cornel wrote: > >Incidentally, I prefer the term homosexual >disposition(s) rather than homosexual attitudes as per >your subject. Do you have a view on this point? >
Cornel, That subject heading was given by Fr. Ivo. I merely hit the reply button. I would prefer your characterization of it. Alternatively, homosexual orientation. Fr. Ivo wrote: > >First, does it (homosexuality) not produce any >adverse effects? > Yes. As I have said many times now, homosexuality does not produce any adverse psychological or social effects. Please read the following reviews to obtain empirical data in support of this assertion: Gonsiorek, J.C. (1991) The empirical basis for the demise of the illness model of homosexuality. In: Gonsiorek JC, Weinrich JD, eds. Homosexuality: research implications for public policy. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage, pages 115-37. Friedman, R. C. and Downey, J. I. (1994) Homosexuality, New England Journal of Medicine, Volume 331, Number 14, pages 923-930. > >Secondly, even conceding it, could we say that it is >"normal" and morally right, because of lack of >consequences? > Yes. As far as I am concerned, I do not want to pass an arbitrary moral judgment against a behavioral trait that does not have adverse psychological or social consequences. Cheers, Santosh
