Gay, Catholic and Doing Fine

[athrock]

If you think I flipped out, you have misunderstood. The only objection I have raised here is when someone accused the man wanting people to suffer. I'm not trying to argue about homosexuality.

We are. Nobody is accusing you of being a homophobe. We are simply saying your logic and his logic, even with you claiming to be accepting, still does not work.

As others keep trying to explain to you, that book teaches you to deny self with the word "sin" and since it was written in an antiquated past and has nothing to do with our modern understanding of evolutionary behavior of primates, of which we are, it really is not a good thing to use as gauge.

Denying self and using a crutch is not creating real happiness. It is placating others just to fit in, and it isn't even demonstrating any scientific reason as to why being gay is a "sin". The real scientists of evolutionary biology and human psychology do not see homosexual behavior as a bad thing to be denied.

And as we said before, even heterosexual couples can and do risk take in sexual acts, so a person's sexuality is not the issue. 

Now again, if you can be wrong about male rape victims, what would make you think an old book would explain to him why he is gay in any scientific sense? It really amounts to expecting him to deny himself. Saying "We aren't like Kim Davis" simply means you water down your justifications, but it is still bad logic no matter what.

Regardless of your intent, this also is the same ignorance both left and right ignore. Whatever empathy you'd like to find in your bible, others also use that same book to justify homophobia and denial of rights and physical harm to gays. You can have all the good intent in the world, it still does not change, for both left and right, that that bible DOES NOT in any real sense, explain the evolutionary behavior of primates, of which humans are part of.

I have to comment here.

Your assumption is that "denying one's self" is equivalent to being miserable and unhappy. Well, no, that does not follow.

We deny ourselves LOTS of things in life in order to have other things that also make us happy. Consider these statements that could be made by different people:

"I deny myself a new car and spend the money on health insurance instead. That's self-denial I'm happy with."
"I deny myself a piece of cake in order to lose a pound. That's self-denial I'm happy with."
"I deny myself hot sex with the man next door in order to maintain a happy relationship with the man I'm married to. That's self-denial I'm happy with."
"I deny myself any sex at all in order to serve God as a priest (or monk or nun). That's self-denial I'm happy with."
"I deny myself a vacation house at the beach because I prefer having a larger home year-round. That's self-denial I'm happy with."

The gay author of the article believes that God is real and that His laws are just. He also believes that the Catholic Church has warmly embraced him and enabled him to pursue eternal life with God in a nurturing environment. He's choosing celibacy in response to those beliefs - not placating others.

However, the idea that anyone would forego sex has some here apoplectic in disbelief.

But others are even more upset that the Catholic Church could possibly be treating this person in loving manner. That's not the narrative they want to hear.