Homosexuality

[Scheherazade]

R e m i n d e r

Homosexuality, a term that usually stirs things up quite a bit. I personally think that there's nothing wrong with homosexuality. I think it to be as normal as heterosexuality. Someone doesn't choose the gender one is attracted to. I know a lot of people have different opinion about this and I know that even within Western Civilization it is quite a difficult topic.

In The Netherlands we have had gay marriage since 2001 and were one of the first in the world to legalize that and I think it's ridiculous that there are countries that don't allow gay couples to get married. They are just two people in love, why shouldn't they be allowed to get married.

I was raised to be very accepting of homosexuality which has led to my current views. I have first hand experience with homosexuality because my grandma is lesbian and has been since a few years before I was born. She was previously married to my grandpa (obviously) but after the divorce she had several relationships with women. And right now she's been married for about six years if I'm correct.

So, what this all comes down to. I am very accepting of homosexuality and think that it shouldn't even be a point of discussion wether they should be able to get married. And I think it's horrible that there are openly gay people everywhere that are mistreated because of their sexuality. How do you guys feel about homosexuality and gay marriage?

Off-topic posts have been and will be removed without further notice.

[Shea]

Okay, so as to not go off topic in the alcohol thread, I want to address this here.

Juniper has been accusing me of not answering her questions. So, here we go…

where is the logic behind being anti-homosexual (or, if you want the faux-lighthearted rhetoric, "against the homosexual lifestyle")?

Here are a few things I said throughout the thread…

I don't hate people who are gay.

I've seen more hate coming from the gay supporters.

I will reiterate, I don't hate someone because of their "sexual orientation"

First of all I'm not "anti-gay", I think I've made my stance on this quite plain.

And since you brought up the “lifestyle” issue too…

I make the choice not to get drunk. I've zero desire to get drunk and I never have. Getting drunk happens to be a popular and accepted activity but I don't agree with that lifestyle. But I also don't go shoving my Bible under people's noses and say "You shouldn't get drunk."

I'm also wondering if you guys think that I'm completely anti-gay marriage? Honestly, I really don't care if it's accepted in this country or not. I don't fight for it, and I don't fight against it. People can do what they want. Just DON'T call me a bigot!

I believe that (maybe it will be easier if I say it this way) homosexual acts are a sin. I believe that a heterosexual couple living together as married but are not (which is a lifestyle), is a sin. I believe it is a sin to get drunk (which can be a lifestyle). BUT I WILL NOT TELL ANYONE HOW TO LIVE THEIR LIFE.

After quoting all that, how can I answer your question if it doesn’t apply to me?

You also said…

They're not hurting anyone.

I agree, which is why I said I will not tell anyone how to live their life.

You also said…

Also, why is it immoral for me to vocalize my strong disagreement?

I never said it was immoral for you to vocalize your disagreement, but you don’t seem to get where I’m coming from. You are extremely presumptive and are borderline bigoted yourself (I’m thinking of your inaccurate and persistent accusation of me being a Fox News viewer). I honestly gave up because I was getting tired of repeating myself.

How much harm does opposing homophobia cause? No where near as much as your "belief" which I'm supposed to respect without question for some reason. You did choose this belief you know, and so I hold you accountable for it.

Again, this doesn’t apply to me, because I’m not homophobic.

I’m a busy stay-at-home mother. Can you maybe now see why I didn’t want to bother if you were just going to ignore what I said anyway?

[JuniperWoolf]

You're really good at avoiding the primary issue and grinding on selfish defensive details that no one cares about. Address this, if you please:

You value a few passages in an obviously convoluted old book more than you do the physical and mental health of your fellow human beings (and just so that we don't have to waste a few posts clearing up this particular subtext: the belief that homosexuals are at the very least "unclean" or "abominations" and at worst will literally burn for all eternity because of the way they are, and the casual malice inherent in and violence inspired by that belief, obviously causes very much suffering).

But not agreeing with something and calling it a sin are two separate things. Saying you don't agree with something can at least acknowledge that the opposing view has some legitimacy, but you will not partake in it. Labeling it a "sin" is judging it from a superior position and condemning someone as inferior - and this is where, as Juniper alluded to, the line of promoting hate comes from. I don't know if you are very vocal about the matter or not, that is irrelevant. If you want to stay completely out of the matter at least accept that you are just following your own belief and don't judge those who don't share your belief. Part of the right-wing conservative hate stems from the fact that people don't realize the impact of their words, how even just the word sin carries with it a connotation that they may not mean.

In saying that homosexuality is a "sin" (which you did and there's no denying that, so this definately applies to you) you're doing your small part to incite beatings, murder, depression, self-loating, suicide ect. Discuss.

[Shea]

You're really good at avoiding the primary issue and grinding on pointless details.

Actually, I'd have to say the same about you.

I will be happy to dissect your quotes. But if that's what you want, you'll have to be patient. Tony is first in line after my kids.

[JuniperWoolf]

Sure. Stay on topic this time though, we're all aware that you don't want to be labeled a "bigot" and that you were simply raised by Fox news viewers and that you don't tell anyone how to live their lives. See? I'm re-iterating, I read your posts thoroughly, so you don't have to repeat these details for a fouth time. Let's move forward with the conversation. Once more, the topic is:

In saying that homosexuality is a "sin" (which you did and there's no denying that, so this definately applies to you) you're doing your small part to incite beatings, murder, depression, self-loating, suicide ect. Discuss.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Well, I don't think that's really the topic at hand as specified by the OP.

In all fairness, I don't think a belief that homosexuality alone contributes to their oppression. I have plenty of beliefs about things that I keep to myself . . . okay, maybe that's not true, but I know other people do. A belief is only dangerous when it brings about some sort of action, and is Shea is telling the truth (and, really, we have no grounds to believe otherwise), this is what she does. She has said she thinks being gay is a sin, but doesn't admonish people for being gay, vote based on issues of homosexuality, etc.

So I'm going to say no, she does not contribute to the oppression, violent or otherwise, of gay people. I kind of think Shea is being lambasted here. She's been nothing but friendly, and you're making some pretty heavy accusations--inciting murder, depression, self-loathing, and suicide? Come on. I don't care what people believe. It's how they express their beliefs that's the problem. It doesn't sound like Shea is being hateful.

[Darcy88]

I think calling homosexuality a sin can contribute to depression and suicide. I am a Christian. If I were gay and told that this made me sinful the amount of self-loathing I would experience would be immense. When I sin I really regret it and pray for forgiveness. For someone's sexual orientation to be regarded as something worth asking God for forgiveness for....that is an incredibly negative, self-esteem-damaging thing. Gay people get enough hate from the non-religious world that religion would be a good place for them to turn to for support and guidance, but then the religious leaders, the people who should be showing them love and support, instead cast aspersions upon them, calling them sinful. I think the real reason many religious people fight against same-sex marriage is because if the homosexual love act were committed between two married persons then it would no longer be lust, as lust is often defined as sex outside marriage. I think there are a lot of bisexual or homosexual Christians who have wives and families who are able to keep down their same sex desire by calling it mere lust.

[cacian]

I personally think that religion should have never got involved in pointing the fingers at anyone. Religion should have remained neutral and kept to itself the way it keeps priest hibernating in celibacy behind closed doors.
Had it kept words such as sin and homosxuality out of its texts the world would have paid a bit more attention to what it is that it preaches.
I do not think it is anyone's fault to feel that something is a sin if religion had it not been clearly hammerd in as the word of sanctity. For a god to feel so much hatred remains to be proven.
At the end of the day naming and shaming individuals in this way is almost like saying religons were solely designed to target certain individuals rather preach stability and harmony.
I cannot make sense of any religion that harbors hatred and discrimination towards anyone.
Now modernisation of religion is duly required and so it should live up to antidiscrimination acts and politically correct itself if wants to survive.
Everyone else's has to abide by the rules of free speech/free information act political correction discrimination and democracy socially politically and in the work place.
Religion is no different.
Should Brussels press on with it too?
I should think so.
Case closed.

[MarkBastable]

Forgive me if I've brought this up before....

There seems to be a big argument in the States about whether homosexuality is a) in-born, genetic or b) an option and ultimately a choice. The pro-gay lobby tends to say it's (a) and the anti-gay lobby tend to say it's (b).

But I don't see why it matters.


Question to those whose who are are anti-gay and believe homosexuality's a choice: So what if it's a choice? Why is it not one that people should be permitted to make?

Question to those who are pro-gay and believe homosexuality's genetic: So what if it's genetic? Just because a behaviour is genetically imprinted, doesn't necessarily mean it's good.

The point, though, is not to elicit answers to those questions. It's more to suggest that, surely, why people are gay is completely irrelevant to the question of their rights to be so. In order to inhibit those rights, you'd have to come up wirth some objection to the effect of doing it, not the cause of doing it.

[Charles Darnay]

Well, I don't think that's really the topic at hand as specified by the OP.

In all fairness, I don't think a belief that homosexuality alone contributes to their oppression. I have plenty of beliefs about things that I keep to myself . . . okay, maybe that's not true, but I know other people do. A belief is only dangerous when it brings about some sort of action, and is Shea is telling the truth (and, really, we have no grounds to believe otherwise), this is what she does. She has said she thinks being gay is a sin, but doesn't admonish people for being gay, vote based on issues of homosexuality, etc.

So I'm going to say no, she does not contribute to the oppression, violent or otherwise, of gay people. I kind of think Shea is being lambasted here. She's been nothing but friendly, and you're making some pretty heavy accusations--inciting murder, depression, self-loathing, and suicide? Come on. I don't care what people believe. It's how they express their beliefs that's the problem. It doesn't sound like Shea is being hateful.

If we're talking about good and bad intentions here, I 100% agree. The truth is, if I wanted to, I could find solid reason to despise almost anyone I know people have views that I disagree with.....that's diverse societies for you. As far as I know (the extent of these boards) Shea is a wonderful person, and the fat that I have ideological differences does not change that.

However, I stand by my claim that the link between homosexuality and "sin" needs to be severed: because as good intentions and accepting as someone may claim to be, this notion contributes to a world of hate, particularly for children.

If someone today told me I was a sinner and I'm going to hell, I would say "cool" and then start quoting Milton.

Growing up, I was told (in so many words) that I was useless and would amount to nothing (for entirely separate reasons): I equate this with the secular version of "you're going to Hell." This had a very harmful impact.

So even if you claim that you are accepting, you promote the idea that homosexuality is a sin, and you allow this idea to spread, one day your kid tells another kid he is going to hell because he is gay, or that gays all go to hell, that kid commits suicide.....I no longer care about your intentions.

[mona amon]

Ok, I do not have any problem with homosexuality, but censorship and curtailing the freedom of speech do bother me. If someone thinks something is a sin, why can't they say so? Why are they not allowed to express their opinion like anyone else? I do not understand this at all.

[Shea]

and that you were simply raised by Fox news viewers

Okay I just gotta stop and address this really quick. Juniper, I wish you would stop being so presumptive. You don't know me. Your statement makes it sound as if I were a teenager. I'm in my 30's. Fox News didn't get started until 1996.


And thank you for some of the later comments about me guys. I'm glad to know that even if you don't agree with me, you can still understand that I respect your opinion too.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Forgive me if I've brought this up before....

There seems to be a big argument in the States about whether homosexuality is a) in-born, genetic or b) an option and ultimately a choice. The pro-gay lobby tends to say it's (a) and the anti-gay lobby tend to say it's (b).

But I don't see why it matters.


Question to those whose who are are anti-gay and believe homosexuality's a choice: So what if it's a choice? Why is it not one that people should be permitted to make?

Question to those who are pro-gay and believe homosexuality's genetic: So what if it's genetic? Just because a behaviour is genetically imprinted, doesn't necessarily mean it's good.

The point, though, is not to elicit answers to those questions. It's more to suggest that, surely, why people are gay is completely irrelevant to the question of their rights to be so. In order to inhibit those rights, you'd have to come up wirth some objection to the effect of doing it, not the cause of doing it.

I completely agree that whether or not it's a choose should be irrelevant. The problem is that the anti-gay crowd uses their "it's a choice" rhetoric to try and inforce a right/wrong binary on to the issue. If homosexuality is a choice, it's much easier for them to condemn it--he's choosing to be gay, he's choosing to be a sinner, etc. If it isn't a choice (which it isn't), this complicates things for the anti-gay crowd, because then they are blatantly oppressing a people who can't live any other way . . . which is exactly what the anti-gay crowd is doing. It shouldn't matter. People should be able to live any way they want if it isn't harmful to others. Try explaining that to them, though.

Ok, I do not have any problem with homosexuality, but censorship and curtailing the freedom of speech do bother me. If someone thinks something is a sin, why can't they say so? Why are they not allowed to express their opinion like anyone else? I do not understand this at all.

Quite honestly, when I defended Shea above, I was playing a bit of devil's advocate. While I believe she has every right to think the way she does, I also think its near impossible to let that belief not influence her actions in some way, conscious or unconscious. She has the right to say she thinks being gay is a sin just as much as I have right to say that such thinking is a complete and utter disgrace, after all. I wouldn't go so far as to say she contributes to the suicide and murder of gays, though she isn't making things better, either.

[JuniperWoolf]

Okay I just gotta stop and address this really quick. Juniper, I wish you would stop being so presumptive. You don't know me. Your statement makes it sound as if I were a teenager. I'm in my 30's. Fox News didn't get started until 1996.

That whooshing sound you just heard was the point going over your head ( I've used that several times in real life, always gets a laugh). The entire purpose of my post was to say "please stop talking about yourself and rather continue with the conversation at hand, I don't care about your minor personal details and would like to stop talking about them now as they are meaningless and derail the thread." I don't know how I could have made that any clearer.

Well, I don't think that's really the topic at hand as specified by the OP.

No, the OP was quite vague and eleven pages ago, but the quotes I specified above from myself and Charles were were the points which I mentioned as having been ignored, which of course is where we currently are in the thread. This is also the point in terms of the modern American subject of homosexuality which I feel is most important, because whenever people are honestly in physical or severe psychological danger, it automatically gets to move to the top of the list. Priorities.

So even if you claim that you are accepting, you promote the idea that homosexuality is a sin, and you allow this idea to spread, one day your kid tells another kid he is going to hell because he is gay, or that gays all go to hell, that kid commits suicide.....I no longer care about your intentions.

Bingo. Who cares if one is polite while promoting hate? Are manners worth more than the well-being of other people?

Ok, I do not have any problem with homosexuality, but censorship and curtailing the freedom of speech do bother me. If someone thinks something is a sin, why can't they say so? Why are they not allowed to express their opinion like anyone else? I do not understand this at all.

Oh, she does have the right to say that homosexuality is a sin. Likewise, I not only have the right but feel an honest sense of responsibility to counter by vocalizing my own opinions as to why such a view is wrong. Everyone must be able to speak plainly, but if what they're saying strikes you as morally wrong it's your obligation to challenge them. Honest and unhindered debate is how a good society reaches sound decisions.

Forgive me if I've brought this up before....

There seems to be a big argument in the States about whether homosexuality is a) in-born, genetic or b) an option and ultimately a choice. The pro-gay lobby tends to say it's (a) and the anti-gay lobby tend to say it's (b).

But I don't see why it matters.


Question to those whose who are are anti-gay and believe homosexuality's a choice: So what if it's a choice? Why is it not one that people should be permitted to make?

Question to those who are pro-gay and believe homosexuality's genetic: So what if it's genetic? Just because a behaviour is genetically imprinted, doesn't necessarily mean it's good.

The point, though, is not to elicit answers to those questions. It's more to suggest that, surely, why people are gay is completely irrelevant to the question of their rights to be so. In order to inhibit those rights, you'd have to come up wirth some objection to the effect of doing it, not the cause of doing it.

Yeah, agreed. Once a guy got seriously angry at me for saying that we don't know whether homosexuality or indeed any behaviour is genetic or not so it's dishonest and rather unscientific making such solid decisions about it, and plus it doesn't matter anyway. If the opposite side says it does matter, don't play into that by making a strong and equally unfounded claim to the opposite, that's not helping. He got all huffy and wouldn't talk to me.

[Bluehound]

"For something as complex as sexual orientation, it's no surprise that everything from genes to gender to environment may play a role in ultimately determining your perfect partner."

http://www.time.com/time/health/arti...815538,00.html