The Catholic Church teaches that homosexual behavior is a sin

Now, do not misunderstand; latent homosexual tendencies are not sinful, but rather temptations. The Catholic position is that homosexuality, like marital infidelity or gluttony, is not sinful until acted out. Is a recovering alcoholic guilty of the sin of drunkenness? No, but if he wallows in his drunkenness he is committing a sin.

---

Consider this quote from the Apostle Paul:

"Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God" (1 Cor. 6:9--10, NIV).

Note that sexual immorality is mentioned four times in Paul's list; it is clearly considered a serious offense to commit sexual sin. Homosexuality is actually mentioned twice in this list directly; male prostitutes and homosexual offenders. There is clearly a Biblical injunction against the ACT of homosexuality. While the nature/nurture argument is frequently employed in the discussion of the sinful nature of homosexuality, it really does not matter; in the end the homosexual still has a choice in what he or she does. One may have inborn tendencies (or not) but those tendencies are subject to volitional control, and they can be resisted. If a person is alcoholic he can choose not to drink. If he is subject to obesity he can choose not to overeat. If a person is wrathful he may teach himself gentleness. If Prideful he may choose humility. The point is, as the Bible pointed out, as a man thinketh, so shall he be; we become what we will ourselves to become. Does it make our temptations any easier? Over time, yes, but the temptations do not go away. It's hard, but not impossible. The point is, we are self-willed in this world to a degree. Consider the work on Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder by Jeffrey Schwartz; Schwartz's research illustrated that the brain can literally rewire itself based on an act of will. Schwartz, a devotee of eastern meditation, had patients who were tormented with OCD apply mindful meditation to their problems, with the goal of bypassing the "stuck" circuits in their brains. Schwarz discovered that, yes, people could rewire their neural network, weakening the damaged area and replacing it with a new circuit. His worked caused an uproar in science because the mapping of the human brain had materialists confident that they could explain consciousness as the sum of the neural parts, and the idea that the brain is itself subject to an act of will demolished the notion that the mind is merely an accidental creation of the brain. Schwarz attributes this to quantum physics, however the great Roger Penrose pointed out that the brain seems to operate by it's own laws of physics, with neither quantum nor classical physics being able to explain neural processes adequately. To be exact, Penrose said:

"In my view the conscious brain does not act according to classical physics. It doesn't even act according to conventional quantum mechanics. It acts according to a theory we don't yet have."

At any rate, Schwarz's work seems to dignify the Biblical concept that we really can choose who and what we want to be. The point is that we have to work at it; nothing comes easy. Which brings us back to the matter of sin; if homosexual behavior is sinful, does it not stand to reason that the Church should discourage the celebration of such behavior? After all, the whole purpose of the Church is to encourage people to act in virtuous ways, so as to attain Heaven. Well, the Catholic Church is failing miserably in that category. Young people are especially vulnerable to outside influences, and one would think the Catholic Church should logically discourage celebrations of sin - especially in the Church's sphere of influence. That is not the case; a recent study by TFP Student Action shows that of the 244 Catholic institutions of higher learning in the United States, 101 of them (41%) have homosexual clubs or organizations listed on their official websites. All 28 Jesuit-run institutions in the U.S. have homosexual organizations. (See the list here ) For example, St. Michael's College in Vermont hosts Common Ground, a group dedicated to " educate the community about issues concerning homosexuality, to create a safe and supportive environment for all students and to sponsor workshops, panels and speakers which address issues of concern to the lesbian, gay and bisexual members of our community" and yet the school also hosts an anti-drinking organization designed to cool the collegiate ardor for drunkenness. So boozing is bad but sodomy is to be encouraged? The Gay Straight Alliance of Loyola Marymount in L.A. offers such events as the Gayla and National Coming out Day. Boston College has a Lesbian and Gay Faculty, Staff, and Administrators Association whose purpose is to advocate for homosexual norming. The school's student newspaper (the Heights) penned an editorial openly calling for a re-evaluation of Church doctrine on homosexuality. The list goes on, and it would be instructive for the reader to go through all of these organizations to see how far from they have rebelled from Church teaching. The point is, one cannot call a university or other institution Catholic if it openly defies what the Catholic Church teaches any more than a devotee of Marx can be called a free market capitalist. Catholic is defined by what Catholics are supposed to believe. And Pope Benedict XVI has solidly reaffirmed this teaching in his book/interview "Light of the World: The Pope, the Church and the Signs of the Times":

"The pope said the church needs to hold firm on this point, "even if it is not pleasing to our age." He said it was still an open question whether homosexual inclinations are innate or arise early in life. In any case, he said, if these are strong inclinations, it represents "a great trial" for the homosexual. "But this does not mean that homosexuality thereby becomes morally right. Rather, it remains contrary to the essence of what God originally willed," he said. When Seewald said that homosexuality exists in monasteries and among the clergy, even if not acted out, the pope responded: "Well, that is just one of the miseries of the church. And the persons who are affected must at least try not to express this inclination actively."' He further reaffirmed that homosexual behavior is "disordered".

Yet those in academia claiming to represent the RC Church are still ignoring this moral issue, preferring to excuse sinful acts because they "feel" normal. Imagine if you will a club celebrating sado-masochism being officially accepted on a Catholic campus; the # could argue that his or her natural impulses are to be abused, and the sadist that his or her natural impulses are to abuse. Under the reasoning employed by these universities, a Catholic institution would be morally bound to accept and, indeed, celebrate this "lifestyle". Where does it end? Will Catholic institutions be filled with adulterer's clubs, fornicator's clubs, bestiality clubs, animal abuser's clubs, polygamist clubs? How far do we carry this belief that people are "born that way" and so should be treated as not just normal, but celebrated? Fornication is as normal as all of nature; animals don't marry, simply go at it as their lusts dictate. Should we establish fornicators clubs on Catholic campuses? The fundamental assumption is that human beings do not have free will but are black boxes, a series of conditioned responses and neural automatons. That behavior is subject to the desires of free will is dismissed by these leftists, for they seek to justify that which is pleasing to them. And young people, free from parental supervision for the first time, will find themselves pressured (both by their own lusts and those smiling faces telling them it is o.k.) to join with those who support sin and to surrender to their own. It is a doctrine of damnation. And if we are to excuse homosexual behavior on campus, why do we not excuse those perverted priests who indulged their own particular foul sins on their young charges? Aren't these "gay clubs" doing what the pedophile priests did, albeit to teenagers rather than minors? Both are seducing and betraying the young students that the Church is supposed to be trying to protect. Why should the Church be guilty for silence when a priests sodomizes a 15 year old but not guilty - actually praiseworthy - when a club for 18 to 21 year olds advocates for sodomy? Yes, it's a matter of a legal definition of age of majority, but the reality is that both bear a striking resemblance. The homosexual is a person. He or she is entitled to dignity, to love, to live life. Nobody has a right to harass or compel them. That said, it should be pointed out that the wages of sin is death, and to celebrate sin is to send them smiling and laughing down the footpath to Hell. Is that love? Can those self-righteous leftists running Catholic universities actually claim they are the standard-bearers for love, when they so easily tolerate the death of the souls of their charges? If they really were charitable and loving they would promote organizations to help those struggling with such urges, rather than celebrate them. (At least promote equal time for such groups.) If nothing else, the homosexual lifestyle is horrible destructive physically and emotionally. Is it kindness to encourage it? The real haters of gays are the LGBT-friendly professors, excusers, and enablers. They are the ones who seek the ruin of these suffering souls. A Catholic university is supposed to represent Catholic beliefs and dogma; why are "Catholic" professors and administrators openly defying a well-established Church teaching, one that states clearly that damnation is the end result? TFP Student Action has a petition for Catholics who want an end to this seduction of our youth and rebellion against Church teachings. Interested individuals may view it here. Thanks to John Ritchie, director of TFP, for the tip.