I often hear homosexuals/allies arguing that homosexuality "is not a choice", for instance in the refrain of this pro-gay marriage song the refrain assures us "I can't change". What I don't understand is why this actually matters. Placing importance on the fact that "it is not a choice" seems to play right into the radical right's collectivist mindset in this issue. What I don't understand is why it matters. Why does it matter if homosexuality is genetic, environmental, or a choice (however one actually decides that they only want to have sex with the identical gender), or if one can be "cured". Why does it matter, why can't we accept people for their approved lifestyle. So does the cause of homosexuality matter to you in your opinions surrounding the social, political, or moral aspects of homosexuality?
Not at all. As far as I am concerned it is no more of a question than 'what is the cause of my being a heterosexual'. I have always known I was attracted to women, and I don't see any reason I need to justify or explain it. Why should a homosexual have to explain why he or she is attracted to whomever?
Why should we? How can it not matter, when if homosexuality is genetic like skin color there is no moral issue?
Because presumably you value human happiness. If someone isn't directly harming you or others, then why should you stop them from acting in the manner that they are acting? That isn't very American. I don't see how the origin matters. If, for instance, god's book says outright that homosexuality is a sin and that all homosexuals should be killed, then it shouldn't matter whether or not one chooses to be homosexual, you should go grab a rock and toss the first stone. The same is true if it is a sin to be one color or another.
Homosexuality is no more about happiness than is drug addiction. Professing homosexuals are harming children by planting the idea in their minds that perversion ought to be accepted as normal. I never laid eyes on it, or heard tell of it. As long as you think its mention in the Bible is what makes it a sin, you cannot understand the issue. If you think you're talking to an idiot, I'd like to know now, tia.
How so? Why can't the same be said about heterosexuality. Why does it matter if something brings one love, fulfillment, and sexual pleasure all at the same time? It is perfectly acceptable when it occurs between members of the opposite sex, why not the main sex. Why is it a perversion, and in what sense? If it is a perversion then why does it matter? This is a predominant argument by conservative Christians who do indeed derive their ethics from what is in the bible. Arguing that it doesn't matter, when so many of the arguments that are levied against homosexuality are religious in nature, it is foolish to say that the bible's stance on the issue isn't a major reason that it is considered a sin. Indeed, I would appreciate it if you told me how else something could be a "sin" in the religious sense of the term. At any rate, I never even said that the bible or any other book did claim that homosexuality was a sin (there is of course debate on this and its implications), merely the logical implication for a literalist if it did.
Genetic and environmental arguments fall into the "it's not my fault crap". I don't hold anything against gays until they try to steal tax dollars from me with their marriage fraud. A more realistic question should be why can't gays simply be gay and not try to steal government cheese?
It should be irrelevant as to whether or not someone is given rights or respect. But to people that illogically hate homosexuality, some of them might tolerate it if it's not a choice. A lot of the time, though, I think it's just an excuse to say, "well, they don't HAVE to be that way, so they can change, and we don't have to give them rights." Either way, some of these people don't care, but they use this as an excuse to just say "just change." And in a religious context, if people are born gay, that sorta makes them question that aspect of their religion. Being free from oppressive, unjustifiably judgmental and hateful people is what happiness is about, and I believe that's what he's talking about. Where is your evidence that gay people make other people gay and that being gay is harmful?
Why can't you just be straight and not steal government "cheese?" Why are you entitled to it but they aren't?
The cause of same-sex orientation does not matter. This should not, however, be confused with the debate over whether or not homosexuality is a choice. The argument of the anti-gay is that since behavior is a choice, homosexuals should change to heterosexual behavior. And that argument ignores the fact that this behavior is often (though not exclusively) driven by an underlying orientation of attraction that isn't chosen nor changeable regardless of the ability to alter behavior. The demand that one should be celibate or couple heterosexually when one has a same-sex orientation is unreasonable.
Because it's a compulsion created and nurtured by a person's dark side. It can, but heterosexual copulation has a legitimate purpose in procreation, and the proclivity towards perverted heterosexual activity can be overcome within the God-given framework of marriage, from which homosexuals exclude themselves. There is no love in homosexual activity, only lust. You might as well ask why pedophilia is a perversion. The question is nonsensical. So take it up with them. Surely that would make sense if I had taken it upon myself to defend positions I have never adopted. Things being what they are... Unless you have some reason to believe the Bible predates the advent of sin, I cannot consider your request worthy of a moment's thought. You'll never have that even after you've murdered every last one of them, because you'll still be a slave of the hatred you pretend is theirs rather than yours.
Kind of like Heterosexual rapists, right? So with this logic, it'd be safe to say that sterile men and women should not be allowed to marry, and that whatever sex they have is not out of love, but lust? I currently know three homosexual couples that are in much happier relationships than I myself have ever been in. Then again I tend to try to have sex with anything with breasts and a skirt while they seemed to be a bit picky with who they want to spend the rest of their lives with. Oh hey look, the pedophilia card. I love it when people throw this card to try and compare homosexuality to pedophilia. Almost like you think having sex with the same sex and having sex with a minor is the same thing. Is pedophilia a choice? Psychologically it is just like any other fetish. Some people enjoy BSDM, some enjoy group sex, and some enjoy people watching them. Then you have people who have sex with children. However, UNLIKE homosexuality pedophilia has proven to have direct psychological trauma done to the minors who have been molested. Quite frankly, homosexuality and pedophilia is comparing Apples to Oranges.
I'm pleasantly surprised with the results of the poll thusfar. My guess is that it will end in 1/3 "yes" and the remained "no" This is such an arbitrary distinction. How in the world do you know what would and would not be created by their "dark side"? Why can't it just be a different taste or feeling on a matter? Furthermore how many people do you know who have engaged in sexual intercourse just for the sake of procreation? Why does homosexuality need to be justified when listening to music, eating cake, and owning a pet do not? All of these are frivolous and without "legitimate purpose", so why does homosexual marriage? How do you know? The idea that two men can "love" one another as greatest friends is ancient, now if you just add physical attraction to this you arrive at homosexuality, just like if you add the idea that a man and woman can care for one another both emotionally and sexually you arrive at heterosexual love They are not the same. One involves a group of people who are not old enough or mature enough to make decisions about their sexuality. The other involves consenting adults and is identical to heterosexuality but with a different set of genitalia. Of course if you're a christian you arrive at the concept of sin through the events documented in judeo-christian works, so the bible and the actual "knowledge" of sin occurred at the same time. This is besides the point, however, since I was originally asking how one would know one was committing a sin in the absence of an explicit commandment from god saying that that sort of act was a sin
The question should be why do homosexuals keep proslytizing their life style, and if anyone objects, they label them a homophobe? Instead of curbing their presence out of respect towards the sensibilities of others, they flaunt it even more. So I ask you, has there ever been a time in history, when something contrary to the majority was flaunted and it didn't end in a horrific way? I don't know if you are aware that homosexuality was prevalent in Germany, and that even the first Nazis were homosexuals? They were all shot...gone...dead. But look, you can keep pushing your 'lifestyle', it is your life.
Or kleptomaniacs, or obsessive-compulsives, or any other sort of pervert, sexual or not. No, because no harm comes to society by recognizing their right to marry. Obviously not, since not everyone who is sterile is aware of it. Then I have no idea what your point is. Actually it can be argued that any trauma along those lines results from social stigmatization rather than the act itself, so the distinction you draw has no factual basis. It has nothing to do with anything "in the world", because such knowledge arises from the insight we are all born with, but which we abandon to varying degrees as we age. Why can't cannibalism be just a different taste or feeling from those of us who refuse to partake of human flesh? Doesn't matter, obviously. Same reason any wrongdoing needs to be justified, obviously: to protect the wrongdoer's fraudulent sense of self-worth. That is a long way from being merely "frivolous", as its advocacy serves no other purpose than to codify glaring insanity into law. See above. Neither is murder the same as petty larceny; but they're both obviously wrong, just like homosexuality and pedophilia. And how exactly are those criteria anything but "arbitrary"? Hmmmmm? You have no idea what you're talking about. Understanding of sin is not arrived at through any analysis of information acquired through the material senses. It is, as I said, inborn; and your failure to understand it results from your having abandoned such understanding in favor of "social conscience".
It matters if it is due to some kind of mental and/or physical abuse in early life. Homosexuality is abnormal, so if at all possible it is best to offer therapy to those for whom the condition is derived through external influences, as opposed to those simply born wrong.
Yes it matters. And here's why. You just unwittingly answered your own question in your OP. We all know (or at least should know by now) that homosexuality is not a choice. And we also constantly hear that no one would choose to be that way to further validate this. So the cause of homosexuality is vitally important because if it can be proven to be caused - even if only in some cases - by environmental circumstances, then do we not have an obligation to stop, correct, and reverse this? Otherwise we are just passively imposing an alternate sexuality upon somebody that they did not choose simply because we're too obsessed with accepting it to bother understanding it first. And this is the greatest injustice you can do to somebody in the name of equality. I think we have a responsibility as a society to fully understand what specifically causes homosexuality before just embracing it and changing a bunch of laws to promote and protect it. This is the responsible course of action. Knowledge first. Then acceptance if deemed appropriate. Anything else is just empty emotionalism that equates to jumping into a pool without first checking to see if there's any water in it.
Why not? Pro-gay advocates always throw out the "it's just like interracial marriage" card. In fact, not long into this thread (post 4), the OP compared the sinfullness of homosexuality to being sinful to be a member of a certain race. So if it's OK for one side to always imply racism on an unrelated topic, I see no reason why the other side can't make a pedophilia comparison, which is actually more apt, as it deals with sexual orientation.
Except Homosexuals have came from all sorts of psychological backgrounds. There has yet to be a study that supports the claim that mental or physical abuse in childhood would lead to homosexuality. Well you're not wrong, but homosexuality is an abnormality that exists in thousands of animals. Only animal that has Homophobia are humans. That is abnormal. Except for the fact there has yet to be a therapy proven to "fix" homosexuals. Everything ever done to attempt to "correct" homosexuals has proven to either fail, or send whoever they put through those practices to depression and suicide. Pro-Gay Marriage advocates throw that comparison because those against gay marriage are for the idea of preventing two people who love each other the right to get married simply for their genetic disposition Well other than the fact that pedophilia is not a sexual orientation but a fetish. A fetish that transcends to both Heterosexuals and homosexuals. You are trying to compare Apples to Oranges because you find Apple's lifestyle weird. You fail to understand the difference between a fetish and sexuality. Oh so it is society we're worried about now? I thought this was about advancing the human race or whatever nonsense you believe in. Aside from that, what actual harm is going to come to society when Adam and Steve can be married happily? If anything this is the same argument used when people were trying to outlaw interracial marriage. (Yeah I went there and here is a link to validate this.) I'm not surprised you are so willing to excuse ignorance, seeing as you are ignorant. You insist that homosexuals don't have actual relationships founded on love. I can name three couples that are very much in love, which is something I can not say being a heterosexual male. Do you even understand the point you are trying to make? Pedophilia is condemned because grown men and women are abusing children who do not understand sex. There is absolutely no psychological trauma done when two consenting adults have sex. Other than of course having to deal with social stigma, you and the other anti-marriage people establish
I think that most Americans are sufficiently enlightened to recognize that sexual orientation is a common genetic predisposition whilst allowing the possibility that environment might contribute as well. But imagine if you are a homophobic bible thumper or radical Islamist. You might well refuse to accept that your God chooses to make most folks straight and some folks gay. Instead, you would be inclined to transfer that choice to the individual you wish to condemn. Of course,it is possible to champion equal rights for someone whose homosexuality you consider to be voluntary if you believe that he has the same Constitutional right to pursue happiness as a heterosexual.
Homosexuals have every right to be homosexual. The government should not discriminate against them for exercising their rights.
I don`t see that cause of homosexuality should matter in a moral sense. In a scientific sense, we are always looking for answers to mysteries. Respect for others is most important. That`s why it shouldn`t be too much to ask, for homosexuals to not try to push in on heterosexual`s marriage. Respect and tolerance, need to be a two way street.
