Homosexuality: Morals and Ethics Catch-All Thread

The Conformist wrote:
CheezePavilion wrote:
The Conformist wrote:

You could be very correct. However people handle situations quite differently, the way RNG felt isn't necessarily the way my child would feel. All I really can say is that I would raise my child the best possible way I could. We would both have a decision to make in our lives, both would not be easy. I would love them with all my heart and soul, and I would HOPE that my religious view on homosexuality would not in any way scare him away from a loving relationship with me. But if that's something that the both of us could not see eye to eye on, I would be crushed, he would most likely be crushed. But life would go on for the both of us and I would still always love him.

Then maybe the answer is just not to have kids. Maybe the answer is for potential parents to take greater responsibility, and acknowledge that a home where the parents have these kinds of beliefs is not a healthy home because of the chances of having a gay child.

With all due respect, I would argue differently. I was raised in a loving Christian family, as were they and so on. We are all very kind people, and very loving people who have very little problems with anyone or anything.

Well, yeah, but you're not gay, I assume? The stance of your parents on homosexuality didn't say anything about you.

The Conformist wrote:
CheezePavilion wrote:
The Conformist wrote:

You could be very correct. However people handle situations quite differently, the way RNG felt isn't necessarily the way my child would feel. All I really can say is that I would raise my child the best possible way I could. We would both have a decision to make in our lives, both would not be easy. I would love them with all my heart and soul, and I would HOPE that my religious view on homosexuality would not in any way scare him away from a loving relationship with me. But if that's something that the both of us could not see eye to eye on, I would be crushed, he would most likely be crushed. But life would go on for the both of us and I would still always love him.

Then maybe the answer is just not to have kids. Maybe the answer is for potential parents to take greater responsibility, and acknowledge that a home where the parents have these kinds of beliefs is not a healthy home because of the chances of having a gay child.

With all due respect, I would argue differently. I was raised in a loving Christian family, as were they and so on. We are all very kind people, and very loving people who have very little problems with anyone or anything.

* A side note however, my mothers family was Christian my fathers was not. Just because you aren't a Christian family doesn't mean that you know better on how to raise a child, or that it's damaging"to a child's growth if you are. It just matters on the child and the parent, religious views aside.

I thought you were raised by an abusive father who fought with your mother.

There's a hell of a lot of "I survived this horrible experience, so anyone can survive any horrible experience" going on here.

SixteenBlue wrote:
The Conformist wrote:
CheezePavilion wrote:
The Conformist wrote:

You could be very correct. However people handle situations quite differently, the way RNG felt isn't necessarily the way my child would feel. All I really can say is that I would raise my child the best possible way I could. We would both have a decision to make in our lives, both would not be easy. I would love them with all my heart and soul, and I would HOPE that my religious view on homosexuality would not in any way scare him away from a loving relationship with me. But if that's something that the both of us could not see eye to eye on, I would be crushed, he would most likely be crushed. But life would go on for the both of us and I would still always love him.

Then maybe the answer is just not to have kids. Maybe the answer is for potential parents to take greater responsibility, and acknowledge that a home where the parents have these kinds of beliefs is not a healthy home because of the chances of having a gay child.

With all due respect, I would argue differently. I was raised in a loving Christian family, as were they and so on. We are all very kind people, and very loving people who have very little problems with anyone or anything.

* A side note however, my mothers family was Christian my fathers was not. Just because you aren't a Christian family doesn't mean that you know better on how to raise a child, or that it's damaging"to a child's growth if you are. It just matters on the child and the parent, religious views aside.

I thought you were raised by an abusive father who fought with your mother.

I'm sorry, I was referring to my fathers side of the family. I apologize if there are misunderstandings in my texts. I have to do this quick, I don't have many open windows.

DanB wrote:

I think you fundamentally under estimate just how deeply psychologically scarring it is for a child to know that their parent doesn't accept who they are.

I think people are also fundamentally underestimating how difficult it is for a committed conservative Christian, one who is certain in their faith, to turn away from that faith. That's what would be required for such a person to accept a gay son and believe that they are not sinning. For such a person, it's not like they can easily just shrug and say "Bah, forget the Bible, the kids are more important."

Maybe that's how some here think it should be, but for someone who devoutly believes in their religious teachings, it's not so simple, especially since turning a blind eye to one teaching can, for some people, result in their entire belief system tumbling down. I think people who have never been deeply invested in religious beliefs have trouble understanding how deep such beliefs can run, and how difficult it can be to turn away from them.

My brother died of AIDS in the mid-90's and never told us whether he was gay or straight. My mother felt it was pretty clear in almost everything he did, and while she believed she accepted him, she never accepted his "behavior". In hindsight, as our society evolves to expose the flaws in that philosophy, she hates herself more and more for this glaring weakness in herself. She recognizes that despite her piety, she never gave her son the acceptance he deserved. I wouldn't wish this fate on anyone.

On a side note, the idea that non-acceptance and physical abuse are similar in effect is fallacious. Children find it easier to perceive physical brutality as cruel and wrong, while that cold "I wish you weren't how you are" can often be cradled in a bed of righteousness and piety. To me, it's comparing pedophilia in clergy with pedophilia in a stranger... one carries with it an inherent implication that the victim is in the wrong, while the other can be externalized more easily.

Crispus wrote:
DanB wrote:

I think you fundamentally under estimate just how deeply psychologically scarring it is for a child to know that their parent doesn't accept who they are.

I think people are also fundamentally underestimating how difficult it is for a committed conservative Christian, one who is certain in their faith, to turn away from that faith. That's what would be required for such a person to accept a gay son and believe that they are not sinning. For such a person, it's not like they can easily just shrug and say "Bah, forget the Bible, the kids are more important."

Maybe that's how some here think it should be, but for someone who devoutly believes in their religious teachings, it's not so simple, especially since turning a blind eye to one teaching can, for some people, result in their entire belief system tumbling down. I think people who have never been deeply invested in religious beliefs have trouble understanding how deep such beliefs can run, and how difficult it can be to turn away from them.

While I can understand how difficult it is, I just don't have sympathy for someone who can't turn away from bigoted beliefs. This has nothing to do with their Christian faith. Plenty of non-bigoted Christians in this very thread. There's no reason for this to shatter their whole belief system. That only happens when you belief system is based on nothing but recited garbage instead of based on thinking and actually BELIEVING something instead of being told that's the way it is and just accepting it.

Crispus wrote:
DanB wrote:

I think you fundamentally under estimate just how deeply psychologically scarring it is for a child to know that their parent doesn't accept who they are.

I think people are also fundamentally underestimating how difficult it is for a committed conservative Christian, one who is certain in their faith, to turn away from that faith. That's what would be required for such a person to accept a gay son and believe that they are not sinning. For such a person, it's not like they can easily just shrug and say "Bah, forget the Bible, the kids are more important."

Maybe that's how some here think it should be, but for someone who devoutly believes in their religious teachings, it's not so simple, especially since turning a blind eye to one teaching can, for some people, result in their entire belief system tumbling down. I think people who have never been deeply invested in religious beliefs have trouble understanding how deep such beliefs can run, and how difficult it can be to turn away from them.

I can understand that, but that's also why I said that maybe if someone believes that devoutly, they shouldn't have children considering how harmful it can be to a child to have a parent like that. Part of being deeply invested in one's religious beliefs is the concept of deep sacrifice for those beliefs.

I had a great relationship with both of my parents growing up. Now that I've come out, our relationship is strained, and it's clear to me that they disapprove of me acting on my homosexuality, as well as rejecting the faith I was raised in. They tell me they love me, and I believe them, but they aren't acting that way. They are conflicted, and it's obvious, and I think they have some kind of misguided notion that their disapproval is going to influence me. Instead it's just alienating us. This is just a sense of disapproval, and nothing else. Hypothetical situations are interesting to ponder, but you have no idea how the situation will play out until it happens. Your position, if you hold to it, will be harmful to your child. I sincerely hope your senses as a parent will be more powerful than the beliefs you espouse if you ever find yourself in that situation, for your own sake and the sake of your hypothetical child.

I do not know why the need to share...

My mom has a VERY bigoted co-worker. It is all due to religion as well. She has heard my mom talking to other people about how she and my dad had dinner with Jake and I, then has the audacity to confront my mom and tell her that she does not understand how my mom could support me or love me. My mom simply replied, that is why your God gave me the gay son.

I still haven't seen a substantive reply that demonstrates why there is a difference between someone considering "being black" wrong and "being gay" wrong. Any ACTUAL difference seems to be tiptoed around rather carefully.

Valmorian wrote:

I still haven't seen a substantive reply that demonstrates why there is a difference between someone considering "being black" wrong and "being gay" wrong. Any ACTUAL difference seems to be tiptoed around rather carefully.

The problem is the fact that religion underpins it. Since people disagree on religion and especially since they disagree on the details, this isn't a fact-based argument. It's my emotions versus your emotions. There will never be a winner in that, honestly.

DSGamer wrote:

The problem is the fact that religion underpins it. Since people disagree on religion and especially since they disagree on the details, this isn't a fact-based argument. It's my emotions versus your emotions. There will never be a winner in that, honestly.

But that doesn't address it either. Racism is about emotions vs. emotions as well, but we still have a clear "winner" on that side.
What is different between the "controlled" racist who thinks that other races are "inferior" and the "controlled" homophobe who thinks that gays are "morally wrong"?

And, actually, I think we already have a "winner" in the argument for homosexuals considered to be normal, it's just going to take some time before it becomes just as unacceptable to consider a gay person "morally wrong" as it currently is to consider a black person "less worthy".

After going through all of these posts, I did some research about being born gay and having the choice of being gay. I'm wondering where everyone is getting their information as I have read conflicting reports. I have a number of friends that are homosexuals and they have also told me some have chosen that lifestyle, while others have told me that they were born that way. The underlying notation from this thread is obviously that everyone was born that way.

Valmorian wrote:
DSGamer wrote:

The problem is the fact that religion underpins it. Since people disagree on religion and especially since they disagree on the details, this isn't a fact-based argument. It's my emotions versus your emotions. There will never be a winner in that, honestly.

But that doesn't address it either. Racism is about emotions vs. emotions as well, but we still have a clear "winner" on that side.
What is different between the "controlled" racist who thinks that other races are "inferior" and the "controlled" homophobe who thinks that gays are "morally wrong"?

And, actually, I think we already have a "winner" in the argument for homosexuals considered to be normal, it's just going to take some time before it becomes just as unacceptable to consider a gay person "morally wrong" as it currently is to consider a black person "less worthy".

The difference is that this is rooted in beliefs that are so core as to be practically unchangeable. Religion was used as an excuse for racism at times, amongst a hodgepodge of other reasons. Homosexuality is different. To ask someone to be tolerant is to ask them to fundamentally change a belief structure they may possibly base their life around. I don't see that getting easier anytime soon as you're essentially asking someone to walk away from their core beliefs.

I'm by no means making an excuse. Not in the slightest. I'm just explaining why this issue will continue to be intractable until people reevaluate their theology or leave the church. It's less akin to racism and more akin to the Middle East.

Chabuda wrote:

The underlying notation from this thread is obviously that everyone was born that way.

The best refutation (with straight people) I've seen to the idea that people choose to be gay is to ask them to answer this:

"At what point in your life did you make a conscious decision to be sexually attracted to women?"

Chabuda wrote:

After going through all of these posts, I did some research about being born gay and having the choice of being gay. I'm wondering where everyone is getting their information as I have read conflicting reports. I have a number of friends that are homosexuals and they have also told me some have chosen that lifestyle, while others have told me that they were born that way. The underlying notation from this thread is obviously that everyone was born that way.

The Kinsey Scale is pretty well-known, and it's just a very simple way of expressing people's tendencies towards homosexuality or heterosexuality. The fundamental issue is not that people are saying everybody gay is born gay, it's pretty much the opposite; the real problem is that a subset of people claim that everybody is born heterosexual, and gays and lesbians are simply choosing their lifestyle. There's absolutely no evidence everybody is born straight, and in fact loads of evidence to the opposite (homosexual behavior being visible in all sorts of species, for example).

So, to your point, no.

DSGamer wrote:

The difference is that this is rooted in beliefs that are so core as to be practically unchangeable. Religion was used as an excuse for racism at times, amongst a hodgepodge of other reasons. Homosexuality is different. To ask someone to be tolerant is to ask them to fundamentally change a belief structure they may possibly base their life around.

And yet, today it isn't acceptable to simply allow even the most religious person a pass at saying something like "Black people are inferior because my religious beliefs say so.". We are quickly getting to the same situation with respect to homosexuality.

Making religious people answer the question "why is racism different?" is one way to emphasize this point.

Chabuda wrote:

After going through all of these posts, I did some research about being born gay and having the choice of being gay. I'm wondering where everyone is getting their information as I have read conflicting reports. I have a number of friends that are homosexuals and they have also told me some have chosen that lifestyle, while others have told me that they were born that way. The underlying notation from this thread is obviously that everyone was born that way.

I strongly suspect that the research that indicates sexual orientation is primarily genetic/hardwired is relatively recent and grounded in the scientific method with peer review, whereas the research that indicates otherwise is probably not so well-grounded or recent. Because in my own recent readings, that's the emerging pattern.

Valmorian wrote:
Chabuda wrote:

The underlying notation from this thread is obviously that everyone was born that way.

The best refutation (with straight people) I've seen to the idea that people choose to be gay is to ask them to answer this:

"At what point in your life did you make a conscious decision to be sexually attracted to women?"

An even better refutation is to demand that the straight person claiming that homosexuality is a choice 'choose' to find their own gender attractive enough to want to make sweet, sweet gay love to them.

The more relevant question is if it matters. I contest that it doesn't. Even so, I never made the choice. My parents also believe that it is not a choice. Acting on it is a choice, however, and it's a choice I made consciously. No one else's terms are going to dictate how I live my life. Not anymore.

And if it being a choice matters, and that places a limitation on my rights, then you create a precedent for limiting the rights of those who choose just about anything. Including a choice of religion.

Valmorian: the man in your avatar seems to be wearing a Russian Navy hat?

I just find it crazy that people are talking about the pain and suffering they went through coming to grips with their sexuality, and we have posters saying "tough stuff, buddy - we all have hard times!" Christians like that are why I left the church.

Gorilla.800.lbs wrote:

Valmorian: the man in your avatar seems to be wearing a Russian Navy hat?

A fake one, and that would be me and my wife in that photo. She's from the Czech Republic and you can get a lot of cheap authentic and knock-off Russian stuff there.

Crispus wrote:

I think people are also fundamentally underestimating how difficult it is for a committed conservative Christian, one who is certain in their faith, to turn away from that faith. That's what would be required for such a person to accept a gay son and believe that they are not sinning. For such a person, it's not like they can easily just shrug and say "Bah, forget the Bible, the kids are more important."

I think you're skirting the fact that one can be a Christian and not consider homosexuality to be a sin. Thus one's faith isn't at issue so much as one possible interpretation of Christian faith. Either way, I simply don't understand how someone holding such beliefs would not be forced to examine them after discovering their child was gay. Do they think that homosexuality is a choice?

Crispus wrote:

Maybe that's how some here think it should be, but for someone who devoutly believes in their religious teachings, it's not so simple, especially since turning a blind eye to one teaching can, for some people, result in their entire belief system tumbling down. I think people who have never been deeply invested in religious beliefs have trouble understanding how deep such beliefs can run, and how difficult it can be to turn away from them.

I'll respond with a quote:

James Luther Adams wrote:

An unexamined faith is not worth having, for it can be true only by accident. A faith worth having is a faith worth discussing and testing.

Chabuda wrote:

After going through all of these posts, I did some research about being born gay and having the choice of being gay. I'm wondering where everyone is getting their information as I have read conflicting reports. I have a number of friends that are homosexuals and they have also told me some have chosen that lifestyle, while others have told me that they were born that way. The underlying notation from this thread is obviously that everyone was born that way.

There has been more research into it, and the use of *shudder* twin studies(where if one twin is gay one study showed a 70% chance the sibling would also be gay) and *double shudder* family studies has begun to yield results. One hypothesis that I saw truly intrigued me. Women pregnant with boys develop anti-boties as it recognizes the male body as a threatening foreign body, as it is very different from her own make up(Y chromosomes and all). There is a strong correlation between women who have several sons, and the younger sons having a higher rate of being homosexual. The American Medical Association and American Psychological Association have fallen on sexual preference being more related to genetics than not. And that brings in a slew of other sub-disciplines of environment, epigenetics, etc.

I take issue on another level. Often the natural vs choice starts at a basis that heterosexuality is the default setting, that heterosexuality is the "right" way, with little support to that. It also presupposes that natural is moral. Honestly, since when has a man's nature determined what we expect him to do? Ghengis Khan had many natural inclinations most of us would call abhorrent. What is your natural inclination when a man bumps into your son at the mall? Knocks him down. Do we want to allow you to beat that man to a bloody pulp? (I do, this fictitious man needs a can opened up on him). I think we draw a line when a natural inclination is unhygenic, dangerous, etc.

Is it natural for animals to relieve themselves wherever they please? Do we want to say that toilets and toilet paper are evil?

I am a funky kind of libertarian, I include harm to self among those forbidden behaviors. Drugs, unprotected sex, etc. Mostly because we are never alone, you OD on Heroine, it effects a lot of other people-police, hospitals, local government, etc. Two men or two women (giggidy) loving eachother, raising a family, paying their taxes, caring for a home seems 100% harmless.

IMAGE(http://i.imgur.com/3JPIP.jpg)

NSMike wrote:

IMAGE(http://i.imgur.com/3JPIP.jpg)

That is sinister.

OG_slinger wrote:
NSMike wrote:

IMAGE(http://i.imgur.com/3JPIP.jpg)

That is sinister.

Niiiice.

IMAGE(http://i.imgur.com/mRwFY.jpg)

This image was making its rounds on the internet, today... I did see an interesting response to it over on Livejournal.

On behalf of myself and other LGBT and pro-gay-marriage observant (or partially observant) Jews, I would like to mention that I do take seriously the "Old Testament" (or rather Torah-based) commandments against eating pork, shellfish and yes, even wearing clothes woven from different fabrics. Nonetheless, my Conservative Judaism is a form of Judaism that takes our traditions seriously even while being willing to examine and reinterpret the commandments in light of new information and new knowledge. So we're by and large egalitarian and supportive of gay rights and gay marriage. Last time I checked, Conservatives Jews--even the most observant ones--weren't living a "sexist, chauvinistic, judgmental, xenophobic lifestyle."

So I dislike this argument--the implication is "opposing gay marriage is just as silly as not eating shellfish or worrying about mixing fabrics! What stupid rules Judaism has!" That's a nasty implication--especially as American Jews overwhelmingly support gay marriage, by as much as 81% per some polls. (See this article and Pew Forum.)

(Also, the question "Should we still obey Old Testament laws" is rather strange in this context, since the commandments against easting shellfish or wearing clothes woven from different fabrics was never intended for the whole world, but only for Jews. Any educated fundamentalist will argue that, and point out that sexual morality is expected of everyone. I happen to think that gay, consensual sex between adults is perfectly moral, but a fundamentalist will argue otherwise. In any case, the shell-fish/fabric argument won't get you very far.)