When liberal-minded people attempt to debate the Roman Catholic Church on her various teachings, they always make the mistake of approaching the table with secular arguments, while the Roman Catholic Church is approaching the table with theological arguments. The disparate paradigms make fruitful debate impossible.

As a homosexual who is also a Roman Catholic, I often struggled with the her teaching on homosexual intercourse; the Roman Catholic Church does not teach that being a homosexual is a sin; rather, it is the act of intercourse between two persons of the same gender that is sinful.

The reason for this teaching is that, according to the Roman Catholic Church, the purpose of intercourse is twofold: procreation and bonding. As procreation can only occur between two people of opposite genders, homosexual intercourse is disordered, and therefore sinful.

As I continued to give thought to the matter, I recalled the Roman Catholic Church's teaching regarding birth control. The Roman Catholic Church teaches that artificial birth controlcondoms, the Pill, etc. – is sinful, but natural birth control – and here I do not mean the rhythm method, but rather the much more precise Dr. Billings' Method of Ovulation – is not. (An explanation of that area is another node entirely. Take it at face value for this node.) According to the Roman Catholic Church, a married couple can practice natural birth control, therefore not procreating, and therefore fulfilling only one of the two purposes of intercourse.

I brought this fact to bear on the teaching on homosexual intercourse. If two people of the same gender are in a loving, committed relationship, then their act of intercourse would fulfill one of the two purposes of said act, namely bonding, and therefore would not be commiting a sinful act.

I have used this argument with fellow Roman Catholics who are conservative-minded, and in the face of a theological justification, they find that their own argument against homosexual intercourse does not stand up.