To The Anti Gay Religious

[Etritonakin]

I understand your goal as I've read your other posts. But at times im lost to your method.

Usually I'm expecting to hear other view points but your method leads to more questions so it leads to circle that honestly I just want to politely stop and again try to understand your opinion.

About what -specifically?


(Also -I made a somewhat vulgar post on another page in frustration, which has been edited -sorry if I offended anyone.)
:sorry1:

 

[LuisDantas]

I believe you should have no trouble with the concept that those who believe in God as the only one who knows what is good will also believe whatever God says is not good is not good.

Why would anyone attempt to deny the rather obvious fact that we have moral discernment (which shows that God is not the only one who does)?

 

[thau]

Reiterations:

From my Catholic perspective,

I am not saying some are not more or less born or destined to live as a homosexual because of some interhent traits or attributes, but I am saying for many others who call themselves gay that is not necessarily the case. Their environment and other factors influenced their choice.

Even those who were born with said “proclivities” I referred to as “destined,” even they could have become happy practicing heterosexual individuals. Given a proper nurturing and grace of God. But I also believe that their “condition” is very much something God is merciful towards in his judgments. So I do not consider that person’s “sin” as severe as an adulterous or promiscuous hetero who thinks his acts are not as perverse so to speak. I think that is a fool speaking.

I also think there is a much higher percentage of practicing homosexuals in the Western affluent cultures in these past 50 years than there were the previous 50 years. That is because of greater liberties, enticements, acceptance, etc. So to me it is clearly still a choice for many, not a decided inherent fact. And to those who may have had some urges in days of yore, yet they were suppressed for various reasons, those people could have become almost fully heterosexual in their thought processes over time.

I also believe sexuality and all its trappings can make a person fall in love with many of perverse or different ways that if they were not exposed to or had the opportunity those thoughts and desires could have subsided. That includes pedophilia, bestiality, voyerism, trans-sexuality, sado-masochism, and so many other “fetishes” one can consider. Are these people born this way or destined to become in love with that particular sexual practice? Again, some may experiment with so many different kinds of sexual fun that they find homosexuality to be their preferred way of expressing it. Bi-sexuality falls into this discussion as well. No one is born with a bi-sexual gene, they just happen to allow themselves to experiment with both and realize they like both. And some of them ultimately choose to be gay. I think there are so many reasons one becomes what he is or does what he does, and I believe God is merciful, understanding and just.

I also ask this question to which I expect many will take offense. I think there is an objective way of measuring the natural beauty of a woman that a good majority would agree with. Example: Vanessa Williams is naturally beautiful, Rosie O’Donnell, not so much. Question: If homosexuality is generally found equally amongst all races and generations (as many contend), why does it seem that there are so few naturally beautiful women who are homosexuals? Yes, I believe that. I believe beautiful women get all the male attention they could want and, conversely, some rather visually less appealing (on the outside) females get little or no attention in their developing years. I believe that can become a major factor in where one's sexuality may gravitate towards. (imo)

 

[Etritonakin]

I understand your goal as I've read your other posts. But at times im lost to your method.

Usually I'm expecting to hear other view points but your method leads to more questions so it leads to circle that honestly I just want to politely stop and again try to understand your opinion.

Some of my opinions, etc.........

I don't care who makes my Chick-fil-A.....
unless homosexuality causes a person to be really bad at making them....
just gimme my sammich.

Brains and genetics are factors to be considered -along with all other factors.

"I was born this way" cannot possibly be the whole story.

Your sexuality is your sexuality. Unless you or it somehow reasonably become my business, I'm not going to think about it -and what do you care what I think about it?
If you ask me stuff directly or indirectly, don't be angry if my answer is not the same as yours would be -unless I am rude or incorrect in a way which actually does harm.
If you think my mindset or present ideas could lead to harm, please explain why -but realize that I may disagree or that you may not fully understand my mindset or present ideas. Please do not assume.

I do believe that choice is a factor in homosexuality -and that brains and genetics are also factors.

I believe that the commandments should be obeyed, and that the authority of God supersedes all other factors concerning sexuality -but that those things under the commandments concerning homosexuality in particular were intended for a state in which all were distinctly male and female in every way -and that application of the law becomes less clear when people are not distinctly male and female in every way. Also, that various factors have affected that state.

I have mentioned the difficulty in applying the law to intersexuals, but if a human happened to somehow have no gender traits whatsoever, the law could not possibly applied.

Just as the commandment concerning adultery concerns our sexuality only as long as we have sexuality (though it has a spiritual aspect of loyalty), so other aspects of the law apply to a certain state.

I understand that others do not believe similarly -and if others are not interested in keeping the commandments or hearing about them -or God -or anything else, I'm not going to try to make them.

I also believe that sexuality is extremely personal, and that personal verbal attacks or negative attitudes toward people based on their sexuality is a form of violence.

I may debate the subject with some intensity, and may even slip up and be rude at times, but I do make every effort to respect people and to keep things on a non-personal level.

etc., etc.

 

[Triumphant_Loser]

I would answer this if the company were more open to actual discussion.

So did you conciously choose to be sexually attracted to women?
I'm all ears.

 

[suncowiam]

About what -specifically?


(Also -I made a somewhat vulgar post on another page in frustration, which has been edited -sorry if I offended anyone.)
:sorry1:

I made this comment early in the morning so my thoughts were very stunted. I'll be more specific when it comes time to and best not to generalize here.

Sorry and thanks.

 

[suncowiam]

Some of my opinions, etc.........

I don't care who makes my Chick-fil-A.....
unless homosexuality causes a person to be really bad at making them....
just gimme my sammich.

Brains and genetics are factors to be considered -along with all other factors.

"I was born this way" cannot possibly be the whole story.

Your sexuality is your sexuality. Unless you or it somehow reasonably become my business, I'm not going to think about it -and what do you care what I think about it?
If you ask me stuff directly or indirectly, don't be angry if my answer is not the same as yours would be -unless I am rude or incorrect in a way which actually does harm.
If you think my mindset or present ideas could lead to harm, please explain why -but realize that I may disagree or that you may not fully understand my mindset or present ideas. Please do not assume.

I do believe that choice is a factor in homosexuality -and that brains and genetics are also factors.

I believe that the commandments should be obeyed, and that the authority of God supersedes all other factors concerning sexuality -but that those things under the commandments concerning homosexuality in particular were intended for a state in which all were distinctly male and female in every way -and that application of the law becomes less clear when people are not distinctly male and female in every way. Also, that various factors have affected that state.

I have mentioned the difficulty in applying the law to intersexuals, but if a human happened to somehow have no gender traits whatsoever, the law could not possibly applied.

Just as the commandment concerning adultery concerns our sexuality only as long as we have sexuality (though it has a spiritual aspect of loyalty), so other aspects of the law apply to a certain state.

I understand that others do not believe similarly -and if others are not interested in keeping the commandments or hearing about them -or God -or anything else, I'm not going to try to make them.

I also believe that sexuality is extremely personal, and that personal verbal attacks or negative attitudes toward people based on their sexuality is a form of violence.

I may debate the subject with some intensity, and may even slip up and be rude at times, but I do make every effort to respect people and to keep things on a non-personal level.

etc., etc.

From your previous responses I truly see you as respectful. But like you, I have convictions that triggers emotion so no worries there.

So from a science perspective:
If scientists were to propose that they isolated a gene that is associated with all or most gay behavior, how would you accept this? How would you think religion will accept this? This is highly unfair of a God to create such beings and ostracize them since their conception.

If science doesn't prove anything then...

Now from a personal freedom perspective:
Who cares if it's a choice? What harm is it doing to society? I would like to hear actual unbiased data on this. I personally believe that homosexuality doesn't harm anyone but I'm open to actual data to lead my beliefs.

This is affecting real world lives. This isn't rhetoric or beliefs being politely discussed among sensible and reasonable adults. People are being oppressed with specific beliefs that might or might not be true... That's why I always ask for data.

 

[Etritonakin]

So did you conciously choose to be sexually attracted to women?
I'm all ears.

Hmmmm I'll start by saying.....

My first memory of considering another person in an intimate way -which resulted in an actual rush of attraction/weird tingly feeling/whatever happened as follows...

I was in school. I was bored out of my gourd. I noticed girl I didn't particularly like. I was actually thinking that I didn't particularly like her -and about how she had done things to express dislike for me. I was thinking generally negative thoughts about her -and they weren't masking some desire to be liked by her. I generally wished more people would like me, but she was not one of them.

She had worn a fuzzy sweater to school. As thoughts of dislike were fading, I noticed the sweater itself. I thought... 'that looks soft'... and after some time and continued boredom -more checking out of the sweater -I asked myself.... "I wonder what it would feel like to hug someone with a sweater like that" -and there was a distinction between the sweater and the girl. I wasn't thinking about what it was like to hug her. I wasn't actually thinking about what it would be like to hug a person. It's just that sweaters are usually on people -I was seriously just thinking about the sweater.

Then I consciously decided to imagine the hug -then..... all of a sudden.... she was in the sweater in my mind ...... and I was then hugging her. There was fuzzy sweater -it was nice - and then there were suddenly skwooshy parts under the sweater....

at which point very strange things started happening to me. I felt all warm and fuzzy inside. My heart raced. I felt tingly all over (though there was never a thought about the nether regions or any particular reaction in that general area -probably too young for all that).
I thought I was going to pass out. I wondered what he hell was wrong with me. Then I began to think that it would be really nice to hug her -not just the sweater.



I threw a fudge bomb pop at the first girl who kissed me -it was a surprise -I missed -then got mad because I didn't have more money for another one.
I haven't really examined that whole thing in much detail yet.

 

[Etritonakin]

From your previous responses I truly see you as respectful. But like you, I have convictions that triggers emotion so no worries there.

So from a science perspective:
If scientists were to propose that they isolated a gene that is associated with all or most gay behavior, how would you accept this? How would you think religion will accept this? This is highly unfair of a God to create such beings and ostracize them since their conception.

If science doesn't prove anything then...

Now from a personal freedom perspective:
Who cares if it's a choice? What harm is it doing to society? I would like to hear actual unbiased data on this. I personally believe that homosexuality doesn't harm anyone but I'm open to actual data to lead my beliefs.

This is affecting real world lives. This isn't rhetoric or beliefs being politely discussed among sensible and reasonable adults. People are being oppressed with specific beliefs that might or might not be true... That's why I always ask for data.

Technically, God did not create beings apart from everything else -he created an extremely complex system. (not simply in 6 days -perhaps more on that later)

He also had an end state in mind -so he also created a process to achieve that end state.

Within that system are beings which can affect that system by choices -whether knowingly or in ignorance -and can also affect their own selves -as well as their offspring -by choices.

In order for such an extremely complex system to remain functioning properly, correct choices have to be made and the system must be maintained -and God is a necessary part of that proper function and maintenance.

So -it is not necessarily accurate to say that God created everything as it is -or as it has become, because our own choices are a factor.

"Nature" is also a factor, but the religious and non-religious disagree about the nature of nature -and I'm not saying either group of people are completely right or wrong.

Who or what is responsible for this or that result is a very complex matter -but God does take ultimate responsibility.

It is, however, accurate to say that God knew of the possibilities which could arise -and allowed them temporarily.

The difference between maintenance of a perfect system and a system falling to ruin is the whole idea behind sin -righteousness -the tree of life -the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, etc...

God did knowingly subject us to the possibility of harsh realities -and allowed them to come to pass -temporarily.

He did allow choices -and gave necessary information -but could not instantly give an experience base from which to discern all things for ourselves.

I'll address the rest later.

 

[suncowiam]

Technically, God did not create beings apart from everything else -he created an extremely complex system. (not simply in 6 days -perhaps more on that later)

He also had an end state in mind -so he also created a process to achieve that end state.

Within that system are beings which can affect that system by choices -whether knowingly or in ignorance -and can also affect their own selves -as well as their offspring -by choices.

In order for such an extremely complex system to remain functioning properly, correct choices have to be made and the system must be maintained -and God is a necessary part of that proper function and maintenance.

So -it is not necessarily accurate to say that God created everything as it is -or as it has become, because our own choices are a factor.

"Nature" is also a factor, but the religious and non-religious disagree about the nature of nature.

Who or what is responsible for this or that result is a very complex matter -but God does take ultimate responsibility.

It is, however, accurate to say that God knew of the possibilities which could arise -and allowed them temporarily.

The difference between maintenance of a perfect system and a system falling to ruin is the whole idea behind sin -righteousness -the tree of life -the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, etc...

God did knowingly subject us to the possibility of harsh realities -and allowed them to come to pass -temporarily.

He did allow choices -and gave necessary information -but could not instantly give an experience base from which to discern all things for ourselves.

I'll address the rest later.

Concerning science:
So, if I read this correctly, you would refute data that suggests that this is not a choice? And you would believe religion would do the same?

 

[Etritonakin]

Concerning science:
So, if I read this correctly, you would refute data that suggests that this is not a choice? And you would believe religion would do the same?

You did not read it correctly.

More correctly.... I don't simply accept what data may or may not suggest -as it can suggest something other then the truth when it is incomplete
-though I do accept data and can accept that it sometimes seems to suggest one thing or another.

Why should we accept -or how can we refute -without complete data -or at least complete enough to be certain?

I would hope that religion would "prove all things" (1Th 5:21) -but that's not always the case.

Because we usually have all possible data only after the fact, we sometimes have to make decisions based on what data we do have -or, considering that we do not have all data, act as though we don't know.

I don't consider that the same as accepting what is suggested by data.

If you wonder how I could accept the existence of God without all data....

I have much more data about the existence of God than I do about homosexuality being a choice or not -enough to be certain -but that's a whooooole 'nother thread.

While the issue of it being a choice or not can lead to people being treated badly -it is because people are stooooopid (sorry -let's say not really good at being people) -not because they believe one thing or the other.

All that being said...... I am not trying to have any sort of effect on anyone's sexuality -or on them because of their sexuality -except perhaps if I were responsible to teach someone things concerning sexuality.

In that case, I would give all possible information -explain my position and choices based on the information -express, where appropriate, my hopes concerning the matter -and know that in the end, they will make their own choices concerning how they express their sexuality and make up their own mind about the subject of choice.

Therefore, it does not matter what I accept or refute -except to me.

 

[suncowiam]

You do not read it correctly.

Frankly, I'm not able to fully assess your summary. Let me try to summarize. Some things are temporary but it is the individual's responsibility to choose the right path?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

You're right about Mormons and no redemptive suffering and not prizing celibacy.

I believe that life can be very, very tough. All experiences can make us stronger. When we're dead and in eternity, we can look back on the hell we called earth and see the good that suffering did for us. The pain will become a distant memory, wiped away, and we will see the wisdom and love in it all.

Now that I made that bleak appraisal of life, let me say that life is great. I see life as full of joy and hope and faith. There's good and there's bad. Life is a school, sometimes of hard knocks. But there is divine purpose to suffering. What an epic mistake it is to think that a loving and all powerful God could not possibly preside over a world full of suffering.

So I put the plight of the Mormon homosexual in the same area as the plight of anyone who has serious obstacles to overcome, in other words, all of us. Once again, I believe that God will help anyone to be happy who's trying to do what they should.

I saw "The Giver". I was moved by the depiction of human joy amidst suffering.

I understand your point of view, but I utterly reject it. I don't hold suffering as a virtue and I don't believe in some all-powerful, all-loving creator deity. I think there is at least one being that is masquerading as such, but is the opposite and is fooling humanity and entrapping us in a world of misery, pain and ignorance. This obsession this being has with repressing human sexuality is one aspect of its scheme of control since sexuality is the creative force and is very powerful. If you repress sexuality and mire it in guilt, shame and self-loathing, you create a very sick, neurotic and imbalanced being that is more open to suggestion and fanaticism, creating violence and crime.

I feel that male homosexuality, in particular, is hated by the cults of this sexually repressive deity because it prevents men from connecting with their more receptive and feminine aspects by disallowing them from erotically bonding with other males. It creates imbalanced, paranoid "macho" types who are more given to violence and oppression of women. That is horrific and tragic, so I'm very much a proponent of "free love" - consensual, responsible erotic intimacy between individuals of any gender or number. Not only is it healthy, great fun, relieves stress and brings us back into balance, but it also is a big middle finger to the human-hating Archons of this planet and a breaking of the chains they seek to hold us in.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Reiterations:

From my Catholic perspective,

I am not saying some are not more or less born or destined to live as a homosexual because of some interhent traits or attributes, but I am saying for many others who call themselves gay that is not necessarily the case. Their environment and other factors influenced their choice.

Even those who were born with said “proclivities” I referred to as “destined,” even they could have become happy practicing heterosexual individuals. Given a proper nurturing and grace of God. But I also believe that their “condition” is very much something God is merciful towards in his judgments. So I do not consider that person’s “sin” as severe as an adulterous or promiscuous hetero who thinks his acts are not as perverse so to speak. I think that is a fool speaking.

I also think there is a much higher percentage of practicing homosexuals in the Western affluent cultures in these past 50 years than there were the previous 50 years. That is because of greater liberties, enticements, acceptance, etc. So to me it is clearly still a choice for many, not a decided inherent fact. And to those who may have had some urges in days of yore, yet they were suppressed for various reasons, those people could have become almost fully heterosexual in their thought processes over time.

I also believe sexuality and all its trappings can make a person fall in love with many of perverse or different ways that if they were not exposed to or had the opportunity those thoughts and desires could have subsided. That includes pedophilia, bestiality, voyerism, trans-sexuality, sado-masochism, and so many other “fetishes” one can consider. Are these people born this way or destined to become in love with that particular sexual practice? Again, some may experiment with so many different kinds of sexual fun that they find homosexuality to be their preferred way of expressing it. Bi-sexuality falls into this discussion as well. No one is born with a bi-sexual gene, they just happen to allow themselves to experiment with both and realize they like both. And some of them ultimately choose to be gay. I think there are so many reasons one becomes what he is or does what he does, and I believe God is merciful, understanding and just.

I also ask this question to which I expect many will take offense. I think there is an objective way of measuring the natural beauty of a woman that a good majority would agree with. Example: Vanessa Williams is naturally beautiful, Rosie O’Donnell, not so much. Question: If homosexuality is generally found equally amongst all races and generations (as many contend), why does it seem that there are so few naturally beautiful women who are homosexuals? Yes, I believe that. I believe beautiful women get all the male attention they could want and, conversely, some rather visually less appealing (on the outside) females get little or no attention in their developing years. I believe that can become a major factor in where one's sexuality may gravitate towards. (imo)

What a load of disgusting hogwash!

Also, FYI: Transsexualism is a medical condition, not a sexual orientation!

 

[Apple Sugar]

What would you consider to fall under your label of anti-homosexual types?

 

[suncowiam]

What would you consider to fall under your label of anti-homosexual types?

Those that would discriminate against homosexuals.

 

[Etritonakin]

Frankly, I'm not able to fully assess your summary. Let me try to summarize. Some things are temporary but it is the individual's responsibility to choose the right path?

More correctly....

1-Do the best you can -do everything you can to ensure that you have all data and sincerely make the best possible choices....

2-Continue doing the above.


What more can reasonably be expected from newbies?

 

[thau]

What a load of disgusting hogwash!

Also, FYI: Transsexualism is a medical condition, not a sexual orientation!

Well I need convincing.

I am also not convinced people wanting to change their sex is good for their mind, body or soul.

Nor am I the least bit convinced science has the answers to these moral issues and psychological issues.

And since I am convinced of who God is and what he expects in most areas of our lives, I will not deviate from the Church on these issues either.

I understand others have struggles I do not personally struggle with, so maybe they look elsewhere for respite or truth.

 

[dgirl1986]

I would answer this if the company were more open to actual discussion.


Didn't realize the picture would be upsetting. It was just to demonstrate that the forms themselves are not very different.

Only the cartoon versions can be seen as not so different.

 

[dgirl1986]

lol

If you assume I'm trying to make a point, you will become frustrated.

My only purpose is to promote more profound consideration of various aspects of the subject.

Considering first attractions -all that led up to first attractions -the individual -genetics -environment -education -media -, etc., etc...

....not simply assuming "I was born this way" without having looked into my own brain.



If I am completely heterosexual, what do we absolutely know are the determining factors? If we could put a sexuality test kit and checklist together which was practical.....

what exactly do we absolutely know to look for in my brain/genetics whatever which would absolutely tell me my sexuality?

1-
2-
3-
4-
etc....

Were you satisfied with the responses?