redhotswami
Blue Crack Addict
Ormus said:Where I get deeply disappointed in the Catholic Church is in the fact that they have embraced science and textual Biblical scholarship so deeply in the 20th century as to be admirable. While much of American Protestantism bickers over the issue of creationism versus evolution, the Catholic Church has long backed evolution, based on the science, coming to the theological conclusion that God can create through such science (this has nothing to do with Protestant "intelligent design," as ID demands strict changes to science, while Catholicism accepts the scientific conclusions about evolution completely). And, yet, it seems like all this fairly reasonable theology is overshadowed by its nonsensical clinging to "natural law" pseudoscience. And, frankly, I don't get it, except that such misanthropic attitudes as espoused in "natural law" have become so core to "Catholic tradition" that they cannot even think of a way to get rid of it. But, in the process, the more they try to reassert "natural law," the more irrelevant and foolish they look.
"Pride," after all, is a vice, not a virtue.
But I still don't understand why they view it so wrong if people are naturally born homosexual. It pisses me off that they even use the term "sexual orientation." HELLO! O-RI-EN-TA-TION!!!! that implies it right there. Making a homosexual engage in heterosexual acts is unnatural. And do you perhaps have an explanation as to why they accept evolution but not the APA saying that people are born into homosexuality?