Homosexuality and Same-Sex Marriage

[PaperLuigi]

That whole "choice" argument is rather silly. Homosexuals are ostracized and made to feel less than human by their peers. Why would anyone willingly "choose" to subject themselves to that?

Rather, being a homophobe is a choice and a disgusting one at that. I used to be one and I hate myself for it.

[BP]

One could make any number of cases as to why anyone would choose that. Attention grab, trying to be different, stick it to God, whatever.

What really makes the idea that you choose your sexuality a silly one is that it implies that one has control over what turns them on. Anyone who has ever had a boner should see the problem there.

But even then, to accept that you can't doesn't mean it's over, because the other side can argue that the choice comes into play when deciding whether to submit to or abstain from it. Except they don't. Homophobes don't care if gay people engage in absolutely no homosexual activity, they think it's something that can be changed, that homosexual can be conditioned to become heterosexual if they just try.

That's nuts

[Weegee]

At least gays are easy to identify.

[CrossEyed7]

[coolkid]

At least gays are easy to identify.

I love the description to that video.

[CrossEyed7]

<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqv-y5Ys3fg" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqv-y5Ys3fg</a>.

[Turtlekid1]

YouTube doesn't want to cooperate with my connection right now.  It finally worked, and I still have to ask: what's this about?  Is there a point, or...?

[Lizard Dude]

It's a video about you.

[Turtlekid1]

Oh?  I mean, I know I'm sort of a creeper, but I don't smile quite that weirdly.  And I don't have pierced ears.

[Luigison]

Awesome video.  The inclusion of Michael Shermer was perfect. 

In the interest of full disclosure, I am a subscriber to Skeptic magazine, own a "Science Rules" skeptic shirt, and have used one of Michael Shermer's talks as to generate discussion in previous honors science classes. 

[PaperLuigi]

YouTube doesn't want to cooperate with my connection right now.  It finally worked, and I still have to ask: what's this about?  Is there a point, or...?

It's trying to demonstrate the absurdity of asserting that sexual preference is a choice. If it is a choice, straight people ought to be able to arbitrarily "go gay" whenever they want.

Now it is a choice to act on these preferences, but then again...so is eating, sleeping, straight sex, and a lot of other things we don't deem morally impermissible.

[Luigison]

CrossEyed7, I am curious as to how you feel about the video you posted.  Feel free to enlighten or ignore my curiosity. 

[PaperLuigi]

I'm pretty sure he posted it with good intentions.

[CrossEyed7]

My stance on the topic has changed quite a bit since three years ago:

• I think there are legitimate doubts to be raised as to the actual meaning of the handful of verses in the Bible used to prove homosexuality is immoral, when the original languages are studied (This PDF raises some interesting points).
• I think orientation probably does have a significant genetic factor, and the environmental factor seems to usually depend mostly on influences too early in life to be within the individual's control, so from an internal perspective, they may as well be genetic (I haven't done much research on this, though).
• I think the element of choice is often downplayed by the LGBTQ crowd in the interest of winning arguments. To make a blanket statement that choice plays absolutely no role ignores bisexuals and the celibate, and can have the effect of reducing us to animals. As PL said, acting on the preferences is still a choice. However, this is often too nuanced a position for it to get a fair representation in such a polarized debate.
• I think Christians spend a lot of time yelling very loudly about the two or three verses in the Bible that say anything about homosexuality and not a lot of time on the many chapters and entire books of the Bible that talk about sins that are more fundamental to the overall message of the gospel, less unappealing to our personal tastes, and which they themselves (and me) are actually guilty of -- ignoring the poor, focusing on external rituals and symbols rather than on having servants' hearts (Isaiah 58 is a very good start on this).
• I used to think, within my Christian high school bubble, that the non-Christian world totally celebrated and encouraged and glamorized homosexuality and the way to be Christian was to stand against their acceptance of sin. Now that I've been in something resembling the world for a while, I've seen that, while that is true of some of the world's media, the actual people in the world generally hate homosexuals because they're gross, and I have a hard time seeing the difference between the average Christian's stance on homosexuality and the average non-Christian's (To be fair, there is also little difference between the Christian and non-Christian stance on murder). Whether it's right or wrong, we need to be doing a better job of loving them.
• I have a hard time believing that Jesus sees this kid as more deserving of hell than the kids who bullied him.
• As for marriage, I still hold to my stance that the legal and religious aspects of marriage should be divorced. Religious sacraments should not be carried out by the government.
• I recognize that I, like everyone, am biased in my own myriad ways on this topic.
• Overall, I'm still deciding. Until I finalize my decisions (if I ever do), I hope to err on the side of charity.

Also I thought the video was funny.

[TEM]

What I find strange is the fact that the Choice Vs. Genetics argument is a big deal; as if it's some kind of turning point in the debate. So what if homosexuals choose to be gay? It's only of relevance when religious hatred lurks in the background, waiting to condemn and decry any that admit (or are revealed) to be operating under freewill. As for the non-christians having homophobic tendencies, I strongly feel the only reason they are there to begin with is a deeply rooted religious moral 'diaspora' in our society. Even if they don't believe they still have the moral inundation.