How the **** do you know if many straight men find it disgusting, have you asked every single straight man? ?IN fact, I bet if you find a man who says he's not grossed out by two guys havng sex, you sould class him as bisexual/homosexual.
Since Straight Men still dominate society they usually create the atmosphere of what is considered "cool" and what is "not cool", and everyone else like sheep just sit down and agree.
Now, take note, that not ALL Straight men are grossed out by Homosexual Male Relationships. The average straight man is not grossed out by the sight or thought of another naked man, but is just not "turned on" so to speak.
Not ALL Straight men are turned on by Lesbian Sex either, although a large majority are, or claim to be.
Since Two men having sex does not promote pleasure to the perceptions of Straight Men in general, the majority of these straight men will have no empathy towards the attraction or love that will exist between two gay men. They will just ignore it.
Homophobia in straight men, often occurs when a man is insecure with himself (not just sexually, but it anyway) and feels a need to separate himself with the "losers" his peers call Gay Men. In order to feel superior and complete, this insecure man feels the need to dump on Homosexual Men, and in order to secure the public appearance of his masculinity he will even go so far as to "gay bash" an innocent man (or woman for that matter)
Homophobia occurs in Gay men when they cannot accept who they are, and because of all the stigma that homophobic men and women cause, feel the need to pretend they are straight and lash out in hate and violence against other Gay men. Take Ted Haggard for example...we all know he's Gay. He's always been...but because of the biases he was surrounded with, those being Christianity and social upbringings, he has denied himself for YEARS. Lied to those who trusted him, ATTACKED those who shared his sexual attractions, only to be exposed later as a hypocrit.
Homophobia is supposedly less common in women, although that is another assumption and not proven by any accurate stats. The homophobia that exists in women, however, is more likely due to personal disgust, as with some homophobia men, only to be BACKED UP by Christian and other religious bigotry.
Just thought you'd be interested to know, since you seem like one of the more open minded Christians on these forums.
I would agree with most of what you said (especially the first paragraph), but I am not personally convinced that Ted Haggard is truly gay, but time will tell. I do not believe that a lot of prison rapists are gay, in fact I believe almost all of them are straight.
I am glad that you have come to understand me better, considering how you used to think I straight up hated you and all homosexuals. This is much better now and hope that we can continue to be civil to each other.
I believe this is something that can help everyone.However if someone already mentioned this please forgive me for repeating it.
THE KINSEY REPORT
The Kinsey Reports are two books on human sexual behavior, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948) and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1953), by Dr. Alfred C. Kinsey, Wardell Pomeroy and others. Kinsey was a zoologist at Indiana University and the founder of the Institute for Sex Research.
The research astounded the general public and was immediately controversial and sensational. The findings caused shock and outrage, both because they challenged conventional beliefs about sexuality and because they discussed subjects that had previously been taboo.
Sexual orientation
Probably the most widely cited part of the Kinsey Reports regard the prevalence of different sexual orientations — especially to support a claim that 10% of the population are gay. In fact, the findings are not so straightforward, and Kinsey himself avoided and disapproved of using terms like homosexual or heterosexual to describe individuals, asserting that sexuality is prone to change over time, and that sexual behaviour can be understood both as physical contact as well as purely psychic phenomena (desire, sexual attraction, fantasy)[citation needed]. Instead of three categories (heterosexual, bisexual and homosexual), an eight-category system was used. The Kinsey scale ranked sexual behaviour from 0 to 6, with 0 being completely heterosexual and 6 completely homosexual. A 1 was considered predominantly heterosexual and only incidentally homosexual, a 2 mostly heterosexual and more than incidentally homosexual, a 3 equally homosexual and heterosexual, and so on. An additional category, X, was created for those who experienced no sexual desire.
The reports also state that nearly 46% of the male subjects had "reacted" sexually to persons of both sexes in the course of their adult lives, and 37% had at least one homosexual experience.[1] 11.6% of white males (ages 20-35) were given a rating of 3 (about equal heterosexual and homosexual experience/response) throughout their adult lives.[2] The study also reported that 10% of American males surveyed were "more or less exclusively homosexual for at least three years between the ages of 16 and 55"[3] (in the 5 to 6 range).
7% of single females (ages 20-35) and 4% of previously married females (ages 20-35) were given a rating of 3 (about equal heterosexual and homosexual experience/response) on the 8-point Kinsey Heterosexual-Homosexual Rating Scale for this period of their lives.[4] 2 to 6% of females, aged 20-35, were more or less exclusively homosexual in experience/response,[5] and 1 to 3% of unmarried females aged 20-35 were exclusively homosexual in experience/response.[6] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinsey...ual_orientation
Masturbation
62% of females subject reported that they had masturbated.[7] 45% of females subjected who reported having masturbated indicated that they could reach orgasm within 3 minutes.[8] 92% of males reported that they had masturbated.[9] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinsey_report#Masturbation
Marital coitus
The average frequency of marital sex reported by women was 2.8 times a week, in late teens; 2.2 times a week, by age 30; and 1.0 times a week, by age 50.[10] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinsey...#Marital_coitus Extra-marital sex
Kinsey estimated that approximately 50% of all married males had some extramarital experience at some time during their married lives.[11] Among the sample, 26% of females had had extramarital sex by their forties. Between 1 in 6 and 1 in 10 females from age 26 to 50 were engaged in extramarital sex.[12] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinsey...tra-marital_sex
Sadomasochism
12% of females and 22% of males reported having an erotic response to a sadomasochistic story, and 55% of females and 50% of males reported having responded erotically to being bitten.[13] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinsey...t#Sadomasochism Methodology
Data was gathered primarily by means of interviews, which were encoded to maintain confidentiality. Other data sources included the diaries of convicted child molesters. The data were later computerised for processing. All of this material, including the original researchers' notes, remains available from the Kinsey Institute to qualified researchers who demonstrate a need to view such materials. The institute also allows researchers to submit SPSS programs to be run on the data.
Subject matter of the report lent itself to sensationalism. Based on his data and findings, others claimed that 10% of the population are homosexual, and that women enhance their prospects of satisfaction in marriage by masturbating previously. Neither claim was made by Kinsey. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinsey_report#Methodology
Criticism
The books have been widely criticised by conservatives as promoting degeneracy. Sexual Behavior in the Human Male has been on two paleoconservative lists of the worst books of modern times. It was #3 on the Intercollegiate Studies Institute's 50 Worst Books of the Twentieth Century and #4 on Human Events' Ten Most Harmful Books of the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries
In addition to moral objections, academic criticisms pertain to sample selection and sample bias. In 1948, the same year as the original publication, a committee of the American Statistical Association, including notable statisticians such as John Tukey condemned the sampling procedure. Tukey was perhaps the most vocal critic, saying "A random selection of three people would have been better than a group of 300 chosen by Mr. Kinsey" [14]. Criticism principally revolved around the over-representation of some groups in the sample: 25% were, or had been, prison inmates, and 5% were male prostitutes. A related criticism, by some of the leading psychologists of the day, notably Abraham Maslow, was that he (Kinsey) did not consider the bias created by the data representing only those who were willing to participate in discussion of taboo topics.
In a response to these criticisms, Paul Gebhard, Kinsey's successor as director of the Kinsey Institute for Sex Research, spent years "cleaning" the Kinsey data of its purported contaminants, removing, for example, all material derived from prison populations in the basic sample. In 1979, Gebhard (with Alan B. Johnson) published The Kinsey Data: Marginal Tabulations of the 1938-1963 Interviews Conducted by the Institute for Sex Research. Their conclusion, to Gebhard's surprise he claimed, was that none of Kinsey's original estimates were significantly affected by this bias, that is prison population, male prostitute and those who are willingly perticipated in discussion of previously taboo sexual topics had the same statistical tendency. The problem of getting unbiased population sample in socially taboo subjects were discussed by Professor Martin Duberman who wrote:
Instead of Kinsey's 37 %, Gebhard and Johnson came up with 36.4 %; the 10 % figure (with prison inmates excluded) came to 9.9 % for white, college-educated males and 12.7 % for those with less education. And as for the call for a "random sample," a team of independent statisticians studying Kinsey's procedures had concluded as far back as 1953 that the unique problems inherent in sex research precluded the possibility of obtaining a true random sample, and that Kinsey's interviewing technique had been "extraordinarily skillful." They
characterized Kinsey's work overall as "a monumental endeavor." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinsey_report#Criticism Conjecture of child abuse
In the Kinsey Reports are data concerning pre-adolescent orgasms. Particularly controversial are tables 30 through 34 of the male volume. For example, table 34 is, "Examples of multiple orgasm in pre-adolescent males. Some instances of higher frequencies." A typical entry indicates that a certain 7 year-old had seven orgasms in a three hour time period. Kinsey's critics state that data such as these could have only been obtained by direct observation of or participation in child abuse. In particular they point to the information given in table 32, "Speed of pre-adolescent orgasm; Duration of stimulation before climax; Observations timed with second hand or stop watch," and say that the only way such precise data could have been collected was through cooperation with child molesters.
The Kinsey Institute states [16] unequivocally on its website, "[Kinsey] did not carry out experiments on children; he did not hire, collaborate, or persuade people to carry out experiments on children." It goes on to say,
Kinsey clearly stated in his male volume the sources of information about children's sexual responses. The bulk of this information was obtained from adults recalling their own childhoods. Some was from parents who had observed their children, some from teachers who had observed children interacting or behaving sexually, and Kinsey stated that there were nine men who he had interviewed who had sexual experiences with children who had told him about how the children had responded and reacted. We believe that one of those men was the source of the data listed in the book. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinsey..._of_child_abuse
to be continued..............
Last edited by The Prophecy on Nov 15th, 2006 at 12:48 AM
Kinsey Report continued.......
Organized opposition
Some conservative groups including RSVPAmerica, headed by Dr. Judith A. Reisman, and the Family Research Council have stated that they aim to discredit the Kinsey Reports. These groups often accuse Kinsey's work of promoting unhealthy sexual practices or morals.
RSVPAmerica advertises publications such as Kinsey: Crimes & Consequences and Kinsey, Sex and Fraud: The Indoctrination of a People, both by Reisman, and the video "The Children of Table 34", funded by the Family Research Council. The campaign website states that the video "presents the story of Dr. Reisman's discovery of Dr. Alfred Kinsey's systematic sexual abuse of 317 male children".
In its 1998 response to the core allegations made by Reisman, Kinsey Institute director John Bancroft stated that the data on children in tables 31–34 of Kinsey's Sexual Behavior of the Human Male came largely from the journal of one adult omniphile, who had illegal sexual interaction with these children. The man's journal started in 1917, long before the Kinsey Reports. Bancroft further stated that Kinsey explicitly pointed out the illegality of the man's actions, but that he granted his source anonymity. In addition, Bancroft reiterated the Kinsey Institute's claim that Kinsey never had any sexual interaction with children, nor did he employ others to do so, and that he interviewed children in the presence of their parents.[17]
Other attacks have centered on the sex life and motives of Kinsey himself (see Alfred C. Kinsey), or have claimed that the Kinsey Reports are themselves responsible for decay in society. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinsey...ized_opposition
Context and significance
The Kinsey Reports are associated with a change in public perception of sexuality. Despite the fact that Kinsey did not explicitly claim that his sampling subjects are representative of overall populartion of U.S. many, whether in support or criticism, did. In the 1960s, following the introduction of the oral contraceptive, this change was to be expressed in the sexual revolution. Also in the 1960s, Masters and Johnson published their investigations into the physiology of sex, breaking taboos and misapprehensions similar to those Kinsey had broken more than a decade earlier in a closely related field.
To what extent the Reports produced or promoted this change and to what extent they merely expressed it and reflected the conditions that were producing it is a matter of much debate and speculation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinsey...nd_significance
My Conclusion/Opinion
I just have a few things to say about this whole thing in general and that is: Nobodys perfect,nobodys the perfect human being. However, no matter who you chose to be, or what you choose to be, your still normal ,your still just like everybody else. But you just shine in your own special and unique way.
Last edited by The Prophecy on Nov 15th, 2006 at 12:58 AM
Well....... not this one at least. I'm basically getting to the point of sexual orientation and so on...... if you read you'll actually figure out that it's related. I just wanted people to get a better understanding more on the sexuality side of the thread thats all.
Gender: Male Location: Northumberland,
United Kingdom
I have already read it. It is quite interesting. Not sure about all the spurious statistics it's spitting out though but then again. I've not actually read The Kinsey Report so I have nothing to back them up.
There is very little/nothing about sexual orientation after the "Sexual Orientation" section and I'm still not sure how the section itself has much to do with the religious aspect of the thread.
The relationship between homosexuality and religion varies greatly across time and place, within and between different religions and sects, and regarding different forms of homosexuality and bisexuality. Currently, authoritative bodies and doctrines of the world's largest religions generally view homosexuality negatively, from quietly discouraging homosexual activity, to explicitly forbidding same-sex sexual practices among adherents and actively opposing social acceptance of homosexuality. Some teach that homosexual orientation itself is sinful, while others assert that only the sexual act is a sin. Some claim that homosexuality can be overcome through religious faith and practice.
On the other hand, voices exist within each of these religions that view homosexuality more positively, and a few liberal religious denominations may even bless same-sex marriages. Some view same-sex love and sexuality as sacred, and a mythology of same-sex love can be found around the world.
Regardless of their position on homosexuality, many people of faith look to both sacred texts and tradition for guidance on this issue. However, the authority of various traditions or scriptural passages and the correctness of translations and interpretations may be hotly disputed.
Views of specific religious groups
Atheists, agnostics and secularists
In societies where a majority religion is opposed to homosexuality, advocates for the rights of non-believers and gay-rights advocates become natural allies on certain political and cultural issues. However, being atheist, agnostic or secularist does not necessarily imply support for gay rights or approval of homosexuality. Various non-believers disapprove of homosexuality for various cultural, personal, and other non-religious reasons, and secular states, such as the countries of the Communist bloc, can at the same time be antagonistic to homosexuality.
Religious people who disagree with the condemnation of sodomy by their religious institution tend to leave their faith in greater numbers than those who agree with it (and thus are more likely to become non-believers, though many simply move to sects which approve of same-sex couples). But as with many religious issues, many dissidents, including lesbian and gay people themselves, maintain their religious affiliation and practice despite their disagreements.
Abrahamic religions
And if a man lie with mankind, as with womankind, both of them have committed abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.
—Leviticus 20:13, JPS (1917 version)
Abrahamic religions such as Judaism, Islam, and Christianity, traditionally forbid sexual relations between people of the same sex and teach that such behaviour is sinful. Religious authorities point to passages in the Hebrew Bible (Leviticus 18:22, 20:13), the New Testament (Romans 1:26-27, I Timothy 1:9-10, 1 Corinthians 6:9-11) and the Qur'an (7:80-81, 26:165), for scriptural justification of these beliefs. The first recorded law against homosexuality is found in the holiness code of Leviticus. Among many other acts, sexual intercourse between men is a capital offense.
Today some major denominations within these religions, such as Reform Judaism and the United Church of Christ, have accepted homosexuality, arguing that it was originally intended as a means of distinguishing religious worship between Abrahamic and pagan faiths, specifically Greek (Ganymede) and Egyptian (see Torah or Old Testament) rituals that made homosexuality a religious practice and not merely human sexuality, and is thus no longer relevant. "Liberal" Christian denominations such as Unitarian Universalism and some Presbyterian and Anglican churches now welcome members regardless of sexual orientation, and perform same-sex marriages, as do Reform and Reconstructionist Judaism.
Christianity
Main articles: Homosexuality and Christianity and List of Christian denominational positions on homosexuality
...God gave them up unto vile passions: for their women changed the natural use into that which is against nature: and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another...
—Romans 1:26-27, ASV
The attitude of Early Christians toward homosexuality has been much debated. One side has cited denunciations of sodomy in the writings of the era, such as in the Didache and in the writings of Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, St. Cyprian, Eusebius, St. Basil the Great, St. John Chrysostom, St. Augustine of Hippo, and in doctrinal sources such as the "Apostolic Constitutions" — for example, Eusebius of Caesarea's statement which condemns "the union of women with women and men with men". Others claim that passages have been mistranslated or they do not refer to homosexuality. Some Christians maintain that the Bible, principally in Leviticus, denounces homosexual activity as a sin, in the eyes of God an "abomination" — a term used to describe harsh disapproval of a wide range of offenses, from incest and bestiality to eating shellfish. In Acts 15 (The Council of Jerusalem) explicitly advised that Gentile converts were keep from sexual immorality. Many of the letters of Saint Paul, the Apostle to the Gentiles, echo this exhortation to "avoid sexual immorality." The first chapter of the Epistle to the Romans contains the only explicit mention of lesbianism in the Bible, calling it "against nature".
Many prominent Christians have been critical of homosexuality throughout the religion's history. Thomas Aquinas denounced sodomy as second only to bestiality as the worst of all sexual sins, and Hildegard of Bingen's book "Scivias", which was officially approved by Pope Eugene III, condemned sexual relations between women as "perverted forms."
Judaism
Main article: Homosexuality and Judaism
The historically prevalent view in Jewish law has been that homosexual intercourse between men was sinful, arguing that it was forbidden by the Torah. For men this position is based on an interpretation of Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, that homosexual intercourse between men is considered on the same level as idolatry, requiring death, and for women it is based on Leviticus 18:2-3, where the Israelites are commanded not to follow the ways of the Egyptians or Canaanites. However, since the late twentieth century this has been a subject of contention between various Jewish groups, and has led to both debate and division among modern Jews.
Reform Judaism argues that homosexuality is a natural attraction, and that the prohibition in the Torah was addressing pagan religious rituals, specifically Egyptian and Canaanite fertility cults and temple prostitution. The official position of Conservative Judaism, formulated in 1992, is that homosexual intercourse is sinful, and the movement does not ordain homosexuals as rabbis or cantors, but insists that homosexual Jews should be welcomed within the movement. In 2003 the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards of the Rabbinical Assembly recognized divisions within the movement, and promised to reevaluate the position in the near future. Orthodox Judaism views homosexual activity as sinful, but halakhic decisors have differed on the causes (and thus severity) of the sin, and on how one should interact with gay Jews. Currently same-sex marriages are forbidden in Orthodox and Conservative Judaism, but Reform and Reconstructionist Judaism allow them. However, while not (yet) officially recognized by the Conservative movement, a growing number of Conservative rabbis do choose to perform same-sex marriages under the auspisces of Jewish ritual. A reconsideration reagrding the Jewish Theological Seminary (main Conservative seminary)'s policy on homosexual ordination will be convened in december of 2006. More information can be found at www.keshetrabbis.org[1].
Dharmic religions
Among the dharmic religions that originated in India, including Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism, teachings regarding homosexuality are less clear than among the Abrahamic traditions. Unlike in western religions, homosexuality is rarely discussed. However, most contemporary religious authorities in the various dharmic traditions view homosexuality negatively, and when it is discussed, it is discouraged or actively forbidden.[3] Ancient religious texts such as the Vedas often refer to people of a third gender, who are neither female nor male. Some see this third gender as an ancient parallel to modern western lesbian, gay, transgender and/or intersex identities. However, this third sex is usually negatively valued as a pariah class in ancient texts.[4] Ancient Hindu law books, from the first century onward, categorize non-vaginal sex (ayoni) as impure.[5] Same-sex sexuality and gender transformations are common among the Hindu pantheon of deities.
Monk performing auparashtika on a visiting prince. Khajuraho, Madhya Pradesh.Main article: Homosexuality and Hinduism
Sexuality is rarely discussed openly in Hindu society today, and homosexuality is largely a taboo subject — especially among the strongly religious. Professor of women's studies and world religions Paola Bacchetta argues that "queerphobia is one of the pillars of Hindu nationalism".[6] In a 2004 survey, most — though not all — swamis said they opposed the concept of a Hindu-sanctified gay marriage.[7] Some of the law codes, such as that of Manu Smriti refer to both female and male homosexuality as a punishable crime.[8] Punishments include ritual baths, fines, public humiliation and having fingers cut off. However, the bulk of sexual matters dealt with by the law books are heterosexual in nature.
A "third gender" has been acknowledged within Hinduism since Vedic times. Several Hindu texts, such as Manu Smriti[9] and Sushruta Samhita, assert that some people are born with either mixed male and female natures, or sexually neuter, as a matter of natural biology. They worked as hairdressers, flower-sellers, servants, masseurs and prostitutes. Today, many people of a "third gender" (hijras) live throughout India, mostly on the margins of society, and many still work in prostitution, or make a livelihood as beggars.
The Indian Kama Sutra, written in the 4th century AD, contains passages describing eunuchs or "third-sex" males performing oral sex on men.[10] However, the author was "not a fan of homosexual activities" and treated such individuals with disdain, according to queer historian Devdutt Pattanaik.[11] Similarly, some medieval Hindu temples and artifacts openly depict both male homosexuality and lesbianism within their carvings, such as the temple walls at Khajuraho. Some infer from these images that Hindu society and religion were previously more open to variations in human sexuality than they are at present.
During Muslim rule (from the 10th to the 18th centuries AD), Middle-Eastern customs that were introduced to India include the castration of male servants and pederasty.[citation needed] These were openly practiced by Muslims and Sikhs in the North while largely overlooked by Hindus in the South. During British control, Hinduism became markedly antagonistic toward homosexuality. Hindus adopted British Victorian values and imposed them upon hijras and the general public. Consequently, homosexuality, crossdressing, and other similar practices that were formerly legal in Hindu society were criminalized by the British during the 19th century.
In Hinduism many divinities are androgynous. There are Hindu deities who are hermaphrodites (both male and female); who manifest in all three genders; who switch from male to female or from female to male; male deities with female moods and female deities with male moods; deities born from two males or from two females; deities born from a single male or single female; deities who avoid the opposite sex; deities with principal companions of the same sex, and so on. One of the most important aspects of Hinduism is the belief that both God and nature are unlimitedly diverse.
Buddhism
Main article: Homosexuality and Buddhism
In keeping with its general culture of moderation and restraint, Buddhism discourages sexual behavior that would be disturbing to the equanimity of the practitioner or other sentient beings. As there are many Buddhist traditions, and whin each major traditions there are many schools, it is not possible to identify one single approach that all take towards same-sex relations. Some, such as the Thai Buddhists, are "disdainful" towards sexuality and distrustful of sensual enjoyment and desire[12]. Other traditions take a more relaxed attitude, and have even been known to incorporate same-sex practices in their culture, such as the Japanese Shingon school. Traditionally, monks are expected to refrain from all sexual activity, and the Vinaya (the first book of the Tripitaka) specifically prohibits homosexuality and gender variance for monks.[13] A notable exception in the history of Buddhism occurred in Japan during the Edo period, in which male homosexuality was celebrated among certain institutions, including the monastic community.[14]
References to pandaka, a deviant sex/gender category that is usually interpreted to include homosexual males, can be found throughout the Pali canon as well as other Sanskrit scriptures.[15] Leonard Zwilling refers extensively to Buddhaghosa's Samantapasadika, where pandaka are described as being filled with defiled passions and insatiable lusts, and are dominated by their libido. The Abhidharma states that a pandaka cannot achieve enlightenment in their own life time, but must wait for rebirth as a normal man or woman. According to one scriptural story, Ananda — Buddha's cousin and disciple — was a pandaka in one of his many previous lives.
The third of the Five Precepts of Buddhism states that one is to refrain from sexual misconduct; this precept has sometimes been interpreted to include homosexuality. The Dalai Lama of Tibetan Buddhism interprets sexual misconduct to include lesbian and gay sex, and indeed any sex other than penis-vagina intercourse, including oral sex, anal sex, and masturbation or other sexual activity with the hand.[16] However, the Dalai Lama acknowledges that homosexual sexual relations can be "of mutual benefit, enjoyable, and harmless" for non-Buddhists, and supports human rights for all, "regardless of sexual orientation."
In Thailand, traditional accounts propose that "homosexuality arises as a kammic consequence of violating Buddhist proscriptions against heterosexual misconduct. These kammic accounts describe homosexuality as a congenital condition which cannot be altered, at least in a homosexual person's current lifetime, and have been linked with calls for compassion and understanding from the non-homosexual populace."[17]
Within Japanese traditions homosexuality was "invented" by the Bodhisattva Manjusri of wisdom and the sage Kukai, the founder of Buddhism in Japan. Japanese Buddhist scholar and author of Wild Azaleas Kitamura Kigin actually said that heterosexuality was to be avoided for priests and homosexuality allowed.[18]
Sikhism
In 2005, the world's highest Sikh religious authority described homosexuality as "against the Sikh religion and the Sikh code of conduct and totally against the laws of nature," and called on Sikhs to support laws against homosexuality.[19]
Jainism
Chastity is one of the five virtues in the fundamental ethical code of Jainism. For laypersons, the only appropriate avenue for sexuality is within marriage, and homosexuality is believed to lead to negative karma.[20] Jain author Duli Chandra Jain wrote in 2004 that homosexuality and transvestism "stain one's thoughts and feelings" because they involve sexual passion.[21]
Sinic religions
Among the Sinic religions of East Asia, including Confucianism, Chinese folk religion and Taoism, passionate homosexual expression is usually discouraged because it is believed to not lead to human fulfillment.[22]
Confucianism
Main article: Homosexuality and Confucianism
In China where Buddhists often belong to Confucianism as well, traditionally exclusive homosexuality was discouraged because it would prevent a son from carrying out his Confucian religious duty to reproduce, whereas non-exclusive homosexuality was permissible and widely practiced. Monogamy was an unusual and foreign idea to many Asians until contact with the West. Chinese traditions attribute homosexuality to Huang Di ("Yellow Emperor"), the father of Chinese civilization.
Taoism
Main article: Homosexuality and Taoism
It is difficult to determine a single position on homosexuality in Taoism, as the term Taoism is used to describe a number of disparate religious traditions, from organised religious movements such as Quanzhen to Chinese folk religion and even a school of philosophy. The vast majority of adherents live in China and among Chinese Diaspora communities elsewhere, and so attitudes to homosexuality within Taoism often reflect the values and sexual norms of broader Chinese society (see Homosexuality in China).
Taoism stresses the relationship between yin and yang: two opposing forces which maintain harmony through balance. The Taoist tradition holds that males need the energies of females, and vice versa, in order to bring about balance, completion and transformation. Heterosexuality is seen as the physical and emotional embodiment of the harmonious balance between yin and yang. Homosexuality on the other hand is often seen as the union of two yins or two yangs, and therefore unbalanced. People in same-sex relationships or people who engage in same-sex sexual behaviour are thought to be susceptible to illness.[23] However, homosexuality is not explicitly forbidden by the Taoist Holy Books, the Tao Te Ching and the Zhuangzi.
Homosexuality has found a place within the history of Taoism, at certain times and places. For example, Taoist nuns exchanged love poems during the Tang dynasty. [24]
Greco-Roman religion
6th century BCE Athenian cup depicting a man seducing a youth. Antikenmuseum, BerlinMain articles: Pederasty and Mythology of same-sex love
In Greco-Roman religion same-sex love was integrated in sacred texts and rituals, reflecting the fact that in antiquity it was considered normal to be open to romantic engagements with either sex. Certain surviving myths depict homosexual bonds (see History), sanctified by divinities modeling such relationships. See Zeus and Ganymede as an example.
The Sumerian religion also held homosexuality sacred. It also was incorporated into various New World religions, such as the Aztec. It is thought to have been common in shamanic practice
TO BE CONTINUED....
Last edited by The Prophecy on Nov 15th, 2006 at 01:38 AM
Neo-pagan religion
Neo-Pagan religions are almost unanimous in their acceptance of same-sex relationships as equal to heterosexual ones. Another New Age perspective, however, is that of Eckhart Tolle, author of The Power of Now. Starting with the idea that "the realization that you are 'different' from others may force you to disidentify from socially conditioned patterns of thought and behavior," he claims that being gay can help in the "quest for enlightenment", but only so long as one does not "develop a sense of identity based on... gayness".
[edit] Mythological figures who engaged in same-sex love
Main article: Mythology of same-sex love
Gilgamesh & Enkidu
Poseidon & Pelops
Zeus & Ganymede
Laius & Chrysippus
Iphis & Ianthe
Heracles & Iolaus, Hylas, Abderus
Apollo & Orpheus, Hyacinthus, Cyparissus
Pan & Daphnis
Achilles & Patroclus
Narcissus & Ameinias
Xochipilli & ?
Religious opposition to civil rights
Religious opponents of LGBT rights believe that supporting reform of anti-gay laws would promote wilful acts of homosexuality, which is incompatible with their faith. Opposition to equal rights protections, same-sex marriage, and hate crime legislation is often associated with conservative religious views. Individuals active in the human rights movement claim this opposition is part of a pattern of religiously-based (and Biblically rationalized) resistance to expansion of the sphere of human rights.
For example, the Unitarian Rev. Dr. Barry M. Andrews, in a recent essay [2], commends efforts to legalize gay marriage and compares resistance to it to the resistance to abolition of slavery, women's suffrage, and the end of anti-miscegenation laws. As he says, "... we know that these civil rights were opposed at one time by a majority of Americans, including churches and the government."
Translation disputes
In translation, certain terms within the various Holy Books of different religions may acquire meanings that were not in the original. For example, the Biblical term to'ba, often translated as "abomination" in English, carries a meaning closer to "forbidden or unclean" in the original sense, and has been applied to a wide range of subjects. Thus in translation it has acquired a term with a sense of exceptionalism and repugnance beyond other 'unclean' acts that, apparently, was not necessarily carried within the original. (See further: Abomination (Bible))
Religious persecution of homosexuality
Persecution of lesbians and gay men is common in conservative Islamic nations such as Saudi Arabia, where gay men have reportedly been beheaded, or forced into therapy. The Taliban regime in Afghanistan reportedly executed lesbians and gay men by burying them alive.
Some translations of the Old Testament have been used to argue that gay men should be punished with death, and AIDS has been portrayed by some such as Fred Phelps as a punishment by God against gay men and lesbians.
Religious support for homosexuality
There exist groups and denominations whose interpretation of scripture and doctrine states that homosexuality is morally acceptable, and a natural occurrence. Some conclude that there can be no scriptural prohibition against homosexuality as it is presently understood, namely as the outworking of an orientation. Others consider that scriptural prohibitions only relate to pederasty, which was a mode of same-sex practice in ancient times. Others consider that scripture has a thoroughgoing patriarchal bias, which expresses itself in a disapproval of all gender-transgressive sexual practices; present-day readings must account for this. Proponents of liberation theology may consider that the liberation of gay and lesbian peoples from stigmatisation and oppression is a Kingdom imperative. Similarly, the inclusion of the "unclean" Gentiles in the early Church is sometimes said to be a model for the inclusion of other peoples called "unclean" today.
Others consider that Jesus Christ made the commandments to "love God and one's neighbour," and to "love one's neighbour as oneself" touchstones of the moral law; that these imply a radical equality, and that, by this principle of equality, the Law of Moses is to be adjusted. Jesus exemplified this principle in his teaching on divorce. Furthermore, it is said that Jesus Christ instituted a virtue ethic, whereby the worth of one's action is to be adjudged by one's interior disposition. For these reasons, it is said that to condemn homosexuality is to fall into a pre-Christian "Pharasaical" legalism.
People adopting one of the foregoing positions would hold that morality which applies to heterosexuals should similarly apply to gay men and lesbians, i.e. sex is acceptable within a monogamous relationship or a same-sex marriage.
Others seek a naturalistic justification for the view that homosexual behavior is moral or that morality does not apply, pointing to evidence of the existence of such behavior in the animal kingdom. Therefore it is said to be natural, perhaps even integral to a species' survival.
Genetic determination, choice, and change
Main articles: Biology and sexual orientation and Choice and sexual orientation
The belief that children could be made gay was propagated by opponents of homosexuality and developed into a general fear that lesbians and gay men would "seduce" or "recruit" children. Anti-gay crusader Anita Bryant started an organization called Save our Children which used the anti-gay slogan "Homosexuals cannot reproduce — so they must recruit." Her claim that one can change their sexual orientation is in contrast to many medical and scientific communities which see sexual orientation unchangeable. Some groups have likened such language to that seen targeting Jews in earlier ages with false accusations of drinking the blood of Christian children.
How did Jesus saying to love one's neighbour as oneself adjust the Law when it was written in the Law? He didn't change anything by saying that because he was quoting the Law.
The Prophecy - Christianity and Judaism ARE Abrahamic religions. Why is there Christianity, then Judaism, then Abrahamic Religions?
And a note on this thread as a whole -
It is stupid and naive to believe that if there were no religious people, it would be heaven for gays. It would not.
The matter of the fact is that there are non-religious homophobic people, and to even claim that only religious people are homophobic is baseless and false.
Sure religion has influence, but it is not ''the enemy''. Socially acceptable and non-acceptable things are, as far as west goes, less and less associated with religion, and far more with social structure.
Thus, get a grip. Religious is not going to save homosexuals, or be the end of the homosexuals. Religious view on homosexuals is marely one in the stream of things which are imbeded in our socio-cultural structure.
__________________
في هذا العالم ثلاثة أشخاص أفسدوا البشرية : راعي غنم , طبيب و راكب الجمال , و راكب الجمال هو أسوأ نشال و أسوأ مشعوذ بين الثلاثة
Last edited by lil bitchiness on Nov 15th, 2006 at 02:09 PM
How can Ted Haggard not be Gay ? He's Bisexual at the very least, but he is NOT straight.
I know that although quite a number of straight men have experimented with homosexuality, but are not truly self identified as being "Gay" or even "bisexual", this is not the case with Ted Haggard.
Ted Haggard has kept a relationship with a Male Prostitute for YEARS. He wasn't just "experimenting" as some straight men often do. He has been enacting in homosexual activity for YEARS.....so he is either Gay, or Bisexual. He is not straight.....
Being Straight is when you are not turned on by homosexual eroticism. Straight Men are only turned on sexually by women, or maybe perhaps a LITTLE bit by men, but NOT so much to the point where a straight man would have a continous sexual relationship with another man for 3 years straight.
Now as for men in prison....I agree with you 100%. Not all men in prison who engage in homosexual activity are actually Gay. They are "Gay by default" as it would be best put.
This meaning they feel the urge to have sex, but since no women are present, they have to settle for sexual activity with other men. If most of these same men who have sex with other men were given the choice of sexual activity with a woman, they would choose the woman all the time.
Since they are not given the luxury of choice, in order to let out thier sexual urges, they must enact that activity with other men.
With Ted Haggar, he HAS A WIFE ! HE is surrounded by women ALL THE TIME ! What need does he HAVE to have sex with another man, unless he was Gay ? On top of that, he would preach ANTI-GAY sentiment all the time. You would think he was 100% straight with all that hateful rhetoric...
Yet he engaged in homosexual behavior himself ~! Do you think he was just TRYING to be a hypocrit, or having sex with another man because he was BORED ?
He had sex with a male prostitute, because he WANTED TO. It TURNS HIM ON ! He OBVIOUSLY was NOT satisfied with his WIFE sexually, and instead of cheating on her with another woman, he cheats on her with another MAN....
Dude...he's NOT STRAIGHT.....it is SELF EVIDENT.
I think the more I read a person's posts, the better I can intepret where they truly come from. You seem to be sincere in everything you say, and not just trying to push your opinion on others.
At least you are a lot easier to reason with than the likes of JIA, Sonnet, and MArcello
Gender: Male Location: Southern Oregon,
Looking at you.
Homosexual Animals Out of the Closet
By Sara Goudarzi
LiveScience Staff Writer
posted: 16 November 2006
09:42 am ET
From male killer whales that ride the dorsal fin of another male to female bonobos that rub their genitals together, the animal kingdom tolerates all kinds of lifestyles.
A first-ever museum display, "Against Nature?," which opened last month at the University of Oslo's Natural History Museum in Norway, presents 51 species of animals exhibiting homosexuality.
"Homosexuality has been observed in more than 1,500 species, and the phenomenon has been well described for 500 of them," said Petter Bockman, project coordinator of the exhibition.
The idea, however, is rarely discussed in the scientific community and is often dismissed as unnatural because it doesn't appear to benefit the larger cause of species continuation.
"I think to some extent people don't think it's important because we went through all this time period in sociobiology where everything had to be tied to reproduction and reproductive success," said Linda Wolfe, who heads the Department of Anthropology at East Carolina University. "If it doesn't have [something to do] with reproduction it's not important."
For pleasure
However, species continuation may not always be the ultimate goal, as many animals, including humans, engage in sexual activities more than is necessary for reproduction.
"You can make up all kinds of stories: Oh it's for dominance, it's for this, it's for that, but when it comes down to the bottom I think it's just for sexual pleasure," Wolfe told LiveScience.
Conversely, some argue that homosexual sex could have a bigger natural cause than just pure ecstasy: namely evolutionary benefits.
Copulation could be used for alliance and protection among animals of the same sex. In situations when a species is mostly bisexual, homosexual relationships allow an animal to join a pack.
"In bonobos for instance, strict heterosexual individuals would not be able to make friends in the flock and thus never be able to breed," Bockman told LiveScience. "In some bird species that bond for life, homosexual pairs raise young. If they are females, a male may fertilize their eggs. If they are males, a solitary female may mate with them and deposit her eggs in their nest."
Mom and Dad and Dad
Almost a quarter of black swan families are parented by homosexual couples. Male couples sometimes mate with a female just to have a baby. Once she lays the egg, they chase her away, hatch the egg, and raise a family on their own.
"Homosexuality" and "heterosexuality" are terms defined by societal boundaries, invisible in the animal kingdom.
"Many species are hermaphrodites," Bockman said. Hermaphrodites have both male and female sex organs. A lot of marine species have no sex life at all, but just squirt their eggs or semen into sea.
Some creatures even reproduce asexually, by dividing themselves into two organisms. In one species of gecko, females clone themselves.
Like most complex issues, animal homosexuality is challenging and poorly understood. Therefore, educators tend to shy away from covering it in their teaching. Many scientists don't even want to be associated with this type of research.
"I've had primatologists offer to give me their data on homosexual behavior because they didn't want to publish it," Wolfe said.
"Against Nature?" was set up partly to demystify the concept.
The argument that a homosexual way of living cannot be accepted because it is against the "laws of nature" can now be rejected scientifically, said Geir Soli, project leader for the exhibition. "A main target for this project was to get museums involved in current debate; to show that museums are more than just a gallery for the past."
But despite your information, we are still gonna have some debators that will argue. "But its still a SIN ! And animals are not people, people can't SIN!"
And then you are gonna have total IDIOTS who are gonna say, "Being Gay is a mental illness and is an choice and makes me wanto vomit and it iz disgusting bacouse it is a SIN"
KMC Community Forums
Nov 14th, 2006 04:24 PM
not this one at least. I'm basically getting to the point of sexual orientation and so on...... if you read you'll actually figure out that it's related. I just wanted people to get a better understanding more on the sexuality side of the thread thats all.
