LGBTQ+ and Catholicism

[Anonymous]

The Church has always said to hate the sin (ie the LGBT lifestyle), but not the sinner (ie love your neighbor bc he's a person).

[Anonymous]

Look, the bottom line is that the Pope doesn’t GAF about being gay and is affirmatively against any laws that discriminate against gays. That’s all that matters. It’s like being personally opposed to abortion but in favor of abortion rights. You can have both positions. The key is to do no harm. The Pope’s official position, which probably is only because he has to placate conservatives, does no harm and in fact actually helps the cause by making clear that anti gay laws are wrong and that the Church must not promote them.

The requirement isn’t that others must think exactly like you. It’s that others cannot impose their moral values on you. That’s how the world works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Church has always said to hate the sin (ie the LGBT lifestyle), but not the sinner (ie love your neighbor bc he's a person).

By LGBTQ lifestyle? No.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But like why would you want to be a part of a faith that says acting on your natural desires is sinful? I know they say that being gay isn't inherently sinful but living a full life as a gay person is considered wrong so why would you want to be a part of this faith?

I have all sorts of “natural desires” I’d like to act on but don’t because to do so would be immoral. I’d like to sport around on my spouse; I’d like to drink to excess; I’d like to punch people in the nose; I’d like to take nice things without paying for them. The ability to sublimate desire in favor of the will is what makes human beings more than barnyard animals.

If your religion told you that your heterosexual desires (even within marriage) were immoral and you had to be celibate your whole life, would you bow to that teaching? Could you live without sex?

The Catholic Church tells priests and nuns to do that.

That’s a choice… and was a financial decision by the church not a religious one.

No, abstinence has been important since Paul (AD 50) or even earlier. I’m not even Catholic and I know that one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But like why would you want to be a part of a faith that says acting on your natural desires is sinful? I know they say that being gay isn't inherently sinful but living a full life as a gay person is considered wrong so why would you want to be a part of this faith?

I have all sorts of “natural desires” I’d like to act on but don’t because to do so would be immoral. I’d like to sport around on my spouse; I’d like to drink to excess; I’d like to punch people in the nose; I’d like to take nice things without paying for them. The ability to sublimate desire in favor of the will is what makes human beings more than barnyard animals.

If your religion told you that your heterosexual desires (even within marriage) were immoral and you had to be celibate your whole life, would you bow to that teaching? Could you live without sex?

The Catholic Church tells priests and nuns to do that.

That’s a choice… and was a financial decision by the church not a religious one.

No, abstinence has been important since Paul (AD 50) or even earlier. I’m not even Catholic and I know that one.

Catholic priests were allowed to marry until 1139.

Also, there are about 120 priests that are Catholic that are actually married today.

Pope Benedict VIII Didn’t want to support wives and children financially and didn’t want children to inherit anything.

Stay in your lane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But like why would you want to be a part of a faith that says acting on your natural desires is sinful? I know they say that being gay isn't inherently sinful but living a full life as a gay person is considered wrong so why would you want to be a part of this faith?

I have all sorts of “natural desires” I’d like to act on but don’t because to do so would be immoral. I’d like to sport around on my spouse; I’d like to drink to excess; I’d like to punch people in the nose; I’d like to take nice things without paying for them. The ability to sublimate desire in favor of the will is what makes human beings more than barnyard animals.

If your religion told you that your heterosexual desires (even within marriage) were immoral and you had to be celibate your whole life, would you bow to that teaching? Could you live without sex?

The Catholic Church tells priests and nuns to do that.

Are you suggesting gay and lesbian Catholics need to become priests and nuns?

I wonder what percentage of priests leave to get married. Add in those who live in what would be considered common-law marriages, or those who have had relationships even while wearing the collar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But like why would you want to be a part of a faith that says acting on your natural desires is sinful? I know they say that being gay isn't inherently sinful but living a full life as a gay person is considered wrong so why would you want to be a part of this faith?

I have all sorts of “natural desires” I’d like to act on but don’t because to do so would be immoral. I’d like to sport around on my spouse; I’d like to drink to excess; I’d like to punch people in the nose; I’d like to take nice things without paying for them. The ability to sublimate desire in favor of the will is what makes human beings more than barnyard animals.

You're simply not a moral or admirable person if you live your life actively having to suppress these urges. You also come across as a hateful bigot.

[Anonymous]

I just can’t imagine the cruelty of a diety who makes hundreds of millions of humans certain way and then tells them to repress themselves for their entire lives.

If you’re a hetero, imagine being told you can’t experience sexual relationships or a love partnership. Not because you choose that for yourself. But because you are not allowed it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well the Pope says being gay is okay so you can go back to Catholicism

Uh no, he literally still says it's a sin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But like why would you want to be a part of a faith that says acting on your natural desires is sinful? I know they say that being gay isn't inherently sinful but living a full life as a gay person is considered wrong so why would you want to be a part of this faith?

I have all sorts of “natural desires” I’d like to act on but don’t because to do so would be immoral. I’d like to sport around on my spouse; I’d like to drink to excess; I’d like to punch people in the nose; I’d like to take nice things without paying for them. The ability to sublimate desire in favor of the will is what makes human beings more than barnyard animals.

You're simply not a moral or admirable person if you live your life actively having to suppress these urges. You also come across as a hateful bigot.

[phone]

Imagine equating love with the desire to punch someone in the face or stealing. PP is a scary person. Feel sorry for her husband.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well the Pope says being gay is okay so you can go back to Catholicism

Uh no, he literally still says it's a sin.

He also said god made gays that way. So god made sins?

We were always taught being gay isn’t a sin, it’s having gay sex that is a sin.

Again. God makes people gay. Do you really want to say god makes mistakes? That he deliberately makes sin?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But like why would you want to be a part of a faith that says acting on your natural desires is sinful? I know they say that being gay isn't inherently sinful but living a full life as a gay person is considered wrong so why would you want to be a part of this faith?

I have all sorts of “natural desires” I’d like to act on but don’t because to do so would be immoral. I’d like to sport around on my spouse; I’d like to drink to excess; I’d like to punch people in the nose; I’d like to take nice things without paying for them. The ability to sublimate desire in favor of the will is what makes human beings more than barnyard animals.

If your religion told you that your heterosexual desires (even within marriage) were immoral and you had to be celibate your whole life, would you bow to that teaching? Could you live without sex?

The Catholic Church tells priests and nuns to do that.

Are you suggesting gay and lesbian Catholics need to become priests and nuns?

I wonder what percentage of priests leave to get married. Add in those who live in what would be considered common-law marriages, or those who have had relationships even while wearing the collar.

Anecdotally the head teacher of my Catholic School (a priest) left the priesthood so he could marry the school nurse. I wondered why whenever I went to the Health office he was hanging around!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But like why would you want to be a part of a faith that says acting on your natural desires is sinful? I know they say that being gay isn't inherently sinful but living a full life as a gay person is considered wrong so why would you want to be a part of this faith?

I have all sorts of “natural desires” I’d like to act on but don’t because to do so would be immoral. I’d like to sport around on my spouse; I’d like to drink to excess; I’d like to punch people in the nose; I’d like to take nice things without paying for them. The ability to sublimate desire in favor of the will is what makes human beings more than barnyard animals.

If your religion told you that your heterosexual desires (even within marriage) were immoral and you had to be celibate your whole life, would you bow to that teaching? Could you live without sex?

You can see what fruit they bear.

The fruit of heterosexual desire is family, children and the continuation of the Church. What is the fruit of homosexual desire?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well the Pope says being gay is okay so you can go back to Catholicism

Uh no, he literally still says it's a sin.

He also said god made gays that way. So god made sins?

We were always taught being gay isn’t a sin, it’s having gay sex that is a sin.

Again. God makes people gay. Do you really want to say god makes mistakes? That he deliberately makes sin?

Correction: there is no teaching about gay sex, it’s premarital sex. Since the church won’t marry gay couples all sex for them is sin. If they marry it’s not sin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But like why would you want to be a part of a faith that says acting on your natural desires is sinful? I know they say that being gay isn't inherently sinful but living a full life as a gay person is considered wrong so why would you want to be a part of this faith?

I have all sorts of “natural desires” I’d like to act on but don’t because to do so would be immoral. I’d like to sport around on my spouse; I’d like to drink to excess; I’d like to punch people in the nose; I’d like to take nice things without paying for them. The ability to sublimate desire in favor of the will is what makes human beings more than barnyard animals.

If your religion told you that your heterosexual desires (even within marriage) were immoral and you had to be celibate your whole life, would you bow to that teaching? Could you live without sex?

You can see what fruit they bear.

The fruit of heterosexual desire is family, children and the continuation of the Church. What is the fruit of homosexual desire?

Family, children, community, love, support, gods love, faith… but the greatest of these is love