Holy See: "Human Sexuality ... Is Not an 'Identity''

Donatello

Holy See Stresses Moral Dimension of Sexuality

Warns Against Undermining the Dignity of the Person

GENEVA, Switzerland, MARCH 24, 2011 (Zenit.org).- The Holy See is underlining the moral dimension of sexuality, affirming the freedom of the person in acting in this realm. Archbishop Silvano Tomasi, permanent representative of the Holy See to the United Nations and Other International Organizations in Geneva, stated this Tuesday at the 16th Session of the Human Rights Council on "sexual orientation."

"The Holy See wishes to affirm its deeply held belief that human sexuality is a gift that is genuinely expressed in the complete and lifelong mutual devotion of a man and a woman in marriage," the prelate said.

He noted that "human sexuality, like any voluntary activity, possesses a moral dimension."

"It is an activity which puts the individual will at the service of a finality," the archbishop stated. "It is not an 'identity.'"

"In other words," he clarified, "it comes from the action and not from the being, even though some tendencies or 'sexual orientations' may have deep roots in the personality."

"Denying the moral dimension of sexuality leads to denying the freedom of the person in this matter, and undermines ultimately his/her ontological dignity," Archbishop Tomasi warned.

He noted that "this belief about human nature is also shared by many other faith communities, and by other persons of conscience."

The prelate underlined "a disturbing trend in some of these social debates: People are being attacked for taking positions that do not support sexual behavior between people of the same sex."

He observed: "When they express their moral beliefs or beliefs about human nature, which may also be expressions of religious convictions, or state opinions about scientific claims, they are stigmatized, and worse -- they are vilified, and prosecuted.

"These attacks contradict the fundamental principles announced in three of the council's resolutions of this session."

The archbishop concluded, "The truth is, these attacks are violations of fundamental human rights, and cannot be justified under any circumstances."

My comment: The world and the Church have opposing visions of the human person. The world sees 'orientations' given by nature (so they say), and sees an inevitableness about acting on the disordered inclinations in order to fulfil the person (''you can't help it, resistance is futile, so indulge yourself'' = a diminishment of human freedom and an enslavement to sin). The Church, an expert in humanity, sees it differently. We are men and women. Human sexuality is designed by God for the procreation of children and the good of spouses. But we are fallen. Our sexuality is fallen. The homosexual inclination is disordered and is ordered to an intrinsic moral evil. People have free will. People can choose to act on or resist their disordered inclinations, whether they be concerned with stealing or fornication or homosexual acts. The ontological identity is our creation as men or women, and not determined by the sexual acts we choose to engage in, nor defined by our sexual attractions.

I believe that Pope John Paul II's Theology of the Body will be a key tool in the evangelisation of the culture of death, which sadly has infected members of the Church, awakening in them a realisation of the beauty of God's plan for man, even as the culture falls further in the sickness of despair which results from the darkening of the mind and the deadening of consciences, as more of the same desperate hedonism is ordered up. As Benedict XVI put it recently:

“No pleasure is ever enough, and the excess of deceiving intoxication becomes a violence that tears whole regions apart – and all this in the name of a fatal misunderstanding of freedom which actually undermines man’s freedom and ultimately destroys it.”

The full statement to the UN can be read here: "Human Sexuality ... Is Not an 'Identity''

Zombrex

Discussion point...?

Donatello

If I may, I would draw readers attention to this blog post, which reflects on what the Holy See has said at the UN:

As I've warned so many times before, "..the same radical homosexual activists who continually cry for more 'tolerance' are anything but tolerant. This is a spiritual war. The homosexual movement is not a civil rights movement. It is an attempt at moral revolution. An attempt to change people's view of homosexuality.

Writing in the Chicago Free Press, even homosexual activist Paul Varnell admitted this. He wrote, 'The fundamental controverted issue about homosexuality is not discrimination, hate crimes or domestic partnerships, but the morality of homosexuality. Even if gays obtain non-discrimination laws, hate crimes law and domestic partnership benefits, those can do little to counter the underlying moral condemnation which will continue to fester beneath the law and generate hostility, fuel hate crimes, support conversion therapies, encourage gay youth suicide and inhibit the full social acceptance that is our goal. On the other hand, if we convince people that homosexuality is fully moral, then all their inclination to discriminate, engage in gay-bashing or oppose gay marriage disappears. Gay youths and adults could readily accept themselves. So the gay movement, whether we acknowledge it or not, is not a civil rights movement, not even a sexual liberation movement, but a moral revolution aimed at changing people's view of homosexuality.' (Paul Varnell, "Defending Our Morality," Chicago Free Press, Aug 16, 2000, See here).

Radical homosexual activists will not rest until they obtain societal acceptance of homosexuality. This is a spiritual war. Those who refuse to embrace homosexuality, lesbianism, bisexuality and transgenderism will not be tolerated.

The Holy See is warning the UN about what is happening. It will get worse - the warning will not be heeded. Yet the Holy See is a prophetic witness at the UN all the same. They can't say they weren't warned. In the meantime, those who do not subscribe to the homosexualist agenda will be mocked, vilified, prosecuted, and jailed.

I really admire the Vatican diplomats who fight the good fight at the UN for the values of the Gospel of Life. They are mocked, yelled at, berated, and harassed. The day will come when they will be expelled. For now, they are merely tolerated.

Ghost Buster

Ah. Another homosexuality themed post from you know who. A bit of an obsession?

You've got to wonder where this obsession stems from. Personally, I believe it's all Freudian. After all, it's a commonly held belief that homophobia - which translates as fear, rather than hatred of gay people - often stems from a homophobic person's denial and repression of their own homosexual impulses.

Dave!

Recent history has taught us that the most vocal opponents tend to be vocal for a reason

Donatello

Dave! wrote: »

Recent history has taught us that the most vocal opponents tend to be vocal for a reason

Who's he? He looks a bit like Obama's homosexual czar!

According to your amateur psychology then, my other 'fixation' (on abortion) is also... problematic and reveals some dark aspect of my personality? :eek:

Jumpy

Was Donatello not widely believed to be gay?

Either way, I dont believe that people should be vilified for their opinion, providing it remains just an opinion. Its when those opinions are forced either by action or law that it becomes vile.

Also in your quote "Radical homosexual activists will not rest until they obtain societal acceptance of homosexuality. This is a spiritual war. Those who refuse to embrace homosexuality, lesbianism, bisexuality and transgenderism will not be tolerated."

Add heterosexual to that. I am of the full belief that anyone who does not accept sexuality in ANY legal form should not be tolerated.

Donatello

Jumpy wrote: »

Was Donatello not widely believed to be gay?

Either way, I dont believe that people should be vilified for their opinion, providing it remains just an opinion. Its when those opinions are forced either by action or law that it becomes vile.

Also in your quote "Radical homosexual activists will not rest until they obtain societal acceptance of homosexuality. This is a spiritual war. Those who refuse to embrace homosexuality, lesbianism, bisexuality and transgenderism will not be tolerated."

Add heterosexual to that. I am of the full belief that anyone who does not accept sexuality in ANY legal form should not be tolerated.

But what if the legal forms continue to evolve? What about sex with minors or farmyard animals? What then? This is where we are headed. The dilemma is: when your best friend announces his engagement to the farm cat, do you send a card?

Jumpy

Donatello wrote: »

But what if the legal forms continue to evolve? What about sex with minors or farmyard animals? What then? This is where we are headed. The dilemma is: when your best friend announces his engagement to the farm cat, do you send a card?

It would give me paws for thought.

stevoslice

so your taking offence at the fact that homosexual people wish to be thought of as normal people. It seems to me that you think they should be happy that hate crimes are illegal, and they should leave it at that.
What of tolerance, i'm sure most gay people must have a lot more tolerance to deal with people like you, than you have for them. Bear in mind that it is still a massive stigma in some circles in society and isn't it everybody's right to be accepted for who they are.
What we need here is one of them secret gay agenda pics...

Donatello

thebhoy wrote: »

so your taking offence at the fact that homosexual people wish to be thought of as normal people. It seems to me that you think they should be happy that hate crimes are illegal, and they should leave it at that.
What of tolerance, i'm sure most gay people must have a lot more tolerance to deal with people like you, than you have for them. Bear in mind that it is still a massive stigma in some circles in society and isn't it everybody's right to be accepted for who they are.
What we need here is one of them secret gay agenda pics...

The point is, sexual attraction is not our identity. You seem to have missed the point the Vatican was making.

Who they are, are men and women created by God. He has a plan for their lives. He desires that all would come to salvation, with sins forgiven and all made whole, so that they may spend their eternity with God.

People are not defined by their sexual attractions or their sexual activity. They are defined by who God made them: men and women, like I said.

28064212

Donatello wrote: »

But what if the legal forms continue to evolve? What about sex with minors or farmyard animals? What then? This is where we are headed. The dilemma is: when your best friend announces his engagement to the farm cat, do you send a card?

Any "slippery slope" argument about homosexuality that attempts to compare it to paedophilia or bestiality is a complete red herring and just plain lazy. It is completely irrelevant due to the issue of consent

Donatello

28064212 wrote: »

Any "slippery slope" argument about homosexuality that attempts to compare it to paedophilia or bestiality is a complete red herring and just plain lazy. It is completely irrelevant due to the issue of consent

The issue of consent can be as woolly as your jumper. The law defines consent.

Leading homosexualist campaigner, Peter Tatchell, advocates for a reduced age of consent in the UK. There's nothing to say that that won't happen, nor that it won't be reduced further in the future to a level we now consider unacceptable. But as society declines further, it will become acceptable. Just like it was in ancient Greece.

The problem is this: the slope is slippery, and history proves it.

28064212

Donatello wrote: »

The issue of consent can be as woolly as your jumper. The law defines consent.

Leading homosexualist campaigner, Peter Tatchell, advocates for a reduced age of consent in the UK. There's nothing to say that that won't happen, nor that it won't be reduced further in the future to a level we now consider unacceptable. But as society declines further, it will become acceptable. Just like it was in ancient Greece.

The problem is this: the slope is slippery, and history proves it.

*Sigh* Regardless of where the line is drawn, there is a line. It's decided by society. You apparently advocate the status quo as the "correct" age of consent. What was it in biblical times?

And again, it's competely irrelevant. Nothing about homosexuality has any relation to paedophilia or bestiality. There are completely different reasons for opposing them. You might as well say allowing homosexuality to become socially acceptable means people will be looking for murder to be legalised. There is no link and it's completely irrelevant in every way

Fanny Cradock

Is there any reason why this thread is discussing bestiality and paedophilia? I see a thread-lock over yonder.

Ghost Buster

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Is there any reason why this thread is discussing bestiality and paedophilia? I see a thread-lock over yonder.

Oh its just Donetellos weekly gay rant. Apparently homosexuality, which has been around for thousands of years is suddenly, now that he has a bee in his bonnet about it, about to transform itself in to human /feline intercourse.:rolleyes:

Fanny Cradock

Locked because we all know where this is going.