The Homosexuality Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Duke
- 9,138 comments
- 447,829 views
- 12,993
- USA! USA!
Err, who cares if Bob gives John a handjob? Is it really anyone's business?
That being said, I've got nothing against a homosexual.
That being said, I've got nothing against a homosexual.
- 9,209
- DerAlta
I've never had to take a stance on In Vitro Ferilization. At last point that I checked, IVF still required semen and an egg. So, are you asking can there be conception without intercourse? And do I really believe in the immaculate conception? If I do answer this, we'll degenerate into a conversation of "Is there really a god?" I believe that there are a few other threads related to that. After that I suppose we could get into the further discussion realted to "Does a clone have a spirit?". We'll reserve that for another thread.
My wife and I have made a choice to not have children. A surgical choice. If others are not given that choice, but are parents that can raise a child, I firmly believe that medical science is there to help them. While I cannot pass judgement if God see this as right or wrong, I will say that I support having this option available for parents.
God does say homosexuality is wrong. I know that. However, I am not the one who makes the judgement call. I accpet that rule and live with my fellow people in the best way that I can.
AO
- 10,832
Wether or not homosexiality is a choice is the heart of this discussion. If it is, it opens the door for every value judgement possible. Words like "sin" become relevant. If it is not, then it's simply a state of being, as natural as being alive, and comments like "sin against god," or the one above can only be bigoted.
The most important choice in this thread, then, would be the decision to believe homosexuality to be a choice or not.
Everything is a choice, even things that may seem constant or given. Gays have no outward biological marker that separates them from non-gays; this is where the decision to believe homosexuality is a choice finds its justification. And I am suspicious of any justification based on a lack of evidence to the contrary.
I posted above, but will repeat here, that I used to know a gay male well, and he told me that he knew he was gay from a very young age. When he reached the age of sexuality and had his first sexual experiences, he "chose" to be non-gay, to be sexualy active with a girl. It made him sick, and I always interpreted his description of the way it felt to be akin to what it'd feel like for me to have sex with a man: wrong... for me.
How many people would argue with the apparent fact that for a pubescent, teenage boy to be repulsed by sexual activity with an attractive girl, something bigger than mere whim is at work? It's almost impossible for me to understand. It is not a wise choice to be gay, it doesn't open any doors, it invites hate and ridicule, may alienate one's family and friends, and in general is not easy. As a choice it is not very beneficial.
The only choice involved is the choice to be yourself, whatever that is; it is not so unbelievable for me that not all men like women just because I do.
People use god to justify all kinds of irrational value judgements. And they all believe they have god's truth to back them up, all of them, whether you and I agree or not. Therefore comments like "sin against god" referring to gays immediately sinks into the realm of religiously justified hate.
If I were to say: "God clearly states in the bible that white people are superior in every way to all other races. But I don't hate them, I just know god favors me and my kind and for that reason I pity them and am compelled to help them, to change them, to pray for them," (which is exactly what millions of people do believe I would be called a patronizing, condecending, racist bigot. But we can say homosexiality, something that trancends race, time, and location, is a "sin against god" with complete confidence that everybody will "accept our views," when all it is, is watered down bigotry. All it shows is that we are nowhere near as liberated as we like to believe we are.
Being hung up on how a person reaches orgasm in the manifold characteristics of a person is small, indeed. And some day, in a dangerously overpopulated world, homsexuality may well end up being one of the most usefull traits of humanity yet.
And one funny thing about bigotry is that it is most hidden from the very ones who live it. The suggstion that their view could be bigoted leaves then flabbergasted and offended. This alone, however, changes nothing.
The most important choice in this thread, then, would be the decision to believe homosexuality to be a choice or not.
Everything is a choice, even things that may seem constant or given. Gays have no outward biological marker that separates them from non-gays; this is where the decision to believe homosexuality is a choice finds its justification. And I am suspicious of any justification based on a lack of evidence to the contrary.
I posted above, but will repeat here, that I used to know a gay male well, and he told me that he knew he was gay from a very young age. When he reached the age of sexuality and had his first sexual experiences, he "chose" to be non-gay, to be sexualy active with a girl. It made him sick, and I always interpreted his description of the way it felt to be akin to what it'd feel like for me to have sex with a man: wrong... for me.
How many people would argue with the apparent fact that for a pubescent, teenage boy to be repulsed by sexual activity with an attractive girl, something bigger than mere whim is at work? It's almost impossible for me to understand. It is not a wise choice to be gay, it doesn't open any doors, it invites hate and ridicule, may alienate one's family and friends, and in general is not easy. As a choice it is not very beneficial.
The only choice involved is the choice to be yourself, whatever that is; it is not so unbelievable for me that not all men like women just because I do.
People use god to justify all kinds of irrational value judgements. And they all believe they have god's truth to back them up, all of them, whether you and I agree or not. Therefore comments like "sin against god" referring to gays immediately sinks into the realm of religiously justified hate.
If I were to say: "God clearly states in the bible that white people are superior in every way to all other races. But I don't hate them, I just know god favors me and my kind and for that reason I pity them and am compelled to help them, to change them, to pray for them," (which is exactly what millions of people do believe I would be called a patronizing, condecending, racist bigot. But we can say homosexiality, something that trancends race, time, and location, is a "sin against god" with complete confidence that everybody will "accept our views," when all it is, is watered down bigotry. All it shows is that we are nowhere near as liberated as we like to believe we are.
Being hung up on how a person reaches orgasm in the manifold characteristics of a person is small, indeed. And some day, in a dangerously overpopulated world, homsexuality may well end up being one of the most usefull traits of humanity yet.
And one funny thing about bigotry is that it is most hidden from the very ones who live it. The suggstion that their view could be bigoted leaves then flabbergasted and offended. This alone, however, changes nothing.
Pako
Staff Emeritus
- 16,455
- NW Montana
- GTP-Pako
- GTP Pako
I don't know what religion or god your talking about, but my God is a just and forgiving. My God is pure love and understanding. My God gave his son to this world so that we might have a example of how to live and to be a ransomed sacrifice for our sins so that everyone may have the oppertunity to be with God. His son would never turn away a sinner, His son would never justify hate for another, as hate was not in his character. There are clear right and wrongs, there are no grey areas. We were given freewill, and the consiquences of our actions will either be good or bad, but there will be consiquences.
I do see what your saying, but your statement was pretty general.
- 9,209
- DerAlta
My belief that homosexuality is a sin against God is written in the bible. I cannot, nor will not treat them any different than I would any other person.
While saying that it is a sin against God, it is not my choice to act upon that issue. I am told to act with goodwill and peace towards other human beings. This is my directive. Judgement is not my place. The choice given to me is to be a bigot and hide behind the bible, or live my life free of hate and full of love. There is no hate involved in me statnig that the in the Bible it is written that homosexuality is a sin against God. Yet, I cannot live to God's word if I believe that it gives me right to hate people based on a choice they make.
The people that do hate others based on Bible teachings are not people that I would like to associate myself with. I can't read the "God Hates Fags" web site without being absolutely infuriated. To take God's word and pervert it to suit your tendencies is as much a sin as homosexuality is. Religiously justified hate is a perversion of God's word. God teaches about love of your fellow man, woman and child. For those people that do hide behind the Bible words and use them to justify hatred are so incredibly wrong, it pains me to be kumped into the christian group with them. I won't ask anyone to share my views. I will not force feed the Bible to anyone. Each person must come to the lord by his own free will. If I were to force you to come to church every Sunday, believe Bible and force you to live by my rules, I am no better than Hitler.
Exactly. This is where my anger over warping what the Bible says comes into play. There is not a place in the Bible that gives anyone rights to hate another person. It gives you clear understanding that you are here to live your life within God's lines. It does not give me the right to pity them, or to change them. It only gives me the right to accept the choices they have made for themselves. I can pray that they may see the light of God, and the err of their ways, but I cannot force them to see the light that I have seen. that is what God commands of me. Some people have told me that I must do all I can to bring people to the Lord. What they have missed, is that people have to make their own choice.
I can't argue with that one specific example. I can state that males and females are built to reproduce and carry on the species. A biological and genetic disposition to procreate. This is why I believe that homosexual choose to live their lifestyle. Basic bodily functions that give inclination for men to be attracted to women and vice versa.
While choices are not beneficial, they are always a choice. While he may choose to hide his sexuality, he is choosing (hence accepting) that he will burden himself with a great pain that he will carry for the remainder of his life. Were he to admit to himself that he is gay, there will be pain as well, but, it's not pain carried in his heart. I'd rather experience physical pain, than emotional pain any day.
I'm not hung up on how a person reaches orgasm (that is the least of the issue, you noted and I believe). I'm not hung up on sex or sexual relations between consenting adults. I'm very hung up on people forcing others to be something they're not.
I know very well, that I could state a position that could be considered bigoted. It would shame me considerably to think that I would do something like that. definition: Bigot - n. a person who is intolerant of any ideas other than his or her own, esp on religion, politics, or race.
Where was it stated that I was intolerant of the issue? Not any place. Nor would I ever construe myself to be intolerant. The fundamental teaching of the Bible is acceptance of all people. I am not granted the right to judge people, only the right to offer acceptance to a person.
Hopefully that explanatino helps.
AO
While saying that it is a sin against God, it is not my choice to act upon that issue. I am told to act with goodwill and peace towards other human beings. This is my directive. Judgement is not my place. The choice given to me is to be a bigot and hide behind the bible, or live my life free of hate and full of love. There is no hate involved in me statnig that the in the Bible it is written that homosexuality is a sin against God. Yet, I cannot live to God's word if I believe that it gives me right to hate people based on a choice they make.
The people that do hate others based on Bible teachings are not people that I would like to associate myself with. I can't read the "God Hates Fags" web site without being absolutely infuriated. To take God's word and pervert it to suit your tendencies is as much a sin as homosexuality is. Religiously justified hate is a perversion of God's word. God teaches about love of your fellow man, woman and child. For those people that do hide behind the Bible words and use them to justify hatred are so incredibly wrong, it pains me to be kumped into the christian group with them. I won't ask anyone to share my views. I will not force feed the Bible to anyone. Each person must come to the lord by his own free will. If I were to force you to come to church every Sunday, believe Bible and force you to live by my rules, I am no better than Hitler.
Exactly. This is where my anger over warping what the Bible says comes into play. There is not a place in the Bible that gives anyone rights to hate another person. It gives you clear understanding that you are here to live your life within God's lines. It does not give me the right to pity them, or to change them. It only gives me the right to accept the choices they have made for themselves. I can pray that they may see the light of God, and the err of their ways, but I cannot force them to see the light that I have seen. that is what God commands of me. Some people have told me that I must do all I can to bring people to the Lord. What they have missed, is that people have to make their own choice.
I can't argue with that one specific example. I can state that males and females are built to reproduce and carry on the species. A biological and genetic disposition to procreate. This is why I believe that homosexual choose to live their lifestyle. Basic bodily functions that give inclination for men to be attracted to women and vice versa.
While choices are not beneficial, they are always a choice. While he may choose to hide his sexuality, he is choosing (hence accepting) that he will burden himself with a great pain that he will carry for the remainder of his life. Were he to admit to himself that he is gay, there will be pain as well, but, it's not pain carried in his heart. I'd rather experience physical pain, than emotional pain any day.
I'm not hung up on how a person reaches orgasm (that is the least of the issue, you noted and I believe). I'm not hung up on sex or sexual relations between consenting adults. I'm very hung up on people forcing others to be something they're not.
I know very well, that I could state a position that could be considered bigoted. It would shame me considerably to think that I would do something like that. definition: Bigot - n. a person who is intolerant of any ideas other than his or her own, esp on religion, politics, or race.
Where was it stated that I was intolerant of the issue? Not any place. Nor would I ever construe myself to be intolerant. The fundamental teaching of the Bible is acceptance of all people. I am not granted the right to judge people, only the right to offer acceptance to a person.
Hopefully that explanatino helps.
AO
- 3,194
that was one heck of an explanatino, LOL,.. 
I likle the Bigot part,.... makes you wonder if anyone ISN'T one....
I likle the Bigot part,.... makes you wonder if anyone ISN'T one....
- 10,832
Originally posted by Pako
I don't know what religion or god your talking about, but my God is a just and forgiving. My God is pure love and understanding. My God gave his son to this world so that we might have a example of how to live and to be a ransomed sacrifice for our sins so that everyone may have the oppertunity to be with God. His son would never turn away a sinner, His son would never justify hate for another, as hate was not in his character. There are clear right and wrongs, there are no grey areas. We were given freewill, and the consiquences of our actions will either be good or bad, but there will be consiquences.
I do see what your saying, but your statement was pretty general.
Obviously I was not talking about your god then. I was talking about people and what they do to justify intolerance and ignorance.
- 3,194
"There are clear right and wrongs, there are no grey areas. "
Just noticed that statement,..... confuses the crap outta me,.... :S
Just noticed that statement,..... confuses the crap outta me,.... :S
- 24,344
- Midlantic Area
- GTP_Duke
I think the point is to institutionalize the feeling that something is not right for that person, and on that basis I fail to understand it.
There is a dangerous line between being tolerant of differences in others, and saying "there is no right or wrong". I think that in cases such as Pako and Der Alta are describing, that the concept of sin is used to reinforce that line. It works that way, but I think that effectiveness comes at some cost against the idea of tolerance.
Right and Wrong definitely exist, but I would draw that line along the difference between consent and coersion, rather than along the more arbitrary line of heterosexuality versus homosexuality (or, as another example, what constitutes sinful heterosexual sex). After all, any sex other than penile/vaginal intercourse for the purpose or procreation is defined as sodomy.
- 9,209
- DerAlta
I call it a sin as it is a transgression of God's known will.
Sin has an incredible effect, but I have no right to judge that sin. It is not a sin against me. Can I call it an act of love that is a sin? Sure. If I was not married to my wife we'd be in the same boat. Commiting an act of sin (even behind closed doors where noone knows) is doing something against God's will. Homosexuality is against God's will.
Yes, in my book Sin is a right or wrong decision. But what I consider right will vary a bit from what you consider right. We can take a look at a Burka for another degree of right or wrong. Tolerance is not quite the same as acceptance. I can accept that a person has chosen a gay lifestyle, and it won't alter how I treat that person. I wouldn't use tolerate with my position on homosexuals in this world.
Tolerate - to treat with indulgence, liberality, or forbearance.
Accept - to receive with approval or admit, as into a community, group, etc.
AO
Sin has an incredible effect, but I have no right to judge that sin. It is not a sin against me. Can I call it an act of love that is a sin? Sure. If I was not married to my wife we'd be in the same boat. Commiting an act of sin (even behind closed doors where noone knows) is doing something against God's will. Homosexuality is against God's will.
Yes, in my book Sin is a right or wrong decision. But what I consider right will vary a bit from what you consider right. We can take a look at a Burka for another degree of right or wrong. Tolerance is not quite the same as acceptance. I can accept that a person has chosen a gay lifestyle, and it won't alter how I treat that person. I wouldn't use tolerate with my position on homosexuals in this world.
Tolerate - to treat with indulgence, liberality, or forbearance.
Accept - to receive with approval or admit, as into a community, group, etc.
AO
mayorbill11
(Banned)
- 1,231
someone in this thread mentioned how they've never seen an animal do a homosexual action, well, if you get two horny male dogs together you'll see some sort of gay action. i saw a male dog try to ass**** another male dog once, the ass****-ee tried to run away, guess he wasn't gay.
i don't care about gays, they can do what they like, but i'd rather not have people talk about gay stuff around me period, and that goes for people seeing someone on TV and saying 'what a fag'. i don't like it when people flaunt anything, including stupidity.
i don't care about gays, they can do what they like, but i'd rather not have people talk about gay stuff around me period, and that goes for people seeing someone on TV and saying 'what a fag'. i don't like it when people flaunt anything, including stupidity.
- 24,344
- Midlantic Area
- GTP_Duke
So what are you saying?
I accept homosexuals, individually and as a group. I may well dislike individual homosexuals on a personal basis, but it will be based upon their actions and personality, not upon their sexual preference.
Do you tolerate them? And are you making a distinction between individual homosexuals and homosexuality as a concept/group?
I accept homosexuals, individually and as a group. I may well dislike individual homosexuals on a personal basis, but it will be based upon their actions and personality, not upon their sexual preference.
Do you tolerate them? And are you making a distinction between individual homosexuals and homosexuality as a concept/group?
- 9,209
- DerAlta
M5power:
No it's not. I can look at a person who listens to scissorfight, and have no clue about their relationship with other people or how they care for a pet. Also parts of a persons character.
And yes, I have attended more than one scissorfight concert.
AO
No it's not. I can look at a person who listens to scissorfight, and have no clue about their relationship with other people or how they care for a pet. Also parts of a persons character.
And yes, I have attended more than one scissorfight concert.
AO
Yes you can! Because certain people listen to certain music types. A rich old conservative man, for instance, is not going to be listening to Mudvayne.
Same thing with the cars they drive; you can generally tell what sex a person is, their political leanings, their wealth or lack of it, etc.
Calculated assumptions are not only much better than judgements, but, as you say, are based on very very many pre-existing (rather than determined
) situations that I've been through -- which means I've got a better chance of making a correct assumption.Meanwhile, a person who is gay or who is black, Hispanic, Asian, etc. can be anything and anyone -- whereas a person who listens to a certain type of music or drives a certain car fits into a certain mold.
- 9,209
- DerAlta
So Neon_Duke drives a Dodge Neon, you drive an SUV, I drive a VW, and my co-worker drives a 1968 prosche.
What assumptions can you make from that? In my CD changer, I have Blind Gaurdian, britney spear (my wifes), a Happy hardcore Techno Cd, and Beethoven. Your assumptions still hold true?
Yes, you see a 60 year old man in a Mercedes SLK, you may be able to make an assumption as to what is in his CD collection, but you can't be positive.
If I walk through the mall, and see a kid dressed in all black with spiked hair, I might think that he has a penchanct for Goth Music. can I ssume he has a bad home life that causes him to rebel?
AO
What assumptions can you make from that? In my CD changer, I have Blind Gaurdian, britney spear (my wifes), a Happy hardcore Techno Cd, and Beethoven. Your assumptions still hold true?
Yes, you see a 60 year old man in a Mercedes SLK, you may be able to make an assumption as to what is in his CD collection, but you can't be positive.
If I walk through the mall, and see a kid dressed in all black with spiked hair, I might think that he has a penchanct for Goth Music. can I ssume he has a bad home life that causes him to rebel?
AO
Similar threads
- Poll
- Locked
