fasef

cite
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049089X16000314


In contemporary America, Catholicism has shown itself as a great opponent of homosexuality (and other gender and sexuality alternatives) through biblical citations and reasoning derived from the Vatican’s interpretation. The Church’s more recent attempts can also be seen through appeals to science and logos with attacks made on the integrity of homosexual marriage and the unnatural and purposeless existence of these people in the human race. These protective measures are in order to further push the perpetuation of their religious practices and abstentions on a society that is slowly moving away from organized religion and towards a more accepting consciences.
Une Petite Histoire
 "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."            (Leviticus 18:22)
"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." (Leviticus 20:13)
“And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet." (Romans 1:27)
In a biblical context, we can see why homosexuality has been so detestable to Catholicism. These instances from the Old Testament are most of the basis for the anti-homosexual rhetoric we are seeing from Catholics as well as fundamental Protestants. In the new world translation, it can be noted that these excerpts become much more specific in their references to homosexuality, which is a direct example of how the belief system of the church has been relatively unchanged. In tandem with the repression of homosexuality, we can also see that sexuality and the exploration of one’s body is also considered sinful and unnatural. Some excerpts even state that harm should come because of these behaviors, implying that it is an action that can be changed or deserves punishment. Referring to sexually alternative acts as an ‘abomination’ is direct conformation of the homo-negative beliefs of the church.
There is also data that supports that those whom adhere to more rigid traditional practices are more likely to be in favor of the limitation of civil rights. “People who are more committed and involved with their religion are more likely than others to disapprove of homosexuality” (Amy Adamczyk, Katharine A. Boyd, Brittany E. Hayes 2015). Although not all who identify as Catholic (or to any religion for that matter) happen to be homophobic, there is enough data to support that there is a relationship between the two. That, in addition to biblical scripture specifically stating detest for LGBTQ people, will be the basis for the coming writing and should be heard knowing there are many exceptions.
Historically, it is important to understand that the political system of the United States has stayed close to religious fundamentalism in regards to sex and gender during this time period. Unlike other countries that have strayed from traditional values (generally opting to support individual values), Americans have successfully incorporated faith and character into the political process. Religious groups can be seen in very close contact with the political system. An excellent example of this would be the Nixon era’s movement to return to ‘family values’ and Christian fundamentals (which soon became synonymous with conservatism). With a rapidly globalizing economy after the end of the cold war, the Watergate scandal causing increased political polarization, the incorporation of The Internet into research, the HIV & AIDS crisis, and greater technological advancement being achieved (among many other things), the stage was set for the contemporary situation between religious conservatives and the LGBTQ community we see today.
Appel a la science de Christianity
Christians appeal to science to convince others to believe what they think. While there are still studies being made and supported by Christians to prove the inherent negativity of homosexuality, we often find that opponents like to bring things back to such abstract concepts as what it means to raise a family, rather than the quantifiable outcomes or empirical data about same sex parenting. This is due to the fact that the scientific community has overwhelmingly supported same sex parenting, causing opponents to discredit the consensus rather than put their own argument at the same objective level. The acknowledgement of previous studies makes the counter argument seem more thought out or viable, even if it doesn’t disprove many of the things that these previous studies proved. As you can see below, the study exemplifies how the researcher does not refute the ability of same sex parents to raise a child, but it brings the subject back to how they have [negatively] changed an institutional definition of what it means to morally/correctly raise a child.
“While it is certainly accurate to affirm that sexual orientation or parental sexual behavior need have nothing to do with the ability to be a good, effective parent, the data evaluated herein using population-based estimates drawn from a large, nationally-representative sample of young Americans suggest that it may affect the reality of family experiences among a significant number.”   (Mark Regnerus, 2012)

The critique of homosexual couple’s impact on their children made by conservative Christians is well documented as being incorrect. While criticism is an important part of the scientific process, this is an example of a study made just to further support the pre-existing bias of the researcher. There are few credible studies made that objectively show that same sex parents are ineffective parents through specific, measurable outcomes.
The study titled “Scientific Consensus, The Law, and Same Sex Parenting Outcomes” by Jimi Adams and Ryan Light compiled approximately 21,000 other studies in order to decide whether or not the scientific community had truly reached a consensus on same sex parenting. They concluded that same sex parenting is no different from opposite sex parenting, proving that there is no negative effect on rearing the next generation.


The idea of traditional marriage as a large societal regulatory institution roots itself in the assumption that homosexuality is a perversion of the human experience.
This has been applied to a genetic and evolutionary perspective as well as a culturally important reason






http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049089X16000314