# Will gay acceptance erode the Bible's authority? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 27, 2014, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-gay-acceptance-erode-the-bibles-authority/682414 "2014-02-27T14:10:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 11
**Author:** ![drewtwo99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d07c76/32.png) [@drewtwo99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drewtwo99)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2014, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-gay-acceptance-erode-the-bibles-authority/682414/201 "2014-03-11T23:57:37Z")
Well since no method of birth control is 100% effective, then the Catholic Church should be ok with all of it, because it’s still a “type of act that could be fertile.” ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-gay-acceptance-erode-the-bibles-authority/682414/202 "2014-03-12T00:42:02Z")
> [@Zero-syde](#): > > But, unfortunately, unless you _already assume it’s true_ it’s just a random assertion with no support and a lot of double-talk. It’s not fair to take an excerpt out of context and claim it’s a “random assertion with no support and a lot of double-talk.” I claim neither to really understand nor to really agree with the Catholic Church’s position, but they have put some thought into it, and unless I take the trouble to study what they’ve said about it and to understand their point of view (and the “natural law” approach to ethics on which it’s based), I can’t claim that it’s irrational or unsupported. I don’t know whether it’s a fair representation or not, but I see the RCC position as saying that contraception is like bulimia: to use artificial birth control is to the act of sex sort of what chewing and spitting out the food rather than swallowing it, or eating it and then vomitting it back up again, is to the act of eating. For a naturally infertile person to have sex would be analogous to a person eating something that their bodies couldn’t digest and extract nutritional value from. ---
**Author:** ![Frank\_Merton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Frank\_Merton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank_Merton)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 10:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-gay-acceptance-erode-the-bibles-authority/682414/203 "2014-03-12T10:33:42Z")
Bulimia is not a sin. Nor is Metphormin, but neither is “natural.” (Metphormin is a drug that helps diabetics and pre-diabetics control blood sugar levels by interfering with the “normal” activity of the liver. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 10:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-gay-acceptance-erode-the-bibles-authority/682414/204 "2014-03-12T10:58:02Z")
Speaking of the Catholic Church… [Cardinal Dolan: Pope Francis opened door to gay civil unions debate](http://ncronline.org/news/politics/cardinal-dolan-pope-francis-opened-door-gay-civil-unions-debate) > [@](#): > > The Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera last week published an interview with the pope in which Francis reiterated the church’s teaching that marriage “is between a man and a woman” while acknowledging that governments want to adopt civil unions for gay couples and others to allow for economic and health benefits, for example. > > Francis said the churches in various countries must account for those reasons when formulating public policy positions. “We must consider different cases and evaluate each particular case,” he said. > > It was the first time a pope had ever held out the possibility of the church accepting some legal arrangement for same-sex couples, and the remarks prompted a wave of stories, some indicating that the pope had endorsed civil unions or was even signaling an acceptance of gay marriage. While that’s not remotely an endorsement of civil unions, it’s not remotely a condemnation of them either. So clearly gay acceptance is eroding the Bible’s authority, when they’ve even got the Pope on their side. /thread ---
**Author:** ![Frank\_Merton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Frank\_Merton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank_Merton)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 11:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-gay-acceptance-erode-the-bibles-authority/682414/205 "2014-03-12T11:19:42Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > Speaking of the Catholic Church… > > [Cardinal Dolan: Pope Francis opened door to gay civil unions debate](http://ncronline.org/news/politics/cardinal-dolan-pope-francis-opened-door-gay-civil-unions-debate) > > While that’s not remotely an endorsement of civil unions, it’s not remotely a condemnation of them either. > > So clearly gay acceptance is eroding the Bible’s authority, when they’ve even got the Pope on their side. > > /thread It sure reads to me as an endorsement, but sheesh the civil unions idea is ancient history. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 11:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-gay-acceptance-erode-the-bibles-authority/682414/206 "2014-03-12T11:24:23Z")
> [@Frank\_Merton](#): > > It sure reads to me as an endorsement, but sheesh the civil unions idea is ancient history. On his latest podcast Dan Savage makes the same point - endorsement of civil unions would have been good in 1985. Nowadays they’re an idea whose time has passed - marriage equality is rapidaly taking root across the western world, and civil unions would be a step backwards. That said, one must recognize the major effort involved in dragging the Church forward to 1985 from its former position of, what, Vatican II? Some progress is better than no progress. ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 12:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-gay-acceptance-erode-the-bibles-authority/682414/207 "2014-03-12T12:11:11Z")
> [@steronz](#): > > I honestly haven’t asked that level of detail, but let’s assume the former. They’re intentionally avoiding sex when they’re the most “fruitful” so they can avoid “multiplying,” while spilling all kinds of seed when they know they’re not at all fruitful. > > IIRC correctly, their argument was that condoms prevent God’s will from happening, but having sex when they have good reason to think there’s no fertile eggs present doesn’t interfere with God’s will because he could always make her ovulate if he really wanted to, and she’d have no way of knowing. But that seems specious to me, since God could also poke a hole in the condom (they’re only 99% effective, after all) and since the whole motivation behind the rhythm method is that they’re making it as hard as possible for God to work his fertilization magic. I find this reason very interesting; They must not have sex if it is a woman’s fertile time is also interfering with their God’s plan, I understand that it is because God could still cause a pregnancy if so chosen, then why can’t God have the condom break or the pill fail? It looks like a way to just run another’s life. or cause them fear. ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 12:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-gay-acceptance-erode-the-bibles-authority/682414/208 "2014-03-12T12:12:51Z")
> [@Hector\_St\_Clare](#): > > Also, "natural family planning " =/= “rhythm method”. We know a lot more about human reproductive physiology now than in the 1930s. Modern natural family planning methods may use a variety of indicators of ovulation (basal body temperature, vaginal mucus consistency, presence of particular hormones in the urine), and don’t simply rely on looking at the calendar. The most recent studies on state-of-the-art NFP suggests that they are a bit less effective than the pill (under typical use), but probably as good or better than the condom. I can furnish cites on request. And that is natural??? ---
**Author:** ![Hector\_St\_Clare](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5ac83/32.png) [@Hector\_St\_Clare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hector_St_Clare)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 12:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-gay-acceptance-erode-the-bibles-authority/682414/209 "2014-03-12T12:18:12Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > Speaking of the Catholic Church… > > [Cardinal Dolan: Pope Francis opened door to gay civil unions debate](http://ncronline.org/news/politics/cardinal-dolan-pope-francis-opened-door-gay-civil-unions-debate) > > While that’s not remotely an endorsement of civil unions, it’s not remotely a condemnation of them either. > > So clearly gay acceptance is eroding the Bible’s authority, when they’ve even got the Pope on their side. > > /thread How is any of that relevant to catholic moral teaching about the morality (or not) of homosexuality? He’s talking about what governments should be allowed to do, not about whether homosexual acts are a sin or not. It’s perfectly consistent with orthodox Roman Catholic teaching, today, to believe that it’s not the role of the state to impose Catholic morality on people. ---
**Author:** ![Hector\_St\_Clare](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5ac83/32.png) [@Hector\_St\_Clare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hector_St_Clare)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 12:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-gay-acceptance-erode-the-bibles-authority/682414/210 "2014-03-12T12:19:43Z")
I don’t know if the Catholic Church will ever change it’s position on the morality of homosexual acts, but if they do, it won’t be for a while yet. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 12:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-gay-acceptance-erode-the-bibles-authority/682414/211 "2014-03-12T12:52:51Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > Good Lord, yes. What a blast of gibberish! The act of love is only valid if jizz is received? A condom is a barrier to real meaningful sex? The only value of sex is the risk of conception, otherwise it’s “mutual masturbation?” > > I can see these guys don’t have a clue about fellatio and cunnilingus. I don’t know the Catholic church’s position on oral sex to orgasm, but given it’s nonsense about birth control and vaginal sex, I’d guess the situation is one of these: - the church has some twisted logic for why it’s okay while still insisting that sex can only be for pregnancy - the church forbids it altogether and millions of Catholics ignore that and do it anyway and gets used to ignoring church doctrine, further eroding its authority Stupid either way. ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-gay-acceptance-erode-the-bibles-authority/682414/212 "2014-03-12T13:50:30Z")
i.e. “I don’t know what they say, but whatever it is, it must be stupid.” ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 1:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-gay-acceptance-erode-the-bibles-authority/682414/213 "2014-03-12T13:54:26Z")
> [@Thudlow\_Boink](#): > > i.e. “I don’t know what they say, but whatever it is, it must be stupid.” I’m not sure it’s entirely unreasonable to expect that chaste people have unrealistic views about sex. ---
**Author:** ![Hector\_St\_Clare](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5ac83/32.png) [@Hector\_St\_Clare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hector_St_Clare)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-gay-acceptance-erode-the-bibles-authority/682414/214 "2014-03-12T13:58:42Z")
The Catholic Church considers oral sex to orgasm to be a sin, and always has. ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-gay-acceptance-erode-the-bibles-authority/682414/215 "2014-03-12T14:21:07Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > I’m not sure it’s entirely unreasonable to expect that chaste people have unrealistic views about sex. If their sexual ethics are solely based on logic, their celibacy shouldn’t be relevant. From my (limited!) perspective, the problem with their sexual ethics isn’t irrationality or twisted logic, it’s that they rely _too much_ on logic and rational deduction, unchecked by reality (which might reveal flaws in the premises their logic is based on). ---
**Author:** ![Hector\_St\_Clare](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5ac83/32.png) [@Hector\_St\_Clare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hector_St_Clare)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-gay-acceptance-erode-the-bibles-authority/682414/216 "2014-03-12T14:32:38Z")
> [@Thudlow\_Boink](#): > > If their sexual ethics are solely based on logic, their celibacy shouldn’t be relevant. > > From my (limited!) perspective, the problem with their sexual ethics isn’t irrationality or twisted logic, it’s that they rely _too much_ on logic and rational deduction, unchecked by reality (which might reveal flaws in the premises their logic is based on). I think this is true. The Eastern Orthodox have been making that criticism of Roman Catholicism for a very long time, and they have a point. ---
**Author:** ![Frank\_Merton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Frank\_Merton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank_Merton)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 2:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-gay-acceptance-erode-the-bibles-authority/682414/217 "2014-03-12T14:41:28Z")
Maybe some need to keep in mind the Pharisees who deduced all sorts of rules from the Law and forgot that the shepard will and should break the Sabbath to save a lost sheep. The problem with using logic to determine moral rules is that while the process is necessary, it should be kept a simple matter of what does the most harm verses what does the most good, and, in addition, save the lost sheep on the Sabbath. And remember that human beings are not terribly good at logic, and even worse in committee. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-gay-acceptance-erode-the-bibles-authority/682414/218 "2014-03-12T17:37:19Z")
> [@Hector\_St\_Clare](#): > > The Catholic Church considers oral sex to orgasm to be a sin, and always has. Thanks. So it’s option b - millions (my estimate, without backup, but most people would roll their eyes if you said it wasn’t a good guess) of Catholics routinely ignore church teachings on sex because they know they are stupid. This is, not surprisingly, leading to people noticing that church teachings can be stupid, and feeling courageous enough to ignore them. Not a good trend for the church. ---
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-gay-acceptance-erode-the-bibles-authority/682414/219 "2014-03-12T18:37:49Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Thanks. > > So it’s option b - millions (my estimate, without backup, but most people would roll their eyes if you said it wasn’t a good guess) of Catholics routinely ignore church teachings on sex because they know they are stupid. > > This is, not surprisingly, leading to people noticing that church teachings can be stupid, and feeling courageous enough to ignore them. > > Not a good trend for the church. Don’t ask for a cite because I’ll likely not be able to find it, but I recall some years ago a self-identified Catholic here on the SDMB was actually _offended_ at the idea that he or she followed everything the Catholic Church (or maybe the Pope) said. Not just denying it, but literally found the idea offensive that we would think that a Catholic would follow the Catholic Church or the Catholic leader entirely. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-gay-acceptance-erode-the-bibles-authority/682414/220 "2014-03-12T18:45:44Z")
> [@Revtim](#): > > Don’t ask for a cite because I’ll likely not be able to find it, but I recall some years ago a self-identified Catholic here on the SDMB was actually _offended_ at the idea that he or she followed everything the Catholic Church (or maybe the Pope) said. Not just denying it, but literally found the idea offensive that we would think that a Catholic would follow the Catholic Church or the Catholic leader entirely. Well, sure, because many Catholics think for themselves. Which is my point. She was actually offended by the idea that the church has, or claims to have, actual authority. That shows you how eroded its authority has become. People are going to use their brains to think past irrational religious teachings. It’s inevitable. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-gay-acceptance-erode-the-bibles-authority/682414.md?page=10) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-gay-acceptance-erode-the-bibles-authority/682414.md?page=12)