Yes, you read me correctly.
If human beings could not lose Heaven, then I would say that the homosexual lifestyle is not a big deal. In your post, I am seeing just the emphasis on humanity’s current welfare and no mention of any eternal consequences. Where’s the big picture here?
Rather than tackling the consequences, I am attempting to explore the more pragmatic reasons *why *homosexuality and specifically same-sex unions are opposed and viewed as sinful. Perhaps I should have clarified my categorical thinking. The Decalogue (The Ten Commandments) refers to sins grouped as sins primarily against the community and sins against God: The first commandment is obviously a commandment to keep from sinning against God, whereas “Thou shalt not kill” is a precept against harming the community and society. All sins can be grouped into these two categories. I do not see same-sex unions as an offense against God, but I would be willing to hear any arguments to the contrary.
Ignoring this, though, I still think that the increased attitude of acceptance toward homosexual unions (and some other lifestyles too) does indeed pose a legitimate threat to the survival of the holistic view of what sexuality is all about. How we survive is just as–if not more–important as whether we survive. You mentioned that homosexuality, despite its natural occurance, has been shunned in many cultures over many centuries. Thus a policy of adopting homosexual unions would be on the defensive and in need of explaining itself thoroughly, wouldn’t it?
True, such a policy would need to be on a defensive, but would it take much for the advocates of such a policy to point out that menstruation was also once regarded as a social taboo among many cultures throughout history, not to mention many other things which were once relegated to the realm of taboo but are now socially acceptable?
The question I have is, what validates the homosexual lifestyle? The occurance of other various natural sexual inclinations (i.e. pedophilia and incest) rules out doing just whatever one feels like doing. Is pedophilia wrong only because of age difference, or because of a lack of consent from the younger one, or is it more than that? Or is incest wrong only because it tends to create genetic defects with a brother and sister’s offspring? Or, if adults consent to it, does that make it right? Then where’s a defense against polygamy or orgies? If personal choice makes acts moral, then how could anything be bad? Maybe I have not talked to enough people, but I have yet to find a truly sound defense for the homosexual lifestyle. To me, the threat of same-sex marriages comes from the lack of principle to keep itself and other sexual confusions and abuses at bay. I guess one could ponder whether the human species could survive letting the reigns of sexual morality go, but that really does sound like a distopia to me.
I think it’s interesting that you mention pedophilia and incest as sexual taboos which, without speaking in terms of ethical relativity, also find there place as generally unacceptable in different times and different places. Like hetero and homosexuality, both of these are also considered to be a “sexual orientation.” Now, while I definitely have arguments against pedophilia and incest, and by no means do I support those practices, it does not seem to me that either one poses the same sort of threat that same-sex unions do. Now, it’s true, if a full-grown male should have sex with a nine year old girl, the object of procreation will never be reached; but there are ages at which “pedophilia” is still technically possible all the while with the full possibility of procreation. I need not even speak of incest, which allows for the same possibilities.
If I decide to marry my sister, or a fourteen year old girl who has passed puberty, I don’t see how I am “sinning,” especially if there is mutual consent between my wife and me to bear children and raise them in accordance with what the Church says about marriage.
Homosexuality negates the possibility of procreation, but agian, I am left asking, “So what?” What if a few fall through the cracks?
Now, it’s not to say I don’t completely understand your position on sexuality and the human person and the consequences that unbridled sexuality might entail, but if the Church is so concerned about procreation, as is more than evident it is, and if for our own purposes we must survive, then that is definitely happening…even among non-Catholics.