Posted: May 18, 2012 9:23 am
by CookieJon
Hnau von Thulcandra wrote:
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.


I'm not sure how you can claim the Catechism "validates homophobic behavior", since it very clearly states that unjust discrimination is sinful.


It's so simple I'm amazed you're not sure!

The answer is that the Catechism contradicts itself; The Catechism both denounces unjust discrimination AND promotes unjust discrimination (by its validation of homophobic behaviour**).

So, it's now up to you to explain why "validating homophobic behaviour" is not unjust in order to explain the blatant contradiction in the Catechism.

You might be able to do this, so my request for an explanation is entirely earnest. It's quite possible I've simply overlooked an obvious reason why validating homophobic behaviour is actually justified!

If that's the case, you can help me out...

Tell me how justice is served by the Church validating the homophobic behaviour of its adherents by encouraging them to consider gay people as "intrinsically disordered", a "threat to civilisation", "abominations", and "contrary to natural law".

---

** I assume we do actually agree that "intrinsically disordered", "threat to civilisation", "abominations", "contrary to natural law", etc. are objectively negative (the justification of the negativity notwithstanding), and would certainly not only validate existing personal biases, but actually give cause to those who consider the Catholic Church an authoratative organisation to adopt homophobic attitudes, and therefore engage in homophobic behaviour. That seems pretty self-evident to me, although if you disagree, we can discuss that first. AFAICT, we're only quibbling about whether the uncontested encouragment of homophobia is justified or not.