New Rules for Gay Clergy -- Catholics only.

[marciadietrich]

Marcia, I'd like it if you read it and gave me feedback on it http://www.cathmed.org/publications/homosexuality.html

Hi Jason...

I have printed it out and need to read it more carefully. I probably agree with some of the ideas as they are discussing morality and encouraging chastity and things of that nature. But one thing I see already. Second paragraph of section 1 "Not Born that Way" they say

If same-sex attraction were genetically determined, then one would expect identical twins to be identical in their sexual attractions. There are, however, numerous reports of identical twins who are not identical in their sexual attractions. (Bailey 1991[11]; Eckert 1986; Friedman 1976; Green 1974; Heston 1968; McConaghy 1980; Rainer 1960; Zuger 1976)

okay, the only reference they give more info on is under endnote 11 (perhaps because it was the most recent study (1991), or because it gave the lowest identical twin correlation?):

[11] Bailey: A study of the male siblings of homosexually active males found that "52% (29/56) of monozygotic co-twins, 22% (12/54) of dizogotic co-twins, and 11% (6/57) of adoptive brothers were homosexual... rate of homosexuality among non-twin biological siblings, as reported by probands, 9.2% (13/142). (p.1089)

Let me quote myself earlier:

Basically soemthing like an 75- 80% correlation in identical twins, 35-40% in fraternal twins and 20-25% in other siblings would be a pattern showing a strong genetic component. If there is no difference between identical and fraternal twins (and/or other siblings) then that would seem to rule out any serious or strong genetic component.

The study they quoted shows that monozygotic twins (identical) are over twice as likely to have both be homosexual when the other twin is homosexual compared to the dizogotic twins (fraternal, non-identical) and in turn the fraternal twins about twice that of non-twin siblings... those ratios quoted in the Bailey study are proportional (less on the top side, but proportional) to what I would expect if there were some genetic component in homosexuality.

If the CMA point is that homosexuality is not strictly or only due to genetics, I tend to agree, if they are trying to deny a genetic component altogether I have to disagree. I especially think the second section showing all the afflictions of homosexuals stengthens the probability of genetic tendency as things like schizophrenia and depression are things they were looking for in our family histories in autism studies.

Also, I was talking to some folks about autism over the weekend and they indicated it had to do with metabolism? is that true?

Well there are a lot of theories about what causes autism and some come down on the side of things in early childhood causing autism in normal children. I think even those that feel things like vaccines or antibiotics upset something in the child's system still attest to a genetic predisposition. I expect your friends meant something like that, or a similiar theory ( like secretin-? therapy to help kids digest better ).

Some people believe that antibiotics can upset something in the intestinal tract, a yeast overgrowth, and cause it to release proteins into the bloodstream which in turn interfere with brain functioning. (Matt tested by a guy big in this area - started at Children's Mercy- and Matt had normal yeast, high on a bacteria - but Matt sometimes eats dirt).

There are some children who fit a profile of normal developement to around 2 years of age and then regress. That was not true of Matt or Jeff. Matt also never had antibiotics until after he was diagnosed autistic and in special ed preschool, then he got ear infections. Where I know Nick had antibiotics at around 2 or 3 months of age because he had a respitory (sp?) virus (RSV) and ended up in the hospital and he was given antibiotics then. So I tend to not hold to much to that theory, at least for my personal experience.

marcia

 

[marciadietrich]

(Incidently, my family are part of the autism research project in the UK as subjects (they have my genes and I want them back!!- j/k) and there is increasing evidence that there is a high heritability in certain forms of autism.)

Hi Cat

Our genes are "immortalized" (or the lines, whatever that means - basically they can replicate them over and over as researchers require) with the AGRE autism research repository. Not that it does us that much good personally, lol. We also participated in a family autism research project being done out of the Univ. of Washington. So we've been poked, prodded and tested - twice ... think we're done now though as if they want our blood and such again they can go to AGRE.

Marcia

 

[fragmentsofdreams]

I had no idea you were so qualified. If you've attended a seminar course, then certaintly you are more qualified than the doctors who wrote that paper. Sorry I doubted you.

You don't need more than that to understand that traits aren't either completely genetic or completely non-genetic.

I suspect you are quoting them out of context - that you are speaking to genetic predipositions, while they are speaking to the fallacious "gay gene" theory. Then you go on to assume they have an evil intention.

I didn't assume evil intention. I left open the possibility that their error was unintentional.

There statements that we haven't identified specific genes involved in homosexuality in humans are true, but they seem to imply that the absence of evidence is evidence of absence. On the contrary, the heritability studies are enough to show us that one or (almost certainly) more genes are involved in the expression of homosexuality.

Looking over all of section 1, I can find no acknowledgement of the role genetics plays in the causation of homosexuality. They also seem to be working under the false equivalency of gentic = immutable and environmental = mutable. Neither is the case.

I disagree - the inclination does not make one culpable of the sin, but that doesn't mean it isn't marked by sin (sinful).

It can be interpreted either way, which is probably an indication that the language is imprecise. They also seem to be ambiguous about what they mean by homosexuality, which could either mean having same sex attractions or desiring to engage in same sex acts. The different definitions have vastly different implications.

 

[D'Ann]

Some of them certainly are. If they take their vows seriously, does it matter?

I think to some, it does. Personally, I'm not sure what I think on this issue. Although, I do believe that any man that can be celibate for 3 years should be given some credit and some trust as well.

Some homosexual priests betrayed the Church, but so did some heterosexual priests as well as some bishops. We shouldn't choose one group and make them pay for the actions of the few.

I'm not saying that all priests should suffer due to a few that have betrayed God, Church and vows. We must pray for those who have betrayed and those who have not.

I also believe that we all are sinners, but by the grace of God go any of us. So, I'm not judging to be unkind or hurtful. I'm just trying to make sense of this issue and I do have mixed feelings. I see all of the sides and they all make some sense... So, I'm going to pray for our beloved Pope and Church and trust that the right decisions will be made.

God's peace,

Debbie

 

[D'Ann]

Hey there Debbie! (High? no thanks lol)

What you mention here is something I would be hopeful that the new policy (if it is indeed as the article says) will correct. One of the most difficult aspects of life for those who are homosexual is the constant struggle to 'fit in', often to the point of concealing the truth about their sexual orientation. Anyone who has ever held a deep personal secret that they cannot discuss with anyone else knows how intensely that secret can affect every part of their lives and how it can drive them to do things not in their norm to try and compensate for that self-repression. Up til now this is the tremendous burden that has been placed on those who might be homosexual and entering the priesthood.

If the new policy allows these people to tell the Bishop "I am homosexual but fully certain that I can live the chaste life expected of me etc..." it relieves them of that pressure to keep the secret hidden. One of the most life-altering moments for someone who is homosexual is the first time they take the step of confiding in another person or someone in authority and being responded to with understanding and compassion rather than disgust or scorn.

Honesty and openness, Charity and compassion. Simple words that can have such a profound impact. Until now it has been Dishonesty and secrecy, harshness and shame ... and we have seen the results and it's not been a good thing for anyone involved or the Church.

I love 1 Cor. 13 and many other Scriptures... we are to show love and compassion and kindness to one another... I would think that it is a big step to be honest and open in a humble way... and also for one to admit their struggle with this part of themselves... I'll keep praying for those who struggle with this burden.

God's Peace,

Debbie

 

[Globalnomad]

Thanks, Cat59, that was an unusualy good and informative piece. Now I understand better that there IS a genetic factor involved in homosexuality, which I did not really believe before. I'm filing your message in my archives for later reference! (I would give you reputation too, but I understand it doesn't work unless I've got at least 1,000 in reputation myself.)

 

[marciadietrich]

Having finished reading the Catholic Medical Association paper there are quite a few things they would have tagged on me as causal if I were gay. I definately had the GID (gender identity disorder). But that GID held long after I started having crushes on boys. My first crush (around 8 yrs of age) I played softball and king of the hill with him. I think I loved him because he could beat me at king of the hill. And he was cute.

Marcia

 

[Globalnomad]

Friends, I think you should read this message, that came in only today on another list I sometimes visit (Christian - not Catholic - not gay-specific - not USA).



Sorry friends - I am deleting this message. I have just realised that, even anonymously, I have no right to publish somebody's words on another board without their consent. It's a matter of principle. I know thousands of people do it every day... and this was a very heart-rending and worthy case... but it's still a principle that I believe in (even though I forgot it for a couple of hours).

I'll try and ask the person concerned for their permission and re-post the messaage if I get it.

OK, I got his permission. Here it is again.

ok i will email him [that's a counsellor they advised him to speak to]... i just hope things dont go against me.. imagine telling someone about this.. people act like they dont judge but deep down they think im a freak.. we all do that... but i'll take all your advice and do it anyway since i have nothing to lose.. i have nothing to live for anyway.. thanks everyone.. you really helped me out! God bless you all.. just one more thing.. every night when you pray.. thank God that you are normal.. thank Him that you have normal healthy desires and dont have to worry about homosexuality.. i think it's the worst sin anyone could ever be stuck with.. btw.. homosexuals are born this way.. trust me they are... i have been this way since i was born.. i know priests say its not true but they are wrong.. we are born this way just like how we are all born with natures capable of horrible things.. i was born capable of abnormal desires.. thank the Lord that even tho you are a sinner you are normal... </FONT>