Homosexuality: Right or Wrong?

[Guest]

On a side note of this topic. There's going to be a report on 60 Minutes (Australia) tonight, concerning a report on what happens when a father leaves his wife to be with another male. The opinions of the people tonight should be interesting. As someone who would be totally against something like this I'd like to know the opinions of everyone in this report, because it can be noticed that if it were an article on the Dad leaving his family to be with another lady it would be a total outrage to everyone, but when its a dad leaving his family to be with another male, there is acceptance there. I think thats a ridiculous inconstancy and a shameful abomination.

[Rebdragon]

On a side note of this topic. There's going to be a report on 60 Minutes (Australia) tonight, concerning a report on what happens when a father leaves his wife to be with another male. The opinions of the people tonight should be interesting. As someone who would be totally against something like this I'd like to know the opinions of everyone in this report, because it can be noticed that if it were an article on the Dad leaving his family to be with another lady it would be a total outrage to everyone, but when its a dad leaving his family to be with another male, there is acceptance there. I think thats a ridiculous inconstancy and a shameful abomination.

 

I was about to laugh if you were making a point that homosexuality is wrong because of that, but thank God :P . Guess all the bad arguments on this thread have reduced my expectations #-o .

 

 

 

So, you're seriously saying the majority of people weren't outraged by it? At the least that's one twisted double standard.

[Faelenof]

I'm Catholic, but I have absolutely no problem with homosexuals at all. Does that make me not-quite-Catholic because I don't conform to all their beliefs, even though I go to church every Sunday, pray, believe in Jesus, etc etc?

 

 

 

I have a few bisexual/homosexual friends at school, and I hear them getting talked about and/or indirectly discriminated against, and I get pretty miffed when I hear my friends talking about the bi friends like that. I don't see why they're not 'fully human'. They're people, they just like different things, just like I don't like, oh, salt and vinegar chips, and other people absolutely love them. Granted, the potato chip flavour analogy wasn't the best, but hopefully you get my meaning: you can't blame people on who they are. It's similar to, in my opinion, the discrimination against people of different race. Discrimination against homosexuals, I think, is wrong. My parents and I often get into short-lived debates about this sort of thing - they're Catholic themselves, so they have the whole 'homosexuality is wrong' mindset. I'm quite often the one saying something along the lines of "let them be who they want to be". Is it odd for me to think this as a Catholic?

 

 

 

I like to think I'm a very open-minded Catholic - I don't mind homosexuals; if people want to have sex before marriage, more power to them; if they don't believe in God, or are of a different religion, go right ahead. Because that's who people are and those are the choices they make. I personally wouldn't have sex before marriage: I'd like to think that I'm saving myself for that someone special. If the guy I marry wants to have sex before marriage, then he's gonna have to wait and respect my wishes, and he should if he really cares for me. I have no problem with homosexuals. If they want to be with people of the same sex, go right ahead. If those are the kind of people you're attracted to, why then does anyone else have a say in it? How do they know who you're attracted to? They don't, and that's why I think it's a bit unfair for Christianity to discriminate against them like this. I'm a pretty devout Christian and all, but that's just unfair.

 

 

 

I think that when Jesus said something along the lines of "God loves everyone", he meant it - why then, do those who follow him not show the same respect to those who are homosexuals? It's not wrong, it's not right. It's who we are, and if who we are is homosexual, who are we, or anyone else, to try and change that? I can't change the fact that I'm female, I can't change the fact that I'm Asian, and I can't change the fact that I'm me.

 

 

 

EDIT: Yikes, I went on a rant, didn't I? ><

[The Real ET]

I'm Catholic, but I have absolutely no problem with homosexuals at all. Does that make me not-quite-Catholic because I don't conform to all their beliefs, even though I go to church every Sunday, pray, believe in Jesus, etc etc?

 

 

 

I have a few bisexual/homosexual friends at school, and I hear them getting talked about and/or indirectly discriminated against, and I get pretty miffed when I hear my friends talking about the bi friends like that. I don't see why they're not 'fully human'. They're people, they just like different things, just like I don't like, oh, salt and vinegar chips, and other people absolutely love them. Granted, the potato chip flavour analogy wasn't the best, but hopefully you get my meaning: you can't blame people on who they are. It's similar to, in my opinion, the discrimination against people of different race. Discrimination against homosexuals, I think, is wrong. My parents and I often get into short-lived debates about this sort of thing - they're Catholic themselves, so they have the whole 'homosexuality is wrong' mindset. I'm quite often the one saying something along the lines of "let them be who they want to be". Is it odd for me to think this as a Catholic?

 

 

 

I like to think I'm a very open-minded Catholic - I don't mind homosexuals; if people want to have sex before marriage, more power to them; if they don't believe in God, or are of a different religion, go right ahead. Because that's who people are and those are the choices they make. I personally wouldn't have sex before marriage: I'd like to think that I'm saving myself for that someone special. If the guy I marry wants to have sex before marriage, then he's gonna have to wait and respect my wishes, and he should if he really cares for me. I have no problem with homosexuals. If they want to be with people of the same sex, go right ahead. If those are the kind of people you're attracted to, why then does anyone else have a say in it? How do they know who you're attracted to? They don't, and that's why I think it's a bit unfair for Christianity to discriminate against them like this. I'm a pretty devout Christian and all, but that's just unfair.

 

 

 

I think that when Jesus said something along the lines of "God loves everyone", he meant it - why then, do those who follow him not show the same respect to those who are homosexuals? It's not wrong, it's not right. It's who we are, and if who we are is homosexual, who are we, or anyone else, to try and change that? I can't change the fact that I'm female, I can't change the fact that I'm Asian, and I can't change the fact that I'm me.

 

 

 

EDIT: Yikes, I went on a rant, didn't I? ><

 

 

 

I happened to very much like your little rant. More open-minded Christians is a good thing. *pokes my post on the previous page*

 

...Still not stating my religious beliefs, but I do believe the Christian bible was tainted by men and should be used for it's message of salvation more than for it's not-so-nice messages.

 

 

 

I don't get why the super Christians don't leave homosexuals alone though? It states very clearly in the bible that vengence (if needed) belongs to God. They aren't God and have no right to try and speak for him/her/it.

[Faelenof]

I don't get why the super Christians don't leave homosexuals alone though? It states very clearly in the bible that vengence (if needed) belongs to God. They aren't God and have no right to try and speak for him/her/it.

 

 

 

I don't get it either. We're living in a more and more liberal society where people can express their views and opinions (without being flamed, hopefully ;)) and most of the time other people respect their opinions. The old views on things like homosexuality are outdated now - it shouldn't be taboo, like I said, and they shouldn't be discriminated against like how they are being. The old "You're different from us! DISCRIMINATE!!!" views shouldn't apply anymore.

 

 

 

And I agree, us humans today are quite clearly not God. We're out there starting wars and using child warriors and being greedy, so we sure as hell aren't God. And to be perfectly honest, I don't see my God casting people out into hell just because they were homosexual. If homosexuality were a sin (which I personally don't think it is), God would forgive them.

 

 

 

Of course, as a Christian, I do have a bit of duty to follow what the Church tells us to do. I don't have a definite opinion on how 'officially from God' some of the Church's teachings are, or how 'officially true' the Bible is, because to be perfectly honest, I believe those sorts of things. I definitely agree with what you said earlier though: the Bible should be used for the message of salvation. That's the core of it all anyway, isn't it?

[The Real ET]

I don't get why the super Christians don't leave homosexuals alone though? It states very clearly in the bible that vengence (if needed) belongs to God. They aren't God and have no right to try and speak for him/her/it.

 

 

 

I don't get it either. We're living in a more and more liberal society where people can express their views and opinions (without being flamed, hopefully ;)) and most of the time other people respect their opinions. The old views on things like homosexuality are outdated now - it shouldn't be taboo, like I said, and they shouldn't be discriminated against like how they are being. The old "You're different from us! DISCRIMINATE!!!" views shouldn't apply anymore.

 

 

 

And I agree, us humans today are quite clearly not God. We're out there starting wars and using child warriors and being greedy, so we sure as hell aren't God. And to be perfectly honest, I don't see my God casting people out into the FIERY DEPTHS OF HELL just because they were homosexual. If homosexuality were a sin (which I personally don't think it is), God would forgive them. Which raises the question... why does the Church say "yarr you're thinking homosexual thoughts, damnation be you!"?

 

 

 

Of course, as a Christian, I do have a bit of duty to follow what the Church tells us to do. I don't have a definite opinion on how 'officially from God' some of the Church's teachings are, or how 'officially true' the Bible is, because to be perfectly honest, I believe those sorts of things. I definitely agree with what you said earlier though: the Bible should be used for the message of salvation. That's the core of it all anyway, isn't it?

 

 

 

Personally I think the Catholic Church is tainted with sin and anti-Christian teachings. Christianity is supposed to go through the bible since that's all it has to has it up. While I believe some parts of the bible to be tainted by man the message for salvation is clear. It says that Christ is the only path and medium to God. No priests, no pope, no silly paganistic rituals. Find me the parts in the bible that back up those things and I'll... well I don't know what I'd do since I've read the bible and never read anything about those things. =P

 

 

 

The points of that whole little anti-Catholic speal was to make the point that you don't have a duty to do as the church commands. The church is often viewed as a way to control people through promises of salvation. The only way to God is Christ according to your own beliefs, so that's all you need.

 

 

 

I'm getting pretty off-topic now, so I think I'll stop this for now (though feel free to pm me about this if you would like to talk about it) and find a way to semi-turn this post on-topic...

 

 

 

*thinks* Oh, here it is. God is supposed to be love and I don't think he'd/she'd/it'd toss people into Hell (TM though I don't understand why) for loving. Love, not war. :thumbsup:

[Guest]

I think that when Jesus said something along the lines of "God loves everyone", he meant it - why then, do those who follow him not show the same respect to those who are homosexuals? It's not wrong, it's not right. It's who we are, and if who we are is homosexual, who are we, or anyone else, to try and change that?

 

 

 

I hate it when ignorant Catholics and Christians distort scriptures in the Bible, taking them totally out of context and then try and use it against fellow Christians who actually stick by their beliefs. Yes God loves everyone, but that's got nothing to do with the fact that he hates the actions of the homosexuals themselves. If he didn't love them he wouldn't of sent his son to die on the cross for them so that everyone may seek forgiveness of whatever sins they may have.

 

 

 

We are as Christians and as fellow human-beings need to love each other no matter who they are (as the Bible instructs us to) but we shouldn't be loving an supporting their actions (if you are living by the Bible, and it being the whole truth - period. I see no truth in people watering down their beliefs and then scrutinizing others who actually choose to believe the whole Bible).

 

 

 

And your "its who we are argument is total crap by the way." I could be a murderer or a rapist and say" its who I am," but we all have freedom of choice and free- will, its something you can choose to be or not to be. (Currently waiting for a reply from someone stating homosexuals are born like that, rapists aren't - yeah right, I'm sure there's a ton of 3 year old gay toddlers running around wanting to get it on with others of the same sex). sarcasm.

 

 

 

I've only picked on you here, since you've taken scriptures out of the Bible and used them with your watered-down views of Catholicism and Christianity to scrutinize other Christians out there who are against homosexuality, and choose to follow the whole Bible as the truth.

 

 

 

I couldn't care what your beliefs are, but I do care about other people of the same faith taking scriptures, distorting them and then using them against other Christians in an incorrect manner.

[Guest]

I don't get why the super Christians don't leave homosexuals alone though? It states very clearly in the bible that vengeance (if needed) belongs to God. They aren't God and have no right to try and speak for him/her/it.

 

 

 

Are you 3 years old? DO YOU know what vengeance means? Or are you just another one of those ignorant people who take scriptures out of context? Do you realize the difference between a Christian stating they personally are against homosexuality and the act of being vengeful?

 

 

 

I'll state the definition of vengeance off dictionary.com (closest dictionary), to clearly point out your stupidity.

 

 

 

 

1. infliction of injury, harm, humiliation, or the like, on a person by another who has been harmed by that person; violent revenge: But have you the right to vengeance?

 

2. an act or opportunity of inflicting such trouble: to take one's vengeance.

 

3. the desire for revenge: a man full of vengeance.

 

4. Obsolete. hurt; injury.

 

5. Obsolete. curse; imprecation.

 

 

 

If your still a bit slow, I'll point out that someone speaking out against homosexuality and believing its wrong has NOTHING to do with vengeance, and therefore that scripture you pulled out about God being the one who seeks vengeance if necessary is as relevant as the "sinking of the titanic" to a thread such as this.

 

 

 

 

 

They aren't God and have no right to try and speak for him/her/it.

 

 

 

So if we aren't God, we have no right to speak out against murder or rape which are both outlined as sins (including that of homosexuality) in the Bible? :roll:

 

 

 

Geez I get annoyed about ignorant, stupidity.

[The Real ET]

And your "its who we are argument is total crap by the way." I could be a murderer or a rapist and say" its who I am," but we all have freedom of choice and free- will, its something you can choose to be or not to be. (Currently waiting for a reply from someone stating homosexuals are born like that, rapists aren't - yeah right, I'm sure there's a ton of 3 year old gay toddlers running around wanting to get it on with others of the same sex). sarcasm.

 

 

 

I will be that guy! "You're born homosexual." I was actually referring to that in my post on the previous page and I now quote myself:

 

On-Topic: I think homosexuality isn't right or wrong, it's there. If there is a god (I'm not saying what I believe), he put homosexuality in all nature. Many animals are homosexual and they run almost purely on insinct. I have homosexual friends who have gone through mental break downs when realizing they were homosexual. The beatings, killings, and torture... why would anyone choose it?

 

 

 

I don't quite understand that gay toddler bit, but rapists and murderers are half-born, half-choice. People can be born naturally violent or with a messed up mind making them violent. That's the born part. The choice comes into play when they supress they violent urges or not. That choice can become harder depending on family life and other experiences, but it is still possible to choose for the better. I know many naturally violent people who have become pacifists to surpress their inner-rage and use that energy for constructive pursuits. I only wish all were that way. :(

 

 

 

With homosexuality though there is no choice other than denying your true self. Violence can be changed to energy for the better. Surpressing who you really are just makes you miserable and depressed. People who claim to have been gay and choosen to be straight are kidding themselves and aren't truly happy on the inside. So, yeah, I'm that guy saying that you're born gay. :thumbsup:

[PaperClipsYaaaar]

 

 

 

And your "its who we are argument is total crap by the way." I could be a murderer or a rapist and say" its who I am," but we all have freedom of choice and free- will, its something you can choose to be or not to be. (Currently waiting for a reply from someone stating homosexuals are born like that, rapists aren't - yeah right, I'm sure there's a ton of 3 year old gay toddlers running around wanting to get it on with others of the same sex). sarcasm.

 

Murder and rape harm people, homosexuality doesn't.

 

 

 

Toddlers don't "run around wanting to get it on," no matter whether they turn out to be gay or straight.

[The Real ET]

Thank you for the insults to my intelligence and age. First I'll attend to that last line of yours.

 

 

 

Geez I get annoyed about ignorant, stupidity.

 

 

 

Stupidity (and calling me slow) implies that my intellect is below average. I'm not going to get specific, but allow me to assure you that is not the case. Calling my opinion ignorant is just wrong. I'm not going to pull out the dictionary.com defintion on you, but ignorant means that I'm uninformed or lacking knowledge. I'm not, I have read the bible, I have done personal studies on many different viewpoints, and I've been to numerous churches. I'm not ignorant and have based my opinions and beliefs on the conclusions of my researching and own feelings. Calling me ignorant because you don't agree with me is a bit infantile.

 

 

 

Are you 3 years old? DO YOU know what vengeance means? Or are you just another one of those ignorant people who take scriptures out of context? Do you realize the difference between a Christian stating they personally are against homosexuality and the act of being vengeful?

 

 

 

Allow to quote the definition you used:

 

 

1. infliction of injury, harm, humiliation, or the like, on a person by another who has been harmed by that person; violent revenge: But have you the right to vengeance?

 

 

 

The injury, harm, and humiliation are the anti-gay laws, beatings, killings, and overall mistreatment of homosexuals by the government and individuals. The "harm" that the homosexuals have commited is them being homosexual. Just it being against someone's religion makes them hate it (and sometimes the person) and some (slightly more radical people) take it as a personal insult to their way of life.

 

 

 

So if we aren't God, we have no right to speak out against murder or rape which are both outlined as sins (including that of homosexuality) in the Bible? :roll:

 

 

 

Murder and rape is against the law and the majority of people's morals (the minority are of course the murderers and rapists). I have already posted my feelings on the bible and will post them one more time:

 

...Still not stating my religious beliefs, but I do believe the Christian bible was tainted by men and should be used for it's message of salvation more than for it's not-so-nice messages.

 

 

 

You're more than welcome to speak out against something you don't believe in (that's the marvel of free speech), but you can't condemn people from happiness just because your holy text is against it. I don't have any kind of statistics, but I hope that the majority of people aren't against homosexuality.

 

 

 

Well, that's what I have for you (without resorting to degrading you), I'd appreciate it if you stopped bluntly insulting me. It's very rude and doesn't make your point look any more right or you any smarter.

[warri0r45]

I think that when Jesus said something along the lines of "God loves everyone", he meant it - why then, do those who follow him not show the same respect to those who are homosexuals? It's not wrong, it's not right. It's who we are, and if who we are is homosexual, who are we, or anyone else, to try and change that?

 

 

 

I hate it when ignorant Catholics and Christians distort scriptures in the Bible, taking them totally out of context and then try and use it against fellow Christians who actually stick by their beliefs. Yes God loves everyone, but that's got nothing to do with the fact that he hates the actions of the homosexuals themselves. If he didn't love them he wouldn't of sent his son to die on the cross for them so that everyone may seek forgiveness of whatever sins they may have.

 

 

 

We are as Christians and as fellow human-beings need to love each other no matter who they are (as the Bible instructs us to) but we shouldn't be loving an supporting their actions (if you are living by the Bible, and it being the whole truth - period. I see no truth in people watering down their beliefs and then scrutinizing others who actually choose to believe the whole Bible).

 

 

 

And your "its who we are argument is total crap by the way." I could be a murderer or a rapist and say" its who I am," but we all have freedom of choice and free- will, its something you can choose to be or not to be. ((1)Currently waiting for a reply from someone stating homosexuals are born like that, rapists aren't - yeah right, I'm sure there's a ton of 3 year old gay toddlers running around wanting to get it on with others of the same sex). sarcasm.

 

 

 

I've only picked on you here, since you've taken scriptures out of the Bible and used them with your watered-down views of Catholicism and Christianity to scrutinize other Christians out there who are against homosexuality, and choose to follow the whole Bible as the truth.

 

 

 

I couldn't care what your beliefs are, but I do care about other people of the same faith taking scriptures, distorting them and then using them against other Christians in an incorrect manner.

 

 

 

(1) If it's such a simple choice perhaps you could explain the quotes I presented in my first post on page 1. Homosexuality nor hetrosexuality is seen in early childhood; you're likely born with a sexual inclination but it's only born out in a sexual nature at puberty. Before that, many with homosexual tendancies can be seen to be more feminine in toy choice, to give you an example.

 

 

 

As I stated for someone else, perhaps you could help me by answering these simple questions as well if you think it's a simple choice -

 

 

 

1) Why would I choose to be gay if I have a biological attraction towards women and no such attraction towards men?

 

2) Why would I choose to be gay when it's still looked down on in society, especially in religious circles?

 

 

 

Here are some light reading sources to start you off.

 

 

 

http://www.glow.cc/net/choice.htm

 

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_fixe.htm

 

http://www.apa.org/topics/orientation.html

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_orientation#Malleability_of_sexual_orientation

 

http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_changing.html

 

http://www.webmd.com/sex-relationships/guide/sexual-orientation

 

http://www.faqs.org/health/topics/70/Sexual-orientation.html

 

 

 

Some quotes from these sources:

 

 

Is Sexual Orientation a Choice?

 

 

 

No, human beings can not choose to be either gay or straight. Sexual orientation emerges for most people in early adolescence without any prior sexual experience. Although we can choose whether to act on our feelings, psychologists do not consider sexual orientation to be a conscious choice that can be voluntarily changed.

 

 

 

Can Therapy Change Sexual Orientation?

 

 

 

No. Even though most homosexuals live successful, happy lives, some homosexual or bisexual people may seek to change their sexual orientation through therapy, sometimes pressured by the influence of family members or religious groups to try and do so. The reality is that homosexuality is not an illness. It does not require treatment and is not changeable.

 

 

 

A number of techniques have been used to try to suppress homosexual feelings and/or create heterosexual feelings in gays and lesbians: 1

 

 

 

Lesbians had their breasts amputated.

 

Lesbians had their perfectly healthy uteri removed.

 

Male gays were given aversion therapy; e.g. clients were shown pictures of naked men and simultaneously shocked with electricity.

 

 

 

Other "treatments" included:

 

 

 

brain surgery in the form of frontal lobotomies.

 

castration.

 

counseling and psychotherapy.

 

drug therapy: e.g. animal-organ extracts, cocaine, estrogen, testosterone.

 

positive therapy: e.g. men were asked to masturbate and then were shown pictures of women just before orgasm.

 

prayer and spiritual counseling.

 

therapy by tedium: men were shown homoerotic pictures until they became totally bored.

 

During the Nazi regime in Germany, Himmler attempted to "cure" gays by requiring them to visit the camp brothel at Flossenburg. "Ten Ravensbruck women provided the services with little success. The women [were later]...shipped to Auschwitz" for execution.

 

During the recent apartheid regime in South Africa, gays and lesbians were considered deviants. They were sent to a special ward of a military hospital to be "rehabilitated." This involved electric shock treatments and chemical castration. Those who could not be "cured" were given sex-change operations. A number of "patients" died.

 

 

 

The success rate of these therapies in actually changing clients' sexual orientation appears to have been between 0% and something less than 0.1%. The success rate at changing clients' sexual behavior is much greater. Some of these techniques can persuade homosexuals to be celibate -- perhaps only for a short interval -- either through terror, guilt, or persuasion that God considers same-sex behavior to be an abomination. They can persuade bisexuals to confine their sexual activities to members of the opposite sex. They may even be able to train gays to successfully have sex with a woman, while fantasize about making love to another man. But therapies do not seem to be capable of changing one's feelings -- one's sexual orientation -- in the vast majority of people.

 

 

 

Scientific studies: Detection of homosexual propensity in children: Richard Green, a psychiatrist from UCLA has compared effeminate with "masculine" boys. 5 Children who grow up to become homosexuals often engage in "gender inappropriate play" in early childhood. 6 "'Feminine' boys played about four times as much with the doll...a third as much with the truck." By interviewing their child subjects later in life when they were in their teens and early twenties, the researchers found that 75% of the effeminate boys had become gay adult males. It is obvious that these boys were not taught this behavior. They did not copy their behavior from other children in the family; they were often under harsh and severe pressure from their parents to change. One reasonable conclusion is that that they are driven to this type of behavior by an innate trait which is outside of their control and consciousness.

 

 

 

Our view of our own sexuality stems partly from our genetic code and partly from environmental factors during both our prenatal and postnatal development. A number of stimuli and triggers must occur for normal development, and the malfunction of any one of these may result in, among other things, a different sexual orientation. Trauma in the form of illness, accident, parental problems, and so on may delay or eliminate a particular trigger.

 

 

 

Many people who end up with homosexual feelings have not made a deliberate choice to be that way. Their genetics and the history of missing triggers, resulting in loss of developmental stimuli are not normally the result of a deliberate decision on the part of the developing person.

 

 

The next two quotes are from the wikipedia article. The numbers in them note the references from the reference section.

 

 

Others organizations disagree with Fritz Klein. The American Psychological Association has stated that homosexuality "is not changeable."[10] In 2001, the United States Surgeon General David Satcher issued a report maintaining that "there is no valid scientific evidence that sexual orientation can be changed."[11]

 

 

To be fair, this next quote was from the same wikipedia article:

 

 

The Centre for Addiction and Mental Health has said "For some people, sexual orientation is continuous and fixed throughout their lives. For others, sexual orientation may be fluid and change over time."[8]

 

 

 

For more than a quarter-century, the major professional associations of mental health practitioners and researchers in the United States have recognized that homosexuality is not a mental illness. They are highly critical of attempts to change sexual orientation.

 

The American Psychiatric Association's official web site notes that: "There is no published scientific evidence supporting the efficacy of 'reparative therapy' as a treatment to change oneÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s sexual orientation, nor is it included in the APA's Task Force Report, Treatments of Psychiatric Disorders. More importantly, altering sexual orientation is not an appropriate goal of psychiatric treatment.

 

 

 

Can a Person's Sexual Orientation Be Changed?

 

Most experts agree that sexual orientation is not a choice and, therefore, cannot be changed. Some people who are homosexual or bisexual may hide their sexual orientation and/or live as heterosexuals to avoid the prejudice that exists against people who are homosexual and bisexual or to avoid their own moral dilemmas felt when their sexual orientation is incompatible with their personal beliefs.

 

 

 

Can Sexual Orientation Be Changed?

 

 

 

This, too, remains a controversial subject. Many therapeutic techniques haveclaimed success in this arena; however, other opinions suggest the change ismerely in behavior and not in actual orientation. Also, in some instances where conversion techniques claim success, the individual was labeled homosexualwhen they were, in fact, bisexual, and already highly desirous of leading purely heterosexual relationships. It also appears that many attempts to changesexual orientation simply cause the individual to suppress their homosexualfeelings and needs, ultimately denying them the ability to respond sexually at all. Some techniques include "exposing the individual to electric shocks ornausea-producing drugs while showing them pictures of same-sex nudes."

 

 

 

The official website of the American Psychiatric Association states that: "There is no published scientific evidence supporting the efficacy of 'reparative therapy' as a treatment to change one's sexual orientation. A similar statement from the APA included the remarks that "research findings suggest that efforts to 'repair' homosexuals are nothing more than social prejudice garbedin psychological accoutrements."

 

 

I'll add more from a wider swag of sources at a later date if need be so I can actually get people to recognise that the idea that sexuality is some sort of 'off/on' switch is rediculous.

[warri0r45]

So let me use this opportunity to make the next logical step in this argument. I'd like to see how many straight answers I can get here or indeed if I get any.

 

 

 

If sexual orientation is so beyond our control, as it seems to be, how can it be wrong? How can you justify saying homosexuality is wrong when attempts to change this sexual orientation seem dismal and riddled with difficulty at best? How can a quality which is essentially part of my nature and hence created by god be wrong?

 

 

 

Even if you still beg to differ and think sexuality is a choice, ignoring all I posted above, flatter me and assume, in the form of a hypothetical scenario, that it's not a choice.

[Ginger_Warrior]

So let me use this opportunity to make the next logical step in this argument. I'd like to see how many straight answers I can get here or indeed if I get any.

 

 

 

If sexual orientation is so beyond our control, as it seems to be, how can it be wrong? How can you justify saying homosexuality is wrong when attempts to change this sexual orientation seem dismal and riddled with difficulty at best? How can a quality which is essentially part of my nature and hence created by god be wrong?

 

 

 

Even if you still beg to differ and think sexuality is a choice, ignoring all I posted above, flatter me and assume, in the form of a hypothetical scenario, that it's not a choice.

 

Because the majority of people find it difficult to accept anything that fits outside their line of thinking. Hence why I'm appreciative of the fact I have an education, as it prevents from falling into that bracket of closed-minded idiots.

 

 

 

Why do people feel the need to quote religion into this discussion. At the end of the day, this is an issue about two people falling in love with each other, it just so happens they happen to be of the same gender. Is anyone seriously implying here that the people who wrote the Bible had any more of an idea of what "love" actually means than we do today? Added to that the fact the Bible was written thousands of years ago, and thus it's not completely relevant to our modern-day situation, and I actually come to the conclusion it's futilre to try and consider religious beliefs on this issue.

 

 

 

I personally have no problems whatsoever. Love isn't merely a device designed by human emotion to encourage reproduction of the species, unless of course, you want to say that when animals mate, they're in love with each other? Love can mean many things to many people, but at the end of the day, it's mutual understanding between two people that are seeking another person that understands them and their emotions. We all look for someone who has a deeper understanding of who we are. If someone finds that people of the same gender to them happen to understand tham and their emotions more than those of the opposite gender, than I really see no harm in that. In fact, I'd be the first to congratulate them and say good for them.

[BlueLancer]

I could be a murderer or a rapist and say" its who I am," but we all have freedom of choice and free- will, its something you can choose to be or not to be. (Currently waiting for a reply from someone stating homosexuals are born like that, rapists aren't

 

 

 

And how exactly can you compare rapists (criminals who hurt other people) to homosexuals (normal citizens who pay taxes to fund the society)? What's their wrongdoing?

 

 

 

You're free to believe whatever your little book tells you, but if you discriminate others based on it, you're subject to the same laws as everybody else.

 

 

 

Fortunately in most developed and intellectual countries, discrimination based on skin color, sexuality, age and nationality is forbidden and punishable by law.

 

 

 

 

...

 

 

 

I wish there were more intelligent christians, muslims, etc. like you posting on online forums. I used to know a lot of religious kids and people and they were pretty much as open minded as you were, yet they went to church and they were baptized etc.

 

 

 

Sadly it's the small minority screaming "SINNER, SINNER" demanding certain groups of people to be denounced based on something out of their control.

 

 

 

You can't force a homosexual person to suddenly 'switch' his/her sexuality which is based on his hormones, physical attributes, brain chemistry... Just stop trying. It's not a "sin" anywhere else than a book. It even happens in other animals than humans

 

 

 

I guess those animals are "sinners" too? :lol: Let's try to talk sense them and 'heal' them?

[Guest]

If sexual orientation is so beyond our control, as it seems to be, how can it be wrong? How can you justify saying homosexuality is wrong when attempts to change this sexual orientation seem dismal and riddled with difficulty at best? How can a quality which is essentially part of my nature and hence created by god be wrong?

 

 

 

Ok well since your asking for my personal opinion then I'll give it to you. Science doesn't come into it here. I'll also come from the point of view thats "its a fact they are born gay" instead of making that "lifestyle choice" during puberty years as you requested.

 

 

 

How can it be wrong in my eyes you may ask? Well from a Christians perspective we were told to go forth and multiply and as we know homosexuality can't do this, so its against that for starters. I also believe its an unnatural act, and there's many (notice I didn't say all) perverted people who do such acts. Simple.

 

 

 

I'm not going to answer your last 2 questions when my argument stands that its a lifestyle choice, and therefore it can't be argued upon. I don't believe its created by God, and I believe that God didn't create them like that. So I'm not going to flatter you that much.

 

 

 

By the way from what I saw of those sites and read (apologies if you can prove me wrong), they weren't credible and even could be seen as biased. You don't like it when on the religious threads Christians post their sources of Christians sites (despite having factual sources on them) but rather sites with a more scientific connotation on the evidence. SO in this case do you have any scientific sources whereby they can conclusively prove that its biological and that a lifestyle choice has nothing to do with their homosexuality? :|

[BlueLancer]

If sexual orientation is so beyond our control, as it seems to be, how can it be wrong? How can you justify saying homosexuality is wrong when attempts to change this sexual orientation seem dismal and riddled with difficulty at best? How can a quality which is essentially part of my nature and hence created by god be wrong?

 

 

 

Ok well since your asking for my personal opinion then I'll give it to you. Science doesn't come into it here. I'll also come from the point of view thats "its a fact they are born gay" instead of making that "lifestyle choice" during puberty years as you requested.

 

 

 

How can it be wrong in my eyes you may ask? Well from a Christians perspective we were told to go forth and multiply and as we know homosexuality can't do this, so its against that for starters. I also believe its an unnatural act, and there's many (notice I didn't say all) perverted people who do such acts. Simple.

 

 

 

I'm not going to answer your last 2 questions when my argument stands that its a lifestyle choice, and therefore it can't be argued upon. I don't believe its created by God, and I believe that God didn't create them like that. So I'm not going to flatter you that much.

 

 

 

By the way from what I saw of those sites and read (apologies if you can prove me wrong), they weren't credible and even could be seen as biased. You don't like it when on the religious threads Christians post their sources of Christians sites (despite having factual sources on them) but rather sites with a more scientific connotation on the evidence. SO in this case do you have any scientific sources whereby they can conclusively prove that its biological and that a lifestyle choice has nothing to do with their homosexuality? :|

 

 

 

http://www.androphile.org/preview/Libra ... r20.24.htm

 

 

 

Link

 

 

 

Can other animals "choose" their sexuality? Assuming "God" created those animals, why did he choose to make those other animals homosexual?

 

 

 

Well from a Christians perspective we were told to go forth and multiply

 

 

 

You're an individual, in case you didn't notice you don't need to lump yourself under a collective "we". "Christians" includes a colourful selection of people all the way from pedophile priests and murdering gangsters to aid workers, common people, doctors, etc...

 

 

 

You're relying on a book telling you to "multiply". All you have is a 'belief' it was written by "God". Be assured it was written by an ordinary man but it's pointless debating 'did he recieve his words from God' :wall:

[Guest]

I could be a murderer or a rapist and say" its who I am," but we all have freedom of choice and free- will, its something you can choose to be or not to be. (Currently waiting for a reply from someone stating homosexuals are born like that, rapists aren't

 

 

 

And how exactly can you compare rapists (criminals who hurt other people) to homosexuals (normal citizens who pay taxes to fund the society)? What's their wrongdoing?

 

 

 

If you would of read the quote I was replying to when I wrote that post instead of mindlessly quoting me out of context you would of know.

 

 

 

[

 

 

 

I was simply comparing the two both having the freedom of choice to choose which lifestyle they wish to endeavor upon, whether you think one may be good or bad. And therefore I can as a fellow human-being speak out against the acts of a homosexuals or in the case I gave a murderer. They're both comparable in the fact that both have the freedom of choice to choose that path.

 

 

 

And as you have the right to strongly accept their way of life so therefore you should accept the way in which I disagree with their actions. Or are you going to be hypocritical?

[BlueLancer]

They're both comparable in the fact that both have the freedom of choice to choose that path.

 

 

 

 

I made a post just for you, above this one. Animals don't choose homosexuality just like they don't "choose" biological behavior. Humans are animals too.

 

 

 

What, does a baboon, chimpanzee, dolphin.. Choose his sexuality?

 

 

 

 

And as you have the right to strongly accept their way of life so therefore you should accept the way in which I disagree with their actions. Or are you going to be hypocritical?

 

 

 

You have a right to disagree with them, I can't deny you have that freedom.

 

 

 

However if you discriminate against them (possibly in real life too), you are void of any rights yourself and you can be even held criminally responsible according to the law (because the lawmakers in most 1st world countries have decided any form of discrimination is a criminal offense)

[Ginger_Warrior]

Eelspremiers, your argument is flawed in two key parts:

 

 

 

Ok well since your asking for my personal opinion then I'll give it to you. Science doesn't come into it here. I'll also come from the point of view thats "its a fact they are born gay" instead of making that "lifestyle choice" during puberty years as you requested.

 

What dyu mean 'science doesn't come into it'? If I went out on the street and said religion had no bearing on the world I'd be laughed at. It annoys me how you say science has no bearing on the world, but if an athiest such as me said religion doesn't come into anything I'd be flamed. Human emotion is partly down to hormonal activity, therefore science is probably directly connected to this.

 

 

 

By the way from what I saw of those sites and read (apologies if you can prove me wrong), they weren't credible and even could be seen as biased. You don't like it when on the religious threads Christians post their sources of Christians sites (despite having factual sources on them) but rather sites with a more scientific connotation on the evidence. SO in this case do you have any scientific sources whereby they can conclusively prove that its biological and that a lifestyle choice has nothing to do with their homosexuality?

 

 

 

If you're gona play the "proof" game, can you prove homosexuality is unnatural? And no, the Bible isn't proof. It's a set of guidelines.

[Guest]

You're relying on a book telling you to "multiply". All you have is a 'belief' it was written by "God". Be assured it was written by an ordinary man but it's pointless debating 'did he recieve his words from God' :wall:

 

 

 

Exactly. And who are you, or society to say that Homosexuality is Ok? And that its not a sinful act? Atleast I'm stating its my belief, and I'm entitled to it. I know one thing, in the wicked world we're living in today, I won't be modeling my morals and ways of life on a debauched society in which we live in today.

 

 

 

Though I'll allow society to pervert your view on what's right this decade and whats not. I'm sure you'd be the one telling everyone that drugs where good, if you were living back in the 70's. Society said it was Ok, so it must of been! sarcasm.

 

 

 

edit: Bed time for me, I'll reply in 20 hours or so...

[BlueLancer]

 

Exactly. And who are you, or society to say that Homosexuality is Ok? And that its not a sinful act?

 

 

 

Who are you to tell it's a sinful act?

 

 

 

I'm sure you'd be the one telling everyone that drugs where good, if you were living back in the 70's

 

 

 

Thanks, nevermind the fact I did a year of anti-drug volunteer work in college at age 19.

 

 

 

Drugs can kill people and destroy your life. Homosexuality doesn't. What the hell is your problem, acting superior to other people?

 

 

 

I personally know a few homosexual people. Want me to arrange them on MSN for you so you can tell them how sick and perverted they are?

[insane]

And your "its who we are argument is total crap by the way." I could be a murderer or a rapist and say" its who I am," but we all have freedom of choice and free- will, its something you can choose to be or not to be.

(1) If it's such a simple choice perhaps you could explain the quotes I presented in my first post on page 1. Homosexuality nor hetrosexuality is seen in early childhood; you're likely born with a sexual inclination but it's only born out in a sexual nature at puberty. Before that' date=' many with homosexual tendancies can be seen to be more feminine in toy choice, to give you an example.

 

 

 

As I stated for someone else, perhaps you could help me by answering these simple questions as well if you think it's a simple choice -

 

 

 

1) Why would I choose to be gay if I have a biological attraction towards women and no such attraction towards men?

 

2) Why would I choose to be gay when it's still looked down on in society, especially in religious circles? [/quote']

 

 

 

There's a difference between having an unchosen, natural inclination towards something and actually acting on it. At this point in my life, I have a natural inclination towards fornication with members of the opposite sex. Does that make me a bad person, sinful? No. Not even from a Christian point of view. This is just like homosexuality; they have natural inclinations towards fornication with members of the same sex, which isn't wrong from a Christian perspective. Just like someone who has a ridiculously short temper and is aggressive by nature has a natural inclination towards murder and revenge. Having these feelings by themselves is okay, we can't choose or change that.

 

 

 

Acting on them is what, from a Christian perspective, is seen as wrong. Me acting on my natural inclinations is wrong, just like the others in the above list is seen as wrong. We all struggle with things, so I don't see why a homosexual having feelings towards what Christianity calls "wrong" is any worse than me having feelings towards something wrong; the only difference is that when I get married, I can legally (from a Christian perspective) act on them with my wife.

 

 

 

But at the moment, I am no different than a homosexual, from a Christian perspective. I have natural inclinations towards sin; I just choose not to act on them.

[warri0r45]

If sexual orientation is so beyond our control, as it seems to be, how can it be wrong? How can you justify saying homosexuality is wrong when attempts to change this sexual orientation seem dismal and riddled with difficulty at best? How can a quality which is essentially part of my nature and hence created by god be wrong?

 

 

 

Ok well since your asking for my personal opinion then I'll give it to you. Science doesn't come into it here. I'll also come from the point of view thats "its a fact they are born gay" instead of making that "lifestyle choice" during puberty years as you requested.

 

 

 

How can it be wrong in my eyes you may ask? Well from a Christians perspective we were told to go forth and multiply and as we know homosexuality can't do this, so its against that for starters. I also believe its an unnatural act, and there's many (notice I didn't say all) perverted people who do such acts. Simple.

 

 

 

I'm not going to answer your last 2 questions when my argument stands that its a lifestyle choice, and therefore it can't be argued upon. I don't believe its created by God, and I believe that God didn't create them like that. So I'm not going to flatter you that much.

 

 

 

By the way from what I saw of those sites and read (apologies if you can prove me wrong), they weren't credible and even could be seen as biased. You don't like it when on the religious threads Christians post their sources of Christians sites (despite having factual sources on them) but rather sites with a more scientific connotation on the evidence. SO in this case do you have any scientific sources whereby they can conclusively prove that its biological and that a lifestyle choice has nothing to do with their homosexuality? :|

 

 

 

Eelspremiers, if you think science dosen't come into it why should I think you'll be any more receptive if I do provide sources to your liking? In what way are the sources I provided biased? Biased towards what? What reason do they have to be biased? Anyone not a Christian can see that your sources, which claim a multitude of falsities on an issue such as evolution alone, are biased to reject anything that dosen't accept thier infalliable word.

 

 

 

Next up, as for it being wrong because it does not produce offspring, is being infertile wrong, too? But of course, that is not a choice and therefore not wrong and homosexuality is a choice and therefore wrong, right? You're whole argument hinges on homosexuality being a choice. Tomorrow, I'll do as you demand and investigate the biased nature and credentials of the sources I provided which all claim that homosexuality or indeed any sexual mindset is anything but a concious choice.

 

 

 

Next on the agenda, your claim of it not being a natural act. Perhaps you skimmed over the many people in this thread alluding to the fact of homosexual behaviour being observed in other animal species. If thier word is not enough for you, I'll work on coming up with a source for you being sure to watch out for bias.

 

 

 

If you still believe it's a lifestyle choice, perhaps we should go to the next logical step of the argument to finish off for now -

 

 

 

1) Why would someone who is biologically programmed to be attracted to women choose to be attracted to another man?

 

2) Why would someone make a concious descision to be gay if doing so would make them shunned by society, especially by those in religious circles? On that final interesting note, why would a man such as Ted Haggard (I suggest a google if you don't know him), who is fully aware of the consequences of homosexual behaviour in his faith, perform homosexual acts with a male prostitute? Why would a man of his stature go against that programmed sexual drive god so elegantly and purposefully placed in his brain? Or is it not at all possible that the poor bloke, now shunned by his own faith because of his actions, had biological homosexual tendancies?

[assassin_696]

If sexual orientation is so beyond our control, as it seems to be, how can it be wrong? How can you justify saying homosexuality is wrong when attempts to change this sexual orientation seem dismal and riddled with difficulty at best? How can a quality which is essentially part of my nature and hence created by god be wrong?

 

 

 

Ok well since your asking for my personal opinion then I'll give it to you. Science doesn't come into it here. I'll also come from the point of view thats "its a fact they are born gay" instead of making that "lifestyle choice" during puberty years as you requested.

 

 

 

How can it be wrong in my eyes you may ask? Well from a Christians perspective we were told to go forth and multiply and as we know homosexuality can't do this, so its against that for starters. I also believe its an unnatural act, and there's many (notice I didn't say all) perverted people who do such acts. Simple.

 

 

 

BlueLancer and myself have both provided evidence that homosexuality occurs in animal species and so for you to argue that "it's not natural" is ignoring the fact that actually, it is. Just because it doesn't propogate the genes of a species does not mean that it's not natural.

 

 

 

If the Bible tells you to go forth and multiply, what about if homosexuals donated sperm to a sperm bank? Would that be okay? Besides, telling a people to go forth and multiply is fine for a small tribal settlement thousands of years ago, but nowadays it's plain ignorant to continue to follow that instruction since we're clearly running out of resources and the ability to care for our brood.

 

 

 

I'm not going to answer your last 2 questions when my argument stands that its a lifestyle choice, and therefore it can't be argued upon. I don't believe its created by God, and I believe that God didn't create them like that. So I'm not going to flatter you that much.

 

 

 

If you're continuing to argue against the facts (that's it's not a conscious choice or decision) then you're just sticking your fingers in your ears.