I think you’ve just used the false dilemma fallacy. How could you possibly know that those are the only two options? I don’t know if sexuality affects only the mind, being uneducated on that specific subject, but I do lean more towards the idea that sexuality is also bodily.
I have had the same experience but I’m heterosexual. I found that as I got older I just behaved naturally with people and some like me and some don’t. I think perhaps I thought too much about what was expected of me from males and females for that matter when I was young. As you become established mentally and more self reliant you may find that you can relax more and just be yourself with people and then you’ll start to enjoy genuine friendships and ‘intimacy’ as were calling it more and it’ll feel natural.
If a male needs friendships within the Church then perhaps you could join or start a cofraternity.
Ah, right to the heart of the matter.
Existence is a priori the highest good, without which you wouldn’t even be here to express your indifference to it.
“To be” comes before anything else (a priori). Does that make sense? Think about the fact that are currently breathing, thinking, and probably typing, and all of this flows from your existence as a human being. Should we take you with full seriousness, or should we shrug with neutral indifference?
Human life, or human existence, should be affirmed with more than a nod of neutral indifference. Human existence ought to be treasured, marveled at, protected, nourished. It ought to be well ordered.
And the process by which it happens ought to be recognized if we are to have sanity in the world. Because the opposite of order is chaos, injustice, deception, and all those entail. (our society is rampant with deception in this age, when college students refuse to recognize the difference between me and the 8’ tall Chinese basketball player that I wish to be)
Honestly, if we really do not agree that human existence and the way it happens deserve more than a shrug of neutral indifference, not much more can be said.
I hope you change your mind.
Homosexuality is disordered because it goes against the natural law of union between a male and a female. It goes against the way marriage is meant to truly be.
However, it is not meant to be a disease or health issue but rather something that opposes God’s plan and therefore should not be done.
We are mental, physical and spiritual beings. So there’s your three options by which to examine human behaviour.
I know that we are often affected by our physiology in sometimes very subtle ways which can lead us to feel and think along certain lines which we will then justify with our intellect. Some people may actually have been affected by substances in the food chain, very subtle and I have no proof but I think studies have been made. I’m not saying that this has influenced people to be homosexual …but I’m not saying that it has not had that effect either. People may say that being homosexual is a response to deep physiological drives beyond their control, but that physiology is created and sustained through what we consume and we cannot be sure that what we have consumed has not had an effect on our minds.
What I am inferring I’ve no doubt is not a popular idea however we tend to justify ourselves in our opinions and we should try to remain open to all possibilities.
Your entire philosophical ‘argument’ is based on the assumption that God doesn’t exist, yet we [this is CAF after all] know beyond question that this assumption is false.
I think that you could tell them that the solution to homosexuality would be to make the punishment so horrific that when fate is not without a sense of humor and they had to do it, that they would be ashamed, or to love each other and have Peace on Earth. Dichotomy intended.
so then you assert beyond question: that which cannot be proved by science is false?
It’s your responsibility to prove that. Or is that “just” your belief? (I respect your beliefs)
See the problem you have?
to make the assertion that the unprovable cannot exist is untenable, and locks one into a self imposed prison, essentially making one’s self into a god.
I can say that I KNOW because of the Eucharistic miracles that I have witnessed…I BELIEVED before that.
The ‘argument’ is based on the assumption of ‘the blind forces of evolution’ in that revelation tells us that humanity - male and female - is created in the image of God, and therefore your allegedly superior forms of life aren’t superior after all…
You will backpedal now…and distance yourself from your own dogma
I did. It didn’t hold intellectual water. I’ve read the same kind of thing many times. Moral relativism that doesn’t recognize objective good (while at the same time making a truth assertion…ummmmm, confusion?)
We are speaking two different languages.
You hold that existence (getting back to the topic) is not any kind of good, let alone the highest good. You hold that existence is neutral.
We are not even speaking the same language. How can I convince you that it is good to be alive, to love, to have joy, to have peace? All flowing from existence? This is a fundamental disconnect.
Getting back to the topic, let me ask you this: can you at least adhere to generally accpeted science?
How are human beings made? What does science say? Is there any other way? Is the union of a man and woman unique in that way? I hope you are not anti-science.
Also, you still should defend your position that the unprovable does not exist
You’ve never read Genesis??? You’ve missed out on a great work of literature…sounds like an abysmal failure on your part…
you have run up against the brick wall that materialism is: the assertion that the unprovable does not exist.
Prove it. We will wait.
Trevize. The highest good on Earth is human existence. We are made in the likeness and image of God. We are the purpose of creation. Our duty is to go forth and multiply so that others can live and prepare for their ultimate home in the presence of God for eternity. Maybe you should read the Bible and the Catechism of the Catholic Curch.If you say you have then go and read them again. Maybe it will sink in and you will grasp the truth.
so now you make the case for suicide…
Like I said, we are speaking two entirely different languages.
Ok go ahead…
People say they know things constantly. In reality, if we get philosophical and technical about it, we can’t “prove” anything. Gravity is a highly supported law, but it is not proven, technically speaking. I am as confident in Gods exsistence as I am in gravity’s. And in many ways even more so. So making the claim that you can’t say you know anything without proof, would basically mean we couldn’t know anything, ever. At some point I think in common language we can make the leap that we know things.
Oh PS I think they found some new gravitational behavior recently if anyone is interested. Personally I thought that was kind of cool, but hey I’m a science nerd
Come here brother in Christ, let me give you that BIG HUG btw: I’m from a latin culture where a hug between friends isn’t frowned upon.