For example, the Catechism of the Catholic Church (2357) teaches: "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."
However, the Catechism (2357-2359) also teaches: "Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection."
In other words, homosexuality itself is not sinful per se. Rather, it is homosexual acts that are sinful.
Now, why think the Catholic Church is right about this? After all, doesn't the American Psychological Association recognize that homosexual behavior is normal? Well, unfortunately for pro-gay rights activists, the APA succumbed to political pressure and the scientific studies simply do not support this conclusion.
For example, J. Michael Bailey, himself an advocate of gay rights, concludes that, "These studies contain arguably the best published data on the association between homosexuality and psychopathology, and both converge on the same unhappy conclusion: homosexual people are at substantially higher risk for some forms of emotional problems, including suicidality, major depression, and anxiety disorder, conduct disorder, and nicotine dependence . . . The strength of the new studies is their degree of control."
What's most striking about this is that Bailey's studies (Commentary: "Homosexuality and mental illness," Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 56, pp. 876-880.) were conducted in the Netherlands, a country highly tolerant of homosexual behavior. This suggests that the mental disorders associated with homosexual behavior are not based on social stigmatism, but are demonstrably correlated.
For those who object that people are born homosexual, that point is moot. People are also born with schizophrenia, but none of us would consider such a condition good or healthy.
The Church should welcome homosexuals into full communion, so long as they abstain from homosexual acts. It may be a struggle, but who among us does not have any struggle?
Now, why think the Catholic Church is right about this? After all, doesn't the American Psychological Association recognize that homosexual behavior is normal?
ReplyDeleteThere are also Natural Law arguments along these lines, which I think are powerful.
If there's one thing I wonder, though, it's about the CCC. Isn't it in principle possible that same-sex attraction either could be lessened with counseling or psychological attention, or at the very least attraction to the opposite sex fostered? And if it's possible, should this be open as a direction of exploration for those willing and desiring to accept such treatment - even if we recognize that right now there may be no 'cure'?
ReplyDeleteFor example, J. Michael Bailey, himself an advocate of gay rights, concludes that, "These studies contain arguably the best published data on the association between homosexuality and psychopathology, and both converge on the same unhappy conclusion: homosexual people are at substantially higher risk for some forms of emotional problems, including suicidality, major depression, and anxiety disorder, conduct disorder, and nicotine dependence . . . The strength of the new studies is their degree of control."
What's most striking about this is that Bailey's studies (Commentary: "Homosexuality and mental illness," Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 56, p. 876-880.) were conducted in the Netherlands, a country highly tolerant of homosexual behavior. This suggests that the mental disorders associated with homosexual behavior are not based on social stigmatism, but are demonstrably correlated.
Correlation does not imply causation. Just because homosexuality is associated with emotional problems does not mean that it is the cause of these emotional problems: there could be a third factor that, perhaps purely by coincidence, causes both (perhaps they are both mapped onto the same gene?).
This is why I think essentialist thinking, and the resulting natural law theory of ethics, is not only misguided but also damaging to individuals. By asserting that everything has an ideal form (essence) and therefore a specific way it is "supposed" to be or act - that is, the way it normally is or acts - essentialism serves to reinforce the status quo by condemning behaviors that run contrary to it as immoral and labeling people who are different from the norm (such as homosexuals) as being "disordered" or "damaged". And this has consequences: one need only look here (I'm fairly certain that's the correct link; it's too long for me to look through to be absolutely certain right now) to see the damaging emotional consequences of being convinced that your sexual preferences are broken or immoral. Knowing personally how it feels to be completely and utterly alone, I can only imagine how it would feel if I were a homosexual and were convinced of the truth of Catholic sexual morality: never allowed to have anything more than a chaste friendship; never allowed any kind of self-stimulated sexual release; consigned to loneliness for the rest of my life because my sexual preferences are "broken" and should not be acted upon. Is it any wonder we have a reactionary LGBT movement in the U.S. that has extended its reach to the point of essentially criminalizing negative opinions about homosexuality?
Crude, I'm not sure whether counseling can have an overall positive impact. It's possible, but I'm no expert on the matter. Unfortunately, we have states like New Jersey that are considering making homosexual counseling illegal. It's as if the APA has decided once and for all what the best course of action is, and anything not in line with it is to be discarded.
ReplyDeleteCrude, I'm not sure whether counseling can have an overall positive impact. It's possible, but I'm no expert on the matter.
DeleteI'm actually not arguing that it does. Personally, I'm skeptical. I don't think we have any technology or therapy right now that 'cures' homosexuals. The question I have is whether or not such research should be pursued.
Granted, the APA has its own political psychosis going on, but that I'm not too concerned with.
ingx24,
And this has consequences: one need only look here (I'm fairly certain that's the correct link; it's too long for me to look through to be absolutely certain right now) to see the damaging emotional consequences of being convinced that your sexual preferences are broken or immoral.
You can find incidents of people who experience damaging emotional consequences of just about anything they're deeply psychologically invested in, and if they're being treated wrongly. Frankly, all of us are in various ways 'broken' - we have desires that we shouldn't have, we lack desires that would be better for us. I don't think people with SSA are in that respect in all that different a situation. The difference is in emphasis and presentation.
Also, your example is suspect: what you just described is 'the Catholic priesthood'. I think all evidence indicates that, at the very least, you are not necessarily 'consigned to loneliness for the rest of your life' just because you can't have anal sex.
Is it any wonder we have a reactionary LGBT movement in the U.S. that has extended its reach to the point of essentially criminalizing negative opinions about homosexuality?
So you're saying that, what... the fact that popular religious and cultural mores speak against the morality of same-sex sexual behavior, it makes sense that the LGBT movement wants to criminalize negative opinions about sexual acts? I agree it's no wonder, but I think it's no wonder for the same reason it's no wonder that Christians in various countries are persecuted: at times, you get people or groups in power who are fanatical. And part of the reason they get away with being fanatical is people justify what they do as a pretty reasonable reaction in context.
Attempts to criminalize negative opinions about same-sex sexual behavior, not to mention heterosexual male or female sexual behavior, are deplorable acts committed by the emotionally disturbed - and the fact that the LGBT movement apparently is incapable of accepting practically any criticism of LGBT sexual behavior whatsoever rather adds onto the suggestion that maybe, just maybe, there's something wrong with these groups even beyond their sexual preferences.
Just another problem with the anecdotal situations.
DeleteHere we have a woman. A lesbian. So devoted a lesbian, she was an activist, wrote a book about her lesbianism, and more. Considering she's now apparently happily married to her husband, something went off the rails there - so much for the earlier heartfelt testimony. She's not exactly alone in this.
ingx24, you'll notice I was careful to use the term "correlation" myself, as opposed to "causation." Maybe there is some third factor as you mention, but the APA doesn't treat this as a mere possibility. Any studies that even begin to suggest that homosexual acts are correlated with mental health disorders are virtually ignored. While correlation may not equal causation, it's just a step away. The APA's solution has been self-affirmation, which is all fine and good, but it's not good if it's at the cost of some greater matter of health.
ReplyDeleteNow, I don't think of anecdotal evidence as constituting a compelling argument. That blogger certainly has my sympathy, but to use his post as an argument for the normalization of homosexual behavior is just to commit an appeal to emotion.
Do these studies show a corrfelation between homosexuality and higher risks for emotional problems or between homosexual activities and such higher risks?
ReplyDeleteDo they compare the potential risks of "chaste" homosexuals with those of "practising" homosexuals?
Because that's the real issue. The question is not whether it's better for someone not to be homosexual but whether it's better for someone who is homosexual to abstain from sexual relations.
Just a quick point about the often heard remark that the fact that those studies were conducted in the Netherlands somehow increases their reliability because the Netherlands is suppose to be highly tolerant of homosexual behaviour. While the last part is certainly true when it comes to official policy it is also true that the Netherlands are also the home of some religious groups that are very intolerant of homosexual behaviour. Calvinism e.g. has left its mark on Dutch society, and even though most Dutch people are not calvinists anymore, the influence on the Dutch society is still huge.
Also the Catholic Church in the Netherlands tends to be much more conservative than e.g. the Catholic church in Belgium. In Belgium, the majority of Catholics are much more pragmatic. As a result the actual tolerance of homosexual behaviour may be much higher in Belgium and in other countries than it is in the Netherlands.
So, while this may suggest "that the mental disorders associated with homosexual behavior are not based on social stigmatism" this is far from a certainty.
Walter, I agree with you that further studies need to be made. I'd love to read a study that compares sexually active homosexuals with abstinent homosexuals, but I haven't found any such studies yet.
ReplyDeleteNow, only 7% of Catholics in the Netherlands attend Mass each week. Only about 30% of Protestants regularly go to church, and even Muslims have a surprisingly low weekly turnout (27%). These are staggering statistics for a once religiously conservative nation. Nobody's talking about certainty, though. Psychologists and psychiatrists are doing scientific studies, which will lead us to probabilities less than 100%.
http://www.cbs.nl/en-GB/menu/themas/vrije-tijd-cultuur/publicaties/artikelen/archief/2008/2008-2476-wm.htm
The situation in Belgium, once an almost exclusively Catholic country doesn't differ too much I guess,but attending or not attending Mass is not always relevant for how someone feels about issues like homosexual relations. Sometimes deep-rooted religious prejudice survives for quite a long time after someone has even completely broken with his or her religion. I know this from my own experience.
DeleteSo it is very well possible for a homosexual who does not attend Mass or does not go to church to experience social stigmatism (or at least to feel that way).
It's possible, but it's also speculative. By the way, I don't deny that social stigma is responsible for any of these results. The problem, though, is that we find the same results in the U.S., where homosexual behavior is less tolerated. If lingering effects of social stigma alone were responsible for Bailey's results, then we should find a correlation between tolerance and mental health.
DeleteHowever, this is not the case. Michael Wallis Ross's cross-cultural study of Denmark, the Netherlands, and the U.S. demonstrated that there were no significant differences in mental health disorders despite the varying levels of hostility. You can look these studies up for yourself if you'd like.
It's not as simple as that. The feeling of being "different" is also an important factor.
DeleteAnd there is also the question of whether these mental problems can be cured without interfering in a relationship. If that's possible, then society has a duty to invets in those kinds of treatments.
The feeling of being different is an appeal to emotion. We have to look at the facts in addition to being charitable. I reply to your following comments below.
DeleteCrude, I just wanted to remark that I agree with you that we should at least raise the question of whether further research should be done on homosexual psychotherapy. While the older measures, such as electroshock therapy, are out of the question, conversion therapy on the other hand has had mixed success. I'm basing this conclusion on the studies I've read, which I can't recall off the top of my head. The studies usually showed that conversion therapy helped some, made no difference to others, and actually made things worse for some. If there could be a way to avoid that last unfortunate scenario, and I think it's a possibility that should be further explored, then why not offer this treatment to homosexuals who would rather live a heterosexual lifestyle? Unfortunately, the political pressures are mounting and this potentiality might never be realized.
ReplyDeleteI'm just going out on a limb, by the way. I'm not a trained therapist, so to anyone reading, this is just a layman's opinion.
I'm just going out on a limb, by the way. I'm not a trained therapist, so to anyone reading, this is just a layman's opinion.
DeleteI don't think the opinion of a 'trained therapist' really has all that much value over your own opinion when it comes to what I'm asking. Maybe they'd be more well-read about the current state of therapy and the measured results, but not about the viability of the prospect in general.
Either way, alright, I understand. Maybe a possible solution will be chemical. Maybe it will be therapeutic. Maybe it will be something that would have to be identified and treated at birth - the prospect of which I imagine will open up quite a can of worms.
Yeah I mean, there could be a multitude of potential treatments. The APA should be open to them, and not reject them because of political pressure. If they continue rejecting these hypotheses without taking them seriously, then they're no longer doing science, but trying to make all of the available data fit in with what they've already concluded.
DeleteWhat is important here is what the homosexual person wants for him/herself. If this person wants to go through this therapy, then this therapy should be available if there is sufficient reason to think the benefits will outweigh the risks.
ReplyDeleteIf, however this person is happy in a homosexual relation, then nobody should interfere.
I don't think anybody's talking about interfering. If such a therapy were available, then the homosexual person ought to be able to get said therapy freely.
DeleteYes, I am explicitly ruling out coercive interference. I don't think it's appropriate for Anthony Weiner either, for the record. Not every sexual issue is an issue for the state.
DeleteBut research and the option should be available for those who actually want this. And for the record, given the anecdotal evidence, I would suggest that therapy may actually do wonders for some/many female 'homosexuals'.