You have information that no one else has about the Majority?

How do you claim to be able to speak for the Majority?

[quote]**I believe that sexual desires are, for most people, immutable by the time these people realise they have these desires. If they were at any stage mutable before, then it is unlikely that anyone would have tried deliberately to ‘mutate’ them at that point since they were not apparent. If these desires were mutable and they were actually mutated, then I believe that nobody would have realised that that process was actually happening. **

How is it you formed this belief that sexual desires are immutable?

Do you have any proof for this belief?

Your notion of immutability differs from those that say no emotion is fixed and no behavior is fixed. How is it you came to believe contrary to fact.

However they are caused, So, in a nutshell, I believe that for most

adults, orientation is sufficiently fixed that for all practical purposes it’s as innate as ‘the colour of one’s eyes’ insomuch as it’s not changeable by a conscious act of will of the individual or anyone else.]

How is it you equate being born with blue eyes to being born with a particular sexual desire?

There is no proof for this.

The fact that there are reports that people do and have change does not equate to this belief. How did you form this belief?

I don’t include those that identify as ‘bisexual’ in this, since they have a luxury of what you might call a ‘choice’ that is natural to them, nor do I include anyone who deliberately acts contrary to their instincts (i.e. doing things that don’t come naturally to them) nor do I include those who have only experienced attractions to one gender but have an innate bisexuality that they have not yet recognised. For these people they have the choice to act in a heterosexual fashion and achieve spiritual happiness, but I do not believe that they would necessarily lose any homosexual desires by doing so: they would just not be answering those desires.

This conjecture you base on what study?

Your notion of behavior is based on what reading?

Are there studies or writings that agree with this belief?

I recommend counselling so that they can understand the moral neutrality of their desires and to help them encounter the love of God and build a fulfilling and chaste life, free from the worry and pain that bigots of religious persuasion would foist upon them by insisting that their desires are in and of themselves sinful or that it is their moral responsibility to try to change themselves.

A homosexual engaged in sodomy, believing that sodomy is a gift of God that then is counselled and understands that the previously hedonistic, immoral behavior is now morally neutral is then capable of changing their understanding of and acting on sexuality. This is consistent with the understanding that emotions and thoughts are not fixed nor is sexual inclination. For this I praise you.:thumbsup:
[/quote]

Dex,

Why is it dishonest to suggest that some people are bisexual?

Plenty of people identify as such, therefore it’s perfectly reasonable for such people to find differing preferences for one gender over another at different times of their lives when they might be experiencing differing influences or wish for different outcomes in the society in which they live.

How is it someone identifies as this or that? What is the process whereby this is done?

Regular,

Read the blog again…

I have found that sharing this part of me allows my relationships with others to be more authentic. It has deepened my friendships and enhanced my interactions, and it has also helped me to feel more accepted by others as it allows others the opportunity to choose to accept me for who I really am.

This part of me. Who I really am…

I knew I was gay when I was 11 or 12.

Accepted as knowledge.

I was a little taken aback by this idea—I don’t consider my sex-life to be counterfeit. In response, I jokingly said “and I’m sorry that you have to settle for a counterfeit family.” She immediately saw my point and apologized for that comment. Obviously, I don’t actually think a family with non-biological members is counterfeit in any way.

What is it you believe he is saying non-biologic members? A man and a woman are to be married. This man says he is gay and married to a woman and then says that his family is with a NON-BIOLOGIC member=born that way…biologically…different…

You don’t get to choose your circumstances, but you do get to choose what you do with them.

If you don’t choose something then how does it happen?

I think he is totally wrong and I infer as infer.

Help me understand how you can read this differently?

Have you ever considered that someone who finds part of themself incorrigible might find sublimation more effective measure than suppression?

For the non-biological member it seems readily apparent that he is talking about the woman’s “daughter”.

Obviously personal sin or sin of parents just like the blind man Jesus healed, oh wait…

DR,

I only considered an inference that this man accepts his status as innate. You consider other things and infer other things.

What I have considered and what you have considered are obvious.

Coptic, I am no longer going to answer your points.

The reason? Because you summarise what I write, draw conclusions that are not the same as the conclusions I drew, then argue with these conclusions.

In short, you build up a ‘straw man’ argument, ascribe it to me - wrongly - and then use it against me.

I’ve had enough of it, and I will not be humouring you.

Yes. The act taints the sanctity of his marriage.(as well as this can be possible in such a sect.) He is experiencing a temptation which is temporary depending on how he determines to handle it. At his disposal an absolute cure can be found by a sincere devotion to the Holy Mother. But would he avail himself to her offer? A priest or Catholic spiritual director would baby step him out of this situation.

God’s laws apply to everyone, regardless of his religious status. There is no Divine standard oriented to what is permissible within a religion. Of the selections of religions that are available to him, it is obvious that the only one sanctioned by God, and the one that was meant to replace all of them, would provide the best knowledge and support in order for him to discern the right decisions in life.

And so it goes for our wayward brothers and sisters. Sacrilege is no longer recognized for what it is, perhaps due to appealing to a secular facet of his religion which satiates the human drive, who knows. But we recognize the pattern of deception all the same. We see satan gleefully chalking up one more win in this downward spiral, and our hearts go out to the spouse who held out such promise for the future.

I suggest we all offer prayers that Divine reasoning will overtake human in this case.

What on earth?
His wife was fully aware at the time of the marriage and they have children from the marriage. I see it as a wonderful witness about what marriage really is - had the wife not been aware of her husband’s inclinations beforehand that would have been different.

Even a gay man (or woman) who marries a person of the opposite sex can make the marriage work although it is surely more of a challenge. IOW, one can love another person emotionally and learn to be sexually attracted to that specific person, while at the same time being attracted to members of one’s own sex. This “case” is not all that unique. Yes, there are also the religious dimensions involved, but the same type of situation may arise in other religions whose practitioners are faithful and observant, such as the Evangelical, Catholic, and Orthodox Jewish communities. I don’t think what this man is doing is immoral so long as both partners realize what the situation is. However, if he had kept his sexual orientation a secret from his wife, his behavior would have been objectionable.

Dex,

You made a statement…

Why is it dishonest to suggest that some people are bisexual?

Plenty of people identify as such, therefore it’s perfectly reasonable for such people to find differing preferences for one gender over another at different times of their lives when they might be experiencing differing influences or wish for different outcomes in the society in which they live.

I asked a question…I have difficulty understanding your understanding. It is your peragotive to believe as you wish.

**How is it someone identifies as this or that? What is the process whereby this is done? **

I don’t understand your point of view. You see this as argument. I see this as a question for discovery.

In short, you build up a ‘straw man’ argument, ascribe it to me - wrongly - and then use it against me.

I’ve had enough of it, and I will not be humouring you.

How long is it that you have believed that there are people against you?

How long is it you have seen discussion as humoring someone else?

My argument stands.

I didn’t read the link and didn’t need to.

If he is either in the state of homosexual sin prior to marriage or after, then respectively it’s a taint on his marriage to come thus nullifying it, or, on his present marriage. This whole case pretty much passe at this point since they are non Catholic, but the Law stands regardless. She should have not married him while in that state and he should have agreed to a regime to rid himself of it prior to marriage.

This obligation is not only to his wife, but one other partner most important to the union, that One to which the contract can have no substance at all, the One to which the Sacrament itself finds it’s origin, and the One who defines what a true marriage is…God.

Regardless of how nonchalant she may view it, it is an offense to God and for the time being so is her attitude. Incidentally, while this complacency is occurring, satan will have plans for the children also, since the parents form their first row of defense by the holiness of their marriage, if indeed it exists.

Again, the true Church could provide an assistance.

If you refuse to read the link, then your argument has no standing and has no relationship to what is being discussed.

Had you taken the time to read the link on which you are so freely passing your opinion, you would have read that this man has not acted out on his homosexual urges either before or during his marriage. He has been faithful to his wife and has been totally truthful to her about his homosexual inclination.

So you are saying that a marriage in which a man is married to a woman and is committed to her and only to her and has conceived children with her is an offence to God? Please explain your reasoning.

again, had you read the article, you would have found that she did not view the matter at all nonchalantly and gave the whole situation thought and prayer.

I strongly urge you to read the link with an open mind before you comment further on this thread.

Djames,

I didn’t read the link and didn’t need to.

If you choose not to read the link then your comments, your thoughts, whatever it is you understand about what is said in the blog has no relevance to the blog as provided in the link.

Is it your habit to discuss things without knowledge of what it is you reference as you have done here?

This is an excellent post. Thank you, Dex.

Dex can’t do it, but you can? You claim that no homosexual’s sexuality is fixed. Do you know them all?

How is it you formed this belief that sexual desires are immutable?

How have you formed a belief that they aren’t? You have certainly had trouble providing any evidence outside of a change in behavior, which means nothing. I look at the topic of this thread and wonder how any SSA person can win in your view. As far as Nicolosi goes, this guy would be a raging success. The only problem: he admits to living a heterosexual life while having a homosexual orientation.

Your notion of immutability differs from those that say no emotion is fixed and no behavior is fixed. How is it you came to believe contrary to fact.

I’ve never seen a person argue here that any behavior is fixed. Seriously, who believes that? Do you honestly think sexual orientation is an “emotion”?

The fact that there are reports that people do and have change does not equate to this belief. How did you form this belief?

Dare I ask again? Where is your proof that even half of the people who attempt to change their sexual orientation (NOT THEIR BEHAVIOR) are successful? You have yet to do it because you can’t.

Pray the gay away doesn’t work.

Kolbe,

Dex can’t do it, but you can? You claim that no homosexual’s sexuality is fixed. Do you know them all?

What is it you are saying here? I ask a question of someone and then you ask me to provide an answer that I have asked someone else. How is it you believe that someone can answer a question posed to someone else? Help me understand.

How have you formed a belief that they aren’t? You have certainly had trouble providing any evidence outside of a change in behavior, which means nothing. I look at the topic of this thread and wonder how any SSA person can win in your view. As far as Nicolosi goes, this guy would be a raging success. The only problem: he admits to living a heterosexual life while having a homosexual orientation.

This statement is in reference to the notion of sexual orientation is immutable and unchangeable=Essentialism. I am not required to refute a belief. Beliefs are thoughts that are accepted with a basis that exists in the mind. Essentiallism is a thought. I find no information in the environment nor in my mind that allows me to accept it therefore it remains a thought and not a belief. Do you believe in Essentialism and if so why?

I’ve never seen a person argue here that any behavior is fixed. Seriously, who believes that? Do you honestly think sexual orientation is an “emotion”?

I imagine you have seen no one unless you skype. I imagine you have read statements like the following…

What is known is that for the vast majority of homosexual persons, whatever its cause may be, their orientation is as unchangeable as the colour of their eyes.

Everyone I have ever spoken to, homosexual or heterosexual, (and I have spoken to many) has told me that they could no more change their sexual orientation and force themselves to be attracted to the other gender than they could change the colour of their eyes.

I have to ask, what is it we are trying to do with ‘reparative therapy’? I think it is trying to change something that, although immutable, is uncomfortable for a person because that person doesn’t feel at home in a society that is predominantly heterosexual. I don’t think that sexuality is mutable in that way.

A person may be motivated to change, but the process should not be attempted if it would be dangerous for them to do so, surely? In the case of homosexuality, the only available choice then is to provide charitable counselling for that person so that they can modify their behaviour.

These statements cause me to believe that some on this forum adhere to an unproved belief of Essentialism.

Dare I ask again? Where is your proof that even half of the people who attempt to change their sexual orientation (NOT THEIR BEHAVIOR) are successful? You have yet to do it because you can’t.

Dare not, I have given you links to articles, Nicolosi’s book…have you read it?..and in my experience when someone wants to know something bad enough they do their best to find out…or at least find out what they do or do not know…

Yeah cos prayer is not efficacious at all and God has no power:rolleyes:

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.