A. So.  To conclude this rather lengthy side-bar, when I say “Homosexual unions champion the “feelings rights” of adults at the expense of “growing-up rights” of children” I mean that homosexual unions champion the modern eros at the expense of agape.  Eros is always a receiving, consuming passion; agape is a giving, creative – procreative – passion.  Eros drinks the water – as we were saying earlier – and forgets the glass.  Agape makes a new glass.  Agape is always open to new life.

Q. But what about heterosexual couples who don’t have children?

A. If they don’t have children because they want to but can’t (fertility issues), then there’s nothing wrong there.

If they could have children but opt not to and for no serious reason, then there is moral culpability there.

Q. Umm…  We’ll have to revisit that one...  There're already questions popping up in my head about what the whole point of marriage is, because you and the Catholic Church seem very bent against consenting adults enjoying some pleasure and would rather people reproduce like rabbits.

A. Ok.  Let’s revisit that a little later.

Q.  So how else are homosexual acts wrong from the effects or consequences perspective, because that “statistic” you pulled on “children living with a biological father and a biological mother tend to be better members of society” is very shaky according to what I’ve read.

A. What have you read?

Q. That kids raised by gay or lesbian couples are as physically or psychologically healthy, capable and successful as those raised by heterosexual couples.

A. And that any unhealthy psychological, physical or social traits are the direct effect of biased societal discrimination?

Q. Correct.

A. Ok.  Let’s leave out the kids for a moment, let’s focus on the gay individuals for a moment.  And let’s speak about not the morality of homosexuality but on the statistics available on homosexuality.

Q. Yes!  Let’s!

A. First myth you have to get rid of is that persons with SSA (same sex attraction) are born that way.  There is no evidence that persons with SSA are born that way—no evidence of a genetic or hormonal cause. If there were such a cause then identical twins would virtually always have the same pattern of sexual attraction, but this is not the case.

Q. If SSA is not genetic, what is the cause?

A. There is no reason to believe that there is a single cause, but many persons with SSA experienced gender identity disorders (GID) as young children. They felt different from their same-sex parent or peers and identified with their other-sex parent or peers. This has been linked to failures to securely attach in early childhood. If these problems are identified early and the parents are willing to make changes, GID can be healed, and subsequent SSA avoided.

In my own personal experience with male friends with SSA, there seems to be a common thread of a defective and sometimes even abusive father-son relationship.

That SSA is a “congenital condition” is merely an emotional argument that is peddled so that it is first of all accepted as “natural”, and that therefore should not be corrected but rather fostered and cultivated like a skill or a talent.

To be continued...

25thSeptember 2017