Homosexuality

I just have some thoughts. It’s clear to me that homosexuality is wrong, and Catholic doctrine and even the Bible aren’t enough to make people see that it’s wrong. It’s clearly an unhealthy way to live and it’s obvious that it is learned and people aren’t just “born” with it.
I’ve been having trouble dealing with people at my school because, well, most of them are liberal and many people at my school are homosexual. They seem to think that because I think homosexuality is wrong, it means that I hate them, think they’re going to hell and think that they’re all evil people. It’s so frustrating because NO ONE understands the concept of “Hate the sin, love ths sinner” It doesn’t matter, apparently I’m a homophobic hater. I’m also ignorant and harsh and “closed-minded” OH YEAH, and intolerant of other peoples beliefs. WELL DUH! I’m CATHOLIC, if I said other peoples beliefs were fine, and they can live however they want, I wouldn’t BE a Catholic.

But, yeah, onto my point. The thing is, there’s no proof that homosexuality is bilogical, but there’s no proof that it’s not either. I’m just thinking though, what if they found something that prooves homosexuality to be biological and they really can’t help it?

God wouldn’t allow that though would he? It wouldn’t make sense. I just want to be reassured that it’s a choice.

Whe I was a C.C.D teacher, our coordinator called a lesson in the cafeteria on the subject, and told the kids that it was something people are born with… but the church does not allow us to act on it because it is wrong. I dunno, sorry.

:hmmm:

[quote=Batgirl1415]But, yeah, onto my point. The thing is, there’s no proof that homosexuality is bilogical, but there’s no proof that it’s not either.
[/quote]

Actually there is evidence that homosexuality can have genetic roots.

Specifically there are twin studies which show higher incidence of both twins being homosexual if the twins are identical as opposed to non-identical.

Here’s why that’s important:

All twins (identical and not) for the studies are raised in the same environment (same time period, same parents, etc). Hence each pair has a very similar if not identical experience as far as “nurture.” Identical twins also have virtually identical “nature” due to having the same genetic material. Non-identical twins show as much variation as any siblings. They have similar DNA but not identical.

So if Homosexuality has a genetic contribution there should be a higher incidence of both twins being gay in the case of identical twins and a lower incidence in the case of non-identical twins. Several studies have shown just that.

Now does that mean all homosexual behavior is genetic in origin? No. But there are at least predispositions to it within the alleles of the gene pool. How you reconcile that with your faith is up to you.

Tlaloc you’ve pontificated on these ‘twin studies’ on multiple threads. Could you please post a cite or are we to understand this is another of your opinions? I’d be interested in who did the study, when it was done, how many twins were studied and whether they had sufficient numbers to be statistically significant. You know figures lie and liars figure.

Aside from that, there may be some genetic tendency, just as there are mental illnesses that run in certain families. But that doesn’t mean the person WILL become homosexual.

The reality is so what? If my family has alcoholism does that excuse me if I drive drunk and kill someone?

There are no benefits and many detrimental effects of homosexual relationships. (More for the men). It would seem to be a behavior that would be discouraged instead of lauded as some kind of oh so precious and cute affiliation.

LIsa N

[quote=Lisa N]Tlaloc you’ve pontificated on these ‘twin studies’ on multiple threads. Could you please post a cite or are we to understand this is another of your opinions?

[/quote]

No it’s not an opinion of mine. Yes I can give you some links.

homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/timt/papers/twin_studies/

It cites three studies, in each case the identical twins (monozygotic) had higher incidence of homosexual concordance than non-identical (dizygotic).

worldpolicy.org/globalrights/sexorient/twins.html

sites two studies one of which wasn’t in the first source. Again identical twins show higher incidence of homosexual concordance than non-identical.

I’d be interested in who did the study, when it was done, how many twins were studied and whether they had sufficient numbers to be statistically significant. You know figures lie and liars figure.

I had heard there was a hell for liars, a hell for damned liars, and three for statisticians. Yes it’s always a good idea to determine where data comes from.

Aside from that, there may be some genetic tendency, just as there are mental illnesses that run in certain families. But that doesn’t mean the person WILL become homosexual.

Indeed not but a genetic factor is at issue and the data supports it.

The reality is so what? If my family has alcoholism does that excuse me if I drive drunk and kill someone?

No but it means that if you become alcoholic it wasn’t purely a “choice” for you. There were biological factors as well.

There are no benefits and many detrimental effects of homosexual relationships. (More for the men). It would seem to be a behavior that would be discouraged instead of lauded as some kind of oh so precious and cute affiliation.

Your opinion is that there are no benefits. Perhaps you should ask what harm is done by repressing one’s sexuality.

[quote=Tlaloc]No it’s not an opinion of mine. Yes I can give you some links.

homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/timt/papers/twin_studies/

It cites three studies, in each case the identical twins (monozygotic) had higher incidence of homosexual concordance than non-identical (dizygotic).

worldpolicy.org/globalrights/sexorient/twins.html

sites two studies one of which wasn’t in the first source. Again identical twins show higher incidence of homosexual concordance than non-identical…
[/quote]

Well one totally unpublished study and another done with 110 twins in 1991, the source of which was a homosexual publication thereby polluting the sample. I’m not particularly impressed although I do believe there is some biological component, whether genetic or environment in the womb. For example in cattle if a cow twins with a male and female calf, the female will be born with all of the outward signs but will be sterile and will not respond to a bull. Apparently some sharing of the environment in the womb causes this problem. It’s not genetic. So there could be some similar developmental issue in the womb that creates the propensity to SSA.

[quote=Tlaloc]Your opinion is that there are no benefits. Perhaps you should ask what harm is done by repressing one’s sexuality.
[/quote]

Well perhaps in this highly sexualized society there are feelings of frustration. As I told many a persistent high school boy, no you will not DIE if your urges are not satisfied. Do you know anyone who exploded or died because they couldn’t find sexual gratification?

Further when making any sort of lifechanging decision you ask about the greater good. One the one hand we have the homosexual who is sexually satiated. He has AIDS, piles, gonorrhea and sees his psychiatrist weekly. OTOH we have the individual who has made a conscious decision to fight the temptation and not be defined by his genitals. He’s not dying of AIDS or buying stock in Preparation H. Hmmmmm, that’s a toughie. Which twin would you like to be Tlaloc?

Lisa N

[quote=Batgirl1415]But, yeah, onto my point. The thing is, there’s no proof that homosexuality is bilogical, but there’s no proof that it’s not either. I’m just thinking though, what if they found something that prooves homosexuality to be biological and they really can’t help it?

God wouldn’t allow that though would he? It wouldn’t make sense. I just want to be reassured that it’s a choice.
[/quote]

If homosexuality were someday proven to have a genetic or biological basis, it would still be no different than any other physical defect. All defects in God’s perfect Creation are a result of the fallen state of man, original sin, they are not created by God.
So, even if found to be genetic, it still could not be said that “God made me this way”. Not any more than he “made” a baby with a deformed heart or muscular dystrophy. Those conditions were caused by defective genes as well.

The homosexual person is called to chastity.

[quote=Lisa N]Well one totally unpublished study and another done with 110 twins in 1991, the source of which was a homosexual publication thereby polluting the sample.
[/quote]

Uh Lisa, there were four unique studies between the two sites and all of them were published. 3+1=4 not 2.

Well perhaps in this highly sexualized society there are feelings of frustration. As I told many a persistent high school boy, no you will not DIE if your urges are not satisfied. Do you know anyone who exploded or died because they couldn’t find sexual gratification?

Oh yes. So do you. Read up on the various big name serial killers. Many of them had abnormal sexual development which fed into their growing psychosis. The reality is that sexual frustration does indeed cause mental issues. Rarely are they that severe of course.

Further when making any sort of lifechanging decision you ask about the greater good. One the one hand we have the homosexual who is sexually satiated. He has AIDS, piles, gonorrhea and sees his psychiatrist weekly.

Tell me when you are done engaging in grotesque stereotypes. I’ll wait.
By the way you did know that heterosexual black women replaced homosexuals as the group reporting the largest increase in AIDS cases?

“A disease once thought to affect only gay White men is rapidly becoming a Black disease and, in some cities, a Black woman’s disease. Although African-American women account for only 33 percent of the New Jersey population, they comprise 66 percent of all AIDS cases, with the highest rates of infection in Newark, Jersey City and Paterson. In Atlanta, long considered the cultural hub of the South, Black women comprise 85 percent of all AIDS cases. In Los Angeles, at the close of the decade, 40 percent of AIDS cases were African-American women.” as of 2002.
cid.harvard.edu/cidinthenews/articles/ebony_1102.html

**

[font=Arial]The easy way out is always, "My genes made me do it."
Homosexuals, rapist, pediophiles, kleptomaniacs, chronic
liars, gamblers, alcoholics etc. all fall back on that excuse
rather than take personal responsibility for their aberrant
behavior.
[/font]**

I wouldn’t have a problem with science claiming that certain people are predisposed to homosexual feelings. The Church doesn’t condem people who have homosexual feelings if they work to overcome them and do not act on them. Some people are more predisposed to alcoholism or pornography than other people. That doesn’t give them an excuse to indulge in those sins. We all have different weaknesses, and that’s not an excuse to act on them.

[quote=Tlaloc]Uh Lisa, there were four unique studies between the two sites and all of them were published. 3+1=4 not 2.

Oh yes. So do you. Read up on the various big name serial killers. Many of them had abnormal sexual development which fed into their growing psychosis. The reality is that sexual frustration does indeed cause mental issues. Rarely are they that severe of course.

Tell me when you are done engaging in grotesque stereotypes. I’ll wait.

By the way you did know that heterosexual black women replaced homosexuals as the group reporting the largest increase in AIDS cases?

“A disease once thought to affect only gay White men is rapidly becoming a Black disease and, in some cities, a Black woman’s disease. Although African-American women account for only 33 percent of the New Jersey population, they comprise 66 percent of all AIDS cases, with the highest rates of infection in Newark, Jersey City and Paterson. In Atlanta, long considered the cultural hub of the South, Black women comprise 85 percent of all AIDS cases. In Los Angeles, at the close of the decade, 40 percent of AIDS cases were African-American women.” as of 2002.
cid.harvard.edu/cidinthenews/articles/ebony_1102.html
[/quote]

Aha! You are Ken/Zoot and now reincarnated as Tlaloc. I thought your style looked familar. Now that you have dusted off the same tired statistics you’ve posted on about three other threads, you’ve shown your hand.

As to serial killers, actually you have clued in on a subject where I’ve done a great deal of reading. These men did not become seriel killers due to sexual frustration. Rape is not a sex crime as much as it is a crime of power. Serial killers often have a sociopathic personality. They do not consider other humans as being human. IOW they have no empathy. Serial killers speak of the power they wielded in their role, not just the power over the individual woman but the power of fear over a community and the power of frustrating law enforcement. Again it’s not some poor guy who can’t get a date…As one killer said when you watch the life go out of a person before your eyes, you are god…It’s the ulitmate power trip. Look at Gary Ridgeway, he didn’t HAVE to kill any of those women. He liked it.

What grotesque stereotypes? I’m dying to know.

As to this study you have quoted before,not it was LARGEST GROWING group. Not largest group. So if you had 100 AIDS cases and last year one was a heterosexual black woman and this year there were two there would be a 100% increase. That’s pretty speedy but the total numbers are not significant. Sorry that dog still don’t hunt.

Lisa N

[quote=Tlaloc]Actually there is evidence that homosexuality can have genetic roots.
[/quote]

No, there isn’t.

[quote=Tlaloc]Specifically there are twin studies which show higher incidence of both twins being homosexual if the twins are identical as opposed to non-identical.
[/quote]

The findings of twins studies by J. Michael Bailey and Richard Pillard are far from conclusive, and are at odds with genetic theory. There were also methodological problems with their study.

“The sampling method employed in this study falls short of the ideal genetic epidemiological study, which would involve systematic sampling from a well-specified population. In particular, although all recruiting advertisements stated that [subjects] were desired regardless of the sexual orientation of their relatives, there is no guarantee that volunteers heeded this request.” Source: Bailey and Pillard, “A Genetic Study of Male Sexual Orientation,” Archives of General Psychiatry, 48 (December 1991).

Follow up research confirmed that Bailey and Pillard did not employ “a systematically ascertained sample of twins. Subjects were recruited through advertisements placed in homosexual-oriented periodicals and, therefore, may not be typical of the homosexual population at large.” Source: Byne and Parsons, “Human Sexual Orientation: The Biologic Theories Reappraised,” Archives of General Psychiatry, 50 (March 1993).

From the previous source: “The concordance rate for homosexuality in nontwin biologic brothers was only 9.2 percent - significantly lower that that required by a simple genetic hypothesis.” “Furthermore, the fact that the concordance rates were similar for nontwin biologic brothers (9.2 percent) and genetically unrelated adoptive brothers (11.0 percent) is at odds with a simple genetic hypothesis, which would predict a higher concordance rate for biologic siblings.”

Bailey and Pillard, in “A Genetic Study of Male Sexual Orientation,” admit that twin studies have failed to demonstrate a genetic cause: “Buhrich et al reported a twin study of sexual orientation and related behaviors. They found a strong familial resemblance, but had insufficient power to determine whether that correlation was due to genetic or environmental factors or both.”

There is also Dean Hamer’s work. Hamer does not claim to have found a genetic cause for homosexuality.

“Although the observed rates of homosexual orientation in the maternally derived uncles and male cousins of gay men were higher than in female and paternally related male relatives, they were lower than would be expected for a simple Mendelian trait.” Source: Hamer, et al. “A Linkage Between DNA Markers on the X Chromosome and Male Sexual Orientation,” Science 261 (1993).

“At present, we can say nothing about the fraction of all instances of male homosexuality that are related or unrelated to the Xq28 candidate locus.” Same source as above.

“Given the overall complexity of human sexuality, it is not surprising that a single genetic locus does not account for all the observed variability.” Same source as above.

It is also noteworthy that there hasn’t been any success in replicating Hamer’s original study. See George Rice, Carol Anderson, Neil Risch, and George Ebers, “Male Homosexuality: Absence of Linkage to Microsatellite Markers at Xq28,” Science, 284 (April 1999). From this study: “These results do not support an X-linked gene underlying male homosexuality.”

There is no convincing scientific evidence of a genetic cause for homosexuality. The primary causes are social and psychological.

– Mark L. Chance.

Mark did you see this? Recent studies debunk 'gay gene"

massnews.com/2005_editions/2_february/2105_gay_gene_study.htm

Lisa N

[quote=Lisa N]Mark did you see this? Recent studies debunk 'gay gene"

massnews.com/2005_editions/2_february/2105_gay_gene_study.htm

[/quote]

I have not seen that, but it is entirely consistent with the research I’ve looked at. The quest for the “gay gene” is all smoke and no fire.

– Mark L. Chance.

[quote=mlchance]I have not seen that, but it is entirely consistent with the research I’ve looked at. The quest for the “gay gene” is all smoke and no fire.

– Mark L. Chance.
[/quote]

Yes the smoke of Satan possibly.

I thought this was interesting. As much as the homosexual activists want to justify their behavior via a genetic component, it seems pretty unlikely.

Lisa N

Let me put a more personal perspective on this topic…if you have read some of my past threads, then you will know what I am about to write.

For personal experiences, I was Led into the homosexual lifestyle because of my environment. I do not believe anything like this is biological. The early esperiences that I had growing up lead me to the life I Once lead for 27 years of my life.

Due to a handicap, my father allowed my mother to meet my needs. My father still lived at home, BUT there wasn’t that "MALE bonding between father and son going on.'
AND from personally discussing with active persons in the homosexual lifestyle, I had heard of their parents being divorced, or the absence of one parent in the person’s life while growning up.

I am a strong believer in the ‘family unit’ and the special Graces God gives for this family orientation. Since divorce became rampant in the last 50 years of the 20th. century, you can see the rise in the ‘gay’ acceptance and the like. It was also in this time, the early 50’s, that secretively and private ‘gay’ organizations began to arise. (Take it from me, when in that lifestyle, I used to read up a lot on ‘gay history’.

If this is truly biological, I would suspect that the % of people ‘truly homosezual’ would be nill and not a major factor.

As a Catholic, I am also a firm believer in the whole ‘sin situation’ and the spiritual world-at-war with the earthly world. Do I have proof, not really but if one is spiritually in tune with events going on today and throughout your life, you actually KNOW that times are NOT what they used to be, even 20 years ago.

WIth that I will say that the struggles in the schools today is the battleground and will be either won or lost due to the lack of 'the truth about homosexual lifestyle being Not what God had intended.

IF given the title of ‘intolerant’, 'homophob, or any such other, I would wear it proudly for Christ, considering I once WAS on the other side and hurled such words.

Be strong!
God IS with Us!
Edwin

even if people are born with an inherent attraction for the same sex, it doesn’t make homosexual behavior acceptable or take away its sin value. just like being born with a tendency to be promiscuous doesn’t make sleeping around less sinful. everyone has ‘tendencies’ toward certain sins. those who have tendencies toward homosexuality have the same cross to carry that all of us do - to die to ourselves daily, and follow Him.

no ‘study’ is going to change that. :wink:

[quote=jeffreedy789]even if people are born with an inherent attraction for the same sex, it doesn’t make homosexual behavior acceptable or take away its sin value. just like being born with a tendency to be promiscuous doesn’t make sleeping around less sinful. everyone has ‘tendencies’ toward certain sins. those who have tendencies toward homosexuality have the same cross to carry that all of us do - to die to ourselves daily, and follow Him.

no ‘study’ is going to change that. :wink:
[/quote]

Jeff,
Excellent points! :clapping:
It seems like certain people have been given certain crosses to bear. Mine was being led easily to something that really wan’t me. And don’t tell me that Satan doesn’t exist? Who else could convince you to do things that are NOT bred into Mankind at the dawn of Creation. (Read up on The Theology of the Body to realize this!)

[quote=Edwin1961]Jeff,
Excellent points! :clapping:
It seems like certain people have been given certain crosses to bear.
[/quote]

Indeed. All people have certain crosses to bear.

To my mind, the danger of the pseudo-science about homosexuality (indeed, about sexuality in general) has nothing to do with doctrine per se. It is a matter of dishonesty that leads to further dishonesty. Too many people - heterosexual or otherwise - are being indoctrinated that the only rule of sexual morality is that everyone consents to whatever activity is performed.

This attitude is dangerous spiritually, emotionally, physically, and culturally.

– Mark L. Chance.

Batgirl1415,

I will assume that you attend a high school. I attended high school for over 35 year. I was a high school teacher of Chemistry and a coach.

From your original post you relate that you are interacting with some other students who evidently disagree with Catholic Dogma. Hoow did they learn of your Catholic beliefs? How did yyou learn of their beliefs.

The way you wrote that original post you made it sound like the majority of the students are homosexual. I just don’t believe that.

In all my years as a H.S. Chemistry teacher I never heard students talking about homosexuality, and I never knew of a homosexual student in my classes.

I would tell you if yyou were my daughter to refrain from talking about sexual issues aat school. It’s not the place to talk about sex.

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.