Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
for example, i'm gay and i never chose to be, i don't think most straight people chose their orientation either. most sraight people are 'openly' straight. (meaning they don't pretend not to be). NEITHER sexual orientations are chosen and NEITHER are a violation of law or harm others. Churches vote to let openly homosexual people be clergy (many only if they're celibate) and conservaties talk about it being a sin. while they enjoy being BOTH OPENLY heterosexual and NON celibate... YET THEY CALL THE CELIBATE GAY THE SINNER. That makes NO SENSE. a SIN is something someone CHOOSES and is an ACTION that HARMS. if being born homosexual is a sin than being born heterosexual is too.
My point is that it is NOT a 'moral' issue. MORALITY has to do with things you DO and how you TREAT others. It's very situational as well. IF someone is born gay and only has sex with ONE person who they committed too and never cheated on they are much more MORAL (coming from intent) than a straight person who has been married 3 times or had lots of premarital sex.
conservatives change the REAL situation and create a new PARADIGM, which comes from a viewpoint not consistend with the reality of the situation. It's a way to take ONE group of people who aren't doing anything particularly wrong and MAKE is as though they are when ALL humans have sexual orientations that ARE NOT CHOSEN, yet THEIR orientation isn't discussed as though it's a behavior, action or choice....
for example, i'm gay and i never chose to be, i don't think most straight people chose their orientation either. most sraight people are 'openly' straight. (meaning they don't pretend not to be). NEITHER sexual orientations are chosen and NEITHER are a violation of law or harm others. Churches vote to let openly homosexual people be clergy (many only if they're celibate) and conservaties talk about it being a sin. while they enjoy being BOTH OPENLY heterosexual and NON celibate... YET THEY CALL THE CELIBATE GAY THE SINNER. That makes NO SENSE. a SIN is something someone CHOOSES and is an ACTION that HARMS. if being born homosexual is a sin than being born heterosexual is too.
My point is that it is NOT a 'moral' issue. MORALITY has to do with things you DO and how you TREAT others. It's very situational as well. IF someone is born gay and only has sex with ONE person who they committed too and never cheated on they are much more MORAL (coming from intent) than a straight person who has been married 3 times or had lots of premarital sex.
conservatives change the REAL situation and create a new PARADIGM, which comes from a viewpoint not consistend with the reality of the situation. It's a way to take ONE group of people who aren't doing anything particularly wrong and MAKE is as though they are when ALL humans have sexual orientations that ARE NOT CHOSEN, yet THEIR orientation isn't discussed as though it's a behavior, action or choice....
WHY?
RESPONSE:
You are asking a very god question, and I'm anxious to see how posters reply.
I'm heterosexual, because I developed that way. It didn't involve any moral choice on my part.
But evidently it is the "approved" way to devlope.
My point is that it is NOT a 'moral' issue. MORALITY has to do with things you DO and how you TREAT others. It's very situational as well. IF someone is born gay and only has sex with ONE person who they committed too and never cheated on they are much more MORAL (coming from intent) than a straight person who has been married 3 times or had lots of premarital sex.
I would argue that neither is inherently more moral than the other. You can sleep around all you like and still be a moral person, as long as you're doing so with respect for yourself and your partner(s), and all that that entails (everyone consents, respect the rules of the relationship, etc.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rlarson21
conservatives change the REAL situation and create a new PARADIGM, which comes from a viewpoint not consistend with the reality of the situation. It's a way to take ONE group of people who aren't doing anything particularly wrong and MAKE is as though they are when ALL humans have sexual orientations that ARE NOT CHOSEN, yet THEIR orientation isn't discussed as though it's a behavior, action or choice....
WHY?
Because boys kissing boys? Ack! Gross!
It's a gut reaction. There may have been some logic to it thousands of years ago when homosexual acts were part of the worship of foreign gods, or when most kids didn't live to see their 5th birthday and the tribe needed to breed as much as they could. But those days are over. Now it's just a matter of instinct, maintaining the status quo, and having a sinful "other" to blame for society's ills.
I think the "it's gross" probably does come in it for Christians who have a problem with even chaste/celibate homosexuals. I imagine if I ever told my Dad I'm attracted to men quite often, but that I'm trying to live chaste as the Church teaches, he'd tolerate it but it would create a distance. Actually that might be putting it too nice. He'd probably be like "Then why did you tell me, you're being weird, let's never speak of this again." Although my Dad's maybe an odd case as he was what you'd call "homophobic" back in his non-theistic adolescence/early-adulthood.
I think for some "normality" is very important and some have very strong views on gender. I have developed some strong views on gender myself, but for some a man just having the attraction to men (even if he doesn't act on it) is both abnormal and unmanly. Some women also feel the same about lesbians, but I've generally found women less strong on this. (Women can be very actively against "gay rights" but even women I've known like that don't necessarily "blame the gay" themselves. They may just pity them, which may not be what they want but feels different to me than scorn and ostracism) The idea that a person of your own sex could be attracted to you, even if they remain as chaste and pure as a saint, is upsetting to how they normally perceive human relationships. This is maybe more/most true of people over 50.
Still I've found, to my pleasure, that on conservative Catholic sites I go to saying I have "same sex attractions but have remained celibate and wish to remain so" usually gets accepted or sympathized with. I also know some older female orthodox Catholics who think "that must be difficult" and are quite nice. Older men generally less so. Although the Church is currently prohibiting celibate gays from entering the seminary. I'm uncomfortable with that, but I think there is a legitimate concern that too many gays want to join the seminary because it gives some clear honor/respect to being celibate. Also maybe that being a chaste homosexual would make things like engagement encounter or marriage counseling awkward. Still personally I think I might lean more to a quota system, no more than say 10% in a seminary can be same-sex attracted, than an outright prohibition. If it's been infallibly proclaimed I guess I'd accept it, but I don't think it has so I didn't much care for it. I accept that from Catholic thought it is a "disorder" but unless there is a blanket ban on people with disordered desires (Reformed alcoholics, people with OCD, etc) it seemed a bit wrong to me.
I think the "it's gross" probably does come in it for Christians who have a problem with even chaste/celibate homosexuals. I imagine if I ever told my Dad I'm attracted to men quite often, but that I'm trying to live chaste as the Church teaches, he'd tolerate it but it would create a distance. Actually that might be putting it too nice. He'd probably be like "Then why did you tell me, you're being weird, let's never speak of this again." Although my Dad's maybe an odd case as he was what you'd call "homophobic" back in his non-theistic adolescence/early-adulthood.
I think for some "normality" is very important and some have very strong views on gender. I have developed some strong views on gender myself, but for some a man just having the attraction to men (even if he doesn't act on it) is both abnormal and unmanly. Some women also feel the same about lesbians, but I've generally found women less strong on this. (Women can be very actively against "gay rights" but even women I've known like that don't necessarily "blame the gay" themselves. They may just pity them, which may not be what they want but feels different to me than scorn and ostracism) The idea that a person of your own sex could be attracted to you, even if they remain as chaste and pure as a saint, is upsetting to how they normally perceive human relationships. This is maybe more/most true of people over 50.
Still I've found, to my pleasure, that on conservative Catholic sites I go to saying I have "same sex attractions but have remained celibate and wish to remain so" usually gets accepted or sympathized with. I also know some older female orthodox Catholics who think "that must be difficult" and are quite nice. Older men generally less so. Although the Church is currently prohibiting celibate gays from entering the seminary. I'm uncomfortable with that, but I think there is a legitimate concern that too many gays want to join the seminary because it gives some clear honor/respect to being celibate. Also maybe that being a chaste homosexual would make things like engagement encounter or marriage counseling awkward. Still personally I think I might lean more to a quota system, no more than say 10% in a seminary can be same-sex attracted, than an outright prohibition. If it's been infallibly proclaimed I guess I'd accept it, but I don't think it has so I didn't much care for it. I accept that from Catholic thought it is a "disorder" but unless there is a blanket ban on people with disordered desires (Reformed alcoholics, people with OCD, etc) it seemed a bit wrong to me.
Thomas I was raised Roman Catholic and as long as YOU let "them" fill your head with "disorder" type of rhetoric....IMHO....you will remain UNHAPPY all your life. I broke away from the church just after I got confirmed....I think I was 12 or 13 years old at the time.
You do realize that being gay is just another facet of human sexual orientation and is NOT a disorder.
IF you don't believe me than listen to the American Psychiatric and Psychological Associations>>>>>
It is so obviously not a choice, and none of their business. Conservatives seem to want to regulate many areas of people's private lives, and sex is a big part of that.
Some pompous people have skewed ideas of what is normal, and what is not, they feel that because they are what they are....you should be too....I just feel sorry for people who would rather be ignorant than understand reality.
Thomas I was raised Roman Catholic and as long as YOU let "them" fill your head with "disorder" type of rhetoric....IMHO....you will remain UNHAPPY all your life. I broke away from the church just after I got confirmed....I think I was 12 or 13 years old at the time.
It's not a "them" it's what I feel is the most obvious thing that flows from the tradition of the Church and Councils. I'm probably one of the happiest people I know, including gay guys I know in relationships.
You couldn't or wouldn't believe it and that's your right.
for example, i'm gay and i never chose to be, i don't think most straight people chose their orientation either. most sraight people are 'openly' straight. (meaning they don't pretend not to be). NEITHER sexual orientations are chosen and NEITHER are a violation of law or harm others. Churches vote to let openly homosexual people be clergy (many only if they're celibate) and conservaties talk about it being a sin. while they enjoy being BOTH OPENLY heterosexual and NON celibate... YET THEY CALL THE CELIBATE GAY THE SINNER. That makes NO SENSE. a SIN is something someone CHOOSES and is an ACTION that HARMS. if being born homosexual is a sin than being born heterosexual is too.
My point is that it is NOT a 'moral' issue. MORALITY has to do with things you DO and how you TREAT others. It's very situational as well. IF someone is born gay and only has sex with ONE person who they committed too and never cheated on they are much more MORAL (coming from intent) than a straight person who has been married 3 times or had lots of premarital sex.
conservatives change the REAL situation and create a new PARADIGM, which comes from a viewpoint not consistend with the reality of the situation. It's a way to take ONE group of people who aren't doing anything particularly wrong and MAKE is as though they are when ALL humans have sexual orientations that ARE NOT CHOSEN, yet THEIR orientation isn't discussed as though it's a behavior, action or choice....
WHY?
First of all, Christian's base their opinions about morality on the Bible (at least, they should). Whether you accept it as the word of God isn't important to answering this question because you're asking why Christian's seem to think as they do and that's the base reason.
So far as I know, the Bible does not address sexual orientation. It addresses sexual ACTIONS, which isn't the same thing. It pretty clearly says that any sex outside the marriage of a man and woman is sin, whether that be lying with the same sex or having an "affair," which is called adultery. There are other, related sins having to do with intent, such as lasciviousness, lust, etc.
So, the sexual standard for those born with either a homosexual or heterosexual orientation is exactly the same: It's not what you are, but what you do. Just as you may be tempted to have sex with a member of the same gender because of your orientation, so too can a heterosexual be tempted to have sex indiscriminately outside of marriage and if either of you act upon those impulses, or entertain fantasies about it, you're both equally guilty of committing sin. None of us can help how we're born or what sins we're tempted to, but we can help whether or not we give into those temptations.
But, with many (if not most) Christian's, personal revulsion at the idea of homosexual sex makes them far more likely to condemn it than to condemn their own indiscretions or the sexual sins of their fellow believers. No, that's not fair and, yes, it's hypocritical, but we can't do anything about what other people feel. We can only do something about our own behavior and morality.
In hand with that attitude, far too many of we believers forget that the Blood of Christ will cover the sin of homosexuality too, just as surely as it will cover the sin of adultery. Too many of us are not willing to forgive the homosexual, or better yet, the backslidden Christian homosexual, when we would easily forgive our heterosexual brethren for their indiscretions. That's just their attitude, not the attitude of Christ who forgives every sin if you believe in Him and trust your life to Him.
That does not mean that any of us can profess a geniune faith in Christ and just go out and do anything we like, counting on His forgiveness. It doesn't work that way, but that's a subject for another thread.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
