My views on homosexuality

[TalAbrams]

Vinayaka has it right. "Who, in their right mind would choose to be homosexual?"
I believe that there are those who were born with these tendencies.
Having these feelings then cannot be construed as sinful.
However, acting on them can!
We all have our demons within which we strive to control if we are seeking to live a Godly life. If that is not the goal then we eventually reap what we sow.
Whether it be the gay issue, excessive drinking, hetero sex outside a marriage, etc, and on and on and on, we must all decide for ourselves what is absolute truth and determine our end goals.
I would ask:
Who in their right mind would choose to be Jewish? It is something inside which cannot be denied without suffering much mental anguish so many have converted.

 

[Dan4reason]

Vinayaka has it right. "Who, in their right mind would choose to be homosexual?"
I believe that there are those who were born with these tendencies.
Having these feelings then cannot be construed as sinful.
However, acting on them can!
We all have our demons within which we strive to control if we are seeking to live a Godly life. If that is not the goal then we eventually reap what we sow.
Whether it be the gay issue, excessive drinking, hetero sex outside a marriage, etc, and on and on and on, we must all decide for ourselves what is absolute truth and determine our end goals.
I would ask:
Who in their right mind would choose to be Jewish? It is something inside which cannot be denied without suffering much mental anguish so many have converted.

What is inherently evil about being homosexual given that you already feel strong homosexual attractions and no attraction for the opposite sex?

 

[Caladan]

Vinayaka has it right. "Who, in their right mind would choose to be homosexual?"

Anyone who doesn't live in a superstitious country.

Who in their right mind would choose to be Jewish?

Anyone who doesn't live in a superstitious country.
America today seems like a very decent place to be Jewish. Spain during the 15th century? not so much.
like so with homosexuality. many men have practiced homosexual relations through every possible period, with many societies approving of homosexuality as a legitimate form of human sexuality.

 

[Greyn]

Calling homosexuality a choice when clearly its not. Why didn't you answer my question? Who in their right mind would choose to be gay amongst this world of haters?"

So, what you are saying is, homosexuals are mindless gay zombies driven to satisfy their base urges with no control what so ever? They cannot choose to abstain because homosexuality strips any ability to choose? People abstain from all sorts of natural (and desirable) activities due to religious and philosophical reasons, but you seem to think homosexuals are unable to do that...

For the record, what you quoted was not bigoted or even what I actually said. I have agreed (many times now) that being homosexual could be naturally occurring.

And the reason I did not answer your question is because I am not gay, you need to ask someone that is gay why they would associate with a group or belief system that does not approve of their lifestyle.

This sin't helped by religion and religious people harming the rights of homosexuals where they can by shooting down law proposals that don't affect them.

Let me correct this for you, "some religions and some religious people harming the rights of homosexuals". So far, this has not been a debate on political actions concerning individuals rights and (again) I have never posted anything that proposes any such political action. But, I will agree with you, laws that restrict consenting adults from living the way they want to is not Constitutional (but, that debate goes in both directions).

However, notice that homosexuality is perfectly explained within a secular scientific perspective.

How is it "perfectly" explained within a scientific perspective? So far, no genes have been found to predispose someone from being gay and gay sex (although found in nature) does not have a specific role within nature. It does not serve to procreate (the main reason for sex in nature), so how does it fit within nature?

I am not trying to argue your opninon on the basis of homosexuality, but show in an emotionally charged arguement how we can quickly jump to assumptions and begin to make "evidence" that they are true. This clouds our logic and weakens our arguement.

i think a country's laws should prohibit the infringement of peoples inalienable rights...
my rights end where yours begin...

This is the real arguement, imo. Should an individual change his/her lifestyle to fit a religious organizations doctrine of their choosing or should the religious organization be forced to accept the lifestyle and change their doctrine? I say it is important to pick the first option. We have to protect the freedom of religion and speech for everyone.

 

[TalAbrams]

Dan>
"What is inherently evil about being homosexual given that you already feel strong homosexual attractions and no attraction for the opposite sex?"

I did not use the word, "evil."
I am not permitted to eat shell fish, among others. Why? I do not really know.
But I obey that which was passed down in Torah.
If Torah is not one's priority the he/she will do as they chose.
All things are our choice. We have free will to obey or to sin.
Keeping the Law keeps me free.
It is the same with the laws of any country.
If you keep the law you need not fear the authorities.
By keeping God's law we need not be afraid of the consequences.
I have contemplated this whole gay issue and it is overwhelming to me.
I cannot imagine having such feelings while being surrounded by hate because of my being different. I do not have the answers. I can only be responsible for my own treatment of my fellow man.
Torah never said that it was OK to hate and abuse gays.
I stand up for everyone who does not harm others. We are no one's judge. God will sort it all out at some point.
I recently received an e-mail from Richard Simmons thanking me for helping others to understand these issues.
Richard is ridiculed and condemned across the U.S. but he laughs all the way to the bank.
He has accomplished more for humanity than most who claim to be religious.
Using the given logic of many here, it would be permissible to abuse children if you have those desires within you.

 

[Greystone]

In my view homosexuality is condemned in the Bible merely because it was common consensus that it was wrong when the Bible was written. The writers of the Bible would not have relied solely on divine inspiration when they were writing it but included in it what they and most other people thought were right and wrong. As well as historical legends which they and others thought were true factual history.

The the writers of the Bible would have strove for accuracy and intended to put down only what they thought they were certain God wanted they would inevitably have got some things wrong. We now know for example that the sun does not revolve around the earth as stated in Genesis but that the earth revolves around the sun. Something that God Galileo into trouble with the Catholic church when he pointed it out. Another example if slavery, which is stated as right in the Bible yet totally wrong today. Most likely because in Biblical times there were a lot of slaves and it was widely believed that God agreed with slavery.

 

[LuisDantas]

So, what you are saying is, homosexuals are mindless gay zombies driven to satisfy their base urges with no control what so ever? They cannot choose to abstain because homosexuality strips any ability to choose? People abstain from all sorts of natural (and desirable) activities due to religious and philosophical reasons, but you seem to think homosexuals are unable to do that...

I can't speak for him, but I will say that I personally find it immoral to pressure homosexuals towards abstinence. There are absolutely no grounds to justify that.

(...)

And the reason I did not answer your question is because I am not gay, you need to ask someone that is gay why they would associate with a group or belief system that does not approve of their lifestyle.

Because they have no choice, of course. Homosexuals can't choose to have non-homophobic parents any more than they can choose not to be homosexuals. Nor can they really choose the culture they are born into.

Let me correct this for you, "some religions and some religious people harming the rights of homosexuals". So far, this has not been a debate on political actions concerning individuals rights and (again) I have never posted anything that proposes any such political action. But, I will agree with you, laws that restrict consenting adults from living the way they want to is not Constitutional (but, that debate goes in both directions).

Which would the other direction be?

How is it "perfectly" explained within a scientific perspective? So far, no genes have been found to predispose someone from being gay and gay sex (although found in nature) does not have a specific role within nature. It does not serve to procreate (the main reason for sex in nature), so how does it fit within nature?

Homosexual tendency is due to many factors, as are many other kinds of tendencies in human beings. Genetics are only one of them. There are, for instance, indications that male homosexuality may be in part due to in fetus interaction with the mother's hormones.

Nor does having a scientific explanation imply that it has a purpose, either.

Even so, avoiding procreation while still being a productive member of society seems to me to be a very useful role for society. Despite some popular misconceptions, being procreative is not necessarily more constructive than the alternative.

(...)

This is the real arguement, imo. Should an individual change his/her lifestyle to fit a religious organizations doctrine of their choosing or should the religious organization be forced to accept the lifestyle and change their doctrine?

A more accurate presentation of that argument would be: should the faithful accept obvious failures of the current state of their doctrine, or should they revise it so that it doesn't chastise people with no good reason?

That is how Christianity let go of slavery. And that is how it will eventualy let go of homophoby.

I say it is important to pick the first option. We have to protect the freedom of religion and speech for everyone.

Sure. But above that, we have to protect the inherent worth of the institutions. From the inside first of all.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

My view on homosexuality depends on one factor.

If homosexuality is a choice, then it's a sin.
If it isn't a choice, then it isn't a sin. God would not create someone who could not help but sin.

Could someone please provide some evidence proving that it isn't a choice or is a choice? I need to clear this up for myself.

And if it is a choice, does this mean that I think that homosexuals will go to Hell (if there is a Hell)? Certainly not. A homosexual would be just as much a sinner as everyone else, and has an equal chance of salvation.

You're looking at homosexuality through your dogmatic spectacles.....NOW, take them off.......

Yep, you see.....it really doesn't matter their sexual orientation.

Homosexuality is no more a "sin" than heterosexuality is. Look to the animal kingdom and ask yourself..."why did sky-daddy make other animals...homosexual"...

 

[Dan4reason]

Dan>
"What is inherently evil about being homosexual given that you already feel strong homosexual attractions and no attraction for the opposite sex?"

I did not use the word, "evil."
I am not permitted to eat shell fish, among others. Why? I do not really know.
But I obey that which was passed down in Torah.
If Torah is not one's priority the he/she will do as they chose.
All things are our choice. We have free will to obey or to sin.
Keeping the Law keeps me free.
It is the same with the laws of any country.
If you keep the law you need not fear the authorities.
By keeping God's law we need not be afraid of the consequences.
I have contemplated this whole gay issue and it is overwhelming to me.
I cannot imagine having such feelings while being surrounded by hate because of my being different. I do not have the answers. I can only be responsible for my own treatment of my fellow man.
Torah never said that it was OK to hate and abuse gays.
I stand up for everyone who does not harm others. We are no one's judge. God will sort it all out at some point.
I recently received an e-mail from Richard Simmons thanking me for helping others to understand these issues.
Richard is ridiculed and condemned across the U.S. but he laughs all the way to the bank.
He has accomplished more for humanity than most who claim to be religious.
Using the given logic of many here, it would be permissible to abuse children if you have those desires within you.

So you say that homosexuality is wrong not for any logical reason but because some book said it was wrong. What arguments does this this book in the Torah give to say that homosexuality is wrong?

 

[waitasec]

This is the real arguement, imo. Should an individual change his/her lifestyle to fit a religious organizations doctrine of their choosing or should the religious organization be forced to accept the lifestyle and change their doctrine? I say it is important to pick the first option. We have to protect the freedom of religion and speech for everyone.

but the latter is what seems to be the trend...
and for a good reason. religious doctrine is still subjected to bias.

 

[waitasec]

So, what you are saying is, homosexuals are mindless gay zombies driven to satisfy their base urges with no control what so ever?

i don't think that is what he's trying to convey here...
to be fair you can say the same thing about heterosexuals, right?


'heterosexuals are mindless straight zombies driven to satisfy their base urges...'

the control part you need to elaborate on...

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

You're looking at homosexuality through your dogmatic spectacles.....NOW, take them off.......

Yep, you see.....it really doesn't matter their sexual orientation.

Homosexuality is no more a "sin" than heterosexuality is. Look to the animal kingdom and ask yourself..."why did sky-daddy make other animals...homosexual"...

So, are we to look at animals for our morality and ethics? Animals are animals, they can do what they want. If God has designed them to follow His ethics, they would not be killing other animals, and certainly some of them would not be killing their own young. But that is the beauty of nature that God created. Humans, however, are a separate creation from animals. They may have evolved from animals (depends on whether you're a creationist or not) but they still have been made separate from them by God, and made to rule over and look after them, becoming the stewards of the earth.

 

[waitasec]

So, are we to look at animals for our morality and ethics? Animals are animals, they can do what they want. If God has designed them to follow His ethics, they would not be killing other animals, and certainly some of them would not be killing their own young.

did god design man to follow his ethics?
gen 8:21 seems to say the contrary...
"every inclination of the human heart is evil from childhood"

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

did god design man to follow his ethics?
gen 8:21 seems to say the contrary...
"every inclination of the human heart is evil from childhood"

That is after Satan's corruption.

 

[Raskolnikov]

My view on homosexuality depends on one factor.

If homosexuality is a choice, then it's a sin.
If it isn't a choice, then it isn't a sin. God would not create someone who could not help but sin.

Could someone please provide some evidence proving that it isn't a choice or is a choice? I need to clear this up for myself.

And if it is a choice, does this mean that I think that homosexuals will go to Hell (if there is a Hell)? Certainly not. A homosexual would be just as much a sinner as everyone else, and has an equal chance of salvation.

Being attracted to member of the same sex is not a choice, just as being attracted to members of the opposite sex isn't. Actually having sex with someone is a choice. However, there's no reason to believe that having sex with someone of the same sex is wrong in any way. If you're attracted to the same sex, there's no good reason not to choose to have sex with someone of the same sex. Even the Bible when interpreted correctly doesn't support homosexuality being a sin.

 

[waitasec]

That is after Satan's corruption.

oh boi...really?

so are you saying a person who is a homosexual is after satan's corruption?

 

[waitasec]

That is after Satan's corruption.

so gods design was faulty...

 

[Dirty Penguin]

So, are we to look at animals for our morality and ethics?

I don't follow your book of morals and ethics yet I have mine and I have raised a wonderful family on them. Morals and ethics are subjective.

Animals are animals, they can do what they want.

The same goes for the human animal.

If God has designed them to follow His ethics, they would not be killing other animals, and certainly some of them would not be killing their own young.

Which makes you wonder if a god did really create man....using your line of reasoning eh?.....Considering our species does all that you cited...

But that is the beauty of nature that God created. Humans, however, are a separate creation from animals. They may have evolved from animals (depends on whether you're a creationist or not) but they still have been made separate from them by God, and made to rule over and look after them, becoming the stewards of the earth.

I disagree. Pretty much every action of the human animal can be seen in the animals of the wild or even our own domestic animals. Some theist seems to put animals lower than us but in many areas they are more unique. As superior as some would have others to think..we are frail in the eyes of some of the smallest and deadliest microbes.......

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

so gods design was faulty...

No. He gave us the gift of free will, and we decided to misuse it. Controlling whether or not we would be tempted by Satan would be taking away our free will.

 

[waitasec]

No. He gave us the gift of free will, and we decided to misuse it. Controlling whether or not we would be tempted by Satan would be taking away our free will.

no. what you are suggesting is...using our free will is sin.