Originally posted by Big Evil
Can you help but be albino?
A midget?
Retarded? (Liberals don't count lol!)Well the same thing go's for homosexuals. It's simply a fluke in the natural design. Nothing to hide or be ashamed of, just work around it. That's life for ya'..
There's a pretty big difference between mental and physical imbalances.
I don't believe in all cases you are born gay.
Sometimes things happen to you in your life that have a big affect on the way you think and that changes you in some ways.
Like being molested or raped or anything along those lines or something like that.
Sometimes nothing has to happened you just get older and you change naturally.
They say that when one becomes a teenager it is natural that they may feel attraction to the same sex with all their hormones going and stuff and puberty.
Sometimes they grow out of that stage of life and realize that they really just like the opposite sex or they realize that they like it and they stay attracted to the opposite sex or both sexes.
Not to say that they choose.
Point is, with all the stuff teenagers go through, being puberty, hormones, and everything like that, they SOMETIMES don't discover theire true sexuality until their teens or later.
Originally posted by powerfulone1987
Now why would you say that?What do you have against Jackie Malfoy?
I said it would be amusing cause these people of like the most opposing views ever.
..this, by the way, was very obvious ´....did you even read my post?
Originally posted by powerfulone1987
I don't believe in all cases you are born gay.Sometimes things happen to you in your life that have a big affect on the way you think and that changes you in some ways.
Like being molested or raped or anything along those lines or something like that.
Sometimes nothing has to happened you just get older and you change naturally.
They say that when one becomes a teenager it is natural that they may feel attraction to the same sex with all their hormones going and stuff and puberty.
Sometimes they grow out of that stage of life and realize that they really just like the opposite sex or they realize that they like it and they stay attracted to the opposite sex or both sexes.
Not to say that they choose.
Point is, with all the stuff teenagers go through, being puberty, hormones, and everything like that, they SOMETIMES don't discover theire true sexuality until their teens or later.
maybe I dunno... Ive never been 'molested'
Originally posted by Bardock42
Where did I say that I had anything against her?I said it would be amusing cause these people of like the most opposing views ever.
..this, by the way, was very obvious ´....did you even read my post?
she obviously didnt
Originally posted by Cinemaddiction
There's a pretty big difference between mental and physical imbalances.
Sorry, this thread is a dying husk of a once-interesting (and new) debate. It has grown tiresome and nears death; it wheezes, occasionally coughing up dust, as it lays on its side, awaiting death. But you continue to resuscitate it with the same arguments that have been debated to death...
And I just prolonged its misery.
Sheesh. Finally, I've read all 114 pages. Cheated on a few that were just so painfully childish (sure you all know which posters I'm talking about).
Wanna hear it from the horse's mouth? DEFINITELY NOT CHOSEN.
I won't cite evidence to support genetics as the root of homosexuality, because no one seems to read that here, but I will tell you this: I'm homosexual, and I had no choice in that.
I have the choice whether to engage in homosexual acts, or not. I CHOOSE TO DO SO, because it is IN MY NATURE. But no one can tell me that I choose to be attracted to men. That's like saying I choose to like a particular flavor of ice cream. I can choose to deny that I like that kind of ice cream, but there is NOTHING I, or ANYONE ELSE, can do to change the FACT that I like that kind of ice cream.
There is no "CURE" for homosexuality. You can't inject me with something that will suddenly make me find women attractive. Anything you do to try to make me deny my attraction to men is AGAINST MY NATURE. If you don't believe me, you can just ask my dick. It's got a mind of its own and it goes up for the guys, not the gals.
I've been attracted to men all my life (since I was 7 actually). And no, I didn't speak with a lisp or have limp wrists, although to any who might have these traits, I say, all the more power to you, honey! I'm 5'3", with a 42" chest and 33" waist and like to wear flannel, jeans and worker boots, and I find the same attractive. Amongst my straight (and some Christian) friends, I'm thought of as butch. I don't appreciate the stereotype of Gays being effeminate or Lesbians being butch. I personally know many lesbian couples who are sizzling hot babes who wouldn't look out of place in any Playboy spread. I play chess with them.
I'm 38 years old and have been hitched to the same guy (my first love) for 14 years, MONOGAMOUSLY. Our love grows stronger with each day that passes. And ANYONE who tells me that that's a sin can ... well ... go to hell in my place. Dogma is not opinion.
I've read most of the posts that had any substance, and have a 3000+ word response to all the homophobic (and yes, it does connote "contempt" American Heritage Dictionary, 4th Ed.; and "prejudice" Wordnet 2.0, Princeton University) ones already typed and ready to post.
Before I go into specific rebuttals let me first post this.
First, I’d like to thank all you gay supporters (gay and straight alike) who have taken the time and effort to post here. It literally brought tears to my eyes.
Consider the following.
How would you feel if one of your parents was lying very ill and dying in the hospital, and for no good reason, you were not allowed to visit him/her or be present when he/she died, or help make decisions about his/her medical care?
Can you imagine going through life with the fear that if your loved one were to suffer an accident that landed him/her in a coma, that their “family” could come in and take him/her away and stop you from even visiting them? This “family” could decide to unplug life-support, and you wouldn’t be able to raise any protest.
Forget about sex. Forget whether love is natural. Forget about the nature/nurture debate.
Think about the pain that would cause you.
That is the kind of pain that gays suffer every day because Christianity has influenced such a large section of society to stigmatize our relationships. That is the kind of pain that denying us our human rights has caused.
Some States in the US are better than others, and I think that things are getting better slowly throughout the US, but for the most part, because gay unions aren’t recognized at the Federal level, couples who have spent their whole lives together, and who love each other very much, are just cut off from each other like Jewish families were cut of from each other during the holocaust.
You wouldn’t put a dog through that kind of pain. Why would you do that to us?
Now you tell me. Is that humane? Doesn’t that go against everything that you believe? Is that natural?
Some of you claim not to discriminate when you tell us to our faces that you don’t approve of us.
EVERY TIME A CHRISTIAN SAYS THAT HOMOSEXUALITY IS A SIN, EVERY TIME A CHRISTIAN SAYS THAT HOMOSEXUALITY IS AN ABOMINATION AGAINST GOD, EVERY TIME A CHRISTIAN SAYS THAT HOMOSEXUALITY IS A CHOICE THAT CAN BE DENIED, IS A TIME THAT CHRISTIANITY IS PERPETUATING THE IDEA THAT IT IS OK TO TREAT HOMOSEXUALS WITH SUCH CRUELTY.
It’s one thing for a complete ignoramus to spout anti gay sentiment. It’s quite another for Christians, supposed moral pillars, to do the same.
Everyone maintains that they are entitled to their opinion. To a certain extent that’s correct. But what if your opinion is founded on shaky logic and directly or indirectly causes others pain and suffering?
On Genetics
I’m not arguing one way or another, but it seems to me that some of you might not realize that genetics is not a complete science. The human genome (or any animal’s genome, for that matter) is so huge that NO ONE can say how it affects our behavior. Think about this: our genes determine exactly how each of our cells is organized, what kind of cell it becomes. Even our neurons are only specialized cells which share the same basic origin: DNA. What tells a skin cell to be a skin cell? What tells a brain cell to be a brain cell? DNA. So if you think that behavior and cognition are independent of our genetic make-up you might want to reconsider. There has been scientific theory (not evidence) that criminal tendency, substance addiction and clinical depression have genetic roots, that our genes predispose us to be violent, to be susceptible to the addictive effect of drugs, or to have problems generating endorphins, the neural transmitter responsible for euphoria. If one little pill can alter our perception of reality (e.g. LSD), why is it so hard for you to believe that anything as systemic as DNA can’t govern our day-to-day behavior? If you really think that genetics and cognition have nothing to do with each other you need to brush up on your behavioral psychology.
If we subscribe to the genetic argument, to address the question of how come Gay’s don’t die out because of a genetic dead-end, some genes are recessive. They remain dormant until several generations later. There are a slew of genetic diseases that display this characteristic (not to associate being Gay with disease). Even eye color or hair color can display this characteristic. You don’t have to be Gay to carry the “Gay gene,” if there turns out to be one (or a combination of them).
I’m going to play devil’s advocate here and throw this out: has it ever occurred to you that homosexuality is a natural genetic response to overpopulation. Wolves, bears and crocodiles, seem to be able to control the sizes of their litters or clutches depending on the amount of food in ratio to their population. Lemmings commit mass suicide when they get too populous. From an ecological point of view, Gay people are in fact performing a very important function: we’re contributing to productivity without contributing to the population growth. If you look at it this way Gays may be the symptom, but the sickness is cuz you breeders can stop popping them out. How about that for a thought?
On Chemical Imbalance
“Chemical imbalance” could mean anything. A chemical imbalance can be caused by many things which include: poor diet resulting in nutritional imbalance, or toxins in the blood; over- or underproduction (in comparison to the average) of hormones due to a genetic trait; desensitization of neural receptors to transmitters due to over-stimulation with opiates. Long-term chemical imbalance typically has genetic origins.
I think the main problem is the word imbalance. Imbalance, in normal parlance, has bad connotations. But in scientific/medical circles, it merely means a deviation from the norm. I use “deviation” and “norm” in completely mathematical senses here. In order for there to be “a norm” there has to be “deviation.” Thus deviation is normal. 😉 In other words, a chemical imbalance is not abnormal, it’s just different from the average.
On Homosexuality Being against Nature
Many detractors against homosexuality cite nature as proof. They claim it’s unnatural. Some claim that because a Gay union won’t produce offspring that means it’s unnatural. The usual rebuttal is that homosexuality abounds in the non-human animal kingdom. Another is that it implies that sterile heterosexual couples are unnatural, too. What most people of the “nature” argument ignore is the complexity of the human need for companionship. It’s not just about reproduction, it’s about spending your life with someone about whom you feel passionately. In any event, looking to the “animal” kingdom for answers is bound to be non-productive because each species is unique, and has it’s own quirks. Many mollusks in fact change their biological sex merely as a function of water depth. Many reptiles’ sex depends on the ambient temperature of their nests while in the egg. And there is one fish which is born female, and switches sexes if the need arises. No other animal on this planet has done what we have done (whatever judgement you may place on our “accomplishments”). How can we cite “nature” in any argument?
Then again it’s hard to resist pointing out to those who cite the human reproductive drive as an argument against homosexuality as human nature. I suppose that these people believe that using natural resources to their exhaustion, and multiplying until there isn’t enough food and water to go around, is natural. What other species on God’s good planet has done this? If anything can be called an abomination, it’s what we’ve done to our own planet. So don’t talk to me about what’s “NATURAL.”
People who claim that homosexuality is not natural NEVER have any solid arguments to back them up. They completely ignore the FACT that homosexual behavior exists throughout the animal kingdom. They completely ignore the FACT that NOTHING in their lives is natural, from the clothes they wear, to the food they eat, to the grass that grows on their white-picket fenced lawns, to the air they breath when they visit the bastion of modern civilization: the mall!
First of all, to tell me that it’s against nature is just plain wrong. How do you know what’s in my nature? You’re not me. It’s like me telling you that being heterosexual is unnatural simply because I don’t understand how you could possibly like the opposite sex. Just because you don’t understand it, doesn’t make it unnatural. Secondly, telling me that I can choose not to act on my nature is equally wrong. Why should I repress my nature? Why should I deny that which God himself has give me? Why should I risk going though years of therapy (oh wait, done that, been there) to overcome the trauma of being made to think that there’s something wrong with me?
On Religious Dogma (and I'm prolly gonna be so blasted for this)
Some claim that God made the sexes for reproduction and nothing else. They believe in biblical creation literally. Some of these people I frankly just cannot comprehend. They wear their religion like a blindfold. And there is just no talking to them. Any attempt at getting them to think beyond their stunted belief system is invariably shot down by an appeal to the Bible. I respect God and all that, but when are these people going to take some responsibility for their own existence? To leave everything to God, or rather the Biblical presentation of God, is such a cowardly philosophy. I say some people, because I know that not all Christians are like this. I have many Christian friends who accept me as a Gay man, and respect my equal right to pursue happiness in any way I choose. They can see that my happiness is not a threat to them.
I just don’t see why some people think that my being happy and respected somehow detracts from their happiness and honor. On the other hand, they seem oblivious to the fact that their persecution of Gays causes a lot of pain and suffering. And for NO GOOD REASON. Why should it bother anyone what two consenting adults do with each other?
Homosexuality has existed since time immemorial, but the “idea” of homosexuality has only been around since Freud. Stigmatization of homosexuality comes primarily from Judeo-Christian thought. There is very little such stigmatization in other religions and philosophies. Christian stigmatization has had a polarizing effect: either you’re “normal” (i.e. straight) or “abnormal” (i.e. Gay). Everything has to be black and white, good or evil. There is very little room for grey. It’s a simplistic world view borne out of failure to think.
There is a book entitled “What the Bible Really Says about Homosexuality.”
It’s a very interesting book. As an example that has nothing to do with homosexuality, it cites Jesus’ teaching that it would be more difficult for a rich man to get into heaven than for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle. Taken out of context it can be interpreted to say that it is impossible for a rich man to get into heaven. But if you consider it in historical context: there was a gate called the Eye of the Needle in Jerusalem. It wasn’t very large and anyone who wished to pass through it with a camel first had to unload his baggage from the camel’s back. So do you see how this, interpreted differently, has a completely different meaning? It’s not impossible for rich men to get into heaven, they just have to see beyond their material desires.
As for homosexuality, the book explains that if you look at the story of Sodom and Gemorrah in historical cultural context, you’d see a different interpretation of God’s message (if you’re open to the concept of interpretation). Homosexuality as a term or a categorization did not exist in those days. I’m going to be quite frank here: buggery was often practiced by the victors in a battle against their prisoners to subjugate and humiliate. If you subscribe to this interpretation, it is for this kind of abuse that Sodom and Gemorrah were condemned. This practice does not characterize Gay relationships today. We enjoy our sex very much, thank you.
And most of the other passages that were written which specifically forbid a man “to lay with another man as with a woman,” were written by religious zealots who also believed in all kinds of extremely restrictive practices. I can’t remember the specifics, but it included things like having to wash your hands a particular way, and a certain number of times a day; you couldn’t eat pork; women had to behave differently. Lots of things that most would consider ridiculous today. So why aren’t people persecuted for not following all these practices? These practices are prescribed in the Bible. Why is homosexuality singled out as the one thing which justifies persecution of a minority group?
Look, I’m not even asking people to accept this interpretation. I’m just asking people to see how interpretation can skew meaning. With deference to God’s Will and all, the Bible was written for a culture which is now long gone. It has been through countless transcriptions and translations. How can anyone with a shred of intellect take it at face value? Jesus spoke in parables. Isn’t it more elevating to believe that the Word of God was written with the intention that we would use our God given intellect to interpret it and apply it in a way that suits new situations?
On Opinion and Dogma (another flameworthy post)
Dogma is NOT opinion. People who quote the Bible as the answer to things aren’t forming an opinion, they’re just quoting dogma. Opinion may be formulated without reference to fact, but there must be at least some reasoning behind it. The “argument” that so and so, or such and such a book said so, is NOT enough as the basis of an opinion. That’s like saying a particular movie was a good or bad movie because some critic said so. Don’t take his word for it. Go and see the movie!
Religion preaches many good things, but it also has the danger of allowing its followers to be intellectually lazy. Everything good comes from God and everything evil comes from Satan. And that’s as far as many religious zealots think, if you can call it that. It’s safe to think that way. They don’t have to take intellectual responsibility for any moral issues. “It’s God’s will.”
I’m not saying that they are incapable of thinking, or that they don’t work hard. I’m just saying that they’re so accustomed to having someone tell them what is right or wrong that they can’t form their own opinions to adapt to new situations. They form an illusory, unfounded, and truly dangerous sense of superiority. Those who say “You’re doing evil, but I still love you” are tolerable, but the message they send out is the sense that it’s their right to judge others based merely on their belief system. This message, in the ears of the less magnanimous turns into hate and violence.
There is a term for this false sense of superiority which makes them feel entitled to dictate the morality of others, to decided what’s best for everyone: fascism. Yes, folks, it’s alive and well in America.
No one is asking you to question God. I’m just asking you to question what other people tell you God is saying. God gave you a mind. It’s a gift. You can waste it if you choose. But what a pity that would be.
Sexuality: Nature or Nurture
I like to think that sexuality is a spectrum. People tend towards one end or another. Some people are extreme and pull all the way to the ends. But some (most I suspect) don’t and remain somewhere shy of the ends. Some (perhaps more rarely) will in fact sway back and forth over the course of their lives. It is not unusual for a man to fall in love with a woman, get married and have children, only to later decide that he would he happier leading life as a Gay man. It is also not unheard of for a Gay man to decide that he’s happier leading a straight life. Whether you believe that the reasons for this are genetic or socio-environmental doesn’t really matter. The fact is that human beings are so complex that any attempt to pigeon hole them is bound to be futile and unfair to some group or another.
I think a very big obstacle to acceptance is the picture that the media paints of “the Gay life-style.” Not every Gay person is a pederast, or nudist, or polygamist, or fetishist. I’ve been with my partner for 14 years and we love each other very much. We’ve had our share of problems. We argue. But not any more than any other couple. We do regular stuff, like watch TV, go to see movies, bike, rollerblade, go on picnics, have a dog, have dinner with friends (Gay and straight), work, read, sleep, eat, have sex, talk, laugh, cry. I feel injustice. I feel uncertainty. I feel fear.
So other than the fact that I love someone of my own gender, in every other respect, my life is the same as everyone else’s. Take away the gender issue and I’m really no different from anyone.
Oh, except that according to some, I’m an abomination against God or nature or something, and that I will burn in hell for my sinful behavior, and I should be and am deprived of my rights to have my union with the person I love recognized as a legitimate institution, and I should not have visitation and next of kin rights if my partner is dying in the hospital.
Sorry, but thinking about this just makes me SO F’ING ANGRY! It’s like being told that I’m sub-human, that I don’t have the right to love at all. I have to love whom they choose for me. How can they claim to “love the person and not the sin” when they inflict such injustice upon us? It’s ludicrous. THAT’S hypocrisy!
If you want to believe it’s genetic, be my guest. If you want to believe it’s environmental, that’s your right, too. There isn’t enough evidence to definitively prove either argument. What I don’t appreciate is people who try to brow beat me into believing that I’m evil or perverse based on their unfounded beliefs. They may have the conviction of faith, and expect people to respect them for that, but they don’t respect anyone else’s beliefs. They believe in one thing, I believe in another. But the difference between them and me is that I don’t wave my beliefs over their heads like a moral baton, and try to deny them their rights as human beings.
On Gay Parades
If you were forced to live in secrecy, self-denial, and self-loathing for years ... nay, decades ... and then one day, you found a community of people who accept you for who you are, allows you to express your God given ability to love, wouldn’t you want to sing it from the tops of the mountains? Gays hold parades not to promote homosexuality, but to take back that which was taken from us since childhood: the right to express ourselves.
Those who don't enjoy seeing us can very pro-actively NOT watch.
On Labels
The best thing is to approach a person as an individual, not as a color, sex, religion, or whatever. Get to know that person before you jump to conclusions about whether what he does is good or bad.
For one Gay man, I’m really beginning to grow tired of people trying to define me as the result of a gene, or some childhood trauma. You can’t simplify people like this. Who we are is an amalgam of everything we’ve been through, good or bad. This includes genetic make-up, childhood trauma, developmental influences, etc..