There have been innumerable threads proposing some version of the idea that homosexuality is a non normal human choice. but, so often this opinion seems to reflect religious views. So here is my question. What If there was no religious or moral judgement involved in the issue... then
Matthew 19:12 For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.
]There have been innumerable threads proposing some version of the idea that homosexuality is a non normal human choice. but, so often this opinion seems to reflect religious views. So here is my question. What If there was no religious or moral judgement involved in the issue. It seems to me that Absent moral considerations, the pervasive nature of homosexuality across time and cultures presents a de facto case that homosexuality is a less common manifestation of what is apparently normal for humans
I agree that the moral-religious objection to homosexuality is flawed My poorly written question is about whether there remains a question of normality or choice in a case where religion and morality are removed from consideration. I do not see how anything that naturally exists could be described as non natural
Most of the homophobia I have gotten has been at the hands of people who haven't been in a church in years, and never cracked a Bible. Judgementalism and the isolation and stigmatism it induces is not caused by religion. It is inherent to the social structure of human beings. Religion has the power to magnify those social judgements , or weaken them. Usually Religion reflects as many values as it helps define.
The issue of homosexuality being wrong does not require religion to tell you because it is a question of biology, plumbing, and logic. Same gender sex and sane gender coupling is illogical. - - - Updated - - - The issue of homosexuality being wrong does not require religion to tell you because it is a question of biology, plumbing, and logic. Same gender sex and sane gender coupling is illogical.
Unfortunately, this subject is something that most people would rather stay away from. Lefties have conditioned people that if agreement is not on their side then one will be labeled a homophobe and/or bigot. It's just best to not be bothered by it....There's better issues to have dialogue/debate about.
Dislike of homosexuals has nothing to do with religion or the bible. Religion is just a justification of the prejudice as is saying it isn't "normal" or natural or that it's a mental illness. Religion in my estimate was contrived to control people. Ex: The Emperor giving an order is just a man commanding men. A god an Emperor invents is devine destiny and going against it is going against all creation. I think that is why we see the erosion of monothistic and monolithic religons in our country. Such things are more suited to monarchy and dictatorships.
Bowling is illogical. Religion is illogical. Fruitcake is illogical. Yet they are all legal and your right to engage in these practices can not be denied absent a compelling government interest
I think that is an indication that it has reached its conclusion more than the topic being nasty. There isn't anything left to talk about regarding it outside of religious debate. All rights have been fulfilled. This is just a very effective political ploy. It is long lived and we see it all through our history. It's simply fear mongering. If you don't agree with "X" than you're an idiot, or a racist, or homophobic, or whatever label is at its cultural peak of hatred. It's really some underhanded manipulation, though I find it as obvious as a big black circle on a white wall. It's basically stating that people who agree with party "A" are smart, good, and sophisticated. It's as old as time. The Emperor's New Clothes comes to mind. This further illustrates my first point. The issue is dead. People don't want to talk about it because there is nothing left to talk about. There are opinions. And people agree or disagree. That's precisely why I don't go into the forums about abortion. I know how I feel about it. My opinions won't change, there is nothing left to discuss.
See this is just another justification for your feelings. If same sex coupling is illogical because it doesn't lead to procreation so is opposite sex coupling that doesn't lead to procreation. Your argument really isn't against homosexuality or same sex couplings it's against coupling without procreation. It's a poor argument not based in logic. Most likely it's based in emotion
Humanity evolved as a heterosexual species, they are physically and mentally different in accordance with the social structure of a heterosexual organism. In evolutionary terms, homosexual members of a heterosexual species cannot reproduce and are a dead end. There is nothing in biology, evolution, sociology, history, that supports the idea that homosexual humans are normal. People accept homosexuals not because homosexuality is normal, but because humans have the intellectual ability to make exceptions to the product of evolution.
There are still plenty of people who hold puritanical opinions independent of their religion. I doubt you would see anything much different, except without religion, there may not be as many people who are as civil about their dislikes in other humans.
Normal means the usual, average, or typical state or condition. Being left handed is also not normal so what No because it is an uncommon natural variation as being left handed As far as we know humanity is not dying out because of gays or our. View of their normality When the species survivL is threatened. We can. Discuse whaf to do about gays
Mostly just among their soldiers, but when you are going to be gone from home a few years at a time, it is more like prison shower sex than what you would be doing under normal day to day life. There was also a belief that if you were shagging the guy beside you, you would fight harder so they would live in a battle.
The same could be said of peiople who are celibate or infertile but we would never deny them rights. - - - Updated - - - Untrue. It was quite common among the people of rome.
Source? Even Sec's favorite gay site says you are wrong..... http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/truth-about-sexuality-ancient-greece-and-rome261012/#gs.Xf7x8pc
Roman men were free to enjoy sex with other males without a perceived loss of masculinity or social status, as long as they took the dominant or penetrative role. Acceptable male partners were slaves, prostitutes, and entertainers, whose lifestyle placed them in the nebulous social realm of infamia, excluded from the normal protections accorded a citizen even if they were technically free.
Religion does help 'control people' but it also organizes and motivates them. What is almost unique about religion is that it has the capacity to motivate people to do things against their material self interest, and even against the interest of their offspring. In a sense religion validates choices that are contrary to our direct biological instincts. We are willing not only to kill or die for 'God' but we are willing to sacrifice the welfare of our own young to these complete abstract concepts of God, heaven and hell. We will go to war for land or treasure or to protect same as long as we believe we will live. That only works when we are winning or think we will win. To get men to leave their families without a breadwinner, to go off to die and kill when there is little hope of material gain, you have to have God on your side who will take you to heaven and bless your children and wife no matter how the battle turns out. .
In ancient times homosexuality wasn't a problem. Alexander the Great had his male lover, the military of Sparta and the Romans who followed the Greeks didn't have a problem. Lots of eastern cultures didn't in both ancient and today. But it was one thing to have a lover, marriage was different. But not all religions condemn homosexuality. Perhaps homosexuality is more of a western problem via western religion than with the rest of the world.
