Is Homophobia a sin?

Before we begin I must emphasize this thread is ***no***t about the Church’s teaching on marriage or the immorality of homosexual acts. The Church has been abundantly clear about it’s teaching concerning these subjects. I know them, I accept them and agree with them.

My questions rather is hatred of homosexuals, like what is practiced and preached by the late Fred Phelps and Uganda’s Yoweri Museveni, sinful? In other words advocating ill treatment and discrimination, even criminal prosecution of homosexuals? After all it’s one thing to not condone or feel comfortable about the act itself but advocating violence and intolerance against an entire category of people seems unchristian and immoral to me-especially when the Church teaches that it is the homosexual act, not homosexuality in itself, that is sinful (please correct me if my interpretation of Church teaching is mistaken) and it is accepted that homosexual orientation is not a choice.

What the Church teaches;

2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

No, that is not what the Church teaches.

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures.** Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained**. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.” They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

Chastity and homosexuality

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

Most people are surprised to hear this, it seems. The Catholic Church does not condone unjust discrimination toward people based on their sexual orientation. The Church, of course, also does not condone homosexual acts or their promotion, but at the same time recognizes the dignity of the people who are attracted to members of the same sex, as they are created in the image and likeness of God. Essentially, the Church’s teaching makes a distinction between the person himself, the attraction, and acting upon the attraction. The person must be treated with dignity, the attraction cannot be considered to be morally wrong. Attractions are not usually something we will for ourselves, and this is true of those with a same-sex attraction; their desires are no more sinful than those of a married man for a woman who is not his wife. Sin comes in acting upon desires which are oriented toward something other than a lawful good–in the case of the former, sexual activity which is by nature closed to life, since it is done between two people of the same sex; in the latter, the breaking of fidelity to the marriage bond.

The problem is that our politicized and polarized society thinks it’s an all-or-nothing kind of thing; you’re either the gay rights movement, or you’re the Westboro Baptist Church, and there’s no in-between. Neither position works for the Church, since we recognize the truth of the dignity of the human person.

-ACEGC

What I have to say about Phelps would get me banned for a couple of lifetimes, but the Uganda laws, altho very strict, are against *actions *and not merely having homosexual attractions.

Hatred against people is wrong. Hatred of *all *sin, esp our own, is what we all should be striving for.

Homophobia is Freudian monkey brain twaddle and 99% of the time it is used, it is as a distracting ad hominem fallacy.

"Etymologically, yes, it is “sinful”. :smiley: In today’s society, if you don’t think or profess to think that homosexuality is just a wonderful, perfectly normal, and natural variation in human sexuality, then the H bomb (“homophobic”) is dropped.

A ten-second Google search pulls up hundreds of instances of gays being set on fire, dragged behind cars for miles, beaten, hung, and murdered.

I really cannot understand why anyone would deny that homophobia exists or is “monkey grain twaddle.”

All of the above are examples of evil acts deserving of strong condemnation, but “homophobia” isn’t a helpful term at all. What it is rather is a subtle attempt at reframing the debate. That is, instead of talking about the inherent wrongness of homosexual acts, “homophobia” is deployed as attempt to distract by suggesting that the one arguing for the wrongness of homosexual acts has some mental or moral shortcoming. It’s BS Political Correctness – which is worse than lying. With lying, one is merely deceiving someone else. Political Correctness attempts to harangue or coerce people into lying to themselves.

But moreover, even if we accept this term. “phobia” implies an irrational fear, and if it’s irrational, then it is not chosen and hence, not sin anymore than arachnophobia is a sin. One can’t have it both ways.

It’s so easy to disregard the unjust treatment of others when we are not part of the group being hated or discriminated against. A person may wish that gay people will disappear back into the closet for eternity, but as with the Civil Rights Movement, history is not moving backwards. If you wish to be a homophobe, fine, but most Americans don’t want to hear you’re hateful dribble. There are those in the Free Phelps ilk who say that there is no such thing as homophobia- kind of odd being that the only reason for this so-called church is to rant and rave about gay people just being on this earth. There is much in common between homophobes and racists. :mad:

See? This is a perfect example of what I am talking about. I am absolutely against the unjust treatment of homosexuals, but how did Fred Phelps get in here? Answer: homophobia has no other purpose than to be inflammatory and distracting rhetoric.

Yes, homophobia would be a sin imo, the problem is how is homophobia defined and what would constitute homophobia.

Homophobia doesn’t exist in the way claustrophobia does, so far as I’m aware.

Rephrase the question:

Is it a sin to have angry thoughts and ill-will about people?

Is it a sin to commit acts of discrimination, violence, prejudice, etc., against people?

Post #4 used Phelps too. It’s easy to use the Westboro Baptist Church as almost the definition of a flock of homophobes. :cool:

Well, I’d call them bigots. I don’t think they fear homosexuals which is what the word implies. Fear is irrational. You can’t go around saying same-sex attraction isn’t a choice and then turn around and say that people are deliberately choosing something irrational like “homophobia”.

Political Correctness makes people stupid.

Homophobia is discrimination and therefore a sin. If I imagine the gay act and it grosses me out, well, this is natural for a heterosexual person and not sinful, but if I treat homosexual people as a result of disgust at the idea of the act and so behave with anything less than respect for their human dignity as a created human being then I am behaving in a judgemental way and so I am sinful. I can explain: if I meet someone called Bob and he is gay, I will recognise Bob and speak to Bob as Bob, not as gay Bob, but if he becomes suggestive in a gay way, or starts doing things in front of me with a gay person (kissing) I would look away as a subtle sign I did not appreciate it and might even make a gentle remark if suggestive remarks were made to me, to let them know I was not appreciative of this kind of forwardness. However, I would be kind in the way I put things because sensitive and vulnerable people can be crushed easily, very easily.

I still don’t understand why we used the term homophobia to describe dislike or hatred of homosexuals. Homophobia means “fear of homosexuals”.

When people tell me that I am homophobic I simply reply, “No, I’m not scared of homosexuals.”

Indeed. Rejecting something doesn’t mean fear of something. For instance, I reject eating used kitty litter. That doesn’t mean I’m afraid of used kitty litter.

So you just hate them? :stuck_out_tongue: Remember, love the sinner, hate the sin! Maybe you didn’t mean to sound as if you hate people but your post does suggest it so could do with being clearer. Just a suggestion! :slight_smile:

How does my post in any way imply that I hate anybody?

Then I was right in thinking you didn’t mean to. But if you read your post again you’ll see you accidently made connections between dislike or hatred of a set of people and your reply to people who don’t like your reaction to the subject. It reads as such although I could tell the way you wrote it didn’t exactly read how you meant it to! We live in intolerant times and can get in trouble for saying this or this that we didn’t actually mean to put in such and such a way :smiley:

In other words, I can read it how you mean it, but also how it could be read, by intolerant members of society who take things the wrong way.

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.