Your two cents would have a lot more weight if you looked into what you were talking about before you posted your opinions.
No one is defined by their sexuality. No one is claiming to be defined by their sexuality. The homosexual community merely wants their basic, supposedly unalienable human rights, which the heterosexual majority has denied for a very long time.
Sexuality is not a "lifestyle." Not in the sense you use it. It's not a choice. It's as sexual identity, the same as a heterosexual orientation is. Claiming you "disagree with it" is the same as saying you "disagree with the African American lifestyle" because you don't like urban culture or rap.
Transgender =/= homosexuality. A homosexual man does not feel like a woman, he feels like a man who is sexually and romantically orientated towards men. A transgender man isn't homosexual-- he's attracted to the opposite sex, just happens to have the "wrong" biological sex in his own body. (Though some transgender people are homosexual).
Many animals do mate for life. Actually. And the species that homosexuality has been most documented in are not hermaphrodites. We're talking over 1,500 species, including primates, birds, dolphins, bison, and elephants.
Marriage is not about taxes. Aside from emotional desires, marriage makes insurance, hospital visitation rights, sharing finances, signing leases and taking out bank accounts and credit cards, and almost everything legal a lot easier, if not simply possible.
Funny, I just read an article about how the stagnant view of the nuclear family and its gender roles leads to homophobia and heterosexism. Guess that was just proved right. So what if a family has two moms or two dads? Honestly, so what? Please explain how a gay couple will reshape our future, because I'm having a hard time figuring that bit out.
And can you also tell me how you know so much about God? Because I'm pretty sure God works in mysterious ways, and just because you "haven't yet found evidence of God's stamp of approval on gay relationships..." Seriously? I haven't found God's stamp of approval on you, either.
i find christians who treat gays differently to be quite distasteful. our lord jesus christ taught about love and treating others as you would treat yourself, that includes all men and women of all walks of life. walk with christ brah.
I don't treat gays differently I don't agree with the lifestyle is all. No human being should be made fun of, beating, or murdered or whatever you consider "treated differently". In the end we are all sinners.
A-This is throw up from a very frustrating night (thread will be locked soon). I was kind of angry and was wondering if anyone else felt my frustration (one person did). I really thought "two cents", "rant" and "long post" would of tipped people off...
B-Do you think I will be changing anyone's opinion with this kind of post? Nope. I'm tired of hearing third hand information so I'm doing some serious research on the subject (I'm hoping to post an educated rant sometime within the next month so that people realize I'm not a total jerk just because I disagree with something).
C-Granted, now that I've calmed down, this probably should of never been posted in the first place.
Discussion doesn't only involve me. Anyway the post probably belongs in the "complain section" by now. Thinking about it I'm surprised it's still not locked. As for the sea sponge, who says it's a victory? I surely don't. I was just making the observation that someone "agreed" with my frustration. I pretty much predicted everyone's else's post and understand why they replied that way (after I got all of that throw up of a post off my chest).
Don't start a debate or thread and not even bother to reply civil and mature with people that don't agree with you. If you wrote this under frustration then that implies you know your view might not be at all true, its based on frustration that blind logic and reasoning.
Well if things had really gone south a few may have migrated to your page, but over such a subject I doubt it. They would have just mostly said the same stuff here a lot more... harshly, or just trolled you.
Okay, a few things. First, you're right about the phobia thing. The actual term for people like you would be heterosexist.
Also Gender confusion and transgenderism is not related to homosexuality. It's very rare for a person to be transgendered and homosexual. It does happen, but that's the exception rather then the norm.
As for the "born this way", while there has been no genetic cause per se, some genes do influence it. Further more there is another way for a person to be born with something. One of the leading theories is that hormones in the mother's womb can affect the child. In studies of homosexual males, consecutive male births increases the chances that the next male child while be gay. After 7 consecutive male children, the chances seem to be about 50% that the boy will be gay. Likewise with twins, even fraternal twins who are no more alike then any other two siblings(except for being in the womb at the same time) there's a 70% chance that if one is gay the other one will be too, suggesting that it's a mix of factors as opposed to any singular cause.
Also, there has been a fair amount of research on families who raise kids with same-gender parents. Studies show that as long as a child has two loving parents, the gender doesn't matter. In fact, some studies showed that same-gender parents were statistically better then their opposite gendered counterparts. That could be attributed to the fact that same-gender couples have to struggle to have a child, adoption, surrogates, etc. all requires extensive planning and money so it's rare for a same-gender couple to have an unwanted or unplanned child.
As for God's design. I don't believe in any particular deity, but if there was one who was responsible for my creation, then he would be similarly responsible for my bisexuality. To reject who I am because someone else said that their hokey book written 1500 years ago by people who still thought the wheel was the greatest thing since fire told them that it was wrong would not only force me to act in a way contrary to my own desires but also make me an ungrateful ass. If there is a god, I'd thank him for making me bisexual.
Geez, that's probably the longest thing I've ever read in the Internet. As for your points, here goes my text wall:
a) Regarding the "homosexual lifestyle", I've never understood why a biological condition should be made into a lifestyle with its own flag, associations, music, clothing, even food! (true, I saw it in a magazine: "food for gays"). I have brown eyes, and not because of that I've joined a brown-eyed coalition, to separate from the blue-eyed. Sure, whenever somebody threatens homosexuals, these have the right to join and protest. But that's different from creating a whole "culture" around the issue.
b) Agree that people put much importance into labels like "straight" or "gay". That shouldn't be a defining quality of your personality. In my opinion, there shouldn't even be words to describe the difference. Those labels were invented by psychiatrists, and have done absolutely no good for anybody. You should see the amount of straight guys who have had some homosexual experience and are panicking, not because of the experience itself, but because people could label them "gay", as if a word could hurt so much.
c) Completely disagree about the "moral education" part. We live in a society in which (in theory) homosexuals have the same rights and are equal to others. So this is what should be teached in schools and what the media should support. The parents can protest all they want, and in the privacy of home they can teach their kids whatever they want: homophobia, racism, or how to beat women...Unfortunately, nobody can stop them. But the public opinion must support the values that are hold by the majority. If we have black characters in children cartoons because society is not racist anymore (again, in theory), then there's no reason to not have gay characters in cartoons. The opinion of homophobes should be kept aside, just like nobody pays attention anymore to the opinion of racists.
d) You seem to confuse homosexuals with transexuals. There's not a dissonance between brain and body for homosexuals. And there are several signs that point towards a biological origin for homosexuality, from genes to masculinization of the brain, left-handedness, and different brain structures: [link]. Also, it's false that animals only indulge into gay sex because they're confused. Bonobos are quite intelligent and they do it a lot. Males usually please each other with the hand. Can you explain why a male bonobo would confuse another male with a female, while holding his penis in the hand? Surely they're not so stupid.
e) As for marriage, why do you suppose that gay marriage is all about sex? What, aren't out there straight couples that just think about sex all the time? Also, marriage wasn't about love at first. It was about reproduction and economical contracts. The bourgeoisie switched its meaning to that of "love" to differentiate themselves from aristochrats and common people, who were far more promiscous and less "romantical". In any case, if marriage only has sense when the couple have kids, then infertile people shouldn't have more right to marry than gays, would they?
1) You're confusing transgender identity with homosexuality. Transgenders are physically one gender and mentally another. Homosexuality simply means you acknowledge your gender and still like the same. Both have been scientifically established as hormonal imbalances.
2) I am glad that you're an at least semi-rational Christian who isn't frothing at the mouth. It's your choice in what you believe(although I strongly encourage you to study Christianity til your eyes fall out and you know all there is to know. Most Christians don't know what's in their own bible, and if they did, they wouldn't be Christian. That's what happened to me.), and I respect that you don't differentiate LGBT as another, lesser species of human.
My advice to you is study the subject matter before forming an opinion on it, lest you look like an imbecile. This goes for all areas of knowledge.
Re: "As you may be aware (or not)" Don't insult your audience. This is a philosophy forum. I guarantee the regulars are quite aware of what's going on. Assuming that a forum may have heard of some issues before you arrived, especially years old ones, is a good assumption.
Re: "I, as my own person with my own brain, do not agree with a homosexual lifestyle." You've already stated "This is my own opinion." No need to be redundant. Also, are you implying something about people who might read your post? Again, don't insult your audience.
Re: "You are not defined by your sexuality" Well ok. You've at least made an attempt to define what makes you who you are, so I won't chase that particular rabbit. But, do you doubt that a person's sexuality isn't an important part of their life? I am not my parents, but who raised me and their love for me is still important. I am not my career, but it is how I chose to spend the better part of my day doing, and how I support myself. I am not my hobbies, but they are how I choose to spend my time. I am not my experiences, but they shape how I behave and react to certain situations. And so on, and so forth. You've as much as hinted that it is the multitude of important things in your life that make you who you are. If so, then how is a person's sexuality any different? It influences who they spend their time with, whether or not they have kids and how, and (in this day and age) how they are treated by others. Are these things not important?
Re: Moral education We teach share-share-alike. We teach patriotism (hand on heart, face the flag, recite the Pledge). We teach anti-drug education. Some schools teach safe sex. Should we obliterate those too? Most parents are happy if the school reinforces their teaching. It's a blessing. Oh, but not if it's a controversial opinion, eh?
Re: "(remember I don't hate them I just wouldn't live like that or encourage anyone else to but I still treat people like people)" So you're a heterosexual. And? I wouldn't live like a homosexual either. The idea of kissing another girl is disgusting to me, personally. So what? That's just part of being hetero.
Re: "Gender isn't here (pointing to genitals), it's here (pointing to brain)" It's both, actually. If you'd like, I can point you to some resources to educate yourself about what goes into sexuality and gender. And yes, a lot of what defines your gender is defined in-utero. I have a challenge for you. Explain to me the various congenital gender disorders, or even one of them, and then tell me how people born with these might have difficulty defining their sexuality, much less their gender. Once you're done, look up the prevalence of homosexuality in our population. When done with that, tell me what your conclusions are. Go! You have homework to do.
Re: "Scientist have tried to see if it is genetic and nothing so far." Appeal to ignorance is a poor logical argument. For a person who is religious, you especially don't want to be using that form of argument. The can of worms I can open up here is remarkable.
Re: "And animals never have commited relationships .... and they don't do it for fun, they do it for survival." Wrong. You just got another homework assignment, young lady.
Re: "Homosexual relationships have been around for a long time ... It has just never been forced into a pillar of society as it is today." Wrong. Look up the role of sexuality in Greek and Roman society. Tell me your conclusions. That makes your homework assignments 3 now. Extra credit: read Plato's Symposium. It's short. Cheap too, if not in your school's library: [link]
Re: The purpose of marriage So you propose marrying someone you're not attracted to? And then learning to love them? Like a friend or something? And then having kids with them? And bearing through sex that you believe is disgusting for the sake of reproducing? Wow. No wonder people marry for money, status, and/or a green card. At least you get something from the deal. Also I'm pretty sure marriage has been a cultural institution regardless of ties to religion. It's a complex thing. Let's not oversimplify it.
Re: "Love and marriage are not for sex, they are for people who truly care about each other and who share an intimate bond (the rest is just hormones)." Hormones are what attract people to each other to begin with. After a while, you learn to care for the other person. You could say lust is the magnet and love is the glue. You don't just love a person without having spent time with them. Period. So? What if a girl is attracted to another girl, and after many years they learn to care for each other beyond the sexual aspect? They're just supposed to have tea parties forever, eh?
Re: "Too many people's moral compasses are getting and already confused" etc. etc. etc. You say confusion, I say cultural change. There are many more things to blame for the culture changing than homosexuality alone. And is it such a bad thing? Family functions and arrangements changing? You said it yourself: the evidence is too slim.
Re: Religious part Again, appeal to ignorance is weak. If your studies have yielded no "stamp of approval" then you can't assume there isn't one. And for all you know, David was bisexual.
Re: Homosexual desires Who hasn't? It's part of being a teen. It's quite natural to explore a bit too, and then ultimately decide what you do and don't like. If you came out the other side of puberty hetero, kudos.
So you're a heterosexual. And? I wouldn't live like a homosexual either. The idea of kissing another girl is disgusting to me, personally. So what? That's just part of being hetero.
-I think you should add into the note that it isn't necessarily is a part of being hetero as it's entirely possible for one to go against their orientation and have 0 problems with it. Experimentation, curiousity, or just the general feeling of meh, I'll try this instead of going by my orientation and more are all examples of feelings/actions that shows one could go against their orientation plus and some would say that sexuality isn't actually attainable as all definitions of sexuality has its problem.
Who hasn't? It's part of being a teen. It's quite natural to explore a bit too, and then ultimately decide what you do and don't like. If you came out the other side of puberty hetero, kudos.
-Some adults still explore themselves and don't even know what to define themselves.
I'm of the opinion that sexuality is a spectrum. There's definite hetero, mostly hetero, bi, mostly homo, definite homo, and of course, asexual. People who aren't 100% one way or the other just aren't.
As for myself, I'd say probably about 95% hetero. Most the time, under most circumstances, the same sex is ick. Occassionally, it isn't. I can be honest with myself too.
Some adults watch Brazilian fart porn. I'd say it's not the majority, though. When generalizing, the exceptions are (generally) left out.
... I now have an image of a blue haired chick kissing a girl under a sign saying 5%, while watching fat brazilians farting while they have sex with a shakira look alike.(Even though she`s columbian, I know.)
I'd like to add that I'm also of the opinion that for some, sexuality doesn't exist because it can't be objectively proven as there are no concrete definition or labels because of the problems within every single one of them.
I'm of the opinion that sexuality is relative meaning others have different perception of sexuality depending on the semantics that they use. There isn't any definitions without a single problem and there isn't any criteria without a single problem, hence why some people believe sexuality is just a social construct.
These three links takes a look at the semantics and social construction of sexuality -[link] -[link] -[link]
For myself, I watch certain types of porn only for the mechanism behind it, whether same sex is in there or not does not affect me and I don't even gain any pleasure just from watching the opposite or same sex. Only looking at the mechanism is all I need.
If sexuality is just a social construct, that would imply that people are only ever heterosexual because society has told them to be, and were raised as such. I call bullshit.
-I am not arguing that sexuality is a social construct, however, I think you're missing the general point of social constructiveness of sexuality. Some asserts that society defines sexuality. Different cultures perceives sexuality different or at least there's some differences in perception between individuals within a culture or something. Sometimes, it could mean that sexuality is subjective.
As for arguing semantics, some sides asserts this and some sides asserts that. In the end, the results will show that every single definitions/criterias have problems as those links would show.