Was Jesus God?

Quote: FrGamble

It is not contempt or condescension to say that the way we are made as human beings clearly shows that men are not meant to have sex with other men

Again, at one time, for a thousand years,
the Church taught that being left handed
was not natural and should be changed
and punished. They were wrong and
eventually realized it and stopped the practice.

They're also wrong about Gay sex not being
natural. They had a dozen reasons why being
left handed was not natural, just like they
have bogus reasons for no Gay sex. You will
change the rules eventually, why not get a
head start and do it now, instead of making
Gay's lives miserable.

Quote: Evenbob

They're also wrong about Gay sex not being
natural. They had a dozen reasons why being
left handed was not natural, just like they
have bogus reasons for no Gay sex. You will
change the rules eventually, why not get a
head start and do it now, instead of making
Gay's lives miserable.

And how are they wrong about it not being natural?

Quote: FrGamble

I can't condemn myself or the Pope until you can tell me why I am being more unfair or more discriminatory than nature and its laws?

Don't you know how people react when told this or that group is "unnatural" and their common, consenting actions are a "sin"?

It doesn't matter if then you turn around and say "but we shouldn't mistreat them." Especially if you include mistreatment in your interactions with them, such as demanding civil marriage not include same sex couples, or supporting laws barring same sex couples from adopting children.

It's the same as saying "This group is inferior intellectually and emotionally, but we shouldn't mistreat them." Then you put them in chains and work them to death. And if not to death, then without any possibility or hope for intellectual development or advancement.

Why do you think slavery had to be abolished? Why do you think the basic civil rights of minorities had to be protected by law?

Quote: AZDuffman

And how are they wrong about it not being natural?

Is oral and anal sex with a woman
natural? Of course it is. A lot of women
don't like it, but a lot of them really enjoy it.

All Gay men don't have anal sex, it's
another stereotype. Many of them don't
like it. If you have an active sex life, having
sex to procreate is a tiny part of it. Anything
that feels good between two people is
obviously natural. Men with men any combo
you like.

The Bible says to not eat pork. Ever eat a BLT?
Did it seem unnatural to you? Of course not.

Quote: Evenbob

All Gay men don't have anal sex, it's
another stereotype. Many of them don't
like it. If you have an active sex life, having
sex to procreate is a tiny part of it. Anything
that feels good between two people is
obviously natural. Men with men any combo
you like.

Ah, no, not at all. I could make a list of deviate things some people like, but "natural" it would not be. And I am not going to make such a list as I am not into listing such behavior, so use your imagination.

Natural is an adjective subject to interpretation. For most non-primates, sex is for procreation and not for pleasure. For upper primates and humans, sex of course is recreational and an act of pleasure. For humans, procreation can be controlled. The physical act of orgasm and the sharing of endorphins between partners creates bonding and love. Having common experiences together and history can grow this love. The church does not view homosexual tendencies as wrong or sinful, just the acts. The act of sexual attraction between people (same sex or not) is natural. I don't accept the definition that just because 96% of people are not heterosexual that being homosexual is not natural. It's like calling Pacific Islanders unnatural.

For the Church, of course, for the best interests of society before abortions (which were dangerous) and effective contraception, sex between married partners was by far the right course for the good of society. You really can't argue otherwise. Even in today's society, it is usually for the best interest of the children to have two LOVING parents. Up to about 50 years ago, the teaching of the Catholic church was probably the best course for society when it came to sex. The bible also taught the same thing, and viewed homosexuality as being wrong.

Conservatives will argue that it is important to have a father figure and a mother figure and that raising a child properly should involve a heavy parental influence from each sex. I don't know if that is true or not, but the experiment is underway and it will be easy to measure outcomes. Raising children as single parents is generally a catastrophe unless both divorced parents are heavily involved and the single parent is well off financially. But the most important factor is love and a community of diverse people (family, friends, etc) to nurture children.

Quote: AZDuffman

I could make a list of deviate things some people like, but "natural" it would not be. .

You mean not natural for you.
Who are you to dictate what
two people agree to do together
and call it unnatural.

Quote: Evenbob

You mean not natural for you.
Who are you to dictate what
two people agree to do together
and call it unnatural.

Who are you to dictate what is?

I am going by science and anthropology. You seem to be making stuff up as you go because you have some kind of vendetta against religion in general and Catholics in particular.

Quote: boymimbo

Conservatives will argue that it is important to have a father figure and a mother figure and that raising a child properly should involve a heavy parental influence from each sex. I don't know if that is true or not, but the experiment is underway and it will be easy to measure outcomes. Raising children as single parents is generally a catastrophe unless both divorced parents are heavily involved and the single parent is well off financially. But the most important factor is love and a community of diverse people (family, friends, etc) to nurture children.

As an "Evolution-ist" I'm going to guess our ancestors traveled in groups mostly. All our close primate relatives don't do well with abandoning offspring, so I going to assume there was a "family" atmosphere but whether it needed to be specifically a nuclear family I would question.

Some species specifically separate mothers and offspring from fathers even within groups. Some don't. Not sure it's clear what branch we might have more in common with. Maybe even both.

Anyway, not sure how much of our family culture is really hardwired into us. We've certainly built up a lot of belief systems which may not reflect how things had worked for a long time. Maybe that inner conflict shows up in the divorce rate of trying to maintain something completely constructed.

Of course if something traditional or not seems to be working, I'd say go with it.

Quote: rxwine

As an "Evolution-ist" I'm going to guess our ancestors traveled in groups mostly. All our close primate relatives don't do well with abandoning offspring, so I going to assume there was a "family" atmosphere but whether it needed to be specifically a nuclear family I would question.

Even within tribes, children got both male and female inputs. The boys learned to be men and the girls how to be women. Take away fathers and boys do not learn how to be men, they remain boys well into adulthood. Nuclear families long have supplanted tribal life.