DoubleStandard Morals

[Terrywoodenpic]

One more point, Michel. Look over here when a Religous extremist runs for President. Gets very few votes.

From my stand point Your President is somthing of a religious extreemist, surrounded by like minds.

Terry
_____________________________________
Blessed are those who suffer in the cause of right, the kingdom of heaven is theirs.

 

[Ori]

Yeah, Bu$h is the reason your country is in such a mess right now.

 

[jeffrey]

Yeah, Bu$h is the reason your country is in such a mess right now.

Two questions. 1st. how is my country in such a mess? 2nd, How is it Bush's Fault?

 

[Melody]

Curious. How much responsibilty does religion take for this? And the Christians are offended by the gay! I think a very "Christian" thing to do would be to support them instead of continually arguing for the right to hate them.

In what way would you expect Christians to support them...keeping in mind that many Christians (not just those using the word to promote their own prejudices) feel it is a sin according to the bible?

 

[Ori]

Your country is in debt and it's Bush who put you in the poo for going to war illegally.

 

[jeffrey]

Your country is in debt and it's Bush who put you in the poo for going to war illegally.

...The President does not have the power you think he does. But i'm to tired to argue with you.

 

[Quoth The Raven]

Your country is in debt and it's Bush who put you in the poo for going to war illegally.

Mate, yours isn't exactly kicking fiscal goals either...

 

[Ori]

No it isn't, but at least I can admit it. If that's the best you can do to counter my statement Lazarus, then there's no hope.

 

[Ori]

Bush has put your country into the worst debt since the depression.

 

[jeffrey]

Bush has put your country into the worst debt since the depression.

The economy is up, unemployment is down, flowers blooming, birds singing, life is grand. Lady L has alot better insight then you, so in my opinion, with your total lack of understanding American politics, you are the one with no hope. Good seats, hay, buddy?

 

[jamaesi]

orichalcum- I'm not sure if your mindless Bush-bashing really applies here.

This is rather late, but NetDoc, I was only repeating what another poster said when I asked "Why do Christians attack Homosexuals so much" as it was originally with those nouns switched. (And yet I'm the one making generalizations.) And I am curious, with people who murder and rape and steal; poverty; and health care crisis- why is there so much hate towards homosexuals?


It wouldn't feel all that great if there was a religion that said "heterosexuality was a sin" just like lying, incest, murder, and stealing and we shouldn't let people like that be together without insulting and throwing our Holy Books at them, now would it?

Here's a novel idea- if you don't like something someone is doing and it's not hurting themself or anyone else, keep your mouth shut about it. This works in all aspects of life and applies to both sides.


I don't know how many times I have heard that "it's okay to have homosexual urges- as long as you don't act on them!" Do you realize how insane and bigoted it is to say that? Do you realize how much that hurts? I don't wake up in the morning and say "wow, think I'll go have sex with a girl and try to oppress me some straights and Christians." I'll be quite frank, boys don't really turn me on and I'm not going to remain celibate my entire life. If I go to hell for it, then so be it. At least I won't be worshipping a G-d who will cast me aside for acting on how I was made- gay. It's cute how people throw away studies that show the fact the homosexual brain is different, muttering something about bias and yawning. But hey, aren't there still people who think the Earth is flat?


Where I live I have had more Christians tell me I'm going to hell than Muslims and Jews. Note how there are more Christians than Jews and Muslims in the USA. Note how Christians are the ones passing laws to ban gay marriage, gay adoption, making it okay for doctors to refuse to treat gays... (and people claim it's the Christians who are so persecuted?)

Honestly now, who do you think I am going to protest against when I want results?

 

[jeffrey]

Please Don't put all Christians into one category. There are a few Christians Attempting to do what you say, but not the majority of us. On a lighter side, I was raised in California. had a gay friend. I would tease him about women, he would tease me about men. I told him I would convert him, he'd tell me he'd convert me. We both knew neither would happen and respected that. I guess the point that i'm trying to make is some people, mostly men, feel awkward around another gay man, a macho thing I guess. Afraid others might think he is gay too. Women on the other hand do not feel as threatened. I still feel It's a sin, but like I have stated so many times before, so are alot of things I do are too.

 

[jamaesi]

It's got to be a majourity if those laws are going through and gays still can't marry.

 

[michel]

[PART QUOTE=jamaesi]
.............."This is rather late, but NetDoc, I was only repeating what another poster said when I asked "Why do Christians attack Homosexuals so much" as it was originally with those nouns switched. (And yet I'm the one making generalizations.) And I am curious, with people who murder and rape and steal; poverty; and health care crisis- why is there so much hate towards homosexuals?


It wouldn't feel all that great if there was a religion that said "heterosexuality was a sin" just like lying, incest, murder, and stealing and we shouldn't let people like that be together without insulting and throwing our Holy Books at them, now would it?

Here's a novel idea- if you don't like something someone is doing and it's not hurting themself or anyone else, keep your mouth shut about it. This works in all aspects of life and applies to both sides.


I don't know how many times I have heard that "it's okay to have homosexual urges- as long as you don't act on them!" Do you realize how insane and bigoted it is to say that? Do you realize how much that hurts? I don't wake up in the morning and say "wow, think I'll go have sex with a girl and try to oppress me some straights and Christians." I'll be quite frank, boys don't really turn me on and I'm not going to remain celibate my entire life. If I go to hell for it, then so be it. At least I won't be worshipping a G-d who will cast me aside for acting on how I was made- gay. It's cute how people throw away studies that show the fact the homosexual brain is different, muttering something about bias and yawning. But hey, aren't there still people who think the Earth is flat?


Where I live I have had more Christians tell me I'm going to hell than Muslims and Jews. Note how there are more Christians than Jews and Muslims in the USA. Note how Christians are the ones passing laws to ban gay marriage, gay adoption, making it okay for doctors to refuse to treat gays... (and people claim it's the Christians who are so persecuted?)"............................

Honestly now, who do you think I am going to protest against when I want results?[/QUOTE]

Please Don't put all Christians into one category. There are a few Christians Attempting to do what you say, but not the majority of us. On a lighter side, I was raised in California. had a gay friend. I would tease him about women, he would tease me about men. I told him I would convert him, he'd tell me he'd convert me. We both knew neither would happen and respected that.[QUOTE/]


jamaesi;

I think I can understand what you are feeling - although I would never be able to empathise, because to be able to do so, one needs to have undergone the same experience.
I don't know how many times I have heard that "it's okay to have homosexual urges- as long as you don't act on them!" Do you realize how insane and bigoted it is to say that? Do you realize how much that hurts?

Frankly, I can't realize how much that hurts, but I can 'hear' from what you have written, that you are very distressed about it - which you ought not to be made to feel. Unfortunately, people fear the unknown; perhaps some fear that they themselves might have homosexual tendencies - and act all 'macho' and hit out at gays to prove to themselves that they are 100% Heterosexual - unfortunately, that's human nature. It is innexcusable for people like yourself to be hounded because of your sexual orientation, but until the populace as a whole, become more tollerant, I guess it will go on. It is unfair.


Where I live I have had more Christians tell me I'm going to hell than Muslims and Jews. Note how there are more Christians than Jews and Muslims in the USA. Note how Christians are the ones passing laws to ban gay marriage, gay adoption, making it okay for doctors to refuse to treat gays...


Are doctors really encouraged to refuse to treat gays ? I think that is dreadful - it is basically inhuman - or should I say 'inhumane'

The only other point I would like to make, is concerning jgalandt's reply to you; I am sure he is correct. There are good Christians, and there are ones who are not so good.... If you are surrounded by the 'not so good ones', then that is awful; I do sympathize, and I hope that people become more tollerant with time.

 

[jamaesi]

[font=verdana,arial][font=verdana,arial] [/font]

[font=verdana,arial]Michigan Preparing To Let Doctors Refuse To Treat Gays

(Lansing, Michigan) Doctors or other health care providers could not be disciplined or sued if they refuse to treat gay patients under legislation passed Wednesday by the Michigan House. [/font][font=verdana,arial][font=verdana,arial]The bill allows health care workers to refuse service to anyone on moral, ethical or religious grounds. [/font][/font]

[font=verdana,arial][font=verdana,arial]The Republican dominated House passed the measure as dozens of Catholics looked on from the gallery. The Michigan Catholic Conference, which pushed for the bills, hosted a legislative day for Catholics on Wednesday at the state Capitol.[/font][/font]

Here's the bill itself.

Google the Conscientious Objector Policy Act if you want to know more.
[/font]

 

[jeffrey]

I'm sorry, but the link only states that a bill was passed, not what was in the bill.

 

[michel]

[font=verdana,arial][font=verdana,arial] [/font]

Here's the bill itself.

Google the Conscientious Objector Policy Act if you want to know more.
[/font]

Thaks for finding the link; In a way, I wish you hadn't done so.........

All I can say is "Emigrate" - sorry, that is flippant; I am upset at the thought of such flagrant bigotry and intollerance in this day and age.

I am not American, but this sort of thing makes me feel vicariously guilty on the part of all us tollerant heterosexuals; I can understand your feelings. I would protest; oh boy, I would protest!!

 

[Ormiston]

In what way would you expect Christians to support them...keeping in mind that many Christians (not just those using the word to promote their own prejudices) feel it is a sin according to the bible?

For starters, I'd suggest that people stop reminding them it's a sin. I read a lot of arguments early in this thread about homosexuality being a choice and that is rediculus. I've been close friends with gay men and many of them wish with all their heart that they were straight. They say, "Why would I ever choose to be this way?". Some of them are content as well with it. Either way, I find it horrible that straight people would even suggest, whether it be with religion or opinion, to know what's best for homosexuals. Just because your book says it's one way doesn't make it right. And since Christians make up the majority of the population in this country, they get to make the rules. How many debates have we all participated in now that deal with this same problem? The notion that peoples religious beliefs should have influence on the laws should be criminal. The laws should be about things like equal rights and a peaceful coexistance, NOT ABOUT SIN. This homosexuality argument is the tip of the anti-humanism iceberg. No ones religious beliefs should influence the quality of life of others, plain and simple. Everyone keeps arguing for their right to believe this and their right to believe that, but once it crosses this line, then religion turns evil in my book.

 

[michel]

source :-http://www.times10.org/lorne_1.htm.http://www.times10.org/lorne_2.htm

Are There Advantages to Being Homosexual?

Lorne Warneke, M.D.

Part One

What advantages are there to being homosexual? Living in a society that treats homosexuality as a minority group that is despised, denigrated and rejected, there may seem to be few advantages. In a society that goes to great lengths to devalue homosexuality through lack of recognition and acceptance of same sex love, that does not legally recognize same sex relationships and that utilizes the legal process to prohibit sexual behaviour between same sex couples, not only does there seem to be a lack of advantages to being homosexual, but many disadvantages as well.

Advantages to Homosexuality will be explored in a two-part article. The first part will deal with the biological basis for homosexuality and the possible role this has played in evolution and the survival of the human species. The second part, to be published in the next issue, will discuss the advantages that a homosexual orientation may provide for a specific individual.

As homosexuality appears to have been an enduring aspect of human behaviour as far back as the beginning of recorded time and no doubt existed before that. As homosexuality at least in some forms, seems to exist in other species close on the evolutionary tree to humans, there must be a biological advantage to this behaviour pattern in terms of survival in the evolutionary sense.

At the outset, it needs to be said that yes, there are many advantages to being homosexual, just as there are advantages to being heterosexual, being female (or male), or having a black skin colour. Human behaviours are diverse and rich and everyone, regardless of any characteristics that may put them into a minority group statistically speaking, is part of the human family with a right to be, and feel to be, part of society as a productive and accepted individual. Any attitude that conveys the impression that individuals, who are different by reason of biological forces over which there is no conscious choice, are inferior becomes pure unadulterated prejudice. Prejudice makes individuals in minority groups feel that their innate characteristics are wrong and are to be ashamed of, to be hidden. These characteristics are then regarded as liabilities rather than reasons to be positive and proud. Before the civil war in the USA (and even today) Afro-Americans, if they could, tried to pass as being white.

Before continuing with this discussion, the biological roots of homosexuality need to be emphasized to dispense with the idea of choice which invites socio/political and religious assault. To talk of homosexuality as a "life style" choice in the context of a disapproving homophobic society such as ours makes absolutely no sense. Why would anyone choose a sexually expressive lifestyle that leads to stigmatization, rejection from the mainstream society, and could lead to a sense of isolation, and a state of despair.

A homosexual orientation is not a matter of choice. It is the expression of biological forces that have culminated by the time of birth, or soon after, and from that point on becomes an immutable or unchangeable characteristic of that individual. The fact that the exact mechanism by which this is determined is not known does not detract from this statement, as the exact mechanism of heterosexuality has also as yet to be determined. What is chosen is how an individual decides to give expression to his or her biological sexuality. For some homosexuals, negative social pressures may be so great so as to force an individual to adopt heterosexual behaviour thus reinforcing the misconception that there is choice about orientation. A chosen lifestyle for homosexuals as with heterosexuals is varied and diverse. The so-called homosexual lifestyle, a misnomer, applies only to what straight society sees of a visible part of the lives of a minority of homosexuals.

A slight digression is necessary here to explore and emphasize the biological basis of homosexuality. All of the biological aspects of our being - our digestive system, our cardiovascular system, our muscle strength and our complex central nervous system, for example, are the result of millions of years of evolution and the result of forces of natural selection. In other words, an expression of the law "the survival of the fittest." Many complex behaviour patterns and emotional states are also the result of this evolutionary process just like other complex, but more specific brain functions, such as language, memory or protective reflexes. Jealousy, fear, envy, panic, and phobic avoidance, to name a few, all seem to be emotional states designed to allow us a greater chance to survive. Sexual behaviours, perhaps the ultimate expression of survival and adaptation (reproduction, passing genetic information onto another generation) are also evolutionarily designed. It takes multiple generations and thousands of years before a mutated or changed gene, which controls a characteristic that provides an advantage in terms of survival, becomes firmly established in our genetic code. This is because of the long time in humans between birth and sexual maturity (14-16 years).

In this respect compare the rapid adaptation speed of insects (some of which can reproduce every day or so) or bacteria (reproduce in minutes to hours) to humans. This explains why species such as insects or bacteria can rapidly develop resistance to insecticides or antibiotics. Human beings, because of slow evolutionary change, have really only evolved to a hunter-gatherer state and living in small nomadic tribes. The necessary 100,000 years or more that would allow enough generations and subsequent biological adaptation to our current living state has not occurred. Evolution is occurring of course, but at a very slow rate. Humans have only been living in a complex technological society for less than 300 years. Therefore, human biological characteristics need to be analyzed in the context of man being adapted to this hunter-gatherer-primitive state. As an aside, our modern society may be slowing the

evolutionary process even further. The number of years between birth and the average age of reproduction for women seems to be increasing. Many women do not have children until the mid-twenties or later. Also, modern medicine has now allowed individuals with genetic illnesses that normally would have resulted in death before reproduction to go on to have children and thus increase the chance of passing on the faulty gene.

Back to the question of homosexuality. What does this have to do with evolution? Homosexuality seems to have been an enduring characteristic in humans, in most if not all races and societies. This observation plus the known prevalence rate (7-8% of the population, perhaps up to 10%) attests to its biological foundations. The 10% prevalence rate has always been assumed as a given based on the original studies of Kinsey. More recent studies suggest the prevalence rate to be about 7-8%, and very recent studies have suggested the rate to be as low as one percent. All of these current studies probably reflect under reporting - either due to denial of a homosexual orientation because of complex psychological reasons, or a lack of disclosure for fear of negative consequences.

What possible advantages are there to being homosexual? This can best be seen from the perspective of homosexuality being a biological characteristic that has been in some ways conducive to the survival of the human species and has thus endured. If it is an advantageous trait to survival, this should provide comfort that homosexuality is a necessary part of the "greater scheme of things". This will be elaborated upon. More importantly, what does this mean in terms of advantages to the individual who is homosexual. By advantage is meant that characteristics associated with homosexuality normally criticized or derided by society as being abnormal or wrong in fact are not abnormal or wrong but can and should be seen not as a handicap but as an asset. Finally, how can the experience of being homosexual in this society, usually regarded as negative, be seen from a more positive perspective.

 

[michel]

Pt2

The fact that homosexuality has endured and has a strong positive biological foundation needs to be explored first. At first glance, homosexuality, because of the virtual lack of reproductive behaviour, would seem to be against any evolutionary/survival advantage. This is true if one thinks of the individual in isolation. In other words, if a man or woman does not reproduce, they are "evolutionary failures". However, in the survival adaptive process of the species, it is our genes or the basic blueprint of ourselves contained within our chromosomes, which need to be passed on. Homosexuality may confer an advantage to survival through a theory called "Kin selection" which attempts to explain why the closer the blood relationship, the stronger the bond between individuals. In other words "blood runs thicker than water." We are more likely to be protective of brothers, sisters and their offspring (nieces, nephews) than

we are of the children of distant relatives or people not related to us at all. In a biological sense this is a way of ensuring survival of our own genes. If a homosexual, male or female, has no children, and therefore, no passing on of his or her genes, then the next best thing is to ensure that close relatives such as brothers and sisters or their children survive and reproduce. A homosexual individual shares half of his genetic characteristics with his brothers or sisters, and about a quarter of these with nieces and nephews.

Kin Selection, (if this theory holds true) would be a very strong biological drive. However, obviously learning and experience, as well as changing societal circumstances could modify it. This explains why individuals can adopt and love non-genetically related children and why, with the extended family being very much constricted, that most homosexuals today probably play a lesser role in raising of the offspring of their siblings.

Humans have evolved and adapted to survive in a tribal state, a tribe sharing the same gene pool. Protection of this gene pool from outsiders who might threaten the food supply, impregnate females and so on was necessary, and still is although modified by our society. This may help to explain the constant outbreak of vicious genocidal warfare in the world such as that seen in Yugoslavia and Rwanda.

Thus humans may have evolved to survive as a unit or tribe only because some members had non-productive qualities (homosexuals). This is not unlike bees or colonies of ants in which many members are non-productive but contribute greatly to the overall survival of the whole. Homosexuals, therefore, although having a specific reproductive disadvantage may have contributed to evolution by passing on their advantageous characteristics that are controlled by their genes.

Another approach to exploring the advantage of homosexuality is the concept of a gay gene or genes. Recent research has suggested that such a gene or genes may exist. It may be that such genes, apart from controlling sexual orientation, may also control other characteristics conducive to survival. An example of such a phenomenon in nature is the sickle cell anemia trait in humans. If an individual is homozygous dominant, that is, has the strong gene for sickle cell anemia from both parents, the individual will develop a severe form of anemia and die (most likely before having children). If the individual is homozygous recessive, that is, has the weak gene from both parents, sickle cell anemia does not develop but like everyone else, has a susceptibility to catching malaria and therefore dies (most likely before having children). However, if this individual is heterozygous, that is, has a strong gene from one parent and a weak gene from the other, not only does he not develop sickle cell anemia, but he also has resistance to malaria and therefore he does go on to have lots of children!

In other words, the sickle cell trait carries with it a survival advantage (resistance to malaria). Likewise the homosexual "gene" may carry with it other advantageous traits that ensure survival for the human species. In other words, the fact that the gene results in a homosexual orientation is coincidental, but the other characteristics controlled by this gene are important and advantageous. Hypothetically speaking, such an associated trait could control the expression of nurturing.

If the individual is homozygous for the homosexual trait and therefore homosexual, being strongly nurturing would confer no advantage as there is likely to be no reproduction. If the individual is homozygous for heterosexuality, there may be very little nurturing characteristics and this may represent a male who is disinterested in children and deserts his vulnerable mate. However, if a male was heterozygous, that is had one homosexual gene but the other heterosexual gene was stronger, he would be heterosexual but also have greater nurturing capabilities and this may translate into sharing the responsibilities of child rearing with his mate. It needs to be emphasized that this is a hypothetical example given only to stimulate thought in this area.

Kirsch and Rodman, two evolutionary biologists have stated that if a structure, function, or behaviour occurs in a number of individuals in a species and if this persists through several generations, than that feature can be presumed to serve some evolutionarily advantageous function. That is, it must contribute to the survival of the species by giving an advantage to individuals possessing that feature. Homosexuality, both male and female is a behaviour that certainly occurs in a great number of individuals and has certainly persisted for many generations. Therefore, according to Kirsch and Rodman's statement, homosexuality must be an advantage to those individuals who are so as well as to the species.