Re: How Should We Respond to Homo***uality?

>>While I don't deny the words of
>>Scripture nor the Church Fathers on the subject, I never did understand
>>why many seemed so inordinately disgusted by this particular sin and so
>>tolerant of other ***ual sins.  As best I can tell, the Holy Scriptures
>>consider homo***ual *** to be simply one of many forms of fornication,
>>no worse than others.
>
> I haven't verified it myself by looking it up in Canon Law....

Remember there are many, many denominations of Christians that do not base

their theology on Canon Law.

>>  But I am reduced to guessing why it is so much more serious too;

Well, we tend to be much more understanding of sins that hit close to 
home....and less tolerant of the sins of "others".

I assume that homo***uality was thought at the time to be affecting only a

few perverts on the edge of society.

The Sins of *those people* are thought to be much more severe than the
sins 
of others.

i.e....Men (not women)made most of the rules/laws...so is it any surprise 
that when a woman was caught in adultry, she was to be stoned to death?

What happens to to the man involved?  I guess the writers of the law had 
much more understanding for him.....than her.